Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire The Indian slaughter you seldom hear about.

Anyone ever hear about the Bear River Massacre....

Dick

It's pretty well accepted as fact that the introduction of New World corn to Africa caused a population explosion there.

It certainly was the only cereal I saw over there grown in the wet tropics, to find millet and sorghum you had to go to the savannah regions.

Fermented millet beer was quite good.

The majority of the copper that was mined off of Isle Royale has been unaccounted for. Many so called experts believe that it ended up in Egypt in some famous/infamous tombs. I guess metallurgists have a way of figuring out what metal came from where and I've read that some of the bronze and other copper based alloys found in that region have come from the ancient Isle Royale mine. That is, if you believe those findings or not.

Indians mined copper, but they didn't smelt it; they used by hammering it to shape.

Exactly. Which according to the research I read (wish I could find the source again) means that it wasn't just native americans mining on that island.

Those so called experts have never let the lack of archaeological records supporting their myths slow them down one bit.

"Actual studies of the archaeological record in Michigan tell a completely different story. Archaeological research on the national forests of the Upper Peninsula, at the region's national parks, by the Michigan Archaeological Society, and by Michigan's universities during the past few years expanded our understanding of prehistoric site locations, both of mining and camp sites, of the many prehistoric copper-using cultures in our region.

The National Park Service supported five years of historic and prehistoric research on Isle Royale from 1985-1990, expanded the site location data base, tested many sites, and monitored conditions at others.
Major research reports, journal articles, paper presentations and one dissertation are the collective result.
This systematic and extensive research program expanded our knowledge about prehistoric pottery-using people, and turned up no evidence, anywhere, of non-native exploitation of prehistoric copper (Clark 1988; Clark 1990; Clark 1991; Martin 1988a; Martin 1988b; Martin 1990; Martin, Martin and Gregory 1994)."

The State of Our Knowledge About Ancient Copper Mining in Michigan
The Michigan Archaeologist 41(2-3):119-138.
Susan R. Martin 1995

Here is more�

"The competent excavation of many prehistoric archaeological sites in the Lake Superior basin reveals the continuous use of copper throughout the prehistoric time range, in association with all of the other items of material culture (projectile points, pottery and the like) that are without a doubt the products of native technologies.
MYTH: The third misstatement has to do with repeated suggestions of Old World contact, such as in the following two segments: "This new wave of "open-mindedness" brought additional scientific theories regarding the Copper Culture people. It was further believed that a Norse King named Woden-lithi left his mark near Toronto in the year 1700 B.C. He left behind petroglyphs and writings to indicate his visit was a trading mission for a well-established copper trade that was known to have existed in the Lake Superior Region some 1000 years before his visit. Evidently the Keweenaw copper industry was well established when the Norse King paid North America a visit!" (Sodders 1990:13) and "it appears entire flotillas of Norse, Baltic and Celtic ships crossed the Atlantic to enter into trade wars with the Algonquians for rich mineral deposits" (Sodders 1990:14).

FACT: There is absolutely no archaeological evidence that anyone but indigenous Americans and subsequent French, British and Euro-American miners took copper from the Keweenaw.
In contrast to speculative stuff and nonsense, here's an actual archaeological fact to consider: all cultures make garbage!
Show me some Norse garbage reliably dated to 1700 B.C. in the Toronto area in pristine context and I'll sign on readily in support of these hypotheses!
What does it take to support them? Archaeological data!

MYTH:Henriette Mertz tells it more plainly and lays culpability at the toes of the archaeological profession: "This incredible amount of copper has not been accounted for by American archaeologists ..... the sum total according to archaeological findings here in the States amounts to a mere handful of copper beads and trinkets.....float copper. Five hundred thousand tons of pure copper does not disintegrate into thin air. It cannot be sneezed away......it must be somewhere, and to date, it has not been located in the United States," and "99.9% is still to be accounted for" (Mertz 1976:18). Mertz concludes, of course, that the copper was disappeared by Old World Bronze Age metal mongers.
FACT: The figures are made up out of thin air and can be sneezed away. That's because no one has a means to measure any of these variables accurately or with any precision. All of these figures are built on ill-constructed estimates. Let's examine the variable "percentage of copper in the trap rock" as an example. Clearly, the actual percentage of copper in rock varies from none (plain old rock) to one hundred percent (Ontonagon Boulder). Additionally, while the course of copper in trap rock is somewhat predictable, the amount of copper isn't necessarily constant or even regular. Many failed mining concerns of the nineteenth century found out this fact of geology the hard way! The counts of copper pits, the sizes of pits, and the weight of removed trap are 1) either arbitrarily-chosen numbers, or 2) variable in reality; despite this they are used as constants in the algorithm. Drier and Du Temple used a constant for copper percentage (error) and then multiply it by an estimated number of pits (error inherent) of a constant size (error), counting some and extrapolating to unknown areas (another error). Because we know that pits are not randomly but systematically located, excavated and followed, it makes no sense to extend their probable locations to unknown areas unless one is willing to accommodate enormous errors. In these algorithms, error compounds error compounds error. The resultant sums are a statement of faith, not fact; the numerologists may as well be counting angels dancing on heads of pins."

The State of Our Knowledge About Ancient Copper Mining in Michigan
The Michigan Archaeologist 41(2-3):119-138.
Susan R. Martin 1995

With that, where did all that copper go? Was it just used up by the native tribes and lost as time went on or has it been found and accounted for? I'm not questioning anything you've said but I know it was a lot of copper taken out of the island I'm curious as to where it went. I happened to read that theory of non-natives being the culprits in some Michigan history book and doubted it from the first read as getting to that part of the world during that time by any other civilized people would have been just short of a miracle. I still think that there is a bunch of unaccounted for copper. Did the natives just use it? Possibly. Did some other people mine it? Not likely but I suppose it's possible.

Alternative History writers and archaeologists will never agree on anything.
The archaeologists say that those large numbers tossed about are "ill-constructed estimates" and that the actual figure is unknown.�

I found a very interesting read on all this at:
copperculture 
copperculture.homestead.com/‎
Ancient copper mines of the Lake Superior Region. ... The presence, in Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota, of many specific types of stone and shell artifacts ...

North America's First Metal Miners & Metal Artisans


�One has to ask the obvious question, where did all this mined copper go? Some scholars would have us believe that the vast majority was taken by Phoenicians, Berbers, Minoans, Bronze Age Europeans or Vikings in a huge international copper trade centering in the Lake Superior Region. Logically one has to ask how these foreign miners knew that this copper existed in the first place? Where is the archeological evidence to support these theories and claims? The truth is that it does not exist. There are no identified community or camp sites, no burial remains, and no identifiable artifacts to support any of these theories. Are we to believe that these foreign miners were so environmentally conscious that they took all their garbage from daily living back with them, along with the copper, and what about their dead, did none of them die here?

If there had been mining operations on a scale sufficient to produce 500 million to 1.5 billion pounds of copper there would be significant archeological evidence to substantiate it.

All of this evidence does exist to demonstrate that the indigenous peoples were the ones who mined the copper and fashioned it into implements, weapons and ornaments, over a period of as much as 7000 years.

One need only analyze Michigan copper and Bronze Age European copper for common trace elements to see if they have the same point of origin. I have yet to see published information on this analysis...

And how did all that copper make over to Egypt, did Aliens transport it for them??

Yes, just having a discussion, but having an argument is really just an escalation of same.

I can't say about Eastern and Southeastern tribes... they're a long ways outside the bulk of my studies, which were/are western Plains Indians, and West Coast Indians.

But you bring up valid points, and I for one won't wield the Paleolithic vs Neolithic cleaver. I think in general it's fair to say that some native American folks made the transition from Neolithic to Iron Age pretty dang fast, and some didn't.

And if I had to say, I'd say there's a bunch of modern day "white" Americans who couldn't qualify at the basic standard as Neolithic Homo sapiens if the flint hit the limestone in a hurry...

I would be inclined to say that Indians leaping with both feet into the technology of the White men was an exception to the rule, except it occurred from Quebec (Abenaki), clear across Upstate New York (Iroquois), Western Pennsylvania (Delawares), much of Ohio (Miami and others), and across the Southeast from South Carolina and Tennessee clear to Florida and Louisiana (Five Civilized Tribes) involving a population of Indians probably greater than what occupied the West Coast and certainly greater than the Plains.

So much so that east of the Mississippi you have to pick and choose to find places where it DIDN'T happen. In general terms, the further you got away from European settlements the more retro the Indian material culture remained, to the point that in the 1750's and '60's, Ottawas from Michigan raiding nearly 1,000 miles from home around Albany NY were notable because they were still using bows and arrows. Nobody else was by that time.

Prior to their collapse 1779-1800, the Iroquois enjoyed the enviable position of having their borders recognized and enforced by English and French officialdom, while at the same time having ready access to trade goods as well as having long and friendly access to relatively stable White settlements. In particular Palatine Germans and Scots.

Up until the Sullivan Expedition in 1779, the more Western tribes of the Iroquois across Upstate New York had enjoyed three generations of relatively undisturbed tranquility in their own homelands.

It weren't ALL tranquil; epidemics of varying severity were steadily whittling down numbers, and Iroquois warriors certainly involved themselves in outside conflict and in particular engaged in longstanding wars with distant tribes, but for the most part war didn't come home with them.

Upstate New York is still beautiful today, at the time of the 1779 Sullivan Expedition it must have been stunning.

What happened when Indians enjoyed the luxury of that sort of time and stability is apparent when one looks at the Five Civilized Tribes, and up in New York we have this description of the Mohawks in 1778 (from the book Bloody Mohawk 2009). This in the words of American Colonel Peter Gansevoort who so ably commanded Fort Stanwix in the Mohawk Valley during Burgoyne's invasion from Canada, and whose repulse of the invading British, Tories and Indians under Barry St. Leger was so instrumental in bringing about the pivotal American victory at Saratoga....


Colonel Peter Gansevoort observed "It is remarkable that the Indians live much better than most of the Mohawk River farmers, their Houses very well furnished with the necessary household utensils, great plenty of grain, several horses, cows and wagons".

Worth pointing out that these same Mohawks showed up for war all painted up and looking much as they always had, armed with the prerequisite sets of skills and weapons. It just rattles our pop history paradigms is all that the Indians could go home to nicer houses than what the White people had.

Birdwatcher

Neither, my bet is that it was taken out by the local tribes and traded over an extended network and ended up in some far away places. Perhaps those simple indian folk were a little more intelligent than people think. Maybe they had some help later on. No one knows for sure. It was a long time ago and perhaps the evidence of others being there is just gone through natural degradation. I'm not sure how many of you have actually been to this island but, I have. I'll tell you this, it is only pleasant to be there for a short period of time in the summer and with it's location being in Lake Superior it is exposed to pretty harsh storms. It's pretty much a nasty place to be outside of the months of July and August weather wise. It doesn't surprise me in the least that evidence of anything can't be found outside of a couple of large holes in the ground. Take a boat ride on Superior this time of year and you'll find out in short order how pleasant life must have been on Isle Royale for some simple indian folk living off the land.