CONTACT: the effect of Columbus' voyage on the old world

In thinking over this one of the interesting aspects of it is that for the first few decades only a few islands were known along with stretchs of coastline, not of course that there were massive continents there.

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

The Mongols only got as far as the gates of Vienna, China was conquered by Kublai Khan, not Genghis, and the Mongols came before the Ottomans, not after. The last Crusade ended in 1272, so the people of the Middle East had more than two hundred years to clean up before Columbus even set sail. The Crusades weren't exactly devastating to the Muslims; the action was confined to the Mediterranean coast and anyway, the Muslims won. The battle of Malta and the siege of Lepanto were confrontations between Christian and Ottoman forces during the 1500s, while Napoleon went to Egypt in 1798.

edit on 14/3/12 by Astyanax because: of a bit more about the Crusades.

Hi Astyanax,
I just had this long neat reply ready and pressed the wrong button and it went poof.
So now in orede to answer quickly I Hope you don't find me to blunt.
I would just like to bump this off you from my memory.
The Mongols had recon forces on the south side of the Channel.
Splitting hairs I know but that's me.
Genghis conqured the majority of China, Kublia just finished up in the south and made it official. Tamerlane was trying to make deals with Cristian Eurpeans as late as 1400. Alliances against the Ottomans. The Europeans turned him down.
The Ottoman territories I mentioned just changed in name from the Bysantine but the Mongols were still major players at the time. Most likely played a role in weakening the Bysantines. But I have never looked at that.
Ah yes. when Bonaparte went to Egypt he conquered Mameluks (sp) who were out of the Ottoman Empire. But this is well outside the timeline of the thread.
the best ljb

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

All of that gold and silver coming back to Spain caused massive inflation on the part of the country and the rise of piracy and other distasteful aspects of that time.

Yes sir. I do like that Captain Morgan rum.
The caribeain was a hot zone.

reply to post by longjohnbritches

The Mongols had recon forces on the south side of the Channel.

What is your source for this statement? Are you suggesting that Mongols were riding unmolested through thirteenth-century France?

Genghis conqured the majority of China, Kublia just finished up in the south and made it official.

Here is a map of the Mongol Empire at the time of Genghis's death. The red lines show the boundaries of modern states, including China. Compare it with this map of Kublai Khan's empire in the east. As you see, the latter covers the whole of modern China and even extends south into modern Indochina. Genghis won less than half of that territory.

Tamerlane was trying to make deals with Cristian Eurpeans as late as 1400. Alliances against the Ottomans. The Europeans turned him down.

Timur was a Muslim Turk, not a Mongol. His ancestors were Mongols, but that's another story. The ancestors of Bahadur Shah Zafar, the Mughal emperor whom the British deposed in 1858, also had Mongol ancestors – in fact, Timur was one of them – but no-one would call the Mughal empire in India part of the Mongol empire! The Mongol Empire was already fragmented and decaying by the time Timur rose to power. He helped finish it off.

The Ottoman territories I mentioned just changed in name from the Bysantine but the Mongols were still major players at the time.

What 'at the time' would that be? The Ottoman empire had its beginnings in formerly Byzantine Anatolia (the bit of Turkey that divides the Black Sea and the Mediterranean) in 1299. By then the Mongol empire was already breaking up – the Golden Horde had split up from the Ilkhanate, etc. The Ottomans finally captured Constantinople in 1451, just forty years before Columbus set sail for the New World. Which time period during this 152-year window are you referring to?

Most likely played a role in weakening the Bysantines.

On the contrary, the Byzantines and the Mongols were allies for about half a century, first against the Latins who threatened Byzantium from the west, then against Turkic tribes who were slowly eating it from the east.

When Bonaparte went to Egypt he conquered Mameluks (sp) who were out of the Ottoman Empire. But this is well outside the timeline of the thread.

That is correct.

reply to post by Hanslune

As you know, Hans, a nearly immediate effect of Columbus's voyage was a rise in political friction between the two great Catholic maritime nations, Castile and Portugal, over imperial expansion in the Americas. The competition between them quickly grew dangerous enough to threaten peace on the Iberian pensinsula, causing Pope Alexander VI to decree a line of division in the middle of the Atlantic to resolve the issue.

The joint crown of Castile and Aragon (ie, Spain) was entitled to all territories west of the line and Portugal entitled to everything east of it. The Pope (who was actually a Spaniard name Rodrigo Borgia) issued a Bull to this effect in 1493, at the time of Columbus's second voyage. His division largely favoured Spain (Castile), much to Portuguese disgust.

A year later the line was redrawn under the Treaty of Tordesillas, conceding more territory in the New World (mostly what is now Brazil) to the Portuguese.

Of course, Castilian-Portuguese rivalry existed before Columbus set sail; in fact, the old navigator exploited it at one point by seeking funds and support from the Portuguese crown when it looked as if Isabella and Fernando were going to let him down.

Comes back to greed though in the end (what most things seem to be about).

A direct quote from Big Chief Elizabeth (written gathering historical sources, diaries, etc):

"Gilbert had not been the first Englishman to be fascinated by the North American continent. Ever since its discovery by John Cabot in 1497 - just 5 years after Columbus had landed in the Bahamas - a handful of dreamers and adventurers had toyed with the idea of visiting the distant shores across the ocean. A few of Bristol's more enterprising merchants had launched expeditions in the wake of Cabot's voyage, hoping to make their fortunes in trade with the "savages". John Thomas, Hugh Elyot and Thomas Assehurst all sailed into the sunset with high hopes, only to return in bitter disappointment. The scantily clad Indians had showed no interest in English woolends and broadcloths - the country's most important export - and even less desire to truss themselves up in slashed doublets and taffeta bonnets. Nor did they have anything of substance to offer the merchants. Their bows and arrows fetched a reasonable price as collectors items; hawks were in some demand among Tudor courtiers, and 'cattles of the montaign' - lynx - made fanciful pets for their noble lordships. But a trade based solely on exotica was never going to be profitable and, after five or six years of failure, the Bristol merchants abandoned their enterprise."

Bearing in mind this was the reaction in one of the Super Powers of the age, i think it is fairly safe to assume this would have been replicated around the Old World - particularly as the first voyages followed on immediately from Cabot's return to England (and therefore well inside your brief Hans).

Without trying to sound like his publicist, i really cannot recommend Giles Milton books enough for a feel of life in other periods. They are historic info rather than fictional novels and therefore (in some cases) a real eye opener. I particularly recommend trying Samurai William for a look at life in feudal Japan (from a shipwrecked European perspective, again based on surviving diaries, accounts, and Japanese texts). If nothing else, they make you realise just how hardy humanity used to be. I say used to be because try reading some of these accounts and then imagining our mollycoddled humans today trying to cope with the same situations!

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

The Mongols had recon forces on the south side of the Channel.

What is your source for this statement? Are you suggesting that Mongols were riding unmolested through thirteenth-century France?

Genghis conqured the majority of China, Kublia just finished up in the south and made it official.

Here is a map of the Mongol Empire at the time of Genghis's death. The red lines show the boundaries of modern states, including China. Compare it with this map of Kublai Khan's empire in the east. As you see, the latter covers the whole of modern China and even extends south into modern Indochina. Genghis won less than half of that territory.

Tamerlane was trying to make deals with Cristian Eurpeans as late as 1400. Alliances against the Ottomans. The Europeans turned him down.

Timur was a Muslim Turk, not a Mongol. His ancestors were Mongols, but that's another story. The ancestors of Bahadur Shah Zafar, the Mughal emperor whom the British deposed in 1858, also had Mongol ancestors – in fact, Timur was one of them – but no-one would call the Mughal empire in India part of the Mongol empire! The Mongol Empire was already fragmented and decaying by the time Timur rose to power. He helped finish it off.

The Ottoman territories I mentioned just changed in name from the Bysantine but the Mongols were still major players at the time.

What 'at the time' would that be? The Ottoman empire had its beginnings in formerly Byzantine Anatolia (the bit of Turkey that divides the Black Sea and the Mediterranean) in 1299. By then the Mongol empire was already breaking up – the Golden Horde had split up from the Ilkhanate, etc. The Ottomans finally captured Constantinople in 1451, just forty years before Columbus set sail for the New World. Which time period during this 152-year window are you referring to?

Most likely played a role in weakening the Bysantines.

On the contrary, the Byzantines and the Mongols were allies for about half a century, first against the Latins who threatened Byzantium from the west, then against Turkic tribes who were slowly eating it from the east.

When Bonaparte went to Egypt he conquered Mameluks (sp) who were out of the Ottoman Empire. But this is well outside the timeline of the thread.

That is correct.

edit on 15/3/12 by Astyanax because: of rotten spelling.

I have to say a well done reply. I also hope Hans doesn't mind the background settings as we are attempting to see how it merges into the time frame of the thread. The Mongols should be a thread of it's own. I guess there might even be one here at ATS.
The Mongols and the Channel info I got from reading books before computers became popular for research. I do not recall if they were molested or not and it could have been further up the coast. Not to important but also remember I said it was reconnaissanse. That I hope you could belive with out a source.
I did a little Google and found out that it was Genghis's son that actually expanded the grasp on Chins proper. Although the real point, the important point, is that as the Mongols became more sober they became less inclined to expand. I tried to use the two most notable khans as examples. This may not be characterized in the Google world but is sure was back when folks read books. And again thanks for keeping me honest. Just wish you would correct my spelling too. I can't find a spell check here on this site.
Let's see if we can squeeze the envelope forward, towards 1510 or so. I know I am going to have to do some reasearch to connect some of those dots.
Which I see you have already done, bravo

Originally posted by Flavian
Comes back to greed though in the end (what most things seem to be about).

A direct quote from Big Chief Elizabeth (written gathering historical sources, diaries, etc):

"Gilbert had not been the first Englishman to be fascinated by the North American continent. Ever since its discovery by John Cabot in 1497 - just 5 years after Columbus had landed in the Bahamas - a handful of dreamers and adventurers had toyed with the idea of visiting the distant shores across the ocean. A few of Bristol's more enterprising merchants had launched expeditions in the wake of Cabot's voyage, hoping to make their fortunes in trade with the "savages". John Thomas, Hugh Elyot and Thomas Assehurst all sailed into the sunset with high hopes, only to return in bitter disappointment. The scantily clad Indians had showed no interest in English woolends and broadcloths - the country's most important export - and even less desire to truss themselves up in slashed doublets and taffeta bonnets. Nor did they have anything of substance to offer the merchants. Their bows and arrows fetched a reasonable price as collectors items; hawks were in some demand among Tudor courtiers, and 'cattles of the montaign' - lynx - made fanciful pets for their noble lordships. But a trade based solely on exotica was never going to be profitable and, after five or six years of failure, the Bristol merchants abandoned their enterprise."

Bearing in mind this was the reaction in one of the Super Powers of the age, i think it is fairly safe to assume this would have been replicated around the Old World - particularly as the first voyages followed on immediately from Cabot's return to England (and therefore well inside your brief Hans).

Without trying to sound like his publicist, i really cannot recommend Giles Milton books enough for a feel of life in other periods. They are historic info rather than fictional novels and therefore (in some cases) a real eye opener. I particularly recommend trying Samurai William for a look at life in feudal Japan (from a shipwrecked European perspective, again based on surviving diaries, accounts, and Japanese texts). If nothing else, they make you realise just how hardy humanity used to be. I say used to be because try reading some of these accounts and then imagining our mollycoddled humans today trying to cope with the same situations!

Hi Flav,
I can clearly see your point here and thanks for the info on Chief Elizabeth.
When tasked with "The Effects of the Discovery" by Colombus alone, it is certaintly impossible to bring that back to the Old World and stay there.
With out looking at and understanding the nautical spring board, recochet effects of all the other European's. It was like an explosive chain reaction.
Every trip flying the flag of a host of countries brought back new news and discoveries. So yes it was alot of the back and forth that conditioned and shaped the Old World from then till this day.
cheers

The explorations of the Americas in the first few years

A list of the explorers - note the nationalities

Early explorers of the Americas

Some interesting tid bits

Alvar Nuñez de Vera (Cabeza de Vaca) - he was one of the four surviving members of the Pánfilo Narváez expedition. On November 8, 1527, the boat he was on, capsized, and they managed to swim to the shore. They walked to Texas and then Mexico, with the help of friendly Indians that fed them along the way. They lost all of their cloths along the way, and continued naked. Cabeza de Vaca, wrote that the shed their skin, twice a year, like serpents. They finally reached Mexico City on July 25th, 1536. It took him and his four companions 9 years to complete the trip.

John Cabot (Second Voyage) - sailed from Bristol in May, 1498. His four ships, and crew were lost at sea, and never heard from again.

Originally posted by Hanslune
The explorations of the Americas in the first few years

A list of the explorers - note the nationalities

Early explorers of the Americas

Some interesting tid bits

Alvar Nuñez de Vera (Cabeza de Vaca) - he was one of the four surviving members of the Pánfilo Narváez expedition. On November 8, 1527, the boat he was on, capsized, and they managed to swim to the shore. They walked to Texas and then Mexico, with the help of friendly Indians that fed them along the way. They lost all of their cloths along the way, and continued naked. Cabeza de Vaca, wrote that the shed their skin, twice a year, like serpents. They finally reached Mexico City on July 25th, 1536. It took him and his four companions 9 years to complete the trip.

edit on 15/3/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

I may have mentioned this before, can't remember.
If anyone has read the report that "Head (face)of the Cow" prepared for the king
please let me know.
To me it is a farce. Not that he was missing for 9 years but the report defies reality. I would like to figure out what he was really up to.
The report alone might make a good thread if there is any intrest.

Poor John, he has a lot of company down there in Davy Jone's Locker

reply to post by longjohnbritches


I'd second that notion, that would make a most interesting thread

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

I'd second that notion, that would make a most interesting thread

I am glsd you agree,
The thoughts that he pulled the greatest AWOL act in recorded history has jelled in my brain for 20 years or more. I think it did not take you long to catch on once you peeked at the report.
A big question at this juncture IS---- Could a felonious report by a new world
notoriety be enough to influence old world polititics or just worthy of some History Detective work.
I yeild to your descression.
Es Muy Bueno Senior

reply to post by enlighteneddante


We are a very special group of people, why else would the creator bless us with a great and beautiful land for such a long time before the secret was let out and spoiled. Listen, I am too tired to lay a lesson upon you so I will only tell you this; your lack of sensetivity to a tough subject demonstrates a lack of mental cognitivity, which makes me surmise that yes you might be proud of your race, but I am pretty sure they are not proud of you. So you know , just stay quite.

Originally posted by Hanslune
The explorations of the Americas in the first few years

A list of the explorers - note the nationalities

Early explorers of the Americas

Some interesting tid bits

Alvar Nuñez de Vera (Cabeza de Vaca) - he was one of the four surviving members of the Pánfilo Narváez expedition. On November 8, 1527, the boat he was on, capsized, and they managed to swim to the shore. They walked to Texas and then Mexico, with the help of friendly Indians that fed them along the way. They lost all of their cloths along the way, and continued naked. Cabeza de Vaca, wrote that the shed their skin, twice a year, like serpents. They finally reached Mexico City on July 25th, 1536. It took him and his four companions 9 years to complete the trip.

John Cabot (Second Voyage) - sailed from Bristol in May, 1498. His four ships, and crew were lost at sea, and never heard from again.

edit on 15/3/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

Looks like vast differences in how friendly some tribes were then!

I would also point out that England and France were skinted after the Hundred Years War so couldn't really afford much in the way of exploration for the early voyages. The Dutch (other great sea farers) on the other hand were also preoccupied with overthrowing (or attempting to) the Spanish.

As such, that is really the main reason for Spanish and Portugese explorers dominating the early voyages - the competition was busy elsewhere (rather than Spanish / Portugese dominance).

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by TDawgRex

 

Great but lets stay on the topic which is the effect of the discovery of the new world on the old world.

You should ask the question the other way. How was the old poor dirty world affected when cabot /columbus found the beautiful, rich, flourishing 'new world'?

How long did the higher ups and the map makers know of the western world before actually setting course for her...again?

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

You should ask the question the other way. How was the old poor dirty world affected when cabot found the rich, flourishing americas beforecabot /columbus?

Are you saying Cabot son found the Americas before Columbus and Cabot senior????

How long did the higher ups and the map makers know of the western world before actually setting course for her...again?

Which 'higher ups' are these?

Originally posted by Flavian

Looks like vast differences in how friendly some tribes were then!

I would also point out that England and France were skinted after the Hundred Years War so couldn't really afford much in the way of exploration for the early voyages. The Dutch (other great sea farers) on the other hand were also preoccupied with overthrowing (or attempting to) the Spanish.

As such, that is really the main reason for Spanish and Portugese explorers dominating the early voyages - the competition was busy elsewhere (rather than Spanish / Portugese dominance).

I'd say they went after Spanish gold first and later thought about colonies, at that time colonies weren't particularly needed, the English were trying to 'colonize' Ireland at the the time and Dutch were involved in wars - so we agree it would seem. The Spanish had a great number of unemployed men at arms - and with few reasons to invade Africa went for the gold - in the Americas

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Flavian

Looks like vast differences in how friendly some tribes were then!

I would also point out that England and France were skinted after the Hundred Years War so couldn't really afford much in the way of exploration for the early voyages. The Dutch (other great sea farers) on the other hand were also preoccupied with overthrowing (or attempting to) the Spanish.

As such, that is really the main reason for Spanish and Portugese explorers dominating the early voyages - the competition was busy elsewhere (rather than Spanish / Portugese dominance).

I'd say they went after Spanish gold first and later thought about colonies, at that time colonies weren't particularly needed, the English were trying to 'colonize' Ireland at the the time and Dutch were involved in wars - so we agree it would seem. The Spanish had a great number of unemployed men at arms - and with few reasons to invade Africa went for the gold - in the Americas

Hi hans,

The war with the Dutch you refer to. Is that thier civil war, 80 year war?
If it is it's a new one for me.
Thanks

reply to post by longjohnbritches


I was referring to the wars ungoing (when the Netherland and Flanders were ruled by Burgundy and the Habsburgs) and later the Frisian rebellions

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

Han
I was referring to the wars ungoing (when the Netherland and Flanders were ruled by Burgundy and the Habsburgs) and later the Frisian rebellions

I will have to check that area and time period out. I am quite lacking.
Thanks
Any thought's on a Cavesa de Baca thread?
I would love to partticipate but don't think I could do all the computer stuff.