Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

European tribe in pre-Columbian America?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Romans in Brazil?

    Not long ago, I saw a fleeting reference to a possible Roman galley that sunk off the Brazilian coast. And someone is trying to go after it. The implication is that it is in very deep water.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by PDHOTLEN
      Not long ago, I saw a fleeting reference to a possible Roman galley that sunk off the Brazilian coast. And someone is trying to go after it. The implication is that it is in very deep water.

      Some years ago I saw at tv that Roman jars would have been found off the Brazilian coast by some divers.
      I wonder if some archaeologists tried to confirm the authenticty of those jars.

      Nordvarg

      Comment


      • #18
        Recently I saw a mention in a norwegian newspaper that they may have found a peruvian Inca buried in Norway more than 1,000 years ago. Apparently the neck of the skeleton was missing a bone which has previously only been found among the Inca. I have yet to see real scientific confirmation though.

        John

        Comment


        • #19
          ancient mariners

          And don't forget those apparent Native Americans who washed up on the shore of one of the Azores(?), unfortunately dead, back in pre-Columbus times. (Now where did I read that?)

          Comment


          • #20
            I have heard of Roman jars found in (northeast?) Brazil.
            I haven't heard, until today, of an Inca found in Norway, and an American Indian found in the Azores. I totally believe all the stories.
            Trade/travel involving the Americas didn't begin with Columbus.
            I know nearly everyone takes it as gospel that Columbus was the first. But even the bible has more to it than the gospel. This is like finding out about Leviticus, or something. Or the Gospel of Mary

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by rainbow
              I have heard of Roman jars found in (northeast?) Brazil.
              I haven't heard, until today, of an Inca found in Norway, and an American Indian found in the Azores. I totally believe all the stories.
              Trade/travel involving the Americas didn't begin with Columbus.
              I know nearly everyone takes it as gospel that Columbus was the first. But even the bible has more to it than the gospel. This is like finding out about Leviticus, or something. Or the Gospel of Mary
              I should have attached the link to the Inca reference: http://www.aftenposten.no/english/lo...cle1856505.ece

              In any case, there is ample proof that the Vikings made it to the americas hundreds of years before Columbus.

              John

              p.s. Here are some people trying to prove your point: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6294786.stm
              Last edited by Johnserrat; 18 July 2007, 10:03 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Johnserrat
                I should have attached the link to the Inca reference: http://www.aftenposten.no/english/lo...cle1856505.ece

                In any case, there is ample proof that the Vikings made it to the americas hundreds of years before Columbus.

                John

                p.s. Here are some people trying to prove your point: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6294786.stm
                Thanks for the links.
                I haven't read the Inca link yet, but I did just read about the reed boat. It's based on a cave painting from 10,000 years ago And the article mentions the nicotine & cocaine found in Egyptian mummies

                I don't think it's a great idea to set sail in the middle of the year. During the summer? Early Spring would be the best time to set sail, I think. But what do I know, I've never been on the Atlantic ocean. At least they set sail from New York and not Florida. I'd worry about hurricane season & the Bermuda Triangle drowning them I hope they took life vests with them.

                I knew about Vikings in North America.
                I think the Egyptians bought stuff that was transported between South America and Africa. Maybe from Brazil to Africa, then around east Africa, then to various places, then eventually to Egypt.
                But the New York to Spain trip looks fascinating. Maybe that'll help explain why Native American mtdna X is found in both Northeast North America and Western Europe (France & British Isles).
                Or maybe the Vikings that left North America to go back to Europe brought along their Indian wives who were X mtdna.
                I wonder if the Vikings that settled Vineland brought some mtdna K women with them to America? Maybe that's why some full-blood Indians have K mtdna?

                http://www.ftdna.com/forum/showthrea...light=nicotine

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by rainbow

                  Maybe that'll help explain why Native American mtdna X is found in both Northeast North America and Western Europe (France & British Isles).
                  Or maybe the Vikings that left North America to go back to Europe brought along their Indian wives who were X mtdna.
                  I wonder if the Vikings that settled Vineland brought some mtdna K women with them to America? Maybe that's why some full-blood Indians have K mtdna?

                  http://www.ftdna.com/forum/showthrea...light=nicotine
                  My understanding is that the mtDNA X found in about 3% of native americans likely orginates in the Caucacus, unlike most of the other NA haplogroups which originate in East Asia. However, that does not mean any contact between Europe and the americas in the past 13,000 years. I have not seen any studies suggesting any population movement of Xs in a "recent" timeframe.

                  I am not familiar with mtDNA haplogroup K being found in native americans. Do you have a source for this?

                  John

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Johnserrat
                    My understanding is that the mtDNA X found in about 3% of native americans likely orginates in the Caucacus, unlike most of the other NA haplogroups which originate in East Asia.
                    That was an old conclusion, from about 2003, based on sparse evidence. That claim was that Native American mtDNA X contained 4 mutations (and usually a 5th) that were not found elsewhere. One of these distinctive mutations always found was 200G, and another usually found was 16213A.

                    However, MitoSearch finds 200G in English people, too:

                    http://www.mitosearch.org/haplosearc...wuid=MY7X6&p=0

                    http://www.mitosearch.org/haplosearc...wuid=REEKC&p=0

                    This would then imply that Native American mtDNA X is closest to English mtDNA X. On the other hand, English descendants are hyper-represented in MitoSearch in comparison to other ethnic groups; it is certainly possible that we will find 200G in the Caucasus, or Lithuania, or who knows where, given enough sampling.

                    The other 3 distinctive mutations were in the coding region, so they will not show up until enough people have submitted their full mitochondrial sequences to GenBank.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by lgmayka
                      That was an old conclusion, from about 2003, based on sparse evidence. That claim was that Native American mtDNA X contained 4 mutations (and usually a 5th) that were not found elsewhere. One of these distinctive mutations always found was 200G, and another usually found was 16213A.

                      However, MitoSearch finds 200G in English people, too:

                      http://www.mitosearch.org/haplosearc...wuid=MY7X6&p=0

                      http://www.mitosearch.org/haplosearc...wuid=REEKC&p=0

                      This would then imply that Native American mtDNA X is closest to English mtDNA X. On the other hand, English descendants are hyper-represented in MitoSearch in comparison to other ethnic groups; it is certainly possible that we will find 200G in the Caucasus, or Lithuania, or who knows where, given enough sampling.

                      The other 3 distinctive mutations were in the coding region, so they will not show up until enough people have submitted their full mitochondrial sequences to GenBank.
                      I suppose another explanation is that these people could be descendants of native americans brought to England during the colonial period. Very interesting stuff.

                      Are you aware of any research on this subject since 2003?

                      John

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        The Solutreans

                        The talk of Europeans coming to America thousands of years ago has been something I've read about and researched for awhile, all very interesting.
                        The Solutreans of were Spain is today, they were the cave painters, they lived in the Spain area around 17,000 years ago.
                        Some Scientist think they came to the Eastern seaboard of North America, sailing along the ice sheets, and were here before Clovis, Clovis was a spear point made around 10,000 years ago, most Clovis is found in the eastern part of North America.
                        If you look up Solutreans on search, you'll find lots about them.
                        They think this is were the X marker from Europe came from that show up in some Native American people's genes.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Guy
                          The talk of Europeans coming to America thousands of years ago has been something I've read about and researched for awhile, all very interesting.
                          The Solutreans of were Spain is today, they were the cave painters, they lived in the Spain area around 17,000 years ago.
                          Some Scientist think they came to the Eastern seaboard of North America, sailing along the ice sheets, and were here before Clovis, Clovis was a spear point made around 10,000 years ago, most Clovis is found in the eastern part of North America.
                          If you look up Solutreans on search, you'll find lots about them.
                          They think this is were the X marker from Europe came from that show up in some Native American people's genes.
                          Fascinating. Thank you Guy.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Johnserrat
                            My understanding is that the mtDNA X found in about 3% of native americans likely orginates in the Caucacus, unlike most of the other NA haplogroups which originate in East Asia. However, that does not mean any contact between Europe and the americas in the past 13,000 years. I have not seen any studies suggesting any population movement of Xs in a "recent" timeframe.

                            I am not familiar with mtDNA haplogroup K being found in native americans. Do you have a source for this?

                            John

                            I've seen it on this forum, somewhere. A few people who are American Indian have posted that their mtdna is K. I just can't seem to find it now.
                            Last edited by rainbow; 20 July 2007, 10:52 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Here is the story of Henry Sinclair coming to Nova Scotia:

                              http://www.geocities.com/athens/aege.../sinclair.html

                              "European fishermen probably crossed to the Grand Banks regularly by the mid-14th Century, although being illiterate, they didn't record these passages, which consequently went ignored by those who wrote history. But the first European to reach these shores who could be called a "cruising sailor" of sorts, may well have been Henry Sinclair, Earl of Orkney. There is reason to speculate that Sinclair visited Nova Scotia in 1398 -- 94 years before Columbus' "voyage of discovery"

                              Columbus may have been aware of a Sinclair voyage. Sinclair's grandson, John Drummond, settled in the Portuguese Madiera Islands c. 1430. Columbus spent time in the service of the Perestrello family in Madeira, eventually marrying Felipa Perestrello. The Perestrellos were related by marriage to the Madiera Drummonds, and Columbus very likely knew Henry Sinclair's great-grandson John Affonso Escorcio ("The Scot") Drummond."

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Pleroma
                                Here is the story of Henry Sinclair coming to Nova Scotia:

                                http://www.geocities.com/athens/aege.../sinclair.html

                                "European fishermen probably crossed to the Grand Banks regularly by the mid-14th Century, although being illiterate, they didn't record these passages, which consequently went ignored by those who wrote history. But the first European to reach these shores who could be called a "cruising sailor" of sorts, may well have been Henry Sinclair, Earl of Orkney. There is reason to speculate that Sinclair visited Nova Scotia in 1398 -- 94 years before Columbus' "voyage of discovery"

                                Columbus may have been aware of a Sinclair voyage. Sinclair's grandson, John Drummond, settled in the Portuguese Madiera Islands c. 1430. Columbus spent time in the service of the Perestrello family in Madeira, eventually marrying Felipa Perestrello. The Perestrellos were related by marriage to the Madiera Drummonds, and Columbus very likely knew Henry Sinclair's great-grandson John Affonso Escorcio ("The Scot") Drummond."
                                I totally believe that Columbus knew something beforehand. I think he wanted the glory & all the credit of 'discovering' new land. And from what I've read about how Columbus treated the Indians, he was extremely cruel to them, he could have been just as mean before that.
                                Last edited by rainbow; 22 July 2007, 12:21 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X