Fortificated villages
IE J
In for example:
http://www.uiowa.edu/~anthro/paleopathology/drybones/ch1.html
one can find more than one interesting detail from the text which in itself
would have been good looking closer at, but that's not what I am heading to,
it's to drawings and photos like these:
http://www.uiowa.edu/~anthro/paleopathology/drybones/images/1-13.jpg - a
drawing which could have been made elsewhere in the world looking almost
identical.
http://www.uiowa.edu/~anthro/paleopathology/drybones/images/1-2.jpg view
from the site which also look almost identical to many here in Europe.
not to mention this air-photo:
http://www.uiowa.edu/~anthro/paleopathology/drybones/images/1-20.jpg
What I wonder is if archaeologists in NA have any knowledge what so ever re.
the 'fornborg' ruins in for example Sweden?
For example:
http://leifgustavsson.nu/books/category.asp?id=14
www.kulturarvostergotland.se
I guess you ask what a 'fornborg' is. Here you have some answers on the
photos:
<www.h.lst.se/.../ 10_vad_ar_fornborg.htm>
<www.arkitekturmuseet.se/. ../foton/eketorp.jpg>
<www.gotlandshistoria.com/ images/fornborg_1.jpg>
While I do understand that naysayers dismiss this and everything alike
without looking twice,
I on the other hand think that it would be valuable to have all fortificated
'villages' in NA marked on a map with notes of how far from a creek a river
or a lake and in which type of terrain they are made. Without comparing such
findings in NA with the Old world many conclusions drawn might be invalid in
the long run.
Inger E
Alan Crozier
news:H6Adg.2039$E02...@newsb.telia.net...
None of these links work because the link was incompletely
copied from the Google Images search, with /.../ instead of
essential details. Here are the correct links for the first
two:
http://www.h.lst.se/h/amnen/Varldsarvet/10_vad_ar_fornborg.htm
http://www.arkitekturmuseet.se/ung/utstallning/permanent/bilder/foton/eketorp.jpg
The third link is out of date but the picture can still be
seen if you search for fornborg (=ringfort) at Google
Images.
A search for "ringfort" and "ring fort" will yield images of
forts of many kinds from diferent parts of the world, to
broaden the discussion.
> While I do understand that naysayers dismiss this and
everything alike
> without looking twice,
> I on the other hand think that it would be valuable to
have all fortificated
> 'villages' in NA marked on a map with notes of how far
from a creek a river
> or a lake and in which type of terrain they are made.
Without comparing such
> findings in NA with the Old world many conclusions drawn
might be invalid in
> the long run.
I myself believe that the natives of North America were
perfectly capable of building such structures without the
influence of white men from Europe.
Alan
--
Alan Crozier
Lund
Sweden
Eric Stevens
I think the people from most parts of the world were capable of
building such structures but the question is, how many did and how
similar were they?
It's rather like that Roman boat found in Vietnam.
Eric Stevens
Alan Crozier
news:4rld72d1bilfgiae1...@4ax.com...
Exactly. That's why the discussion should not be restricted
to Swedish and North American ringforts.
Lisbeth Andersson
<...>
> I guess you ask what a 'fornborg' is. Here you have some answers
> on the photos:
> <www.h.lst.se/.../ 10_vad_ar_fornborg.htm>
> <www.arkitekturmuseet.se/. ../foton/eketorp.jpg>
> <www.gotlandshistoria.com/ images/fornborg_1.jpg>
I have some problems with those links :-(
For the first two I found:
http://www.h.lst.se/h/amnen/Varldsarvet/10_vad_ar_fornborg.htm
http://www.arkitekturmuseet.se/ung/utstallning/permanent/skog.html
The third one seems to have some real problems.
Lisbeth.
----
The day I don't learn anything new is the day I die.
*What we know is not nearly as interesting as *how we know it.
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***
IE J
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet
news:4rld72d1bilfgiae1...@4ax.com...
And then I haven't gone into details such as palisads.... how the trees were
cut and how many holes were placed in a certain length, not have I gone
deeper into the stolpholes of the buildings inside..... or other
artifacts......
In the Crow Creek case we do have a very close in time connection with the
massacre and a Norwegian King's warfleet passing(!) Greenland westward.
That this also correspond with artifacts found on the route down from Hudson
Bay, and with a story told by the present Indians living close to the Crow
Creek, that is an other story.
Of course some will by now discuss the 'we came home found 10 men red with
blood' on KRS. That might very well be related, but that's neither my
intention to draw that line on KRS up in this discussion, nor does that line
in itself if everything else can be shown to 'fit' have any other impact
than that KRS definitely is proven true. Nothing what so ever to the
fortificated villages.
Before we go any further I urge those who are interested in these questions
once again to look at early maps. I have sent one to the groups which
definitely show the route from Hudson Bay to where a very discussed and
disputed armour been found.....
More later.
Inger E
>
>
>
> Eric Stevens
>
Peter Alaca
I miss the point in Inger's post.
What is she trying to say?
What I am trying to say with this collection
of Indian fortified villages?
http://tinyurl.com/juktk
http://tinyurl.com/e5w5u
http://tinyurl.com/f5qdr
http://tinyurl.com/g99xk
http://tinyurl.com/frmj3
http://tinyurl.com/l2umb
--
p.a.
Alan Crozier
news:4476e2f9$0$85795$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl...
No idea. Are you trying to show us that you know how to use
Google and can make a tiny url? Anyone can do that.
Here's a causewayed enclosure with palisade from Neolithic
Denmark:
http://tinyurl.com/ry6z2
and one from England
http://tinyurl.com/mglqy
Peter Alaca
> "Peter Alaca" wrote in message
>> Alan Crozier wrote:
>>> I myself believe that the natives of North America were
>>> perfectly capable of building such structures without
>>> the influence of white men from Europe.
>> I miss the point in Inger's post.
>> What is she trying to say?
>>
>> What I am trying to say with this collection
>> of Indian fortified villages?
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/juktk
>> http://tinyurl.com/e5w5u
>> http://tinyurl.com/f5qdr
>> http://tinyurl.com/g99xk
>> http://tinyurl.com/frmj3
>> http://tinyurl.com/l2umb
> No idea. Are you trying to show us that you know how to use
> Google and can make a tiny url? Anyone can do that.
No, not everyone
> Here's a causewayed enclosure with palisade from Neolithic
> Denmark:
> http://tinyurl.com/ry6z2
> and one from England
> http://tinyurl.com/mglqy
Yes, there are hundreds or thousands of examples
of defended sites from every place and time.
That is why I miss Ingers point.
But I understand we are supposed to take treecutting
techniques in consideration, to count postholes and
to go deeper in "stolpholes".
Any idea what stolpholes are?
--
p.a.
Alan Crozier
Postholes, Swedish stolphål
VtSkier
I believe that it is not correct to say that there has never
been pre-Columbian contact between the Old World and the New.
There are just too many anomalies to say this. For instance,
Greenland was occupied by Europeans for almost 400 years. The
colonists built European style houses, mostly of stone, but
even stone houses need rafters of wood. Where did the wood
come from? Most likely the coast of Labrador or Newfoundland.
Greenland never had much in the way of trees, even during the
warm period that it was occupied and driftwood would not have
been enough. Especially if the roof covering was sod, the
rafters would need to be replaced on a regular schedule to
keep up with rot.
Then there is the Kensington stone. Denied legitimacy by the
fact that the inscription is not "pure" Old Norse. However,
if the date of 13th century is correct, then a thoroughly
bastardized version of Old Norse would be expected. This and
other artifacts put Scandinavian people in the Great Lakes
region well before Columbus' trip to the Caribbean.
Then there are the Mandans of the Upper Missouri. Catlin found
an incidence of red hair, blue eyes and a marked difference
in social structure from their neighbors. Too bad they died
out before DNA testing could answer some questions.
While it's true that a lot of what is written about pre-
Columbian New/Old World contact is fable about what the author
would like to and like to have us believe, there remains a
number of items that makes some kind of contact probable.
How about the Newport, RI round tower? The best explanation
I've read is that it's Portuguese from around 1500 plus or
minus 50 years.
Alan Crozier
news:4dob61F...@individual.net...
Good job I didn't say that, then.
> There are just too many anomalies to say this. For
instance,
> Greenland was occupied by Europeans for almost 400 years.
The
> colonists built European style houses, mostly of stone,
but
> even stone houses need rafters of wood. Where did the wood
> come from? Most likely the coast of Labrador or
Newfoundland.
Labrador is a very likely source of timber.
Source?
Peter Alaca
> Alan Crozier wrote:
>> I myself believe that the natives of North America were
>> perfectly capable of building such structures without the
>> influence of white men from Europe.
>>
>> Alan
>
> I believe that it is not correct to say that there has never
> been pre-Columbian contact between the Old World and the New.
> [..]
Nobody here denies pre-Columbian contact.
The part I have snipped has nothing to do
with the subject of this thread.
--
p.a.
VtSkier
>>
>> How about the Newport, RI round tower? The best
> explanation
>> I've read is that it's Portuguese from around 1500 plus or
>> minus 50 years.
>
> Source?
>
> Alan
>
http://www.apol.net/dightonrock/portuguese_tower_of_newport.htm
is the following
"Radiocarbon Dating
of Newport Tower
In 1993 a Danish group, lead by Jorge Siemonsen, came to Newport to
collect very small samples (about 28) of the mortar-cement of Newport
Tower in order to evaluate its date by determining the age of the carbon
dioxide that was caught inside the mortar when the tower was being built.
They took the samples to Denmark and after a few months revealed that
their studies of the carbon 14 radioactive, indicate that the tower
could not have been built by the Vikings nor by the Benedict Arnold and
that the most probable date of its construction was around 1500, plus 50
or minus 50 years, therefore within the period of the Miguel Corte
Real's entrance in the Narragansett Bay, in 1502.
This press release caused a big storm not only among the defenders of
the Vikings, but even more intense among the Arnoldists."
Alan Crozier
Lisbeth Andersson
news:4dob61F...@individual.net:
<...>
> I believe that it is not correct to say that there has never
> been pre-Columbian contact between the Old World and the New.
>
Nobody has seriously suggested any such thing *after the discovery of
L'anse aux Meadows. And long before that, we chauvinistic
Scandinavians insisted that the Norse visited America, based on pre-
Columbian texts.
<...>
>
> Then there is the Kensington stone. Denied legitimacy by the
> fact that the inscription is not "pure" Old Norse. However,
> if the date of 13th century is correct, then a thoroughly
> bastardized version of Old Norse would be expected. This and
> other artifacts put Scandinavian people in the Great Lakes
> region well before Columbus' trip to the Caribbean.
>
<...>
14th century (1362). No, nobody is saying that the stone is a fake
because the language is not "pure" Old Norse. As you say, by that time
the language(s) had changed. They had changed from Old Norse to Old
Swedish or Old Norwegian (or whatever the technical terms are in
modern English), and "pure" Old Norse would be a sure sign that it is
a fake. One objection to the text is that a lot of the differences
from Old Norse, is not what you would expect in a 14th century text,
they usually happened a lot later. For example, the endings of dative
nouns have usually not dissapeared at that time. The argument is more
of the kind "well, some of those changes may have started by then,
(although we really have to look through a lot of text to find
examples, and we're still looking for some of them,) but it's really
weird that all those late forms show up but not many of the typical 14
century forms or even earlier ones".
Alan Crozier
news:Xns97CFB9114B41B...@66.150.105.47...
Yes, the strongest linguistic argument against authenticity is of a
statistical
nature, that so many seemingly modern forms occur together in one text
which has so few 14th-century forms.
Tom McDonald
Tom McDonald
VtSkier wrote:
<snip>
> I believe that it is not correct to say that there has never
> been pre-Columbian contact between the Old World and the New.
Who has said that? Whoever did (in the last 50 years or so) is
ignorant.
> There are just too many anomalies to say this.
Ah. Argument from incredulity. Do you also think biological systems
have too many contingent elements to have evolved from a pre-cellular
ancestor?
> For instance,
> Greenland was occupied by Europeans for almost 400 years. The
> colonists built European style houses, mostly of stone, but
> even stone houses need rafters of wood. Where did the wood
> come from? Most likely the coast of Labrador or Newfoundland.
> Greenland never had much in the way of trees, even during the
> warm period that it was occupied and driftwood would not have
> been enough. Especially if the roof covering was sod, the
> rafters would need to be replaced on a regular schedule to
> keep up with rot.
We know they had set up shop for a few years at L'Anse aux Meadows. I
suspect they noticed that there were trees in the neighborhood. My
hunch is that they didn't keep this fact a secret from their pals in
Greenland. So, yeah, it would be unremarkable if they did harvest
timber on the mainland of North America.
Didn't stay, though.
>
> Then there is the Kensington stone. Denied legitimacy by the
> fact that the inscription is not "pure" Old Norse. However,
> if the date of 13th century is correct, then a thoroughly
> bastardized version of Old Norse would be expected. This and
> other artifacts...
...if shown to be authentic and found in good enough context to be sure
at least some of them were present in something like the locations in
which they were said to have been found before ca. 1492, would
probably...
> ...put Scandinavian people in the Great Lakes
> region well before Columbus' trip to the Caribbean.
Sorry. Your absolute statements are unwarrented.
> Then there are the Mandans of the Upper Missouri. Catlin found
> an incidence of red hair, blue eyes and a marked difference
> in social structure from their neighbors. Too bad they died
> out before DNA testing could answer some questions.
You are in luck! Well, except for making another erroneous absolute
statement:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandan
"Beginning in 1837, a major smallpox outbreak reduced the number of
Mandan to approximately 125.[1] With such meager numbers, the Mandan
banded together with two neighboring tribes, the Arikara and Hidatsa.
In an effort to establish good relations, the U.S. government founded
the Fort Berthold Agency to care for the combined tribes. The Agency
soon set up the Fort Berthold Reservation. With the 1934 Indian
Reorganization Act, the Mandan officially merged with the Hidatsa and
the Arikara into the "Three Affiliated Tribes," known as the Mandan,
Hidatsa and Arikara Nation. About half of the Mandan still reside in
the area of the reservation, the rest residing around the United States
and in Canada."
Notice the great loss of Mandan to smallpox. Wouldn't it seem that a
tribe so heavily influenced genetically by some Welsh would do better
in the staying-alive smallpox sweepstakes than their neighboring tribes
without that advantage?
> While it's true that a lot of what is written about pre-
> Columbian New/Old World contact is fable about what the author
> would like to and like to have us believe, there remains a
> number of items that makes some kind of contact probable...
...if it is determined that those items are from the relevant period,
and their provable context is such that they were more likely than not
left by folks from the Old World before ca. 1492.
There, that's improved it.
> How about the Newport, RI round tower? The best explanation
> I've read is that it's Portuguese from around 1500 plus or
> minus 50 years.
Read more:
http://www.ramtops.co.uk/newport.html
...which is a summary of an article by Johannes Hertz, a medieval
archaeologist and head of the Danish State Antiquary's Archaeological
Secretariat. It was published in
the Journal of the Newport Historical Society, Vol 68, Part 2, 1997:
The History and Mystery of the Old Stone Mill
>From the summary:
"The meat of Hertz's article, though, is the C14 dating of the lime
mortar. Samples were taken in 1993 in a variety of places and from a
depth where 'pollution' from repair work could be excluded. These were
tested and show that the tower was probably built in the middle of the
17th century, with a 16th century date not completely excluded."
And this does not require the injection of the Templars, which the
Portuguese gambit does.
Peter Alaca
news:1148662101.6...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
> Peter Alaca wrote:
>> Alan Crozier wrote:
>>> I myself believe that the natives of North America were
>>> perfectly capable of building such structures without the
>>> influence of white men from Europe.
>> I miss the point in Inger's post.
>> What is she trying to say?
>>
>> What I am trying to say with this collection
>> of Indian fortified villages?
>> http://tinyurl.com/juktk
>> http://tinyurl.com/e5w5u
>> http://tinyurl.com/f5qdr
>> http://tinyurl.com/g99xk
>> http://tinyurl.com/frmj3
>> http://tinyurl.com/l2umb
> And:
> http://tinyurl.com/rj3kh
> http://www.madison.k12.wi.us/whitehorse/ss/intro_files/introdu7.jpe
> http://www.madison.k12.wi.us/whitehorse/ss/intro_files/introdu4.jpe
> http://www.madison.k12.wi.us/whitehorse/ss/intro_files/introdu9.jpe
> http://www.madison.k12.wi.us/whitehorse/ss/intro_files/introdu8.jpe
That is an amazing settlement
See also http://tinyurl.com/hhrz7
The Greenlanders did a good job there ;-)
cf
Avila, Spain, 12th c walls
http://www.travelthewondersofspain.com/Avila-Lg.jpg
Biskupin, Poland, late bronze/early iron age
http://www.biskupin.pl/eng/index.php
--
p.a.
Doug Weller
I don't know about the press release, but since then they have
consistently said it is probably colonial. The latest report I have by Jan
Heinemeier and Högne Jungner (Newport History, Vol 70, part 2, 2000, page
59) says:
"calibration of the mean age of the mortar samples from the Newport Tower
yields a calendar age of AD 1665; when the measuring uncertainty is taken
into account, the calibrated time interval corresponding to 1 sigma or 68%
confidence level is AD 1651-1679, to 2 sigma or 95% confidence level AD
1635-1698 calibrated. The Newport Tower is most likely colonial, and a
pre-Columbian age is almost certainly excluded."
Doug
--
Doug Weller --
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Amun - co-owner/co-moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Amun/
Doug Weller
[SNIP]
>
>Then there are the Mandans of the Upper Missouri. Catlin found
>an incidence of red hair, blue eyes and a marked difference
>in social structure from their neighbors. Too bad they died
>out before DNA testing could answer some questions.
Are you sure that the Mandans of today aren't related to the Mandans then?
I don't think I've read of comments by Catlin about the incidence of red
hair -- he did write:
"A stranger in the Mandan village is first struck with the different
shades of complexion, and various colors of hair which he sees in a crowd
about him; and it is at once almost disposed to exclaim that "these are
not Indians." There are a great many of these people whose complexions
appear as light as half-breeds; and amongst the women particularly, there
are many whose skins are almost white, with the most pleasing symmetry and
proportion of features; with hazel, with grey, and with blue eyes...
(Catlin, Vol. 1, p. 93)
And we are talking about the early 19th century here, why do you think
that the Mandan then had never intermarried with Europeans post 1492?
Read the artist, Rudolph Kurz, who commented that a 14 year old Mandan
girl with grey hair was referred to by someone else as a blonde, and who
wrote "what Catlin calls blond hair among the Mandan is nothing more than
sun-burned hair that is not continually smeared with grease...I may
mention, also, that the lighter color of some Indian's skin (not
only Mandan) is easily traced to the 'whites'."
On the other hand:
Washington Matthews, writing in the late 1860s, wrote that "It is not
necessary to suppose an intermixture of European blood in order to account
for lightness of color in an Indian. There is no reason why marked
varieties of color should not arise in the Red Race as it has done in
other races of man...An increase of hairiness is a more reliable sign of
Caucasian blood in an Indian than a diminution of the color of the skin,
and I never could discover that those fair Indians, claiming pure blood,
were more hairy than others."
Also try to get hold of Marshall T Newman's article "The Blond Mandan: A
critical review of an old problem", Southwestern Journal of
Anthropology, Vol. 6, 1950.
Then there is albinism. Whenever I raise this people say 'but no one
noticed pink eyes!). But most people with albimism have, guess what, blue
eyes - or grayish.
Web page for this quote lost:
"It is commonly thought that to have albinism, a person must have red
eyes. In fact, most people with albinism have blue or grayish eyes. In
some types of albinism, the irises appear to have a violet or reddish
hue. The eyes appear this way because the iris has very little pigment,
and allows light to reflect back from the reddish retina in the back of
the eye. "
From http://www.albinism.org/publications/what_is_albinism.html
"A common myth is that by definition people with albinism have red eyes.
In fact there are different types of albinism, and the amount of pigment
in the eyes varies. Although some individuals with albinism have reddish
or violet eyes, most have blue eyes. Some have hazel or brown eyes" .
So Catlin's grey, hazel or blue eyes could have had various sources.
Tom McDonald
Well, dog my cat! They are just about identical with Aztlan!
My apologies, Inger. I've now seen the light! Vikes did everything,
everywhere, everywhen.
They are gods. And you are their prophet, Inger E. Johanssen (pbuy)
Horace LaBadie
"Tom McDonald" <kil...@gmail.com> wrote:
Next we will be burning down embassies.
HWL
IE J
"Lisbeth Andersson" <lis...@bredband.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:Xns97CFB9114B41B...@66.150.105.47...
Lisbeth,
Well the forms most certainly did exist 1435 in at least one document I am
aware of. A document which btw at least one of the two main figures for the
1362 voyage did write in......
Inger E
IE J
"IE J" <inger_e....@telia.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:75Jdg.2115$E02...@newsb.telia.net...
As you by now must be aware of there exist not only the Uppsala example
where you can find the Norwegian Kingslist, but also an other. Handwritten
lawbook, two parchement still exist with notes on, all the lawbook and and
an annal(which goes up to 1435) was copied in 1524 by a named person a
Linköping's Bishop's man. Same book I tracked from 1477/78 voyage by
Pothurst and Pinning, with at least one of Colombus' brother on board and
also one of his navigators, to Munkaliv which at that time had become a
Birgittener monestry over to Vadstena. All people in Sweden are aware of
which Bishop we had in Linköping at that time. Those who doesn't know of who
he was and what he did to protect items of all kind that belonged to
Catholic monestries, might look at this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Brask
There were a specific reason why books of all kind were brought to Linköping
to be protected in 1524.
What most Swedes don't know either is that Gustav Vasa as early as 1524 did
call for valuable items from monestries and churches in Östergötland as
early as this year. Look for example at the documents in Vadstena for
Västerlösa Church.
Now the lawbook had seen many different hands adding to it if one look
closer at the fragments. Thus my comment.
Inger E
IE J
"VtSkier" <VtS...@nospam.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:4dob61F...@individual.net...
Well now the naysayers better keep silent until they listen to this. I doubt
that the Newport tower is Scandinavian as much as I doubt the dating from
layers that definitely were mixed before the samples were taken, but I do
know that there exist a painting before the officially suppesed time, a
painting on which you can see the tower at a distans. I doubt that the
Portugeseans built it, but have anyone looked closer at Irish roundchurches
and round towers from before 1500?
<www.stevebulman.f9.co.uk/ churches/norfolk.html>
<library.ucsc.edu/slides/ graphics/Ireland.jpg>
Inger E
VtSkier
Good article, thanks.
Doug Weller
>
>
>Well now the naysayers better keep silent until they listen to this. I doubt
>that the Newport tower is Scandinavian as much as I doubt the dating from
>layers that definitely were mixed before the samples were taken, but I do
>know that there exist a painting before the officially suppesed time, a
>painting on which you can see the tower at a distans.
And the painting is where? Can you identify it? What's the date of the
painting, the painter, etc? Is it this one?
http://www.redwoodlibrary.org/tower/frame2.htm
or this one?
http://lithic.50g.com/ri.htm
I doubt that the
>Portugeseans built it, but have anyone looked closer at Irish roundchurches
>and round towers from before 1500?
><www.stevebulman.f9.co.uk/ churches/norfolk.html>
What's the point of this url? There are a lot of churches in Norfolk!
>
><library.ucsc.edu/slides/ graphics/Ireland.jpg>
Can't find the server.
IE J
No matter that, Doug is definitely on the wrong track. Told all of you long
ago that there is one Greenlander who returned to Norway, married to an
Indian woman..... That happened in 1480's. Short after King Hakon's warfleet
passed Greenland.....
But back to the important things - fortified villages.
http://wadbring.com/historia/sidor/mosseborg.htm
please go down to "borgen sedd från norr" and look at the drawing where the
pallisad is seen as it was.
There are many examples among Sweden's 1100(approx) fornborgar(hill
forts/fortress/fortified villages) that have alike. So in Norway, Denmark
and of course in other parts of Europe where Scandinavians been.
Inger E
VtSkier
> On Fri, 26 May 2006 20:27:48 GMT, in sci.archaeology, IE J wrote:
>
>>
>> Well now the naysayers better keep silent until they listen to this. I doubt
>> that the Newport tower is Scandinavian as much as I doubt the dating from
>> layers that definitely were mixed before the samples were taken, but I do
>> know that there exist a painting before the officially suppesed time, a
>> painting on which you can see the tower at a distans.
>
> And the painting is where? Can you identify it? What's the date of the
> painting, the painter, etc? Is it this one?
>
> http://www.redwoodlibrary.org/tower/frame2.htm
> or this one?
> http://lithic.50g.com/ri.htm
>
> I doubt that the
>> Portugeseans built it, but have anyone looked closer at Irish roundchurches
>> and round towers from before 1500?
>> <www.stevebulman.f9.co.uk/ churches/norfolk.html>
>
> What's the point of this url? There are a lot of churches in Norfolk!
>
>> <library.ucsc.edu/slides/ graphics/Ireland.jpg>
>
> Can't find the server.
Cut and paste the url into your browser, then take out the space
just before "graphics". It will work fine.
>
> Doug
IE J
It does. Apart from which Doug doesn't seem to have one clue neither what
the significance for round Irish churches built up to 1500 nor which type of
painting(didn't write drawing) that explorers made on their voyages. A
hint - some can be find in French explorers diarys or at least you can find
ref to where to look.
The drawing has been presented here many times. The first times I wasn't the
one who refered to an url with it.
I have had enough of feeding Doug over and over without him never looking
closer before he dismiss anything that disturbs his 'not before Columbus'
wall!
Inger E
> >
> > Doug
Peter Alaca
> "VtSkier" skrev i meddelandet
>> Good article, thanks.
>
> No matter that, Doug is definitely on the wrong track. Told all of
> you long ago that there is one Greenlander who returned to Norway,
> married to an Indian woman..... That happened in 1480's. Short after
> King Hakon's warfleet passed Greenland.....
>
> But back to the important things - fortified villages.
> http://wadbring.com/historia/sidor/mosseborg.htm
> please go down to "borgen sedd från norr" and look at the drawing
> where the pallisad is seen as it was.
>
> There are many examples among Sweden's 1100(approx) fornborgar(hill
> forts/fortress/fortified villages) that have alike. So in Norway,
> Denmark and of course in other parts of Europe where Scandinavians
> been.
>
> Inger E
You are an idiot.
VtSkier
> VtSkier wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> I believe that it is not correct to say that there has never
>> been pre-Columbian contact between the Old World and the New.
>
> Who has said that? Whoever did (in the last 50 years or so) is
> ignorant.
Well, Louis Agassiz's legacy is still on the minds
of a lot of people. I'm sure the scientific community
agrees that there certainly was contact. I do think that
the "pro" contact people/writers of the 70's/80's went
a bit overboard with what they wanted to believe.
>> There are just too many anomalies to say this.
>
> Ah. Argument from incredulity. Do you also think biological systems
> have too many contingent elements to have evolved from a pre-cellular
> ancestor?
'scuse me?
Of course not but how does the evolution of biological systems
correlate to the study of movement of human populations?
>> For instance,
>> Greenland was occupied by Europeans for almost 400 years. The
>> colonists built European style houses, mostly of stone, but
>> even stone houses need rafters of wood. Where did the wood
>> come from? Most likely the coast of Labrador or Newfoundland.
>> Greenland never had much in the way of trees, even during the
>> warm period that it was occupied and driftwood would not have
>> been enough. Especially if the roof covering was sod, the
>> rafters would need to be replaced on a regular schedule to
>> keep up with rot.
>
> We know they had set up shop for a few years at L'Anse aux Meadows. I
> suspect they noticed that there were trees in the neighborhood. My
> hunch is that they didn't keep this fact a secret from their pals in
> Greenland. So, yeah, it would be unremarkable if they did harvest
> timber on the mainland of North America.
>
> Didn't stay, though.
Well now. How do we know this for sure? Correct they didn't
"stay" as a society. However, who is to say that individuals
or even small groups didn't stay and get assimilated into
the native societies.
>> Then there is the Kensington stone. Denied legitimacy by the
>> fact that the inscription is not "pure" Old Norse. However,
>> if the date of 13th century is correct, then a thoroughly
>> bastardized version of Old Norse would be expected. This and
>> other artifacts...
>
> ...if shown to be authentic and found in good enough context to be sure
> at least some of them were present in something like the locations in
> which they were said to have been found before ca. 1492, would
> probably...
>
>> ...put Scandinavian people in the Great Lakes
>> region well before Columbus' trip to the Caribbean.
>
> Sorry. Your absolute statements are unwarrented.
Also sorry. In this shorthand which is Usenet, I, like
a lot of people, choose the fewest words possible to
express the idea and sometimes leave out some of the
words necessary to be perfectly correct. I do fully
realize that absolute language in these suppositions
is erroneous.
>> Then there are the Mandans of the Upper Missouri. Catlin found
>> an incidence of red hair, blue eyes and a marked difference
>> in social structure from their neighbors. Too bad they died
>> out before DNA testing could answer some questions.
>
> You are in luck! Well, except for making another erroneous absolute
> statement:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandan
>
> "Beginning in 1837, a major smallpox outbreak reduced the number of
> Mandan to approximately 125.[1] With such meager numbers, the Mandan
> banded together with two neighboring tribes, the Arikara and Hidatsa.
>
> In an effort to establish good relations, the U.S. government founded
> the Fort Berthold Agency to care for the combined tribes. The Agency
> soon set up the Fort Berthold Reservation. With the 1934 Indian
> Reorganization Act, the Mandan officially merged with the Hidatsa and
> the Arikara into the "Three Affiliated Tribes," known as the Mandan,
> Hidatsa and Arikara Nation. About half of the Mandan still reside in
> the area of the reservation, the rest residing around the United States
> and in Canada."
>
> Notice the great loss of Mandan to smallpox. Wouldn't it seem that a
> tribe so heavily influenced genetically by some Welsh would do better
> in the staying-alive smallpox sweepstakes than their neighboring tribes
> without that advantage?
One would think so, but Diamond, in "Guns, Germs and Steel"
implies that an appropriately long isolation is enough to
lose immunity to epidemic diseases.
>> While it's true that a lot of what is written about pre-
>> Columbian New/Old World contact is fable about what the author
>> would like to and like to have us believe, there remains a
>> number of items that makes some kind of contact probable...
>
> ...if it is determined that those items are from the relevant period,
> and their provable context is such that they were more likely than not
> left by folks from the Old World before ca. 1492.
>
> There, that's improved it.
Indeed.
>> How about the Newport, RI round tower? The best explanation
>> I've read is that it's Portuguese from around 1500 plus or
>> minus 50 years.
>
> Read more:
>
> http://www.ramtops.co.uk/newport.html
>
> ...which is a summary of an article by Johannes Hertz, a medieval
> archaeologist and head of the Danish State Antiquary's Archaeological
> Secretariat. It was published in
> the Journal of the Newport Historical Society, Vol 68, Part 2, 1997:
> The History and Mystery of the Old Stone Mill
>
>>From the summary:
>
> "The meat of Hertz's article, though, is the C14 dating of the lime
> mortar. Samples were taken in 1993 in a variety of places and from a
> depth where 'pollution' from repair work could be excluded. These were
> tested and show that the tower was probably built in the middle of the
> 17th century, with a 16th century date not completely excluded."
>
> And this does not require the injection of the Templars, which the
> Portuguese gambit does.
>
While it is popular today to discredit anything to do with
Templars because of recent popular fiction, it is apparently
(see the waffle word "apparently" being correctly used) true
that the Templars morphed into the Order of Christ in Portugal
http://www.thornr.demon.co.uk/kchrist/overview.html
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03698b.htm
This is interesting too...
http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/pt_oxp.html
And Prince Henry was apparently the head of the order in his
time.
http://www.thornr.demon.co.uk/kchrist/phenry.html
Also apparently, the whole age of Portuguese exploration
was fueled by the Order of Christ.
