ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/hist_text/archive/v01.n641

Internet Message Format | 2000-10-05 | 39KB

From: [e-mail] (hist_text-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: hist_text-digest V1 #641
Reply-To: hist_text
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


hist_text-digest        Friday, October 6 2000        Volume 01 : Number 641



In this issue:

-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: corn
-áááááá MtMan-List: corn & bees
-áááááá MtMan-List: corn and bees
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: corn
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: corn and bees
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: corn & bees
-áááááá RE: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: corn
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: pemmican
-áááááá RE: MtMan-List: pemmican
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: pemmican
-áááááá MtMan-List: word-phrase searchable hist-text digest archives
-áááááá MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses
-áááááá RE: MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses
-áááááá RE: MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses
-áááááá Fw: MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:43:35 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: corn

>     Here's what I think:  According to an early post, which I confirmed with
>  an expert, bees did not exist in America prior to the time of Columbus.

Frank,
Are you sure you asked this expert the proper question?
The European honey bee was an introduced specie.
There are many kinds of bees, hornets and wasps.  They didn't all come over
with the Pilgrims.

>  Thusly, most of the continent was almost barren plains land and all plants
>  were far less lush than they are now.

Not even close............you know better than this if you stop and think
about it.

>  Bees introduced more vigorous
>  pollination and made some plants, corn one of them, into something better
>  and almost unrecognizable from its early scrawny ancestors.

I suggest that you reread how the birds and the bees work in nature.
I think you should have had your coffee before sending this post. <G>
It requires further thought on your part.

Dave Kanger

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:06:14 -0500
From: "Frank Fusco" <[e-mail]>
Subject: MtMan-List: corn & bees

Ole' #718 wrote,

    <I will probably be more gentle than others but I am sorry to report
that
there were bees. No there were not European bees. There were Bumble Bee's
and probably in the neighborhood of 50+ native bees.>

    I know only what my expert told me, and he is a recognized authority.
Bumble bees may have been here, he acknowledges that. But they do a very
poor job of pollinating. Other insects that may pollinate also do a very
poor job.  I agree something did some pollinating otherwise life would not
exist.
    Better and more vigorous pollination started when the Mayflower landed.
I don't see that we are in disagreement. I jest didn't speeceefi wat kinds
of bees. I ain't the eekspurt.
Frank G. Fusco
Mountain Home, Arkansas




- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 08:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ronald Schrotter <[e-mail]>
Subject: MtMan-List: corn and bees

Frank, your last statement was true enough, crops did
get much better after the pilgrims landed [140 years
after Columbus]because the native americans were not
trained horticulturists, whereas Europeans had been
farming for quite a spell, and it was experience that
made the difference.  Don't know what kinds of bees
they brought, but since ol' Chris never landed on our
continent, I have no idea what he had to do with their
introduction. I sure do enjoy the result though, Dog

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!
http://photos.yahoo.com/

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:37:06 -0700
From: "Roger Lahti" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: corn

Frank,
Lots of confusion has revolved around the use of corn.

>     Here's what I think:  According to an early post, which I confirmed
with
> an expert, bees did not exist in America prior to the time of Columbus.

So far your right on target.

> Thusly, most of the continent was almost barren plains land and all plants
> were far less lush than they are now.

That may or may not be true but I don't see it that way. All plants have a
unique pollination stratagy special to them. Some plants are pollinated by
moths, some by butterflys, some by other indigenous insects and some by
birds and mamals. Those plants that depend on an outside agent to assist in
the pollination process and were compatible with the honey bee's pollination
habits benefited from the introduction of european honey bees. Remember too
that there are more than just the european honey bee on this continent.
Bumble Bees, leaf cutter bees, etc. It was the european honey bee that was
introduced.

Bees introduced more vigorous
> pollination and made some plants, corn one of them, into something better
> and almost unrecognizable from its early scrawny ancestors.

