new video
hot off the press!  
    more about rocket
mass heaters here.
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic

Native Americans were in decline before Columbus  RSS feed

 
duane hennon
gardener
Posts: 763
Location: western pennsylvania zone 5/a
45
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

so the "good old days" may not have been so good

http://popular-archaeology.com/issue/winter-2017/article/climate-change-drove-population-decline-in-new-world-before-europeans-arrived

Climate change drove population decline in New World before Europeans arrived

What caused the rapid disappearance of a vibrant Native American agrarian culture that lived in urban settlements from the Ohio River Valley to the Mississippi River Valley in the two centuries preceding the European settlement of North America? In a new study, researchers from Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis reconstructed and analyzed 2,100 years of temperature and precipitation data—and point the finger at climate change.
Employing proxies of prehistoric temperature and precipitation preserved in finely layered lake sediments, somewhat analogous to tree-ring records used to reconstruct drought and temperature, the IUPUI scientists have reported on the dramatic environmental changes that occurred as the Native Americans—known as Mississippians—flourished and then vanished from the Midwestern United States. The researchers theorize that the catastrophic climate change they observed, which doomed food production, was a primary cause of the disappearance.
 
Devin Lavign
pollinator
Posts: 483
Location: Pac Northwest
40
books chicken forest garden goat hunting solar trees wofati woodworking
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
This is actually fairly old news. I was reading about it in the 90's

Though they did not exactly vanish, they just broke up into smaller groups and spread out more. Forming the foundations of the loosely affiliated tribes Europeans encountered when they did arrive. It also wasn't just a massive drought that caused the "empire" to fail. But a youthful and inexperienced ruler taking power. He continued to demand the same tax/tribute from people when their crops were failing due to drought. This caused many to just leave and the others to start a small civil war to depose the ruler. The end of which saw the complete collapse of the society as everyone disbanded into smaller groups, rather than trying to continue with the failed civilization.

And speaking of, these remnants of that culture where then wiped out massively due to 1 sick Spanish man being left behind when the Spaniards sailed up the Mississippi. That spread through the native populations like wild fire and what was once a quite powerful and populated region became a void of isolated people.

This further altered the culture and landscape of the interior of N America. A double blow destroying the people who lived there.
 
Steven Kovacs
Posts: 225
Location: Western Massachusetts (USDA zone 5a, heating zone 5, 40"+)
9
urban
  • Likes 2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Interesting, thanks for sharing!

Note that the article is about one period in one region in North America.  The Americas are enormous and over thousands of years conditions changed differently in different areas, and civilizations rose and fell all the time.  None of those declines or falls really compare in magnitude to the death toll caused by the introduction of Old World diseases after Columbus, though.  Numbers are hard to estimate well but it seems like current thinking is that Native populations dropped about 90% due to disease after contact.
 
Tyler Ludens
pollinator
Posts: 9740
Location: Central Texas USA Latitude 30 Zone 8
180
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Agriculture is very vulnerable to climate change.  Fortunately now we're learning Permaculture!

http://kennysideshow.blogspot.com/2008/05/agriculture-or-permaculture-why-words.html
 
Glenn Herbert
gardener
Posts: 2184
Location: Upstate NY, zone 5
74
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I recommend Mayflower by Nathaniel Philbrick.  Aside from the fascinating, deeply researched story of the social and political beginnings of New England, there is a good bit of info on native agricultural and community-organizing practices.

There was an epidemic in 1616-19 that swept the east coast, decimating the population just before the Pilgrims arrived. They found (and stole) caches of corn, some left by dead people and some by living owners.
 
John Weiland
Posts: 921
Location: RRV of da Nort
41
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
From the article: "....IUPUI scientists have reported on the dramatic environmental changes that occurred as the Native Americans—known as Mississippians—flourished and then vanished from the Midwestern United States. The researchers theorize that the catastrophic climate change they observed, which doomed food production, was a primary cause of the disappearance."

