 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
History Forum / General / Archaeology / January 2007Killing of next myth.
That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting area of the Norse Greenlanders, is an underestimation of the Norse Greenlanders activity in the area. That becomes clear when following is put on the table where it belongs. On page 73 in Jansen Henrik M, A critical account of the written and archaeological sources' evidence concerning the Norse settlements in Greenland, Meddelelser om Grönland 182:4, 1972, following is noted that a Norwegian King in 1261 demanded blood-money for homicide not only in the bigger settlements but also from Norðrsetr, a settlement in Disco Bay. Given that Jansen is correct, which he usually are and he seems to be when his ref been checked, this calls for killing of the myth that the Norse Greenlanders 'only' used Disco Bay area as hunting area. But the impact of this also is that the ruins found in Disco Bay might be Norse and not as interpreted otherwise. It's hard to believe that any King of Norway would call for law being followed in Norðrsetr if Norðrsetra wasn't more than a seasonal used settlement in Disco Bay. Inger E > That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting > area of the Norse Greenlanders, [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > that the ruins found in Disco Bay might be Norse and not as > interpreted otherwise. What great logic. So if someone says that a dog was beaten in near my house once, my cat might be a dog. > It's hard to believe that any King of Norway would call for law being > followed in Norðrsetr if Norðrsetra wasn't more than a seasonal used > settlement in Disco Bay. > > Inger E > That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting area of > the Norse Greenlanders, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Inger E Quite apart from the problem that you haven't killed the first myth yet (see A. L. Binns et al.), this seems an unwarranted assumption. Why should a King of Norway who claimed suzerainty over Iceland and Greenland not want the rule of law to extend to summer hunting-grounds, as well as to winter quarters? The alternative could be, as we know from other sagas, an uncontrollable series of revenge-killings, and that could be an economic disaster, from the royal taxation point of view. The words "clutching" and "straws" come to mind. Pete Stretton >> That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting >> area of the Norse Greenlanders, [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > Pete Stretton She didn''t say what Henrik Jansen (not Jansen Henrik) actually wrote, and we have seen in the past the most fantastic interpretations of what she thought people wrote.  Signaturep.a. Peter, <snip. > >> On page 73 in Jansen Henrik M, A critical account of the written and > >> archaeological sources' evidence [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > -- > p.a. Might it not be that Inger comes from a country that follows different ways of refering to persons. As you can see she wrote Jansen(,) Henrik M. That can be read as Henrik M. Jansen. Further on you can see that mentioned the same person als ( ) Jansen. I have no difficulty reading her. I have not followed the previous and past discussion. I feel no need to participate though I had to say my piece on this item. With regards, Hans Vogels Helmond, The Netherlands > <snip. >>>> On page 73 in Jansen Henrik M, A critical account of the written >>>> and archaeological sources' evidence >> She didn''t say what Henrik Jansen (not Jansen Henrik) >> actually wrote, and we have seen in the past the most >> fantastic interpretations of what she thought people wrote. > Might it not be that Inger comes from a country that follows different > ways of refering to persons. As you can see she wrote Jansen(,) Henrik > M. That can be read as Henrik M. Jansen. Further on you can see that > mentioned the same person als ( ) Jansen. I have no difficulty reading > her. I have not followed the previous and past discussion. I feel no > need to participate though I had to say my piece on this item. You are right of course, and in this case it is not diffucult (esp.not to us Dutch with such a familyname), but she does this all the time, making it sometimes hard to find the correct name, and there usually is very little else to search for when she gives a reference. BTW, Inger E. Johansson is from Sweden. Signaturep.a. >> <snip. >>>>> On page 73 in Jansen Henrik M, A critical account of the written [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > search for when she gives a reference. > BTW, Inger E. Johansson is from Sweden. Or, do people in Linkoping speak a different nordic language from the rest of Sweden? > In sci.archaeology message > <p.alaca@purple.invalid> . . . : [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>>> actually wrote, and we have seen in the past the most >>>> fantastic interpretations of what she thought people wrote. >>> Might it not be that Inger comes from a country that follows >>> different ways of refering to persons. As you can see she wrote [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>> and past discussion. I feel no need to participate though I had to >>> say my piece on this item. >> You are right of course, and in this case it is not diffucult >> (esp.not to us Dutch with such a familyname), but she >> does this all the time, making it sometimes hard to find >> the correct name, and there usually is very little else to >> search for when she gives a reference. >> BTW, Inger E. Johansson is from Sweden. > Or, do people in Linkoping speak a different nordic language > from the rest of Sweden? She is from Barceløna. Signaturep.a. In sci.archaeology message news:1169243618.246429.202810 @l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com by "Volucris" <volucris@kpnplanet.nl> . . . > Peter, > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > With regards, Inger mislabels to diffuse her irresponsibility when she is proven to have misquoted people or quoted them out of context. Its quite a normal practice for her, make it difficult for critics to follow up and confront her on her references. This is nothing but a childish propoganda ploy. She finally has run out of excuses I guess for not providing her references and sources. >>> That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting >>> area of the Norse Greenlanders, [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > actually wrote, and we have seen in the past the most > fantastic interpretations of what she thought people wrote. What exactly Henrik Jansen wrote I don't know, but his source must have been Håkon Håkonson's saga. It states that in the autumn of 1261 three men (names given) returned from Greenland having been away for four winters. They report to the king that the Greenlanders has decided to pay him taxes, including fines for murder, both if the victim was a Norwegian or a Greenlander and if the murder took place either in the settlement or Nordsetur. So IEJ gets it wrong again ;-) And if she once again wants to accuse me of lying, the above is translated from P.A. Munch's translation to Norwegian, online at http://tinyurl.com/275j2d page 434. >>>> That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting >>>> area of the Norse Greenlanders, [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] >>> >>> The words "clutching" and "straws" come to mind. >> She didn''t say what Henrik Jansen (not Jansen Henrik) >> actually wrote, and we have seen in the past the most >> fantastic interpretations of what she thought people wrote. > What exactly Henrik Jansen wrote I don't know, but his source must > have been Håkon Håkonson's saga. "Given that Jansen is correct, which he usually are and he seems to be when his ref been checked" > It states that in the autumn of 1261 three men (names given) > returned from Greenland having been away for four winters. > They report to the king that the Greenlanders has decided to > pay him taxes, including fines for murder, both if the victim was > a Norwegian or a Greenlander and if the murder took place either > in the settlement or Nordsetur. That makes sense. > So IEJ gets it wrong again ;-) And if she once again wants to > accuse me of lying, the above is translated from P.A. Munch's > translation to Norwegian, online at http://tinyurl.com/275j2d page > 434. Do you think that will help you? :-) Signaturep.a. > >>> That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting > >>> area of the Norse Greenlanders, [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > translation to Norwegian, online at http://tinyurl.com/275j2d page > 434. Thanks for the useful link, Erik. Inger leaves unasked the question "Why should the king be interested in Nordstetr murders?" Answer: They would be a source of royal revenue, like any other murders. In the words of Abba: "money, money, money". Pete Stretton >> What exactly Henrik Jansen wrote I don't know, but his source must >> have been Håkon Håkonson's saga. It states that in the autumn of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> translation to Norwegian, online at http://tinyurl.com/275j2d page >> 434. > Thanks for the useful link, Erik. Well, Gothic Norse is not that easy reading for me but on the sight of it, Saganet is a great source. > Inger leaves unasked the question "Why should the king be interested > in Nordstetr murders?" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Pete Stretton Signaturep.a. Erik H, Peter A and Flexford, Are WRONG, not I! False information presented by Erik H over and over again - Munch was not mentioned by me - Jansen Henrik M was - the text is correct by me, but once again Erik H shown incapacity to read and understand! IF you three continue, you may do so, BUT that doesn't alter the fact that you are WRONG. Neither does it alter the fact that the article of Jansen by other scholars have been interpretated the way I done. Is it possible for you to understand that you aren't specialists in this area, I am and there are many more who really are who arrived to same conclusion as I done! Stop attacking me! Present valid arguments instead of pure lies! Inger E > Erik H, Peter A and Flexford, His name is Pete . > Are WRONG, not I! Do you realy think that shouting works? > False information presented by Erik H over and over again Repeating that over and over again makes it still not true. >- Munch was not mentioned by me - Jansen Henrik M was - Nobody said Much was mentioned by you, but you should have mentioned him. > the text is correct by me, What do you mean? > but once again Erik H shown incapacity to read and understand! > > IF you three continue, you may do so, BUT that doesn't alter the fact > that you are WRONG. > Neither does it alter the fact that the article of Jansen by other > scholars have been interpretated the way I done. So, if it is not your idea, how can you kill a myth then? > Is it possible for you to understand that you aren't specialists in > this area, I am No you aren't. > and there are many more who really are who arrived to > same conclusion as I done! Good for you. > Stop attacking me! Present valid arguments > instead of pure lies! You have to start with giving facts. All you gave us was a speculation based on mis-interpretation, as Erik showed. And now stifle yourself, woman. Signaturep.a. > Erik H, Peter A and Flexford, > Are WRONG, not I! Ad hominem isn't proof, and so far that is all you have produced - in addition to unfounded speculations. > False information presented by Erik H over and over again - Munch was not > mentioned by me - Jansen Henrik M was - the text is correct by me, > but once again Erik H shown incapacity to read and understand! The only one of us being unable to read and understand seems to be yourself. > IF you three continue, you may do so, BUT that doesn't alter the fact that > you are WRONG. Ad hominem again. > Neither does it alter the fact that the article of Jansen by other scholars > have been interpretated the way I done. Assertion without documentation. > Is it possible for you to understand that you aren't specialists in this > area, I am and there are many more who really are who arrived to same > conclusion as I done! To the last, that's an undocumented claim. To the first, to be recognized as a specialist you have to show it, for example by producing scholarly publications - which you have not done (posts on Usenet do not qualify of course). > Stop attacking me! Present valid arguments instead of > pure lies! Relevant quotes from regular scholars are of course neither attacks nor lies, that you are conceited enough to regard them as such only shows your incapacity of logical thought. > Erik H, Peter A and Flexford, My pals call me Pete. > Are WRONG, not I! > False information presented by Erik H over and over again Never seen any of that. - Munch was not > mentioned by me - Jansen Henrik M was - the text is correct by me, > but once again Erik H shown incapacity to read and understand! Oh. no, Inger -- he understands you only too well. > IF you three continue, you may do so, BUT that doesn't alter the fact that > you are WRONG. Gracious me! Why? With references, please. "Because I say so" won't do. > Neither does it alter the fact that the article of Jansen by other scholars > have been interpretated the way I done. So your work has been plagiarised from others? > Is it possible for you to understand that you aren't specialists in this > area, ...and if you are an example of one, I'm almost infinitely pleased not to be counted among you. As it happens, I am happy in my work, and it pays very well, allowing me the privilege of being an amateur mediaevalist. > I am Tee hee! >and there are many more who really are who arrived to same > conclusion as I done! Are they all in the same institution? (P.S. "..as I _did_"). >Stop attacking me! You think this is an attack? Try annoying me.... > Present valid arguments instead of > pure lies! You really have got a cheek calling us liars. After misrepresenting what Mr. Binns said in the way you did, I would be very wary of accusing others of lying. I really would. > Inger E Pete Stretton > >>> That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting > >>> area of the Norse Greenlanders, [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > murder, both if the victim was a Norwegian or a Greenlander and if > the murder took place either in the settlement or Nordsetur. The forms of the place-names indicate a difference in the type of settlement. The saga says (in Munch's translation) "i Bygden eller i Nordsæderne", and formulaic phrases like this recur in Old Norse texts: "til sætra ok í bygðinni", "bæði til setra ok svá í bygðir", i.e., "both in the summer settlements and in the year-round settlements" (in other words, everywhere). These place-name elements are also reflected in the names given to the Norse parts of Greenland: Eystri bygð and Vestri bygð, the two permanent settlements, but Norðrsetr for the summer hunting grounds. > So IEJ gets it wrong again ;-) And if she once again wants to > accuse me of lying, the above is translated from P.A. Munch's > translation to Norwegian, online at http://tinyurl.com/275j2d page > 434. Alan >> What exactly Henrik Jansen wrote I don't know, but his source must >> have been Håkon Håkonson's saga. It states that in the autumn of [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > bygð, the two permanent settlements, but Norðrsetr for the summer > hunting grounds. Actually it seems that it is Munch who introduced the words "i Bygden eller i Nordsæterne" in his translation. In the original text that I can find, http://tinyurl.com/3y6cxq page 567, Codex Frisianus version, it says only "allt nordr vndr stiornv sva at giallda thegngilldi eftir sem Sturla quad." after which follows the poetic words of Sturla Tordarson noting that the land of the king now extended as far North as under the leitharstiornv (the polar star?) farther than the sun shines (a very rough translation). Perhaps Alan knows of another version where the Nordsetr reference is explicitly given? As I understand a remark in Edvard Bull's 1931 History of the Norwegian People, there are no other sources on this that Sturla Tordarson's saga, which is also what Knut Helle writes in his 1995 Norway's History. > >> What exactly Henrik Jansen wrote I don't know, but his source must > >> have been Håkon Håkonson's saga. It states that in the autumn of [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > on this that Sturla Tordarson's saga, which is also what Knut > Helle writes in his 1995 Norway's History. I hardly think that Munch introduced those words into his translation (especially since he has a footnote explaining what Nordsæterne meant). Perhaps the Codex Frisianus version differs radically from the others. The saga is preserved in three other manuscripts which I can't check here at home on a Sunday: Flateyarbók, Eirspennill and Skálholtsbók yngsta. Perhaps Inger can tell us what those manuscripts actually said? She's the one who has studied these primary sources closely. Alan > > >> What exactly Henrik Jansen wrote I don't know, but his source must > > >> have been Håkon Håkonson's saga. It states that in the autumn of [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > > Alan Dang! There goes another ruined keyboard. Your dry sense of humour will get me into the debt trap, at this rate. In emergency, Flateyarbók is available online on Sagnanet, but don't hold your breath while waiting for the pages to download. Pete Stretton Alan Crozier wrote: > > Alan Crozier wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > Alan <snip> : In emergency, Flateyarbók is available online on Sagnanet, but don't : hold your breath while waiting for the pages to download. As far as I can see, all they have is 15 pages of the edition of Flateyarbók by Unger and Vigfusson. The rest hasn't been scanned yet. :-( Alan > Alan Crozier wrote: >>> Alan Crozier wrote: [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > Flateyarbók by Unger and Vigfusson. The rest hasn't been scanned yet. > :-( Try this one http://tinyurl.com/2nwxov I believe the passage we are discussing is on page 290v, as far as I can decipher the handwriting it says: "Gellt a Grønlande & skrede jafnvel nordast i obigdum". As far as I can see this is yet another version of the saga that does not name Nordsetr explicitly. Which manuscript this is scanned from I cannot discern (it says Lbs 423 fol [1700-1799?]), but allthough different it is more in line with the Codex Frisianus version than Munch's translation. I trust that Alan will be kind enough to follow this through, I'm afraid its beyond the capabilities of IEJ ;-) >> Alan Crozier wrote: >>>> Alan Crozier wrote: [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] > I trust that Alan will be kind enough to follow this through, I'm afraid > its beyond the capabilities of IEJ ;-) Lbs 423 fol is from AM 47, Eirspennill. > > Alan Crozier wrote: > >>> Alan Crozier wrote: [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > I trust that Alan will be kind enough to follow this through, I'm > afraid its beyond the capabilities of IEJ ;-) But, of course, Alan is not an Icelander, so he won't be able to translate or understand "obigdum" -- see earlier thread. At least we see that the King's writ reaches to the _uninhabited_ parts of Greenland, which is the point misunderstood or (less charitably) misrepresented by Inger. BTW, does my finely-attuned nose smell a Cambridge ASNaC in Alan? Pete Stretton Erik Hammerstad wrote: > Alan Crozier wrote: > > <flexford@ntlworld.com> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] > I trust that Alan will be kind enough to follow this through, I'm > afraid its beyond the capabilities of IEJ ;-) But, of course, Alan is not an Icelander, so he won't be able to translate or understand "obigdum" -- see earlier thread. At least we see that the King's writ reaches to the _uninhabited_ parts of Greenland, which is the point misunderstood or (less charitably) misrepresented by Inger. BTW, does my finely-attuned nose smell a Cambridge ASNaC in Alan? Yes indeed! Alan > Erik Hammerstad wrote: > > Alan Crozier wrote: [quoted text clipped - 98 lines] > > Alan Aha! Thought so! I shared Old English tutorials with some of your lot in the 1960s. They were all seriously eccentric. Not like yourself, of course...ahem...or me... Pete Stretton > > Alan Crozier wrote: > >>> Alan Crozier wrote: [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] > handwriting it says: "Gellt a Grønlande & skrede jafnvel nordast i > obigdum". Yes, and that last bit means "in the northernmost uninhabited areas". Instead of using bygd (permanent settlement) or setr (seasonal settlement) the text has "obygdir" (UNinhabited areas = no people living there at all). This breathes new life into the "myth" that there was no permanent settlement in the north of Greenland. > As far as I can see this is yet another version of the > saga that does not name Nordsetr explicitly. Which manuscript this [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I trust that Alan will be kind enough to follow this through, I'm > afraid its beyond the capabilities of IEJ ;-) I'll check Flateyjarbók too, but it will take some time, with trips to the library on two separate days, one to place the order, another to consult the works. Alan >>> Alan Crozier wrote: >>>>> Alan Crozier wrote: [quoted text clipped - 90 lines] > the library on two separate days, one to place the order, another to > consult the works. From the introduction to the Norwegian translation I see that Håkon Håkonson's saga was not actually translated by P.A. Munch, but by D. Rygh after Munch's death. He refers to five manuscripts, but the fifth may be a version only available in a translation by Peder Claussøn though, see http://tinyurl.com/237ayp page XIII-XIV. But while the main source for Rygh is Flateyjarbook, it has been supplemented by material from the others. Take your time, and thanks in advance. > Alan Crozier wrote: > > > Alan Crozier wrote: [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > > Alan Sorry, Alan -- I should have checked it was all there before giving the reference. Comes of not being a specialist. ;-) Pete Stretton >> Alan Crozier wrote: >>>> Alan Crozier wrote: [quoted text clipped - 66 lines] > Sorry, Alan -- I should have checked it was all there before giving the > reference. Comes of not being a specialist. Almost 60 pages from the Håkon Håkonsson saga from the Skálholtsbok yngsta is scanned, see http://skaldic.arts.usyd.edu.au/db.php?table=images&id=11286 but it seems too much to look through for the few lines regarding Greenland - here it must be much better to await the specialist's results :-) You are welcome to try of course. I have failed to find the Flateyarbok version unfortunately, again we hope for Alan's help. > >> Alan Crozier wrote: > >>>> Alan Crozier wrote: [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] > I have failed to find the Flateyarbok version unfortunately, again > we hope for Alan's help. I have now looked at editions of two of the manuscripts and can sum up the situation as follows. Lbs 423 fol is an 18th-century paper copy of AM 47 fol (Eirspennill). The passage about Greenland in Lbs 423 is not in AM 47 since the last six or so leaves of that manuscript are lost. The text in Lbs 423, as we have seen, uses the phrase "nordast i obygdum" (in the northernmost uninhabited areas). I can't find the passage in Skálholtsbok yngsta. It seems to be yet another very different redaction from the one in Flateyjarbók. The Codex Frisianus version is shorter than the passage in Flateyjarbók. It says only that teh Greenlanders agreed to pay tax to the king and also blood-money for homicide, whether the slain men were Norse or Greenlanders. The king now took þegn-gildi (blood money for a thane) all the way north under the Pole Star, as the poet Sturla said in a quoted verse. The same verse is quoted in Flateyjarbók, but here the prose is slightly more detailed. This is where the Norwegian translation by Munch et al. comes from. It says (ch. 271, or vol. 3, p. 214 of the edition by Unger & Vigfusson): oll manndraap skylldi bæta vid konunginn huart er væri norænir edr grænlendzkir ok huart sem þeir voru drepnir i bygd edr nordrsetu "compensation for all homicides was to be paid to the king, whether it was for Norwegians or Greenlanders and whether they were killed in "bygd" (settled land) or "nordrsetr". That last word is a compound of "north" and a word that in Norway refers to mountain pastures used in the summer. In Greenland it is unlikely to refer to transhumance; "summer hunting grounds" would perhaps be a better translation. The word is not a place-name. I can't find the passage in Skálholtsbok yngsta. It seems to be yet another very different redaction from the one in Flateyjarbók. This particular verse about the Pole Star by Sturla does not occur (although lots of others do). There is nothing here to suggest permanent settlement in the north of Greenland. On the contrary, the formulaic character of the language shows that the king wanted to get blood money for any possible murder, no matter who the victim was and no matter whether it happened in inhabited or not (permanently) inhabited areas. The "nordrsetr" clearly belonged to the latter category. Alan >> flexfordwrote: >>>> flexford wrote >>>> Alan Crozier wrote: >>>>> "Erik Hammerstad" wrote >>>>>> Alan Crozier wrote: >>>>>>> "Erik Hammerstad" wrote >>>>>>> What exactly Henrik Jansen wrote I don't know, but his source >>>>>>> must have been Håkon Håkonson's saga. It states that in the [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >>>>>>> permanent settlements, but Norðrsetr for the summer hunting >>>>>>> grounds. >>>>>> Actually it seems that it is Munch who introduced the words "i >>>>>> Bygden eller i Nordsæterne" in his translation. In the original [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >>>>>> sources on this that Sturla Tordarson's saga, which is also what >>>>>> Knut Helle writes in his 1995 Norway's History. >>>>> I hardly think that Munch introduced those words into his >>>>> translation (especially since he has a footnote explaining what [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>>>> In emergency, Flateyarbók is available online on Sagnanet, but >>>>> don't hold your breath while waiting for the pages to download. >>>> As far as I can see, all they have is 15 pages of the edition of >>>> Flateyarbók by Unger and Vigfusson. The rest hasn't been scanned >>>> yet. :-( >>> Sorry, Alan -- I should have checked it was all there before giving >> the reference. Comes of not being a specialist. >> Almost 60 pages from the Håkon Håkonsson saga from the >> Skálholtsbok yngsta is scanned, see [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > > Alan Thanks, I think the myth is thoroughly killed now. That adds another ten year to her book. Signaturep.a. >>>> Alan Crozier wrote: >>>>> "Erik Hammerstad" <egeha.is.all.you.need@start.no> wrote in [quoted text clipped - 138 lines] > inhabited or not (permanently) inhabited areas. The "nordrsetr" clearly > belonged to the latter category. Thank you very much for an enlightening and scholarly piece of work, too bad that you-know-who probably won't take any notice. flexford, I have killed the first myth - that you and some here haven't got it doesn't change that several scholars more qualified in the field have. Inger E IE_Json wrote: > That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting area of > the Norse Greenlanders, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Inger E Quite apart from the problem that you haven't killed the first myth yet (see A. L. Binns et al.), this seems an unwarranted assumption. Why should a King of Norway who claimed suzerainty over Iceland and Greenland not want the rule of law to extend to summer hunting-grounds, as well as to winter quarters? The alternative could be, as we know from other sagas, an uncontrollable series of revenge-killings, and that could be an economic disaster, from the royal taxation point of view. The words "clutching" and "straws" come to mind. Pete Stretton > IE_Json wrote: > > That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting area of [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Pete Stretton <top-posting corrected yet again -- sigh!> > flexford, > I have killed the first myth - that you and some here haven't got it doesn't > change that several scholars more qualified in the field have. > > Inger E Name one scholar who thinks that there are unique armrings (or even wrist clasps) that are only found in Vest Agder and Yorkshire, and that prove that women from Vest Agder migrated to Yorkshire. Pete Stretton > > IE_Json wrote: > > > That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting area of [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > Pete Stretton No response. So myth 1 remains standing, its hair barely ruffled. Let's see how myth 2 fares. Oh, and it would be hard to find a scholar less qualified in this field than I am, so if you can drag them all out to support your contentions, please do. I'm a sucker for qualified scholars, Real Mediaeval Historians, and the like. Pete Stretton > That Norðrsetrn in Disco Bay been accepted as the northern hunting area of > the Norse Greenlanders, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Inger E So then, let's take it from the top. You're wrong. Alan has demonstrated that you're wrong. Another myth mysteriously comes back to life. Any news on A.L. Binns? Please don't hesitate to quote real scholars. After all: Lag (1960:729) om upphovsrätt till litterära och konstnärliga verk. 22 § Var och en får citera ur offentliggjorda verk i överensstämmelse med god sed och i den omfattning som motiveras av ändamålet. Taken from the Swedish Government website on copyright. That seems to give you pretty much permission to quote, in so far as is necessary, any published work, provided that your quotation is in good taste. Of course, you may argue that the works are private. I am only interested in the public parts. As far as I know, no one here, apart from perhaps R.R., is interested in your private parts. Pete Stretton |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.