No video, nothing relevant to put up, and I couldn't be bothered going out for B-roll. Link to patreon if you are so inclined. www.patreon.com/user?u=3998481
She:kon onkyara'se:'a! Hello cousin! Beautifully told, well done. I hadn't heard this ending before- when I tell this story to my friends the lesson to them is to be thankful that mosquitos aren't the size of pine trees anymore! 😁
Oh man, I feel your irritation on this one and share it. We had to go through all the debates on the topic in one of my PhD classes, and there were so many agendas at play, even by the standards of colonial history, that it made one want to scream.
A similar discussion could also be had about Post-contact populations. I was working on a project regarding the Mohawk (looking for info about a captured Jesuit) and got distracted with such questions. I found a study (can’t remember the name or authors, it has been a while) on the Mohawk that found that the population in much of the post contact period was around 3000, estimated from settlement size and accounts of warrior numbers. Both of which have issues but might corroborate each other if assumptions are made. But what I found most interesting is that I think the study stated that only 3 towns were occupied at any given time over the vast Mohawk territory. Of course, it’s hard to determine since they moved around every so often. But while I know the historical reasons, it’s still baffling to think about. I think the post-contact settlement patterns and pressures would make for an interesting video.
In some ways the post contact numbers are harder because they rapidly change in dramatic fashion, whereas the precontact numbers, while unknown, were relatively stable. The three towns point is incorrect, I can think of four contemporaries off the top of my head, upper castle, lower castle, Kahnawake and Akwesnasne. Then there is the report of the sullivan campaign to address.
I have done extensive research on the Sullivan Campaign from journals of the soldiers and maps. I have plotted out their camps, the villages they came upon, and the observations made. From this, the scale of the destruction they caused becomes very apparent. The density of village sites, smaller sites like single houses and camps really comes to life. It really shows how well built up some of these places were even if there are conflicting reports of the amount of houses (some accounts of the same villages differ. For example one person might have written there were 75-90 houses while someone else observed 120.) Then to live in the area and visit these places, it really is something to know the history and to walk the lands where these things occurred.
In 08 I had a history teacher that was actually watching a lot of studies being done, she said the estimates go as high as 100 million in the Americas, before the very first Contact. I grew up around the Tennessee River, and I think that estimate is probably low.
I don't really know if it's possible to come up with a remotely reliable estimate for the continents. There's just too much ground to cover and not enough data.
The Haudenosaunee most certainly outnumbered us French when what we call the Franco-Iroquoian wars happened. Broswer translate works good on this: fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerres_franco-iroquoises
i must say sir, somthing about no visuals, allows my mind to wander. i have had to rewind several times into this video so that i may refocus. i believe your walk abouts a corn field or forest, allow my mind to focus on your imaginary body language. movement while walking. almost as if the hike was taken togeather while discussing topics. i enjoy this information but has been difficult to focus.
perhaps you could create dawings af diagrams or somthing for each part of this story just for visual indicators. even if vague images. much how you created pictures for your "misremembered stories" line. of thumb nail.
I dont know if this is a productive method, but when pondering about “tribal” populations of Africa and the americas, I tend to compare them to my peoples(Latvians, specifically the Kurss and Livonians) populations when they were disparate tribes. Around 25 to 40 thousand is a good estimate in my eyes and I think most non centralised nations can’t go over that number. In a lot of places there’s not a necessity to go over that number, without large urban cities, pastoral and agricultural traditions- these population numbers, Western European population numbers, are quite hard to achieve. I wish I were a tribesman…I’m glad Latvia doesn’t have a lot of people.
Really interesting video! Great job!
Your videos always make me eager to know more about topics that had never crossed my mind. That was some impressive detective work!
You are so much better than the average history youtuber
you're the only guy talking about these things in this way.
There are many scholars who back up what he is saying. But yes, content like his on RUclips is few and far between
very good analysis!
ive been enjoying your videos for a while, and they are always good to see, nice work!
really great videos! love it when someone else sorts through the mixed up evidence and tries to figure out the best estimate
She:kon onkyara'se:'a! Hello cousin!
