How did the Colonization of America Happen? (1492 - 1600)

[@Knowledgia]

You can now support our work on Patreon: www.patreon.com/Knowledgia or by becoming a KZbin Member: kzbin.infojoin

[@fuqupal]

Before Columbus, China was in America. Before China, The Norwegians (Vikings) were in America. Before The Vikings, the Irish were in America (or at least sailed outside of it) Before the Irish, The Roman Empire was in America. And before the Roman Empire, Egypt was in America. And before Egypt... Senegal, Gambia, Guinea and Sierra Leone were in America. As a matter of fact the latter has been there the entire time until the last few hundred years.

[@adaoneves1388]

Im sorry to say but you have to study mutch more before to do this video !!!

[@dgonthehill]

ty love history this one great too

[@kingbullyrock8739]

@@fuqupal Wrong, you need to stop with the pseudohistory.

[@binuses]

Su video es una falta de respeto a la Historia . Su video es una mierda pincha en un palo . Espero q lo retiren y lo hagan apropiadamente.

[@teviottilehurst]

Britain and England aren't interchangeable. Up until 1707, it was England. After unification with Scotland, the kingdom of Great Britain was established. From 1707, it was the British.

[@sergiomorcillo5341]

You forgot that the Spanish conquistadors made alliances with the native tribes to conquer those territories. Also except in the Caribbean islands, slavery en Spanish viceroyaltys was anecdotic.

[@GL-iv4rw]

So basically the age old divide and conquer approach. The English and French copied them in the subsequent Beaver Wars, but they put their own one of a kind unique spin in their version of that strategy.

[@Jean_Jacques148]

The Taino were killed off systematically. Not to mention, this was after Guacanarix welcomed Columbus with gold, silver and food and plots on his territory of Hispaniola. The Spanish empire repaid them by enslaving them and wiping them out systematically. Yes, disease accelerated this process, but the mass executions and grueling forced labor didn’t help this.

[@Seisgea]

@@Jean_Jacques148 In her instructions from the year 1500, Queen Elizabeth made it clear that the indigenous people of the newly discovered lands were her subjects and therefore should not be enslaved. Slavery was a crime, and much worse was genocide, which as you can imagine was not seen very well in the eyes of God. During the conquest there was no systematically organized mass executions, but massacres were recorded. Often soldiers who justified their actions with contradictory words: fear, glory, mistakes, gold. "One thing led to another"

[@willwang6260]

@Seisgea The discussion is about Taino people in Hispaniola, they were systematically enslaved and slaughtered by Spaniards

[@muhammadshehreyarkhan1851]

Same can be said about any other oppressed nations like the Jews or Africans, with a tiny minority of them collaborated with the Nazis or Slave hunters for the extermination or subjugation of their brethren hence coining the term "More German than the German themselves". But that doesn't mean that all Jews or Africans were in league with the Nazis. Same can be said about the indigenous Americans, whose population was reduced from millions to thousands systematically through conquest, mass murder, disease & slavery. You cannot justify this historical atrocity and settler colonialism.

[@MajoraZ]

