The Normative Views of Columbus in the Historical Record - Essay Example

Like any other hugely influential historical figure, the picture of Christopher Columbus modern Americans have is hugely divided between polarized accounts of his place in the history of North America. Although Columbus is popularly credited with the discovery of America and other heroic deeds, he is frequently demonized as the first step in a continuous, systematic genocide and oppression of a native American people. These normative views of Columbus in the historical record, rather than helping produce a clearer picture of history, often cloud one’s vision of the true facts of what happened, aside from our contemporary interpretations of these facts. For this reason, it is helpful to understand the difference between perspectives, and the distinction between facts and values in the study of history, in elucidating a true account of what Christopher Columbus accomplished and what the effects of these accomplishments are still being felt today. For such a popular and well-known figure as taught in American public schools, public knowledge of who Christopher Columbus actually was, both as a man and an explorer, is surprisingly lacking, according to both the deification and demonization accounts of his character. And, in many ways, the historical account of Columbus is still alive today as America, as a society, changes the manner in which it views its most famous explorer. History is written in terms of perspectives, where a perspective is a particular evaluation of a situation or facts, especially from one persons point of view. Because no human being is without his or her own perspective, it is impossible to generate a truly objective account of historical facts, independent from the values and biases of primary and secondary sources. The belief in the possibility of an objective study of history is mistaken, since history deals with the particulars of wholly contingent events (events that could have happened just as easily one way as any other way). In the analysis of Christopher Columbus, for instance, it is one’s perspective that distinguishes one of his accomplishments from one of his errors. Perhaps the simplest case of this is in his “discovery” of America, which was not so much a discovery as a happenstance coincidence. While some who support an overall favorable view of Columbus treat the discovery as the opening of a new avenue and opportunity for European powers, those who take an overall negative view of Columbus treat the discovery as an accident and a blunder on the part of the captain. Regardless of one’s perspective, one cannot deny that some facts have happened and some events have not, and the events that have happened are, despite possessing some connotation of good or bad to some, a part of a value-neutral history. This value-neutral history shall become our focus shortly. However, it is important to ask why, for some, the accomplishments of Columbus are to be mourned or to be celebrated, to give some context to the question of what Columbus did that was so monumental in American history. Some conservatives believe that Columbus Day, a national holiday to celebrate the arrival of the explorer in 1492, is a time to celebrate Western greatness. According to those who value Western thought, Columbus ought to be honored for bringing Western civilization to a land in which “the inhabitants were primarily hunter/gatherers, wandering across the land, living from hand to mouth and from day to day” (Berliner). This line of thinking equates Christopher Columbus’ legacy with that of the Renaissance in Europe—a time of rebirth from the age of Christian mysticism in government and philosophy. This kind of sentiment is typified in the belief that Columbus Day “stands for the values that make human life possible: reason, science, self-reliance, individualism, ambition, productive achievement” (Berliner). If this is true, then the “discovery” of America by Columbus is an expression of Western expansion into the primitive with good connotations; that is, the facts of history indicate a kind of Westward expansion of human values, not bringing native populations to destruction but to their ultimate furtherance. In contrast to the overwhelmingly positive account of Christopher Columbus (especially as his legacy is celebrated on the national holiday), critics of Columbus look censoriously at the notion of “discovering” America, given that people had lived on the continent for thousands of years. In addition to the false discovery of America, Columbus is frequently pinned to images of slavery and genocide, Holocaust and widespread destruction of entire cultures (Berliner). On this view, the facts of history indicate a negative direction in the normative value of what happens on the American continent, from European intrusion, to enslavement, to oppression in the context of today’s Euro-American and Native American relations. In contrast to the relatively dominant view of Columbus as a triumphant and heroic figure in early American history, this account of and perspective on the historical facts as presented by primary and secondary sources points to another conception of Columbus through the construction of history. Although history is theoretically a collection of facts to be sifted through and analyzed, it seems more like a box of interpretations loosely fitting on the shelf (Pelta). Despite these value-laden accounts of Columbus’ achievements and accolades, one can try to derive a reliable view of the man’s life. Columbus, of course, discovered the so-called “New World” in an attempt to find trade routes to India. He accomplished this on his second voyage after his first voyage, which ended in 1492. After sailing by Puerto Rico and Navidad, Columbus reached Central America, providing the basis for widespread interest in Europe about the nature of this foreign land. He laid the foundation for future European voyagers, who began a continuous stream of attempts to seize treasures and success in the Americas. Columbus laid this foundation through his articulate appeals to European monarchs for their support and benedictions, which funded his voyages and made his successes possible. It is probable Columbus’ success can be attributed to his high opinion of himself (Randall 17). These facts of Columbus’ life and accomplishments provide numerous opportunities for allies and opponents of whatever ideology to deify the figure or demonize him. Either way, the argument is likely valid, which proves the influence of Columbus extends far beyond the mere contingencies of his discoveries, and to the lasting effect of his legacy to this day. One can characterize ideological rifts between movements like, for example, conservatism and multiculturalism, simply by examining their different conceptions of Christopher Columbus. However, as one digs deeper, beyond the historical façade built from the so-called “discoverer” or “destroyer” of America, one sees only a man seeking sponsorship for a voyage from Europe to the Indies (Keegan). This man, in serving what has already been established as a problem of arrogance (Randall), does not seem, from the facts of history alone, to have been interested in causing the destruction so many ascribe to him, nor in the discovery of America he evidently did not intend. In fact, evidence seems to suggest that, rather than showing a true interest in finding India, Columbus pursued personal goals, like spending two weeks searching for gold in the Bahamas. He also notably claimed lands for the Spanish Crown, which would have been strange if these lands belonged to an Asiatic Kingdom he had an interest in trading with. Ultimately, these facts only raise more questions about the historical figure of Columbus that is so ubiquitously taught in American public schools either as a benevolent, heroic explorer or as a figurehead for Eurocentric oppression. The only answer the student of history is really left with is the ideology he or she wishes to support by using the case of Christopher Columbus. Either Columbus was a destroyer or a discoverer, with little room in the middle for negotiation. The historical facts, however, seem to suggest that like most men, Columbus was motivated by self-interest, rather than the ideals and their opposites as suggested by political perspectives. Works Cited Berliner, Michael S. "Columbus Day: A Time to Celebrate." Ayn Rand Institute 10 October 2008. Keegan, William F. Columbus, Hero or Heel? 500 years after his epoch-making trip, The Great Navigator remains an enigma. VISTA, 24 March 1991. Pelta, Kathy. Discovering Christopher Columbus: How History Is Invented. New York: Lerner Publishing Group, 1991. Randall, Jessica. Christopher Columbus: Navigated by God. New York: Xulon Press, 2009. Read More