Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Eric in the Ozarks

If you look at the Aztec and Mayan civilizations, you’ll see larger numbers. But north of Mexico, the numbers were probably never more than five million. The historians looked at the absence of cities and the nomadic life of most Indians and calculated that it would have been very difficult to build up large numbers of people. We must be wary of work done by leftist academicians who look to inflate numbers for political purposes.


50 posted on 09/24/2011 2:49:38 PM PDT by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: driftless2
That's Mann's conclusion. Very large cities and populations in southern Mexico, Central America and South America. Very little of this on the plains.

The first Indians that the English and Dutch encountered on the east coast (1600s) had sizable populations and stayed in an established range for the most part but did not have the structure found around Mexico City and south.

All these populations were cut down mercilessly by having never been exposed to European disease. Africans had been exposed, thus made better slaves for the Spanish and other Europeans.

Mann mentions “over-counters” and “under-counters” who have political issues they want to put forward. I'd recommend both his books.

52 posted on 09/25/2011 5:22:15 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson