Older The Better
Silver Member
- Apr 24, 2017
- 3,143
- 5,852
- Detector(s) used
- Whites Eagle Spectrum
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Iâve seen a lot of âexpertsâ lately on various shows and some articles talk about certain areas, many of them in California, and they say the so and so tribe has been here for 10,000 years and then they talk about historical interactions with the same tribes.
This kind of assumption bothers me. I canât imagine any band has remained in one area peacefully and maintained a continuous identity for 10,000 years. As more and more people claim such a thing it has me wondering if maybe Iâve got it wrong
Is there really any merit to a person claiming a group has lived in a certain valley for 10,000 years? Personally I think itâs a sloppy conclusion combining two facts they know, who was here historically, and how long have people been in North America. Spreading misinformation can cause confusion for those who have an interest in history.
One last thought Iâve had is it a political maneuver? if they can claim a group has been in an area throughout history then they can grant all ownership of artifacts to said tribe. I guess it makes things simple if thatâs the case.
Personally I think a Clovis band stopping in the valley is a completely different group from the woodland groups which were different from historic tribes. People move, fight, bands die off, places experience drought, fire, floods, groups split, and mix. I just think it silly to say a named tribe has been around 10,000 years.
Iâm curious if others feel differently or if these âexpertsâ were just people with opinions that helped support the direction of the show or article.
Iâll throw in something to look at an all txt seems a bit boring, feel free to do the same if you want with your response
This kind of assumption bothers me. I canât imagine any band has remained in one area peacefully and maintained a continuous identity for 10,000 years. As more and more people claim such a thing it has me wondering if maybe Iâve got it wrong
Is there really any merit to a person claiming a group has lived in a certain valley for 10,000 years? Personally I think itâs a sloppy conclusion combining two facts they know, who was here historically, and how long have people been in North America. Spreading misinformation can cause confusion for those who have an interest in history.
One last thought Iâve had is it a political maneuver? if they can claim a group has been in an area throughout history then they can grant all ownership of artifacts to said tribe. I guess it makes things simple if thatâs the case.
Personally I think a Clovis band stopping in the valley is a completely different group from the woodland groups which were different from historic tribes. People move, fight, bands die off, places experience drought, fire, floods, groups split, and mix. I just think it silly to say a named tribe has been around 10,000 years.
Iâm curious if others feel differently or if these âexpertsâ were just people with opinions that helped support the direction of the show or article.
Iâll throw in something to look at an all txt seems a bit boring, feel free to do the same if you want with your response
Upvote
10
