Truth About Columbus and Triangle Trade

Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress Essay

In the beginning of the first chapter Zinn tells us about Christopher Columbus's expedition. He tells us about the indians or natives of Haiti and other islands, and how open they were to the white man. They traded, hospitalized, and respected these men that they never knew of. In return Zinn writes about how inhumane, barbarous, and cruel the white man was to the natives. Columbus was so ambitious that he didn't take the time to understand that natives were people too, they had their human rights and emotions. Later Zinn writes about Hernandez Cortez and other spanish conquistadors that nearly annihilated tribes along their way. They too were so determined to please their kings and queens with gold, silver, slaves, and other treasures that they showed no mercy to the Aztecs, Incas, and other tribes. He thinks of the columbian exchange from different view points. One view point was from the conquers, and another from the indians and natives. The European invaders said their crimes were necessary in order to make humanity more “civilized”, But was it really? It is estimated that approximately 80-95% of the american population had died withing the 100-150 years following 1492. The smallpox epidemics are believed to have resulted in the largest death tolls among native americans, surpassing any wars. Withing the two years half of the 250,000 natives on Haiti had died due to suicide, murder, or mutilation. In mexico nearly 90% of the natives there had died, and the Europeans found this necessary? and found the Columbian Exchange a big success? That's almost like saying World War 2 was a total victory for the USSR when they had lost about 25 million people (military and civilians). Zinn however disagrees with the Europeans and their actions on “civilizing” the western world. He argues that as a result of their crimes they weren't able to make much progress. In the chapter he says “For all the gold and silver stolen and shipped to Spain it did not make the Spanish people richer. It gave their kings an edge in the balance of power for a time, a chance to hire more mercenary soldiers for their wars. They ended up losing those wars anyway...”. He also explained that not only did the conquers not make much progress, they also didn't gain much. He also disagreed with the conquers that thought of the indians as uncivilized, barbarous, and a bunch of savages. He described natives and their land as “a world which in some places was as densely populated as Europe itself, where the culture was complex, where human relations were more egalitarian than in Europe, and where the relations among men, women, children, and nature were more beautifully worked out than perhaps any place in the world.” Later Zinn mentioned that “On their own, the Indians were engaged in the great agricultural revolution that other peoples in Asia, Europe, Africa were going through about the same time.” In conclusion wether you believe it was necessary or not for all these events to happen in order for Europeans to get what they wanted is a personal opinion. Zinn says that morally the person who gets to decide whether suffering is “necessary” is the person who suffers it, but unfortunately the indians didn't get to decide anything. I believe the columbian exchange had positive and negative effects on both Europeans and the people of the New World . livestock such as Pigs and cattle were brought to the indians providing an easy source for meat. Horses ever changed the ways indians hunted buffalo, helped with transportation, and played a big role in battles. In return explorers brought back turkeys, llamas, alpacas, and guinea pigs to Europe. These animals did not have as much of an impact on the Old World as the animals brought to the New World had. Also, the Old World and New World exchanged diseases that caused great losses on both sides. The Columbian exchange changed the world dramatically but I don't fully agree with the people that consider it as a total success. I think It would have been far more successful if the cruelty was kept at a minimum reducing the death toll that could have been smaller than in came out to be.