Beautifully told, well done. I hadn't heard this ending before- when I tell this story to my friends the lesson to them is to be thankful that mosquitos aren't the size of pine trees anymore! 😁
Contemporary storytelling, some parts I made up to fill in blanks, others just got thrown in because they sound good.
This was super interesting. Thank you.
Oh man, I feel your irritation on this one and share it. We had to go through all the debates on the topic in one of my PhD classes, and there were so many agendas at play, even by the standards of colonial history, that it made one want to scream.
Thank you!
Brilliant reasoning and methodology.
A similar discussion could also be had about Post-contact populations. I was working on a project regarding the Mohawk (looking for info about a captured Jesuit) and got distracted with such questions. I found a study (can’t remember the name or authors, it has been a while) on the Mohawk that found that the population in much of the post contact period was around 3000, estimated from settlement size and accounts of warrior numbers. Both of which have issues but might corroborate each other if assumptions are made.
But what I found most interesting is that I think the study stated that only 3 towns were occupied at any given time over the vast Mohawk territory. Of course, it’s hard to determine since they moved around every so often. But while I know the historical reasons, it’s still baffling to think about. I think the post-contact settlement patterns and pressures would make for an interesting video.
In some ways the post contact numbers are harder because they rapidly change in dramatic fashion, whereas the precontact numbers, while unknown, were relatively stable.
The three towns point is incorrect, I can think of four contemporaries off the top of my head, upper castle, lower castle, Kahnawake and Akwesnasne.
Then there is the report of the sullivan campaign to address.
I have done extensive research on the Sullivan Campaign from journals of the soldiers and maps. I have plotted out their camps, the villages they came upon, and the observations made. From this, the scale of the destruction they caused becomes very apparent. The density of village sites, smaller sites like single houses and camps really comes to life. It really shows how well built up some of these places were even if there are conflicting reports of the amount of houses (some accounts of the same villages differ. For example one person might have written there were 75-90 houses while someone else observed 120.) Then to live in the area and visit these places, it really is something to know the history and to walk the lands where these things occurred.
insightful
Very nice reasoning.
In 08 I had a history teacher that was actually watching a lot of studies being done, she said the estimates go as high as 100 million in the Americas, before the very first Contact.
I grew up around the Tennessee River, and I think that estimate is probably low.
I don't really know if it's possible to come up with a remotely reliable estimate for the continents. There's just too much ground to cover and not enough data.
The Haudenosaunee most certainly outnumbered us French when what we call the Franco-Iroquoian wars happened. Broswer translate works good on this: fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerres_franco-iroquoises
i must say sir, somthing about no visuals, allows my mind to wander. i have had to rewind several times into this video so that i may refocus. i believe your walk abouts a corn field or forest, allow my mind to focus on your imaginary body language. movement while walking. almost as if the hike was taken togeather while discussing topics. i enjoy this information but has been difficult to focus.
perhaps you could create dawings af diagrams or somthing for each part of this story just for visual indicators. even if vague images. much how you created pictures for your "misremembered stories" line. of thumb nail.
That’s not a bad idea. I wish I were a better artist, even simple drawings take me forever.
But yeah Champlain is known for embellishing many occurrences.
I dont know if this is a productive method, but when pondering about “tribal” populations of Africa and the americas, I tend to compare them to my peoples(Latvians, specifically the Kurss and Livonians) populations when they were disparate tribes. Around 25 to 40 thousand is a good estimate in my eyes and I think most non centralised nations can’t go over that number. In a lot of places there’s not a necessity to go over that number, without large urban cities, pastoral and agricultural traditions- these population numbers, Western European population numbers, are quite hard to achieve. I wish I were a tribesman…I’m glad Latvia doesn’t have a lot of people.
So much anger towards Johnny American! 😂
As well there should be.