Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Evidence of Viking Outpost Found in Canada

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Evidence of Viking Outpost Found in Canada

    Exciting if true......
    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...ce-sutherland/
    But there's also this;
    http://www.ottawacitizen.com/travel/...294/story.html
    Rhode Island

  • #2
    Very interesting Charlie. Thanks for sharing.
    TN formerly CT Visit our store http://stores.arrowheads.com/store.p...m-Trading-Post

    Comment


    • #3
      Good read! With the renewed interests in the vikings, maybe they'll scratch up more evidence of the
      Solutrean connection as well - good sites were used for a looooong time.
      If the women don\'t find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.

      Comment


      • #4
        Just read the Nat. Geo. article yesterday. The cords/Viking Yarn are pretty undeniable evidence. Doesn't predate Columbus by much but I always knew those Vikings were here first! Kinda
        Searching the fields of Northwest Indiana and Southwestern Michigan

        Comment


        • #5
          I was surfing the forum and found this topic. Since we're talking Vikings and this was such an interesting article I thought I would share a little of my home state's history on Vikings as well. I hope you like it. I am not that far away from this place and it has been a topic of discussion for years.
          http://urbane-chaos.hubpages.com/hub/VikingsinOklahoma
          Enjoy!!

          Comment


          • #6
            But the consensus among experts is that the stone is a fake, along with the Kensington stone and so many others. The evidence for Viking presence in Oklahoma is equally spurious. Wiki pretty much has it right:
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavener_Runestone
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kensington_Runestone
            I outlined here some of the (non-archaeological) reasons why so many of these hoax items turn up in areas where there were high concentrations of recent Scandinavian immigrants:
            http://arrowheads.com/forums/what-di...-stone-anchors
            As I said, it’s a shame because the fakes and hoaxes detract from the possibility of genuine examples… of which there are perhaps four that hold any realistic prospect of authenticity – none of them in Oklahoma.
            I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.

            Comment


            • #7
              riverbottomkid wrote:

              I was surfing the forum and found this topic. Since we're talking Vikings and this was such an interesting article I thought I would share a little of my home state's history on Vikings as well. I hope you like it. I am not that far away from this place and it has been a topic of discussion for years.
              http://urbane-chaos.hubpages.com/hub/VikingsinOklahoma
              Enjoy!!
                Here's an old photo of epigrapher Gloria Farley at the Heavener Runestone. Riverbottomkid, if you read the "anchor thread" painshill posted a link to, I posted there some details on a "runestone" in Narragansett Bay, RI.

              Rhode Island

              Comment


              • #8
                I thought I had heard in high school that Vikings did visit here first but they didn't stay to long. I believe they landed on Newfoundland Canada and made a small outpost there. Anyone else here anything about this ?

                Comment


                • #9
                  JR wrote:

                  I thought I had heard in high school that Vikings did visit here first but they didn't stay to long. I believe they landed on Newfoundland Canada and made a small outpost there. Anyone else here anything about this ?
                    Yes, a Viking presence is pretty well established for the site at L'Anse Aux Meadows in Newfoundland -and- Labrador, Canada which seems to tie in with ancient Viking sagas of voyages to "Vin-Land". Also possible evidence from Baffin Island and Northern Labrador. There’s a good summary in Wiki here:
                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinland
                  But, apart from isolated pieces of evidence which are not universally accepted, no firm evidence for Viking presence beyond that, or which extends into what is now North America itself. Viking presence as far south as Maine remains a possibility (but only a possibility). Viking presence in places such as Minnesota or Oklahoma is disputed by most archaeologists and the supposed evidence is either proven to be faked/hoaxed or hotly disputed.
                  I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I just want to make it clear. I did not say I believed it nor did I say I didn't. Growing up here you hear lots of lore mostly on native american's and bandits. I found a topic and read the post, found it interesting, and shared a "topic of conversation" I heard round the domino table so many times by my 90 year old grandfather and his windy friends. I enjoy the stories and round table discussions the same as the next but don't make me feel stupid because I post something you don't agree with or like. If I took it wrong I apologize ahead of time.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      riverbottomkid wrote:

                      I just want to make it clear. I did not say I believed it nor did I say I didn't. Growing up here you hear lots of lore mostly on native american's and bandits. I found a topic and read the post, found it interesting, and shared a "topic of conversation" I heard round the domino table so many times by my 90 year old grandfather and his windy friends. I enjoy the stories and round table discussions the same as the next but don't make me feel stupid because I post something you don't agree with or like. If I took it wrong I apologize ahead of time.
                        Yeah, you did take it wrong. Roger(painshill) would be the last person in the world to make anyone on the forum feel stupid.  The subject has come up before on this forum(the link Roger posted to my thread is but one instance), as well as other forums. He's made it clear that he finds the evidence for lack of authenticity where NA runestones are concerned more compelling. I myself just don't know. I haven't personally written off any of them that come to mind, but I'm more aware of some of the problems with them thanks to arguments that Roger has presented here. So don't take things the wrong way, if I lived in Ok, I'd be hearing and telling stories about it too, just like the Newport Tower, here in Newport, RI, has been associated in lore and book with the Norse, whether it was built by them or not. And talked about all my life
                      Rhode Island

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        riverbottomkid wrote:

                        I just want to make it clear. I did not say I believed it nor did I say I didn't. Growing up here you hear lots of lore mostly on native american's and bandits. I found a topic and read the post, found it interesting, and shared a "topic of conversation" I heard round the domino table so many times by my 90 year old grandfather and his windy friends. I enjoy the stories and round table discussions the same as the next but don't make me feel stupid because I post something you don't agree with or like. If I took it wrong I apologize ahead of time.
                          Hi Bobbie
                        My sincere apologies if that came over as “trying to make you feel stupid”.  :blush: That wasn’t at all my intention, and I wasn't assuming anything about your take on the story. It’s just that when links like that get posted without any counter-comment there are folks who read what’s there and take the information as factual or proven. That’s fine. I don’t have any issues with people making up their own minds about something – as long as they have at least some exposure to the pro’s and con’s of particular theories. But, unfortunately, it often results in a flurry of posts from people with rather extreme views of what established research actually tells us, who think they’ve found related artefacts of huge archaeological importance.
                        If you use the search facility on the forum, you’ll see that we have had several “Viking flurries”. We’ve had triangular stones, stones with triangular holes, carved runestones, clay tablets, swords… none of them Viking… but the posters are frequently aggressively insistent, based on some information from links like the one you posted. The only things we haven’t had yet are Viking maps or horned helmets. But I’m not holding my breath. :whistle:
                        Our collective aim is to make this forum a professional and authoritative reference source for anyone with an interest in artefacts. That doesn’t in any way exclude alternative opinions, debate or argument. But we do try to firmly refute artefacts (not just Viking ones) which are clearly not what they are claimed to be in the interests of accuracy for people trawling the forum for helpful information.
                        Thanks for the kind words you posted on my profile (I responded there). I hope this doesn’t mean you're cancelling that dinner date. I've ordered the flowers and everything. I was looking forward to it. I’ll buy.
                        Best wishes
                        Roger
                        I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Roger, I wish you hadn't brought up clay tablets LOL.
                          Like a drifter I was born to walk alone

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X