3 ms·

> There was a huge collapse of the population between first contact with hispanics and the roughly 100 year later attempts at second contacts, where the explore

by timeon 4y ago

> There was a huge collapse of the population between first contact with hispanics and the roughly 100 year later attempts at second contacts, where the explorers relying on Spanish descriptions that ended up being called lies, because the second explorers could not find any of the people described by the Spanish. Sounds like first expedition might have introduced new disease.

frankfrankfrank 4y ago
I don’t think that can be concluded, the Spanish appear to have made little to no contact with natives during those early exploratory ventures that weren’t really expeditions in that sense, but rather more scouting. So, e.g., they described being on large bluffs overlooking the horizon and setting an immense number of smoke columns rising, as would be expected from tribal communities, which were then not at all witnessed 100 years later. I also don’t think it’s conclusive that it was disease or disease alone, it’s the rather blind assumption today that it must have been disease and somehow that makes Europeans culpable for something they also didn’t understand, but there are any number of things that could have happened in 100 years that led to such changes. It seems more plausible to assume that semi-nomadic hunter gatherer societies that were extremely conflict prone would have likely moved, been overrun by hostile tribes and/or been decimated in wars with other tribes, faced hunger, followed livestock, or simply just moved. In spite of the semi-religious nature of what I’ll call native-worship, (and don’t get me wrong, I find them fascinating for different reasons) fact of the matter is that the indigenous people were very underdeveloped relative to the European state, and as such were confronted with all the similar trappings of hunter-gatherer societies that didn’t even have the wheel, let alone a writing system or even bronze weapons. They were in effect Stone Age people, dealing with Stone Age systems and parameters. And that doesn’t even go into the fact that genetic testing has shown that the mass extinction event of the Americas due to what were Asian pathogens that Europeans almost didn’t survive either, was inevitable because any contact prior to the technology of the last few decades would have resulted in the same outcome.
noworld 4y ago
I think a lot of this is from 1491: https://www.amazon.com/1491-Revelations-Americas-Before-Columbus/dp/1400032059 https://www.amazon.com/1491-Revelations-Americas-Before-Colu... It's been a while since I read it but IIRC, the theory is that some of the pigs the Spanish brought with them got loose and went wild, but brought the flu with them. As wild boar spread so did the disease.
- TSiege 4y ago
  Actually 1491 was more a condensing of research. IIRC it was actually Alfred W. Crosby who proposed this in his book The Columbian Exchange
- carapace 4y ago
  I think the book was an expansion of this essay? In any event it's a good summary. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/03/1491/302445/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/03/1491/30...

by timeon 4y ago

frankfrankfrank 4y ago

I don’t think that can be concluded, the Spanish appear to have made little to no contact with natives during those early exploratory ventures that weren’t really expeditions in that sense, but rather more scouting. So, e.g., they described being on large bluffs overlooking the horizon and setting an immense number of smoke columns rising, as would be expected from tribal communities, which were then not at all witnessed 100 years later. I also don’t think it’s conclusive that it was disease or disease alone, it’s the rather blind assumption today that it must have been disease and somehow that makes Europeans culpable for something they also didn’t understand, but there are any number of things that could have happened in 100 years that led to such changes. It seems more plausible to assume that semi-nomadic hunter gatherer societies that were extremely conflict prone would have likely moved, been overrun by hostile tribes and/or been decimated in wars with other tribes, faced hunger, followed livestock, or simply just moved. In spite of the semi-religious nature of what I’ll call native-worship, (and don’t get me wrong, I find them fascinating for different reasons) fact of the matter is that the indigenous people were very underdeveloped relative to the European state, and as such were confronted with all the similar trappings of hunter-gatherer societies that didn’t even have the wheel, let alone a writing system or even bronze weapons. They were in effect Stone Age people, dealing with Stone Age systems and parameters. And that doesn’t even go into the fact that genetic testing has shown that the mass extinction event of the Americas due to what were Asian pathogens that Europeans almost didn’t survive either, was inevitable because any contact prior to the technology of the last few decades would have resulted in the same outcome.

noworld 4y ago

I think a lot of this is from 1491: https://www.amazon.com/1491-Revelations-Americas-Before-Columbus/dp/1400032059 https://www.amazon.com/1491-Revelations-Americas-Before-Colu... It's been a while since I read it but IIRC, the theory is that some of the pigs the Spanish brought with them got loose and went wild, but brought the flu with them. As wild boar spread so did the disease.

TSiege 4y ago
Actually 1491 was more a condensing of research. IIRC it was actually Alfred W. Crosby who proposed this in his book The Columbian Exchange
carapace 4y ago
I think the book was an expansion of this essay? In any event it's a good summary. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/03/1491/302445/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/03/1491/30...