Compare And Contrast The Idea Of The Noble Savage

Columbus never even walked on what we now call the United States of America. Where ever he did land, he was motivated only by his own greed. Columbus came for the gold, spices, and slaves. In his diary, he mentioned gold 75 times just in the first two weeks, alone (Katz 13). Indians who weren’t able to find gold, were punished by having their hands cut off. Most slaves died en route to Spain. Many Indian females were taken as sex slaves, some as young as nine and ten years old. Columbus forced cooperation from the Indians by disfiguring them and using them as examples. Even worse, he used hunting dogs to tear the Indians apart. Many natives committed suicide, and murdered their own children to save them from such a horrible life. Those who survived the voyage were worked to death. Still, another huge portion of these Indians died from disease brought over by Columbus and his

For the longest time, Americans have celebrated Columbus day, commemorating the admiral’s supposed discovery of America. But, in “The Inconvenient Indian”, Thomas King shatters this idea and develops a new thought in the mind of the reader about natives. By using excellent rhetoric and syntax, King is able to use logos, ethos and pathos in his chapter “Forget Columbus”, where he develops the argument that the stories told in history aren’t always a true representation of how it actually happened.

Columbus has always been portrayed as an enlightened, peaceful explorer who “discovered” a new world, and became friends with the native people. Howard Zinn’s view on Columbus’s encounter with the natives is an entirely different perspective. Zinn describes Columbus as a man who is willing to torture and kill others to be able to accomplish what he wants; in this case he wanted to obtain gold and other resources to take back with him to Spain.

In 1492, Italian cartographer and explorer, Christopher Columbus, set off on a mission from Spain in order to find a quicker, alternative route to Asia. With him, Columbus brought eighty-seven men and three ships, the Niña, the Pinta, and the Santa María, to sail across the large and vast Atlantic Ocean. Unfortunately for Columbus, a new route to Asia was never discovered by Spain that year because he had arrived in the Caribbean, which was found in North America. Thinking that he had just entered the Indies, he started to call the people of this land, “Indians”. These Indians were actually Native Americans who had lived on these lands for thousands of years prior. Immediately, letters from Columbus to the King and Queen of Spain were sent by boat back to Europe and soon Columbus was seen as the man who helped create a bridge of prosperous trading and riches between Europe and “Asia”.1 While this discovery proved that Columbus was a hero-like figure to Spain, it’s what he did within the new land that actually makes him one of the biggest villains to ever set foot on Earth. But what classifies this explorer as a villain? Columbus captured thousands of natives, many of which were sent back to Spain to live and work as slaves. Along with that, Columbus also forced the Christian religion onto them, spread diseases that killed thousands of lives, and used violence as a means of persuasion and control.2 Corrupted by his pursuit of riches,

The frequent depiction of the “Noble Savage” trope has many functions, with its main function being to portray Native Americans as sinless uneducated humans and to make their abusers and torturers seem evil and superior, which in most cases the torturers are indeed evil. Bartolomé de Las Casas and Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca use the “Native Savage” trope for different reasons, which makes their portrayal different, and not because they are writing about different tribes and groups of Native Americans. The “Noble Savage” is a very common adaptation of Native Americans, but the definition isn’t as pretty as the name of the trope may seem to be.

The full measure of Columbus's failure as a colonizer was not yet apparent when he returned to Castile in 1496. Yet by the end of six or seven years of his governorship, with his own, the monarchs', and the settlers' objectives all still unachieved, and Hispaniola suffering an apparently interminable series of rebellions not only by the Indians but by the colonists too, Columbus was to be superseded and disgraced, and shipped home to Spain in chains.1 Overall, Fernandez-Armesto depicted Columbus as an annoyingly eccentric person incapable of succeeding. Although, he discovered the Americas, he failed to be a leader to his crew and the natives. Instead, he was on the lookout for ways of manipulating the motives for profit.

To begin with, Christopher Columbus should be vilified for converting Native Americans to slaves. In the diary of Columbus, Columbus wrote about his intentions to turn Native Americans into “good and intelligent servants”. Columbus turned his intentions into a reality when he brought Native Americans to Europe as servants. As well as bringing slaves back to Spain, Columbus was an active involver in the slave trafficking network between America and Europe, thus becoming the “first slave trader in the Americas”. Slavery, the cruel practice that blighted the Americas for centuries, was heavily used by Columbus. By founding the American slave industry and kidnapping several slaves back home with him, Columbus showed that he did not value the Native Americans, as he treated them as objects rather than humans. If

In the movie the director continued to show Columbus as a greedy perpetrator who destroyed the lives of innocent humans and took a land that wasn’t his. Columbus was not seen as a hero who discovered America, the way he was presented in the movie is totally agreeable. It was clear that Columbus thought highly of himself. In his letter addressed to the king, he explains how the Indians believe he was chosen by God. Throughout the movie and in his own written letter, it is clear that his purpose was to get recognition from the King and Queen of Spain. While also trying to get as much gold as possible for his own selfish needs. In The letter of Columbus, he describes himself as being the only one who discovered everything. Furthermore, in the movie scenes of Columbus’s arrival and conquest of the indigenous people, he forces them to convert to Catholicism. They are exploited for seditious outrage. The Indians didn’t mind giving the Spanish gold or being slaves. But when the Spanish started to kill them they had to rebel.

Zinn’s thesis focused primarily on the devious Christopher Columbus. He wrote that Christopher Columbus wasn’t a real hero. He was power hungry and obsessed with finding gold. He was dishonest and deceitful to his crew. “The first man to sight land was supposed to get a yearly pension of 10,000 maravedis for life, but Rodrigo never got it. Columbus claimed he had seen a light the evening before. He got the reward.” He was also a cruel man, abusing the inhabitants of the land which he explored. The Arawaks were friendly and welcoming to these European men with overwhelming hospitality and their belief in sharing, but Columbus abused their kindness. He took them by force and used them as slaves, took all their gold and then killed them.” As soon as I arrived in the Indies, on the first Island which I found, I took some of the natives by force in order that they might learn and might give me information of whatever there is in these parts.” Columbus wrote this about his experience when he first arrived to the Bahama Islands. This shows that he did not care for the people; instead of returning back the hospitality he used unnecessary

Columbus DBQ Christopher Columbus created the social image of himself as a villain. Columbus didn’t necessarily create the image of himself by himself, but it did reflect it. He never really truly realized what damage he has done to the Indian and other race populace around him. Therefore, stating that the man that discovered America is actually a villain, evidence will be provided to support it.

Now, in our present society, people are rethinking the goodness of Columbus and the actual impact that he had on our world. People feel that the killing of the American Indians was “unethical and morally wrong,” says Janet Mckay in an article from TIME magazine (“Columbus Day in Cali” TIME MAGAZINE Oct. 15, 1995, pg. 17). When Columbus made the Voyage to the Americas it was a different time, a different way of life. People thought differently than we do today. In 1492 there were many internal conflicts in many countries. Fighting was a thing that was normal.

Christopher Columbus should be remembered by history as a sadistic man who paved the path of genocides, exterminating and enslaving many innocent natives for his own pleasures and “successes.” He exploited the generosity that was given to him by the natives as a way to get what he wanted. He uses this to his advantage, “When you ask for something they have, they never say no,” clearly showing the natives weaknesses. (Zinn, 5) Instead of thanking the natives for their hospitality, the Europeans use it to get the natives to their bidding.

Throughout the book, King has a few recurring themes. The big two were racism, whether intentional or unintentional, and the way the past has been changed to make white people feel better about the past. This story helps exemplify both of these themes. Most white people, myself included, do not know that Columbus took groups of

Columbus was cruel and violent. He never took anything for granted and pretty much wanted to be a wealthy man so that he could control everything

The noble savage in antiquity is often characterised by the traits of the golden races accounted for by Hesiod in Works and Days and Ovid in the Metamorphoses which traces the decline in human moral behaviour from the ideal Golden Age to the civilised but violent Iron Age world. Accordingly, the noble savage is always discussed from an ethnocentric world-view wherein the spaces most familiar to the authors are deemed the most civilised while the places further from them become increasingly primitive. In this way a reading of the noble savage is a negative description of both the technologically inept people in question, and the morally bankrupt civilised peoples corrupted by the conflict and greed their society engenders. Characteristics of the golden race peoples usually applied to noble savages are: lack of agriculture, property, hard labour; no demarcation of territory, greed, warfare, written laws, seafaring, and metallurgy. The difficulty with noble savage descriptions in antiquity is that they are not all analogous and some are significantly unlike the Golden Age races. Moreover, their depictions are due to the ‘writer’s preconceptions of the moral value of prehistoric peoples and their lifestyles will colour their valuation of noble savage’ ; therefore, it is the ancient author who chooses how the noble savage is presented.