Submitted by Roger Lee (United States), Jun 25, 2005 at 15:18
I have been aware of Kennedy's theory of the Meleungeon origin since the first publication in Blue Ridge Magazine. I have watched the theory being expanded by him and others in the intervening years as more proported evidence has been revealed until, as the list of hits the last time I googled on the word shows, it has become a virtually cottage industry. One thing I am still waiting for, however, is actual citations for the primary evidence that is said to support the theory so that independent researchers could examine it. Much such evidence has been alluded to but use no more specifically than the kind of terminology used in the above review, i.e. "reports" show that one such deposit took place of Roanoke Island [of Moslem slaves no longer useful to the Portugese]. Nothing is provided that would allow locating the "reports" for examination and so we are left with unanswered questions such as why would the Portugese go to all the trouble of taking such servants on a several week voyage to get rid of them when they could have done so much easier closer to home? Such questions, of course, generate a certain amount of skepticism about the basis for the claims. This skepticism will persist as long as the "reports", "documents", "DNA tests", etc. remain unavailable for independent examination.
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.
Reader comments (3) on this item
Comment on this item
See the 25 most recent outstanding comments.
|
