Talk:Vinland

Vinland as Greenland?
Erik the Red, having been banished from Iceland for manslaughter, is said to have explored the uninhabited southwestern coast of Greenland during the three years of his banishment. He made plans to entice settlers to the area, even purposefully choosing the name Greenland to attract potential colonists, saying "that people would be more eager to go there because the land had a good name".

is it possible that something like it happened to the Vinland? takk for any comments —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dng23 (talk • contribs) 16:26, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Ignorance such as yours is not welcome here. -Can't someone delete this above entry??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuckwitt (talk • contribs) 00:37, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

==Leif Eriksson Was a viking who explored what is today called Canada

The article wrongly states, as factual, that the land known as Vinland is the are now know as Newfoundland. There is no proof of that notion. The L'Anse aux Meadows find only proofs Viking presence into at area. Vinland gets its name because in the Sagas it is described as a place where grape vines grow wild and without human care. Grapes do not naturally grow in Newfoundland, Vinland would have to be much further south. Épargnez le visage (talk) 04:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Meaning of 'Vin'
The last sentence in the first paragraph; "These synonyms are often mixed up" confuses me. Synonyms are supposed to be different words, that describe appr. the same thing. NOT a single word that describes several things, as seems to be the case here. I don't know a good adjective that describes this ambiguousness, however... I suggest removing this sentence and instead add to the text, that the actual meaning of the word 'vin' is disputed. -- Dennis

The word Vinland doesn't necessarily mean 'wineland'. The word 'vin' could also mean .. how to say it in english .. 'large open land usable for agriculture'. --anonymous

I will give this some attention: anonymous, you are quite correct: vin/viin is the subject of much scholarly contention. user:sjc

Also, beyond that, the article on global warming states that in Leif's time the climate of Greenland and Newfoundland was substantially warmer than today - making vines possible. Vines do grow in Nova Scotia, which isn't much further south, today, although they're not so commercially viable as other places, they DO grow.

Regardless, "vine" was never a word describing the viniferis plant associated with wine and grapes in Old Norse. It is a reference to the vanes of grass, alluding to the pastureland. --anonymous


 * På Island, liksom i Norge och Danmark, hade det visserligen i flere århundraden varit väl bekant, att nordmän långt i sydväst från Grönland upptäckt ett stort land, som de af den där vildt växande vinrankan gifvit namnet Vinland. Men traditionen härom hade småningom dött ut, och de gamla handskrifter som förtäljde därom lågo förgätna i de isländska torfstugornas undangömda vrår. (Source: "Amerika, dess upptäckt, eröfring och fyrahundraåriga utveckling" Vol. 1 ("Amerikas upptäckt af isländarne. Vinland"), 1892)


 * Although on Iceland, as well in Norway and Denmark, it had been well known for multiple of centuries that norsemen from the far south-west relative Greenland had discovered a great land, that they from the wild growing "vinranks" (=vitis vinifera) gave the title Vinland. But this tradition had nowadays vanished, and the old manuscripts that told the true story was lying hidden in various corners of Icelanding peat-cottages.


 * // Rogper 23:40, 2 May 2004 (UTC)


 * What I can simply not understand in this debate is WHY Vinland cannot derive from the explanation given in the saga itself - namely from WINE. Doesn't Occham's Razor apply to this kinds of dabate? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.113.238.211 (talk) 04:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

Did Leif Eriksson give Vinland its name?
In "Was Vinland in New Foundland", we find that names with "vin" were given from AD 100 to 600. This coincides with the period of St.Brendan. Quotes below are from "St Brendans journey" ca. AD 900, i.e. before Leif Eriksson: Chapter 1: "...et apparuit terra spaciosa et herbosa pomiferosaque valde." / "...and land appeared, spacious and grassy, and bearing all manner of fruits.". Chapter 9:"...pascuis semper commorantur die noctuque" / "...pasture always for eating, day and night". Based on these "pasture" is likely, but "wine" is not. St.Trond (talk) 18:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Couldn't grapes be included in "all manner of fruits"? Yopienso (talk) 03:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Grapes are not necessarily wine. See also Gothic language "winja": grazing land, pasture, ref: Norsk stadnamnleksikon, 2nd ed. p.343. The use of the Gothic language also predates Leif Ericson. St.Trond  (talk) 15:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, in Swedish for example "vinbär" means currants, and not grapes, if I am not mistaken. That might make more sense climate-wise.--95.89.29.209 (talk) 13:26, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * However, the word "currant" without modifying prefixes such as red- or black- means a dried grape (of the Corinth variety). All in all, it seems most likely that "vinbär" means "berries from which wine can be made", which may or may not include actual grapes, such as are to be found in south-east Canada. David Trochos (talk) 05:31, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Must note that meanings get lost  in translation and   they named things so they sounded attractive to others -like   "Greenland" (not very green is it)  - "Markland"  (believed  to still in the subarctic means  "forestland"). Naming something Vine land does not seem out of the norm - Does not mean the lands actually  had any vines. I agree can make wine out of any berries  vines or not.  The  Vinland  is  attractive to settlers, while at the same time  making the  documented discovery more notable then it realy may be. The Norsemen were not famous for there vanity in anyway Moxy (talk) 06:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Vín and Vin are different words, with (obviously!) different spellings, and thus (obviously!) different meanings. How many times does a body have to try to get this into your thick skulls??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.180.5 (talk) 00:43, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Has ANYONE scribing above read any book aboot the subject? or Studied any of these subjects? If not, why is Wikipedia allowing these clouds of dust to obliterate real people? Is this a U.S. model of stupifaction? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.180.5 (talk) 00:49, 15 December 2013 (UTC) These are Norse/Icelandic words! Not English! How can anyone above presume to throw opinions about without starting with THE OBVIOUS? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.180.5 (talk) 02:26, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Propaganda
A-ha, just like how Yngvi-Freyr was king of the Turks? That Thrudheim(Thor's home) is Troy? Give me a break! There are so many lies written to impress the Mediterranean cultures I am nauseated!. Just like how Hitler called the Nordic man "Aryan"(Iranian). I do not condone upholding lies to "improve" the social status of the Nordic people. I am Nordic myself, and that is insulting to me, to think I would embrace blatently fake propaganda and shift my cultural allegiance to please those who would outright meanly call my ancestors barbarians as a way to get people to feel inferior, just because they weren't Mediterranean! --anonymous

You also wreak of User:Mic's B.S. like when he went and latinised all manner of provincial placenames in Sverige just because the Catholics did after St Ansgar came. The agenda is misleading and dangerous, not populist in the least, except after people have given up complaint, and their feelings are over-rided. I do not have to tell you again. STOP IT! The Nordic peoples deserve their Germanic characterisations, regardless of what some POV Mediterranean scholastic pushers believe otherwise, fascist! --anonymous

Hey Kenneth
Hey Kenneth, at it again, I see. I've just de-Kennethized your additions to this page. Some of it was interesting, but as usual instead of adding you overwrite in an unsubtle manner with any theory you are personally convinced of. Could you please cut that out in the future? Thanks. Martijn faassen 22:07, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

No, I will not bow to you. Do not stalk me like a plague. You do anything to discredit me, troll! Lord Kenne 07:20, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

The meaning of Vinland
I can't understand what an editor is trying to say with "hull-land" and the etymolgi of "vinland", that it has something to do with cereal grass. Are you trying to say that hull is the same as häll (="flat rock")? Can you describe your aims in Swedish? // Rogper 19:40, 4 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Hull is a protective outer shield, and that is what Baffin is to the southwest of Nunavut including Hudson Bay; there is remarkably low salt content to the calmer waters beyond Baffin as opposed to those outside of the archipelago in the Davis Strait. The Faeroyska, Islenska, Groenlanders and intended settlers of Vinland counted animal husbandry as their economical mainstay with fishing a compliment to this.  Good pasture was like maize for the Virginia "Planters"--a very wealthy local crop!  Lord Kenne Alansson 01:28, 5 May 2004 (UTC)


 * I noticed you left in the 'vane of grass' theory as the main theory for the name of 'vinland'. Is this now commonly accepted as the main theory as opposed to the one involving wine? In my sources it is mentioned briefly as an unconvincing theory and the wine theory is favored.


