The Newport Mystery Tower

Originally posted by ravenshadow13

The most recent theory proposed to explain the Newport Tower's origins comes from the book "1421 – The Year China Discovered America." ...
This startling revelation is based on a comparison of the Rhode Island tower to a similar structure used as a lighthouse in the port of Zaiton in Southern China. The towers do look alike; each built atop eight columns and once covered in smooth plaster. Other design elements such as the windows and fireplace are also similar.

This issue is also discussed at The Hall of Ma'at: www.hallofmaat.com...

It seems clear there isn’t any “Zaiton lighthouse”, as Gavin claims: there are only these stone made Buddhist pagodas, that incidentally had a use as navigational aids. And not one of them looks anything like the Newport Tower.

Thing about research is that some people are full of poo, and can't be trusted to deliver the straight goods. Look for what's called an 'intuitive leap', which is usually prefaced by the words...rather breathless..."This could only mean that...".

But keep on pokin' at that tower...take a look at the Sinclair story. Much of it is conjecture...but not all.

self edit to say to russi..." There is 100% evidence and this evidence is in the colonial documents and they state that the tower was built in 1675 by the english governor of Rod island"
...if you check out the reference I provided, you'll see that even an examination of primary source material by a skeptic proved ambiguous in that regard.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]

reply to post by Russi


www.neara.org...
I suggest this article for your contemplation.

I think that there is not 100% proof because if there were, it would not be debated in the archaeological community.
I'm not trying to pick a fight, I'm suggesting other alternatives that may have some validity. If you have those four volumes, please share. I could not find them just now when I tried to search.

I also tried to search for "Rod island" and came up with nothing. I don't know if you mean "Rhode Island" or if there was a different name back then.

Benedict Arnold seems to have said that the tower is "his" but I have not come across any evidence as to him decreeing anyone to build it.

If it was not a mystery to most people, it would not be included in my research. You may be right, but many people see the story a different way.

reply to post by ravenshadow13
JohnnyCanuck's link is quite extensive and amongst the best available on the Newport Tower. The reference to Runes keeps popping up. They seem to be a distracting part of the puzzle yet there are no images or illustrations to be found? There's an interesting correspondence between Earl Syversen and Tom McDonald here.

reply to post by Kandinsky


I agree with Johnny on this topic.
I also found pictures and illustrations of the runes in two locations which are available for view on the previous page of this thread.
The Zaiton Lighthouse theory has been mentioned in numerous links and posts on this thread. The theory has been doubly noted ^_^

Ahhh, Kand, GREAT source.
Let me quote

Of its existence prior to the
English emigration to America there is now but little doubt; and it is
asserted that the Indians, of whom Mr. Coddington and other early
settlers upon Aquitneck (now Rhode Island) solicited information
concerning the structure, had no tradition respecting its origin.
Because it was called a "mill" in some old documents, some have
argued, or, rather, have flippantly asserted, that it was built by the
early English settlers for a wind−mill. Thus Mr. Cooper disposes of
the matter in his preface to Red Rover. A little patient inquiry would
have given him a different conclusion; and if the structure is really
ante−colonial, and perhaps ante−Columbian, its history surely is
worthy of investigation. That it was converted into and used for a
wind−mill by some of the early settlers of Newport, there is no doubt,
Re: Earl Syversen's "Norse Runic Inscriptions" and Newport Tower 3
for it was easily convertible to such use, although not by a favorable
arrangement.

sci.tech-archive.net...

Thank you very much! The source also claims that Arnold owned the land because the structure was deemed to be special, and by referring to it as "his" it does not implicate that he built it. Also, the carbon dating would then be explained because it seems that the structure may have been converted into it's current state from something else for use as a windmill.

[edit on 2/2/2009 by ravenshadow13]

One added piece

The "oval" is: From southeast to northwest the diameter measures 22 feet, 2 inches, but when measured from east to west, the diameter lengthens to 23 feet, 3 inches. So 11 inches or a error of 4%, well within the margin of error of a round building of that age. I would say the building is round, but not perfect, instead of "oval". ie the oval'ality' of it cannot be seen and was discovered when it was surveyed.

Zaiton 'lighthouse'

The tower at Quanzhou was not primarily a lighthouse, rather a Buddhist pagoda. That “lighthouse” addendum was Gavin’s invention. The stone Buddhist pagodas built in the area had an incidental, beneficial function as navigational landmarks, which included lamps in the windows at night to aid travelers, but, that is not the reason they were built. They were constructed to serve the Buddhist religion.

