Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Christopher Columbus" in English language version.
Finally, the most famous son of Filippone, Bartolomeu Perestrello (I), who participated in the rediscovery of the island of Madeira in 1418, and was captain and feitor [administrator] of Porto Santo until, by a letter of 1 November 1446 from Infante Henrique, he became the first donatary captain of the island, a privilege that continued until the 19th century, with the last donatary captain Manuel da Câmara Bettencourt Perestrello in 1814.
The date of Fernando's birth, November 1488, gives a terminus ante quem early in that year for the start of Columbus's liaison with Beatriz Enríquez. She was of peasant parentage, but, when Columbus met her, was the ward of a well-to-do relative in Cordoba. A meat business gave her income of her own, mentioned in the only other record of Columbus's solicitude for her: a letter to Diego, written in 1502, just before departure on the fourth Atlantic crossing, in which the explorer enjoins his son to 'take Beatriz Enriquez in your care for love of me, as you your own mother'. Varela, Cristóbal Colón, p. 309.
Columbus never married Beatriz. When he returned from the first voyage, he was given the greatest of honors and elevated to the highest position in Spain. Because of his discovery, he became one of the most illustrious persons at the Spanish court and had to submit, like all the great persons of the time, to customary legal restrictions on matters of marriage and extramarital relations. The Alphonsine laws forbade extramarital relations of concubinage for "illustrious people" (king, princes, dukes, counts, marquis) with plebeian women, if they themselves were or their forefathers had been of inferior social condition.
Most researchers however trace the beginning of the early modern era to Christopher Columbus's discovery of the Americas in the 1490s
It is most probable that Columbus visited Bristol, where he was introduced to English commerce with Iceland.
Some writers have suggested that it was during this visit to Iceland that Columbus heard of land in the west. Keeping the source of his information secret, they say, he concocted a plan to sail westward. Certainly the knowledge was generally available without attending any saga-telling parties. That this knowledge reached Columbus seems unlikely, however, for later, when trying to get backing for his project, he went to great lengths to unearth even the slightest scraps of information that would add to the plausibility of his scheme. Knowledge of the Norse explorations could have helped.
Many Columbists ... have doubted that Columbus could ever have gone to Iceland.
Constructed on a framework of latitude and longitude, the Ptolemy-revival map projections revealed the extent of the known world in relation to the whole. Typically, they displayed a Eurasian landmass extending through 180° of longitude from a prime meridian in the west (variously the Canary Islands or Cape Verde) to a location in the "Far East."
It is also known that wind patterns and water currents in the Atlantic were crucial factors for launching an outward passage from the Canaries: Columbus understood that his chance of crossing the ocean was significantly greater just beyond the Canary calms, where he expected to catch the northeastern trade winds—although, as some authors have pointed out, "westing" from the Canaries, instead of dipping farther south, was hardly an optimal sailing choice, since Columbus's fleet was bound to lose, as soon it did, the northeasterlies in the mid-Atlantic.
in 1488 Columbus returned to Portugal and once again put his project to João II. Again it was rejected. In historical hindsight this looks like a fatally missed opportunity for the Portuguese crown, but the king had good reason not to accept Columbus's project. His panel of experts cast grave doubts on the assumptions behind it, noting that Columbus had underestimated the distance to China. And then in December 1488 Bartolomeu Dias returned from his voyage around the Cape of Good Hope. Certain now that they had found the sea route to India and the east, João II and his advisers had no further interest in what probably seemed to them a hare-brained and risky plan.
The Capitulaciones de Santa Fe appointed Columbus as the official viceroy of the Crown, which entitled him, by virtue of royal concession, to all the honors and jurisdictions accorded the conquerors of the Canaries. Usage of the terms "to discover" (descubrir) and "to acquire" (ganar) were legal cues indicating the goals of Spanish possession through occupancy and conquest.
Bobadilla was prejudiced in advance by what he heard, or what the monarchs relayed, from Columbus detractors. HIs brief was to conduct a judicial inquiry into Columbus' conduct, an unjust proceeding, in the Admiral's submission, since Bobadilla had a vested interest in an outcome that would keep him in power. [...] Motivated by self-interest or excessive zeal, Bobadilla clapped Columbus in irons with his brothers, gathered depositions against them, and shipped them back to Spain.
El 14 de agosto de 1502 Cristóbal Colón descubrió Punta Caxinas, hoy Punta Castilla o Cabo de Honduras.
