Yes, young Christopher (Cristobal) often gets mentioned as somebody who was "credited" with discovering America. But historians should also take full account of the other history evident in this - that we also know by archaeology and written records that Eirikr Rautha's son Leifr Eiriksson came to America 500 years earlier (more or less). And he met all kinds of "skraelings" in this previously-unknown (to him) land. And even more neat is the progress that anthropologists have made in recent years on what the many origins of these people are. Have you heard that there is a theory that the spear points distinctive of America much earlier (i.e. thousands of years earlier) show some similarity to points in France - and both at times when the ice cover at the poles was probably far worse than it ever has been since. And the similarities of some groups of people from Asia with some groups in the Americas cannot be doubted. And it should make us less (much less) likely to brag about C. Colon making a trip "where no one had ever gone before."
2006-06-21 17:12:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by ghart27 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
Christopher Columbus is the first person "Credited " with discovering America. The reason being is that he was on an expedition to find new land for a growing population that felt oppressed. My son's history books (and as I recall, mine as well) do not say that Columbus discovered American, but that he is the first person "credited" with doing so. Probably because the "Native Americans" weren't eager to tell anyone as they had already escaped an over populated land and canoed/walked/swam to a new land. Now think about this where did the Indians come from and why do they look like Hawaiians who look similar to Asians. Hmmm! Did Asians>Polynesians>Indian/Native Americans discover America. I think so, but they knew enough not to blab it to the whole world or they would be, once again, over populated and on the verge of starving. Then us white people come over and encroach on their food supply and land. Then, to top it all off, we throw on little (relatively speaking) pieces of land, fence them in and say they must stay there. Aren't we the nice ones?
2006-06-21 23:35:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by Redneck-n-happy 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Historians don't say that. What makes you think they do? Children, who are too young to see a bigger picture, say that.
2006-06-21 23:30:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by LazlaHollyfeld 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
They were people, but they hardly discovered their own land.
That said, maybe the term should be ' conquered '.
2006-06-21 23:32:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's been said so much they just accept it as truth.
2006-06-21 23:31:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