# Was Columbus evil? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 2, 2004, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939 "2004-08-02T06:18:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2004, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939/21 "2004-08-03T21:41:37Z")
> [@aurelian](#): > > Sorry, that’s an oversimplification of las Casas’ position. He did not encourage it, and its implementation was highly problematic and painful for him. Hmm. What I’ve read on de las Casas suggests otherwise-- that he did encourage the importation of black slaves, firstly to spare the natives, and secondly because he thought black slave would be heartier. As I understand, he brought his own black slaves with him when he came, seven of them, IIRC. Perhaps it was “painful” for him, just as I’m sure some Nazi guards found it painful to put Jews in the gas chambers. Nevertheless, it happened. No historical figure is “all good” or “all bad.” Even those we consider to be good men had fatal flaws. I do not blame or judge de las Casas for his faults, nor do I excuse them. He was a man of his times just as Columbus was-- he just held one opinion which we modern folk agree with, but that opinion was not shared by many at that time. We should not laud him for that opinion any more than we should condemn him for his support of black slavery. > [@](#): > > In addition, las Casas is not the only Spanish (peninsular) writer who questioned the colonial machine - he just happens to be its best-seller (along with Cabeza de Vaca). Yeah. I know. But, as I said, just because a few voices were raised in opposition, are we to assume that cruelty and inhumanity were not the norm at the time? A few exceptions do not prove anything. There were people who objected to the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials, the Holocaust, various and sundry genocidal campaigns around the world, and the slaughter of the Native Americans in the United States. Nevertheless, these things happened, on a wide scale because they were tacitly approved of by the majority. > [@](#): > > In reference to Oviedo, again, you’re oversimplifying. I love to do that. > [@](#): > > According to the science of the time, such statements applied not just to purely indigenous people but to the mestizos and criollos, as well. From Cortes on, the West (and the rulers in America) often used science to prove the innate inferiority of Americans (a person that inhabits the New World). Juan y Ulloa, Velasco, de Fonte, all posited that America, due to its inferior flora and fauna, and climate, had a corrupting influence on all. The ‘scientists’ of the Enlightenment continued to use the science of their day to support cultural dominance and the need for control. Even Thomas Jefferson, while simultaneously reacting against Buffon’s treatise about the inferiority of America, said that blacks were stupid, smelled bad, incapable of true deliberate artistic creation, and that the men were sexually attracted to orangutans. In other words, Oviedo falls into a much greater trend of European ‘scientific’ judgment used to justify the continued dominance of the colonial system. And this refutes my position that the idealogy of racial inferiority was rampant at the time _how?_ My statements were that Columbus was a man of his times, no crueler or more “evil” than the next fellow, and that we cannot expect him to “rise above” his culture and espouse 20th century values. ---
**Author:** ![laigle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ce7236/32.png) [@laigle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/laigle)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2004, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939/22 "2004-08-03T22:06:50Z")
By our moral standards, Columbus was a monster. By the standards of his day, he was an opportunistic bastard. He lived in an environment which denoted brown people as non-human, and he treated them as such. Make of it what you will. I, personally, don’t buy the “But the natives are a slightly different color, that makes it okay” excuse, and tend to indict the society as a whole for using it. ---
**Author:** ![aurelian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f4b2a3/32.png) [@aurelian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aurelian)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2004, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939/23 "2004-08-03T22:41:23Z")
To Lissa: > [@](#): > > I love to do that. Sorry if you took that badly - I wasn’t meaning to make an assumption, and I should have used a better word. I meant that it’s not enough to simply talk about Columbus’ actions in terms of the general trend of seeing indigenous people as less human than Europeans, as that is part of a larger trend, used to justify the colonization and domination of many nations. I didn’t intend to say it wasn’t a ‘rampant’ attitude - but given that it was a stance taken by Europeans (and eventually Americans - Jefferson, Clavijero), justifying their right to power because of the lacks of the other, it was amorphous - initially in the conquest it was indigenous people that lacked humanity, then it became criollos and mestizos, then it became blacks people, etc…until Mier turned the tables on the Europeans and los poetas civicas like Bello and Olmedo turned the ‘faults’ of America into proof of their right to power. > [@](#): > > Nevertheless, these things happened, on a wide scale because they were tacitly approved of by the majority. Well, of people in power - in Madrid, in Paris, in London; there were 20-odd editions of Cabeza de Vaca’s book (if I remember right), but literacy was still a privilege of the elite and powerful. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2004, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939/24 "2004-08-04T01:57:02Z")
> [@aurelian](#): > > Well, of people in power - in Madrid, in Paris, in London; there were 20-odd editions of Cabeza de Vaca’s book (if I remember right), but literacy was still a privilege of the elite and powerful. Of course. They were the only ones who mattered. Peasants, for purposes of deciding policy, didn’t exist. They had virtually no voice. Due to their political invisibility, it’s doubtful the nobility cared one whit what the peasants thought. As long as they weren’t rebelling, peasants pretty much occupied their own world. You’re right about the attitudes which accompany colonialization. It’s difficult to exploit those with which we identify, so dehumanization is essential to colonialism. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2004, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939/25 "2004-08-04T05:09:01Z")
> [@](#): > > Was Columbus evil? Naw, just chaotic-neutral. He got more experience points that way. ---
**Author:** ![MsRobyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@MsRobyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsRobyn)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2004, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939/26 "2004-08-04T12:14:03Z")
I didn’t mention Loewen’s book as a history textbook, per se. I just thought it would be useful in explaining why Columbus (and others) are regarded with such awe in secondary-level history classes. Its discussion of the outside political influences on history classes is pretty interesting, too. Robin ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2004, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939/27 "2004-08-04T12:32:20Z")
EsotericEnigma writes: \> I learned in school that Columbus was a great man and treated the natives \> kindly (although not with equality) and yadda yadda. Did you really? I graduated from high school in 1970 and I don’t remember the treatment of Columbus being that good (and there was certainly nothing avant guard about my high school’s textbooks.) There was nothing about the atrocities he committed, but neither was there any praise of his attitude to American Indians. He was just described as being an important explorer. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2004, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939/28 "2004-08-05T19:10:56Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > Parents often took their children to watch executions in which the condemned sometimes had their entrails ripped out of them, and then were chopped into pieces. The crowd cheered every move. You could also watch people being burned alive. Lesser criminals might have their hands chopped off, their tongues cut out, or nails driven through their ears. Events like these were considered fun for the whole family. You could buy snacks, souvineer pamphlets, and sometimes, pieces of the rope used to hang the victim, or if you were really lucky, you might get to dip your handkerchief in the victim’s blood. > > Bear-baiting was a popular sport in which a live bear was torn apart by a pack of dogs. People of the time thought it was hilarious. Yeah, and some people today like professional wrestling and Jerry Springer…your point being? ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939/29 "2004-08-06T00:44:39Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > Yeah, and some people today like professional wrestling and Jerry Springer…your point being? Watching people being loud and obnoxious and watching an event with staged combat moves in which no one gets hurt is quite different than watching someone be burned alive, or having their guts cut out in front of them. Even cock fighting, which most people deplore, is not as bloody and brutal as bear-baiting was. My point is that it was a different age. Vast differences exist between the modern outlook and that of Columbus’ time. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939/30 "2004-08-06T01:52:23Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > My point is that it was a different age. Vast differences exist between the modern outlook and that of Columbus’ time. I’m just sayin’ that those who would show up at public executions and enslave foreigners are not necessarily more representative of their culture than those who duke it out on talk shows and watch simulated violence. Which is basically what this thread is about. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939/31 "2004-08-06T03:27:48Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > I’m just sayin’ that those who would show up at public executions and enslave foreigners are not necessarily more representative of their culture than those who duke it out on talk shows and watch simulated violence. Which is basically what this thread is about. Do you think that those who went to executions and bear-baitings were in the _minority_? Why would you think so, when almost everything from that era seems to indicate otherwise? 1. The Church wholly supported public executions because it was supposed to scare others into behaving. 2. It was one of the few forms of public entertainment available to the peasantry, so was vastly well attended. 3. There was no public outcry against the cruelty of such things, or at least, so little that it’s barely worth mentioning. 4. People took small children to view such events. It was thought to be edifying. (Few parents today would take their children to a place where people were dying in horribly bloody ways.) 5. Bull baiting was such a popular sport that a couple of specific breeds of dogs sprang from it: bulldogs and pitbulls. It was a bloody and violent time, and life was certainly “nasty, brutish and short” for the majority of people. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-columbus-evil/257939.md?page=1)