Posted on 12/21/2007 7:39:54 AM PST by finnsheep
Gutefar - The Bronze Age Sheep of Gotland
This article claims sheep of the British Isles descended from sheep from Gotland, an Island in the Baltic "...arriving in Britain between 2,000 and 3,000 years ago, doubtless traveling along with the same Viking raiders that brought sheep originally to Gotland." She also claims Vikings are the ANCESTORS of the Visigoths.
Only problems is that the Visigoths preceded the Vikings by about 400 years. The Visigoths sacked Rome in 451 AD and the first recorded Viking raid on the British Isles happened around 800 AD with the raid on the monastery at Lindisfarne.
The people who might have brought sheep to the British Isles 2,000 or 3,000 years ago would have been Celtic peoples or even their predecessors. The only folks raiding the British Isles 2,000 years ago would have been Romans.
She also claims the Icelandic sheep are descended from sheep from the island of Gotland which is also not true since Icelandic sheep arrived with the first humans in 874 and they came from NORWAY!
Further on in this article she claims the prehistoric mouflon is the ancestor of the Big Horn sheep (Ovis canadensis) of North America. Only problem with that is that it isn't true either. The Big Horn sheep's closest relative isclosest relative is the Siberian wild sheep (ovis nivicola) and the Big Horn diverged from them 600,000 years ago. Genetically the Big Horn belongs to the Pachyceriform group, not the Moufloniform and evolved separately from them having diverged 1.4 million years ago.
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks Fiddlstix. Someone got the wool pulled over their eyes somewhere along the line. :') |
||
· Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
wonder what a jane fonda-bill clinton kid would be like?
Yup. That was my people...they were R1b (DYS390-23) from Denmark. If You're Irish, you're probably R1b (DYS390-24). I learned that this past year when I had my family DNA analysed. BTY, my last name is LAMB (hence, blam).
Damn ... can’t imagine going thru the rest of my life not knowing this ... now my life (knowledge wise) is complete.
This thread is useless without SPAM.
But I don’t like SPAM!
I don’t care what anyone says. Vikings had horns on their helmets just like in the movies.
I didn’t know Vikings ate SPAM. Did they fry it and make sandwiches? Or did they chop it up in soups and stews?
Might not want to bet on that, though. According to Dr. William Savage, the professor who taught Oklahoma history at OU a few years ago, there are no viking artifacts associated with the Heavener Runestone. Just the carvings themselves. My personal opinion of Savage is that he’s a jerk, but a competent and knowledgeable jerk. He’s certainly an entertaining lecturer...
Didn’t read the article. But the Goths did come from Southern Sweden. Some of them might have been ancestors of the Vikings, not the other way around. At any rate, they might have been closely related.
How does Gothic compare with Old Norse liguistically? There is part of the answer.
There is folklore around Mulberry, AR of another Viking hieroglyphic site. Only locals are aware of it and it hasn’t been looked at professionally to my knowledge. What I wonder about that, making the assumption these are in fact of Viking origin, is how did they get this far inland? The Arkansas River was not navigable until we dredged it for barge traffic, unless Viking boats were wide based with little to no keel. We are talking about 600 miles inland from the Gulf. My understannding is that the hieroglyphics are inconsistent with Native American writings.
Everyone knows they ate lutifisk. {;0)
Viking longships are, in fact, wide, with not much in the way of a keel. From what I know of them, it is “possible.”
The runes are, as far as I know, as you say, incompatible with native writing. Dr. Savage’s conclusion was, he says, drawn from the fact that in excavations around the Heavener area, there are absolutely no viking artifacts. Not so much as a bead. Not sure how you would tell an Indian bead from a viking bead, but every other site I know of where the vikings stayed for even a little while, they left a lot of artifacts behind.
Best guess is 18th or 19th century hoax.
Oh not those Vikings, never mind.
lutifisk? That’s a food?
I have always thought that was the term for what Vikings did to villages.
Yes, Scandinavia, where the men are men and the sheep are nervous!
· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe · |
|||
Antiquity Journal & archive Archaeologica Archaeology Archaeology Channel BAR Bronze Age Forum Discover Dogpile Eurekalert LiveScience Mirabilis.ca Nat Geographic PhysOrg Science Daily Science News Texas AM Yahoo Excerpt, or Link only? |
|
||
· Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword · |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.