History Channel - Oak Island mini series January 5, 2014

[burlbark]

As far as being planted they really were digging around in the muck. If you've ever metal detected before you know you're as likely or even more so to find something in the plug/removed dirt than at the bottom of the hole. I'm not saying this is proof that it wasn't staged, but just because it was found towards the surface is NOT proof it was planted.

What?

Do you really believe a nearly 500 year old coin in a bog alongside a coastline with vibrations from the ocean and heavy storms vibrating the ground and causing the heavies to settle to the bottom was found at the surface?

You can see the hole he proclaimed to have dug it out of, it wasnt dug from the bottom 4-8 feet down

You are trying to say coin hunting in soil is the same thing as opposed to a high viscosity fluid environment?

This area was also pumped dry and that causes the silt to compact under its own weight. I dredged irrigation ponds for a summer with my commercial dredge in the Napa Valley vineyards. I have had allot of experience with mud and metal objects.

That coin would be sitting on the rock layer or hardpan under all the mud, not in the top 10 inches. There is no way that coin was not planted.

The guy doing the detecting was clamoring all over and was completely inexperienced, how many times did they find big gold treasure signals? He said silver and gold are on the same side of the ctx 3030. He was a hired hand that did exactly what he was supposed to.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[Sinbadthesailor]

Shucks, I forgot about the force field. Perhaps it's the wrong Oak Island and this is just a decoy.

 

[FinderKeeper]

It could, but again, that would depend on context. If at some point it's proven that those stones were placed there by men, it doesn't prove that the same men dropped that coin. Likewise, if they find a modern coin (and I'd be surprised if they don't, or haven't already), it doesn't mean that someone put those stones there in the 20th century. But it may be another piece of evidence, depending on what else is found.

I would think if there was a pile of stones out in the deepest part of the swamp and a coin was found with the pile , the odds are both where put there by man at the same time. If Marty would check out the stones he got to see if they had charco or burn marks on them , that would tell me its a camp site. I don't think there is any charco to be found at this site now but if they can locate other stone piles in the swamp then they could do a better job to look for charco to carbon date.

 

[HenryWaltonJonesJr]

Heya BurlBark,
It's interesting how two people can see the same thing and have completely different takes! The way I saw it they were digging up muck with their hands and it was spreading all over the place. The guy that found it seemed to be getting the hit right by the plywood and that was an area that the muck was strewn about in. I remember thinking to myself when they were digging with their hands, "put it all in a pile and md it, you're contaminating the whole site!"

 

[Sinbadthesailor]

Hutchinson Translation - William Canyng(e) builder of St Myn and Lorraine connection

WILLIAM CANYNGE CANYNGES (c. 1399-1474) , English merchant, was born at Bristol in 1399 or 1400, a member of a wealthy family of merchants and cloth-manufacturers in that city . He entered, and in due course greatly extended, the family business, becoming one of the richest Englishmen of his day . Canynges was five times mayor of, and twice member of parliament for, Bristol . He owned a fleet of ten ships, the largest hitherto known in England, and employed, it is said, 800 seamen . By special license from the king of Denmark he enjoyed for some time a monopoly of the fish trade between Iceland, Finland and England, and he also competed successfully with the Flemish merchants in the Baltic, obtaining a large share of their business . In 1456 he entertained Margaret of Anjou at Bristol, and in 1461 Edward IV . Canynges undertook at his own expense the great work of rebuilding the famous Bristol church of St Mary, Redcliffe, and for a long time had a hundred workmen in his regular service for this purpose . In 1467 he himself took holy orders, and in 1469 was made dean of Westbury . He died in 1474 . The statesman George Canning and the first viscount Stratford de Redcliffe were descendants of his family . See Pryce, Memorials of the Canynges Family and their Times (Bristol, 1854)

WILLIAM CANYNGE CANYNG... - Online Information article about WILLIAM CANYNGE CANYNG...

Getting somewhere " he entertained Margaret of Anjou (Henry VI wife) - the Lorraine link

"Margaret of Anjou (French: Marguerite d'Anjou) (23 March 1430 – 25 August 1482) was the wife of King Henry VI of England. As such, she was Queen consort of England from 1445 to 1461 and again from 1470 to 1471. She also claimed to be Queen consort of France from 1445 to 1453. Born in the Duchy of Lorraine, into the House of Valois-Anjou, Margaret was the second eldest daughter of René I of Naples and Isabella, Duchess of Lorraine."

 

[Sinbadthesailor]

More on Sir William Canynge and the Cabot's

Sebastian Cabot was born in Bristol 1474 the year Canynge died there. His Father and navigator John Cabot was 24 a Venetian. There is no doubt that Cabot was aware of Canynge's fleet and stories of new lands. They "officially" discovered New Found Land and Nova Scotia in 1497 but with Canyge's sailing the Med, Baltic, Iceland and Greenland, is it not possible he got there first with his army of 800 seamen and hid whatever he hid?

From the Works of Thomas Chatterton "William Canynge , Esq will be found (page 347, Vol 3) to be metamorphosed into Sir William Canyge, Knight of Jerusalem"

 

[rowanns]

I am curious to know first put Sinclair, the Templars and Oak Island all together and when?

Hi there Smithbrown. I can tell you that I first became acquainted with the idea when I read a book by Michael Bradley called Holy Grail Across the Atlantic. He mentioned ruins at a place nearby called New Ross and he argued that Champlain was a member of a secret society engaged in protecting the grail. He also mentioned Henry Sinclair in his book and used much of Pohl's deductions. Oak Island was then linked as well. think this book came out in 1988 or thereabouts. I think it is also important to note that another book called Holy Blood, Holy Grail came out in 1982 where the Templars were put front and centre into the public realm. There is a very strong link between these two books.

I can only go on what I am aware of, but I don't recall mention of any Templars or Sinclair alongside Oak Island in the public arena until a couple of decades ago. That is not to say, however, that others weren't quietly pursuing the theory on their own. I suspect they were.

 

[HenryWaltonJonesJr]

If I was going to plant a coin for the purpose of renewing high interest and investment in the island I wouldn't plant a"Pirate Treasure Coin". To really spark passion I'd plant a silver or gold coin from 12th or 13th century...that was minted anywhere in the Middle East. THEN you're talking serious interest!

 

[Dave Rishar]

I would think if there was a pile of stones out in the deepest part of the swamp and a coin was found with the pile , the odds are both where put there by man at the same time.

I believe that my house was built in 1931. I've dug up all sorts of coins next to it, but not a one was minted before 1965. Just my luck, right? Old house in a working class neighborhood and no silver...not even a wheatie.

Was my house actually built in 1965? No. I'm quite sure that it was built in 1931. The architecture and features strongly suggest a construction date around this time (not to mention the city records), as do the materials used in its construction. The lack of pre-'65 coins around it does not change this evidence. Likewise, if I'd found a coin minted in 1900 on my lawn, it would not necessarily mean that my home had been built in 1900 - again, there are features that can debunk this connection. The house was originally built with plumbing and electrical wiring, but this particular city did not have functioning sewer or electrical systems at that time. In fact, the entire block that the house is on was a second growth forest back then. I've read that it was a good place to hunt grouse. (It no longer is, unfortunately.) Thus, I'm forced to conclude that the lack of pre-'65 coins is just a coincidence, and has no bearing on the age of my home. I must also conclude that if the people who built the home left these coins there, they did it decades after the house had been built. I can safely assume that they were left by someone else entirely.

I'll say it again: a coin might mean something, or it might not. It's a matter of context. Simply assuming that two objects are related due to proximity (and nothing else) can lead to all sorts of shenanigans.

 

[Dave Rishar]

The issue of a Viking presence in Nova Scotia is being actively investigated by both amateur enthusiasts and by scholars on both sides of the Atlantic. It's about time.

Indeed.

While I've never been to Iceland, my girlfriend took a trip there not that long ago. According to her, extensive Icelandic colonization of the New World is taken for granted there - it's common knowledge and completely accepted. Given that Old Norse is close enough to modern Icelandic that it can be easily understood by today's Icelanders, I wonder if their level of research hasn't progressed beyond ours, at least on an informal level. I often find myself frustrated by translations because something is always lost (or added*) in the process.

Thank you for the links.

