Well, well, well, Christopher Columbus wasn't Italian after all....

[gunrunner8]

Read article by UK Dailymail!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333895/Christopher-Columbus-Polish-Portuguese-claim-historians.html

[ShooterAZ]

What??? The world isn't really flat?

[snowwolfe]

Who cares, lol.

[Mk42gunner]

I wonder just how mature the writer of the new book is; he calls anybody that believes any other way than what his new hypothesis is a fool.

At this point in time, I'm with snowwolfe; "Who cares..."

Robert

[montana_charlie]

Did you see Jesse Watters asking people questions about Columbus?
One girl thought he made the trip in 1940, and somebody else thought it happened in 'the sixties'.

CM

[Janoosh]

As someone who's ancestors came from somewhere in Poland, I'd like to expand the statement of "Who cares" to add...."So What...!!".

[Multigunner]

I'm reminded of a scene from a British film "closed circuit.
A Journalist tells her source "no evidence no headline" the source replies "you obviously haven't read many British newspapers".

[Multigunner]

Only good point made by the article is that no one back then doubted that the Earth was a sphere.
All that flat earth bushwa was started by a novel written by Washington Irving.
Oddly enough there was no actual scientific proof that the Earth was a sphere that rotated on an axis till 1858.

[dagger dog]

He was also the first of the conquistadors. Even though he wasn't Spanish, his treatment of the native peoples was as a master to his slaves.

Also don't forget he was lost and had no idea where he was ! The Vikings preceded Columbus by a couple hundred years.

[bob208]

the Vikings landed on the main land. Columbus landed on an island.

[Multigunner]

Greenland is part of the North American continent but its hardly the Mainland. Its a pretty big island, nearly a subcontinent.

I haven't heard of any conclusive evidence of Vikings actually landing on the Mainland.
I don't doubt that they did, I just haven't seen real evidence of that fact.

There are legends of Irish and Welsh explorers reaching the Americas, but haven't seen real evidence of that either.

Genoa was an independent city state and a republic during Columbus' lifetime, so he would not have been a citizen of Italy as a modern nation.
Back then where your parents came from meant little, where you lived and swore alegiance governed your status as a citizen.
There was no long drawn out naturalization, you were whatever you chose to be for better or worse.

There are may Mexicans who's ancestors were French, German, or Irish, but they are 100% Mexican.

[waksupi]

in 1960, undeniable proof of Vikings in North America came to light at L’Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland, Canada. Several Norse Viking pieces and clear Icelandic- style house foundations gave proof positive that Vikings had indeed landed, and briefly settled, in North America 500 years before Columbus.

http://www.mnh.si.edu/vikings/1137.html

Click through on the links for more.

[RogerDat]

Sailors (or at least the officers) knew the earth was curved. Simply the fact that a ship mast and hull went "down" when over the horizon indicates this. I can't swear to it but am pretty sure navigation by a cross staff the results would not been as useful if sailors using it assumed the earth was flat. 6 knots speed for 24 hrs. is a different location on a flat surface than a curved one. Those were around before Columbus.

What was not known was if it was possible to arrive in the east with a shorter route by sailing west. That was just a theory since it had not been proven by someone doing it. Instead they found N. and S. America along with some islands. It is ironic the real wealth was found in South America in the form of precious metals and jewels along with indigenous people to work as slaves. North America had woods, Indians and wilderness critters. Not so great for plundering but pretty good for immigration from Europe.

[Cmm_3940]

The 'Daily Fail' seems to be the British equivalent of the 'National Enquirer'.

[montana_charlie]

He was also the first of the conquistadors. Even though he wasn't Spanish, his treatment of the native peoples was as a master to his slaves.

Also don't forget he was lost and had no idea where he was ! The Vikings preceded Columbus by a couple hundred years.
Are you one of those who actively seeks out denigrating things to say about America and our traditional beliefs?



What was not known was if it was possible to arrive in the east with a shorter route by sailing west. That was just a theory since it had not been proven by someone doing it.
Columbus knew the earth was round, and logic told him that he could reach 'The Orient' by sailing to the west.
But, the planet is simply a lot bigger than he knew ... with a whole set of continents he never suspected sitting between Spain and 'India'.

CM

[Janoosh]

It was the age of trans-global exploration.
There is a major difference between not knowing where you are, and being lost.

