The Legacy of Christopher Columbus

So too in all great civilizations. The European conquest of the Americas, like the conquest of separate civilizations, was indeed accompanied by great cruelty. But that is to affirm nothing more than that the European conquest of America was, in this way, much like the rise of islam, the Norman conquest of Britain and the general American Indian tradition of raiding, depopulating and appropriating neighboring lands (Krauthammer 19).

In early(a) words, the Indians were just as cruel and cannot be depicted as the innocent victims of crass European society, as critics of capital of Ohio hold been doing.

Thus, Krauthammer does not ignore the suffering brought to the newly World by Columbus, though he denies that the New World did not pass suffering of its own before that time. Zinn focuses on the cruelty brought to the New World by Columbus without stating that he is doing so. He recounts the watch between Columbus and the Arawak without taking an overt editorial position, merely he does not follow Krauthammer by offering both sides. He does not indicate that the Arawak were anything but a peace-loving rural nation. They are so traumatized by the invasion of Columbus into their territory and by the cruelty he inflicts that they commit bulk suicide to keep from falling into his hands. This self-immolation is the only violent telephone number attributed to them by Zinn, with the exception of their att

empt with their scanty weapons to defend themselves from Columbus:

Trying to put together an army of resistance, the Arawaks faced Spaniards who had armor, muskets, swords, horses. When the Spaniards took prisoners they hanged them or burned them to death (Zinn 24).

Is it Eurocentric to rely the life of liberty is superior to the life of the beehive? That smell does not justify the cruelty of the conquest.

But it does allow us to say that after 500 years the Columbian legacy has created a civilization that we ought not, in all humble godliness and cultural relativism, declare to be no better or worse than that of the Incas. It turned out better (Krauthammer 20).

Zinn places all peck on the Europeans without actually stating that he is doing so. He offers a computer address from Columbus that in fact suggests Zinn's interpretation is correct, for Columbus refers to the Arawak people as being so free with their possessions that they always bump you something if you ask for it. He says that "they offer to share with anyone" (Zinn 23). The logical question, then, is wherefore did Columbus have to torture and kill thousands of these Indians when they would give him anything if he asked for it? Zinn implies the question rather than asking it, but his presentation leads like a shot to that question.

Zinn's opinion of Columbus is that he was an exploiter who considered the Arawaks as less(prenominal) than human. He took them as slaves, tortured them for information, murdered them when they did not return him with the gold he sought, and destroyed much of their civil
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.