 * Anyway, the section on etymology is a bit of jumble right now and needs editing. Martijn faassen 20:07, 4 May 2004 (UTC)


 * I've just edited the etymology section to include a number of theories. I hope everybody (including Kenneth) likes it.


 * Wine is not a native term to Norse speakers nor is it a native plant to the actual Norse settlements discovered in all the time of colonisation in New England and Nova Scotia; the encroachment of civilisation hasn't upturned any new rocks. I had lived in New England for 19 years to not hear a single local tale of that BS about Vinland being south of Newfoundland, and the people who would have talked would be the whalers and fishermen who never bragged such damned rubbish, amongst other wild tales!  I have grudgingly watched the tabloid American History Channel on TV where many Mediterranean POV histories and crypto-zoological type pseudoscience about ghosts and Judeo-Christian tales of the Bible with slants on the Middle East conflict, predominating as "facts".  One of their bogus programs is the "Irish in America before Columbus" story which has them supposedly built a stone settlement in northeastern New England.  I was like ?WTF?  I am part Irish but I am not stupid to fall for that, nor the St. Brendan crossing over either, such falsified and fallacious claims only serve to make those people look like asses!  It's most assuredly native American or by the Pilgrims.  Lord Kenne Alansson 01:28, 5 May 2004 (UTC)


 * 'viin' as wine seems to be accepted by most researchers. Therefore this theory deserves mention. The rest of your rant seems to be an irrelevant exposition of your world view. Martijn faassen 09:47, 5 May 2004 (UTC)


 * That is because their tendencies are POV in favour of Mediterranean sources for linguistics. It is extremely common to base research on Latin Catholic ideas, at least in Western Europe where much cultural interplay and domination was achieved by the religious faction with their tongue and etymologies.  You say you have no part to play in other people's games/agendas, but you are clearly falling into place just as I described.  Lord Kenne Alansson 10:34, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

I've reverted to my last edit, because I thought Kenneth only introduced POV in what was a NPOV exposition of competing theories. If Kenneth wants to introduce things in that section I suggest we debate this in the talk page first. Private psychological theories about why certain theories developed do not belong in the article, nor do private etymological theories. Martijn faassen 09:56, 5 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Aha, it is the responsibility of the editor to judge the credibility of his sources by examining the data; that is at least a common way of doing things, unlike in Soviet Russia where you shouldn't have judged the communist motives of people, much less thought of it. I will not add data to an article if it is partisan POV, which you have allowed to predominate as the question.  In the Northern lands, placenames had always been Germanic terms at least to that time period, so I suggest you kick your sorry arse out of here and stop whining!  You only help people to be confused!  That is a bad article!  Pretending we know nothing definitive about an article doesn't educate!  It doesn't teach people the central issues to the article.  For instance, there is no mention in this article of Hop being a chief's settlement, as we would typically identify a colony or nation's capital.  Most people would percieve the writings as little to nil actual substance, or meat to the article, using the confusion you adhere to as a filler, like fat, salt and sugar.  Lord Kenne Alansson 10:34, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

Vinland is spelled "Vínland" in modern Icelandic with the "Vín" in it meaning either wine which in it's standalone form is "Vín" or alternatively "Vínviður" which is Grapevine, and "land" being just "land". The danish article however defines it as: "græsland, tundra." or a "grassland" or "tundra". -- Ævar Arnfjörð [ Bjarmason]  01:25, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)

Edit summary
Since otherwise we'll be trapped in a revert war, I've done an edit of Kenneth's contributions.

Restore Helluland as flatstone land. Can you specify a source for the "hull" etymology?

Restore balanced view of etymology of Vinland in main text (outside etymology section). This mentions wineland (which is still a commonly accepted explanation) as well as the pasture land theory and defers further discussion to the etymology section.

Tightened up and NPOV-ed section on why those who advocate Newfoundland based Vinland consider it unlikely the settlement could be further south. Attributed it to particular advocates instead of saying 'most'. Left out detailed explanation of early English settlement as irrelevant to this article (perhaps a link to an article about this topic can be added?). Left out discussion about why the various native americans made this futile to even try for security reasons. This is rather speculative, and the vikings might not have reasoned that way at all. Vikings settled distant areas with a far higher native population density with a lot higher technology in Europe, such as Normandy and various places in the Mediterranean. They even attacked Constantinople.


 * I've since found arguments along these lines. Far from supply lines battle with the natives can't have been very easy, of course. I still think the supply lines are the main reason, not the ferocity of the natives, but I'll add back a bit of text about this. Martijn faassen 18:50, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

Turned Olav Magnusson and Olaf the White into "Olaf Skyrre", for which I can find many google hits. I can't find any in connection with the penny for the others.

Spun discussion of Maine Penny into separate article.

Turned "Svend Estridson" (which didn't have a link) back into linked Sweyn Estridson. Researched it; this is the same king (same date of death, for instance), just under another name. Svend Estridson in fact redirects to this page.
 * Yes, that's right. Sweyn Estridson in English, Svend Estridson i Danish, and Sven Estridsson in Swedish. // Rogper 13:07, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

Much tightened arguments in main text to defend short-i 'vinland' (grassland) interpretation. Shortened versions of these arguments are still in the main text. Removed psychological theory about how men kept up the king's wording to retain his credibility. These sagas were written much later. We don't need to edit this listing of theories so that one favorite stands out way stronger than the other, like Kenneth has been trying to do, obviously favoring the pastureland theory.

Got rid verbiage by Kenneth arguing against the wendland theory, and clarified it a bit. Added the word 'even' to make it appropriately speculative. The theory is that Wendland was referred to by the king in an earlier discussion, and Adam later confused this early discussion (about grapes) with a later discussion about Vinland. I found this theory in a rather obscure posting though, so I'll gladly remove it entirely if we can't find some backup by others.

Got rid of "more fanciful" as a description of the vinland is further south theory; this is definitely POV. Many scholars have and do search vinland further south; it's not wikipedia's job to declare them all fanciful.


 * I have added a separate on how romantic view could influence the desire to place Vinland further south. Martijn faassen 19:27, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

Remove psychology theory as to the roots of this theory. Again, we want to present the competing theories, not explain why the people who hold a theory is wishfulfillment, certainly not as a definite statement.

I don't understand why "longer" was changed into "unchartered". Unchartered by who? I changed it back to longer.

I've moved the line saying: "Straumfjord was the name of the northern settlement and Hóp the name of the southern settlement", which was sitting there all alone, up into the third paragraph of the article. I hope they are right there; I don't know the details about these names.
 * I suggest that the mention of Straumfjord (=Kangerlussuaq?) and Hop be removed and put into own articles about Thorfinn Karlsefni and Snorri Thorbrandsson, because there are plenty of other names too. . // Rogper 13:07, 6 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Could you do this? I don't know enough yet about these topics to make sense. Martijn faassen 18:46, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

Martijn faassen 20:35, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

Big restructuring
I've restructured the article quite a bit, moving things quite drastically, and making the sections more coherent (though bigger). Someone please read over it to see whether the ordering is all right. I've also spun off some non-Vinland material into Adam of Bremen, which I also restructured. Martijn faassen 23:13, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

Restructuring?
Perhaps some of the text should be put into their origin sagas and Viking colonization of the Americas, and not Vinland? There is currently a redirect of the former to the latter. Comments? // Rogper 23:04, 7 May 2004 (UTC)


 * I think at present it'd be too difficult to unstangle the topics into two coherent stories? Where'd the localization debate go? Both articles would have to say something about it. I don't think the article is long enough yet to make a split worthwhile. Note that I have been able to split off material into the Maine penny article (entirely new) and Adam of Bremen articles (big edits). If other subtopics arise that could stand on their own as their own page, we could split them off. Martijn faassen 23:17, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

