It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

American History??

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 03:23 PM
link   
I've alwats wondered , all over the world there is historic buildings, old writings,and such dating back to the 1100's or older.But here in the US history seems to start in the 1600's. I know thats when Europens arrived here.

My question is didn't the natives have history?? built buildings??? why did the move around so much?? why didn't they become civilizaived ( build homes and communitys)




posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by twestjr79
 


"My question is didn't the natives have history?? built buildings??? why did the move around so much?? why didn't they become civilizaived ( build homes and communitys)"

Try googling "Cahokia mounds". Or Native American Mound Builders. Interesting stuff. At Cahokia, they built a pyramid with greater internal volume than the pyramid of Khufu.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   
There a TONS of native american structures around this country. However, no one cares about the native culture of this country.

Also, the natives were earthly people. Many of what they built and used were things made from the earth, that would not hold up for centuries. Throw in the fact that the american government made it a point to COMPLETELY ERADICATE these people and their traditions, and it starts to make sense why you dont see more of it....

Come out to Oregon, though. You'll see native heritage that will blow your mind.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic
There a TONS of native american structures around this country. However, no one cares about the native culture of this country.


Sorry, but that's simply not true. The Pueblo Indians did some amazing work and it's being cared for most carefully. Just one example.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Many indian sites have been worked, and people in general, and various different funded societies, usually through Universities or State Pride type affiliations, work very hard to preserve them.

The main reason we have a lot more history after the 1600's is mostly because the Northern Native Americans predominantly passed their history on orally. Same with early Celts and other cultures, the only early writings we have of them are the writings of the people who studied them.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   
I have to agree with what the people above had said but to also had in writing and buildings the winner writes the history therefore anything about the natives would have been blacklisted if it made the colonist look bad.

They were hunter gathers at first and then moved on to farming, since they were moving from place to place they wouldn't build huge castle and stone buildings like Europe has, and the same for everything else the natives basically had no need for it so it wasn't discovered or built; that would be wasting man power useless stuff.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by jatsc
 


"the winner writes the history"

??????

You've obviously never heard of "Vietnam".



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 03:55 AM
link   
They did have history, but most North American peoples did not have writing before Columbus came. Some did, notably the Central American peoples.

They did build buildings, and there is all kinds of ruins in places like Mexico or Peru, and some in other places too, though they are concentrated in those areas. There are native buildings in southwest USA, for instance, I think made by the Pueblo that Gawdzilla mentions.

The reasons the natives moved around a lot has to do with the kinds of food available in pre-Columbian times. Jared Diamond wrote two great books called "Guns, Germs and Steel" and "Collapse" that set down some pretty good arguments that this type of lifestyle was dictated by the environment and resources they had available at the time. By the luck of the draw, areas like the Middle East got a lot better crops to grow and eat, and the Americas far fewer, so if you wanted to eat in early America, you often had to be nomadic, as just one example from those books.

As for equating civilization with homes and communities, I understand where you are coming from with that, but I'd argue that isn't necessarily what defines civilization. And again, there were peoples that did build permanent communities, like Aztecs or Incas, for instance.

Another reason, already mentioned in this thread, why natives appear to have no history, is because it was quashed by Europeans. I have read accounts of early missionaries burning every scrap of native writing that they could get their hands on because it was 'pagan'. Entire tribes were wiped out, either deliberately (warfare, extermination, relocation) or accidentally (diseases their immune systems had never seen). The Beothuk were an example of one such tribe that no longer exists; if memory serves they lived in the Maritimes/New England area.

Another great book is Howard Zinn's "People's History of the United States." Chapter 1 is about Columbus, and it goes all the way up to the late 90s, when it was written. Included in the early chapters are historical accounts of all kinds of horrible treatment of the natives. Columbus, for example, thought that natives 'would make great slaves', because he didn't think they would be able to put up much of a fight. (turns out that making natives into slaves didn't work very well, but they tried) In later years, the early American government reneged on deal after deal with the native peoples, cheating them out of land, forcing relocations on them, provoking battles, and so on.

You could, though it's slightly off topic, probably change 'native American' with 'African' in just about every sentence I wrote, and it would still be true. Africa has a rich and diverse history, but again, it's not well known by the average person, just as the natives of America do. There are books you can read that talk about such history, but you'll find that books on other cultures, like Europeans (especially Greek/Roman) vastly outnumber them. Also, most general history/world history texts tend to mention such peoples only very briefly. I've read quite a few history books, and taken classes on it in university, and the world history books almost invariably were nearly all Europe and the Middle East, and very little on the Americas or Africa, or most of Asia.



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Star for you DragonsDemesne. Your post very eliquently spells out what is wrong with our history books. I have always been fascinated with mythology of our ancestors (and by our ancestors, I do mean across the world). The problem is finding out what it is when several cultures had oral traditions and no consistent writings.

Side note. If anyone can recommend some books that detail Native American or African mythology, please U2U me. Those are two definite areas my library is lacking on.



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   
The problem of "American history" or "African history" is it's the history of bands and tribes (small by today's standards)... and you are trying to grab a tail of a thousand threads.

For folklore, I like Pitt's site since it details how old the story was and where it was collected -- www.pitt.edu... . There are some ethnographic sites with authentic tales. Many of the modern books are "modern tales."

Oh. Franz Boas had a number of books on the Northwest tribes that included some folklore.



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic
There a TONS of native american structures around this country. However, no one cares about the native culture of this country.


Sorry, but that's simply not true. The Pueblo Indians did some amazing work and it's being cared for most carefully. Just one example.


ugh, thanks for the reading comprehension. As I said there are TONS of these structures around. As a whole, this society does not care about them, which is why they are not national monuments and things of that nature like they are in other countries.

I live in the northwest. The native american influence is HEAVY, everywhere you go around here. As a whole, they are largely ignored by the rest of the country.

It's the truth. Like it or not.



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 


"ugh, thanks for the reading comprehension. As I said there are TONS of these structures around. As a whole, this society does not care about them, which is why they are not national monuments and things of that nature like they are in other countries."

One of us failed, certainly. The Peublos are ONE stance of such being cared for. (Didn't think I'd have to explain that.)



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 




However, no one cares about the native culture of this country.


That's a bit of an overstatement don't you think? There are nat'l. monuments, state parks, etc... that deal exclusively with Native American, and in Canada, the First Nation, culture.

There are many people who care.



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 


"ugh, thanks for the reading comprehension. As I said there are TONS of these structures around. As a whole, this society does not care about them, which is why they are not national monuments and things of that nature like they are in other countries."

One of us failed, certainly. The Peublos are ONE stance of such being cared for. (Didn't think I'd have to explain that.)


So your argument is that since 1/100th of the native history in this country is being preserved, that means that this country cares?

Come on now.



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic

So your argument is that since 1/100th of the native history in this country is being preserved, that means that this country cares?

Come on now.

You shouldn't make up your own statistics to avoid the tiny, tiny amount of work (research) required to show that you don't know what you're talking about.

Harte



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 


Actually, hundreds or thousands of sites are worked, studied, and preserved.

I have no idea if the "country" cares, however the people who work the sites certainly do, probably a good deal more than you do.


You shouldn't make up your own statistics to avoid the tiny, tiny amount of work (research) required to show that you don't know what you're talking about.

Harte



Well, 89% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

[edit on 30-4-2009 by RuneSpider]



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic

So your argument is that since 1/100th of the native history in this country is being preserved, that means that this country cares?

Come on now.

You shouldn't make up your own statistics to avoid the tiny, tiny amount of work (research) required to show that you don't know what you're talking about.

Harte


Okay. I do live in the most heavily populated native american area in the nation. I have spent 10 years studying the culture. That i threw out a random number like 1/100th(which the actual percentage would be lower), has nothing to do with the POINT of what I am saying.

Whether you like to admit it or not, this nation has disregarded the history of our natives. Most of the history is UNRECOVERABLE(which is truly my point), because it has been destroyed.

The native history of this country has been completely erradicated. That they are NOW trying to recover it doesnt change the fact that the majority of it is lost forever.

But please, appease your guilt however you need.



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by RuneSpider


Actually, hundreds or thousands of sites are worked, studied, and preserved.

I have no idea if the "country" cares, however the people who work the sites certainly do, probably a good deal more than you do.




Well, 89% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

[edit on 30-4-2009 by RuneSpider]

wow, you guys are amazing. That a VERY SMALL group of people (as compared to the whole) cares kind of proves my point. Thanks for playing.



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   



But please, appease your guilt however you need.

What guilt does he need to appease?

I'm not completely sure, but I don't think anyone on this site had a hand in that cookie jar.



posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   
*star* Dragon.

Quite simply, the only reason humans are able to design and build technology is because we are able to live in abundance. Every life form on earth is completely absorbed with survival, find food, eat food, find more food, eat more food.

Humans, once able to have abundant food, or able to delegate other people to gathering food, gives them the opportunity to work on technology. The natives had no made it to a point where they could sustain large civilizations and thus were forced to move from area to area in search of food.

As dragon mentioned previously, just like every other civilization that was encountered by europeans, the Natives, their writing, and their history has been systematically destroyed.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join