In Fourteen Hundred And Ninety-Two Columbus Sailed The Ocean Blue

[+ Avalon]

It was on Friday, 3 August 1492 that Christopher Columbus set sail from Palos, Spain on his First Voyage. He returned to the same small port on 15 March 1493, Friday.

 

I told my landlord yesterday that if not for Columbus neither of us would be here today. He would be in Greece and me in England.

 

One of the great things about America is that people who would never otherwise have met have.

[bigvalboy]

One of the great things about America is that people who would never otherwise have met have.

 

That's not necessarily a good thing...

[MikeBiDude]

That's not necessarily a good thing...

So we will celebrate “Indigenous People’s Day” Monday 10/8

[marylander1940]

It was on Friday, 3 August 1492 that Christopher Columbus set sail from Palos, Spain on his First Voyage. He returned to the same small port on 15 March 1493, Friday.

 

I told my landlord yesterday that if not for Columbus neither of us would be here today. He would be in Greece and me in England.

 

One of the great things about America is that people who would never otherwise have met have.

 

Will you start a new thread on October 12th or will you bump this one?

[+ honcho]

When I was in grade school I recited the title of this thread to my teacher and she immediately replied

 

"In fourteen hundred and ninety three, Columbus sailed the deep blue sea".

[+ Avalon]

When I was in grade school I recited the title of this thread to my teacher and she immediately replied

 

"In fourteen hundred and ninety three, Columbus sailed the deep blue sea".

 

In fourteen hundred and ninety-four Columbus sailed to a foreign shore.

 

Will you start a new thread on October 12th or will you bump this one?

 

Don't know. I have a poor memory.

 

So we will celebrate “Indigenous People’s Day” Monday 10/8

 

Wouldn't 25 June be more appropriate at least here in the USA? The anniversary of the Battle of the Little Big Horn; the Native Americans won that one.

 

Or maybe 11 October the day before their world changed forever.

 

Or 18 October the anniversary of the Battle of Mabila in 1540. One of the bloodiest encounters between Europeans and Natives.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mabila

Edited August 3, 2018 by Avalon

[MikeBiDude]

In fourteen hundred and ninety-four Columbus sailed to a foreign shore.

 

 

 

Don't know. I have a poor memory.

 

 

 

Wouldn't 25 June be more appropriate at least here in the USA? The anniversary of the Battle of the Little Big Horn; the Native Americans won that one.

 

Or maybe 11 October the day before their world changed forever.

 

Or 18 October the anniversary of the Battle of Mabila in 1540. One of the bloodiest encounters between Europeans and Natives.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mabila

I think there’s a point to the same date:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_People's_Day

[+ WilliamM]

So we will celebrate “Indigenous People’s Day” Monday 10/8

 

Who knows? @Avalon also mentioned draining a sea in other thread, soon it may be the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean.

[+ Avalon]

I think there’s a point to the same date:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_People's_Day

 

What about a compromise? The Second Monday in October can be Native American Day and 12 October can remain Columbus Day. Each can take what they want to celebrate. Btw 12 October in 1492 was a Friday.

[samhexum]

When I was in Yeshiva (until I was paroled in 5th grade) we'd sing

 

In 1492, Columbus was a Jew.

He sailed with the British, and made a kiddish.

 

I think we were just going for the rhyme.

[+ Avalon]

When I was in Yeshiva (until I was paroled in 5th grade) we'd sing

 

In 1492, Columbus was a Jew.

He sailed with the British, and made a kiddish.

 

I think we were just going for the rhyme.

 

I think so too. But clever.

[+ poolboy48220]

One of my favorite books is "Pastwatch", science fiction by Orson Scott Card (and yeah, I know all the stuff about his political views, but I read it before I heard of that). Researchers with machines enabling them to view the past see that Columbus was deliberately manipulated (by other time-travellers?) to divert his attention from a new crusade to liberate Constantinople into his trip to the New World. They determine to further mess around with the past to avoid the exploitation of the New World and its people by Columbus.

 

Much better summary of the book here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pastwatch%3A_The_Redemption_of_Christopher_Columbus

[+ poolboy48220]

From the notes in the book, Card did a lot of research on Native American cultures of the time while he was writing it. I have a copy of "1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus", published about 7 years after Card's novel, but have never finished it. Maybe this year on vacation...

[JayCeeKy]

One of the great things about America is that people who would never otherwise have met have.

 

I know it sounds sorta perverted, but if it weren't for Hitler I wouldn't be here - my dad who was from Illinois was drafted and ended up at the end of the war at Fort Knox; my mom who was from NJ joined the WAC and ended up at Fort Knox, where she met my dad. So, if it weren't for Hitler and the war, neither one would have left their native state and I would never exist. Weird thought.

[spider]

My [evil] sister messed me up for life by teaching me "in fourteen hundred ninety three, Columbus sailed the deep blue sea."

Edited August 4, 2018 by spider

[+ Avalon]

 

I know it's a bit long (@30 minutes) so no one will watch it but there is another side to all the negativity said about Columbus today.

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

So did Columbus discover America? It all depends on what one means by America. If one means the USA then no. But the islands of the Caribbean are considered a part of the continent of North America then yes Columbus did discover America. He sighted South America on one Voyage and he also sailed along the coast of Central America. So yes indeed one can say that Christopher Columbus discovered America.

