| Re .0:
I don't have the article but I remember a Paul Harvey "And Now You
Know The Rest Of The Story" piece that mentioned Columbus's Jewish
roots.
Also, as was mentioned in an earlier BAGELS note, there are some
Spanish-Americans in the Southwest United States who claim descendancy
from Marranos who fled Spain in 1492 or thereabouts (there was a
NPR piece on them a couple of years ago).
Mark
|
| Some time ago I remember trying to find out about Columbus'/Columbo
/Colon's background and came to the conclusion that he may or may not
have been Jewish/Catholic/Spanish/Italian/Portuguese/French.
Unfortunately, there does not seem to be very much solid biographical
data on him. Some of the documents, on close examination, seem to be
more wishful thinking than fact, and depending on which ones are
selected, you can make a case for any of these categories.
About the only thing that seems reasonably certain is that his
departure on the voyage of exploration coincided with the departure of
large numbers of Jews who were being expelled from Spain. Until that
point it was not illegal to be a Jew in Spain, so it was not necessary
for Jews to pretend to convert unless they did it in preparation for
staying in Spain. Those who could not get out after that date did face
the choice of conversion or death.
After the expulsion of 1492, the Inquisition set about to verify that
the new conversos were sincere. Those who were found to be practicing
Judaism in secret (and for this reason were dubbed marranos (swine) by
the inquisitors) were subject to torture, confiscation of property, and
execution.
Then, having practiced on the Jews, Spain went to work on the native
Americans...
|
| Re: .2
I would like to comment on some technicalities concerning the
expulsion of the Jews from Spain, the Inquisition and the
Spanish treatment of Native Americans.
1. Before 1492 it was "legal" for a Jew to stay in Spain. Some
of them were in very important positions within the court
of Fernando and Isabella "the Catholic kings", such as the
Santangel family and many others. During the 14th and 15th
century there were many persecutions of Jews that included the
forced conversions of Jews (Toledo and other cities).
Technically the church rejected forced conversions, however
it was almost imposible for those forced to convert to return
openly to their Jewish faith. BTW, there were also forced
conversions of other "infidels", i.e.: moslems.
Only those that were brought by force, at the point of the spear,
to be baptized, could claim they were forced. If there was a mob
in the quarter and some family could only find refuge in the
church and be baptized, this was not considered "forced conversion".
> Until that
> point it was not illegal to be a Jew in Spain, so it was not necessary
> for Jews to pretend to convert unless they did it in preparation for
> staying in Spain.
There were some cases where in order to progress in the social
position, some families converted out of their "free will" and
free convenience. The Santangel family was one of those that
converted and were so proud of their position and tradition
they did not follow the custom and change their family names
but they kept the Santangel family name after their conversion.
The Santangel family contributed quite a few of the martirs of
the Inquisition.
> After the expulsion of 1492, the Inquisition set about to verify that
> the new conversos were sincere. Those who were found to be practicing
> Judaism in secret (and for this reason were dubbed marranos (swine) by
> the inquisitors) were subject to torture, confiscation of property, and
> execution.
About the word marranos I found two etymologies (sp?): one is
swine, just a derogative word or perhaps related to the fact the
converted Jews despised pork (one of the signs by which the
Inquisition checked their faithfulness to the mosaic creed) or
a more complicated one, of jewish origin, being the origin of the
word marrano - "mar anus" i.e.: 'Mr. Forced One'.
> Then, having practiced on the Jews, Spain went to work on the native
> Americans...
Even I don't have anything to protect the Spanish relation to
the Indians or Native Americans, it should be said that Spain
enslaved the Indians in the most bitter ways and put them in
a second citizenship (kind of), intermixed with them creating
the mestizos in different classes and categories, but did not
try to exterminate them, at least intently.
With Jews it was absolutely different: It was forbidden to be Jewish
under Spanish rule. Being Jewish was equivalent to a death sentence.
Being an "unfaithful converse" was also equivalent to death. If you
"repented" there might have been a change in the way the death
sentence was executed (strangling instead of burning - how merciful!).
Is more evil to exterminate a people on intent or enslave another?
Please, free me of deciding on that. However I feel the evil Spanish
treatment of the Indians was, according to 16th century standards,
more "human" than that of the Jews.
Regards,
Juan-Carlos Kiel
|