So, if the tower IS Portuguese, then the Templars/Order
of Christ is involved whether we like it or not. If it
isn't Portuguese, then...
By the way, I never said it was Portuguese, I said
that explanation rang the truest of any of them
for me.
(Again from incredulity) I find it hard to believe that
the tower is of Colonial times without record of some
sort having been made and kept. Or at least a "Kilroy
was Here" inscription in the stone.
VtSkier
Uhm, Inger,
The Eastern settlement went extinct about 1350.
The last historical record from Brattahlid was of a
Christian wedding in 1408. The last ship known to
have returned to Europe from Greenland was in 1410.
http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/greenland/
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16928
Where did this "Greenlander" come from in 1480?
(snip)
Tom McDonald
VtSkier wrote:
> Tom McDonald wrote:
> > VtSkier wrote:
<snip>
> >> There are just too many anomalies to say this.
> >
> > Ah. Argument from incredulity. Do you also think biological systems
> > have too many contingent elements to have evolved from a pre-cellular
> > ancestor?
>
> 'scuse me?
>
> Of course not but how does the evolution of biological systems
> correlate to the study of movement of human populations?
You were using the logical fallacy of argument from personal
incredulity, viz. you think there are 'just too many anomolies' to say
there weren't visits from the Old World to the New.
This is the logical fallacy at the heart of the Intelligent Design
schmegeggie. I gave you that example of the fallacy to help you see
your own use of it.
That's the correlation.
> >> For instance,
> >> Greenland was occupied by Europeans for almost 400 years. The
> >> colonists built European style houses, mostly of stone, but
> >> even stone houses need rafters of wood. Where did the wood
> >> come from? Most likely the coast of Labrador or Newfoundland.
> >> Greenland never had much in the way of trees, even during the
> >> warm period that it was occupied and driftwood would not have
> >> been enough. Especially if the roof covering was sod, the
> >> rafters would need to be replaced on a regular schedule to
> >> keep up with rot.
> >
> > We know they had set up shop for a few years at L'Anse aux Meadows. I
> > suspect they noticed that there were trees in the neighborhood. My
> > hunch is that they didn't keep this fact a secret from their pals in
> > Greenland. So, yeah, it would be unremarkable if they did harvest
> > timber on the mainland of North America.
> >
> > Didn't stay, though.
>
> Well now. How do we know this for sure? Correct they didn't
> "stay" as a society. However, who is to say that individuals
> or even small groups didn't stay and get assimilated into
> the native societies.
Might have. Not a scrap of evidence that they did. More importantly, no
evidence that they made the slightest difference to the culture(s) into
which they notionally assimilated. A difference that makes no
difference is hardly a difference, eh?
It is possible. Likely, even. But they did not die out, as you
suggested. This is fairly common knowledge. But the myth of the extinct
Mandan is a staple of a certain type of 'history' that likes to gild
the lily as regards white (or black or yellow) folks mixing with the
pre-Columbian American locals; or at least coming and doing neat stuff,
then disappearing without a (very clear) trace. I reacted more to the
probable source of your 'lost Mandan' thing than to you.
Doug, as he usually does, gave a better reply to the whole 'Welsh
Mandan' bugbear than I. Suffice it to say that this, as with most such
early white observations of Indian cultures that have been used
latterly to promote some diffusionist idea or other, the 'Welsh Mandan'
whotchacallit only provides support for diffusionist ideas if one
cherry-picks the data, and ignores the rest. Although it is not unknown
for diffusion advocates to use hand-waving and muddying the waters as
well.
Look, I'm all for investigating the possibility of significant
pre-Columbian contact between the Old World and the New. I merely
insist that the evidence be subjected to the same scrutiny, and the
underlying hypothesis be capable of predicting future discoveries, in
the same manner as any other archaeological or historical possibility.
(This last, misconstrued, earns me a 'naysayer' badge from the Inger
and Septic Guild. Soon I will be an Eagle in their shadow Guild. Then
let them say me nay! ;-) )
<snip>
> > And this does not require the injection of the Templars, which the
> > Portuguese gambit does.
>
> While it is popular today to discredit anything to do with
> Templars because of recent popular fiction, it is apparently
> (see the waffle word "apparently" being correctly used)
Thank you. I honestly appreciate appropriate tentativeness on the ngs,
especially in this sort of discussion. So many folks have carved out
absolutist positions that one cannot automatically assume that a given
poster (absent long experience of her/him) is a sane person writing in
shorthand, or a nutball (one one issue, at least) writing his/her
veriest belief.
> true
> that the Templars morphed into the Order of Christ in Portugal
>
> http://www.thornr.demon.co.uk/kchrist/overview.html
> http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03698b.htm
> This is interesting too...
> http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/pt_oxp.html
>
> And Prince Henry was apparently the head of the order in his
> time.
>
> http://www.thornr.demon.co.uk/kchrist/phenry.html
>
> Also apparently, the whole age of Portuguese exploration
> was fueled by the Order of Christ.
>
> So, if the tower IS Portuguese, then the Templars/Order
> of Christ is involved whether we like it or not.
Oh please Dog, if this thread takes off on the Templars, will you
please promise to take it to s.h.m where it belongs (bringing
archaeologically-relevant tidbits back to s.a. ONLY when they do have
an archaeological purpose). Or promise to shoot me? Either one.
> If it
> isn't Portuguese, then...
>
> By the way, I never said it was Portuguese, I said
> that explanation rang the truest of any of them
> for me.
What is your take on the difference between the 1500 mol date you gave,
and the mid-17th century date from the article summary? I'm happier
reading it at closer to first hand from a person involved in the
dating.
> (Again from incredulity) I find it hard to believe that
> the tower is of Colonial times without record of some
> sort having been made and kept. Or at least a "Kilroy
> was Here" inscription in the stone.
Try Doug's Archaeology Site:
Look at the articles about Newport Tower.
Also try the Hall of Ma'at:
Especially the articles toward the top of this search of Hall of Ma'at:
Nice to have information, ain't it!
Peter Alaca
> Uhm, Inger,
> The Eastern settlement went extinct about 1350.
> The last historical record from Brattahlid was of a
> Christian wedding in 1408. The last ship known to
> have returned to Europe from Greenland was in 1410.
> http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/greenland/
> http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16928
>
> Where did this "Greenlander" come from in 1480?
> (snip)
All your arguments in this thread are more than
well known in scia and shm.
You better take a day off and read the archieves.
--
p.a.
Peter Alaca
news:1148688488....@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com
> VtSkier wrote:
>> Tom McDonald wrote:
>>> We know they had set up shop for a few years at L'Anse aux Meadows.
>>> I suspect they noticed that there were trees in the neighborhood. My
>>> hunch is that they didn't keep this fact a secret from their pals in
>>> Greenland. So, yeah, it would be unremarkable if they did harvest
>>> timber on the mainland of North America.
>>>
>>> Didn't stay, though.
>> Well now. How do we know this for sure? Correct they didn't
>> "stay" as a society. However, who is to say that individuals
>> or even small groups didn't stay and get assimilated into
>> the native societies.
> Might have. Not a scrap of evidence that they did. More importantly,
> no evidence that they made the slightest difference to the culture(s)
> into which they notionally assimilated. A difference that makes no
> difference is hardly a difference, eh?
Robert McGhee (1984)
"Contact between Native North Americans and the
Medieval Norse: A Review of the Evidence"
American Antiquity, Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 4-26
http://tinyurl.com/mll3j (jstor)
Abstract
" Historical and archaeological evidence relating
to Norse activities in the New World early in
the second millennium A.D. is reviewed,
together with archaeological evidence relating
to contemporaneous aboriginal occupations of
the regions probably reached by the Norse.
The Norse probably contacted Indian popula-
tions in southern Labrador and Newfoundland,
Dorset Palaeoeskimos in northern Labrador,
and Thule Eskimos in Greenland and perhaps
in the eastern Canadian Arctic. Speculation on
the nature of relationsips between the Norse
and these groups is presented, and it is
concluded that occasional contacts involving
both trade and plundering probably occurred
over a period of several centuries.
There is no evidence to indicate that these
contacts had any major influence on aboriginal
North American populations, and it is argued
that such influences are unlikely to have
occurred. The most important result of contact
between these groups was the prevention of
European colonization of the New World for
half a millennium. "
--
p.a.
VtSkier
> VtSkier wrote:
>> Tom McDonald wrote:
>>> VtSkier wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>>> There are just too many anomalies to say this.
>>> Ah. Argument from incredulity. Do you also think biological systems
>>> have too many contingent elements to have evolved from a pre-cellular
>>> ancestor?
>> 'scuse me?
>>
>> Of course not but how does the evolution of biological systems
>> correlate to the study of movement of human populations?
>
> You were using the logical fallacy of argument from personal
> incredulity, viz. you think there are 'just too many anomolies' to say
> there weren't visits from the Old World to the New.
>
> This is the logical fallacy at the heart of the Intelligent Design
> schmegeggie. I gave you that example of the fallacy to help you see
> your own use of it.
>
> That's the correlation.
Aha, OK, point taken. However, in various areas of questioning,
taking an incredulous viewpoint is often a starting point from
which you search for facts. Criminal investigation comes to mind.
By the way "schmegeggie" is a great word for ID.
>
>>>> For instance,
>>>> Greenland was occupied by Europeans for almost 400 years. The
>>>> colonists built European style houses, mostly of stone, but
>>>> even stone houses need rafters of wood. Where did the wood
>>>> come from? Most likely the coast of Labrador or Newfoundland.
>>>> Greenland never had much in the way of trees, even during the
>>>> warm period that it was occupied and driftwood would not have
>>>> been enough. Especially if the roof covering was sod, the
>>>> rafters would need to be replaced on a regular schedule to
>>>> keep up with rot.
>>> We know they had set up shop for a few years at L'Anse aux Meadows. I
>>> suspect they noticed that there were trees in the neighborhood. My
>>> hunch is that they didn't keep this fact a secret from their pals in
>>> Greenland. So, yeah, it would be unremarkable if they did harvest
>>> timber on the mainland of North America.
>>>
>>> Didn't stay, though.
>> Well now. How do we know this for sure? Correct they didn't
>> "stay" as a society. However, who is to say that individuals
>> or even small groups didn't stay and get assimilated into
>> the native societies.
>
> Might have. Not a scrap of evidence that they did. More importantly, no
> evidence that they made the slightest difference to the culture(s) into
> which they notionally assimilated. A difference that makes no
> difference is hardly a difference, eh?
Unless some genetic anomaly shows up later, eh?
