Pre-Columbian Contact Claims Encyclopedia

With respect to Columbus, it is quite clear -to me, at least- that he was well informed about the scandinavian expeditions in Greenland and Newfoundland, and that he met, or at least he believed, asiatic-looking people went paddling in the icy seas of northern Europe.

Originally posted by Cryptic Originally posted by Omar al Hashim The first journey was in 1310 with 200 ships, and the second (which included Abu Bakr II and 1000 ships) in 1311. It is quite possible that the descendants of these ships were found by Columbus. That is pure fantasy. The Kingdom of Mali accomplished many things. Sea voyages to America, however, were not one of them.

Edited by Ikki - 05-Oct-2008 at 00:55

Originally posted by rider So weren't others mentioned here (Vespucci). I think that under pre-Columbian, we should rather take it before someone reached the main American land.

That would include Columbus, who was not the first to discover the mainland (which claim belongs to Cabot).

But here are some other claims, some generally accepted, others disputable.

1000 AD: Thules (ancestors of modern Aleut, Inuit, Yupik etc) cross the Bering Strait, colonizing the far north of the Americas and replacing the Dorset Culture. Generally accepted.

1003 AD: Leif Ericson establishes colony in Newfoundland. Generally accepted.

1497 AD: John Cabot discovers North American mainland. Generally accepted.

986 AD: Bjarni Herjólfsson sights Labrador coastline. Generally accepted, although not widely known.

1490's AD: Secret expedition of Cabot, prior to 1497 voyage. Disputable.

1480s AD: Bristol fisherman discover Grand Banks and Newfoundland. Disputable.

1474 AD: Joäo Corte Real discovers "Stock Fish Land" (Newfoundland and the Grand Banks). Disputable.


Also, not all the claims are one-way: some fringe claims are about Americans making transoceanic contact with Eurasians. These are all highly disputable. Here are a few of those:

1480 AD: Yupanqui (Incan ruler) voyages out into the Pacific, and makes contact with Polynesians.

15th century AD: Bartolome de las Casas claims Columbus found two dead native Americans in the Azores, further claims that this is why Columbus presumed there was an Atlantic route to India. Columbus's son writes a variant version of this story, in which Columbus finds the two bodies in Ireland.

1153 AD: Antonio Galvão picks up two "Indians" (ie it is written as if they were East Indians) somewhere out in the Atlantic.

1st century AD: Pliny the Elder writes that the proconsul of Gaul in the early 1st century received from Germanic allies two "people from India" who were caught in a storm at sea and washed up on the coast of Germany or Denmark.


My theory on the latter three (which all seem to feature a pair of "Indians" found at sea) is that the Germans really did capture two people of foreign appearance and sent them to Gaul as a present, though they were probably Sami or Finns. Sometime in the Middle Ages, someone read Pliny's account which set off an oral myth about two Indian castaways being found in the Atlantic.



Edited by edgewaters - 25-Oct-2008 at 14:23

Originally posted by brunodam it seems the only universally accepted evidence of precolumbian contacts are the viking ones in Newfoundland and the roman "bust" found in Mexico. All the others seem "fairy tales", like the one in Rio de Janeiro

The roman bust in Mexico is hardly universally accepted. It, like most of the others, is a fringe theory.

Viking contact in Newfoundland, however, is not the only universally accepted contact claim. No serious scholar disputes the colonization of the Arctic by the Inuit, Aleut, Yupik etc, who crossed into Alaska around 500 AD.

None of the claims you mention enjoy much support in the academic community, therefore, they are fringe, whether or not they claim to be "scientific" (every little bit of pseudo-science out there does this).

But we aren't really supposed to be debating the claims ... just noting them. I think it is fair to segregate those which enjoy near-universal support (ie Vikings in Greenland, Columbus, Inuit) from those that do not, and I do not find the "roman bust in Mexico" has any support at all in mainstream academia. It is a claim, and has a place in this thread, but it should not be passed off as a mainstream theory when it clearly isn't.


Edited by edgewaters - 30-Oct-2008 at 13:00

Well, if it is for believing, we can believe many things. I personally believe the Americas lacked Old World visitors for most of its history. Besides, I also believe visits of proto-eskimos, Inuits and amerindians to Europe were quite common...

