| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Europeans: what they brought to the Americas?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Europeans: what they brought to the Americas?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 1 Votes, Average 5.00  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4720
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Europeans: what they brought to the Americas?
    Posted: 12 Dec 2017 at 23:45
Quote Disease killed most, disease, starvation, warfare, and then massacre.

None of which were beneficial to the indiginous people.
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2982
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2017 at 01:15
Disease killed most, disease, starvation, warfare, and then massacre, which the massacre by Indians, justified in the eyes of the Whites, the massacre of Indians.  As far as warfare is concerned, the Indians fought a loosing battle, but they generally weren't passive, until they were beat.

There might not be much nobility in being dead, but for some people they think there is nobility in dying.

But there are more Indians alive today, then there were when Columbus arrived, just a lot of other people too.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4720
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Nov 2017 at 03:46
You forgot to mention the dead people-massacred, murdered, killed deliberately. The vast majority of them, Indians or Native Americans.

There's not much nobility in being dead!
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2982
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Nov 2017 at 00:44
I think that it is part of the myth of the noble savage, to believe that the Indians were always the victims, and the settlers were always the perpetrators.  It is the same kind of belief that says that the Palestinians are noble, because they're picked on by the Israelis, or the Jews are noble, because they were picked on by the Nazis.  The fact is that being on the short end of the stick does not ennoble someone so much as often embitter them.  There is a difference between becoming ennobled and becoming weak.  Neither the ennobled or the weak take advantage of someone, but the reasons for them not doing so, are entirely different.  Weak is not the same thing as being moral, it is just being weak.  To properly be moral, one has to have the capacity to do help or harm, and the inclination or disinclination to engage in it, as the situation sees fit.  Someone who does not have the capacity, is neither moral, nor for that matter, immoral.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4720
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Nov 2017 at 03:54
The elephant in the room being disease, resulting in diminishing populations, starvation and death.

Indiginous Americans, having never been exposed to measles, and other minor ailments, were nevertheless devastated by them, literally dying in their millions. 

With them went the secrets of how they came to be so advanced in agriculture, architecture, astrology and many other sciences, compared to their North American counterparts, and indeed, many European populations of the time.

Whole cultures were wiped out by European massacres, enslavement and disease.



Edited by toyomotor - 23 Nov 2017 at 06:58
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2982
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Nov 2017 at 23:49
Lynn White writes about the medieval antecedents to the renaissance, the renaissance was/is amazing, but it could not have happened without several things coming together, such as the rediscovery of the ancient world.  Raphael goes tunneling in the catacombs, and sees ancient art that the medieval world couldn't do, (or was it at Herculaneum, I forget).

But, the thing that Europeans brought the most to the New World, was Europeans, and it was mainly just sheer demographic masses that overran the sparsely populated Indians, or conquered with superior firepower the civilizations already there.  Of course, the diseases of Eurasia and Africa did the lion's share of the work.  It must have seemed to the Indians like the world was ending.  And it did end, although the world goes on.
Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Feb 2012 at 19:56
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

What the Europeans brought to the Americas?

If somebody says they brought civilization, religion or writing it would be wrong. Those things existed already in the Americas. In the New World there were ships, bridges, stonework, metalurgy, poetry, music, empires, accounting, bells, paper, textiles, toothfillings, concave mirrors for lighting fires, and even the zero and the golden rate were known.

So, the question is, what really brought the Europeans to the Americas that was something new, and that contributed to development? I have a list on here, and let's see if you can make it longer.

(1) New vegetables, particularly wheat and rice, that made food more available. Lettuces, onions, cabbage, grapes, olives and many other produce came from the old world as well.

(2) New animals that revolutionazed farming and transport: horse, the mule (the 4WD of ancient times) which worked harder than a llama, the cow that provided lot of meat and milk (animal milk was unknown in the Americas, together with cheese, yogurt and derivatives), the sheep, that made fiber production cheaper, the goat that produced milk and meat, and the ox which was a heavy duty animal for works that requiered force.

(3) Iron. That was the single metal that impacted the most in the Americas.

(4) Cheap paper. The European methods copied from the Chinese allowed for mass producing paper. In the Americas there was amate paper in some regions of Mesoamerica, but it was produced in small scale.