Good article. Just the facts. 'course the facts only engender
further speculation. Main fact, nobody really knows.
> Also try the Hall of Ma'at:
>
> http://www.hallofmaat.com/
>
> Especially the articles toward the top of this search of Hall of Ma'at:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/k35dd
>
> Nice to have information, ain't it!
Yeahbut, still, nobody knows.
Frustratin'
VtSkier
Maybe so, but does Inger know the arguments?
And for Inger, where did the Greenlander come from
in 1480?
t(nospam)kavanagh
<snip>
Nothing worth commenting on.
tk
Tom McDonald
Look, you seem like a nice guy. But if you start another vast
outpouring of Ingerish Greenlandia, we may have to kill you.
The Archaeology Cabal (TINAC) will take this up in a week or so.
<snip>
IE J
Correction they did stay as a society but not in L'anse Meadows. Written
sources as well of the past as well documentation signed by the first
English governor confirms that there were many more Swedes south of todays
NY all way down to Florida then who sailed from Sveden to establish the so
called 'nya Sverige'. Look at who many farms, cows and horses was stolen by
a decret from Swedes to give to the newcoming Englishmen. This part is due
to a very specific factor which I refered to before dealing with Erik XIV
and Elizabeth I.
What's been sadly missed in discussion here was that Elizabeth's so called
Dear John letter was written after a horseman in haste had been able to stop
Erik from going with an escader of 5 ships to England to be married. Erik
had only hours left before sailing when he thus were called back in haste to
Stockholm.
Elisabeth had at that time among other maps of NA Desliens 1544 map(one
example of it still is to be seen in her archieves) were Norwegian
settlements in Labrador is seen on same place where some of the
discussed/disputed so called Late-Dorset ruins....
The Swedish area in NA had been up in the negotiations for the planned
marriage.
The Norwegian had at that time, actually in 1490's moved to islands in the
southern parts of Hudson Bay. Some had in mid 1500's moved to northern
Visconsin...
The Danes had areas north and west of Hudson Bay and areas in south western
corner of Hudson Bay.
All these can be seen on a French map as late as 1666.
(Eric have you had a chance to look closer on the map before I come public
with it?)
VtSkier wrote:
However, who is to say that individuals
> or even small groups didn't stay and get assimilated into
> the native societies.
>
> >> Then there is the Kensington stone. Denied legitimacy by the
> >> fact that the inscription is not "pure" Old Norse. However,
> >> if the date of 13th century is correct, then a thoroughly
> >> bastardized version of Old Norse would be expected. This and
> >> other artifacts...
> >
> > ...if shown to be authentic and found in good enough context to be sure
> > at least some of them were present in something like the locations in
> > which they were said to have been found before ca. 1492, would
> > probably...
That's been shown many times over - go for example back looking at the cave
I refered to and sent url:s for close to Twin City. I sent that 7 years ago
first time.
Look at the green bead and please take a look at the firesteel. Once I sent
you all an url for that as well as an url from the identical one found in a
dateable site on Aaland island, Finland.... dated to have been made in
1340's. Which btw correspond very well to the dating of the site in the
cave.......
Especially when a group arrived from Greenland where we don't have any notes
of larger smallpox emidemies between 1350 and 1435......
Inger E
IE J
correction the wedding was in 1409 according to the annal. They weren't
allowed to get married before announcing their wedding at the St Olof's
mässan, a specific merchandise trade/fair which took place at the time of St
Olof's day. They were betrothal in church 1408. And they were by no means
the last noted persons in the annals which goes to 1435. The cheese in the
basements where the visiting sailors were allowed to see and buy from were
shipped to Helsingborg together with furs and whiteheaded eagle..... that is
in one of the shipsdocument so many haven't bothered looking for....
The last note I know of recieved from the Greenlanders arrived in mid
1500's. That I not only know from 'own' findings but also from a Catholic
Church representant who contacted me a few years ago asking which years and
documents I was aware of and then confirmed that we had same information -
he/they from origins.....
THAT I will not give more information about here.
Subjectline still is Fortified villages.
VtSkier wrote:
>
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16928
>
> Where did this "Greenlander" come from in 1480?
> (snip)
That will be revieled in due time.
for the moment I am discussing Scandinavians and fortified villages in NA
which no one here at least been able to show that they have taken every
factor into consideration before dismissing them.
Inger E
IE J
Not true. We are at least 30 persons on both side of the Atlantic who knows.
Some of us have known it longer than others. Others known since they tested
remains of artifacts found.
Inger E
IE J
IE J
"t(nospam)kavanagh" <"tkavanag"@(nospam)indiana.edu> skrev i meddelandet
news:e58d9a$t1m$1...@rainier.uits.indiana.edu...
tk,
I think it would be wise for you to rethink this. First you need to get hold
of excavation reports from Scandinavian sites with same structure, same type
of holes for poles and same type of pallisad. You may not like this, but
when you look closer into it those comment of yours can't help falling to
pieces.
Inger E
Doug Weller
And you know that Indian was a Mandan? You never cease to amaze me. And
your claim is evidently that they were the ancestors of the 19th century
Mandan. How did that come about?
>
>But back to the important things - fortified villages.
>http://wadbring.com/historia/sidor/mosseborg.htm
>please go down to "borgen sedd från norr" and look at the drawing where the
>pallisad is seen as it was.
>
>There are many examples among Sweden's 1100(approx) fornborgar(hill
>forts/fortress/fortified villages) that have alike. So in Norway, Denmark
>and of course in other parts of Europe where Scandinavians been.
>
The Indians weren't smart enough to invent fortified villages by
themselves?
Doug Weller
Kirsten Seaver, who Inger will tell you doesn't know diddley squat, thinks
there were Greenlanders until the end of the 15th century. My point is
that she is talking nonsense if she thinks her claim has anything to do
with what I wrote about the Mandan.
Doug Weller
Inger is lying again. She knows I have no 'not before Columbus' beliefs.
I am very sure that Scandinavians reached North America long before
Columbus.
And if you look at my article here:
http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=99
I start the article by writing
"Before 1492 at least one group of Europeans, probably two, visited North
America. The first is the Norse, whose visits we know about through
evidence of trade, the Sagas, and the remains of one short-term
settlement. The second group is less certain, but it is very likely that
sailors from Bristol were fishing off North American coasts before 1492."
So, it is clear that Inger is lying by claiming I have a 'not before
Columbus wall'.
And I have looked in great detail at pictures of buildings Inger and
others have suggested relate somehow to the Newport Tower. Inger's latest
(which didn't work last night) at
http://library.ucsc.edu/slides/graphics/Ireland.jpg
looks nothing like the Newport Tower.
And she hasn't answered my questions about the painting or the relevance
of the Norfolk url.
Doug Weller
Ah yes, the Templar copy of what they thought was the Holy Grail. :-)
Uwe Müller
"Horace LaBadie" <hwlab...@nospam.highstream.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:hwlabadiejr-1995...@sn-radius.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
> In article <1148668853.4...@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Tom McDonald" <kil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Peter Alaca wrote:
> > > Tom McDonald wrote:
> > > news:1148662101.6...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
> > > > Peter Alaca wrote:
> > > >> Alan Crozier wrote:
> > >
> > > >>> I myself believe that the natives of North America were
> > > >>> perfectly capable of building such structures without the
> > > >>> influence of white men from Europe.
> > >
> > > >> What is she trying to say?
> > > >>
> > > >> What I am trying to say with this collection
> > > >> of Indian fortified villages?
> > >
> > > >> http://tinyurl.com/juktk
> > > >> http://tinyurl.com/e5w5u
> > > >> http://tinyurl.com/f5qdr
> > > >> http://tinyurl.com/g99xk
> > > >> http://tinyurl.com/frmj3
> > > >> http://tinyurl.com/l2umb
> > >
> > > > And:
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/rj3kh
> > > > http://www.madison.k12.wi.us/whitehorse/ss/intro_files/introdu7.jpe
> > > > http://www.madison.k12.wi.us/whitehorse/ss/intro_files/introdu4.jpe
> > > > http://www.madison.k12.wi.us/whitehorse/ss/intro_files/introdu9.jpe
> > > > http://www.madison.k12.wi.us/whitehorse/ss/intro_files/introdu8.jpe
> > >
> > > That is an amazing settlement
> > > See also http://tinyurl.com/hhrz7
> > > The Greenlanders did a good job there ;-)
> > >
> > > cf
> > > Avila, Spain, 12th c walls
> > > http://www.travelthewondersofspain.com/Avila-Lg.jpg
> > >
> > > Biskupin, Poland, late bronze/early iron age
> > > http://www.biskupin.pl/eng/index.php
> >
> > Well, dog my cat! They are just about identical with Aztlan!
> >
> > My apologies, Inger. I've now seen the light! Vikes did everything,
> > everywhere, everywhen.
> >
> > They are gods. And you are their prophet, Inger E. Johanssen (pbuy)
>
> Next we will be burning down embassies.
Viking embassies?
have fun
Uwe Mueller
IE J
"Uwe Müller" <uwemu...@go4more.de> skrev i meddelandet
news:e596sg$7k5$1...@online.de...
Horace is once again out of his own field, that's what's to be expacted. You
Uwe almost hit the needle's head.
Inger E
>
>
Peter Alaca
Yes she does, but she ignores them if they don't fit her believe
> And for Inger, where did the Greenlander come from
> in 1480?
--
p.a.
Peter Alaca
> [...]
> for the moment I am discussing Scandinavians and fortified villages
> in NA which no one here at least been able to show that they have
> taken every factor into consideration before dismissing them.
It is to you to prove that the (any) fortified vilages
in NA are of Scandinavian origine.
And you still have to explain this insane statement:
" There are many examples among Sweden's
1100(approx) fornborgar(hillforts/fortress/fortified
villages) that have alike. So in Norway, Denmark
*and of course in other parts of Europe where
Scandinavians been*."
(my emphasis)
--
p.a.
Peter Alaca
Peter Alaca
Uwe Müller
"Peter Alaca" <P.A...@556.nn> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:447836f4$0$99943$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl...
Never really thought about that. A lot, I think. And there are numerous soil
colourations that have been named postholes, without any actual information
about the use of the pit.
There was a lot of creative thinking ., when, for Germany, the
posthole-concept was developed during excavations at the german Limes by
Kiekebusch at the start of the 20th c. There are different ways to place,
excavate and fill postholes, the post themselves may have been left inside
or taken out afterwards (leaving different strata), they may have been
coated with substances or roasted to prevent rot, ... All that will show in
the ground, when preservation conditions are good.
There can be different types of postholes in one building, as there are
examples with different types of walls in one building. Just about any
settlement had raised, level and sunken buildings, using different systems
of support.
