[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: chicken in America: from Asia? (cont.)

In article <5996v4$j01@news1.io.org>, yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky) wrote:
>agdndmc@showme.missouri.edu (DomingoMartinez-Castilla) wrote:

>: Acosta, Mr Kuchinsky, is NOT, repeat , NOT an early observer for South 
>: American standards: 1590 is late, very late.
>Yes, but he was an early observer in _that area_.

False.  Carter mentions Acosta's surprise about finding words for hen and egg 
(this one still makes me smile) in the Kechwa language of the Incas... in 
1590!  Spanish towns and cities were well established all over the Andes by 
then.  There were no conquistadors left anymore, and the Spanish polity was 
already established all over the Andes.  Sheesh!  You hate to recognize that 
somebody else may be right even when that person is providing a better source 
than the one Carter gives!

>I am grateful to you for finding that quote from Trujillo. But that quote
>doesn't exactly disprove what I said. It may indeed add weght to it...

Another bigger sheesh!  Of course it adds weight to Carter's argument.  The 
problem is that the argument itself is not such a thing.  Carter talks about a 
*hypothesis*, doesn't he?  In your lovely "essay about the chicken" you claim 
that such hypothesis has not been disproven!  Can you tell me of a hypothesis 
that has?  Any hypothesis?  Hypotheses are meant to be proved, not the other 
way around, lest they become religion.

If I posted the Diego de Trujillo quote it was because it is part of my 
interest in a topic very dear to you: diffusion, especially related to 
agriculture, has not been studied as much as it should.  (Of course, the only 
diffusion you care to "study" is the one coming from Eurasia or Africa before 
Columbus, especially if it is "documented" in one of the ...er... abundant 
sources you quote ad nauseaum.)  I am of course more interested in the 
consequences of the introduction of the very few and successful Eurasian 
domesticates (plants and animals) in an agricultural environment dominated by 
the largest (by far) variety of domestic plants (and the lowest in domestic 
animals).  But that is another thread altogether.

The history of American pre-Columbian agriculture has not been written yet.  
We do not even have enough information to understand how research and 
development of the abundant  varieties (very necessary in such a varied 
environment) of local crops were accomplished and, yes, diffused.  We still 
are fighting with the concept of multicrop agriculture vis-a-vis specialized 
monocrops. En fin...

Perhaps you have all the answers to those issues as well...

Domingo Martinez Castilla