Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Ancient History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Ancient History Ancient History Forum - Greece, Rome, Carthage, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and all other civilizations of antiquity, to include Prehistory and Archaeology discussions


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 20th, 2010, 10:48 AM   #11

Robert165's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: North Georgia
Posts: 4,161
Re: The Kensington Runestone


yeah, i agree, geological evidence plus the obscure language seem pretty convincing.
Robert165 is online now  
Remove Ads
Old April 20th, 2010, 10:53 AM   #12

okamido's Avatar
knows what the bee knows
 
Joined: Jun 2009
From: land of Califia
Posts: 29,884
Blog Entries: 28
Re: The Kensington Runestone


Quote:
Originally Posted by Chookie View Post
I recently came across a report that Columbus spent the winter of 1477-78 in Iceland...
Can you share a link or name of text?
okamido is offline  
Old April 20th, 2010, 11:38 AM   #13

okamido's Avatar
knows what the bee knows
 
Joined: Jun 2009
From: land of Califia
Posts: 29,884
Blog Entries: 28
Re: The Kensington Runestone


Interesting.

Quote:
The voyage which Jon Skolp made to Iceland and Greenland, which began towards the end of 1476, and in which Christopher Columbus took part,
http://www.cristobalcolondeibiza.com/eng/eng12.htm


Quote:
Shortly after reaching the city of Lisbon, Columbus was at
Quote:
sea again. He joined a second fleet sent from Genoa to pick up
the survivors of the battle off Cape St. Vincent and proceed on
its way to England which had been its original destination. This
second merchant fleet was composed of two ships that had escaped
from the battle, as well as three ships belonging to rich Italian
merchant families, all of whom were closely associated with
Columbus. And at the end of December 1476, the Genoese fleet
continued the voyage that had been interrupted five months before
by the corsair Guillaume de Casenove.
From London, he would have gone on to Bristol, an English
seaport of great importance. Their commercial interests would
also have taken the Genoese ships to Galway, on the western coast
of Ireland, and from there, further north to Iceland.
http://www.millersville.edu/~columbu...pc/CATZ-01.SPK
okamido is offline  
Old April 20th, 2010, 12:45 PM   #14

Chookie's Avatar
Creature of the Night
 
Joined: Nov 2007
From: Alba
Posts: 7,628
Blog Entries: 15
Re: The Kensington Runestone


Quote:
Originally Posted by okamido View Post
Can you share a link or name of text?
Sorry, I can't provide a link, I wasn't at home when I found it, I can, however, supply this:-
Quote:
Recent scholars in Iceland have begun to assert that Columbus actually visited Iceland some years before 1492, and that he over-wintered in Olafsvik on the Snaefelsness peninsula, as set out in parish registers from Olafsvik. Olafsvik is the closest harbour to Greenland, and the point of departure for many Icelandic boats voyaging to Greenland. Eirek the Red's first voyage to Greenland departed from nearby Breithafjordur, and the manuscript of The Vinland Sagas was preserved on Flatey, an island in the vicinity.
Source: Vikings in America, Graeme Davis, Birlinn, 2009, pp141-142
Chookie is offline  
Old April 20th, 2010, 01:02 PM   #15

okamido's Avatar
knows what the bee knows
 
Joined: Jun 2009
From: land of Califia
Posts: 29,884
Blog Entries: 28
Re: The Kensington Runestone


I must say, that after looking all over the web the last couple of days, I am no longer on the fence, I'm a believer.
okamido is offline  
Old April 20th, 2010, 01:24 PM   #16

Chookie's Avatar
Creature of the Night
 
Joined: Nov 2007
From: Alba
Posts: 7,628
Blog Entries: 15
Re: The Kensington Runestone


Quote:
Originally Posted by Chookie View Post
For myself, though I'm not entirely convinced...
Not any more I'm not. My 2 cents says it's genuine. so..........

