Was Christopher Columbus a Hero or a Villain?

[RJDiogenes]

Historical figures go in and out of fashion like anything else-- even Jefferson has done so (and has his own detractors in the current political climate). Few people are capable of looking at History objectively, let alone from a contemporaneous point of view. Human History is a tapestry of exploitation and subjugation that we are still trying to evolve beyond, and we are far from finished with that process. Columbus's voyages came at the tail end of the Dark Ages, and in the context of his culture resulted in the discovery of a new world, which began an age of migration and colonization that changed Human History beyond measure. To regard him as either hero or villain is both simplistic and irrelevant to his Historical status.

 

[stj]

It is not irrelevant or simplistic to ask if things were better in the past, or whether we should place our hopes for a better world in the future. An honest assessment of historical figures by our standards is part of answering that question. Part is asking whether how we might stand up to the scrutiny of our posterity, should be care to leave them a usable world with a working society. I expect we would be as generous in our judgments to people in the past as we are to those in the present.

Educated people had a fairly good idea of the size of the planet in the late 1500s. Columbus explained away lots of evidence with lots of dubious argument to claim it was small enough to circumnavigate the western hemisphere in a single leg of the voyage, lands to the west being obscure stories smacking of legend. Huy Brasil, St. Brendan's isle, Madoc the Welsh prince, those Icelandic brigands? Admitting that he was hugely wrong about the distances might not have just been embarrassing but opened him to charges of deliberate deception. Or calling into question the privleges granted to him by the Spanish crown. Columbus had a vested interest in something foolish. This commonly makes men stupid.

And Columbus voyages came well after the Renaissance, not the tail end of the Dark Ages, which are more or less fifth to ninth century. In Western Europe. Elsewhere the sun still shone.

 

[Rett Mikhal]

Historical figures go in and out of fashion like anything else-- even Jefferson has done so (and has his own detractors in the current political climate). Few people are capable of looking at History objectively, let alone from a contemporaneous point of view. Human History is a tapestry of exploitation and subjugation that we are still trying to evolve beyond, and we are far from finished with that process. Columbus's voyages came at the tail end of the Dark Ages, and in the context of his culture resulted in the discovery of a new world, which began an age of migration and colonization that changed Human History beyond measure. To regard him as either hero or villain is both simplistic and irrelevant to his Historical status.

Yeah, but he was still more or less an idiot. People don't forget that.

 

[ichab]

So again, where did he state he was looking for slaves? His arrest for cruelty is likely partially influenced for his notoriety not to mention if you bothered including his mental and physical state at the time it can be argued he was not himself and not acting like he used to.

Wow. That's all I can say to that bit of spin.

But again, call the man a villain, it's what's popular these days.

If the shoe fits, why not?It sure beats saying that he discovered America or that he proved the Earth is round, which is what was popular to teach american children for many years.

 

[bigdaddy]

Historical figures go in and out of fashion like anything else-- even Jefferson has done so (and has his own detractors in the current political climate).

There are two national holidays made for people, MLK Jr. Day and CC Day. That's bullshit, the the point.

 

[suarezguy]

Sure, he wasn't perfect, but who is? Nobody has said he's a saint. There were people that did far worse things than he has, such as pirates. But let's not stop there. What about Roman Emperors, or Napoleon. Should these people be stricken from the history books for what they did? No. Because that's how we learn from history. But by your definition, they shouldn't be there.

They should be included in history books but with their flaws noted. Learning from history is important; that's no reason to glorify or whitewash someone with a holiday.

 

[STR]

Also, I'm probably more angered by the public education system's insistence that Tesla is a footnote and Edison is a genius than the cleaning up of Columbus. Think of the world we would have had if Edison ended up the penniless bum and Tesla got infinite funding.

About the same. It didn't go that way because Edison was great with PR and business in general. Tesla didn't have those skills, nor was he able to forge any relationships with the business community. If he had, and was able to stand against Edison and Marconi better, we probably would have just ended up with another giant multinational that rivaled GE. The business might have even been folded into United Technologies, which already rivals GE in a lot of areas today.

Tesla would never have been in charge. He's wasn't a manager and really never could be. He'd end up being COO or head of R&D, or even just given a lab to tinker around with. He still wouldn't be a household name. I honestly don't think he wanted to be.

Yeah, but he was still more or less an idiot. People don't forget that.

And you think that his mistake, or ignorance, really matters. It doesn't. By lucky chance, he brought the new world back into the sights of Europe. He kick started the migration that petered out when the Vikings pulled stakes in Canada. History cares more about consequences than intents. That latter can be bullshitted in memoirs and whitewashed in documentaries. The former is concrete.

 

[RJDiogenes]

It is not irrelevant or simplistic to ask if things were better in the past, or whether we should place our hopes for a better world in the future. An honest assessment of historical figures by our standards is part of answering that question. Part is asking whether how we might stand up to the scrutiny of our posterity, should be care to leave them a usable world with a working society. I expect we would be as generous in our judgments to people in the past as we are to those in the present.

Again, irrelevant to Columbus's status as a Historical figure.

And Columbus voyages came well after the Renaissance, not the tail end of the Dark Ages, which are more or less fifth to ninth century. In Western Europe. Elsewhere the sun still shone.

As anybody who studies History knows, there is overlap between the Dark Ages and the Renaissance. Columbus's voyages came at the tail end of the Dark Ages; in fact, the year of his first voyage is often used by Historians to date the end of the Dark Ages.

Yeah, but he was still more or less an idiot. People don't forget that.

Again, irrelevant to Columbus's status as a Historical figure.

 

[stj]

"Dark Ages" is not a synonym for Middle Ages. 1492 is often used as a convenient marker for the beginning of modern times.

It is not at all clear how being regarded as the perpetrator of gratuitous crimes would make Columbus less of an historical figure.

 

[Deckerd]

If it hadn't been Columbus it would have been someone else, probably within a few years. The idea that the Americas would still be pristine lands, untouched by westerners if CC hadn't hit an island is risible.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

And Columbus voyages came well after the Renaissance, not the tail end of the Dark Ages, which are more or less fifth to ninth century. In Western Europe. Elsewhere the sun still shone.

As anybody who studies History knows, there is overlap between the Dark Ages and the Renaissance. Columbus's voyages came at the tail end of the Dark Ages; in fact, the year of his first voyage is often used by Historians to date the end of the Dark Ages.

No one uses the term Dark Ages for the Middle Ages anymore. Generally speaking, many Medievalists object to using it at all or, at a minimum, object to using it to describe any event after Dec. 25, 800 AD.

Any end of the Middle Ages will be nebulous (end of the Classical age could be nebulous, but we at least have an arbitrary concrete date to point to). I prefer to use 1453 as the arbitrary date to end the Middle Ages, but I had one Professor who taught Renaissance History, but preferred to refer to the period as part of the Late Middle Ages.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Well, not "no one," since I do. "Dark Ages" is far more evocative than "Middle Ages." "Dark Ages" sounds like knights and feudal castles and damsels in distress and evil kings; "Middle Ages" sounds like sitting on the couch and drinking beer while watching Wheel Of Fortune. But substitute "Middle Ages" if you prefer.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Dark Ages implies a time of suffering and ignorance that was bookended by periods of prosperity and enlightenment (which was Petrarch's argument and he coined the term).

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I got a paid holiday yesterday - lovely weather, had time for a nice lunch and coffee with a friend and a drive in the country. So Columbus is a hero as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

"Dark Ages" sounds like knights and feudal castles and damsels in distress and evil kings

And French taunters.

 

[bigdaddy]

I got a paid holiday yesterday - lovely weather, had time for a nice lunch and coffee with a friend and a drive in the country. So Columbus is a hero as far as I'm concerned.

And with my idea you could have gotten free ice cream too...

 

[RJDiogenes]

Dark Ages implies a time of suffering and ignorance that was bookended by periods of prosperity and enlightenment (which was Petrarch's argument and he coined the term).

Just a little something I found amusing: History Channel just had a documentary on a couple of nights ago called The Dark Ages.

Of course, they also show Axe Men, Ice Road Truckers and Swamp People, so their credibility is not what it used to be.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Yeah, I've seen it. Fairly well made for history-entertainment. What period do they go up to? I'm pretty sure they at least stop before the High Middle Ages. So you get Vikings and things like that. Then again, I remember Byzantium, which certainly wasn't in a Dark Age.

 

[RJDiogenes]

I didn't get a chance to watch it, but I'm pretty sure I saw that one before. I'm hoping it will show up on their On Demand section so I can review it when I have more time.

 

[Skywalker]

If you have Netflix, I'm pretty sure they have The Dark Ages on Instant Streaming, along with a lot of other similar programs.