Chris,
You found two sites, that link the Vikings to the Middle East, if you
followed my link to the Swedish Old Nordic Research Institution's paper,
even if you do not read Swedish. The Viking and Turkish runic writing used
the nabateic language from the area of Southern Israel - Jordanien etc. I
lost the link to the site you found and it would be nice if you can give it
to me. In the Viking tales, Miklagård (Constantinople) is referred to as
the "the big city" and as a sort of home city or origin. The Vikings also
had a quite unique way getting there, by the Russian rivers, which is a bit
illogical, if their origin was European. The Viking findings and tales,
goes back to around 200 AD and their conquering and trading period
westwards was between 800 to 1100 AD.
The only serious and failed attempt to conquer Constantinople by the
Swedes, that I can remember from the Swedish history, was by a Swedish King
and around 600 years after the Vikings era ended. Maybe you can refresh my
memory on that point.
It is interesting and a lot of the Swedish Viking history has been
rewritten and reevaluated, since I first learned it in school more than 50
years ago. If I think about what I read and learned then, it corresponds
very much with your and Bob's Viking history.
It is funny, because we decided to not go to our summer house in Sweden
this year, were we normally spending July, from my childhood and onwards.
My wife started to rent luxury villas and apartments for friends during the
summer and I made a web site for it http://villaslujo.com/ a year ago. This
expanded so much and so fast, that we decided to stay at home this year.
Otherwise I have a childhood friend at the summer place, who is professor
in Nordic History at Stockholm University, but what I can remember I have
never really discussed detailed history with him. He could have straighten
me out on this matters, if I am too wrong.
Hakan
At 02:30 AM 6/28/2005, you wrote:
hi, hakan.
there is absolutely no question that the vikings traded with byzantium.
there was one viking group which also tried to conquer it. having failed
at this, they opted to formally establish friendly trade and diplomatic
relations, arranging dynastic marriages (which served as the foundation
for the later russian empire's presumption to carrying on the legacy of
the ceasars). others saw fit to serve the byzantine emperor: the
varingian guard to which bob and i have both referred previously.
their trading (and conquering) activities were even more far flung than
byzantium, though. and it is generally accepted that for several hundred
years they were essentially *the* vessel for the transfer of huge amounts
of wealth from asia minor; the middle east; and asia to europe.
i did some looking and found a single site which links the viking runic
alphabet with the turk script. the author's assertion is that the
symbols, at least insofar as their phonetic representation, are
identical. he went so far as to transcribe viking runic writings to the
turk runes, yielding an effective translation. it must be emphasized that
this was a strictly phonetic exercise. he did not use the turk language.
-----Original Message-----
From: Hakan Falk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
Sent: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 03:21:31 +0200
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] vikings, turks and romans
Chris,
Look at my mail to Bob.
The Vikings had a regular and well established trading relationship
with Miklagård, which was Constantinople. This is proven in many
ways, by written "sagas" and also by history from that part. When
they visited Constantinople, it was special rules for them and they
were not allowed to be a larger group or to have arms, which also
is documented.
All the links are there, it is possible and Swedish historians have
started to accept the links and their probability. They do not regard
it as speculative. It is not much more that I can say off or on line,
but if you have substantial evidence that the theory is wrong, the
we can continue off line.
Hakan
At 02:16 AM 6/27/2005, you wrote:
>hakan,
>
>i wasn't disputing everything you suggest.
>
>what i do have trouble with, and correct me if i'm misinterpreting you, is
>the notion that the vikings could somehow be descended both from the roman
>legions and the turks. could there have been contact between the romans and
>scandinavia? possibly a trade relationship? certainly, but i find this
>questionable because the vikings would have had little if anything
to >offer that the
>romans weren't already getting from the peoples of britania, and western
and
>central europe. it seems more likely that scandinavian goods would
have >found
>their way to the romans indirectly, via trade with the germanic peoples
of >central
>europe.
>
>but even if we suppose that there was direct trade contact, i highly
doubt it
>could have had sufficient regularity or depth to be of significant
>cultural/technological/political impact, with the possible exception
of >their longboats.
> but even this i've never heard suggested, and it seems about as likely
that
>this influence could have come from phoenician traders. that is, if the
>viking longboat wasn't an entirely autoctonous technology.
>
>there may be more to the turkish/turkic relationship, because the history
>gets a little more complex. but it seems highly speculative in the
least >if not
>utterly baseless and fanciful, to suggest that the connections are anything
>but extremely remote in some cases, and superficial in others.
>
>anyway, except for the fact that (as was pointed out earlier in this
thread)
>everything is connected to everything, we seem to have gone pretty far
afield.
>
>perhaps you'd like to continue this discussion off-list?
>
>-chris b.
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
