1000-year-old coins found in Northern Territory may rewrite Australian history.

page: 1
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+3 more 
posted on May, 20 2013 @ 12:13 PM
link   


REMEMBER when you were taught that Australia was discovered by James Cook in 1770 who promptly declared it "terra nullius" and claimed it for the British throne? Turns out that could be completely and utterly wrong. Five copper coins and a nearly 70-year-old map with an "X" might lead to a discovery that could rewrite Australia's history. Australian scientist Ian McIntosh, currently Professor of Anthropology at Indiana University in the US, is planning an expedition in July that has stirred up the archaeological community.

The scientist wants to revisit the location where five coins were found in the Northern Territory in 1944 that have proven to be 1000 years old, opening up the possibility that seafarers from distant countries might have landed in Australia much earlier than what is currently believed. Back in 1944 during World War II, after Japanese bombers had attacked Darwin two years earlier, the Wessel Islands - an uninhabited group of islands off Australia's north coast - had become a strategic position to help protect the mainland. Australian soldier Maurie Isenberg was stationed on one of the islands to man a radar station and spent his spare time fishing on the idyllic beaches. While sitting in the sand with his fishing-rod, he discovered a handful of coins in the sand.

He didn't have a clue where they could come from but pocketed them anyway and later placed them in a tin. In 1979 he rediscovered his "treasure" and decided to send the coins to a museum to get them identified. The coins proved to be 1000 years old. Still not fully realising what treasure he held in his hands, he marked an old colleague's map with an "X" to remember where he had found them. The discovery was apparently forgotten again until anthropologist McIntosh got the ball rolling a few months ago. The coins raise many important questions: For a start, if James Cook wasn't the first person to discover Australia, who was?
Read more: www.news.com.au...

Except for the misnomer of saying that the coins were the first to be minted in Sub-Saharan Africa, Axum is in Sub-Saharan Africa.. WoW!.. not saying that the Swahili Africans bought it there after all coins by their very nature are trade items but I ain't ruling it out either.
edit on Mon May 20 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: subst ex tags IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS




posted on May, 20 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   


They are African coins from the former Kilwa sultanate, now a World Heritage ruin on an island off Tanzania. Kilwa once was a flourishing trade port with links to India in the 13th to 16th century. The trade with gold, silver, pearls, perfumes, Arabian stone ware, Persian ceramics and Chinese porcelain made the city one of the most influential towns in East Africa at the time.



It took the writer of this article a very long time to get to point... I was reading this with the idea that the coins were minted by ancient aboriginal Australians. But the coins are in fact African coins from 1000 years ago. I also don't understand why the coins would not have "monetary value" -- how can a 1000 year old coin not have monetary value?


Very nice story though, thanks for your post.



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Spider879
REMEMBER when you were taught that Australia was discovered by James Cook in 1770



No, I dont remember that at all.
In fact, I dont think ANY kids in Australia were EVER taught that. Even Cook himself knew that others had been to the southern continent before him.

Interesting to hear about the coins though. Pity the news article had to start with a lie, but that stupid journalistic sensationalism for you.



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   
So, we have to take that fella's word that he found them where he says he found them?

Also, couldn't the coins have washed up on that beach from a wreck no where near there?

m' just sayin'.

S&F, velly intellestiiing...



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by antoinemarionette



They are African coins from the former Kilwa sultanate, now a World Heritage ruin on an island off Tanzania. Kilwa once was a flourishing trade port with links to India in the 13th to 16th century. The trade with gold, silver, pearls, perfumes, Arabian stone ware, Persian ceramics and Chinese porcelain made the city one of the most influential towns in East Africa at the time.



It took the writer of this article a very long time to get to point... I was reading this with the idea that the coins were minted by ancient aboriginal Australians. But the coins are in fact African coins from 1000 years ago. I also don't understand why the coins would not have "monetary value" -- how can a 1000 year old coin not have monetary value?


Very nice story though, thanks for your post.


Thanks I could have made the title 1000 yr old African coins Discovered in Australia but that would take away from the fun I believe the writer was going for, well the coins are copper so maybe that's why??..I don't get it either these coins should be a rare coin collectors dream but I really don't know how these things work.
edit on 20-5-2013 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by antoinemarionette



They are African coins from the former Kilwa sultanate, now a World Heritage ruin on an island off Tanzania. Kilwa once was a flourishing trade port with links to India in the 13th to 16th century. The trade with gold, silver, pearls, perfumes, Arabian stone ware, Persian ceramics and Chinese porcelain made the city one of the most influential towns in East Africa at the time.



