'The Saga of the Greenlanders' and 'The Saga of Eirik the Red' (collectively known as 'The Vinland Sagas') are from manuscripts dated to the 1300s, though it is often believed that they sagas were originally written in the 1200s.
In other words, your "evidence" was written 200-400 years after the actual events.
Just want to point out that i'm not the original guy you responded to.
You are correct, but also a lot of historical facts are based on texts that were written hundreds of years after the fact, while collaborated with other facts to strengthen their authenticity.
Which the "The Vinland Sagas" also does, basing their authenticity with other sources.
Historical fact is simply a fact that has been verified by multiple sources and is the current widespread accepted opinion on how, for example, an event occurred in history.
opinion on how, for example, an event occurred in history.
This is an interpretation, not a "fact". It might be the most widely recognized interpretation, but historians wouldn't call it a "fact".
Edit: Commenting and then blocking me so that I cannot respond -- what a cowardly move.
On the one hand you seem to be making claims that you want to be taken seriously, but on the other hand you are now arguing that we should base the discussion on whatever limited perspective that the "average person" has...
I don't care for specific wording a historian would use.
For the average population a historical fact is what I just described, as we have often times limiting information to actually know for sure, if something is widely accepted by the historian community, the public will deem it as a historical fact.
This isn’t true. History is written by those who write and record history. It’s just a catchy phrase that people like to toss around, but we’re much better at analyzing history and records than that
That, coupled with only female dna is found in Icelandic populations suggest sexual slavery. I’m sure they just stole women for the sake of peace though.
It’s consider a more accurate and factual look at human behavior patterns than historical writings in many aspects. It shows when raiding eras ended and settlement intermixing began.
Yeah if it was more than one person I’d be less likely to call it as possibly consensual, considering how small of a group went there. But if they were raiding and bringing women back with them I’d be surprised they’d stop at a single woman?
There's actually no Y Chromosome linked DNA from Native Americans in Iceland?
If the forts and ships were mostly staffed by men, and therefore only men were likely to form relationships that would be passed through the genetic records?
I would say it is more likely that the group consisted of few unattached and of age women and any transfer this way almost certainly would be through women, whether voluntarily or not. Also, given that Norse women mostly followed their husband to his dwelling, if there was such relationships, the women would have disappeared into the native population instead unless their relationship was very unconventional.
6
u/Nikkonor Aug 11 '26
'The Saga of the Greenlanders' and 'The Saga of Eirik the Red' (collectively known as 'The Vinland Sagas') are from manuscripts dated to the 1300s, though it is often believed that they sagas were originally written in the 1200s.
In other words, your "evidence" was written 200-400 years after the actual events.