I do posts + consulting on Mesoamerican history: I agree with other comments that the video should have mentioned how allied native armies enabled Spanish conquests (which were arguably more Mesoamerican then they were Spanish, with local kings calling the shots or manipulating Conquistadors, not just supplying troops), but basically every other comment pointing out oversights also makes notable errors in their own right (EX: that Cortes got allies due to the Aztec being hated/oppressive, which is mostly a misconception, and the truth is way more interesting) , including repeating some of the same problems the video has (calling those allied groups "tribes" instead of city-states/kingdoms). So here's a bunch of corrections & clarifications for both the videos and other commentors. Firstly, even just focusing on the Spanish side of things, this skips over some notable events and people. For example, before Cortes's expedition in 1519 into Mesoamerica, there were expeditions in 1517 and 1518 which did not go as well, beaten badly by armies from Maya states, though they, especially the latter, did give Spanish officials some knowledge of the mainland and that there might be rich, more complex societies there then in Cuba (One Spanish source remarked with amazement that the natives on the mainland "wore clothes"). This also gave Mesoamerican societies some knowledge of the Spanish: news of the Spanish spread through the Aztec spy network at least this early, and there is some evidence that the Aztec were aware of the Spanish even back in the 1510s Next, to loop back to my point about "tribes": This is a term both the video and other comments use in reference to Mesoamerican cultures here, and it's simply wrong. What is generally considered Mesoamerica's first city dates back to 1400BC, or almost 3000 years before Spanish contact. In the same valley that later became the core of the Aztec Empire, but 1000 years prior in the Roman period, Teotihuacan was a major city with a giant ~18 sqkm planned urban grid, 100,000+ denizens (+ more space/people in its suburbs), almost all of whom lived in fancy palaces akin to Roman villas with dozens of rooms, open courtyards, painted frescos and even some toilets. The city could even fill a huge arena with water for rituals ala the Roman colosseum. Tlaxcala, one of Cortes's main allied states, had ~36,000 denizens (around the size of the largest cities of Castilian Spain at the time) in the city proper with more in it's extended kingdom, and was ruled by a formal senate, and the city is described as Cortes as "...so great and marvelous...it's provisions...and...shops...as well arranged in any...in the world...they behave as people of sense and reason...". On that note about Tlaxcala, let's segue into talking more about those allies that Cortes made then here: As I said, the idea that Cortes got those alliances due to the Aztec being oppressive and hated as a result is largely a misconception. The reality is that Mexica (the denizens of Tenochtitlan, the Aztec capital, tho there's nuances with terms and the structure of the "empire" i'm skipping over) were absolutely militaristic conquerors and may not have been beloved, their rule was quite hands off: the lack of draft animals and the difficult terrain meant that most Mesoamerican states opted for indirect, hegemonic style political networks rather then directly governed imperial structures, and the Aztec Empire was not an exception, actually they were arguably more hands off then some other major powers (like the Purepecha, who DID have a direct imperial model) States conquered by the Mexica usually kept their existing kings/senators/etc, laws, customs etc: they just had to pay annual taxes of economic goods (NOT usually people as slaves or sacrifices: the Mexica collected these during conquests, not typically as annual taxes. Sacrificing war captives was also something everybody did, even the Tlaxcalteca), provide military aid, put up a shrine to the patron Mexica deity, and not undermine Mexica political interests, especially with trade and tax collection. Some states even joined the empire voluntarily for better trade access, protection, or to hopefully get political marriages and status Rather then tyranny, it was ironically this loose system that causes Cortes to get allies: Since subject and voluntary vassal states retained their own agency to manage themselves and make decisions, as well as their own political identity, interests, and ambitions, it enabled opportunistic secessions, side switching, backstabbing, and coups (especially forming alliances to do all those things) as a method to gain or retain political power. If you don't lose much by being a subject anyways, then a great strategy is to pledge yourself to some other state, then work together to take out your rivals or capital when/if they're vulnerable or there's political instability, and then you kick back in a position of high status within the new kingdom or empire you helped prop up This is what happened with Cortes, and was simply business as usual in Mesoamerica. And while Cortes did knowingly try to play local powers against one another, he too was being used and manipulated by local kings and officials: the Totonacs of Cempoala complained about heavy Aztec taxes and asked for his help to get rid of a nearby Aztec fort, but that "fort" was really the rival Totonac city of Tzinpantzinco. After the ruse was found out, Cempoala's forces basically ditched the Conquistadors to get attacked in Tlaxcalteca territory, by most accounts it was the Conquistadors who were desperate for the Tlaxcalteca to spare and ally with them, which they narrowly (Other senators had eventually convince Xicotencatl II to allow it) decided to do to use the Spanish against the Mexica (Tlaxcala was NOT an Aztec subject, but an enemy state the Mexica were at war with and trying to conquer: So they specifically did resent Mexica aggression). But even the Tlaxcalteca were trying to gain power and used the Conquistadors to install a puppet government in Cholula (after it had recently switched from a Tlaxcalteca to an Aztec ally) en route to Tenochtitlan The entire reason the Conquistadors even were able to enter Tenochtitlan was this system: Rather then Cortes being seen as a god by Moctezuma II (Cortes himself deconfirms this), it was that Moctezuma refusing entry would be seen as cowardice and vulnerability and might incite secessions or opportunistic alliances. Letting them in would signal that Moctezuma was unafraid and still in control, and also meant Cortes could be watched and couldn't mingle and conspire with rival leaders. Inviting foreign kings and diplomats to marvel at your city's opulence and to intimidate them with sacrifice ceremonies of the soldiers you defeated was also normal part of courting subjects or allies: Cortes and some of his men were even given noblewomen as attempted political marriages, and Cortes may have been kept similar to the way the Mexica had princes of foreign kings around as attendants and servants (as well as a variety of animals and plants and foreign artifacts and art) as an act of dominance and control and to, again, impress upon them Mexica power It's only after the massacre of unarmed nobles during Toxcatl, Moctezuma II's death, the Spanish/Tlaxcalteca victory at Otumba, then the Smallpox outbreak that devastated Tenochtitlan; that Cortes gets sustained alliances with states inside the Aztec Empire: At this point Tenochtitlan was vulnerable and couldn't project authority. In fact, the allies they gained were mostly core states who, to a degree, BENEFITTED from their close political marriages with Mexica royalty and the taxes brought into their valley. Those benefits were now jeopardized and they had less to lose and more to gain by turning on it. Personal ambition was also a factor: Ixtlilxochitl II previously lost a war of succession to rule Texcoco (the second most powerful Aztec city) when the Mexica backed a different heir, and he and his followers joined the Conquistadors and Tlaxcalteca. On the flip side, many states still stayed loyal (the rest of Texcoco's realm sided with the Mexica; Xochimilco initially defended the Mexica, but was defeated and forced to switch sides etc), and the vast majority simply stayed neutral to see who won On that note, the video glosses over those other states and their integration into the Spanish Empire: As I noted, basically every culture in or around the "Aztec Empire" (which itself was more a network of quasi-independent states) were city-states, kingdoms, or empires (such as the Purepecha Empire, the Kingdom of Tututepec, Tlaxcala and Cholula etc) but the map shows none of their territories or labels any beyond the Maya, and shows everything being swallowed up by Spain in a few years. In reality, it would take many decades for all of these to be conquered, or for them to actually recognize Spanish authority (rather then Spain merely claiming to rule them) and started to pay taxes. In some cases areas weren't conquered for centuries: The last Maya kingdoms only fell in 1697! Much of those subsequent conquests were also enabled by alliances ( the kingdom of Tehuantepec allied with the Spanish take out Tututepec, the Iximche did it to beat the Kiche, etc) or relied on subject Mesoamerican armies/supplies, and even in campaigns in other parts of the world: Most of the men in Coronado expedition up into Kansas in the 1540s were soldiers from Central Mexican states, and some Spaniards in that expedition still used Mesoamerican armor and helmets. Some Mesoamerican soldiers even fought in the Philippines I'd recommend people watch DJPeachCobbler's trio of Aztec videos, which I helped with. The videos themselves focus the most on the Spanish political side of things, but does touch on the Mesoamerican ones, and I have comments on each video which delve more into that

