Saturday, July 23, 2016


AD 1346
The HISTORIAN tries to make ONE stanza for each year.
The story starts in 1346, 
which may be the year the first LENAPE arrived.]
(Most of these following Stanzas were deciphered by
Craig Judge, Kean University.}

Before; the LENAPE certainly came,
to look where there was an abundance of rivers.
What do the two heads “looking in” mean?
The LENAPE historian may have been trying to show tribes “looking back” toward their ancestors.
What does the triangle in the circle mean?
Perhaps the Historian was trying to show the origin of the tribes with the same language.  The tribes started in the same place [the point of the triangle] and spread out [the triangle sides].
Why did the historian repeat the “abundance of rivers” symbol?
Perhaps because at the time the Historian was trying to tell about, the origin of the ancestors, which he knew was traceable to James Bay.  The Historian appears to have been in South Dakota when he composed the beginning of his stanzas.  So remembering a migration from James Bay would have been "recent history."
 AD 1347

Geese return to the large fish near the shore to expand all the children.
Why does the bird look like a sea gull?
Probably because the historian was located in South Dakota where seagulls flock.  He may have only seen the geese fly overhead.  He definitely was saying, “goose,” which were flying overhead, “Ne wa, ne wa”
What does the line over the bird mean?
That may be the cue to use the “expanding” adjective.
Where is the “large fish near the shore”?
I think it is the little circle with the “poof” at top.

___________________By the way_____________
Remember the Lil Abner comic strip
 and the “Kikapooh joy juice”
Well, “Kikke” = “See.” "Pooh" = spout from a whale.

When the arrogant French discovered the Americans in Wisconsin, they thought that the people, who were half-dressed in hides, had never ventured far from their home on the shore,  The French bragged about crossing a big ocean, where they had seen whales spout in a large spray.  

The Wisconsin people tried to tell the French that they knew about the ocean.  They pointed at their chests and said,“We ‘kikke pooh.’ “ 

Which meant that they had seen the whales in the ocean too.
The French named the people the “KIKKE Pooh.”  They were recorded as a distinct tribe.  Centuries later the tribe was an element of ridicule in the comic strip.
“See the Pooh Joy Juice”—indeed!
“The arrogance of the Europeans should have been ridiculed instead.

See this from the (Kickapoo Tribe in Kansas)

The Kickapoo were one of many tribes of Catholics, who spoke Norse, in the Great Lakes areaa.  They occupied the western portion of the woodlands in southern Michigan near Lake Erie. However, European invasion changed the lives and cultures of these woodland Catholics, who spoke Norse, forever.

During the 1830s, the U.S. army drove the Kickapoo west of the Mississippi.  There are still three bands of Kickapoo in the United States and one in Mexico.

______Part B______

The fact that all three syllables refer to directions and two of them refer to the same direction implies a “more than coincidence” relation ship between FINNLAND and the LENAPE history.

What do you think that relationship might be?

In this case, the relationship might be that a symbol set, similar to the Egyptian Hieroglyphics, existed and was used by the better-educated class.  The symbols for directions may have been more repeated in common use and thus were better known.

When the people in Iceland divided to escape the Odin worshipers. Each group may have taken a copy of the original symbol set.  These symbols and its related direction may have been repeated through generations.

The LENAPE historian was composing in self-validated verse and drawing pictures to clue the future historians about the subjects.  The LENAPE historian chose symbols for three directions.  But on the east side of the Atlantic the meaning for one symbol had changed.


The sounds of the LENAPE stanza words are not the same as the sounds of the FINNISH letters.

Wemipayat gune'unga shinaking, Wunkenapi chanelendam payaking,  Allowelendam kowiyey tulpaking.

What do you think about this situation?

I think the LENAPE historian depended on the self-validation sounds to transmit information.  He was making pictures to support the story told by the sounds. 

The self-validated stanza was the important creation.  The picture was a help to the next historian, who would recite the LENAPE history.

I do NOT think he was using the symbols to write only the first letter of a word that had be guessed by future generations.

But, because this was the last stanza of his story, he may have chosen to use the symbols from the symbol set to draw the picture.  The “Abundance of Rivers” symbol would have been useful to show the many major rivers flowing into James Bay.

The LENAPE historians had consistently used the mounds to illustrate lands.

Perhaps he was thinking that “I have the symbol set from long ago, but I do not really know what sound each symbol means.  If I put many of the symbols into a picture, some future historians, somewhere, will recognize that I had the symbol set from long ago. “

The important information is carried in the self-validating sound set.
The symbol set from long ago was used to draw the pictographs and as a way to tell other historians that the LENAPE did have the symbol set.
Aidon Aakelas March 23, 2017 at 1:06 PM
Regarding the warm relations between the settlers of New Sweden on the Delaware, and the Lenape, it was the Finnish settlers, (whose ancestors had been living in the forests of Sweden for several generations following their traditional Finnish lifestyle) who were closest to the Lenape. 

Most of them understood the Lenape language and often lived in close proximity to the Lenape.

Perhaps this relationship between Finns and Lenape preceded post Colombian European settlement. 

Could the Finns have been traveling across the Arctic ice to America via Greenland for centuries?

Could European settlements have predated even the Viking settlements in Greenland? 

There are Spanish, Norse and English accounts of contact with the Irish speaking people of Great Hibernia, south of Chesapeake Bay down to Florida,

 Spanish, English and American accounts of a Welsh speaking tribe in America and 13th century accounts of the British colony of Albania in America , founded by King Arthur, (preceding the Elizabethan John Dee's claims)

 Even Columbus, in his journal, noted that Newfoundland was discovered by St. Brendan. (Because that is what his map stated). 

Knowledge of and trade with America had been taking place for thousands of years before Columbus discovered Cuba.

 The wrecks of three Roman galleys have been found in Rio de Janeiro harbour. Thus, it would not be much of a surprise to discover that the Finns, along with the Norse, Gottlander Swedish, Irish, Welsh and British settled in America before Columbus.

Aidon (and other viewers)
All you comments may be valid.  But if all of them did exist in history, then the Pristine Wilderness paradigm, which is the basis of American history, is not valid.

Try another paradigm:  The English won the firsrt world war.  (They called it the French and Indian War.)  The English knew the word "Indian" was used in place of "Catholics, who spoke Norse.  "Indian" suppressed both the "Catholic" and "Norse."  (Clever, Heh.)

But the English Agents were not done.  They scoured maps, books, tales, and artifacts so they could SUPPRESS them by omitting them from history.  They wanted to world to believe that America was truly a Primitive Wilderness with only a few pagan, savage people, who could never be converted to be Christians.

The English have nearly SUCCEEDED!  More that four thousand (4,000) times have I tried to have a discussion with an academic historian.  More than four thousand times I have been ignored.

(There are a FOUR academic historians following along this blog. But that is a 2017 development.)


We have seen that type of suppression in action in this LENAPE HISTORY.  For example, two of you challenged the Viking Sword without giving an adequate  explanation of how the French sword could have gotten eleven inches deep, below the usual plowing base.

I suggest you, too, had the false Primitive Wilderness paradigm in your head.  (A Viking sword could not be in Minnesota near a place called an Old Norse Church and in the midst of many stones with holes in them because, well, America was a Primitive Wilderness.  Only a sword made after Columbus found America could be the sword on display.

An archaeologist working in China wrote that the English "Profoundly Distorted" history.  Use those words to create a new paradigm in place of the Primitive Wilderness paradigm.

The English PROFOUNDLY DISTORTED history by suppression by omission.  Any thing in history books about events before the American Independence should be considered FALSE.
 ______PART C______
What does MUSKOGEE mean?
Look at:


All of these are place names.  One is a place in New England. 

What is that state? 


Also, I know there is a Muskogee stream running into the Nelson River near the Christian Sea (a.k.a. Hudson Bay).

So, "Muskogee" was in southern Georgia & Alabama, in New England, and in Western Canada. 

What does the word mean? 

A swampy place, or pond, or creek.  The Americans in Muskogee, OK call themselves the "Creeks."
Were people using the same language in all those places before the English invaded?

The Swampy Christians (a.k.a. Cree) in Canada were related by language to the Swampy Americans in Massachusetts, Georgia and Alabama.  Because the English. who invaded, drove the Creeks to Oklahoma, the Okies from Muskogee are still related to the Swampy Catholics, who spoke Norse in Canada.

The major elements required to make that situation happen are a boat (canoe) with oars (paddles) and time. 


1 comment:

  1. Myron, regarding the Ulen sword, it seems to me that as its authenticity is disputed, it gives your critics (of which there are many) too much ammunition to dispute your excellent research. The way people are trained in universities nowadays, is if they can find one tiny, supposedly weak element of an argument (such as the Ulen sword) then they discount the whole theory. The Ulen sword does not look to me like a medieval battle sword and it does not seem nearly corroded enough to have been buried in a wet climate for a thousand years, when compared to other Viking era swords, which are severely corroded.
    You, Myron, being an engineer, are trained to be a problem solver. You can project a hypothetical scenario, (which is apparently what engineers are trained to do) then find a way to construct a convincing narrative, with supporting evidence, to support this contention. (For instance: There are Algonquin legends that the Greenland Norse did not all starve to death, frozen in their ice bound homes
    -as Jared Diamond concluded-but walked across the ice to America. Being a trained engineer, as well as a brilliant historian and researcher, you have amassed a wealth of evidence supporting a convincing narrative that in my mind proves your case.) No one else could have done this.
    How many highly skilled engineers are also historians?
    You are so far ahead of everyone else and you have a unique set of skills. Most people are are spoon fed their information by the media,
    and need convincing, hard evidence. They are not trained to join the dots from all the tantalising evidence which is available. Why give them ammunition (such as the disputed Ulen sword) to discount your work?
    As for having the dominant paradigm in my head, I was outraged that your brilliant research was summarily discounted on the strength of that darned Ulen sword. I have read on many occasions that even in the 19th century, there were many more inscribed stones in America, which were destroyed by, at first religious fundamentalists, then trophy hunters. I have also read accounts of early settlers that these stones "were everywhere." (Apparently "stonekillers" were also very common in England in the 18th and 19th cenruries and nearly all the stones in North Africa and Arabia -one was described in 19th century accounts as being larger than Stonehenge- were similarly destroyed).
    Just because an artifact is found near buried stones does not mean it is related to them. I have been working in what I thought was wild Eucalyptus bushland in Australia, digging deep holes in order to plant rainforest trees and have dug up deeply buried Coca-Cola cans!
    So why Myron, when you have amassed a wealth of meticulously detailed evidence do you give armchair critics a free shot, over that darned sword, named as the Ulen sword by a bunch of honest, hardworking, well meaning Scandinavian immigrants?