Re: The Neolithic/Mesolithic Boundary(4) Climatic Instability Gives way to Stability

prd <X_header@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
floyd@xxxxxxxxxx (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
"Peter Alaca" <P.Alaca@xxxxxx> wrote:
Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
"Peter Alaca" <P.Alaca@xxxxxx> wrote:

but perhaps you learned something about
"prd" (and reindeer) after you wrote this.

I've yet to see anything indicating any knowledge of
carioub/reindeer from either the people who claimed to know all
about them. Maybe you do, but that isn't yet evident.

Okay then, taxonomically speaking there is only one
(circumplolair) species, so it doesn't realy matter how
it is commonly known.
But what else was there to say to a prd's evasive reply
to my question to him than 'yes'?

Whatever, you seem to have confused before and after.

I don't understand what you mean.

You stated that I learned something "after".

But, I finally did! *You* actually do know the difference
between a caribou and a reindeer, which is only in how the words
are spelled.

There is some ambiguity to what a Reindeer is, I am not
altogether familiar with free roaming reindeer herds

There is a lot of ambiguity to what 'prd' is. A brat for sure,
but somewhat slow it appears too.

Here we are... and he *finally* went and looked it up somewhere;
and now wants to claim he actually knew something in the first
place (i.e., when he claimed he did).

Given a total lack of perspective on what he states, it appears
'prd' had not previously heard of the information he posts, and
still hasn't got a clue as to what it means.

in eurasia, but at least some authors treat Reindeer
as the domesticated version of Caribou. And since we

I certainly hope _some_ of them do!

were talking about the Mesolithic/Neolithic boundary
then the proper name would be Caribou, or conversely
carbio = wild reindeer. That is like calling a wolf
a wild dog or Arouch, wild cattle. I call this sloppy
nomenclature.

But what do /you/ know about it?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/Browser/wwwtax.cgi?mode=Undef&id=9881&lvl=3&lin=f&keep=1&srchmode=1&unlock

Rangifer
Rangifer tarandus (reindeer)
Rangifer tarandus caribou
Rangifer tarandus dawsoni
Rangifer tarandus fennicus
Rangifer tarandus granti
Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus
Rangifer tarandus pearyi
Rangifer tarandus platyrhyncus
Rangifer tarandus tarandus

I consider reindeer to be closer to elk than deer.

*You* consider? You don't know diddly squat *** about them, so
what difference does it make what you think it all means.

But taxonomical the cervids are treated as deer, which
makes it somewhat difficult to explain moose but . . .

The old norse word is "hreidyri" which means [reindeer]
it was shortened and deer was added as a suffix.

None of which has an iota of significance.

We could be real sophisticated and use the old Norse
if anyone liketh it.

You could have been a lot more sophisticated, and *not* claimed
to know anything about them. That would be called "honest".

Lets now see you do some research on caribou, and use that to
connect with this thread in relation to development of human
technologies/cultures following the last Ice Age.

There *are* some obvious relationships that exist at least here
in Alaska. I am not familiar with archaeology in Siberia or
Europe, and hence do not know what influences existed there.

A bit of suggested reading for you would be the specifics of
caribou migration patterns and timing. Ken Whitten, Brad
Griffith, and Ray Cameron et al have reported extensively over
the past 30 years on those topics. Here is a fairly detailed
review of their work,

http://www.absc.usgs.gov/1002/index.htm

The known connections between caribou and Paleo archaeology that
I am aware of are mostly centered on work done at the Mesa site,
by Kunz et al. They suggest that after the end of the last Ice
Age there were few caribou on the North Slope, and a climate
change resulted in loss of both megafauna and human habitat for
perhaps 3000 years. Humans and caribou repopulated the area at
the same time. It appears that virtually all human habitation
on the coastal plain of the Brooks Range (the "North Slope") was
Dependant upon caribou for several thousand years, until
development of Thule Technology by Eskimos made a fully marine
mammal dependent culture possible.

Here are two quickie overviews that put it into perspective.

http://www.gi.alaska.edu/ScienceForum/ASF15/1533.html
http://www.cr.nps.gov/archeology/Cg/fd_vol8_num1/planet.htm

For specific details, do a web search for this document:

M. Kunz, Bever. M., Adkins C. 2003. The Mesa Site:
Paleoindians above the Arctic Circle. U.S. Bureau
of Land Management, Anchorage Alaska.

Kunz gives his perception (which is not universally agreed to by
others, but certainly is accurate enough for our purposes) of
the history of human occupation of the North Slope of Alaska,
beginning on page 21 and continuing for several pages because he
speculates on various relationships, including between caribou
and various human cultures that occupied the area from 11,000
years before present up to modern times.

When you digest all of that, and at least have a meager
background, *then* lets talk about how caribou and humans
interacted over the past 10,000 years.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@xxxxxxxxxx
.