Talk:Norse colonization of North America

I hope to see this brief statement removed because it is false--- "There are many claims of Norse colonization in New England, none well founded."

Well, here is the problem.... Many people today have been led to believe that only rank amateurs and starry-eyed romantics believe the Norse exploration of North America includes the area of New England. In fact, the weight of scholarly opinion has placed Vinland in the area of southern New England- for well over 100 years now. See page eight of Magnusson and Palsson's 40-page introduction in "The Vinland Sagas', [Penguin Classics]. They wrote-

"...generally speaking, the most acceptable interpretation of the elusive information in the sagas suggests that Vinland was somewhere in the New England region, and the majority of scholars have inclined to this view."

Some Canadians who are heavily invested in L'anse aux Meadows don't like to hear this, but it is still true today over sixty years after Magnusson & Palsson made that observation. Theories placing Vinland in Southern New England ARE well founded. Even Carl Ortwin Sauer, remembered today as America's greatest Geographer of the 20th century believed so, and added his two-cents to the Vinland debate in his 1968 book "Northern Mists." See Facebook- "Vikings? On Cape Cod? for more... 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 12:43, 16 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Where are yours sources? You should have two or three contemporary quality secondary sources, not one that is fifty years old. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 21:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Even after all this time [1965], Magnusson and Palsson's introduction and translation of the two sagas is so highly regarded, I dare say it "...stands alone." It appears in most every recent bibliography that covers this topic. Sure its old, but it's one of those books that is considered 'essential reading' if you really plan to study this topic. It's really difficult to see how anyone could regard it as "outdated."

But I will produce other sources.

Carl's Sauer's "Seventeenth Century North America" [1980] contains this line [page 11]--

"Vinland was placed in southern New England by early well informed students. Later, others located it in northern Newfoundland, inferring either a climate much milder than at present or that vin did not signify grapes. Reviewing what the sagas said of plants, animals, and people, I found additional evidence in support of Vinland as having been in southern New Egland, the climate as at present."

He presented his additional evidence in the 1968 book "Northern Mists".

Many people today think theories locating Vinland in New England as "...unfounded."

It would be difficult to dismiss anything Carl Sauer had to say on the topic as "Fringe.

------------------------------------------------

"Wikipedia on verifiability... means other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than editors' beliefs, opinions, experiences, or previously unpublished ideas or information. Even if you are sure something is true, it must have been previously published in a reliable source before you can add it. If reliable sources disagree with each other, then maintain a neutral point of view and present what the various sources say, giving each side its due weight."

-------------------------------------------------

"Fringe theories and pseudoscience"

"Pseudoscientific theories are presented by proponents as science but characteristically fail to adhere to scientific standards and methods. Conversely, by its very nature, scientific consensus is the majority viewpoint of scientists towards a topic."

-------------------------------------------------

Magnusson and Palsson made it clear in 1965 that "...the majority of scholars..." had inclined to the view that Vinland was in New England. No serious challenge to that statement has been made since then. 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 23:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Regarding your claim that "No serious challenge to that statement has been made since then". This is your original research, dismissive of scholarship since 1965. Contra your assertion, just to cite one example that gives the lie to this statement, Davide Zori in the "7 Stories of Vínland: The End of the Viking Horizon" chapter of his 2023 book, Age of Wolf and Wind: Voyages through the Viking World, says:

A large body of scholarship has attempted to harmonize the places mentioned in the sagas with North American geography and the single New World Viking archaeological site at L’Anse aux Meadows. Most commonly, scholars have assigned this archaeological site to one of the Vínland settlements remembered in the sagas.

Sauer may have been a great geographer, but he was not so great a historian discussing these matters in his outdated book Northern Mists (1968), mainly because he is speculating, drawing rather sweeping conclusions from the scantest historical evidence. It is true that he advocates for identification of New England with Vinland, but he also proposes that the Irish began a westward advance in the 5th century and that they landed in Iceland a century before the Norse, and then, under pressure from Viking settlers, that they continued on to Greenland and North America, where they settled Hvitramannaland—"Ireland the Great"—in the St. Lawrence River valley in the 10th century. In a further indication of how outdated this book is, Sauer deduces that the L'Anse aux Meadows settlement was Irish rather than Norse, citing the extensive evidence of ironworking at the site and carbon dating. I think this qualifies as fringe material. Carlstak (talk) 05:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

When trying to decide how L'anse aux Meadows factors into the Vinland controversy, we all should keep in mind this statement made by Birgitta Wallace, the archeologist who worked closely with the Ingstad's at the site.

