# Did a Welshman discover America?



## editor (Jan 8, 2008)

Did butty boys find America first?! Or is it LlanBollocks?





> In 1170 he (Madoc) and his brother, Riryd, sailed from Aber-Kerrik-Gwynan on the North Wales Coast (now Rhos-on-Sea) in two ships, the Gorn Gwynant and the Pedr Sant. They sailed west and landed in what is now Alabama in the USA.
> 
> Prince Madog then returned to Wales with great tales of his adventures and persuaded others to return to America with him. They sailed from Lundy Island in 1171 and were never heard of again.
> 
> ...



More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madoc
http://www.tylwythteg.com/fortmount/Ftmount.html


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jan 8, 2008)

No.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 8, 2008)

Vikings were there well before this one.


----------



## editor (Jan 8, 2008)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Vikings were there well before this one.


This is perfect: I've found a link between the Welsh claim on America, David Icke lizards and conspiraloonery!

Get your tin foil hats on folks!


> The Mandan Indians reportedly had pale skin, blonde hair, and spoke Welsh until being wiped out by a smallpox epidemic in 1837. The stone wall at Fort Mountain, Georgia is held by some to be a fort built by Madoc and his followers to defend themselves against the Indians.
> 
> Other theories have arisen over the years, including that the Moon Eyed People are actually members of the subterranean race of lizard-people that are secretly shaping mankind's destiny. The English Royal Family is counted by some as being members of this race, which opens the possibility for those brutally conspiracy minded types that both legends are true. Charles is prince of Wales, after all.
> http://www.ophymirage.net/ghosts/mountains/mooneyedpeople.php


----------



## editor (Jan 8, 2008)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Vikings were there well before this one.


The coracle, castle design and language references are interesting though, no?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 8, 2008)

Sure, they nicked them from the someret marshes though. Moon eyed people  Get back to neath.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 8, 2008)

We may not have disocvered it, but there is a very strong claim that America was named after a Welshman.


----------



## editor (Jan 8, 2008)

We've got a plaque, so it must be true!





> George Catlin, a 19th century painter who spent eight years living among various Indian tribes including the Mandans, declared that he had uncovered the descendants of Prince Madog's expedition. He speculated that the Welshmen had lived among the Mandans for generations, intermarrying until their two cultures became virtually indistinguishable. Some later investigators supported his theory, noting that the Welsh and Mandan languages were so similar that the Mandans easily responded when spoken to in Welsh.
> 
> Unfortunately the tribe was virtually wiped out by a smallpox epidemic introduced by traders in 1837. But the belief in their Welsh heritage still persists and is celebrated by a plaque placed alongside Mobile Bay in 1953 by the Daughters of the American Revolution.
> 
> ...


Right. I'd like to claim Manhattan as part of my heritage please.

Hang on. Some other Taff has got in their first:


> The descendants of a Welsh pirate claim they have the rightful title to billions of dollars worth of Lower Manhattan, including some of the most pricey earth on Earth: land under the World Trade Center, part of Wall Street and acres of New York City steel and concrete.


http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/19990907edwards1.asp


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 9, 2008)

No. If it was any of you people, it was an Irishman.

http://www.castletown.com/brendan.htm


----------



## editor (Jan 9, 2008)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> No. If it was any of you people, it was an Irishman.


There's even less proof for that one than the Welsh claim!


----------



## pogofish (Jan 9, 2008)

I'd tend to go with the Vikings & of course the Earls of Orkney, who were descended from a Viking line:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Merika



> The most controversial theories speculate that Henry (Zichmni) traveled not only to Greenland but to present-day Nova Scotia, where he may have founded a settlement among the Micmac Indians, and perhaps as far south as present-day Massachusetts and Rhode Island. According to these theories, his expedition may have been responsible for the building of the Newport Tower and the carving of the Westford Knight.
> 
> The theory that Henry Sinclair explored North America is based on several separate propositions:
> That the letters and map ascribed to the Zeno brothers and published in 1558 are authentic
> ...


----------



## Poi E (Jan 9, 2008)

Native Americans found America first


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Poi E said:
			
		

> Native Americans found America first


Correct answer.

Next wacky Welsh link - was America named after a Welshman?

The candidate is Richard Amerike, sponsor of John Cabot's voyage in 1497.


----------



## CharlieAddict (Jan 9, 2008)

nah the chinese discovered america.


