Am I just slow?

Ok, maybe I'm just slow, but I was looking around on the internet, and I saw an article about Carthage possibly discovering America. Is this a new revelation, or am I just slow to hear about it? Any details would be great.

Marvel

Ok, maybe I'm just slow, but I was looking around on the internet, and I saw an article about Carthage possibly discovering America. Is this a new revelation, or am I just slow to hear about it? Any details would be great.

It's old garbage. You're not slow, just lucky.

Is there anyone who didn't get to America before Columbus? So far, I've heard about the Norse, Welch, Irish, Egyptians, Greeks, Atlanteans, Polynesians, and Japanese. Now, the Carthaginians. It's beginning to look like Peter Minuit didn't buy Manhatten from the Indians, so much as he paid off their mortgage.

So Cato, I assume from your response that is pretty much bunk. Is this correct?

Marvel

It is a matter of record that the Norse briefly settled in Newfoundland, and the Greenland vikings visited Labrador frequently to get timber until their settlements were extinguished in the 15th century. Scottish fishermen were fishing the 'Grand Banks' from 1300 onwards. The Piri Reis map of 1518 shows areas of the Americas not at that time visited by European sailors, as well as the outline of Antarctica as it is under the ice. See this link: http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_1.htm

Piri Reis stated that his map was compiled from other maps, some dating back to the 4th century, as well as up to date information from contemporary sailors. It shows the coast of the Americas and Antarctica as if the projection of the globe is centred on Cairo, and shows that a correct measurement of the size of the globe was made prior to Magellan's circumnavigation (1522).

The comparison at the end of my link, between the Piri Reis map and a modern map using the same projection is the most telling - the azimuthal equidistant projection of the globe centred on Cairo, as you can see, does not merely display the map as close, but as damn - near accurate as you can get. Not bad, for 1518. The map is regarded as authentic, but its implications have been put on the backburner by academics, largely, I think, on account of the 'pseudo - historians' who we have discussed in other threads, and to whom this map is their one and only sound source.

Although this map has more implications with respect to Antarctica than the Americas, it nonetheless shows that geographical knowledge in pre-Columbian times was significantly more widespread than is currently accepted. The map, although authentic, does not state categorically where the information comes from. So, for me, although the Carthage / Americas theory is at best tenuous, it cannot be ruled out, as this map demonstrates. Seems to me that the Columbian discovery of the Americas was by no means the first, merely the only one that gave rise to permanent European settlement. This idea becomes less ludicrous still when one considers the immense distances covered by settlers of the many Pacific islands in ancient and mediaeval times, using vessels far cruder than those of the phoenicians, Carthaginians and Norse. And crossing a far larger ocean.

Is there anyone who didn't get to America before Columbus? So far, I've heard about the Norse, Welch, Irish, Egyptians, Greeks, Atlanteans, Polynesians, and Japanese. Now, the Carthaginians. It's beginning to look like Peter Minuit didn't buy Manhatten from the Indians, so much as he paid off their mortgage.

Don't forget the Basques...they've laid claim that their whaling and cod-fish expeditions took them to the New World!

Is there anyone who didn't get to America before Columbus? So far, I've heard about the Norse, Welch, Irish, Egyptians, Greeks, Atlanteans, Polynesians, and Japanese. Now, the Carthaginians. It's beginning to look like Peter Minuit didn't buy Manhatten from the Indians, so much as he paid off their mortgage.

 

 

Don't forget the Basques...they've laid claim that their whaling and cod-fish expeditions took them to the New World!

And not forgetting the Chinese. One of the most famous examples of pseudo-history in recent years was the claim by a British sailor that a Chinese navy sailed to the Americas, New Zealand, Australia, Africa and Europe in 1421.

*ugh* So, who did discover the new world? I knew about the Vikings and all. But after reading that article that Northern Neil gave us, I have no clue...I'm so confused....*sigh* I'm gonna go get some coffee....

Does it really matter, anyway? Whoever bumped into the Western Hemisphere before Columbus either didn't have the ability or inclination to capitalize on their success. If the Vikings had made good on their effort, I'd be speaking a form of Danish now and living in the United States of "Vinland."

Is there anyone who didn't get to America before Columbus? So far, I've heard about the Norse, Welch, Irish, Egyptians, Greeks, Atlanteans, Polynesians, and Japanese. Now, the Carthaginians. It's beginning to look like Peter Minuit didn't buy Manhatten from the Indians, so much as he paid off their mortgage.

 

 

Don't forget the Basques...they've laid claim that their whaling and cod-fish expeditions took them to the New World!

 

And not forgetting the Chinese. One of the most famous examples of pseudo-history in recent years was the claim by a British sailor that a Chinese navy sailed to the Americas, New Zealand, Australia, Africa and Europe in 1421.

That was because of Zheng He's fleet. He explored Australia, South Asia, and the coast of Eastern Africa although saying they reached the new world is a bit hard to believe.

As record stands the Vikings were the first to North America. They called Newfoundland Vinyland growing grapes and gathering wood. There is now evidence of earthen houses and Viking metallurgy in these areas. Not to mention they scared the heck out of the natives.

This should probably go the the Universum folder.

*ugh* So, who did discover the new world?

The people who were already here when Europeans 'discovered' it.

*ugh* So, who did discover the new world? I knew about the Vikings and all. But after reading that article that Northern Neil gave us, I have no clue...I'm so confused....*sigh* I'm gonna go get some coffee....

ModernMarvel,

In essence, Moonlapse is of course correct but I want to revisit your original question about the Carthaginians.

There are 3 primary things that provide the crux of 'argument' for the folks who support the hypothesis that the Carthaginians-Phoenicians made it to America:

1. A horde of Carthaginian coins found on Corvo in the Azores in the late 18th Century. (Because the Azores are so far out in the Ocean and the easiest way to get there is to ride the currents from America and not to sail directly from Iberia, bla, bla) However, the coins are now missing and the context which they were originally found is fundamentally questionable.

2. Epigraphic 'evidence' of Punic inscriptions found in various locations in the Eastern US as identified by the late Dr. Barry Fell...

3. What Diodorus says in Book V. 19 & 20...

There are also scattered claims about 'verified' Phoenician-Punic shipwrecks in the Western Hemisphere but I've never been able to find anything published by an archaeological source on the subject.

There are a lot of tantilizing clues out there and it is highly probable that the situation Diodorus describes could have in essence happened (a ship blown off course from around the Canaries to be caught in the equitoral current and driven west). But the fact remains that nobody (other than the natives) exploited America in any lasting way until the arrival of Columbus & the Spanish.

There are a lot of tantilizing clues out there and it is highly probable that the situation Diodorus describes could have in essence happened (a ship blown off course from around the Canaries to be caught in the equitoral current and driven west).

The best single compilation and critique of these tales may be Morison's "The European Discovery of America." Besides evaluating the stories academically, Morison (an accomplished naval historian and retired admiral) attempted to reproduce the various landfalls in his own boat. His ultimate conclusion was, essentially, that there's no reason to vigorously dispute conventional wisdom on this subject.

I understand what Moonlapse is saying (although they weren't natives really) I just didn't know about the argument about Carthage. Well, for now, I think I'll stick to vikings.....

Marvel

I understand what Moonlapse is saying (although they weren't natives really) I just didn't know about the argument about Carthage. Well, for now, I think I'll stick to vikings.....

 

 

Marvel

Ahh, yes. New claims seem to come out every other year.