ancient peoples discovered america?

[Vietcong]

I remember seeing *i forgot what site, im thinking wiki* a long list of evidence showing that some ancient ppls discovered america.
this includes,
roman coins found in what was the triple alliance and all over America, some depicting what is Nero.
statues of roman gods and goddess.
a tablet found in Brazil, talking about a Phoenician ship that was lost in a storm and hit land their.
some Celtic/germanic looking writings on rocks in the east coast of usa.
and alot more.

i was wondering if any one has links to more credable sorces to this stuff then wikki? i allso the link to wikki will be nice too since i lost it and cant think of what it is. thanks

 

[cybrxkhan]

there are quite a few books on them, i have them myself; unfortuantely i forgot the name and can't find it; if i find it i'll put it here.

as for the evidence of it being credable, i suppose that's up to opinion.

 

[Vietcong]

what i mean by that is, well is thear any realy well ducumented finds? like the phonecan tablit?
edit:
http://paranormal.about.com/library/weekly/aa080700a.htm

 

[~Corsair#01~]

Even if the Romans or Phoenicians made it to America, they still would have been a bit too late on the scene to "discover" the continent in the sense of being the first to live in the new world. If by "discover", you mean bring news back to the old world of the new continent, then they also clearly failed.


Various cultural trinkets have been found, however I have never heard of a credible historian saying that ancient mediterraneaners found America. There are sources saying that the Chinese did so (notably the novel "1421") and I even heard some lunatic once say that the Aztecs were descended from the Sardinian "sea-people" of legend, but these are generally found to be fabrications and lies.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I usually see the word "discover" as "find something on one's own", although for some reason when it comes to exploration "discover" gets put in quotes if the person in question wasn't the first ever to discover it. Drives me nuts.

[/rant]

 

[Traitorfish]

some Celtic/germanic looking writings on rocks in the east coast of usa.

Those are supposed runestones left by Norse of the unsuccessful Vinland colonies. A lot of them are suspect, however, especially the ones found further south and further inland than the Norse are thought to have traveled. What's more, by c.1000, the time of the colony, runic inscriptions had largely fallen out of use in Iceland, replaced by parchment and ink. Also, some appear to be in the Eldar Futhark, obsolete by the time of the Vinland expeditions.

 

[Vietcong]

im tying to get into contact with the galvistion county historical musem and the galvison librarie, but im haveing truble reaching a mr. green.
i was going to ask on the credablity on the roman style ship found in galvistion.

 

[Sharwood]

Well, there is (fairly compelling) evidence that there was at least one way traffic from Eurasia to the Americas. Chinese jade and artwork of a distinctly Chinese nature has been found in Central America. A stash of Roman coins was discovered in Nicaragua. There are several Phoenician/Carthaginian inscriptions up and down the Brazilian coast. The aforementioned Viking settlements.

Most interestingly the alphabet on Easter Island (whose people did not possess writing) is identical to that of one early Indian seafaring civilisation. Can't remember their name.

The only example I've heard of the traffic going the other way was an American Indian-style canoe washing up in Germania during Trajan's campaign there, with people fitting the description of North American Indians still living there. Trajan apparently took them as his most favoured slaves due to their uniqueness.

Of course, the problem with all this stuff is verification. Most of the textual evidence involves copies of copies of copies, so it's possible that they're outright mistakes if not deliberate lies from later periods. It's also virtually impossible to research these things, as they fly in the face of 'accepted' history. It is quite interesting though.

On another note, Melanesian people routinely intermarried with North Australian Aborigines, as did some Malayan peoples.

 

[philippe]

I believe the native americans discovered america, i regard them as very ancient

 

[Valka D'Ur]

some Celtic/germanic looking writings on rocks in the east coast of usa.
and alot more.

Those are supposed runestones left by Norse of the unsuccessful Vinland colonies. A lot of them are suspect, however, especially the ones found further south and further inland than the Norse are thought to have traveled. What's more, by c.1000, the time of the colony, runic inscriptions had largely fallen out of use in Iceland, replaced by parchment and ink. Also, some appear to be in the Eldar Futhark, obsolete by the time of the Vinland expeditions.