[@MajoraZ]

Reserved to add onto later

[@Alduin_el_Compadre]

Your oddisey to post and make the world aware of factual Mesoamerican history and information will never be forgotten by me. You won't get as much likes as The "Aztecs were súper Nice and advanced" crowd or The "Aztecs were worse than nazi" crowd. But please. As long as You have a passion for mesoamerica History. Don't surrender in Your académic pursuit

[@FillupMan]

You might be a genius.

[@FillupMan]

I've subscribed, to you, oh my goodness what unique, well delivered and immaculate information, good delivery, never heard of this allegedly occoured stuff, respect given to the Americans, seeing all humans for what they really are, not brutalizing without just cause some humans reputations over other individuals or etcs publicly and populistic known alleged "personality(ies)". Chad setup 🤫🧏

[@trackgt]

@@MajoraZ There is a growing consensus among scholars that tens of thousands of human sacrifices occurred within Mesoamerican cultures, including those of the Aztecs. Some authors indicate hundred of thousands per year. Furthermore, evidence suggests that cannibalism was a common practice across Mesoamerica, the Caribbean, and parts of Brazil. Downplaying the extent of these practices represents a departure from historical accuracy and may be motivated by a desire to present a romanticized view of pre-Columbian societies.

[@maximusjackassicus3042]

One thing I don't like when people discuss the conquest of the Aztec empire, some historians make it out that a few hundred Spaniards armed with guns that could only fire once a minute conquered an empire of hundreds of thousands of people. Many historians gloss over the fact that the Aztecs were monsters, violent and brutal conquerors in their own right, who held entire tribes as enslaved peoples or as vassals, performed mass human sacrifices. All this led to the Aztecs being HATED by nearly every single tribe in Mexico and those tribes saw the Spaniards as a chance to destroy their oppressors and hundreds of thousands of natives joined the Spaniards in hope of destroying the Aztecs and freeing themselves from Aztec tyranny. Don't get me wrong, those native allies themselves were also destroyed by European diseases so it didn't work out well for them in the end either. Still we shouldn't look at the Aztecs as some peaceful happy people or innocent babes in the woods, the Aztecs were monsters and because of that they were hated by ALL their neighbors.

[@kingbullyrock8739]

The Aztecs liked to throw human body parts down giant stairs

[@MataMoros-x2o]

Their white god Quetzalcoatl told them to make sacrifices until his return which they predicted he would come from the east with his chalky white face as a white people who were the spainards. In a 1-in-52 chance, Cortez arrived in the Aztec year of 1 Re.

[@maximusjackassicus3042]

@MataMoros-x2o so it's the fault of white people that the Aztecs mercilessly sacrificed living men women and children on the altars of their Gods?

[@bunglebutts3163]

so close to being right! But you’re still wrong :( do better

[@Alduin_el_Compadre]

The Aztecs were disliked yes, They were brutal and they comited thousands of sacrifices. But to Say they we're universally hated is a bit of a misnomer. Some absolutely despised them, in particular the Tlaxcalas, but they has been enemies for decades. The Native there was for a simple reason, no one likes the to pay tribute (sacrifices sadly were The norm in the american continent so it wasnt the sacrifice per se What angered them, but The taxation itself). Also it's not like all Natives were happy with the Spanish when they arrived and promised to take over from The "evil evil aztecs". According to the Relación de Michoacán, Tangaxoan II (the King of the Purépechas. The 2nd most powerfull polity in mesoamerica) was found weeping in his chambers by a "service woman" the Night he promised and swore fidelity to spain and Cortés after The fall of Tenochtitlan. Several Native kingdoms and lordships independent from The Aztecs fought thoot and nail against the Spanish during and long after The Aztec fall. In My own state, My own ancestors of the Colima kingdom waged a year long guerrilla war against Spanish, Tlaxcala and Purépecha forces; the Mixtec and Zapotec kingdoms were played against one another, The Maya lands were spains vietman in america (the last maya city fell in the mid 1600s) and lets not get started on the northern Chichimecas, apaches and Comanches. In regards to the "Aztec monsters" well, they were absolutely brutal and barbaric. But not worse than The Germanic and Gaul tribes, the Spartans or The Mongols (and imo the Romans), But we dont get never a "Mongols were monsters" "the Spartans were monsters" Because unlike them, the Aztecs (and The rest of mesoamerica) got 90% of their history and records destroyed and What was rewritten or preserved was done So by their enemies.

