Adler17
Prussian Feldmarschall
If Egyptian ships were able to cross the ocean, Phonician were also able to do so.
Adler
Adler
Who was explore America first?
- Thread starter REDY
- Start date
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
Adler17 said:
Sure, just like if Soviet spaceships could go to Alpha Centauri, then so could American ones.
Phoenician ships were galleys - even in the Meditteranean they didn't go far from the coast if they could avoid it. Egyptian craft were even less advanced in the same period. Phoenicians did have rounder ships which relied more on sails, but they were still galleys, and the most advanced Phoenician craft were early biremes. Their Carthaginian successors built more advanced craft, triremes and even quinquiremes, and these were copied by the Romans. But even these later, and far more advanced craft, could not venture on the open ocean. That took clinker or lapstrake built hulls, which are stronger and allow the hull to displace less water so it can ride waves far beyond the coastlines. Meditteranean craft simply didn't have this feature until about the 15th century, and even then, most Meditteranean powers primarily still used galley-type craft.
Che Guava
The Juicy Revolutionary
@frekk
The one thing I never understood is why the egyptians/phonecians would ever decide to just take off westward across a seemingly unending ocean when there were still so many parts of africa/europe that they didn't explore/colonize. It just seems like an odd choice for a voyage: head towards the horizon, sail for weeks without knowing where you might be headed, find land, meet people, teach them how to build pyramids & speak in your language (since they obviously couldn't figure out any of this on thier own), then take off back to egypt with some coca.
Having said that, I'm a little interested (as someone who knows little about naval engineering) as to how the Ra II, the reed boat built by Thor Heyerdahl, managed to cross the atlantic. From an uneducated eye, it doesn't look all that different than galleys, but then again I don't know what really makes the difference between galleys/triremes/longboats, besides the obvious of course.
The one thing I never understood is why the egyptians/phonecians would ever decide to just take off westward across a seemingly unending ocean when there were still so many parts of africa/europe that they didn't explore/colonize. It just seems like an odd choice for a voyage: head towards the horizon, sail for weeks without knowing where you might be headed, find land, meet people, teach them how to build pyramids & speak in your language (since they obviously couldn't figure out any of this on thier own), then take off back to egypt with some coca.
Having said that, I'm a little interested (as someone who knows little about naval engineering) as to how the Ra II, the reed boat built by Thor Heyerdahl, managed to cross the atlantic. From an uneducated eye, it doesn't look all that different than galleys, but then again I don't know what really makes the difference between galleys/triremes/longboats, besides the obvious of course.
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
Che Guava said:
Thor Heyerdahl was a Polynesian archaeologist ... he used Polynesian techniques in his construction, which the ancients of the West and the Meditteranean just didn't know. Like alot of this stuff, he started with an assumption he wanted to prove was true, applied modern knowledge, and got the result he wanted. He did a bit better with the Kon-Tiki, although I think it was a better demonstration of the possibility of Polynesians making it to Peru rather than Peruvians reaching Polynesian centres.
As for the coca and nicotine ... I wouldn't assume too much. There are plenty of unanswered questions about that, too many to assume Egyptians were trading with Olmecs or Mayans. They identified alkaloids that apparently resemble the alkaloid traces left behind by tobacco and cocaine use - but it doesn't necessarily mean they are from the same plants at all. Cocaine, in particular, is not really well-established (no one has been able to reproduce the results) though nicotine does seem to be fairly common in mummies. But the levels are weird, far too high - enough that it would kill a person a few times over. Could have been used as an insecticide? But it seems unlikely that they would travel all the way to Central America to get an insecticide. It's a mystery, for sure, but personally - I wouldn't assume it's indictative of any sort of contact. More likely, its some sort of African plant that is now either extinct or was a cultivated strain from something in the jungles (the Egyptians did possibly manage to circumnavigate Africa, after all). There are still thousands of species in the jungles whose chemical properties are yet unknown.
Che Guava
The Juicy Revolutionary
Now biochem I DO know a little about! 
Just off the top of my head, I think high nicotine content on mummies would probably be for preservative/insecticidal properties. Since humidity is necessary for propoer microbial decomposition, arid environments usually have a higher abundace of arthropod scavengers to pick up the slack. It would therefore be likely that a properly prepared mummy in egypt would have been more at risk of being eaten by insects/arachnids than decomposing via bacteria/fungi.
