Encounters Unforeseen- 1492 Retold
Page 61
S: Vilar Sánchez, Juan Antonio. 1492–1502: Una Década Fraudulenta; Historia del Reino Cristiano de Granada desde su fundación hasta la muerte de la Reina Isabel la Católica. Grenada: Editorial Alhulia, 2004.
Cristóbal, Isabel, Fernando, and Luis de Santángel
Reconsideration of Colón’s Voyage, January–May 1492
P, prev. cit.: Ferdinand Columbus, chaps. 12, 14, 15. Italian Reports Repertorium, doc. 17, Alessandro Geraldini. Journal, 2/14/1493 (two sons living in Córdoba). Journal Raccolta Notes, n. 13, containing translation of Passport and Letter of Credence. Las Casas Repertorium, sec. 2.3. Morison Documents, Articles of Agreement, and Nader, Santa Fe Capitulations, April 17, 1492. Morison Documents, Conditional Grant of Titles and Honors, and Nader, Grenada Capitulations, April 30, 1492. Morison Documents: Letter of Credence, April 30, 1492; Royal Decree Requiring Peoples of Palos to Provide Columbus with Caravels, April 30, 1492; the Passport, in Latin with translation; Royal Decree Ordering the Suspension of Judicial Proceedings Against Criminals, April 30, 1492; Royal Decree Ordering Columbus to be Given Every Facility to Repair His Vessels and Procure Supplies at Reasonable Prices, April 30, 1492; Royal Decree Prohibiting Taxation of Provisions, April 30, 1492. Navarrete, vol. 2, Col. Dipl. 11 (Diego Columbus’s appointment as page). Oviedo Repertorium, sec. 3.5.
P: Anghiera, Peter Martyr of. The Discovery of the New World in the Writings of Peter Martyr of Anghiera. Edited by Ernesto Lunardi, Elisa Magioncalda, and Rosanna Mazzacane. Translated by Feliz Azzola, revised Luciano F. Farina. Vol. 2, Nuova Raccolta Colombiana. Rome: Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca Dello Stato, 1992 (“Martyr Raccolta”). This contains English translations of portions of the Opus Epistolarum in addition to Decadas de Orbo Novo. Letter to John Borromeo, May 14, 1493 (sovereigns’ disbelief in Columbus’s voyage).
S, prev. cit.: Fernández-Armesto Before Columbus, Columbus, Conquest; Journal Raccolta Notes; Manzano Siete; Morison Admiral; Nader, Introduction; Phillips; Rumeu de Armas Indigenista; Taviani Grand Design; Thomas Rivers; Thomas Slave Trade; Torre y del Cerro.
S: Fernández-Armesto, Felipe. Pathhfinders: A Global History of Exploration. New York: W.W. Norton, 2006.
S: Gambia García, Mariano. De Colón a Alonso de Lugo. Las Capitulaciones de Descubrimiento y Conquista a Finales Del Siglo XV: America, Canarias y Africa. XVIII Coloquio de Historia Canario-Americana, October 2006. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain: Casa de Colón.
Contemporaneous accounts agree both Isabella and Ferdinand thought the voyage was unlikely to succeed. Historians debate which noblemen, prelates, and other advisers were instrumental in convincing the sovereigns to authorize it. After the voyage’s success, many claimed that role. I have limited focus of the narrative to Santángel and the two friars without denying that others may have been instrumental before the fact.
Isabel, Fernando, Abraham Seneor, and Isaac Abravanel
Expulsion of the Jews, 1492
P, prev. cit.: Bernáldez, chaps. 110–114. Documentos Expulsion, 177 (Edict of Expulsion, March 31, 1492). Zurita Hernando, bk. 1, chap. 6.
P: Pérez, Joseph. Historia de una tragedia: La expulsión de los judíos de España. Barcelona: Crítica Grupo Grijalbo-Mondadovi, 1993. Apendices 1 (Torquemada’s order of March 20, 1492), 2 (Edict of Expulsion, March 31, 1492), and 3 (Ferdinand’s Edict of Expulsion for Aragón, March 31, 1492).
