Looking for Pre-Colombian Southern Californian His

WELCOME, OUR CURRENTLY ACTIVE FORUM HAS MOVED OVER TO:

http://allempires.net/forum/forums.html

, ADMINISTRATION

Hi, new to the forum here and was looking for notable resources (preferably books) on pre-Colombian southern Californian history.  I'm very interested in the customs and traditions of the native peoples, particularly what they ate and how it was obtained.  Unfortunately this topic doesn't seem to be well documented so I hope you guys will be able to help me, thanks.

Edited by Seko - 14-Jan-2010 at 20:19

From the perspective of the surviving Amerinds, try this link:

That's curious. Today we know a lot more about Native Americans than our ancestors did a century ago. Rather than lossing theirs heritage, the rate of rediscovery is really amazing. For instance, Caral was unkown just a decade ago. And in the states, only recently Kahokia has been reconstructed from zero.

Have you read "Ishi?" It is about the last wild Indian in California who lived with anthropologist in the 1800's. Sarah Winnemucca also has a good book about the Paiute who lived in E. California and Nevada/Utah. They are not pre-Columbian but I think they have some good information for your research.

http://www.unr.edu/nwhp/bios/women/winnemucca.htm

Edited by eaglecap - 08-Jun-2009 at 23:16

Well, William Prescott didn't have any clue about Caral or the Chinchorros in Peru.

I don't think Prescott would have ever pretended otherwise. For all their alleged faults (which generally brush lightly over any faults of their "victims"), the Spanish were meticulous record keepers. Whether they owe that  to the Romans, or to Carlos V's upbringing in Flanders, they did well by it. One wonders how many of today's Ph.Ds in studies touching on High Amerindian culture owe their degrees to documents contained in the Archives of the Indies.

What is amazing of the Spanish Chronicles is that they are impartial. Anyone that has studied them will realize that Spanish were brutal, but not genocidal people. In fact, of all the lands conquered by the Spaniards natives survived the best in Spanish America.

Edited by pinguin - 11-Jun-2009 at 05:10

Originally posted by lirelou I don't think Prescott would have ever pretended otherwise. For all their alleged faults (which generally brush lightly over any faults of their "victims"), the Spanish were meticulous record keepers. Whether they owe that  to the Romans, or to Carlos V's upbringing in Flanders, they did well by it. One wonders how many of today's Ph.Ds in studies touching on High Amerindian culture owe their degrees to documents contained in the Archives of the Indies.

I don't know how this could be considered a serious argument. Not that I am a defender of High American culture let alone an indigenist (which I consider racist), but disqualifying people who do because they use documentation created by the Amerindians' oppressors. The Nazis were meticulous record keepers, but it would be absurd to criticize scholars of the Holocaust for using Nazi sources. The Khmer Rouge were also meticulous record keepers. Romania's and East Germany's communist regimes were meticulous record keepers. Paraguay's Stroessner regime was a meticulous record keeper. Are you suggesting anybody studying these regimes do not use data collected by them?

Originally posted by Mixcoatl ... I don't know how this could be considered a serious argument. Not that I am a defender of High American culture let alone an indigenist (which I consider racist), but disqualifying people who do because they use documentation created by the Amerindians' oppressors. The Nazis were meticulous record keepers, but it would be absurd to criticize scholars of the Holocaust for using Nazi sources. The Khmer Rouge were also meticulous record keepers. Romania's and East Germany's communist regimes were meticulous record keepers. Paraguay's Stroessner regime was a meticulous record keeper. Are you suggesting anybody studying these regimes do not use data collected by them?

Edited by pinguin - 11-Jun-2009 at 15:13

Mixcoatl, If you read my post carefully, you'll see that I have a very high respect for the Archives of the Indies, and those who wrote the various studies and accounts that went into those archives. The Spanish had great respect for the peoples they conquered, and it showed in their writings. Even the turgidly difficult "Historia de la Nueva Mexico" by "Capitan" Gaspar de Villagra, written (poorly) in the form of an epic poem, contained a wealth of details on the Aztec origins, and Juan de Onate's expedition to what is today New Mexico. Indeed, you can find the names of virtually every old family in New Mexico by reference to their progenitor.

Pinguino and Carcharodon, If you keep dredging up polemics, we will simply see again the tired old arguments we've seen in so many other threads. drgonzaga make his point well. There was probably not a single people in the americas at the time of the Conquest, except perhaps in the Amazon and out on the Pampa, who had not taken their territory by conquest. Pinguino, you might find the "Atlas Historico de Mesoamerica" compiled by Linda Manzanilla and Leonardo Lopez Lujan of some interest. Published by Larousse (Referencias Larousse), it gives a very brief overview of the Americas prior to the conquest. Of note, it the constant mentioning of peoples who have been conquered, or have conquered.

Both of you keep missing the point on North America, that part of the continent that nobody wanted because the Indians were not "civilized", as were the mesoamericans, Chibcha. and Peruvians. It was not a conquest. It was a process of accretion. More Europeans kept arriving, and the Indigenous population kept falling. It was a process of dislocation. The Great Plains were "conquered" by Swedish, Norwegian, and German immigrants who moved into empty lands and put up fences. The Buffalo, already seriously impacted by the railroads, were nearly exterminated. With that, the days of the Great Plains tribes were over. More than any military campaigns, that was what settled the future of the plains tribes. Their real problem was that their total population as a semi-nomadic people following the buffalo, could never match that of an emerging industrial and agricultural giant.