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 LockedThe word "America"

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1899
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2006 at 12:57
Quote Simply finding another source that states the same theory as you, also without any evidence, doesn't constitute proof.
Paul, if I am not mistaken, the German historian suggests the name of America was inspired by Amerigo (Americo) in a feminized form (as many other names from New World were). It is only that some modern historians believe these comments were fakes (interpolations). In this situation, those who make the extraordinary claim (which in our case would be the latter), have to bring the proper justification. Otherwise from a set of possible hypotheses, I (and probably many others) would take the most simple and verosimile - i.e. until other evidences suggest the contrary, I consider the account genuine.
Back to Top
jacobtowne View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 24-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 102
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jacobtowne Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2006 at 14:49
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Then, there still exist a change to discover the real Vinland south of Newfoundland. if so, the post found in Newfoundland could be just a secondary settlement. Any clues of the location you have heared?

That's really amazing!
 
Pinguin


Over the years, there have been several claims of Viking evidence in Maine and Massachusetts, mainly in the form of runes carved in stone. None of these claims has been substantiated.

It is entirely possible that some of the people from the settlement in Newfoundland sailed south to explore along the coast of what is now New England in the U.S.  and thus encountered the native grape.

JT

Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph

Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 2963
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2006 at 09:39
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Then, there still exist a change to discover the real Vinland south of Newfoundland. if so, the post found in Newfoundland could be just a secondary settlement. Any clues of the location you have heared?

That's really amazing!
 
Pinguin
 
 
The Mystery of The Mother Vine-
 
 

Mother Vineyard in Roanoke Island is home to the oldest known grapevine in the United States. This four-hundred year old Scuppernong mother vine has a trunk two feet thick and once stretched one-half an acre. Sir Walter Raleigh found this vine here in the Outer Banks and sent back reports that the vines "covered every shrub and climbed the tops of high cedars". That is a lot of grapevine! The Scuppernong is a variety of the muscadine grape and is the first grape actively cultivated in the United States. These sweet muscadines are a bronze-green color and have very thick bitter outside hulls, while the inside is sweet and juicy. Scuppernong grapes are extraordinarily high in antioxidants and are great for your cardiovascular health.

The mystery lies in who set these vines. The vines are set equal distances from each other, obviously planned and well taken care of since they were planted. Everyone agrees that these vines were set by advanced cultivators, who even used scaffolds to hold the vines but who were these advanced farmers? Algonquian Indians were native to this area and indeed grew tobacco and potatoes and were quite sophisticated in their farming methods. Colonists reported that the Indians made and enjoyed wine. Still the question arises - where did the original vines come from?

Perhaps the North guys got farther south than we thought? Wink
 
 
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: 30-Oct-2006 at 10:00
First, you should not downplay the skills of Algonquians or any Native Americans in the knowledge of agriculture. Remember that about half the plants the world consumed today, from corn to potatoes and chocolate, where selected and improved by Native Americans. They could have developed their own methods, like they did when they invented paper, adobe, sails, and thousands of other things. However, that does not excludes the possibility of contact. But if so, why Algonquians didn't have iron? Norse were skillful in that art. Besides, all the sagas say Natives and Inuits were very hostile with Norses, and viceversa.
 
Now, what about another clue?
 
Have you hear about the biography the son of Christopher Columbus wrote about his father? (It is authentic, you may find a translation in a good library)
 
It seem Columbus had news about the ancient settlements in the Northern lands of North America by the norse. After all, he was a sailor that made the routes to Northern Europe and Scandinavia, and was an excellent geographer and map maker. Not only that, he knew about certain acounts about the visit strange looking people in Ireland, perhaps Inuits. So, he was quite sure there were new lands across the Atlantic.
 
Well, some people have though Columbus planned his trip in a route close to the ecuator to avoid hitting northern lands!
 
There are many mysteries still there.
 
Pinguin
 


Edited by pinguin - 30-Oct-2006 at 10:32
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 2818
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2006 at 11:42

Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Well, some people have though Columbus planned his trip in a route close to the ecuator to avoid hitting northern lands!

    
Well, those people probably don't know so much about sailing. The reason is to be found in the concepts of currents and winds; it's pretty much impossible going straight westwards into the Gulfstream. Even ships going to the colonies in nowadays US took the same rout as Columbus, soutwards, then crossed to the Caribbean and then north.
Back to Top
jacobtowne View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 24-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 102
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jacobtowne Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2006 at 11:56
As far as I know, the only major agricultural crop developed in North America is the squash. Beans and corn came from South and Central America, and took many centuries to move north, mainly because of the desert barriers in northern Mexico and the American Southwest.

At the time of the first European settlers' arrival in New England in the 17th Century, the local Algonquin peoples had been cultivating these imports for only a few centuries.

In addition, North American Indians never domesticated draft animals to help with farming, since there were no suitable animals. Without the aid of horses and oxen, which came from Europe, all cultivation was done by people. This tended to limit the extent of agriculture.

New England Indians were mainly hunters and gatherers who lived on large rivers, lakes, or the seacoast, where fish were plentiful. Cultivation  of the "Three Sisters,", squash, beans, and corn, supplemented their diet.

An excellent study of this topic is Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fate of Human Societies by Jared Diamond. His thesis of the east-west axes of cultural contact and exchange, and the corresponding lack of north-south axes,  is fascinating.

The aborigines here not only did not have steel, they had no bronze, and so technically were New Stone Age people.

Great story about that Roanoke muscadine vine. At least the southerners  have a native species that is sweet, and not sour like a lemon.Smile

JT



Edited by jacobtowne - 30-Oct-2006 at 12:00
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: 30-Oct-2006 at 17:26
Originally posted by jacobtowne jacobtowne wrote:

As far as I know, the only major agricultural crop developed in North America is the squash. Beans and corn came from South and Central America, and took many centuries to move north, mainly because of the desert barriers in northern Mexico and the American Southwest.
 
Curiously enough, North American natives gave one important domestic bird that is consumed worldwide today: the turkey.

Originally posted by jacobtowne jacobtowne wrote:


At the time of the first European settlers' arrival in New England in the 17th Century, the local Algonquin peoples had been cultivating these imports for only a few centuries.

In addition, North American Indians never domesticated draft animals to help with farming, since there were no suitable animals. Without the aid of horses and oxen, which came from Europe, all cultivation was done by people. This tended to limit the extent of agriculture.
 
Not necesarily, although I agree in the case of North America. In Mexico and Peru, special techniques like the chinampas and terrace cultivation produced large yields.

Originally posted by jacobtowne jacobtowne wrote:


New England Indians were mainly hunters and gatherers who lived on large rivers, lakes, or the seacoast, where fish were plentiful. Cultivation  of the "Three Sisters,", squash, beans, and corn, supplemented their diet.

An excellent study of this topic is Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fate of Human Societies by Jared Diamond. His thesis of the east-west axes of cultural contact and exchange, and the corresponding lack of north-south axes,  is fascinating.

The aborigines here not only did not have steel, they had no bronze, and so technically were New Stone Age people.
 
I have the book of Jared Diamond, and I believe he has a very convincing thesis.
 
Although, the lifestyle of North American native peoples was simple, they were very ingenious and invented lots of things, starting from the mocasin, the snow racket, parkas, canoes and many other inventions. I recomend to take a look to this book: "American Indian Contributions to the World"
 
 
%5bbook cover%5d

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Now, for being in the stone age, I recall not all Native Americans of North America were in that stage. I can't recall the exact cite, though. Besides, In other places, like Mexico and Peru, metalurgy was thousand of years old already.
 
Originally posted by jacobtowne jacobtowne wrote:


Great story about that Roanoke muscadine vine. At least the southerners  have a native species that is sweet, and not sour like a lemon.Smile

 
That's quite interesting, indeed. I always though wine was brough by the Spanish priest for the ritual of mass
 
Pinguin


Edited by pinguin - 30-Oct-2006 at 17:28
Back to Top
jacobtowne View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 24-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 102
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jacobtowne Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2006 at 09:00
"Curiously enough, North American natives gave one important domestic bird that is consumed worldwide today: the turkey."

As far as I know, and someone will surely correct me if I'm mistaken, the Indians never domesticated the turkey.

