Romans In Brazil?

[Badass Buddha]

I'm curious as to what you guys think of this:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9402E2DA1139F936A15755C0A963948260&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/S/Salvage

[Atraphoenix]

I'm curious as to what you guys think of this:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9402E2DA1139F936A15755C0A963948260&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/S/Salvage

interesting but it is quite logical to see roman trade ships had shipwreched and dragged to south american coasts, and I do not think that survivors had any chance to go back...

[Folgore]

You need to have been sailing south of the equator to get blown to Brazil. (Well, Rio anyway, northern Brazil might be possible.) I think that's a highly unlikely place for a Roman ship to be sailing.

Also note how your article is 25 years old :p

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

I think it's not that unlikely that Roman ships might explore the eastern coastline of Africa, looking for trade opportunities with 'Nubians'. It's really not all that different from sailing north from the Pillars of Hercules (Gibraltar) along the Spanish and Gallic coasts to reach Britain.

So it doesn't seem impossible that a Roman ship might be blown into mid-Atlantic in a storm, and then drift to Brazil. However, it's likely that most if not all of the crew would be dead from lack of food and fresh water by the time they got there, weeks after setting sail, and it's almost certain that none of them returned home.

I think to count as the 'dicoverer' of anything, you have to survive the expedition, and return home to tell of it. If you 'discover' a new land but then die there, and nobody else from your expedition makes it back either, then you're not a 'discoverer' but an unfortunate failure.

[Havok.]

I think to count as the 'dicoverer' of anything, you have to survive the expedition, and return home to tell of it. If you 'discover' a new land but then die there, and nobody else from your expedition makes it back either, then you're not a 'discoverer' but an unfortunate failure.

There were already a native population in Brazil before europeans came, saying ''we've discovered Brazil'' is just a too much european way of thinking.


And i disagree with this Robert Marx of the article, saying discovering a Roman navy in brazillian coast line would require us to rewrite our history because it wouldn't, during the process of colonization of Brazil there were absolutely ZERO evidences of romans in here or even if there was, its influence was nule.

What it could imply having a roman navy at our bay, perhaps a few more pages in the history book of this land (which would be quite interesting i might add) but rewriting? please.......


EDIT: In the last part of the article there is this something that is overly partial and offensive for a journalism article in my opinion:

''Brazilians don't care about the past. And they don't want to replace Cabral as the discoverer.''

Mr Robert Marx claim he was told this but there is no proof. This quote does nothing but damaging our people with absolutely no gain in either parts of the dispute(the brazillian navy and him), and its also a lie because we -do care- about our past.

[bobbin]

I think it's not that unlikely that Roman ships might explore the eastern coastline of Africa, looking for trade opportunities with 'Nubians'. It's really not all that different from sailing north from the Pillars of Hercules (Gibraltar) along the Spanish and Gallic coasts to reach Britain.

I think you mean Western Africa, it would be quite a feat to blown to Brazil from the Eastern coast.

It also is a lot different sailing south down the west african coast because you've got the Sahara desert covering most of the coastline until you near the equator, and so no chance to come ashore and get fresh supplies or drinking water.

[WinsingtonIII]

I sincerely doubt the ability of Roman sailors to make it across the Atlantic Ocean. They were used to sailing in the Mediterranean where they could stop for supplies pretty much at will, and even if they did get blown out to sea, my expectation would be they would not be carrying enough supplies to make it across the Atlantic. Even if a Roman vessel was blown into the coast of Brazil, I doubt anyone would have been left alive on board.

[moonburn]

actually the romans had pretty big ships capable of transporting enough suplies what i doubt is those ships hability to navigate in the atlantic and survive a mild atlantic storm

[antisocialmunky]

Not really a new topic...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca_head

[Brennus]

I think it's pure nonsense personally.

[WinsingtonIII]

actually the romans had pretty big ships capable of transporting enough suplies what i doubt is those ships hability to navigate in the atlantic and survive a mild atlantic storm

It doesn't really matter if they had the storage space for enough supplies if they don't bring enough in the first place. And considering that they are used to the Mediterranean, where resupply could happen almost anywhere, I don't think that they would bring enough supplies for the journey.

Beyond that, I agree that their ships, and sailors for that matter, simply wouldn't have been capable of making a transaltantic journey.

[Olaf The Great]

The Romans were around in one form or another for over 2000 years, surely a LOT of history has been lost due to all the book burnings, lost books, decaying paper, and whatever. I don't know what to make of it, but think about what has happened in the last week and see how much news there is. Now look at Roman times. There was probably a LOT of "expeditions" all over the place, and a lot of them probably never came back.

[Cute Wolf]

Come on, some even claim that there are Atlantis... What? their ships can't go for long? They didn't use normal ships, they use Alien airships! :clown:

Too much reading conspiracy theories eh?

[Jebivjetar]

Too much reading conspiracy theories eh?

Exactly my thought, Jeb.

[Finn MacCumhail]

I want to introduce to you Mr Thor Heyerdahl, but you all know him.

He crossed Atlantic Ocean on the papyrus ship. He started journey in Morocco and reached Barbados. The journey prooved, that ancient people even on the primitive ships, under the sail might reach Americas with the help of Canary Current.

His ship
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/RaII.InMuseum.jpg

There is also information about Phinikean coins in South America and other artefacts.

[Ibrahim]

I think you mean Western Africa, it would be quite a feat to blown to Brazil from the Eastern coast.

It also is a lot different sailing south down the west african coast because you've got the Sahara desert covering most of the coastline until you near the equator, and so no chance to come ashore and get fresh supplies or drinking water.

well, you can have it happen when this guy is your ruler:
http://www.i-mockery.com/generalzod/media/zod4prez.jpg

now..KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!!!

ok, jokes aside: @ everyone: I doubt it: Galley IIRC didn't hold much in the way of cargo capacity, and required regular stops in order to continue sailing any distance. lacking any such stops in the Atlantic makes it unlikely that a galley made it to America (unless as a gohost ship). then there is the fact that galley's aren't desighned as deep-ocean goers.

one could, however, make the argument that Roman imperial era trading vessals could have done it (since they had more dunnage and relied more on sail, not oars), but even then, it is dubious.

[Lysimachos]

I want to introduce to you Mr Thor Heyerdahl, but you all know him.


He knew he would find land there and he had a reason to go on that journey in the first place. Columbus thought he knew he would find land in the west (and was accidentally right) and he had a reason to try to reach it. But why would any ancient european or north african people just sail out in the open and not turn back for weeks without a reason to believe they would come across land?

[Kikaz]

He knew he would find land there and he had a reason to go on that journey in the first place. Columbus thought he knew he would find land in the west (and was accidentally right) and he had a reason to try to reach it. But why would any ancient european or north african people just sail out in the open and not turn back for weeks without a reason to believe they would come across land?

Chasing Atlantis?

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

He knew he would find land there and he had a reason to go on that journey in the first place. Columbus thought he knew he would find land in the west (and was accidentally right) and he had a reason to try to reach it. But why would any ancient european or north african people just sail out in the open and not turn back for weeks without a reason to believe they would come across land?

Having no choice.....ship dismasted and drifting with the current?

[Finn MacCumhail]

Ibrahim, Heyerdahl proved on his own example that even on papyrus boat it is possible to reach Americas, without having supplies from civilization during the journey.


lacking any such stops in the Atlantic makes it unlikely that a galley made it to America

Vikings sailed to Americas under the sails too, without steam engine.

Lysimachos, I have no idea about their motives, or what made them move so far. But having no idea why have they done it doesn't mean they didn't done it. If I don't know why people build Stonehenge, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[antisocialmunky]

The Vikings navigated a much shorter Northern Atlantic route during a period of warming. However, in the distant past, people crossed into North America from Europe as evidenced by European culture arrow heads found in Virginia a few years ago. That was over icecaps but who knows what shenanigans people were up to back then.

[Ibrahim]

Ibrahim, Heyerdahl proved on his own example that even on papyrus boat it is possible to reach Americas, without having supplies from civilization during the journey.



Vikings sailed to Americas under the sails too, without steam engine.

Lysimachos, I have no idea about their motives, or what made them move so far. But having no idea why have they done it doesn't mean they didn't done it. If I don't know why people build Stonehenge, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

2 problems:

1-the viking boats a a base of operations near the Americas (Iceland and Greenland). they also had smaller crews, relied more on sail*, and could carry (slightly) more cargo (heck, their naval tech was better overall, inspite of the apparent crudeness). the Romans never even knew, AFAIK, that Iceland even existed. and as mentioned, there was a lower cargo capacity in galleys, expecially since most of the space was taken up by oarsmen (hence, if you were reading, why I mentioned the need for regular stops), and as I clearly stated, galleys were designed not for the Ocean, but for calmer waters. mind you, the design was in general used right up to the 16th century, so we have instances of them flopping in deep water (e.g, the Armada).

2-that would presuppose (as was the case in heyerdal's experiment), that they KNEW, or had reason to believe, that land even exists this far west, and could store provisions accordingly. Erik and his son Leif both had reasons to think so: the former had to run from a murder, and had heard of land out west, and the latter IIRC knew of America because one ship was blown off course once, and saw the coast (though that particular captain never set foot on American soil). same applies to Columbus.

look, I'm not saying it didn't happen; I am however, stating my belief that this is unlikely to happen. mind you, I did state a way for Romans to make it to America:


one could, however, make the argument that Roman imperial era trading vessals could have done it (since they had more dunnage and relied more on sail, not oars), but even then, it is dubious.

mind you, it is dubious for reason # 2: did they even know, or suspect, that land existed 4,000 miles away, and prepare accordingly?

also, as a side note: Thor's vessel was a sailing vessel: it did not require the heavy labor of oarsmen to regularly propel the ship. thus it is unsurprising that he was able to store enough supplies for his trip. also, again, he knew in advance where to go for Land. a Roman ship straying too far from the mediterranian would'nt necesarily know this, and would thus not necessarily have the supplies to make it this far.

*where the heck did I say that steam power was required? my problem is related to supply and ship design, not ship power in and of itself.

EDIT:
Kon Tiki: note the big sail, and lack of oars.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Kon-Tiki_inside.jpg

here is the same ship while sailing. again, note the general lack of oars:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Kon-Tiki.jpg

[Duguntz]

It is only an opinion, but I find it very very very very very unlikely, and even barely "plausible", to see a roman ship going to Brazil... even by mistake, without any knowledge of winds direction, or the principal wind currents north and south or "trade winds". Their ships were not neither desings to whistand the storms that occurs on the Atlantic, and would've blown to pieces. It is however only my hypothesis...

[vartan]

The Romans didn't need the know-how for a passage to South America. That's what West Africans were for (in a matter of speaking; not in the offensive manner at that). How do you think Europeans were able to 'discover' the Americas? And why do you think they were sent to Cuba so as to delay their discovery of the mainland? You can thank the ancestors of those who live in what is now Sierra Leone for that knowledge (something the natives of the western coast needed in order to trade as they did with the Caribs and others from the Americas).

[Lysimachos]

Lysimachos, I have no idea about their motives, or what made them move so far. But having no idea why have they done it doesn't mean they didn't done it. If I don't know why people build Stonehenge, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

That's hardly comparable. There is irrefutable proof that Stonehenge exists, just go there and take a look. Ancient europeans sailing to America on the other hand, is a mere hypothesis. If you want us to believe it happened, you have to give us more than "You can't prove it didn't happen".


The Romans didn't need the know-how for a passage to South America. That's what West Africans were for (in a matter of speaking; not in the offensive manner at that). How do you think Europeans were able to 'discover' the Americas? And why do you think they were sent to Cuba so as to delay their discovery of the mainland? You can thank the ancestors of those who live in what is now Sierra Leone for that knowledge (something the natives of the western coast needed in order to trade as they did with the Caribs and others from the Americas).

Would you care to elaborate on that? Are you saying the West Africans had established trade contacts with the Caribbean before Columbus' travels? And what exactly do you mean by "sent to Cuba so as to delay their discovery of the mainland"?

[Ca Putt]

Imo ancient europeans mediterraneans could've possibly reached the americas by mere chance as a merchant ship(definately not a large warship) got caught by the right wind and those buggers forgot to strike the sail and they were(by mere chance) also transporting large quantities of food and fresh water and the captain was either an optimist('well, we cant go back, so lets just sail ahead and see what happens') or a fatalist(were screwed anyway so lets just go on forward) then it could have happened that a ship be it roman phonecian greek or whatever made it to the americas in one piece. but surely you couldn't be talking about ROMANS or CARTHAGIANS more of people who once lived in an ancient mediterranean empire and now are just castaways in a far away land. these things may sound like some big news but tbh this is nothing near a large historical event, think of it: in a total war game it would merely be a small message that one of your trade ships has got lost and cannot be found. if one would prove this journey history books would not have to be rewritten, the really reputable history books would probably get an extra footnote.

[Finn MacCumhail]

Ancient Mediterranean dwellers could reach Americas. It was possible for their ships. Why it was possible? Mr. Hyeyrdal sailed to Americas from Africa on the papyrus Egyptian boat. If it was possible for Egyptian papyrus boat, it was possible for other more developed and quality ancient vessels. Anyway they could still use papyrus boats.

Nero time Romans build huge vessels with the water displacement 1200 tons (Spanish Galleons usually had 500 tons). Caligula had to bring obelisk from Egypt and used vessel with 1300 tons water displacement. Usually ships had lead and bronze coverage below waterline. Roman grain cargos were bigger then 19 century Frigates, and might deliver 1200 tons of grain at once. Average trade ship had 340 tons of different goods. In 64 AD Joseph Flavius sailed from Alexandria to Rome on the board that placed 600 passengers. Lucian described Roman grain ship, which was brought to the shore after the storm. It had 54 meters long and 13 meters height (without mast)

The key aspects of transatlantic voyages are winds and currents. Strong currents from West Africa goes to Mexican bay. Powerful Canary and North Equatorial Current with strong northeasterly trade winds help the sailors. If Romans sailed to Canary Islands, there is no surprise they could use that currents and winds to sail to Americas.

The indirect evidence:

Indian Corn on the Ocrilum (sp? Very sorry for spelling, it is my own translit from Cyrillic) baths near Rome (now in Hermitage)

picture

http://gorod.tomsk.ru/uploads/11809/1227104485/corn_1.jpg

Next. Herculanum and Pompey wall paintings with pineapples, annona and lemons! Pineapple came from Brazil.

Italian Casella and Russian Vavilov wrought about it.

(Casella D. La frutta nelle pinture Fompeiane // Pompeiane: racolta di scavii di Pompei. — Naples, 1950. — P. 355—386.)

How the fruits and vegetables from New World came to the patrician dinner in 1st AD?

In 1964 AD on Azor Islands were found roman pots dated 2-3 centuries AD.

In 1933 in Aztec tomb dated 13-15 centuries AD was found head of Roman sculpture dated 2 century AD. (Garcia Payon J. Una cabecita de barro, de extraña fisionomia // Boletin del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia. — México, 1961. — № 6. — P. 1—2.)


Hellen statues, Roman terracotta Venus (Romans in the Americas // Katunob. — Vol. П. — № 2. — Carbondale, Illinois, 1961. — P. 12; Gaddis V. H. American Indian Myths and Mysteries. — Pennsylvania, 1977. — P. 102.)

Venezuela – roman coins dated 4 century AD. (Romans in the Americas // Katunob. — Vol. П. — № 2. — Carbondale, Illinois, 1961. — P. 12; Gaddis V. H. American Indian Myths and Mysteries. — Pennsylvania, 1977. — P. 102.)

Ancient sailors

Have you ever heard about Nearh fleet? In 323 Nearh from Crete sailed to India to settle there and conquer it, but he decided to move further and reached Indonesia and then South America.

Himilco sailed to the Europe North and reached the starced sea, where algae prevent from moving (Sargasso Sea?).

Πυθέας from Massalia sailed to the Northern Europe, he was the first Hellen who described Polar day, Polar light and eternal ice.

Legendary land Ofir according to geologists situated in Brazil Amazon, the only place where all described germs are in one place. Solomon sent there a fleet.

Mishel Lesco who explored Ramses II Mummy said, that he has found tobacco in the embalming stuff. Pharaon Neho ordered to sail away in the quest of far away lands.

The Phoenicians visited the Azores, as evidenced by the treasure Carthaginian coins found on Corvo in 1749. The coins date back 330-320 years BC.

[Lvcretivs]

http://gorod.tomsk.ru/uploads/11809/1227104485/corn_1.jpg
Considering this particular mosaic evidence for Roman 'pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact' with the Americas seems to me a little bit farfetched and questionable - the above mosaic in the Eremitage is not the famous actual mosaic floor of the roman thermae in Ocriculum (modern Otricoli near Rome), today in the Sala Rotonda (http://www.flickr.com/photos/diwan/3806634421/) of the Vatican Museums, but an 19th century (1847-51) 'reproduction', which, although technical very skillfully executed, isn't really faithful - especially in details of the ornamental garlands - to the original.

Concerning the postulated tropical 'pineapples', 'mangos' and 'custard-apples' in Pompeian frescoes (Casella D.:La frutta nelle pinture Pompeiane, in: Pompeiana: racolta di scavi di Pompei., P. 355-386.(Naples 1950)) - Casellas 'identifications' disregard artistic ('Hellenistic') traditions and 'pattern books' used by the painters and treat the frescoes as 'scientifically' absolute precise documentation of contemporaneous available fruits of the Roman Mediterranean. His 'pineapple' e.g. can be identified as an 'oversized' pine cone, which had ritual significance as votive offering.

[vartan]

Would you care to elaborate on that? Are you saying the West Africans had established trade contacts with the Caribbean before Columbus' travels? And what exactly do you mean by "sent to Cuba so as to delay their discovery of the mainland"?
To re-iterate and more, Europeans' 'need' (let's call it) to find a route to the Americas (as they saw it, the 'Indies') was satisfied. I can still recall the general plot of the history (pre-European trans-Atlantic trade/transportation isn't my niche). You may have heard of the Caribs, the people from whom the Caribbean received her name. Apparently, West African people(s) were trading with the Caribs, who themselves already had a trade network that connected N., C., and S. America. I think it is Bartolome de las Casas (but I may be mistaken) who can help a reader realize soon enough that these Caribs used gold as ornaments, not as value-containers (those were left for the cocoa beans). Anyway, the West Africans were trading with these Caribs. That is, the Africans knew of the routes to the Americas, both the mainlands as well as the islands. There was a prince in where is now Sierra Leone, and his family was held hostage and the prince, a navigator, was used to take the first ships (I think there were three) to the Americas. Being clever, of course, the prince didn't take Cristobal Colon to the mainland, but to an island the Spaniard was to call Hispaniola (I think that would be Cuba). Anyway, this is why it took another 30 or so years for the Europeans to reach the mainland. Of course, by that time, millions had already died, whole islands wiped out, and the rest is history. This isn't my interested niche, but thinking about it more makes it all the more interesting, so I'll contact my source and see if he can dig up anything on this (being a fan of videography, it sounds to me like a possible candidate for a feature film). :book:

[Lvcretivs]

[...]Anyway, the West Africans were trading with these Caribs. That is, the Africans knew of the routes to the Americas, both the mainlands as well as the islands. There was a prince in where is now Sierra Leone, and his family was held hostage and the prince, a navigator, was used to take the first ships (I think there were three) to the Americas. Being clever, of course, the prince didn't take Cristobal Colon to the mainland, but to an island the Spaniard was to call Hispaniola (I think that would be Cuba).

Absolutely no offence meant, vartan, but that's an extremely questionable 'hypothesis' - not to say conspiracy theory - based on virtual no 'hard' nor even circumstantial evidence. Neither for transatlantic African-Carib trade nor for the existence of an West African 'prince' acting as Columbus' navigator exists any historical documentation.

The only African 'prince' associated with the various 'pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact' theories I can think of is the semilegendary mansā Abu Bakr II of the Mali Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Bakr_II) (reigned ca.1310/11[?] - 180 years before Columbus!), who, according to an anecdote documented by the Arab historian Shihāb al-Dīn al-Umarī (1300/01-1349) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Umari) 'did not believe that it was impossible to reach the extremity of the ocean that encircles the earth [the Atlantic Ocean]: he wanted to reach that (end) and was determined to pursue his plan. So he equipped two hundred boats full of men, and many others full of gold, water and provisions sufficient for several years' and sent this fleet on a westward journey, from which it not returned. The mansā eventually built a second fleet under his personal command, departed and vanished traceless.

Afrocentric authors, which your source seems to take at face value, take this story as an account of an early African exploratory journey discovering the Americas - which completely negates the dubious historicity of both Abu Bakr II and the curiously cursory tale related by the Arab historian - there is no oral tradition in Mali recounting his reign and his surely spectacular journey and disappeareance, his historical existence as mansā is attested directly only by al-Umarī, and the story is generally vague und 'parabolic' (excellent German wikipedia article (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abubakari_II.#Mande-.C3.9Cberlieferungen)).

Al-Umarī's story is likely a fictive Islamic 'morality tale', warning against hubris and undutiful royal behaviour - according to the Koran there is no 'extremity of the earth-encircling ocean' and Abu Bakr's fixation on discovering is therefore not only implicitly heretic but also extremely harmful to his people - he is likely intended as the antithesis to his famous 'sucessor' mansā Musa I.(ca.1312-ca.1337) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musa_I_of_Mali), who is explicitly mentioned as a exemplary and devout muslim ruler.

[vollorix]

Got no source at hand, but i remember reading something about the old maps which Columbus & Co. used. On the other hand: while analyzing the body of one of the Pharaos the traces of "coca" have been found, - a plant originated ( only ) from South America. Those are two infos coming to my mind, with no scientific sources or support material, though. And iirc, the knowledge about the fact, that the Earth is a ball is quite old, and that information would be enough encouragement for some intrepid explorers of the ancient times to accept the challenge and find out, what´s out there, imho.

[Finn MacCumhail]

Palmira, Baal Temple 1 BC- 1 AD. Look what lies on the table.

http://www.chronologia.org/fimages/tur/3714.jpg

pineapple in Pompii http://www.pompeisepolta.com/english/america.htm

and this (perhapse in Spanish) http://www.vendotutto.org/public/flat/index.php?mod=read&id=1238411103

moar

"Isiac lararia had all the usual features of domestic cult: niche, altar, snake, offerings (eggs, pineapple, fruits)."
Pompeii Revisited: The Life and Death of a Roman Town
Von Jean-Paul Descœudres, Penelope Mary Allison, Derek Harrison. Meditarch, 1994
ISBN 0646206591, 9780646206592

[stratigos vasilios]

Garh! I heard somewhere (I'm source-less I'm sorry) that China has given a map or a route for Columbus to use to get to the Americas. I'm not sure how accurate that is, clearly being source-less doesn't strengthen my arguement, but it's something I've heard.

You know, talking about the Americas and all...

[Ludens]

Must have been a pretty poor map, since Columbus thought he would reach the Indies. Anyway, how could the Chinese have known about the east coast of America?

[Lvcretivs]

Palmira, Baal Temple 1 BC- 1 AD. Look what lies on the table.[...]

http://www.chronologia.org/fimages/tur/3714.jpg
Fig.1: Frieze of the Temple of Ba'al in Palmyra (early 1st Century CE - 2nd Century CE) showing an altar with pomegranades flanking a pine cone.

Let's compare this sculpted frieze to an wall painting in Pompeji...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/Lararium_Pompeji_Detail.JPG/800px-Lararium_Pompeji_Detail.JP
Fig.2: Detail of a painted lararium from Pompeji (pre-79 CE), altar flanked by snakes representating the lares loci, adorned with painted offerings of a pinecone and two eggs

...and to the botanical illustration of an Stone (Umbrella) Pine cone:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/Pinus_pinea2.jpg
Fig.3: Botanical illustration of an Stone Pine (Pinus pinea) cone [digitalized image from: 'Description of the Genus Pinus, with directions relative to the cultivation, remarks on the uses of the several species and descriptions of many other new species of the Family of Coniferae illustrated with figures by Aylmer Bourke Lambert, Esq.' London, Weddell, 1832]

...and - with the geographical situation of Palmyra and Pompeii in mind - let's also look at a map showing the modern native distribution of the aforementioned Stone Pine:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9d/EUFORGEN_Pinus_pinea.png/800px-EUFORGEN_Pinus_pinea.png

And now tell me, why on earth the Romans should have portrayed the tropical and utter unreachable Pineapple (Ananas comosus) - without it's characteristical 'tuft' of fleshy leaves! - and not rather the readiliy accessible cone of the Stone Pine, which '' has been exploited for its edible pine nuts since prehistoric times" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pine_nut) and whose carbonized remains (pine cones not pineapples!) have been found in the temple of Isis at Pompeji (http://books.google.de/books?id=3xfjyTqqR7IC&pg=PA144&dq=pine+pompeii&hl=de&ei=nfUQTe2vEM32sga6kbjgDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=pine%20pompeii&f=false)?

I can't help but reiterate what I said: The postulated identifications of tropical 'pineapples', 'mangos' and 'custard-apples' in Pompeian frescoes by Casella (Casella D.:La frutta nelle pinture Pompeiane, in: Pompeiana: racolta di scavi di Pompei., P. 355-386.(Naples 1950)) are at their best extremely doubtful - not to say almost certainly false - and are rightfully challenged by many experts. (http://books.google.de/books?id=3xfjyTqqR7IC&pg=PA81&dq=pineapple+pompeii&hl=de&ei=2vcQTerdL8zHswbJnNzxDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=pineapple%20pompeii&f=false)

PS: The internet 'sources' you gave are either extremely unscientific sensationalistic news articles or clearly promoting well known conspiracy theories.




Must have been a pretty poor map, since Columbus thought he would reach the Indies. Anyway, how could the Chinese have known about the east coast of America?

One name - Gavin Menzies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Menzies) :dizzy2:

[WinsingtonIII]

Yeah, Lvcretivs' explanation makes a heck of a lot more sense than the Romans depicting pineapples. Pine nuts have long been popular in the Mediterranean diet, so why wouldn't they be portraying the pine cone from which they got pine nuts?

[Finn MacCumhail]

Casella and Vavilov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Vavilov) and Von Jean-Paul Descœudres, Penelope Mary Allison, Derek Harrison identified it as an pineapple. Cassela and Vavilov were professional biologists, so they definitely knew the difference between pine and pineapple. Vavilov also best known for having identified the centres of origin of cultivated plants.

What is more interesting, pineapple came from Brazil. The article calls "Romans in Brazil", coz several Roman artefacts were found there.

1) Romans had ships, that could make transatlantic journeys. Tur Heyerdal proved that it is possible even for ancient papirus boat, without having supplies from the civilization during the journey.

2) There are favorable winds and currents linking Canare islands and Mexican bay.

3) The faraway expeditions were pretty common among Mediterenian dwelers.

4) There is pretty much Roman and Phoenician stuff found in Americas.

[Arjos]

While I can imagine Phoenicians getting there, I can't say the same for Romans...
It's not in their mentality...
And the only castaways I can believe in are dead ones XD

[Finn MacCumhail]

Pliny refers that the Roman merchants, incited by good earnings, found a very short way for India across Nile River, the Red Sea and the Arabic Desert; the whole run was completed in ninetyfour days.