* Imagine my confusion when, while reading "The Story of Burnt Njal," I found repeated references to Icelanders planting their corn - circa 980 AD. Now where did they get corn from? It was only after additional study that I realized that this particular translation had been made by a gentleman from the UK, and that "corn" in British useage was actually a generic term for any cereal and not maize specifically. A reader from the UK wouldn't have been confused by this, but as an American, I had to go and look it up. I wonder who else has been tripped up by things like this.

 

[rowanns]

Hi Dave and other folks who may be interested: here's something that was sent to me by someone who has been working for many years on the issue of the Norse:

http://rafhladan.is/bitstream/handle/10802/2769/The Wineland Millennium.pdf?sequence=1

Considering your girlfriend was to Iceland (lucky her!), perhaps she may be interested as well....

It has some really interesting information within and parts are starting to match up with certain findings coming out of Labrador and the Maritimes. I think one thing to consider in all of this is that the Norse may not have stayed long in these areas, which would make physical evidence difficult to obtain or even identify at the present time. I have a funny feeling however, that the DNA of certain Inuk/Inuit groups might yield some interesting results!

This is off topic somewhat to Oak Island and I apologize to folks here for "changing the channel" a bit so to speak.

Hope the link works!

By the way, since I'm new around here, is there a current conversation that deals specifically with the Norse/Vikings in North America? I must be overlooking it....

Cheers

 

[Yard Waste]

I stayed out of this thread because History Canada aired the series so much later than the US. Very disappointed in general. Infact when I came across the news about Oak Island Season 2 before the I saw the last episode I just had a feeling that this was just another reality show that is manipulating viewers. Finally watched it on the PVR and the coin, a plant imho. The series--fake.

On a side note History Channels' 'The Vykings' will explain everthing about Oak Island in their next season as the Viks man the boats, pack thier shovels, block and tackle and head to Oak. Episode 8 I believe!! ( Not really but that show has as much reality as the Curse series) (force fields, Shakespear, An untrained brother puts on the headphones and control the uber detector while the trained professional looks on, gimme a break).

 

[FinderKeeper]

I believe that my house was built in 1931. I've dug up all sorts of coins next to it, but not a one was minted before 1965. Just my luck, right? Old house in a working class neighborhood and no silver...not even a wheatie. Was my house actually built in 1965? No. I'm quite sure that it was built in 1931. The architecture and features strongly suggest a construction date around this time (not to mention the city records), as do the materials used in its construction. The lack of pre-'65 coins around it does not change this evidence. Likewise, if I'd found a coin minted in 1900 on my lawn, it would not necessarily mean that my home had been built in 1900 - again, there are features that can debunk this connection. The house was originally built with plumbing and electrical wiring, but this particular city did not have functioning sewer or electrical systems at that time. In fact, the entire block that the house is on was a second growth forest back then. I've read that it was a good place to hunt grouse. (It no longer is, unfortunately.) Thus, I'm forced to conclude that the lack of pre-'65 coins is just a coincidence, and has no bearing on the age of my home. I must also conclude that if the people who built the home left these coins there, they did it decades after the house had been built. I can safely assume that they were left by someone else entirely. I'll say it again: a coin might mean something, or it might not. It's a matter of context. Simply assuming that two objects are related due to proximity (and nothing else) can lead to all sorts of shenanigans.

Hi Dave, I like your story about a treasure hunt in your back yard but I have a few questions, Could the coins have been planted and who could of done that. Why are they there. When was this done. I am sure you found the coins but did anyone see you dig them up and could I have their name. You said you live in a house built in 1931 and you own a metal detector but how do we know this is true.
My point is its easy to be negative on stories posted here, the hard part is posting any story here. You had a great find but if you think more positive you may find something bigger. Good Job

 

[Dave Rishar]

Hi Dave, I like your story about a treasure hunt in your back yard but I have a few questions, Could the coins have been planted and who could of done that. Why are they there. When was this done. I am sure you found the coins but did anyone see you dig them up and could I have their name. You said you live in a house built in 1931 and you own a metal detector but how do we know this is true. My point is its easy to be negative on stories posted here, the hard part is posting any story here. You had a great find but if you think more positive you may find something bigger. Good Job

I suppose that one or more of them could have been planted. I saw no evidence of this (and can see no reason why someone would want to do something like that) but anything is possible. If the coins were planted, they had been in the ground for some years, as even the nickels and quarters were pretty toasted.