I'm a believer.......
Chookie is offline  
Old April 30th, 2010, 09:29 PM   #17
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,296
Re: The Kensington Runestone


Certainly it is real. Olaf's found the stone on a very high area of his farm. If the water table was higher, or the land mass lower, it would have been an island. The waterway that is now the Red River would have expanded to the Olaf farm. This would have made a a connection with the Hudson Bay in Canada. From Greenland, the Viking would have sailed west into Hudson's Bay, instead of sticking to the east and traveling down the east coast of Canada.
And, yes, any serious historian knows that the Vikings were in North America first before Columbus. But it is also very possible that the Romans were in the southern United States before the Vikings.
steve53 is offline  
Old May 1st, 2010, 01:24 AM   #18

Sargon of Akkad's Avatar
Backworldsman
 
Joined: Jun 2009
From: Glorious England
Posts: 6,987
Re: The Kensington Runestone


Quote:
Originally Posted by steve53 View Post
But it is also very possible that the Romans were in the southern United States before the Vikings.
You know what they say about extraordinary claims...
Sargon of Akkad is offline  
Old May 1st, 2010, 05:16 AM   #19

Ri Fhionngaill's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: Loch na Seilg, Alba
Posts: 2,597
Blog Entries: 1
Re: The Kensington Runestone


I think that it's genuine. Too many pieces of archaelogy have been dismissed as forgeries because they don't seem to 'fit' with what's already been 'established'. The Ogham Stone in America is but one example. The Welsh coat-of-arms is another. They may be forgeries, but until someone can explain why they are forgeries (no, that doesn't include any sentence that begins with 'but everyone knows that...') then they are far more believeable. It's a choice between a possible historical overhaul and modern prejudice.

It's already known that the Norse, and possibly others, reached the area long before Columbus. Why is this even controversial?
Ri Fhionngaill is offline  
Old May 3rd, 2010, 05:35 AM   #20

Edratman's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2009
From: Eastern PA
Posts: 6,044
Re: The Kensington Runestone


I am not a believer.

My problem with the Kensington Stone is the location. If it was 10, or even as much as 30 miles from the Atlantic coast I would accept it without question. But I cannot concieve of any plausible, or even implausible justification or reasoning for an entire ships complement to make that journey from Greenland to Kensington.

Using rudimentary measuring, the Red River connection to Hudson's Bay is about 2500 miles from Greenland. Sailing and rowing along an unknown coast would have been pretty slow going, and I would be surprised if a Viking ship could average as much as 50 miles per day. Add in that the ship would probably have to reprovision every 4 or 5 days, a task that would probably take 2 or 3 days, and the basic journey to the mouth of the Red River would be as long as 5 months, which is pretty much the entire ice free period for the region. This does not even allow for an additional round trip up the river to Kensington, another 600 miles or so, which as the stone says, involved additional travel on foot.

I cannot concieve of the Viking ships not hugging the coast. This was uncharted waters and the Vikings were experienced seamen. There was no way they would have even considered the straight line route across Hudson Bay, which is an enormous body of water.

Why would they continue the journey? No one lives along the Hudson Bay coast today because it is cold, desolate, forbidding place. The only crop that can be grown there reliably are rocks, not a real lucrative career path. One thousand years ago, it was not any better. There probably were a few scattered villages along the coast, but they would have been hunter/gatherers without much excess food to trade to the Vikings. And the longships probably would have required some repairs and I guarantee that nothing was available that could have been readily used without days/weeks of fabrication.

What would have motivated the crew to keep on rowing/sailing after the first 1000 miles of nothing? The promise that a convenience store was only another 250 miles further distant? There was also a near zero likelihood that the native peoples had tales of a city of gold, only another 1000 miles up the coast.

The Viking crew were just common people, motived by gold, women, drink food and leisure. None of that appeared after the first 1000 miles, and there was zero prospect of any appearing the next 1000 miles. The crew would also have been intimate with ice free season at those Northern latitudes and have known that they only had at most 6 months to travel. The duration of the trip, as used by the Kensington Stone adherents, would have required overwintering in a very cold, very barren spot in northern North America. Why would they do that?

There is no way I can picture the crew going along on the trek. At some point, well before the walk to Kensington would have occured, they would have insisted on going back. If the leader didn't agree, well, he had to sleep at some point.

This is real life. The crew would have grumbled and complained, not automatically and slavishly agreed with every order the chief gave.

On top of that, why would they journey up the Red River? It is not like it was the Hudson River. At the first shallows the boats would have turned around and headed back, if they even made it that far. And why would they walk more than a mile or so from the ships, again if they made it that far?

The length of the trip to carve a stone to be left in Kensington, Minnesota does not make sense. At all. That is my objection.
Edratman is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Ancient History

Tags
kensington, runestone



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.