Isn't it against their mentality?

[stratigos vasilios]

One name - Gavin Menzies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Menzies) :dizzy2:

Although I've never read it, that's the one I was referring to! (I think)...

Since its a hypothesis we can guarantee it's 'accuracy'.

[Arjos]

Pliny refers that the Roman merchants, incited by good earnings, found a very short way for India across Nile River, the Red Sea and the Arabic Desert; the whole run was completed in ninetyfour days.

Isn't it against their mentality?

Well it's a "shores" route and as merchant class goes, I don't know how high in the roman society they were, if they were "citizen" of the Italian peninsula ok, otherwise they could have been roman subjects...

[Lvcretivs]

Casella and Vavilov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Vavilov) and Von Jean-Paul Descœudres, Penelope Mary Allison, Derek Harrison identified it as an pineapple. Cassela and Vavilov were professional biologists, so they definitely knew the difference between pine and pineapple. Vavilov also best known for having identified the centres of origin of cultivated plants.

Let's adequately clarify some issues: Jean-Paul Descœudres, Penelope Mary Allison, Derek Harrison are the editors - not the authors - of an essay collection accompanying a 1994 exhibition (http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/2045443), the 'identifications' proposed in their book are neither their own - they are their contributors' - nor do they most probably constitute a separate scientific contribution.

Descœudres', Allison's and Harrison's contributor(s) likely simply followed Casella in his erroneous identification of 'pineapples' (Ananas comosa), 'mangos' (Mangifera indica) and 'custard-apples' (Anona squamosa) in Pompeian frescoes, 'identifications' which quite frankly constitute a blatant scientific blunder that really isn't mitigated by Casella's position as professor at the Faculty of Agriculture (Instituto di Coltivazioni Arboree) at the University of Naples. His academic prestige as an 'professional biologist' didn't save him from mistakes even a layman could rather easily detect.

As to Vasilov's 'identification' - could you please name a credible source (scientific publication) for such a claim?


What is more interesting, pineapple came from Brazil. The article calls "Romans in Brazil", coz several Roman artefacts were found there.

1) Romans had ships, that could make transatlantic journeys. Tur Heyerdal proved that it is possible even for ancient papirus boat, without having supplies from the civilization during the journey.

Roman naval technology of the High Empire (late 1st/2nd Century CE) was probably sufficiently advanced to make transatlantic exploratory journeys to the Americas at least theoretically feasible - but that there really were transatlantic exploratory journeys is a completely unfounded hypothesis based on no 'hard' or even 'circumstantial' existence.

Where are e.g. the literary and epigraphical sources that document such journeys and the supposed transatlantic trade? If e.g. tropical fruits from Brazil were ubiquitous commodity and common trade good in the Mediterranean, why is there not the slightest mention of these surely interesting exotic fruits and their spectacular origins in contemporary 'scientific' literature eg. Pliny's 'Naturalis historia'(77/79 CE) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_History_(Pliny))? Why there is no mention in contemporary poetry and literature (1st century CE: Persius, Petron, Juvenal, Martial, Statius, etc....). Where are the archaeological remains? The excavations in Pompeii have yielded carbonized remains of nearly every plant depicted in the frescoes - but there are no preserved remains of pineapples nor mangoes nor custard-apples.


2) There are favorable winds and currents linking Canare islands and Mexican bay.

Excuse me, but this thread is about 'Romans in Brazil' not 'Romans in Mexico (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca_head)' - or have you spotted cocoa beans in Roman frescoes!?

;)


3) The faraway expeditions were pretty common among Mediterenian dwelers.

That's no valid argument in favor of Roman transatlantic exploratory journeys - in fact thats no argument at all.


4) There is pretty much Roman and Phoenician stuff found in Americas.

No comment.

[Andy1984]

Must have been a pretty poor map, since Columbus thought he would reach the Indies. Anyway, how could the Chinese have known about the east coast of America?
1421 - Gavin Menzies: A popular (but in academics not really all that accepted) book which describes how Zheng He's fleet set sail accross the world, explored several continents (including both Americas), and must have drawn maps. In his following book 1434 Menzies describes how a Chinese fleet visited Florence, and probably left quite a bit of information (on astronomics, mathemathics,...) in Italy. Menzies described how several scientists of that time 'invented' calendars, ways of counting and instruments that heavily resembled upon chinese models, and states these similarities as proof of the scientific contacts in 1434. (Again: this is as far as I know only a statement of Menzies, and still subject to criticism or even discarded.) One of the things being left by these Chinese would have been a worldmap, including coasts of Australia, the East- and Westcoast of the Americas,...

Nonetheless: some books (e.g. Klaus Brinkbaumer and Clemens Hoges*) pretty clearly state Colombus knew to what he set sail. As far as I remember, Colombus deliberatly 'discovering' and claiming the Americas is no longer subject to academic criticism. And didn't Portuguese sailors discover Brazil before Colombus his Carribean?

kind regards,

Andy



* I think it was the one (http://www.standaarduitgeverij.be/boeken/overzicht/klausbrinkbaumer/9789085490241)of Klaus Brinkbaumer and Clemens Hoges, but I could be mistaken

[Lvcretivs]

1421 - Gavin Menzies: A popular (but in academics not really all that accepted) book (...)

That's a really elegant euphemism, Andy1984... ;)

[Finn MacCumhail]

About Vavilov, it was his letter to the editor of the magazine, that published Casselas work.

Here is map of currents.

http://www.burialsatsea.com/images/gulf-stream.jpg

As you see, currents do link Africa, Europe and Americas. To reach Brazil you need go a bit southern holding the shores of Africa and then moving with Equatorial Counter Current then with North Brazil current. Or moving with Cannary current then with North Equatorial current, then going south holding the shores.

Tur Heyerdal and his team sailed from West Africa to Americas and spend about 100 days or so. They used papyrus boat and faced no problems with drinking water or food supplies.

Nearh, Himilco, Πυθέας, Solomon Ofir expedition, Pharaon Neho expedition - are examples of Mediterranean dwellers faraway visits. Someone doubt that that time people without any purpose would sail away beyond known world. What is more exciting is treasure Carthaginian coins found on Corvo (Azores) in 1749. The coins date back 330-320 years BC. On the way to America.

Speaking about Roman voyages, the first significant was Scipio Emilio exploration of West Africa shores in 145 BC. So they did big voyages.
Also, Romans knew about Azores too, as their amforas were found there.

Why so few documents? Well, the Vikings reached America for sure but still, they haven’t informed all civilized world about their invention. Carthaginians made a government secret from their trade routs, no surprice why so few information.

Also, if neither Romans nor Carthaginians visited Americas, who leaved coins and sculptures? (above posts)

[Lvcretivs]

About Vavilov, it was his letter to the editor of the magazine, that published Casselas work.

Extremely improbable - Nikolai Ivanovich Vavilov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Vavilov) died in prison on 26 January 1943, Casella published his 'identifications' (La frutta nelle pinture Pompeiane, in: Pompeiana: racolta di scavi di Pompei., P. 355-386.) 1950 in Naples - it looks like your source is trying to boost the 'academic relevance' of Casellas 'identifications' by associating them with a well known authority - unfortunately an already dead authority, who couldn't have know of Casella's publication... extremely unsound, direct disinformation.


Here is map of currents.

http://www.burialsatsea.com/images/gulf-stream.jpg

As you see, currents do link Africa, Europe and Americas. To reach Brazil you need go a bit southern holding the shores of Africa and then moving with Equatorial Counter Current then with North Brazil current. Or moving with Cannary current then with North Equatorial current, then going south holding the shores.

Tur Heyerdal and his team sailed from West Africa to Americas and spend about 100 days or so. They used papyrus boat and faced no problems with drinking water or food supplies.

1) Are you aware that the hypothetical routes you have just given are both nautically absurd and logistically completely infeasible - in short, blatantly ludicrous?

2) Heyerdahl's crew consisted of 7 men - the crew of an Roman corbita surely numbered ca. 40-50 men, which are extremely difficult to adequately provision for a extended transatlantic journey using your given routes - dehydration and starvation would soon take their toll. Motivation and morale would likely be an equally difficult to solve problem...


Nearh, Himilco, Πυθέας, Solomon Ofir expedition, Pharaon Neho expedition - are examples of Mediterranean dwellers faraway visits. Someone doubt that that time people without any purpose would sail away beyond known world. [...]

'Without any purpose'? Economic-ethnographical interests (Pytheas [Cornish tin, commercially relevant geography and ethnography of the British Isles and the European North-West], Himilco [almost identical motives]) or political-strategical-logistical considerations (Nearchos) evidently seem no real incentives for you ... apropos Necho and Solomon - both their 'expeditions' are likely legendary.


Speaking about Roman voyages, the first significant was Scipio Emilio exploration of West Africa shores in 145 BC. So they did big voyages.
Also, Romans knew about Azores too, as their amforas were found there.