“…But even without a slavish acceptance of every word of the sagas, there are certain board suggestions which make it impossible to equate northern Newfoundland with Vinland. All scattered references to Vinland make it plain that, compared with Markland, Vinland was more bountiful, the weather was warmer, the tides were higher, the resources more exotic, and, above all, more varied.  As one source put it: the further south one traveled, the better the land became.”

[Page 300, The Norse Atlantic Saga, Gywn Jones, 2^nd Edition, 1986]

Davide Zori may be reporting in his new book; - "Most commonly, scholars have assigned this archaeological site to one of the Vínland settlements remembered in the sagas."

...but he and others who believe this are only speculating. At the same time, they are ignoring the fact that northern Newfoundland simply does not match the picture of Vinland - as admitted by Wallace.

Southern New England on the other hand does match the picture - according to many reliable sources - such as Carl O. Sauer. 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 22:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

More original research. We go by what reliable sources say, not by your personal opinion, which doesn't supersede a scholarly work published by Oxford Academic. You don't have a case—Carl O. Sauer is demonstrably not a reliable source with his extremely fringe claims that L'Anse aux Meadows was an Irish settlement. This is laughable given the state of archeological work done at the site and the data collected. Carlstak (talk) 23:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes, we have to remember butternuts were collected at L'anse aux Meadows --- clear evidence the Norse had traveled father south. .

And remember also that NO evidence of livestock was found, which conflicts with the saga reports that cattle had been taken to Vinland.

And speaking of "Oxford Academics", it's worth mentioning here Geoffrey M. Gathorne-Hardy. He also placed Vinland in southern New England in his 1921 book "The Norse Discoverers of America". Oxford University Press decided to reprint it in 1970.

His book has been described as "...a model of historical criticism, in a remote and difficult field."

Is he going to be dismissed as "unreliable" also?

----------------------------------------------------

Policy statement from Wikipedia....

"All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 00:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia also says that greater weight must be given to more recent sources, which should be obvious anyway. You have been told that already but are conveniently ignoring it. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 01:13, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes, now the IP is citing a source published in 1921, as if scholarship since then doesn't have more weight. This quixotic crusade is getting ridiculous, and is a waste of other editors' time. Carlstak (talk) 01:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Would Gisli Sigurdsson’s “The Vinland Sagas” published in 2008 be satisfactory as a source?

He has some interesting comments about Vinland’s location and New England on page xxxv of the introduction;

“...How far south from here Karlsefni may have gone is impossible to tell with certainty but reasonable suggestions have been made for the coast of New England, and even as far as New York…”

“…And the headland on the way north from Hop recalls the only prominent headland between the Bay of Fundy and New York, namely Cape Cod.” 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 02:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

All of which is speculative, and has no actual evidence to support it. Speculation is not fact. Mediatech492 (talk) 03:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes…, but it is a fact that highly credible academic researchers believed and continue to believe that Vinland was in southern New England, - in spite of a lack of concrete proof.

William Hovgaard,  A.W. Brogger, Askell Love, Einar Haugen and Carl Sauer were not alone in holding this view.

It is not a “fringe” idea supported only by amateurs.   2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 04:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

That quoted text does not say that it says its a reasonable suggestion, that does not mean well founded. Slatersteven (talk) 08:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Can you please clarify. The text you have in mind must be the same text pasted below. As I see it, the text does say it is "...reasonable..." to locate Vinland on the coast of New England or New York.

-----------------

Gisli Sigurdsson, "The Vinland Sagas", 2008 page xxxv

“...How far south from here [points north] Karlsefni may have gone is impossible to tell with certainty but reasonable suggestions have been made for the coast of New England, and even as far as New York…” 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 11:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

There you have it "impossible to tell", it is not a well-founded theory as it can't be proved with any degree of certainty. Slatersteven (talk) 12:28, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

And folklore isn't evidence for reality. .. Doug Weller talk 12:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Is this folklore, or modern scholarship trying to link folklore to a specific region? Slatersteven (talk) 12:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Recommended reading would include chapter 7, "The Saga Map of Vinland" in Gilsli Sigurdsson's "The Medieval Icelandic Saga and Oral Tradition" 2004, distributed by Harvard University Press.

Something older - but a very quick read - would be Icelandic botanist Askell Love's 2-page paper from 1954- "Locating Vineland the Good." And then there is Robert Bergersen's 1997 "Vinland Bibliography; Writings Related to the Norse in Greenland and America." It is 411 pages long, with over 6000 entries.2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 16:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

They discuss archaeology? Doug Weller talk 18:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

On pages 278-279 Gisli Sigurdsson’s book has a heading—"Hoaxes, forgeries, and hard evidence”, - and he does a very good job quickly covering the topic.

---------

Final lines in Askell Love’s 1954 paper; - “…from the botanical evidence, it is concluded that the Icelandic settlement must have been situated somewhere on the coast from southern Maine to Long Island. From other geographical, nautical, and astronomical points of view it has been pointed out by several authors since Rafn's «Antiquitates Americanae» in 1837, that the Vineland settlements must have been on the southern shore of Cape Cod in Massachusetts. This is in line with the botanical testimony. All that is needed is archeological confirmation. It is highly desirable therefore that learned specialists from Scandinavia investigate archeological remains in this region before housing projects and unwise amateur archeologists have destroyed the possible evidence.  If the archeologist’s discoveries corroborate our other conclusions the «Vineland problem» will be solved.”

--------

Robert Bergersen’s bibliography must have hundreds of listings covering archeology. Birgitta Wallace wrote a 'thumbs up' review that might be online somewhere. 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 21:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

So it again looks like that source provides little of value besides referencing something from 70 years ago. "We need more research" is not a particularly definitive statement. Similarly, I've looked at some more modern sources (ones you're seeming to leave out) like the work of Kristjánsson, Einarsson, Traustason among others that provides more comprehensive analysis of the relevant evidence. There is nothing to add beyond the simplest acknowledgement, but "Some scholars think they might be referring to parts of New England" is not particularly insightful. Wikipedia is not a repository for any and all hypotheses. Lostsandwich (talk) 00:02, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

I am aware of those three sources. If I recall, they all lean towards Newfoundland. Good time to remember what Birgitta Wallace has written, [see above]; "...there are certain board suggestions which make it impossible to equate northern Newfoundland with Vinland."

Harvard's Einar Haugen also rejected Newfoundland as Vinland...and he was firmly in favor of New England. Review his paper at this link- Was Vinland in Newfoundland? (archive.org) 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 02:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Of course you neglect to mention his conclusion to this 47-year-old address to the Eighth Viking Congress: "In conclusion I will say that I do not venture to propose any single location for the Vinland of the sagas. I am happy to recognize Newfoundland as its beginning and congratulate the Ingstads on their discoveries. But Newfoundland cannot be the end of Vinland." Quite typical of your arguments here. Carlstak (talk) 03:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Probably the most interesting line in Haugen's paper is this one-

"...there can be no doubt that New England fulfills the conditions described in the sagas better than does Newfoundland."

That was true in 1977-1981, and it is still true today.

As they say; "...it's in the literature." 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 03:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Again, continuing to rely on 40 year old works that make strong declarations with little to back them up, while ignoring anything written about the subject or that piece itself any time afterwards. Your opinion that "nothing changes that", despite considerable volume of work on that very subject very clearly indicates a very strong bias that violates WP:NOPV. Little "pet theories" do not belong on wikipedia. Lostsandwich (talk) 03:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

You are stating your personal opinions here.

This is not my 'little pet theory' as you say.

And I'm not ignoring anything at all. But I'm afraid people here are ignoring the large group of professional researchers who have located Vinland in New England in the past- and the researchers who continue to do so today.

