6.0099 Rs: Discovery (6/86)

Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Tue, 23 Jun 1992 16:17:21 EDT

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 6, No. 0099. Tuesday, 23 Jun 1992.


(1) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 17:00:10 -0400 (EDT) (13 lines)
From: J_CERNY@UNHH.UNH.EDU
Subject: An e-mail 'discovery'/observation?

(2) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 16:30 CDT (7 lines)
From: HOKE ROBINSON <ROBINSONH@MEMSTVX1.BITNET>
Subject: RE: 6.0095 Further Rs: On 'Discovery' (3/125)

(3) Date: 23 June 92, 10:46:08 SET (23 lines)
From: Marc Eisinger <EISINGER@FRIBM11>

(4) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 20:29:20 EST (22 lines)
From: ROLAND BOER <rboer@metz.une.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 6.0095 Further Rs: On 'Discovery' (3/125)

(5) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1992 08:39:36 -0600 (9 lines)
From: David Bantz <D-Bantz@uchicago.edu>
Subject: Re: 6.0095 Further Rs: On 'Discovery' (3/125)

(6) Date: 23 Jun 92 13:59:24 GMT (12 lines)
From: D Mealand <ewnt05@castle.edinburgh.ac.uk>
Subject: Americas - Cabot

(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 17:00:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: J_CERNY@UNHH.UNH.EDU
Subject: An e-mail 'discovery'/observation?

>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 92 13:00:48 -0230
>From: NNTP server account <usenet@morgan.ucs.mun.ca>
>Subject: R: "Discovery" - who cares? I do!
>
Seems ironic to me that such an eloquent follow-up comment
on the discovery discussion is anonymous! Let's see now,
does that mean it has no impact ... ?? ;-)
Jim Cerny, Computing and Information Services, Univ. N.H.
j_cerny@unhh.unh.edu
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------9-----
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 16:30 CDT
From: HOKE ROBINSON <ROBINSONH@MEMSTVX1.BITNET>
Subject: RE: 6.0095 Further Rs: On 'Discovery' (3/125)

Morgan's point -- that the Norse expedition is important as a contrast
to Columbus precisely because it did _not_ result in the "discovery"
of America -- is extremely well taken. Reason enough to care.
(3) --------------------------------------------------------------26----
Date: 23 June 92, 10:46:08 SET
From: Marc Eisinger +33 (1) 49 05 72 27 EISINGER at FRIBM11

>> My point is simply : there is no difference between something that has
>> no impact and something that doesn't exist.

> I doubt it. Take for example an unexploded atomic bomb...

The atomic bomb by its simple existance had a lot of impact,
the cold war demonstrated it.

> The colonial conquest of the Americas has had a MAJOR IMPACT on
> the native populations of the continent. Their relegions,
> cultures, ways of life, languages, social organisations were next
> to totally destroyed and irradicated. Beside these trivialities,
> there was of course, officially, no impact reported.

As everybody (minus one) on this list had understood, the non
impact I was talking of was the (hypothetic) precolumbian
contacts. No one would think that the arrival of Colomb had no
impact either on the americans or on the europeans.
(l'ironie dessert celui qui en use)
Marc
(4) --------------------------------------------------------------33----
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 20:29:20 EST
From: ROLAND BOER <rboer@metz.une.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 6.0095 Further Rs: On 'Discovery' (3/125)

Excellent point made about the difference between the Norse
experience in North America and that of Columbus; ie. that
social, political, economic and technological factors meant
that the Norse settlements should fade away while the effort
of Columbus seems, alas, to have been more permanent.

To fill it out somewaht further: the Norse arrived with all
the limitations of pre-capitalist modes of production while
Columbus was driven, as were so many voyages of discovery,
with the power of a nascent capitalism that would colonize
the "world." This would seem to be the crucial difference
between the Norse efforts and the European ones that began
with Columbus in the fifteenth century.

Roland Boer
University of New England
Armidale Australia
RBOER@METZ.UNE.EDU.AU
(5) --------------------------------------------------------------19----
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1992 08:39:36 -0600
From: David Bantz <D-Bantz@uchicago.edu>
Subject: Re: 6.0095 Further Rs: On 'Discovery' (3/125)

My thanks for an elegant contribution; I'm only sorry for the anonymity!

>From: NNTP server account <usenet@morgan.ucs.mun.ca>
>Subject: R: "Discovery" - who cares? I do!

(6) --------------------------------------------------------------27----
Date: 23 Jun 92 13:59:24 GMT
From: D Mealand <ewnt05@castle.edinburgh.ac.uk>
Subject: Americas - Cabot




As a Bristolian can I insert a brief note about John Cabot's
trip across the Atlantic having preceded that of Columbus.
He may not have reached the mainland, but.

David M. (Univ. of Edinburgh)