'Significant'? 'Big voyages'? Read Pliny,'Naturalis historia' 5,9,10 (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/L/Roman/Texts/Pliny_the_Elder/5*.html) and learn that Polybios only reached Lixus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lixus_(ancient_city)) -a short 'coastal exploration trip' which had nothing in common with the great exploration journeys of Pytheas, Himilco or Hanno (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanno_the_Navigator).


Why so few documents? Well, the Vikings reached America for sure but still, they haven’t informed all civilized world about their invention. Carthaginians made a government secret from their trade routs, no surprice why so few information.

Read the Islandic sagas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinland_sagas) and Hanno the Navigator's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanno_the_Navigator) 'Periplus' (http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Hanno.html).


Also, if neither Romans nor Carthaginians visited Americas, who leaved coins and sculptures? (above posts)

Which 'coins', which 'sculptures'? The Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca_head) is - albeit most probably a genuine Roman artifact - a cleverly planted hoax, the Roman coins are from lost colonial collections from the 18th/19th century...

[removed].

[Arjos]

Also, if neither Romans nor Carthaginians visited Americas, who leaved coins and sculptures? (above posts)

I don't know, wrecked boats from the Azores washed up the shores by those currents?
I can't see how the Romans or Carthaginians might resupply in the middle of the Atlantic, Vikings made it, but with multiple stops...

[Ludens]

Please keep the discussion polite, everyone.

I am quite willing to believe that the Romans could have sailed to America, but if contact was extensive enough to leave a serious footprint we would have known more about. Not necessarily from primary sources, but from archaeological finds and casual references. However, if it's just scattered coins and a statue then it doesn't suggest a clear time-line or base of operations: and that either means long-lasting, widespread contact or randomly planted artefacts. Given the lack of corroborating evidence I am inclined to think the latter. If planting these artefacts wasn't an accident, it wouldn't be the first time someone forged evidence because he wanted to make a major discovery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilt_down_man).

By the way: several of the pictures in this thread were hotlinked (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline_linking). This means we're stealing bandwidth of the hosting website. Please use a dedicated image-host like Imageshack or Photobucket rather than hotlinking. I am not sure if Wikimedia Commons allows hotlinking. Could somebody enlighten me?

[moonburn]

i wonder why this feels like a kind of opening part of a national geographic or even worse history chanel special

the romans refused the steam technology because it would screw their economy and slaves would become worthless so why would such a conservative society would want to discover new lands ? i mean the traders yes but the politicians ... new lands would mean new conquest new generals arising to power and more political instability (and according to goldsworth probably one of the greatest romanologist of our days the roman world wanted stability not more reasons for generals to rebel and try to become emperors )

the route to india was easy to track i mean romans conquered the eufrates from time to time they could navigate from the persian gold or even the red sea to india if they knew the winds...

as for the chinese western world conection there was a silk road that for thousands of years passed technology from one end of euroasia to the other wouldn´t it make alot more sence that for instance the chinese inventions and blueprints could have been copyed from the drawings of explorers such as marco polo or passed on from one people to the other instead of assuming the chinese went to europe ?

i agree that the poenii where extremly secretive about their trade routes but to assume they where capable of travelling to south america and return is too far fetched they had to deal with diseases (new diseases for wich they weren´t prepared for) storms that unlike the showers of the mediterranean that where far more deadly and knowledge of the right timing (or else they would have to create inventions 1000 years before they where created that enabled them to sail against the wind) to make the voyages

i mean i´m no expert but according to what i learned from the portuguese initial travels the return rate of ships was not that great so for the poenii i can only assume that it wasn´t profitable for them to send 100 ships and only have 50(?) return the costs in manpower ships and suplyes would make it impossible for the poeni to launch such enterprises expecially considering that they could get the gold from africa the tin from britain and th sorts

as for the azores finds the poeni traded with the peninsula for hundreads of years so what would have stoped the portuguese from taking several of those coins and other artifacts with them when they colonised the azores ? i mean madeira and the azores where desert of people when the portuguese 1st arrived

also another wierd thing is that the azores are clearly in the north atlantic where storms hit the hardest and trust me i´ve seen well above 20 meters waves during storms in the azores when i went there and it´s 3.000 kilometers away from any other land so for any classical ship of a mediterranean power to reach there (with the crew alive may it be understood not a drifting ship) is ludicrous and even more ludicrous is for that ship to be able to return

as for south america or the mexican golf it´s highly possible for a ship to arrive there with a few survivors but the trip is still too dangerous to make (and even that dude on a palm boat? i bet he had a radio and a proper ship close by not to mention weather forecasts and modern technology just in case it went bad and ofc he knew where he was going and how long it would take)

so an exploration ship sent into the atlantic ... only a fool would try it imho the romans had the boats to do it but i doubt they had the will (politically at least) to make it

as for drifiting ships once a container with 10.000 ruber ducks falled to the atlantic and rubber ducks started appearing all over the world so a drifting boat could even reach australia doesn´t mean it was on purpose or that the seamen knew how to return (if they managed somehow to survive)

[Lvcretivs]

Please keep the discussion polite, everyone.

I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience caused and readily admit that my last post was probably a little too polemical and aggressive - even tired as I was I really could have chosen a more fact-bound and unemotional argumentative approach... :embarassed:


By the way: several of the pictures in this thread were hotlinked (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline_linking). This means we're stealing bandwidth of the hosting website. Please use a dedicated image-host like Imageshack or Photobucket rather than hotlinking. I am not sure if Wikimedia Commons allows hotlinking. Could somebody enlighten me?

Wikimedia Commons allows hotlinking (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reusing_content_outside_Wikimedia#Hotlinking), but regarding other image sources I completely agree with you.

[Finn MacCumhail]

About Vavilov, my bad, it was Petr Zhukovsky, don’t know why I confused them.
Zhukovsky wrote a monograph “Cultivated plants and their relatives” 2nd edition 1964 about this issue. He says that Cassela was right.

This information about Zhukovsky taken from book Guliaev V. I. “Pre-Columbian voyage to America: Myths and Reality” chapter 4.

Internet version of the book. You can use google translate. (http://mesoamerica.narod.ru/precolumb_sail4.html)

(there is no English version about him in Wiki, but you can use Google translate)
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%96%D1%83%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9,_%D0%9F%D1%91%D1%82%D1%80_%D0%9C%D0%B8%D1%85% D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

The hypothetical routes, actually were used by Columbus during his third trip. Anyway, both Columbus and ancient used wind and currents, that existed in both time frames, and as far as we know, by 3rd AD Romans had very good ships, that theoretically could survive the transoceanic journey.

About crew. Santa María also had 40 men crew, and they made transatlantic journey. But they managed to survive. And I don’t know if Romans used slaves on their ships, speaking about morale controle.

I was speaking about Scipio Aemilianus not Polybios. Guliaev argues that he reached modern Senegal.

If Europe has sagas, then indigenous peoples of America – tales about white beard people coming on the boat.

What coins etc?

In 1933 in Aztec tomb dated 13-15 centuries AD was found head of Roman sculpture dated 2 century AD. (Garcia Payon J. Una cabecita de barro, de extraña fisionomia // Boletin del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia. — México, 1961. — № 6. — P. 1—2.)

Hellen statues, Roman terracotta Venus (Romans in the Americas // Katunob. — Vol. П. — № 2. — Carbondale, Illinois, 1961. — P. 12; Gaddis V. H. American Indian Myths and Mysteries. — Pennsylvania, 1977. — P. 102.)

Venezuela – roman coins dated 4 century AD. (Romans in the Americas // Katunob. — Vol. П. — № 2. — Carbondale, Illinois, 1961. — P. 12; Gaddis V. H. American Indian Myths and Mysteries. — Pennsylvania, 1977. — P. 102.)
If some stuff belongs to collections, why only Roman stuff lost? Where are missing Egyptian, Arabian artifacts? Why the collections consist only from one item?

[Conqueror]

This isn't really relevant to the subject of "Romans in Brazil" and is thus technically off topic, but I want to reply quickly to this one statement:

they would have to create inventions 1000 years before they where created that enabled them to sail against the wind
Sailing against the wind (that is, tacking) is not that difficult and does not require such advanced technology. In his book "Ships and Seamanship of the Ancient World" (pages 273-274) Lionel Casson presents that even the ancient square-riggers (*) were capable of tacking. Not very good at it mind you, but capable. Not that this is any support to hypothetical transatlantic voyages; trying to cross that sea by tacking would only make the trip even slower.

* Note that the ancient ships were not limited to the square-rigged sail type. Casson also discusses fore-and-aft type sail rigging in the era and argues for the presense of the lateen sail on the Mediterranean by 404 AD.

[Lvcretivs]

About Vavilov, my bad, it was Petr Zhukovsky, don’t know why I confused them.
Zhukovsky wrote a monograph “Cultivated plants and their relatives” 2nd edition 1964 about this issue. He says that Cassela was right.

This information about Zhukovsky taken from book Guliaev V. I. “Pre-Columbian voyage to America: Myths and Reality” chapter 4.