Yeah, I'd have to read the full article to get a flavor for what is new information relative to books and other articles already describing Cahokia and the Mississippian cultures--maybe it's just better data at this point on the climactic angle for the decline:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia
 
duane hennon
gardener
Posts: 763
Location: western pennsylvania zone 5/a
45
  • Likes 2 Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

I would like to venture a few points before this gets reported or sent to the cider press

the arrival of improving climate coincided with the arrival of Europeans
many Native Americans living when the Europeans came weren't "living in harmony with nature" (they were struggling to survive)
the Europeans didn't disrupt a way of life "unchanged for thousands of years"
the great buffalo herds didn't start to grow and expand until the decline of the Native Americans due to the drought
the shifting climate favored grasslands over farmlands
the remaining Native Americans couldn't really take advantage of the buffalo and start to flourish until they had the horse


http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2017/02/10/513963490/1-000-years-ago-corn-made-this-society-big-then-a-changing-climate-destroyed-the

1,000 Years Ago, Corn Made This Society Big. Then, A Changing Climate Destroyed It
 
Tyler Ludens
pollinator
Posts: 9740
Location: Central Texas USA Latitude 30 Zone 8
180
  • Likes 7
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
duane hennon wrote:

the remaining Native Americans couldn't really take advantage of the buffalo and start to flourish until they had the horse


Only the Plains tribes had culture based on the bison, so they were not "the remaining Native Americans."  There were some 500 distinct cultures in North America prior to European conquest. 

 
Glenn Herbert
gardener
Posts: 2184
Location: Upstate NY, zone 5
74
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Some tribes (western ones especially) claim to have inhabited the same land continuously for thousands (sometimes many thousands) of years. I don't have an authoritative opinion on that, but there is documentation of a number of eastern tribes migrating in early historic or prehistoric times, sometimes due to warfare, aggression, or maybe just population pressures. As the Iroquois Confederacy grew, they pushed on other populations, and then the Tuscaroras arrived from the South and were given refuge and finally membership.

Some tribes (Plains area, Southwest) had declined before Europeans, others declined catastrophically from European diseases, and some just faded from relentless pressure.
 
Ben Zumeta
Posts: 198
Location: Redwood Country, Zone 9, 60" rain/yr,
8
dog duck hugelkultur
  • Likes 2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Was this decline just before Columbus or just before the actual European first contact (Basque and Nordic sailors and fishermen)? Algonquins already had Basque names from intermarriage with fisherman/explorers when French and Spanish contacted them in the 1490s (Kurlansky). This is because Basques and Vikings had reached North America already on fishing excursions which kept Catholic Europe fed on Fridays. I would venture to guess they brought diseases with them that started problems for Native Americans.

This sounds very familiar to the misconception we had about Easter Island, which did not collapse because of ecological exploitation but rather due to Captain Cook's introduced diseases (according University of Hawaii anthropology department head and chair of a major Easter Island research study). I think it is a lot easier for us to accept a story where climate or people's misuse of the land lead to their demise rather than our dirty European asses getting millions of people sick.
 
Bryant RedHawk
garden master
Posts: 2757
Location: Vilonia, Arkansas - Zone 7B/8A stoney, sandy loam soil pH 6.5
225
chicken dog forest garden hugelkultur hunting toxin-ectomy
  • Likes 6
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Interesting how all these "reports" were written by white men.
Sounds like they still try to shift blame or make out that "it wasn't us" for what I see as worse than Hitler's abominations.
White eyes came here long before "Columbus", once the tall ships came did the holocaust begin.

Redhawk
 
Marco Banks
Posts: 553
Location: Los Angeles, CA
46
books chicken food preservation forest garden hugelkultur trees urban woodworking
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
The beaver trade was a massive precipitating factor in the disruption and death of native peoples across North America.

Erik Wolf's classic, "Europe and the People Without History" chronicles the movement of people displaced by the beaver trade as the trapping moved steadily westward to exploit un-tapped resources.  Disease, intra-tribal warfare, and the scramble for the resources brought by the white man's "need" for beaver pelts for hats in Europe.  What gold was to the 16th and 17th centuries, beavers were in the 18th and 19th centuries.