The kind of argument of assuming a connection between similar construction
technics, would have to show a regularity of constuction first, a
professionell builders guild at least. But even then constructions differ a
lot, as we know from settlement excavations. If house building was done on a
personal basis, or a communal event, post holes would differ a lot even
inside one village.
To make an archaeological argument from this, it would have to be shown how
postholes looked in NA at the time, in the region, lets say at least 50 for
each main type. Then show that the postholes you want to connect differ in
basic ways from the postholes from NA, and that the different technics do
not come from the regions in contact with the area.
If you can proove, that the Norse where in NA at the time, in the area, this
would strengthen the argument about posthole types being connected to the
Norse. But a different type of posthole cannot proove Norse contacts with
NA, unless it spreads, and appears in larger numbers.
have fun
Uwe Müller
t(nospam)kavanagh
You should do the same for any NA site you propose commenting on. Not
just purdy pictures.
tk
IE J
Thanks for a real good answer Uwe.
I have more to add to this mostly dealing with excavation reports from
palisades close to mounds dated to 800's-1400's. And I will add that later
on.
What I at present have in mind is if there are any good excavation reports
in works or articles written in German from later mounds. Noticed something
in reports from Ohio monds which I have been trying to find a good English
or German work showing 'our' migration age to viking age mounds in Europe.
Haven't been successful. I have some in Swedish. edited works by RAÄ i
Östergötland and in Västra Götaland. But only minor parts of articles and
works been translated so I haven't been able to give a good 'text' to
photo-images I have at hand.
Inger E
>
>
IE J
read Uwe's lines.
Inger E
"t(nospam)kavanagh" <"tkavanag"@(nospam)indiana.edu> skrev i meddelandet
news:e59lj4$agg$1...@rainier.uits.indiana.edu...
Peter Alaca
And the necessary condition is of course
that the 'style' of the postholes is unique,
or at least characteristic for a culture.
And I don't think there is much more variation
then vertical, diagonal, round and 'square'.
--
p.a.
Uwe Müller
"Peter Alaca" <P.A...@556.nn> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
Usually they are somewhat oval at the top, becaue the post rests on the rim,
when it is let down. Usually they are vertical, but some are leaning to one
side, as if the post had not been placed upright. Depending on the ground
and on the tools used for digging it will be more or less regular in shape,
it can be shaped like a sack, like a trough, like a cylinder, like a funnel
(comes from removing the post), ...
There are sometimes stones added to the filling, or the posts are placed on
flat stones. The same ground can be refilled, or different material added or
substituted (postholes filled with burned clay from wattle and daub walls).
There are lots of features that can be distinguished, but none of them can
be shown to be impossible to occur or invent independently.
have fun
Uwe Mueller
Alan Crozier
news:aaee725ums1cisk2s...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 26 May 2006 11:03:40 -0400, in sci.archaeology, VtSkier wrote:
>
> >Alan Crozier wrote:
> >> "VtSkier" <VtS...@nospam.net> wrote in message
> >(snip)
> >>>
> >>> How about the Newport, RI round tower? The best
> >> explanation
> >>> I've read is that it's Portuguese from around 1500 plus or
> >>> minus 50 years.
> >>
> >>
> >> Alan
> >>
> >From:
> >http://www.apol.net/dightonrock/portuguese_tower_of_newport.htm
> >is the following
> >
> >"Radiocarbon Dating
> >of Newport Tower
> >
> >In 1993 a Danish group, lead by Jorge Siemonsen, came to Newport to
> >collect very small samples (about 28) of the mortar-cement of Newport
> >Tower in order to evaluate its date by determining the age of the
carbon
> >dioxide that was caught inside the mortar when the tower was being
built.
> >
> >They took the samples to Denmark and after a few months revealed that
> >their studies of the carbon 14 radioactive, indicate that the tower
> >could not have been built by the Vikings nor by the Benedict Arnold
and
> >that the most probable date of its construction was around 1500, plus
50
> >or minus 50 years, therefore within the period of the Miguel Corte
> >Real's entrance in the Narragansett Bay, in 1502.
> >
> >This press release caused a big storm not only among the defenders of
> >the Vikings, but even more intense among the Arnoldists."
>
>
> I don't know about the press release, but since then they have
> consistently said it is probably colonial. The latest report I have by
Jan
> Heinemeier and Högne Jungner (Newport History, Vol 70, part 2, 2000,
page
> 59) says:
>
> "calibration of the mean age of the mortar samples from the Newport
Tower
> yields a calendar age of AD 1665; when the measuring uncertainty is
taken
> into account, the calibrated time interval corresponding to 1 sigma or
68%
> confidence level is AD 1651-1679, to 2 sigma or 95% confidence level
AD
> 1635-1698 calibrated. The Newport Tower is most likely colonial, and a
> pre-Columbian age is almost certainly excluded."
I got the following message from Scott Wolter:
"The 1993 testing program performed on the Newport Tower was severely
flawed since they took powder samples of the mortar and they were not
secure. We do this type of testing every day in our industry and the
hammer drill method of extraction they used is inappropriate. The only
way to perform such a testing program is to obtain a core sample (1-2"
diameter would do it) through the base of one of the columns near grade.
This way uncontaminated samples could be obtained that would yield
accurate test results. That tower has probably been re-pointed numerous
times and you would have no idea what you were sampling with a hammer
drill. A core sample would also allow for petrographic analysis of the
mortar (ASTM:C 856) and stone (ASTM:C 295). If you really want to know
what's going on with the Tower, that's what needs to be done!"
Alan
I'm just the messenger
--
Alan Crozier
Lund
Sweden
Peter Alaca
Yes, I forgot the digging and the filling. Only thought
of the traces of the posts themself.
--
p.a.
Alan Crozier
news:TqPdg.2156$E02...@newsb.telia.net...
Then, of course, if you want to rule out the possiblity that anyone but
Iron Age Scandinavians could have built these forts in North America,
you have to prove that the postholes could not possibly have been made
by native Americans, or by Irish monks, or by Welsh settlers, or by
Portuguese explorers, or by Chinese, etc.
In other words, tk has to read a lot of archaeological reports.
(Unless he believes a priori that only Scandinavians could be
responsible)
;-)
Alan
IE J
Correct in most ways, but factors/facts that one by one can't be shown to be
impossible to occur or invent indepently will together where all
factors/facts including sizes and figures for how many and where holes been
placed give an other indication - not proof but indication that a diffusion
at least can't be roled out.
That together with placement of houses or buildings or earth put in 'walls',
artifacts that you normally wouldn't think twice about in other context
and/or periods strengthen the possibility.
Inger E
>
>
>
Horace LaBadie
"Uwe Müller" <uwemu...@go4more.de> wrote:
Yes, except the ones with the Goth Templar chaplains who can carve the
proper runic password on the hill fort wall around the compound.
HWL
Peter Alaca
Inger, if you are talking about postholes in this context,
are you talking about the postholes themselves (like we
do) or are you talking about the floorplan as indicated
by postholes?
And (again) what do you mean with 'diffusion'?
> That together with placement of houses or buildings or earth put in
> 'walls', artifacts that you normally wouldn't think twice about in
> other context and/or periods strengthen the possibility.
--
p.a.
Bryn
<P.A...@556.nn> writes
Dammit!
I thought it said "Fornicated"...
--
Bryn
Yes!
I admit it!
I am the man who shot Bambi's Mum....
And it was me smoking on the Grassy Knoll...
Eric Stevens
wrote:
'pattern' Peter, but I'm sure you know that.
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
Nevertheless there are usually distinct local ideas about how houses
are built. See for example
http://www.fcps.k12.va.us/ForestvilleES/classes/Fourth_Grade/villagepage/Longhouse.htm
http://www.malaysiasite.nl/images/longhouse.gif
http://tinyurl.com/fbgqz
>
>To make an archaeological argument from this, it would have to be shown how
>postholes looked in NA at the time, in the region, lets say at least 50 for
>each main type. Then show that the postholes you want to connect differ in
>basic ways from the postholes from NA, and that the different technics do
>not come from the regions in contact with the area.
>
>If you can proove, that the Norse where in NA at the time, in the area, this
>would strengthen the argument about posthole types being connected to the
>Norse. But a different type of posthole cannot proove Norse contacts with
>NA, unless it spreads, and appears in larger numbers.
>
While Inger hasn't made it this time, I think her argument has been
that somewhere in NA there is a cluster of longhouses with both layout
and construction atypical of the traditional practices of the locals
but very similar to those of the norse. I've never seen the actual
evidence for this.
Eric Stevens
t(nospam)kavanagh
Nor has she.
tk
Peter Alaca
> While Inger hasn't made it this time, I think her argument has been
> that somewhere in NA there is a cluster of longhouses with both layout
> and construction atypical of the traditional practices of the locals
> but very similar to those of the norse. I've never seen the actual
> evidence for this.
Because there isn't any.
I'll come back later (tomorrow?) with
the opinion of an expert.
--
p.a.
Tom McDonald
Eric Stevens wrote:
<snip>
> While Inger hasn't made it this time, I think her argument has been
> that somewhere in NA there is a cluster of longhouses with both layout
> and construction atypical of the traditional practices of the locals
> but very similar to those of the norse. I've never seen the actual
> evidence for this.
tk and Peter pointed out that she hasn't shown any indication that she
has the goods.
IIRC, when she's buited this about before, the best guess about her
hints have been quite normal longhouses which have known in situ
development histories. But of course, her hints suck such hard rocks
that she can 'no, that's not what I meant' to anything we present.
Perhaps you can get it out of her.
deowll
"Peter Alaca" <P.A...@556.nn> wrote in message
news:4476e2f9$0$85795$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl...
> Alan Crozier wrote: news:_AAdg.2041$E02...@newsb.telia.net>> news:H6Adg.2039$E02...@newsb.telia.net...
>>> one of all the artifacts and type of ruins I never seen
>>>
>>> In for example:
>>>
>> http://www.uiowa.edu/~anthro/paleopathology/drybones/ch1.html
>>> one can find more than one interesting detail from the
>> text which in itself
>>> would have been good looking closer at, but that's not
>> what I am heading to,
>>> it's to drawings and photos like these:
>>>
>>>
>> http://www.uiowa.edu/~anthro/paleopathology/drybones/images/1-13.jpg -
>> a
>>> drawing which could have been made elsewhere in the world
>> looking almost
>>> identical.
>>>
>>>
>> http://www.uiowa.edu/~anthro/paleopathology/drybones/images/1-2.jpg
>> view
>>> from the site which also look almost identical to many
>> here in Europe.
>>>
>>> not to mention this air-photo:
>>>
>> http://www.uiowa.edu/~anthro/paleopathology/drybones/images/1-20.jpg
>>>
>>> What I wonder is if archaeologists in NA have any
>> knowledge what so ever re.
