Vikings May Have Taken American Indian to Iceland

[John317]

ABEND Lisa Abend – Fri Nov 26, 4:30 am ET

Pity poor Leif Ericsson. The Viking explorer may well have been the first European to reach the Americas, but it is a certain Genoan sailor who gets all the glory. Thanks to evidence that has until now consisted only of bare archeological remains and a bunch of Icelandic legends, Ericsson has long been treated as a footnote in American history: no holiday, no state capitals named after him, no little ditty to remind you of the date of his voyage. But a group of Icelandic and Spanish scientists studying one mysterious genetic sequence - and one woman who's been dead 1,000 years - may soon change that.

Ten years ago, Agnar Helgason, a scientist at Iceland's deCODE Genetics, began investigating the origin of the Icelandic population. Most of the people he tested carried genetic links to either Scandinavians or people from the British Isles. But a small group of Icelanders - roughly 350 in total - carried a lineage known as C1, usually seen only in Asians and Native Americans. "We figured it was a recent arrival from Asia," says Helgason. "But we discovered a much deeper story than we expected."

Helgason's graduate student, Sigridur Sunna Ebenesersdottir, found that she could trace the matrilineal sequence to a date far earlier than when the first Asians began arriving in Iceland. In fact, she found that all the people who carry the C1 lineage are descendants of one of four women alive around the year 1700. In all likelihood, those four descended from a single woman. And because archeological remains in what is Canada today suggest that the Vikings were in the Americas around the year 1000 before retreating into a period of global isolation, the best explanation for that errant lineage lies with an American Indian woman: one who was taken back to Iceland some 500 years before Columbus set sail for the New World in 1492.

"Quantitatively, the importance of the discovery is fairly minimal," says Carles Lalueza, a researcher at Barcelona's Institute of Evolutionary Biology, who collaborated on the project. "You're talking about a few people on a remote island. But qualitatively, the fact that there is evidence for the transmission of genes between two continents at that early a date is very exciting."

And it's not just the mere fact of contact that is intriguing. Until now, the historical evidence has suggested that while the Vikings may have reached the Americas, they didn't really engage with the indigenous population. "According to the sagas, the Vikings had troubles with the locals and couldn't settle there, so they returned to Iceland," says Helgason. "But if we're right, it will mean they didn't just sail there and come back. They had real contact with them." (Comment on this story.)

For now, the story of the lone American Indian woman taken on a Viking ship to Iceland remains a hypothesis. To prove it will require finding the same genetic sequence in older Amerindian remains elsewhere in the world - family members, as it were, of that 1,000-year-old woman who ended up so far from home. That sounds like a daunting task, but Helgason and his team hope that as news of their finding spreads, other geneticists will re-examine remains they have already studied for evidence of the same lineage.

In the meantime, Helgason will also be exploring one other possible explanation for the unexpected finding. Though unlikely, the presence of the C1 lineage could indicate that it originated in those ancient populations who dispersed from Europe into Asia and the Americas. In other words, instead of a single American Indian carrying the lineage to Europe, it may have risen out of primitive Europe and migrated to different parts of the world. "If that's the case, we'd be talking about 14,000 years ago," says Helgason. "So even if we're wrong about this one American indian woman, the other answer would be even more spectacular."

[Gerr]

I have always found European egotism quite amusing. Textbooks proclaim Columbus or Leif Ericsson discovered America while ignoring the fact the natives greeted them. Captain Cook discovered Hawaii when in fact the Polynesians have been there a long time. It is claimed Magellan discovered the Philippines while natives were there to meet him.

[doug yowell]

Captain Cook discovered Hawaii when in fact the Polynesians have been there a long time.

Yes, those Europeans even try to take credit for inventing topless beaches which Cook encountered on his Hawaian vacation.

[doug yowell]

It is claimed Magellan discovered the Philippines while natives were there to meet him.

Next thing ya know the Europeans will be claiming to have invented boxing.

[John317]

I understand what you're saying, but no one is denying that the Indians were here in America before the white man. The Indians helped the early whites learn how to survive the first winter after they came over on the Mayflower. A large number died and they all might well have died except for the Indians' help.

It's interesting that one of the Indians who assisted the white's the most was Squanto, who had earlier been captured and taken to England where he learned English and accepted the gospel, then returned to his country. But if Squanto hadn't learned English, he wouldn't have been able to help the whites as he did.

[John317]

The native people's here in 1700 lived almost exactly same as their ancestors had lived a thousand years before. An interesting question is, why did the Indians continue to live in exactly the same way as they had lived for thousands of years, virtually without change?

[cricket]

The Native Americans had a good thing going. Why change when there's no need for change?

[John317]

In some ways, you're right, but contrary to popular ideas from TV and most films on the indians, their lives were often very brutal and horrifying. There are a few films that show this, but most of them romantisize it.

If interested in an Apache viewpoint of their existence before and after the coming of white men (Mexicans), read Geronimo's fascinating and wonderful autobiography:

http://www.ibiblio.org/ebooks/Geronimo/GerStory.htm

[Dr. Shane]

The issue is global communication. Yes there were natives in most every part of the world, but they were not communicating overseas with other parts of the world. The Europeans get the credit because (for good or bad) they were creating global commerce. This is the history of the global markets which has been both good and evil. The global markets have enhanced the lifestyle of many populations but often used slavery and oppression.

[John317]

Good point. Given the differences in lifestyle and worldview, the conflict between the European and the Indian was bound to happen when they came into contact. It was tragic and lots of terrible things were done by both groups. Like you say, too, it brought about both good and evil, but I think the good outweighs the bad, and the Indians (or Native Americans) generally agree with this. Most of them would not want to live as their ancestors did, running after buffalo, digging for roots, and perhaps freezing to death in their huts or Teepees.

Many historians believe that there are probably more Indians living here now that ever lived at one time before the coming of the white man. On the other hand, many smaller tribes that used to roam the wilderness no longer exist but have been wiped out by either disease or violence from indians or whites.

[Dr. Shane]

The Native Americans that assimilated to the European culture tended to do OK. That is, they built cabins and farmed land. Those that tried to preserve their way of life, didn't fair so well. Many will argue that the Native Americans shouldn't have had to assimilate. I tend to look at it as change. I could refuse to use a cell phone and insist that those that want to talk to be call me on a land line. I could resist changing fashions and modern technology but I am only going to hurt myself in the process.

There was plenty of land for both the Europeans and the Native Americans when the pilgrims started to settle here. The Europeans did bring things that helped the Native Americans, like horses and weapons for hunting. Looking back on it with hindsight, there was a lot of unnecessary fighting. Thanksgiving is really a celebration of two cultures working together and getting along. It is too bad that arrangement died out within a generation of that first feast.

The Native Americans from North America did fare much better than the Aztecs and Mayans of Mexico and Central America. Cortez just killed all the men and raped all the women. Mexico doesn't have Aztec of Mayan reservations. No casinos there. In fact, Mexicans are sometimes called the race of the raped because they are half Spanish and half Aztec/Mayan.

[Gerr]

S: There was plenty of land for both the Europeans and the Native Americans when the pilgrims started to settle here.

G: Really? As soon as something valuable was found on Indian land, guess what happened?

[John317]

Have you read about how the first disagreements took place between the indians and the white people after they came over on the Mayflower? It's really interesting, but tragic, too. They were evidently getting along fine until one day some of the natives stole some livestock. What the whites didn't realize is that most of the American indian tribes didn't see stealing from non-tribal members as anything morally wrong. In fact, most of the American indians believed it was a good thing, and they taught their children to steal. They considered stealing a mark of a good man.

So one of the problems between the indians and the whites was the completely different set of moral values and world-views. The two people simply did not understand each other. The Indians didn't see the land in the way whites saw it, so this was also a problem. It was the same with their differences in their views of the buffalo and the gold and silver.

[Gerr]

Didn't know that. That's interesting.

[phkrause]

Have you read about how the first disagreements took place between the indians and the white people after they came over on the Mayflower? It's really interesting, but tragic, too. They were evidently getting along fine until one day some of the natives stole some livestock. What the whites didn't realize is that most of the American indian tribes didn't see stealing from non-tribal members as anything morally wrong. In fact, most of the American indians believed it was a good thing, and they taught their children to steal. They considered stealing a mark of a good man.

So one of the problems between the indians and the whites was the completely different set of moral values and world-views. The two people simply did not understand each other. The Indians didn't see the land in the way whites saw it, so this was also a problem. It was the same with their differences in their views of the buffalo and the gold and silver.

How unfortunite, us civil ones always think we know everything. We come into other peoples counties and tell them how they should behave.

[doug yowell]

How unfortunite, us civil ones always think we know everything. We come into other peoples counties and tell them how they should behave.

Yes, that's what happens when a Minnesota football team tangles with an Ohio baseball team.Sad.