S, prev. cit.: Azcona Isabel; Baer; Beinart; Benbassa; Fernández-Armesto Sovereigns; Kamen, including translation of Ferdinand’s letter to noblemen, p. 21; Kayserling; Lea; Liss; Netanyahu Abravanel; Netanyahu Origins; Rubin. I have not trusted Abravenel’s (Netanyahu’s) account that Isabella might have relented but for Ferdinand.
Cristóbal
Recruiting Crews to Traverse the Sea of Darkness, Palos, Moguer, Huelva, Summer 1492
P, prev. cit.: Bernáldez, chaps. 111, 112, 117. Ferdinand Columbus, chap. 16. Las Casas Repertorium, sec. 3.1. Marco Polo, bk. 2, chaps. 6, 68, 77; bk. 3, chap. 2. Oviedo Repertorium, sec. 3.6. Pleitos docs. 5.9, 7.2, 7.3, 7.5, 7.6, 8.3, 8.6, 8.7, 9.2, 9.4, 19.8, 20.2, 22.6, 22.7, 22.9, testimonies of Francisco de Morales, Juan Rodríguez Cabezudo, Martín González, Cristóbal de Triana, Alonso Pardo, Bartolomé Colin, Diego Bermudez, Juan Quintero Principe, Gonzalo Alonso Galeote, Juan Rodríguez de Mafra, Diego Fernández Colmenero, Juan Portugues, Fernando Valiente, Pedro Ortiz, Hernan Yáñez Montiel. Raccolta Letters on Subsequent Voyages, Letter to Sovereigns, February 6, 1502 (observations on sailing between Spain and Italy).
P: Gil, Juan. El Libro de Marco Polo: Las Apostillas a la Historia Natural de Plinio el Viejo. Vol. 1, Biblioteca de Colón. Madrid: Alianza Editorial, 1992 (“Marco Polo Biblioteca”). Bk. 2, chaps. 11, 28, 64, 70; bk. 3, chap. 2.
S, prev. cit.: Angel Ortega; Fernández-Armesto Conquest; Gay; Journal Raccolta Notes (including n. 17 as to Juan Portugués); Larner; Manzano Siete; Morison Admiral; Nunn; Phillips; Taviani Grand Design.
S: Fernández Duro, Cesáreo. Pinzón en el Descubrimiento de las Indias, con Noticias Críticas de Algunas Obras Recientes Relacion. Madrid: Impreores de la Real Casa, 1892. BiblioLife, LLC reprint.
S: Gould, Alicia B. Nueva Lista Documentada de los Tripulantes de Colón en 1492. Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia, 1984.
S: Martínez-Hidalgo, José María. Las naves de Colón. Barcelona: Editorial Cadi, 1969.
S: Manzano Manzano, Juan, and Ana María Manzano Fernández-Heredia. Los Pinzones y el Descubrimiento de America. Vol. I. Madrid: Ediciones de Cultura Hispanica, 1988 (“Manzano Pinzón”).
By the time of Columbus’s death (1506), the land “discovered or acquired” to which Columbus’s titles, authorizations, and profits arguably extended exceeded that envisioned when the agreements were executed in 1492 by gargantuan proportion. Isabella and Ferdinand soon treated the agreements as violated by Columbus’s conduct and revoked titles and profit entitlements. Diego Columbus and his heirs contested the crown’s revocations in a series of lawsuits—the “Pleitos”—extending in principal part over fifty years. Key issues included which lands Columbus discovered and whether others discovered them first. The parties—the Columbus heirs and the Castilian crown—secured the testimony of witnesses in 1512–1515 and 1535–1536, including Columbus family loyalists and members of the Pinzón family, who aided the crown by giving credit to the discoveries on the first voyage to Martín Alonso Pinzón. While the testimony of many witnesses was infected with self-interest, there are witnesses who may not have had a financial, reputational, or emotional stake in the litigation’s outcome, and there is testimony that reflects an admission against interest and/or that must have disappointed the proponent who sought the testimony. The testimony contains factual information as to what occurred in Palos, Moguer, and Huelva in 1492, as analyzed by Manzano in detail, as well as perspectives of seamen and other commoners on the first voyage.
While some historians are persuaded by testimonies of Pinzóns and others that, after delivering the sardines, Martín Alonso Pinzón found documents in the papal library in Rome giving geographic support for his own independently conceived voyage to the Indies, I have found this testimony not credible and it is well controverted. While Pinzóns and others testified that Columbus gave Martín a participation on the voyage, no other evidence establishes that. Las Casas believed that something was offered beyond participating as captain. I have followed Manzano’s speculation as to such an offer, finding it the most plausible of many speculations.
In the absence of records, naval historians have debated for centuries the specifications of the three ships. I have relied on Martínez-Hidalgo.
Juan Portugués’s Pleitos testimony indicates he was black, Columbus’s servant, and from the Canary Islands. Following the Journal Raccolta Notes, I have speculated Juan was a black Guinean who previously had been sold by the Portuguese on the Canaries and then “employed” or purchased by Columbus.
According to Las Casas, Rodrigo de Escobedo was Fray Pérez’s nephew. According to Meyer Kayserling, four crew members in ad
dition to Luís de Torres were conversos or Jews.
In the absence of evidence, I have speculated as Taviani that the Genoese seaman Jácome el Rico represented Francesco Pinelo and/or other Italian financiers.
Bakako’s Sentry Duty
Guanahaní (San Salvador?, Bahamas)
The same primary and secondary sources listed under Chap. V, “Bakako’s Fishing Lesson Guanahaní (San Salvador?, Bahamas),” above.
Kamana is a fictitious person.
CHAPTER VII: CROSSING THE SEA OF DARKNESS
Palos to San Sebastián, Gomera, Canary Islands,
August 2–September 9, 1492
P, prev. cit.: Dotson, doc. 140 (Domenico still survives). Ferdinand Columbus, chaps. 16–18. Journal, Prologue; 8/3–9/9/1492; 2/14/1493. LC Synoptic Journal, LC1–6, LC120. Pleitos doc. 7.2, testimony of Juan Rodríguez Cabezudo (muleteer charged with Diego). Oviedo Repertorium, sec. 3.6.
P: Salazar, Eugenio de. Cartas de Eugenio De Salazar: Vecino y Natural de Madrid, Escritas Á Muy Particulares Amigos Suyos. Madrid: Imprenta y Estereotipica de M. Rivandeneyra, 1866.
S, prev. cit.: Angel Ortega; Fernández-Armesto Columbus on Himself; Fuson Log; Gould; Journal Raccolta Notes; Morison Admiral; Nader; Nunn; Rumeu de Armas Tordesillas; Zamora.
S: Henige, David. In Search of Columbus: The Sources for the First Voyage. Tuscon: University of Arizona Press, 1991.
S: Taviani, Paolo Emilio. The Voyages of Columbus: The Great Discovery. Translated by Marc A. Beckwith and Luciano F. Farina. Novara: Istituto Geografica de Agostini, 1991 (“Taviani Voyages”).
Scholars disagree whether Columbus, Columbus’s heirs, Las Casas, or another wrote the prologue to the Journal and whether the prologue was ever given to Isabella. Since the prologue deals with the voyage’s purpose and historical context and bears upon Columbus’s and his heirs’ claim to land discovered, and since it does not contain nautical information, it is quite possible Columbus did not write it or that the prologue was substantially edited by another—regardless of Las Casas’s assertion that he is quoting Columbus’s prologue in full. I believe neither Las Casas nor Ferdinand Columbus would have written some of the statements in the prologue in their hindsight; Columbus possessed the thoughts presented in the prologue on August 3, 1492— having argued them to the sovereigns for years as a reason for the voyage, as well as being acutely concerned with his hereditary entitlements; and I have presented the prologue as his work (albeit possibly edited thereafter).
