5 ms·

An article so good it was expanded into a book. In contrast with most books which never have been more than articles. :) The book was reviewed thousands of tim

An article so good it was expanded into a book. In contrast with most books which never have been more than articles. :) The book was reviewed thousands of times but here's mine http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2005/12/28/1491/ http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2005/12/28/1491/ Or there's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1491:_New_Revelations_of_the_Americas_Before_Columbus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1491:_New_Revelations_of_the_A... and about the followup https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1493:_Uncovering_the_New_World_Columbus_Created https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1493:_Uncovering_the_New_World...

b_emery 11y ago
The article is pretty old. Do the books, or other articles address the criticisms? eg: " "I have seen no evidence that large numbers of people ever lived in the Beni," says Betty J. Meggers, of the Smithsonian Institution. "Claiming otherwise is just wishful thinking." Similar criticisms apply to many of the new scholarly claims about Indians, according to Dean R. Snow, an anthropologist at Pennsylvania State University. The problem is that "you can make the meager evidence from the ethnohistorical record tell you anything you want," he says. "It's really easy to kid yourself."" I just wonder how it's viewed by experts in the field, now.
- mlinksva 11y ago
  It's been a very long time since I read the first book, afraid I recall few details. The second book probably not as it covers the biological effects of the 'great exchange' and IIRC doesn't retread the 1491 material. But I had those sorts of questions while reading, and generally do about books. I wish all were continually revised, or at least the articles on English Wikipedia about them would point out obsolete and incorrect claims.
- mkozlows 11y ago
  The book is a fairly evenhanded account of where the controversies are, what positions are held, and what the major points of evidence are.
Gravityloss 11y ago
Thank you so much! Mind boggling. (I think I have lost the capability to enjoy reading long-winded books or stories.)

b_emery 11y ago

The article is pretty old. Do the books, or other articles address the criticisms? eg: " "I have seen no evidence that large numbers of people ever lived in the Beni," says Betty J. Meggers, of the Smithsonian Institution. "Claiming otherwise is just wishful thinking." Similar criticisms apply to many of the new scholarly claims about Indians, according to Dean R. Snow, an anthropologist at Pennsylvania State University. The problem is that "you can make the meager evidence from the ethnohistorical record tell you anything you want," he says. "It's really easy to kid yourself."" I just wonder how it's viewed by experts in the field, now.

mlinksva 11y ago
It's been a very long time since I read the first book, afraid I recall few details. The second book probably not as it covers the biological effects of the 'great exchange' and IIRC doesn't retread the 1491 material. But I had those sorts of questions while reading, and generally do about books. I wish all were continually revised, or at least the articles on English Wikipedia about them would point out obsolete and incorrect claims.
mkozlows 11y ago
The book is a fairly evenhanded account of where the controversies are, what positions are held, and what the major points of evidence are.

Gravityloss 11y ago

Thank you so much! Mind boggling. (I think I have lost the capability to enjoy reading long-winded books or stories.)