[jmort]

If nothing else, Columbus was a "Master Mariner." What he accomplished was incredible. Great story of exploration and discovery.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

"Columbus? It's 'Indigenous People's Day' in Mpls."

http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/256788831.html

Happy Indigenous People’s Day

[Janoosh]

Here....and thought it was "el dia de la raza"......
LOL. ..

[Multigunner]

in 1960, undeniable proof of Vikings in North America came to light at L’Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland, Canada. Several Norse Viking pieces and clear Icelandic- style house foundations gave proof positive that Vikings had indeed landed, and briefly settled, in North America 500 years before Columbus.

http://www.mnh.si.edu/vikings/1137.html

Click through on the links for more.
Newfoundland is also an island, far smaller than Greenland. Neither can be considered the mainland, certrainly not by those who live there.

[bob208]

they also found ruins along the St. Laurence river.

but to even predate the Vikings. read the Ra expeditions. the Egyptians did get to the main land although it was South America.

[dakotashooter2]

America was discovered long before Columbus or the Vikings....Remember?.... there were already people here.................................

[pressonregardless]

America was discovered long before Columbus or the Vikings....Remember?.... there were already people here.................................

I think this is a point that is lost on many.

[jmort]

I don't think it's lost on anybody. I think everyone has enough sense to know that North and south America were populated. The point is that the "known" world did not know about North and South America.

[dagger dog]

Are you one of those who actively seeks out denigrating things to say about America and our traditional beliefs?



Columbus knew the earth was round, and logic told him that he could reach 'The Orient' by sailing to the west.
But, the planet is simply a lot bigger than he knew ... with a whole set of continents he never suspected sitting between Spain and 'India'.

CM

No I'm one of those that actively seeks the truth be told to innocent minds !

Columbus discovered nothing, the "new world" was inhabited when he arrived.

Besides he and JFK have enough bridges, express ways, and buildings named after them.

[jmort]

For sure he did discover a whole lot. If we pretend that the indigenous Native Americans had a more technically advanced culture, and they sailed over to Europe, they, from their perspective, would have discovered Europe. Since they were at a technological disadvantage, they were beaten like a piñata.

[Janoosh]

As has every civilization that was technologically inferior.
The indigenous peoples of the American continents were no angels. Eastern woodland indians enslaved each other.
Aztecs butchered surrounding tribes.
Mayans butchered each other.
As did most of Europe.
The major difference is the technology.
And the use of it to explore new territories.

[jmort]

They were brutal, and the oppressed tribes were more than happy to get back at the Aztecs and Incas. There were no good guys in this. The liberal myth of the benign Indian is just that, a myth.

[Janoosh]

+1 jmortimer.

[montana_charlie]

Columbus discovered nothing, the "new world" was inhabited when he arrived.
Using that kind of 'logic', I guess you would say that nobody ever discovered anything.
You're probably not at all impressed by Lewis and Clark, either.

CM

[cbrick]

The liberal myth of the benign Indian is just that, a myth.

More accurately it is a flat out lie. The same as Columbus didn't discover America, it's all part of the re-writing of history meant solely to diminish America and put her in her proper place.

Read any high school history books lately?

Rick

[jmort]

Brother you know had bad it is out here and I have a 16 year old daughter and she has a constant barrage of garbage. So yes I know what is being done to our kids. Thank God she has a clear view of things. She is constantly debating the obama drones.

[Hamish]

Are you one of those who actively seeks out denigrating things to say about America and our traditional beliefs?



Columbus knew the earth was round, and logic told him that he could reach 'The Orient' by sailing to the west.
But, the planet is simply a lot bigger than he knew ... with a whole set of continents he never suspected sitting between Spain and 'India'.

CM

What dagger dog said is the truth. I'm having a REALLY hard time figuring out how you misconstrued what he said and turned it into that Trollish question.

[dagger dog]

Charlie I have nothing bad to say about the Lewis and Clark expedition. Just imagine what the USA would be like if Thomas Jefferson hadn't put the OK to the Louisiana Purchase and sent them on their quest.

There wouldn't be a Montana and you would have been deprived of your handle.

[Multigunner]

I've read of Heyerdahl's recreations of supposed sea voyages and seen the documentaries, but these don't prove that such voyages occurred only that it was possible that they could have occurred.

