Keith
Hunter
Bushfire close but safe now. Getting some good rain.
Posts: 1,002 
|
Post by Keith on Feb 12, 2021 23:56:48 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on Feb 13, 2021 2:49:39 GMT -7
I'm wondering why they ruled out the possibility of the beads drifting ashore with floating wreckage of a shipwreck.
They say there is no evidence for European contact with native Alaskans this early. But we know there was maritime traffic between Europe and Asia. Could a ship have ventured north, got caught in one of the bearing sea's famous storms and wrecked? Asian fishing gear washes up on Alaskan shores even now.
|
|
|
|
Post by paranger on Feb 13, 2021 6:16:07 GMT -7
I find it quite plausible, if as yet inconclusive. Russian fur traders who left no documentary record of their exploits - perhaps to protect their trade sources? Why not?
|
|
|
|
Post by Black Hand on Feb 13, 2021 6:24:20 GMT -7
Interesting.
However, I'd be more impressed if the beads were found further south, as the trip across the Bering Strait isn't all that far (~53 miles at the narrowest point).
|
|
ewoaf
City-dweller
Posts: 203
|
Post by ewoaf on Feb 13, 2021 6:45:35 GMT -7
The author of the original report points, with his own data, to a likely 16-17th c date which I agree with. The the 15th c hit on the carbon dated textile is being sensationalized.
|
|
|
|
Post by Black Hand on Feb 13, 2021 8:40:14 GMT -7
There is also the margin for error to consider for radiocarbon dating. Ultimately, the find is at least as old as the youngest part - If the beads are known to be of a certain historical age, that's the earliest age one can reasonably consider for the find. Yes, the other items could be older, but they are mundane items that aren't out of context with the area.
I have issues with the statement made by the archaeologist suggesting the beads are older - he should know better....
"The discovery of the twine, likely made from shrub willow bark, was key; it's wrapped around part of a blue-beaded bangle, meaning it could provide a date range of when the bangle was made. According to the radiocarbon-dating analysis, the twine likely dates to between 1397 and 1488, said study co-principal investigator Michael Kunz, an archaeologist with the University of Alaska Museum of the North in Fairbanks.
"We were astounded because that was before Columbus had ever even discovered the New World, by several decades," Kunz told Live Science."
Unfortunately, the article is behind a paywall so the M&M and Results can't be critically analyzed.
|
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on Feb 13, 2021 11:03:33 GMT -7
I also don't understand the correlation to Columbus. So what if it was before Columbus arrived on the, EAST COAST of the Americas?
There had already been vast amounts of European fishing in the area. But again, so what? What has that to do with the west coast of Alaska?
There was already plenty of maritime activity in the Pacific and, I'm sure, Bering Straight before Columbus bumped into the Americas. After all,,,,, where was he actually trying to go?
|
|
|
|
Post by Black Hand on Feb 13, 2021 13:07:37 GMT -7
Columbus never set foot on the continent we now know as North America..
As to why they are obsessing about Columbus - who knows? At best, it suggests to me the trade-routes from Europe through Asia were extensive and in no way proves the beads arrived prior to Columbus. To very loosely paraphrase our dear friend Sarah Palin - "We can see Russia from here"...
|
|
