Re: Amerindian navigators and Eurocentrism in scholarship
On Sun, 14 Sep 1997 03:52:29 GMT, firstname.lastname@example.org (Ron Hopkins-Lutz)
>In article <email@example.com
>(William Wallace) wrote:
>}On Fri, 12 Sep 1997 23:19:27 -0700, firstname.lastname@example.org (Hugh
>}>In article <email@example.com
>}>(William Wallace) wrote:
>}>> Even in the most primitive "things that float" found have
>}>> streamlining of some sort. About the only thing that doesn't is river
>}>> barges that do not move under their own power.
>}>Irish used to use round "coracles", which must have been rather ungainly
>}>in the water, but they could get from Britain to Ireland.
>} I am not familiar. Are you saying they are rectangular?
>Oh if you don't know about coracles, then you're missing a really fun
>Coracles are circular:
Circular beats rectangular any day. And certainly I agree to at
least one sort of exception.
>not even elliptical. Navigating them is as hard or
>easy as navigating an inner tube, depending on how good you are with inner
>tubes. I've always been amazed they can make it more than three feet at a
>in a given direction in them.
Rather the more problem with a rectangular raft, as I was saying.
>They were in use in deep water for at least a few hundred years. Amazing
>tribute to human tradition that. Made of hide too. Some fellow tried to show
>that St. Brendan could have made to the Americas across the Atlantic in a
>coracle, per some Irish sources. Don't remember if he actually made it, but
>seems to me he did, or got so far to the West as to make no matter. Of
>since they'd probably hit North America somewhere between New Jersey and
>Boston, one wonders why anyone would have bothered coming back to North
>America once they did? (That's a joke.)
Having visited the region, I don't think that region is a
laughing matter either.
But again it asks the question, how would they get back? Rowing?
You can't effectively position oarsmen on a round object.
Any sufficiently convoluted argument can be made to appear to be science
as the layman equates incomprehensibility with science.
Partial thread listing: