this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
108 points (98.2% liked)
Historic(al) Map Porn
815 readers
1 users here now
Welcome to c/old_maps @ Mander.xyz!
A community about captivating historic and historical maps from around the world, from the oldest examples known to those created around 1950.
Notice Board
This is a work in progress, please don't mind the mess.
- 2023-06-13: We are looking for mods. Send a dm to @[email protected] if interested!
About
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Be kind and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
Links
Similar Communities
Sister Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
Plants & Gardening
Physical Sciences
Humanities and Social Sciences
Memes
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't know about your guys, but I recognize one name only. Tells you how thorough the genocide was, eh?
Many of our cities states and regions in America are named for these tribes, so you probably know more than you think.
I've only been to North America twice, and I recognize several dozen.
I hadn't zoomed in enough to see the smaller names below.
The 16th century is old enough that some people groups went through name changes, and many of the names you are familiar with are not on here. This map also prioritizes the endonym (what they call themselves) name over any exonyms (what other people call them). Some exonyms are just anglicisations of the endonym (or another European language), or sometimes they are direct translations or the native name, or names from another tribe.
Apsáalooke means "crow" in the Apsáalooke language, so most people call them Crow.
Additionally, writing these names in the Latin alphabet is not always done the same.
I do find it hard that you wouldn't recognize more than one name, though. I'm no scholar, but I counted at least 140 that I recognized, and I'm sure I would recognize more of them under other names.
If there's a tribe who's name you know that isn't on here, it's probably because it was a less popular exonym (like souix, for lakota), or they didn't exist yet (like the Seminoles), or it refers to more than one tribe (like iroquois).
Thank you for the info! I hadn't zoomed in enough to see the smaller names which I do recognize.
Really, not even the exonyms in smaller printing below the endonyms?
Oh! I hadn't zoomed in enough!