Who was the 1st to discover America?

Originally posted by pinguin Originally posted by The Canadian Guy Also being First-Nations Canadian(for most ppl were called Amerindian)in the history of the Americas....my ancestors  travels here but the Asian continent and some from the European continent(many don't realize that there was also an ice path form Europe as well). The first Europeans we the Northmans and they settled in what we call now "Newfoundland" and they settled there for many reasons(wood, iron and escape for the law).   Did they settled? All that has been found of the Norse in New Foundland was a small post. Something like the bases in the Antartic that some modern nations have. Places were people lived part time. I wouldn't call that a "settlement"   Originally posted by The Canadian Guy Then soon after Columbus set out to discover a quicker trade route to east Asia and mistakenly found the Caribbean. So over time he rapes and committed genocide to the Caribs.     Please, show evidence that Columbus personally commited rapes. With respect to genocide, you could find quite a bit of Amerindian genetics in the Caribbean and the historical records show admixture, rather than extermination of natives at the North American style, I am afraid.    Originally posted by The Canadian Guy The the true first powers of Europe came to claim the Americas...than the four of the mightiest one were  England, France, Holland and Spain.   You forgot Portugal, a lot more important than Holland, I am afraid. Portugal was the largest slave trader and also got Brazil, which is half of South America.   Originally posted by The Canadian Guy  The Spanish controlled most of the Caribbean,     Spaniards controlled more of the Western Hemisphere, from Florida and most of the South West of the United States, Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean and Half South America. That makes the largest chunk of the Americas, and still today the former Spanish colonies have the largest territories and populations of this side of the world. Spanish is also the language more spoken in the Americas.   Originally posted by The Canadian Guy the French controlled most of Canada, the English most the the USA     Not really, French controlled Quebec and Louisiana, besides Haiti and a Guyana. The English controlled just a coastal part of Eastern North America and some small spots in the Caribbean, South and Central America.   Originally posted by The Canadian Guy and Holland had trade ports form New York to the Caribbean.     Small territories, indeed.

1) Yes the Nords settled...but their time was not long.
2) I saw a documentary on the history channel...so blame then if they're wrong.
3)My bad...i forgot bout Portugal
4)I meant the Caribbean...not the Western Hemisphere
5) Canada/Quebec was of French control. the French were called Canadiens. As for the English..the colonies eventually became the USA.
6) Im glad you agree.
 

True...They only discovered Vinland(Newfoundland). Not all of the NA.

If your arguing with me SearchAndDestroy, can u read all of my previous post...I said they came to Newfoundland for resources. 

oh...lol srry. 

Originally posted by Sun Tzu Today my class was in the Library doing job research and while waiting for the bell to ring I was looking at a book about the question stated and it included Columbus, Leif, and some Chinese guy. I'll have to check this book out but can anyone shed light on this subject? plus I've always wondered if the Phonecians couldn't have stumbled on American soil ages ago.

There are persistent rumours of Roman artefacts being found in the Americas. There are also legends which attribute the finding of the Americas to Saint Brendan tha Navigator (an Irish saint who died around 580AD).

The first recorded voyage to the Americas that I know of is that made by Prince Henry Sinclair, the Jarl of Orkney in 1398.

Here are some links which might help:-

http://www.orkneyjar.com/history/historicalfigures/henrysinclair/princehenrytrip.htm

http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/masons/glooscap.html

http://www.firstfoot.com/great%20scot/siclair.htm

Originally posted by Pinguin Don't put words in my mouth. Norse didn't know what they had found. Period.

I'm not, here are two quotes from you which say exactly what I "put in your mouth":

There are also persistent rumours than green alliens from Mars or other planets are abducting people in flying sauces....

Or of Amerindians or Inuits reaching Europe before Columbus

Edited by Chilbudios - 24-Apr-2008 at 22:09

Originally posted by Chilbudios There are also persistent rumours than green alliens from Mars or other planets are abducting people in flying sauces.... Or of Amerindians or Inuits reaching Europe before Columbus

You bet

Originally posted by pinguin I don't have anything against Eupeans. I just have tried to take a little bit of gas out of theirs egos inflated like baloons With respect to the achievements of "Europeans", I wonder which Europeans. The term European as an identity is very recent. Each nation of Europe has contributed to the progress of mankind one way or the other. However, believing Europe is some sort of special place, or that had the monopoly in progress, culture or intelligence, is simply outdated. With respect of the "mythical battle", the genocide that Northern Europeans practised agains American Indians, I believe it is just a proof there was nothing mythical in those encounters fueled by greed. I wish Spaniards would return the silver they robbed in the Americas as well, and that French could receive in Paris all the Haitians they brough to the Americas to live like hell in Haiti. Yes, Europe has a long debt with the Americas, I am afraid.

If you read history, it is quite obvious that almost every nation on earth ''has a long debt with'' another nation.
We should also not forget the ambiguity and generality of our aggregative concept of what is a nation, which can simply change depending on how an individual perceives it and in what context. For example in the beginning of the paragraph which I quoted from your post, you wrote,

Originally posted by pinguin With respect to the achievements of "Europeans", I wonder which Europeans. The term European as an identity is very recent

Here you implied that calling all the different peoples in Europe with a single and generalized term "Europeans'' is a recent development with which you do not agree. Yet, later in your paragraph you generalized all of Europe into one single entity writing,

Originally posted by pinguin Yes, Europe has a long debt with the Americas, I am afraid.

. This example shows how the concept of nation can be abused or bent to fit an argument.
As an analogy I would like to propose some arguments against this ''debt to pay'' way of thinking in the context of Europe and the Americas.

1. It is known archaeologically that the ancient populations in the Americas up to 8000 years ago possessed a much greater biological/physical diversity than modern native Americans who show a very limited physical variety. This can imply that the modern peoples of the Americas are the descendants of a group who killed off many other types of peoples around 8000 years ago, hence they too have or had a ''debt to pay''.

2. It is known from population genetics that the (modern) native Americans are closely related to and are descendants of the Siberians whom Altaic people are also a part of, therefore it becomes possible to lump together the Altaic peoples, native Americans and Siberians into one ''nation''. From this perspective, and with the consideration of the westward expansion into Europe of many Altaic peoples such as the Huns, Turks, Mongolians...etc since the forth century AD, which consequently might have pushed the ''Europeans'' westward to the Americas (perhaps it was not a coincidence that Columbus went to the Americas in the year 1492 shortly after the fall of Constantinople into the hands of the Ottoman Turks in the year 1453), we can even say that maybe this one big Siberian-related-nation ''had debts to pay'' to the Europeans, which subsequently were paid off by the expansion of the Europeans to the Americas.

My point is that when there are historical atrocities, by concentrating on the actors with the mentality of ''who has debt to pay to whom'' rather than concentrating on the actions themselves with a more universal perspective, one would limit himself/herself to blaming others for responsibilities and being hypocritical while doing nothing to prevent such atrocities in the future.







Edited by omshanti - 24-Apr-2008 at 22:54

Originally posted by omshanti ... My point is that when there are historical atrocities, by concentrating on the actors with the mentality of ''who has debt to pay to whom'' rather than concentrating on the actions themselves with a more universal perspective, one would limit himself/herself to blaming others for responsibilities and being hypocritical while doing nothing to prevent such atrocities in the future.

The history of Latin America, since  1492, has been a long series  of abusses from outsiders.  First  Iberians, then Europeans in general, then the imperialist United States, and finally  Russians and  Americans that used us to fight theirs Cold War.

Those events are something very deep in the mind of those bastards children of Europeans that are called Latin Americans. We don't forget those events easily, perhaps because they were still going on just twenty years ago. Perhaps with time and more prosperity we will change our minds as well, and will forgot.