Evidence of Viking Outpost Found in Canada

For fifty years ever since the finding of L'Anse aux Meadows a thousand-year-old Viking site in Newfoundland amateurs and archaeologists have combed east coast of Canada and the US searching for traces of Viking visitors.

People have been searching for a 'second' site for some time and this may be it

New Viking site?

The finds have been made by an Archaeologist named Sutherland

If Sutherland is correct, the lines of evidence she has uncovered may point to a previously unknown chapter in New World history in which Viking seafarers and Native American hunters were partners together in a transatlantic trade network. "I think things were a lot more complex in this part of the world than most people assumed," Sutherland said. James Tuck agreed. "It's pretty convincing that there was a much larger Norse presence in the Canadian Arctic than any of us thought

The artifacts came from four sites, ranging from northern Baffin Island to northern Labrador, a distance of a thousand miles (1,600 kilometers). Indigenous Arctic hunters known as the Dorset people had camped at each of the sites, raising the possibility that they had made friendly contact with the Vikings.

Intrigued, Sutherland decided to reopen excavations at the most promising site, a place known as Tanfield Valley on the southeast coast of Baffin Island. In the 1960s U.S. archaeologist Moreau Maxwell had excavated parts of a stone-and-sod building there, describing it as "very difficult to interpret." Sutherland suspected that Viking seafarers had built the structure.

More on the how this find was made

More

There's a lot of our history that is wrong, waiting to overcome the Dogma of science and known history to reveal itself.

Originally posted by RocksFromSpace
There's a lot of our history that is wrong, waiting to overcome the Dogma of science and known history to reveal itself.

Okay but what does this have to do with the possible find of a new Viking site in North America?

Excellent post, I believe that the Vikings went as far south as the Caribbean. they were always in search of new lands to plunder or trade with, and their longboats were more than capable of allow such travel. Since they did have outposts in the America's, it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine such a feat. For such "primitive" people, they sure got around. This is very cool news, thanks for posting it!

There a few outposts in the maritime of Canada ( the east coast)

Not really surprised that have found more sites as their housing were made of earth and sod as they can easily erode over time finding them will just be harder and harder over time goes on .

viking settlement

reply to post by Hanslune



My thoughts:

Christopher Columbus was a northern European. I can buy that he was Scottish. Regardless, I believe that he, or his family, hailed from the northern regions. As well, he was a nobleman from these northern regions.

I believe that the northern people knew of the New World, and had for generations. And Christopher Columbus was just following through on knowledge he had from his northern roots. I would be surprised if the Spanish royals didn't already know, too. Or, at least to the extent they cared to (the knowledge is abstract, of little use to them at the time, until they were ready to monetize the knowledge).

Ah, the Indiana Jones-like thrills and glory of archeology. Otherwise known as lying in a cold square hole in the ground, slowly using a paint brush to loosen the dirt from a piece of broken pottery.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Christopher Columbus was Genoese, not northern European. The Vikings were obviously Nordic but Italy isn't now nor was it then a Nordic country.

How do you get the idea that Columbus was of Scottish extraction? Do you know something the rest of us don't?

Ahahaha! Okay, so some guy says Columbus is really Pedro Scotto and portraits of Columbus are completely made up images. Hmm. If that version of his life's story is true then it could just as well be the man in the moon too. A more convoluted history we're unlikely to see!

What do they say though: The truth is stranger than fiction. The thing is though that the truth always comes out. Let's see what kind of fruit this tree bears.

unknown chapter in New World history in which Viking seafarers and Native American hunters were partners together in a transatlantic trade network.

That's a long way to sail, coupled with the Viking combat centric culture, to presume they only wanted trade relations. Look at the other first contacts in north and South America, they usually resulted in bloodshed.

The way I figure it, there was probably a little Viking vs native combat.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Hanslune

 

My thoughts:

Christopher Columbus was a northern European. I can buy that he was Scottish. Regardless, I believe that he, or his family, hailed from the northern regions. As well, he was a nobleman from these northern regions.

I believe that the northern people knew of the New World, and had for generations. And Christopher Columbus was just following through on knowledge he had from his northern roots. I would be surprised if the Spanish royals didn't already know, too. Or, at least to the extent they cared to (the knowledge is abstract, of little use to them at the time, until they were ready to monetize the knowledge).

No Columbus was genoese, but he had access to scandanavian nautical knowledge. He made a trip to Iceland in 1475, and his father in law was a ships master with the knights of Christ, in Portugal.
The knights of Christ were the remnants of the templars in Portugal.
Did you notice that Columbus' sails flew the standard of Templars, red cross,on a white field.

There is circumstantial evidence that the Portugese reached the new world as early as the 1470's
, when the Spanish got to Brazil in the early 1500's there were already Portugese sugar plantations on a fee offshore islands.
The Portugese crown did its best to keep knowledge of its newly discovered lands from it trade competitors, the Italian city states and the Spanish. Many of the early expeditions' information and charts were seen as a state secret and were kept very secret.
And seeing how it was from iceland that the scandanavians jumped off for the new world, it is very plausible that he could have gained knowledge from them about the new world.
Clearly the scandanavians had much more contact with the new world than just the failed out post
L'anse aux meadow and the newly discovered site, but those sites were just seasonal camps used for lumbering and fishing and would have left very little trace. But they did leave traces that aren't fully accepted yet.
One thing most people don't understand is that the Viking period ends when two things happen, the first is the fuedalizing of scandanavia society, by the new monarchies in Denmark and Sweden, then christianization.

Another thing people don't think about the place in society that many of the earlier explorers had, they were mostly outcasts, forced to leave home because of being banished for crimes or fueds with other clans in the tribe.
When they settled Iceland and greenland it was as much to get away from everyone else as it was about exploration. And by the time the mainland was fully christianized the outlying settlments were stubornly hanging on to their pagan ways.
So there was an impetus to keep the knowledge of new lands from the church and crown. Also these people didn't appreciate the kings, whom they had no real connection with, forcing them to pay taxes on thier goods they worked so hard to export to the mainland.
There are even records of ships full of lumber from the new world being taxed in danish ports, lumber that had to have come from much farther south than is the currently accepted limit of scandanavian exploration.

Originally posted by BaneOfQuo

unknown chapter in New World history in which Viking seafarers and Native American hunters were partners together in a transatlantic trade network.

That's a long way to sail, coupled with the Viking combat centric culture, to presume they only wanted trade relations. Look at the other first contacts in north and South America, they usually resulted in bloodshed.

The way I figure it, there was probably a little Viking vs native combat.

edit on 22-10-2012 by BaneOfQuo because: (no reason given)

The notion that all scandanavians were Vikings is popular modern romance, only a very small number were coastal raiders, they usually started out as 2nd 3rd sons who had no chance of inheritance from the father and the only way toake a name for themselves was to go on raiding parties to gain enough wealth to buy a bride and some land. The vast majority of " vikings" were herdsmen and simple subsistance farmers as well as lumbermen, very few were actually warriors.

reply to post by Hanslune


It always amazes me when I think of how little we know about our TRUE past.

reply to post by punkinworks10


Please note, I only referenced that combat centric nature of the culture and at no point did I presume they were coastal raiders.

The point I was trying to make, which you obviously missed, was that an interaction between to cultures as the Vikings and native Americans would mostly result in conflict.

This is just a opinion of mine and you are welcome to share it or not, but please refrain from making assumptions.

reply to post by Hanslune


Fascinating stuff Hans

More sites will be found I'm sure
But like has been said they left a pretty light footprint that will be hard to find.
I bet that ant good sites further south would have been reoccupied by subsequent settlement and are buried underneath modern cities in many cases.

reply to post by BaneOfQuo


What I'm saying is that the scandanavians weren't anymore warlike than anyone else of the time , and a lot of the interactions with the N Ams really depended on the native American attitudes towards strangers than those of the scandanavians, some tribes were very hospitable others not so much.
And mostly the people exploring the new world were NOT warriors, they were cattle farmers, lumbermen and fishermen,
There are known instances peaceful contact with native americans and scandanavians..

