neal brown

Hi guys i was reading the nation edition 25 Nov/2009,Bones show life from 2000BC.It speaks about humans(armerindians) remains that was found in Port St.Charles, St:Phillip & Holetown that is thousands of years old. This is another blow to the British ignorance,of trying to fool the world that they was the first people in Barbados.They even put it in the history books and fooled our children for generations.Arawaks and Caribs was here long before the British,then they tell us about Christopher Columbus that did not discover nothing,just a bunch of Pirates, murderers and slave traders that never achive nothing shame on whoever believe in that crap.In the next 50years we will have our history books rewritten so people can know the truth of the genocide that take place back in the days.

meauxna

Are you drunk?
Granted, I'm American, but it's no secret that the Awaraks & Caribs were there first.

There are a lot of people already atoning for the past 500 years, I just wonder what you are hoping to accomplish with this post.

Please share.

Serendipidy

OK Neal enough is enough now - I have told you several times that this site is for information and guidance for expats wanting to visit or live in Barbados. As i have stated several times its not a personal blogging space or a chat room for you to air all your issues with brits and other foreigners.

This thread will be up long enough for you and any others who just dont get wat im saying and then will be deleted - if you can continue to offer guidance of a positive nature please feel free if not you will be duly deleted from this forum with no further explanation.

I would request no one else respond to this post or anythign else like it cos its just a waste of everyones positive energy and will get deleted with no further explanation

garfield250

Christpher Colombus was not British his true nationality is disputed but common thought puts his nationality at Italian but there is thought that it may either be Portugese or Spanish. According to many common historical publications he was preceded in the discovery of the Americas by the Norse people some 500 years before his 'discovery'.

The following history FYI.........
Early History
The first indigenous people are thought to be Amerindians who arrived from Venezuela around approximately 350-400 B.C. The Arawak people were the second wave of migrants, arriving from South America around 800. In the thirteenth century, the Caribs arrived from South America in the third wave, displacing both the Arawak and the Salodoid-Barrancoid culture. For the next few centuries, the Caribs — like the Arawak and the Salodoid-Barrancoid — lived in isolation on the island.

The Portuguese then briefly claimed Barbados from the mid-1500s to the 1600s; and may have seized the indigenous Caribs on Barbados and used them as slave labour. Other Caribs are believed to have fled the island to neighbouring islands. Apart from possibly displacing the Caribs, the Portuguese left little impact and by the 1610s, they left for South America, leaving the island almost uninhabited.

British colonial rule
British sailors who landed on Barbados in 1625 arrived at the site of present-day Holetown. From the arrival of the first British settlers in 1627–1628 until independence in 1966, Barbados was under uninterrupted British control. Nevertheless, Barbados always enjoyed a large measure of local autonomy. Its House of Assembly began meeting in 1639. Among the initial important British figures was Sir William Courten.


The books you are mentioning were probably written erroniously due to limited historical knowledge but no doubt are being rewritten once new information becomes available.
There is much empirical evidence that indicates that Amerindians were in the Caribbean and Americas LONG before British or other European settlement; that is not in dispute.
So to dispute the theory that you have put forward the history books are probably being rewritten now, and I do not see where your statement of genocide comes from??
Atonement and acknowledgement of past actions is an ongoing process, lets move forward shall we?

_Tropical_11th

Nobody is quite clear about Barbados' history but it is well known that the English were the third set of Europeans to set foot in Barbados. None of the other two stayed though.

There's confusion if the Spanish were first, or the Portuguese.

For example see these three sources:
http://www.british-civil-wars.co.uk/...y/barbados.htm
http://www.barbados.org/history1.htm
http://thecommonwealth.org/YearbookI...45147/history/

If the Portuguese were first then Barbados' name would have *had* to be "Os Barbados"... If the Spanish were first it would have been "Los Barbados". However-, I still hear people say the Portuguese were first and the islands' name was Los Barbados... That would mean the Portuguese didn't know how to speak their own language!

Most seem to believe that:

*The Spanish (in the late 1400s) may have rounded up whatever Amerindians/Caribs/Arawaks etc. that were in Barbados and either deported them or caused them to flee for islands to the west in the Windward Islands. It is well known that the Spanish were mainly interested in gold exploration and not so much about acquiring a lot of new land.

*The Portuguese likely came next, in the 1500s and they reportedly found the island uninhabited. They appeared to be more interested in securing their vast land claim in South America (Brazil), rather than diverting some of their resources to Barbados. The Portuguese claimed Barbados, but they only left behind some wild pigs as a food source, in case they ever returned to the isle.
*English sailors then stopped at Barbados in 1625 while traveling to or from Brazil and claimed it in the name of the Empire. The first English settlement was than later established in 1627 at present day Holetown. And since that settlement Barbados was the only isle in the West Indies never to have changed hands until Independence.

The British put down significant resources in Barbados to maintain it in the Empire. England even signed the Treaty of Oistins to keep Barbados' parliamentarians from proceeding toward their declaration of independence in the 1600s... The Treaty of Oistins allowed Barbados to have more local control then other islands in the West Indies. Barbados was later outfitted with part of the West India Regiment to protect the island from any invasion and thusly formed one (if not the--) oldest standing garrisons in the western hemisphere. The structure of Barbados was then copied and used by the British for Grenada, Saint Lucia, Tobago, Saint Vincent & the Grenadines, and Guyana.

Anyway, you appear to me to have some chip on your shoulder about something. Why not try to take that pent up animosity-- and try and do some community service or something? You still have a few more days until Barbados independence day on November 30th. To my mind we have a lot of work to do around this island, do you need some suggestions on something to do that is more productive?

pgtips

Neal, you know what the real shame is ? The fact that slavery was abolished nearly 180 years ago in the Caribbean and you as a free man, who has the liberty to educate your mind have only just discovererd the Arawaks and Caribs were the first inhabitants of the caribbean.

I ask you brother, educate your mind and free yourself from mental slavery.
The only one who can hold you down now is yourself.

I suggest you get hold of the book "Up from slavery" by Booker T Washington. A man who was born into slavery but rose to acomplish great things in his life and never once let the fact that slavery was just abolished when he was a child stop him from achieving great things.

The past is history, tomorrow is a mystery, it's today that counts. Think positive and remain focussed on learning and improving yourself, so when you read such an article again it does not rattle you so.

Stay blessed.

neal brown

This one is not to be answer