AskHistorians 内の PM_ME_STUPID_JOKES によるリンク Did Squanto's life experiences make him a unique historical figure?

[–]anthropology_nerd 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Tisquantum's life, while amazing, is one of many such strange journeys in the expanding Atlantic world. Sadly, abduction into slavery was a common form of first contact along the Atlantic coast. European fisherman and traders routinely supplemented their cargo by abducting a few unwary captives for sale in the Caribbean, Europe, or North Africa. Captives could be sold for profit, or in the case of many Spanish explorations, an initial foray to a new region involved kidnapping several individuals to train as interpreters. Two such captive translators have vastly different outcomes, and provide some insight into the various ways conquest unfolded.

For the first example, Pizarro kidnapped two boys from the Peruvian coast in 1528. The young men were taken to Spain, learned Spanish, and accompanied the Conquest of Peru in 1531. They acted as translators during the famous showdown in Cajamarca in 1532 that resulted in Atahuallpa’s capture. The translators were rewarded for their service. Pizarro granted at least one of the two men, Martinillo, a share of the Cajamarca spoils. Martinillo changed his name to Don Martín Pizarro, and settled in Lima as the Interpreter General with two encomiendas to his name.

Kidnapped Native American translators could also escape their captives, and return to their homeland armed with new languages and valuable insight into European objectives. Don Luis de Velasco, a Native American abducted from the Virginia tidewater region in 1561 returned in 1571 with Franciscans establishing a mission near the James River. Don Luis escaped, and returned with an armed party that killed the Franciscan fathers. We may never know for sure, but there is sufficient reason to believe Don Luis was Opechancanough, brother of paramount chief Powhatan/Wahunsenacawh. Openchancanough would later advise his brother to violently oppose English settlement at Jamestown. His insight led Powhatan/Wahunsenacawh to expand the Powhatan Paramount Chiefdom to better oppose Spanish encroachment in the years preceding the English arrived in Virginia. By the time the Virginia Company arrived to establish Jamestown in 1607 Powhatan incorporated over thirty tributary nations, and held sway over a land known as Tsenacommacah (densely inhabited land).

On the other side of the coin, shipwrecked or captive Europeans often had amazing experiences within Native American communities. In many cases they became vital translators for both sides when their countrymen returned. In Florida and Central America Spaniards were valued in Native American communities as translators and their ability to provide insight into European aims. As an example, in Florida the de Soto entrada encountered Juan Ortiz, a Spaniard captured while searching for the lost 1528 Narváez entrada. Ortiz learned the Timucua language during his years in Florida and served as a translator while de Soto rampaged through the region. De Soto said of Ortiz, “This interpreter puts new life into us, for without him I know not what would become of us.” Interestingly, Ortiz refused wear Spanish dress while traveling with de Soto, and preferred the company of his Mocoso friends, possibly indicating his desire to keep them informed of Spanish intentions. Likewise, the Conquest of Mexico famously required two translators. A shipwrecked Spaniard who lived for eight years among the Maya, Gerónimo de Aguilar, translated Spanish to Maya, and Dona Marina/La Malinche, a Nahua noblewoman from the frontier of Nahuatl-speaking central Mexico, then translated Maya to Nahuatl.

The greatest journey of a shipwrecked Spaniard must be Álvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca. One of the few survivors of the unfortunate Narváez entrada, Cabeza de Vaca traveled among the Native American nations of the U.S. Southeast, Texas, and Northern Mexico for eight years before re-uniting with his countrymen in Northern Mexico. A map of his journey provides some perspective of the vast distances he covered. Check out his narrative for more insight into his travels.

As these brief examples show, the early years of contact are filled with amazing stories and individuals with unbelievable journeys. If something specific strikes your interest let me, or one of the other flaired users, know. We can make some recommendations for further reading.

AskHistorians 内の caffarelli によるリンク Tuesday Trivia | History’s Greatest Failures

[–]anthropology_nerd 23ポイント24ポイント  (0子コメント)

The popular version of Spanish conquest often paints Europeans as a vastly advanced people, armed with superior technology and biological organisms, who steam-rolled Native American nations without trouble. Cortés’ success against the Triple Alliance is often the poster child for this Spanish juggernaut narrative, completely omitting the role of native allies, impeccable timing, pure dumb luck, and the protracted nature of a prolonged, often tenuous, conquest. Conquistador failures in the New World far outnumber their successes, and underscore how the popular narrative completely fails to encapsulate the complex, messy nature of conquest. Here are a few examples showing the diverse fate of many would-be conquistadores in North America taken from a previous post I made in another history community.