As a historical aside, that great Jack-of-all-trades, Benjamin Franklin, wanted the wild turkey as America's national bird. He was outvoted, and we got the bald eagle instead.

Spanish priests planted vineyards at some of their missions in California, and perhaps elsewhere in territory formerly belonging to Mexico. I assume this was done with imported Vitis vinifera, since native grapes make terrible wineThumbs Down.

During the 18th Century, some adventurous experimenters, Thomas Jefferson among them I believe, imported vinifera to the East Coast. The vines grew well for a few years, and then died. No one knew at the time the cause for this - phylloxera, a plant louse that destroys grape vines. The native Eastern species are largely immune to this. Unfortunately, vinifera is not. Even more unfortunate, American grapevines were exported to Europe, resulting in the destruction of most of Europe's vineyards in the 19th Century.

JT

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: 31-Oct-2006 at 09:50

Jesus! I believe you should take a look at this book:

http://www.kporterfield.com/aicttw/index.html

As far as I know, Native Americans domesticated turkey. It not such difficult bird to domesticate after all. Come on.
Now, Vitis vinifera is an European grape, and of course Native Americans didn't have that grape available in the East Coast, and Catholic priest always carried wine parrs with them because the ritual of the mass required wine. So they brough European wine parrs to all the places they lived.
 
Now, for liquor, Native Americans contributed with some outstanding liquors. Take tequila, for instance, which is made of the blue agave.
 
"Even more unfortunate, American grapevines were exported to Europe, resulting in the destruction of most of Europe's vineyards in the 19th Century"
 
That was great for us in Chile, because we still have the original grapevines who where not affected by phylloxera.
 
Pinguin
 
Back to Top
jacobtowne View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 24-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 102
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jacobtowne Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2006 at 10:51
Here's a bit from the Encyclopedia Britannica. You are correct that Indians domesticated the turkey, but I was referring (perhaps unclearly) to North American peoples (north of Mexico).

"Domestication of the common turkey was probably begun by the Indians of Pre-Columbian Mexico. The birds were first taken to Spain about 1519, and from Spain they spread throughout Europe, reaching England in 1541. When the bird became popular in England, the name turkey-cock, formerly used for the guinea fowl of Islamic (or ďTurkishĒ) lands, was transferred to it. English colonists then introduced European-bred strains of the turkey to eastern North America in the 17th century. Turkeys were mainly bred for their beautifully coloured plumage until about 1935, after which the breeding emphasis changed to their meat qualities."


The wild turkey, which at one point was almost extinct in New England, was re-introduced in the 1960s. Today there are so many where I live that there are two different hunting seasons for them, one in the spring and one in the fall.

JT



Edited by jacobtowne - 31-Oct-2006 at 10:52
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: 31-Oct-2006 at 14:47
Hey Jacobtowne, now that we are talking about pre-contact Natives of the East coast, I wonder if you know the influence that Algonquins and other Natives had from the cultures of the south, mainly from Kahokia in the Mississippi. As far as I know, both the Anazasis and the Kahokians have pretty developed civilizations in the past and perhaps they were the link between the culture of Mexico and the East Coast.
 
Besides, I am interested to know if the case of Pocahontas (it was Algonquin, isn't?) it was an isolated case, of if intermarriage with Native Americans in the early East Coast colonies it was more widespread than usually though.
 
What do you think?
 
Pinguin
 
Back to Top
jacobtowne View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 24-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 102
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jacobtowne Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2006 at 15:50
Pinguin: I don't know near  enough to answer the questions in your first paragraph. Somehow the cultivation of beans and corn was transmitted to New England. These things spread slowly, tribe to tribe or band to band, but once north of Mexico, the cultivation of these plants spread north, east, and west, although some of the plains Indians remained nomadic.

Pocahontas was Powhatan, not Algonquin, although the Powhatans spoke an Algonquian dialect. But then many tribes in the northeast, midwest, and plains also spoke dialects of this large language group.

(Algonguin and Algonquian are two different things. I think the Algonquins are a tribe in eastern Canada.)

Few Northeast Indians as far as I know are full-blooded. Most have European blood, and some African blood. Whether this intermarriage took place during the early years of the colonies, or later, or both, I cannot say.