It took the writer of this article a very long time to get to point... I was reading this with the idea that the coins were minted by ancient aboriginal Australians. But the coins are in fact African coins from 1000 years ago. I also don't understand why the coins would not have "monetary value" -- how can a 1000 year old coin not have monetary value?


Very nice story though, thanks for your post.


if its made of gold or silver. Its not about the value but the history it holds.



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Spider879
 


If in fact these coins do exist the value would be Enormous. We're talking Millions Each.

It would be something that Re-Writes History. How can something like that NOT have any value? Hell, Museums might even pay Millions just to get their hands on ONE.

I have tried to find a picture of the coins to no avail. I would be Very Interested in seeing them as I am somewhat of a coin collector myself.



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by Spider879
 


If in fact these coins do exist the value would be Enormous. We're talking Millions Each.

It would be something that Re-Writes History. How can something like that NOT have any value? Hell, Museums might even pay Millions just to get their hands on ONE.

I have tried to find a picture of the coins to no avail. I would be Very Interested in seeing them as I am somewhat of a coin collector myself.

Even if they are in bad shape??



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by antoinemarionette
 


Antiquities the American Indians made usually have little value. Ancient creations the Africans made have little value. Same with all the antique stuff made by the unimportant countries of the world, they are simple artifacts. Now a three hundred year old English creation, get out the checkbook. Whatever the elite decided to give value to by collecting, that is what became valuable. In my world, an oil painting by a good artist is worth the same no matter what his name.



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by Spider879
 


If in fact these coins do exist the value would be Enormous. We're talking Millions Each.
The point is that while the intrinsic value of the coins is not huge, the context in which they were found is. Of note, too, is that they were found...apparently...in association with coins of a later date. Those would reflect the earliest side of the temporal bracket. Still, a very cool discovery. S&F for the thread!



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Spider879
 


Of Course.

It is What it Represents. That in itself will have a collector reaching for his wallet.



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Ya know, the whole "discovered" thing is really stupid.

If white folks stumble on land that has nonwhite folks living on it, that land has already been discovered, regardless of the late arrival of Western civilization. Thus, I guarantee that Cook didn't discover anything.



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 02:07 PM
link   
I always wondered who discovered Europe.



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Dumbass
 


The natives, obviously.



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   


1000-year-old coins found in Northern Territory may rewrite Australian history


Each time a story like this surfaces and it is confirmed, it is a reminder to me of just how imperfect our concepts of human history truly are and just how silly and immature our mainstream science has become.

There's just so damned much we don't know about our past to see official story-telling latch on so completely to that which has no real foundation. Each time we turn around and find something like Gobekli Tepe or those in Central and South America that defy all logic... we don't try to understand them. The first thing is to 'explain' the unexplainable... as if our science was playing a lottery ticket.

We aren't entirely stupid but... we're still not that smart, either.



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   
I can see how the significance of such a find may have been have diminished by when it was found.There was a world war going on and all.I think a modern expedition is overdo and may yield a few surprises
edit on 20-5-2013 by TDawg61 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Ya know, the whole "discovered" thing is really stupid.

If white folks stumble on land that has nonwhite folks living on it, that land has already been discovered, regardless of the late arrival of Western civilization. Thus, I guarantee that Cook didn't discover anything.


And the kangaroos and wombats and all the other native-Australians were there before the lot of them.



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Here is my issue with this:



While sitting in the sand with his fishing-rod, he discovered a handful of coins in the sand.


This implies to me that they were sitting on top (or shallow) of the sand, therefore to me it would seem most probable they had recently washed up.
Now if that is from another close location I do not know, but entertaining the thought that these 1000 year old coins could be part of an already discovered collection that has ended up in the ocean, I find this can not be ruled out.

edit on 20-5-2013 by byteshertz because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Yes though the origin of te coins seems a bit dodgey, they are real enough to have been dated.
The templars came to America before Columbus did, and others before them....
The seas are ringed with ocean going cultures from many ages(almost every age) so anything is possible...
A thousand year old wreck may lie in the shallow water just offshre, and the coins are whats washed inshore over time...
The gold coins would have sunk far deeper maybe?



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 07:04 PM
link   
I don't want to make it seem less cool, But...

If we live by our ways of writing down history, we are using our own archive to report in, without older documented
events and happenings from those that beat us to it.

We didn't witness it to be able to know about earlier invasions. So we took credits, and if we want to up hold our ways of scientific discovery and keep it clean from anything fantasy or incorrect order. We can only rewrite it after we found proof of the age , origin and place they were found.

Until then the coins are save, since they aren't worth anything if one of the above, turns out not being proved a fact.

Or have they proved it's legitimacy already ?





new topics
 
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join