  • Juan Ponce de Leon’s second journey to Florida in 1521 ended in disaster shortly after landing on the Gulf Coast. The crew included roughly two hundred men, as well as farmers and farming implements, and associated livestock. While constructing shelters a Calusa party attacked the settlers, wounding Ponce de Leon with an arrow. The colonists abandoned their makeshift site, and returned to Cuba where Ponce died of his wounds.

  • Lucas de Ayllón mortgaged his fortune to mobilize a group of 600 colonists to head toward the U.S. southeast. He established San Miguel de Gualdape, the first Spanish settlement in what is now the United States in 1526. The colonists arrived too late in the season to plant, and fell ill, likely due to contaminated water sources. After Ayllón succumbed to illness, the colony fractured and abandoned San Miguel. Less than 150 colonists survived to limp back to Hispaniola. It would take Ayllón’s widow, Ana Bezerra, years to pay off her husband’s debts.

  • After losing an eye fighting Cortés at Cempoala in Mexico, Narváez was appointed adelantado of Florida. He finally arrived in Florida in 1528. His unfortunate decision to split his land and sea forces after landing near Tampa Bay was but one of many disastrous mistakes. Hunger, hostilities with the Apalachee, and illness diminished the strength of the land forces, who failed to reconnect and resupply with their sea-based comrades. Narváez decided to skirt the gulf coast back to Mexico, and died on a make-shift raft blown out into the Gulf of Mexico near Galveston, Texas. Only four men, including the famous Alvar Cabeza de Vaca, survived the final overland journey through Texas and into northern Mexico.

  • Hernando de Soto survived the conquest of Peru, only to die in 1542 on the banks of the Mississippi after pillaging his way through the southeast. The exact location of his watery grave remains unknown and the tattered remnants of his forces limped south to the Gulf of Mexico.

  • The 1540 entrada into New Mexico bankrupted Francisco de Coronado. He died in Mexico City, exonerated of changes of crimes against the Native Americans, likely because the magistrate considered him a broken man “more fit to be governed… than govern”. Coronado’s chief lieutenant faced similar charges of brutality, was tried in Spain, found guilty, and died in prison.

In Central and South America the story of failure continues. Here I'll quote this compilation by another user for ease of reading...

  • Francisco Hernández de Cordoba: Cordoba led an expedition of 110 Spaniards to the Yucatan in 1517, four years before Hernan Cortés arrived in the region. After poking around at various locations, his men set up camp on the shore of the Western Yucatan to get some fresh water. His men clustered around a well near a Maya city called Champutun. Unbeknownst to him, the Maya of the Yucatan had already been informed of the Spanish and their intentions by a shipwreck survivor named Gonzalo Guerrero. The Maya promptly attacked Cordoba's camp and killed a great many Spaniards. The men retreated back to the boats. Cordoba himself was mortally wounded and died shortly after returning to Cuba.

  • Juan de Grijalva: Grijalva's expedition followed very closely in the footsteps of Cordoba's. In 1518, one year after Cordoba, Grijalva left with about 300 men (probably) for the Yucatan. Once again he sailed around the Yucatan, stopping at Cozumel and a few other key areas, before landing outside Champutun. And once again, the army of Champutun arrived and clashed with the conquistadors. The way Diaz del Castillo told it, this encounter sounded more like a draw. The Spaniards won a few battles but, after encountering heavy resistance, they made a 'tactical decision' to withdraw. In all likelihood it was probably a defeat, and Grijalva just put a more positive spin on it.

  • Aleixo Garcia: This poor guy was a Portuguese conquistador who had been exploring around the Río de la Plata area of South America (modern day Paraguay) when indigenous informants told him of a rich land to the west. A great king ruled over a huge chunk of territory in the mountains. Having heard of Cortés's conquest of the Aztecs, Garcia decided to try to replicate it for Portugal. In 1525 he gathered a group of indigenous allies from the region and marched west into, what he would later discover, was the Inca empire. He only really succeeded in raiding a few border communities before the Inca army arrived and kicked him to the curb. After retreating, what was left of his indigenous allies turned on him and killed him for leading them into a suicide mission.

