Slashdot Mirror
Danish Expert Declares Vinland Map Genuine
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."
The edges arent slightly burnt and you dont roll it out to read it and c'mon, where's the X?
Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
Now in the Americas they should all speak Danish and not Italian!
Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
actually, this is rather interesting. 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. suppose it's like atlantis and sunk to the bottom of the sea?
The experts name is most probable not Rene Larson but René Larsen. As a Dane living in the UK, having a surname ending with sen, I'm proper fed up with having to spell my surname to everyone taking my name down. To me Larsen sounds Danish and Larson sounds Swedish. Sorry for rambling.
Zoom in and look at the UK. The South coast is just a hastily drawn zig zag. It looks like a fake.
You forgot to mention how he obtained it from the Thule Society.
Aside from being generally suspicious of a person anonymously bashing a guy on /., your inability to get even basic facts straight makes me skeptical of your arguments. The map's prominence dates to 1965, after the initial authentication work was completed; prior to that point virtually no one knew of it, so there would be no story of his fame, and definitely no nationwide headlines. Mods, please drop this guy to oblivion.
$_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
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?
Is it just me or does Vinland seem as if it became Finland...in name only of course. :D
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...
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,
Sounds to me like
All the tests that we have done over the past five years -- on the software and other aspects -- do not show any signs of security holes,
Which of course does not mean that there are none. :)
Proving that the map is genuine, is something different, that he can never arrive to, trough only searching for signs of forgery. He should search for something that proves it can only be old.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Come on, when it's not in Debian Stable, it's a beta, even kids know that. :-)
Ezekiel 23:20
So we can give him an F in Geography.
Whoever drew that map must have sucked at drawing.
I mean, come on dude, at least add some decent coffee stains and not some "coffee stain stamp". (see map)
Seriously? Rectangular stamp marks or what?
Kids these days.
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
I don't know. I'm looking at some of those pixels and they don't look quite right. I've also seen a few shops in my day.
The Vinland map is a classic case of well-funded idiots who can't consider all the data.
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 the text. In other words, it's what you'd get if you took the book and sketched out a map from it.
The "Vinland" section is crammed into the left, and is laughably realistic: there's no medieval text from which you could construct a similar map. Hell, nobody circumnavigated Greenland until much later. Moreover, the saga of Erik the Red was not exactly a medieval best seller. It survived in a couple manuscripts, and Norse was not a language that the scribe of the map would have known. The codex, content and hand are all consistent with a scribe around Basel, if I recall correctly
So all this nonsense about carbon dating is beside the point. You can argue the ink composition all you want, but every single linguistic, codicological, paleographical and cultural historical indicator points to this being an obvious and bad fake.
And get off my lawn.
But they spell it a little different.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=vineland
Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
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.
Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
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.
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.
From http://www.physorg.com/news91798327.html "Viking navigation hypothesis under foggy and cloudy skies requires more light" This article speaks of the Viking sun-dial for sunny days and a less-known sunstone for the foggy ones. Interesting theory, if anything.
The more you know, the less you need. [Admin added: from me.]
As a Norwegian I am embarassed by those of my countrymen that routinely describe "Leif Eiriksson" and "Snorre Sturlason" - Snorri was his name, and he was Sturluson - as Norwegians. They were both so Icelandic, although Leifur went to Greenland along with his father and might also be called a Greenlander,,, Snorri's writings are very important to us, too important to want to claim him for our own - especially since he was murdered by order of the then King of Norway. Wet ops even then. Sorry, Iceland.
Titanium dioxide is the most common compound of the ninth most common element found in the Earth's crust. It is as common as dirt because it literally IS dirt, somewhere between 0.5 and 1.5 percent of soil by weight. It is hard to understand how something as common as TiO2 can form the basis of definitive conclusions about a 600 year old piece of parchment. I'd be more surprised if TiO2 was NOT found in some medieval concoction of ink.
The TiO2 claim came from Walter McCrone of "Shroud of Turin" fame. He used a spectrometer to detect the ubiquitous TiO2 in the Vinland map ink. He spent most of his career in high drama caused by his various claims. Although calling him a fraud may not be fair, Walter McCrone never let a good controversy go to waste.
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). That's because once there is no more carbon-14 uptake from the atmosphere, the ratio of carbon-14 to carbon 12 will decline (i.e. the plant/animal died)... which brings up another good point, i.e. what pigments were used, what they were derived from.
Also of interest is how carbon-dating in the future will become more difficult due to the advent of atmospheric atom bomb tests and other nuke industry emissions.
Lastly, whether the map of Vinland is authentic or not is for someone else to decide. However, I doubt anyone quibbles with the idea that plenty of humans inhabited the Americas well before other folk documented shorelines, etc. when they "discovered" the North and South American continents. For me, too many of these document-authenticity quests take on a quasi-nationalistic tint, i.e. "my grandpa was braver/wiser/better than your grandpa". Cheers.
Thanks for pointing out mistakes in his explanation. This allows other readers to see his statement in another light. But why "mod him to oblivion"? He offers a remarkable story. Why should others not be able to judge for themselves (taking into account your own comment)?
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 judge the story for ourselves, given that down-modding does not in any way prevent us from reading the story, which we are all aware of now because of the high-modded rebuttal?
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
...makes my serious sleep disorders even worse. Only a German could spell it Vinland. Sumbody does not like this!!
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?"
