So someone made a guess, it was wrong, that happens. But why did end up being spread around the news so much. So what, even if it said Allah? Vikings liked to travel, they might have been buying or copying decorative elements from various places.<p>I saw in the tweet she tagged Guardian, BBC, NatGeo and NYTimes. Was there just a slow news day that they all picked up that one claim and ran with it.
I dont get why this gets so much attention. Of course there was a contact.<p>Vikings conquered Sicily, south Italy and other meditarinian locations since 8th century. There was a slave trade. At some point Islam conquered 20% of Europe.
Single page collection of the actual tweets for people who don't want to try to read a massive tweet thread: <a href="https://tttthreads.com/thread/919897406031978496" rel="nofollow">https://tttthreads.com/thread/919897406031978496</a>
Follow-up to <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15454787" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15454787</a> ("Arabic characters found woven into burial costumes from Viking boat graves").
> haha - I wrote the whole thing out (in tweets) in a Word doc, counted them, added numbering back in, and cut & pasted into Twitter!<p>> It took a week to do the research and two days to write, which is basically like lightning speed in the academic world.<p>The effort is greatly appreciated, but having to then digest the content on Twitter really lets the content down.
Here is some links to info on one interaction between Vikings and Arabs/Islamicate civilisation in this case the 10th Century Traveler Ibn Fadlan:<p>"In this episode we explore the how Rurik might have been buried through the accounts of the Arab diplomat and adventurer Ibn Fadlan.. . . " <a href="https://history-podcasts.com/the-real-middle-ages/116269" rel="nofollow">https://history-podcasts.com/the-real-middle-ages/116269</a><p>Secondly is The Volga Vikings BBC In Our Times Podcast <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00vrx8g" rel="nofollow">https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00vrx8g</a>
Which includes the Sir Thomas Adams's Professor of Arabic James Montgomery also speaking about Ibn Fadlan.<p>He also wrote a translation for the Library of Arabic Literature for NYU Press <a href="https://nyupress.org/books/9781479803507/" rel="nofollow">https://nyupress.org/books/9781479803507/</a>
To all the folks harping on an academic for writing and releasing a work in their field in a week, and for having no shame about releasing it on Twitter:<p>You’re not being very inclusive, folks. She wanted to post it on Twitter, not a blog. She did. Don’t waste all this thread time discussing Twitter. Discuss her work. Discuss her points. But please, stop wasting time and energy on the “meta” of her chosen communication platform in a thread about Viking textiles.
I've seen immediately that there was no "Allah" in that picture. But I dismissed the article as click bait not scam.<p>It's Bait Blindness. I claim the novelty of the naming
>It should go without saying that a single scholar’s un-peer-reviewed claim does not truth make.<p>What about a single scholar's un-peer reviewed rebuttal? One of the fun things of social media is that something like this goes viral and everyone says "see I knew it" and the skeptics get shot down for "you're not an academic" but then another academic is skeptical and then we're back to "see, see I knew it." I don't see a solution here buts an amusing pattern.<p>Not sure who the authority here is, if anyone. I imagine this is the kind of thing that will need to be debated and 'solved' at a later time, regardless if Prof Mulder's skepticism is correct. There could be more to this story that she doesn't know, for example, but I'm personally leaning towards her thesis, but I'm naturally skeptical so I'm fairly biased.