(5) The alphabet. This method of writing was a lot superior to the memorizing devices of the Iroquos wampun, or the Inca quipus, and it was also a lot simpler than Maya writing. The phonetic alphabet also allowed to transcribe native languages and therefore to record theirs tought early on.

(6) The arch. The single more important invention introduced by the Europeans in architecture it was the arch, unknown in the Americas. This allowed in colonial times the development of aqueducts following the roman model.

(7) The galeon. In the Americas there were large dugout canoes and balsa rafts driven by sails, but there wasn't anything such as the European ship technology, with complex sails and rudders. A technology that took thousand of years to develop in Eurasia and that was unknown in the Americas.

(8) The wheel. The wheel was known in Mesoamerica, but was used only in toys. The Europeans spread the use of the wheel in transport.

(9) Codified law. It was unknown in the Americas.

(10) Gunpowder. Unknown in the Americas, changed war.

What a first class post and thread starter.Clap
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
KayKatz View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 08 Jan 2012
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 30
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote KayKatz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Feb 2012 at 19:45
I have an artistic bias toward the Modern period of the arts (1860s onward) and still I can recognize the immense cultural changes to Europe through the Renaissance.

I find it frustrating that you continue to devalue the contribution of Europe to Western culture, even seem to take delight in so doing. Although continued bias towards Europe in scholarship I feel that it is being effectively challenged and there are many, many publications from European nations which also contest this view and seek to acknowledge the contributions of immigrants to the culture of their respective countries. It feels as though you are provoking simply to provoke, rather than state something no one has ever thought of before. I think scholarship is changing but I don't see why it necessitates dismissing all of Europe's accomplishments.
Back to Top
KayKatz View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 08 Jan 2012
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 30
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote KayKatz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Feb 2012 at 19:41
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by bagrat bagrat wrote:

Renaissance was not just an artistic , invented by lazy Italians over an espresso and a fag, but
a cultural phenomenon, triggered by social and economical changes in Italy and the rest of Europe, that encompassed new directions in philosophical, scientific and political etc. thinking, and the new intellectual ideas got subsequently expressed in in the literary and visuell arts.
Ever heard of the scientific enterprises of a certain Leonardo da Vinci, another lazy Italian?
I leave the last word to the great Blackadder: "To you,..., the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?"
 
 
Sure, the renaissance has quite a prestige on the artistic biassed minds. In any case, the European booming started a lot earlier, about the 12th century, when engineering techniques and new phylosophical tendencies changed the society. From that time are most of the gear Europeans brought to the Americas, such as astrolabes, clocks, firearms, ironwork, paper and the rudder. And those practical things weren't invented by Da Vinci. This later guy was a dreammer but he created very few practical things.
Back to Top
fusong View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 485
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fusong Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2012 at 16:21
Dose anyone know anything on the attempted Scottish colonization on Panama 
Every ideology has a kernel of truth and sea of whitewash.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2012 at 01:35
I agree with you in your point. I lived in Saskatchewan, Canada, and I saw many Native Americans there, alive. I believe at least 10% of Canadian population is Native American, Mixed native American or has some Amerindian ancestry.

 
Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2012 at 01:29
The west coast of Canada saw an explosion of aboriginal culture ofter the first Euopean contact. The totem poles, ceremonial masks, ect, seen today were the product of iron tools, and did not exist in such form before contact. New food products also increased trade in the area (ie the Haida developed a long range trade in potatoes, something unknown before). After colonization, the continuous tribal wars of the region were brought to a halt, saving countless lives. This also meant the rule of law, meaning that one could wander outside their tribal territory, and not assume that their chances of being killed were fairly high.
 
As with all mass movements of people in history, there were both positive and negative aspects.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2012 at 00:32
Originally posted by Mixcoatl Mixcoatl wrote:


If Uruguayans having Charrua ancestors means Indigenous Uruguays aren't extinct then that means there are still Visigoths in Spain.


Indeed

Originally posted by Mixcoatl Mixcoatl wrote:


Ethnicities are rarely wiped out physically completely. So if an ethnicity is suppressed so much that a lot of their members dy and they culture, language, political organization goes extinct then for all practical purposes that ethnicity has been exterminated.


Exterminated means killed by violent means. The rest is stretching words. Not the Celts nor the Norse where exterminated when they become Christianized. The Celts again didn't change when other ethnic groups invaded the British isles.