Originally posted by brundoam First, how do you get such a roman bust worth a fortune? There are only a few in the world and they are in the hands of collectionists and Museums, that are not going to allow their easy "disappearance"...second, if you and I or whoever, own such a roman burst, why I will drop -and lose- such a fortune worth a lot of dollars only to create/damage a theory, knowing that some scholars will quickly deny everything (as happened)?  You can drop accidentally a FAKED roman bust, of course, and that is why has been done a detailed research by the respected german institute that has confirmed the autenticity of the roman bust (worth nearly half a million dollars in the black market, according to an italian scholar!). Only a stupid can "drop" such a fortune, don't you believe?   BTW, do you know that some scholars believe that the Viking settlement in Newfoundland is fake? They declare that in the XVI/XVII centuries some whale hunters from Iceland/Norway took stones and artifacts found in abandoned Greenland real viking settlements -because was easy and economical to embark in their ship- and so built a very little settlement in Newfoundland as a winter base for their hunting travels. Those "original" stones created the confusion when checked in the XX century...... as you can see everything and the contrary of everything can be said about something, be it the viking or the romans.....

But what you said of Vikings, can be true of this allegedly Roman bust. Not today, but some centuries ago perhaps some European carried that bust on a ship as a personal belonging and now it is on the other continent.

Originally posted by Chilbudios ... a school drop-out writing on UFOs, paranormal and similar topics.

I had a book titled "BC America." It talked about how the Celts were possibly used by the Phonecians as labor to extract copper out of mines on some island- I think it is called Royal isle but it is in one of the great lakes near Michigan. They claim there are mines there where tons of copper ore has been extracted, far too much for the natives to have used. I recall him also talking about the ancient Minoans being part of this copper ore trade also. It is an interesting book and he had his thesis statement and provided his share of evidence to help support it.
We all should know that copper and tin = bronze His claim was that the copper ore mined in the Americas was combined with tin from present day England.

Can you really trust the book of Mormon as a historical source. I suppose there is a grain of truth in all mythos. No offense to Mormoms but it has been revised so many times I doubt its historical accuracy.
It also names old world animals such as horses, sheep, cattle and camels but none of this was found in the New World. I do not know of any archaeological evidence to support this. There is a jouranl also titled BC America but most, not all, of the articles are bogus and I have wonder if either the Mormon church is behind this publication or if it is a memeber of the church.

600bc Lamanites & Nephites The Book of Mormon describes how the lost tribe of Israel, led by Lamas and Nephi, travelled via the Middle East to the Americas. The two groups lived at odds with one another but were unified by converting to Christianity. However the division resurface and a larger group, The Lamanites stayed Christian, and a smaller groups, The Nephites began denying Christ. The Lamanites then massacred the Nephites. God punished the Lamanites for their wickedness by turning their skin black. Mormons believe that the Lamanites are the ancestors of the Paleo-Indian.

Originally posted by Constantine XI Originally posted by eaglecap I had a book titled "BC America." It talked about how the Celts were possibly used by the Phonecians as labor to extract copper out of mines on some island- I think it is called Royal isle but it is in one of the great lakes near Michigan. They claim there are mines there where tons of copper ore has been extracted, far too much for the natives to have used. I recall him also talking about the ancient Minoans being part of this copper ore trade also. It is an interesting book and he had his thesis statement and provided his share of evidence to help support it. We all should know that copper and tin = bronze His claim was that the copper ore mined in the Americas was combined with tin from present day England.   This is a very out there theory. While it is true the Phoenicians did get their tin from Britain, they traded the natives for it. And Britain was considered very much on the periphery of the known world in those days. We have to ask ourselves, why would the Phoenicians transport thousands of people across thousands of miles (assuming they even knew of the Americas) to a place without the agricultural and industrial capacity to support a major mining operation? The answer is they would not, especially when they could simply get the needed copper they wanted by trading for it in copper rich areas such as Cyprus.   Originally posted by eaglecap Can you really trust the book of Mormon as a historical source. I suppose there is a grain of truth in all mythos. No offense to Mormoms but it has been revised so many times I doubt its historical accuracy. It also names old world animals such as horses, sheep, cattle and camels but none of this was found in the New World. I do not know of any archaeological evidence to support this. There is a jouranl also titled BC America but most, not all, of the articles are bogus and I have wonder if either the Mormon church is behind this publication or if it is a memeber of the church.   The Mormon religion in itself is one of the biggest laughing stocks any historian can come across. It suits their purposes to convince others that Abrahamic religion somehow made it to the Americas before Columbus. Their holy book claims the usage of 6 different types of coins in the Americas, yet none of these have ever been found (which is inconceivable, considering how durable coins are). There often is a grain of truth to do with many myths, but not with theirs; because theirs are the product of a hyperactive imagination inclined to engage in pure invention.

Some good points - I agree!!! -
Although, if they want to believe this then it is their freedom of religion or at least in the USA and I assume Australia.