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

Re: Maize origins [was re: "Corn" in medieval Europe]

In article <5dcjjo$dqt$1@trends.ca> yuku@mail.trends.ca (Yuri Kuchinsky) writes:
>If fossilized corncobs are found in India, the argument will be over,
>sure. Ditto if genetic research proves (or disproves) beyond doubt that
>maize was ancient in India. 

Exactly, couldn't agree with you more.

>But until such time as decisive evidence shows up, the investigation
>should continue and all further evidence should be considered. So the fact
>that no fossils are available so far does not mean much. It's simply a
>lack of evidence and is of little consequence. 

All well and good.  And as long as Precolumbian maize in India proponents
want to say that it is a possible, yet still unproven hypothesis I
don't know of anyone who would have a problem with this.  Where the whole
thing gets out of hand is when individuals claim that the matter has
been definitely settled, that J&P's work proves for certain maize was in
India, and that anyone who disagrees with this is wrong and/or covering
up the truth.

Again if J&P or any of their followers feel that sufficient work has not 
been done at relevant sites then I suggest that they go about organizing 
a detailed archaeological investigation which will examine the cultural
and botanical remains at such sites.  If they don't go about such work 
then we'll just have to wait until Indian archaeologists get to such
work for their own reasons.

Peter van Rossum

Follow-Ups: References: