Danish Expert Declares Vinland Map Genuine 210
MBCook writes "A Danish conservation expert named Rene Larsen has finished a 5-year study of the infamous Vinland Map and declared it genuine. 'All the tests that we have done over the past five years — on the materials and other aspects — do not show any signs of forgery,' he said at the press conference. He and his team studied the ink, the paper, and even insect damage. They believe that the ink, which was discovered in 1972 to contain titanium dioxide and thus supposedly was too new for the map to be genuine, was contaminated when sand was used to dry the ink."
I'm not so sure. (Score:5, Funny)
The edges arent slightly burnt and you dont roll it out to read it and c'mon, where's the X?
Good Point... (Score:5, Interesting)
It reminds me of a problem my mum told me about in the art world: Verifying the authenticity of ancient scrolls has become virtually impossible due to the discovery of large quantities of paint supplies (dried ink especially) and paper in monasteries. Armed with "old materials", forgers only have to focus on getting the technique, etc. right since there is no means to catch them technologically; for example, carbon dating and similar techniques will give the "right" results. Thus, art historians and dealers in that field allegedly have to rely more and more on their eyes to spot bad technique...
It would not surprise me if the Vinland map could have been constructed under similar circumstances (if that is what someone intended to do). I'm sure someone somewhere could have scared up some old ink and a hide to paint it on. It is or this reason that I guess so many folk are skeptical of the repeated maps from around the world that have come out "discovering" the Americas...
Re:Good Point... (Score:4, Insightful)
That's the thing... (Score:2, Interesting)
All isotope based dating techniques are based on natural decay... whether something is painted or not, I doubt the paint will have any effect on the amount of Carbon-14 you'll find inside it... According to howstuffworks (for what that is worth), carbon-14 is made by cosmic rays, and the ratio of carbon14 to carbon-12 was traditionally pretty stable. Since carbon 14 has a half life of 5,700 years, you can look at the ratio of the two to determine how old something is (well, for the last 60,000 years or so)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well you've convinced me, everyone knows a mum trumps an expert [www.kons.dk].
Re:Good Point... (Score:5, Interesting)
It reminds me of a problem my mum told me about in the art world: Verifying the authenticity of ancient scrolls has become virtually impossible due to the discovery of large quantities of paint supplies (dried ink especially) and paper in monasteries. Armed with "old materials", forgers only have to focus on getting the technique, etc. right since there is no means to catch them technologically; for example, carbon dating and similar techniques will give the "right" results. Thus, art historians and dealers in that field allegedly have to rely more and more on their eyes to spot bad technique...
That's the best news I've heard in weeks. Assigning Art monetary value based on some imaginary or hidden property like "authenticity", or "name recognition" is incredibly silly. The fact that forgers have been able to replicate this so people might actually have to assign value based on... what the Art looks like... is really wonderful! Perhaps someday forgery will be so perfect and complete that the concept of an "artistic forgery" will be a concept people have to look at history books to understand. I especially love the occasional documentary on a "master forger" who fooled all the "experts" into believing some work of art was really created by -famous artist-.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is it "incredibly silly" for people to value something the way they want?
Sure I would never pay $20 for a single pokemon card, but if someone else wants to that's their business.
Same with BoA stock and antique furniture and art.
Re: (Score:2)
You've generalized my statement beyond it's original intent. I simply believe the monetary value of art should be based on.. the art, and not on some arbitrary value based upon the name of artist who created it. If you can't tell if something is "good" without knowing who created it, that's "bad" IMO. If we can destroy the concept of "creator", that's "good" IMO.
Re:Good Point... (Score:4, Insightful)
And you've ignored his point, which was that people can value the art for whatever reason they want. Just because YOU don't like that reason doesn't mean other people don't.
Re: (Score:2)
I ignore his point because it's irrelevant. Other people are also free to believe things I feel are wrong, so what?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, how could I forget? Yours is the only valid opinion, O Master!
So what? (Score:2)
That you are claiming that a nonsensical situation would be desirable.
Since we humans can record our achievements we pay homage to people that are original and talented, your comments wish for a situation that is simply against human nature: we prefer innovators to imitators.
If you are going to defend a situation that goes counter all what we humans naturally understand as more valuable you surely don't expect to get a free pass from other people reading your nonsense.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You sir are an idiot, the value of any art is the value someone is willing to pay for it irrespective of how good the actual art is in your infallible opinion.
