15
   

Should we Still Celebrate Columbus Day?

 
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sun 18 Oct, 2015 05:13 pm
@BillRM,
"Must later on?" Jesus, you're lame.

Neither Cortés nor Pizzaro had cannon. Nobody had Gatling guns nor Maxim guns at the time of European contact with the aboriginals. You just live in your own little world, don't you. Read The Conquest of New Spain by Bernal Dias and The History of the Conquest of Mexico by William Prescott. The Tlascalans came very close to exterminating Cortés puny force of just over 400 men with an army of thousands when Cortés was able to negotiate and alliance with them.

If you don't know the history, you just make **** up, don't you.
BillRM
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 18 Oct, 2015 06:06 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
Nobody had Gatling guns nor Maxim guns at the time of European contact


No kidding an where did I said they did have such weapons at the times of first contact or for a few hundred years afterward!!!!!!!!!!!! Those weapons however was employed to keep control of the natives by the colonial powers as soon as they became available in the 1880's or so.

As far as cannons I am fairly sure they as a culture have such weapons if not with them at the time of first contact at least ship mounted weapons. At no point did I imply I was limiting myself to first contact in any case.

Lord what silliness....................
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 18 Oct, 2015 06:45 pm
@Setanta,
There was cannons around at that point in time if not at the moment of first contact.

Quote:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Tenochtitlan

The road to Tenochtitlan[edit]
In April 1519 Hernán Cortés, the Chief Magistrate of Santiago, Cuba, came upon the coast of Mexico at a point he called Vera Cruz with 508 soldiers, 100 sailors, and 14 small cannons. Governor Velazquez, the highest Spanish authority in the Americas, called for Cortés to lead an expedition into Mexico after reports from a few previous expeditions to Yucatán caught the interest of the Spanish in Cuba.[3] Velázquez revoked Cortés' right to lead the expedition once he realized that Cortés intended to exceed his mandate and invade the mainland. After Cortés sailed, Velázquez sent an army led by Pánfilo de Narvaez to take him into custody.
But Cortés used the same legal tactic used by Governor Velázquez when he invaded Cuba years before: he created a local government and had himself elected as the magistrate, thus (in theory) making him responsible only to the King of Spain. Cortés followed this tactic when he and his men established the city of Veracruz. An inquiry into Cortés' action was conducted in Spain in 1529 and no action was taken against him.

By the day of the festival, the Aztecs had gathered on the Patio of Dances. Alvarado had sixty of his men as well as many of his Tlaxcalan allies into positions around the patio. The Aztecs initiated the Serpent Dance. The euphoric dancing as well as the accompanying flute and drum playing disturbed Alvarado about the potential for revolt. He ordered the gates closed and initiated the killing of many thousands of Aztec nobles, warriors and priests.[13]
Alvarado, the conquistadors and the Tlaxcalans retreated to their base in the Palace of Axayacatl and secured the entrances. Alvarado ordered his men to shoot their cannons, crossbows and harquebuses into the gathering crowd. The Aztec revolt became more widespread as a result. Alvarado forced Moctezuma to appeal to the crowd outside the Palace and this appeal temporarily calmed them.[14]






http://www.mrdowling.com/711-pizarro.html

Quote:
The Inca did not know of writing, horses, or metal weapons, so what happened next took the empire by surprise. A priest appeared before Atahualpa and the Incas as Pizarro kept his horses and cannon hidden from view. The priest presented Atahualpa with a holy book, telling the ruler that it was the word of God. The Sapa Inca did not understand writing, so he tossed the book on the ground. When the book dropped, Pizarro waved a white scarf to signal the attack to begin.

Spanish soldiers on horseback began to charge as others pulled the cannon from hiding and fired into the crowd. The terrified Incas trampled one another as they attempted to flee. Pizarro grabbed Atahualpa and dragged the Sapa Inca through the crowd as a hostage.
BillRM
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 18 Oct, 2015 07:05 pm
@Setanta,
I am going to be interested in your reply to your claims of there being no cannons.

The Spanish of that time period love their cannons almost as must as their horses so your statement was somewhat strange to me, but I gave you credit as you seems so sure of yourself.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 01:24 am
Yes, there were cannon. Where was that grapeshot you were bullshitting us about, Bill? Your "knowledge" of history is like like a mud puddle. Possibly wide, certainly murky and without a doubt, shallow. We were talking about first contact, Bubba.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 01:26 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
Quote:
The only advantage the Europeans enjoyed was social organization.


?????

Cannons with grape shots and over all military tactics and organizations was one hell of an advantage and must later on Gatling guns and Maxmin guns used in dealing with the natives.


Here was your claim. Where was the grape shot, Bill? Perhaps you can explain what "must later on" is supposed to mean.
Setanta
 
  4  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 04:05 am
My point was that European technology was not the advantage it has always been cracked up to be, and especially i was referring to Diamond's book. Those who have read it will know that he was replying to a query by a native of Papua-New Guinea as to how the Europeans had prevailed. Diamond then came up with this "guns, germs and steel" BS. Natives were not always cowed by European technology, and wise leaders did not rely upon it. Cortés used thousands and thousands of Indian allies. Pizarro seized Atahualpa and effectively decapitated his enemies command structure. The Spanish chose Manco as a puppet ruler in place of Atahualpa, but Manco soon grew discontented, and four years later, escaped and lead an insurrection which lasted a decade. By then, of course, Spaniards were flooding into Peru, and that is the advantage the Europeans always enjoyed--social organization which meant that there were always more soldiers and settlers coming in after the initial invasion.

