Greetings, all,

Here's some interesting info about the ancient Andean-Mexican seagoing
trade, bringing into focus especially the importance of metalwork for
tracing these cultural links.

All the best,

Yuri.

=================


ANCIENT MARINERS: Strong evidence of Andean-Mexican seagoing trade as
early as 600 A.D. by David L. Chandler

The Boston Globe, August 14, 1995. Pp. 25-27.

Archeologists studying the ancients empires of Central and South
America have long noticed similarities in some pottery designs and
food crops and wondered whether mariners from the Andean coast traded
with their counterparts 2,000 miles to the north. Now, an MIT
researcher says she has strong evidence they did.

Sophisticated and unique metalworking techniques, developed in
South America as far as 1200 B.C., suddenly appeared in Western Mexico
in about 600 A.D. - without ever being seen anywhere in between. The
only reasonable explanation, according to archeologist Dorothy Hosler,
is seaborne trade.

As far back as the Spanish conquest it was clear that the South
American cultures had the capability for such trade. When Francisco
Pizarro approached Peru in 1527, he saw large sailing rafts traveling
along the coast. But until now, there was little evidence of how far
they travelled, or the fact that there was any significant contact
between the two great civilizations of that era, the Mesoamerican
(including the Mayans and other groups) to the north and the Andean
(including the Incas) in South America.

It took Hosler's innovative, detailed metallurgical analysis of
ancient bronze and copper artifacts to provide the convincing evidence
that this trade ranged over thousands of miles.

Hosler, an associate professor of archeology and ancient
technology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has spent
years studying the composition, design and metalworking technologies
used to make a variety of bells, ornaments and small tools found in
Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, and Western Mexico.

Centuries after their development in South America, metal objects
appeared suddenly on Mexico's west coast. But the absence of any
metal artifacts from that period in all of Central America in between,
or in the interior and east coast of Mexico, indicates that these
casting methods, alloys and designs could not have been exported via
overland trade.

"Her findings have been very important, I think, in the New World
picture," said Gordon Willey, professor emeritus of Mexico and Central
American, archeology at Harvard University. "What she has shown
without much doubt is that metallurgical technologies were diffused
from the south, probably carried by travelers on rafts."

"There has always been a lot of speculation on the relationship
between Mesoamerica and the cultures further south," Wiley added.
"But to pin anything down as tightly and specifically as this
metallurgical technology is very unusual."

The fact that the South American civilizations had coastal trade
and fishing routes is well known from the writings, and at least one
drawing, of 16th century European voyagers. They described oceangoing
balsawood sailing rafts, capable of carrying anywhere from a dozen to
40 people and laden with goods, plying the coasts of present Peru and
Ecuador. Some archeologists had speculated, on the basis of
similarities in pottery designs, that these South American marine
traders made it as far north as Mexico, but the evidence was ambiguous
because pottery-making was so universal at the time.

"The Mexican case is very interesting," Hosler said last week in
an interview at MIT, during a brief break from her fieldwork in
Mexico. "It's one of the few places where advanced civilization arose
without metallurgy.

"And then suddenly, around this area which was not a primary area
of state-level society" - that is, not part of one of the great
empires but rather a region of smaller chiefdoms - "metal artifacts
start to show up around 600 to 700 A.D."

At the time, she said, there was "nothing with respect to
metallurgy going on in eastern Mexico or Central America," where Mayan
civilization, among others, was in its heyday, whereas the peoples of
Peru, Ecuador and Colombia had thriving metallurgical traditions.

Unlike the use of metals elsewhere in the ancient world, where
the focus was usually on weapons and agricultural tools, much of the
emphasis of both the Mexican and Andean metallurgists was on
decorative and ceremonial objects such a bells and jewelry, and small
tools such as needles and tweezers.

That emphasis led them to develop metal alloys quite different
from those found in other areas. Their bronze, for example, appears to
have been formulated specifically for its color and sound qualities,
rather than for mechanical strength, Hosler found. Bronzes used for
ornamental bells and other items were formulated to give the
appearance of gold (by adding larger than necessary amounts of tin to
copper) or silver (by adding more arsenic than necessary to the
copper).

Among the extraordinary similarities Hosler found between metal
working in the two regions:

The use of the "lost wax" technique for casting distinctive
ceremonial bells, a method that allows greater control over the
thickness and sound properties. This involves carving the bell's
shape from beeswax, then casting a hard mold (sometimes of clay and
ash) around it. Molten metal poured into the mold melts away the wax
and assumes its shape inside the mold, which is broken away after the
metal hardens. Identical techniques and designs are found in Columbia
and Mexico.

-- The design and manufacturing methods for producing items such as
needles and tweezers out of hammered copper or bronze.

Distinctive methods, which Hosler describes as "very
idiosyncratic," such as the way a needle's eye is made by folding,
are found in both places. And unique designs of tweezers, used by men
to pluck beard hairs, also are found in both regions. In Mexico, the
tweezers became ceremonial objects, worn by priests as pendants.

"There's a whole constellation of artifact designs that were
common to both areas," Hosler says. "They were used the same way, and
the objects were fashioned the same way."

Hosler's detailed analysis of the metals themselves proved that
it was mainly the knowledge of metallurgical techniques, rather than
the metal objects themselves that was transported from the
civilizations to the south; virtually all the objects found in Mexico
were made from native Mexican ores.

"We know they weren't trading in ores," Hosler said,"because
Ecuadorian and Mexican ores are very different in their isotope
ratios. What seems to have been introduced was technological
know-how."

In order to have imparted such detailed technological knowledge,
she concludes, the visits must have been much longer and more
extensive than would have been needed simply to trade finished goods.

What motivated the far-flung trading? Hosler speculates that the
South American mariners may have been searching for a much prized
bright-orange seashell, the spondylous, that was used to make beads
and ornaments and for rain-making rituals.

The idea gets some support from Spanish records. Pizarro's chief
pilot, Bartolome Ruiz de Estrada, describes capturing off the
Ecuadorian coast a balsa raft carrying 20 men and trade goods that
included "tiaras, crowns, bands, tweezers and bells, all of this they
brought to exchange for some shells."

Another possible trade item was the hallucinogenic peyote cactus,
which is prevalent in Mexico and may have figured in religious
ceremonies among the South American people, where the use of
psychoactive substances was widespread.

The evidence for extensive trade could affect the whole picture
of how the great civilizations of Mesoamerica and the Andes developed,
said Hosler, whose analysis of her evidence is detailed in a book,
"The Sounds and Colors of Power," published by MIT Press this year.

"One of the aspects that's very interesting for archeologists,"
Hosler said, "is that we tend to think these two great civilizations"
- the Mesoamerican and the Andean - "grew without much influence from
one another... This is fairly unambiguous evidence that there was more
extensive interaction than was thought."

Others who specialize in Pre-Columbian American archeology agree.
Michael Smith, associate professor of anthropology at the State
University of New York at Stony Brook, says "the evidence she has, the
evidence from metallurgy, is the strongest evidence. I don't doubt at
all what happened... I don't know what more you could hope for, other
than finding a boat with a sign that says 'this way to Acapulco'."