>>> the 'fornborg' ruins in for example Sweden?
>>> For example:
>>> http://leifgustavsson.nu/books/category.asp?id=14
>>> www.kulturarvostergotland.se
>>>
>>> I guess you ask what a 'fornborg' is. Here you have some
>> answers on the
>>> photos:
>>> <www.h.lst.se/.../ 10_vad_ar_fornborg.htm>
>>> <www.arkitekturmuseet.se/. ../foton/eketorp.jpg>
>>> <www.gotlandshistoria.com/ images/fornborg_1.jpg>
>>
>>
>> None of these links work because the link was incompletely
>> copied from the Google Images search, with /.../ instead of
>> essential details. Here are the correct links for the first
>> two:
>> http://www.h.lst.se/h/amnen/Varldsarvet/10_vad_ar_fornborg.htm
>> http://www.arkitekturmuseet.se/ung/utstallning/permanent/bilder/foton/eketorp.jpg
>> The third link is out of date but the picture can still be
>> seen if you search for fornborg (=ringfort) at Google
>> Images.
>>
>> A search for "ringfort" and "ring fort" will yield images of
>> forts of many kinds from diferent parts of the world, to
>> broaden the discussion.
>>
>>
>>> While I do understand that naysayers dismiss this and
>> everything alike
>>> without looking twice,
>>> I on the other hand think that it would be valuable to
>> have all fortificated
>>> 'villages' in NA marked on a map with notes of how far
>> from a creek a river
>>> or a lake and in which type of terrain they are made.
>> Without comparing such
>>> findings in NA with the Old world many conclusions drawn
>> might be invalid in
>>> the long run.
>>
>>
>> I myself believe that the natives of North America were
>> perfectly capable of building such structures without the
>> influence of white men from Europe.
>>
>>
>
> I miss the point in Inger's post.
> What is she trying to say?
>
> What I am trying to say with this collection
> of Indian fortified villages?
>
> http://tinyurl.com/juktk
> http://tinyurl.com/e5w5u
> http://tinyurl.com/f5qdr
> http://tinyurl.com/g99xk
> http://tinyurl.com/frmj3
> http://tinyurl.com/l2umb
>
> p.a.
>
I don't know. I did notice that Indians seem to have missed the gate idea.
deowll
> been pre-Columbian contact between the Old World and the New.
>
> There are just too many anomalies to say this. For instance,
> Greenland was occupied by Europeans for almost 400 years. The
> colonists built European style houses, mostly of stone, but
> even stone houses need rafters of wood. Where did the wood
> come from? Most likely the coast of Labrador or Newfoundland.
> Greenland never had much in the way of trees, even during the
> warm period that it was occupied and driftwood would not have
> been enough. Especially if the roof covering was sod, the
> rafters would need to be replaced on a regular schedule to
> keep up with rot.
>
You may have a point about the above. Considering the climate of Greenland
some wood might be left to check.
> Then there is the Kensington stone. Denied legitimacy by the
> fact that the inscription is not "pure" Old Norse. However,
> if the date of 13th century is correct, then a thoroughly
> bastardized version of Old Norse would be expected. This and
> other artifacts put Scandinavian people in the Great Lakes
> region well before Columbus' trip to the Caribbean.
>
> Then there are the Mandans of the Upper Missouri. Catlin found
> an incidence of red hair, blue eyes and a marked difference
> in social structure from their neighbors. Too bad they died
> out before DNA testing could answer some questions.
>
> While it's true that a lot of what is written about pre-
> Columbian New/Old World contact is fable about what the author
> would like to and like to have us believe, there remains a
> number of items that makes some kind of contact probable.
>
> How about the Newport, RI round tower? The best explanation
> I've read is that it's Portuguese from around 1500 plus or
> minus 50 years.
I think most of the rest is more or less total fuzz as in make of it what
ever you wish but what any of it means is ambiguous. You are most likely
correct that some sort of incidental contact did occur. Not enough to allow
the Indians to get hit with European and African diseases before 1497
however. That's very strong evidence that the contact was extremely
incidental.
deowll
>> fact that the inscription is not "pure" Old Norse. However,
>> if the date of 13th century is correct, then a thoroughly
>> bastardized version of Old Norse would be expected. This and
>> other artifacts put Scandinavian people in the Great Lakes
>> region well before Columbus' trip to the Caribbean.
>>
>> Then there are the Mandans of the Upper Missouri. Catlin found
>> an incidence of red hair, blue eyes and a marked difference
>> in social structure from their neighbors. Too bad they died
>> out before DNA testing could answer some questions.
>>
>> While it's true that a lot of what is written about pre-
>> Columbian New/Old World contact is fable about what the author
>> would like to and like to have us believe, there remains a
>> number of items that makes some kind of contact probable.
>>
>> How about the Newport, RI round tower? The best explanation
>> I've read is that it's Portuguese from around 1500 plus or
>> minus 50 years.
>
> doubt
> that the Newport tower is Scandinavian as much as I doubt the dating from
> layers that definitely were mixed before the samples were taken, but I do
> know that there exist a painting before the officially suppesed time, a
> painting on which you can see the tower at a distans. I doubt that the
> Portugeseans built it, but have anyone looked closer at Irish
> roundchurches
> and round towers from before 1500?
> <www.stevebulman.f9.co.uk/ churches/norfolk.html>
>
> <library.ucsc.edu/slides/ graphics/Ireland.jpg>
>
> Inger E
>
>
>
>
I know this is going to come as a horrid shock but people all over the
planet are still building round towers for all sorts of reasons. That
somebody built a round tower proves that somebody built a round tower.
IE J
"Bryn" <Scotland-...@finhall.demon.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:faO10bAx...@finhall.demon.co.uk...
Hi Bryn,
that reminds me of a partly dirty story circling Gothenburg last year. In a
monestry somewhere in Scotland(yes we do have Scottish stories circling from
time to time. guess it's an 'inheritance' since the last time the Scots came
here to settle in Gothenburg) a new protelyt to become a munk. He was placed
among the monks who copied old handwritten texts. He helped as much as he
could but one day he asked: Why are you copying text from already copied
documents? That's the way it's always been done he was told. The origins is
in the inner room of our Library's archieve and only the Abbot A and a few
others are allowed to go there.
The very next day the young proselyt were talking to the Abbot A and
couldn't help asking him same question. The Abbot A said, it's so it always
been done. And the proselyt didn't think more about it until the morning
after when Abbot A wasn't seen. The monks and the proselyt search the
buildings. Finally they came to the inner parts of the Library and the door
was open into the inner room. There they saw the Abbot with tears falling
down as pearls from a broken necklace. They asked what's up and the Abbot
answered - the origin said 'celebrate' not 'celibate'....
Inger E
IE J
IE J
You have seen one part of it when you looked at the maps some of us had from
NY the other year. I can send it again later tonight.
Inger E
>
>
>
> Eric Stevens
>
IE J
Sorry tk,
I have been trying to present that picture WITH background information for
the last 11 years. As I said back in autumn 1995, If I should present the
full proof for each part it would take between 32 A4 pages up to 300 for
presenting full analyse of each fact, conclusion etc. That can't be done in
a discussion group. You weren't among those who in 96-98 started to pollute
the discussion critizing me for spelling errors(yes I am dyslextic but that
doesn't make my any less then any of the other scholars of the world who
are. And we are many. some reached to close to Einstein's level) instead of
discussing what I presented.
Inger E
Peter Alaca
> "Peter Alaca" wrote
>> I miss the point in Inger's post.
>> What is she trying to say?
>>
>> What I am trying to say with this collection
>> of Indian fortified villages?
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/juktk
>> http://tinyurl.com/e5w5u
>> http://tinyurl.com/f5qdr
>> http://tinyurl.com/g99xk
>> http://tinyurl.com/frmj3
>> http://tinyurl.com/l2umb
> I don't know. I did notice that Indians seem to have missed the gate
> idea.
Those treacherous norse taught the Indians how to
defend themselves but didn't tell them about gates.
--
p.a.
Peter Alaca
> "Bryn" skrev
>> Dammit!
>> I thought it said "Fornicated"...
> Hi Bryn,
> that reminds me of a partly dirty story circling Gothenburg last
> year. In a monestry somewhere in Scotland(yes we do have Scottish
> stories circling from time to time. guess it's an 'inheritance' since
> the last time the Scots came here to settle in Gothenburg) a new
> protelyt to become a munk. He was placed among the monks who copied
> old handwritten texts. He helped as much as he could but one day he
> asked: Why are you copying text from already copied documents? That's
> the way it's always been done he was told. The origins is in the
> inner room of our Library's archieve and only the Abbot A and a few
> others are allowed to go there.
>
> The very next day the young proselyt were talking to the Abbot A and
> couldn't help asking him same question. The Abbot A said, it's so it
> always been done. And the proselyt didn't think more about it until
> the morning after when Abbot A wasn't seen. The monks and the
> proselyt search the buildings. Finally they came to the inner parts
> of the Library and the door was open into the inner room. There they
> saw the Abbot with tears falling down as pearls from a broken
> necklace. They asked what's up and the Abbot answered - the origin
> said 'celebrate' not 'celibate'....
>
> Inger E
Good one.
Uwe Müller
"Peter Alaca" <P.A...@556.nn> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
Clever, weren't they? They only had to tell the Indians, that the palisades
needed building from the inside, and than all Indians would have been
enclosed by their own palisades, no way to get out.
Somehow it doesn't seem to have worked though.
have fun
Uwe Mueller
Uwe Müller
"deowll" <deo...@bellsouth.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:Jg9eg.2530$8e2...@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
It is equally hard to guess why on earth the construction of fortified sites
should have been taught to NA population by people from the one european
region, that lacks those through most of its history. It is less absurd to
assume, that the lack of fortified sites in NA is a sign of contact with the
Norse.
have fun
Uwe Mueller
IE J
Uwe you most have missed the articles I sent the other year one of the times
we discussed 'White Indians' . Not only is it possible from contemporary
documents from 16th and 17th century to show that Swedes(who else would be
so stupid :-) ) gave the White Indians guns and other vapons for free. (they
were in some case related in some case close friends since long). Now the
interesting thing is that in some areas on the estern coast of NA- Virginia,
Kentucky, South and North Carolina, and New England you can find written
document for that and also artifacts, in Kentucky also armour and such,
close to mounds, ruins of settlements with either palisade or walls of earth
and stones around, grave types and mortar in stonefoundations under later
built houses etc etc.
If you in the middle of the night drive your car having problem and see what
looks like at least a farmhouse where someone supposingly could a bit about
motors, wouldn't you check it before you dismiss it?
