I like this "Los Gentiles"

[Pisgah]

Here it is. It is young, not a mature graft, but I like it...

This is going to look sweet when it grows up.

[transDiMenTional]

I like it, but what is it?

[planthelper]

 

ok, here is mine.

[transDiMenTional]

cmon u guys dont make me UTFSE

[Rev]

mmm you guys caught me on the backfoot...

no only do i not have any

i dont even know what they are!

tsk

ive been negelecting my homework

[transDiMenTional]

ok im sold, i want one!

[Pisgah]

That's wild Darcy, your plant really does look diff from mine. the sheen of the skin and the spination is a touch different. The rest of mine were either grafted more recently, or not grafted at all, so I'll have to wait to see variety in my own lot.

PH, is one of your plants pupping already?

[Moses]

One of the SS seed packets.

?????????????????

excuse my ignorance but where are these from(SS??)

i'm planting up big this year and would like 50-100 seeds

cheers

[Osprey]

i have a bunch of these seeds that I would be happy to trade with my australian friends for say..(extends little finger to edge of mouth).....An Eiileen cutting perhaps?????

[M S Smith]

I have "Icaros," I have "GF", I have "Luther Burbank", but I don't have the "Los Gentiles" yet. I pretty much doubt there is a significant amount of difference in any of them, and any statements that a plant has been cultivated for 3,800 years begs for some meaningful support to verify.

Hum, I suppose I could order the seed, but anyone up for a trade?

Alright, here's what I am going to do this weekend. I'm going to take my small Eileen and cut it into 3" sections for propagation. Osprey, you no doubt are likely a better propagator than myself and I should probably just pass one on to you...maybe for the GF? I got a couple others begging for the plant too, but they might have to wait.

~Micheal~

[Osprey]

Just a note to anyone who doesn't know this already,

A packet of "Los Getiles"seeds is only $3.50 from sacred succulents.International airmail is just another $2.50.

(Us dollars)

Order a catalouge.theyhave alot of great tricocereus seed varieties.

i'm not sure if I have a right to a peice Michael(but I apreciate the offer )since I already have a nice little 5"tip cut.( I'm also involved in international negotiations regarding getting another soon)

i think I will just let it grow for a year or 2 before trying to propigate it.

So when you guys graft trico seed onto pereskiopsis,how long before you have to remove it or re-graft onto something else?

It seems like a good way to speed things up.

mine are like grains of rice

[Gunter]

any statements that a plant has been cultivated for 3,800 years begs for some meaningful support to verify.

Have you asked SS?

The people who grow it are said to trace their lines back at least that far as well, and to have grown the plants traditionally for millenia as well. I recall Trout mentioning they had some picky harvesting practices such as only using 7 ribbed plants.

[Torsten]

Don't forget too that SS is an offshoot or in association with BPC, who were (with "Allies") the other half ".... off the jungle". These companies have long and respectable ethnobotanical research histories.

[teonanacatl]

Its always luck of the draw with seeds though. Interesting plants. Ive got an interesting plant i should take a photo of some time, its some sort of kk but unique in its form, ive got three and they all the same.

[M S Smith]

I haven't asked Ben about the 3,800 years, but even if it were true I am at a loss to understand the ability to preserve such knowledge. Certainly I can see someone saying to Ben or one of his collectors, "hey, we've cultivated this plant for 3,800 years," and then this just being passed along without either proof, or even the ability to be proved. For someone to say in such a definitive manner that this plant has been cultivated for 3,800 years is rather inappropriate without support other than comments from those who grow it and likely have absolutely no "records" which could adequately maintain such dating. I think the whole thing rather preposterous.

Certainly the people who presently grow this plant may have been "said to trace their lines back at least that far as well," but this doesn’t mean that this statement is true and should be equally applied to the plant. I seriously doubt that the people who currently grow this plant have maintained either an accurate written or oral history that goes back even 200 years much less close to 4000 years. Certainly one generation may have told another that they grew it, and then the next carry that forward with the addition of their own years, but for this to be carried on successfully for 3,800 years with any sort of accuracy in what would have been an illiterate culture is ridiculous. This is not to say that this particular plant hasn't been cultivated continuously for 3,800 years or for 5,000....but without some sort of record you can't really know how long it has been cultivated past a few generations. Certainly these cultures continue to support and develop myths and legends, and that is all I think this is. I have no trouble with myths and legends, only with the discussion of that which could possibly be myth being discussed as though it were fact when in fact its likelihood as being myth is much more likely.

~Michael~

[Gunter]

It would be an oral history, which I have a feeling you would not take seriously, or rather you are taking it quiter seriously hence your desire for evidence.

I find the claim not only plausible but also probable.

The Los Gentiles are said to be cultivated at present, atop of rock walls bordering food gardens, this alone makes them distinct from Icaros plants which are not cultivated.

Edited September 9, 2006 by Archaea

[Torsten]

For someone to say in such a definitive manner that this plant has been cultivated for 3,800 years is rather inappropriate without support other than comments from those who grow it and likely have absolutely no "records" which could adequately maintain such dating. I think the whole thing rather preposterous.

"Said to have been tended to for at least 3,800 years by the lineage of people known as as "Los Gentiles".

The way this is worded is far from stating a fact. It's more like Ben is recording an oral history or even a myth. That aside, I have not had any yummy fruits off T.peruvianus and this strain has been cultivated for it's fruit as well as the medicine. So maybe there are images of these plants or fruit from that long ago to support this claim.

[M S Smith]

It would be an oral history, which I have a feeling you would not take seriously.

I find the claim not only plausible, but, probable.

The Los Gentiles are said to be cultivated at present, atop of rock walls bordering food gardens, this alone makes them distinct from Icaros plants which are not cultivated.

Yes, I figured it would be an oral history, but it isn't that I "would not take [it] seriously," only that the likelihood of the oral history being maintained intact for even 3,300 years within pre-Columbian Peru is improbable. I might in fact take it seriously if the claim had some sort of backing that could be supported by fact or not questioned so easily with reason. With all due respect, the claim is plausible, but that it is plausible doesn't make it probable. And the acceptance of such a claim when it can be deconstructed with a bit of anthropologically based thought should in the least keep such a claim in the realm of speculation and not probability. There is clearly not enough information available to consider the claim as being true, but if you want to say it is "plausibly" true then this is based upon a belief. I would like to find some basis of support that indicates how the cultivators of this plant have been able to maintain an accurate 3,800 year long oral record of their growth of it. As it stands I don’t see any other representation of oral history of this degree of antiquity that has been maintained intact for 3,800 years. What if they said they cultivated it for 5,000 or 500 years? Is there any way to grant either proposition as true? No, there is not. I’m sure there are lots of traditions and cultivated plants in the Andean culture, and in many others, that no one could account for going back even more than a few generations without modern scientific support, much less the number of generations within 3,800 years. What’s needed is more than words and some actual archeological support, which I would surmise none exists regarding this particular plant.

And that the Icaros plants are not cultivated and not existing on a particular rock wall doesn’t mean that they hadn’t been cultivated at some point in history. No doubt these plants fruit and set seed that isn’t prevented from finding its way off said wall. And this obviously brings up the question of the Los Gentiles not being a “clone” as if it was it wouldn’t set seed unless out-crossed. So then the Los Gentiles isn’t a clone, but rather then a collection of a particular sort of plant that continues to adapt evolutionarily by continued interbreeding, something which would mean that the plant, even if cultivated for 3,800 years, is not the same plant as it originally was unless they are restricting their use to plants that are only propagated by cuttings and have been for 3,800 years. Any support for this?

I have too many questions to simply grant the status of this particular collection of plant as having nearly 4,000 years of use.

Torsten, I just saw your post and you are certainly correct in repeating said to, but unfortunately like so many things regarding these plant such simple wording is often misinterpreted as supportable when it is not. I regret the fact that the statement isn’t said to by such and such and then addressed as to the probability of the statement being supportable in light of the reporter and in light of analysis regarding all that is know about the culture, anthropology, and history. I hate to say it, but using such comments appears to be simply a means to sell plants and seed.

~Michael~

[Torsten]

And that the Icaros plants are not cultivated and not existing on a particular rock wall doesn’t mean that they hadn’t been cultivated at some point in history. No doubt these plants fruit and set seed that isn’t prevented from finding its way off said wall. And this obviously brings up the question of the Los Gentiles not being a “clone” as if it was it wouldn’t set seed unless out-crossed. So then the Los Gentiles isn’t a clone, but rather then a collection of a particular sort of plant that continues to adapt evolutionarily by continued interbreeding....

A type of heirloom cotton that has been cultivated for 500 years is also not the same plant that it was 500 years ago, but still retains the name of that cultivar/variety. I don't think anyone claimed this to be the same clone as thousands of years ago. In fact, all it says in Ben's blurb is that the plants were tended to for that long, but this doesn't exclude the possibility that they were completely replaced somewhere along the way.

Torsten, I just saw your post and you are certainly correct in repeating said to, but unfortunately like so many things regarding these plant such simple wording is often misinterpreted as supportable when it is not.

I think this is being a little harsh. Reading ethnobotany and herbal books we constantly come across such references. And when there is no reference to the source we simply accept that it is folklore or myth. Like Pan is said to have used Arundo for his flute, and the witches are said to have used aconitum for flying ointment, or god is said to have created earth in 7 days. Really, there is little real evidence of an of these, but plenty of oral and written history for both.

Maybe you are reading more into that statement then was intended

[M S Smith]

....And when there is no reference to the source we simply accept that it is folklore or myth....Maybe you are reading more into that statement then was intended

Well Torsten we might accept it as folklore, but that doesn't mean others won't make the mistake we might avoid. Hell, it might not even be folklore, it could be a freaking lie by a dishonest curandero looking to draw attention to his services and supplies.

Yeah, and you're probably right, I am likely reading more into it than I should, but hell, it sure did make for some interesting writing for me, and I hope some interesting reading for you.

Or did I just waste everyones time?

~Michael~

[Gunter]

Mike, I don't think you appreciate the signifigance or oral history, can you show me a case where an oral history was shown to change over generations in Turtle Island culture? We are not talking about just cactus cultivators, we are talking about a culture. Oral histories, which relate to the mysteries you have so well studied, are often remarkably conserved, this includes ritualistic methods such as the Icaros, some of which are said to be passed down for thousands of years, unchanged, in the amazon Basin. Given the aspects of oral hisotry and their relation to staunch conservation of their content, as well as the addition of new content, but not revision, make the burdon of proof in the antithesis of the specific focus of the oral histories. That is to say that they more than deserve the benefit of the doubt and conservation is more probable than improbable. I don't think 3-5000 years is a very long time at all when it comes down to it either.

I think you will find music that has been part of religious traditions, that has been passed down for millenia, music is an aspect of oral tradition. Please forgive me for saying this, but I don't believe you have studied oral tradition in andean culture or Turtle Island culture. There is remarkable conservation involved and any study of a cactus cultigen goes far beyond just botany, it involves chemistry, pharmacology, anthropology and archaology among other things. When you have taken the time to study the cutlures involved, then your notion of what is or is not improbable in relation to them will hold much more sway with me. Not that you have to convince me you are bright or apt at what you are familiar with.

So you know this is pertinant to Quechua culture, history, tradition, ancestory and language, which has been traced back to 2000+ BC through archaeology and whose language shares an uncanny range with these cacti including Peru and Bolivia, southern Colombia and Ecuador, north-western Argentina and northern Chile. Before the spanish it has no written alphabet, ergo the emphasis on oral conservation is something that people used to written language often have little appreciation of and for. Quechua is the language of those cultures who we can archaeologically verify as having cultivated and used these cacti. Likewise all litterature in Quechua culture and language was passed down via oral tradition before spanish invasion, needless to say that is no small amount of litterature. I might also point out Ray bradbury's book fahrenheit 451 proposes that we adopt and rekindle oral traditions for the conservation of our own valued litterature in the face of censorship and intolerance. Anybody who has ever memorized a song word for word can pass on that song, and so on and so forth, it doesn't make much of a difference if that song goes through 3 or 30 generations. For oral traditions pertaining to other species I suggest researching whale song.

If you research the cultures of the pottery with sacred cactus themes, your going to find it is Quechua, the same with textiles. The textile tradition is also something that has been conserved for millenia, and it is related to the oral tradition. The designs and patterns in the clothing and textiles themselves pertain to the oral tradition. If there is one thing western people tend to do, it is underestimate Andean Cultures.

In cultures lacking writing oral conservation is common, this fact, (not any jungian archytype BS) is largely responsable for common themes in cultures isolated from each other for millenia.

Edited September 10, 2006 by Archaea

[Torsten]

Or did I just waste everyones time?

Not at all. It makes people look at the detail a little closer, including the power of well chosen words in a plant description

[M S Smith]

Well,......thanks Archaea.

Now if I could only find some verifiable support in any of that for the "said to" claims of Ben being true, something you apparently think the case though no evidence exists and the claims come from a cactus catalog. I understand your respect for oral histories, but until you yourself understand the context of the claim of the Los Gentiles having a 3,800 year history, and who said it, and if it could be backed up with further supporting evidence, I don't know why you would give it the benefit of the doubt based upon your respect for oral histories that may exist elsewhere and don't pertain to this particular claim.

And I do appreciate oral history, but only in so far I understand it is much more amenable to change than written history. This obviously leads me to conclude, in opposition to your views, that the ways of today are not always the way things had been in the past, and in fact are usually not.

I don't underestimate Andean culture, but appreciate the fact that it is not stagnant and always has been an adaptable changing culture that though maintaining certain features having lengthy histories they change them to fit ever changing times and needs....like us all.

~Michael~

Edited September 10, 2006 by M S Smith

[Gunter]

You have very good points. I am going to dig a little deeper here and see what more evidence we can have, other than language, oral history, pottery, textiles and archaeology, as well as extant locations of cacti. Sometimes though I think some of us can be so skeptical, that we would doubt the claim that China exists if we have not seen it with our own eyes.

Edited September 10, 2006 by Archaea

[M S Smith]

Jeez Archaea, you don't have to be so patronizing towards me...I mean "some of us." Of course China exists, as I know I can go there if I wanted to and know it exists because the preponderance of evidence supports it. But why am I being so defensive, I mean it wasn't as though you were accusing me of being so skeptical as to doubt China exists without having seen it with my own eyes. But that leaves me wondering who doesn't think China exists because they haven't seen it?

Regardless of these idiots, every bit of my skepticism regarding the specific claims regarding the "Los Gentiles" is warranted and acceptable in light of the information provided. I say "specific claims" as I have not challenged anything else besides them in this thread, but you seem to think I am challenging the whole cactus use within the culture when I do understand there is a basis to support the history of these plants in the Andes. Saying a plant has a millennia’s old history with a culture or cultures of the Andes, and presenting archeological support is one thing, but claiming a specific localized people have cultivated a particular plant for a very specific and defined length of time when lacking archeological support, and having only a "said to" claim, is quite another.

~Michael~