Easily enough for you to type "Norse history in Greenland" and you will see all kin's of articles for your leasurely waving away all you wish my friend.
My apologies, I thought you were talking about Canada not Greenland from what Trix was saying about Newfoundland - L'Anse aux Meadows. I know Greenland is considered part of the north american continent but is in the European political system and thus not considered by most as part of north America proper. Yes they were in Greenland for a long time, I knew that, guess I should have highlighted the part he quoted that came up black in the quote. I thought you were saying that they were in north america (Canada) for 500 yrs. My fault for not reading the rest of your posts about the "Indian warriors", sorry about that. Edit, you should really re read some of the other nonsense that you posted though, it makes it hard to read your stuff, and then your backtracking, dang.
its all good soj, not many people know about alot of what happened (the truth) to native american's and the recent history of only a couple hundred years =)
What you posted was about Greenland, there are not any recognized Native Americans in Greenland. If you are referring back to you Native Americans beat the vikings, well sure if you want to hype up some old unknown history of Native Americans (numbers unknown) beating a couple of viking families in new territory in what is now Canada, sure whatever, and the stuff about Vikings kicking the Romans rears, nah they didn't, the vikings made quick raids against Roman areas and retreated, as was the viking style, but never took the Romans on organized battle. Going off of memory.
You specifically mentioned counting coup as part of your warrior heritage being referenced. That's a tradition 2700 miles (the earth is only 7.9k all the way around!) from ever hearing a rumor about Greenland and Vikings, and the whole discussion is still neither here nor there. That "warrior" is the translation of something totally different in a culture that EQ isn't built on is basically a funny coincidence.
Coincidentally scholars have placed Native American population prior to Columbus .. at anywhere from 50-100 million strong in north america. That would be why .. 2700 miles away would be nothing for a civilization, that is that populated. Also .. might wanna use the same metric, when you dicuss circumfrence of the earth .. I am not that smart, so I dunno how to convert =P
LOL you just pulled stats from Wikipedia and that was for both north and south america, and that page has questionable sources.
Incorrect my friend. I found them here .. http://beforeitsnews.com/alternativ...pulation-of-the-americas-in-1492-2476844.html
lmfao ! Dude you literally only have to google to find the good sites with the pertinent information.
Let's go ahead and grant your 100mil total. Whatever. That's a total across how many disconnected nations? With wildly varying religious, economic, social, and military traditions? "Non Feudal-European" isn't some grand monolith of culture for you to claim heritage on, and even if it were is still irrelevant since the specific tradition you referenced happens not to be the specific tradition EQ was built on. That the "warrior" of your questionably historical reference shares a word with the "warrior" of EQ remains mere coincidence.
So we turned this from a potential nice thread about changes, and how we feel about the class, to a irrelevant conversation that no longer has anything to do with fantasy pixels.... I don't care either way what peoples opinion of real world or their applications to the warrior type people of earth. This is Norrath, not earth. If the devs had wanted they could have called warriors such and made them wear pink spanx that say "juicy". Afterall we get out milk from little beareded women! I forgot though, this is a post on the internet, so in the end everything has to be derailed. There is no saving this thread on which the topic had originated. This might as well be in the offtopic discussion now
Lol that's funny considering how I have a degree in History. I have books and books stacked in my room about this stuff. But go ahead, you can google it and I'm sure you'd learn more than what I know Oh and for the record, I concentrated on Native American and Asian history (My advisor was the head of the Native American studies). But yes, I definitely should just use the internet more! And rereading what you say, how are you considering Greenland the Americas? /boggle. Your historiography is very...flawed. Besides, it is unknown why the Norse left Greenland. There are varying theories and the most commonly accepted is harsh weather and their own stubborness caused them to move on. If you want to give credit to Native Americans for bringing bad weather, sure, then you're right! However, I'd be one to say that the Inuits were just opportunistic. They weren't necessary the cause. They were more of an effect. Edit: Your own argument goes against your theory-- "In the end, the answer to the Greenlander question may be a lot less dramatic than the theories that have surrounded it in mystery. Thomas McGovern of New York's Hunter College, who has participated in excavations in Greenland, has proposed that the Norsemen lost the ability to adapt to changing conditions. He sees them as the victims of hidebound thinking and of a hierarchical society dominated by the Church and the biggest land owners. In their reluctance to see themselves as anything but Europeans, the Greenlanders failed to adopt the kind of apparel that the Inuit employed as protection against the cold and damp or to borrow any of the Eskimo hunting gear. They ignored the toggle harpoon, which would have allowed them to catch seals through holes in the ice in winter when food was scarce, and they seem not even to have bothered with fishhooks, which they could have fashioned easily from bone, as did the Inuit. Instead, the Norsemen remained wedded to their farms and to the raising of sheep, goats, and cattle in the face of ever worsening conditions that must have made maintaining their herds next to impossible." All possible credit just thrown out the window right here.
Considering most of a viking raiding party consisted of men who were not professionals, and armor was very hard to come by due to cost constraints. You'll find the majority of a raiding party was not that well equipped past axes and wooden shields. The professionals or the well seasoned sure they probably had some armor. But realistically. In an actual battle, the worst equipped is at a disadvantage. That disadvantage can be overcome sure (especially in a fantasy world). Now its all well and good to rely on ferocity alone, its often not the most intelligent course of action to recklessly fight without taking proper precautions to protect oneself. Also thats not at all how Warriors in fantasy games are conceptualized...
And did you seriously even read the articles you posted? All 3 actually weakened your argument rather than strengthened it. They stated reasons much different than your stance of Native American/Inuit raids as causing the Norse to leave Greenland. It was a combination of environmental, economical, and geographical reasons. Your "proof" managed to show your naivety on the subject and lack of in depth reading. I only had to scan these articles to know they didn't reinforce your claims of Native American superiority.
While there is some speculation that natives did drive out the Vikings. The entire point seems irrelevant. A couple hundred vs untold thousands isn't some big bad accomplishment.