=======================

Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

It is a far, far better thing to have a firm anchor in nonsense than
to put out on the troubled seas of thought -=O=- John K. Galbraith

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

Greetings, all,

Here's some interesting info about the ancient Andean-Mexican seagoing
trade, bringing into focus especially the importance of metalwork for
tracing these cultural links.

All the best,

Yuri.

=================

ANCIENT MARINERS: Strong evidence of Andean-Mexican seagoing trade as
early as 600 A.D. by David L. Chandler

The Boston Globe, August 14, 1995. Pp. 25-27.

Archeologists studying the ancients empires of Central and South
America have long noticed similarities in some pottery designs and
food crops and wondered whether mariners from the Andean coast traded
with their counterparts 2,000 miles to the north. Now, an MIT
researcher says she has strong evidence they did.

Sophisticated and unique metalworking techniques, developed in
South America as far as 1200 B.C., suddenly appeared in Western Mexico
in about 600 A.D. - without ever being seen anywhere in between. The
only reasonable explanation, according to archeologist Dorothy Hosler,
is seaborne trade.

As far back as the Spanish conquest it was clear that the South
American cultures had the capability for such trade. When Francisco
Pizarro approached Peru in 1527, he saw large sailing rafts traveling
along the coast. But until now, there was little evidence of how far
they travelled, or the fact that there was any significant contact
between the two great civilizations of that era, the Mesoamerican
(including the Mayans and other groups) to the north and the Andean
(including the Incas) in South America.

It took Hosler's innovative, detailed metallurgical analysis of
ancient bronze and copper artifacts to provide the convincing evidence
that this trade ranged over thousands of miles.

Hosler, an associate professor of archeology and ancient
technology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has spent
years studying the composition, design and metalworking technologies
used to make a variety of bells, ornaments and small tools found in
Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, and Western Mexico.

Centuries after their development in South America, metal objects
appeared suddenly on Mexico's west coast. But the absence of any
metal artifacts from that period in all of Central America in between,
or in the interior and east coast of Mexico, indicates that these
casting methods, alloys and designs could not have been exported via
overland trade.

"Her findings have been very important, I think, in the New World
picture," said Gordon Willey, professor emeritus of Mexico and Central
American, archeology at Harvard University. "What she has shown
without much doubt is that metallurgical technologies were diffused
from the south, probably carried by travelers on rafts."

"There has always been a lot of speculation on the relationship
between Mesoamerica and the cultures further south," Wiley added.
"But to pin anything down as tightly and specifically as this
metallurgical technology is very unusual."

The fact that the South American civilizations had coastal trade
and fishing routes is well known from the writings, and at least one
drawing, of 16th century European voyagers. They described oceangoing
balsawood sailing rafts, capable of carrying anywhere from a dozen to
40 people and laden with goods, plying the coasts of present Peru and
Ecuador. Some archeologists had speculated, on the basis of
similarities in pottery designs, that these South American marine
traders made it as far north as Mexico, but the evidence was ambiguous
because pottery-making was so universal at the time.

"The Mexican case is very interesting," Hosler said last week in
an interview at MIT, during a brief break from her fieldwork in
Mexico. "It's one of the few places where advanced civilization arose
without metallurgy.

"And then suddenly, around this area which was not a primary area
of state-level society" - that is, not part of one of the great
empires but rather a region of smaller chiefdoms - "metal artifacts
start to show up around 600 to 700 A.D."

At the time, she said, there was "nothing with respect to
metallurgy going on in eastern Mexico or Central America," where Mayan
civilization, among others, was in its heyday, whereas the peoples of
Peru, Ecuador and Colombia had thriving metallurgical traditions.

Unlike the use of metals elsewhere in the ancient world, where
the focus was usually on weapons and agricultural tools, much of the
emphasis of both the Mexican and Andean metallurgists was on
decorative and ceremonial objects such a bells and jewelry, and small
tools such as needles and tweezers.

That emphasis led them to develop metal alloys quite different
from those found in other areas. Their bronze, for example, appears to
have been formulated specifically for its color and sound qualities,
rather than for mechanical strength, Hosler found. Bronzes used for
ornamental bells and other items were formulated to give the
appearance of gold (by adding larger than necessary amounts of tin to
copper) or silver (by adding more arsenic than necessary to the
copper).

Among the extraordinary similarities Hosler found between metal
working in the two regions:

The use of the "lost wax" technique for casting distinctive
ceremonial bells, a method that allows greater control over the
thickness and sound properties. This involves carving the bell's
shape from beeswax, then casting a hard mold (sometimes of clay and
ash) around it. Molten metal poured into the mold melts away the wax
and assumes its shape inside the mold, which is broken away after the
metal hardens. Identical techniques and designs are found in Columbia
and Mexico.

-- The design and manufacturing methods for producing items such as
needles and tweezers out of hammered copper or bronze.

Distinctive methods, which Hosler describes as "very
idiosyncratic," such as the way a needle's eye is made by folding,
are found in both places. And unique designs of tweezers, used by men
to pluck beard hairs, also are found in both regions. In Mexico, the
tweezers became ceremonial objects, worn by priests as pendants.

"There's a whole constellation of artifact designs that were
common to both areas," Hosler says. "They were used the same way, and
the objects were fashioned the same way."

Hosler's detailed analysis of the metals themselves proved that
it was mainly the knowledge of metallurgical techniques, rather than
the metal objects themselves that was transported from the
civilizations to the south; virtually all the objects found in Mexico
were made from native Mexican ores.

"We know they weren't trading in ores," Hosler said,"because
Ecuadorian and Mexican ores are very different in their isotope
ratios. What seems to have been introduced was technological
know-how."

In order to have imparted such detailed technological knowledge,
she concludes, the visits must have been much longer and more
extensive than would have been needed simply to trade finished goods.

What motivated the far-flung trading? Hosler speculates that the
South American mariners may have been searching for a much prized
bright-orange seashell, the spondylous, that was used to make beads
and ornaments and for rain-making rituals.

The idea gets some support from Spanish records. Pizarro's chief
pilot, Bartolome Ruiz de Estrada, describes capturing off the
Ecuadorian coast a balsa raft carrying 20 men and trade goods that
included "tiaras, crowns, bands, tweezers and bells, all of this they
brought to exchange for some shells."

Another possible trade item was the hallucinogenic peyote cactus,
which is prevalent in Mexico and may have figured in religious
ceremonies among the South American people, where the use of
psychoactive substances was widespread.

The evidence for extensive trade could affect the whole picture
of how the great civilizations of Mesoamerica and the Andes developed,
said Hosler, whose analysis of her evidence is detailed in a book,
"The Sounds and Colors of Power," published by MIT Press this year.

"One of the aspects that's very interesting for archeologists,"
Hosler said, "is that we tend to think these two great civilizations"
- the Mesoamerican and the Andean - "grew without much influence from
one another... This is fairly unambiguous evidence that there was more
extensive interaction than was thought."

