Nothing wrong with doubt, but there are some pretty decent arguments on the subject. Lots of fertile places had big populations in the past that collapsed for different reasons, from drought to war to disease to who knows what.
As long as it's not pinned on "colonialism" you know the eventual reduction.
They mostly all died before any contact with settlers from what I've read. They had a bad habit of fleeing from places where disease was spreading into healthy areas since they had no concept of quarantine, etc. Supposedly, anyways - it's all just theory based on circumstantial evidence.
Where are the agricultural tools to support the hypothesis? Stone arrow heads are plentiful in the mud around Cahokia. They lived off the wildlife, grains and berries around the area. There was no organized agriculture beyond naturally sowing seeds during harvesting of naturally occurring edible plants. I doubt the population was more than a 2 million in the whole region.
I don't think Cahokia was supposed to be even close to a million people. I meant it was basically the only permanent settlement on par with a town/village anywhere in the north. Most of the land America occupies today was basically uninhabited.
I think we're agreeing here. The only large populations were a few select southern valleys, and even then the evidence is not strong enough to make it more than a theory.
(post is archived)