The true “native” population of today is more of a mixture-
the mestizos and creoles.
Alright! Now it’s beginning to feel like Columbus Day.
From Barratolome de Las Casas (who was there): The Admiral {ie Columbus} percieved that daily the people of the landwere taking up arms {in protest of Columbus’ incessant demands for gold}, ridiculous weapons in reality, he hastened to proceed to the country and disperse and subdue, by force of arms, the people of the entire island…For this he chose 200 foot soliders and 20 cavalry, with many crossbows and small canons and swords and a still more terribleagainst the Indians in addition to horses: this was 20 hunting dogs who were turned loose and immediatly tore the Indians apart."
And this for his own son about the same campange: The soliders mowed down dozens with point blank volleys, loosed thedogs to rip open the limb and bellies, chased fleeing Indians into the bush to skewer them on sword and pike and 'with God’s aid soon gained a complete victory,killing many Indiansand capturing others who were also killed."
So I would say he killed people.
**
You can’t credit him with “opening up new land” in one breath and dissassociate him from every aspect of how that land was opened up (and I do find “opened up” just a tad euphemistic)in the next. If you want to celebrate a great navigator we could have Leif Erikson Day. It’s because of what followed that Columbus is signifigent.
Moreover, while he is not personally responsible for any terrible thing that happened after him, he did set the tone (part of the reason he is more important that Leif Erikson) by claiming the land outright, by taking slaves, by exploiting the native population for monatary gain and meeting their resistance with violence.
Columbus’s letter to Isabella: “In the name of the Holy Trinity, we can send from here all the slaves and brazil-wood which could be sold.”
**
Oh really. So how come when I posted some contemporary sources who were alarmed by the excesses of the Spanish Inquistion, you disappeared?
Certainly you have to consider any historical event in the context of it’s time. But that doesn’t mean abandoning all discernment about the nature of those events.
Pointing out that “the conquest of the earth, which consists mainly in the taking away from those with broader nose or darker skin, is not a pretty thing if you look into it overmuch”, or that Columbus was involved in just that, doesn’t mean (or shouldn’t) that he wasn’t a great historical figure and a damn fine sailor, or that everything is white men’s fault.
spooje, I think we are talking about intentionally killing natives. I do not think we can hold the Europeans responsible for communicating diseases to the native Americans any more than we can blame the natives for communicating diseases to the Europeans. Noene of them understood the mechanisms of disease and it would be some centuries before it was well understood.
What I say and maintain is that anyone who says there was a concerted effort to exteerminate the Indians is making it up. The word “genocide” has no place here. It is simply inaccurate and untrue. Genocide means the extermination of an entire people or race. The Spanish never had this in mind. To compare the Spanish colonization with Hitler is an extreme show of ignorance of the facts.
I’m working on convincing Janelle’s family (American) to celebrate Thanksgiving now.
Advantages.
It actually is harvest time in Pennsylvania, with lovely fall colours instead of bare branches and snow.
There are no lines or inflated prices for turkeys.
Gives a nice holiday between summer vacations, Halloween, and Christmas instead of one crammed in a few weeks before the Christmas break.
Janelle’s convinced, now I just have to work on the parents.
Perhaps Canada can culturally assimilate the U.S. 
On one level:
Columbus kicked native American ass and kicked it good!
Another level:
Without Columbus, its unlikely that Spain (or England) would have struck off towards the Western Hemisphere. Spain might have concentrated on continuing their war of liberation with the Moors further into North Africa.
Eventually, some European power would have encountered the Americas and – kicked some ass.
Much of the “history” about Columbus (or Cortez, Pizzaro etc.) comes to us from their enemies so a lot has to be taken with a grain of salt. There are a number of facts:
Columbus did it. Yep, him. He organized it and pulled it off successfully. Yeah, yeah he got the size of the globe wrong…yada yada. IIRC, the evidence he collected persuaded him that a land mass was out there relatively close to Europe. He interviewed Basque fisherman who were already fishing off the Grand Banks (and who most likely had already made landfall). He interviewed sailors who had discovered (or had been told) of an “asiatic” body found in the North Atlantic. (probably an Inuit fisherman). He may have even heard of the Norse colony of Vinland.
Spain was late in the game. The Portuguese had already established trade centers in India an were bringing back spices and gold. (Sorry, no slaves just yet, not much need for them and the Portuguese were on good terms with their trading partners.) Going west would lead to India on the eastern coast, he hoped.
The were late because they had just finished a war of liberation of 700 years against the Moors. A particularly nasty conflict in which you were lucky to be made a slave if taken prisoner (like Cervantes was). A nasty brutish war that often featured the hurling of decomposing plague victims into the enemies’ town to break a siege.
These soldiers, free from conflict were available to Columbus in his second voyage designed to establish naval bases in the West Indies and find both India and the spice islands.
Remember the Santa Maria, wrecked during the first storm? Columbus had left 39 sailors with adequate provisions on an island until his next return. Since the first voyage had had few violent encounters with the natives, you’d suppose that the Spaniards had been serenaded by the natives with songs right out of Pocahantus.
Nah. The natives stormed the fort and killed everyone there, probably in nasty ways. Not surprisingly, Columbus and his soldiers proceded to kick ass. This pissed off the priests on board the second expedition as Spain was also determined to save the natives’ souls. Hence the letters that have come down to us not just about Columbus but Cortez and the other conquistadors.
Thus the link to genocide is broken right there. Despite their desire for gold, spices and slaves, the Spanish also wanted souls. Granted, if you didn’t want to convert, they’d kill you anyway but that was the same choice offered back home to the Muslims and Jews (though exile for a fee was available in Spain but not America.)
Next thing you know, the natives start dropping like flies from European diseases. As fellow Christians, the Spanish did what they could to save them but what would kill 10% of the Spaniards would kill 70 to 90 percent of the natives. Soon all that was left were the offspring of Spanish/native marriages.
But by then, Columbus was dead (from disease at age 55), Cuba had been colonized, the Spanish knew they weren’t anywhere near India, and stories about Aztec gold and native rebellions against Aztec tyranny were filtering into Cuba.
Nixon, it is also important to note that “Spain” (well, in actuality “Castile”) was no more a single uniform entity than any country has been in history.
The Crown and government back in Spain commissioned studies by scholars and ethicists about the right morality. They ended up being the “protectors” of the natives against the greed and immorality of the Spanish individuals. Laws and decrees were issued to protect the indians. The Spanish in America saw things very differently. They thought it was easy for the crown to see things in such a rosy and theoretical way but they thought the decrees lacked any understanding of the practical difficulties encountered out in the frontier.
Communications being what they were and efective control beig very weak at best, the Spanish did in many cases what they thought they could get away with. Thast is human nature everywhere and at every time in history.
But there is NO doubt the Spanish crown saw the indians as souls to be saved. very shortly after the conquest of Mexico, schools and even a university were built to teach the natives and Spanish works were translated into local languages. It would be ludicrous to think the Spanish would teach these people anything in order to kill them later.
Also note that there were people back in Spain very critical of the Spanish colonization (LasCasas comes to mind) and who made their voice heard very clearly.
Think of the USA today on the matter of race relations. The legal situation is one of protection of minorities and yet you could argue this is a racist country beacuse the actions of some individuals. Does that mean the USA is an evil country? (Well, some people, like the guy who authored that site, think so, but I don’t.)
This is not a one sided thing of the evil Spanish slaughtering the gentle indians. Like anything in history it is a complex mixture of many shades of gray.
At any rate, I still insist on separating two issues:
-The discovery of America (done by one Christopher Columbus)
- The subsequent colonization
In my view they can and should be totally separated. The effort of the discovery cannot be blamed for what happened later (whether you think it was good or bad).
In that case, sailor, I don’t think you can give Columbus credit for “discovering America,” because he clearly did not. He did not step foot on the North American continent, and others did. QED. We can quibble about whether or not he discovered or enabled the exploitation of (in its traditional, non-negative sense) “the Americas,” but I think that’s a different thing altogether.
I also think you’re wrong that nobody has ever changed their mind on any topics because of GD. I have had my opinions altered or reversed on several topics, as have others. If you can recommend any worthwhile books on this topic, I’d be happy to read them.
In conclusion, I think that “everybody did it back then” is an overused justification for people’s actions. Part and parcel of being a hero, IMNSHO, is to rise above one’s circumstances. Going with the flow shouldn’t make anyone a role model or a hero.
Columbus did not discover America. He was the first European to learn of it’s existance.
And yes, the Aztecs were bad. But then, what about Pizarro and the Incas?
(Man, I’m making Dr. Brett proud!)
Ahem. Please see my previous post.
But if it wasn’t for Columbus, we wouldn’t have the song “Columbia, the Gem of the Ocean”!