Let me quote directly from Jashemsky,W.F; Meyer F.G. (ed.): The Natural History of Pompeii, University of Cambridge Press 2002 (http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/item1168563/?site_locale=en_GB) [review (http://mcr.brynmawr.edu/2003/2003-09-27.html)] the most recent comprehensive - and conveniently partially digitized (http://books.google.de/books?id=3xfjyTqqR7IC&printsec=frontcover&dq=natural+history+of+pompeii&source=bl&ots=sK6Mw1PnCf&sig=p6yc-LhURab-UbMug6eCyv_jC4k&hl=de&ei=k94TTZXFFpGp8QPR9OCCBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false) - publication on the subject:


"A [...] study of the fruits pictured in the wall paintings by Professor Domenico Casella, of the Istituto di Coltivazioni Arboree of the University of Naples, was the next work on plant material of the area. He believed that he could identify many modern fruit varieties in these paintings. His study "La frutta nelle pitture pompeiane" was published in Pompeiana in 1950 [...] In two subsequent illustrated articles he defended his identifications, which rightfully have been challenged by other botanists, of the pineapple (Ananas comosa (L.) Merril), mango (Mangifera indica L.) and the custard-apple (Anona squamosa), all tropical plants unknown in Europa in antiquity.The fruit identified as pineapple is the cone of the umbrella pine. The fruit he called custard-apple and mango cannot be identified."

[Jashemsky,W.F; Meyer F.G. (ed.): The Natural History of Pompeii, University of Cambridge Press 2002, 81]

Please show a little more common sense and critical reflection of the matter at hand - don't you see that your argumentation almost completely relies on 'conspiracy' authors of questionable academic standing, which constantly cross-reference exclusively themselves and like-minded?

Neither does stereotypical repetition of 'author x says hypothesis y is right' ad infinitum prove the veracity of y - it only shows a questionably skewed understanding of scientific debate - nor does 'academical authority' automatically equal 'truth' - blind faith in unquestioned 'authorities' is extremely dangerous and misleading.


The hypothetical routes, actually were used by Columbus during his third trip. Anyway, both Columbus and ancient used wind and currents, that existed in both time frames, and as far as we know, by 3rd AD Romans had very good ships, that theoretically could survive the transoceanic journey.

About crew. Santa María also had 40 men crew, and they made transatlantic journey. But they managed to survive. And I don’t know if Romans used slaves on their ships, speaking about morale controle.

I was speaking about Scipio Aemilianus not Polybios. Guliaev argues that he reached modern Senegal.

Please read Pliny,'Naturalis historia' 5,9,10 (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/L/Roman/Texts/Pliny_the_Elder/5*.html), the only literary source which attests this rather short 'coastal exploration trip':


"Scipione Aemiliano res in Africa gerente Polybius annalium conditor, ab eo accepta classe scrutandi illius orbis gratia circumvectus, prodidit a monte eo ad occasum versus saltus plenos feris, quas generat Africa; ad flumen Anatim CCCCLXXXXVI, ab eo Lixum CCV. [...]"

"When Scipio Aemilianus was in command in Africa, Polybius the historian went round in a squadron furnished by the general for the purpose of exploring that continent, and tells us that from Mt. Atlas to the west as far as the river Anatis for 496 miles [734 km], 205 miles [303 km] distant from Lixus, there are woods full of those wild beasts that Africa produces. [...]"

Pliny,'Naturalis historia' 5,9,10

Following Edward Lipiński (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Lipinski_(orientalist)) (Lipiński, E.: Itineraria Phoenicia (Studia Phoenicia 18), Leuven 2004, 465f. (http://books.google.de/books?id=SLSzNfdcqfoC&pg=PA466&lpg=PA466&dq=identification+anatis+plinius&source=bl&ots=fEUmYzEQlH&sig=IciFMoz1K2CmYX3t5di3fKd5FQQ&hl=de&ei=4uQTTe24Hcmh8QOOhqSGBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false)) the 'flumen Anatis' should be most probably identified with the Oum ar-Rbia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oum_Er-Rbia_River), the longest river of modern-day Morocco, which clearly disproves Guliaev's hypothesis of an exploration journey into modern Senegal.



What coins etc?

In 1933 in Aztec tomb dated 13-15 centuries AD was found head of Roman sculpture dated 2 century AD. (Garcia Payon J. Una cabecita de barro, de extraña fisionomia // Boletin del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia. — México, 1961. — № 6. — P. 1—2.)

Hellen statues, Roman terracotta Venus (Romans in the Americas // Katunob. — Vol. П. — № 2. — Carbondale, Illinois, 1961. — P. 12; Gaddis V. H. American Indian Myths and Mysteries. — Pennsylvania, 1977. — P. 102.)

Venezuela – roman coins dated 4 century AD. (Romans in the Americas // Katunob. — Vol. П. — № 2. — Carbondale, Illinois, 1961. — P. 12; Gaddis V. H. American Indian Myths and Mysteries. — Pennsylvania, 1977. — P. 102.)
If some stuff belongs to collections, why only Roman stuff lost? Where are missing Egyptian, Arabian artifacts? Why the collections consist only from one item?

[Ibrahim]

Ancient Mediterranean dwellers could reach Americas. It was possible for their ships. Why it was possible? Mr. Hyeyrdal sailed to Americas from Africa on the papyrus Egyptian boat. If it was possible for Egyptian papyrus boat, it was possible for other more developed and quality ancient vessels. Anyway they could still use papyrus boats.

again, you run into problem # 2 of mine: how would people know to get enough supplies for that? Thor knew where he was going, and could stock up accordingly.

and no, the Kon Tiki was based on a South American boat style, not an egyptian one. the style of sail, the shape of th bottom is different, even the details of construction are different. if you cannot even get that detail right, I dunno what to say to you.

EDIT: Thor was trying to prove that south Americans settled in Polynesia; Kon-Tiki is an old inca word for the sun god. here is an article: http://www.solarnavigator.net/history/kontiki.htm . and as I misspelled the name, I have corrected it in this post.


Nero time Romans build huge vessels with the water displacement 1200 tons (Spanish Galleons usually had 500 tons). Caligula had to bring obelisk from Egypt and used vessel with 1300 tons water displacement. Usually ships had lead and bronze coverage below waterline. Roman grain cargos were bigger then 19 century Frigates, and might deliver 1200 tons of grain at once. Average trade ship had 340 tons of different goods. In 64 AD Joseph Flavius sailed from Alexandria to Rome on the board that placed 600 passengers. Lucian described Roman grain ship, which was brought to the shore after the storm. It had 54 meters long and 13 meters height (without mast)

most of these boats did have sails, and when they didn't, they were either rowed by oarsmen, or towed to place. and these kind of boats are incapeable of sailing in Atlantic waters (they'd crack in half from the waves), due to their construction technique. they were, however, perfect for the relatively shallow, calm, mediterranean. and yes, I';m aware of the grain ship-it was lucky to have been built for storage, rather than rowing.


The key aspects of transatlantic voyages are winds and currents. Strong currents from West Africa goes to Mexican bay. Powerful Canary and North Equatorial Current with strong northeasterly trade winds help the sailors. If Romans sailed to Canary Islands, there is no surprise they could use that currents and winds to sail to Americas.

winds and currents aren't alone: you have to consider the season (storm or no storm), and the ability of the ship to sail in contrary winds (since no matter what, a sail ship will take a few weeks to make it across), even the fact that it is an ocean (since waves there from storms will be larger and deadlier; even Rogue waves are more common there). galleys weren't used to get to the canaries necessaeily (Roman trade ships though could), and even if they were, the canary islands aren't that far from the African coast (60 miles, relatively shallow water): all a ship had to do was make repeated stops along the west African coast, then turn right when at the general latitude of the islands.


The indirect evidence:

Indian Corn on the Ocrilum (sp? Very sorry for spelling, it is my own translit from Cyrillic) baths near Rome (now in Hermitage)

picture

http://gorod.tomsk.ru/uploads/11809/1227104485/corn_1.jpg

Next. Herculanum and Pompey wall paintings with pineapples, annona and lemons! Pineapple came from Brazil.

Italian Casella and Russian Vavilov wrought about it.

(Casella D. La frutta nelle pinture Fompeiane // Pompeiane: racolta di scavii di Pompei. — Naples, 1950. — P. 355—386.)

How the fruits and vegetables from New World came to the patrician dinner in 1st AD?

In 1964 AD on Azor Islands were found roman pots dated 2-3 centuries AD.

In 1933 in Aztec tomb dated 13-15 centuries AD was found head of Roman sculpture dated 2 century AD. (Garcia Payon J. Una cabecita de barro, de extraña fisionomia // Boletin del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia. — México, 1961. — № 6. — P. 1—2.)


Hellen statues, Roman terracotta Venus (Romans in the Americas // Katunob. — Vol. П. — № 2. — Carbondale, Illinois, 1961. — P. 12; Gaddis V. H. American Indian Myths and Mysteries. — Pennsylvania, 1977. — P. 102.)

Venezuela – roman coins dated 4 century AD. (Romans in the Americas // Katunob. — Vol. П. — № 2. — Carbondale, Illinois, 1961. — P. 12; Gaddis V. H. American Indian Myths and Mysteries. — Pennsylvania, 1977. — P. 102.)

Ancient sailors

Have you ever heard about Nearh fleet? In 323 Nearh from Crete sailed to India to settle there and conquer it, but he decided to move further and reached Indonesia and then South America.

Himilco sailed to the Europe North and reached the starced sea, where algae prevent from moving (Sargasso Sea?).