[@HSingingTree]

10:57 Cortes's main tool was his leadership. He managed to unite all the rebellious and unhappy natives under Aztec rule against them. His army was primarily composed of the people of the Tlaxcala Republic, along with Totonac and other rebellious native tribes, not Spanishmen. Cannons helped but Cortes couldn't have done it without Tlaxcala (his army was nearly decimated at Tlaxcala, which was already one of the poorer states at the time due to constant warfare with the Aztecs) 12:25 His kidnapping of the Inca emperor is probably the luckiest part of it... 12:32 They did have reply. The Inca had slingshots and Boleadoras (kind of like hand catapults) that when fired would be lit on fire too. Imagine you're a Spanish soldier, your horses failing to work on the Incan stairs, and fire started raining from the sky. Their arrival right at the conclusion of the devastating Incan Civil War and a smallpox epidemic, along with their kidnapping of Atahualpa was what ensured the Incan fall, not just advanced European technology. 13:36 A decade earlier was the De Soto expedition, when Spaniards tried to mimic Cortes and Pizarro, but the various american Paramount Kingdoms like Joara, Cofitachequi, Quigultam and Ocute stood firm unlike the Inca and Aztecs in the face of the "more advanced europeans"

[@the0ne809]

Yeah. The Spanish were less than a thousand people. There was no way they could have beaten the Aztecs with those numbers, even with diseases.

[@user-re6gv5jk2v]

Thank you for the excellent summary, as a direct descendant of Cortez, I appreciate it.

[@hisvin]

He was married to a native (a noble).

[@carm5014]

A lot of people seems to miss that pizarro had incan support too,besides inca was a title so only the nobility were the incas,his support derived from the civil war mentioned,atahualpa killed huascar, and a little after is when pizarro arrives,huascarist were eager to aid pizarro as they saw atahualpa as an usurper and hated him with fervor,when atahualpa was killed the huascarist incas recieved francisco as a hero in Cusco

[@AzureTheWolf-l6u]

This is one reason I don’t like with his videos, he doesn’t provide the full picture and instead makes it seem like the Europeans steamrolled through them without any resistance, and the natives were peaceful loving people who did no harm

[@christiancook5738]

Don’t forget that Hernan Cortes overthrew the Aztecs with just 500 men and some friendly relations with the Aztecs enemies. And also don’t forget the Aztecs would cut people’s hearts out atop pyramids and offer them to their “gods” whilst still alive. And they also offer the flesh of children to Cortes as a delicacy

[@bunglebutts3163]

so much misinformation here

[@McKeeNJackson]

Cortez needed those tribes. Without them he wouldn’t have won anything. Those 500 started out at 1000. They weren’t fairing well enough to succeed so he went to some lame haters to take out the biggest tribe at the time. Had the Aztec not been so bad towards other tribes and they had united against the Spanish, Cortez would have never stood a chance

[@Ciech_mate]

I know it's not you it's in YTs contracts but the amount of ads I am getting is ridiculous. It's worse that tv

[@faenethlorhalien]

Watch the video on a computer with Adblock or watch it on Brave browser on your phone without ads.

[@Someperson217]

Yeah everything's got to many ads these days.

[@TheEbrithil2]

You could try revanced or smarttube

[@mattmacknight3000]

Yeah I gave up long ago and got premium. KZbin is my go to and it was either just stop using it or pay for it. It’s crazy.

[@Dumbledore6969x]

@@mattmacknight3000Paying for premium is crazy. Don’t fund evil. Revanced on android, Firefox + adblock on computer, and smarttube on fire stick. Never see an ad or a sponsored segment again.

[@jussim.konttinen4981]

Juan Sebastián Elcano proved the Earth was a sphere in 1522 via Brazil and the Philippines.

[@Benito-lr8mz]

Its a shame vast foreigners thinking Magellan is the first circunnavigarion of history and no known Magellan died in Phillipines and the rest of travel is realizated for Spanish Juan Sebastián Elcano.in comand of expedition therefore the first person and country in circunnavigated the world is Spanish and Spain 60 years before Drake the 2 in circunnavigated .

[@lost_porkchop]

​@Benito-lr8mz Magellan had already gone east, so going west was just completing the trip

[@bconni2]

@Benito-lr8mz Magellan was the first to circumnavigate the world. first sailing to the East Indies under the command of his Portuguese comrade Afonso de Albuquerque and the conquest of Malacca. then sailing the other way to the Philippines.

