Ramble: The St Lawrence Iroquoians and the difficulty of knowing anything.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 ноя 2022
- Some thoughts on on the Laurentians and the study of history.
Another semi failed test of sound equipment. Something better coming soonish... Hopefully...
Your point on the Ojibwe's words for others makes me think of the common usage of Anasazi, 'ancient enemy', by the Diné to refer to Ancestral Puebloans. Their word obviously doesn't reflect any identity of the Puebloans, and yet it stood as the most commonly used word for them for many decades.
Jacques Cartier was a native of Bretagne which used to be its own Celtic kingdom in modern day France where they spoke Brezhoneg so French was not his first language. A lot of us in Quebec descend from folks who had different dialects like Brezhoneg, the Langues D'oil, Norman-French, Guernésiais and Poitou among others.
Thank you for this comment. It has motivated me to learn more on all of those languages.
🧠👍
All very good points! Well said!
Wonderful food for thought. I've always had similar thoughts about archeology, especially when it delves back into prehistory. It makes me wonder just how complex and varied prehistoric peoples may have been, but we'll just never really know because we have no surviving evidence of it. Almost 100K years of anatomically modern humans spreading around the world and we only really know anything concrete about the last few thousand years. So interesting!
We have concrete evidence of piramid type structures as far back as 21.000 BC, at least one, and another one as far back as 11-10.000BC, a Egyptian city as far back 8000-7000 BC, another city in Anatolia as far back as 9000BC so a bit more than a few thousand years, but we know practically nothing else about them, or the people who built them, apart from the Egyptian one
@@alexmag342 21000? Gobekli Tepe and surrounding sites are only dated to 9000BC, and they're the oldest afaik
We have historical evidence of an Algonquian telling the Jesuits they used to lived there. It matches historical records of Laurentian artifacts showing up in Algonquian sites in greater number by the late 1500s. Some of the Hochelaguians definitely migrated from Montreal island to the Algonquians. BUT we also find more Laurentian-type artifacts within the Mohawk sites by the late 1500s. I think both stories are true. The contemporary Kanenienke narrative that they are the Saint-Lawrence Iroquoians is probably based upon migration of at least some Hochelaguians to their land.
The problem is that the way we see national identity now is largely based on racial European lineage, and I don't think 16th century Iroquoians had the same clear cut definition of who they were as a group. Their societies were probably more multicultural than we imagine. Wars were also closer to family feuds than the European national framework we are used to. It is also perfectly possible that some clans sided more with the Iroquois than the Algonquians.
On another note, there is an interesting pictogram drawn by Lahontan, and which is analyzed in Roland Viau's last book, which shows Mount Royal on Montreal island being depicted as a mountain topped with a bird. Lahontan notes : the bird signifies departure. The many sepultures we found on top of Mount Royal seem to accredit the thesis of this place being used as a necropolis. Someone, probably Donnacona, also relayed to cosmographer André Thevet the spiritual belief held by Laurentians of a bird taking away bad people's soul, while others were going to the West in a land of plenty.
This was interesting. I read a book called On Being Certain and the author talked about how people have different levels of tolerance for uncertainty. It's a disposition; a variable. So for people with a low tolerance for uncertainty, if they hear a story about the past or even the speculation of a story that person is going to end up thinking the story is either true or not true. Not having the level of high certainly is uncomfortable, to the point where it is not tolerable. I think this is how some widespread understanding and misunderstandings of history happen.
I might get that book. I have come to think that it is the reason religion exists. Almost all cultures seemed to have developed religions. Almost all of them seem to promote certainty. From observation it seems to be about 80% of people who struggle to live without religion. Of course, I could be wrong :)
Was it Wittgenstein, by any chance?
Lots of cogent hypotheses...thanks for your thoughts and insights.
This is a great explanation of what a historian's job is.
Very interesting video. I am also captivated by the by-story of a European returning an act of grace and healing with kidnapping and homicide.
They say the past is a foreign country, even so, Cartier seems unusually mercenary.
It is a grotesque thing to do, but I think those people were probably not intentionally killed but died of disease when brought to Europe, they would have been more valuable to the Europeans alive as something to bring home and show people.
It's not very nice to think about but many of these explorers were trying to make a fortune and wealth for themselves and if they couldn't bring back material goods from their trip they probably wanted to at least capture some natives as an oddity to show around. Europeans brought native people back to Europe on several occasions.
@@aduantas Very little daylight between "killed outright" and "died during enslavement"
There is an old saying to the tune of
”worse things than this happen at sea every day”.
The seas before the British Empire were COMPLETELY lawless.
This is sometimes/places true even today.
The only "code" out there was basically "who is going to stop me?"
Fisherman even were armed.
The distinction between merchant, fisherman, and privateer (pirate), was really just a matter of speed and force discrepancy.
Despite what Hollywood tries to moralize into history,
You would not really want to trust sea men any farther than you could shoot them.
@@kinghenry100 all in the name of colonialism, my friend.
Knowing the history of the fur trade wars that came after, it makes a lot of sense to me that places like Hochelaga became a no-man’s-land in a short time. Everyone knew that the strangers in the big ships and the interesting trade goods might return the same way, and control of that site would have become a life or death struggle for the powerful confederacies.
Dude, thank you. I was always curious about native perspective of history and you finally provide it. It's all logical. And your voice and speaking pace is so easy to listen to. Keep on going.
BTW, can you recommend any similar sources?
Very interesting! I hope that you keep going and contributing. It has great value. Thanks again
Such a fascinating take on this topic. Your perspective is so valuable. Thank you for these videos and if convenient, I hope you will continue. I can find nothing like this as I try to learn and learn more.
I appreciate your insights and videos
At the end of every single one of your videos I respond "I did!". it's remarkable how interested I seem to be in every one of your rambles 😂
I have a paper written by an archaeologist of the St. Lawrence Iroquoian, Dr. James F. Pendergast if you would be interested in reading it. Jim conducted digs in Grenville County, Ontario.
"tenuous at best" is probably the best description of any of our assumptions of the peoples around the St. Lawrence based on the colonizers' experiences. Surviving lore of First Nations' are much more to the point.
It’s got its own set of issues. It’s a clue, just like everything else.
Indeed, interesting. Knowing, knowing one knows, knowing what one knows and (likely most important) knowing what one does not know, are all different points of the same question; it's all an eternal self interrogation.
Best is to conclude that knowing anything is almost impossible and nearly all of which nearly all people "know" is assumption, impression, conjecture, reflex, projection, habit/custom, or preference & convenience.
It's all a mess and we're thoroughly fucked.
I think we have to assume there are things we know other wise we die. So we know that fire burns and jumping of a cliff isnt good. If we say, well nobody knows so I'm going to jump then natural selection removes you from the gene pool. So, I think its OK to say here is a beaker made in a certain style using a certain technology, it probably belonged to these people and they probably used it for this purpose. Now, somebody else can dispute that, thats fine, whats you evidence. In other words, we have to take a position so that we can make predictions based on that position. If some body can show the predictions are wrong then we need to revaluate. For example, there is deep water at the bottom of this cliff so sometimes you can jump off.
looking forward to more of your videos.
brilliant take brother, thank you. the analogy of the bucket holds water even when considering humanity's past in whole: the bucket, particularly the book bucket of the box people, is way too small to begin to get a grasp on the depth and width of even our contemporary kin, much less all of our pasts. theirstories take way more time and love and heart to keep alive than would ever fit into a book...
I *did* find this interesting. Thank you.
There were Europeans visiting what is now Canada on an annual basis between Cartier and Champlain exploiting both the fishery and marine mammals. It's more than likely they were introducing new diseases on a regular basis. So it wouldn't have been a one time 50% but also 5% three years later and again and again.
Pretty History Listen, thanks for making it!
Thank you, that was really useful. Similarly, I have an ancestor who is *said* to have been Mohawk who did barge stuff with other ancestors of mine (married, barges get lonely, right?), but what we know about her, besides that she was a woman with a name registered in an old family bible, is very, very small. And saying "dunno" seems like the smart-money move.
I think it’s as he stated, a mix of all the above. Certainly some of their people found refuge or were taken captive and taken back to New York to the Iroquois and to the west by Huron/other Iroquoians. Neutral and Wenro Indians etc. even north to Micmac and Abenaki territory where their identity would have been changed completely.
How can we move forward despite the inherent uncertainty of research? I think it comes down to the methodological approach, the clear identification of the limitations and the validation methods. After that, the interpretations are based on the evidences we have and at some point accepting the fact that not all things can be known. It always cool to hear your valuables thoughts. Thanks.