I don't know where you got your information but I believe you have been
advised wrong. Having been an avid gardener and having lived in an
agricultural community with farmer grandfathers, and having had some
agricultural training in school I can assure you that corn and most of the
other grains do not depend on nor do they utilize insects of any kind to
carry out their pollination strategy's. Bee's do not pollinate corn. Corn is
pollinated by a wide dispersal of pollen by air currents.

The indians were great corn growers long before europeans set foot on this
continent. They also had a tradition of growing special strains of corn for
different uses and for hardiness in different climates varying from the
tropics of South America to the high dry mountains of the west and from the
upper plains states across Amercia and south into South America. They also
made it a point to not plant one strain next to another one or the result
would be serious cross pollination. I have had this problem with my corn
growing efforts since my garden is only a 1/4 acre in size and it is hard to
separate different strains with enough distance. They discribed it as "the
sisters walking in the night" (better known as teepee creaping <G>).


But those who spent
> time west of the big muddy more likely did not have anything so fine and
had
> to use whatever was available.

I believe I read where the Wilson Price Hunt expedition/group traveling
overland to the mouth of the Columbia for the Astor venture in 1810/11
traded for corn from the Indians in the Snake River plains. Perhaps it was
another group but it was done. Corn was and had been a big trade commondity
for many thousands of years all over North America. Now wheat is another
story. Remember too, that Indians harvested but did not cultivate other
grass grains in minor amounts just as they foraged for variously available
regional nuts, roots and fibers.


The question and thus the argument as to whether ground corn meal was
carried, available for trade or, etc. is problematic. The indians certainly
had it to trade. They grew or traded for corn and many, though not all
tribes, ground it into flour for baking. So why wouldn't it be available to
the long hunter along with the RMFT and beyond? That doesn't take away from
a person's vow to not use anything not thouroghly documented. That is
personal choice.

I remain....

YMOS
Capt. Lahti'




- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 11:47:47 -0600
From: "Ole B. Jensen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: corn and bees

Dog,
Are you comming to the Camp?
Ole
- ----------
>From: Ronald Schrotter <[e-mail]>
>To: hist list <[e-mail]>
>Subject: MtMan-List: corn and bees
>Date: Thu, Oct 5, 2000, 9:44 AM
>

>Frank, your last statement was true enough, crops did
>get much better after the pilgrims landed [140 years
>after Columbus]because the native americans were not
>trained horticulturists, whereas Europeans had been
>farming for quite a spell, and it was experience that
>made the difference.  Don't know what kinds of bees
>they brought, but since ol' Chris never landed on our
>continent, I have no idea what he had to do with their
>introduction. I sure do enjoy the result though, Dog
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!
>http://photos.yahoo.com/
>
>----------------------
>hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html
>

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 11:10:11 -0700
From: "DRB Hays" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: corn & bees

Thank goodness  fo  those  endo-urapeeing  Bees
the poor natives could have never made it on their primitive--godless own.

Some  Phd , some where  has set the record straight.  Popcorn and tacos to
you sir.

All you rendevous police take note: no second time around corn will be
tolerated in this camp!

LOLROTFLMAO
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Fusco" <[e-mail]>
To: "AMM" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 7:06 AM
Subject: MtMan-List: corn & bees


> Ole' #718 wrote,
>
>     <I will probably be more gentle than others but I am sorry to report
> that
> there were bees. No there were not European bees. There were Bumble Bee's
> and probably in the neighborhood of 50+ native bees.>
>
>     I know only what my expert told me, and he is a recognized authority.
> Bumble bees may have been here, he acknowledges that. But they do a very
> poor job of pollinating. Other insects that may pollinate also do a very
> poor job.  I agree something did some pollinating otherwise life would not
> exist.
>     Better and more vigorous pollination started when the Mayflower
landed.
> I don't see that we are in disagreement. I jest didn't speeceefi wat kinds
> of bees. I ain't the eekspurt.
> Frank G. Fusco
> Mountain Home, Arkansas
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:05:58 -0600
From: Joe Brandl <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade

I had a great time at Ft Union and learned a bit while there. Gowen
and Hansen had interesting luncheon presentations. Bought a ton of
new books. Now just have to find a quiet time in the bathroom to read.
Joe
Have a look at our web site @ www.absarokawesterndesign.com
Call us about our tanning, furs & leather and lodgepole furniture 307-455-2440
New leather wildlife coasters and placemats - ther're great!!

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 15:53:30 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: corn

In a message dated 10/5/00 9:16:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< there were bees. No there were not European bees >>
You can even change that to European Honey Bees which Native Americans called
the white mans stining flys.  These were imported to have honey and mead and
wax which were common back in Europe.

<<'They' had corn until it ran out.  It may have been called wheat, or the
wheat may have been called corn, I dunno>>

In the 1700 all grain was (wheat, barley, oats) called corn by Europeans and
what we call corn was called maze or indian corn.  This can confuse people
using early cook books and journals.

Indian corn was prolific, if you read the accounts of Sullivans campaign in
1779 against the 6 natiions you will see that maze/corn was grown (along with
beans and squash, the three sisters) by the thousands of acres.  Sullivan did
not defeat the Iroquois in battle, he use a slash and burn warfare (Gen G.
Washingtons orders) to reduce the natives to starvation and force them to
retreat to Ft. Niagara and north to further drain the British supplies,
thereby reducing British attacks from the north.

But maze/corn was an extremely viable crop in North America early in the
1700's.  It may not have been planted as abundantly in the west but growing
grain was practiced by the natives that were forced to relocate time and time
again further and further west.

YMOS

C.T. Oakes

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 15:46:44 -0700
From: "larry pendleton" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade

John,
  I'm right there with you on this one.  I refuse to converse with anyone
who chooses to use a bogus name, no name, or doesn't have his or her e-mail
address on his or her messages.  Just seems kinda rude to me.  There seems
to be a growing number of folks on this list and others who want to air
their opinions, and yet remain totally anonymous.
   You and I have had rather heated discussions on this list and others, but
we always knew who we were talkin to.  If you wanted to e-mail me privately
or if you wanted to call me up and give me piece of your mind, so be it.  I
had the same options.  That just seems like the right way to carry on a
discussion to me.
Pendleton
- -----Original Message-----
From: John Kramer <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Date: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 9:16 PM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade


Dear -b, aka Billy Corgan, aka Chris Riddle, aka drownyoursorrows:

Who the hell are you anyway???

It seems you have determined that "man" is not part of the natural order:
hence, by your reasoning, it must be true; men are from Mars and women are
from Venus.  Or are we all from Uranus?

Nothing you've said so far suggests an open mind.

Your broad statements of "fact" are unsupported by evidence.

You probably get good grades in school.

A know-it-all-already university student without a real email address or
name doesn't warrant answers, courtesy or consideration.

John...

At 02:13 PM 10/4/00 -0400, you wrote:
>I was not trying to put forth the idea that I have a negativ view of the
>situation going into the paper which I am writing.  It is a fact though
>that no matter what, ever time man has populated a region and exploited
>its resources, something environmentally negative has happened.  Man
>naturally throws off the cycle of life due to overhunting, building dams,
>pollution from cities/trade posts, and wastes from man made
>technologies.  It is impossible to say that man had no adverse effect on
>the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers as a result of the fur trade, and
>other factors, which caused a large increase in population in that
>area.  I hope to discuss as well the positive effects of man, but it is
>hard to see how building up cities is in any way positive to nature.  The
>fur trade may not be at fault for the cities, but the fur trade was a
>major part of industry, was it not?
>I am still in the planning stages of this paper, and am trying to
>determine what angle I would be best to take.  So far I have not made up
>my mind and have a lot of research to do, obviously.  Once I have done my
>general research I plan to formulate my angle of approach and attack the
>situation from there.
>Thank you to those who helped me out with finding information, you have
>helped enlighten me about the realities of the fur trade and when I get to
>reading all the material in full I will hopefully have my ideas straight.
>Thanks again.
>-b


"Never ascribe to malice that which is
adequately explained by incompetence."
                            Napoleon Bonaparte.


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 17:07:29 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade

Pendleton,

You have a valid point...much like how the ol' coons of yesteryear
appreciated a man what would toe up and rassle face-to-face.  But some folks
is just green to cyber-etiquette.  Takes some a while to learn.  Give -em
time...give 'em time...my granpap used to say.   Ignorance can be
educated...stupidity-now that's forever.

I remain respectfully yours,
- -C. Kent

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 16:08:56 -0500
From: "Paul W. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade

Damn, but here I am agreeing 100% with both Larry and John, and in Public!

Regards,  Paul

- ----- Original Message -----
From: larry pendleton <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 5:46 PM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade


> John,
>   I'm right there with you on this one.  I refuse to converse with anyone
> who chooses to use a bogus name, no name, or doesn't have his or her
e-mail
> address on his or her messages.  Just seems kinda rude to me.  There seems
> to be a growing number of folks on this list and others who want to air
> their opinions, and yet remain totally anonymous.
>    You and I have had rather heated discussions on this list and others,
but
> we always knew who we were talkin to.  If you wanted to e-mail me
privately
> or if you wanted to call me up and give me piece of your mind, so be it.
I
> had the same options.  That just seems like the right way to carry on a
> discussion to me.
> Pendleton
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Kramer <[e-mail]>
> To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> Date: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 9:16 PM
> Subject: Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade
>
>
> Dear -b, aka Billy Corgan, aka Chris Riddle, aka drownyoursorrows:
>
> Who the hell are you anyway???
>
> It seems you have determined that "man" is not part of the natural order:
> hence, by your reasoning, it must be true; men are from Mars and women are
> from Venus.  Or are we all from Uranus?
>
> Nothing you've said so far suggests an open mind.
>
> Your broad statements of "fact" are unsupported by evidence.
>
> You probably get good grades in school.
>
> A know-it-all-already university student without a real email address or
> name doesn't warrant answers, courtesy or consideration.
>
> John...
>
> At 02:13 PM 10/4/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >I was not trying to put forth the idea that I have a negativ view of the
> >situation going into the paper which I am writing.  It is a fact though
> >that no matter what, ever time man has populated a region and exploited
> >its resources, something environmentally negative has happened.  Man
> >naturally throws off the cycle of life due to overhunting, building dams,
> >pollution from cities/trade posts, and wastes from man made
> >technologies.  It is impossible to say that man had no adverse effect on
> >the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers as a result of the fur trade, and
> >other factors, which caused a large increase in population in that
> >area.  I hope to discuss as well the positive effects of man, but it is
> >hard to see how building up cities is in any way positive to nature.  The
> >fur trade may not be at fault for the cities, but the fur trade was a
> >major part of industry, was it not?
> >I am still in the planning stages of this paper, and am trying to
> >determine what angle I would be best to take.  So far I have not made up
> >my mind and have a lot of research to do, obviously.  Once I have done my
> >general research I plan to formulate my angle of approach and attack the
> >situation from there.
> >Thank you to those who helped me out with finding information, you have
> >helped enlighten me about the realities of the fur trade and when I get
to
> >reading all the material in full I will hopefully have my ideas straight.
> >Thanks again.
> >-b
>
>
> "Never ascribe to malice that which is
> adequately explained by incompetence."
>                             Napoleon Bonaparte.
>
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html
>
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 16:36:49 -0700
From: "larry pendleton" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade

You have a valid point...much like how the ol' coons of yesteryear
appreciated a man what would toe up and rassle face-to-face

>>  Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I figure a person who isn't willing to "toe
the line" ain't worth talkin to.
Pendleton


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 15:13:34 -0700
From: "Roger Lahti" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "larry pendleton" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 3:46 PM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade


> John,
>   I'm right there with you on this one.  I refuse to converse with anyone
> who chooses to use a bogus name, no name, or doesn't have his or her
e-mail
> address on his or her messages.

