American History

[nnyhav]

Fed action resources:

Today's WSJ frontpager on the past week or so can be had without $ubscription
http://www.moneyweb.co.za/mw/view/mw/en/page94?oid=155117&sn=Detail

FOMC economist on market ops
http://www.voxeu.com/index.php?q=node/460

Lots of other commentary on this at
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/
(with links to other topics top right)

[madupont]

Stocks & Bonds
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/21/business/21stox.html?hp

Investors, on Edge, Grab Up Treasury Bills

The rush to buy Treasuries offered an indication that the Federal Reserve, which on Friday unexpectedly reduced its rate for loans to banks, might need to do more to reassure investors about the credit markets

[madupont]

thanatopsy

Thanks for the barnes and noble input as I've learned three important facts, on a personal level to start with:  I have Dane dna on both sides of my family which I had not considered before.

It is good to know the Iroquois had the capability to keep the Vinlanders from proceeding much further southward past L'Anse.

I now know why the "Berserkers" carried those battle axes as their main weapon of choice. They had to in order to break the ice off the mast sail to keep them from becoming top heavy and going under and drowning.

[madupont]

Bob

"it was the grossly selfish mismanagement of this control of the nation's credit structure in the 1920s that finally brought down the WASP ascendancy with the Crash of 1929, and the ensuing Depression."

Joseph W. Alsop

[caclark]

weezo, August 20, 2007 at 10:56 PM: ".... when we teach children that "Columbus Discovered America", we are teaching a falsehood....... I will be curious how one officially "discovers" geography enough so as to be given that discovery in the history books."

You need to give more credit to historical writing that's gone on over the past few decades. History has made great strides in correcting past inequities and trying to place Columbus’ 1492 voyage into a more balanced perspective. The writing of history is an ongoing process and is continually subject to revision. But if you're trying to argue that Columbus was not the first to discover America and that he got disproportionate credit for his accomplishment, then you're arguing against ideas that very few thinking and educated adults believe anymore.

[weezo]

Clark,

When I see Columbus put in proper perspective in elementary textbooks in wide use, I will feel better.

A week or so ago, I got an email from a grandmother who was taking over the raising of her twin grandchildren. She had found my Famous Americans, and knowing we were in the same age range, asked me to compile and send her a list of the facts and names that "should" be taught to children, as was done when we were in school. My reply to her was to suggest she take a look at the SOLs used by schools in Virginia, which was the original basis of my Famous Americans (although they have grown greatly since that beginning), and to consider the fact that history is never a done deal and that even now I was learning about others who preceded Columbus so that the "historical fact" of his accomplishment was in serious decline.

I have not heard back from her since.

I'm sure that if she checks other sources, she will stumble upon the infamous work of Ed Hersch, who does set out to set down once and for all what children are to learn and in what order. She would find Hersch's dogmatism much more to her liking than my always inquiring mind.

[caclark]

weezo,

Yes, we do have a ways to go. Deeply ingrained cultural biases are difficult to counter and Columbus' 1492 voyage still looms larger than life in popular imagination. It always will, and to some extent deservedly so, not because it was first or most important but because of the impact it had on Western consciousness. Those who preceded Columbus and came back to tell about it had limited impact in isolated locales. But Columbus' voyage touched off a continental competition between Spain, Portugal, England, and France to send their own fleets sailing westward to find out what was out there.

For America's indigenous tribes, it spelled the end to their hegemony and the submergence of their cultures to European dominance. Resentment still lingers and fosters an intellectual atmosphere that is ripe for books like Menzies' 1421 that attempt to take the luster off of the European triumph. A ready readership can easily overlook sloppy or even bogus history that offers a hope. The very title 1421 offers a not-so-subtle counterpoint to 1492.

[Dzimas]

I think the native Americans could dispute any claims to discovering America, since they migrated to the continent from Mongolia and ancient Japan. Numerous theories abound from land bridges to fishing expeditions, but they got here long before Columbus, the Chinese, the Norse or anyone else.  The idea that Columbus discovered America has always rankled me, since he was pretty late in the game.  He didn't even put the continent on the map, still thinking he was seeing outlying islands of China.  But, one has to give him credit for opening a new area of exploration, which was quickly exploited by fellow Europeans.  It is interesting that Vinland remained for centuries a myth.  I suppose Norse cartography was rather primitive in those days, which is why Leif Eriksson got so little credit.

[weezo]

Dzimas,

You are probably right that the Norse were not mapmakers. It wasn't one of their interests or skill sets. They just told one another how to make the voyages.

Actually, if we were to explore the work of the Portuguese prior to Columbus, in discovering and charting the world, we may find that Columbus, who was said to be a cruel and mean-spirited individual, actually did little but promote his expedition while the Portuguese were more secrative in their efforts. I guess the laurels of history rest on the man who beats the loudest drum, and in that sense, Gavin Menzies seems to want to be the Columbus of the 21st century!

[thanatopsy]

Thanatopsy:
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?ean=9780465022724&displayonly=CHP&z=y#CHP

From THE LITTLE ICE AGE

RW,

Thanx for that note on the climate change.  Interestingly, if it is true that warm waters enabled the Chinese to traverse the Arctic, then why pass up all of nearby Europe if they were looking for tribute as Menzies claims?

[Bob]

thanatopsy:

Because, in part, Menzies is based  on speculation and, in part, the question can never be answered--we can never know why people do not do what they do not do unless they leave the answer themselves, in writing if possible. Lastly, the Chinese navigators didn't really know where Europe was--so they didn't know they were passing up anything----Europe hadn't been "discovered" yet...

[madupont]

Dzimas,re:#786

I have to suppose that Mongolia was a great deal more romantic when it was considered separate from China; and,  maintained that it was, even after a Mongolian dynasty that became China  Today, it is just considered one of the indigenous minority regions and as much of their own culture that remains is not quite as wonderful but I dare anyone to say that who has watched the film, The Story of the Weeping Camel,
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373861/plotsummary

Although, they may not have come to the NA continent by camel, I say they walked, possibly with Mongolian ponies pulling "travois" which of course were called something else at that time because they never had met the French.

Above is a German-made film by the way, but since it is in spoken Mongolian with English subtitles, what the hey. I sat there never moving out of my chair, but noticed the cat could not leave the room either. She apparently knew what the camels were saying.

[Bob]

Something can be "discovered" only once.  America was discovered once. When that was and by whom can be the subject of argument....it all depends on the definition and the  criteria regarding the discovery of lands. That's why I asked what the criteria is--that way it'll be easier to decide who fulfilled the criteria. My problem is that I can't remember where I read the criteria, but I remember the book I was reading was quite specific with its list. I know settlement and control had something to do with it--some sort of exploitation (rather than just trade) is also necessary---exploitation with a neutral connotation, rather than a negative one. In the Age of Exploration it was necessary to have such criteria in order to determine what lands belonged to whom. You just couldn't go into an area and plant the cross and declare the land for a given monarch. The land had to be identified as newly found and hitherto belonging to no one--going in and trading, as the Chinese reportedly did does not imply "discovery." They could care less--they weren't there to discover and claim--neither were the Irish or the Norse--all  of them may have visited this continent, but never realized they  stepped on hitherto undiscovered lands--all they wanted was to fish and trade.....

See what I'm driving at?

[weezo]

Bob you said in part:

'"The land had to be identified as newly found and hitherto belonging to no one--going in and trading, as the Chinese reportedly did does not imply "discovery." '"

Ah, therin is the rub. The land Columbus landed on did indeed "belong" to someone - those who were living there. The Natives had rulers, rudimentary laws and government, and strong traditions including who was entitled to use which lands.

I think the definition you learned was rather euro-centric, in that if it didn't belong to a European power, or a power recognized by the Europeans, it could be "claimed". Of course, it was only by armed force that the "claim" could be enforced as we see in the history of the Europeans in both Americas.

Even by your Euro-centric definition, England could not "claim" Virginia, since it had already been given to the Spanish by a papal edict.

To my mind, if you develop trade and begin, however weakly, colonization or intermarriage with the native people, someone else cannot claim to have "discovered" those lands. They already exist on someone's books and cannot be "re-discovered".

The only people who can be said to have "discovered" the Americas are those who came from Mongolia, Siberia, China, Japan, Australia, the South Sea Islands, Scandanavia, Scotland, etc. etc., etc., who planted their bodies on the land and made it their own. Any other claim of "discovery" is pure semantics, and not suitable to be taught to elementary students.

[caclark]

weezo, August 21, 2001 at 5:18 PM: "....The only people who can be said to have "discovered" the Americas are those who came from Mongolia, Siberia, China, Japan, Australia, the South Sea Islands, Scandanavia, Scotland, etc. etc., etc., who planted their bodies on the land and made it their own. Any other claim of "discovery" is pure semantics, and not suitable to be taught to elementary students."

Whatever you decide to teach elementary students in the next edition of your reader, be sure to let them know that it’s coming from an “always inquiring mind” as you put it in describing yourself. Otherwise, the little tykes might get the misunderstanding that what you tell them is part of a catechism they’re expected to memorize.

As for me, I’m finished here for today. This whole argument as to whether Columbus did or did not discover America has become downright ludicrous.