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Hanslune

 

My thoughts:

Christopher Columbus was a northern European. I can buy that he was Scottish. Regardless, I believe that he, or his family, hailed from the northern regions. As well, he was a nobleman from these northern regions.

I believe that the northern people knew of the New World, and had for generations. And Christopher Columbus was just following through on knowledge he had from his northern roots. I would be surprised if the Spanish royals didn't already know, too. Or, at least to the extent they cared to (the knowledge is abstract, of little use to them at the time, until they were ready to monetize the knowledge).

Howdy Bigfurry

Scotish? Italian from Genoa but little if anything is known about his ancestors. The people of Greenland and Iceland did but probably didn't realize the extent of the lands beyond what might have been reached by the Norse earlier

If the Spanish knew anything they knew that the Portuguese were finding new lands to the south. The problem was the Greeks had figured out the circumference of the earth and that it was round, and this pointed to Asia being really far away to the West and well beyond their naval technology of the time. The Bible mentioned no lands or people 'in the new world' therefore it didn't exist'. Had the Spanish (or the earlier nations that combined to form Spain) had known about the new world and what it contained they would have certain voyaged there, they could have used the resources to fund their reconquista

Originally posted by punkinworks10
reply to post by Hanslune

 

Fascinating stuff Hans

More sites will be found I'm sure
But like has been said they left a pretty light footprint that will be hard to find.
I bet that ant good sites further south would have been reoccupied by subsequent settlement and are buried underneath modern cities in many cases.

Most probably, a friend of mine has spent 45+ years looking for signs of Vikings in New England, if they were there their site was probably built over.

I'll speculate that their might be another site along the St Lawrence and perhaps a lumber camp in Labrador - somewhere too. Wood was needed in Greenland and Labrador had lots

There has already been documented evidence the "vikings" were here at least a hundred years before Columbus...possibly much more. Nothing new here. If you stay on top of science through venues other than the "lame stream media" you would already know this. "Real" evidence...such as long houses...were discovered in eastern Canada decades ago that dated to the 11th and 12th century.

Not new...but the lame stream media doesn't want to do away with 'Columbus Day"...plus...if they beat the drum too hard...they might require a re-write of history books and the establishment (Government) is too damn cheap to fix that.

Originally posted by Jeremiah65
There has already been documented evidence the "vikings" were here at least a hundred years before Columbus...possibly much more. Nothing new here. If you stay on top of science through venues other than the "lame stream media" you would already know this. "Real" evidence...such as long houses...were discovered in eastern Canada decades ago that dated to the 11th and 12th century.

Not new...but the lame stream media doesn't want to do away with 'Columbus Day"...plus...if they beat the drum too hard...they might require a re-write of history books and the establishment (Government) is too damn cheap to fix that.

edit on 10/22/2012 by Jeremiah65 because: (no reason given)

About a 1,000 year actually and yes all the discoveries related to the Vikings have been made by the evil mainstream. Ah the fact that the Vikings got here before Columbus is well established, as is the fact various waves of American Indians and Inuit did too. The book were re-written decades ago.....you seem somewhat confused! lol

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

Christopher Columbus was Genoese, not northern European. The Vikings were obviously Nordic but Italy isn't now nor was it then a Nordic country.

How do you get the idea that Columbus was of Scottish extraction? Do you know something the rest of us don't?

Ahahaha! Okay, so some guy says Columbus is really Pedro Scotto and portraits of Columbus are completely made up images. Hmm. If that version of his life's story is true then it could just as well be the man in the moon too. A more convoluted history we're unlikely to see!

What do they say though: The truth is stranger than fiction. The thing is though that the truth always comes out. Let's see what kind of fruit this tree bears.

edit on 22/10/2012 by CosmicEgg because: (no reason given)

Christopher Columbus Was A Scotsman Named Pedro Scotto