And the old saying - if it walks like a dog and talk like a dog.... one
can't of course dismiss possibility that it's an ape or a cat acting like a
dog :-)
Inger E
>
>
Bryn
<inger_e....@telia.com> writes
>> --
>> Bryn
>
>Hi Bryn,
>that reminds me of a partly dirty story circling Gothenburg last year. In a
>monestry somewhere in Scotland(yes we do have Scottish stories circling from
>time to time. guess it's an 'inheritance' since the last time the Scots came
>here to settle in Gothenburg) a new protelyt to become a munk. He was placed
>among the monks who copied old handwritten texts. He helped as much as he
>could but one day he asked: Why are you copying text from already copied
>documents? That's the way it's always been done he was told. The origins is
>in the inner room of our Library's archieve and only the Abbot A and a few
>others are allowed to go there.
>
>The very next day the young proselyt were talking to the Abbot A and
>couldn't help asking him same question. The Abbot A said, it's so it always
>been done. And the proselyt didn't think more about it until the morning
>after when Abbot A wasn't seen. The monks and the proselyt search the
>buildings. Finally they came to the inner parts of the Library and the door
>was open into the inner room. There they saw the Abbot with tears falling
>down as pearls from a broken necklace. They asked what's up and the Abbot
>answered - the origin said 'celebrate' not 'celibate'....
>
Nice one! Inger...
--
Bryn
Erik Hammerstad
>> There are just too many anomalies to say this. For instance,
>> Greenland was occupied by Europeans for almost 400 years. The
>> colonists built European style houses, mostly of stone, but
>> even stone houses need rafters of wood. Where did the wood
>> come from? Most likely the coast of Labrador or Newfoundland.
>> Greenland never had much in the way of trees, even during the
>> warm period that it was occupied and driftwood would not have
>> been enough. Especially if the roof covering was sod, the
>> rafters would need to be replaced on a regular schedule to
>> keep up with rot.
>>
>
> You may have a point about the above. Considering the climate of Greenland
> some wood might be left to check.
>
Turf or sod was just as important a building material as stone,
probably more so at least in the early period of the settlement.
And the wood used seems to have been mostly driftwood (as in
Iceland), see for example http://www.natmus.dk/sw18655.asp
Uwe Müller
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:r7kh725ged7079a6k...@4ax.com...
ghouse.htm
> http://www.malaysiasite.nl/images/longhouse.gif
> http://tinyurl.com/fbgqz
These are modern constructions, where you have a class of builders,
architects etc. where modern tools etc. were used.
Try doing it youself, with ancient tools and technics and with logs hauled
in from the woods.
> >
> >To make an archaeological argument from this, it would have to be shown
how
> >postholes looked in NA at the time, in the region, lets say at least 50
for
> >each main type. Then show that the postholes you want to connect differ
in
> >basic ways from the postholes from NA, and that the different technics do
> >not come from the regions in contact with the area.
> >
> >If you can proove, that the Norse where in NA at the time, in the area,
this
> >would strengthen the argument about posthole types being connected to the
> >Norse. But a different type of posthole cannot proove Norse contacts with
> >NA, unless it spreads, and appears in larger numbers.
> >
> While Inger hasn't made it this time, I think her argument has been
> that somewhere in NA there is a cluster of longhouses with both layout
> and construction atypical of the traditional practices of the locals
> but very similar to those of the norse. I've never seen the actual
> evidence for this.
Peter has shown that the basic assumptions were wrong, that the type of
construction was widely used in NA, and that there are serious doubts wether
they are relics of a house in the Norse sense of the word at all.
So again, all the basic facts were wrong, she fooled herself by comparing
pictures.
have fun
Uwe Mueller
IE J
Peter hasn't proven anything at all. There have never been any disputes that
the type were widely spread. But about who initiated it to be spread AND
also, according to a Ph.D this was discussed with minuits ago, when.
I have been told to look into a diss where it's said to be proven to have
been spreading of the megalits in late Stone Age early Bronze Age all around
the Atlantic on both sides. going north from England, France, Germany up to
Sweden Norway and over the Atlantic. I have to read it myself, in other word
get hold of it at our UB before other scholars order it, that's why I don't
give the title today.
Inger E
>
>
>
t(nospam)kavanagh
Once more, there was no such group as "white Indians." There is no
archaeological
evidence to support the claims of such. It is a legend.
Not only is it possible from contemporary
> documents from 16th and 17th century to show that Swedes(who else would be
> so stupid :-) ) gave the White Indians guns and other vapons for free. (they
> were in some case related in some case close friends since long). Now the
> interesting thing is that in some areas on the estern coast of NA- Virginia,
> Kentucky, South and North Carolina, and New England you can find written
> document for that and also artifacts, in Kentucky also armour and such,
Bull shit.
> close to mounds, ruins of settlements with either palisade or walls of earth
> and stones around, grave types and mortar in stonefoundations under later
> built houses etc etc.
More bull shit.
tk
t(nospam)kavanagh
You certainly are.
> I have been trying to present that picture WITH background information for
> the last 11 years.
You have provided no such evidence.
As I said back in autumn 1995, If I should present the
> full proof for each part it would take between 32 A4 pages up to 300 for
> presenting full analyse of each fact, conclusion etc. That can't be done in
> a discussion group.
You certainly haven't.
You weren't among those who in 96-98 started to pollute
> the discussion critizing me for spelling errors
Oh damn, I missed out. I criticize you more often for failing to show
the evidence you claim to have.
(yes I am dyslextic but that
> doesn't make my any less then any of the other scholars of the world who
> are.
Less than what?
>And we are many. some reached to close to Einstein's level) instead of
> discussing what I presented.
Einstein's level of what??
Your logic amazes me.
tk
t(nospam)kavanagh
Well, according to a Ph.D I happen to know fairly well, you are wrong.
tk
IE J
FOR THE 21st time - there were a group who never been accepted by the
Indians as Indians but who as late as around 1960 was declared to be natives
by US goverment. That group were called white Indians by the Swedes who
lived in NA BEFORE the first English colony was established and before the
first English settler had arrived!!!!!! If you can't wait until everything
is revealed, than I will have to stop this once again instead of presenting
things my way = parts of my manuscript which has been peer-viewed btw!
It's definitely not a legend - and there are artifacts found to support the
texts confirming what I wrote!!!!!!!!!!!!!11
>
> Not only is it possible from contemporary
> > documents from 16th and 17th century to show that Swedes(who else would
be
> > so stupid :-) ) gave the White Indians guns and other vapons for free.
(they
> > were in some case related in some case close friends since long). Now
the
> > interesting thing is that in some areas on the estern coast of NA-
Virginia,
> > Kentucky, South and North Carolina, and New England you can find written
> > document for that and also artifacts, in Kentucky also armour and such,
>
> Bull shit.
>
NO YOUR COMMENTS ARE!
> > close to mounds, ruins of settlements with either palisade or walls of
earth
> > and stones around, grave types and mortar in stonefoundations under
later
> > built houses etc etc.
>
> More bull shit.
NO YOUR COMMENTS ARE.
Inger E
>
> tk
IE J
> IE J wrote:
> >
> > "t(nospam)kavanagh" <"tkavanag"@(nospam)indiana.edu> skrev i meddelandet
> > news:e5anrs$ldc$1...@rainier.uits.indiana.edu...
> > > Eric Stevens wrote:
> > > >
I have provided such - don't know if you read my lines the first years or
not. Many of the Professors, Ph D and MA I receive mails with requests,
subjects to discuss etc I heard from due to presenting those evidence.
Problem for you tk isn't that you are naysayer,
problem is that you are used to take one thing at a time instead of
analysing pattern which occurs over and over.
Nothing more to discuss at this point. You will have to wait for answers.
But I suggest you to start looking closer at 'Quitsa' megalit grave on
Magdalen Islands. (No photo on net as far as I have found) Contact Terry at
NEARA if you want to have an image - I think he can help you.
Compare that with
Dösar (dolmens
<http://www.trelleborg.se/t_templates/t_Page____6918.aspx>
an url I sent under thread Type of graves....
Good Night tk
Inger E
inger E
Doug Weller
Surely the group that was declared to be natives by the US government
can't be a secret?
>>
>> Not only is it possible from contemporary
>> > documents from 16th and 17th century to show that Swedes(who else would
>be
>> > so stupid :-) ) gave the White Indians guns and other vapons for free.
>(they
>> > were in some case related in some case close friends since long). Now
>the
>> > interesting thing is that in some areas on the estern coast of NA-
>Virginia,
>> > Kentucky, South and North Carolina, and New England you can find written
>> > document for that and also artifacts, in Kentucky also armour and such,
>>
>> Bull shit.
>>
>
>NO YOUR COMMENTS ARE!
Without evidence, your claims have no evidentiary value.
>
>> > close to mounds, ruins of settlements with either palisade or walls of
>earth
>> > and stones around, grave types and mortar in stonefoundations under
>later
>> > built houses etc etc.
>>
>> More bull shit.
>
>NO YOUR COMMENTS ARE.
>
>Inger E
>>
>> tk
>
--
Doug Weller --
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Amun - co-owner/co-moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Amun/
Doug Weller
[SNIP]
>
>But I suggest you to start looking closer at 'Quitsa' megalit grave on
>Magdalen Islands. (No photo on net as far as I have found) Contact Terry at
>NEARA if you want to have an image - I think he can help you.
>Compare that with
>Dösar (dolmens
><http://www.trelleborg.se/t_templates/t_Page____6918.aspx>
>an url I sent under thread Type of graves....
I did a double take on this, and then also found her post where she wrote:
"I have been told to look into a diss where it's said to be proven to have
been spreading of the megalits in late Stone Age early Bronze Age all
around the Atlantic on both sides. going north from England, France,
Germany up to Sweden Norway and over the Atlantic. I have to read it
myself, in other word get hold of it at our UB before other scholars order
it, that's why I don't give the title today."
This should be amusing. Well, it might be if we had any hope of actually
ever seeing the claims in any detail. Probably NEARA related. I'm dissing
it, I've studied megaliths enough to know that even 'going north from
England, France, Germany tup to Sweden Norway' doesn't match the evidence.
Doug
jackli...@earthlink.net
Perhaps you can explain to me the meaning of "fortificated villages"?
Are they fortified or fornicated? Have vitamins or sugar been added or
just rape and pillage?
IE J
<jackli...@earthlink.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:1148836574.8...@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
IEJ: first of all I have to tell you and the others that Doug himself proven
that what ever it is he say he has study, he has no clue at all of what most
of the scholars of archaeology and history here knows about the megalits in
question nor does he have a clue of which identical or almost identical ones
I plan to refer to.
Back to question: a fortified village is either a stationary or a
temporary(wartime assumed) village within walls either made of earth or
stones around. Some of these are having palisades = tree-poles placed
together to get better(higher and sometime walkable on top) walls around the
other wall or on top of it.
Inger E