[Yaakov ben Avraham]

This is an interesting question. Columbus Day is a very interesting debate nowadays, at least in the United States. Should it be celebrated? If it should, how? Should it be celebrated or reflected upon? What about the man himself? Should he be praised or condemned, or held somewhere in the middle of two extremes? I invite you to answer the question above with your votes, and then comment below. I shall be curious to see your responses.

[Rama Set]

Not as interesting as the last time you asked it.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

I asked it on the other site. That is why I am asking it here. I am curious as to what people think here vs. the other site. I don't think I've asked it before here, have I? If I did, then woe is me. *GRIN* That would be just like me, though. Repeating myself.

[Rama Set]

I thought you did last Columbus Day. Maybe I'm wrong.

[Rushy]

If Columbus actually discovered a new world, wouldn't the continents be named North and South Columbia?

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

I thought you did last Columbus Day. Maybe I'm wrong.

Its entirely possible that I did. But it is an interesting question. I am writing a book about Columbus. Trying to answer several questions, to wit:

1. What drove the man? I mean, beyond the clap-trap we are taught in school as children. We've all heard (at least those of my generation; I am not sure how old you are) of how Isabella (and I am STILL trying to figure out why they use the Italian form of her name in American English, rather than the English form "Elizabeth", since her husband is known by the English form "Ferdinand", rather than the Spanish or Italian "Fernando"; in Britain I've noticed some authorities go with "Elizabeth", and some with "Isabella") sold her jewels to pay for his First Voyage, which in fact is total crap. We've also all heard of the Council of Salamanca where all the learned scholars of Castile and Aragon insisted that the world was flat, and Columbus stood, the Great Hero, and alone was able to convince the Sovereigns to trust him that it was round. This was also crap, since all educated persons since Aristotle had known the Earth was round, and any Sailor worth a damn knew it was round.

So, all the  Washington Irvingite nonsense aside, what truly drove the man? They say it was to find the Grand Khan. Well, I am sure that was part of it. To convert the heathen. I expect that was another part of it. To get gold and glory. I expect that was some of it. And yet, there seems to have been so much more. Columbus was a deep thinker. The man knew he was courting death, for G-d's sake. I mean, he claimed the Earth was smaller than just about every scholar out there claimed it was, except one. Why would any experienced seaman go with the one scholar that everyone considered wrong? Was he truly that crazy, or did he have another motive?

It is also interesting to note that his ships' sails were white with a red Cross. This was the symbol of the Knights Templar, which had been forcibly disbanded in 1312 in France and throughout much of Europe. However, in Portugal, they had been cleared of all charges, and simply renamed the Order of Christ. Columbus' father-in-law was reputedly connected to this Order in some fashion.

So the question I have is, what did Columbus know, when did he know it, and what precisely was he looking for? And why, then, were the ships' sails outfitted with the above decor when they were Castilian and not Portuguese? There certainly seems to have been some tolerance for the Templars in Spain, who largely joined other Orders. So, this is one question I hope to answer.

2. I want to examine the historiography of Columbus. In my lifetime of 41 years, which isn't that long, we have gone from treating Columbus as a total hero to a complete, vicious, slavering, genocidal savage beast. How in the hell did that happen? What aspects of our social existence have allowed us to do that, and still sleep at night? I for one don't think he was either. But it is amazing how we have gone from one radical extreme to another. I should like to examine how this occurred and why, and what we can learn from it as historians and teachers, and even as people who aren't specialists in the field.

So, it should be very interesting. I look forward to it, all told.

RUSHY, to answer your question (and a fair one it is), the reason they were named North and South "America" is because Amerigo Vespucci was the first to map them extensively. Columbus only reached a bit of the mainland, namely, Costa Rica and a bit of Venezuela. Amerigo Vespucci saw a lot more of the mainland. And he mapped much more of it. So they ended up naming it for its cartographer rather than the first European to see it.

[Rushy]

RUSHY, to answer your question (and a fair one it is), the reason they were named North and South "America" is because Amerigo Vespucci was the first to map them extensively. Columbus only reached a bit of the mainland, namely, Costa Rica and a bit of Venezuela. Amerigo Vespucci saw a lot more of the mainland. And he mapped much more of it. So they ended up naming it for its cartographer rather than the first European to see it.

Columbus wasn't the first European to see it, though. Scandinavians ventured between continents far before the Spanish or English did.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

RUSHY, to answer your question (and a fair one it is), the reason they were named North and South "America" is because Amerigo Vespucci was the first to map them extensively. Columbus only reached a bit of the mainland, namely, Costa Rica and a bit of Venezuela. Amerigo Vespucci saw a lot more of the mainland. And he mapped much more of it. So they ended up naming it for its cartographer rather than the first European to see it.

Columbus wasn't the first European to see it, though. Scandinavians ventured between continents far before the Spanish or English did.

In a sense they did. But their journies were VERY brief, and pretty much forgotten about. They made no permanent settlements, and very quickly decided not to bother with what they saw. The land of Vinland was pretty much ignored. Even when the Admiral (Columbus) went to Ultima Thule (Iceland) himself, he talked to scholars and sailors and Captains alike, and they all pretty much told him that the trips to anything further West of Greenland were the stuff of legend, and that was about it. Now, we do know today that they actually did make it. In fact, there seems to be some idea that they actually did post a settlement there, or at least they tried. But it didn't last long.

So I won't disagree with you. There was European contact with a part of the Americas before the Admiral reached San Salvador on 12 October 1492. And of course, there will always be debates and arguments over whether anybody else managed to get here or not. I have heard (and I fully expect you have too) all kinds of theories about how different groups arrived here to the American Hemisphere and influenced one or more groups of Native cultures in their development. Some of these theories are more outlandish than others. Personally I believe they are all rather outlandish, but that's as may be.

As regards The Northmen, there seems to be pretty much no doubt that they were here, however briefly. But they had no lasting effect. Columbus gets that distinction, for better or for worse,depending on your point of view.

[Rushy]

Columbus was also the first man to use biological weapons for genocide. European diseases swept through the continent killing millions. In essence, the only reason European settlers weren't killed by natives was because they were so dirty and diseased that the natives died before major colonization took place.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Columbus was also the first man to use biological weapons for genocide. European diseases swept through the continent killing millions. In essence, the only reason European settlers weren't killed by natives was because they were so dirty and diseased that the natives died before major colonization took place.

Well, it should be noted that Columbus had no idea that he and his men would kill the Natives by disease. I mean, who the hell knew anything about disease in the XVI Century? The Admiral himself had no idea. Now, it IS true that Euro-Americans later DID find this out, and they in fact DID use this technique, deliberately against Native persons, by giving them blankets that they knew were infested with smallpox. But that was in the XVIII and XIX Centuries. And that was, in my opinion, unconscionable, and utterly inexcusable by any moral standards, whether present or past.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

It should be further noted that there was one lovely little gift that the Native unknowingly gave to Europe. That little gift has gone by many names, mostly by nationality names, usually one your own nationality does not like. In England, it was always called "the French Disease". We usually call it "Syphilis" today. It was not French at all. If should have been called the "American Disease", since Columbus most likely brought it back on his First Voyage, when he returned home.

An interesting little side-note on the subject:

QUOTE-The exact origin of syphilis is disputed.[4] Syphilis was indisputably present in the Americas before European contact. The dispute is over whether or not syphilis was also present elsewhere in the world at that time. One of the two primary hypotheses proposes that syphilis was carried from the Americas to Europe by the returning crewmen from Christopher Columbus's voyage to the Americas. The other hypothesis says that syphilis existed in Europe previously, but went unrecognized until shortly after Columbus' return. These are referred to as the Columbian and pre-Columbian hypotheses, respectively.[16] The Columbian hypothesis is best supported by the available evidence.[39][40] The first written records of an outbreak of syphilis in Europe occurred in 1494 or 1495 in Naples, Italy, during a French invasion (Italian War of 1494–98).[13][16] As it was claimed to have been spread by French troops, it was initially known as the "French disease" by the people of Naples.[41] In 1530, the pastoral name "syphilis" (the name of a character) was first used by the Italian physician and poet Girolamo Fracastoro as the title of his Latin poem in dactylic hexameter describing the ravages of the disease in Italy.[42][43] It was also known historically as the "Great Pox".[44][45]

The causative organism, Treponema pallidum, was first identified by Fritz Schaudinn and Erich Hoffmann in 1905.[13] The first effective treatment (Salvarsan) was developed in 1910 by Paul Ehrlich, which was followed by trials of penicillin and confirmation of its effectiveness in 1943.[13][44] Before the discovery and use of antibiotics in the mid-twentieth century, mercury and isolation were commonly used, with treatments often worse than the disease.[44]

Many famous historical figures (including Franz Schubert and Niccolò Paganini) are believed to have had the disease.[13]-END QUOTE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syphilis#History

Emphasis mine.