Pendleton,

Sounds like a policy I can live with. No name, no email, bogus name, No
Comment! It is just plain rude. Guy or gal like that on the mlml and called
himself "me". I tried to tell him it was impolite and he wouldn't listen. No
one talks to him as far as I know. Probably a nice fella otherwise.  Just
seems kinda rude to me.


Capt. Lahti'




- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 18:50:32 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade

[e-mail] writes:

> Where are them boys who went off to ft union.  Why are they so quiet?>>

We've been contemplatin' all that we learned and gettin' ready for the fall
hunts.

I went to Fort Union and had a great time. Best symposium/conference I have
attended. Not only did I learn a lot, it got me fired-up for some new
projects and interested in some new research. Made many new friends and I
also met several good folks from this and other lists. However, there were
several who from the list, who said they were coming, but I did not see or
get a chance to meet them. There were about 175 paying participants, many
presenters, National Park employees from the Fort, plus many from the local
Ft. Union Association and area club(s) who stopped in and out of the
proceedings. I think they said there were 29 states and 4 countries
represented. It was a "jam" packed event with presentations during lunch and
up until 10:00 at night. The presentations, vendors, tours, artifacts, and
reenactment were all first class. I would highly recommend it. The host
committee from Fort Union and all the re-enactors from far and wide should be
congratulated.

A friend, who is a rendezvous trader, went to the Fort Union Rendezvous on
Memorial Day and said it was one of the best he attended. I will definitely
put it on my calendar for next year. Only criticism I have is that they
raffled the brain tan buffalo robe off to some "dude" from New York City.
Tentative schedules for future symposiums (based on who volunteers to host
it) are Fort Benton, MT 2003 and Chadron, NE (Museum of the Fur Trade) in
2006. I will not miss either or these.

YMOS
Ghosting Wolf

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 19:51:07 -0700
From: Linda Holley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: missouri r./ fur trade

Glad someone had a good time.  For those of us who were stuck in the "Sunny" Fla.

slaving away with the uneducated children of tomorrow......
But, for those of you who are interested in Native American Material Culture,
there is going to be a new seminar in the fall to go to.  If anyone is
interested, it may be in  Sheridan, Great Falls? or somewhere in that area.  Many
of our " Material Culture" people went to Ft. Union and had such a good time they
want to have another type a group gathering.  Many of us go to the Plains
Symposium in Cody, but that has turned into a Social, economic, modern, why do we
hate the indians by the indians or how to be politically correct, bust.  Use to
be a great place to learn.

Any way.....glad to hear the news.  Sounds great.

Linda Holley

[e-mail] wrote:

> [e-mail] writes:
>
> > Where are them boys who went off to ft union.  Why are they so quiet?>>
>
> We've been contemplatin' all that we learned and gettin' ready for the fall
> hunts.
>
> I went to Fort Union and had a great time. Best symposium/conference I have
> attended. Not only did I learn a lot, it got me fired-up for some new
> projects and interested in some new research. Made many new friends and I
> also met several good folks from this and other lists. However, there were
> several who from the list, who said they were coming, but I did not see or
> get a chance to meet them. There were about 175 paying participants, many
> presenters, National Park employees from the Fort, plus many from the local
> Ft. Union Association and area club(s) who stopped in and out of the
> proceedings. I think they said there were 29 states and 4 countries
> represented. It was a "jam" packed event with presentations during lunch and
> up until 10:00 at night. The presentations, vendors, tours, artifacts, and
> reenactment were all first class. I would highly recommend it. The host
> committee from Fort Union and all the re-enactors from far and wide should be
> congratulated.
>
> A friend, who is a rendezvous trader, went to the Fort Union Rendezvous on
> Memorial Day and said it was one of the best he attended. I will definitely
> put it on my calendar for next year. Only criticism I have is that they
> raffled the brain tan buffalo robe off to some "dude" from New York City.
> Tentative schedules for future symposiums (based on who volunteers to host
> it) are Fort Benton, MT 2003 and Chadron, NE (Museum of the Fur Trade) in
> 2006. I will not miss either or these.
>
> YMOS
> Ghosting Wolf
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 19:08:14 -0600
From: Angela Gottfred <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: pemmican