  • Gonzalo Pizarro: The younger brother of the better-known Francisco Pizarro who toppled the Inca empire. In 1541-42 Gonzalo led an expedition into the Amazon rain forest to find a legendary indigenous ruler named "El Dorado," a king so rich he supposedly covered himself in gold dust. Before the Spanish arrived, the Inca had previously attempted several incursions into the Amazon with disastrous results. Indigenous allies tried to explain to Gonzalo Pizarro why this was a terrible idea, but he was undeterred. They started moving East following the course of a tributary of the Amazon. Not surprisingly to the Inca who accompanied him, the expedition started going downhill almost immediately. Supplies were a serious problem, as was disease, and the terrain proved very difficult to navigate. 140 of the 220 Spaniards died en route, as did 3 out of 4 indigenous allies. After hitting an impasse, he sent his second-in-command ahead with a smaller party to find some source of food. However, the scouting party quickly became separated as it was clear that moving upstream was not an option. With little choice left, Pizarro turned back.

AskHistorians 内の Emily_McEwan-Fujita によるリンク AMA: Scottish Gaelic language and culture in Scotland and Nova Scotia

[–]anthropology_nerd 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Dr. McEwen-Fujita, thanks so much for dropping by today. I'm one of those biological anthropologist who, despite claims to a four field approach, am ashamed at my lack of linguistics knowledge! I hope these questions don't seem too basic or strange!

I'm interested in the link between identity and language, but I'm having trouble formulating the question. I guess my best attempt is, how much of the revitalization of Gaelic language has been influenced by notions of identity in Nova Scotia and Scotland? Is the movement part of a larger cultural revitalization, and what role does language play in shaping this transformation?

Also, an easy question, why Gaelic revitalization? What prompted your interest in this area?

Thanks again!

AskHistorians 内の mightbebrucewillis によるリンク How did Native American societies of the Eastern Woodlands change after being severely depopulated by Old World diseases?

[–]anthropology_nerd 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

To preface this answer know that scholars are now stepping back from assuming disease alone caused the demographic changes we see in the New World after contact. To quote the introduction to an excellent compilation of articles written last year

We may never know the full extent of Native depopulation... but what is certain is that a generation of scholars has significantly overemphasized disease as the cause of depopulation, downplaying the active role of Europeans in inciting wars, destroying livelihoods, and erasing identities. This scholarly misreading has given support to a variety of popular writers who have mislead and are currently misleading the public. (Beyond Germs: Native Depopulation in North America)

Every time we discuss the impact of disease in the Americas I feel I need to stress the multitude of factors influencing Native American populations. Epidemics never hit in isolation. The conditions actively created by colonial environments led to both decreased host immune defense and decreased ability to rapidly rebound in the wake of disease. In the Southeastern portion of the Eastern Woodlands the Indian slave trade did far more to destabilize the region, create the conditions needed for the spread of pathogens, disrupt previous lifeways leading to chronic nutritional stress and overcrowding, and create a world where demographic recovery became challenging in the wake of epidemics. You can read more about the Indian slave trade here. To stress the upheaval caused by the slave trade, Gallay's highly conservative estimates hold the number of slaves taken (not including those who died trying to protect loved ones, or as refugees fleeing slavers) from the Southeast between 1685 and 1715 to be somewhere near 24,000-51,000. Slavers nearly depopulated the Florida peninsula, leading to the collapse of the Spanish mission system.

In the Southeastern shatterzone created by the slave trade, territorial displacement, chronic warfare encouraged by Carolina slavers, epidemics, and resource deprivation a collection of confederacies began to coalesce. The Creek, Choctaw, Cherokee, and Chickasaw emerged as confederacies of convenience in this period. The Creek, for example, were composed primarily of a Coosa, Cowets, Cuseeta and Abihka core, all Muscogulge people with related, but not mutually intelligible languages. Marriage, ritual adoption, linguistic ties, former chiefdom alliances were used to glue these new societies together (Etheridge and Shuck-Hall).

The confederacies allowed for a united front against traditional Native American enemies, as well as the ability to negotiate between the French or the English or the Spanish in an effort to increase access to trade goods. Due to the loose nature of confederacies, individual villages had autonomy to act on their own behalf. Confederacies were not a total break from previous chiefdoms. They retained their town councils, reciprocal gift-giving relationships with neighbors, clan organization, and the matrilineal kin system.

