Traveler Hat
travel.hat.net
Guide Books
World
:
South America
:
Patagonia
: Guide Books
..
Highlights
Movies
Wide Screen
Buenos Aires
Tierra Del Fuego
Punta Arenas
Torres Del Paine
Puerto Natales
El Calafete
Moreno Glacier
Fitz Roy
Navimag
Lake District
Santiago
From The Sky
Guide Books
Food
Hotels
Last
Next
Home
/
Parent
/
Details
/
Page Top
Web
www.hat.net
Copyright:
@hat.net
About
the photographer
Quick
Feedback
Form
28/03/2007 1:07:19 PM
I'll give you three examples from the "Facts on Argentina" section that reveal lack of knowledge of the region's geography and geopolitics.
1. It says: "In most of Argentina and the other Rio de la Plata countries (Uruguay and Paraguay)...". This is the grosser mistake because Paraguay is nowhere near! the Rio de la Plata river. And that is easy to see in a map of the area this book writes about. Also from a cultural perspective, this is a gross mistake. Only Uruguay and Argentina are (and always have been) known as "the Rio de la Plata river countries". There is even a culture common to both margins of the Rio de la Plata (River Plate in English). This "rioplatense" culture (from "Rio" and "Plata") is not even shared by all of huge Argentina that is a lot more than just the region around this river that divides it from smaller Uruguay.
2. It says that Spaniard "Solís probed the area now known as Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay". But the region occupied by what today are those three countries is VERY big--and one could not say more than Solís probed the region around the Rio de la Plata river, which covers only a small section of today's Uruguay and Argentina (and not Paraguay).
3. It says that "Solís died at the hands of Uruguayan tribes". This sounds almost as a joke if not an insult. Uruguayans did not exist in Solís's times. The author might mean "the tribes *then* inhabiting *today's* Uruguay". Those tribes were not Uruguayan, just as the Apaches were not American (nationals of the U.S.).
I leave the conclusions up to you. I'm sure *some* facts must be right in this book, but such a lack of professionalism revealed in the absense of the most basic review of the facts of a book edited by a large, well knwon publisher does not inspire the least trust in me. I rather not waste my money: I am willing to pay for information--not for mis*information.