Long item on the Menzies ideas go way down to find the item on Zaiton






[edit on 2/2/09 by Hanslune]

reply to post by Hanslune


In Brian Haughton's book Hidden History, it was described as oval.
The lighthouse theory, I believe, refers to the use and similarly advanced structures built at an early age for an area. It is a valid allegory. No one is suggesting that the same group of people built both structures.

reply to post by ravenshadow13


I put up a further correction the tower in Zaiton appears to have been a Buddhist temple.

Oval seems to have been added to list to make it more "mysterious". Domestic buildings of the time were not built by instrument but by experienced builders who did it by hand and eye.

reply to post by Hanslune


Good point, Hanslune. Gotta hand it to ya.

I can cross the oval part off the list. And the fireplace. I'll go update that list.

Rhode Island, sure,sorry, i just type quickly..
'If you have those four volumes, please share. I could not find them just now when I tried to search. '
I meant that these 4 volumes didnt contain any evidence - thats why he asked for help! If you want to wste time I can search

\I think that there is not 100% proof because if there were, it would not be debated in the archaeological community.\

I think that in case to find the answer there is sense to combine this mystery with the "lost colony" of Nuremberg! they are interconnected!

sorry, Norumbega
Norumbega
i got too much involved in those political posts on ats




[edit on 2-2-2009 by Russi]

Cannot find a clearer and nearer picture of the Zaiton pagoda. It probably has a specific name in Chinese and if you can find someone familar with that city you can get a more detailed image.

reply to post by Hanslune


It's okay. It's just making a connection, not saying they are similar in structure. That's pretty obvious. Clearly the Tower is Mill-Shaped.
Note- I crossed the mill question off the list. Obviously at one point it was used as a mill.

This thread is to discuss different theories, not just settle on the most likely one, Russi, sarcasm is not necessary.

Originally posted by Russi
I think that in case to find the answer there is sense to combine this mystery with the "lost colony" of Nuremberg! they are interconnected!

Ok, here's a link that I found through the Council For northeast Historical Archaeology newsletter (don't be afraid to consult the pros):

www.chronognostic.org...

I haven't read it yet, but it looks promising...

I'll get to it later. Never heard of the "Lost Colony of Nuremburg", though.

Well, there was one source that mentioned "a round stone tower" before Arnold, right!
In 1632 a Edmund Plowden submitted a plan of creating an enlgish colony on Long island and mentioned as one of the conveniences of that place "a round stone tower" that could serve as good fortification for the garrison as the defense from the attacks of the native americans from the north...the document was written 40 years before arnold ... and 7 years before newport was founded.

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
reply to post by Skyfloating

 

Well, Wikipedia isn't always right

Other groups have been known to use Runes. Pagans, Druids, Masons maybe, New Age religions, and all the "Light" or "White" "Brotherhood" type groups, there are a few of those. I think Satanists may occasionally use them, as well. Plus it could be Runic poetry inscribed, if the person who built the tower was creative/witty like that.

But what did the tower do? Was it a house? A shrine? I have no idea what it is. I've heard that it was a mill, but it seems like a pretty fancy mill to me.

Sky, I'm not saying you're wrong in terms of the transatlantic stuff. I think it is just as probable as anything else.



[edit on 2/2/2009 by ravenshadow13]

Just wanted to put this in here(mainly to be nitpicky), the druids used Ogham. The Scandinavian and Germanic Norse and Saxons used Runes. While similar in appearance, they are totally different in meaning and origin. Good thread very interesting research.

reply to post by Russi


Good contribution! It seems that a few sources connect such towers to either defense against Native Americans, or possibly creation by them. That was Long Island. I suppose something similar was possible in Rhode Island. I wonder how common something like that would have been. I wonder what it looked like before it's apparent conversion into a mill.

reply to post by optimus primal


Haha, sorry, I should have read been more specific. I did mean in appearance because they could all be interpreted somehow from the etches on the rocks.

I read Elder Futhark, so I tend to think about that more than others. Oops...

Also for consideration, some Native American tribes used similar-looking figures. I'm thinking of the ones that they etched onto trees/sticks in different directions/numbers. It's a type of divination, I don't know if they ever did it on rocks.

I think it may also be possible that bears or other animals may be responsible for the etchings, or erosion... I'm not an expert on stone carvings.

[edit on 2/2/2009 by ravenshadow13]

Edmund Plowden and stone towers

Reaching the limits of our knowledge on the Tower it might be a good idea to look at the surrounding town and area.

Any indicators of Norse influence whatsoever...be it in hill names or symbols or anything else...could buffer the idea.

reply to post by Hanslune


Very interesting. I had a feeling about possible Irish origin. That talks about Long Island, though, do you think there was something similar in Rhode Island? Are they the same thing, in this case? "Thirty soldiers will reside in a round, stone tower for the safety of the colony."

Seems like a tight fit, but highly possible. Maybe this is a smaller version of that one, or maybe it's the same thing.