Others who specialize in Pre-Columbian American archeology agree.
Michael Smith, associate professor of anthropology at the State
University of New York at Stony Brook, says "the evidence she has, the
evidence from metallurgy, is the strongest evidence. I don't doubt at
all what happened... I don't know what more you could hope for, other
than finding a boat with a sign that says 'this way to Acapulco'."


Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm

--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Seppo Renfors wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

snip

Others who specialize in Pre-Columbian American archeology agree.
Michael Smith, associate professor of anthropology at the State
University of New York at Stony Brook, says "the evidence she has, the
evidence from metallurgy, is the strongest evidence. I don't doubt at
all what happened... I don't know what more you could hope for, other
than finding a boat with a sign that says 'this way to Acapulco'."



Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm


Seppo,

What do you find interesting in that web site? It reiterates,
without a shred of evidence and no references, the story of vast
amounts of copper being mined by Europeans ca. 3000 BC-1250 BC,
and shipped to Europe from the mines in the UP of Michigan. The
web site's 'History' is right out of some of the more
speculative Mormon views of history and North American
archaeology, and has holes in it large enough to drive a lorry
train through.

So, what do you find interesting and applicable to the present
topic in that web page?

Tom McDonald

Tom McDonald wrote in message ...
Seppo Renfors wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

snip

Others who specialize in Pre-Columbian American archeology agree.
Michael Smith, associate professor of anthropology at the State
University of New York at Stony Brook, says "the evidence she has, the
evidence from metallurgy, is the strongest evidence. I don't doubt at
all what happened... I don't know what more you could hope for, other
than finding a boat with a sign that says 'this way to Acapulco'."



Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm


Seppo,

What do you find interesting in that web site? It reiterates,
without a shred of evidence and no references, the story of vast
amounts of copper being mined by Europeans ca. 3000 BC-1250 BC,
and shipped to Europe from the mines in the UP of Michigan. The
web site's 'History' is right out of some of the more
speculative Mormon views of history and North American
archaeology, and has holes in it large enough to drive a lorry
train through.

So, what do you find interesting and applicable to the present
topic in that web page?

Were such a claim to have any basis I'd expect there to be a port from
where this copper trade (millions of tons) ? was shipped.. with sunken
ships
And the DNA of the visiting sailors, intermarraige and loan words.
Pottery, tools, buildings, introduction of art, all missing.
The roads used to carry the copper from the mines to the smelters and
to the port and the accomodation/villages along the route.
The growing of and evidence of European crops.
Local Folk lore recording such industry....


The claims in the URL are at leasy lauughable

|| Others who specialize in Pre-Columbian American archeology agree.
|| Michael Smith, associate professor of anthropology at the State
|| University of New York at Stony Brook, says "the evidence she has, the
|| evidence from metallurgy, is the strongest evidence. I don't doubt at
|| all what happened... I don't know what more you could hope for, other
|| than finding a boat with a sign that says 'this way to Acapulco'."
||
||
||
|| Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?
||
|| http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm
||
||
|| Seppo,
||
|| What do you find interesting in that web site? It reiterates,
|| without a shred of evidence and no references, the story of vast
|| amounts of copper being mined by Europeans ca. 3000 BC-1250 BC,
|| and shipped to Europe from the mines in the UP of Michigan. The
|| web site's 'History' is right out of some of the more
|| speculative Mormon views of history and North American
|| archaeology, and has holes in it large enough to drive a lorry
|| train through.
||
|| So, what do you find interesting and applicable to the present
|| topic in that web page?
||
||Were such a claim to have any basis I'd expect there to be a port from
||where this copper trade (millions of tons) ? was shipped.. with sunken
||ships
||And the DNA of the visiting sailors, intermarraige and loan words.
||Pottery, tools, buildings, introduction of art, all missing.
||The roads used to carry the copper from the mines to the smelters and
||to the port and the accomodation/villages along the route.

Levitation, just as the Egytians moved the blocks for the pyramids, and the
Easter Islanders moved their statuary. Some guy in Florida built a coral castle
in the 1920s using the "technology". Saw it on TV

G
Texas Parts Guy

Tom McDonald wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

snip

Others who specialize in Pre-Columbian American archeology agree.
Michael Smith, associate professor of anthropology at the State
University of New York at Stony Brook, says "the evidence she has, the
evidence from metallurgy, is the strongest evidence. I don't doubt at
all what happened... I don't know what more you could hope for, other
than finding a boat with a sign that says 'this way to Acapulco'."



Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm


Seppo,

What do you find interesting in that web site? It reiterates,
without a shred of evidence and no references,

Well..... that alone should have been very attractive to you! I don't
really know why you are asking me, as you are not really interested in
my opinion - merely an opportunity to denigrate what ever that opinion
might be - irrespective of what it might be. You see, you have already
anticipated exactly that and started the denigration even though you
don't know WHY I posted that URL! So your question is redundant and
needs no answer.

the story of vast
amounts of copper being mined by Europeans ca. 3000 BC-1250 BC,
and shipped to Europe from the mines in the UP of Michigan.

Oh but that site tells of far more than merely that!!

The
web site's 'History' is right out of some of the more
speculative Mormon views of history and North American
archaeology, and has holes in it large enough to drive a lorry
train through.

Is "Mormon" a verboten religion in your mind as you hold that LABEL
up? It is indeed true that "North American archaeology" dogma has
"holes in it large enough to drive a lorry train through" (whatever a
"lorry train" might be). There is a will to retain the holes as well -
you know to protect the establishment dogma.

So, what do you find interesting and applicable to the present
topic in that web page?

You can't tell? How about some key words like "metallurgy" + "mining"
+ "Gulf of Mexico" + "Acapulco" + "cast copper" + "Cahokia" + "copper
trade" + missing copper.

Still, if you looked under the heading "Gallery" you might see
something interesting.


--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Seppo Renfors wrote:


Tom McDonald wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

snip

Others who specialize in Pre-Columbian American archeology agree.
Michael Smith, associate professor of anthropology at the State
University of New York at Stony Brook, says "the evidence she has, the
evidence from metallurgy, is the strongest evidence. I don't doubt at
all what happened... I don't know what more you could hope for, other
than finding a boat with a sign that says 'this way to Acapulco'."



Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm


Seppo,

What do you find interesting in that web site? It reiterates,
without a shred of evidence and no references,


Well..... that alone should have been very attractive to you! I don't
really know why you are asking me, as you are not really interested in
my opinion - merely an opportunity to denigrate what ever that opinion
might be - irrespective of what it might be. You see, you have already
anticipated exactly that and started the denigration even though you
don't know WHY I posted that URL! So your question is redundant and
needs no answer.

Seppo,

You are funny. Don't ever change.

Tom McDonald



the story of vast
amounts of copper being mined by Europeans ca. 3000 BC-1250 BC,
and shipped to Europe from the mines in the UP of Michigan.


Oh but that site tells of far more than merely that!!


The
web site's 'History' is right out of some of the more
speculative Mormon views of history and North American
archaeology, and has holes in it large enough to drive a lorry
train through.


