Talk:Norumbega

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Video game reference seems trivial in this context. 128.102.107.197 (talk) 07:44, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Funny article, no mention of Martin Behaim, an early explorer, who was born in Nuremberg, a still existing town in Germany!22:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.186.205.102 (talk)

Speculation[edit]

Here's the material that was deleted with that edit summary (except for the lead changes):− An early reference was that of the Luso-French navigator Jean Allefonsce (1542) who reported that he had coasted south from Newfoundland and had discovered a great river. "The river is more than 40 leagues wide at its entrance and retains its width some thirty or forty leagues. It is full of Islands, which stretch some ten or twelve leagues into the sea. ... Fifteen leagues within this river there is a town called Norombega, with clever inhabitants, who trade in furs of all sorts; the town folk are dressed in furs, wearing sable. ... The people use many words which sound like Latin. They worship the sun. They are tall and handsome in form. The land of Norombega lie high and is well situated."[1]


It often appeared on subsequent European maps of North America, lying south of Acadia somewhere in what is now New England. Norumbega was thought to be a large, rich Native city, and by extension the river it was on, and the region surrounding it.[citation needed]

Samuel de Champlain searched for Norumbega in 1604 and believed he had found Allefonsce's river in the form of the Penobscot, which he called "the great river of Norumbega". He sailed as far as the rapids at what is now Bangor, Maine, but finding only villages, his and subsequent maps deleted reference to Norumbega as a town, region, or even river.[2] Most historians have subsequently accepted the Penobscot region as Allefonsce's source for Norumbega, though the matter was hotly contested by some nineteenth century antiquarians, who argued that the name should be identified with their own river or region.[3]

The city of Bangor embraced the Norumbega legend in the nineteenth century, naming their Greek Revival style municipal hall "Norumbega Hall", a venue for public meetings and lectures. The building stood in the center of the city until destroyed in the Great Fire of 1911. A park named "Norumbega Mall" now occupies the site, and an adjacent building housing the University of Maine Art Gallery is now named "Norumbega Hall". There was also a Norumbega Bank in nineteenth century Bangor. In 1886 Joseph Barker Stearns, the inventor of the duplex telegraphy system, built a mansion named "Norumbega Castle", which still stands on US Route 1 in Camden, Maine, overlooking Penobscot Bay.

References

  1. ^ DeCosta, 1890, p. 99.
  2. ^ Susan Danforth, The Land of Norumbega: Maine in the Age of Exploration and Settlement (Portland, Me.: Portland Museum of Art, 1988), p. 54
  3. ^ John Fiske, The Dutch and Quaker Colonies in America (NY: 1899) p. 70: “the most common opinion is that the Penobscot was the River of Norumbega, with a village on its bank somewhere up country, where European skippers traded with the natives for furs”. Fiske argued for the Hudson being Norumbega.

"Speculation" is not a reason to remove material. Virtually all our articles on archaeology, for instance, include speculation. The comment about appearing on maps is important although obviously needs citing, and isn't speculation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talkcontribs) 13:46, December 18, 2015 (UTC)

I agree. The material on the history of speculation around Norumbega belongs in the article. Of course, the speculation should not be in our editorial voice, but reporting on others' speculation. --— Preceding unsigned comment added by Macrakis (talkcontribs) 15:30, December 18, 2015 (UTC)

Davistownmuseum[edit]

Removed without explanation in one case and WP:NOTDIR in the other case, which doesn't seem to cover this. I've raised it at WP:ELN but it's a holiday season so there may not be much response. I do think that after I replaced it discussion here would have been appropriate rather than just removing it again with no justification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talkcontribs) 07:14, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]