You're overlooking the L'Anse aux Meadows colony in Newfoundland. There's no question whatsoever that it was a Viking colony from c. 1000. As for what was or wasn't in use in Iceland, that's irrelevant. The L'Anse aux Meadows colonists were from Greenland.

im haveing truble reaching a mr. green.

He's probably in the Lounge, with the Candlestick.

I believe the native americans discovered america, i regard them as very ancient

Best answer!

 

[TheLastOne36]

Imo, it was the Polynesians that were the first Eurasian people to have discovered the Americas. The evidence such as Polynesian canoes used by Californian Indians, and some fruit or vegetable native to Polynesia were discovered growing by Californian Indians to. As well as a washed up Polynesian canoe on the Ecuadorian coast and sweet potatoes as we know, are native to the Americas, have been found growing and cultivated by the Polynesians.

Imo that points to some contact between Polynesians and Amerindians.

 

[cybrxkhan]

some other theories i have heard, about people who came before Columbus, some more plausible than others (some may have been mentioned already):

- Phoenicians
- Romans
- Ancient Scandinavians (Pre-Viking ones, yes)
- China (and not just the 1421 hypothesis)
- Ancient Japanese
- Polynesians
- Ancient Egyptians
- Arabs
- Malians
- Welsh
- Israelites
- Portugese (about ~20 years before Columbus i think, so they say)
- Spanish (same as above)
- Italians (same as above)
- Columbus himself (i read that he could have possibly went to North America in an accidental trip about ten or twenty years before his famous voyage)

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

You're overlooking the L'Anse aux Meadows colony in Newfoundland. There's no question whatsoever that it was a Viking colony from c. 1000. As for what was or wasn't in use in Iceland, that's irrelevant. The L'Anse aux Meadows colonists were from Greenland.

This is the big thing. I find it plausible that there were other people that made pre-Columbian contact with the New World. The difference with the Greenlanders is that they are the only ones (besides the different waves of Asians crossing over in pre-historic times) for which there is concrete proof. Others may have been possible, but there is no doubt that the Vikings were here.

 

[Sharwood]

Everyone's forgetting the Eskimos, they clearly made it before the Vikings.

I don't recall ever hearing anything about Columbus visiting America before his famous journey. I've heard many rumours that he already knew of America, possibly from old Phoenician maps, but never that he'd already been there.

As for Polynesians, there is certainly evidence that they reached America. I'd never heard about the canoes, but the sweet potato was grown in both Hawaii and the Americas, and it's name differed by approximately one syllable. I think it was kumera and kumar, or something like that. There's also indications that the Easter Islanders had some Peruvian ancestry, but I guess we'll find that out for sure now that DNA testing is available.

The Irish are also considered a possibility, they certainly knew of Iceland and possibly Greenland. Greeks for the same reason, along with the South America theory of Atlantis - although personally I think Plato just pulled it out of his arse.

How the hell could the Israelites get there? Not another "Lost Tribe" theory, please? Never heard any stories about the Arabs or Malinese making it, but it's possible.

 

[TheLastOne36]

As for Polynesians, there is certainly evidence that they reached America. I'd never heard about the canoes, but the sweet potato was grown in both Hawaii and the Americas, and it's name differed by approximately one syllable. I think it was kumera and kumar, or something like that. There's also indications that the Easter Islanders had some Peruvian ancestry, but I guess we'll find that out for sure now that DNA testing is available.

forgot about the name of sweet potatoes but i think your right.

i'm pretty curious about this, i want to research a bit...

 

[TheLastOne36]

Ok here's one:

Polynesian Chickens in South America:

Scholars have long assumed the Spaniards first introduced chickens to the New World along with horses, pigs, and cattle. But now radiocarbon dating and DNA analysis of a chicken bone excavated from a site in Chile suggest Polynesians in oceangoing canoes brought chickens to the west coast of South America well before Europe's "Age of Discovery.

Site here for more info: http://www.archaeology.org/0801/topten/chicken.html

Also from wiki,

Apparently the word for a type of logs used in making Polynesian canoes, is kumulā'au in Polynesian, where in the Californian amerindian group the Chumash, who also happen to have polynesian like canoes, the log is called tomolo'o. kumulā'au vs tomolo'o sounds pretty similar.