Πυθέας from Massalia sailed to the Northern Europe, he was the first Hellen who described Polar day, Polar light and eternal ice.

Legendary land Ofir according to geologists situated in Brazil Amazon, the only place where all described germs are in one place. Solomon sent there a fleet.

Mishel Lesco who explored Ramses II Mummy said, that he has found tobacco in the embalming stuff. Pharaon Neho ordered to sail away in the quest of far away lands.

The Phoenicians visited the Azores, as evidenced by the treasure Carthaginian coins found on Corvo in 1749. The coins date back 330-320 years BC.

-I did not need to read Lucretius' comment to know that that was not really a roman Fresco: the proportions used for some objects are wrong, and the appearence is too fresh, and looks well kept (no sign of burial or erosion).
-Lemon is a word derived from Spanish IIRC, in turn from the Arabic Laymun. tell you sth about Lemons and the old world?
-the Tobacco could also be evidence of contamination-unsurprising, since some excavators of the cache would have smoked, and hence the Nicotine.
-the Azores weren't that far from the continent (930 miles) and given a bit of luck, and the right amount of supplies, I can see them making it. however, I need more evidence of those coins having been found there, as IIRC, the earliest discovery was by the portuguese. until then, I will consider this as a lie on the part of whatever source you use.

[Finn MacCumhail]

Lvcretivs, the issue with Pompeii painting shows that there are 2 theories that can exist. Mr Zhukovsky was not 'conspiracy' author, but very influential botanist. I do not want to say that if he says smth that it is absolute truth, but that he had an experience and knowledge to state that. Where is the truth? Who is right, Cassela and Zhukovsky or their opponents? I really doubt they didn't knew about pines.

The chief argument against the theory why couldn't Romans or other Mediterenians be in Americas is "it is impossible because it is impossible". That is way any argument starting with paintings in Pompeii and ending with archaeological findings in America can not be truth because "it is impossible".

You convinced me with Scipio travel, but what about all those findings? Also currents and routes that used Columbus might be used at any historical time, not only during Columbus live.

Ibrahim, you should know, that Thor Heyerdahl had not only Kon Tiki expedition. His Egyptian boat called Ra 2 (this picture http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:RaII.InMuseum.jpg compare with Kon Tiki http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:KonTikiInMuseum.jpg). You can read his book about this expedition or just google it.

Speaking about Lemon, it's motherland is India and China, not Spain.

To reach Azores you can not hold shores. It means that people could find them without holding any shores using stars for navigation may be, it means that they were able to find other distant land with stars, or smth.

Cracking down ships... well, not everyone believed that papyrus boat can survive the transatlantic voyage. Also some man in 1976 sailed through the north Atlantic ocean on small boat made of bull skin. And he did it.

How to explain archeological finding in America, that evidence the Roman or other pre Columbu visits?

[Ludens]

The chief argument against the theory why couldn't Romans or other Mediterenians be in Americas is "it is impossible because it is impossible". That is way any argument starting with paintings in Pompeii and ending with archaeological findings in America can not be truth because "it is impossible".

Finn, I don't think anybody here has claimed it was impossible for the Romans to have reached America. The actual argument is (a) that it is fairly unlikely; and (b) the evidence that it did occur hardly provides a coherent picture of Roman-American contact, so we are justified in doubting it.


How to explain archeological finding in America, that evidence the Roman or other pre Columbu visits?

We've given you two alternative explanations. You've addressed only one. Of course, you may think it unlikely, but equally we find your explanation (that there was major trade-contact between the Romans and the Americas which left nothing but scatted images of fruits in Europa and some coins and a statue in America) not convincing. I don't think further arguments can be made at this point, so perhaps we should agree to disagree.

[Finn MacCumhail]

I do not think of full scale trade routs. I think that there were several accidental visits made by Romans or other Mediterraneans, in the result of what their belongings occurred in America.

If the Roman stuff was forged... for this matter I gave credits then everyone could verify the information. Unfortunately, I have not found any information that examples above were forged. praesumptio innocentiae. Unless there such information we should consider that facts as truth, isn't it?

If this stuff was transported by water currents from sinked ship, that delivered this treasures to museum, why only Roman stuff was delivered with currents? Where are Chineese amphoras, Budda statues, and other things popular among museums and collectioneers?

[Ibrahim]

The chief argument against the theory why couldn't Romans or other Mediterenians be in Americas is "it is impossible because it is impossible". That is way any argument starting with paintings in Pompeii and ending with archaeological findings in America can not be truth because "it is impossible".

no one here claimed it was impossible. However, at least two people called it unlikely, either due to Archaeology and historical accounts (Lvcretivs), or due to supply, navigation, or ship structure (me). why you'd ignore everything we say, or completely skew what we said, is beyond me.



Ibrahim, you should know, that Thor Heyerdahl had not only Kon Tiki expedition. His Egyptian boat called Ra 2 (this picture http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:RaII.InMuseum.jpg compare with Kon Tiki http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:KonTikiInMuseum.jpg). You can read his book about this expedition or just google it.

I'm aware of these: and again, none address the structural problems of Roman galleys (the typical ship of the Roman era). to my knowlege, none are 90ft+ in length; none have length to width ratios of 7:1 or more; and none have crews of almost 60 or more, all of whom involved in strenuous, 24 hour activities (i.e, the oarsmen), or coordinating the activities of these men. lastly, none of the above, in consequence of lacking the type of crew a Roman galley has, lacks space enough to store dunnage in their hold to feed every member of the voyage.

what that has to do with the kon tiki's construction itself is beyond me, since my comment then was about how you specifically stated the kon tiki was of egyptian design; either way, they are irrelevant to the debate, as the construction technique, donnage, transportation means, and even the reason for the voyage, are different from a hypothetical roman galley.


Speaking about Lemon, it's motherland is India and China, not Spain.

I already knew that. what I was criticizing with my statement was how you mentioned Lemons as evidence for your "idea".


To reach Azores you can not hold shores. It means that people could find them without holding any shores using stars for navigation may be, it means that they were able to find other distant land with stars, or smth.

what the heck are you talking about? I earlier clearly stated that galleys made regular stops as a result of lack of storage space for supplies in Roman galleys, not lack of navigation skill. and again, i did state that roman trade ships from the common era could-the ones that relied more on sail, were relatively wider.


Cracking down ships... well, not everyone believed that papyrus boat can survive the transatlantic voyage. Also some man in 1976 sailed through the north Atlantic ocean on small boat made of bull skin. And he did it.

you don't get it, do you? a roman galley is not the kon tiki, or that leather boat (which IIRC was to replicate St. Brandon's voyage), or any other of these experimental ships: as mentioned earlier, galleys were not built for the open seas, galleys lacked the ability to hold supplies for such a trip, and lastly, being 90ft or so, and incredibly narrow, they run the risk of hogging and sagging. hogging and sagging is the same issue that people point out to creationists when dealing with Noah's Ark afterall.


How to explain archeological finding in America, that evidence the Roman or other pre Columbu visits?

1-accident (someone misplaced an artifact (it happens)
2-hoax
3-coincidence

see, I just came up with 3 ways to account for ways these "items" of yours could end up in the Americas, aside from Romans landing there.

[Finn MacCumhail]

and no, the Kon Tiki was based on a South American boat style,

No one was speaking about Kon Tiki, but about Ra 2.


not an egyptian one. the style of sail, the shape of th bottom is different, even the details of construction are different. if you cannot even get that detail right, I dunno what to say to you.

I already posted links above to the image of Egyptian boat of Heyerdal

EDIT: Thor was trying to prove that south Americans settled in Polynesia; Kon-Tiki is an old inca word for the sun god. here is an article: http://www.solarnavigator.net/history/kontiki.htm . and as I misspelled the name, I have corrected it in this post.

what that has to do with the kon tiki's construction itself is beyond me, since my comment then was about how you specifically stated the kon tiki was of egyptian design;

what that has to do with the kon tiki's construction itself is beyond me, since my comment then was about how you specifically stated the kon tiki was of egyptian design; either way, they are irrelevant to the debate, as the construction technique, donnage, transportation means, and even the reason for the voyage, are different from a hypothetical roman galley.

you don't get it, do you? a roman galley is not the kon tiki

I never said Kon tiki was of Egyptian design. I don't know why you are speaking about his Pacific Ocean expedition when I was speaking about his Atlantic expedition on the Egyptian boat Ra 2.


none address the structural problems of Roman galleys (the typical ship of the Roman era)

I'm aware of these: and again, none address the structural problems of Roman galleys (the typical ship of the Roman era). to my knowlege, none are 90ft+ in length; none have length to width ratios of 7:1 or more; and none have crews of almost 60 or more, all of whom involved in strenuous, 24 hour activities (i.e, the oarsmen), or coordinating the activities of these men. lastly, none of the above, in consequence of lacking the type of crew a Roman galley has, lacks space enough to store dunnage in their hold to feed every member of the voyage.

1) See above posts about ships.
2) They could always use Egyptian boats or bull-skin boats ;-)

By the way Mediterranean in winter hosts often storms and big precipitations, and in summer, yes it is quite. Also Magallanes when he crossed Pacific Ocean faced no storm and called it “Pacific”. But it was just luck. Who said ancient Atlantic travallers couldn’t have such luck too? Azores are pretty deep into the open Ocean. If the galleys didn't crack on the way to Azores, it makes me think, they can survive the whole journey.

Accident – I really can’t get how the archaeologists start digging in America and accidentally found Roman statue in the tomb of 13-15 century? (Garcia Payon J. Una cabecita de barro, de extraña fisionomia // Boletin del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia. — México, 1961. — № 6. — P. 1—2.)

Coincidence – what do you mean exactly? Accidently Indigenous peoples of America in Middle Ages or in ancient era produced exact things as Romans done?

[Ibrahim]

No one was speaking about Kon Tiki, but about Ra 2.

ok, I concede; but again, they do not prove anything about roman galleys, as again....they aren't built the same way, or have the same circumstance to their voyages. (like, how would Roman galleys know where to go, and why).


1) See above posts about ships.
2) They could always use Egyptian boats or bull-skin boats ;-)

By the way Mediterranean in winter hosts often storms and big precipitations, and in summer, yes it is quite. Also Magallanes when he crossed Pacific Ocean faced no storm and called it “Pacific”. But it was just luck. Who said ancient Atlantic travallers couldn’t have such luck too? Azores are pretty deep into the open Ocean. If the galleys didn't crack on the way to Azores, it makes me think, they can survive the whole journey.

brilliant: you have managed to ignore everything I just said.

1=yeah, I saw the ships: and again, they aren't built like galleys, or work exactly the same way: both are square shaped in the hull, while the galleys were elangated; both are smaller, and both, consequently, are actually (counterintuitively) better made for the sea.
2-again, Magellen did not use galleys (sheesh, can you use an example of a roman galley replica doing this?). and yes, the mediteranean has storms (what sea doesn't?): no, this isn't as big an issue there, since galleys kept near as possible to the coast; should a storm arrive, the ship could easily dock or ground. and yes, galleys often sank due to storms-especially if loaded with supplies incorrectly, and far from any coast (e.g. roman galleys in the 1st punic war; even carthaginian galleys, and they had no Corvi). mind you, trade generally slowed down in the winter back then, precisely because of the storms and heavy rains typical of that season. again, you can look this up for yourself*. (http://libro.uca.edu/ics/ics1.htm) (it doesn't explicitly say it here, but it is implied; it was why trade by Arabs in the 6th and 7th centuries was pursued northward in the summer, and southward in the winter, among other things)

and ok, I'll play your game: suppose everything was quiet, and there were no storms or hurricanes as the galley (somehow, for some reason) starts to cross the 900 or more miles to the azores. again, you would still run into a problem I mentioned earlier (which again, you ignore): how can they carry the supplies (food and water/wine) needed to feed rowers rowing almost 24/7 (unless the wind were somehow perfect and stiff)? remember, galleys didn't have large loads-relatively speaking. you would need to be lucky consistently in order to do this: considering the Atlantic's reputation for being somewhat...upredictable, I would say that this is far too unlikely to make any coherent contact with the Azores (or, while we're at it, America) possible. and suppose they did: why in the name of all things holy, would the Romans and carthaginians not write about this? don't you think they would have? I would expect some mention of "red skinned" people wearing cotton and engaging in gruesome blood rituals (which the Maya were by EB's timeframe already doing).


Accident – I really can’t get how the archaeologists start digging in America and accidentally found Roman statue in the tomb of 13-15 century? (Garcia Payon J. Una cabecita de barro, de extraña fisionomia // Boletin del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia. — México, 1961. — № 6. — P. 1—2.)

I did not say that, or even imply it. what I meant was that (for instance) someone, say an archaelogist or.tourist at a site was carrying a small figurine with him-perhaps a souvenir-and he/she dropped it. later, some unfortunate archaeologist found this figurine, and not knowing any better, came to the wrong conclusion. It's not the first time this happened (remember the Nicotine?), and not the last.

and about you source: I will reply thus: I want a PDF of this source of yours-preferably with an English translation-if in spanish.


Coincidence – what do you mean exactly? Accidently Indigenous peoples of America in Middle Ages or in ancient era produced exact things as Romans done?

you do realize that that is not what I meant, right? I never claimed that 2 cultures could produce two identical items. allow me to clarify:

it is perfectly possible for two cultures to produce two superficially similar items (e.g. the maya and Indonesian pyramids, Swastikas (apologies to anyone offended out there), etc), or possibly the figurine. just because they are similar, does not mean they are the same. if you can show me that the item was not forged (either in context or production), or misplaced by a random, more recent person(s), I just might change my mind-or at least begin to.

look, if you would just carefully read what I have to say, you would realize that I am not saying it is impossible: for all I know, you are (somehow), right, and the romans et al had sufficient contact with the Americas to leave more than a few items (why they never wrote about this though, is beyond me). however, I am going to need more evidence than what you have produced (which strike me as dubious, innacurate, or incomplete). merely throwing paper titles and journals isn't going to do d*** in helping your cause: I want exact quotes, PDF's (of the paper's themselves), analyses of experts, etc.

also, I'm going to need an example of a roman style galley actually crossing the atlantic under normal (read: unpredicatable) conditions, on its own, with only the supplies it could carry. perhaps the fears of the relative fragility of the ship, by reason of size and shape, are either unfounded, or exaggerated. and no, don't give me any of these Hayerdal-style voyages: if the boats are built differently, and are smaller, then they can survive the atlantic (again, provided that they don't take in too much water).

mind you, I did twice throw a bone at you, and gave you one way the Romans could have done this: roman trade ships from the common era: only this time, you have to provide a clear, rational reason why they would want to go this far in the first place.

*here is the quote, in case you have trouble finding it:
"In overseas trade, land travel was conjoined with sea travel to form patterns with distinct seasonal rhythms. A crucial link to the East were the land caravans -- called mawsim, "season," because they departed at set times (late May, most typically, for the summer caravan) --traversing Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia (which was for most of the period the entrepôt between Andalusi and eastern commerce), finally arriving in Egypt after a journey of two or three months. Caravans were of particular importance in the winter, when the sea was generally closed to shipping, and in the summer, when the rhythm of trade and travel picked up, to fill in between the more or less regular sailings of organized trading expeditions. Ships sailed in convoys, setting out in the spring and returning in the fall; the convoy from al-Andalus usually arrived in Egypt in late August or early September.(19) Merchants, in particular, preferred sea to overland travel: it was faster, surer, and less hazardous. This was true even when the distance involved was short. A man wanting to travel from Libya to Tunisia around 1140 was advised to accomplish this mission by taking a boat first to Seville and then proceeding to his destination.(20)"

this should be the last post here: this is getting pointless.

[Finn MacCumhail]

One more thing. Why I don't believe it is a hoax. This way it turns out into conspiracy theory. Secret powerful organization forge Roman artifacts in Americas, and keeps an eye on it's members then they will not tell anyone about their activity.

Still, there are no answers about that above artifacts, which are particular cases. The theories that it might be hoax or accident are just speculations unless there are scientific evidences of this artifacts being forged, that do not present.

[antisocialmunky]

One more thing. Why I don't believe it is a hoax. This way it turns out into conspiracy theory. Secret powerful organization forge Roman artifacts in Americas, and keeps an eye on it's members then they will not tell anyone about their activity.

Still, there are no answers about that above artifacts, which are particular cases. The theories that it might be hoax or accident are just speculations unless there are scientific evidences of this artifacts being forged, that do not present.

Nah, actually supporters of Marius fled from Rome after his death to sea and ended up blown off course to Brazil. Roman physicians then attempted created numerous clones of Marius and raise Brazillian legions to go back and win the civil war.

Of course it never quite worked out right. Boyz from Brazillia.

[Ludens]

One more thing. Why I don't believe it is a hoax. This way it turns out into conspiracy theory. Secret powerful organization forge Roman artifacts in Americas, and keeps an eye on it's members then they will not tell anyone about their activity.

Finn, the reason you are getting such hostile responses is because you keep using strawman arguments. Nobody claims it's a conspiracy any more than that it's impossible to cross the Atlantic ocean with Classical-era naval technology. Frankly if there is a conspiracy to make people believe the Romans were in America, it's a fairly inept one. I still maintain that the pattern of finds is too random to ascribe to regular contact, so part if not all of the evidence was accidentally or purposefully planted. That should answer your second question too: there are answers. You may not find them compelling, but we can say the same about your reasoning.

@ antisocialmunkey
~D

[cmacq]

One more thing. Why I don't believe it is a hoax. This way it turns out into conspiracy theory. Secret powerful organization forge Roman artifacts in Americas, and keeps an eye on it's members then they will not tell anyone about their activity.

Still, there are no answers about that above artifacts, which are particular cases. The theories that it might be hoax or accident are just speculations unless there are scientific evidences of this artifacts being forged, that do not present.

Yes there is evidence this was actually a Con not a hoax.

[antisocialmunky]

What would it really matter anyway?

The Americas after were populated by several waves of variable sized migrations from Asia, Polynesia, and to a much less extent Europe. Heck, the Siberian migrants across the Bering Strait was just the most recent mass migration in the Pre-Columbian age.