[Up] [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: America's Stonehenge 2

Well,  I have been gone on vacation and y'all have been busy :)  I also 
apparently forgot how to use email while I was gone and just deleted a reply 
to all these archaeology posts.   I don't think I can remember all I wrote 
so I'll sum it up as best as I can.

First, history is great if it's well documented.  John has done that and I 
really appreciate it.  However, though everything Pohl suggested is 
possible, without the hard evidence it's just conjecture and good 
day-dreaming.  Someone comes up with the ideas (Pohl) and someone else has 
to test the hypothesis.  In this case, the hypothesis must be tested by 
artifacts.  Archaeology is like crime scene investigations.  Without the 
hard evidence it is purely circumstantial.

My mother is a historian and she thinks archaeology is a waste of time.  
However, history relies on artifacts as well.  Diaries, papers, maps, etc. 
are artifacts.

As to how history is taught in the US... I knew about the Viking settlements 
up north by the time I was in the 4th or 5th grade.  They were proven to be 
Viking by the artifacts RECOVERED.  Schliemann proved the existence of Troy 
by the artifacts RECOVERED.

I fully understand that history is written from the perspective of the 
ruling class.  White, European males have controlled history for a VERY long 
time and not just in the US.  They view Egyptians, Hebrews, and Middle 
Easterners as their ancestors-  the Tigris-Euphrates river valley, i
n Iraq, is the "Cradle of Civilization" (White European females view these 
people as ancestors as well.)

I'm sorry to those of you who might have been bored by the Indian 
discussion.  My point was that the Indian cultures that were here were every 
bit as capable as the Europeans to build these types of structures.  THe 
European descendants that lived at this rock structure REMOVED artifacts 
that didn't support their views.  This greatly biases any type of 
information that can be gained.

The vikings left artifacts, the Spanish left artifacts, the English left 
artifacts, the Indians left artifacts, where are the artifacts left by the 
Sinclair voyage?  Everyone brings gifts when they go to a new place.  It 
helps keep the natives friendly.  People are a lot less likely to kill their 
trade partners. I know, the argument has been made that Sinclair didn't 
intend to trend.  He certainly didn't intend to get killed and he would have 
done his best to bribe the people he encountered not to kill him.

I agree that it's a shame that governments in general won't spend more money 
on archaeology.  If these voyages did happen (and we have plenty of 
circumstantial evidence that they did) then the artifacts are just waiting 
to be found.  That is where we need to focus our energies. Oh, and the 
cannon that is often mentioned...  It was found in the harbor.  One 
explanation for this is that it was used as ballast and then discarded when 
no longer needed.  A cannon of that age is junk to the modern (or recent 
historic) traders that might have been carrying it so discarding it would 
not have been a hardship. Other artifact found in situ (in place in the 
ground) are needed to support the cannon.  This explanation is highly 
probably.  The church I grew up attending has a tile embedded in the floor 
that came from a monastery that Henry VIII destroyed.  It was part of ship's 
ballast from Virginia.  All kinds of junk were used as ballast.  A cannon 
that could no longer be used would have been no different.

As far as finding in situ evidence, we talked a good while back of 
excavations at the Castle of the Cross.  That would be a good place to start 
but since it is on private land work can't begin until the property owners 
say it's okay.

Well, I have to go to a meeting and get back to work.  I hope I addressed 
everything.  I hate that I lost my original post:(  I look forward to 
talking to you all later about this.  Take care, Darwin

P.S. as a point if interest- My spell checker offer "vain" as a substitute 
for the VIII after Henry VIII name.  It may be onto something here.  DTR

>From: RBranshaw@aol.com
>Reply-To: sinclair@mids.org
>To: sinclair@mids.org
>Subject: Re: America's Stonehenge 2
>Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 21:50:57 EDT
>Right on!
>[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
>[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html

Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html