Re: Kensington runestone in the Scandinavian press

cgjt wrote: 
"Tom McDonald" <tmcdonald2672@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet
news:Fn_qe.8718$rt3.3314@xxxxxxxxxxx

cgjt wrote:

"Tom McDonald" <tmcdonald2672@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet
news:0jNqe.1216$eL5.196@xxxxxxxxxxx


<snip>

In addition, harvesting the bark is not something that can be
done easily (as would be necessary, one might imagine, for
beginners such as the Norse)



Beginners ?? I dont understand. A pack of fat bishops or
spoiled tax collectors , OK, but what prevent presence
of a carpenter that know how to build a small boat
or experienced sailors that know how to swing an axe?
Bark was used in Scandinavia on many places for
various pupouses during a wide time span.


Was bark commonly used for canoes or other small boats? 


I would not say that it was common, but there are a few findings.
One is found in Horred, Västergötland but I have no usefull
information.Sorry. I live in Östergötland and don´t mind
go to Linköping for looking at a house with a cross,
but going Göteborg for finding out about a boat that may
not even be of relevance is a bit to much for me.
My -79 G20 Beauville is to thirsty :-[



	Thanks for that.

BTW, I commiserate about the price of gas. Here in Wisconsin, we're now paying about $2.15 per gallon. <ducks and runs :-)>



If not, then these guys might or might not have been neophytes
in removing bark; but they would certainly have been beginners at
bark canoe building. It is a very skilled craft filled with
not-immediately-obvious pitfalls and specialized techniques.



I can not se a band of Nordic explorers/tax collectors
building bark canoes. If they built something for use
on water it would most likely be made of wood.

That makes sense for a Lake Superior landfall, because the forests there would provide any number of large trees just right for felling and splitting into planks. However, ISTM that one would have had to have gone quite a long way south from the mouth of the Nelson or Hayes rivers to get to anything like usable-sized trees. Of course, if the knorr had a couple of boats....

FWIW, the French missionaries that came to Wisconsin early on used large birch bark canoes to get around. A couple of such canoes would have been just the ticket for a notional KRS party in western Minnesota. I wonder whether cultural differences between the midaeval Norse and the 17th century French might have inclined one group to accept native watercraft and the other to reject them?

<snip>

What do you make of Inger's assertion
that remains of a klinker-built of pre-Columbian vintage was
found in Canada?



If there is two clinker built boats in a museum I trust that
the museum knows what it is they have.

And I would like to know about the museum, to ask them directly. Inger hasn't deigned to tell us, and I must have missed it if anyone else did tell us. Aside from tk's mention of two dugouts in an Indiana museum, that is.



There is nothing
that will make me thrust Inger E Johansson.


	YE GODS! PLEASE tell me you meant 'trust'!

	The Horror! The Horror!




Do you have the references that she is not giving? 


No. Don't you guys on the other side  have access to
information.

I'm easily confused, and haven't noticed until today anyone mentioning the possibility of Inger's boats actually existing. I've also learned not to waste a lot of time on looking up things she says support her unless she's pretty specific about what to look for or where to look for it. I have leagues of wild Inger chases under my belt, and am become wary.

[Hmm. That last reads oddly, and oddly stomach-churning. Perhaps I should have said, 'I have leagues of Inger-inspired wild goose chases under my belt....]

I don't trust Inger to give sane references any more than you do; or do I accept what she gives without real investigation if she appears to.

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