Re: True history and myths told by naysayers

IEJ wrote: 
to nospam,
while I agree upon many things you write, you seem to forget or maybe not
know that it's not Scandinavism we who put forward KRS are talking about
and/or in view of, it's the true story we are after no matter which.

For many hundred years Columbus has been the one to be presented as the
'finder', explorer etc of America. That's not true.
While KRS doesn't alter the fact that the Norwegian Greenlanders sailed and
traded with the natives, Indians as well as Inuits, KRS supports written
documents and works from 1400's up to mid 1500's. THAT's one of the issues,
too many scholars who aren't experts neither of Medieval trade nor North
European History and Scandinavian/Arctic Archaeology tries to put forward
false information instead of presenting existing documentation and excellent
archaeologic excavation reports made by Canadian, Danish and others after
excavations in Greenland, Arctic Canada and along Hudson Bay. The truth
needs to be told instead of myths leaning to scholars who believes more in
the Icelandic Sagas then the true story of the contacts between groups of
people from Greenland down to mid NA and from mid NA eastward down to
Virginia.

The Scandinavians weren't first. The Irish were. I am not talking about St
Brendan. He were probably there close to or in what we later calls New
England.
But there are a lot of details presented in Hon. Bede's works as well as in
other Fathers of the Church works which presents us with facts which up to
1700's and/or later centuries excavations sounded 'queer' but have been
proven in line with the historic facts found during excavations. This
includes type of huts in some areas, type of floor and how the entrences
were as well as other details. Most of this details never discussed by
scholars in NA or Europe. Probably because the Prime Sources aren't among
those that most Archaeologists and Historians have been and still are aware
of.
Thus one important factor is to present correct information re. the Irish in
early Medieval Age as well as the Irish living in Vitmannaland which
according not only to the Sagas existed in eastern NA.

Then it's important to present the Indians trade routes not only from
Columbus days onforward but as they were for many generations long before
Columbus was born. What would it hurt to learn that the People of First
Nation not only were good hunters but that they were excellent traders of
cargo that were exported out over almost all the world, to China and Egypt
as well as to England, Scandinavia and Russia? The merchandisers may have
given them good pay or not, but that the merchandisers sailed for the
Norwegians and in many cases were men from Orkney, does that hurt to learn
that they weren't English?

Does it hurt to learn that not only are their early maps showing knowledge
of Hudson Bay long before Hudson was born. Who does such knowledge hurt but
the descendants of Hudson? The carthographers of the maps were almost all of
them Dutch, a few English, one Dane, one Icelander and one
Greenlander(origin not known). Can knowledge of their work in anyway be
thought to be racistic or is it the fact that some of them participated on
Scandinavian ships' crew or had their information from the Scandinavians
reason enough for people to believe that we Scandinavians in anyway could be
mistaken for the Nazis or the Nationalists of 1930's and 1940's? No it
can't.

True history doesn't deal with anything but what really happened knowing
that it's only a slim minority of all written sources that survived and that
runes on wood and birchbarch letters in most cases never have. The history
of our past, human's past, has almost always been written by the winners
and/or from a power position.

Of course it hurt the Brits and desendants to the 'first settlers' to learn
that Pitt stole and ordered lifestock, cows and horses, as well as land
taken from the Swedes of Nya Swerige. Thus I can understand that some didn't
like to learn that there were documents by Pitt's own hand showing this to
be true.

Of course the knowledge that the French weren't first in areas of Canada
they today live in might hurt some nationalistic feelings that still linger
on after the disputes between the Brits and the French over the centuries
after Columbus days. I used the word nationalistic because what's been put
up against Swedes living in Minnesota and Wisconsin can also be said for
every other group settling in mass in regions of NA. And it's true there are
few who holds their own flag higher than those who migrated from their
'home'country. That's nothing there that makes Scandinavians anything better
or worse than the rest.

It's also true that there were many Swedes arriving in NA after 1880. But
they weren't alone and someone might take themself time to think why the
Swedes in many cases didn't stop in the growing towns on the eastcoast and
headed one way or an other to Minnesota. Why didn't they prefer to go to
Delaware or other states in the area that once was Nya Swerige? What most,
linguists included forgotten is that there were tales told about the land in
mid NA the centuries when officially no Scandinavians, or any other than
passing explorers, visited or lived in.

The abusive attacks on Swedes, Norwegians, Danes and other Scandinavians for
wanting our part of the story told as well as the other groups to present a
true history of the past instead of present days English-French version,
those attacks can't be anything but racistic and nationalistic. The
Scandinavians are in no way different than the rest who want's the history
of the past told not by present Paragidm building on later victories and
today's borders between Canada and US. It's sad that some tries to place
themselves on high horses instead of trying to go back to the basic facts in
written contemporary sources, pollen-analyses, historic flie-analyses,
excavation reports they lean to scholars who lean to scholars who tries to
make believe they know but only lean to quotes taken out of it's context
and/or which aren't transcribed correctly.

The KRS is one of many artifacts which can show not only a pattern but
written documents to prove that what's written on the stone actually
happened with or without secret code of the Templars on the stone. I am not
talking about any of the artifacts which been up here over and over being
dismissed by naysayers. You who tries to make that believe you simply don't
know what you are in for. There are others with good context and known
content.

Inger E



	Twat-tle.

--
Tom McDonald
http://ahwhatdoiknow.blogspot.com/
.

Relevant Pages

  • True history and myths told by naysayers
    ... know that it's not Scandinavism we who put forward KRS are talking about ... European History and Scandinavian/Arctic Archaeology tries to put forward ... What would it hurt to learn that the People of First ... Scandinavian ships' crew or had their information from the Scandinavians ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: a question for inger
    ... the stone itself is beleived ... >>scandinavians in St. Paul, ... >>scandinavian immigrants began concentrating, made with materials ... >>These are points of logic not argument for or against KRS. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: a question for inger
    ... >match the stone. ... greywacke of the KRS to the north of Kensington. ... >scandinavians in St. Paul, ... >materials in that 18 year period. ...
    (sci.archaeology)