Originally posted by Mixcoatl Mixcoatl wrote:


Of course they haven't, why should they?


Theirs business. Who cares?

Quote Latin America do understand that imperialism is not only an anglosaxon thing. But the fact is that the only people that keeps fooling around with imperialism TODAY are the anglosaxon!


So, what territories did Britain imperialistically seize in Latin America after 1833?

Even if the original capture of the Falklands in 1833 was imperialist (which is pretty much irrelevant nowadays, every modern territorial demarcation is based on some kind of imperialism, conquest or occupation if you go back long enough), wanting to keep a territory you already rule, and with the overwhelming support of its inhabitants, doesn't have anything to do with imperialism. Trying to annex a territory against the will of its inhabitants is.[/QUOTE]

Sure. The British stopped in Latin America but the U.S. people followed the Anglosaxon destiny shortly after.

With respect to population, you got a point there, though, but the territory was legaly Argentinean when it was captured by Britain.

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2012 at 00:23
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

The priests came as religious fanatics determined to destroy (etc. etc. etc.... ) original economic structures.



Sorry. I don't argue with you anymore. You are a scratched vinyl Big smile




Edited by pinguin - 22 Feb 2012 at 00:26
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
Kaveh ye Ahangar

Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Location: MidX,Engelistan
Status: Offline
Points: 12491
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2012 at 18:55
Indeed, Argentina is the one being imperialist here.
"There was glory in pissing, Corabb decided as he watched the stream curve out and make that familiar but unique sound as it hit the ground." So true.
Back to Top
Mixcoatl View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Location: Poyais
Status: Offline
Points: 5042
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mixcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2012 at 18:00
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:



Uruguay? Give me a break. Uruguayans do have Indigenous features and aspect, no matter than in a smaller proportion than in the rest of Spanish America. Also Cubans and Dominicans have quite a bit of indigenous ancestry, no matter than also in smaller proportion compared to the rest.

If Uruguayans having Charrua ancestors means Indigenous Uruguays aren't extinct then that means there are still Visigoths in Spain.

Ethnicities are rarely wiped out physically completely. So if an ethnicity is suppressed so much that a lot of their members dy and they culture, language, political organization goes extinct then for all practical purposes that ethnicity has been exterminated.

Quote And the only people that identify with English in Spanish America are Blacks who descend from former slaves of the British. Those blacks english speaking minorities that are visible in Central America have never been integrated to the hispanic society, actually.

Of course they haven't, why should they?

Quote Latin America do understand that imperialism is not only an anglosaxon thing. But the fact is that the only people that keeps fooling around with imperialism TODAY are the anglosaxon!


So, what territories did Britain imperialistically seize in Latin America after 1833?

Even if the original capture of the Falklands in 1833 was imperialist (which is pretty much irrelevant nowadays, every modern territorial demarcation is based on some kind of imperialism, conquest or occupation if you go back long enough), wanting to keep a territory you already rule, and with the overwhelming support of its inhabitants, doesn't have anything to do with imperialism. Trying to annex a territory against the will of its inhabitants is.

Edited by Mixcoatl - 21 Feb 2012 at 18:00
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2012 at 08:19
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Uruguay? Give me a break. Uruguayans do have Indigenous features and aspect, no matter than in a smaller proportion than in the rest of Spanish America. Also Cubans and Dominicans have quite a bit of indigenous ancestry, no matter than also in smaller proportion compared to the rest.
 
That some traces of native DNA have survived in Uruguay do not mean that the natives have survived as a people or that their cultures have survived. For all practical purposes the natives in Uruguay actually were exterminated.
 
Just a little reminder what happened to the Charrua people of Uruguay:

Quote Following the arrival of European settlers, the Charrúa were progressively killed by or integrated into the prevailing colonial cultures.

Most of the remaining ones were massacred at Salsipuedes (literally "Get-out-if-you-can") Creek on 11 April 1831 by a group led by Bernabé Rivera, nephew of Fructuoso Rivera who later became the first president of Uruguay. Bernabé Rivera had invited the Charrúa to a meeting, then ambushed them. Rivera's forces slew the men and enslaved the women and children. Only a few escaped this massacre. That massacre was followed four months later by another led by Rivera in Mataojo.