Such adaptations in the 200 years following contact transformed the South by 1730. Where de Soto once encountered chiefdoms and polities, large nations like the Creek, Chickasaw, Catawaba, Choctaw, and Caddo now held sway, with Europeans confined to a thin sliver of land along the Atlantic coast.

Sources:

Cameron, Kelton, and Swedlund, eds. Beyond Germs: Native Depopulation in North America

Paul Kelton Epidemics and Enslavement: Biological Catastrophe in the Native Southeast, 1492-1715

Robbie Ethridge and Sheri M. Shuck-Hall Mapping the Mississippian Shatter Zone: The Colonial Indian Slave Trade and Regional Instability in the American South

Alan Gallay The Indian Slave Trade: The Rise of the English Empire in the American South, 1670-1717

AskHistorians 内の DuckDuckNyquist によるリンク Nonviolent resistance in Spanish missions in North America

[–]anthropology_nerd 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

This answer is modified from a previous post I wrote in another history community. Here we go...

After the excesses of cruelty seen in the initial years of contact, the 1573 Comprehensive Royal Orders for New Discoveries placed missionaries at the forefront of exploration/pacification of new lands. Franciscans and Jesuits became conquistadores of the spirit along the northern borderlands in Florida, Texas, New Mexico along the Rio Grande, southern Arizona, and Alta California (links for fun maps). In the fight to complete the conquest, the Crown believed missionaries could pacify land at less cost, and with a greater impact, than soldiers. The missions provided a spiritual harvest, as well as a vital frontier presence against encroachment from other European nations. The southwestern colonies protected lucrative mining enterprises in Northern Mexico, and Florida provided a safe haven/support for ships crossing the Atlantic. For this protection, New Mexico lost the Crown 2,390,000 pesos in the 17th century alone. Florida cost four times as much (Weber).

Though covering a wide geographic range, the total number of missionaries remained small; never more than 70 at a time for Florida, and < 50 for New Mexico. Alta California represents a unique case given the late expansion to confront Russian merchants in San Francisco Bay, and reveals a bit about the ideal Franciscan mission demographics. In Alta California

the mission typically housed two friars (the majority from Spain), a mission guard of six soldiers (most of whom were mestizos or mulattos of Spanish, African, and/or native ancestry from northern Mexico), and a thousand or more baptized Indians or neophytes (Lightfoot, p. 5)

Isolated on the fringe of the known world, the remote colonies featured interactions not always possible in the heart of the empire. Here, on the ragged edge, survival depended on negotiation and accommodation from all parties. Even something as rigid as the castas racial system relaxed on a frontier where calidad (social status) could be defined by occupation and wealth, not just ancestry and skin color (Weber, p. 327-8).

Of course, one person’s frontier is another’s home. Analysis of Native North Americans in mission communities requires one to walk a tightrope of sorts. On the one hand, missions are viewed as primarily carceral institutions completely under European control and designed to extinguish indigenous cultures. Any evidence of persistence and acculturation reinforces the narrative of European actors and Native American re-actors/victims. Conversely, focusing only on resistance “in nearly every part of daily life is counterproductive and only serves to reinforce the idea of a bounded, carceral mission landscape” (Panich & Schneider, p.21). The tightrope, then, is to describe how Native Americans actively negotiated Spanish colonialism on their own terms. We must examine how Native Americans incorporated, or decided against incorporating, missions into the indigenous system of power, belief, exchange, subsistence, and residence (Panich & Schneider, p. 10).

The everyday acts of mission inhabitants show how autonomy was negotiated along the northern frontier. Here “Indians accepted one aspect of Spanish colonization in order to facilitate their rejection of another” (Restall). Missionaries likewise accepted one aspect of Native American rebellion, while stressing obedience on another, typically public, front.

For example, official regulations required baptized Native American inhabitants of the missions to live on the premises, and procure a pass for permission to leave the mission. Escaped neophytes could be pursued, returned to the mission, and subject to corporal punishment. In North America, however, mission authorities often realized the impossibility of enforcing this law. Depending upon place and time, mission Indians negotiated absence from the mission to forage for traditional foods, maintain familial connections, and continue religious practice away from the eyes of the friars.

