In Defense of Columbus: An Exaggerated Evil.

Perotista said:

Another interesting subject that interests me is the missing copper from around the Great Lakes area. Mined from around 3-4000 years ago. The American Indian didn't mine or use copper. Also Great Lakes copper from that time period has been found in the Mediterranean area. There's so much we don't know or refuse to acknowledge as not to upset the current theories of history.

Click to expand...

Oh sure they did!

Almost every single Indian culture had skilled metalsmiths. The difference however is that only in the last century or so before Columbus did any of them start to make the leap from jewelry to tools.

Jewelry has been found all over North and South America made of gold, silver, copper, even iron. And just like the wheel which had been used on toys but never made the leap to wagons, the leap from metal jewelry to tools really had not happened yet.

We know of copper smelting and use in the Great Lakes region over 5,000 years ago. And the isthmus region of Central America was using a gold-copper alloy starting at around 300 CE. And starting in around 800 to 1200 CE there was a growing metal trade stretching from West Mexico to Peru. The trade was primarily in a variant of bronze, and you had both an "axe currency" that was used for large purchases (these were not functional axes but axe shapes made of the alloy), but also finished goods.

But once again, almost never actual tools. Jewelry, bells, holy symbols, and needles were the most common items. They are even known to have used a "Lost cast" form of smelting.

But do not think for a moment that the Great Lakes tribes did not use copper. Or that they did not also use them as tools. There is also evidence of a great many pre-Columbian copper and alloy tools. However there was no major improvement of these compared to stone tools, so their use never really gained popularity.

maxparrish said:

I also liked it when they were they were actually old; are we to believe modern English such as "Atlantic Ocean" and "Caspian Sea" were also on this map?

Click to expand...

This was a "modern" interpretation of a "Strabo Map" made in 1903. Specifically it was one created for the "Encyclopaedia Biblica". So yes, it is using modern names or translations laid over a recreation of a more ancient map.