[mike carey]

Of course Columbus didn't discover America. People had known it was there for at least 14,000 years.

[+ Avalon]

Of course Columbus didn't discover America. People had known it was there for at least 14,000 years.

 

With that reasoning can anything truly be said to be discovered?

[alkan]

Sorry @Avalon, there are distinctions to be made here. North America was inhabited already (not heavily populated of course, although the inhabitants were widespread enough) and Columbus thought he had reached somewhere else entirely so I would object to the use of the word "discovery" in this instance. And after all the Vikings had a short-lived settlement in Canada several hundred years before where they seem to have traded with the locals so you can't even say Columbus was the first European to reach it. None of that should diminish the pioneering spirit of the man, though.

 

I was taught without equivocation in school "Columbus discovered America". That is not only factually incorrect in regard to the meaning of the word, but it also encapsulates a euro-centric view of the world that is deeply unfortunate. That of course was a long rime ago and I think UK schools treat it differently now.

[+ Avalon]

Nothing came of the Viking's brief presence and it was soon forgotten. However Columbus opened up a whole New World for colonization.

[mike carey]

There is pushback here on the idea that Cook 'discovered' Australia. He hadn't of course, with the partial exception of being the first European to chart the east coast. Terra Australis had long existed in the imagination of Europeans. Torres had charted the straits between Australia and New Guinea, the Dutch (Hartog) and the English (Dampier) had landed on the west coast, Abel Tasman had charted Van Diemen's land (now Tasmania) and New Zealand, all before Cook's first voyage. Makassans had been frequent visitors to the north of the continent.

With that reasoning can anything truly be said to be discovered?

In geographic terms, 'European discovery' is still a valid term, as were the discoveries of Antarctica and some oceanic islands, although in the Pacific Polynesians had discovered most, even incredibly remote ones like Rapa Nui. Beyond geography, 'discovery' in its unqualified sense can be applied to scientific and biological discoveries. The word is often used carelessly or in a general sense to describe the arrival of a dominant group in an area, but it can and is used deliberately to deny or minimise previous inhabitants in settler countries. There is no harm in celebrating the voyages of Columbus or Cook, but that should not be used to underplay 65,000 or 14,000 years of previous continuous human history.

Nothing came of the Viking's brief presence and it was soon forgotten. However Columbus opened up a whole New World for colonization.

Aka 'theft'. And yes, it was brief and largely forgotten (and extensively denied by southern European settler communities in the Americas). There are speculative early accounts of other Europeans reaching North America before them, but given the documented extent of Viking settlements across the North Atlantic (they discovered Iceland and settled Greenland), the accounts of Vinland are hardly implausible.

North America was inhabited already (not heavily populated of course, although the inhabitants were widespread enough)

Finally, don't forget that in the US imagination, native Americans are the plains 'Indians', but they are not the only previous inhabitants of North America. Mexico is also part of North America, and there was a flourishing civilisation there when the Spanish arrived (as there were, and previously had been further south in both continents).

[+ Avalon]

Regarding Mexico's "flourishing" civilization - I don't know what kind of civilization it is where people practice human sacrifice and cannibalism.

 

And regarding "theft". There have always been battles and wars. The indigenous fought each other in the Americas and Europeans fought each other in Europe. Now the two fought each other. There are winners and losers.

 

One of the reasons Claudius gave for going to war in Britain was because the Druids there practiced human sacrifice.

 

Some think the natives here in the New World lived in peace and harmony with each other and with nature. Nonsense! One of the reasons Cortes was able to conquer the Aztecs was because he had native allies who readily joined him because they had been oppressed by the Aztecs.

[+ purplekow]

Nothing came of the Viking's brief presence and it was soon forgotten. However Columbus opened up a whole New World for colonization.

Columbus was only part of whole cavalcade of explorers and sailors who set off to explore the world. He brought back information about the new world, but he alone is not responsible for opening up the new world and most now believe that the thought of colonization is a symbol of suppression not of success. Surely the world would be different if it were not for colonization. I suggest it would be almost exactly the same without Columbus.

[+ Avalon]

Columbus was only part of whole cavalcade of explorers and sailors who set off to explore the world. He brought back information about the new world, but he alone is not responsible for opening up the new world and most now believe that the thought of colonization is a symbol of suppression not of success. Surely the world would be different if it were not for colonization. I suggest it would be almost exactly the same without Columbus.

 

Natives exploited natives. Europeans exploited Europeans. Asians exploited Asians. Africans exploited Africans. Just the way humans are. And when they came into contact with each other they continued on.

[+ purplekow]

Regarding Mexico's "flourishing" civilization - I don't know what kind of civilization it is where people practice human sacrifice and cannibalism.

 

And regarding "theft". There have always been battles and wars. The indigenous fought each other in the Americas and Europeans fought each other in Europe. Now the two fought each other. There are winners and losers.

 

One of the reasons Claudius gave for going to war in Britain was because the Druids there practiced human sacrifice.

 

Some think the natives here in the New World lived in peace and harmony with each other and with nature. Nonsense! One of the reasons Cortes was able to conquer the Aztecs was because he had native allies who readily joined him because they had been oppressed by the Aztecs.

Your arrogance is totally Eurocentric. Learn something about the cultures of the indigenous populations of the Americas and compare that to the fiefdoms and egalitarian civilization of Europe and perhaps you may not feel that Europe was so superior.