Why not put Vinland in the context of Newfoundland?
Why not put Vinland in the context of Newfoundland, as MOST scientists advocate, even if they aren't sure of any other sites or excursions, they are VERY certain of the settlement in L'anse aux Meadows, just as it is in the saga, further past Groenland. We have no other site found. Put the facts and the fantasy together and grow some balls, for crying out loud! No need to feel less acknowledging of our viking relatives just because they didn't go very far as the later explorers and merchants did on voyages financed by wealthy royalty, with better tech. No need to see the vikings weak for only going so far. They were poor and in inclement weather. Just think, if the Groenland settlements died out, how profitable could further ventures have been? I propose to include this as the early history and founding of Newfoundland's European society. Their business in the sagas reflects the geography and natural resources.
 * I don't suggest to do that, because "Vinland" is a place orignially written in the Icelandic sagas, and only a modern scarcer excavitation has suggest its place. But we can write "in recent time, the interest of identifying Vinland with North America and deduce the truefullness in the sagas have increased, but there are much archeological work still to do." // Rogper 13:41, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

That's not fair! They did it for Heinreich Schliemann when he found "Troy" in Anatolia! No way, Rogper, we have to change things to be a bit more fair! We can't just let the Mediterraneans always win out and minimise our accomplishments for their ego! Lord Kenneð Alansson 21:41, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree with Rogper in that this article is about Vinland. We have reasonable indications that this is in Newfoundland and not everybody agrees. There is also an interesting history behind it; at first it was thought it was just a myth, later it turned out the Norse did reach North America in fact. We could add a few lines to the Newfoundland article that this is considered by many the most likely place of Vinland perhaps, and link back to here (if such a thing is not already there). Martijn faassen 18:26, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment. We must note that most ideals that DO seem controvertible to the Newfoundland case were begun long before Ingstad found the settlements at L'Anse aux Meadows. To me, it seemed like there were too many hurt prides running around that refused to admit they had chosen a less illustrious place to emigrate from the Nordic countries. It seems like they just became stubborn about their ignorance to hold up their own credibility and wishfulness they could have Vinland in the Midwest. For the English, it would seem they like the idea of getting more tourists out in New England, not giving a crap for dinky Newfie-land. I know how the tourism industry works. They lie and encourage lies to make a living off of it. I'm not into that, even though my birthplace can be found right smack dab in Yankee-land. I don't want the lies flourishing. Self delusive fantasy is interesting sometimes, which is why I will sit through a Hollywood rendition of Jean D'Arc, fully discounting Jean but still be on the French side when my forefathers were on their enemy's taxed soil. My point is, the painted picture is fantastic, and inspiring, like how the French defeated the English based on Jean's craze, but wholly ignorant of the truth.

When I first saw the map of the vikings going through the Hudson to the Great Lakes, I was thrilled at the idea, but all the evidence reeked of Newfoundland, and again, I'll say the same for New England, they both were most industrious sites of Northern European extraction in the New World. Both the British Isles and Scandinavia, including the Low Countries and English Channel have markedly high amounts of viking heritage. It would be foolish to let the guard down in editing to not note that when seeing some interpretations that seem ethno-patriotic fantasy. Even in Quebec, some have conjured that Saguenay-Lac St. Jean are the remains of some viking kingdom, but the history on that is in error and inextricable tied to the French monarchy. On another note, it would seem that some ex-Confederate oriented Dixie-landers of Celtic blood want to say that the Welsh Prince Madog visited South Carolina to get the native tribes blue eyes and lighter hair. This is all fanciful as it is chiefly aimed at converting ignorant people into fools for the fantasy that they had such "ancient" origins that are their singular pride. It seems maddening, but that's the newer version of "white power/pride" out there. Of course, the same with Irish Saint Brendan, who is immortalised on the grounds that he supposedly found America before anybody as well, but his Christian achievements seem to go unnoticed, what he was actually canonised for. Lord Kenneð Alansson 01:50, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

I check here for updates from time to time. I've been reluctant to join in because it is so hard to keep ahead of things these days. The last thing I want to do is appear to be disagreeable, but most scientists DO NOT believe Vinland was located in Newfoundland. Most scholars who have studied this controversy in detail have endorsed, to one degree or another, the theory that Vinland was in Southern New England. Magnus Magnusson and Hermann Palsson sketched this out in their 1964 book “The Vinland Sagas.” Things have not changed at all since then. The case for Southern New England has only gotten stronger. See comment # 2753 at http://www.nae.usace.army.mil/projects/ma/ccwf/comments/2669-2818.pdf

Quotes from Magnusson and Palsson; "Every one of the theories put forward has had to disregard one or more inconsistencies between the two sagas or even within the sagas themselves; but, generally speaking, the most acceptable interpretation of the elusive information in the sagas suggest that Vinland was somewhere in the New England region, and the majority of scholars have inclined to this view.” Page 8

“…in the end it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that Vinland cannot have lain very far from New England.” page 42

In 1964 Norwegian Johannes Kr. Tornoe proposed Leifsbudir was built on Waquoit Bay on the south coast of Cape Cod. I think he was right. Early navigational charts support his theory.

Neil Good, July 3, 2005

Objectivity in articles
Oh, and I am not a "Newfie", and I'm not trying to fluff their genesis up to countreweight the Ontario English stereotypes of them. Would it occur to you that the lifestyle of early settlers in Newfoundland mirrors the experiences of the sagas? Or are we to encourage to forays into Madog and Brendan for the sake of Romanticism? The Romantics are exaggerating for their ethno-patriotic pride on who knew and experienced America first. Utter nonsense. If Wikipedia is trying to increase its own credibility, it's editors should refrain from editing things in clearly POV manners. One manner is; "Oh, we can't be sure, there's just so much we don't know." Bullshit, they know only what they know and what we all have proof of so far. If they insist on cryptozoologic style science, they push their own falsehood and POV. Don't you look at these researchers and get a sense of their HOPEFULLNESS that things aren't what the evidence calls for? Or, do you hope they get their delusion circulated everywhere to satisfy your own? Certainly, their CLAIMS are just that. As you would steer my edits here to be NPOV, try to use some sense with your sources, and get a sense of the craze over "America the Beautiful". Everybody has a place here in America now, you don't need to entice anybody with false mythologies on the roots of people seeking their place in the wall of fame. It is surely looking like the wall of shame. Lord Kenne Alansson 22:43, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
 * The history is written by those who wins the battle, the victories, and not the loosers. :-) Are there any specific statement by you that someone thinks is POV? // Rogper 13:45, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

Rogper, that was Martijn Faassen following me around to make sure I be a "good little boy". Pfft. Lord Kenne Alansson 21:45, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * But is there anything in the article at present that you consider POV and want to fix? Martijn faassen 18:21, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

My problem was viewing the article as it was totally a tourist's fod for thought and not scientific. It seemed too heavily fancy laden with the vines being the "preferred truth"(Indeed, Welch's Concord Grape Juice is the biggest grossing grape product in New England-I confess it is better than the green grapes of the Old World). I know New Englanders, I am one, and they would definitely encourage the lies in order to get more people in their B&B and rented vacation cottages. I confess, they ARE nice. :) I just don't want the whole legitimacy of this heritage issue discredited, when there is so much to gain from looking at it candidly.  Please keep that in mind in editing, is all.  Lord Kenne Alansson 02:01, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, the wine and wheat path of the meaning is not our thoughts but the description given in the written texts. Compare to Iceland that is a very hot climate. // Rogper 08:42, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Hullland instead of Flatstoneland
Sorry, I just now got finished viewing the article. It's been doen nicely. My reason for "hull" is because it is etymologically connected to that "häll" term. Since the nature adjective comes before the technological reference. I am not debating that hull has no connection to "flat stone", like slate. The land of Baffin-I have seen pictures-has flat rocks in so many places. I was just using a word in English close enough to häll, just as we use Greenland instead of Groenland. What gives? I am making sense here. Instead of Helluland or Häll-land, we can put Hull-land for English. Just a bit of translation on my part.
 * The etymology is the word's origin and have nothing to do with their similarity in spelling. The  "häll" (or "haell") have another transcription from "hull". The heall should sound like when saying the word hell. According to  is haell something that has an incline. Perhaps the english "hill" is etymologically related, but that is my guess. // Rogper 14:00, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

Well, I believe you are right. Baffin is on an incline everywhere away from the sea, moving inward. There was some comment on the ice in the sagas, was there not? I have seen people link the two words "hell" and "hill" often enough, but never a mention of "hull". I did, because this is a nautical description. They never really experienced the land just glanced over it many times. Because there is a city in England called Hull, I figured it would work very easily. That is bound by water just as Helluland. A hull is a natural protective feature that does often more than not does rise or incline. Just like we call Groenland Greenland, I figured this would work. Just like we have Iceland instead of Island. Are you understanding me? Lord Kenneð Alansson 22:01, 16 May 2004 (UTC)