Thinking back in spring 1692 to "the antiquities of New England," Cotton Mather came upon a crucial connection, as he saw it, between the voyage of Columbus two centuries before and the Puritans' Great Migration. Considered together, the founding of the Massachusetts Bay Colony and the landing at San Salvador held the key to a great design. To begin with, Columbus's voyage was one of three shaping events of the modern age, all of which occurred in rapid succession at the turn of the sixteenth century: (1) "the Resurrection of Literature",... (2) the discovery of America, ... and (3) the Protestant Reformation.
When we speak today of the "legacy" of Christopher Columbus, we usually refer to the broadly historic consequences of his famous voyages, meaning the subsequent European conquest and colonization of the Americas.
{{cite book}}
: |journal=
ignored (help)Of Columbus, too, none of the familiarly reproduced portraits is thought to have been made in his lifetime.
Christopher Columbus did not discover a new world, nor did he ever set foot on the North American continent. Rather, he established continuous contact between two continents, each with major populations. But he became a national hero for the United States, and, as such, he has frequently been placed on the same level with George Washington and Abraham Lincoln by Americans who prefer mythology to facts. Early in our history, he became a unifying symbol to the struggling English colonies when Puritan preachers began to use his life as an exemplum of the developing American spirit. On the eve of the American Revolution, poems, songs, sermons, and polemic essays in which Columbus was idealized as the discoverer of a new land for a new people flowed from New England. Such veneration culminated in a movement to name the nation "Columbia."
... Alfred Crosby, a scholar with the mind of a scientist and the heart of a humanist. He writes that "the major initial effect of the Columbian voyages was the transformation of America into a charnel house." The cataclysmic loss of native life, largely to imported diseases, "was surely the greatest tragedy in the history of the human species.
Colón was directly responsible for instituting this cycle of violence, murder, and slavery... This cycle of violence, intentionally created to maximize the extraction of wealth from the islands, in combination with the epidemic diseases that were running rampant through the Taino population, together promoted the genocide of the Taino people... Disease, only in combination with this cycle of brutal colonial violence, could produce the death toll that we see on the island of Española. Therefore, at best, the theory that disease did the business of killing and not the invaders can only be seen as a gratuitous colonizer apologetic designed to absolve the guilt of the continued occupation and exploitation of the indigenous people of this continent. However, the truth of the matter is much worse and should be called by its appropriate name: American holocaust denial.
{{cite book}}
: |journal=
ignored (help)While most of the other epidemics in history however were confined to a single pathogen and typically lasted for less than a decade, the Americas differed in that multiple pathogens caused multiple waves of virgin soil epidemics over more than a century. Those who survived influenza, may later have succumbed to smallpox, while those who survived both, may then have caught a later wave of measles. Hence, there were documented disease outbreaks in the Americas that killed 30% of the remaining indigenous population over 50 years after initial contact, i.e. between 1568 CE and 1605 CE
Colón was directly responsible for instituting this cycle of violence, murder, and slavery... This cycle of violence, intentionally created to maximize the extraction of wealth from the islands, in combination with the epidemic diseases that were running rampant through the Taino population, together promoted the genocide of the Taino people... Disease, only in combination with this cycle of brutal colonial violence, could produce the death toll that we see on the island of Española. Therefore, at best, the theory that disease did the business of killing and not the invaders can only be seen as a gratuitous colonizer apologetic designed to absolve the guilt of the continued occupation and exploitation of the indigenous people of this continent. However, the truth of the matter is much worse and should be called by its appropriate name: American holocaust denial.
While most of the other epidemics in history however were confined to a single pathogen and typically lasted for less than a decade, the Americas differed in that multiple pathogens caused multiple waves of virgin soil epidemics over more than a century. Those who survived influenza, may later have succumbed to smallpox, while those who survived both, may then have caught a later wave of measles. Hence, there were documented disease outbreaks in the Americas that killed 30% of the remaining indigenous population over 50 years after initial contact, i.e. between 1568 CE and 1605 CE
Christopher Columbus did not discover a new world, nor did he ever set foot on the North American continent. Rather, he established continuous contact between two continents, each with major populations. But he became a national hero for the United States, and, as such, he has frequently been placed on the same level with George Washington and Abraham Lincoln by Americans who prefer mythology to facts. Early in our history, he became a unifying symbol to the struggling English colonies when Puritan preachers began to use his life as an exemplum of the developing American spirit. On the eve of the American Revolution, poems, songs, sermons, and polemic essays in which Columbus was idealized as the discoverer of a new land for a new people flowed from New England. Such veneration culminated in a movement to name the nation "Columbia."
... Alfred Crosby, a scholar with the mind of a scientist and the heart of a humanist. He writes that "the major initial effect of the Columbian voyages was the transformation of America into a charnel house." The cataclysmic loss of native life, largely to imported diseases, "was surely the greatest tragedy in the history of the human species.
When referring to the conquest, Venezuelans tend to side with the original "Indians" inhabiting the territory, even though "we" are generally careful to distinguish ourselves from them, and above all from their contemporary descendants. This tactical identification suggests that the force of this rejoinder comes not just from the hold of the familiar — Columbus already discovered America, so what's new — but from the appeal of a more exclusive familiarity evoked by a shift of location — he only "discovered" it for Europe, not for "us". It is as if we viewed Columbus's arrival from two perspectives, his own, and that of the natives. When we want to privilege "our" special viewpoint, we claim as ours the standpoint of the original Americans, the view not from the foreign ship but from our "native" land.
Colón was directly responsible for instituting this cycle of violence, murder, and slavery... This cycle of violence, intentionally created to maximize the extraction of wealth from the islands, in combination with the epidemic diseases that were running rampant through the Taino population, together promoted the genocide of the Taino people... Disease, only in combination with this cycle of brutal colonial violence, could produce the death toll that we see on the island of Española. Therefore, at best, the theory that disease did the business of killing and not the invaders can only be seen as a gratuitous colonizer apologetic designed to absolve the guilt of the continued occupation and exploitation of the indigenous people of this continent. However, the truth of the matter is much worse and should be called by its appropriate name: American holocaust denial.
{{cite book}}
: |journal=
ignored (help)The encounter between two worlds is a fact that cannot be denied... The word discovery gives prominence to the heroes of the enterprise; the word encounter gives more emphasis to the peoples who actually "encountered" each other and gave substance to a New World. Whereas discovery marks a happening, an event, encounter conveys better the idea of the political journey that has brought us to the reality of today, spanning the five hundred years since 1492... These historical and political milestones are valuable because they relate the present to both the past and the future. It was inevitable that history written from a Eurocentric standpoint should speak in terms of discovery and it is equally inevitable that, as history has now come to be seen in universal terms, we should have adopted so evocative a term as encounter.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)Bobadilla was prejudiced in advance by what he heard, or what the monarchs relayed, from Columbus detractors. HIs brief was to conduct a judicial inquiry into Columbus' conduct, an unjust proceeding, in the Admiral's submission, since Bobadilla had a vested interest in an outcome that would keep him in power. [...] Motivated by self-interest or excessive zeal, Bobadilla clapped Columbus in irons with his brothers, gathered depositions against them, and shipped them back to Spain.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)Christopher Columbus did not discover a new world, nor did he ever set foot on the North American continent. Rather, he established continuous contact between two continents, each with major populations. But he became a national hero for the United States, and, as such, he has frequently been placed on the same level with George Washington and Abraham Lincoln by Americans who prefer mythology to facts. Early in our history, he became a unifying symbol to the struggling English colonies when Puritan preachers began to use his life as an exemplum of the developing American spirit. On the eve of the American Revolution, poems, songs, sermons, and polemic essays in which Columbus was idealized as the discoverer of a new land for a new people flowed from New England. Such veneration culminated in a movement to name the nation "Columbia."
... Alfred Crosby, a scholar with the mind of a scientist and the heart of a humanist. He writes that "the major initial effect of the Columbian voyages was the transformation of America into a charnel house." The cataclysmic loss of native life, largely to imported diseases, "was surely the greatest tragedy in the history of the human species.
When referring to the conquest, Venezuelans tend to side with the original "Indians" inhabiting the territory, even though "we" are generally careful to distinguish ourselves from them, and above all from their contemporary descendants. This tactical identification suggests that the force of this rejoinder comes not just from the hold of the familiar — Columbus already discovered America, so what's new — but from the appeal of a more exclusive familiarity evoked by a shift of location — he only "discovered" it for Europe, not for "us". It is as if we viewed Columbus's arrival from two perspectives, his own, and that of the natives. When we want to privilege "our" special viewpoint, we claim as ours the standpoint of the original Americans, the view not from the foreign ship but from our "native" land.
Colón was directly responsible for instituting this cycle of violence, murder, and slavery... This cycle of violence, intentionally created to maximize the extraction of wealth from the islands, in combination with the epidemic diseases that were running rampant through the Taino population, together promoted the genocide of the Taino people... Disease, only in combination with this cycle of brutal colonial violence, could produce the death toll that we see on the island of Española. Therefore, at best, the theory that disease did the business of killing and not the invaders can only be seen as a gratuitous colonizer apologetic designed to absolve the guilt of the continued occupation and exploitation of the indigenous people of this continent. However, the truth of the matter is much worse and should be called by its appropriate name: American holocaust denial.