Voyages to the Americas

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Christopher Columbus is said to have “discovered” America, but of course we all know better than this, as long before him people/peoples had been there, even settled. Native Americans arrived there many centuries before Columbus, and there is good evidence that explorers from other civilizations beat Columbus here, too. Artifacts have now been found suggesting that ancient cultures explored the continent. Greek and Roman coins and pottery have been found in the U.S. and Mexico; Egyptian statues of Isis and Osiris were found in Mexico as well as evidence of Egyptians in the Grand Canyon. Ancient Hebrew and Asian artifacts have also been found. Stories of travellers from distant lands in native myths and folklore also suggest probability.

The truth is, we know very little about early, far-traveling cultures.

Found on listverse.com...




posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiracyintheuk
 
There's some persuasive evidence that Norsemen made sporadic forays across to Newfoundland from Greenland. Several sagas describe expeditions across to N America with details about livestock and crews. For one reason or another, they weren't welcomed by the locals and were unable to successfully colonize. The best evidence is an 11th century settlement discovered at L' Anse aux Meadows, Newfoundland (I'd avoid wiki but it's probably the best page out there...the YT vids are awful).

Norse coins have been found in burial mounds hundreds of miles from the coast...which indicates the Native American trade routes rather than Norse trade routes. I've read about the Roman and other country's coins elsewhere. IIRC, of the handful of these that have a provenance, it can't be ruled out that they came across with the Norsemen. I don't think there's any suggestion that Egyptians, Greeks or Romans visited the Americas.

The example of Egyptian treasure being found in the Grand Canyon is a nonsense claimed by an early 20th Century explorer. It's a story favored by the 'forbidden archaeology' crowd.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiracyintheuk
 


This is a topic which has always interested me. I too heard about the story of Viking's discovering North America.

I read somewhere that they gave milk and honey to some Native Americans they met as a gift. However as the Natives were lactose intolerent, they became ill from the milk and believe they had been poisoned by the Vikings, so they attacked them.

Also what about China, a couple of years ago, a guy brought a book out arguing China had visited North America long before Columbus ever did.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiracyintheuk
 


It has also been conjectured that the Knights Templar buried a third of the legendary treasure they collected when they were in power in the Americas, suggesting they knew of the continent before Columbus "discovered" it. I think it is quite probable the ancients did know about the area and traded with it.

It could also be the remnants of a great civilization that existed over 10,000 years ago, and the knowledge of the areas was passed down to a select few.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
The best evidence is an 11th century settlement discovered at L' Anse aux Meadows, Newfoundland (I'd avoid wiki but it's probably the best page out there...the YT vids are awful).

I was at L'ans aux Meadows two weeks ago. Great Parks Canada/World Heritage Site. One of the artefacts found on site was a butternut...the closest of which would have been found around New Brunswick. Current thought is that the site was used as a base from which they explored further trade and resource possibilities.

Look to Red Bay, Labrador to present possibilities of pre-Columbian European contact as well.

I recommend the visit...both to The Rock, and Labrador. Moose, whales and icebergs. God's Country.

edit to say, check out the following item regarding the Vinland Map

Vinland Map of America no forgery, expert says

www.newsdaily.com...

[edit on 20-7-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 
That's an interesting link. I can remember reading about how the ink was too recent...not any more. I've mentioned the Berlitz book a few times around here...it generated my interest in unusual history. By my recall of the shiny photo pages inside, this must be the only damn thing he got right....and about time!

I'll look at your other suggestions too. If you've just been to L'ans aux Meadows...compare it to the two You Tube vids
Did Norsemen get down to Irish banjo music? Diddlee aye do...



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Columbus was certainly not the "discoverer" of the americas, that notion was really abandoned quite some time ago.
It is generaly accepted that columbus was not the first european to come to the new world. But what columbus was the first at, his expaditions were the first state sponsored attempts at exploration and colonization.