[Pongo]

Columbus was also the first man to use biological weapons for genocide. European diseases swept through the continent killing millions. In essence, the only reason European settlers weren't killed by natives was because they were so dirty and diseased that the natives died before major colonization took place.

How come we never hear about the pernicious Native American diseases that swept through the Old World?

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Aside from Syphilis , there were none. Remember that Natives took baths often. Europeans did not because they thought it was bad for them. In fact, Isabel made it illegal for the Natives to take so many baths in an attempt to protect their health. Go figure. The law was not regularly enforced, but it was on the books.

[Lord Dave]

Columbus was a moron who thought the world was smaller than it was.

You're right that most people knew it was round but Columbus said "Yeah but you're all morons if you think the ocean is THAT big."  He convinced Isobella to help fund his voyage by basically arguing that the world is smaller than predicted and the path to Asia wouldn't take long.

THAT was his driving force: to prove the world wrong.
And he sucked so hard at it, he succeeded.  He proved that there was land between Asia and Europe.  The Scandinavians knew it before hand but they didn't really tell anyone about it because they weren't stupid.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Columbus was a moron who thought the world was smaller than it was.

You are certainly correct about that. However, he did have one scholar from which he drew this information, and that was Alfragan the African. but Alfragan measured in Arabic miles, rather than the Roman mile with which Columbus was familiar. That was where the problem started.

You're right that most people knew it was round but Columbus said "Yeah but you're all morons if you think the ocean is THAT big."  He convinced Isobella to help fund his voyage by basically arguing that the world is smaller than predicted and the path to Asia wouldn't take long.

Roger that.

THAT was his driving force: to prove the world wrong.
And he sucked so hard at it, he succeeded.  He proved that there was land between Asia and Europe.  The Scandinavians knew it before hand but they didn't really tell anyone about it because they weren't stupid.

Well, did the Scandinavians really know it? They did get to Greenland, certainly, and they did make it to Vinland, but they spent very little time there, and although they did try to leave a settlement, it lasted very little time. By the time Columbus himself traveled to Ultima Thule (as Iceland was known in those days), he was told that the sagas were the stuff of legends, and nothing more.

I mean, yes, today we do indeed know that the Northmen did indeed get to Vinland. But in the Admiral's day, anything West of Greenland was deemed to be a mere dream. And let's be honest, the Northmen never made the land they visited relevant at all. In terms of having any effect on world history, they ought not to have bothered to show up at all. I mean yes, so Greenland is still a self-governing territory of the Kingdom of Denmark, since Denmark once controlled Iceland. Good to know. I think you will agree that when it comes down to it, the influence the Northmen had by coming here was minimal to none.

The Admiral's visit is what really opened the New World and made it relevant. Before Columbus arrived,   nobody in Europe other than a few poets and sages knew or cared that the Western Hemisphere existed, aside from Greenland. So I think on that level alone he deserves credit.

Ultimately, he was damned lucky. He found Cuba right where he expected Cipango (Japan) to be. If the Americas hadn't existed, he and his men would have died. There is no way they could have made it all the way to Asia and back!

[drevko]

Columbus was a moron who thought the world was smaller than it was.

Columbus was a magician/kabalist who managed to break the isolation spell of America.

America was hidden out of view.

[drevko]

It's good to know that Spain created the first labor laws, securing a max of 8 hours of daily work and protected from the hardship of the sun.

And Columbus himself was arrested for mistreated the Indians.

Killing of natives started only after the "independence" or slavery to the evil modern capitalist system, in their case, their dependency to Britain and their slavery as small powerless republics used one against the other.