Talk:Glooscap

Merge with Glooskap

A merge has been suggested between these two articles. It makes sense to me. A quick check as to which was the more common name shows it to be Glooscap by a fairly wide margin. Here is a comparison of number of search results for each term:

• Glooscap - 7,360
• Glooskap - 945

Accordingly, I propose to move the text of the Glooskap article to this one and make Glooskap a redirect. Comments? Sunray 17:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge completed. Sunray 08:19, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Henry Sinclair

I read about this connection in a book about the Knights Templar, but for the life of me I cannot remember what it was called. If anyone else is familiar with it, please let me know so I can properly cite my addition.--Caliga10 15:35, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

A book about the Knights Templar could be fictional. We need a reliable source in order to refer to this on this in the Glooscap article. However, since there is no reliable historical or archeological record of Sinclair's travels, it is unlikely that you will find one. Finding one would be a major breakthrough in the annals of European exploration of North America! Sunray 14:39, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

You might be interested in this tidbit. Now, Knight and Lomas aren't the most widely agreed upon authors, and they've certainly got their own bias and agenda with their ties to Freemasonry, but they're very academic in their writing and research. So, take this as you will:

"[The Reverend Janet Dyer] continued her helpful commentary by referring to the documented evidence that Prince Henry Sinclair, the first St Clair Jarl (Earl) of the Orkneys had, thanks to Templar money, commissioned a fleet of twelve ships for a voyage to the 'New World'. The fleet under Antonio Zeno landed in Nova Scotia and explored the eastern seaboard of what is now the United States of America prior to 1400. The date is certain because Henry Sinclair was murdered upon his return in that year."

_The Hiram Key_, Knight and Lomas, p. 302.

--Luke 67.173.165.18 03:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

You most likely read Frederick Pohl's book, "Prince Henry Sinclair: His Expedition to the New World in 1398." I was able to write a history essay regarding his voyage by stating in the first paragraph "this is a contested fact." Andrew⁶⁴⁷ 18:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

This is a bit late to the game, but the book you're referring to is "Knights Templar In The New World" by William Mann. I've read the book, but couldn't really see Mann's resoning to assume that Glooscap was actually Sinclair, despite some parallels drawn between the two. While I'm an advocate of research into alternate views on history (such as Sinclair's pre-Columbian voyage to and potential settlement in North America), I don't think there's enough evidence to properly draw a link between Glooscap and Sinclair. Kt'Hyla (talk) 02:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Clean-up

Someone added a "Clean-up" tag to the article but neglected to state what was required. So I will wade in. The article is a hodge-podge of legends, but no sources are cited. Perhaps we could find some sources. Sunray 00:47, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

"Creation myth"

Since there are thousands of gods, many in Wikipedia, for consistency if one of them is stated as being due to a creation myth they should all be. Including the currently popular ones. The less divisive approach would be to remove the phrase from god descriptions throughout Wikipedia. NStahl (talk) 12:19, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glooscap. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110930083633/http://www.invisiblebooks.com/Rand2.pdf to http://www.invisiblebooks.com/Rand2.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:55, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glooscap. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151105224905/http://www.invisiblebooks.com/Rand.pdf to http://www.invisiblebooks.com/Rand.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:05, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• The creation of Kluskap.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:51, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Norumbega? Earthquakes?

Like many legends, this one may have some basis in fact: a massive earthquake converted a mountain on the east side of the stone fort Norumbega into a new channel through a split in that mountain[when?]. The eastern side of this mountain became Mi'kmaq island, and the new river channel passed in-between. Later, when explorers asked where Norumbega was, they were told that it lay on the eastern side of the river (which it did prior to the earthquake), and so could never find the new location.

This claim lacks any supporting evidence and is a common ahistorical narrative promoted by conspiracy/pseudoscience websites and content creators. I have removed it. ~2026-16250-38 (talk) 02:47, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

While the passage is widely shared on cultural education pages—such as Parks Canada and the Mi'kmaq Confederacy of PEI—the exact historical year of this earthquake is intentionally left unrecorded.

The timeline can be narrowed down using contextual clues from geology and colonial maps:

1. The Pre-1600s Mapping Timeline

The mythical region or city of Norumbega first appeared on European maps in the 1520s (following voyages by Giovanni da Verrazzano) and was typically mapped near the Penobscot River in Maine or the wider New England/Maritime coastline. By the early 1600s, explorers like Samuel de Champlain heavily surveyed the region and noted that no such grand stone fort or city existed where previous charts claimed it was. If a real geological shift caused the discrepancy, it would have occurred prior to or during the 16th century, right as early European contact was fragmenting oral histories.

2. The Seismic Record of the Northeast

The Northern Appalachian region and the Charlevoix seismic zone affecting New England and Eastern Canada have a documented history of major, landscape-altering earthquakes.

The 1663 Charlevoix Earthquake, for example, (estimated magnitude 7.3–7.9) famously triggered massive landslides, permanently altered the courses of regional rivers, and split rock faces across the Northeast.

there are also pre-contact events documented by on geologic evidence. Geologists have mapped several massive paleoseismic earthquakes in the Maritimes and New England that occurred prior to the 1500s, which perfectly align with the deep-time framework of Wabanaki oral traditions.

Ultimately, the event exists in a chronological gray area: it lives as an undated, ancient memory in Wabanaki history that explains a real, physical shift in the landscape, but it lacks a definitive calendar year because it occurred outside the bounds of written European colonial logs. Having said that, There's zero legitimate, scientific basis for believing this explanation to be a-historical or conspiratorial simply because the only recording of it is within the historical records kept by the Wabanaki, rather than a European logbook. Dismissing a detailed account of a landscape-altering event simply because it is preserved in an Indigenous oral tradition rather than a European logbook is a deeply flawed, deeply unscientific approach to history.

In fact, the modern fields of geomythology and historical seismology are increasingly proving that Native oral histories are highly accurate, reliable archives of real geological events.

For centuries, Western academia treated oral histories as "mere legends" or "a-historical folklore." However, oral transmission systems in Indigenous cultures -such as the Wabanaki, Mi'kmaq, and Anishinaabe- incorporate strict community cross-checks, mnemonic devices, and precise geographical anchors specifically designed to preserve true events across generations.

i recommend this section be restored, but with proper citations added to the text and more skeptical language be worked in. ~2026-42626-79 (talk) 16:33, 1 August 2026 (UTC)