Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Between 3000 to 5000 people died during the Inquisition's 350 years, but debate continues about the extent of and nature of atrocities committed and about the number of victims.
5000/350 = approx. 15 per year.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Not to distract from the terrible deed, but the magnitude is FAR SMALLER than what is generally believed.
I said tens of thousands as an approximate guess. I was in Edinburgh a few years ago and they were estimating thousands in that one town alone. They would dump the remains in the lake. They actually give tours on it - "oh here is the square where we burned them", laugh about it, brag about it as a historical curiousity - that's why I commented on "amusement park". It's all part of history, and human history is not always pretty.
"It has been estimated that tens of thousands of people were executed for witchcraft in Europe and the American colonies over several hundred years. Although it is not possible to ascertain the exact number, modern scholars estimate around 40–50,000."
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,462,489 times
Reputation: 12187
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCityTheBridge
The colonial era was inextricably linked to the rise of the European powers. The two non-European empires, Japan and the Ottomans (well, the Ottomans were kind of European), were engaged in similar practices.
Was colonialism a dark period of human history? Yes. It is marked by atrocities committed in furtherance of its ends. And it is tied up in a period of intensifying warfare that accompanied the scramble for territories and resources.
It seems to be a uniquely American thing to separate out the conquering Europeans did and call it "colonialism" and rebrand every other similar act in history as somehow better. The Ottomans aren't even the first great Muslim empire (too many to name) or empire that was based in modern Turkey. (Hittites were)
Until recently few people even thought on a racial level, instead people were nationalists. How many "fellow Whites" did the English kill in Ireland and Scotland? Genghis Khan killed millions of his "fellow Orientals" Mayans decimated other Native Americans. People didn't think like that. "European colonization" was not a uniform "White" thing but instead the surprisingly widespread success of several Western European countries throughout most of the world.
I think the core problem European descended people today have is that the actions of our ancestors go totally against the values of the Enlightenment that now dominate our societies. Today any nation that militarily invades another nation instantly faces international condemnation and sanctions. I am fine with acknowledging that things done in the past don't match up with are current values and making some amends to minimize the remaining damage. But in general I think we should worry less about what happened 400 years ago and more about what's wrong with now, like the effect of the War on Drugs in Latin American. I can't do anything about Columbus but I can do something about current problems.
It seems to be a uniquely American thing to separate out the conquering Europeans did and call it "colonialism" and rebrand every other similar act in history as somehow better. The Ottomans aren't even the first great Muslim empire (too many to name) or empire that was based in modern Turkey. (Hittites were)
Hardly. We call it the colonial era because virtually the entire world was under the rule of the colonial powers. This era differed from the ancient empires because the colonies were frequently *not* part of the colonial power's "nation," rather they were something separate. And the colonial mission in this era was rationalized in part by a "civilizing" mission, even if access to resources and markets was the underlying motivation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by censusdata
Until recently few people even thought on a racial level, instead people were nationalists. How many "fellow Whites" did the English kill in Ireland and Scotland? Genghis Khan killed millions of his "fellow Orientals" Mayans decimated other Native Americans. People didn't think like that. "European colonization" was not a uniform "White" thing but instead the surprisingly widespread success of several Western European countries throughout most of the world.
Nationalism is a recent invention. But the colonial era involved both racial and nationalist justifications.
Quote:
Originally Posted by censusdata
I think the core problem European descended people today have is that the actions of our ancestors go totally against the values of the Enlightenment that now dominate our societies. Today any nation that militarily invades another nation instantly faces international condemnation and sanctions. I am fine with acknowledging that things done in the past don't match up with are current values and making some amends to minimize the remaining damage. But in general I think we should worry less about what happened 400 years ago and more about what's wrong with now, like the effect of the War on Drugs in Latin American. I can't do anything about Columbus but I can do something about current problems.
That's a naive view. Enlightenment ideas were woven together with the justifications of the colonial period. Invasions do not always result in condemnation today, and Enlightenment ideas typically accommodated invasion (with the notable exceptions of Kant & Marx). The colonial era didn't really end until the 1960s. It was not something that happened 400 years ago. And we live with its legacy today, especially in the Middle East and Africa. For example, colonial diplomacy gave us an Iraq that was an awkward state containing Kurds, Sunnis (with roots in Syria) and Shia (with roots in Persia). Why did it give us that state? Because Britain wanted to expand it's existing colonial holdings with several former Ottoman provinces, including Baghdad, Mosul, and Basra. It was keen on Mosul for its oil. It also wanted access to the Gulf (the province of Basra was important for that). And the province of Baghdad was a powerhouse in food production.
I said tens of thousands as an approximate guess. I was in Edinburgh a few years ago and they were estimating thousands in that one town alone. They would dump the remains in the lake. They actually give tours on it - "oh here is the square where we burned them", laugh about it, brag about it as a historical curiousity - that's why I commented on "amusement park". It's all part of history, and human history is not always pretty.
"It has been estimated that tens of thousands of people were executed for witchcraft in Europe and the American colonies over several hundred years. Although it is not possible to ascertain the exact number, modern scholars estimate around 40–50,000."
FWIW - I am skeptical of "modern scholars." They tend to have an agenda and are not always impartial.
As to hearsay, tales are often exaggerated far beyond the historical facts.
The previous post about the Spanish Inquisition bears out that point. Most assume that thousands were killed each year, when the records show far less.
As to the winner for killing the most, that award goes to Islam.
270+ million over 1400 years of incessant jihad.
Kafir Deaths (cumulative)
• Christians : 60 million
• Buddhists : 10 million
• Hindus : 80 million
• Africans : 120 million
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Total : 270 million
Source : www.politicalislam.com
(Not to forget to mention the millions captured, enslaved and abused.)
Europeans and Christians do self-criticize, whereas it is capital offense to question Islam, the Koran or the Prophet.
What former colony would be a better place if it had not been a colony? Is there one that had an industrial revolution? Is there one that could realistically be called a nation with representative government?
Europeans are not all at fault for the problems of the world. The majority of problems track back to France and Britain. Neither feel bad for the past as both continue to do what they did behind closed doors. What they say and what they do are not the same.
Europeans have primarily been the ones to venture out to new lands, colonize and usually as a result displace and even nearly wipe out the peoples that have been there. Should Europeans, or white people in general feel regret and shame for their past?
We are discussing history here, not today's world. There is no way to change history and except for recent history, all the people are dead!
As far as America's colonization I strongly reading this book:"1491: New Revelations of the Americas" by Charles C. Mann, (library call #970.1 M281) which discusses what the New World (the Americas) was like just before Europeans began their colonization.
I'm content to try to do my best to make a good world by the actions of my own life. I'm not willing to accept blame for my ancestors.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