As for a source, I think it's likely that there is a plant somehwere in africa that produces a nicotine analogue and was maybe even cultivated by the egyptians (or maybe just traded). In fact, small amounts of nicotines are found in other related plants, including tomotoes peppers and potatoes, not to mention coca (although these are all american in origin).
However, many members of the Solanaceae, or nighshade, family occur in europe/africa and produce a variety of tropane alkaloids, a chemical family that includes nicotine (some other notable members include the Henbane & Mandrake families, both of which have complex alkaloid composition). In fact, the metabolic pathway that is responsible for Scopolamine, hyosciamine and a few other alkaloids that are present in eurasian/african Solanaceae is also responsible for nicotine synthesis:
With all the botanical diversity in Africa, I would find it almost more unlikely that there isn't a plant out there producing nicotine, or nicotinic acid. Wheter is was actually cultivated is another question...
Just off the top of my head, I think high nicotine content on mummies would probably be for preservative/insecticidal properties. Since humidity is necessary for propoer microbial decomposition, arid environments usually have a higher abundace of arthropod scavengers to pick up the slack. It would therefore be likely that a properly prepared mummy in egypt would have been more at risk of being eaten by insects/arachnids than decomposing via bacteria/fungi.As for a source, I think it's likely that there is a plant somehwere in africa that produces a nicotine analogue and was maybe even cultivated by the egyptians (or maybe just traded). In fact, small amounts of nicotines are found in other related plants, including tomotoes peppers and potatoes, not to mention coca (although these are all american in origin).
However, many members of the Solanaceae, or nighshade, family occur in europe/africa and produce a variety of tropane alkaloids, a chemical family that includes nicotine (some other notable members include the Henbane & Mandrake families, both of which have complex alkaloid composition). In fact, the metabolic pathway that is responsible for Scopolamine, hyosciamine and a few other alkaloids that are present in eurasian/african Solanaceae is also responsible for nicotine synthesis:
With all the botanical diversity in Africa, I would find it almost more unlikely that there isn't a plant out there producing nicotine, or nicotinic acid. Wheter is was actually cultivated is another question...
Attachments
sydhe
King of Kongs
There's a bit of evidence of people before the Native Americans, but I think more has to be proven. Barring that, the first would be the ancestors of the American Indians in two waves, the Na-Dene's ancestors following the main wave. Next, the ancestors of the Inuit, then the Vikings, then Columbus and possibly the cod fishermen.
There's also the tale of the Emperor of Mali who took a fleet west into the Atlantic and was never seen again, and who may conceivably have made it to Brazil. I want more evidence on the Brazilian end before I accept that he made it, although I'd love it if it were so.
There's also the tale of the Emperor of Mali who took a fleet west into the Atlantic and was never seen again, and who may conceivably have made it to Brazil. I want more evidence on the Brazilian end before I accept that he made it, although I'd love it if it were so.
Adler17
Prussian Feldmarschall
At first Heyerdahl built a boat not to Polynesian but Egypt plans. His first attempt was a failure as he did not use a certain rope everybody though it was only decorative. However Ra II was a boat built after Egyptian plans. So if such a boat worse than the Phoenician could make it, it is highly propable the Phoenicians made it to the New World, since Phoenician artifacts were found there. However this is no real prove but highly likely.
At last Nicotine can be the product of certian plants of Africa explaining much. But I once read that not only Cocaine, but Coca plant parts were found in Egyptian graves. So there must have been a trade from Egypt to the Indians and retour Perhaps via China, if the Egyptians were not able to go there?
There is much in the dark. Too much to say this happend so. However this is the most likely explanations. Also you have to consider that if a sailor found the way to a country not known in his own country he would do everything to keep it secret. So also because of the dangers of such a voyage however, I think the relations between both continents were only very limited, but more than one sailor drifting away and coming back with some Coca plants.
Adler
At last Nicotine can be the product of certian plants of Africa explaining much. But I once read that not only Cocaine, but Coca plant parts were found in Egyptian graves. So there must have been a trade from Egypt to the Indians and retour Perhaps via China, if the Egyptians were not able to go there?
There is much in the dark. Too much to say this happend so. However this is the most likely explanations. Also you have to consider that if a sailor found the way to a country not known in his own country he would do everything to keep it secret. So also because of the dangers of such a voyage however, I think the relations between both continents were only very limited, but more than one sailor drifting away and coming back with some Coca plants.
Adler
Dreadnought
Deity
We are saying that the Egyptians went to the Indians, but what if the Indians went to the Egyptians? 
I voted Vikings BTW.
I voted Vikings BTW.
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
sydhe said:
Oh my ... can't believe I forgot the Inuit. I think they definately deserve a mention, being the first group to "circumcolonize" the hemispheres.
Che Guava
The Juicy Revolutionary
Well I guess it goes without saying that the inuit and Dene came before any european (and probably someone before that, as Adler17 pointed out), but as for trips cross the atlantic, I'm still hedging my bets on the vikings.
@Dreadnought: funny you should mention boats comeing the other way! After doing a little research I found out that the Ra II was actually based on an Andean reed boat design. The egyptian design they tried first (the Ra I) fell apart after making it near the coast of barbados, although this could be due to the fact that the designs they used were from egyptiantombs, and may have been built with aethetics rather than function in mind.
Actually, part of Heyerdahl's theory on pre-1492 contact between Egypt and Mesoamerica was based on the fact that thier boat designs were so similar. Personally, I think that any two groups of people living on a floodplain with lots of papyrus reeds are going to come up with a similar optimal design eventually, but I'm certainly no expert.
@Dreadnought: funny you should mention boats comeing the other way! After doing a little research I found out that the Ra II was actually based on an Andean reed boat design. The egyptian design they tried first (the Ra I) fell apart after making it near the coast of barbados, although this could be due to the fact that the designs they used were from egyptiantombs, and may have been built with aethetics rather than function in mind.
Actually, part of Heyerdahl's theory on pre-1492 contact between Egypt and Mesoamerica was based on the fact that thier boat designs were so similar. Personally, I think that any two groups of people living on a floodplain with lots of papyrus reeds are going to come up with a similar optimal design eventually, but I'm certainly no expert.
sabo
My Ancestors were Vikings
I would have said Siberians but I don't think that theory has been proven beyond a doubt, I said Vikings...
I'm glad no one is saying Chris Columbus..
I'm glad no one is saying Chris Columbus..
Dreadnought
Deity
Me too!!!
deo
Emperor
i saw somewhere a numidian coin that had a map of mediterian in the centre, arabian penisula in the west and some unknown land in the east ( america?)
I think its possible a Carthagenian or Poenician (or anyother acient vessel) ship could have gotten blown off course out side the pillars of Herculese and wound up on the coast of Brazil or something.
I think there is a rock or something in Brazil with Phoenician writing on it that supposedly was written by a group of survivors that landed their when they got lost in a storm on the coast of West Africa.
I think there is a rock or something in Brazil with Phoenician writing on it that supposedly was written by a group of survivors that landed their when they got lost in a storm on the coast of West Africa.
The first explorers were Spanish (Colombus). They chartered the coasts, drew up the first maps, settled down, founded colonies, blended with the natives, imposed their language ... I'm surprised I'm the only one that ticked this option in the poll.
Although it's true Vikings set up a colony in the north american coast they actually thought it was Greenland not a new continent.
The Chinese also got there first but failed to provide maps, input, colonies or whatever. And it hasn't been until the recent publishing of some book that this has been broadly known.
It was in fact the Spaniards who discovered and started to colonize the american continent.
Thousands of american cities and small towns bear Spanish names:
Tejas (Texas), Los Ángeles, California, Florida, Nevada, Las Vegas, Toledo, Las Cruces, Arizona, Alburquerque, San Antonio, Boca Ratón, Colorado, Fresno, Los Gatos, Montana, San Francisco, Valle de San Fernando etc... to name but a few !
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/spanishnames.html
Where are the Viking and Chinese names of states, cities, towns or even hamlets ?
If this question had been asked about Africa it would occur to nobody to say that the Hutus and the x tribe where the first to explore the african continent. Everyone would vote for Dr Livingstone and the likes.
Neglegting the truth doesn't cloud the historical facts.
That's why General Eisenhower when entering the nazi "prison" camps immediately called in the world press and invited them to take photos. He forced the german civilians nearby with bayonnettes to come over to the extermination nazi camps and see for themselves, he also forced them to bury the dead jews.
Eisenhower was a keen historian and knew very well that someday someone would say that the holocaust was an invented myth, just western propaganda. How true does that ring today with Le Pen and Haidder around.
Let us not forget the past, because then we'll be doomed to repeat it. The first step to change history is neglecting the truth and facts. History is cyclical.
Although it's true Vikings set up a colony in the north american coast they actually thought it was Greenland not a new continent.
