Who was Christopher Columbus?

[Bill O]

Interesting theory... I suppose we'll have to wait another year to find out!!

https://www.bbc.com/reel/video/p08jg...opher-columbus

[letsgetsailing3]

Just another historical figure being reinterpreted and compared to contemporary standards.

[chris95040]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

Just another historical figure being reinterpreted and compared to contemporary standards.

The horror!

[Bill O]

Sorry about the subtitles, but if you get past the intro, the historical info and records found calls into question his family origin and possible place of birth (not Italy?).

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by Bill O

Interesting theory... I suppose we'll have to wait another year to find out!!

https://www.bbc.com/reel/video/p08jg...opher-columbus

Wow, the first blurb below the vid claims history books have ignored how Cloumbus treated the indians. What a silly claim, it has been well documented for as long as I can remember that he treated the badly. That in and of itself discredits the link.

There have been many disputes about just how much Columbus knew before he set sail and how he managed to get support for first voyage. He traveled widely in Europe and there is some evidence he met King Harold who told him about earlier Viking voyages, even providing him maps. Since the Vikings landed well North of Columbus's first landfall they encountered land well East of where Columbus did, and was expecting to make a land fall. See Arne's book for details.

What is unquestioned is that Columbus was one of the most skilled navigators of his age and used things like a primitive sextant along with Johann Muller's ephemeris; something few other navigators were aware of. Way back in 1963 I wrote a paper for my senior year in high school about why Columbus sailed and all these facts were noted in a book "Why Columbus Sailed"https://www.worldcat.org/title/why-c...ions%2021%20cm first published in 1939.

What is new in revisionist history, not just with Columbus plenty of other examples, it trying to impose today's morals on a bygone age.

[atoll]

was he not the first "SuperSpreader" to the new world,bringing small pox and syphallis that decimated the indigenous population

[Andreas W]

Originally Posted by atoll

was he not the first "SuperSpreader" to the new world,bringing small pox and syphallis that decimated the indigenous population

You are right about the small pox, but syphilis was actually brought back to Europe from the Americas.

[denverd0n]

Originally Posted by tomfl

Wow, the first blurb below the vid claims history books have ignored how Cloumbus treated the indians. What a silly claim, it has been well documented for as long as I can remember...

Yeah. I am getting really tired of this, but it seems to be the "thing" these days. First say that history has ignored something that it absolutely has NOT ignored, and then go on to "expose" the horrors of what has (not) been ignored.


I suppose it comes from the "publish or perish" mentality. You have to publish something. You don't want to say, "I'm going to hash over the same crap that has been hashed over a hundred times before." So instead you pretend like you're revealing some great secret that no one has ever talked about.


It really is pretty absurd.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by atoll

was he not the first "SuperSpreader" to the new world,bringing small pox and syphallis that decimated the indigenous population

If my memory is correct, syphilis was one of the few diseases that went the other direction.

It's a tragedy of history that any contact prior to modern medicine was doomed to have a similar effect. Without the influenza/malaria/smallpox trio, especially malaria, the Americas would likely look quite different today.

[ThereAndBack]

Originally Posted by denverd0n

Yeah. I am getting really tired of this, but it seems to be the "thing" these days. First say that history has ignored something that it absolutely has NOT ignored, and then go on to "expose" the horrors of what has (not) been ignored.


I suppose it comes from the "publish or perish" mentality. You have to publish something. You don't want to say, "I'm going to hash over the same crap that has been hashed over a hundred times before." So instead you pretend like you're revealing some great secret that no one has ever talked about.


It really is pretty absurd.

It is absurd if you look at it from a perspective of absolute "correctness". You might think... Why are these people wasting effort or willfully ignoring the fact that something wasn't ignored.

However, that is not the game. So change your perspective on WHY you're reading something.

They that control the past will control the future.

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by Andreas W

You are right about the small pox, but syphilis was actually brought back to Europe from the Americas.

Probably true, but your post does not fit in the SJW view. There is much better evidence that syphilis came from the new world to Europe; but there is some weak evidence that some strains may have existed in Europe prior to Columbus returning.

[Bill O]

Really the interesting part of this piece wasn't about what CC did in his later life, but understanding his origins and early life. It will be interesting to see if CC's DNA matches the Antaide family DNA.

[Bill O]

For the people fixated on disease, here is an overview of the history of syphilis

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by ThereAndBack

However, that is not the game. So change your perspective on WHY you're reading something.

They that control the past will control the future.

You're getting very warm.

[boatman61]

I thought the indigenous people of the Caribbean had already been wiped out by a cannibalistic warrior tribe that swept up through the islands from what is Venezuela today.
The Spanish in turn wiped out the Caribes.. some believe Columbus was really Portuguese..
They were after all the best navigators at the time and first circumnavigator's..