264 replies to this topic

[Oniomancer]

Abramelin, on 21 February 2010 - 07:00 PM, said:

Btw, I read a sample of the first chapter of that book, Puzzler:


"Sometime during the 1470's a group of Native Americans followed the Gulf Stream from the Americas to Ireland. We don't know if they were from the Caribbean region or from North America. We don't know if their journey was intentional or if they were driven eastward by a storm. What we do know is that two or more Americans, at least a man and a woman, reached Galway Bay, Ireland, and were there seen by Christoforo Colomb (Columbus) long prior to his famous voyage of 1492.

This momentous event, largely ignored by white historians, marks a beginning of the modern age, since it is precisely because of this experience that Columbus possessed the absolute certainty that he could sail westward to Cathay (Katayo or China) and India."

http://search2.barne...n=9780252031526


Oh hell, you can read the book here:

http://books.google....page&q=&f=false
.

Seems like quite a bit supposition to some of forbes' conclusions, his extrapolation of hollow logs from the given quotes for instance.

[Qoais]

PersonFromPorlock, on 21 February 2010 - 07:04 PM, said:

That's a little confused: Heyerdahl's 1947 voyage ("Kon-tiki") went west from the west coast of South America, on a South-American-style Balsa raft, to prove that the Polynesia could have been settled from America. The reed boats ("Ra" and "Ra 2") were of ancient Egyptian design, to see if the Egyptians could have reached America (from Morocco). The first one sank but the second one made it. This was in the late 60s - early 70s.

None of these expeditions had anything to do with Vikings or Phoenicians.

The point was:

The Kon Tiki’s voyage of over 4,300 miles proved that ancient navigators could have sailed much farther than originally believed.  

If the S. Americans did have sails they COULD have ended up in Spain, Portugal, Great Britain, or Morocco.  I have read where the Vikings may have followed the coast line southward, and I was just trying to say that perhaps the S. Americans followed the coast line northward.  

Earler it was being asked WHY would anyone sail out into the ocean no knowing what's out there.  Maybe it was on a dare, maybe it was because of a challenge, maybe it was because maybe it came to someone in a dream that there was land out there and other people.  

It just seems to me that there could really be a possibility that people in Europe (not many though) knew there was land and people somewhere to the west.  The native Indians of the Americas traveled with the herds and there's no doubt they were very aware of each other.  Likely had big pow wows with each other and caught up on all the latest news.  No doubt the word was passed that there were men of white skin and red hair in the northern regions.  Maybe someone set out to find these people and ended up in Ireland.

[Alien Being]

Qoais, on 21 February 2010 - 10:51 PM, said:

The point was:

The Kon Tiki’s voyage of over 4,300 miles proved that ancient navigators could have sailed much farther than originally believed.  

If the S. Americans did have sails they COULD have ended up in Spain, Portugal, Great Britain, or Morocco.  I have read where the Vikings may have followed the coast line southward, and I was just trying to say that perhaps the S. Americans followed the coast line northward.  

Earler it was being asked WHY would anyone sail out into the ocean no knowing what's out there.  Maybe it was on a dare, maybe it was because of a challenge, maybe it was because maybe it came to someone in a dream that there was land out there and other people.  

It just seems to me that there could really be a possibility that people in Europe (not many though) knew there was land and people somewhere to the west.  The native Indians of the Americas traveled with the herds and there's no doubt they were very aware of each other.  Likely had big pow wows with each other and caught up on all the latest news.  No doubt the word was passed that there were men of white skin and red hair in the northern regions.  Maybe someone set out to find these people and ended up in Ireland.

We need to ask why Angles, Saxons and Vandals started scalping people about 800 A.D.

Where did the idea come from?

[Abramelin]

marcos anthony toledo, on 21 February 2010 - 07:23 PM, said:

I the book THEY ALL DISCOVERED AMERICA it is mention that during the period that the romans were invadeing gaul that to captives of american origins were givean to the romans in unkown deal.

I found it, Marcos:


It's in chapter 5 of the book THE AMERICAN DISCOVERY OF EUROPE,  "5. From Iberia to the Baltic: Americans in Roman and Pre-Modern Europe"

http://books.google....page&q=&f=false

[jaylemurph]

Alien Being, on 21 February 2010 - 11:08 PM, said:

We need to ask why Angles, Saxons and Vandals started scalping people about 800 A.D.

Where did the idea come from?

Most likely from the people who were actually doing some scalping, like the Scythians, who were doing it more than a thousand years previously in Europe, at least according to Herodotus.

The /only/ person claiming that anyone in Western Europe in the Early Middle Ages was doing anything like scalping was the Abbe Domemench is his rather unique translations of Flodard -- and Flodard, as a Christian adviser to European monarchs had ample reason (and precedent) in defining non-Christian or Arian Christians like the Angles, Franks and Vandals as sub-human monsters.

--Jaylemurph

[pbarosso]

the answer to the OP is no, there would be hard evidence because it would have been a big deal.

[TheSearcher]

Alien Being, on 21 February 2010 - 11:08 PM, said:

We need to ask why Angles, Saxons and Vandals started scalping people about 800 A.D.

Where did the idea come from?

Herodotus recorded scalping by ancient Scythians in central Asia and archaeologists have since unearthed skulls with likely scalping marks at Scythian sites. Evidence indicates Europeans were scalping from the Stone Age till as late as 1036 in England.

While Europeans did not originate scalping, they did encourage its spread through the establishment of bounties. New Englanders were apparently the first to grasp the usefulness of scalps as proof of death. In 1637 they began paying their Indian allies for either the heads of their Pequot enemies or, when the return distance was too great, the scalps. New Englanders were also first to pay whites for Indian scalps (1675-76). The egalitarian French upped the ante in 1688 by offering to pay for any enemy scalps, white or Indian.

[MARAB0D]

Qoais, on 21 February 2010 - 01:04 AM, said:

Show me!!

Quote

...for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent.

Timaeus, 360 BC

This was claimed by Plato as taken from Solon's memoirs in their part when the Egyptian priest Sonkhis tells him about the ancient records, Egyptians had. The memoirs themselves are lost but were mentioned in antiquity as then existing. It is not a fact or a historical record, and certainly in the times described (10,000 BC) there was no Maya or Nahuatl existing. Yet Plato seems more a historical source than, say, OP article. Any more solid ancient data would be appreciated.

[Clobhair-cean]

Abramelin, on 21 February 2010 - 05:58 PM, said:

"We are not talking about the past few decades."

No, actually I was talking in general: people (in general, now and then) tend to do illogical and crazy things on a frequent basis.

The emergence of the media and other factors mean that in the past century people are much more inclined to do insane things then ever. While 500 years ago an insane feat that could have gotten you killed achieved only local appreciation, lately it became a potential source of huge income.  No-one in, let's say, Classical Antiquity would have wanted to become the "First under-20 woman to sail around the globe unaided."

Abramelin, on 21 February 2010 - 05:58 PM, said:

"Could you please prove this? I'm yet to see any connection between Tlapallan and Kukulkan."

That was my mistake, I meant the Mayas borrowed some of the myths from the Toltec (or whatever their true name must have been).
It is said that Kukulkan is a literal translation of the Nahua Quetzalcoatl, "Feathered Serpent".
Now I cannot prove this - I read it in a book, long ago - but the Maya also adopted other legends from the tribes (Toltecs?) that conquered them. So maybe they also had a Mayan translation for the Nahua "Tlapallan".

But Quetzalcoatl is most probably the combination of two different deities, the Kukulkan-like feathered serpent and a deified Toltec king. Tlapallan is connected to the latter, and I'm yet to find anything proving that he was worshipped by the Maya.

Abramelin, on 21 February 2010 - 05:58 PM, said:

"There was one single segment of the Mayan peoples who ventured onto the sea and even they weren't dependent on it. "

That were the Chontal Mayas, and whether they were dependent on it, they did it anyway. And they could have learned a thing or two from the Carib/Arawak tribes who appear to have been great seafarers.

That's one big unknown

Abramelin, on 21 February 2010 - 05:58 PM, said:

"No. It's a realistic look on things. Exactly why is Eurocentric to say that Mayans had no absolutely reason to do something they did not do?"

Because you look at it with a modern Eurocentric (better word: modern western) mindset. And I already posted about what could have motivated them, apart from trade.

I look at it with a descriptive mindset. There has been no voyages in pre-modern history that would have been similar to the Maya heading off towards Europe, so there's no reason to suppose it happened.  

Abramelin, on 21 February 2010 - 05:58 PM, said:

"Oh, and could you please prove your statement that the Maya had sails?"

That is the most interesting question, please read this http://www.jstor.org/pss/681400

And this is about seafaring Arawaks, not Mayas:
http://www.penn.muse.../14-3/Easby.pdf

"Meanwhile Columbus had reported huge dugout "canoes" with 70 and 80 paddlers, and one in Cuba big enough for 150 men and 70 feet long. Later in Jamaica he measured one of 96 feet. The large vessels has sails that could be used if the wind and the strong currents were favorable. The ubliquios dugouts ranged in size down to one-man canoes, and there were also rafts."


Now this is based on early reports, and it would not be a surprise to me that
-1- Columbus and his men could not distinguish between seafaring Arawak and Maya
-2- the Mayas had been in contact with these Arawak, and
-3- that they may have learned to sail the seas - with sails - from these Arawak/Carib.


EDITED to add NOT in statement -1-
.

Once again, unknowns. The Maya might have learned the use of sails (though there is no evidence for this anywhere, and all Maya depictions of boats are without sails), and for some unknown purpose they might have gone to Europe, even though there is zero evidence for this.

Not a particularly strong argument.

[TheSearcher]

Abramelin, on 21 February 2010 - 07:44 PM, said:

Hi Marcos,

I don't know that book, and I've never heard of any captive native Americans being handed over by the Gauls to the invading Romans.

Of course I've Googled like crazy, but was unable to find anything about that online.

You have anything more on that, like links to Roman sources?

Hmm you're right, a source might be interesting for this.

[Abramelin]

TheSearcher, on 22 February 2010 - 10:13 AM, said:

Hmm you're right, a source might be interesting for this.

That's why I posted to Marcos I found that (Roman) source (post 49 in this thread):

Quote

I found it, Marcos:


It's in chapter 5 of the book THE AMERICAN DISCOVERY OF EUROPE, "5. From Iberia to the Baltic: Americans in Roman and Pre-Modern Europe"


http://books.google....page&q=&f=false

[TheSearcher]

Abramelin, on 22 February 2010 - 12:32 PM, said:

That's why I posted to Marcos I found that (Roman) source (post 49 in this thread):

Ooops sorry missed that one, my bad.

[Qoais]

Quote

Qoais, on 21 February 2010 - 01:04 PM, said:
Show me!!


Quote
...for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent.
Timaeus, 360 BC

This was claimed by Plato as taken from Solon's memoirs in their part when the Egyptian priest Sonkhis tells him about the ancient records, Egyptians had. The memoirs themselves are lost but were mentioned in antiquity as then existing. It is not a fact or a historical record, and certainly in the times described (10,000 BC) there was no Maya or Nahuatl existing. Yet Plato seems more a historical source than, say, OP article. Any more solid ancient data would be appreciated.

Plato lied.  Plato made the story of Atlantis up.  Even if he was describing some land far, far away that he'd heard a story about, it wouldn't have been the Americas he was talking about. Unless of course, we can find proof that the Amerindians did in fact drift over to Eastern shores and somehow the scholars of Egypt heard about it. In the time he described, (10,000 BC) there were no Athenians either.  

So inasmuch as this thread isn't supposed to be about Atlantis, it would go a ways in showing that the ancient priests of Egypt had heard tell about this land on the opposite side of the ocean if it can be shown that Indians did travel East.  Also just a small point, Plato does not name the priest Solon talked with.  Someone else gave the name Sonchis.

Edited by Qoais, 22 February 2010 - 03:22 PM.

[Corp]

While the idea is interesting I find it unlikely. Don't see rafts and canoes doing too well out on the ocean. Don't think the various South American empires had the technology to make the trip safely, unless it was a complete freak occurance.

[Abramelin]

Corp, on 22 February 2010 - 04:59 PM, said:

While the idea is interesting I find it unlikely. Don't see rafts and canoes doing too well out on the ocean. Don't think the various South American empires had the technology to make the trip safely, unless it was a complete freak occurance.

The Chontal Maya were like the Phoenicians of the Caribbean, according to one of the links in my OP.

And Columbus encountered many huge rafts and vessels (or whatever you want to call them) of Indians in the Caribbean, vessels with lots of cargo and people onboard .

The Chontal Maya did sometimes travel the Caribbean for like 10 days on end before setting foot on land again (from Yucatan to Florida).

It is just not wellknown that they had the expertise to do it.

And what I liked about the book Puzzler mentioned (although I was not very impressed by the reasoning of the professor who wrote the book...) is that this professor suggested that European looking artifacts that showed up in Meso America were not brought in by Egyptians, Phoenicians or Romans, but were artifacts that these Indians collected and brought back home. Or that they depicted/sculpted what they encountered on their voyages to Europe and the Mediterranean.


Oh yes, I agree, it may have been a freak occurence, and I was never suggesting these contacts were planned or frequent.

And I am also not suggesting - I am getting the feeling people think I want to prove the Mayans or other American tribes - were responsible for the pyramids and other great feats in Europe. No way.

All I want to say is : could native Americans - Inuit, Carib, Mayans, Tupo-Guarani, Lenape, whoever - have reached Europe? And are there accounts of their travels?

And don't tell me these people should have had a logical reason to to set out on such a voyage.

People don't act on logic in general. They act, and invent a logical reason afterwards, and try to convince themselves and others that that was why they did what they did.




.

Edited by Abramelin, 22 February 2010 - 06:16 PM.