But even in the days of later, vastly superior technology, it was not a sure thing that European armies would win. Most of us are probably familiar with the battle of Rorke's Drift, the subject of the motion picture Zulu. Indeed, a large fistful of Victoria Crosses were handed out to the survivors of that battle. But that was largely public relations, to attempt to bury the shame of the battle of Isadlwana. More than 1300 British, other European and native troops were slaughtered by Zulus carrying iron assegais (short handled, long-bladed spears). The British had breech-loading Martini-Henry rifles, two three inch artillery pieces and a rocket battery. Although about a thousand Zulus were shot down, they overwhelmed the British. They had kept their forces concentrated while the British were spread out in several columns. They had, as much as possible, kept the main body of their army hidden, and rushed to the attack as soon as they were detected, achieving tactical surprise. It was over so quickly that the technological advantages possessed by the British were of no avail. After all, what the Zulu accomplished is what any competent European commander would hope to accomplish.

At the battle of Adwa in Abyssinia in 1896, an army of people whom we would call Ethiopians overwhelmed a poorly handled Italian army, evne though they were not as well-equipped, many of their firearms and artillery being outmoded. They were, however, willing to take the casualties, and although they had fewer killed, they had far, far more wounded. Many of the Italians who were killed might have survived in a battle in which their army had not been driven off.

There's the example of Elphinstone's retreat from Kabul in 1842, and more recently, the example of the Tiger tanks used by the Nazis. The Germans built a superior tank--and built fewer than 2000 of them. The Sherman tank, although not as good, overwhelmed them--the Americans built almost 50,000 of them. Technological superiority doesn't mean much is you can't exploit it, or if your enemy is competent and unafraid.
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 04:24 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
There was cannons around at that point in time if not at the moment of first contact.


But apparently no English teachers .........
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 04:27 am
@ehBeth,
Diamond's "Collapse" is another one.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 04:29 am
@farmerman,
Just ordered 1493. Didn't even know about it, I still think 1491 was good book.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 04:31 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
so you meant "MUCH LATER" instead of" must later...". my bad.


No problems, you just aren't fluent in poor English or trailer talk.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  4  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 04:35 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
Only in your own mind and it would seems and of course my fan club


It would seems like you failed English as well as history, TonyRM!
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  4  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 05:00 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
You both are doing better at not drunk posting and/or cats running over the keyboard posting.


What is this, National Broken English Day?
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 06:26 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
Where was the grape shot


What the hell are you talking about as using a cannons with grape shots an similar loads had been around as long as cannons had been around.

Quote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cannon_projectiles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A cannon is any large tubular firearm designed to fire a heavy projectile over a long distance. They were first used in Europe and China, and were the archetypical form of artillery. Round shot and grapeshot were the early projectiles used in cannon.

BillRM
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 06:39 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
Technological superiority doesn't mean much is you can't exploit it, or if your enemy is competent and unafraid.


Sure but the results in most cases is a very very large pile of bodies of your unafraid troops/natives in front of the cannons and later the machine guns.

You need one hell of a large number advantageous to even hope to "win" and few tribes could survive more then one such victory.
Setanta
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 06:45 am
@BillRM,
Translation: You have no evidence that the Spanish in the so-called New World had and used grapeshot in the early- to mid-16th century. I thought not.
Setanta
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 06:53 am
@BillRM,
The Abyssinians survived Adwa and it was 40 more years before the Italians attempted to invade again. Repeated attempts by the Spanish to overrun the Yucatan lead to more than 150 years of near continuous slaughter, and some regions were never entered by Spanish troops. The Mapuche of Chile have never entirely surrendered to the Spanish-speakers--to this day, there are those among them who fight those whom they consider the invader. Of course, now, the government describes them as terrorists. There are so many other examples, too.

As i said, Bill, your "historical" knowledge is like a mud puddle, a very small mud puddle: neither broad nor deep, and very murky.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 07:17 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
Most of us are probably familiar with the battle of Rorke's Drift, the subject of the motion picture Zulu. Indeed, a large fistful of Victoria Crosses were handed out to the survivors of that battle.


Hell the battle you are referring to was a wonderful example of a small munber of troops beating the hell out of the natives.

Quote:

http://www.britishbattles.com/zulu-war/rorkes-drift.htm

Casualties: Zulu casualties are thought to have been around 500. The garrison of the mission station comprised 8 officers and 131 non-commissioned ranks. Of these 17 were killed and 10 wounded.
Size of the armies: 139 British troops against about 4,500 Zulus.



Hint you are thinking of the wrong battle as the battle that would support your position happen just before this battle.
BillRM
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 07:23 am
@Setanta,
You kidding me that they for some strange reason was using round shots when the situation clearly call for grape shots.

Sure they fired at point blank range into a tight group of natives with round shots sure they did.

Maybe they just fired empty cannons as we have no proof by your logic that they employed any kind of shots.

At least you are no longer trying to claimed that they did not have any cannons.

Why do some people when they was found to be clearly wrong need to fall back on pointless game playing?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  4  
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2015 09:00 am
Internet is often a poor secondary source of information (if you have no idea about the subject). Id always learnt that Cortes had ZERO cannon cause he only had about 15 horses . When I looked at severeal sources on the internet, they estimate Cortes "Cannon" from between ZERO and 20.
I wonder whether they didnt mean the HARQUEBUS carriers. These things were loud, huge (like a two man punt gun) and of poor accuracy.
Perhaps the match-lock Harquebus is the "cannon" reference cause that would be less of a holdup to such a small force.
Most of the damage was inflicted by the Spanish lances and Toledo steel , backed by armor plate.

Just a thought Billy, dont get all pissed off and start stuttering.
 

Related Topics

Columbus Day - Discussion by edgarblythe
A typical American hero - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/13/2021 at 02:58:40