History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedReplica of Ming boat reached America, then sunk

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 00:42
Originally posted by Constantine XI Constantine XI wrote:

 
I thought we were discussing the Americas.

As I said, I am in no doubt of the awesome impact of East Asian civilisations. And indeed, their continued vitality and strength in this day.

I think when we discuss the history of the Americas and the influence of outside nations, we need to keep in mind one thing - reach means little, grasp means a lot.
 
I was just talking in general terms for a while, but when it concerns America I agree with you. One good example of that is the northmen, they reached America but couldn´t grasp especially much so they just had to return home again.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 11:26
Actually, Inuits were more sucessful in moving to Europe (Greenland) than Norse to establish in the Americas
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
Constantine XI View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Lord of Hut River Province Principality

Joined: 01-May-2005
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 5713
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Constantine XI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 11:59
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Actually, Inuits were more sucessful in moving to Europe (Greenland) than Norse to establish in the Americas


I thought Greenland was part of the Americas, rather than Europe.
It is not the challenges a people face which define who they are, but rather the way in which they respond to those challenges.

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 12:06
Greenland is Europe, according to geographers. In fact, is part of Denmark.
Even more, you can go from Britain to Pharoes, to Iceland and then to Greenland in small jumps. In classical times, Europe ended in Iceland, the last Thule. However, everybody talks about Norse arriving to the Americas at the time Leif Ericson reached Canada, and not when Eric the Red landed in Greenland.
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
Constantine XI View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Lord of Hut River Province Principality

Joined: 01-May-2005
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 5713
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Constantine XI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 12:33
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Greenland is Europe, according to geographers. In fact, is part of Denmark.
Even more, you can go from Britain to Pharoes, to Iceland and then to Greenland in small jumps. In classical times, Europe ended in Iceland, the last Thule. However, everybody talks about Norse arriving to the Americas at the time Leif Ericson reached Canada, and not when Eric the Red landed in Greenland.


I would not class Greenland as part of Europe. It does belong to Denmark, true. But once upon a time, Australia belonged to Britain, however this did not mean Australia was a part of the European geography.

Looking at a map, we can clearly see that Greenland is much much closer to the North American mainland than to the European one.
It is not the challenges a people face which define who they are, but rather the way in which they respond to those challenges.

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 12:40

As far as I know, Greenland has never been considered as part of the Americas.

"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 13:08
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

As far as I know, Greenland has never been considered as part of the Americas.

 
Geographically it is considered a part of the Americas, at least by geographers, but politically it´s European.
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 137
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 16:00
Of interest, and I was following East Asian affairs closely when Menzies' book came out, no serious Chinese historian accepts the theory that the Chinese discovered America first. One advantage of being among the world's longest established nations is that you have the records to prove, or disprove, such assertions.
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 16:23

Besides, China has such a magnificent history, they don't need to claim the achievements of others.

"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 22:27
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

Of interest, and I was following East Asian affairs closely when Menzies' book came out, no serious Chinese historian accepts the theory that the Chinese discovered America first. One advantage of being among the world's longest established nations is that you have the records to prove, or disprove, such assertions.
 
They chinese during the Ming dynasty had the technological skills to go to America but there is no evidence that they ever did. Especailly Zheng He who Gavin Menzies claim should have travelled there had really no reason to do such thing. His expeditions was designed for trade, exchange of gifts, diplomacy and for taking up tributes and show off the strenght and power of the Ming throne. They were not assigned to go off into the unknown. The surviving records of his seven voyages also tell us rather clearly where he went and how long time it took. If he should have wondered of around the globe for a sighteeing to the New World than the records would have clearly showed it.
 
Here is a map of his voyages:
 
 
 
  So the real achivement of the voyage of Princess Taiping wasn´t that it showed that someone maybe could have travelled  to America but instead it shows the seaworthiness of the vessel and the skill and prowess of Ming Dynasty ship building.
 
And on top of that so was it a really beautiful little ship.
 
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 07-May-2009
Location: denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 111
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2009 at 09:22
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Greenland is Europe, according to geographers. In fact, is part of Denmark.
Even more, you can go from Britain to Pharoes, to Iceland and then to Greenland in small jumps. In classical times, Europe ended in Iceland, the last Thule. However, everybody talks about Norse arriving to the Americas at the time Leif Ericson reached Canada, and not when Eric the Red landed in Greenland.
Greenland should be counted as part of americas, since the distance to nearest land, Canada (I think it is "Elesmere"), is rather short. there is little logic in counting Iceland part of Europe from a purely natural-geographical point of view. It is rather a mid-ocean Island of its own, in contrast to "offshore" Britain,Ireland and surroudings. French Guyana is Frensch territory, still geographically no less Southamerican than (mainland) Chile, and Greenland is of course no way "european" (and extremely different from Denmark as far as I know).
Another coment: If, as I have recently noticed, it can be shown that the earliest greenlanders descent from aleutian people, in contrast to the contemporary "inuits" there, then they perhaps should get the prize as the first peoples reaching Americans over sea. At least they should if there was not still earlier voyages. Whether the very first discoverers (whoever they were) walked or navigated along the shores, or perhaps by "canoo" on forgotten amerasian rivers is as far as I see it a matter of belief. If the earliest humans on the continent made river voyages, their mobility may have increased (I believe the ancient river systems of Your continent were even more extensive at that time than now?).
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2009 at 13:23