I think that you misunderstood the point of my story. It wasn't about my finds because - and let's be honest here - there's nothing great about finding a few bucks in clad, even on a lawn as tiny as mine. The point was that I can't assume that the coins and the home are from the same time period simply because they're next to each other. They might be related but, as I hope I've proven with my example, there's no guarantee that they are without further proof. In my case, the majority of the proof is on the side of my house being from 1931, and the coins being dropped there later.

This is logic, not negativity, and while it is indeed easy to be negative, it is much more difficult to be meaningfully criticial as I believe that I am. I don't call BS on people or make fun of them. I find and point out problems with evidence and logic, and when those problems can't be addressed, I investigate why they can't be; sometimes I'll offer up my own theories of why this is.

I have posted a treasure legend on Treasurenet. While I can't prove without a doubt that it existed or that it's still there, I couldn't debunk it either. I've heard several other local treasure tales but they fell apart under even a cursory investigation, which is why I did not bother posting them.

Likewise, I am not completely without hope and faith, but I reserve these for religion and I openly admit that I'm behaving illogically in doing so. Everything else must make sense and be supported by facts. That is my problem with the Money Pit: it doesn't make sense and it's not supported by facts. It's supported by stories that have changed over time, with some of them being almost definitely false. As the years went on and the theories changed, so did the "finds," as most or all of them were fabricated by the finders to support whatever theory was in vogue at the time, and now new theorists are faced with the unenviable task of crafting a theory that can utilize all this conflicting, and probably false, evidence; alternatively, they can discard some of the evidence as being fake, but then they're forced to admit that the evidence that they've cherry-picked to support their theories - which is just as valid as the evidence that they've discarded - might also be false.

Is this negative, or rational? My intent is not necessarily to discourage. My intent is to get people to think the problem through critically and to fact-check the evidence. There were areas where this wasn't happening, so I began doing it. Someone had to, right?

While I won't apologize for presenting facts or pointing out logical flaws in a theory - "plot holes," so to speak - I will indeed apologize for the wall of text that I just wrote. Let it stand as a summary of my position for the new arrivals to this thread.

 

[Sinbadthesailor]

What are the facts?

Source data is the best we can get for facts. This from 1863 from a traveller Google Books. Scalps? Hair?- this must be the coconut fibre.

Having removed the timber and excavated a few additional feet, another barrier of immovable boulders and oak*logs completely arrested their progress. Again they applied to their neighbours for aid, assuring them that the*treasure*was near; but all their entreaties were in vain. Those who ventured to pay a visit to the mysterious pit beheld it with only reluctance and superstitious horror. Some of the elder grey-beards solemnly shook their heads, assuring them that the spirits of the murdered ones were hovering around the pit, and that blood would have to be shed for blood before the*treasure*could be obtained. These appalling remarks, together with the appearance of hair and scalps among the logs, became so startling and terrifying, as to cause the islander to desert his island home, and the work to be relinquished by them forever.

 

[Sinbadthesailor]

What are the facts? More

From another 19th Century book. Summary. Notice "Blue Sand"

7ft diameter, 2ft flagstones, 10ft logs, 15ft more logs,
15 y later 10ft charcoal, 10ft putty, then inscription stone
90ft hit something hard - flooded
50 y after 98ft auger, 4.5in wood, 20in nails, 4.5in wood, brought part of head of oak cask with marks of coopers knife and tropical grasses
Found foreign grass and blue sand on drain tunnel
Found piece of oak 4ft long
Cedar plank
Mill-sawed spruce slab
Cocunut husks and more blue sand

 

[Dave Rishar]

What are the titles of the books?

 

[Sinbadthesailor]

Will post later. The only blue sand I can find is Namibia. This is interesting Shipwreck off Namibia is 500-year-old treasure trove - ABC News

 

[Sinbadthesailor]

Book references


The New Dominion Monthly - Google Books

Rambles among the Blue-Noses: or, Reminiscences of a tour through New ... - Andrew Learmont Spedon - Google Books

 

[Sinbadthesailor]

More on Namibian 1500's wreck allAfrica.com: Namibia: MOU On Portuguese Shipwreck Treasure