Re:Good Point... (Score:5, Insightful)
If we can destroy the concept of "creator", that's "good" IMO.
Except that knowing the creator, their milieu, culture, and intentions is often vital to a proper understanding and appreciation of the artwork in question, rather than some superficial and effectively meaningless reaction based on your cultural biases and limited experience.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is a point of view I don't agree with.
Oh, an anarchist. (Score:2)
Poor sod...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So the history and intent are irrelevant for the appreciation of a piece of art? :-D
So you've never heard song lyrics which sounded silly, but made perfect sense when you found out what the song writers intent was?
Or have you never wondered why some art or music seems almost 'timeless' while some songs sound incredibly dated just three years after they were produced? Hint, these two phenomenon are strongly related.
I agree with the other poster. You poor sod....
Re: (Score:2)
People assign value to things based upon things unrelated to how "good" they are objectively. Expecting them not to do in the art world seems the sillier than the fact that people like to do that.
The creator is one such way, rarity is another.
This isn't just the art world. Some people will pay considerably more for a baseball signed by babe Ruth than they would for one signed by me. Others will pay more for a copy of "The C Programming Language" signed by Kernighan and Ritchie than they would for one writte
Oh yes, and I wish pigs could fly. (Score:2)
Wishing stupid things is anyone's prerogative, the real world has this nasty habit of behave in ways that don;t conform with our wishes specially if they are bizarre and devoid of any logic.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure I would never pay $20 for a single pokemon card, but if someone else wants to that's their business.
Of course it's their business - and no-one argues against it, or wants to ban people from wasting their money like that. But it's silly nonetheless, for fairly obvious reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Hidden? Imaginary? (Score:2)
Authenticity is not a hidden property. A piece of art is either authentic or not, and the authenticity is based in as much documentary evidence as you can possibly gather.
Authenticity is neither imaginary. Either the person claiming to have painted something did, or did not do it, . That is not an imaginary contraption, it is a matter of fact which may or may not be possible to verify.
Although your bizarre point of view may have some merit in a pure philosophical sense, back on earth, in the real world, peo
Carbon dating (Score:4, Interesting)
Carbon dating any plastic material would probably result in a very old age. Carbon-14 is produced by cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere. Any material that's produced from petroleum, such as plastics and solvents, is depleted of carbon-14, because it comes from oil that was buried for millions of years.
The same is true for coal. Mix rock coal in a black pigment that's normally made with charcoal and it will appear to be much older.
Re: (Score:2)
It will also appear to be made of rock coal, which might be something of a problem.
The real question here is:if people were already living here, how could Vikings OR Colombus genuinely have been considered to discover anything?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The word "discover" is relative. To discover means to find out the existence of a thing or fact you didn't know before.
It's quite possible to discover things that everyone around you knows about (but you were ignorant of); however, that's fairly uninteresting, and doesn't get you any praises.
People around you credit you with discovering something, if you were the first to see or describe something of interest that the people didn't know before.
So the person discovered the Americas. And their discov
Re: (Score:2)
"so many folk are skeptical of the repeated maps from around the world that have come out "discovering" the Americas"
In this case the map isn't particularly surprising for having part of North America on it. The Vikings are known to have colonized Newfoundland prior to this map's alleged origin.
Re: (Score:2)
Hah ! I bet your mom doesn't know the answer to that !
Re: (Score:2)
You forget that the X is on the other half of the map that's tattooed on some teenage girl's shoulder, and the map lines up perfectly with the tattoo. She can probably be found somewhere in LA, maybe Beverly Hills.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
If only history was right (Score:5, Funny)
Re:If only history was right (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, Norway has two languages - Norwegian Bokmål ("Book language" - but also spoken - very similar to Danish) and Norwegian Nynorsk ("New Norwegian"). Norwegian Nynorsk might be more like Icelandic than Danish, but Norwegian Bokmål is essentially Danish. I guess it's because Norway was part of Denmark some time ago...
I'm a dane and I speak both Danish and Norwegian (Bokmål). I know some Norwegian Nynorsk, but not enough to carry a conversation. I've heard quite a bit of Icelandic, and I don't understand a word... well... yeah, I know one word... :-)
When it comes to it though, Icelandic is very much like the language spoken in Denmark at the time of the map - if it's real...
Actually, Norwegians never spoke Bokmal. It looks like Danish, because it essentially is Danish. Norwegians spoke Norse, and wrote in Danish. Much like the middle ages where most of Europe spoke this language or that language, but everything was written in Latin.
Nynorsk was started in order to try and provide Norwegians with a written version of the language that they actually spoke, rather than continuing to force their children to learn a new language just to write in.
Icelandic is much closer to Old Norse than any surviving North Germanic language (which is the Scandinavian languages + Icelandic). Since they were isolated on an island, and were colonists, they tended towards linguistic conservation. A similar situation happened with English in the USA (only on a way smaller historical scale.)
Overall though, Nynorsk is about as similar to Icelandic as Danish/Bokmal, and Swedish are. The three "languages" are reasonably mutually intelligible, and mutually unintelligible with Icelandic.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Leifur Eiriksson was Icelandic, definitely (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Leifur Eiriksson was Icelandic, definitely (Score:5, Interesting)
Leif Ericson is described as Norwegian because his grandfather and his father were born there. His grandfather was a murderer, so he fled to Iceland. His father was a murderer, so he fled to Greenland, where Leif was born.
Calling them not Norwegian is like calling the Nazis who escaped to Argentina not German.
And now that I have successfully Godwinned this argument, we are done.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
*Leifr EirÃksson* was born in Iceland to an "Icelandic" mother, ÃzjÃÃhildr. His father, EÃrikr inn rauÃi (Erik the Red), was a Norwegian outlaw.
Still, it's ridiculously anachronistic to apply modern-day nationalities to the 9th century. If asked, my guess would be that Leifr would have called himself a Norseman.
Larsen != Larson (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Larsen != Larson (Score:5, Informative)
The source has him as Larsen, also here is his work page [www.kons.dk].
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Larsen != Larson (Score:5, Funny)
Yet they both mean exactly the same, son of Lars.
Obviously Lars was leading a double life with a family in Sweden and a family in Denmark.
Re:Larsen != Larson (Score:5, Funny)
The normal Swedish spelling is Larsson.
Larsen is a danish or norwegian guy. Larson is a scandinavian immigrant to the US, or a swede who wants to insinuate he has more money than some random Larsson. Larzon is a swede who's in the sleazier part of the entertainment industry.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Larzon is a swede who's in the sleazier part of the entertainment industry.
From the same people who gave us Zed from Zardoz?
Re: (Score:2)
Larson is a scandinavian immigrant to the US, or a swede who wants to insinuate he has more money than some random Larsson.
... but without having to resort to larceny?
Re:Larsen != Larson (Score:5, Funny)
Don't think you're the only one. Everybody thinks I'm a food. I even had the nickname MC in university. There has been maybe two times I didn't have to spell my name for somebody.
Re:Larsen != Larson (Score:5, Insightful)
Population of Denmark: 5.5 million
Population of Sweden: 9 million
Out of curiosity, without scurrying off to wikipedia, could you differentiate a Punjabi name (130 million) from a Bengali (230 million) name?
Or, not even leaving Europe, how about the difference between Ukrainian (50 million) and Russian (100 million)?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Population of Denmark: 5.5 million Population of Sweden: 9 million
Out of curiosity, without scurrying off to wikipedia, could you differentiate a Punjabi name (130 million) from a Bengali (230 million) name?
Or, not even leaving Europe, how about the difference between Ukrainian (50 million) and Russian (100 million)?
You don't have to look anything up in Wikipedia, you just need to copy/paste correctly from the article that you are submitting.
Maybe even submitters do not RTFA?
Re: (Score:2)
Population of Russia is 140 million. Estimated number of speakers of Russian language as their primary language is 165 million (mostly because most in Belarus, and quite a few in Ukraine, prefer Russian over their national languages). Total number of Russian speakers is 280 million (mostly a legacy of the USSR). Either way, I've no idea where your 100 million figure came from.
50 million for Ukrainian is also somewhat off - it's closer to 40 million in practice (unless you take the official talking point tha
Re: (Score:2)
I'm proper fed up with having to spell my surname to everyone taking my name down.
That can happen to almost anyone. My surname is the 4th or 5th most common in the UK, but I was at school with a family who had a rare variant of it, so I still had to spell my surname for everyone. It took me a few years after leaving school to get out of the habit, and in that time I confused everyone who didn't know about the variant. (Imagine saying "Larsen, -en" to someone who always spells it that way: they think you're saying "Larsen, E. N.").
Important viking discoveries (Score:5, Funny)
I remember some years ago learning about a Viking who were one of the first to visit Greenland (I do not recall who). It was written "en passant" in one of the sagas that he had reported back in Island that curiously enough if you stab an Inuit with a sword he just keeps on bleeding (due to the extreme cold Inuits are genetically adapted to have blood that does not coagulate easily).
And who says that these Vikings were brutal warriors and not peaceful traders?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It sounds to me that my ancestors were very keen on performing scientific experiments, with rigorous field testing to back up the scientific data!
Re: (Score:2)
Not to be a killjoy, but they might have been both. The bleeding incident may have come from an encounter that wasn't the reporter's fault. Now the fact they reported it, both this and this map, that points to a scientifically inclined culture.
Re:Important viking discoveries (Score:4, Informative)
Well, Wikipedia does not agree with you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Greenland [wikipedia.org]
I have found a reference to the story. It is from Historia Norwegia and the quote I was looking for is for example referenced in this NYT 1911 article:
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9D02EFDC1E31E233A25755C2A9679D946096D6CF [nytimes.com]
So the full quote was actually (about the Skraelings of Greenland):
"...they are struok with weapons when alive, their wounds are white and do not bleed, but when they are dead the blood scarcely stops running."
"Magnae Insulae Beati Brandani Branziliae Dictae"? (Score:5, Funny)
Look at those large islands to the west of the Canaries. They're labelled Magnae Insulae Beati Brandani Branziliae Dictae: St Brandon's Large Islands, Called The Branzillas. Branzillas? Nobody used -zilla to mean "large" before Godzilla, and it didn't become really popular until Mozilla. The whole thing is clearly a forgery by some 21st-century geek, probably a Terry Gilliam fan, trying to mock up a folk etymology of the name "Brazil". ;)
Peter
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the expression 'brazillian' didn't become popular (and therefore used on a map) before it meant 'an enormous amount of money', as in 'I've just earned a Brazillion dollars' or something.
Re: (Score:2)
Dollars? No, it's men. As in the joke:
Rumsfeld is giving Dubya the daily briefing on Iraq. "And, I'm sad to say, Mr President, that two Brazilian men were killed yesterday by IEDs." Bush turns white, his jaw drops open, and he freezes as though catatonic. After two minutes he stammers, "That's, that's terr-terrible. How, how, how many is a Brazilian?"
Google Maps works too (Score:2)
But they spell it a little different.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=vineland [google.com]
Re:hm (Score:5, Informative)
Vinland is recognised by most historians as being a short-lived Norse ('Viking') colony in the Newfoundland area, probably on mainland North America (though the exact location and extent is very unsure). See the Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org].
The map shows it as an island presumably (assuming it is genuine) because the area was explored to a very limted extent and the explorers were unaware that it was part of a much greater land mass.
Re:hm (Score:5, Informative)
Huh? The map shows Vinland as an island because it's Newfoundland and Newfoundland is an island. The province people commonly refer to as "Newfoundland" is more properly known as "Newfoundland and Labrador", Labrador being the mainland part of the province (possibly what the Norse called "Markland", as your article noted) and Newfoundland being the island of Newfoundland (site of the only Norse village in North America outside of Greenland).
Re: (Score:2)
Newfoundland is one possible site - there are a number of proposed locations in that area, down to Massachusetts. In addition, Newfoundland island is only 17 miles off the coast of Labrador, so it's not really relevant - if they'd explored Newfoundland, or sailed round it, they would clearly have been aware of the much larger land mass.
Anyway, even though the map is not to a fixed scale, the 'island' couldn't really be Newfoundland - it's the size of most of western europe!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Newfoundland is one possible site
Newfoundland is the only site in the Americas where actual Viking artifacts and remains of a building were found: L'Anse aux Meadows [wikipedia.org]
As for the map, there really wasn't any need for physical analysis of it to know that it cannot be genuine, as it contains information that was unknowable in the 15th century. According to the wikipedia page, the writing on the map also contains anachronisms. Did someone take a genuine map and add Japan, Australia and Newfoundland, or was it a complete forgery from the ground u
Re:hm (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Except the wikipedia article disagrees with the poster and doesn't contradict the expert.
As for the dumber, since he couldn't even read the second paragraph of the wikipedia article he cited, accurate or not, before posting, I have to agree with you.
Might want to check those facts of yours (Score:5, Informative)
As for the map, there really wasn't any need for physical analysis of it to know that it cannot be genuine, as it contains information that was unknowable in the 15th century. According to the wikipedia page, the writing on the map also contains anachronisms. Did someone take a genuine map and add Japan, Australia and Newfoundland, or was it a complete forgery from the ground up?
Information that was unknowable? What information?
If you'd bother to look at the map which is part of the Wikipedia article linked in this article, you'd see, there is no Australia on that map. As far as Japan. Japan was certainly known. You know from the Silk road trade routes with China and the spice routes that existed back into antiquity. You know those primitives like the Greeks and Romans and earlier civilizations that all had trade with China. Ever heard of Marco Polo (1254-1324), who lived in the 13th and 14th centuries? He went to China and knew of Japan. Japan was written about as early as his visit and his story was widely and wildly popular in Europe. So to say it was unknowable that Japan existed is the exact opposite of what is true. It would have been almost impossible to NOT know about Japan in the 15th century. I see nothing on the map that was unknowable in the 15th century.
I guess this is part of the reason why you are NOT an expert on ancient maps and forgeries. Although, the first thing that I thought of was, maybe someone added Vinland to a genuine 15th century map. I'm no expert, but if I were that'd be on the things I'd spend five years trying to (dis/)prove.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Good points, well made, and I agree.
Also, on a more fundamental level, all things that are true and affect our reality are knowable. Using the word unknowable to mean "I don't understand how they could have found out" is an abuse of logic.
Re: (Score:2)
L'Anse aux Meadows is known to be one site of a Viking colony in North America. Whether it's the only one, and whether it is what they called Vinland is far from certain. The actual location of "Vinland" on that map, particularly compared with other maps of the time including the one that lead to the discovery of L'Anse aux Meadows, suggests to me that the Vinland on the map is actually indicating more northerly land than NF. Perhaps Baffin Island.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
" It was not uncommon in the 19th and 20th century, with the emergence of the nation state and nationalism, to forge artifacts with the intention to make ones ancestors look smarter and more important than they really were. Not just in Europe. The Kensington Runestone is an example from the US, and mr Shinichi Fujimura planted forged stone tools in an attempt to 'prove' that human civilization must have started in Japan."
Look at the Prince Madoc story - A prince of Wales, Madoc, left Glamorgan county in 11
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently the name "new found" is misleading
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
" I know it's not cool on Slashdot to read the article or any links from the summary, but "Vinland" is Newfoundland, and that's basically why people consider this map important.
You'd figure the screech stain on the map would settle the argument there by.
Re: (Score:2)
"if it's genuine, what does that tell of this "vinland"? maybe i've got it wrong, but it's written as if it's in the middle of the ocean."
Well, with our current geographical knowledge, what's west of Iceland? I'd say it's a mass of land in the middle of the ocean. Certainly it's a bit bigger than how it's depicted in that map (it might be that vikings didn't have the time to visit it all around, you know, America is quite big), but it *is* a landmass in the middle of the ocean.
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot to mention how he obtained it from the Thule Society.
Re:J. Lawrence Whitten... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why should others not be able to judge for themselves (taking into account your own comment)?
We can, but now those of us reading at +3 or so don't have to wade through the made up stuff before seeing the rebuttal. Now we get to see the high-modded rebuttal, and if we think the story being rebutted sounds interesting, we are perfectly free to go look at it.
So it isn't clear why you are talking about "others not be[ing] able to judge for themselves". What exactly do you think is making us UNABLE to read and
Re:Fake. (Score:5, Insightful)
Zoom in on the actual southern coast of England. It looks like a hastily drawn zigzag. England must be fake.
In all seriousness, if authentic, the map predates the effective computation of longitude. You notice how the East/West elements of the map are stretched and skewed, far more than the North/South elements? You try accurately illustrating a fairly complex coastline when you can't say where you are on the East/West axis except by dead reckoning.
Re: (Score:2)
Note: the map predates the *known* effective computation of longitude. The Vikings could probably do it. Of course, they didn't try to sail across the middle like some impulsive Italian trader apparently did without thinking in advance: "hmm. maybe hitting islands along the way that I know about would be easier."
Re:Fake. (Score:5, Insightful)
You're saying the Vikings managed to develop clocks that could work at sea, didn't tell anyone, and then forgot about it for 500 years? Because prior to GPS, that was *still* the only way to get an accurate reading on longitude. Yes, there are other methods, but they don't work at sea, they only work at the time of known planetary events, and they are crude even when used correctly (far too crude to provide the resolution needed for detailed coastlines).
