3 ms·

Given the whole misconceptions a about "the earl of sandwich INVENTED the sandwich" and "Columbus DISCOVERED the new world" when other people already knew abou

by samrus 3y ago

Given the whole misconceptions a about "the earl of sandwich INVENTED the sandwich" and "Columbus DISCOVERED the new world" when other people already knew about those things, I think we should add "... For Europe" to the end of this stuff.

Affric 3y ago
It’s interesting the great man version of history and its hold on our consciousness. The “sandwich” was “invented” by the Earl of Sandwich’s servants. Erik the Red discovered Greenland (which is in North America) and Leif Erickson “discovered” Vinland and (I think) the American mainland. You can only discover things which already exist. Otherwise it’s invention. It’s more right to state he accidentally discovered that you could sail west from Europe and hit landfall after crossing the open ocean. He defied almost all expectations. I think most of the rest of the debate looks to diminish him due to his evils (and the evils that sprung from European colonisation in the modern period) rather than attempting to more accurately describe what he did. Regardless, a group of intrepid people migrating across the Bering land bridge is a little different in terms of the risks faced by a man blindly sailing west when everyone rightly said he was mad. He’s the first non-Pacific Islander to belong to the exclusive club of finding a route to land where he went through open ocean.
- eesmith 3y ago
  When you get into the nitty-gritty details, it is convention that Greenland is in North America while the western half of Iceland, which is on the North American Plate, is not. Leif Erickson did not discover Vinland. It was Bjarni Herjólfsson. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjarni_Herj%C3%B3lfsson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjarni_Herj%C3%B3lfsson . Leif Eriksson was the first to make landfall. > He defied almost all expectations. He followed the tradition that found the Faroe Islands, Iceland, and Greenland. I think the Norse expectation was you could find new land going west, but it wasn't easy. > He’s the first non-Pacific Islander to belong to the exclusive club of finding a route to land where he went through open ocean. I don't see how early Norse trips to the Faroes, Iceland, and Greenland don't count. In any case, Madagascar was discovered before even Iceland.
  - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
    > > He’s the first non-Pacific Islander to belong to the exclusive club of finding a route to land where he went through open ocean. > In any case, Madagascar was discovered before even Iceland. The island of Flores is east of Wallace's line. Homo may have been doing this since before we were Homo spaiens. And Australia is east of Lydekker's line. I guess it's possible they were journeyed to by sight (thus not open ocean).
    - eesmith 3y ago
      "thus not open ocean" is my hypothesis as well. Otherwise there's Sri Lanka, Cuba, the Canaries, and whole bunch of other islands settled before the Norse.
      - Affric 3y ago
        Sri Lanka was likely connected by a land bridge to South Asia that eventually eroded. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%27s_Bridge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%27s_Bridge How cool is that? With regards to defying all expectations, Columbus was called mad in his time by everyone and anyone who was doing much ocean going seafearing. He believed that he was going to reach Asia because he erred in his estimation of the Earth's circumference. I think throwing our knowledge of Norse knowledge into the situation is presentism. I take your points on Norse exploration history. The fact he came back alive is in many ways an incredible stroke of luck.
        eesmith 3y ago
        I had no idea! That is cool.
    - Affric 3y ago
      My understanding is that the evidence points to Australia being reached by sight during times of lower sea levels but I can't find the exact publication I first read it in.
shakow 3y ago
Even for Europe. America had already been found by Vikings sailors a few centuries before Colombus, probably by Brittons sailors a few decades before. And I hardly believe that no one in Europe (let alone the world) ever put a slice of meat in a bread before the 18th. Those people were the first one to put it in the records that were not lost to the ages, so that's why we remember them.
- BellsOnSunday 3y ago
  Same way that Shakespeare "invented" the word "elbow" and thousands of others.
dalbasal 3y ago
Idk. I think these are useful disillusionment mines to leave in place. The intuitive idea of inventors and originators is often wrong, and caused by narrow mindedness. Most inventuons are originated many times. I'm sure plenty of people raised a wolf puppy, just like lots of people find and raise wild pets today. Very few of these become a "domestication event." For cuisine, the implication of "the earl of sandwich invented the sandwich" should be intuitively be a story about culinary fashions. The origin of the term "sandwich." How it became part of upper class cuisine. Why watercress sandwiches at high tea. If you hear about prior art and react with "I thought England invented sandwiches! Lies!"... If that's the reaction, then your intuition needs refinement. Every culture with bread will inevitably invent sandwiches. It might happen differently though. Maybe there is no name for it, and it's just what you do with bread and cheese. Maybe specific sandwiches (eg burger) have names... but there is no generic name. In that case, starting a sandwich shop and naming the nameless is "invention." Most invention is conceptual. The sandwich will usually predate the idea of a sandwich.
ROTMetro 3y ago
Why? If something is named after someone, if someone popularized something, why do we need to make is some larger deeper anything? It's funny that this comes in an article about the Islamic Golden age period where people's identity just gets erase to fit some narrative. Where Christian Greeks keeping Greek history become Arab Muslim's keeping the West's knowledge for the ignorant Christian West. Why is it misconception about the origination of the sandwich that is being discussed, not erasure of entire populations of subjugated people who get attributed as being their conquers creation and their accomplishments attributed to some 'Islamic Golden Age'. Maybe the Islamic Golden Age is in greater need of being deconstructed. Maybe Europeans and Middle-easterners would see each other as 'others' so much if history didn't so artificially try to create otherizing constructs.

by samrus 3y ago

Affric 3y ago

It’s interesting the great man version of history and its hold on our consciousness. The “sandwich” was “invented” by the Earl of Sandwich’s servants. Erik the Red discovered Greenland (which is in North America) and Leif Erickson “discovered” Vinland and (I think) the American mainland. You can only discover things which already exist. Otherwise it’s invention. It’s more right to state he accidentally discovered that you could sail west from Europe and hit landfall after crossing the open ocean. He defied almost all expectations. I think most of the rest of the debate looks to diminish him due to his evils (and the evils that sprung from European colonisation in the modern period) rather than attempting to more accurately describe what he did. Regardless, a group of intrepid people migrating across the Bering land bridge is a little different in terms of the risks faced by a man blindly sailing west when everyone rightly said he was mad. He’s the first non-Pacific Islander to belong to the exclusive club of finding a route to land where he went through open ocean.

eesmith 3y ago
When you get into the nitty-gritty details, it is convention that Greenland is in North America while the western half of Iceland, which is on the North American Plate, is not. Leif Erickson did not discover Vinland. It was Bjarni Herjólfsson. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjarni_Herj%C3%B3lfsson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjarni_Herj%C3%B3lfsson . Leif Eriksson was the first to make landfall. > He defied almost all expectations. He followed the tradition that found the Faroe Islands, Iceland, and Greenland. I think the Norse expectation was you could find new land going west, but it wasn't easy. > He’s the first non-Pacific Islander to belong to the exclusive club of finding a route to land where he went through open ocean. I don't see how early Norse trips to the Faroes, Iceland, and Greenland don't count. In any case, Madagascar was discovered before even Iceland.
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago
  > > He’s the first non-Pacific Islander to belong to the exclusive club of finding a route to land where he went through open ocean. > In any case, Madagascar was discovered before even Iceland. The island of Flores is east of Wallace's line. Homo may have been doing this since before we were Homo spaiens. And Australia is east of Lydekker's line. I guess it's possible they were journeyed to by sight (thus not open ocean).
  - eesmith 3y ago
    "thus not open ocean" is my hypothesis as well. Otherwise there's Sri Lanka, Cuba, the Canaries, and whole bunch of other islands settled before the Norse.
    - Affric 3y ago
      Sri Lanka was likely connected by a land bridge to South Asia that eventually eroded. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%27s_Bridge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%27s_Bridge How cool is that? With regards to defying all expectations, Columbus was called mad in his time by everyone and anyone who was doing much ocean going seafearing. He believed that he was going to reach Asia because he erred in his estimation of the Earth's circumference. I think throwing our knowledge of Norse knowledge into the situation is presentism. I take your points on Norse exploration history. The fact he came back alive is in many ways an incredible stroke of luck.
      - eesmith 3y ago
        I had no idea! That is cool.
  - Affric 3y ago
    My understanding is that the evidence points to Australia being reached by sight during times of lower sea levels but I can't find the exact publication I first read it in.

shakow 3y ago

Even for Europe. America had already been found by Vikings sailors a few centuries before Colombus, probably by Brittons sailors a few decades before. And I hardly believe that no one in Europe (let alone the world) ever put a slice of meat in a bread before the 18th. Those people were the first one to put it in the records that were not lost to the ages, so that's why we remember them.

BellsOnSunday 3y ago
Same way that Shakespeare "invented" the word "elbow" and thousands of others.

dalbasal 3y ago

Idk. I think these are useful disillusionment mines to leave in place. The intuitive idea of inventors and originators is often wrong, and caused by narrow mindedness. Most inventuons are originated many times. I'm sure plenty of people raised a wolf puppy, just like lots of people find and raise wild pets today. Very few of these become a "domestication event." For cuisine, the implication of "the earl of sandwich invented the sandwich" should be intuitively be a story about culinary fashions. The origin of the term "sandwich." How it became part of upper class cuisine. Why watercress sandwiches at high tea. If you hear about prior art and react with "I thought England invented sandwiches! Lies!"... If that's the reaction, then your intuition needs refinement. Every culture with bread will inevitably invent sandwiches. It might happen differently though. Maybe there is no name for it, and it's just what you do with bread and cheese. Maybe specific sandwiches (eg burger) have names... but there is no generic name. In that case, starting a sandwich shop and naming the nameless is "invention." Most invention is conceptual. The sandwich will usually predate the idea of a sandwich.

ROTMetro 3y ago

Why? If something is named after someone, if someone popularized something, why do we need to make is some larger deeper anything? It's funny that this comes in an article about the Islamic Golden age period where people's identity just gets erase to fit some narrative. Where Christian Greeks keeping Greek history become Arab Muslim's keeping the West's knowledge for the ignorant Christian West. Why is it misconception about the origination of the sandwich that is being discussed, not erasure of entire populations of subjugated people who get attributed as being their conquers creation and their accomplishments attributed to some 'Islamic Golden Age'. Maybe the Islamic Golden Age is in greater need of being deconstructed. Maybe Europeans and Middle-easterners would see each other as 'others' so much if history didn't so artificially try to create otherizing constructs.