 * If there is no other research besides your theory that indicates the 'hull' translation, I think we should leave in the current interpretation (flatstone), as part of the no original research policy.Martijn faassen 18:30, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

In the Mercia article, I had formerly debated the decision for something more English as an alternative to a latinisation. We had seen Mierce and another, but aimed for and ending like -land. From such intense analysis, we determined the likely existence of that, just as there is Northumberland for Northumbria and East England for East Anglia. My point here is a tapering one from that, and eating away at the back of my mind for some time now. We know that Mark has at least two meanings, border and forest, at least in the minds of the inhabitants speaking latin or germanic. I look at it as the forest being the borders anyways. They have always anciently served as a border.
 * I think the English word "Woodland" have the same meaning as "Markland". However, in today Swedish, mark changed its meaning from "wood or forest" to "ground". I don't now how it is in Danish or Norwegan. // Rogper 14:09, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

That change in mark for Swedish seems reflective of the boundary issue. Territory, I suppose, eh? That's how it happened for the Danes, correct? That's a latinisation, but mark as the wood does work because it's a Norse term. You know what, as ironic as it is that we need some scientist consensus for explicitly confirming the natures of the places, if you look at the Labrador flag, like I said, it has Spruce twig in it's jack, specifically denoting wood as it's primary bounty. Too bad we aren't "allowed" to make such calls. Lord Kenneð Alansson 22:01, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

Map
What prevents us from drawing that conclusion into the naming convention?


 * Which conclusion? That Vinland is in Newfoundland? Because there is a debate, and we have to respresent that fairly in the NPOV policy. The readers can draw their own conclusions from the article, if they want to. I think we give Newfoundland good support, though perhaps you have specific suggestions for improvement there? Martijn faassen 18:46, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Well, at least putting the focus into better light. For instance, the UFO phenomena in Roswell, New Mexico. Obviously, it's delusion as truth has engrossed Hollywood billions of dollars with their twists and turns. Most have casually agreed, after the F-117 stealth fighter and B-2 stealth bomber rolled out for display, that the US military had secrets it was trying to conceal regarding test weaponry(U-2, SR-71, AND weather balloons). No big deal, we put the alien existence part of that topic onto the sideline feature(not denying aliens or embellishing in them). Lord Kenneð Alansson 02:11, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Markland, if in Labrador, would definitively been as far as they've traveled inland from the sea, from the saga and archaeological results. What's to stop us from holding that as a primary focus for the description? Even Labrador's flag is remniscient of the Greenlander description of it being a prime source of wood, as the Black Spruce is the key feature in the jack of the flag. I'm not to sure about the effectiveness of spruce for shipmasts, but I know that the Eastern White Pine(used by English settlers as a replacement for Scots Pine) is present in Newfoundland in ample enough quantities. Perhaps, as some people have speculated in regards to Greenland's climes during the viking age, that the weather was hospitable enough for pine to be present in Labrador, but all I know for certain is that Jack Pine happens to be the only pine in that region, and concentrated to the southwest border on Quebec, quite aways from the sea. I am confused by the claims of Markland's location, then, unless somebody could clarify the wood uses. Maybe this was a confusion for those who postulated further than Newfoundland. If it is, I haven't seen this theory, but it makes a confusion enough for me to somewhat doubt the locales I defended. Did the Greenlanders care whether it was 'gran' or 'furu'? Lord Kenne Alansson 23:17, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I think a good idea would be to scetch a map containing the places from the sagas, and indicating the places where archeological remains have been found. For example, http://www.nyteknik.se/bilder/bildarkiv/Vinland.jpg, is one such attempt. // Rogper 14:12, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I have seen that map before, but it relies on the Kensington Stone to work, which most people, scientists and general others believe is a fake by the Scandinavian settlers in the Midwest. I agree with your idea, but perhaps it would be best to just have a visual of the northwest Atlantic coastline?  Maybe linking to those sites with specific lines of travel postulated is great.  Lord Kenneð Alansson 22:06, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Sketching such a map sounds tricky. I agree that this map looks like it relies on the Kensington Stone, of dubious provenance. Sketching it on a real map based on mythology sounds tricky (and could be considered as original research). A map of north-east America and Greeland might be nice though, without marking anything.

I see that you've got your mind in the right place Martijn, and you recognise my attempts to preserve this article. Regards. Lord Kenneð Alansson 02:11, 18 May 2004 (UTC)


 * My small contribution to the nonsense:

From growing up in Norway, having a fairly good understanding of various Norwegian dialects as well as having studied Old Norse, I would like to state the following: Helluland, or "Hell-land" is beyond doubt "(Flat) Stone Land). Hell, helle, heller, hellu have been used for flat stones for over 1000 years in Norway as well as in Sweden and Denmark. Markland means "Forestland". "Mark" can also mean meadow, but in Norway it means Forest. "Mark", or "Mork" is still being used in dialects. Now, for "Vinland", it has little to do with grapes. "Vinr" is Old Norse for grass (hay). It is still being used in dialects in Oesterdal in Norway. "Vinna" there means "haying season". Grassland would have been "Vinrland" (Vinland). --Lars in Wisconsin.


 * Lars! Thank you very much for your contribution to the topic!  Just to point out again...Flat stone areas can be considered hulls when at the shoreline.  How is transcendant insight so hard to understand?  Lord Kenneð Alansson 19:45, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Lars, et all, I'm sorry, I thought it was generally accepted that "Vinr" in Old Norse was "Friend", the basis for the name "Vanir" - a group of wild nature and fertility gods and goddesses, the sworn enemies of the warrior gods of the Aesir. I've never seen an alternate spelling of Vinland spelled "Vinrland", only "Viinland". According to http://www.historicaldocuments.com/VoyagestoVinland.htm "This hypothesis rests on the fact that the word 'vin' has two possible meanings. Vin (long I) means grapes or wine in Old Norse, whereas 'vin' (short i) means grass or pasture lands in Old German, the European language most closely associated with the Vikings' Old Norse language. The theory that Vinland meant grassy fields found support when L'Anse aux Meadows was discovered in a grassy location far north of lands where grapes could grow. Modern scholars are included to read 'Vinland' as grape land not only because grapes are found in southern portions of this regions but because some saga reference, like Flateyarbk, spell Vinland with a double i (Viinland), whereas pasture land in the Greenlanders' Old Norse would have been vinjaland or vinjarland. In fact, either 'wine land or pasture land' would have conveyed Vinland's bounty. Just as Erik the Red was able to recruit Icelanders to follow him to the 'green' land, Leif's naming of Markland and Vinland "for what they had to offer" would have encouraged others to explore and settle these new lands."

Norse naming conventions
What are the norse naming conventions in Wikipedia; anybody know? The most recent edit to the article edited away what are presumably the English spellings of various names, replacing them with the norse spelling. Leif for instance becomes Leifur, though Leif is definitely the name commonly used in English. Comments? Martijn Faassen 02:30, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Possibility of grapes
A recent edit changed text into the following:

'''Finally it has been speculated that grapes did in fact grow in the area in the past, but not anymore due to climatic changes. The posibility that grapes once grew in Newfoundland is high. In the present day, grapes grow in many areas of Europe, mainly France and northern Italy, that are at the same latitude as Newfoundland.'''

While it's true that in Europe grapes can at least be cultivated at high latitudes, that doesn't mean the climate is the same. Europe is influenced by the gulf stream, north america (at that latitude) is not. Wild grapes growing in the area of L'Anse aux Meadows generally seems to be considered unlikely as far as I'm aware. I've changed the article back, adding a note about latitudes. If the original editor has some evidence that the possibility is indeed high, please let's first discuss this on the talk page. Martijn Faassen 20:44, 9 May 2005 (UTC)


 * A correction to the above statement, Newfoundland is influenced (albeit to a minor degree) by the Gulf Stream. The entire south coast of the island has water temperatures that are higher than the water temperature on the north coast because of the Gulf Stream. Also Newfoundland and comparable lattitudes of Europe (e.g. France, Northern Italy) are not "high lattitude", they are intermediate lattitudes of ca. 47-49 degrees.