Four surviving Charrúas were captured at Salsipuedes. They were Senaca, a medicine man; Vaimaca-Piru, a warrior; and a young couple, Tacuabé and Guyunusa. All four were taken to Paris, France in 1833, where they were exhibited to the public. They all soon died in France, including a baby daughter born to Tacuabé and Guyunsa.

Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2012 at 08:09

Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

  What culture do you want to save? The priests came to save souls; not to save survival lifestyles.
The areas were they had the strongest influences were usually the more backwards, and there they founded cities, churches and schools from scratch. 

The priests came as religious fanatics determined to destroy other peoples religious, ethical and cultural integrity. And much of the things they funded where in fact often nothing but glorified labor camps. That some of these slave camps developed into cities later is another matter. That often contributed even more to the demise and destruction of the indigenous population and the environment they once lived in.

And by the way, what is good with founding a church? Just some place where people are getting brainwashed into Christian superstition.

Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

  They didn't replace things such important as language, though. In fact, they helped to preserve many native languages and even today the Jesuit books are a source to the past of native peoples in the region. But, of course, the hunting gathering style was changed. I wouldn't miss that.

Unfortunately the missionaries also destroyed such important parts of the native cultures as art, architecture, clothes (where healthy climate adapted clothes became replaced by unhealthy clothes in the name of prudery), adornment, structure of power, social relations, relations between the sexes (which were corrupted by the sexual phobias of the church) and ofcourse the original economic structures.

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2012 at 01:40
Uruguay? Give me a break. Uruguayans do have Indigenous features and aspect, no matter than in a smaller proportion than in the rest of Spanish America. Also Cubans and Dominicans have quite a bit of indigenous ancestry, no matter than also in smaller proportion compared to the rest.

And the only people that identify with English in Spanish America are Blacks who descend from former slaves of the British. Those blacks english speaking minorities that are visible in Central America have never been integrated to the hispanic society, actually.

Latin America do understand that imperialism is not only an anglosaxon thing. But the fact is that the only people that keeps fooling around with imperialism TODAY are the anglosaxon!







Edited by pinguin - 21 Feb 2012 at 01:43
Back to Top
Mixcoatl View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Location: Poyais
Status: Offline
Points: 5042
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mixcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Feb 2012 at 18:04
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:


In general, no matter theirs famous brutality and several crimes, the Spaniards were the Europeans that treated the Indigenous people the best. That's why Indigenous peoples are numerous in most of the Spanish Speaking countries, while in the rest they were exterminated and replaced either with Europeans or Blacks.


Indigenous peoples are more numerous in the Spanish speaking countries because they have always been more numerous there to begin with. Precolumbian population centers were Mesoamerica and the Andes, which also are the areas with the largest Indigenous population today.

Besides, the only country outside the Caribbean were the Indigenous people were completely wiped out was Uruguay.

Also the only indigenous kingdom that arose after 1492, the Miskito Kingdom on the Atlantic coast of Nicaragua, did so under English protection. In fact, in that part of Nicaragua even today the people identify themselves with the English and consider the Spanish/Nicaraguans to be outsiders. Belize and Guyana aren't too fond of expansionist ambitions by their Hispanophone neighbors either.

Latin America needs to understand that imperialism is not an exclusively Anglo-Saxon thing, nor is everything Anglo-Saxons do in the Americans necessarily imperialist.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Feb 2012 at 23:26
Originally posted by UFG UFG wrote:

Perhaps they imagined that stopping the culture of ritual sacrifice and cannibalism to be more important than preserving the cultures in toto.  It's fair to say the effects of the Spanish civilization were a mixed bag.

Overall, it's a template for what has transpired, in large part, with the meeting of aboriginal peoples and colonizers throughout history. That's a pretty good list imo, pinquin, derails and all.



I can't argue against that, becouse you are right. The Spaniards buried the culture of ritual sacrifice.

In general, no matter theirs famous brutality and several crimes, the Spaniards were the Europeans that treated the Indigenous people the best. That's why Indigenous peoples are numerous in most of the Spanish Speaking countries, while in the rest they were exterminated and replaced either with Europeans or Blacks.