Its a certainty that the norse penetrated much farther into north american than in presently accepted.
These parties of only a few men would have left a very small footprint, almost undetectable.
Like JC says ,from larger base camps like L'ans aux Meadows, they set out on small scale trips, trips to fish for salmon and for fur hunting.
The fact they didnt stay has more to do with climate than anything else.
When they first arrived in NA in the 9th century, they had favorable seasonal winds and currents that made the journey fairly easy.
But as the 13th century approached the change in the climate ,meant what was once a seasonal journy of somthing like 3 weeks now took more than two months and longer for the return.
Supplies got harder to get and good harder to return for trade with the home land.
Eventually the supplies stopped altogether and the settlements failed.

I had an early american history class that centered on early explorations of north america previous to columbus.
My professor assembled information on a small number of sites in NA that seem to indicate a deep level of penetration into the interior of north america, by several european peoples including the irish and possibly the basque.
including these two examples of norse explorations

In 1931 a railroad brakeman named James Edward Dodd found a broken sword and fragments of an axe and shield near Beardmore Ontario east of Lake Nipigon. Upon extensive examination, European Norse experts agreed that the relics were authentic Norse weapons. [1] Similarly, an artifact called the Kensington Runestone was unearthed in 1898 by a Norwegian-American farmer in West-Central Minnesota. Now residing in a Minnesota Museum, the stone carries an inscription that depicts an attack on a party of Goths and Norwegians that took place in 1362. The authenticity of this artifact is in dispute. [2]

the source
tripatlas.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> tripatlas.com...
The kensington runestone
A new piece of the runestone puzzle has added yet another layer of mystery.

Recently[when?], an authentic rune was discovered in a 13th century document that was identical to one of the unusual runes on the Runestone, which linguistic experts had suggested was invented by a hoaxer.[citation needed] In response, Wolter examined each individual rune on the Kensington stone with a microscope. He found a series of dots engraved inside four R-shaped runes. Research found that identical dotted runes are found only on 14th century graves in churches on the island of Gotland off the coast of Sweden. Wolter considered this proof of the runestone's authenticity.

The stone says it was a party of norse and "goths" and it has a rune specific to 14th century gotland.
That combined with the 14th century sword and sheild in quebec makes a pretty good argument.


We also discussed a japanese manuscript (12th -13th century?)that seems to describe a journey by buhddist monks to the west coast of north america, well before the documented journeys of the 15th century to central and and rumored 17th century trips to south america.
In the monks account they sailed from japan with the rising sun on their right, for many weeks they sailed north, past the lands of the barbarians (the Ainu) into a land of dark skys fogs and stormy seas.
After a long and arduous voyage they came to realize that the rising sun was now on there left, they were headed south.
As they sailed south the land grew more hospitable and warmer.
They past many different tribes of "ainu", they used the same word to describe both the ainu and the natives.
After quite some time they found themselves sailing along the coast of vast and unpopulated desert, the likes of which no japanese could even imagine, coming from the wettest temperate region on the planet.
Agian they sailed for many days until one day after rounding a cape the rising sun was again on the right.
They sailed north till they entered the delta of a large and muddy river.
They sailed up the river till they reached a small settlement of "ainu".
Here they put in and set up camp, the locals were at first frightend of the strangers in the boats, but it didnt take long for them to realize that the strangers were no threat.
they were able to communicate with hand gestures and crude pictures drawn in the sand.
From these locals they learned that there was a larger and more powerful tribe farther up the river, that lived in houses with roofs, not the temporary saltbrush and willow shelters these people did.
They made/traded for some canoes and went up river for a short time (2 weeks) before they came to the first village of mudbrick houses.
They stayed with these friendly people for a fair amount of time, before returning down river to the rest of the compliment.
They stayed for a cycle of seasons (1 year?) before returning home.
There was also a voyage in the 15th century to central america that returned with samples of cotton cloth and pineapples.
Whats interesting is that peru was the first country to make formal diplomatic relations with japan in 1870.


And while I was in highschool (1980) a pair of chinese anchor stones were dredged up from long beach harbor.
They were of a style used in the 15th century, they were immediately dismissed as being dropped by a chinese ship in the 19th century.

the chinese treasure ship voyages led by Zheng He
The real Sinbad
Travelled all over the east and indian ocean and my have journeyed into the atlantic and maybe to the americas as is claimed by Gavin Menzies.
Although he is strongly disagreed with in the historical community, it is a good possiblity.

I honestly haven read his book or the refutations of it, but its not a strecth, and and Zheng He's logs of his last two voayages were destroyed by the succesive emporer. But they did make it as far as africa.



Imagine how different the world would be if some of the early attmepts exploration were more succesful















[edit on 20-7-2009 by punkinworks]



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by punkinworks
Its a certainty that the norse penetrated much farther into north american than in presently accepted.
These parties of only a few men would have left a very small footprint, almost undetectable.
Like JC says ,from larger base camps like L'ans aux Meadows, they set out on small scale trips, trips to fish for salmon and for fur hunting.
The fact they didnt stay has more to do with climate than anything else.


Actually, the sagas state plainly that the Norse were driven off by the 'scraelings'...the natives. Interestingly enough, the Inuit cite a legend that describes the battles with the Norse as well...main difference is in whose fault the conflict was.



In 1931 a railroad brakeman named James Edward Dodd found a broken sword and fragments of an axe and shield near Beardmore Ontario east of Lake Nipigon. Upon extensive examination, European Norse experts agreed that the relics were authentic Norse weapons.



Don't know about this one, but the Kensington Runestone is currently regarded as a hoax. Gavin Menzies, certainly is being accused of telling whoppers...see Hall of Maat for a good treatment of his book. The Vinland map is being accepted as fact, though.

Refutations of good stories are always a buzzkill, but when the facts come out, it's usually a better story that emerges.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 

With the scientific evidence, the state of crystal decomposition in the enscription, the geochemical evidence that says it was buried before the arrival of recent european settlers.
The fact it uses an obscure rune used only on a particlar island off of Gotland and only in the 14th century.
There is such a preponderance of good scientific evidence that it is not a hoax i dont see how it is seen as such.
How could a late 19th century farmer have know of the extremely obscure 14th century gotland runes and stylistic elements that were used only during the the 14th century.
The biggest argument against, improper runes, it has been refutted by the discovery of the same runes on verified 14th century materials.
The runestone says the party was made of norse and gotlanders, and it uses runes appropriate to gotland in the 14th centurie, come on .
It fits with the 14th century weapons found in ontario canada. and with possible mooring stones found in minnesota that are strikingly similar to what is used in scandanavia in the 14th century.
How much more evidence do people need.

Yes the early attempts at settlement of continental north america were met with resistance from the locals. But that was early on and there was a norse presence in greenland and iceland for several centuries to come.
And its known they made individual trips to places to the west and obtained firs and lumber.
Climate did change dramtically in the transition from the 13th-14th centuries.
And it did affect norse travel to north america
From Brian Fagan's "The Little Ice Age-How Climate made history 1300-1850" 2000 pgs 61-62.

"In Eirik the Red's day, Norse merchant ships (knarrs) had taken the most direct route from Iceland to east Green Land, along Latitude 65 north, then coasted south and west round Cape Farewell to the Eastern Settlement. Even In those warmer times, ships foundered in offshore gales, were dashed to pieces against the rugged Greenland and Icelandic coasts, capsized when overloaded, or were simply blown off coarse never to be seen again.



" By 1250, many fewer ships made the crossing to the Norse colonies. Those that dared traveled a much more hazardous route, far from land in the open Atlantic. A skipper now sailed a a day and a night due west from Iceland, then altered southwestward to avoid the pack ice off southeastern Greenland"



"Two and a half centuries later , in 1492, Pope Alexander VI remarked in a letter that "shipping to that country [Greenland] is very infrequent because of extensive freezing of the waters-no ship having put into shore, it is believed, for eighty years"



I read the Hall of Maat's piece on menzies book and they have valid points, but there also seems to be a complete rejection of the idea that the chinese could have sailed to the east.
They did make it to africa there is no denying that, and there is an english account of a large fleet being sighted in the mid atlantic.
And the official imperial records for the last two voyages were destroyed by the new emporer. We will never know where these voyages went.
When they made contact with existing countries and kingdoms and were given gifts for thier emporer. The chinese took the view they were accepting tribute for the all powerful emporer.
What if in their possible voyages to the americas they ran across a king or kings who would not have acknowledged the all powerful emporer, ie the very powerful empires of central and south america.
This would have been such an insult to the his imperial majesty that it could not have been tolerated. I could see all such references to such an unacceptable insult being striken from the record.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:06 AM
link   
then theres the obscure and lost Vérendrye Runestone.
reportedly found west of the great lakes in the 1730's

The Vérendrye Runestone was allegedly found on an early expedition into the territory west of the Great Lakes by the French Canadian explorer Pierre Gaultier de Varennes et de la Vérendrye, in the 1730s. It is not mentioned in the official records of La Vérendrye's expeditions,[1] but in 1749 he discussed it with visiting Swedish scientist Pehr Kalm, from whose writings virtually all information about the stone is taken.[2]

According to Kalm, Vérendrye's expedition found the tablet—measuring about 5 inches wide and 13 inches long, and carved on both sides with characters unfamiliar to them—on the top of an upright stone (referred to by some, perhaps incorrectly, as a cairn) in a location which, from the description, may have been near present-day Minot, North Dakota. When asked, natives of the area claimed that the tablet and standing stone had always been there together.

The Verendrye Runestone
These accounts come from a time when a man such as Pehr Kalm wouldnt have "hoaxed" something.

Among his many accomplishments, Kalm can be credited for the first description of the Niagara Falls, written by someone trained as a scientist.

en.wikipedia.org...

Thor Hyerdhal and a collegue think that the scandanavians had a much larger presence as well.


Settlers and traders from throughout the North Atlantic drifted west to escape the grasp of royal tax collectors and bishops demanding tithes. On becoming Vinlanders, they lived primitively, much as French trappers did centuries later, marrying Indian women and leaving few traces.

According to Mr. Lilliestrom, their numbers may have spiked around 1110. A reported 10,000 Norwegian crusaders returning from the Middle East sailed through the Strait of Gibraltar that year, but there is no record of a homecoming in Norway. Mr. Lilliestrom thinks they may have sailed or been swept westward on the current that would later bring Spaniards to America. On sighting land, he said, they would instinctively have turned north and found the Vinland farers.

Such an infusion would have raised Vinland's profile, accounting for later mentions of the place in Icelandic annals and even, Mr. Lilliestrom said, on the infamous Vinland Map.



www.nytimes.com...

well then Im goin to have to read that book of theirs.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 05:10 AM
link   
I believe wreaked Chinese and Japanese ships with crew drifted across the pacific in the The North Pacific Current (sometimes referred to as the North Pacific Drift and landed on the west coast of Canada and the US.

en.wikipedia.org...

These ships would have been small and few would have survived the trip.
most that did would have repaired there ships and tried to return and even fewer would have survived.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by punkinworks
The runestone says the party was made of norse and gotlanders, and it uses runes appropriate to gotland in the 14th centurie, come on .
It fits with the 14th century weapons found in ontario canada. and with possible mooring stones found in minnesota that are strikingly similar to what is used in scandanavia in the 14th century.
How much more evidence do people need.

Far as I know, the jury is still out on the Kensington Runestone, because there are still indications of hoax with the nature of the glyphs. The Ontario weapons...so far all I've found is a Time Magazine reference to 1938. Lots has changed in dating techniques since then. Also...no sealed context, so it's not definitive, I would guess. Which is why amateurs are discouraged from digging...it's like a hole-in-one when you snuck onto the course. I'll pursue it.

Mooring stones? Could have been ballast. I just got back from Red Bay, Labrador. Lot's of European roof tile lying around...I'm certain much of it pre-dates Columbus. However, it comes from the whaling enterprise ca 1560 and on...so, old tile brought in the ships as ballast. Not from pre-Columbian Basque villas in North America. Though watch for Red Bay to reveal more secrets...

Maine touts a Viking coin on one site...clear evidence? No...turns out it was found in association with a native toolkit containing Labrador flint. So, an Aboriginal or Inuit person brought it south.

All I'm saying is that there are clear indications of Norse presence outside of Newfoundland and Labrador...Baffin Island, for instance. But if you are going to change the paradigm...as L'ans aux Meadows did, you need proof...which L'ans aux Meadows has.

Once again, to change what is considered fact, you need to keep the bar high.

Quick edit to address the issue of the Vérendrye Runestone. If you go to the material cited...Peter Kalm's accounts, he mentions that the Indians would travel as far as Hudson's Bay to trade. That makes it possible that a native may have found the stone in those latitudes, deemed it special and brought it back to the Dakotas. I'm not trying to reach, here...I'm simply presenting an alternative theory that could carry equal weight.

That's why paradigm change requires a sealed context, multiple dating techniques in agreement, a principle investigator of impeccable credentials, and peer agreement. That's what came together at L'ans aux Meadows, that's what came together at Monte Verde, and in both cases our knowledge was changed.

And yet another edit, further to the Ontario weapons, page 382 of the ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 1953 states that while some specialists of note accepted the artifacts as legit, others disagreed:


And here is the all-important point. Although some investigators —
including myself — accept the probability that a grave (or a deposit)
containing Norwegian Viking weapons was found at Beardmore in
1930, and even if from this the conclusion may be drawn that in the
beginning of the eleventh century Norwegian Vikings penetrated
North America deep enough to reach the area east of Lake Nipigon
(perhaps via Hudson Bay and James Bay), this does not conceal the
fact that it has been impossible to produce clear evidence in support of
it ; we have merely a certain degree of probability. And in that case
we lack justification for employing the Beardmore find as a reliable
archeological document for the present. www.archive.org...


[edit on 21-7-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   
The "Egyptian artifacts in the grand canyon" is, to put it bluntly, a lie. That single issue of the Arizona gazette is the only source for the story. No one has ever been able to corroborate the story. At the time, interest in Egypt was at an all-time high, and htey were being painted as supermen capable of anything.

I hope to hell that a hundred years from now, future crypto-hunters aren't searching for batboy.

The "Hebrew artifacts" are for the most part, the result of Mormons in the west trying to validate the frankly idiotic "history" their religion is based off of. They had a nasty habit of carving this stuff over actual native American petroglyps and paintings, too.

It's also interesting that these "roman artifacts" are always found by some lone dude in the midwest, who's first reaction is to sell it. No such item has ever appeared in an actual dig, whether it be archaological or even industrial (seriously, about an eighth of our country is covered in pavment, from sea to see, do you think we just happened to miss every single Roman hoard?)

As for earlier expeditions... We know of course that Icelanders came to the coasts of Labrador and Newfoundland, perhaps further south to Maine and New england even.

We also know that basque and Portuguese fishermen were hauling in cod fro mthe Grand Banks. whether they ever sighted land or even made landfall is a mystery, but they were out there by at least the 1480's,

It's also entirely possible that over in the west Coast, Polynesians may have paid a visit. Since while migrating all they brought were their boats, taro roots, and whatever livestock survived the trip (and the odds of chickens, pigs, and dogs surviving the trip between Hawai'i and California, or Rapa Nui and Chile, are rather slim) their archaeological impact would have been very low.

Siberians colonized much of the North American arctic somewhere around a thousand years ago. Yeah, the Inuit are fairly recent.

In the distant past, it's possible that a people very similar to the Australian Aborigines made it to the Americas - whether they went through Siberia, boated the Pacific coast, or even skirted Antarctica is unknown, but if Monte Verde and similar sites pan out, it's a legitimate possibility.

The story of China's voyage to the Americas is pretty much trash. These Chinese went where there was profit - that means Indonesia, India, and the coasts of Africa. Even as interesting as the Polynesians and Pacific Native Americans wew, there were no trade routes, and there would have been little of material value to gain if there were trade routes



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by punkinworks


the chinese treasure ship voyages led by Zheng He
The real Sinbad
Travelled all over the east and indian ocean and my have journeyed into the atlantic and maybe to the americas as is claimed by Gavin Menzies.
Although he is strongly disagreed with in the historical community, it is a good possiblity.

I honestly haven read his book or the refutations of it, but its not a strecth, and and Zheng He's logs of his last two voayages were destroyed by the succesive emporer. But they did make it as far as africa.


This is more of a comment on Gavin Menzies than Zheng He.
I found the research of Menzies to be dubious at best.
He contested that the Moeraki Boulders (just South of Oamaru, New Zealand) were actually manufactured anchor stones for a giant junk that is buried somewhere in a sand dune - and that these 'anchor stones' don't occur naturally.

I emailed him with information regarding the geologic formation of the Moeraki Boulders and that there are numerous occurences of spheroidal concretions, including the Waipara River Gorge where they contain Plesiosaur bones.