 * The essence of the statement of climate change seems to have been missed. The time period of the Viking settlement of Vinland corresponds to the Medieval Warm Period which influenced most of the northern hemisphere. The Medieval Warm Period resulted in changes in the strength of North Atlantic thermohaline circulation which more than likely affected other ocean currents including the Gulf Stream, resulting in slightly warmer temperatures in the North Atlantic region. Jcmurphy 19:43, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Also, Newfoundland's climate isn't as frigid as a lot of people think. According to Environment Canada, St. John's has the third mildest winter in Canada, after Vancouver and Victoria. On parts of the south coast, the average January temperature is 0 celcius. Granted, Lanse aux Meadows is on the northern tip of the island, and so cooler, but the Dark Cove vineyard, on the north coast (Bonavista Bay), is in its fifth year of successful vinticulture in Newfoundland. So it's not quite true that grapes can't grow here. It's probable that if they're growing in Bonavista Bay, they'd also grow in St. George's Bay and the Humber Valley --- and certainly in the Corderoy Valley. Trollcollins 12:34, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I have added information and an external link to the article page about vineyards and wine production at 54°N in northern England. 1 April 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.94.210 (talk) 08:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Possibility of fraud
I accept the NF site is gennie, but I've seen it raised the Maine penny is evidence of fraud, & maybe NF is a fake. Is it well established as gennie? Trekphiler 18:24, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

L'Anse aux Meadows is definitely NOT a fake. It's highly dubious that it was either Eriksson's Vinland or Karlsefni's, also (see Farley Mowat, West-Viking).Skookum1 20:20, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Removing 'vikings got here first'
I am removing the sentence "There is a general consensus of scholarly opinion that the Vikings got to North America first." This really has little to do with the article and obviously overlooks the fact that the north american continent had been inhabited for 25+ thousand years by that time.


 * it is more contructuve to clarify this than to remove information. --KimvdLinde 20:44, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * It is indeed. We should just inform the reader who discovered what when, and in which order these movements of people took place. Fairly simple, eh ? =J //Big Adamsky 20:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Inaccurate assessment
"There have been several instances where evidence of pre-Columbian presence of Norse explorers in the United States has been considered to be fake by most researchers, such as for example the Kensington Runestone."

The Kensington Runestone is up for grabs at this point in time. It's not considered fake by most researchers, it's considered fake by some researchers, genuine by some other researchers, and in a very unknown state by most researchers.


 * yeah, someone was obviously going overboard on the pov there. In any case, its fixed.

The runic alphabet
It is scientifically and historically proved that the Etruscan alphabet gave origin to the viking alphabet. But the Etruscan alphabet didn't develop from the Phoenician language or from the alphabet of Magna Graecia (Southern Italy), as many authors mistakenly write. It had origin from the Sardinian alphabet, an ancient language spoken in the Mediterranean area around the 2nd millennium BCE. It is commonly thought that the islanders of Sardinia (Italy), who worked as sailors, warriors, traders etc. are the "vikings" of the Mediterranean Sea. These warriors, who built over 20,000 stone castles best known as "nuraghe" and even worked for the Egyptian pharaoh Ramseth IInd, wore horned helmets and fur coats. They had spears, swords and axes. In reality many German playwrights and novelists of the past, when wrote about the vikings of Scandinavia, about their clothes and traditions, described the same Sardinians. (i.e. Wagner)In addition, there is hard evidence of this ancient civilization making their mark in places where, according to traditionally accepted history, they just shouldn't be. Interesting, some scholars think and support the theory that the Sardinian-Phoenician sailors went to the USA over 3,000 years ago. The Sardinian influence can be still found among the Aztecs (i.e. buildings) and other local cultures. There are tons of pics and news about this ancient folk on Google. Unfortunately, most of the pages are not written in english language and my altavista translator doesn't work well. -- Susy Hallen & Pet Stromberg 12:00, July 30 2006 (UTC) --

This text seems to be added to various talk pages on articles related in some way ro runes. Interesting, but as long as it remains on talk, harmless. Anyone knows what this is about? Martijn Faassen 21:42, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Well first of all there is no runic alphabet, the people in question wrote with their "fuþark" derived from the first letters in the system, just like alphabet is a reference to alpha(A), beta(B) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.90.14.61 (talk) 00:40, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Finland
Winland redirects to Vinland. I talked to a friend from Finland the other day, and Winland seems to be an area there, so perhaps this should be added somehow. --83.89.124.37 21:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I am from Finland, and would think that perhaps "Vinland" refers to Finland: there is no "F" in old Finnish language - "F" is usually changed to "V". Or, could also be "fin land", which means "good land", "fine land".

Germanic Paganism
Is there any particular reason this article is listed in the "Germanic Paganism" category? Not only does their seem very to be very little connection (Is Christopher Columbus's voyage listed under "Christianity"?) but from what I've read, Leif Erikson wasn't even a pagan. I agree with you Vinland is Finland V sound in Norse is a F sound as in Finland Arysvargas 68.187.225.59 04:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Nationality of Leifr Eiríksson
There are some things to consider here. Leifr Eiríksson had a father from Norway (Eiríkr rauði) and an mother from Iceland. He was probably born in Iceland, but grew up in Greenland and served the king in Norway. Add to this that the idea of nationality in the West Norse Sprachraum a millennium ago can not be compared to how we understand it today. With this in mind the most representative description would be Norwegian/Icelandic, as has been used in this article. I suppose you could add Greenlandic, but I think that would clutter up the sentence. (Nidator 14:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC))

He was not Norwegian but Icelandic, and why do you think he served a king of Norway. It seems like you have your own POV here. --Arigato1 16:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Let's just call him Greenlandic as he lived most of his adult life there. Fornadan (t) 16:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have my "own POV"?! That is a bit rich coming from you. If you had actually read the relevant sagas you would have known that Leifr stayed in Norway and served in the hird of Óláfr Tryggvason. You are also making the common mistake of applying modern standards to a past period. (Nidator 17:31, 20 February 2007 (UTC))


 * He was Icelandic. I am tired of yours POV pushing here --Arigato1 18:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * It wasn't me who made the text you edited in the first place. I just reverted to it and tried to give you some reasoning behind it. You seem to have some issue with Norway though. (Nidator 18:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC))


 * Yes but you failed to give me a reason, next time try find sources before editing. No i like Norway it's where my grandfather is from. --Arigato1 18:22, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * My goodness! The Icelandic/Norwegian infighting over Mr.Eriksson's nationality is beyond ridiculous! Take into consideration that a thousand years ago there WAS NO ICELAND and NO NORWAY as we know it today. Whether he was from here or there doesn't really matter, since people in BOTH PLACES spoke the same language (Norse), shared the same cultural heritage (Western Scandinavian), the same religion (pagan with Christian overtones), and themselves COULD NOT CARE LESS if they carried a Norwegian or an Icelandic "passport". Iceland was primarily colonized from Western Norway, but the debate on whether he was Norwegian or Icelandic reminds me of the ancient debate of what was the language of Eden. Why not conclude that 100,000 years ago (or thereabout) his ancestors migrated out of Africa!!!! --141.149.57.224 04:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)Sparviere


 * What you mention is pretty much why I thought that the article should continue to use Norwegian/Icelandic, but since it seems to have settled with using neither I see no reason to restart the argument. -- Nidator 13:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I have edited it to Icelandic/Greenlandic. Since he grow up in Iceland. --Arigato1 16:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * So, what everyone appears to be saying is that those Native Americans growing up and living along the Willamette River 10,000 years ago should be called Oregonians? Svyatoslav 23:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * However, speaking about nationality at all when the subject of debate lived around the year 1000, is not right. Nation/nationality is as you all probarbly know modern terms, and of no consequence for these events.  Eiriksons' family and background was probarbly just as important for him in defining himself as was were he was from, lived or had served.  It just depends on the situation one is asked: "Who are you?".  Leif Eirikson would not have answered "I am Norwegian/Icelandic/Greenlandic" anyway. Rather: "I am Leif, son of Eirik son of..., I was born on..., and voyaged to..., my profession is..., and I am a christian.St12357 (talk) 03:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Natives and hostilities
I highly doubt any major raids deep into the continent would have occured. With the 1st skirmish ending in the death of the Vikings' leader, I would think that the natives could hold their own in a mongol-type stratagem consisting of an unlimited source of feints and ambushes. The terrain could be used without question among the fact the the only armor the vikings used were chain mail, a shield, and a helmet.

Apart from arrows, the natives had very dense warclub and even the Zacateco had arrows which could penetrate the spanish soldiers' armor - though I highly doubt the natives in question had the same weapon.

My point is, only after the vikings were considered a major threat did the natives in the area see fit to dislocate them. The vikings were seriously outnumbered. Chichimeca War - InternetHero 17:33, 16 April, 2007 (UTC)

Confusing first paragraph
"Vinland (Icelandic: Wine land ) was the name given to a part of North America by the norseman Leif Eiríksson, about the year (AD) 1000. At that time, the word "vin" didn't mean wine, but plain. These synonyms are often mixed up."

1. According to standard practice, "Icelandic: Wine land" indicates that "Wine land" is a translation into Icelandic, but I'm guessing it's supposed to be a translation into English from Icelandic?

2. Translating it as "Wine Land" and then saying that "vin" didn't actually mean wine is kind of offputting. I think it would be better to combine the two and say something like "the modern translation from the Icelandic is Wine Land, but at the time,... etc."

3. Presumably "plain" means the geographical feature? It would be good to make that clear since "plain" has other meanings.

4. I don't know what value the sentence "These synonyms are often mixed up" adds. What synonyms? Mixed up by whom, and with what relevance to the topic? (Does it mean "homonyms" rather than "synonyms" maybe?) Suggest simply removing it unless someone knows what point is being made.

Matt 19:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC).

Skalholt map
The "Skalholt" map shows what can only be a depiction of northern Newfoundland and calls it "Promontorium Winlandia", the exact position of the L'Anse aux Meadows Norse site and parallel with England! 29 July 2007. Note how the "finger" of Newfoundland (on a modern map) is shown "pointing" in the direction of southern Greenland and is so depicted on the Skalholt map. 3 August 2007. See the notes on grid references, next to the Skalholt map link on the Vinland page. 24 Jan 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.86.225 (talk) 14:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC) The Skalholt map shows the north tip of "Vinland", the southern tip of Ireland and Bristol, England on the same latitude (due to the latitude grid numbering error on both sides of the map it has them all at 56°N instead of the actual 51°N). 24 January 2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.14.69.45 (talk) 13:59, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Localization debate
Re .... "However, grapes do not grow in the sites commonly seen as possible locations of Vinland". A list of these "possible locations" is then given which includes Newfoundland. But Adam of Bremen says that Vinland/Winland is the name of a whole island (insulam) & we know grapes (and blueberries) can and do grow on the island of Newfoundland. It has one Viking site and there may be others, so Newfoundland could be the island he mentions. 12 August 2007

Suggestion for locating sites in Vinland in known coastal geography
I think that the legend of Vinland is neat as it is also closely based on facts. It is remarkable that it describes there being no snow in the Land of Hop when the Vikings stayed there one winter, as the farhtest north where this currently applies on the US Coast is in the Carolinas. It would be especially helpful if scholars who studied Vinland listed the directions for sites that the Sagas describe and then drew a map for the geography of the region as the Sagas depict. I tried doing this for Eric the Red's Saga here: https://historum.com/t/where-do-the-viking-sagas-point-to-the-vikings-visiting-in-the-us-or-southeast-canada.196378/ Below is my own hand-drawn map: Rakovsky (talk) 00:55, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Plain vs. Wine
I personally don't think the "pastureland/plainland" idea doesn't hold water, for a number of reasons. First off, the first mention of Vinland ever comes from Adam of Bremen, and as it says in the article, not only mentions the name Vinland, but the fact that wwine grapes grow there, and that is why it is named for it "Moreover, he has also reported one island discovered by many in that ocean, which is called Winland, for the reason that grapevines grow there by themselves, producing the best wine."

Second, we have no scholarly sources cited that support this "pastureland" claim. And the sagas clearly says the land was heavily wooded, pastures by definition being open land, not forested as the land is in the sagas

--Jadger (talk) 08:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Not sure that's right. Isn't it called Vinland in the Greenlander's Sage?  I think Adam of Bremen is the first reference that explains (possibly incorrectly) the origin of the name, not at all the first mention of the word Vinland.  Alexwoods (talk) 15:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Challenging the purpose of the flag
I want to challenge the flag that is being used as the 'unofficial flag of vinland.' It hardly seems encyclopedic for this entire article to be full of hotly debated scholar material, only to have a second class bands, no offense, interpretation of what it could be. Is their even any evidence that they used actual historical documents or did they just sit down one day and pound it out? I'm not going to take it down until at least a few people can discuss it, so... Asatruar (talk) 05:15, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You're more patient than I am. I'm taking a Wikibreak soon and may not be around for much discussion. We've got no reason at all to think there was such a flag, it doesn't belong in the article, and it isn't in the article any more. Doug Weller (talk) 06:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that the flag Type O Negative used was just a recoloring of the Finland flag using the Type O colors. It would be worth a mention in a new section like "Legacy" or "Influence" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.125.242.236 (talk) 16:04, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Promontorium
Chambers dictionary: says it is Low or Late Latin and translations include promontory, headland, high cape and projection. Oxford dictionary: says it is Medieval Latin and translations include promontory, a point of high land jutting out into the sea and headland. 12 August 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.89.239 (talk) 22:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * This dictionary offers two meanings of the English word "Foreland", which both may been translated into "pro + montorium" in Latin. An example of foreland as one land (red) before a greater land (green) is here:.
 * It is common to assume that those who wrote the text on the map had the Norse language as working language, since the map originates from Iceland. Then "foreland" would mean a small land, in front of a larger land. Just like, if they had English as working language, then what they did translate from, when the wrote promontorium in Latin could have been "Cape of Vinland". St.Trond (talk) 13:31, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Bishopric of Vinland
In a few things I've read, including discussions about Prince Henry Sinclair and in O.G. Landsverk's Runic Records of the Norsemen in North America, as well as in Farley Mowat, that there was a Bishop of Vinland at the Vatican in the 13th Century or thereabouts; like the Bishopric of Greenland the office continued long after any population did. Landsverk's theories about the encryptions he reads into North American runestones (his work is now discredited) says they document the affairs of the Bishopric of Vinland in some way; irrespective of the validity of his theory is that he - and the others mentioned - cite Vatican records on teh matter. This was most likely an honorific office, perhaps given to a Norse priest who maybe set out en route but never got there, or just a sinecure within the Vatican, an honorific office. Cites for it are out there somewhere; it seems most likely to have been a paper office only, but definitely aprt of the paper trail about Vinland; probably fit for the "Other" section at least....btw looking for Landsverk's book online (JSTOR has it) I found this, which some of you will find provocative.Skookum1 (talk) 03:43, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Name of first settlement?
The article lists the first settlement as being named Straumfjöður, when in a book I'm reading it's called Leifsbúðir. So what is the actual name of the first settlement? --134.117.200.36 (talk) 20:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Comment on the location of Vinland
There are many conflicts concerning the locations visited by Scandinavians in North America. Even the name "Vinland" itself is debatable, as some literary evidence suggests that "Vinland" was named for the large number of grapes found in the area. However, if the site of L'Anse aux Meadows is actually Vinland, it should be noted that grapes were NOT growing in that area. They were distributed farther to the south.Also, a walnut known as the "butternut" was found at the site - a walnut which is known only to exist some 500 miles to the south, to the south of the the St. Lawrence river. It should be noted that the southernmost, eastern waterway associated with Vinland on the the Vinland Map bears a remarkable resemblance to the St. Lawrence River. But if that's the case, where is Newfoundland and L'Ans aux Meadows? Other sources support evidence that the term "Vinland" just means "pasture land" and "vin" is a Norse term for pasture. With that said, "L'Ans sux MEADOWS" sounds like the correct place to look. It can als o be suggested that the Leifbudir mentioned in the Sagas is itself L'Ans aux Meadows. This is most likely the case. Furthermore, this site is mentioned as merely a base camp of sorts, serving to support expeditions further south and west.

The above was added to the article by Smartsmokey, and moved here by me. Regards, ClovisPt (talk) 23:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The section badly needs clearing up, too much OR/unreferenced stuff. Doug Weller (talk) 06:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a good article. The archaeologists who discovered L'Anse aux Meadows' Viking site considered that Vinland actually is named after pasteurs. But nonetheless the Saga of Eric the Red claims that Vinland was named after the discovery of wild "grapes" there, and recounts a story of a German named Tyrker who was with the Vikings getting drunk off of the fruit that he found in Vinland. The Saga of Eric the Red can be read here:
 * https://sagadb.org/eiriks_saga_rauda.en Rakovsky (talk) 00:46, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Confusion on Wikipedia re date of Vinland settlement
The date given on wiki pages is: Vinland 1001, L'Anse Aux Meadows 1003, Leif Ericson 1001-1002, Newfoundland 1006 and 999-1001. 29 June 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.28.203.31 (talk) 11:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Pack ice in Northern areas
This post occurs as a result of a war between myself and "XX" who deletes my reference to "History of Norway" from 12th century as a description related to Vinland. From the picture you will find, that except from Spitzbergen, which was uninhabited, the only land separated from Greenland by ice, and especially pack ice is Canada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by St.Trond (talk • contribs) 21:02, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * In my last revert of the article, done in a great hurry, I wrote, rather rudely, "do some proper research". By "proper research" I did not mean looking at a modern, climate-change influenced image of the Arctic in autumn; I meant research into medieval Norse perceptions of the Arctic. What they describe (as is clearly shown on map interpretations of medieval material, such as Bishop Resen's and Thorlaksson's) is Greenland as the end of a vast peninsula stretching over the Pole from northern Russia east of the White Sea (which they called Biarmeland, specifically mentioned in the source text for this mistaken reference). David Trochos (talk) 06:46, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * On page 78 in the same text we find that: "From Bjarmaland uninhabited land continues through the north until it joins Greenland" (Icelandic text from 1387). I hope this can help us make a better article. St.Trond (talk) 13:37, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * OK. As it happens, there are medieval sources which do more accurately express the concept of Vinland's proximity to Africa, but a more detailed explanation of the medieval world concept will be required. I'll try to pick the most reliable of those sources and rewrite the section. David Trochos (talk) 06:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Then someone should look into whether "Africa" meant the same among the Vikings as it does today as well. The Vikings also had Serkland and Blåland as names of parts of Africa. If "Africa" means only "the area with very hot climate", then the quoted sentence does not implicate a proximity (IMHO). St.Trond (talk) 08:26, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * In Norse learned literature from the high middle ages (12th-14th centuries), the world was considered to consist of three parts: Asia, Africa and Europe. The bit south of the Mediterranean was referred to as Africa.--Barend (talk) 18:28, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Barend's comment, and p.3 of ""History of Norway" makes Helluland, Markland and Vinland parts of Europe. Vinland is the bordering part. The map showing the Medieval Icelandic geographical concepts should be corrected to reflect the extension of Europe. St.Trond (talk) 20:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Very fair point. With luck I've still got the original graphics file at home, so I should be able to amend it later today. David Trochos (talk) 05:29, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Then "History of Norway" is used as source for the "Medieval Icelandic geographical concepts". Changing the caption to "Norse geographical concepts" should be considered.St.Trond (talk) 14:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Both changes now attempted. David Trochos (talk) 20:07, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Stand by for some brutality
This article has become very bloated, particularly the section about the location of Vinland. On the other hand its treatment of the sagas, the key source material, is quite perfunctory. I therefore intend to make some quite brutal revisions over the next week or two, which I suspect will offend many contributors- but will, I hope, be worthwhile. David Trochos (talk) 21:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The map is more informative than the text was. I would expect that the deleted quote: "where the water of the oceans flow in" or something like that, rather referred to the Gulf Current passing northwardly on both sides of Iceland, than to the tide as the article now says. Please clearify. The gap in south is missing (if the quoted text is representative). St.Trond (talk) 09:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I've restored the deleted quote to help clarify the concepts, and modified the tides reference (though Norse sailors would have been aware of the tidal difference between the Atlantic and the Baltic, and the fierce tidal effects in the Skagerrak). David Trochos (talk) 08:22, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Dave. I hope you have kept the map files. Here are some more corrections. The map indicates an "Atlantic". The Norse name for this ocean is "Vesterhavet". It translates into Western Ocean. Similarly the Mediterranean is "Middelhavet" or Middle Ocean (Central Ocean). St.Trond (talk) 19:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Butternut distribution
Butternuts (Juglans cinerea) were found during the archaeological excavations at the L'Anse aux Meadows site. The USDA distribution map indicates that butternuts are "absent" from the province of Nova Scotia. The COSEWIC report confirms this as it states that butternut distribution in Canada is found in New Brunswick, southern Ontario and southern Quebec, without any reference to Nova Scotia (even though it's peninsula extends further south than New Brunswick). If this was the situation a 1000 years ago, it would imply that the butternuts found at the Norse site were collected from somewhere other than Novia Scotia. 15 November 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.242.215 (talk) 15:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, the article does not claim that butternuts were found in Nova Scotia (and I'll be clarifying the "Location" section in the next day or two). David Trochos (talk) 22:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Wine/Meadow
This used to be an external link:


 * "Was Vinland in Newfoundland?"- Paper by Einar Haugen, (1906-1994) Professor emeritus of Scandinavian Studies, Harvard University

It was removed in this edit in March 2009. Turns out that the final third of the paper is a good source for the claim that the "meadow" reading is unlikely on linguistic grounds. The paper is a bit old, though - 1977. I haven't read Gisli Sigurdsson, does he cover the same ground? If not, Haugen should be added back as a reference. Jon kare (talk) 10:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Sigurdsson only mentions the topic in passing, but Seaver (the other ref. for that paragraph) is more thorough. Possibly worth substituting Haugen for Sigurdsson? David Trochos (talk) 19:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Have done so. Seaver is a historian. Adding the linguist Haugen adds weight. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jon kare (talk • contribs) 21:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I wonder why it is not mentioned that 'vinbär' in scandinavian languages can refer to 'berries' such as redcurrant ....called 'röda vinbär'. Could it be that they meant some berries of that kind? ... Redcurrant wine is quite feasible ... actually can be bought in the appropriate shops. Clem 26 November 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.201.147.34 (talk) 21:50, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Earl Eric
A note in the Penguin edition of the Vinland Sagas explains that "Earl Eirik" is probably based on a mistranscription error meaning Eirik the Red instead. Earl Eirik ruled Norway from 1000-1012, so it's strange that Bjarni goes to see him in 985 or 986 just after it states that he stayed in Greenland all his life. I don't have a good source, so I won't change it myself. --136.152.148.247 (talk) 22:32, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * There's actually a larger paradox behind this- if Bjarni discovered Vinland around 985, why was there no further investigation until around 1000? Both the Vinland Sagas indicate that the main Vinland voyages occurred just after a meeting of the discoverer with his main overlord back in Scandinavia; and the "Greenlanders" version does make a delayed meeting by Bjarni plausible, because he only remains land-bound in Greenland during the lifetime of his father. David Trochos (talk) 06:02, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