Back to Top
UFG View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2012
Location: oregon
Status: Offline
Points: 15
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote UFG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Feb 2012 at 20:46

Perhaps they imagined that stopping the culture of ritual sacrifice and cannibalism to be more important than preserving the cultures in toto.  It's fair to say the effects of the Spanish civilization were a mixed bag.

Overall, it's a template for what has transpired, in large part, with the meeting of aboriginal peoples and colonizers throughout history. That's a pretty good list imo, pinquin, derails and all.

No tats no chains, just the snub-nosed truth
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Sep 2011 at 00:19
What culture do you want to save? The priests came to save souls; not to save survival lifestyles.
The areas were they had the strongest influences were usually the more backwards, and there they founded cities, churches and schools from scratch.

They didn't replace things such important as language, though. In fact, they helped to preserve many native languages and even today the Jesuit books are a source to the past of native peoples in the region. But, of course, the hunting gathering style was changed. I wouldn't miss that.






 
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Aug 2011 at 09:57
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Absolutely ridiculous. If anything the christian priests prevented a worst disaster. Your finger pointing is pathetic.

Unfortunately the missionaries contributed very much to the demise of native cultures and peoples. They were to a hight degree an integrated part of the colonialist enterprise and exploitation in the Americas.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Aug 2011 at 06:35
Gutenberg refinaments could be cute, but that matters to the history of Europe only, given that China was centuries ahead of the West in mass producing printing books. You can still light candles to St. Gutenberg if you wish, but you haven't link his inventions to mass production of books, but in Europe. Anyways, that was another topic, given the fact European printing presses were very few in the Americas, for centuries, and the impact of that invention happened very late in the region.

I already mentioned a list of the things, I believe, Europeans brought to the Americas. If you didn't read it, I will copy it at the end of this post.

With respect to "integration", in a certain sense that's true. However, the price payed for that kind of integration was too high. Integration under the boot was what happened in the Americas. Anyways, that was not the topic. The contributions of the Europeans to the Americas were at least these. If you have more ideas about contributions, please extend the list.


1) New vegetables, particularly wheat and rice, that made food more available. Lettuces, onions, cabbage, grapes, olives and many other produce came from the old world as well.

(2) New animals that revolutionazed farming and transport: horse, the mule (the 4WD of ancient times) which worked harder than a llama, the cow that provided lot of meat and milk (animal milk was unknown in the Americas, together with cheese, yogurt and derivatives), the sheep, that made fiber production cheaper, the goat that produced milk and meat, and the ox which was a heavy duty animal for works that requiered force.

(3) Iron. That was the single metal that impacted the most in the Americas.

(4) Cheap paper. The European methods copied from the Chinese allowed for mass producing paper. In the Americas there was amate paper in some regions of Mesoamerica, but it was produced in small scale.

(5) The alphabet. This method of writing was a lot superior to the memorizing devices of the Iroquos wampun, or the Inca quipus, and it was also a lot simpler than Maya writing. The phonetic alphabet also allowed to transcribe native languages and therefore to record theirs tought early on.

(6) The arch. The single more important invention introduced by the Europeans in architecture it was the arch, unknown in the Americas. This allowed in colonial times the development of aqueducts following the roman model.

(7) The galeon. In the Americas there were large dugout canoes and balsa rafts driven by sails, but there wasn't anything such as the European ship technology, with complex sails and rudders. A technology that took thousand of years to develop in Eurasia and that was unknown in the Americas.

(8) The wheel. The wheel was known in Mesoamerica, but was used only in toys. The Europeans spread the use of the wheel in transport.

(9) Codified law. It was unknown in the Americas.

(10) Gunpowder. Unknown in the Americas, changed war.



Edited by pinguin - 07 Aug 2011 at 06:41
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Aug 2011 at 05:22
At last we get to the crux of the matter and it is the sama yada yada, courtesy of the Penguinated iceberg that freezes all into the outre mind-set of the ideologue crystallizing his favored sugary sop. Earlier he had produced a link about his Chinese fixation that spent more time emphasizing the intricacies of Gutenberg and underscoring the major differences in his refinements with all that went before yet he used it as a substantive to his fantasy over mass production. Well he could always angle for a position in the propaganda division of the Chines embassy in Chile, were it not for the fact that the Chinese woukd be a bit queasy about his logic.
What did the "Europeans" bring to the Americas? In a brief word: Integration--a crash course on modernity and the absorption of the isolated onto the world stage. All else is but simple verbiage emphasizing current political blather expressed entirely in the languages and ideologies of the West. Pretty soon we will have the Penguin emphasizing the need to "return" to Pachamama and subsistence agrarianism...perhaps by then he will have made peace with Carch, the post above certainly provides a hint to that outcome!