Is "Mormon" a verboten religion in your mind as you hold that LABEL
up? It is indeed true that "North American archaeology" dogma has
"holes in it large enough to drive a lorry train through" (whatever a
"lorry train" might be). There is a will to retain the holes as well -
you know to protect the establishment dogma.


So, what do you find interesting and applicable to the present
topic in that web page?


You can't tell? How about some key words like "metallurgy" + "mining"
+ "Gulf of Mexico" + "Acapulco" + "cast copper" + "Cahokia" + "copper
trade" + missing copper.

Still, if you looked under the heading "Gallery" you might see
something interesting.

Seppo Renfors wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

Greetings, all,

Here's some interesting info about the ancient Andean-Mexican seagoing
trade, bringing into focus especially the importance of metalwork for
tracing these cultural links.

All the best,

Yuri.

=================

ANCIENT MARINERS: Strong evidence of Andean-Mexican seagoing trade as
early as 600 A.D. by David L. Chandler

The Boston Globe, August 14, 1995. Pp. 25-27.

Archeologists studying the ancients empires of Central and South
America have long noticed similarities in some pottery designs and
food crops and wondered whether mariners from the Andean coast traded
with their counterparts 2,000 miles to the north. Now, an MIT
researcher says she has strong evidence they did.

[snip]

Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm

Let's see what we find there, Seppo.

"THE LOST PYRAMIDS OF ROCK LAKE"

"The group acquires through personal funds a 28ft. research
vessel the - R.V. TYRANENA to facilitate in the quest. ...
Aerial photography captured many new features in the water
and on land. ... acquires RV Tyranena II ..."

Hmm... these folks have got ships, planes, looking for some
underwater pyramids in a Wisconsin lake...

I think they should launch their own submarine next --
that'll find them pyramids in no time!

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku -=O=-
Toronto

For every credibility gap, there is a gullibility fill.

|| Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?
||
|| http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm
||
||
|| Seppo,

Seppo

I found it very interesting.
Thanks for posting it.
Texas Parts Guy

All these years and still nothing substantive so far as I know out of Rock
Lake.

This 6 year old web page from a definitely non-establishment site is
interesting:

http://www.mysteriousworld.com/Journ...inter/Aztalan/

Doug

On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 16:42:40 GMT, Seppo Renfors
wrote:



Tom McDonald wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

snip

Others who specialize in Pre-Columbian American archeology agree.
Michael Smith, associate professor of anthropology at the State
University of New York at Stony Brook, says "the evidence she has, the
evidence from metallurgy, is the strongest evidence. I don't doubt at
all what happened... I don't know what more you could hope for, other
than finding a boat with a sign that says 'this way to Acapulco'."



Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm


Seppo,

What do you find interesting in that web site? It reiterates,
without a shred of evidence and no references,

Well..... that alone should have been very attractive to you! I don't
really know why you are asking me, as you are not really interested in
my opinion - merely an opportunity to denigrate what ever that opinion
might be - irrespective of what it might be. You see, you have already
anticipated exactly that and started the denigration even though you
don't know WHY I posted that URL! So your question is redundant and
needs no answer.

the story of vast
amounts of copper being mined by Europeans ca. 3000 BC-1250 BC,
and shipped to Europe from the mines in the UP of Michigan.

Oh but that site tells of far more than merely that!!

The
web site's 'History' is right out of some of the more
speculative Mormon views of history and North American
archaeology, and has holes in it large enough to drive a lorry
train through.

Is "Mormon" a verboten religion in your mind as you hold that LABEL
up? It is indeed true that "North American archaeology" dogma has
"holes in it large enough to drive a lorry train through" (whatever a
"lorry train" might be). There is a will to retain the holes as well -
you know to protect the establishment dogma.

So, what do you find interesting and applicable to the present
topic in that web page?

You can't tell? How about some key words like "metallurgy" + "mining"
+ "Gulf of Mexico" + "Acapulco" + "cast copper" + "Cahokia" + "copper
trade" + missing copper.

Still, if you looked under the heading "Gallery" you might see
something interesting.

You should have posted http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/gallery.htm to
begin with.



Eric Stevens

Eric Stevens wrote:

On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 16:42:40 GMT, Seppo Renfors
wrote:



Tom McDonald wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

snip

Others who specialize in Pre-Columbian American archeology agree.
Michael Smith, associate professor of anthropology at the State
University of New York at Stony Brook, says "the evidence she has, the
evidence from metallurgy, is the strongest evidence. I don't doubt at
all what happened... I don't know what more you could hope for, other
than finding a boat with a sign that says 'this way to Acapulco'."



Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm


Seppo,

What do you find interesting in that web site? It reiterates,
without a shred of evidence and no references,

Well..... that alone should have been very attractive to you! I don't
really know why you are asking me, as you are not really interested in
my opinion - merely an opportunity to denigrate what ever that opinion
might be - irrespective of what it might be. You see, you have already
anticipated exactly that and started the denigration even though you
don't know WHY I posted that URL! So your question is redundant and
needs no answer.


the story of vast
amounts of copper being mined by Europeans ca. 3000 BC-1250 BC,
and shipped to Europe from the mines in the UP of Michigan.

Oh but that site tells of far more than merely that!!


The
web site's 'History' is right out of some of the more
speculative Mormon views of history and North American
archaeology, and has holes in it large enough to drive a lorry
train through.

Is "Mormon" a verboten religion in your mind as you hold that LABEL
up? It is indeed true that "North American archaeology" dogma has
"holes in it large enough to drive a lorry train through" (whatever a
"lorry train" might be). There is a will to retain the holes as well -
you know to protect the establishment dogma.


So, what do you find interesting and applicable to the present
topic in that web page?

You can't tell? How about some key words like "metallurgy" + "mining"
+ "Gulf of Mexico" + "Acapulco" + "cast copper" + "Cahokia" + "copper
trade" + missing copper.

Still, if you looked under the heading "Gallery" you might see
something interesting.


You should have posted http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/gallery.htm to
begin with.

Eric,

The Rock Lake stuff is interesting, but doesn't relate to the
issue of movement of copper in the New World. The link he
posted does. It is just that that url is full of recycled
claims without any evidence, and has been strongly challenged
without successful rebuttal. IMHO. Of course, Seppo could have
attempted to support that info, but chose not to.

Therefore, since Seppo didn't want to explicate his views on
the topic, he changed the topic. The second url is a head-fake.

Tom McDonald

Doug Weller wrote:

All these years and still nothing substantive so far as I know out of Rock
Lake.

This 6 year old web page from a definitely non-establishment site is
interesting:

http://www.mysteriousworld.com/Journ...inter/Aztalan/

Ahhh..... how's that for a reaction from one of the Establishment
Dogma Protectors!! :-)

--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Rex B wrote:

|| Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?
||
|| http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm
||
||
|| Seppo,

Seppo

I found it very interesting.
Thanks for posting it.
Texas Parts Guy

No problems - have a look at the link by Doug as well.