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Another coment: If, as I have recently noticed, it can be shown that the earliest greenlanders descent from aleutian people, in contrast to the contemporary "inuits" there, then they perhaps should get the prize as the first peoples reaching Americans over sea. At least they should if there was not still earlier voyages. Whether the very first discoverers (whoever they were) walked or navigated along the shores, or perhaps by "canoo" on forgotten amerasian rivers is as far as I see it a matter of belief. If the earliest humans on the continent made river voyages, their mobility may have increased (I believe the ancient river systems of Your continent were even more extensive at that time than now?).

The Inuits and Aleuts are not entirely separate; they both originate with what's called "Thule Culture", which was a Siberian culture crossing over into the Americas beginning around 500 AD. The languages of the Inuit and Aleut are closely related and both belong to the "Eskimo-Aleut" family (aka Eskaleut). For whatever reason, the linguists haven't made the transition from "Eskimo" to "Inuit" but I digress ...

The Thule Culture moved in from Siberia around 500 AD and displaced a pre-existant Arctic culture already there, the Dorset. Nobody knows the exact origins of the Dorset, but it's thought they developed out of cultures existing in the area since Neolithic times (Independance I and II in Greenland, for instance) in which case they would be a Native American group or possibly a very ancient arrival from Siberia. Thule were clearly Eurasian, and of the AD era.

Who the "Skraelings" of Greenland were at the time the Norse arrived is a mystery, but not until around AD 1200 did the Thule Culture (ancestors of the Inuit) arrive in Greenland, having spread clear across the North American Arctic. Soon after, the Dorset and Norse both vanish from Greenland. The mystery is just the same, whatever happened to the Dorset as the Thule expanded is unknown, and we don't know what happened to the Norse colonies either - all that's known for certain is that the Inuit had been in contact with both, as they were familiar with both the Dorsets and the Norse. Wherever the Thule went, the Dorset - who had once covered the High Arctic - disappeared. When they got to Greenland, the Norse disappeared too.



Edited by edgewaters - 24-May-2009 at 13:25
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2009 at 14:35
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Greenland should be counted as part of americas, since the distance to nearest land, Canada (I think it is "Elesmere"), is rather short. there is little logic in counting Iceland part of Europe from a purely natural-geographical point of view.
 
Greenland is part of Europe from the historical point of view, rather than geographical. When it was "discovered" by the Norse it wasn't though as a land of another continent, but just a land a little farther from Iceland. By the way, Iceland is also considered European since ancient times, and is not close to Europe either.
 
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

 It is rather a mid-ocean Island of its own, in contrast to "offshore" Britain,Ireland and surroudings. French Guyana is Frensch territory, still geographically no less Southamerican than (mainland) Chile, and Greenland is of course no way "european" (and extremely different from Denmark as far as I know).
 
Guyana, Suriname, French Guyana and the Flaklands are part of South America, indeed, which is a geographical entity. They aren't part of Latin America though, which is a linguistic, historical and social entity. On the other hand, Mexico, Costa Rica, Cuba and Puerto Rico are part of Latin America, no matter they aren't in South America.
 
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2009 at 14:43
Originally posted by edgewaters edgewaters wrote:

...The Inuits and Aleuts are not entirely separate; they both originate with what's called "Thule Culture", which was a Siberian culture crossing over into the Americas beginning around 500 AD. The languages of the Inuit and Aleut are closely related and both belong to the "Eskimo-Aleut" family (aka Eskaleut). For whatever reason, the linguists haven't made the transition from "Eskimo" to "Inuit" but I digress ...

The Thule Culture moved in from Siberia around 500 AD and displaced a pre-existant Arctic culture already there, the Dorset. Nobody knows the exact origins of the Dorset, but it's thought they developed out of cultures existing in the area since Neolithic times (Independance I and II in Greenland, for instance) in which case they would be a Native American group or possibly a very ancient arrival from Siberia. Thule were clearly Eurasian, and of the AD era.

Exactly. In a very real sense, the corridor between Asian and the America never closed fully. No matter the land passage was blocked, it was still possible to cross by boat as the Thule culture did. I read a report not long ago that even during the Cold War, Inuits crossed from Siberia to Alaska and viceversa to see relatives! That's amazing to me.
 
Originally posted by edgewaters edgewaters wrote:

...
Who the "Skraelings" of Greenland were at the time the Norse arrived is a mystery, but not until around AD 1200 did the Thule Culture (ancestors of the Inuit) arrive in Greenland, having spread clear across the North American Arctic. Soon after, the Dorset and Norse both vanish from Greenland. The mystery is just the same, whatever happened to the Dorset as the Thule expanded is unknown, and we don't know what happened to the Norse colonies either - all that's known for certain is that the Inuit had been in contact with both, as they were familiar with both the Dorsets and the Norse. Wherever the Thule went, the Dorset - who had once covered the High Arctic - disappeared. When they got to Greenland, the Norse disappeared too.
 
