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

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

Yuri wrote:
GKeyes6988 (gkeyes6988@aol.com) wrote:
: Yuri wrote:

: Yuri re-replied:  : >And where did the Asian chickens get to the
Caribbean from? Methinks : >you're obfuscating. If they were in the
Caribbean, they MUST HAVE BEEN in : >S. America before then. So the
evidence for the Caribbean is even : STRONGER : >than the evidence for S.
America that you asked for. 

: Not true.  Why do you assume that the chickens could only have reached
: Carribean overland (and then oversea) from South America (and yet never
: reaching Central America, bu Carter's own admission)? 

>Well, the Caribbean islands are very close to S. America.

: Yuri, there were
: boats going EVERYWHERE, all the time in this two hundred years.  Boats
: going from Europe to Asia to South America, from Asia to Europe to South
: America, from Asia around the cape and up to the Carribean -- and back!.

>The latter was not a common route. Usually, (coming from Asia) they
>unloaded in Mexico, and the goods were transferred overland and then
>taken to Europe.

>I do not think it likely that the boats would come across the Pacific
>from Asia directly to the Caribbean. If you know of such cases, please
>enlighten us. 

Actually it was dealt with by someone else on another post -- about
Manilla galleons.  Manilla being in the Phillipines, of which I'm sure you
are aware.

I never said that ships came non-stop from Asia to the Carribean, only
that ships came from Asia to the Carribean before returning to Europe.  Of
course I can look up these routes, if you refuse to believe this, but it
will wait until after Christmas.

Even assuming that such a voyage happened only once a decade (and it
happened  much, much more than that) that's still twenty voyages in two
hundred years.

: Constantly.  Every year, more than once a year.  The ships carried all
: kinds of things, especially things like chickens that the people on the
: ship could eat.

: >So? This is not the point. Did the Europeans bring Asian chickens from
: >Europe? Absurd. 

: Not absurd at all. 

>Yes it is. Europe didn't have Asian chickens at the time.

And of course, if you hadn't dissected my paragraph in this way, it would
be clear that I don't say that they did, nor that this is why it isn't
absurd.  Try dealing with my argument as a whole rather than fragmenting
it to give the illusion that you are arguing it.

: As Carter admits, Asian chickens could have easily
: come on European ships. 


So Asian chickens in the Carribean after two hundred years of global trade
does nothing whatsoever to prove that they were there in Pre-Columbian
times.  I refuse to believe that you don't understand this point.

: You think European ships only came to the
: Carribean via Europe? 

>This would be absurd. I don't believe this.

Good.  Then what is your point?

: In the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth
: centuries?  Thinking that is the absurdity. 


: : Capa is a scholar writing in the early part of the
: : 20th century. Almost has far removed from the situation we are.

: >But having access to unique and original sources.

: What sources were these? 

>Archival sources, Greg.

This is kind of like answering the question, "what kind of people did you
talk to?" with "The kind that talk."

Of course, I meant what specific documents.  As someone who does primarily
ethnohistory, I am well aware of archives and their contents. 

: Unique usually means that there is only one such : source, or that this
source has some singular quality.  Original implies : that these sources
are either unlike others or are germinal in some way.  : Your net
implication seems to be that he had sources that we do not.  If : this is
not what you mean, then what do you mean?

: What sources did he have that we do not?

>I'm glad to be able to clarify this for you, Greg. Capa went to the
>colonial archives and raised obscure eyewitness accounts.

This doesn't clarify much because you don't tell me which accounts.These
also  do not qualify as sources we do not have, which is what I asked you
for.  I have a friend who has been working in the Spanish Colonial
archives for some time now, and those researching Central and South
America do so constantly.    Furthermore, much of the material in the
Spanish archives has been published in book form and is readily available.
 This is true of most of what you have cited Capa as using.  I suppose I
assumed you had the Carter chapter in hand and could just tell me which
sources he used, but I guess you don't and can't.  In which case I can go
back to the library and get it myself (again).

Why is it that you accuse me and others of not informing ourselves, when
it seems like we are the ones who do all of the library work on this ng?

>This is what happened. If you get a big grant, you can do the same, I

I probably don't need a big grant to see Capa's sources.

--Greg Keyes-