----------



## editor (Jan 9, 2008)

Poi E said:
			
		

> Native Americans found America first


"Discovered" as in  "connected it to the rest of the world."


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

editor said:
			
		

> "Discovered" as in  "connected it to the rest of the world."


That's not a definition of discovered I've heard before. What you really mean is 'connected it to Europe'.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 9, 2008)

editor said:
			
		

> "connected it to the rest of the world."


 
That was the people at RISK.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 9, 2008)

editor said:
			
		

> "Discovered" as in  "connected it to the rest of the world."



People in Florida were trading with tribes in central America...At the time you refer to (1100s) Europe wasn't itself connected to the "rest of the world". Hadn't been to Africa, much of Asia. The southern hemisphere may as well not have existed for Europeans.


----------



## editor (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> That's not a definition of discovered I've heard before. What you really mean is 'connected it to Europe'.


Do you want my log in for a while so you can post up some more thoughts I didn't know I had?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

editor said:
			
		

> Do you want my log in for a while so you can post up some more thoughts I didn't know I had?


I think you should answer Poi E's objections before getting sarky with me.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

Poi E said:
			
		

> People in Florida were trading with tribes in central America...At the time you refer to (1100s) Europe wasn't itself connected to the "rest of the world". Hadn't been to Africa, much of Asia. The southern hemisphere may as well not have existed for Europeans.



Thats not actually true.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Thats not actually true.


What is true is that, at that time, Europeans hadn't been to sub-Saharan Africa, Australia was unknown to them, and China was only vaguely heard of. The point stands - to say 'connecting with the rest of the world' is both wrong and culturally arrogant.


----------



## editor (Jan 9, 2008)

Poi E said:
			
		

> People in Florida were trading with tribes in central America...At the time you refer to (1100s) Europe wasn't itself connected to the "rest of the world". Hadn't been to Africa, much of Asia. The southern hemisphere may as well not have existed for Europeans.


Err, hello? Where are you getting this nonsense from? The Romans established African colonies thousands of years ago, and the Greeks had been trading with Africa before that. 

http://www.unrv.com/provinces/africa.php
http://historymedren.about.com/od/aentries/a/11_africa.htm


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> The point stands - to say 'connecting with the rest of the world' is both wrong and culturally arrogant.



Im not sure it is tbh - Native Americans had no contact with the rest of the World prior to Columbus opening up the trade routes.


----------



## editor (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> I think you should answer Poi E's objections before getting sarky with me.


His 'objections' are historically plain wrong..


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> What is true is that, at that time, Europeans hadn't been to sub-Saharan Africa, Australia was unknown to them, and China was only vaguely heard of



Europe has ancient trading links with both sub-Saharan Africa and China - the rise of Islam blocked the traditional links (and was the major impetus in the European 'Voyages of Discovery').


----------



## editor (Jan 9, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Europe has ancient trading links with both sub-Saharan Africa and China - the rise of Islam blocked the traditional links (and was the major impetus in the European 'Voyages of Discovery').


Indeed:





> Long-distance trade played a major role in the cultural, religious, and artistic exchanges that took place between the major centers of civilization in Europe and Asia during antiquity.
> 
> Some of these trade routes had been in use for centuries, but by the beginning of the first century A.D., merchants, diplomats, and travelers could (in theory) cross the ancient world from Britain and Spain in the west to China and Japan in the east.
> 
> The trade routes served principally to transfer raw materials, foodstuffs, and luxury goods from areas with surpluses to others where they were in short supply.



http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/trade/hd_trade.htm


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 9, 2008)

I've been doing a lot of research on ancient trade routes recently. Also, theories about early civilizations and the earliest settlements. Some theories date the earliest settlements (and early examples of art and culture) to 140,000 BC. I find it to much to believe that civilizations weren't trading between continents and particularly America until a few hundred years ago. Total bollocks.

The most commonly believed theory here is that trade routes and fishing grounds were kept secret by those who controlled them. Columbus apparently crewed his ships with Basque fisherman because they were already familiar with the route. There are also reports that the leaders of tribes in Peru understood the Basque language already.

There are similar theories about early Welsh and Irish/Celtic trade routes and a waymarked path full of ancient Celtic symbols stretching from North to South America. These are the earliest known European symbols to be found in America possibly dating to 2,500 BC.

Can't link to anything on the web. It's all come from old books.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Europe has ancient trading links with both sub-Saharan Africa and China - the rise of Islam blocked the traditional links (and was the major impetus in the European 'Voyages of Discovery').


