Or perhaps just a claim to justify the cost until a passage was found to Asia.
Um… we’re talking about his opinion of Columbus himself, not his opinion of subsequent treatment of the ‘Indians’ by Spanish colonists. He didn’t blame or criticize Columbus for that.
He wrote his praise of Columbus in Historia de las Indias towards the end of his life, long after his final return to Spain.
Hmm, after taking a recheck I see I conflated two different people who wrote books about the History of the Indies, one hated Columbus, but as you say,las Casas praised Columbus for his navigating and sailing skills. True, he later condemns the slave taking and similar results, but yes, you are correct, I am wrong- las Casas had nice things to say about Columbus’s sailing skills, etc, altho vehemently condemning the treatment of the natives that came out of that.
Still, he was a very young boy when Columbus pitched his ideas and wasnt around for that.
Here is a reprt on the translation, but note las Casa sez nothing about what Columbus actually pitched-
Charles Mann makes a compelling case in 1491 that when De Soto had released 13 pigs in North America to create a breeding stock for future explorers/conquistadors he had unleash a plague on the Native Americans. Those pigs spread rapidly carrying diseases that Europeans had resistance to, but the Natives did not. Within three years, those thirteen pigs had multiplied to over seven hundred. Within one generation, the huge civilizations along the Mississippi the De Soto had described were wiped out.
By the time of Columbus’ death, it was clear that the lands he found, whether they were actually Asia or not, were quite profitable. He had no need for any further fiction on that front. It really does seem that he was personally convinced that it really was Asia that he had found.
Yes, I concur, he convinced himself. Remember, he never touched North America, and very little exploration of South America. He apparently even tried to circumnavigate.
Columbus reached North America on his 4th voyage. He visited what’s now Panama, Costa Rica, and Nicaragua.
Ok, yeah, I meant he never reached the USA. He did reach central America, but still didnt realize it.
I want to make it clear- other than a trip to Bristol, there is no evidence CC had any sort of insider knowledge. It is pure speculation. It is possible sure, but not probable.
If he had heard in Bristol or from Basques about land to the west, then he would also have heard they were savages with no hint of civilization -but again, as mentioned above, he thought Japan and the rest of the Orient might be a lot further south, near the equator. So heading northwest would have been a waste of time. (But as he progressed down the American coast, would have been far more informative…) It makes sense, since he thought 3,000 miles should do it, that he headed due west (and took advantage of the winds and currents going there).
But that is perhaps the most valid point against all prior knowledge, that he made no mention of Newfoundland/ Vineland. Perhaps he was worried that even mentioning worthless scrub and savages would be a minus to his cause; or perhaps he really did not know of the place. After all, saying “the wild northeast coast of Asia is a place we already fish from, right where it should be” would certainly bolster his case.
Cite for this, please? It certainly doesn’t match Jacques Cartier’s explorations in three voyages in 1534, 1535-36, and 1541-42.
In his 1534 voyage, he explored the Gulf of St Lawrence and landed, likely in the Gaspé, where he erected a cross and claimed the land for the King of France. He had dealings with a group of Iroquoians from up-river, who were there for seasonal fishing, and he took two of the sons of the chief, Donnaconna, back with him to France (whether voluntary or not is an issue). He may also have had dealings with Mi’kmac.
When he came back the next year, it was with the intention of starting a settlement. He sailed up the St Lawrence and dealt with Donnaconna at the settlement of Stadacona (believed to be the location of Quebec City), and also with another Iroquoian group at Hochelaga (now Montreal). He and his group wintered over near Stadacona, suffering badly from the Canadian winter and scurvy. They only survived because the Iroquoians at Stadacona showed them how to make a concoction from spruce bark which kept the scurvy at bay. Cartier and his group all returned to France in the spring.
In his third settlement, Cartier again explored the St. Lawrence, hoping to find a fabled kingdom of the Saguenay where there were rumours of gold and jewels. He again dealt with the Iroquoians, but relations were not good, and he left the next year.
For details, see the wiki article on Cartier:
Nothing about the Europeans being considered dirty and smelly, trade only by ropes, and the First Nations able to keep the Europeans from landing in their territory. All of Cartier’s voyages occurred in the first half of the 1500s.
I recall reading a discussion about one of the early explorers that mentioned how locals often were quite friendly and used heir passing through as an occasion for a feast. The explanation was - locals may have a war-like relationship with neighbours, since they were often fighting over the same resources. But for a small group that was obviously not a collection of families looking to settle down, too small for a raiding party and not acting like one, they were quite willing to greet the strangers and entertain them for a while.
As for Jacques Cartier:
“They call this land Kah-Nada”
“I think that means the village over there…”
Considering how some natives were treated, no surprise if they eventually came to dislike Europeans. After all, most visitors did not come as friends. The Chileans basically stripped Easter Island of its population to make them slaves in South America. The Andaman Islanders who refuse to deal with modern visitors probably remember the same treatment from India and Indonesia back in the 1200’s.
I suspect Tisquantum’s story was unique only because he escaped and survived - that his kidnapping was not an unusual event.
Charles Mann in his book 1491 in both editions. The discussion (to be clear, only a single chapter of a long book) focused on interactions between the Native Americans and European sailors along the coast of what is now the US. The first interactions, say in the early to mid 1500s were probably a bit more civil, but the Europeans did not conduct themselves well and the natives soon developed a habit of not allowing the sailors to land. At least not land where the Natives were living. Trade was conducted, but on Native American terms. Remember, these were almost all fishing vessels, not explorers. The weaponry of the time on the fishing vessels were usually not a match for large war parties of Natives. Especially once they figured out that the noise-makers of the day were not particularly dangerous at any distance. All that started to change in the 1600s as European military technology (guns) improved, groups of Europeans came the N. A. specifically to stay for a while, and the resulting disease depleted the Native American populations.
So he’s identified some cases of some fishermen in some parts of what became the US coastline, and extrapolating that to all Europeans in all of North America? In spite of contrary evidence such as Cartier’s expeditions? Not much of a source.
Maybe not. They might not have landed much, why would they? Get some fresh water, get back with the catch. And didnt the Chinese think the Koreans and Japanese were savages anyway?
Anyway, really, I dont think Columbus has any such intel, but it isnt crazy speculation, it is certainly possible, if not probable.
Yes, and the early English explorers didnt seem to have any big issues with the natives either- Cabot, Weston, Elliots, etc. Nor AFAIK, did Real, Lavrador, Fagundes ,Verrazzano, Gomes etc. True, Ponce de Leon was killed by natives. So, it wasnt all peaceful, but perhaps de Leon started it, he was truying to establish a colony, not just do a little flag planting and trading.
To dry their catch. They’re out there for a few weeks, they don’t want the stuff they first catch to go bad before they get home. So they dry that stuff on shore before it does.
To be clear, Mann did not extrapolate. His example in the book was limited solely to what later became New England and the Maritime Provinces. Anyway, my point is that 1491 is a good read.
As to the actual topic of the thread, I have no real opinion, but consider it unlikely. I suspect that Ferdinand and Isabella were so desperate to get a leg up on the Portuguese that they were ready to gamble on Columbus’ faulty data.
Except Cartier in his first voyage landed in what is now Gaspé, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, met and traded with natives, likely Mi’kmack, as well as some Iroquoians:
He landed and erected a cross to claim the land for the King of France. Technically, the Gaspé isn’t part of the Maritimes, but overall, Cartier’s experiences don’t match what the author of 1491 is saying.
I certainly agree that Cartier’s experience was mostly peaceful. From reading Mann’s book most initial contacts were. Even along the New England coast. The issue is that repeated contacts resulted in negative impressions. The Native Americans were at least not initially hostile to visitors, but especially if the visitors showed signs of settling in and staying, the welcome didn’t last. Cartier’s experience is a good example. He visited, found Native Americans to be generally friendly, and then he wisely moved on. Erecting a cross and telling himself he claimed the land didn’t have much of an impact on the Native Americans who probably never even noticed and certainly would not have agreed, didn’t constitute settling in. Those times he did try to settle-it didn’t work out.
What certainly did happen was that eventually the kind of visits the N. America changed from fishing vessels drying fish or explorers trying to draw maps to groups of settlers. We all know how that turned out.
What I mean is - the fishermen, assuming they reported these details, would have said - The locals appear to have no large buildings, just huts. Nothing more than arrows and spears; no woven broadcloth and certainly not silk, no roads, no horses or carts, no uniformed armies, no armour, no decent-sized ships or boats, no domestic herd animals. So basically, whatever they were, they were far (metaphorically and literally) from what one would expect in Cathay or surrounding regions. But then, they were significantly farther north than Columbus expected Japan and China to be, so perhaps if he heard this, this was the explanation he told himself… Proof of land, but still a distance from the civilization he expected to find, and spent the rest of his life seeking.
Perhaps if the first European encounters had been greeted instead with Mayan or Aztec settlements - they would have been convinced they were near to China.
There is also archeological evidence that at or about the time of Columbus, European fishermen were putting ashore to salt dry their catch - I recall one article discussing a site on the shore of Labrador.