Three Events in Dominican History

[Ricardo900]

Originally Posted by Chip

I would question the above numbers, mainly because it does not mention mulatos nor mestizos. I would recommend reading the following post by our resident historian, Baracutay, who has dedicated his life to the study of the Dominican peoples, and especially their Domincan roots.

http://www.dr1.com/forums/511031-post112.html

I have read and followed the Taino thread and Baracutay is probably a good historian, but I would rely more on published materials by recognized historians, to substantiate what happened in history, because it's not hard to put your opinions on paper, but its difficult to be a world-renowned author, where other experts will read and critic your work. I am not looking for a blogster.

[Ricardo900]

Originally Posted by NALs

One does need to wonder why there is a discrepancy between the Library of Congress (claiming a pop of 125,000 in 1790) vs. the most respected Dominican historian, Frank Moya Pons claiming a pop. of 180,000 for the same year. To that, one must take into account the depopulation that lead to a pop. of 63,000 in 1812. That was a good 10 years prior to the Haitian invasion by Boyer and the subsequent introduction of thousands of former black American slaves to the primarily Puerto Plata - Samaná areas of the country and everywhere in between.

By 1844 the country gained its independence without expelling the thousands of black Americans (known as libertos) that were settled by the Haitians during the occupation. Following that, the sugar industry began to take shape at the end of the 1800s and that created an infusion of blacks from the British West Indies (cocolos). By the 1900s, their labor was supplanted by massive numbers of Haitian migrants and, in a nutshell, that leads us to today.

Its not too hard to imagine that most of the African blood in the typical Dominican is NOT from slaves that were brought to the country, as I previously mentioned.

-NALs

How about showing us, by providing a link, or a scanned copy from Frank's book, that substantiates your claims on the low number of slaves brought to the DR and that "most of the African blood in the typical Dominican is NOT from slaves that were brought to the country"

So far A.Hidalgo is the only one who provided a link from "The Library Of Congress", which references over 13 authorities of Dominican history or relations to it.

Now, why should I believe Nals, Chip & Baracutay over The Library of Congress?? Show me something other than words and opinions, because I have tons of those.

I am flexible, I listen to everybody, especially Lou Dobbs. So if The Library of Congress is wrong. Why don't you send them a correspondence detailing their mistake and requesting for them to correct it. I doubt that you guys have enough letters after your names to even warrant them to respond to your request, but hey, it doesn't hurt to try. Oh yeah, don't forget to cc myself and DR1.

[Chip]

Originally Posted by Ricardo900

I have read and followed the Taino thread and Baracutay is probably a good historian, but I would rely more on published materials by recognized historians, to substantiate what happened in history, because it's not hard to put your opinions on paper, but its difficult to be a world-renowned author, where other experts will read and critic your work. I am not looking for a blogster.

No offense, but if you would have read the actual post I posted, you would have seen that Baracutay references who was the author of the census. Also, he is not a blogster, but a paid historian who works for the Nat'l Museum of the American Indian in NY. Furthermore, the comments he had about the hereditaty influence of Tainos in the DR population has been backed up with recent DNA evidence. Therefore, I think this lends weight to his referencing of historical material in general.

National Museum of the American Indian

[Ricardo900]

Originally Posted by Chip

No offense, but if you would have read the actual post I posted, you would have seen that Baracutay references who was the author of the census. Also, he is not a blogster, but a paid historian who works for the Nat'l Museum of the American Indian in NY. Furthermore, the comments he had about the hereditaty influence of Tainos in the DR population has been backed up with recent DNA evidence. Therefore, I think this lends weight to his referencing of historical material in general.

National Museum of the American Indian

First, I would like to clear up that I am not or did not want to imply Baracutay is a blogster. That blogster reference was in general and "Tongue-in-Cheek".

Now, I read that link to the Tainos in DR, which references a "Jose Alvarez de Peralta", now I only found one site that even references his name and that site is devoted to "demonstrate that Taíno cultural and biological survival in Cuba, Haiti, the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico", so please excuse me if I consider the site "self-serving" EstevezCronos

The site is dedicated to the promotion of Taino culture, even though many people including the US Government believes they were extinct by the late 1500s, so of course everything on that website will promote and try to strengthen the argument that Tainos survived. But that's a topic saved for your other thread "Tainos in the DR". Are there photocopied documents or other websites to substanitate what "Jose Alvarez" claims?? Or other general websites that are not trying to push an agenda.

Also, every history school teacher, whether it be in elementary school or college is a "paid historian" My 5th grade history teacher "Mrs. Bullock" was paid to teach us history. Now, now, I am not down-playing his credentials but if you are going to give out his resume, you should also add any published articles and books, including awards and citations accomplished.

[Chip]

My point is this guy has dedicated his life to Domincan history. As far as "bias" goes, the statements about the hereditary influence of the Tainos on the Dominican popuation is being proven as fact.Therefore, I think he deserves some leeway, given that some "reputable" historians chose to ignore the indian completely, ie your reference:

colony of Santo Domingo increased from about 6,000 in 1737 to approximately 125,000 in 1790. Of this number, about 40,000 were white landowners, about 25,000 were black or mulatto freedmen, and some 60,000 were slaves

Where is the indian component? Wouldn't it follow as logical that there would be even a stronger concentration of indian influence in 1790 than today?

I also don't understand where the disconnect is - like it is bad or something to recognize the native indian contribution back then and much less today - this was my only point. Talk about getting the short end of the stick(not me, the Tainos).

[Ricardo900]

Originally Posted by Chip

My point is this guy has dedicated his life to Domincan history. As far as "bias" goes, the statements about the hereditary influence of the Tainos on the Dominican popuation is being proven as fact.Therefore, I think he deserves some leeway, given that some "reputable" historians chose to ignore the indian completely, ie your reference:

colony of Santo Domingo increased from about 6,000 in 1737 to approximately 125,000 in 1790. Of this number, about 40,000 were white landowners, about 25,000 were black or mulatto freedmen, and some 60,000 were slaves

Where is the indian component? Wouldn't it follow as logical that there would be even a stronger concentration of indian influence in 1790 than today?

I also don't understand where the disconnect is - like it is bad or something to recognize the native indian contribution back then and much less today - this was my only point. Talk about getting the short end of the stick(not me, the Tainos).

Now how can Taino indians be included in that census, when historically,Taino Indians became extinct by the late 1500's? Is it true, who knows?? That's the story the US government is sticking by. Is it the "short end of the stick", probably. Let's not forget that the "off-topic" discussion was about how many slaves were in the DR.

[Chip]

Originally Posted by Ricardo900

Now how can Taino indians be included in that census, when historically,Taino Indians became extinct by the late 1500's? Is it true, who knows?? That's the story the US government is sticking by. Is it the "short end of the stick", probably.

Who knows??? We do of course. There were many people at that time who had high percentage of indian blood based on the fact that many Dominicans today still do per the referenced DNA results.

Therefore, this calls into question previous historical references that refuse to acknowledge their existence. The fact's (DNA) don't lie. As far as this particular US government department's stance, I wouldn't consider put much stock in what they say, as their scope is very limited in their goal of summarizing all of the countries of the world. I would think other US government entities, such as the "National Museum of the Americian Indian" would be more authoritative on the matter.

http://www.dr1.com/forums/603841-post291.html

[Chris]

Oh dear .. I was looking forward to reading three events in DR history ...

[Ricardo900]

Originally Posted by Chip

Who knows??? We do of course. There were many people at that time who had high percentage of indian blood based on the fact that many Dominicans today still do per the referenced DNA results.

Therefore, this calls into question previous historical references that refuse to acknowledge their existence. The fact's (DNA) don't lie. As far as this particular US government department's stance, I wouldn't consider put much stock in what they say, as their scope is very limited in their goal of summarizing all of the countries of the world. I would think other US government entities, such as the "National Museum of the Americian Indian" would be more authoritative on the matter.

http://www.dr1.com/forums/603841-post291.html

Chip, I AM WORN OUT, the white flag is up and I am calling it quits, good night buddy, but I will leave you with this quote:

"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of its behind." - Ricardo

[Chip]

Originally Posted by Ricardo900

Chip, I AM WORN OUT, the white flag is up and I am calling it quits, good night buddy, but I will leave you with this quote:

"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of its behind." - Ricardo

Or in my case, the lack thereof...