Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Harmless Teddy Bear; Renfield

Exclusive control over the supply, and lower costs — same as business operates now.


70 posted on 08/07/2011 1:28:03 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Yes, as a matter of fact, it is that time again -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]


To: SunkenCiv
Costs would be higher and they would not have had control over supply, that was my point.

It makes no sense to make a dangerous trip across the sea wasting time and money when the same product is available right on your doorstep.

Tin was rare, copper was common. For tin you would make the voyage. In fact they did, to the British Isles and to the Black Sea area. But they did not travel for copper. There was copper in the Sinai. There was copper in Asia Minor. There was copper in Europe. There was copper in Africa. There was copper in the Middle East.

76 posted on 08/08/2011 10:56:50 AM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear (Can we ask questions which God finds unanswerable? Easily. All nonsense questions are unanswerable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]

To: SunkenCiv
There was a thread a while back that triggered a similar discussion, but I don't remember the exact subject.

I'm open to Phoenicians visiting North America, but it would be quite an undertaking to have them work these mines. Plus, there are rapids and cataracts on the St. Lawrence where portages would have to be maintained. It would be an enormous effort.

An easier theory is that the Native Americans worked the mines because they heard of markets on the East Coast and Central and South America.

77 posted on 08/08/2011 2:55:00 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson