Talk:Nicaragua: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Line 296:
 
The lack of information regarding pre-Columbian history and culture of Nicaragua is concerning. There is certainly underrepresentation of native histories and narratives of Nicaragua that should be addressed. By painting an image of Nicaragua as a solely hunter-gatherer society with no cultural complexities or histories, the article as a whole reflects poorly on the accurate history of the country and its indigenous people. Particularly because there seems to be a convergence of Aztec and Maya cultural groups in the area, it would be great to see more relevant research on the pre-colonization cultural history. A historical account of Nicaragua that materially begins with colonization serves to undermine the existence and importance of the natives who inhabited the country prior to conquest. The history of Nicaragua does not begin at colonization. --[[User:Brimo1014|Brimo1014]] ([[User talk:Brimo1014|talk]]) 00:41, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 
You’re right, Brimo1014, in pointing to the very short treatment of pre-colonial Nicaragua. The same is true for the separate "Nicaragua History" page. The reference "hunter-gatherers", however, refers only to the Caribbean Coast cultures. Nicaragua’s characterization as "Intermediate Area, between the Mesoamerican and Andean cultural regions, and within the influence of the Isthmo-Colombian area" actually makes clear that we deal with complex societies and the development of early stages of states. The phrase is correct but too cryptic and needs expansion for sure. [[User:Mexkalātsīntli|Mexkalātsīntli]] ([[User talk:Mexkalātsīntli|talk]]) 17:27, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 
== Etymology messed up ==