Also something that isn't Polynesian, an article on wiki about the Olmec:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olmec_alternative_origin_speculations

Still looking more about the polynesians. Will post more after.

 

[TheLastOne36]

http://www.hawaiiankingdom.info/C259362623/E20070605200101/index.html

"There is increasing evidence of multiple contacts with the Americas," [Matisoo-Smith] said, "based on linguistic evidence and similarities in fish hook styles." Physical evidence of human DNA from Polynesia has yet to be found in South America, she added

I'm not sure how different fish hooks can be, but it's worth some mention.

another linguist similarity between Amerindians and Polynesians.

I'd be interested in learning more about the linguistic evidence. I have one isolated example that caught my attention when I first heard it. The language of the Huaorani people is Huao Terero. Take the common interchange of t/k and r/l in Polynesian languages, and consider how Hawaiian words commonly use an 'okina in place of t/k (e.g. kava = 'awa, vaka = wa'a), Terero is not far from 'Olelo. They say Huao Terero is a "language isolate" with "no demonstrable genealogical (or "genetic") relationship with other living languages," so perhaps it is just coincidence, but it does make me wonder. (I know this is stretching it, but Huaorani itself almost sounds like a Hawaiian word. Hua = seed, egg, offspring; rani/lani=heavenly, chiefly. Hmm...)

Star-Bulletin editorial mentions that "the Chumash and nearby Gabrielino Indian tribes learned how to build sewn-plank boats from the Polynesians sometime between 400 and 800 A.D, after thousands of years of using less seaworthy boats," which clicks something else into place for me. Kekula has a story in her family told by her great-grand-uncle David Kaonohiokala Bray, who visited the Hopi repeatedly from 1958 to 1968, after finding a migrational connection between Hawaii and Hopi that also involved the Chumash. The Hopi told of a group of their Sun Clan who had travelled to the Chumash, and then some of them had sailed off into the ocean and were never heard from again. Until Daddy Bray showed up and sang an old chant from his heritage that turned out to be the Hopi song the Sun Clan were to sing when they returned. Seriously. And he had a story of a people who had arrived after the time of Pa'ao and had helped to preserve aloha (Hopi are "people of peace"). They had migrated around I think 24 generations previous, or about 500 years. Now when I read about Polynesians visiting the Chumash several hundred years earlier, improving their sailing canoes, it makes sense that the Chumash would not only be capable of open-ocean navigation, but knew where Hawaii was.

^ A reverse theory. Polynesians came to the Chumash Californian indians, taught them how to make good sea-worthy canoes and the chumash were able to find hawaii themselves.

 

[TheLastOne36]

- Portugese (about ~20 years before Columbus i think, so they say)
- Spanish (same as above)
- Italians (same as above)

Found a good source to that: http://www.dightonrock.com/discoveryofnorthamerica.htm

 

[Shaihulud]

If we are talking about ancient people, obviously the Amerindians discovered it first. I don't know why people are so anxious about wether newcomers later arrive in America other than the Spaniards/Portugese/British who also have a great impact.

 

[Traitorfish]

You're overlooking the L'Anse aux Meadows colony in Newfoundland. There's no question whatsoever that it was a Viking colony from c. 1000.

I didn't mean that. I know it's a well-established fact that the Norse had North American colonies, no question. I was referring to things like the Kensington Runestone, found in Minnesota, or the Heavener Runestone, found in Oklahoma.
The L'Anse Aux Meadow colony doesn't contain any runestones, let alone those written in an obsolete alphabet, so it's not really what I was talking about.

As for what was or wasn't in use in Iceland, that's irrelevant. The L'Anse aux Meadows colonists were from Greenland.

Hardly irrelevant. Greenland was itself the result of Icelandic colonisation, only a generation before the Vinland colonies were established, so there's absolutely no reason that the Greenlandic Norse would use the Elder Futhark, an alphabet which had been abandoned even before Iceland was settled.
Unless you're seriously suggesting, against all reason, that the 11th century Vinland colonies were established by 8th century Norwegians, it is entirely relevant.