Edited by drgonzaga - 08 Aug 2011 at 15:44
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Aug 2011 at 01:28
Yes, smallpox affected the native population, but not enough to defeat it. Mapuches, for instance, lost a large part of theirs population, but recovered and continue fighting, up to the time the invader received a kick in the butt. The irony is that the descendants of the own Spaniards that conquered Chile defeated the evil empire, ruled by the cross and the silver coin, by profit and foundamentalism.

Today savage capitalism is under control, but we still has to get rid of Christianity. That's a long way to go. Wink


Edited by pinguin - 07 Aug 2011 at 01:31
Back to Top
Pelantaro View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 12 Jul 2011
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 15
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pelantaro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Aug 2011 at 01:19

Don’t forget that European brought to the Americas, includes: capitalism, western political ideas, (such a predatory individualism) and Christianity. Most destructive of all they brought disease that ravages the Indians, one of the main reasons of the defeat of the Indians in the America, was disease smallpox killed the native population.

Pelantaro from the Nahuelbuta
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Aug 2011 at 20:42
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

But applying rhetoric is all you ae doing there with your 'of course' and 'it is known'. At least drgonzaga supplied an authoritative - seeming chronology. If you're suggesting it is wrong you should provide some reasoning for it being wrong. In partixular you need to substantiate that 'mass production' of books in China. they cetainly didn't do it with block printing whether of wood tablets or metal ones (which afaik would have been in Korea anyway). They wear out too fast and it's way too cumberome to keep resetting them.
 
In fact China has always suffered from the diffiulty of learning to read the glyphs.


But learning ideograms is not the point. Yes, they have always suffering from the difficulties of reading, but by the 12th century millons of Chinese read.

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:


Probably not, but much more to the point, the English didn't invent ships, but they did invent the techinques of anaylsing a ship's construction on paper, which made it possible to make multiple copies of them. Americans didn't invent the car but they did invent the assembly line making it possible to mass produce them.


Sure, but this is not the same case with printing. The doctor seemed to believe there was a relation between movable types and mass producing books. That maybe correct in the West, but not in China. The doc believed Chineses only had wood xylography, which of course is not enough to print large numbers of books. But Chinese resorted to stone xylography to print the classics and other mass produced works.

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:


You don't appear to understand the point being made, or qat keast you don't have any argument to support you.


I do understand.

Now, with respect to sources, you can follow this link. Here you will find out that mass produced prints were done very early in China.

http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ab78





Edited by pinguin - 06 Aug 2011 at 20:43
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Aug 2011 at 20:19
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Please, try to apply logic instead of retoric. Of course, Chinese mass printed bills and books such as the I Ching centuries before Europeans. It is pathetic you try to give Gutenberg the merit of mass producing books, when it is known Chinese made it first. Of course, it is just your eurocentrism which blinds you.
But applying rhetoric is all you ae doing there with your 'of course' and 'it is known'. At least drgonzaga supplied an authoritative - seeming chronology. If you're suggesting it is wrong you should provide some reasoning for it being wrong. In partixular you need to substantiate that 'mass production' of books in China. they cetainly didn't do it with block printing whether of wood tablets or metal ones (which afaik would have been in Korea anyway). They wear out too fast and it's way too cumberome to keep resetting them.
 
In fact China has always suffered from the diffiulty of learning to read the glyphs.
[/QUOTE]

What's next? Saying that Bacon invented gunpowder? LOL
[/QUOTE]
Probably not, but much more to the point, the English didn't invent ships, but they did invent the techinques of anaylsing a ship's construction on paper, which made it possible to make multiple copies of them. Americans didn't invent the car but they did invent the assembly line making it possible to mass produce them.
Quote
I am amazed you can't understand quite simple thing. I child would do better.
 
You don't appear to understand the point being made, or qat keast you don't have any argument to support you.


[/QUOTE]
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.