MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Falkland Islands wolf-like canine Warrah pre-dates human occupation
Bones found on West Falkland in 2010 by a boy then aged thirteen, which were subsequently kept for a while in the bottom of his grandmother’s wardrobe, may have narrowed down the search for an answer to a mystery which puzzled Charles Darwin when he visited the Falkland Islands in 1837. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesSurprised at this story, the origins of the Warrah were revealed in 2009,
Jun 01st, 2011 - 08:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Traditionally it had been supposed that the most closely related genus was Lycalopex, including the Culpeo (and its domesticated form, the perro Yaghan), which has been introduced to the Falkland Islands in modern times. However, in 2009, research conducted by a scientific team directed by Graham J. Slater at the University of California, Los Angeles, identified the Falkland Island wolf's closest living relative as the Maned Wolf (Chrysocyon brachyurus) - an unusually long-legged, fox-like South American canid, from which it separated about 6.7 million years ago.[3]
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrah
That's not a skull that's just a piece of skull. Al final estos están más agrandados que bombacha de gorda.
Jun 01st, 2011 - 08:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0pre-dates human occupation
Jun 01st, 2011 - 08:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0just as well, if the humans were their, then they would have killid it,
humans are not that good at preserving things, untill they are thousands of years old, , but interestingly,
as the falklands are an island 300 miles from land, how did they get there ? were they south american in origin ??
“Charles Darwin reported that the gauchos with whom he made some excursions around the Islands told him....”
Jun 01st, 2011 - 08:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Let´see a bit deep about it....
In his book “The Voyage to Beagle” Charles Darwin tells an interesting story that occurred in the Malvinas in 1833 (just 2 months after possession by force by english officer) where several gauchos were shown as they hunted with “boleadoras” and also prepared “carne con cuero” (argentinean “asado”) Everything is typically Argentine food and also described in details by his spanish name with many “gauchos” helping them in their work in Malvinas.....
I wonder today still exist Argentinenan Gauchos in Malvinas and his tipical customs ?
If the answer is no ..... which may be the cause? someone had removed ?
Also said the islands belonged to whom and for what purpose had.....
“After the possession of these miserable islands had been contested by France Spain, and England, they were left uninhabited. The government of Buenos Ayres then sold them to a private individual, but likewise used them, as old Spain had done before for a penal settlement” “England claimed her right an seized them”
Remmber Darwin was there just 2 month after England seized the islands by force !!
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/charles_darwin/voyage_of_beagle/Chapter9.html
Who inhabited the islands?
“The absence of any species whatever in the whole class of Reptiles, is a marked feature in the zoology of this country, as well as in that of the Falkland Islands. I do not ground this statement merely on my own observation, but I heard it from the Spanish inhabitants of the latter place” Charles Darwin 1 Jun 1834
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/charles_darwin/voyage_of_beagle/Chapter9.html
It's so easy to understand the history and the reason for the controversy caused solely by the British occupation of foreign territory and the expulsion of its inhabitants and the Argentine government established by law. FACT
so_far ,, now that’s why the world laughs at you,
Jun 01st, 2011 - 09:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0a sensible question is returned by British pirates , and poor Argentina who had it stolen in spite the fact to the contrary,
Now then about that poor lone dead animal, were did it originate from,
Can someone answer without bringing the bloody war into it ,,
geoff wheres geoff ??
FACT my arse.
Jun 01st, 2011 - 09:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Two months after Argentina claims the population were expelled, funnily enough they're still there showing him around the islands. And you're claiming they were expelled.
It was not an Argentine Government establishment, it was a private venture by one Luis Vernet, who sought British consent for the venture. If you want to talk facts, then how come the Argentine accounts conveniently forget to mention Argentine pretensions to the Falklands in 1829 and 1832 were made by an illegal Government whose proclamations were repudiated by the Government that succeeded it.
George Orwell coined the phrase double think in 1984, for the ability to hold two utterly contradictory thoughts and believe in both fervently, Seems to be alive and well in South America.
”1833 (just 2 months after possession by force by english officer) where several gauchos were shown as they hunted“
Jun 01st, 2011 - 09:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”the expulsion of its inhabitants”
Not very smart?
#7 the expulsion of argentinean inhabitants was a gradual process.....in anycase it is not very smart think that in the same day british officer land and seized Malvinas by force also drop argentinean people to the sea...
Jun 01st, 2011 - 10:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No.
Jun 01st, 2011 - 10:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Charles Darwin reported that the GAUCHOS with whom he made some excursions around the Islands told him that they would kill Warrahs by holding a piece of meat in one hand to attract the animal and a knife in the other with which to kill it.”
Jun 01st, 2011 - 10:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What happened to them?
The book The last Colonies by Robert Aldrich and John Connell page 200
1833 ' The Brithish commander raise the Union Jack, claimed possession of the islands and expelled the Argentinians.
”The Falklands officially became a Crown colony in 1840, a governor and a few Scotsmen arrived to establish a British pastoral settlement. Argentina hotly disputed the Brithish takeover, and Buenos Aires made continual diplomatic representations over the next 150 years to recover the islands”
Usual rubbish from SoFa there. And so easily proven ... from the records of the ship that took the trespassing Argentine Garrison back to BA.
Jun 01st, 2011 - 11:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And even more from MoreCrap who knows full well that there was a long period of official silence after 1850. Still using inacurate books MoreCrap ?
Why Rotten? Do you want me use the Official British history instead?
Jun 01st, 2011 - 11:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/7331547/Official-British-history-of-the-Falklands-War-is-considered-too-pro-Argentina.html
4 so_far , Very interesting!
“Do you want me use the Official British history instead?”
Jun 01st, 2011 - 11:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I believe he uses Dr Pascoe and Mr Pepper history, and if you read your own link you'll find it was them who corrected the mistakes :-)
MoreCrap loves spouting the same old ..... More
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 01:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0And doesn't let either the facts or the truth get in the way !
:-)
Many sources say that in 1833 lived in Malvinas Islands 20 to 40 people ... no more, and most of them were the Gauchos who were doing the hard work ....
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 02:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0Probe of that is story Charles Darwin recounts in his book “The Voyage to Beagle”, so interesting and highly recommended as historical facts. (special Chapters VIII, IX, X and XI)
Assuming that the Gauchos at the time were about 50% of the population and continuing with the present growth rate of the islands ... means that today the 3000 Falklands kelpers ........today 1500 should be Gauchos ? is logical ?
Follows the original question that Marcos Alejandro and I did (#4 and #12)
WHERE ARE THESE GAUCHOS ?????
WHAT HAPPENED THEM ???
Im worry
:)
People come, people go.
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 02:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0There was no coercion, people just decided what they wanted to do and some left!
Perfectly natural, so don't worry ..... :-)
People are also forced to leave, like Malvinas and Chagos islands.
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 04:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Common denominator?
Who else, Britain.
They weren't forced though, were they MoreCrap! In fact they were encouraged to stay. Another FACT, and a proveable one.
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 04:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0Mind you, if you'd asked the Gauchos in 1833 if they were 'Argentine', they'd have thought you quite mad!
But it's a good thought about the Chagos Islands ... I wonder if the Yanks will want a large base in the South Atlantic? I'm sure they will at some point. When the Antartic Treaty starts to fall apart. After all they've 'reserved' their position on making a claim to a chunk of Antartica. That's diplomatic speak for, “ We're thinking about it” :-)
“WHERE ARE THESE GAUCHOS ?????
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 09:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0WHAT HAPPENED THEM ???”
Dumb question.
Most people in this world, after about 70 years or so die due to old age or sickness. Given this was about 200 years ago, it's very doubtful they're still alive.
Lots of people on the islands can trace there roots back to those times, they most likely had children and those granchildren are now British.
I am of irish decent, my fathers father was irish, as my mothers. I am english because me and my pairents were born here. This is just common sense, the fact that it had to be explained to you just shows you're a complete idiot.
There were 26 people living in Port Louis in August 1833.
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 12:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 05 were murdered by one Antonio Rivero and his 7 co-conspirators.
Of the 7 Co-conspirators, 1 was killed by his “friends”, 2 escaped on a sealing vessel, 5 (inc. Rivero were captured, sent to England for trial then returned to Argentina).
This leaves 13 people
Thomas Helsby returned to Argentina to continue working for his employer Vernet.
Capt Lowe and 2 companions were not permanent residents but shipwrecked sailors. They left on the first available ship.
Manuel Coronel and his 2 sons stayed in the islands. His common-law wife Carmelita Simon later married one of the residents to become Carmelita Penny.
Antonina Roxas became an important landowner in Stanley.
That is what happened to the people, they became part of the population. There is a significant Gaucho component in the ethnogenesis of the Falkland Islands, reflected in items as diverse as the common vernacular (eg Camp for countryside from the Spanish Campo) up to horse riding styles and equipment.
So in answer to the dumb question, there are islanders living today that can trace their ancestry back to Vernet's settlement.
Good posts So-far Good questions
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 12:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0About the animals, what you call “warrah” the only native mammal of the islands (this people wasnt able to protect this only native species of mammal), here it was called “zorro lobo malvinero” and there was a “perro fueguino” of the yamanes that was extinguished that lived in T. del Fuego.
www.midulcepatria.cl/index.php/extincion-del-perro-fueguino
In Tierra del Fuego still lives el “zorro fueguino or colorado” not extinguished he eats rats those that bothers you in south georgia. The zorro lobo malvinero looks much more like this one and probabily had another mix.
Which people Malen?
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 12:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0guess saphira begins with bri and ends with tish??
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 01:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0do you think im going to believe this story of MP of gauchos extinguishing el zorro?
the last one was killed in 1876 take your own conclusions we werent there in 1876
Thought you meant these people'When Spanish settlers introduced cattle to the islands in the early 1700's, the Warrah was killed in large numbers. Surprisingly tame, they could be lured to humans with meat and then stabbed to death. Later, sheep farmers laid poison baits. The Warrah probably didn't offer any real threat to livestock and probably ate penguins and other ground-nesting birds, their eggs, sea creatures (some scavenged) and vegetation. '
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 01:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Same old style . Rather than accept the findings of the Warrah the Argentines deviate to culture and past conflicts. Reality is the Fox was on our Islands long before Argentina came about so even if they were of South American Origin they would have belonged to the indigenous people who as History also shows were slaughtered by the new Argentine settlers .
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 02:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0When is Argentina going to acept that we are here and now and the past is firmly in the past. Get used to it we have international rights to be left to live peaceably in this world.
Why do you still want to dispute everything anyone for that matter in this world does. Even your bordering neighbours are having to tow the line due to the constant pressure from your Country. Have you ever heard of either the UK or The Falkland Islands ever make claim to the mainland of Argentina. No and the reason for that is we have no interest in doing so. However The article in this column is about the 1,000 year old Warrah and it will no doubt one day be proved where it really originated from. If it happened to be South Africa would you Argentines acept the answer. Probably not because you believe that you are always right. Start Growing up will you.
Again to correct a common misconception, the Spanish did not introduce cattle to the Falklands. Falklands cattle were introduced by the French in Bougainville's settlement and genetically are related to the Balzac breed.
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 04:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#20 is correct, a number of gauchos remained and married into the local community, including some of my ancestors. So nothing “happened” to the gauchos other than they stayed, married, had families and became Falkland Islanders.
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 06:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You'll find that the Argentinians don't care about the islands as much as the fact that they need something to use as a lightning rod. This is common in Latin America. It's like Chavez in Venezuela. He speaks complete nonsense, but if he keeps inserting the “evil Yankee” into his 5 hour speeches every Sunday, then it gives him to use as a lightning rod...something he can use to give “the people” something to unite about. It's the same thing in Argentina. This is something every politician in Argentina will continue to use as part of their platforms, blah blah blah. They'll never get the islands back and they know it. They're simply not strong enough militarily and not relevant enough in the international community for enough other countries to give a rat's behind. But, the politicians can continue to use it. Actually, I believe that some Argentinian politicians probably want them to stay in British hands as this will continue to give something to use politically.
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 06:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 05 were murdered
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 09:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 01 killed by friends
2 escaped
5 sent to england
then 1 return to arg
3 left
4 stay
1 became a landowner
missing 4
garrison out
this is your “gaucho component” justin??
Ask a question then complain about the answer.
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 10:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No one is missing, their names weren't recorded that is all.
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 10:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The answer doesn't suit Mad'un .... he wanted to show that we threw them all off, so any other answer is unacceptable. It's the Argentine way.
Jun 02nd, 2011 - 11:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Malen,
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 12:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.scribd.com/doc/14887706/Falkland-Islands-Population-Evolution
@ 29 Dana Winner is prettier than you are, you are an ugly parrrrot
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 01:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqD3_L3tsNc&feature=artist
@34 And you are a chilean going to school in Gran Buenos Aires.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 02:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0Aguante Quilmes..en la B.
I see that the new (and biased) Chair of the C-24 is already trying to twist the committees remit and 'move the goalposts -
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 05:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0In a keynote address, Special Committee Chair, Mr. CARRIÓN-MENA said the seminar — the first held during the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism — would address the Special Committee’s communication and cooperation with administering Powers; the participation of Non-Self-Governing Territories; and the status of self-government and the Territories’ socio-economic development ....... Citing Assembly resolution 567 (VI) (1952), he said that “[in] this day and age, for a Territory where there is no dispute over sovereignty, there is no doubt that the opinion of the population will guide the way towards successful decolonization action .... ”.
“ ... where there is no dispute over sovereignty ...”
That's a new one ..... unfortunately for him, he doesn't have the power to so amend the UN Charter .... but he's going to try anyway :-)
An attempt to introduce this distinction was thrown out in the 4th Committee a couple of years ago, so the Chairman is unacceptably ignoring UN policy on the matter. Where's he from..........??
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 11:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0Spain and Argentina sponsored a motion that would remove the right to self-determination where sovereignty was in dispute. That motion was comprehensively and overwhelmingly rejected.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 12:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Doesn't stop them trying. The 4th Committee hasn't adopted any recommendation from the C24 for some time.
Justin in other words I would called this an intelligent way of usurpation.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 01:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Expelled the garrison, the authorities and remove the argentinian flag and put the britain in a fragile moment of Arg that was fighting against realistas. Then, facts only 20 % of a little and insignificant quantity of mainland settlers that came from Argentina remain (5 of 26, 2 womans 2 kids and a man) so they were very easily dominated. Never could have mixed so much or in such a way as it happened in Argentina that we could surpass in number and force our dominators and became different of them.
Barilo and you must look like el “perro fueguino” What a nice pet!!
39 :-)))
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 02:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0bingo malen :) That´s exactly the point and help to understand why international community support Argentina....is sooooooooooooooooo easy to understand.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 02:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What international support? You haven't even got the full backing of your neighbours ..... or haven't you read the other articles from today.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 02:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No Argentines were displaced, no Argentines were entitled to be there. The islands have been British since 1765 .....and any dispute was with Spain. From them you inherited nothing but a tendency to whinge!
“Then, facts only 20 % of a little and insignificant quantity of mainland settlers that came from Argentina remain”
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 02:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If your own people didn't go around killing eachother, the number of Argentinians on the islands would be significantly.
We are not to blame for this, They were free to choose to stay or leave.
significantly higher*
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 03:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0you colonize 26 argentines so yes we were entitled to be there
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 03:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0if you wouldnt usurpated the isles the number of argentinians on the islands would be significantly nowadays
“you colonize 26 argentines so yes we were entitled to be there”
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 04:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, the Argentinains did stay and have children, those children now no longer wish to be a part of Argentina.
It´s nice see the truth emerging :)
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 05:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“implanted population” anyone ?
Argentina is an “implanted population”. What any poster here is yet to provide is information on why calling them implanted makes the slightest difference. It doesn't.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 06:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So a population of 26 in 1833, established in a settlement for which the owner sought British permission first and apparently this establishes sovereignty. Mmm I don't think so.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 09:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And note how the vehement claims the population were expelled have been quietly forgotten.
The defence rests. Stick a fork in this idiot he's done.
This is bullsh*t, the only reason to make these claims is that this is a BOT, that's all, if the country were not the UK, there would be no problem and no claims. It's sickening, we're listening to this song all day, MALVINAS MALVINAS MALVINAS. Why do I care about 26 people who died like 200 years ago??? In this country you say you like something British and it's the perfect excuse to be insulted or rejected, that is not NATIONALISM, that's just hatred. Perhaps one day new generations will forget about these stupid claims and we'll finally live in peace, one day, I mean like 1000 years, with the brainwashing machine working at full capacity it will take 1000 years for this region to be a peaceful place, governments are always telling us that we are always in danger, that the Empires are coming to enslave us, they are going to destroy us, that's bullsh*t! These goverments in South America are old people with resentment with a life of failure, and all they can do is transfer their hate to us, an intergenerational transfer of hate. They blame other countries for what they did wrong because they can tell the truth, because they are losers, they're always teaching new generations that this region is always under the attack of the EMPIRES, hat we are idiots and all that we can do in life is be victims and we must be always in this state of paranoia because other countries want to control us, this is what they are telling and teaching us. They won't stop ruining the lives of all new generations of Southamericans with the same bullsh*t. And here they are, posting stupid links to documments that do NOTHING, that change NOTHING! Thinking that because they say that the islands belong to Argentina that means something, LOSERS! Instead of leaving the past behind, we're always stirring up the same sh*t! I really hope that one day the United Nations will finally make this government shut up.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 10:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There are quite a lot of Latin Surnames in Stanley Cemetry.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 10:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Stanley did not have a population until 1843.
So I guess Latins were still arriving after 1833.
RG's are totally stupid!
@ 51 “Latin Surnames” Do you mean Spanish surnames? Latins were a group of people in Europe. No, we are not stupid, the fact that I don't think the islands belong to us, shows that I'm not stupid, unless you talk only because you are a Xenophobe.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 10:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No i mean Latin. I do not know if they are Spanish.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 11:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For example I guess Garcia, Perez, Gonzales, Lorenzo, llamosa might be Spanish?
But Roba, Agostini, Paulini and Palloni perhaps not?
There are a lot more of each. Hence the term I used as Latin. I am sorry if I have offended you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_Falkland_Islanders
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 11:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This is actually quite a good summary.
Sorry to disappoint you, ' so_far', but a lot of the things that Darwin saw can still be seen in the Falklands.
Some say, even buried treasure , hidden there by pirates, mmm
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 11:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Is it not very weird that on other post the RG's say that they were kick out and were not allowed to live here!
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 11:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The South American contribution to the Falklander ethnogenesis is further recorded by Commodore Augusto Lasserre of the Argentine Navy, who traveled extensively around the islands; according to his account there were up to 20 Argentine-born Islanders in 1869, “working either as labourers or foremen in the ranches, because in this kind of work they are better than the majority of the foreigners”.[11][16]
Good link Monty :-)
Jun 04th, 2011 - 12:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0#54 Monty is really good news !! That probably means that tourists visiting the Falklands now can see Gauchos in Stanley in their daily tasks and eat with them a good “asado” or “carne con cuero” ... they must be hundreds now as they were not actually expelled !!!..... have given really good news , thanks !! :)
Jun 04th, 2011 - 03:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 058 so_far
Jun 04th, 2011 - 05:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That's right, you're just as likely to see gauchos cooking up an asado in downtown Stanley as you would in BA or Montevideo.
I don't know why I'm bandying words with you as you're clearly a complete pillock.
However, for anyone out there who is genuinely interested in Falklands culture, I have been thinking about South American influences that can still be seen in everyday life.
Unsurprisingly, a lot of it is to be found in the Camp (from the word campos): beef is hung on a plinky (palenque), horse gear and horse colours are called by their gaucho names, and geographical features are called 'rincon', 'arroyo' and so on.
I could give you a lot more examples but I'm sure you get the point. It seems, therefore, most unlikely that all the gauchos took ship in 1833 and were never seen again, doesn't it?
As for you, so_far, if you really think that the Falkland Islands would have turned into some crappy gaucho theme park if they hadn't all been expelled in 1833, you're even more dense than most of the half- wits we get on here.
Argentina says, they have lived their for ever, living in big cities towns and parks, selling children at the weekly markets, and then the dreaded british cam, destroyed everything , kicked them out , flattend all the buildings, and pretended that they were here first, interesting argentinian history, or a dream, but just who does the world belive,
Jun 04th, 2011 - 05:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0the honest trustworthy british, or a dilinquent country who sells babies,
explode the blog they say , for argentinians never lie, grrrrrrrrrr,
ouch its only a blog dog and smoking joe, marco xbox on the go,,so-far mailing martin go mmmmjust an imaginary wisecrack
dear monty, thanks again for confirm that gauchos still are alive there and you lot don´t kill them (yet).....the rest of your words is exactly what i (and others) expect from you lot.....no surprise at all “lady”, thanks again !! :)
Jun 04th, 2011 - 06:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For those interested, genuinely interested, as opposed to most Argentine posters.
Jun 04th, 2011 - 07:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Gaucho cooking had a strong influence in Falklands cooking. Until very recently meat was cooked over an open “suffolk grate” in a manner very similar to asado. Also common was the Shadro or cast iron cooking pot, which evolved from the Gaucho tradition as a simple oven.
Why don't you try learning a little? I would guess it would lead to recognising them as people in their own right and not the untermenschen you prefer.
Monty69: He has no argument, is just trolling because he's been proven wrong.
Jun 04th, 2011 - 08:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 061 so_far
Jun 04th, 2011 - 08:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I never claimed to be a 'lady'!
I forgot about Falklands food! I guess empanadas, milanesas, casuela.....all came from South America originally, and all very much part of Falklands cuisine.
Another interesting thing is that the Chileans and St Helenians who have arrived recently have brough their own ways of cooking; there is a new eaterie in Stanley now where you can get plo, chacarero, chorrillana, and steak a la pobre, as well as fish and chips.
I know that this isn't what you Argentines with your 'implanted English population' want to hear. Sorry.
“ ... found principally in parts of Argentina, Uruguay, Southern Chile, and Southern Brazil....”
Jun 04th, 2011 - 11:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Guachos seem to have come from places other than Argentina too ... :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaucho
Now some of Vernett's settlers came from what is now Uruguay, so I was wondering where his Guacho's came from. Anyone know ?
Vernet states that there were 10 Whites from Buenos Aires. 10 sailors mostly American and English. Vernet's brother and Brother in law 18 Negroes and 12 Negro girls. These were present on 8 august 1829.
Jun 05th, 2011 - 12:08 am - Link - Report abuse 062 JustinKuntz
Jun 05th, 2011 - 12:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Gaucho cooking had a strong influence in Falklands cooking”
Of course! They are in Argentina.
What do you want the kids there to eat? Haggis?
67. You are a clown. Yes we can eat Haggis.
Jun 05th, 2011 - 12:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0You can even buy Haggis in the Chandlery on the Airport Road.
Please do some research before writing drivel.
#66 Thanks ... I should read my own links properly :-)
Jun 05th, 2011 - 02:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0” .On 5 January 1833 .....27 of the original Vernet settlers and 2 temporary residents remained. These included 12 gauchos from Argentina and their Capataz (foreman); a Frenchman; 5 Indians from Montevideo, Uruguay; 3 women from mainland South America and their two children. Other nationalities recorded are Irish, Scottish, German, and North American, making up a tiny population of some 7 different nationalities....”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_Falkland_Islanders
Less than 50% were from Argentina then !
Of course! They are in Argentina
Jun 05th, 2011 - 06:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Have they got a Villa miseria in Stanley?
Not in Argentina, never in Argentina
Jun 05th, 2011 - 11:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0Most of the Gaucho population came from Uruguay. They were imported by Samuel Fisher Lafone, a merchant from Montevideo. This is where Lafonia gets its name from.
Jun 05th, 2011 - 09:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What have we learnt so far?
“What have we learnt so far?”
Jun 05th, 2011 - 10:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If the question was directed towards the Argentinians i can confidently say not a lot.
And the best mutton I have ever tasted was cooked in a “shadrow” And on horseback we put things in “maletas” not saddlebags. Just shows we appreciate our heritage both Britsh and the Gaucho. Just to confuse the Args further we have “smoko” onstead of “elevenses” - got it from Australia!
Jun 07th, 2011 - 12:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0@74
Jun 07th, 2011 - 06:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0Sorry British ;-)
The term is believed to have originated in the British Merchant Navy,[2] and was in use as early as 1865.[3] The term is still in use in the British Merchant Navy today. The tradition of a smoko in the Australian sense seems to have begun amongst sheep shearers in the 1860s.[4]
? was that a cut and paste ? :-)
Jun 07th, 2011 - 09:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0Strayans have 'smoko' which , as you pasted, probably came from the now as good as non existent British Merchant Navy....... they also have ( or at least 'had' ) a 'crib break' .
Cut'n'paste from the wiki, note that islander already said it came from Australia.
Jun 07th, 2011 - 10:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0Note he ignored the rest.
Used in 'British Merchant Navy' as early as 1865...
Jun 07th, 2011 - 11:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0Used in Australia by shearers in the 1860's........
hmmmmmmmmm......
How did the expression get to the Falklands ... who would know....
Small point of order ... there wasn't a 'British Merchant Navy' until it was created in 1919 by order of the Court of St James.....
wiki is what wiki is....
Small point of order ... there wasn't a 'British Merchant Navy' until it was created in 1919 by order of the Court of St James.....
Jun 07th, 2011 - 01:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well that would of suprised my late Grandfather, who survived being torpedoed whilst in the Merchant Navy on the 12th May 1918
78 Frank:
Jun 07th, 2011 - 01:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Metchant navy is dated back to the 1700's. It wasn't “offically” called the Merchant navy untill after ww1.
Oh dear...... @79.... I doubt if your grandfather would have been surprised at all... considering it was quite a ' big thing ' in 1919 for KGV to make that an official name and to allow the awarding of campaign medals , the wearing of an officially sanctioned uniform etc etc etc in recognition of the sacrifices made in WW1.
Jun 07th, 2011 - 09:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Zethe... there were british merchant ships pre 1919 .... I doubt anyone called them or considered part of a Navy.
Was just making the point that wiki is an imperfect source is all.....
So how did the expression ' Smoko' get to the Falklands? Probably a Queensland shearer arriving on a British ship... maybe one of the shearers that cleared out of Qland and headed for Paraguay after the Great Strike...
Best wishes from the Ozarks.......
Comment removed by the editor.
Jun 07th, 2011 - 10:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nobody is “Perfect”
Jun 08th, 2011 - 04:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0Not even Frank the Yank.........................
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Navy_%28United_Kingdom%29
the wearing of an officially sanctioned uniform etc etc etc in recognition of the sacrifices made in
Jun 08th, 2011 - 05:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0He never wore a uniform in the first or second world war,they were issued with a MN badge to show they were not draft dodgers.
Which part of that was to hard for you to comprehend , Thick?
Jun 08th, 2011 - 06:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0“In honour of the sacrifice made by merchant seamen during the First World War, King George V granted the title ”Merchant Navy” to the service'
Jeeez you really are Thick aren't you....
@ 84, that was the norm, in fact MN uniform was only allowed to be worn when on articles and on board....... or on special occasions such as morning tea with the King....
In many tramp companies uniform was rarely worn... there was no obligation to wear it .... and many of the fancy companies had their own cap badges and braid....
Greetings from the Ozarks
“Zethe... there were british merchant ships pre 1919 .... I doubt anyone called them or considered part of a Navy.”
Jun 08th, 2011 - 11:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0They were in times of war. A perfect example of a big merchant navy would be the East India Company whom had it's own army and navy, even ruled parts of the world. Would also be called upon in times of war.
OK... whatever....
Jun 08th, 2011 - 12:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!