The Old Norse/Algonqian Link, the Mandan Tribe, and the link between Vikings and Native Americans (ancient, England)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I recently read a book about Lewis and Clark. I was particularly interested in a chapter which described their incursions into the lands of the Mandan people. One interesting thing about this tribe is that, according to historical accounts, many had light eyes and light hair, which obviously goes against our modern understanding of Native Americans.
After I delved a little bit deeper, I discovered the theory of the Norse-Algonquian connection. Specifically, the theory posits that much of the Algonquian language derives from the Old Norse Tongue. This was, presumably, the result of a group of ancient Norse intermixing with Algonquian tribes on or after 1100 AD.
I discovered some very, very interesting information:
Quote:
Quite by chance, many years ago, Reider T. Sherwin heard a certain New England place name before he saw it in print. The speaker said it the name was of American Indian origin, but Sherwin, a native of Norway before moving to the United States, disputed that because he recognized the word as one he had long known.
Sherwin was familiar with dialectal Norwegian, which is much closer to the Old Norse language than literary Norwegian. And the meaning of the word Sherwin knew was identical to the meaning of the place name the speaker was identifying as Indian.
His curiosity piqued, Sherwin began to look upon New England maps for other place names of Indian origin. He closed his eyes to the spelling and considered only the pronunciation. Several of these he could readily identify as Norwegian or as strings of Old Norse root words put together.
Familiar with Leif Ericson’s attempted settlement of Vinland (later known as America) around 1000 A.D., Sherwin began to study the Old Norse language more intensely to see if it was more than coincidence that certain places bore descriptive names which were called Indian names but which mirrored the sound and meaning of Old Norse names for the same types of places.
He also studied the language of the Algonquin tribes in dictionaries compiled by early French, English, Swedish and German missionaries who worked among various tribes of these Indians as European colonists began to arrive in great numbers in the early 17th century. Those tribes included the Cree, Chippewa (Ojibway), Ottawa, Algonquin, Potawatomi, Sauk, Fox, Kickapoo, Abnaki, Micmac, Mohican, Shawnee, Illinois, Blackfoot, Pequot, and others who speak dialects of the Algonquin language.
Why is it so far out of the realm of possibility that some of the Norse settlers ventured further into the Americas than what was documented?
I've yet to see a souce that has meaningfully debunked the Norse/Algonqian connection, so if anyone has a source they're willing to share, I'd like to see it.
It would be very hard to prove without DNA or hard evidence now. But in the southwest, Cabeza de Vaca and three other shipwrecked survivors walked from near Galveston TX to Mexico City in the 1530s. It took eight years and they lived among the tribes along the way never seeing another Spaniard until they reached Culiacán on the Gulf of California. They absorbed the Indian lifestyle more than spreading Spanish culture or language among the tribes. If a handful of Spanish soldiers could survive eight years in the largely desert regions of the southwest it is possible that some norse stragglers or traders could have ventured into the wilderness and survived a while. I don't think I would base the argument on linguistics --- teaching the Indians old Norse would not be a top priority if you are roaming around Canada or the Great Lakes trying to survive. Adapting to the Indian customs -- as Cabeza de Vaca's group did -- seems like the way they could survive. Skeletal evidence, DNA, or indisputable artifacts at an inland site away from Vinland would be helpful.
Complete science fiction. The Viking settlements in Vinland were very small, the settlers stayed for a very short time, they never ventured far inland and quickly got on bad terms with the Natives. The main function of the colonies was to collect timber for export to Greenland. The settlements were basically timber lodges with a few houses and maybe 30-50 persons, mainly men. At some summers families maybe could join, and the population could rise to 100.
It's impossible that the Norse would had any effect on Native American culture, language or customs. There were just too few Norsemen there.
I recently read a book about Lewis and Clark. I was particularly interested in a chapter which described their incursions into the lands of the Mandan people. One interesting thing about this tribe is that, according to historical accounts, many had light eyes and light hair, which obviously goes against our modern understanding of Native Americans.
After I delved a little bit deeper, I discovered the theory of the Norse-Algonquian connection. Specifically, the theory posits that much of the Algonquian language derives from the Old Norse Tongue. This was, presumably, the result of a group of ancient Norse intermixing with Algonquian tribes on or after 1100 AD.
I discovered some very, very interesting information:
Why is it so far out of the realm of possibility that some of the Norse settlers ventured further into the Americas than what was documented?
I've yet to see a souce that has meaningfully debunked the Norse/Algonqian connection, so if anyone has a source they're willing to share, I'd like to see it.
Reider Sherwin wasn't a linguist. The Algonquin languages have been extensively studied and determined to be part of the Algic language family, completely unrelated to Indo-European (the language family to which Old Norse belongs, via the West branch of the Germanic sub-family).
The explanation, which you think doesn't exist, is quite simple.
First, there's absolutely zero evidence that the Norse got anywhere near the Missouri River (and, no, no non-quacks give any credence to the Kengsington runestone), the homeland of the Mandan. Second, there's absolutely zero evidence - and plenty of evidence to the contrary - that the Norse presence in North America was far too small to leave any significant linguistic imprint. Third, there is a far more plausible explanation for blue eyes and blonde hair among the indigenous tribes of the continental interior, and that is the steady stream of post-1492 Europeans - Spanish explorers and missionaries, the voyageurs, other trappers and hunters, and so forth.
It doesn't need to be debunked. That's not how history works. First, compelling evidence needs to be put forth in favor of it. There isn't any. Show us a modern linguist that connects the Algic and Indo-European family. Show us any evidence of Norse penetration in the requisite numbers. Show us Scandinavian DNA. A 'theory' (the term for your assertion is too generous) first needs to be supported by evidence - throwing out a claim and then demanding that it either be disproven or accepted is not how the serious study of history works.
It would be relatively easy to back up this notion with DNA analysis.
Has any been done?
Not really, you would be hoping that a small population of Europeans was able to have offspring with particular native American population and that those offspring actually survived to pass on their genes to subsequent generations.
However there has been some suggestion that Native American genetic traces have been found in Iceland, which they believe indicates Native American woman(s) being brought to Iceland around 1000 years ago.
I'm guessing a qualified DNA expert could tease out some Y haplogroup information from Scandinavia that didn't belong in a Native American genome from around 1500...if it exists. After that date there would be all sorts of mingling possibilities. Maybe they could tease it out from a current isolated population. I'm not that well informed on the topic but I've not heard of this happening in North America. In Ecuador, they have found a small number of native individuals with East Asian/proto-Japanese markers that date back about 3000 years indicating the arrival of outsiders... probably shipwrecked fishermen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
