Re: Amerindian navigators and Eurocentrism in scholarship

From (Yuri Kuchinsky)
Date 12 Sep 1997 16:34:42 GMT
Followup-To sci.archaeology.mesoamerican,sci.archaeology,sci.anthropology,
Newsgroups sci.archaeology.mesoamerican, sci.archaeology, sci.anthropology,
References <5v7uj4$l3p$ > < >

Bernard Ortiz de Montellano ( wrote:
: In article <5v7uj4$l3p$
: (Yuri Kuchinsky 17784) wrote:

: > : If Heyerdahl gives primary sources, why don't you look at them and cite
: > : the primary sources rather than citing Heyerdahl?
: > 
: > He gives plenty of primary sources. And, in case you didn't know, he
: > organized the first modern achaeological excavations there in 1955. So he
: > himself happens to be a primary source. And then he organized another set
: > of excavations in 1986. 
: > 
: > The great achievements of Heyerdahl in advancing archaeological knowledge
: > in this area can be doubted only by those who are completely clueless
: > about this whole issue.

: Again, primary sources are mentioned but we do not get any.

What kind of primary sources would you like, Bernard?

: One more
: time-- let us not forget that we have repeatedly asked Yuri for citations
: by the scholars who actually excavated and found *C. moneta* cowrie shells
: in an Adena culture mound.

Trying to change the subject?

: We need evidence that the dig was done
: correctly, that the identity of this species of shell was proven, and that
: there was no sister species native to the New World existed.

I will try to accomodate your requests in the future, since the literature
in question is not easily available.

: Do not keep
: going to new topics before we settle this question-- or retract the claim.

Here we see very clearly how Bernard operates. His style has nothing to do
with true scholarship which is all about FINDING THE TRUTH. I wonder if
Bernard cares about the truth even a little bit...

Let's review this whole discussion. I posted about a very interesting
theory by George Carter re: cowries. Carter claims that this evidence is
solid. I have given citations for where more info can be found.

If Bernard was interested in finding out more on this matter, and in
finding the truth, his first response should have been to go and try to
find this literature. At no point Bernard indicated that he tried to do
this. (He even said that he refuses to read Carter!!!) For all I know, his
library has the copy of the NEW DIFFUSIONIST where Carter's detailed
article is, as cited by me -- so he can find this info for himself (this
article is unavailable to me, as I indicated previously). Instead, Bernard
has launched into a campaign of obfuscating and stalling. He's now raising
all kinds of preconditions that I must fulfill at the drop of a hat,
according to him. And, believe it or not, he demands that I withdraw the
claim by Carter -- because my library doesn't have the copy of his
detailed article! Absurd! 

And not only that... It seems that Bernard is now gone to the extreme of
actually trying to FORBID me to explore other related issues until I can
provide the information that he imperiously commanded me to provide for
him! And why should I bother at all, seeing how negative and unscholarly
his attitude is?

This is in very poor form, Bernard. I think you've demonstrated
conclusively that you care very little about the historical truth.


Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto -=O=-

You never need think you can turn over any old falsehoods 
without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population
that dwells under it -=O=- Oliver Wendell Holmes 

Partial thread listing: