Re: Vikings & logs & climate and settlement

["Neil Sinclair/Peggy Rintoul" <rinsin@globalserve.net>]

Laurel; It is so nice to see a scholar at work, with research and applied
knowledge. I do not think there is any evidence as to their being any
harvested by Henry Sinclair but in light of the legnth of stay, the
manpower, and the constant need to repair ships it can not be logically
discounted either. Now is the planks took wood, the beams must have taken a
great deal. Nova Scotia is home of the great shipbuilding indistry at the
early part of this century so it is sort of obvious to a maritimer.
Interesting economical motivation, and I caution again that my thesis was
not PH purpose coming over but rather the logical economic reaosns which
made the voyage become necessary at one point or another.

Now the next fly in the perspective of History as we go through a period of
time of global warming. Henry's time period preceded a cooling period of the
earth and there is of course no record of evidence of temperatures. However
we do have some evidence from plants and settlements. I would postulate that
not only was the climate warmer, but it was warm enough to support life if
Greenland and had been doing so for some years prior to 1398 going back as
far as 800 AD. These viking and Noregian settlements in Greenland are
established from the archelogical perspective. So when old English
references mention PH discovering Greenland this is in error. He was however
able to approach Greenland from the knowledge that it had been settled.
Whether the communities were in existance at that point is moot, and there
is to my understanding neither proof for against this hypothesis. That siad
my thesis is further supported as to the route and adds one more purpose
together with the evidence that it was warmer and habitations in the
Northern Climates more possible than they would be subsequently.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Spirit One Email" <laurel@spiritone.com>
To: <sinclair@matrix.net>
Sent: 11 May, 2000 9:48 PM
Subject: Re: Articles about the Vikings & logs


> In "How Scotland Changed the World" Robert S. Wright says on pg. 53:
> "Thousands of years of building Viking ships had decimated the suitable
oak
> forests in Norway.  It took 60 trees to build one ship....The old
> shipwrights were only able to cut two planks from one tree.  They first
> split the log in two, then used an adze to shape one plank from each
side."
>     So my question now is:  I wonder whether they didn't cut their planks
> there in North America and bring them and any smaller planks they needed
on
> their knorrs, thus eliminating the extra unneeded weight of the tree
waste.
> And eliminating dangerous rolling logs.
> Laurel
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Niven Sinclair <niven@niven.co.uk>
> To: <sinclair@matrix.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2000 2:17 PM
> Subject: Re: Articles about the Vikings & logs
>
>
> > At 12:06 09/05/00 -0700, you wrote:
> > >
> > The 'knorrs' of the Vikings could carry up to 300 tons.
> >
> > Niven Sinclair
> >
> > [ 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
>
> [ 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
>

[ 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