• Fushuan [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Not by conquistador standards, conquistadors weren’t a thing when he died. He was the Caribbean governor and conquistadors conquered the rest of americas some years after he died.

        • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          1: Would you agree that the Spanish systemically conquered the Caribbean islands to establish the base of operations they needed to expand on the mainland?

          2: What does conquistador directly translate as?

          3: Was Columbus specifically removed because he was bad even by the other conquered islands’ standards?

          • Fushuan [he/him]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            Yes. Conqueror. Yes.

            I don’t get if you are trying to be smug about it or whatever, but the “conquerors” were a specific warring campaign soldiers deployed to conquer the rest of america, specifically the Aztecs since those weren’t “easy” to convert to catholicism given that they already had a religion.

            You specifically said “conquistador” standards, which although it’s an Spanish word that translates to conqueror, makes reference to a specific group that wasn’t even formed when Columbus died.

            Anyway, yes he was bad but I don’t get why no fucking one mentions Hernan Cortez, who massacred waaay more people, and went with the intent to murder and dominate them from the very beginning.

            Minor edit: he wasn’t removed of his titles because he was bad/evil, the Spaniard crows didn’t care about the murder of natives. He was removed because he became a tyrant of anyone who lived in the Caribbean, be it native or setter.