Mission policy required neophytes to integrate European crops into existing native agricultural practices. Bluntly stated, they should eat like Christians. Mission inhabitants resisted this demand by complementing their mission diets with foraged foods consumed in private residences. This small act of rebellion indicates access to the surrounding landscape, ongoing knowledge of local resources, and small-scale trade conducted outside the control of mission authorities. Remains of acorns, seeds, fruits, fish, shellfish, waterfowl, and game have been found in mission residential structures from Florida to California. This private rebellion was known to mission officials, who often decided not to press an issue they couldn’t enforce. At Mission San Antonio in California the fathers noted “in private, in their own houses, they prepare their seeds which are of good quality and in abundance such as acorns, sage, chia, pine nuts and others” and remained “very fond of the food they enjoyed in their pagan state” (Panich & Schneider, p.15).

Liberty from the missions also allowed the continuation of religious ceremonies. In New Mexico, Cochiti oral history tells of moving dances and rituals to the hinterlands away from the missions. In Texas and California, this act of resistance was well known to the friars, who were powerless to prevent the practice. Fermín Francisco de Lasuén, president of the Alta California missions, wrote “if we absolutely denied them the right to go to the mountains, I am afraid they would riot” (Panich & Schneider, p. 17). Lightfoot estimates five to ten percent of the total Alta California neophyte population became runaways at some point. As a compromise on official regulations, Alta California instituted paseo (approved leave of absence), and granted mission inhabitants furloughs for five to ten weeks a year. This small measure of autonomy underscores the constant compromise between neophytes and the Spanish missionaries. Native Americans negotiated, in both official and covert ways, freedom of movement and space to continue religious practice.

The separation of public and private lives is echoed throughout the mission system in North America. At Mission San Buenaventura in California oral tradition indicates weddings consisted of two marriage ceremonies; one public Catholic ritual, and a private native ceremony held inside the neophyte residences. The public/private dichotomy in San Buenaventura included a variety of religious ceremonies and sacred dances. Some dances were officially permitted for performance before the entire mission community, while others were hidden, performed in inner plazas/alleys or within residential structures. Archaeology and ethnohistory show Native American neophytes, from the highest rank alcaldes to poorest orphan, constantly negotiated this double life of public accommodation while maintaining private autonomy. Archaeologically, we find evidence of a private life in the foods, tools, ornaments/clothing, and ceremonial paraphernalia that indicate the continuation of native practices and identity, even among devout Catholics who publicly rose to high social status in the mission hierarchy (Lightfoot).

Wrapping Up

In the small acts of resistance and accommodation a rich story of life in the missions emerges. We see evidence for vital communities negotiating for autonomy and continuing to adapt. Alcaldes who used the mission system to gain public social status negotiated a far different private world where outlawed indigenous traditions continued hidden from the eyes of the padres.

Too often the narrative of conquest focuses on illness, violence, and death. Yes, there was death, and oppression, and disease, but this was not a terminal population waiting for the end. Here, in the missions, history, ethnohistory, and archaeology combine to highlight rich evidence of life: a mission abounding with gambling, games, dances, feasts, hidden performances, and religious ceremonies (Lightfoot).

For More Info

Hackel Children of Coyote, Missionaries of Saint Francis: Indian-Spanish Relations in Colonial California, 1769-1850

Kessell Spain in the Southwest: A Narrative History of Colonial New Mexico, Arizona, Texas, and California

Lightfoot Indians, Missionaries, and Merchants: The Legacy of Colonial Encounters on the California Frontiers

Panich and Schneider, editors Indigenous Landscapes and Spanish Missions: New Perspectives from Archaeology and Ethnohistory

Restall Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest

Riley The Kachina and the Cross: Indians and Spaniards in the Early Southwest

Weber The Spanish Frontier in North America

AskHistorians 内の 04231993 によるリンク Are there ever any "bad" historical questions that historians dislike and get angry over?

[–]anthropology_nerd 45ポイント46ポイント  (0子コメント)

There are a great deal of misconceptions in my field, specifically related to Native North American populations after contact. I don’t ever get angry so much as throw up my hands in frustration and exclaim, “Even your question is wrong!”

Let me explain what types of questions I mean…

  • Why did Native Americans ______?