I'm reminded of a viking sword found in a river in the U S that later turned out to have been stolen from a collector in a burglary and tossed in the river when the thief couldn't find a fence who would buy it.
Deliberate frauds are also a known factor.
The degree of misrepresentation of archaeological finds is apalling.

Not long ago a new theory on viking migration and armor construction was based on a single example of an until then unknown type of helmet.
The theory blew up when a militaria collector recognized that rather than an ancient viking's iron helmet it was a flack resistent steel lining from a ME 262 jet fighter pilot's helmet. Its apparent aging was due to burning jet fuel and hitting the ground at hundreds of miles per hour then lying in the ground for sixty+ years.

Planting artifacts in order to "discover" them at a later date in order to sell a few books was an all too common ploy over the years.

[Multigunner]

Bob 208

they also found ruins along the St. Laurence river.

Turns out that was fraudulent story put out by "the World News Daily" a hoax news site similar to "the Onion".
The hoax was spotted when someone recognized the supposed photos of found artifacts to be a photo of viking artifacts from a Norwegian museum exhibit.
Once a hoax news report goes viral it takes on a life of its own.

[jmort]

That is OK as it gave us the opportunity to post and celebrate the great achievements of Columbus

[montana_charlie]

What dagger dog said is the truth. I'm having a REALLY hard time figuring out how you misconstrued what he said and turned it into that Trollish question.
He stated three things.
A. Columbus treated the natives badly.
B. Columbus was lost.
C. The vikings beat Columbus to the Americas.

Each of those takes away from any recognition of Columbus as having risked much to explore a theory which greatly expanded the knowledge of (then current) modern civilization.

a. Columbus' treatment of 'primitive people' was considered entirely appropriate by the standards of his day, so he deserves no vilification for it.
b. He 'found' a landmass between Spain and India that he didn't know existed, but he was entirely capable of navigating back to his starting point. That does not fit the definition of 'lost'.
c. As for the vikings, even if it's true that they reached this continent ahead of Columbus, that is not something for which he deserves condemnation.

True or not, none of the 'accusations' address the benefit to civilization from Columbus' discovery of an unknown set of continents rich in resources ... and the means to reach them.
Therefore, their only function is to 'denigrate' the man, himself, and thereby detract from his place in history.

Still think I misconstrued what he said?




Charlie I have nothing bad to say about the Lewis and Clark expedition. Just imagine what the USA would be like if Thomas Jefferson hadn't put the OK to the Louisiana Purchase and sent them on their quest.
Imagine what the known world would look like if Isabella had not funded Columbus.

CM

[Janoosh]

You cannot deny mankind's longing for exploration.....and conquest. It would not be sound analysis to say there would be No state of Montana.
Egypt, Greece, Persia, Rome, France, England, Germany, Russia et al, All have sought "Manifest Destiny". As did the indigenous peoples of the American continents.
Anthropologists/ Archaeologists have " discovered that the America's were beset by three distinct waves of peoples. Note the difference between the physical aspects of them. Eastern Woodland peoples were not short people.....Mayans are.
Inuit peoples differ from Western peoples.
The victors write history.
Now......if it "Truth" we are after......
All the truth......or just the feel good truth....or all the truth the made to fit.
I can handle ALL the truth.!!!

[jmort]

^ Exactly

[dagger dog]

The evidence of Viking occupation in the New World came from a forged iron straight, cloak, pin found in the ruins of a longhouse foundation, radio-carbon dated along with other fireplace and midden discards to the 11th century, and found in Newfoundland, North America .

The fact that Columbus was lost was my interpretation. Yes he may have known about the global theory and the "shortcut" by sailing west, but why did he call the inhabitants Indians if he wasn't lost ?

Does age temper the conception of slavery ? You'd be hard pressed to explain his actions in the name of the Crown, today or even in his time !

I am an American ! I cherish my native heritage ! My forefathers fought and died so that I could live free !

My full name and place of habitation are free for the asking, that way anyone that cares to differ can stand nose to nose with me and discuss this subject !

[bob208]

I read about the Viking discoveries long before I had a computer. the other explorations and theories too. I even had some ideas of my own that were later proved right. most time the ones doing the most nay saying are only protecting their book rights and grant money. I respect Thor Hierodule he took the trips to prove his point. I never said anything about the Chinese anchors found off the ca. cost.

but then to many the world is still flat.

[KCSO]

And the first telephone was invented by Alexander Grahm Belkowski the first telephone pole? I would like to read all the documentation first.

[montana_charlie]

The evidence of Viking occupation in the New World came from a forged iron straight, cloak, pin found in the ruins of a longhouse foundation, radio-carbon dated along with other fireplace and midden discards to the 11th century, and found in Newfoundland, North America .

The fact that Columbus was lost was my interpretation. Yes he may have known about the global theory and the "shortcut" by sailing west, but why did he call the inhabitants Indians if he wasn't lost ?

Does age temper the conception of slavery ? You'd be hard pressed to explain his actions in the name of the Crown, today or even in his time !

I am an American ! I cherish my native heritage ! My forefathers fought and died so that I could live free !

My full name and place of habitation are free for the asking, that way anyone that cares to differ can stand nose to nose with me and discuss this subject !
Thanks for all of that, but my last post (and question) was directed to Hamish ... who remains silent.
CM

[Multigunner]

Yes he may have known about the global theory and the "shortcut" by sailing west, but why did he call the inhabitants Indians if he wasn't lost ?

"Indios" was the Spanish/Latin as applied to the Hindu was a generic term meaning "people of many gods". It meant civilized Pagans who worshipped many gods.
The Spanish later applied the term to the native peoples of the islands though they altered the meaning to "people of God"considering them to be man in his natural state un affected by civilization and not knowing any better.
The term remained even after meeting the more civilized Indios of the South American continent where it once more meant "people of many gods".

In India the term Indian never caught on with the people who actually lived there. It would be the same as an Aussie calling all Englishmen "Poms" or an Englishman calling all Americans "Yanks".

[jmort]

There is no debate, he was lost in that he had no idea where he was. But, again, he was a superb mariner and added a huge and valuable cache of knowledge of the known world. As for the notion that he was worse than the savages he encountered, what a joke.

[Multigunner]

The evidence of Viking occupation in the New World came from a forged iron straight, cloak, pin found in the ruins of a longhouse foundation, radio-carbon dated along with other fireplace and midden discards to the 11th century, and found in Newfoundland, North America .

My point was that theres never been reliable evidence that Vikings reached the "Mainland" of North America. Greenland and Newfoundland are not part of the "mainland" they are islands. Newfoundland is small and close to the coast and Greenland is huge for an island but very far from the mainland.

I don't doubt that vikings reached the mainland, its logical that some would have done so, but they left no indisputable evidence of presence there.
The many faked finds have obscurred any actual finds.

Other "finds" have been misinterpreted. The ancient Chinese coins found among the Tlingit tribe of Alaska turned out to have been left there by 19th century seafarers who picked them up cheap in China to use as trade items. The coins had holes in the middle like a washer so the Tlingit liked to use them like conchos. They also laced the coins to leather shirts to make body armor proof against arrows and edged weapons.

As for Chinese vessels reaching the west coast thats very likely. Asian vessels still wash up on the California coastline on occasion though not because the crews wanted to go there. Ocean currents are still bringing debris from Japanese container ships sunk during that last big earthquake and tsunami.
Whether any ancient Chinese sailors arrived on our coasts alive and returned to tell the tale is the question.

It you are the first to reach a island and return you can be considered an explorer. It you end up there and can never get home you are a castaway.

I have read of an Eskimo in a Kayak ending up swept all the way to the coast of the UK. I'm sure he did not have that in mind when he went out hunting seals one morning.

[jmort]

The Vikings in America is less important as the discovery was never disseminated. It was never put to use except for the failed settlements.

[waksupi]

I seem to recall that there was a lead tablet found in Minnesota left by the vikings. Any Minnesotans know if my recollecter is working right?

[Mk42gunner]

I don't think this is what Ric is talking about; but I remember there being some theory that the Mandans were descended from a "lost colony" of Vikings.

Regardless of if Columbus was the first or the fiftieth to discover America, he was the first to widely publicize the fact.

America isn't even named after Columbus; Amerigo Vaspucci ring a bell with anyone?

Robert

[Multigunner]

A short list of the most notorious Viking in America hoaxes.

http://www.vikingrune.com/2009/05/top-ten-viking-hoaxes/

[facetious]

We will most likely never know who were the first people to discover the America's. Thy will never be know'en because when thy discovered it thy stayed instead of going back home and declaring that thy had claimed it for their king ,country or church, who then got to write the history books.

[Multigunner]

Most likely the first man to cross the Bering Straights and set foot on this continent was immediately run down and eaten by a Short Faced Bear.
In Russia they call it the "God Bear". Scientists say that no human population could have survived where these bears roamed, and they were all over the North American continent just before humans settled here.

I once ran across a article that told of a possible attempt by ancient Russ Vikings to invade South America. It used Spanish made copies of illustrations and text from the Incas. Later all those texts were locked away from public view and researchers now have a hard time getting permission to study them.
A Spanish Priest in charge of destroying the Inca texts instead became fascinated by them and made accurate copies that survived till modern times.

[Hamish]

Thanks for all of that, but my last post (and question) was directed to Hamish ... who remains silent.
CM

My apologies! I've been a little busy,,,,,,

Go back and look at your initial post that I first commented on and look at it like someone else posted it, and tell me it doesn't look like a trolling attempt.

Charlie, a lot of the time anymore, it appears that a good bit of what you post is fighting, just to fight, and I'm just not up for that at the moment.

[popper]

I do remember seeing his 'house' in Italy, he evidently was someone of standing as he got the Queen to finance his trip (against the king's wishes), wasn't 'lost' so he was a pretty good navigator. Where he was born? Who cares - doubt he did.

[Janoosh]

As a student of anthropology/ Archaeology I personally think that Columbus knew where he was going. Being that the Portuguese were master sailors at the time and knew of the Grand Banks, Columbus sailed towards what he thought was India, or so he said to Cya, but sailed towards a land, unfounded by Europe. For the accolades and possible rewards.
We must Remenber that it was Europe in the time of the Guilds and passage to India for spices, etc. was a restricted enterprise. Thus a "New, faster" way was needed.
And what Columbus.. "discovered".. was that there was no direct passage and that a "New" continent was there.
My interpretation of being lost is not knowing where you are....and not being able to return to base camp. Lasalle comes to mind.
Exploring new lands means not knowing where you are. ...but being able to return. Columbus. Lewis and Clark. The mountain men of the Rockies.

[ksfowler166]

The fact that Columbus was lost was my interpretation. Yes he may have known about the global theory and the "shortcut" by sailing west, but why did he call the inhabitants Indians if he wasn't lost ?

Does age temper the conception of slavery ? You'd be hard pressed to explain his actions in the name of the Crown, today or even in his time !
Columbus was not really lost at the time maps were missing a couple of degrees of longitude that coincidental cover North and South America. They had no idea that the continents were there. At the time he set foot in the Americas Columbus thought he was in the East Indies. Hench why he named the natives Indians.

An interesting side note Columbus did not sail or Spain or for King Ferdinand but for Queen Isabella the monarch of Castile.

As for slavery, Spanish law expressly forbade slavery what the Spanish set up in the New World was a feudal system. With natives becoming serfs bound to the land on these encomiendas and plantations. Slavery at that time was common across the world the Aztecs practiced it, the Portuguese practiced it, as well as many African tribes. It is very easy to justify slavery at said time.

[Janoosh]

DNA. A good friend of mine does dna research for IBM ( tinfoil hat time, IBM wants a living chip.) He has researched mytochondrial dna along the Pacific rim. And researched mytochondrial dna in the Mediterranean, specifically Syria and has found that the majority of Christians in Syria are related to people in France (Crusaders). Testing the indigenous peoples of America would tell where they came from. There is a Religious restriction though as these peoples believe that they have been here forever.
The last theory I read of about the inhabitation of the American continents stated that there was also a bridge (ice,land) across the Eastern straights. And that those peoples died out with the mega-fauna (which scientists don't know how they died out also).

To expound on the original post of the possibility of Columbus being Polish.....

"So What.....Who Cares..!!!"

[Lngntooth]

I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/danielboon142243.html)
Daniel Boone (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/danielboon142243.html)

[montana_charlie]

Go back and look at your initial post that I first commented on and look at it like someone else posted it, and tell me it doesn't look like a trolling attempt.

If you consider a question that encourages introspection to be 'trolling', I guess you have just trolled me ...


Charlie, a lot of the time anymore, it appears that a good bit of what you post is fighting, just to fight, and I'm just not up for that at the moment.
Then, by all means, ignore me ... please.