JT

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: 31-Oct-2006 at 19:55
Jacobtowne:
 
Thanks for your answers.
 
I am curious about admixture in early colonial times in today's U.S. because a simple reason: history of the U.S. hides some facts.
 
In Hispanic America, Brazil, the Caribbean and Canada there are quite detailed records of the admixture between European and Natives, particularly between European male and Native females, which formed families and rised theirs kids in the western society. Everything that its known, the evidence of historical sources and also genetics, is conclusive.
 
Everywhere there were assimilation of Natives into the mainstream of the colonial settlements, except in the U.S.. At least that is what the official history of the U.S. tell us.
 
Yes, every time I have asked  that question to an american, either experts or common people, the answer is always that "Natives in the U.S. have admixture of Europeans". Yes, people knows that. But what about White people? How much native admixture have the average white individual of the U.S.?
 
Actually, I know the answer because I have seen the genetical studies, but It amazes me this topic is been so forgotten in the history of the U.S. and I wonder when the whites will take theirs Indian side "out of the closet".
 
Pinguin
 


Edited by pinguin - 31-Oct-2006 at 20:01
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: 16-May-2009 at 04:51
About intermarriage. In the Swedish colony of New Sweden (in todays Delaware, New Jersey and Pennsylvania ) the Swedish priests complain over Swedish and Finnish settlers that were marrying native women and moving in with their people.
 
New Sweden lasted as a Swedish colony from 1638 - 1655.
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: 16-May-2009 at 05:04
That's interesting. Do you have the sources?
"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
Frederick Roger View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 09-Jan-2005
Location: Portugal
Status: Offline
Points: 661
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Frederick Roger Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-May-2009 at 13:22

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Amerike

Were America named after Amerigo Vespuci it would have been called Amerigia or, more likely, Vespucia.

Edited by Frederick Roger - 16-May-2009 at 13:24
Back to Top
Ikki View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Guanarteme

Joined: 31-Dec-2004
Location: Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 1358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ikki Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-May-2009 at 14:04
Originally posted by 1492 1492 wrote:

I saw a Latin Language map which describes Northwest Africa as a word "Amharica" (I think) very similar to "America." There is also an Ethiopian Language with the name "Amhara" or "Amharic."

 
 
After three years, i ask how this guy found this strange info. I think he confused √Āfrica with Am√©rica because hand writing letter, or is possible he confused Al-Maghrib or Magreb with Am√©rica. All in all, the info he provided was totally wrong.
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: 19-May-2009 at 19:04
Once I read a theory, or a suggestion, that the word America should not come from Amerigo Vespuci but from an Indigenous people in Middle America called the Amerique, living in the Amerique mountain range. These people was known to have a lot of gold. When the spaniards harassed the Indigenous peoples along the coast they used to point inwards  to the inland and say "Amerique" meaning that that people had a lot of gold and that the spaniards should go there instead.
 
Persson, Lars, 1968: "Amerigo Vespucci och Ameriqueindianerna (Amerigo Vespuci and the Amerique Indians)" in Flodk√§llornas folk (the People of the Sources of the Rivers).
 
The id√©a came originally from  Jules Marcou of the Academy of Sciences in Paris. He proposed it 1875.
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 07:29

I don't believe it comes from Amerigo Vespucci.

Nobody ever named anything after a first name.

Waldseemuller - not Vespucci - was the first to give this explanation. He did not know the source of the name and attributed it to Vespucci. 

What we know is that he was working with a copy of a map made by Giovanni Caboto (John Cabot), the first explorer to discover the mainland. This map is now lost but there are some suggestions he named the mainland after his most important sponsor, a Bristol merchant by the name of Richard Amerike. From this same map, we also get the name for Newfoundland.

Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1899
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2009 at 10:06
Quote Nobody ever named anything after a first name.
Georgia comes from George, Louisiana from Louis, Carolina from Charles (Carolus in Latin), Alexandria from Alexander, Konstanz from Constantine, Johannesburg from John (Johann), that's not to add lots of places with names like St. George (e.g. one of Danube's mouths), or Valea lui Mihai (in western Romania, this names means Michael's Valley).
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.