AD v CE
The latest edit summary says, "RV, consensus is to use CE on WP." I don't see there's been a discussion of that on this page. Excerpts from the general guidelines say: "AD and BC are the traditional ways of referring to these eras. CE and BCE are becoming more common in academic and some religious writing. No preference is given to either style.  ...  Do not change from one style to another unless there is substantial reason for the change, and consensus for the change with other editors." Yopienso (talk) 03:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Order of sections
I'm going to re-revert the order of sections to bring the Sagas back to their old position above "Medieval Geographers", because, to my mind, the alternative order by Beyond My Ken does not, and effectively cannot, achieve what it purports to do: "present 'current' information then the background". In reality, BMK's order "buries" the current information in the middle of the article, sandwiched between "Later Norse Voyages" (which feels really out-of-place as we haven't been properly introduced to the first Norse voyages) and the Sagas. Putting the Sagas near the beginning clearly shows the historical process which got us where we are today. David Trochos (talk) 05:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Do whatever you want, you want to bury current, accurate information about Vinland under some turgid retellig of sagas, go ahead, it makes the article a piece of shit, and that's on your head. I leave it to you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:58, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I was mad at someone else and directed the anger at you, instead -- my apologies. Look, I think the way I had it was better, and if I was the King of Wikipedia that's the way it would be, but there's value in what you say too. I won't stick around to get in your way (my interest in the article was mostly about the layout & other visual aspects), but I'll leave with one suggestion, that if you leave the section order as it is, it might be a good idea to try to trim the saga sections down a bit, so that there's not so much material in the reader's path as they work their way down the article. Again, my apologies for shooting off my mouth like that, it was very bad behavior on my part. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries- I've attempted a compromise. David Trochos (talk) 19:45, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, an excellent idea. If you're good with that, it certainly works for me.  You've been very gracious, thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Wineland
I'm not sure Wineland should redirect here, I suggest is should be a dab. PatGallacher (talk) 11:14, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

The Kensington runestone and the Maine penny should be considered hoaxes.
This article states that: "Numerous artifacts attributable to the Norse Greenlanders have been found in Canada, particularly on Baffin Island and in northern Labrador. A late-11th century Norwegian penny, with a hole for stringing on a necklace, has also been found in Maine. Although there is no dispute about the authenticity of this small penny, its discovery by an amateur archaeologist in 1957 has become controversial; questions have been raised whether it was planted as a hoax.[18] Other possibly Norse artifacts in the area south of the St. Lawrence include a growing number of stones inscribed with runic letters, such as the Kensington Runestone. The age and origin of these stones is debated, and so far none has been firmly dated or associated with clear evidence of a medieval Norse presence.[19]"

However the wikipedia articles on the Maine penny and the Kensington runestones states that "The Norse coin from Maine should probably be considered a hoax" and "Almost all Runologists and experts in Scandinavian linguistics consider the runestone to be a hoax." And they refer to much better sources than the sources that claim that they are disputed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maine_penny http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kensington_Runestone

So the entire section of "Other Norse finds in America" should be removed or corrected. I am going to remove it because I don't have the linguistic ability to write articles in english. Someone else has to correct the text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stockholmsödermalm (talk • contribs) 15:31, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree - or that section at least needs to be reframed. It might be interesting to simply retitle it as "Probable Vinland Hoaxes." The content may not be credible, but it is related to Vinland at the modern cultural level, and is certainly notable.  de Bivort 21:09, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree it needs to be dealt with. I'm not a fan of including hoaxes, because that gives them credibility by default, but mentioning them is warranted. More than passing comment, a line or two, is undue, IMO.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  21:17, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I added the section User:Stockholmsödermalm took out, but I added more caveats to it. It's pretty short the way it is. --AW (talk) 14:19, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Skalholt map
The Skalholt map latitude grid has the northern tip of "Vinland" at just over 56°N. L'anse aux Meadows (Newfoundland), Mizen Head (Ireland) and Bristol (England) are just over 51°N. This shows that the Skalholt map scribe made an error of +5°N when numbering the grid sections on the left and right sides ( by putting 55 instead of 50, 60 instead of 55, etc). 30 March 2012. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.135.88 (talk) 22:08, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That seems very likely, but unless a Reliable Source has specifically commented on the error in connection with Vinland, it's not relevant here. David Trochos (talk) 05:31, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Henry Wheaton
Hello, I was wondering what everyone things about this section being removed. It's not obvious to me that this reference is trivial, and seems to set the historical context for how far back there was awareness of pre-colombian contact. In fact, maybe there should be a Progression of Evidence section or something like that. de Bivort 20:45, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It was the editor who added it who removed it, and I think that was right. It seems pretty trivial to me and does not show "awareness of pre-Columbian contact". By the way, the 'astronomy' is observing the position of the stars, which certainly did not need contact with Europeans. Dougweller (talk) 20:55, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Heh, thanks for explaining what astronomy comes from! But if we make a section on the evolution of the idea of pre-columbian contact, then this is probably worth putting in as it is from a prominent author, and as far as I can tell is a WP:RS. de Bivort 03:11, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * It is not RS, it is an opinion based on the assumption that two very loosely analogous facts are linked, with no substantial evidence to support it. Mediatech492 (talk) 03:56, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * How is it all of you have such strong, misguided opinions about this source? 1) It's not our job to evaluate the validity of the position (that would be WP:OR) - it is our job to evaluate whether the sources are reliable. 2) This is clearly reliable. Here's |secondary source (with 300 citations itself) that gives Wheaton's book considerable discussion, in a historical context. |Here's another source that establishes Wheaton as an authority. de Bivort 05:35, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Your assertion that we cannot assess validity is nonsense, it is precisely our role as wiki editors to assess for validity of both the position in question and the source from which it comes. Regardless of Wheaton's credentials, his reference to the Gaspe' tribe is only speculative and Wheaton does not assert it as fact but only mentions it as possibility. Speculation is not fact, and treating it as fact is WP:OR. Mediatech492 (talk) 07:00, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * You're right about WP:OR -- but I'm not trying to say that Henry Wheaton's argument was correct. When I googled for source on his contribution it became clear that he has made a notable contribution to the topic, cited many times and discussed as an important part of chronologies about the identity of Vinland, as determined by reliable secondary sources. Saying something like "among the first advocates for Vinland in North America was scandinavia scholar Henry Wheaton..." does not assert his beliefs as fact, and respects all the other secondary sources. de Bivort 15:07, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * That is called "Weasel Wording", please review WP:WEASEL, thank you. Mediatech492 (talk) 22:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Rubbish. The statement is precise, and supported by the references. Which part of that sentence implies something unsupported by the sources? Have you even looked at the sources I linked?  de Bivort 01:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC)


 * And I cannot see how we can discuss the evolution of the idea without sources discussing the evolution of the idea. Without those sources it would be original research. Dougweller (talk) 07:30, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The second source I provided does exactly that. de Bivort 15:07, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Modern map needed
A map showing modern geography would be helpful in illustrating the various hypotheses about historical events. -- Beland (talk) 18:32, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I submit that the article's title be changed to Vínland
Hello Cluebot & Philip Trueman, please consider and react to the issues I have raised. I can't be bothered to campaign upon every uninformed Wiki article, and since I have your attention, please help us all to have a worthwhile entry here. And I advise you to cease destroying my correct, sourced and scholarly additions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.180.5 (talk) 23:38, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Cluebot isn't a person, and all that you need to do to get agreement to the suggested name change is show that your version is the common name in reliable English-language sources. Read WP:COMMONNAME. Dougweller (talk) 14:11, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Waquoit Bay and Leifsbudir
Half of this stub is the unchallenged cliam by Tornöe that this is where Leifsbudir was, although that article doesn't even mention Tornöe. I can find no reliable sources discussing this claim. Doug Weller (talk) 12:06, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Vinland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070522105216/http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/nl/meadows/natcul/vinland_e.asp to http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/nl/meadows/natcul/vinland_e.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216063635/http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/nl/meadows/index_E.asp to http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/nl/meadows/index_e.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:30, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Vinland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303223625/http://www.kb.dk/permalink/2006/manus/678/eng to http://www.kb.dk/permalink/2006/manus/678/eng

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:27, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Needs to be pruned heavily
We don't know the extent of Vinland, but this article is only about what we know and the sagas say about it, not about anything later than the possible Norse presence. I'll trim it later. Doug Weller talk 08:32, 18 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Fixed by going back to version before User:WikAcct edited. There is no "history" of Vinland, no certain knowledge of what it meant and where it might have been, if it ever even was a clear geographial area. Stories of visits which might have been to North America aren't relevant without some clear connection to Vinland, either in the story or in modern academic texts. Doug Weller  talk 13:44, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

New source
Conquest of the North Atlantic 21 Jun 2007 by G. J. Marcus''. Doug Weller talk 13:51, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Finland redirect?
This feels unnecessary. I'm going to remove it since I believe it's just clutter. Colin dm (talk) 01:38, 13 November 2021 (UTC)