"A 17th century Inuit massacre site found. " Topic

link

"Rival warriors then proceeded to Agaligmiut, killing its inhabitants, mostly women, children and old men, and burned the village to the ground.

Archaeological discoveries confirm this, as the 28 bodies consist mostly of women, children and older men. 'There was only one male of fighting age,' Dr Knecht said.

The exact date of the massacre is not known but they said the complex was constructed sometime between A.D. 1590 and 1630.

It was destroyed by an attack and fire sometime between 1652 and 1677, he said."

Two points
1. Th continuing presence i of this event in the oral tradition suggests that events like this were rare. if there had been many events then the significance of this event would have been less making it less likely to have been remembered.

2. The article uses "Eskimo" to describe the people. It is a non-Inuit term meaning "eaters of Flesh" that was used by the Inuit's neighbours. The Inuit consider this term to be very derogatory and hurtful and would be equivalent to using the "N" word to describe black people. it should not be used

The article uses "Eskimo" to describe the people. It is a non-Inuit term meaning "eaters of Flesh" that was used by the Inuit's neighbours.

Not quite, as I understand it.

There are apparently two possible etymologies for "Eskimo", either "eaters of raw meat" or "people who lace snowshoes". The latter seems to be the more widely believed these days.

This archeological site is in Alaska, though, and related in Yupik legend; and the Yupik people aren't Inuit, and for all I know may be offended to be called Inuit – see for instance link

What we think the word es***o means is irrelevant. What is relevant is what it means to the Inuit people. They feel there is stigma attached to the word The Inuit of Canada and Greenland find the word to be pejorative, so governments of Canada and the media in Canada refer to them by their own name for themselves.

Es***o was used to identify all non first nation people in the Arctic from Siberia to Greenland . It would be similar to words like European, African or American . Its use is not only offensive to some but highly inaccurate genetically and historically.

From what I have read about the Alaskan non first nation people, like the Yupik, they don't like the term but unwillingly accept the term as a means of differentiating themselves from the Inuit and Aleut. Their preferred term is Yupik or Alaskan native.

As long as we do not have to memorize more special pronouns.

B

That would be hard; I still haven't learned the 17 different names for 'snow'… ;-)