1491

The Atlantic ^ | 4-2-2002 | Charles C. Mann

[xm177e2]

Bump for an interesting (anti-environmentalist at one point) article.

[blam]

Click here for link to article

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Bumpity...

[goody2shooz]

The Spaniards of the 15th century weren't exactly what I would term "model Christians", far from it. But they were honestly shocked, horrified and outraged at the sight of obvious human sacrifices and, dare I say it, cannabilism practiced by the peoples of the Western Hemisphere.

Any attempt to equate THAT so called native civilization with ours today sickens me.

[Ole Okie]

Dang, those Amazon rain-forests sure look just like Amazon jungles to me.

Sorta like the Native Americans look just like American Indians to an old Oklahoman.

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

If they want to return as much of the landscape as possible to its 1491 state, they will have to find it within themselves to create the world's largest garden.

Fantastic Read Thanx

[Map Kernow]

the Amazon rain forest may be largely a human artifact

So then the Amazon rain forest, being a human creation for human use, may be exploited for current human needs, correct?

[Eska]

I know alot of good decent alaska natives; but have you ever been to a bush village or on a reservation? They sure did a 180 after 1492.

[spqrzilla9]

Some of the claims in the article appear highly unlikely. I think they overestimate population in the Americas pre 1492 by at least a factor of two.

[rightofrush]

Dang, those Amazon rain-forests sure look just like Amazon jungles to me.

You sound like one of those un-reconstructed paleo-cons who call wet lands swamps.

You've got company.

[farmfriend]

As the University of Wisconsin historian William Cronon has written, restoring this long-ago, putatively natural state is, in the view of environmentalists, a task that society is morally bound to undertake. Yet if the new view is correct and the work of humankind was pervasive, where does that leave efforts to restore nature?

Long but an interesting read. This should interest you Mark as it seems to support your ideas.

[farmfriend]

Pinging others who might find this interesting. If you like this article, you will like this.

[B4Ranch]

Have you ever read the Wilderness Act of 1964 Not one word about the United Nations in the whole damn thing!

[RightWhale]

Quite a story.

[LadyDoc]

I loved the article.

Not only did it point out that the "pristine" wilderness never existed since the Indians were farmers, but it pointed out that they died of disease, not deliberate genocide.

However, the comment of historians that they would have rather been an Indian than a European in 1491 sounds true. Indian MEN had high status. Women, on the other hand, in many tribes were little more than chattel. Better to be a European woman who had some rights.

[RandyRep]

Thanks for the post and the link. This was a fascinating article from a historical, anthropological and epidemicological view.

I'm going to post the link on some History and Archy forums I frequent to see what the consensus of opinion is.

From my initial read, I found this article was pretty much devoid of PC, environmentalist or socialist propaganda. There are many interpretations of data collected over centuries, including the eyewitness accounts from history. It seems to assume that the accounts by de Soto, la Salle and others were correct - and tries to figure out why the changes took place.

[LostTribe]

Thanks for the bump. Printed it (17 pages) out for study.

[denydenydeny]

Indexing.

[farmfriend]

I will read that. I noticed the Forest Service emblem on the page. My dad worked for the Forest Service. He just told me this weekend that the federal government owns 72% of the land in California. I was shocked that it was that high. I knew it was over 50%.