I didn't hear back from him.

If he is so wrong on this matter, I wonder how rigid his research has been regarding the rest?





[edit on 21-7-2009 by aorAki]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by aorAki
I found the research of Menzies to be dubious at best....
If he is so wrong on this matter, I wonder how rigid his research has been regarding the rest?

I point you towards the commentary available at The Hall of Ma'at. Menzies' dissertation on the Newport Tower...already a foggy notion...is total hooey of the highest order.

You can't take a notion and bang 'evidence' into it until it looks like it fits. Not and call it science.



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 10:18 PM
link   
I've always been interested in the idea of Norse traders or raiders coming to North America. The thing is, I didn't hear about the Kinsington Runestone until a few years ago. Here in Northeast Oklahoma, we have our own runestones to ponder. The Heavener Runestones were what got me looking into the subject. It's possible that Norse made it into the Gulf of Mexico at some point and journeyed up the Mississippi river. Alternately, they may have worked their way inland and then down the Mississippi. The Arkansas River empties into the Mississippi so the idea that that may have come this way at some time is possible.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 01:02 AM
link   
reply to post by soontide
 


I just read up on your local rune stones, very interesting.
What i noticed from reading up on them and some of the other "runestones", seem to be occuring near rivers, hmmmm .

The vikings sailed up every major river in europe and a couple in asia. They sailed into the med and black sea.
They explored Newfoundland and we know they went farther south for firs and lumber.
They as far south a place that would have grown grapes, thats pretty far south.

Why could they have not gone up the st larwence or the hudson, or any of the other major rivers on the ne coast.
It is possible that they could have gone all the way dowqn and around florida and into the mississippi.
It would have been a stroke of luck to sail up the right channel and actually get into the missippi itself.
the french tried in the late 17th century, and missed the mississippi delta and sailed to texas intsead, where things went badly.

What intruiges me is ,thor hyerdhal's mention of a group of scandanavian crusaders that left port in gibtalter and theres no record of them getting home.
If you ge blown off course, leaving the med you could find yourself in the carribean.

And therby make the mississippi, thats a rough journey.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 01:02 AM
link   
reply to post by soontide
 


I just read up on your local rune stones, very interesting.
What i noticed from reading up on them and some of the other "runestones", seem to be occuring near rivers, hmmmm .

The vikings sailed up every major river in europe and a couple in asia. They sailed into the med and black sea.
They explored Newfoundland and we know they went farther south for firs and lumber.
They as far south a place that would have grown grapes, thats pretty far south.

Why could they have not gone up the st larwence or the hudson, or any of the other major rivers on the ne coast.
It is possible that they could have gone all the way dowqn and around florida and into the mississippi.
It would have been a stroke of luck to sail up the right channel and actually get into the missippi itself.
the french tried in the late 17th century, and missed the mississippi delta and sailed to texas intsead, where things went badly.

What intruiges me is ,thor hyerdhal's mention of a group of scandanavian crusaders that left port in gibtalter and theres no record of them getting home.
If you ge blown off course, leaving the med you could find yourself in the carribean.

And therby make the mississippi, thats a rough journey.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 01:28 AM
link   
Eureka! It was the Phoenicians

Perhaps it was the Phoenicians?

They reached Australia... why not North America?



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 01:47 AM
link   
One of the things that the rune experts keep bringing up is that the runes arent being used "properly", or in the proper syntax.
Or theres a mix of norse, saxon, irish usage or other things like that.
You these people who were exploring the western atlantic, werent fancy pants city folk, with church educated priests writing every thing down in the best grammar of the day.
No, they were, essentially viking hill-billys, . Living a hard life in a remote region with little to no contact with the homeland.
i doubt that if you could have come up with a handfull of people in a villiage who could read and write.
No doubt theres going be bad grammar and poor spelling, using the rune backwards or in the wrong place. And if the party is made up of a group of people who speak different languages or dialects and converse in a common tounge, it going to get jumbled up.
And what if the person who can write doesnt speek the same language that they converse in?
Its all very fascinating stuff, I'm laying odd's that the vikings made it up the st lawrence and into the great lakes and surrounding territory.





new topics
top topics
 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join