I would suggest that the destruction of this key-stone species (beavers) unleashed more environmental chaos than any other single variable in North American ecological history, and that includes the climate change we are seeing today.
 
duane hennon
gardener
Posts: 763
Location: western pennsylvania zone 5/a
45
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator


let's all go to the ciderpress....


Native Americans were naive about the wider world, but were not children
they participated in the trade because they wanted what the white men had
guns, horses, wool blankets, cotton clothing,  metal knives and axes, metal cooking pots, new fruit and vegetables, etc
they helped decimate the beaver without any "modern" ecological thinking
disease and greed merely aggravated existing tensions  over hunting grounds
as one tribe would side with the whites to attack another tribe

the Native Americans of the plains did the same thing years later with the buffalo
as buffalo hides became the thing that the white traders wanted
a number of tribes had the same idea of becoming nomadic and following the buffalo (now that horses made that possible)
and many brutal tribal wars were fought on the plains,  up to 1840 when a peace was finally declared
living on the plains required horses, lots of them, (10 to 12/person)
and these horses also competed with the buffalo for grass ( which varied depending upon the rains)
the plains people didn't farm or store hay for winter
so many horses starved to death in winter
requiring more buffalo hides to replace their horses each spring.....


see "The Contested Plains - Indians, Goldseekers, and the Rush to Colorado by Elliott West, University of Kansas Press, 1998

one could see this as a cautionary tale
of what happens when a less technical society
adopts a technology (in this case, horses)
without fully understanding it requirements and ramifications
(farms, winter feed, etc)
 
Glenn Herbert
gardener
Posts: 2184
Location: Upstate NY, zone 5
74
  • Likes 2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Beaver alter their landscape by building dams, flooding lowlands, cutting down trees. This creates ponds for fish habitat, possibly water retention and aquifer recharge in drier climates, a source of ample drinking water for all animals in the area, sediment trapping which enhances soil fertility as the ponds turn to wetland and then meadow, more meadow/edge habitat from clearing trees...
 
duane hennon
gardener
Posts: 763
Location: western pennsylvania zone 5/a
45
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator


rather than a people "frozen in time and culture"
the "Native Americans" it turns out were evolving just like everyone else
http://nativesnewsonline.com/2017/04/16/dna-scientists-claim-that-cherokees-are-from-the-middle-east/

DNA scientists claim that Cherokees are from the Middle East

The laboratory immediately stumbled into a scientific hornet’s nest. That Cherokee princess in someone’s genealogy was most likely a Jewish or North African princess. Its scientists have labeled the Cherokees not as Native Americans, but as a Middle Eastern-North African population.Cherokees have high levels of test markers associated with the Berbers, native Egyptians, Turks, Lebanese, Hebrews and Mesopotamians. Genetically, they are more Jewish than the typical American Jew of European ancestry. So-called “full-blooded” Cherokees have high levels of European DNA and a trace of Asiatic (Native American) DNA. Their skin color and facial features are primarily Semitic in origin, not Native American.



At present, the researchers at DNA Consultants seem unaware that throughout the 1600s Iberian Sephardic Jews and Moorish Conversos colonized the North Carolina and Georgia Mountains, where they mined and worked gold and silver. All European maps show western North Carolina occupied by Apalache, Creek, Shawnee and Yuchi Indians until 1718. Most of these indigenous tribal groups were forced out in the early 1700s. Anglo-American settlers moving into northeastern Tennessee and extreme southwestern Virginia mentioned seeing Jewish speaking villages in that region until around 1800.