Thank you so much for bringing all this knowledge and wisdom to one place and sharing it. It feels so good to get this information in an ethical way
You've got it exactly right. We're conflating descriptive and prescriptive terms when we assume there must have been a specific and distinct group to even have vanished. Cartier describes the people's language, which, when compared to future examples dont quite line up. We've made a category error when we anticipate an exact match to his original described language, otherwise that must mean it's a different people group. The people we're searching for are part of an invented category that was imposed upon them from the outside by Cartier when he described their language. We can't say for sure if this invented category corresponds in reality with anyone apart from those he spoke to, and to assume there must be a vanished wider population distinct from its neighbours... you might as well be asking "where's the 'any' key?" when you're told to press any key to continue.
It's more like, the future historian who having never seen a keyboard, assumes there must have been an "any key."
The uncertainty is the important thing. There might well have been an "any" key, afterall they had, "pgup" "ctrl" and "fn". "Any" doesn't seem implausible, but until you actually find a keyboard it is ultimately just guesswork.
@@MalcolmPL That's a great way to put it, honestly. I think there's a bounty of knowledge that is sadly lost to time in spite of our best efforts. This specific instance especially seems like the assumptions we're making based almost solely on 2 people's accounts could have done great deal in getting in the way of learning about the people's of that region at that time. Doesn't help much when for most of Native history, especially once the eugenics got rolling, white people almost always got the final say, even going as far as to discredit and even destroy the works of actual living nations' historians.
I hope that more folks like you are able to put out the kind of content you do so that we can at least finally stop the cycle of losing contemporary voices and so much of their knowledge with them. Even the smallest tidbits can go a long way to making sure we don't end up with an 'any key' type debacle in the future lol
"Babylon has only heaved half a brick at us, though it be a brick of cuneiform."
It’s amazing how easy it is to make a whole big interpretation that can fall apart upon a little scrutiny…
Great video though 💯👊🏾
I'm a direct descendant of Pocahontas. Her story is similar. Went to Europe and died young. I've always wondered how her life would have been had she lived longer than 21
btw , what do you think about the polish wings on armor
They look cool.
@@MalcolmPL i was looking up if the wings armor you showed was ever used on horses , not really the closes thing was the japanese " baloon " cape armor that the bodyguards used to have againts arrows
There was an explorer who went up over the Andes mountains and down some of the tributaries of the Amazon about a hundred years before the Spanish & Portugese conquests began in earnest. He brought back fantastical tales of vast cities and the sprawling agrarian but still quite advanced communities that supported them, replete with orderly roads, canals, and so forth. Sure, they had no ridable animals, no wheeled carts, but they were quite advanced and sophisticated.
Unfortunately...when more explorers finally returned to the same regions roughly a hundred years later, they found no cities, no farmlands, no civilizations. Just indigenous tribes that hid in the forests and threatened to attack them. So they believed he had lied. The thing was, he had not. With modern technology like LIDAR, we've been able to map structures hidden under the jungle growth...and it turns out there ARE signs of vast cities and sprawling farmlands, replete with geometrical fields, walls, roads, temples, you name it.
It's just that the diseases the Europeans brought with them rapidly wiped out probably 99% the people of that original nation, who had nowhere near the exposure to diseases that Europeans had, which meant their immune systems were rapidly overwhelmed So yes, a jungle IS going to overgrow any signs of a vast advanced civilization down there, especially when given a hundred years' head start. Those civilizations would have been wiped out within just a few years, and the few survivors would have fled deep into the jungle, becoming isolationist specifically to avoid being infected.
That's exactly what happened to the Lawrentian Iroquoians...and just like what happened to *many* populations in the Americas.
Not sure beaker culture is a good example since we now know from genetic testing they were a single people. That wiped out their neighbours.but I see your overall point.
But genetic testing can’t tell you that, it only tells you about the gene pool. Different societies and cultures can draw from the same pool.
@@MalcolmPL true but the interaction with the neolithic locals in both Spain and the British isles shows a near complete wipe out of the local populations. In the British isles it's been extreme with no male side DNA surviving of the neolithic locals. This suggests a very clear us Vs them filter. The bell beakers were filtering the local population. It doesn't tell us the exact method or methods. But its hard evidence of a distinct group. Furthermore they brought along techniques of metal working that the neolithic locals technologically didn't have. It's very different to other neolithic peoples in mainland Europe who picked up metal working. It seems the neolithic inhabitants of the British isles never got the chance.
I’m going to give a counterexample, the Inuit are not one people, they are a culture group consisting of societies of similar cultures not necessarily associated with one another, beyond point of ancestral origin.
When they came across they displaced the former inhabitants. The genetic archaeology of this would look similar to what you describe, but it would miss the fact that “Inuit” describes a continent’s worth of variation.
@@MalcolmPL That's a fair cultural comparison. I agree the bell beakers likely wouldn't have been a politically unified people just like the many Inuit peoples spread across the artic regions.
@@imperatorcaesardivifiliusa3805 they were more than likely significantly far more unified and not so dispersed, probably not much different than pre Roman conquest Britain, with small to medium sized kingdoms, while the Inuits divided do to the conditions where they were pushed to live in, which is arctic and subarctic conditions, where a large neolithic population could never exist in a single place do to very finite food resources, so by the conditions they were forced to live in(by losing conflicts with other different north Americans peoples for territory further south)they had to disperse over a vast swat of land, and over time their cultures diverged into subgroups, but genetics remained the same, this is not the same at all in most other parts of the world as genetic groups stayed together and never had such tremendous scarcity of food like the Inuit so no need to disperse in the way the Inuit did, so I do not think comparing the Beaker to Inuit, Eskimos or Tinglits or any other people forced to live in harsh conditions to be a fair comparison to people of temperate or even tropical or subtropical climate who wouldn't have that necessity, there is the matter of displacements of populations which did happen, like the Indo-European language tree, from Western Europe to the India and in the past to where today is western China(Tarim basin Tocharians) which shows that they all originated from a single group, then left in "migrational waves" aka expanded through war and and over time separated which coincides with the taming of horses and invention of the wheel and the spread of the indo europeans throughout Eurasia, but it definitely is an complicated and nuanced discussion, but there are clear rules, many which are tied to intrinsic human behaviour and instinct, and exceptions may exist yet they are not the rule.
Kwe skennen, there is another fact that needs to be taken into consideration; ancient Kanienke:ha is not the same as the modern language. Hochelaga in the ancient language became ohsnonh:saka (People of the hand) in the modern one. What I have been told by the council of Elders of Kahnawake, is that the territory from Kanienke, now Syracuse New York, to Stadacona, Québec city nowadays, was occupied by the Mohawks.
Tho, niiowen:nake.
9:53 dang, messed up the ole reliable type 25A pot ... rats
Not sure the Susquehannock or the Hurons would call it a "cope out theory".
I would argue the events of the sixteen hundred exist in a separate context to the events of the fifteen hundreds.
@@MalcolmPL Fair point. But what then drastically changed such context in the meanwhile for these sorts of actions to now take place and not before? What led to the antagonistic relations Hurons and Algonquins toward Mohawks had when Champlain arrived? I'm curious.
The Mohawk-Huron hostilities predate Champlain, it’s quite likely they extended back centuries.
I would argue instead that it is the shape and nature of warfare that changed.
I believe the genocidal nature of warfare during the beaver wars was a response to the social instability brought about by colonial endeavor.
It’s too complex a topic for me to cover in a RUclips comment. It needs an essay and more research than I have presently done.
@@MalcolmPL Thanks for the reply. You're really professional about what you do, and that comes from a graduated historian so that means something. All of us, nations of the world, stateless or not, should look back on the dark moments of our pasts at face value and try to make amends for what we've done, it's part of showing how we've matured as nations/peoples and take responsability of our past, both good and bad. I applaud you for that as I try to do the same.
On an unrelated note, I'd like more videos about indigenous armors. Think you could do that someday? Or perhaps even videos about non-american indigenous peoples like the Udmurts, the El Mari, the Samis, the Manchus, the Nenets, the Yidinji, stuff like that? I'd really like that.
🤠👍🏿
When I hear Greek words read by English speakers like say they are reading out loud the Greek New Testament as a native Greek speaker I can barely understand what they are saying.
My problem with most archaeology is that it is interpreted by people who've never made a pot, lit a fire from scratch or grown their own food. They. have. no. clue what it takes to survive or thrive or have your arse kicked into oblivion by famine or neighbours.
F'example, the ridiculous emphasis on neolithic big game hunting vs the obvious and universal preference for, and efficacy of, gathering and picking. The dreadful expense of the former and efficiency of the latter are completely ignored, because it doesn't fit the macho fantasy of the researchers themselves. It's humped on by people who've never had to deal with an angry cow. Women are the core of every society, but we are routinely ignored.
A few trips with essentially neolithic people in Arnhem Land, northern Oz, opened my eyes to how shit really works as far as food and resources are acquired in an open forest and coastal landscape. Hunting is opportunistic and peripheral, gathering and making is everything. The women provided 80% of what was eaten and utilized, and they thought male contributions were too scatterbrained and prestige-orientated to be taken seriously; they laughed about basically everyone dying in a ditch if they waited for successful male hunts lol, and their very ancient mythos themes supported the antiquity of this jaundiced view. You won't see that reality proposed in too many archaeological papers.
Don't really know where I'm going with all of this, but basically, I agree with your dissatisfaction with historical analysis. It's mostly whack.
Agreed 100% .Australian Aboriginals are a fantastic insight to our own hunter-gatherer ancestors. And yes, women collect all the Carbohydrates and a lot of protein and fats imo. Interrupt that system and you've got starvation. This was caused by the catastrophic Smallpox. If you've ever seen photos of Indigenous people with Smallpox then you know that it's bad, really deadly.
No offense meant, but this comment sounds quite reductive, if not outright biased.
It paints a picture of some ignorant, useless, "obviously" chauvinist archeologist who sits in his leatherback chair somewhere in London, pontificates about peoples he deems uncivilized and dismisses those cultures he deems primitive. This sounds like silly Hollywood movies and stereotypes, not like the archeologists I know. Almost like how a right-wing conspiracy theorist sees "corrupt, clueless climate scientists". Why would a guy like this even waste his time and efforts on all those "primitives" he so despises?
Most archeologists I've seen are deeply inspired by the cultures they study - to the point of dedicating their lives to it. If anything, they'll usually think of historical societies much more highly than of our modern society (which is why they're willing to put up with the miserable and stressful life of a humanities scholar in today's gig-economy academia). They're the kind to learn the language, read the first-hand accounts, dispel pervasive myths, cook the food just to try it out. I've seen archeologists pick up all sorts of crafts to better understand the people they study - cooking, spinning, sewing, basket-weaving, pottery, metalworking, woodworking, stone napping. If anything, they're probably the handiest of all the academics I usually meet. They're the outdoors people - know how to hike, set up tents, dig, carbon date, not be miserable in the blistering steppe and freezing tundra, etc. etc. As opposed to, say, mathematicians or theoretical physicists.
As for chauvinism - idk, from my experience, most humanities people are really left-leaning (in the Western sense of the word), often to an obnoxious degree. After all, it's them who writes the endless papers that made colonialism, imperialism, gender and sexuality in historic societies, etc. etc. popular terms and topics in wider society.
I'm really wondering how you came to see historians/archeologists so differently from what most people experience.
Firrrrst...!!!
Some of your comments sort of run parallel to my hypothesis as to why so many native place names (I'm in western PA) have such convoluted spellings. Well... because of the influence of both French and English on top of the existing peoples, you have native words spelled by the French and then re-translated by the English. There's pretty much no chance that the spelling is going to make sense.
They were wiped out from ceremonial purposes.
After falling from a horse.
When I had to write down the word "write" in german, with german spelling, I would write it wuait. just as an example
Reading the second, I would pronounce it woo-wait.
@@MalcolmPL funny how different german and english pronounciation of the same letters can be.
Thing is, linguists know that. They correct for these expected mistakes, and sometimes even use them to better understand the source and language they're researching.
Imagine a Slavic person speaking English. Even without a linguistics degree, you have an idea of what sounds they'll struggle with and how they'll try to imitate them. E.g., "th" will turn into either "t" or "z" depending on the word, "r" will be rolled, the vowels will be slightly off in a characteristic way, etc. etc.
Well, linguists have an even better, more precise understanding of this process. They can even make pretty precise predictions and estimates based on those mistakes. They'll say something like "Based on the lack of aspirated plosives and how this speaker palatalizes most of his consonants after certain front vowels, his native language has to be East Slavic, probably Ukrainian".
What's more, the difference between how 2 people spell the same unknown word can be very illuminating. Imagine that we've found a journal of an English traveller, and he wrote down the name of a local river as "Thepe". But how was that "th" pronounced: is it voiceless, like in "theme", or voiced, like in "them"? Thankfully, we later find the same word written down by a Ukrainian, and he writes "Zepe". This gives us a lot more info: we can deduce that the sound was somewhere between an English "th" and a Ukrainian "z", so it was probably voiced (like in "them"). Etc.
So I'm 99% sure that the researchers who studied the Spanish texts accounted for how a Spanish person would struggle with a language he doesn't know. If they didn't, it's just a poorly written or centuries-outdated paper.
Nya:wëh
Iö.
If you've ever seen photos of native people with Smallpox then you know that it was bad, really bad. Their interdependence meant that they were vulnerable to societal collapse. If you take Australian Aboriginals as an example, women collect all the carbohydrates and men hunt. Without either, starvation becomes a real problem.
This is one of the reasons I dropped out of my archaeology course. Well that and the lack of any real jobs afterward. Too much speculation just to publish. Too many assumptions based on easy to contradict information. It's sad really. On a side note.........there's an excellent documentary about the Tera Preta in south american here on youtube. The reason I mention it is because when the first spanish explorers went up the amazon there were descriptions of huge numbers of peoples and villages but only 100 years later the current explorers and conquerers found almost nothing matching those descriptions. Basically plague had seriously wiped out most of the previous people in only 100 years. The black soil created by their villages later proved the original descriptions were accurate. Then it goes on to explain that the amazon was really never wild and vast until after European contact when massive population reduction happened. Anyway if it happened there and we have better evidence to document it.....I'm sure it also went on up here. It's easy to say that the rest of the people who didn't die of plague should have still been around but here is the next issue. Division of labour. When you lost a huge percentage of your population you also lose the best hunters, the best craftsmen, the best medical knowledge, the best warriors etc et. No people can survive a massive death rate like that without a total restructuring of some kind.......as you point out in this video. Add to that, traditionally no human wants to live in a place where everyone they knew died for fear of that plague hitting again and because it just becomes a sad place to be.
Beakers weren't just useful. They were used as gravegoods, and most european archeological cultures got named after their grave good, or grave type. Beakers left offerings of food and water for the deceased.
One of my favorite facts about this is, that you can find beaker grave goods at neolithic cairnes sometimes (mostly in ireland)
The prevalence seems to indicate a more peaceful integration than in some other beaker sites.
daam i realize czechs can write fonetecly everything
Almost everything we think of as a yes-or-no this-or-that question is in fact a spectrum - and this includes culture. It's an inherently limiting feature of human language that we cannot accurately describe things that don't fit neatly into boxes.
I think we tend to like having good stories, uncertainty doesn't make for good stories, and we are really uncomfortable with uncertainty.
Maybe that discomfort with uncertainty is part of why we do things like archaeology or any science at all. What was here before me? I don't know, and I don't like that.
But, the further you get into any scientific study the more familiar you get with the limitations of what is known, and what is possibly knowable, and you're forced to confront that uncertainty never really goes away, you have to make your peace with it, and that's it.
You hear people say shit like evolution is just a theory - good! Thats the way it should be, gathering as much evidence as possible to develop the best theories we can, while simultaneously not being entirely convinced of their complete accuracy. I've heard this described as "strong convictions loosely held".
All we know is the French pissed them off.
are you spelling things phonetically 500 years after someone that spoke a different language wrote it down phonetically ?
you'll need a time machine to know what exactly went on.
Interested in knowing native population in all of Canada 1700?
Read 20mil all of North America.
So maybe 2mil?
Two million seems reasonable, but again it’s a complicated issue and any conclusions beyond a few specifics are essentially guesswork.
The data you present is very interesting. What is the purpose of your video? It is very distracting and almost impossible to see.
Something rather than nothing.
I like the walking, it gives a perspective of time passing and is a better background than clip art.
How does not joining the Mohawk make more sense? When the US bombs another country, that country's people move here.
A Vietnamese woman once told me that when you see the bombers coming, you run toward them so the bombs explode behind you.
It makes absolute sense that they may have joined the Mohawk.
Well, we were allied with half of Vietnam which might be a different case than that
i have no former knowledge of any of the stuff you post really, outside tidbits, but you make it interesting and easy to digest. subscribed!
I thought that some (one or two?) of the captured natives that were taken back to France survived and even learned French, and somewhat were assimilated
One vanishes from the record.
@MalcolmPL I wanted to comment on your single platform anti-snowmobile, excesses o if capitalism rant, but comments are turned off. I guess too many ugly responses? Anyway, I was just wondering how you knew about the infamous GHW Bush "just say no" program?
@@leemason4024 No idea it was from Bush, it's a meme in my circles.