The "new' research you appear to have in mind does not change things at all. New England still conforms to the picture of Vinland better than sites farther north. All the alleged 'Norse artifacts' presented to date in New England can be set aside... they have no bearing at all on the effort to find Vinland's actual location. 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 04:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

When did Wallace say Vinland couldn't be equated with Newfoundland? What she did say in 2003 was " With Straumfjord in northern Newfoundland and Hóp in northeastern New Brunswick, Vinland can be defined. Vinland comprised the coastal region around the Gulf of St. Lawrence, from the Strait of Belle Isle in the north, to the Northumberland Strait in the south. L'Anse aux Meadows-Straumfjord was part of Vinland and was the gateway to its rare and valuable resources.' See her comments also on grapes and salmon.[1] Doug Weller talk 09:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Her definitive statement – from 1986 – is pasted above, but it bears repeating. She wrote, […in an appendix to Gwyn Jones, “The Norse Atlantic Saga”, 2^nd Edition, Page 300];

“But even without a slavish acceptance of every word of the sagas, there are certain board suggestions which make it impossible to equate northern Newfoundland with Vinland.  All scattered references to Vinland make it plain that, compared with Markland, Vinland was more bountiful, the weather was warmer, the tides were higher, the resources more exotic, and, above all, more varied.  As one source put it: the further south one traveled, the better the land became.” 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:F15B:D5B2:1F4C:C0F (talk) 12:27, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

I see no reason not to accept her 2003 statement and assume she changed her mind about the one she made in 1986 . You keep writing "board", that must be broad". Doug Weller talk 12:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes, ‘broad.’ Thank you for pointing that out.

The problem is that she made her earlier statement in such a definitive way; ["certain, clear, and not likely to change”, Cambridge Dictionary.]

Add to that all the other highly credible researchers who also reject Newfoundland as Vinland for many good reasons.  She may be promoting a “new and revised" view today, but it’s not convincing.  Her earlier statement IS convincing. 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:F15B:D5B2:1F4C:C0F (talk) 13:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

If a person changes their mind, we take their new stance, not an older one. Slatersteven (talk) 13:57, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

And you, IP, are not at all convincing with these misleading and obfuscatory arguments. You should know that what you think about what the sources say has no standing. Carlstak (talk) 14:23, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

It is very surprising to see you now claiming I am using “misleading and obfuscatory arguments.”  Please show where I’ve done that.  Maybe it involves something related to Carl O. Sauer’s 1968 study mentioned earlier?

More about Sauer later, but here is another source that I will let speak entirely on its own as I believe I usually do with all these sources.  Maybe you will be happy with this one, but probably not-- British journalist/writer J. R. L. Anderson’s 1967 book “Vinland Voyage.”

Vinland voyage : J. R. L. Anderson : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

J. R. L. Anderson - Wikipedia

Guardian expedition in search of Vinland sets sail from Scarborough - archive, 1966 | Sailing | The Guardian

In 1966 he put the Vinland saga navigation information to the test, sailing a 44-foot cutter from England to Iceland, and on to North America.  He ended the voyage by sailing into Nantucket Sound and going ashore on Martha’s Vineyard Island.  If you want to be truly informed about the Vinland debate, be sure to take the time to read his book.

Here are a few of many quotes from it that speak firmly against Newfoundland as Vinland.

Pg. 111- “There is a Newfoundland school in modern Vinland history, which holds that the main Norse settlements in Vinland were on Newfoundland. This theory has attractions, but there are grave objections to it. The more I considered my own studies, and what I learned in Iceland, the more improbable it seemed to me that Vinland was to be found in Newfoundland.”

Page 196- “It may be useful here to sum up briefly the main arguments against Newfoundland as the location of Vinland. First, there are the sagas themselves. If these saga records embody real history it seems to me impossible to discount all the topographical descriptions of Vinland that they give.”

Page 199- “The topographical evidence against Newfoundland is so formidable that alone it seems to me convincing.” 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:F15B:D5B2:1F4C:C0F (talk) 16:17, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

At this point, you're just bludgeoning the page. Give it a rest—you're going nowhere with this and you know it. This is hot air, very tiresome and unproductive. I suggest that if you really want to contribute to WP, you should start working on editing articles where you might actually accomplish something. Carlstak (talk) 17:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

What sir, does it explain? 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:6782:E9C4:BD68:5CE6 (talk) 03:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

It explains this obsessive focus on New England being Vinland, and why you are so willing to distort what your own outdated sources say. Carlstak (talk) 03:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think we can close this, as it is now circular. Slatersteven (talk) 10:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

I agree. If no hard evidence can be shown for this, then it's time to move along. Mediatech492 (talk) 11:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

I firmly disagree. You are attempting to shut down discussion covering a topic that has been under debate for over 300 years now.   2601:18E:C380:1DC0:F15B:D5B2:1F4C:C0F (talk) 14:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply