Evidence of Early Metalworking in Arctic Canada (Norse)

New evidence related to an early (pre-Columbian) European presence in Arctic Canada. Artifacts from archaeological sites that had been assumed to relate to pre-Inuit indigenous occupations of the region in the centuries around A.D. 1000 have recently been recognized as having been manufactured using European technologies.



Figure 1. Map showing location of the Nanook site and other sites mentioned in the text: (1) L'Anse aux Meadows, (2) Nunguvik, (3) Willows Island-4, (4) Cape Tanfield localities, (5) Avayalik-1.

Norse metal working site in Canada

The crucible from the Nanook site provides new evidence of an early (pre-Columbian) European presence in the Canadian Arctic. It may also represent the earliest evidence of high-temperature nonferrous metalworking in the New World north of Mesoamerica.

a reply to: Hanslune
Very interesting stuff hans,
Those sites on baffin island would have tested the norse arctic skills, which werent very good as compared to the inuit or dorset peoples. The norse never adapted their clothing to the arctic, while the indigenous people had adopted fingerless mittens, hooded parkas with draw strings at the cuffs, waist and hem( to keep the warm air in and cold air out), the norse stuck to what ever was fashionable at home, usually a loose fitting hoodless coat with loose sleeves and gloves with fingers, fingerless mittens go a long way to keeping your fingers.
As i understand the paper, they were making bronze?, seems odd, as they were securley iron users at the time, and iron implemements were one of the biggest imports to the greenland colonies.
I would bet that the more remote sites were dead end hunting camps, are caribou found that far north?
Diamond's book "Collapse" has a very good and concise section on the greenland colonies and why they failed.

a reply to: Hanslune
Do you know that there is a highly political element to Pat's research as well? Dear Leader Steve had her fired from her gig at the Museum of Civilisation and locked her away from all her research. She manages to publish this in spite of his actions. The murmur is that the Danes are poking around on the sovereignty issue in our far north, and Dear Leader did not want to provide them with any more ammo. Hence the push for the Franklin search...reaffirming our ties to Ol' Blighty.

Here's where I do agree with the notion that TPTB sometime suppress archaeological findings. BUT...you'll note the word gets out anyway! Kudo's to Pat and her team!

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck


Well just wrote a nice replied that got lost; to reply in a more simple way; the Self-Government Act of 2008 limits Danish control of Greenland to defense and foreign affairs. They took over in the 18th century well after the end of the Norse colonies. As Canada 'took over' the claims of the inuit and Dorset I not sure what Canada would be afraid of. However I don't follow Danish politics very closely any more.


Edited to add: I read up on the controversy dealing with the wonderfully named Hans island and the contest between Canada and Denmark over it.

a reply to: Hanslune
Good treatment of her work here:
The Norse: An Arctic Mystery

Little Steve's museum now states that she was fired for 'harassment', which doesn't explain why her husband, who worked for the museum as well, was #e-canned as well.

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck
Are the Danish taking a play from China's book, " we sailed by there a thousand years ago so it is ours now"
I don't understand why Canada would fear a Danish claim, they don't have one. The people who founded the Greenland colonies predate the founding of the Danish state, and they were mostly Norwegian, via Iceland, weren't they?. Also most of the women that settled iceland have been shown to be from the orkenys and Shetlands, so wouldnt that give a Scotland a claim ?

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck
Hey JC,
While looking for a reference for something else I came across this link to a paper on Labrador archeology, if you haven't read it I'm sure you will find it interesting.
pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca...

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck


Well just wrote a nice replied that got lost; to reply in a more simple way; the Self-Government Act of 2008 limits Danish control of Greenland to defense and foreign affairs. They took over in the 18th century well after the end of the Norse colonies. As Canada 'took over' the claims of the inuit and Dorset I not sure what Canada would be afraid of. However I don't follow Danish politics very closely any more.


Edited to add: I read up on the controversy dealing with the wonderfully named Hans island and the contest between Canada and Denmark over it.

But we got quite a predicament if they want to go toe to toe, since both Denmark and Canada are two of the founding nations of NATO.

So if Canada want to claim Greenland from the Danes, then NATO have to declare war on Canada. But since Canada is part of NATO, they have to invade themselves. And knowing Canada, they'll probably win.

originally posted by: merka
So if Canada want to claim Greenland from the Danes, then NATO have to declare war on Canada. But since Canada is part of NATO, they have to invade themselves. And knowing Canada, they'll probably win.

Actually, it's the Danes eying Canada's north. But i wouldn't put it past Steve to declare war on us...he's doing a pretty good job of reinventing the country as is.

a reply to: Hanslune

I think it is very difficult to look at these sites and say they are Norse sites, which is what you seem to be implying. Clearly there was some cultural exchange going on and that very likely including manufacturing and building methods. There are all sorts of scenarios that get the crucible there.

The crucible in question may have been traded to the Inuit with no Norse presence in the area whatsoever. A lone Norse explorer may have wintered with the Inuit at the site. A Norse group may have linked up with the Inuit at the site to improve survival. And on and on with the possibilities.

Full on Norse sites are constructed much differently than these sites from my understanding. I think people need to be careful to limit jumps to colonization given such little evidence.

originally posted by: noeltrotsky
a reply to: Hanslune

I think it is very difficult to look at these sites and say they are Norse sites, which is what you seem to be implying. Clearly there was some cultural exchange going on and that very likely including manufacturing and building methods. There are all sorts of scenarios that get the crucible there.

The crucible in question may have been traded to the Inuit with no Norse presence in the area whatsoever. A lone Norse explorer may have wintered with the Inuit at the site. A Norse group may have linked up with the Inuit at the site to improve survival. And on and on with the possibilities.

Full on Norse sites are constructed much differently than these sites from my understanding. I think people need to be careful to limit jumps to colonization given such little evidence.

Yes that is a possibility too. After L'anse aux Meadows was uncovered there was one theory floated that Native Americans had gone to Greenland and Iceland picked up a lot of cultural baggage and brought it back to form that site.

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

It's so hard to keep track of all the BS Harper and co get up to! Hadn't heard of this at all, but not surprised.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: noeltrotsky
a reply to: Hanslune

I think it is very difficult to look at these sites and say they are Norse sites, which is what you seem to be implying. Clearly there was some cultural exchange going on and that very likely including manufacturing and building methods. There are all sorts of scenarios that get the crucible there.

The crucible in question may have been traded to the Inuit with no Norse presence in the area whatsoever. A lone Norse explorer may have wintered with the Inuit at the site. A Norse group may have linked up with the Inuit at the site to improve survival. And on and on with the possibilities.

Full on Norse sites are constructed much differently than these sites from my understanding. I think people need to be careful to limit jumps to colonization given such little evidence.

Yes that is a possibility too. After L'anse aux Meadows was uncovered there was one theory floated that Native Americans had gone to Greenland and Iceland picked up a lot of cultural baggage and brought it back to form that site.

Both Norse sagas and Inuit oral tradition recount this meet-up. There was mention in an earlier post of Farley Mowat's book 'Farfarers', also known as 'The Alban Quest'. It's worth a read, and may factor into Pat's work at some level...I need to go back to it.

Here is a very good primer on the indigenous people of the arctic.


people.wku.edu...

Reconstructed Floor of Thule Semi-Subterranean House

Dorset Culture

developed from Pre-Dorset and Sarqaq (indigenous rather than a new migration of people)

800 BC to AD 1000

land and sea mammals used

used stone lamps, kayak, hand sled

according to Smith (1991) Dorset did not use dogs, umiak, bow and arrow, whale gear

Inuit/Eskimo/Thule

ancestors arrived about 1000 BC to present; late prehistoric and historic time periods

indigenous name is Inuit (the people), Anglo name is Eskimo

many tribes (Thule, Nukleet, Nunamiut, Copper, Kobukmiut) but rather homogeneous culture

live in Arctic tundra, as far east as Greenland in prehistory (first humans in tundra)

one of most recent groups to migrate to Arctic/Subarctic

probably came from west (east Asia)

sea focus with use of skin boats and marine resources

Thule developed after AD 500 from Birnirk culture of northern Alaska and replaced Dorset by AD 1000 to cover most of northern Canada

Thule used skin boats, bow and arrow, dog sled, harpoons, lamps, igloos

Thule had rich technology superior to Dorset; most tools still used today

Thule had several house forms, including tent-ring houses and semi-subterranean pit houses; whale bone was used in construction of some houses

 Hans , thanks again for posting this, as it has led me to more thoroughly read up on the people of the arctic.

 It seems the  cultural footprint of the Thule and Dorset are very well defined, if the site is an indigenous occupation at the time, it should be pretty straightforward to tell from a Norse camp.