"Ponyrider" <[e-mail]> wrote:
 >angela g. or anyone;
 >looking for date the hudson bay co. started to sell pemmican to europ.
 >armys. also firm up about when hudson bay started useing pemmican in their
 >post systems.
Sorry, Ponyrider. I thought I knew stuff about pemmican, but I'm afraid I
can't help you out with the question of European armies. I'm not sure what
you mean by "using pemmican in their post systems"--do you mean sending
pemmican to a central provisioning post, or do you mean when they started
using pemmican as food? I might be able to find out those answers, but if
you meant something else, let me know.

Your humble & obedient servant,
Angela Gottfred



- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 19:38:30 -0600
From: "Walt Foster" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: MtMan-List: pemmican

"Ponyrider" <[e-mail]> wrote:
 >angela g. or anyone;
 >looking for date the hudson bay co. started to sell pemmican to europ.
 >armys. also firm up about when hudson bay started useing pemmican in their
 >post systems.
Sorry, Ponyrider. I thought I knew stuff about pemmican, but I'm afraid I
can't help you out with the question of European armies. I'm not sure what
you mean by "using pemmican in their post systems"--do you mean sending
pemmican to a central provisioning post, or do you mean when they started
using pemmican as food? I might be able to find out those answers, but if
you meant something else, let me know.

Your humble & obedient servant,
Angela Gottfred

Ponyrider and Angela,

One of the big items for trade was pemmican.  North of the border it was a
major trade item back into the trading posts.  The Assinaboine  and Metis
did a lot of trading of pemmican.. Another example of pemmican trade in
large amounts  was at the Fort Union Trading Post.  Is the representative
from Fort Union present on the list?


Walt
Original Rocky Mountain College 1836-1837
Yellowstone Canoe Camp
On the Lewis & Clark Trail
Park City, Montana






- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 22:31:50 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: pemmican

> Sorry, Ponyrider. I thought I knew stuff about pemmican, but I'm afraid I
>  can't help you out with the question of European armies. I'm not sure what
>  you mean by "using pemmican in their post systems"--do you mean sending
>  pemmican to a central provisioning post, or do you mean when they started
>  using pemmican as food?

That information should be in the archives.  We discussed it several years
ago.  I remember the thread and I provided substantial information, but it
was too long ago and I can't remember the sources.  It had to do with the
Metis Buffalo hunts and the fact that they made pemmican from the buffalo
meat and fat, packed it in the stomachs of the buffalo, carted it back on
their Red River carts, and sold it to HBC and others.  You just have to dig
it out of the archives.

Dave Kanger

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 23:06:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Jon Marinetti)
Subject: MtMan-List: word-phrase searchable hist-text digest archives

Are there any plans or discussion among the AMM brethren (i.e., Dean & a
few brothers) to do this?  [too much work - not enough time?]  It would
make a great web site even greater.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
from Michigan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 23:47:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Jon Marinetti)
Subject: MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses

Mammoths-mastadons-elephants became extinct on the American continent as
a result of the Civil Wars that caused the total destruction (except for
1 man who survived for 9 months) of the Jaredite people ~ 585 B.C.
[non-American Indian civilization].

Horses became extinct on the American continent as a result of the
Nephite-Lamanite Civil Wars that caused the total destruction of the
Nephite people only ~ 421 A.D. [American Indian ancestor civilization =
Lamanite].

Only ~ 10% of the archaeological sites of Central and South America have
been uncovered.  Much is still hidden, but what will come forth will be
mind-boggling (an understatement to say the least).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
from Michigan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 23:59:11 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses

[e-mail] writes:

> Mammoths-mastadons-elephants became extinct on the American continent as a
result of the Civil Wars that caused the total destruction....of the Jaredite
people ~ 585 B.C....Horses became extinct on the American continent as a
result of the Nephite-Lamanite Civil Wars that caused the total destruction
of the Nephite people only ~ 421 A.D.....>>

What is your documentation for this?  Where is the archeological and/or
geological evidence? I also think you need to check the dates, from the
geological evidence, of when these animals became extinct and compare them to
your dates.