The legend of Prester John (a mythical Christian community) suggests that there may have been some kind of contact with sub-Saharan Africa at some point. The wrongness of the legend also suggests that any contact was limited. 

As far as I know, the only well documented journey down the coast of Africa in the ancient world was that of Hanno, who may have made it as far as Cameroon. He had little or no contact with the people there - and indeed he did not realise that chimpanzees were not people. 

The Portuguese began to explore the west coast of Africa in order to find a route through to Asia after the Silk Road had been blocked. I have not heard of any trade routes to sub-Saharan Africa being blocked off by the rise of Islam. I would be genuinely interested to hear of it.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

> The most commonly believed theory here is that trade routes and fishing grounds were kept secret by those who controlled them. Columbus apparently crewed his ships with Basque fisherman because they were already familiar with the route. There are also reports that the leaders of tribes in Peru understood the Basque language already.



In his 'Basque Hisotry of the World' Mark Kurlansky puts forward a strong arguement that the Basques were fishing cod off the Grand Banks prior to Columbus - I've never seen any convinving evidence of any of the other claims though.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> In his 'Basque Hisotry of the World' Mark Kurlansky puts forward a strong arguement that the Basques were fishing cod off the Grand Banks prior to Columbus - I've never seen any convinving evidence of any of the other claims though.


And Leif Erikson got to Newfoundland in around 1000 CE. This still does not change the fact that there were already people there.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

> Can't link to anything on the web. It's all come from old books.



Books which its fair to see arent taken seriously by the vast majority of historians.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> And Leif Erikson got to Newfoundland in around 1000 CE. This still does not change the fact that there were already people there.



Who claimed there werent?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Who claimed there werent?


I dislike the use of the word 'discover' in this context - especially editor coming up with new and bizarre definitions of the word which others are unlikely to pick up on. 'Was the first European to set foot on' is all one should say.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> I dislike the use of the word 'discover' in this context - especially editor coming up with new and bizarre definitions of the word which others are unlikely to pick up on. 'Was the first European to set foot on' is all one should say.



I agree, thats why I've been careful to avoid it and have used terms like 'opened up trading links with'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> I agree, thats why I've been careful to avoid it and have used terms like 'opened up trading links with'.


Ok apologies. My comment was aimed at editor, not you.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

> The legend of Prester John (a mythical Christian community) suggests that there may have been some kind of contact with sub-Saharan Africa at some point. The wrongness of the legend also suggests that any contact was limited.



The Prester John legend seems to have been based on confused reports of Nestorian Christians among the Mongols which then became confised with the knowledge of Christian Kingdoms in sub-Saharan Africa; there was a famous forged 'Letter from Prester John' I seem to remember.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 9, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Books which its fair to see arent taken seriously by the vast majority of historians.



Quite possibly, but I still refuse to believe that people haven't been crossing the Atlantic for thousands of years. It may even have been an early South American civilization that found Europe first, although all evidence pinpoints South Africa as the first place of human settlements.

We know fuck all about history basically.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Quite possibly, but I still refuse to believe that people haven't been crossing the Atlantic for thousands of years.



Why not? theres no real evidence of Atlantic crossings prior to the Vikings.



> It may even have been an early South American civilization that found Europe first, although all evidence pinpoints South Africa as the first place of human settlements.



No ti doesnt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

The latest evidence, based on DNA patterns around the world, suggests that we are all descended from one woman in East Africa around 50,000 years ago.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> The latest evidence, based on DNA patterns around the world, suggests that we are all descended from one woman in East Africa around 50,000 years ago.



I've read a very convincing one that puts it at 130,000 years ago. I'll try and find a link.

There is also a new excavation just up stream from Cadiz here in Andalucia that makes a new claim for earliest European settlement.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

> Why not? theres no real evidence of Atlantic crossings prior to the Vikings.



Saying that I did watch a doc last year about 'Clovis point' Stone tools being found in Europe and America, didnt look into it any further though.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> There is also a new excavation just up stream from Cadiz here in Andalucia that makes a new claim for earliest European settlement.



That would make sens in terms of 'Out of Africa'.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 9, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Why not? theres no real evidence of Atlantic crossings prior to the Vikings.



There's strong evidence of cultural exchange between Ancient Egypt and South American civilizations of the time.



> No ti doesnt.



This is a new claim for the earliest settlement dating to 130,000 BC.

Give me 10 minutes and I'll try and find some web reference.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

> There's strong evidence of cultural exchange between Ancient Egypt and South American civilizations of the time.



There really isnt as far as I'm aware, its an old claim.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> There's strong evidence of cultural exchange between Ancient Egypt and South American civilizations of the time.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


As far as I know this is just Thor Heyerdahl's pet theory. There's no evidence at all really beyond 'they both built pyramids', and why it is unreasonable for them to have come up with this design independently is beyond me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> I've read a very convincing one that puts it at 130,000 years ago. I'll try and find a link..


Yes, you may be right - thinking about it, 50,000 years is the date given for the first people leaving East Africa. I always was rubbish at dates.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 9, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> There really isnt as far as I'm aware, its an old claim.



I guess you could argue that similarities in architecture and art came about through instinctive development rather than cultural exchange, but I see evidence for the later.

BTW: Posted a link to this in Photography & Graphics, but it's relevant here and a nice bookmark - History of Art Timeline: http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/splash.htm

I'll try and find the web references mentioned whilst making my coffee. If I don't find them now I'll take another look this evening. They're very interesting.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

> I guess you could argue that similarities in architecture and art came about through instinctive development rather than cultural exchange, but I see evidence for the later.



Why? by similarities in architecture do you mean Pyramids? you do realise the South American ones were built a couple of millenia after the Egyptians ones?

I know little about Art, do you mind giving me some pointers to the similarities (and the timescale)?


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> There's no evidence at all really beyond 'they both built pyramids', and why it is unreasonable for them to have come up with this design independently is beyond me.



Innit, Pyramids are popular in Ancient Cultures because its the simplest, strongest design for a big fuck-off monument.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 9, 2008)

Didn't know that in 1100s Europeans were trading with Sub-saharan Africa (which I meant rather than N Africa) and China, Japan. Apologies


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 9, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Why? by similarities in architecture do you mean Pyramids? you do realise the South American ones were built a couple of millenia after the Egyptians ones?
> 
> I know little about Art, do you mind giving me some pointers to the similarities (and the timescale)?



I'm trying to find some!

In the meantime (and drifting further away from the thread title, but...) WTF!

400,000 year old art  

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/733747.stm


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Poi E said:
			
		

> Didn't know that in 1100s Europeans were trading with Sub-saharan Africa (which I meant rather than N Africa) and China, Japan. Apologies


China yes, but I don't think they were trading with sub-Saharan Africa. I'd be interested in any links.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> In the meantime (and drifting further away from the thread title, but...) WTF!
> 
> 400,000 year old art
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/733747.stm



Wow! that really pushes the first evidence of art back!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> I'm trying to find some!
> 
> In the meantime (and drifting further away from the thread title, but...) WTF!
> 
> ...


Winner of the 'Most gratuitous use of a photo of a tattooed man' award.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> China yes, but I don't think they were trading with sub-Saharan Africa. I'd be interested in any links.



There had been trade in an earlier period (the Romans traded extensively across the Sahara) but the rise of Islam blocked of those trade routes for Christian Europe.

In Timbuktu you were once able to trade a pound of salt for a pound of gold!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> There had been trade in an earlier period (the Romans traded extensively across the Sahara) but the rise of Islam blocked of those trade routes for Christian Europe.
> 
> In Timbuktu you were once able to trade a pound of salt for a pound of gold!


How far south, though? Timbuktu is in the Sahara - hence the value of salt!


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 9, 2008)

This is a new one to me, but interesting:



> THE DISCOVERY of coca and tobacco used as preservatives in the mummification process in ancient Egypt of Rameses III suggests that around 1200BC a people were engaged in trade between the South American continent and Egypt.



http://www.geocities.com/myessays/LocationofTarshish.htm


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> This is a new one to me, but interesting:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.geocities.com/myessays/LocationofTarshish.htm


With the scholarly authority of geocities to back it up.


----------



## lewislewis (Jan 9, 2008)

I find this stuff incredibly interesting. Maybe there is some truth to the Welsh tale 
I wonder if Madog had to process a legislative competence order through Westminster before he set sail, or whether naval policy was already devolved to Gwynedd in the 12th century 

As an aside, there are conspiracy theories that black africans built an early advance civilisation with writing, pyramids etc.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> This is a new one to me, but interesting:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.geocities.com/myessays/LocationofTarshish.htm



I'm going to need a more authoratative source than that website before I'm convinced!


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> How far south, though? Timbuktu is in the Sahara - hence the value of salt!



I'm not sure tbh though as Timbuktu was a major trading centre I'm guessing its where merchants from the North and South met.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> China yes, but I don't think they were trading with sub-Saharan Africa. I'd be interested in any links.



So not quite connecting to the rest of the world, then...


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> With the scholarly authority of geocities to back it up.



Well yes, but it shouldn't necessarily be entirely dismissed


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Well yes, but it shouldn't necessarily be entirely dismissed


Um, yes it should.

If it were worth considering, the author would have provided at least one reference.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2008)

OK, pedant's hat on, but it's worth getting this clear...

At the time we are talking about - 1000-1500 CE - Europeans were not in contact with sub-Saharan Africa. The ancient Romans may have been in contact at least as far south as Timbuktu, but this connection had been lost. No European knew of the existence of Australia or indeed the Pacific Ocean. So when Europeans landed on the Americas, they were connecting the Americas with Europe and, via Europe, potentially with Asia and North Africa, but not with any other part of the world. They did not in any sense 'discover' America as there were already people there, and to use this language is dangerous, because the justification for later European colonisation of both the Americas and Australia was based partially on the myth of the 'empty land'.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> Um, yes it should.
> 
> If it were worth considering, the author would have provided at least one reference.



Spoil sport.

Try this one instead:



> NEGATIVE VIEWS ON SMOKING MUMMIES ARE NOT JUST RESTRICTED TO CIGARETTE PACKETS WILLIAM JACOBS FINDS THAT EGYPTOLOGY HAS ALL BUT IGNORED THE DISCOVERY OF TRACES OF NICOTINE AND COCAINE IN MUMMIES.



http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/toke_like_egyptian.htm


----------



## Poi E (Jan 9, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> the myth of the 'empty land'.



Yes, terra nullius, interestingly opposed in the legal sense by the oft-neglected common law doctrine of aboriginal title.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Spoil sport.
> 
> Try this one instead:
> 
> http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/toke_like_egyptian.htm



Heh,  an article from Fortean Times entitled 'Toke like an Egyptian', now your just taking the piss mate


----------



## bendeus (Jan 10, 2008)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Heh,  an article from Fortean Times entitled 'Toke like an Egyptian', now your just taking the piss mate



http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~legneref/ethnic/mummy.htm



> “The initial reaction to the findings of Balabanova et. al. was highly critical.   These criticisms were not based on a known failing in the authors' research methodology, rather they were attempts to cast doubt on an implication of the research - that cocaine and nicotine were brought to Egypt from the New World before Columbus.   This conclusion is not acceptable to conservative investigators of the past.   In fact it suggests a deep-rooted aversion to what Balabanova suggested might mean an unraveling of aspects of history contrary to basic reconstructions.   This aversion, according to Kehoe (1998) stems from the conviction that Indians were primitive savages destined to be overcome by the civilized world - that the acme of evolutionary success resided in the conquering race itself.   ‘Childlike savages could never have voyaged across oceans.’ “
> *
> “Balabanova's findings bring yet other evidence forward that humanity is not so easily pinioned into the pre-conceived notions of primitive and advanced - even as this might be related to the presumed technology of earlier times.   The quest for discovery - to find new worlds - is not just a modern selective advantage of our species.   Perhaps it is the defining characteristic. *“


----------



## Brockway (Jan 11, 2008)

A top quality book on the Madoc legend is: _Madoc - The Legend of the Welsh Discovery of America _by Gwyn Alf Williams which reads like an adventure story. Been ages since I read it but I think he came to the conclusion that Dr John Dee dug up the Madoc legend to legitimise Elizabeth 1's territorial claims on N. America against the French. ie a Welsh bloke discovered America therefore America belongs to Britain. Typical British imperialism for ya.

Of course that doesn't stop me believing that it's my absolute birthright to have a free apartment on the upper west side.


----------



## editor (Jan 11, 2008)

Brockway said:
			
		

> . Been ages since I read it but I think he came to the conclusion that Dr John Dee dug up the Madoc legend to legitimise Elizabeth 1's territorial claims on N. America against the French. ie a Welsh bloke discovered America therefore America belongs to Britain. Typical British imperialism for ya.


So a Welshman discovers the place, so it goes to the English crown?


----------



## lewislewis (Jan 11, 2008)

There's no call for that attitude here, I think your job running U75 should be taken and given to a British worker, under Brown/Hain's 'British jobs for British workers' policy.


----------



## Zeppo (Jan 11, 2008)

Can welsh peeps claim a bit of America? I bags NY at least the Chelsea Hotel.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 11, 2008)

If anyone hasn't seen that programme done by that newsreader guy, forget his name...Humphries(?) about the Welsh in America, you should try and see it. very interesting. makes the point that the Welsh influence on US is actually greater thanh the Irish, but goes unrecognised.


----------



## editor (Jan 11, 2008)

1927 said:
			
		

> If anyone hasn't seen that programme done by that newsreader guy, forget his name...Humphries(?) about the Welsh in America, you should try and see it. very interesting. makes the point that the Welsh influence on US is actually greater thanh the Irish, but goes unrecognised.


I've not heard of that programme. Can you remember any more details?

John Humphreys is a Splott lad!


----------



## editor (Jan 11, 2008)

Ah, found it: 





> STAR SPANGLED DRAGON Narrated by John Humphrys
> BBC (3 x 30 minutes)
> 
> As George Washington observed: ‘Good Welshmen make good Americans’. A major series which explores the profound influence of the Welsh in shaping America, from the founding fathers to the present day, from Thomas Jefferson to Hillary Clinton. Nominated for best documentary series at Celtic Film and Television Awards and Best Editor at BAFTA CYMRU AWARDS 2005.


Anyone know where I can get a copy?


----------



## Strangeways (Jan 12, 2008)

anyway, returning to the discovery of america...

the 'native americans' crossed from siberia, acorss the bering straits. it wouldn't surprise me if there had continued to be contact between the nomads of siberia and their cousins over the water after that.

as for europeans being aware of the pacific before 1500, there were romans who travelled to china, a long time before marco polo. just because *most* europeans weren't aware of something didn't mean it wasn't known to *some* europeans.

and, as for contact with sub-saharan africa, i imagine there was, when one considers the activities of the famous prince henry the navigator.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 12, 2008)

editor said:
			
		

> I've not heard of that programme. Can you remember any more details?
> 
> John Humphreys is a Splott lad!


there was one by Huw Edwards recently also


----------



## ddraig (Jan 12, 2008)

something different
http://www.madoc1170.com/home.htm



			
				bbc said:
			
		

> MADOC
> 
> The site's about the Welsh prince Madog who, some say, was the first European to sail to North America. Catchphrase newsletter subscriber ,V. Martin of Charlotte, NC, USA, wrote to say hes convinced the legends real:
> "Some of the Madoc/Modoc groups merged with Indian tribes, including the Cherokee and Mandan, Shawnee and others, including some of my relative families: Martin, Combs, and many others of the American South."
> You can read a one page piece about Madog's discovery here:


----------



## Karac (Jan 12, 2008)

Whether they did or didnt is up for speculation-but whats not is a massive Welsh influence on America.
"It is said that Thomas Jefferson could speak six languages, including Welsh. There is an inscription halfway up the steps of the Washington Monument which reads Fy iaith, fy ngwlad, fy nghenedl Cymru - Cymru am byth! ("My language, my land, my nation of Wales - Wales for ever!")."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/northwest/sites/familyhistory/pages/jefferson.shtml


----------



## 1927 (Jan 12, 2008)

A really interesting publication by the Welsh Assembly office in New York can be downloaded  in pDf form.

In addition to the folks mentioned in this I recently discovered that Jack London was of Welsh ancestry.

In the Natural History museum on Central Park West there is an exhibit which is a cross section thru a giant redwood or some such large tree. To illustrate the historical events that have occurred during the lifetime of the tree there are dates and events marked on the rings of the tree. The centre of the tree is amrked with a date, I dont recall what year, and the event "Christianity arrives in Wales" ! Just seemed a really strange event to mention as most Americans would not know of Wales!!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2008)

Strangeways said:
			
		

> and, as for contact with sub-saharan africa, i imagine there was, when one considers the activities of the famous prince henry the navigator.


The Portuguese sailors who were sponsored by Henry the Navigator did indeed push down the African coast, establishing a fort at Port Elmina and laying the foundations for among other things the Atlantic slave trade. How widely known the exploits were outside Portugal is another matter.

Of course, another problem here regarding the integration of knowledge is that different countries jealously guarded new discoveries. The voyages of Abel Tasman, for instance, were not known to wider Europe until after his death because the Portuguese wanted to keep them secret. Columubus claimed the lands he stumbled upon in the name of Ferdinand and Isabela, his sponsors, not in the name of Europe.


----------