--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Eric Stevens wrote:

On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 16:42:40 GMT, Seppo Renfors
wrote:



Tom McDonald wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

snip

Others who specialize in Pre-Columbian American archeology agree.
Michael Smith, associate professor of anthropology at the State
University of New York at Stony Brook, says "the evidence she has, the
evidence from metallurgy, is the strongest evidence. I don't doubt at
all what happened... I don't know what more you could hope for, other
than finding a boat with a sign that says 'this way to Acapulco'."



Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm


Seppo,

What do you find interesting in that web site? It reiterates,
without a shred of evidence and no references,

Well..... that alone should have been very attractive to you! I don't
really know why you are asking me, as you are not really interested in
my opinion - merely an opportunity to denigrate what ever that opinion
might be - irrespective of what it might be. You see, you have already
anticipated exactly that and started the denigration even though you
don't know WHY I posted that URL! So your question is redundant and
needs no answer.

the story of vast
amounts of copper being mined by Europeans ca. 3000 BC-1250 BC,
and shipped to Europe from the mines in the UP of Michigan.

Oh but that site tells of far more than merely that!!

The
web site's 'History' is right out of some of the more
speculative Mormon views of history and North American
archaeology, and has holes in it large enough to drive a lorry
train through.

Is "Mormon" a verboten religion in your mind as you hold that LABEL
up? It is indeed true that "North American archaeology" dogma has
"holes in it large enough to drive a lorry train through" (whatever a
"lorry train" might be). There is a will to retain the holes as well -
you know to protect the establishment dogma.

So, what do you find interesting and applicable to the present
topic in that web page?

You can't tell? How about some key words like "metallurgy" + "mining"
+ "Gulf of Mexico" + "Acapulco" + "cast copper" + "Cahokia" + "copper
trade" + missing copper.

Still, if you looked under the heading "Gallery" you might see
something interesting.

You should have posted http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/gallery.htm to
begin with.

You mean to say all that history in the page I pointed to as a
starting point - is not worth looking at - or what is there to be
afraid of on that page?

Whatever you might think about their theories, there is one thing that
is particularly interesting there - the claimed hiatus of mining
between 1200 BC and 900 AD. Didn't you see that?

--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

Greetings, all,

Here's some interesting info about the ancient Andean-Mexican seagoing
trade, bringing into focus especially the importance of metalwork for
tracing these cultural links.

All the best,

Yuri.

=================

ANCIENT MARINERS: Strong evidence of Andean-Mexican seagoing trade as
early as 600 A.D. by David L. Chandler

The Boston Globe, August 14, 1995. Pp. 25-27.

Archeologists studying the ancients empires of Central and South
America have long noticed similarities in some pottery designs and
food crops and wondered whether mariners from the Andean coast traded
with their counterparts 2,000 miles to the north. Now, an MIT
researcher says she has strong evidence they did.

[snip]

Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm

Let's see what we find there, Seppo.

"THE LOST PYRAMIDS OF ROCK LAKE"

"The group acquires through personal funds a 28ft. research
vessel the - R.V. TYRANENA to facilitate in the quest. ...
Aerial photography captured many new features in the water
and on land. ... acquires RV Tyranena II ..."

Hmm... these folks have got ships, planes, looking for some
underwater pyramids in a Wisconsin lake...

I think they should launch their own submarine next --
that'll find them pyramids in no time!

Nothing wrong with that. Here we had a plane fly over for weeks in a
grid pattern, searching for minerals underground! They have already
used sonar and video. Sonar is a fairly common tool for underwater
research - side scan sonar is fairly sophisticated.

2002
"RLRS as team does more sonar side scan work to recapture correct
DGPS (Differential GPS) readings that were faulty due to satellite
equipment linkup problems on some targets. Additional underwater video
work may resume with ROV & Divers later on in the year for Rock Lake
video documentary."

I have heard about ancient trade routs down to Mexico having existed
some time ago from elsewhere. If so, then what is there to prevent
copper having been traded along the trade routs too? If it did go down
to South America where extensive trade networks did exist, then the
"missing copper" may have a partial answer at least.

--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 07:15:46 GMT, Seppo Renfors
wrote:



Eric Stevens wrote:

On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 16:42:40 GMT, Seppo Renfors
wrote:



Tom McDonald wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

snip

Others who specialize in Pre-Columbian American archeology agree.
Michael Smith, associate professor of anthropology at the State
University of New York at Stony Brook, says "the evidence she has, the
evidence from metallurgy, is the strongest evidence. I don't doubt at
all what happened... I don't know what more you could hope for, other
than finding a boat with a sign that says 'this way to Acapulco'."



Hmmmm perhaps this might do instead?

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm


Seppo,

What do you find interesting in that web site? It reiterates,
without a shred of evidence and no references,

Well..... that alone should have been very attractive to you! I don't
really know why you are asking me, as you are not really interested in
my opinion - merely an opportunity to denigrate what ever that opinion
might be - irrespective of what it might be. You see, you have already
anticipated exactly that and started the denigration even though you
don't know WHY I posted that URL! So your question is redundant and
needs no answer.

the story of vast
amounts of copper being mined by Europeans ca. 3000 BC-1250 BC,
and shipped to Europe from the mines in the UP of Michigan.

Oh but that site tells of far more than merely that!!

The
web site's 'History' is right out of some of the more
speculative Mormon views of history and North American
archaeology, and has holes in it large enough to drive a lorry
train through.

Is "Mormon" a verboten religion in your mind as you hold that LABEL
up? It is indeed true that "North American archaeology" dogma has
"holes in it large enough to drive a lorry train through" (whatever a
"lorry train" might be). There is a will to retain the holes as well -
you know to protect the establishment dogma.

So, what do you find interesting and applicable to the present
topic in that web page?

You can't tell? How about some key words like "metallurgy" + "mining"
+ "Gulf of Mexico" + "Acapulco" + "cast copper" + "Cahokia" + "copper
trade" + missing copper.

Still, if you looked under the heading "Gallery" you might see
something interesting.

You should have posted http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/gallery.htm to
begin with.

You mean to say all that history in the page I pointed to as a
starting point - is not worth looking at - or what is there to be
afraid of on that page?

When someone complained about the page you posted you said to look at
the 'gallery'. When I sai you should have directly posted the URL of
the gallery you said I should be looking at the original page.

Which one do you really mean to direct us to?

Whatever you might think about their theories, there is one thing that
is particularly interesting there - the claimed hiatus of mining
between 1200 BC and 900 AD. Didn't you see that?

Yep - that story is old hiatus.




Eric Stevens

Seppo Renfors wrote:

snip

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm

snip

Whatever you might think about their theories, there is one thing that
is particularly interesting there - the claimed hiatus of mining
between 1200 BC and 900 AD. Didn't you see that?

Seppo,

This claim flies in the face of the evidence of copper from the
UP of Michigan being used from ca. 7000 ybp through the coming
of the French. The Old Copper complex dates from about 3000 BC
to something like 1000 BC (depending on location).
Mississippian cultures began about 800-900 AD, and also used
copper. I wonder why these two dates were chosen by the
website's authors. I suspect it might have had to do with the
florescence of the Old Copper Complex and the rise of the
Mississippian cultures; although they clearly relate those dates
to events in Europe, too.

However, copper use never stopped, and mining in the UP of
Michigan continued. Red Ochre, Hopewell, Effigy Mound,
Mississippian, Oneota (ca. 400 BC--European contact) were all
manifestations of Indian culture in the American midwest that
used copper. Most of the copper was from the areas we've been
discussing.

There was no hiatus in copper mining.

Tom McDonald

Tom McDonald wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:

snip

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm

snip

Whatever you might think about their theories, there is one thing that
is particularly interesting there - the claimed hiatus of mining
between 1200 BC and 900 AD. Didn't you see that?

Seppo,

This claim flies in the face of the evidence of copper from the
UP of Michigan being used from ca. 7000 ybp through the coming
of the French. The Old Copper complex dates from about 3000 BC
to something like 1000 BC (depending on location).
Mississippian cultures began about 800-900 AD, and also used
copper. I wonder why these two dates were chosen by the
website's authors. I suspect it might have had to do with the
florescence of the Old Copper Complex and the rise of the
Mississippian cultures; although they clearly relate those dates
to events in Europe, too.

However, copper use never stopped, and mining in the UP of
Michigan continued. Red Ochre, Hopewell, Effigy Mound,
Mississippian, Oneota (ca. 400 BC--European contact) were all
manifestations of Indian culture in the American midwest that
used copper. Most of the copper was from the areas we've been
discussing.

How the hell can you have "Red Ochre, Hopewell, Effigy Mound" cultures
at 400 BCE when the "Effigy Mound" people didn't appear till about 600
AD? The Red Ochre (from about 500 BCE), Hopewell (from about 100 BCE)
cultures did overlap but both were gone by 600 AD.

There was no hiatus in copper mining.

I note you point to Iowa for a claim re-Michigan........


"Copper was obtained through trade with groups of the Old Copper
complex to the north, who had been accessing the extensive Lake
Superior copper deposits since at least 7,000 BP." - Susan R. Martin:
"Wonderful Power: The Story of Ancient Copper Working in the Lake
Superior Basin"; ...... Hmmmmm.... *not* a very reliable source!!


Red Och "Unfortunately, little else is known of this culture, as
reliable radiocarbon dates are scarce and few human physical remains
have been studied to date." - Jennifer R. Hass: "Human Skeletal
Remains from Two Red Ocher Mortuary Contexts in Southeastern
Wisconsin,"

Some artefacts of Lake Superior copper is claimed to have been found
with these burials. The claim requires there to be a Lake Superior
copper "signature" to make the claim. I'm certain there are more than
ONE "signature" required for the copper from that area considering the
variety of forms it is found in there. Wouldn't this also require a
knowledge of the composition to claim a "signature" for it? IF so,
then why is this knowledge not readily available? It is perhaps merely
an assumption it is copper from Lake Superior?

Of course c14 dated mines during that claimed hiatus period in
Michigan would answer the question - only I don't know how it is
possible to date a hole.


--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Seppo Renfors wrote:


Tom McDonald wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:

snip

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm

snip

Whatever you might think about their theories, there is one thing that
is particularly interesting there - the claimed hiatus of mining
between 1200 BC and 900 AD. Didn't you see that?

Seppo,

This claim flies in the face of the evidence of copper from the
UP of Michigan being used from ca. 7000 ybp through the coming
of the French. The Old Copper complex dates from about 3000 BC
to something like 1000 BC (depending on location).
Mississippian cultures began about 800-900 AD, and also used
copper. I wonder why these two dates were chosen by the
website's authors. I suspect it might have had to do with the
florescence of the Old Copper Complex and the rise of the
Mississippian cultures; although they clearly relate those dates
to events in Europe, too.

However, copper use never stopped, and mining in the UP of
Michigan continued. Red Ochre, Hopewell, Effigy Mound,
Mississippian, Oneota (ca. 400 BC--European contact) were all
manifestations of Indian culture in the American midwest that
used copper. Most of the copper was from the areas we've been
discussing.


How the hell can you have "Red Ochre, Hopewell, Effigy Mound" cultures
at 400 BCE when the "Effigy Mound" people didn't appear till about 600
AD? The Red Ochre (from about 500 BCE), Hopewell (from about 100 BCE)
cultures did overlap but both were gone by 600 AD.

Seppo,

'ca. 400 BC--European contact'. 'From about 400 BC to European
contact'. Sorry you didn't grasp that.



There was no hiatus in copper mining.


I note you point to Iowa for a claim re-Michigan........

Where did I point to Iowa?



"Copper was obtained through trade with groups of the Old Copper
complex to the north, who had been accessing the extensive Lake
Superior copper deposits since at least 7,000 BP." - Susan R. Martin:
"Wonderful Power: The Story of Ancient Copper Working in the Lake
Superior Basin"; ...... Hmmmmm.... *not* a very reliable source!!

Then why did you choose it?



Red Och "Unfortunately, little else is known of this culture, as
reliable radiocarbon dates are scarce and few human physical remains
have been studied to date." - Jennifer R. Hass: "Human Skeletal
Remains from Two Red Ocher Mortuary Contexts in Southeastern
Wisconsin,"

The Riverside site is Red Ochre. It is probably the
best-studied Red Ochre burial site. It is the context from
which R666/55786 comes. It's well-known, and well-studied.
Curious you didn't follow up on that.


Some artefacts of Lake Superior copper is claimed to have been found
with these burials. The claim requires there to be a Lake Superior
copper "signature" to make the claim. I'm certain there are more than
ONE "signature" required for the copper from that area considering the
variety of forms it is found in there.

That's for you to research and provide evidence for. Ask Inger
the value of this sort of 'what-if' scenario.

Wouldn't this also require a
knowledge of the composition to claim a "signature" for it? IF so,
then why is this knowledge not readily available? It is perhaps merely
an assumption it is copper from Lake Superior?

From the Lake Superior area, not from the lake. But Seppo,
surely you've followed all the links and read up on the what
makes Lake Superior-region copper identifiable?


Of course c14 dated mines during that claimed hiatus period in
Michigan would answer the question - only I don't know how it is
possible to date a hole.

That's your assumption. Why not follow it up yourself?

Tom McDonald

Eric Stevens wrote:

On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 07:15:46 GMT, Seppo Renfors
wrote:

[..]

You mean to say all that history in the page I pointed to as a
starting point - is not worth looking at - or what is there to be
afraid of on that page?

When someone complained about the page you posted you said to look at
the 'gallery'. When I sai you should have directly posted the URL of
the gallery you said I should be looking at the original page.

Which one do you really mean to direct us to?

Is there some form of convention or "law" that says I cannot suggest
more than a SINGLE page as being "of interest"?


[..]

--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 04:10:59 GMT, Seppo Renfors
wrote:



Eric Stevens wrote:

On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 07:15:46 GMT, Seppo Renfors
wrote:

[..]

You mean to say all that history in the page I pointed to as a
starting point - is not worth looking at - or what is there to be
afraid of on that page?

When someone complained about the page you posted you said to look at
the 'gallery'. When I sad you should have directly posted the URL of
the gallery you said I should be looking at the original page.

Which one do you really mean to direct us to?

Is there some form of convention or "law" that says I cannot suggest
more than a SINGLE page as being "of interest"?

I don't know about it being a matter of convention or law, but it
certainly seems to be a matter of fact. :-)

If you really meant to draw our attention to both pages, why didn't
you do it the first time when you had a chance?



Eric Stevens

Eric Stevens wrote:

On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 04:10:59 GMT, Seppo Renfors
wrote:



Eric Stevens wrote:

On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 07:15:46 GMT, Seppo Renfors
wrote:

[..]

You mean to say all that history in the page I pointed to as a
starting point - is not worth looking at - or what is there to be
afraid of on that page?

When someone complained about the page you posted you said to look at
the 'gallery'. When I sad you should have directly posted the URL of
the gallery you said I should be looking at the original page.

Which one do you really mean to direct us to?

Is there some form of convention or "law" that says I cannot suggest
more than a SINGLE page as being "of interest"?

I don't know about it being a matter of convention or law, but it
certainly seems to be a matter of fact. :-)

If it is neither "convention or law" then it cannot be a "fact"
either, you know.

If you really meant to draw our attention to both pages, why didn't
you do it the first time when you had a chance?

Ahhhh.... but you see I have generously attributed a certain amount of
mental agility and self motivation to people, considering the group IS
a "sci.*" group presuming it to refer to "science" but without the
"fiction" - though certainly sci-fi people have agile minds at least
:-)

--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Tom McDonald wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:


Tom McDonald wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:

snip

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm

snip

Whatever you might think about their theories, there is one thing that
is particularly interesting there - the claimed hiatus of mining
between 1200 BC and 900 AD. Didn't you see that?

Seppo,

This claim flies in the face of the evidence of copper from the
UP of Michigan being used from ca. 7000 ybp through the coming
of the French. The Old Copper complex dates from about 3000 BC
to something like 1000 BC (depending on location).
Mississippian cultures began about 800-900 AD, and also used
copper. I wonder why these two dates were chosen by the
website's authors. I suspect it might have had to do with the
florescence of the Old Copper Complex and the rise of the
Mississippian cultures; although they clearly relate those dates
to events in Europe, too.

However, copper use never stopped, and mining in the UP of
Michigan continued. Red Ochre, Hopewell, Effigy Mound,
Mississippian, Oneota (ca. 400 BC--European contact) were all
manifestations of Indian culture in the American midwest that
used copper. Most of the copper was from the areas we've been
discussing.


How the hell can you have "Red Ochre, Hopewell, Effigy Mound" cultures
at 400 BCE when the "Effigy Mound" people didn't appear till about 600
AD? The Red Ochre (from about 500 BCE), Hopewell (from about 100 BCE)
cultures did overlap but both were gone by 600 AD.

Seppo,

'ca. 400 BC--European contact'. 'From about 400 BC to European
contact'. Sorry you didn't grasp that.

You mention a mob of people, then point to a time, now you tut-tut
about your own actions attempting to somehow imply an "error" by me -
why else point to a specific (but irrelevant) time? You see your
"european contact" in this context doesn't state a time as the ARTICLE
claims "european contact" before then. You don't specify what you
referred to with your sloppy writing.

There was no hiatus in copper mining.


I note you point to Iowa for a claim re-Michigan........

Where did I point to Iowa?

Are you suggesting none of the "cultures" you point to exist in Iowa?

http://www.nps.gov/efmo/web/hrs/images/fig8.jpg

"Copper was obtained through trade with groups of the Old Copper
complex to the north, who had been accessing the extensive Lake
Superior copper deposits since at least 7,000 BP." - Susan R. Martin:
"Wonderful Power: The Story of Ancient Copper Working in the Lake
Superior Basin"; ...... Hmmmmm.... *not* a very reliable source!!

Then why did you choose it?

To say even revisionists agree with certain aspects - BTW, I can quote
whomever I like and designate the value of them as I see then warrant.

Red Och "Unfortunately, little else is known of this culture, as
reliable radiocarbon dates are scarce and few human physical remains
have been studied to date." - Jennifer R. Hass: "Human Skeletal
Remains from Two Red Ocher Mortuary Contexts in Southeastern
Wisconsin,"

The Riverside site is Red Ochre. It is probably the
best-studied Red Ochre burial site. It is the context from
which R666/55786 comes. It's well-known, and well-studied.
Curious you didn't follow up on that.

..... or Beothuck? The term "red ochre" is about a people who's burial
customs involved red ochre - that includes the Beothuck as well as the
early Saami in Finland. It can be and is also called "Terminal
Archaic" as a culture. I also tends to creep in on the "Woodland
traditions" and can be referred to as that too. "Red Ochre" is a
poorly chosen name as it is practically meaningless.

My understanding is that no burials were found at Riverside..... but I
could be wrong:

http://www.cast.uark.edu/other/nps/n...CS/nic0394.pdf
"Riverside Site (20- ME-1), Menominee County, Oshkosh, Wisconsin - 3
bodies were found at that site. The remains of one of the three
individuals was cremated."

"The Riverside Site is a multi-component cemetery and habitation site.
Intermittent occupation of the site spans a time period circa 1000
B.C.-A.D. 1850. The stylistic attributes of the copper objects are
characteristic of the Red Ochre Culture, an archeologically defined
culture within the Archaic Period, dated to 1000-400 B.C."

"The remains of two of the three individuals were removed from Feature
A. Funerary objects date this burial feature to the 18th and 19th
centuries. These objects, not in the possession of the Oshkosh Public
Museum, consist of glass beads, a kettle brass bracelet, and a ceramic
vessel."

So only one set of remains were of any age and that age is unknown.
The primary identifier for "Red Ochre" culture hasn't been found
apparently. Cremation was not a part of that culture either, IIRC
cremation dates to the "Middle Woodland" culture. Again this isn't
exactly the Keweenaw peninsular in Michigan either - if it is indeed
the same "Riverside" we are dealing with.


Some artefacts of Lake Superior copper is claimed to have been found
with these burials. The claim requires there to be a Lake Superior
copper "signature" to make the claim. I'm certain there are more than
ONE "signature" required for the copper from that area considering the
variety of forms it is found in there.

That's for you to research and provide evidence for.

What part of "I'm certain" didn't you understand?

Ask Inger
the value of this sort of 'what-if' scenario.

You know, your life would really be empty and hollow without her as
you can't stop thinking about her for long enough to write a few lines
of text!

Wouldn't this also require a
knowledge of the composition to claim a "signature" for it? IF so,
then why is this knowledge not readily available? It is perhaps merely
an assumption it is copper from Lake Superior?

From the Lake Superior area, not from the lake.


Psssttt.... they have found a HUGE piece (7 Yank ton) of that pure
copper IN the lake itself, you know. Who is to say the ancients didn't
dive for it as well?

But Seppo,
surely you've followed all the links and read up on the what
makes Lake Superior-region copper identifiable?

This has already been discussed and searched for - it doesn't appear
to exist - therefor it tends to point to an ASSUMPTION based on
establishment dogma more than science as it requires the rejection of
all refining processes pout of hand. BTW, you are one of those
reporting on such things and there has been diddly-squat from you as
well.

Of course c14 dated mines during that claimed hiatus period in
Michigan would answer the question - only I don't know how it is
possible to date a hole.

That's your assumption. Why not follow it up yourself?

Listen, even with the intelligence of an oven mitten it is obvious you
cannot c14 date a HOLE!

--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Seppo Renfors wrote:


Tom McDonald wrote:

Seppo Renfors wrote:


Tom McDonald wrote:


Seppo Renfors wrote:

snip

http://www.rocklakeresearch.com/history.htm

snip

Whatever you might think about their theories, there is one thing that
is particularly interesting there - the claimed hiatus of mining
between 1200 BC and 900 AD. Didn't you see that?

Seppo,

This claim flies in the face of the evidence of copper from the
UP of Michigan being used from ca. 7000 ybp through the coming
of the French. The Old Copper complex dates from about 3000 BC
to something like 1000 BC (depending on location).
Mississippian cultures began about 800-900 AD, and also used
copper. I wonder why these two dates were chosen by the
website's authors. I suspect it might have had to do with the
florescence of the Old Copper Complex and the rise of the
Mississippian cultures; although they clearly relate those dates
to events in Europe, too.

However, copper use never stopped, and mining in the UP of
Michigan continued. Red Ochre, Hopewell, Effigy Mound,
Mississippian, Oneota (ca. 400 BC--European contact) were all
manifestations of Indian culture in the American midwest that
used copper. Most of the copper was from the areas we've been
discussing.


How the hell can you have "Red Ochre, Hopewell, Effigy Mound" cultures
at 400 BCE when the "Effigy Mound" people didn't appear till about 600
AD? The Red Ochre (from about 500 BCE), Hopewell (from about 100 BCE)
cultures did overlap but both were gone by 600 AD.

Seppo,

'ca. 400 BC--European contact'. 'From about 400 BC to European
contact'. Sorry you didn't grasp that.


You mention a mob of people, then point to a time, now you tut-tut
about your own actions attempting to somehow imply an "error" by me -
why else point to a specific (but irrelevant) time? You see your
"european contact" in this context doesn't state a time as the ARTICLE
claims "european contact" before then. You don't specify what you
referred to with your sloppy writing.


There was no hiatus in copper mining.


I note you point to Iowa for a claim re-Michigan........

Where did I point to Iowa?


Are you suggesting none of the "cultures" you point to exist in Iowa?

http://www.nps.gov/efmo/web/hrs/images/fig8.jpg


"Copper was obtained through trade with groups of the Old Copper
complex to the north, who had been accessing the extensive Lake
Superior copper deposits since at least 7,000 BP." - Susan R. Martin:
"Wonderful Power: The Story of Ancient Copper Working in the Lake
Superior Basin"; ...... Hmmmmm.... *not* a very reliable source!!

Then why did you choose it?


To say even revisionists agree with certain aspects - BTW, I can quote
whomever I like and designate the value of them as I see then warrant.


Red Och "Unfortunately, little else is known of this culture, as
reliable radiocarbon dates are scarce and few human physical remains
have been studied to date." - Jennifer R. Hass: "Human Skeletal
Remains from Two Red Ocher Mortuary Contexts in Southeastern
Wisconsin,"

The Riverside site is Red Ochre. It is probably the
best-studied Red Ochre burial site. It is the context from
which R666/55786 comes. It's well-known, and well-studied.
Curious you didn't follow up on that.


.... or Beothuck? The term "red ochre" is about a people who's burial
customs involved red ochre - that includes the Beothuck as well as the
early Saami in Finland. It can be and is also called "Terminal
Archaic" as a culture. I also tends to creep in on the "Woodland
traditions" and can be referred to as that too. "Red Ochre" is a
poorly chosen name as it is practically meaningless.

My understanding is that no burials were found at Riverside..... but I
could be wrong:

http://www.cast.uark.edu/other/nps/n...CS/nic0394.pdf
"Riverside Site (20- ME-1), Menominee County, Oshkosh, Wisconsin - 3
bodies were found at that site. The remains of one of the three
individuals was cremated."

"The Riverside Site is a multi-component cemetery and habitation site.
Intermittent occupation of the site spans a time period circa 1000
B.C.-A.D. 1850. The stylistic attributes of the copper objects are
characteristic of the Red Ochre Culture, an archeologically defined
culture within the Archaic Period, dated to 1000-400 B.C."

"The remains of two of the three individuals were removed from Feature
A. Funerary objects date this burial feature to the 18th and 19th
centuries. These objects, not in the possession of the Oshkosh Public
Museum, consist of glass beads, a kettle brass bracelet, and a ceramic
vessel."

So only one set of remains were of any age and that age is unknown.
The primary identifier for "Red Ochre" culture hasn't been found
apparently. Cremation was not a part of that culture either, IIRC
cremation dates to the "Middle Woodland" culture. Again this isn't
exactly the Keweenaw peninsular in Michigan either - if it is indeed
the same "Riverside" we are dealing with.



Some artefacts of Lake Superior copper is claimed to have been found
with these burials. The claim requires there to be a Lake Superior
copper "signature" to make the claim. I'm certain there are more than
ONE "signature" required for the copper from that area considering the
variety of forms it is found in there.

That's for you to research and provide evidence for.


What part of "I'm certain" didn't you understand?


Ask Inger
the value of this sort of 'what-if' scenario.


You know, your life would really be empty and hollow without her as
you can't stop thinking about her for long enough to write a few lines
of text!


Wouldn't this also require a
knowledge of the composition to claim a "signature" for it? IF so,
then why is this knowledge not readily available? It is perhaps merely
an assumption it is copper from Lake Superior?

From the Lake Superior area, not from the lake.



Psssttt.... they have found a HUGE piece (7 Yank ton) of that pure
copper IN the lake itself, you know. Who is to say the ancients didn't
dive for it as well?


But Seppo,
surely you've followed all the links and read up on the what
makes Lake Superior-region copper identifiable?


This has already been discussed and searched for - it doesn't appear
to exist - therefor it tends to point to an ASSUMPTION based on
establishment dogma more than science as it requires the rejection of
all refining processes pout of hand. BTW, you are one of those
reporting on such things and there has been diddly-squat from you as
well.


Of course c14 dated mines during that claimed hiatus period in
Michigan would answer the question - only I don't know how it is
possible to date a hole.

That's your assumption. Why not follow it up yourself?


Listen, even with the intelligence of an oven mitten it is obvious you
cannot c14 date a HOLE!


Seppo,

You're funny. Don't ever change.

Tom McDonald