Sea of Darkness,
September 10–October 9, 1492
P, prev. cit.: Bernáldez Raccolta, chap. 118. Ferdinand Columbus, chaps. 18–22. Journal, 9/10–10/9/1492. LC Synoptic Journal, LC6–26. Martyr, decade 1, bk. 1. Oviedo Repertorium, sec. 3.6. Pleitos docs. 17.1, 19.8, 19.11, 20.2, 22.9, testimonies of Manuel de Valdovino, Diego Fernández Colmenero, Francisco García Vallejo, Juan Portugués, Hernán Yáñez de Montiel.
S, prev. cit.: Fernández-Armesto Conquest; Fuson Islands; Gould; Journal Raccolta Notes; Morison Admiral; Nader; Nunn; Phillips; Taviani Voyages.
Scholars disagree whether Columbus “kept two logs”—intentionally reporting to the crews shorter distances sailed daily than he actually estimated. While the Journal expressly affirms multiple times that he did so, some believe Las Casas or a scribe misinterpreted Columbus’s original log in which Columbus was merely converting measurements into Portuguese leagues. Ferdinand Columbus also affirms falsification, and I see ample motive therefor.
The Journal, Ferdinand Columbus, and LC Synoptic Journal do not specifically report the conversations on October 9 or that they occurred on board the Santa María. Morison believes conversations occurred then and there based largely on testimony in the Pleitos, some noted above, and because the sailing conditions that day permitted transfer between the ships, facilitating the private, frank discussion presented in the text (rather than shouts from ship to ship for all to hear). The Pleitos contain testimony that Columbus wished to return to Spain but the Pinzóns forced him to continue, that Columbus wished to continue but the Pinzóns wanted to return and conceded to proceed only for some days (consistent with Las Casas, Oviedo, and Martyr, as well as Morison), and many accounts in between. I have presented that neither Columbus nor Martín Pinzón wished to return, consistent with the Pleitos testimony of Juan Portugués (Columbus’s servant).
Landfall,
October 10–12, 1492
P, prev. cit.: Bernáldez Raccolta, chap. 118. Ferdinand Columbus, chap. 22. Journal, 10/10/1492; 10/11/1492 (which includes 10/12/1492). LC Synoptic Journal, LC24–26. Oviedo Repertorium, sec. 3.6. Pleitos docs. 18.1, 20.2, testimonies of Garcia Fernández (sailor on Pinta) and Juan Portuguéz (Columbus’s servant, on Santa María).
S, prev. cit.: Gould; Morison Admiral; Taviani Voyages.
Regardless of the assertions by Ferdinand Columbus, Las Casas, Oviedo, and Martyr that a crew’s “mutiny” occurred, most scholars agree that the disturbance on the Santa María that did occur was more subdued. The Journal does not mention a mutiny on October 10, and it is only on February 14 that Columbus or Las Casas so characterizes the events (to be discussed under Chap. XI. “Violent Storm, Off Azores, February 12–15, 1493”). For discussion of Columbus’s sighting of firelight, see Chap. VIII. “Possession, Guanahaní, October 12, 1492” below.
CHAPTER VIII: LUCAYAN ISLANDS
Arrival of Unknown,
Guanahaní, October 12, 1492
P, prev. cit.: Ferdinand Columbus, chap. 22. Journal, 10/11/1492 (which includes 10/12/1492). LC Synoptic Journal, LC27–28.
S, prev. cit.: Keegan Prehistory; Indigenous People; Journal Raccolta Notes; Morison Admiral; Morison Documents; Rouse; Schwartz, chap. 5, Peter Hulme, “Tales of Distinction: European ethnography and the Caribbean”; Taviani Voyages; Wilson.
S: Craton, Michael, and Gail Saunders. Islanders in the Stream: A History of the Bahamian People. Vol. 1: From Aboriginal Times to the End of Slavery. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1999.
S: Richter, Daniel K. Facing East from Indian Country: A Native History of Early America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001.
It bears repeating that the primary historical record for the encounter was written entirely by Europeans. The text is entirely fictional other than the location of Columbus’s ships and their progress to Guanahaní’s western coast, as indicated in the primary sources cited. For example, the Journal entries for October 12–14, 1492, do not indicate that the Guanahaníans prepared to defend themselves or that Columbus met Guanahaní’s paramount cacique or even knowingly identified such person.
Yuni and Abana are fictitious persons.
Possession,
Guanahaní, October 12, 1492
P, prev. cit.: Ferdinand Columbus, chaps. 23, 24. Journal, 10/11/1492 (which includes 10/12/1492); 10/15/1492. LC Synoptic Journal, LC27–29.
S, prev. cit.: Fernández-Armesto Conquest; Gay; Keegan Prehistory; Journal Raccolta Notes; Morison Admiral; Richter; Rouse; Taviani Voyages.
S: Deive, Carlos Esteban. La Española y la Esclavitud del Indio. Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic: Fundación García Arévalo, 1995.
S: Greenblatt, Stephen. Marvelous Possessions: The Wonder of the New World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991.
S: Restall, Matthew. Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
S: Todorov, Tzvetan. The Conquest of America: The Question of the Other. Translated by Richard Howard. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1939.
S: Weaver, Jace. The Red Atlantic American Indigenes and the Making of the Modern World, 1000–1927. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2014.
Most scholars believe Columbus could not have seen firelight on Guanahaní at the estimated distance of the Santa María from Guanahaní before midnight on October 11 and that Columbus’s sighting was either a lie or wishful thinking. What is known is that the sovereigns’ awarded the queen’s pension to Columbus, apparently disentitling Juan Rodrígu
ez Bermejo and Pedro Izquierdo. I have assumed that Columbus did not tell his crews of his decision to seek the pension during the voyage—if he had made this decision at this time—because of the rancor it would spawn. The Journal entries of October 11 include October 12, and I suspect Columbus wrote them no sooner than at the end of the day on October 12—after landfall and possession. These entries are the key record of Gutiérrez’s affirmation of the light and Sánchez’s denial, very conveniently establishing both that Columbus’s sighting was confirmed and the denial which explains his choice to have the lombard not fired. The Journal does not record the independent sighting by Izquierdo, supplied by Oviedo. I suspect Columbus desired and felt justified to take credit and see his lying and wishful thinking both plausible. I also believe there was an additional motivation supporting his lying. See Chap. XIV, “Córdoba, June 1493,” below.
It is unclear whether Columbus’s crews and the captives referred to him as “Admiral” after landfall, and many historians believe Columbus waited to use that title until the sovereigns confirmed it on his return to Castile. I think otherwise based on Ferdinand Columbus’s and Las Casas’s narration concerning October 12, Columbus’s apparent references to himself as an admiral twice during the return voyage (Journal, 2/19/1493, 3/5/1493), and the text of the Grenada capitulations themselves, which require the “crews” to recognize him as “Admiral” upon the act of possession; while the sovereigns’ representatives would have waited the sovereigns’ confirmation, I suspect the rest of the crew were concerned more with satisfying Columbus than that protocol.
From the heavens,
Guanahaní, October 13–14, 1492
P, prev. cit.: Bernáldez Raccolta, chap. 118. Ferdinand Columbus, chaps. 24, 25. Journal, 10/13–14/1492, 11/4/1492. LC Synoptic Journal, LC29–30 (including that captives swam to the launch).
P: Genesis 2:25; 3:7, 11.
S, prev. cit.: Manzano Pinzón; Morison Documents; Phillips; Restall; Richter; Rouse; Wilson.
S: Keegan, William F. “Mobility and Disdain: Columbus and Cannibals in the Land of Cotton.” Ethnohistory 62, no. 1 (January 2015).