How the occupants of the North Carolina Mountains became a mixed Semitic, North African, European and Native American population, known as the Cherokees, remains a mystery. Slave raids may have been a factor. The 18th century Cherokees were the “biggest players” in the Native Americans slave trade. Perhaps young Sephardic females were captured by slave raiders to be concubines and wives


 
Chris Kott
Posts: 804
Location: Toronto, Ontario
9
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I found the book 1491 very interesting. It's been a year and change since my last read, but I believe it was the Cahokians that were being discussed as the mound-building southeastern american people whose civilisation collapsed because of climate change. What I gathered from that, though, was that it was incredibly localised, and that they caused it. The book suggested that they cut lumber for their various uses from the outskirts of their settlement (I forget the size, but there were thousands, if not tens of thousands, of inhabitants). They just harvested the trees that were closest, to avoid unnecessary travel. As the clearing enlarged, the land's hydrology was altered, as was its ability to absorb water. The result was hydrological devastation. The evidence presented, I believe, was sedimentary layers in core samples taken from the area that were greatly increased over time, until the point of the civilisation's collapse. I do need to re-read that book, though, but I will edit or repost entirely if I find I am in error. If the ability of the land to retain water was compromised, though, by the time that drought became a problem in the midwest, that lack of retentive ability and years of flood damage would only make the area more sensitive to decreased precipitation.

I think what we are talking about here are the natural growing pains, the learning process, of a people creating permaculture. A people, or many diverse groups of people, that were so instrumental to the land that many consider THEM the keystone species of pre-colombian America. In the larger context, these ingenious people performed the first and most monumental of plant husbandry projects, engineering corn out of grass over thousands of years. They maintained open land with fire to the extent that whole ecosystems, even now, could not survive without burning over occasionally. And a series of systems were being maintained so seamlessly that when europeans arrived to settle, they though they were looking at untouched, unspoiled virgin wilderness. Of course, between initial contact and the first waves of settlement, the cleared space that had first been there had grown over into something more resembling wilderness, but a 90% die-off of the indigenous population that were its caretakers would do that.

As to the OP's statement, I don't see the dynamism of a people adapting to changing living conditions as evidence of decline. I saw a show on the History Channel discussing exactly the situation Devin describes. I think the assumptions inherent to the title bear a kind of civilisation bias, one that assumes that a civilisation is only vital if it resembles the classic old-world models. Why can't you have a less-centralised and still vibrant civilisation? I have never been a tribalist, if that is the right word, but especially in times of resource scarcity, doesn't it make sense to learn from evolutionary history? The largest organisms die out first, don't they? And so as an adaptible organism, these people decentralised their civilisation, organising into smaller bodies that required fewer resources. They were also, thanks to smaller size, more mobile and better able to react or respond to changing conditions, and to exploit advantages of regional microclimates. In the larger sense, if one smaller body failed, it didn't necessarily lead to a greater drain on the rest of the whole.

And what was the result? Over 500 distinct cultures. I think the term "decline" inappropriate in this context. I think it suggests population decline, when only the loss of static settlements was mentioned in the article. I think the way it was used is clumsy and suggests an effort to exhonorate European colonialism, whether or not that was the intent. I think that a decentralised civilisation transitioning from a monolithic one doesn't represent decline, whatever the forcing factors, but perhaps progress to a more resilient, adaptable, sustainable, dare I say permacultural form of civilisation.

-CK
 
duane hennon
gardener
Posts: 763
Location: western pennsylvania zone 5/a
45
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator


I would tend away from attributing everything to the ecological knowledge of the "noble savages" as opposed to the evil white men.

do any of the histories or legends of the native Americans include this period of time when they lived in large settlements?

my guess is that they lived within nature because that's all their stone aged technologies allowed.
with the coming of metal, horses and guns, their use of nature changed.
 
Dale Hodgins
garden master
Posts: 6700
Location: Victoria British Columbia-Canada
252
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Native populations in Canada are growing quite rapidly. They have the highest birth rate in the country. There is also much integration both culturally and genetically. I'm on the west coast, where contact with Europeans came much later. Still, in the south, many are of mixed heritage. Further north, the majority are native on both sides of the family, but even there, some families have a gold miner or explorer of European ancestry.

When I lived in Ontario, I'm met many people who had native status, who were obviously more European genetically.

One member of my mother's family was a Searson from Newfoundland. They identify as being Micmac. This would make me 1/32 Micmac, if the great great grandmother was in fact of pure blood, which is highly unlikely. The family looks nothing like the source population that they identify with.
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
Boost this thread!