"Historian claims Columbus may have been Norwegian"
 
in "Intelligencer Journal" (Wed. March 6, 1991, p. A-3)
 
     Oslo, Norway (AP)--Norwegians have been miffed for centuries
about Christopher Columbus stealing credit from Leif Ericsson for
discovering the New World.
     But a Norwegian maritime history writer said Tuesday it really
makes no difference because Columbus may have been Norwegian.
     Tor Busch Sannes does not claim to have definitive proof. 
Instead, he cites a series of coincidences, historical fact and
imaginative interpretation he hopes historians will investigate
further.
     His book, "Christopher Columbus--A European from Norway?"
suggests that Columbus was a Norwegian nobleman named Christopher
Bonde who discovered America in 1477, not in 1492.
     Columbus actually undertook a voyage north of Iceland in 1477,
according to the World Book Encyclopedia.  Sannes argues that
voyage could have reached Canada or New England 15 years before
Columbus laid anchor in the West Indies in 1492.
     "America is getting ready to celebrate the 500th anniversary
(of Columbus' discovery) 15 years too late," said Sannes.
     The book has generated considerable news coverage, skepticism
and amusement in Norway.  Some see it as belated revenge for
overlooking the Viking seafarer Ericsson's discovery of North
America nearly 500 years earlier.
     Many Norwegians believe Ericsson was one of their countrymen. 
But historians believe he was actually born in Iceland of a
Norwegian father.
     Knut Utstein Kloster, the millionaire shipowner who funded
Sannes' work, said he didn't know whether Columbus was a Norwegian
and neither did Sannes.  "But this is an exciting story that should
inspire researchers and others to carry on work with the theory,"
he said.
     "Circumstantial evidence cannot be considered definitive
proof," agreed Sannes.  "But I hope that the possibility will be
seriously researched by historians."
     Sannes' publisher, Norsk Maritimt Forlag A.S., prints about
two books a year, mainly on maritime history.
     History books generally say Columbus was born in 1451, the son
of an impoverished weaver from Genoa, Italy, named Domenico and his
wife Suzanna.
     Historians dispute the details of the explorer's clouded
childhood.  Several countries--including Spain, Portugal and
Italy--claim him as a native son.  Sannes said the historical
evidence could just as easily lead to a conclusion that Columbus
was born in Norway.
     "The most convincing evidence was Columbus' coat of arms,"
said Sannes.  In the position designating a father's lineage, it
bears an emblem identical to that used by the Bonde family, he
said.
     Sannes said Columbus' father could have been a member of the
noble Bonde family who he believes fled to Italy in the 1400s to
avoid persecution in Norway.
     Sannes cited other bits of evidence: Columbus never wrote in
Italian, he called himself a foreigner in southern Europe and he
was described in some biographies as tall, fair and blue-eyed,
typical Nordic characteristics.
     Sannes said documents on Columbus gathered by Genoa residents
in the 1930s mentioned the Norwegian Bonde family and other
associates of the explorer with ties to Norway.
     Sannes said Columbus' son Fernando, in a biography of his
father, wrote that the explorer never wanted to disclose where he
was born, but called himself a man of the sea.