simonwillems Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 Hello, I find a lot of islander-and-pirate MOC's in the forums, a while a go however, I combined Pirates (soldiers that is) and Western-Indians in one scene. Has anybody else done that as well? :-D For those of you who haven't seen it on Brickshelf, enjoy! http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=109891 Quote
Scouty Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 Hehe, Pirates of North America. Nice MOC. The island is quite nice *y* . And Welcome to EuroBricks :capn: Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted December 10, 2006 Governor Posted December 10, 2006 Alas I don't have any Indian mini-figures but the thought of using parts of them (I.e. the head) to depict a person of Mesoamerican (I.e Aztecs, Incas, etc) origin. The problem I find is the Achu mini-figure head is not suitable for any other character but Achu as I don't think it would work for the average Aztec peasant. This got me to pondering if the Indian mini-figure heads would be suitable, after all the northern Native Americans did descend from the southern so they tend to share characteristics. Quote
simonwillems Posted December 10, 2006 Author Posted December 10, 2006 Alas I don't have any Indian mini-figures but the thought of using parts of them (I.e. the head) to depict a person of Mesoamerican (I.e Aztecs, Incas, etc) origin. The problem I find is the Achu mini-figure head is not suitable for any other character but Achu as I don't think it would work for the average Aztec peasant. This got me to pondering if the Indian mini-figure heads would be suitable, after all the northern Native Americans did descend from the southern so they tend to share characteristics. I would'nt use the heads of the indians in combination with Achu's (never knew the guy had a name :-$ ) head because all the Indians have big noses in their faces. Achu's face is not much alike.... But you are right, they might share characteristics. It's a shame really, that in the adventurers theme Lego only gave us a chief, no Aztec Peasants whatsoever. Quote
Norrington Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 i'm actully more interested in the bsb turned to imperial service than the actual moc to be honest Quote
Sting Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 This got me to pondering if the Indian mini-figure heads would be suitable, after all the northern Native Americans did descend from the southern so they tend to share characteristics. Isn't it the other way around? Didn't people from Siberia cross the landbridge, populating the North first and slowly but continiously spread Southeast until finally reaching the southern tip of South America? So didn't the Southern Native Americans descend from the Northern? Or am I misinformed? Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted December 10, 2006 Governor Posted December 10, 2006 You're correct to a point Mr Sting. People did cross from Siberia via a landbridge and began spreading south, however an ice age came along making Northern America uninhabitable for several thousand years. So this forced the people to migrate south to escape the cold. Eventually the ice age ended and the landbridge was no more, so the people from Southern America began migrating north again, but no longer could people migrate from Asia. If you compare an Eskimo to a Native American you'll notice they look quite difference which is attributed to the separation of the two peoples. I.e. they evolved to look different. I would'nt use the heads of the indians in combination with Achu's (never knew the guy had a name :-$ ) head because all the Indians have big noses in their faces. Their big noses is exactly why I had them in mind! Quote
oo7 Posted December 11, 2006 Posted December 11, 2006 What a good idea executed in such a nice MOC! It looks like the settlement of Jamestown or Roanoke. Now to be really nitpicky; I don't think the Scorpion Palace rug makes a good British/French flag. Eskimo Inuit... Quote
ZCerberus Posted December 11, 2006 Posted December 11, 2006 heh- Phes knew to be politically correct about 'Native Americans' but not 'Inuit'. Hehe, maybe Phes would have been more careful if we were talking about 'Aborigines', or he were from Canada. Anyways, I don't mind the combination, but it is a little odd for the Native Americans to be built into the side of a cliff with a more 'Plains Indians' type living structure (tipi). It looks like you want a jungle cliff side, with lodging that was more conducive to flat, open lands. (Hey look at me, Citizen! And I did it without spamming! Yippee!!!) Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted December 11, 2006 Governor Posted December 11, 2006 I don't really understand why "Native American" is any better than "Indian" because "America" is a European name anyway. But I'd never heard of "Inuit" before. And we can't call them "Aborigines" because they now must be called "Indigenous Australians". And once again "Australia" is a European name... Quote
ZCerberus Posted December 11, 2006 Posted December 11, 2006 I don't really understand why "Native American" is any better than "Indian" because "America" is a European name anyway. But I'd never heard of "Inuit" before.And we can't call them "Aborigines" because they now must be called "Indigenous Australians". And once again "Australia" is a European name... Well Indian would be because the original explorers thought they were IN India, so they called them 'Indians', which of course, is probably worse than being called a native of a land mass that they were actually on. Maybe most tribes prefer to be referred to by their tribal identification like Sioux (actually probably not Sioux, I think that was some kind of derogatory slang term), or Lakota, or Apache etc., and now most speak English as a first or second language, so it is probably okay to be referred to in English. But I think it is often more important to people being politically correct than it is to the Native Americans themselves. Like African Americans often say they don't mind or prefer 'black', the same is probably true of Native Americans being called 'Indian'. In terms of the Inuit, they maybe the same way, and prefer 'Eskimo', but who knows, North Americans general hear a little more about them than others because they now have an entire province in Canada that they govern (Nunavut? I am not sure how it is spelled) which was added recently, and, of course, many live in North America. There probably are not many Inuit in Australia! Quote
Sting Posted December 11, 2006 Posted December 11, 2006 You are correct, Nunavut is how the newest province is spelt. The term Eskimo is not used as much, and most Inuit prefer to be called Inuit since "Eskimo" means "eater of raw meat". Not a very flattering term. Quote
Eurobricks Emperor Bonaparte Posted December 11, 2006 Eurobricks Emperor Posted December 11, 2006 It's a good looking scene with some nice pictures. It all looks very realistic. So we have a ship that is supposed to be British (?) that's approaching an indian village. It would be interesting if the creator could tell us if this is just a random coincidence or there is some deeper (historical) meaning to this scene before I do some more research. Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted December 11, 2006 Governor Posted December 11, 2006 Well Indian would be because the original explorers thought they were IN India, so they called them 'Indians', which of course, is probably worse than being called a native of a land mass that they were actually on. Long live the Spanish! Even though Columbus was Italian... There probably are not many Inuit in Australia! I've only ever seen one person that appears (i.e. obvious physical traits) to have descended from the natives of northern America, but he could have been a tourist... So I reckon there's almost none. You are correct, Nunavut is how the newest province is spelt. Ok, how is it pronounced? X-D Quote
simonwillems Posted December 11, 2006 Author Posted December 11, 2006 It's a good looking scene with some nice pictures. It all looks very realistic.So we have a ship that is supposed to be British (?) that's approaching an indian village. It would be interesting if the creator could tell us if this is just a random coincidence or there is some deeper (historical) meaning to this scene before I do some more research. Just a random coincidence here, or have you yet identified the flag on the main mast to be of any country you know of? No historical meaning, just fooling around and mixing the Pirates and Western themes Pitty really that Lego only printed this "flag" (or rug, who knows?) on one side, other side is just plain yellow. What I really had in mind while creating this scene was something out of the movie Pocahontas, but then of course the timetable is all wrong because The New World got invaded much earlier in history. Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted December 11, 2006 Governor Posted December 11, 2006 Do anachronisms really matter though? Historic accuracy has never been a strong point when it comes to LEGO! Quote
Eurobricks Emperor Bonaparte Posted December 11, 2006 Eurobricks Emperor Posted December 11, 2006 Historic accuracy has never been a strong point when it comes to LEGO! Thats true, but they should make more historical (and more or less accurate) sets. What's wrong with adding some educational value? Quote
ZCerberus Posted December 11, 2006 Posted December 11, 2006 NunavutOk, how is it pronounced? X-D I am not sure. If I had to guess... Noon-a-vit, with a really short v. I suppose the question was rhetorical or sarcastic... but I thought I would give it a shot anyway! Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted December 11, 2006 Governor Posted December 11, 2006 Thats true, but they should make more historical (and more or less accurate) sets.What's wrong with adding some educational value? There's nothing wrong with it, but I think Willems shouldn't feel hindered to create his Pocahontas scene because it came later in history than the period the Western or Pirate theme was set. However, I was referring to MOCs rather sets in this instance. Quote
Eurobricks Emperor Bonaparte Posted December 11, 2006 Eurobricks Emperor Posted December 11, 2006 There's nothing wrong with it, but I think Willems shouldn't feel hindered to create his Pocahontas scene because it came later in history than the period the Western or Pirate theme was set.However, I was referring to MOCs rather sets in this instance. Aha. I thought you referred to official sets. But of course Willem should not be hindered in any way to make his Pocahontas scene because its not entirely historic correct. I might be a bit of a history freak :-D Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted December 11, 2006 Governor Posted December 11, 2006 I suppose I was indirectly referring to the official sets as they haven't shown strict historical accuracy, but that's not saying I think historic accuracy is a bad thing. I'm pointing out a fact than offering an opinion. Quote
Capn Frank Posted December 12, 2006 Posted December 12, 2006 hey simonwillems, that's a nice settlement area. do you know what part of american coastline this moc is at? Edit: That scene might work if it were set along the Georgia coast or along the northern gulf coast of Florida. It definetly can't be further North than the Carolinas cause that's where the Iroquois were. I might work along the Texas and Louisiana Coasts but I know that Louisiana is extremely swampy and flat (with those mountain pieces and all). (Hmm. I wonder if I'm caring too much and simon just decided to throw some stuff together and see what happens. 8-| ) Quote
simonwillems Posted December 12, 2006 Author Posted December 12, 2006 hey simonwillems,that's a nice settlement area. do you know what part of american coastline this moc is at? Edit: That scene might work if it were set along the Georgia coast or along the northern gulf coast of Florida. It definetly can't be further North than the Carolinas cause that's where the Iroquois were. I might work along the Texas and Louisiana Coasts but I know that Louisiana is extremely swampy and flat (with those mountain pieces and all). (Hmm. I wonder if I'm caring too much and simon just decided to throw some stuff together and see what happens. 8-| ) I am afraid my knowledge of the American coastline is pretty limited... Never been there... Indeed I did throw some stuff together (if I had had more rocks at the time it would have been bigger and higher *sweet* ). Quote
Capn Frank Posted December 12, 2006 Posted December 12, 2006 I am afraid my knowledge of the American coastline is pretty limited... Never been there...Indeed I did throw some stuff together (if I had had more rocks at the time it would have been bigger and higher *sweet* ). This is the type of longhouse that most Iroquois nations lived in. Hey you try building some of these if ya wanna. However, much to my surprise, there were Iroquois nations that lived in teepees. :-$ See the pic below in the background. Most of the Iroquois lived in the New England States and south eastern Canada. I know the coast line in Connecticut and Maine can be very hilly right at the shore. So I guess you could have those teepees right next to the mountains and coastline. Just gotta get rid of the jungle theme going on (if you want to be historically correct 8-| ). Quote
simonwillems Posted December 13, 2006 Author Posted December 13, 2006 This is the type of longhouse that most Iroquois nations lived in. Hey you try building some of these if ya wanna. However, much to my surprise, there were Iroquois nations that lived in teepees. :-$ See the pic below in the background. Most of the Iroquois lived in the New England States and south eastern Canada. I know the coast line in Connecticut and Maine can be very hilly right at the shore. So I guess you could have those teepees right next to the mountains and coastline. Just gotta get rid of the jungle theme going on (if you want to be historically correct 8-| ). Wow, if anyone is able to build a longhouse like that out of legobricks, please post it. I think it's kind of hard/impossible.... :'-( Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.