Oatmeal Savage (curious nick, no?) posted a question about a Sleeved waistcoat in the Kilt Accessories forum in which a very evocative image was used. To whit:
Quote Originally Posted by Oatmeal Savage
I am a historical reenactor interested in the French and Indian War, 1754-1763. ...


Story to the Painting
When the Highlander was summoned to the American frontier to fight on behalf of The Crown, he formed an instant kinship with his Native American counterpart. Tribe and clan were remarkably similar in temperament and philosophy and both cultures produced highly skillful and courageous fighters. In this scene, a Cherokee warrior and Highlander scout in advance of Grant's disastrous expedition against Fort Duquesne. Sadly, both cultures eventually crumbled beneath the oppressive weight of British expansion.
This brought to mind a very interesting book I'm reading titled simply 1491 by Charles C. Mann. (For a much better perspective on the subject of this post, I suggest following this link and reading the article.)

In it, Mann explains that the pre-Columbian Americas (as suggested by the title) were much more densely populated than previously thought. In fact, the Americas may have been more populous than Europe. It appears that disease decimated huge segments of native populations on first contact; the Inkas * by small pox, and in New England - then referred to as "Norumbega" by Europeans (the term "New England" dates to 1616) - by viral hepatitis spread by contaminated food.

He goes on to imply that had disease not been so effective at eliminating so much of the native populations almost instantly after contact with Europeans (English, French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese), there is very little likelihood that Europeans could have gained a foothold in the New World. "New England, the Europeans saw, was thickly settled and well defended. In 1605 and 1606 Samuel de Champlain visited Cape Cod, hoping to establish a French base. He abandoned the idea. Too many people already lived there."

When, however, about half of the population died off from disease, the existing native socio-cultural-political structure collapsed. Little wonder then that a relatively small colony of Pilgrims at Plymouth were able to effectively colonize a continent, or that Pizzaro and just 168 Conquistadors were able to defeat the Inka empire - then presiding over a huge coastal nation along the central west coast of South America (see map below) with a huge population, perhaps the largest city in the world (Cusco), and standing armies numbering well over one-hundred thousand.

These conquests had been attributed to superior technological achievements, especially in weaponry, and in the case of the Inkas, the use of horses by the Conquistadors. However, these conclusions were reached by historians who may have been a little too quick to dismiss the scale of both the number of native inhabitants at the time, and of their capabilities and achievements. Also, knowledge of some of the plagues that spread through native populations was not common.

In any event, if you're interested in a good read, pick up 1491 by Charles C. Mann. You won't regret it.


Tawantinsuyu, the land of the Inkas

*Inka is the romanized version of the name. Inca is the Spanish version.

Regards,
Scott Gilmore