And yet somehow, the Vikings could "probably" do it. With no supporting evidence whatsoever, you leap to "probably." Wow... Just wow...
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm not claiming that the Vikings actually pulled this off, but there were accurate celestial clocks available in antiquity. Gavin Menzies described the method in his book about early Chinese exploration, 1421. Off topic, but this is how it works:
0. Develop the ability to predict lunar eclipses.
1. Draw a crappy map using the stars to determine your latitude and speed over water to determine your longitude.
2. Build and staff celestial observatories along the coast at intervals.
3. Note the star that transits
Re: (Score:2)
Gavin Menzies described the method in his book about early Chinese exploration, 1421.
Ah, yes, because that's certainly a book I'd want to trust about, well, anything.
Re: (Score:2)
What -- me worry?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That requires that you have a bunch of established outposts. That's not possible when you're on a voyage of exploration and for well populated areas regular surveying or even pacing off distances sounds like it would be a whole lot easier and probably more accurate.
Viking sun dial and sun (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Fake. (Score:4, Informative)
Note: the map predates the *known* effective computation of longitude. The Vikings could probably do it. Of course, they didn't try to sail across the middle like some impulsive Italian trader apparently did without thinking in advance: "hmm. maybe hitting islands along the way that I know about would be easier."
You are under the impression that Columbus was acting on impulse? He didn't just happen to have three well supplied ships and crew.
The Turkish empire was in control of the land route to India and China, and the Portuguese seemed in control of any eastern route around Africa. Like astronomers and scientists did at the time, Columbus knew the earth was round, and knew he could get to 'India' via the western route. He tried to sell this idea to investors in various places, until he found the queen of Spain willing to finance an expedition.
He did underestimate the size of the Earth and thus the length of his journey, even though Eratosthenes [wikipedia.org] had calculated it to reasonable accuracy more than 17 centuries earlier. Going through the middle is simply the shortest route by sail, following the prevailing wind.
Re: (Score:2)
Columbus wasn't Italian. He's probably referring to Amerigo Vespucci or someone.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Eh? There was no nation of Italy at the time, but Columbus came from the area now known as Italy, as did Vespucci.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While Genoa is Columbus' most likely birthplace, we are not certain of it. You are as wrong affirming that he came from Italy as the grandparent was by saying that he wasn't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Columbus was from Genoa (probably), which was an Italian city-state. So he almost certainly was Italian.
Re: (Score:2)
No, he was Genuese. There wasn't an Italy.
Re: (Score:2)
You're splitting hairs, Genoa is part of modern Italy.
It is not splitting hairs. (Score:2)
Italy is a modern state born in the 19th century.
People back in the time of Columbus would have not understood what that Italy of ours is, if you could tell Columbus that he is Italian he would not know what the heck you would be talking about.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He didn't underestimate it, he purposely faked his calculations. As you say, the actual circumference had been known for a long time, and it was the principle objection to his plan. Somehow he talked the queen into believing his numbers as opposed to everyone else's.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Zoom in on the actual southern coast of England. It looks like a hastily drawn zigzag. England must be fake.
In all seriousness, if authentic, the map predates the effective computation of longitude. You notice how the East/West elements of the map are stretched and skewed, far more than the North/South elements? You try accurately illustrating a fairly complex coastline when you can't say where you are on the East/West axis except by dead reckoning.
Actually, this provides some of the best evidence against it being authentic (ok, solely in my opinion.)
The reason why? Everything in Europe is distorted incredibly, however Greenland is about 90% accurate. So, either the Vikings never bothered to measure their own peninsula, or Britain properly, yet totally managed to survey Greenland with nearly modern accuracy... or, it's likely a fake.
Absolutely Fake. (Score:2)
Yes, the parchment is authentic. Yes, most of the map is authentic. No, there is no way in Hell the "Vinland" section is.
The rest of the map illustrates the travelogue (of journeys to the East) contained in the same codex. It's entirely consistent with the material in the book, with contemporary maps, and with what one would expect. It ain't a perfect representation, but more a spatial arrangement that coheres with t
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not trying to say that I know much about this analysis because I didn't see the data, but his explanation is not rigorous.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I forgot: What when it just was created as a fantasy map, back it those very old times? Like for a cult, where Vinland was some holy place. Very unlikely, yes. But hey, who knows...