The first kind of question is completely well-intentioned, but the person asking the question has no idea the depth and breadth of their query. The user doesn’t know what they don’t know. We understand, we were all there once, and we face the same issues when we want to know something outside our knowledge base. Prefacing your answer to a question about “Native Americans” by reminding the user they are asking about hundreds of nations in more than a dozen linguistic families, spread out over two continents, over ~15,000 years of history is slightly frustrating. There is no one answer. We need to address this complexity before diving down to answer the small portion of the question within our specific area of expertise. Answers to these questions will be incomplete, simply due to the wide range of time we have to cover, and leaving incomplete answers is sometimes frustrating.

Take home message: the more specific you can be regarding time and place the happier you make historians.

  • What did Native Americans think about crystals/guns/beards/ships/tornados/metal?

The second kind of frustrating question are the same dozen or so questions asked every few months here. Native American scholars are accustomed to this type of question, and we usually point people toward the Frequently Asked Questions page while quietly weeping that no one asks about the incredibly fascinating, but evidently obscure, nuances of our field of study. Seriously, why are people so interested in tornados? Wouldn’t you like to hear about how archaeology and ethnohistory inform our understanding of non-violent resistance in Spanish missions in North America? No? Oh well.

Take home message: search for similar questions before you ask yours. There is nothing wrong with asking about new research, but check to see if your query was addressed in the past.

The third kind of question, much like /u/ETFox mentioned about pirates, assumes something currently under debate (or outright wrong) as a given, and then asks a question from that perspective, forcing us to spend the first few paragraphs explaining why the truth is slightly more complex than the question implies. These questions are challenging because it takes a great deal of time to explain why the premise of the question is flawed, and the person asking the question usually doesn’t want a lecture on why they were wrong in the first place.

Take home message: try to eliminate preconceptions from your question, if possible, and dive to the root of what you want to know. For example, if you really want to know about Europeans facing novel diseases in the Americas I would change the example question to “Do we have any evidence of Europeans falling ill from pathogens native to the New World?”

  • Did the Indians even stand a chance against the white man since they didn’t even advance out of the Stone Age?

The final kind of frustrating question is less well-intentioned and seeks to re-inforce previously held beliefs. You’re not fooling anyone, my friend. We’ve been at this for a while now, and can tell the “just asking questions” users from the ones with legitimate questions. Help the mods out and hit the report button if you find something in this category. We greatly appreciate it.

TheBlackList 内の anthropology_nerd によるリンク A Compendium of Concussions, Seasons One and Two

[–]anthropology_nerd[S] 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, I had that as a possible one, but removed it because, well, I didn't want to make it seem like I thought Ressler couldn't take a punch! I compromised and gave him a possible concussion for the extended fight in the Wujing episode.

Gina finally incapacitated him with a choke hold, not a blow to the head. If we tallied anoxic brain injuries (an injury from a lack of blood/oxygen flowing to the brain), Ressler might be in the lead. He had this instance with Gina, and he almost bled out in Anslo Garrick I.

AskHistorians 内の Georgy_K_Zhukov によるリンク This Week's Theme: Agriculture and Farming

[–]anthropology_nerd 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is such a cool theme! I have two questions I want to ask, but can't think of how to ask them without violating the throughout history rule.

One, there is a popular great chain of progress idea that once you go agricultural you never go back, but I would love to read some discussions of cultures who transitioned from more of a farming to more of a foraging lifestyle. Just can't figure out how to phrase that one without breaking rules.

Second, and this might be more a human ecology question, but how do I phrase a question about the gradual and fuzzy distinction between foragers and farmers? Foragers routinely manage their ecosystem to promote the growth of desired plants, and encourage the movement of prey animals to their hunting grounds. Agriculturalists routinely supplement their caloric intake with foraged and hunted foods. It seems like only a few steps of intensity to go from tending a wide variety of plants/animals to specialising in only a few, yet we popularly think a huge gulf exists between foragers and sedentary agricultural groups. Can anyone smarter than me think of how to ask that question? :)

TheBlackList 内の anthropology_nerd によるリンク A Compendium of Concussions, Seasons One and Two

[–]anthropology_nerd[S] 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Season One

Episode Liz Ressler Red Honorable Mention
1.01 Pilot Possible, car crash - - Possible, Zumani beats up Tom
1.03 Wujing - Possible, fight - -
1.04 The Stewmaker 2 Obvious, blast injury and KO-ed - - Red KO’s Stewmaker
1.05 The Courier Possible, car crash - - -
1.08 General Ludd Possible, blast injury Possible, blast injury - -
1.09 Anslo Garrick I Obvious, pistol whip KO - - RIP Lui-Li
1.10 Anslo Garrick II - - Possible, evidence of head trauma -
1.16 Mako Tanida - Obvious, car crash - -
1.17 Ivan Possible, punched by Tom - - -
1.18 Milton Bobbit - Possible, blast injury - -
1.22 Berlin II - - Possible, head trauma after car crash -

Season Two

Episode Liz Ressler Red Honorable Mention
2.01 Lord Baltimore - - Probable, awakes groggy with head trauma Mossad KO’s Dembe
2.05 The Front Obvious, KO-ed in the catacombs - - -
2.06 Mombasa Cartel - Obvious, KO-ed by Animal Underground - -
2.07 The Scimitar Obvious, car crash Obvious, car crash - -
2.09 Luther Braxton I 2 Obvious, blast injury and punched x2 - Obvious, blast injury -
2.10 Luther Braxton II Possible, blast injury Possible, blast injury Possible, blast injury -
2.13 The Deer Hunter Obvious, KO-ed with a shovel - - -
2.17 The Longevity Initiative - - - Possible for Tom when tortured by The Disenfranchised
2.21 Karakurt 2 Obvious, blast injury and KO-ed by Karakurt Obvious, blast injury - -

AskHistorians 内の AutoModerator によるリンク Friday Free-for-All | March 11, 2016

[–]anthropology_nerd 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Stop toying with my anthropology/Potter nerd heart!

AskHistorians 内の AutoModerator によるリンク Friday Free-for-All | March 11, 2016

[–]anthropology_nerd 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

Quoting /u/Reedstilt...

Tell me about the fall and redemption of the Dark Wizard Tadodaho. Tell me that Capafi actually was the powerful Wizard that de Soto's men claimed that he was. Tell me about Tomocomo's voyage to Hogwarts in 1616. Tell me about how the Witch Tituba united American, African, and European magical traditions into the unique magical tradition that now dominates the United States.

Can you imagine this version? I've never been so sad a book doesn't exist. I would gladly camp out to buy the first copy and then pull an all nighter to read through that book.

IndianCountry 内の Opechan によるリンク JK Rowling Under Fire for Writing About 'Native American Wizards'

[–]anthropology_nerd 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Tell me about the fall and redemption of the Dark Wizard Tadodaho. Tell me that Capafi actually was the powerful Wizard that de Soto's men claimed that he was. Tell me about Tomocomo's voyage to Hogwarts in 1616. Tell me about how the Witch Tituba united American, African, and European magical traditions into the unique magical tradition that now dominates the United States.

I never knew I wanted to read anything as much as I want to read this. Oh my goodness. I'm actually sad this book doesn't exist now.

badhistory 内の BreaksFull によるリンク Particular instances of mild/petty badhistory that threw you out of a historical fiction?

[–]anthropology_nerd 25ポイント26ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not sure this is pedantic, but The 13th Warrior would be quite a fascinating investigation of cultural differences, trade, and the spread of ideas between the Viking and Arabic worlds in the 10th century if it wasn't for the Neanderthals. A hominid species surviving 40,000 years longer than the rest of their kin kinda took me out of the story a bit.

AskHistorians 内の AutoModerator によるリンク Saturday Reading and Research | March 05, 2016

[–]anthropology_nerd 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

I have two good books to recommend this week. Here we go...

  • The Saltwater Frontier: Indians and the Contest for the American Coast by Andrew Lipman examines the history of the southern New England and the Long Island Sound during the first few decades of contact. He does a very good job establishing a sense of place, and emphasizing that Europeans and Native Americans met first as fellow watermen. Too often the popular narrative omits Native American watercraft, placing them as re-actors on the edge of the forest who only enter the story once Europeans arrive on their shores. Here Lipman details a world where the Narragansett, Wampanoag, Montauketts, and Mohegan were intimately tied to the sea. He describes their skill with gigantic dugout canoes, some longer than the European craft making the trans-Atlantic voyage, as well as the smaller birchbark craft used for sheltered waterways, and dives into their dominance of the coastline during the first decades of contact. I highly recommend the book to anyone interested in Native American and colonial history, as well as anyone interested in New York/New England history.

  • Masters of Empire: Great Lakes Indians and the Making of America by Michael McDonnell is also highly recommended. McDonnell pivots our typical perspective of U.S. history and tells the story of the Anishinaabeg looking east from their heartland. In the past authors like Richard White saw the Great Lakes region as a bit of a shattered wasteland inhabited by refugees in the wake of devastating Iroquois mourning wars. Rushforth's Bonds of Alliance: Indigenous and Atlantic Slaveries in New France and this volume re-examine this perspective, finding greater cultural continuity in the area than previously thought. From their vitally important position at the Straits of Mackinac, and surrounding areas, the Odawa were able to control trade and respond rapidly to a quickly changing world. Instead of re-acting to Europeans, McDonnell describes how the Anishinaabeg worked to support their own goals, with the French, English, and Dutch as subordinate players in a larger indigenous world of alliances and historic feuds. I'm only halfway through this one, but I do enjoy it. Highly recommended if you liked Richter's Looking East from Indian Country, or are interested in the larger history of the Great Lakes region.

AskHistorians 内の AutoModerator によるリンク Friday Free-for-All | March 04, 2016

[–]anthropology_nerd 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I study North American history, specifically Native American history after contact, and I prefer the term borderlands. Frontier is helpful when talking to laymen (and for sparking the imagination!) but, at least to me, the term implies an actual boundary instead of a diffuse area of interaction that can ebb and flow with time. Popular U.S. history likes the story of the gradually advancing line of modernization/frontier, bravely pushing into the wild unknown. The truth was far more messy, with trade and admixture and alliances and feuds occurring between many people along a convoluted area of interaction. Many of the authors examining the northern fringe of the Spanish presence in North America prefer the term borderlands, so I'm a little biased based on my own readings, but I find that term allows for more nuance and explanation than a frontier.

Also, in the U.S. Southeast, where colonial advancement was halted for a few centuries but the repercussions of colonial presence transformed the area, we are starting to use the term shatter zone. Like a hammer hitting a ceramic vase the English presence was limited to the Atlantic coast (the actual strike of the hammer), but the cracks/damage/influence permeated far beyond where that hammer fell (in this case deep into the interior of the continent). I'm not sure if this works in Ireland, but I find that term useful for explaining wide-ranging transformation in the absence of actual contact.

history 内の carl2k1 によるリンク Which Native American tribes were the most fearsome and formidable foe the US government faced and why?

[–]anthropology_nerd 18ポイント19ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm opposed to distilling a culture down to one attribute, in this case Gwynne's focus on Comanche violence, to the exclusion of almost all other discussion of their culture. As I said, I'm more sensitive to this trend because the tendency to essentialize Native Americans into tropes, be it "noble savage" or "bloodthirsty savage", permeates the popular discussion of our shared history on this continent. I find these tropes challenging to overcome when trying to teach/detail the complexity of factors shaping Native American communities in the years following contact.

As an aside, I have no aversion to discussing violence in Native American nations, there is ample archaeological, bioarchaeological, ethographic, historical, and linguistic evidence for warfare in Native American societies, I just take issue with only discussing that violence.

history 内の carl2k1 によるリンク Which Native American tribes were the most fearsome and formidable foe the US government faced and why?

[–]anthropology_nerd 88ポイント89ポイント  (0子コメント)

The main issue I have with Empire of the Summer Moon is the author sensationalized Comanche violence against outsiders. As you can tell from the other replies, most readers only take away stories of Comanche brutality instead of seeing them as a complete culture full of people with various desires and goals who carved out a vast territory between competing empires. True, there were acts of incredible violence, but another work like Hamalainen's The Comanche Empire or Kavanagh's The Comanches: A History, 1706-1875 will place those acts in context.

Granted, I'm an anthropologist and highly sensitive to any popular works that perpetuate the trope of bloodthirsty and savage Indians, so I'm biased on this one.

badhistory 内の AutoModerator によるリンク Mindless Monday, 29 February 2016

[–]anthropology_nerd 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Report the crap and the mods will take care of it, often within minutes.

TheBlackList 内の adjoyce によるリンク Who should play Katarina Rostova?

[–]anthropology_nerd 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, if we are going perfect world impossible then Meryl Streep, but I seriously doubt that would happen.