• DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    17 days 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]@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days 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.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        Mmhhmm.

        Tell me when conquistador became an official title, and what, exactly, was different about the mainland conquests that means you should treat the armed butchers as a separate entity?