The Chinese also got there first but failed to provide maps, input, colonies or whatever. And it hasn't been until the recent publishing of some book that this has been broadly known.
It was in fact the Spaniards who discovered and started to colonize the american continent.
Thousands of american cities and small towns bear Spanish names:
Tejas (Texas), Los Ángeles, California, Florida, Nevada, Las Vegas, Toledo, Las Cruces, Arizona, Alburquerque, San Antonio, Boca Ratón, Colorado, Fresno, Los Gatos, Montana, San Francisco, Valle de San Fernando etc... to name but a few !
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/spanishnames.html
Where are the Viking and Chinese names of states, cities, towns or even hamlets ?
If this question had been asked about Africa it would occur to nobody to say that the Hutus and the x tribe where the first to explore the african continent. Everyone would vote for Dr Livingstone and the likes.
Neglegting the truth doesn't cloud the historical facts.
That's why General Eisenhower when entering the nazi "prison" camps immediately called in the world press and invited them to take photos. He forced the german civilians nearby with bayonnettes to come over to the extermination nazi camps and see for themselves, he also forced them to bury the dead jews.
Eisenhower was a keen historian and knew very well that someday someone would say that the holocaust was an invented myth, just western propaganda. How true does that ring today with Le Pen and Haidder around.
Let us not forget the past, because then we'll be doomed to repeat it. The first step to change history is neglecting the truth and facts. History is cyclical.
Rambuchan
The Funky President
Time-scales guys!
When was the ice age that bridged the Baring Straits between Alaska and the North East of Russia/Asia? About 20,000 years ago. When did the Phonaecians and all the others being referred to live? Much more recently.
It was the settlers and hunter gatherers which followed the bison migrations during the Ice Age that first explored and then settled the whole of America. I know this is contested by many folk but IMO the genetics and artistic similarities between American Indians in general and the Siberia / Central Asian peoples confirm this account of events over others. And let's remember this all happened way before the Egyptians were even a glint in some Nubian / Middle Eastern eye.
When was the ice age that bridged the Baring Straits between Alaska and the North East of Russia/Asia? About 20,000 years ago. When did the Phonaecians and all the others being referred to live? Much more recently.
It was the settlers and hunter gatherers which followed the bison migrations during the Ice Age that first explored and then settled the whole of America. I know this is contested by many folk but IMO the genetics and artistic similarities between American Indians in general and the Siberia / Central Asian peoples confirm this account of events over others. And let's remember this all happened way before the Egyptians were even a glint in some Nubian / Middle Eastern eye.
Reno
The Studio Ghibli Fanatic
The people coming across the Bering Strait to colonise the Americas during the Ice Age, of cource the first Europeans to Explore America were the Vikings.
But Native Americans (As in American Indians) were the first.
But Native Americans (As in American Indians) were the first.
Dreadnought
Deity
Drakan, they called the land VINELAND, not GREENLAND. They knew it was a seperate land because, quite simply, grapes grew there, but in Greenland they didn't.
Che Guava
The Juicy Revolutionary
Rambuchan said:
I guess the original question posed at the begining of this thread is a little ambiguous. I always interpreted it as who was the first to explore the americas since the begining of recorded history (~5 000 years ago), because, frankly, I don't think anyone can really ever answer who got to the americas first.
The crossing of the berring's strait by siberians as the first colonization of the americas is still a controversial theory at best. Besides problems with the timescale (if the siberians did cross the berring's strait 12 000 years ago, they would have had to have spread all the way to the southern tip of south america is record time!), genetic studies (presence of aboriginie, and even ancient european fragments in amerindian genes), the incredible diversity of languages in amerindian cultures, and evidence of civilization here before the Clovis migration are enough to cast doubt in almost anyone's mind. I personally don't think this mystery will ever be solved.
As for people that have made it over without the benefit of an ice age, I still think that the vikings are the best bet. While it is certainly possible, even likely, that an egyptian, malese (sp?), irish or basque ship might have been blown off course and found the americas, I don't think they would have been able to make it back without navigational skills, or be responsible for a large scale of cultural diffusion. We do, however, have pretty compelling evidence, through sagas and archeological evidence, that Vikings were able to get to North America, record what they saw, set up a temporary colony, and make it back to europe, all a good 500 years before Columbus, Cabot, and the rest of 'em ever set sail. That's why I still hold firm on my vote for the vikings.
Similar threads
- Poll