YMOS
Ghosting Wolf

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 01:19:35 -0600
From: "Walt Foster" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses

Jon, since when did the book of Mormon become an ML list as a source of
history?


Walt
Original Rocky Mountain College 1836-1837
Yellowstone Canoe Camp
On the Lewis & Clark Trail
Park City, Montana



- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 01:25:04 -0600
From: "Walt Foster" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses

Horses became extinct on the American continent as a result of the
Nephite-Lamanite Civil Wars that caused the total destruction of the
Nephite people only ~ 421 A.D. [American Indian ancestor civilization =
Lamanite].

Jon this is a bogus statement.  Mammoths food supply as things dried up
after the last Ice age.  The bow and arrow arrived in what is now called
Montana about the time you mention. 421 A. D.

About the only thing you said that rings true is more is to be discovered
south of the border.

Walt
Original Rocky Mountain College 1836-1837
Yellowstone Canoe Camp
On the Lewis & Clark Trail
Park City, Montana






- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 06:24:57 -0700
From: Linda Holley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses

Where is the documentation for any of this "Information"??????????
Never heard of this before.

Linda Holley

Jon Marinetti wrote:

> Mammoths-mastadons-elephants became extinct on the American continent as
> a result of the Civil Wars that caused the total destruction (except for
> 1 man who survived for 9 months) of the Jaredite people ~ 585 B.C.
> [non-American Indian civilization].
>
> Horses became extinct on the American continent as a result of the
> Nephite-Lamanite Civil Wars that caused the total destruction of the
> Nephite people only ~ 421 A.D. [American Indian ancestor civilization =
> Lamanite].
>
> Only ~ 10% of the archaeological sites of Central and South America have
> been uncovered.  Much is still hidden, but what will come forth will be
> mind-boggling (an understatement to say the least).
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> from Michigan
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 07:28:46 -0500
From: "Ratcliff" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: MtMan-List: OT slightly Mammoths-Horses

Jon
While all of us are free to worship as we choose, many of the "facts" =
presented in the texts of the various religions are not facts at all but =
are stories that must be accepted as true strictly as a matter of faith. =
 Your "facts" cannot be supported by any other evidence outside your =
faith and should not be presented in any other context. =20

I am sure you have been taught these "history" lessons in your religion =
and that you believe them with all your heart, but they cannot be proved =
and should not be held out as facts when, in fact, they are only part of =
your faith and are not otherwise in the historical record.  Quoting from =
your religious litterature is not proof of the "facts" just as quoting =
from the Bible or any other religious text is not proof of what is said =
there either. =20

Of course, your "facts" can no more be disproved than they can be =
proved, but accepting that a negative cannot be proved is not "proof" =
that the original idea is true.=20

I, for one, would prefer that anything presented here as factual should =
be supported by verifiable research, not by stories from one's religion. =


cordially
Lanney Ratclff =20
Mammoths-Horses


> Mammoths-mastadons-elephants became extinct on the American continent =
as
> a result of the Civil Wars that caused the total destruction (except =
for
> 1 man who survived for 9 months) of the Jaredite people ~ 585 B.C.
> [non-American Indian civilization].
>=20
> Horses became extinct on the American continent as a result of the
> Nephite-Lamanite Civil Wars that caused the total destruction of the
> Nephite people only ~ 421 A.D. [American Indian ancestor civilization =
=3D
> Lamanite].
>=20
> Only ~ 10% of the archaeological sites of Central and South America =
have
> been uncovered.  Much is still hidden, but what will come forth will =
be
> mind-boggling (an understatement to say the least).
>=20
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> from Michigan
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>=20
>=20
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: =
http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

End of hist_text-digest V1 #641
*******************************

-
 To unsubscribe to hist_text-digest, send an email to
"[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe hist_text-digest" in the body of the message.