Discovery Could Rewrite History of Vikings in New World

Discovery Could Rewrite History of Vikings in New World
(news.nationalgeographic.com)

Guided by ancient Norse sagas and modern satellite images, searchers discover what may be North America's second Viking site.

For those of you consoling yourselves after tonight's episode of Vikings, here is an interesting tidbit of Viking's history:

To date, the only confirmed Viking site in the New World is L’Anse aux Meadows, a thousand-year-old way station discovered in 1960 on the northern tip of Newfoundland. It was a temporary settlement, abandoned after just a few years, and archaeologists have spent the past half-century searching for elusive signs of other Norse expeditions.

“The sagas suggest a short period of activity and a very brief and failed colonization attempt,” says Douglas Bolender, an archaeologist specializing in Norse settlements. “L’Anse aux Meadows fits well with that story but is only one site. Point Rosee could reinforce that story or completely change it if the dating is different from L’Anse aux Meadows. We could end up with a much longer period of Norse activity in the New World.”

The site of the discovery, hundreds of miles south of L’Anse aux Meadows, was located by archaeologist Sarah Parcak, a National Geographic Fellow and “space archaeologist” who has used satellite imagery to locate lost Egyptian cities, temples, and tombs.

We now have a second confirmed site in addition to L’Anse aux Meadows of the Norse in N. America.
Edit to add: It isn't 100% confirmed, but 'probable.'

Fascinating. I love Vikings, they are one of my favourite parts of history. Plus, the show is awesome!

I wonder why their attempt at colonisation failed?

Just for mention there is this as well Kensington Runestone however it is highly speculated that it is a hoax unfortunately but if it is indeed real that would indicate that the Vikings made it pretty far inland.

The Kensington Runestone is a 202 pounds (92 kg) slab of greywacke covered in runes on its face and side. A Swedish immigrant, Olof Ohman, claimed to have discovered it in 1898 in the largely rural township of Solem, Douglas County, Minnesota and named it after the nearest settlement, Kensington.

I wonder why their attempt at colonisation failed?

edit on 1-4-2016 by RainbowPhoenix because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-4-2016 by RainbowPhoenix because: (no reason given)

I wonder why their attempt at colonisation failed?

Ok so I definitely tried to post all of this in my above post but it was acting wonky and I messed it up but I have often wondered this myself. Perhaps they were unable to defend and sustain settlements due to the sheer numbers and aggressiveness of the natives despite superiority of armor and weapons.

A similar scenario would be this Battle of Isandlwana

The Battle of Isandlwana (alternative spelling: Isandhlwana) on 22 January 1879 was the first major encounter in the Anglo–Zulu War between the British Empire and the Zulu Kingdom. Eleven days after the British commenced their invasion of Zululand in South Africa, a Zulu force of some 20,000 warriors attacked a portion of the British main column consisting of about 1,800 British, colonial and native troops and perhaps 400 civilians.[12] The Zulus were equipped mainly with the traditional assegai iron spears and cow-hide shields,[13] but also had a number of muskets and old rifles[14] though they were not formally trained in their use.[15] The British and colonial troops were armed with the state-of-the-art[16] Martini-Henry breech-loading rifle and two 7-pounder (3-inch, 76 mm) mountain guns deployed as field guns,[17][18] as well as a rocket battery. Despite a vast disadvantage in weapons technology,[19] the numerically superior Zulus ultimately overwhelmed the poorly led and badly deployed[20] British, killing over 1,300 troops, including all those out on the forward firing line. The Zulu army suffered around a thousand killed.[21]

a reply to: lydie15
Primarily, attacks by Native bands, climate change, and lack of settlers (as Greenland itself was sparsely populated). Author Helge Ingstad noted that the Beothuk largely absorbed any surviving Norsemen.


a reply to: RainbowPhoenix
Note that even if it were genuine, it wouldn't be "Viking". It would be from a later epoch.

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

Are there any ginger natives in the area?

It's possible that love may have been their downfall,not war.😃

This article has more information, for those interested.

www.bbc.com...

a reply to: lydie15

The little ice age had a lot to do with it.

Sea ice surrounding Iceland extended for miles in every direction, closing harbors to shipping. The population of Iceland fell by half, though this may have been caused by fluorosis after the eruption of the volcano Laki in 1783.[21] Iceland also suffered failures of cereal crops and people moved away from a grain-based diet.[22] The Norse colonies in Greenland starved and vanished by the early fifteenth century, as crops failed and livestock could not be maintained through increasingly harsh winters, though Jared Diamond has suggested they had exceeded the agricultural carrying capacity before then. Greenland was largely cut off by ice from 1410 to the 1720s