Yes, and those who RTFA will note several mentions of *wormholes*. WTF, they knew about wormholes back then??? Or is that how the Vikings arrived on our planet? Ponderous.
What is far more interesting to me about the Vinland map than the inclusion of "vinland" is the rather large island directly west of the the Strait of Gibraltar, exactly coinciding with Plato's description of the position of Atlantis.
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, people value what is scarce, and there are few things as scarce as the produce of talented *and* original people.
You don't like it? Don't buy the real thing, buy the forgeries, the forgers still have no right to claim as theirs the work of people that can actually come with original ideas. Such practice is simply immoral any way you want to slice it.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
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.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
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.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Poor sod...
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
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.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Stop. Really. Stop...
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
But thanks for playing, nice troll.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
One history is as good as another.
"VINLAND, FUCK YEAH!!!" just doesn't sound quite right.
His grandfather was a murderer, so he fled to Iceland.
Keep in mind that the ancient Norse sometimes distinguished sharply between "murdering" somebody and just plain "killing" a person. They didn't necessarily treat the words "murder" and "kill" as synonyms in the way christians do. There is actually a passage in one of the sagas where a group of men were said to have: "... killed him and then murdered him". Killing was just that, ending somebody's life, it only became murder if you committed the act of killing as part of , say, a robbery i.e. there was no point of honor involved (such as: The bl**dy git raped my sister/wife/daughter/mother/cousin) to justify the killing. Another reason a killing might become regarded as murder was if you tried to conceal what you had done, i.e. hide the body to weasel out of paying the obligatory compensation money which was considered a very low thing to do. What Thorvald Asvaldsson, and Erik the Red became guilty of could be described as "feuding", which makes at least some of what they did killing rather than murder. The reason they were exiled probably had more to do with the rest of their community being fed up with the constant fighting and ceaseless cattle raids than that the exile was a punishment for "murder". Even though it was a widespread practice feuding was still actively discouraged under norse law.
And some source material
http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/lhn-nhs/nl/meadows/index.aspx
No, no, no. The Egyptian gods came here by wormhole. Thor, the Supreme Commander of the Asgard Fleet, came here by ship. Sheesh.
"...history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." --Ghandi
The Kensington Runestone is almost certainly authentic, for one simple reason. It includes runes that at the time of its discovery were not in any known runic dictionary, which is one major reason it was considered a fake at the time of its discovery by linguistic experts, but decades later were found to be authentic runes. A pretty neat trick for a purported 19th century hoaxer, no? Whoever wrote the Wikipedia entry should probably have a chat with Alice Beck Kehoe of the Univesity of Wisconsin, as she thoroughly deals with all the arguments raised there while providing substantial unanswered evidence for authenticity. I note that her key text on the topic "The Kensington Runestone: Approaching a Research Question Holistically" is not cited in the Wiki entry. Unfortunately, this is what you get when you rely on Wikipedia as a sole source.
Awesome.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
This is what happens when you read an exciting book about an epic adventure that you desperately want to be true.
Dr. Kehoe writes that Kensington is fourteen days journey from Lake Superior (easily reached from Newfoundland via the St. Lawrence River), and Hudson's Bay, via Winnipeg and Canadian rivers. However, both routes would require porting a ship over land for tens of miles at several points. sailing a boat up the extremely violent Niagara river, let alone the falls, is obviously out of the question. Hiking over land would take a lot more than 14 days, even disregarding the nagging question what motivation men in such a situation would have for venturing hundreds of miles inland. This last question is very difficult get past occam's razor, especially compared to the great simplicity of the alternative options: a forgery, or a genuine stone found somewhere around the baltic and transported to Minnesota in the 19th century.
Yeah, pretty much everything about that post was false (just like the Vinland Map), starting with the guy's name! In light of the renewed interest in the Map, I've now put a page about Laurence Witten [not Lawrence, not Whitten] on Wikipedia.
If you think that "The Kensington Runestone: Approaching A Research Question Holistically", with its chapters on geology, archaeology, linguistics, and biology is "an exciting book about an epic adventure"... either you've never read the book, or you've already decided what you want to be true. Apparently, you don't even know what conclusion Kehoe comes to. Either way, you've pretty clearly invalidated your qualifications to comment. Look, the stone includes runes that appeared in no dictionary at the time, and this was taken as contemporary proof that it was a bad fake. Those runes were later found to be genuine by further research. How do you explain the presence of genuine runes unknown at the time if its a forgery? And why do you find the fabricated-after-the-fact, unsupported by any evidence fabulation that the stone was transported from Minnesota more plausible than the simplest explanation? Unless you can come up with a credible theory of who transported it, how, when, and for what gain, and how it came to be buried and then found... you've got nothing other than, to borrow a phrase, an epic adventure that you desperately want to be true. For the record, I have no desire, desperate or otherwise, for this to be true or false. I have no historical, ethnic or other attachment to the story. I simply looked at the evidence, and it's obvious which side of the argument is ignoring the evidence it doesn't like...
Scandinavians in the 19th century didn't rely on dictionaries for writing runes; it wasn't a lost skill at the time.
How is it 'simplest' to assume that 15th century Scandinavian explorers traveled hundreds of miles inland on an unfamiliar continent, frequently having to port their ship many miles overland across considerable differences in elevation, and that after being ambushed, they took a day or so to carve an elaborate inscription on a stone, that happened to be politically apropos 5 centuries later?