Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Tom McDonald <kiltmac@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 08:45:59 -0500
Inger E wrote:
"Tom McDonald" <kiltmac@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet
news:Gjgii.104$Fb7.30@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Inger E wrote:translation
<snip>
The picking one is you Doug.
Eric partly understood but not completely. OK you haven't seen a
tofrom one of my academic essays where I presented it simple, didn't needexplain since everyone understood what I meant:Fine. Please give the exact reference that shows this purported
"An artifact documented to have been found exist no matter if it's not
expected to have existed in the period which the layer it was found in
dates. "
It's as simple as that.
'chili pepper' was found, in a pre-Columbian context.
Tom,
do you want me to translate a larger amount of text to English? or which
part of the work do you find essential?
The first thing needed is the quotation from Hjelmqvist, Hakon: "Cayennepeppar från Lunds medeltid", Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift, vol 89, pp. 193 ", in which the identification of the 'cayennepeppar' is made. Reference especially the taxonomy Hjelmqvist presents for the pepper, and the characteristics of the material that he uses to make the identification of Capsicum.
I would also like a brief precis (although the actual quotation from Hjelmqvist would be better, even if it was in Swedish) of the context within which it was found, specifically how he was convinced that the material had not been disturbed since it was deposited in the Middle Ages.
That would be enough for me to be going on with for now.
Mind you I might take you up on your request and you will either having same
problem as you sometimes do understanding what I say, or you will find
secundary questions to which I as well as most others can't answer since the
scholar who wrote about the chili pepper isn't among us living.
A scholar need not be living to have her/his work evaluated and carried forward. That is why folks write these things down in the first place.
whereThe next step is to analyse the possible ways it could have ended upit did.The first step is to make available the information upon which
the thing (not an artifact, really, in this case) was found.
That's not the first step, only the second in my book. But never mind. The
first step as I been told is the background knowledge for the place's
history and if a place due to that is linked to for example trade, larger
'roads' ridingways or waterways, major or minor known farms excavated and/or
written about in for example medieval age etc etc.
I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. The first step *in this discussion* is to make available the information upon which the identification as Capsicum was made. Of course, if one were to be doing the original, or follow-up, work on the ground, what you suggest is necessary. At this point, that's a bit farther down the road.
Only
when that has been done, and examined by others for possible
problems, can your next step happen.
In case Lund it's even more known background, mostly Danish, part of today's
town built around the Cathedral on land given by Canote the Great. The areas
around are under same law from 1666 (the first law), as all here in Sweden.
You can read about the laws for our heritage here
cultural_heritage_past_present_and_future.pdf on url:
http://www.raa.se/cms/extern/en/about_us/our_mission/our_mission.html
What it means is that you can't as in many other countries do an excavation
in known ancient layers without taking special precautions and above all: if
anything is found that's essential the RAÄ's archaeologists and/or
archaeologists appointed to the excavation must be contacted. The cost for
excavatations falls on the owner of the land or the company that wants to
build a house, a road etc.
In Lund's case every single part of the town and the older settlement, which
been discussed in group before, are 'known' to hold heritage. Thus you don't
have to ask about how an excavation was done. It's done by professionals as
always in such cases. For the thing you call it, it's from analysing
artifact/artifacts found during such a professionally done excavation's
findings.
OK. Then the report is available, as you gave the reference. But it is always necessary to ask how an excavation was done. Professionals do not always follow the same procedures. An archaeologist 20 years ago would not have done exactly the same things an archaeologist would today. Thus, the 'methods' section of a formal paper.
goApart from which I had new information from an Indian scholar born in El
Salvador who told me that there is a tale that some Incas' ancestors DID
to Europe and stay for some years long before the Spaniards arrived.Evidence? Whose was the purported tale? Was it from El Salvadoran
Indians? Or was the El Salvadoran scholar reporting it working in
Inka-land when he heard it?
A tale told in school and btw El Salvador wasn't an Inca area.
Yes. I know. I know where El Salvador is, and where the Inka live. Thus my questions.
<snip>
ITake your time. But don't forget to finish what you start.
haven't had time during day to check the ref I was given.
I guess you are refering to my manuscript re. the Greenlanders.
In this case, I am referring to the topics you raised in this thread--the Capsicum in Lund and the Inka story.
That's close
to be finished.
A consummation devoutly to be wished.
Have a bit more for 1370's to recheck and during the
rechecking done I managed to find one more Greenlanders who moved to Norway
in 1380's. Will try to find out what he and his did between 1387 and 1430's
when he passed on.
A suggestion, Inger: finish the basic work first. Then issue updates as you find more information. Your current procedure is a sure-fire way never to publish anything.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Inger E
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- References:
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Inger E
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Doug Weller
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Inger E
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Doug Weller
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Inger E
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Peter Alaca
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Inger E
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Peter Alaca
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Johansson
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Peter Alaca
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Eric Stevens
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Doug Weller
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Inger E
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Tom McDonald
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- From: Inger E
- Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- Prev by Date: Re: Best is best on Noah and the Flood
- Next by Date: Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- Previous by thread: Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- Next by thread: Re: Archaeological sensation in Oestfold
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|