The mistery of the Skraelings still go on. However, the mystery of the extinction of the Norse colonies in Greenland it seems is solved. A very detailed account of the process shows in the book "Colapse" by (who else?) Jared Diamond. According to him, the Norse culture was based in farming and milking, and the places where to put farm in Greenland were very few, particularly for pasture for cows. When the climate got rough, Europeans simply couldn't addapt and perished by hunger. The Inuits surivived, though, because they had a hunter gatherer lifestyle, unlike Norse that were only farmers.
 
 
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 07-May-2009
Location: denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 111
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2009 at 20:56
Diamonds view of the disappearance of norse settlements are not uncontested. The objections went there was little sign of violence and little sign of decreasing health or maltnutrition in skeletons. But as I remember the article there were some evidence that the norse adapted to local coirkumstances - ate more meat of local animals and less traditional agricultural products.
So Diamonds hypothesis may be good and elaborate and seems plausible. Not the same as true necessarily.
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-May-2009 at 02:30

Actually Diamond retracted and corrected that view in a later book (can't remember the name but it was published after collapse) when it was shown that research into the midden heaps in the Norse colonies showed that about 85% of the diet came from maritime sources, mostly seals. Practically none from cattle or wheat.

So the mystery goes on ...



Edited by edgewaters - 25-May-2009 at 02:31
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-May-2009 at 02:41
So, Colapse was balooney in that topic? Jesus! Diamond should research more carefully.
In conclusion, I liked his information on taro agriculture in New Guinea. His explanation about the relation between plants, animals and civilization is also very interesting.
 
I think he -and many others- exagerate too much the impact of contagious desease in the Americas. These guys don't read chronicles, I am afraid, and just want to invent the wheel once again.
 
His East-West spread theory makes some sense, but his north-south idea lacks support. It is just wrong.
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 07-May-2009
Location: denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 111
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-May-2009 at 07:27
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

So, Colapse was balooney in that topic? Jesus! Diamond should research more carefully.
In conclusion, I liked his information on taro agriculture in New Guinea. His explanation about the relation between plants, animals and civilization is also very interesting.
 
I think he -and many others- exagerate too much the impact of contagious desease in the Americas. These guys don't read chronicles, I am afraid, and just want to invent the wheel once again.
 
His East-West spread theory makes some sense, but his north-south idea lacks support. It is just wrong.
Not long ago I read his view of easter islanders have soome inaccuracies too. Where he gives the impression the islands ecosystem were directly destroyed by the actions of the inhabitants others say there is evidence some rats they unvoluntarely brought to the island (blind passengers over the pacific) - perhaps combined with worse climate. Still, that means humans indirectly were the main cause in my opinion.
Back to Top
Jams View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 06-Sep-2006
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 352
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jams Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-May-2009 at 19:07
Originally posted by edgewaters edgewaters wrote:

The Thule Culture moved in from Siberia around 500 AD and displaced a pre-existant Arctic culture already there, the Dorset. Nobody knows the exact origins of the Dorset, but it's thought they developed out of cultures existing in the area since Neolithic times (Independance I and II in Greenland, for instance) in which case they would be a Native American group or possibly a very ancient arrival from Siberia. Thule were clearly Eurasian, and of the AD era.

 
According to some research, the Dorsets were assimilated into the Inuit culture, so they did not dissapear completely, only their culture did. And many of the earlier culture's were not Dorset, the Dorset is a specific culture, not all pre-Thule cultures are Dorsets.
The interesting conclusions made by studying old human remains by the way of DNA is that they were related to Inuits but not Amerindians. Even older remains, 4000 years old, have been tested, and they show most similarity to Aleuts! and Siberian Yupik (Who originally came from Alaska!!!), but not Inuits. So maybe Aleuts and Yupik** are related to the early pre-thule (and pre-Dorset) Greenlanders -and they may be the last descendants of that culture.*
It is possible that the people the Norse met in Newfoundland was Dorset people.
 
 
**Interesting note:
The Siberian Yupik population was decimated after contact with European whalers - because of disease.
 
Ps. some of those "Yupik" was perhaps Sirenikski speakers, I'm not sure about that - the language is now pretty much extinct.
Anyone here know anything about those Sirenikski people? It's possible that they were the first "Eskimos" in the Americas!!
 
It is very mysterious. To bad it died out. Thank the Soviets for that. Here's an article, but it is very inconclusive, and is mostly about the other languages than Sirenikski,
It does claim, though, that the Sirenikski language was very distinct from the other "Eskimo" languages.


Edited by Jams - 25-May-2009 at 19:39
Infonor homepage: http://infonor.dk/ RAIPON homepage: http://www.raipon.org/
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-May-2009 at 04:20
Do the Dorset and other pre-Eskimos cultures of Greenland had Kayaks? That's something I wish to know since long ago.
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
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 0.047 seconds.