[@Napkin24]

Wasn’t it some Greek philosopher or something? I think scientist calculated the circumference of the earth hundreds of years before the 1500s

[@EduardoAMarques]

Thank you for sharing this great piece of content. Well illustrated and driven. Excited to know more about the following 100 years.

[@elsapenaloza6317]

Great vacuum in this video from 1494 to 1499... when in 1497 Cabot landed in Newfounland North America, Columbus in 1498 discover Trinidad, the Orinoco river, Venezuela and Margarita island in mainland of South America....Ojeda and Vespucci sailed the entire Venezuelan coast from Paria to LaVela cape in 1499...and finaly Pinzon discover the Amazone river in 1500

[@Bellephrontos]

England did not have a strong navy in the 16th century.. i can't believe I'm listening to this

[@mcgiver6977]

At least, english navy struggled spanish navy when those last tried to invade in the 1580's decade.

[@Bellephrontos]

@mcgiver6977 you mean "the Spanish navy struggled dealing with the English navy". Which is correct. The Spanish navy was the strongest, but the strongest doesn't always win

[@rickintexas1584]

Fantastic overview. Thanks. My family arrived in 1636 in Port Royal, Acadia (now New Foundland). I’m definitely looking forward to the next chapter.

[@AuntyKsTarot]

Wow you're proud to be a colonizer? that's gross

[@rickintexas1584]

@ LOL. What a stupid comment.

[@davidviloria9824]

@@rickintexas1584 Really stupid

[@davidviloria9824]

@@rickintexas1584 Probably he is a descendant of the conqueror like all the hispanic people or the north american people.

[@dont173]

Nova Scotia not Newfoundland

[@MaxMoreno-Madriñan-m9q]

This account is interesting and, for the most part, provides a good description of events. However, it contains inaccuracies on critical issues. For example, the Spanish did not intentionally bring diseases as a biological weapon. They were unaware that the diseases Europeans had developed a tolerance for would be fatal to the native populations. It was not in the Spanish interest for the natives to die, as they were considered valuable as cheap labor. While Queen Isabella forbade enslaving the natives, employing them at low wages for life was still possible and much cheaper than importing costly African slaves. Purchasing an African slave was significantly more expensive than relying on native labor. Another serious inconsistency in this account is the assertion that Spanish domination of the Aztecs and Incas was solely due to their superior weapons. In reality, the Spanish relied heavily on alliances with native groups who had been subjugated by the Aztecs and Incas. With the help of these native allies, the Spanish forces significantly outnumbered their adversaries, contributing to their eventual success.

[@Titus921]

Is call Santo Domingo which still stand today not "Santa Domingo".

[@beyondborderfilms4352]

The issue here was that in both instances, the spanish took advantage of the political instability of both regions. The aztecs were at their peak but hated by most natives and they sided with the spanish thinking it was going to be an tributary way of rule rather than direct rule and conquest like in eurasia. The inca by contrast had a succesion dispute between two men atahualppa and his older half brother huascar that led to civil war which was coming to its conclusion with atahualppa winning just as the spanish arrived and werent seen as a threat at that moment. The spanish took advantage of this manage to set a trap for him,routing his forces and capture the atahualppa,he did manage to trick the spanish to raid and kill enemy nobles as they went to find gold but eventually the spanish got to him too (most likely told by an enemy noble how much gold he had) and got killed for it. It was really just Great timing more than anything else.

[@RonaldGrant-l7n]

This is what would also eventually lead to the colonization of Africa and the Industrial Revolution

[@Trancymind]

Have you ever heard of the Arab slave trade??? 600's- 1900's. Arab slave trade was the worst of all in Africa.

[@RonaldGrant-l7n]

@ I have, they had so many slaves

[@Trancymind]

@@RonaldGrant-l7n In south western Sahara, slavery is still legal by the locals as of 2024.

[@Trancymind]

@@RonaldGrant-l7n My comment got deleted it. Slavery is still legal in Africa.

[@Trancymind]

@@RonaldGrant-l7n My comment got deleted it even though it is 100% true.

[@RMMHSATejaswiRoy]

Spanish empire had conquered The Bahamas from 1492 to 1493 , cuba , santo domingo, Mexico, u.s. states of florida , south and north carolina, Arizona , Texas and new mexico , California, western territories of Canada and the Southern coast of Alaska in north America, also conquering the entire isthmus of panama , and also conquering columbia, Peru , Argentina, Venezuela in south America, becoming the only European colonial empire who controlled and ruled the largest amount of territories of North America and south america from 1492 to the year 1821 when their power in North America and south america declined till their last hold on cuba which the United States conquered by winning the Spanish american war in 1898 , ending completely the Spanish rule in North America and south america, collectively called the americas 🌎.

[@Benito-lr8mz]

❤🇪🇦

[@pfvkktmnhyTR9237]

183 later, enter the UNITED STATES. Treaty of Paris---3 September 1783 Article 1st: "His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States; that he treats with them as such, and for himself his Heirs & Successors, relinquishes all claims to the Government, Propriety, and Territorial Rights of the same and every Part thereof." Pre-1783: France (Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Mississippi River Valley, the Ohio Country). Spain (Florida, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California).

[@Turmanya]

Hi, I need a blank version of this map, where can I find it?

[@justahomosapiens1861]

Guess the Castilians (incorrectly referred to as the Spanish) must have had superpowers: there a total of 600 that landed with Cortes, in an unknown territory, subject to new diseases such as malaria (guess they must have had a shot against it before embarking) and facing the might of the mexicas with hundreds of thousands of warriors and intimately familiar with the lay of the land. This video simply revolves around non factual historical information which seems to have permeated through history books courtesy of the black legend extended by the Anglo-Saxon world. What did happen, and this is reinforced even by Mexican Army historians, is that Cortes soon realized the Aztecs were actually newcomers which had been subjugating, enslaving and massacring the original inhabitants of what's now Central Mexico which had generated tons of hatred towards them (mexicas). He basically offered them to join and free themselves from the Aztecs which they did. After that a massive project that involved intermixing European and local bloodlines started which brought about Mexican independence and nowadays Mexico. This was not replicated by any other European power in any subsequent conquest be it on the American continent or any other continent for that matter.

[@D0N-Kaiser]

The whole notion of “aztecs being brutal rulers”is nothing short of a scape-goat or excuse used by the euro hypocrites to do the barbaric and horrible things they’ve done throught history. the alliances with natives was from scheming local leaders that wanted power or the tlaxcalans that weren't aztec

[@faenethlorhalien]

That's a good summary

[@fernathebest414]

Malaria is an African disease. There weren’t many deadly diseases in tropical America before the introduction of Africans.

[@alt1f4]

spain was already unified

[@tubumafu232]

Portugal did the same

[@TomsOnUK]

Another great and historically informative video thank you very much

[@aruggles]

I think you missed Hernan's allies when fighting the Aztec, I think there is has been pretty good evidence that they were a bigger factor than the weapons

[@TarzanWannaBe7]

Why did they wait?

[@aruggles]

@@TarzanWannaBe7 Cortez got various tribes/groups to join with him, they were not allied before and each group was too weak to take on the Aztecs by themselves.

[@TarzanWannaBe7]

@ Yup. Seems A ‘police state’ is generally unstable and susceptible to an organized uprising.

[@starmarinrtur1493]

Still daunting to think an entire continent worth of culture an history is gone from an entire continent

[@youuglymess]

Still irrelevant,most latinos are mixed conquistadors and indeginous with African ancestry.People like to act as if natives were almost completly wiped out, that's completly wrong however,most latinos still have significant native ancestry

[@jansoltes971]

Are you sure? First, some Native cultures survived, some were created by blending the Native and European traditions. And second, I´m not so sure this is a shame if the Aztec culture, or at least some of its traditions, went extinct. Many tribes sighed out with relief when the Aztecs were conquered. And by the way, do you realize there are languages going extinct even in Europe, or Asia by no fault of European colonization? It´s a pity, but many times it´s the speakers of the language themselves who perceive it as a burden.

[@guleiro]

Not all was lost. There is still a lot preserved from those original cultures and peoples.

[@hemziraşmuyam]

​@@jansoltes971the thing is we don't know how much is gone if it wasn't recorded in the first place

[@woodykusaki9970]

I'm Filipino and the Spaniards and later, the Americans destroyed our identity.

[@johnka5407]

20:16 isn’t it a basic characteristic of a religion to believe it is the only right belief?

[@alexdietz7362]

Omnist belief means to believe many other religions have truth to them. although it is common for such people to believe they have a more accurate representation of the divine. There are omnist agnostics, but technically they're a type of atheist as they do not belong to a religion

[@misterkittyandfriends1441]

It is the characteristic of knowing *anything* to know that the things that contradict that thing must be wrong. This is known as the law of non-contradiction.

[@HSingingTree]

@@johnka5407 Abrahamic faiths nowadays and therefore the perception of religion are more inflexible than the ones in the past, hindu-buddhism was a thing in southeast asia, mixing hindu and buddhist elements while having both be compatible. Different Buddhist 'denominations' still coexisted because they weren't mutually exclusive. Romans incorporated different gods from different cultures and those different cultures incorporated different gods too.

[@thegaminganimationstudio7976]

For the Abrahamic Religions yes. For some of the Dharmic Religions and many of the Pagan and Animist Religions then no.

[@ThinkTwice2222]

No, it's not about the religion but about the human desire to want to save a fellow human from eternal suffering. The deepest form of altruism

[@rockyhockey16]

Inaccurate title. Should be "How Europe Civilized America"

[@Bellephrontos]

The conquest of Mexico is very misrepresented. 1. The Aztec empire IS Mexico. The Mayans are not a part of "Mexico". 2. The most important factor was Cortez's diplomatic genius. He allied with all of Mexico's enemies. 3. The sicknesses didn't play a role at all during the conquest. It was something that became obvious only in the decades after the conquest

[@Tusiriakest]

“In 1500 this was unknown by the Portuguese”… sure… thats why the Portuguese king refused two previous proposals of Spain to set the line that far west.

[@A5T01F]

Just few clarifications: 1. There's no such thing as "the americas" but America. America is a continent, not a country. 2. The Spanish didn't took over their share of America just because they had better technology, they formed alliances with numerous indigenous populations who were fed up of aztecs and incas. 3. It wasn't the Pope the only one who forbid to enslave the natives, the Spanish Kings did it too. Natives in the Spanish America were considered Spanish as well.

[@TheSuperVideoRey1]

Exactly.

[@Napkin24]

No there are 2 Americas North and South America unless you believe asia, Europe, and Africa are all one continent.

[@JordyJ.]

​@@Napkin24That doesn't change anything, it's North AMERICA and South AMERICA and both are AMERICA

[@SkyBlue-qn8me]

Will there be a part 2 to this? (1600 -1800)

[@quimera7012]

where do you mention that the spanish conquest was made thanks for the alliance with the natives? where do you mention that the spanish territories werent colonies but vicerroyalties with castillian laws? where do you mention that the spanish made laws to protect the indiands such as "leyes de burgos" and "leyes nuevas"? where do you tell us about the spanish development into cities, churches, hospitals and more? because you only told us the portuguese example of one city but in the spanish empire appeared in all their cities disguisting video... the title should be "how the conquest of the americas DIDNT Trully was?

[@BlackSunWithin]

Well unfortunately for you they didn’t include any of that information, so just move on bro . There’s a number of other videos that contain that information

[@quimera7012]

@@BlackSunWithin the problem is that if one account with nearly 2M followers spread such missinformation then he is doing bad, later the people would make bad ideas about what trully happened and they will make opinion based on half-false information so no, my critic stay here thanks

[@BlackSunWithin]

@@quimera7012 well I don’t necessarily think it’s such misinformation, it’s more of a lack of information. Your comment was asking the question “where do you mention..”, and now you’re saying it’s misinformation. I honestly don’t fully understand your argument . Am I missing something ?

[@alexwall7204]

Why don't you share some videos or resources you approve of for others to learn more from?

[@quimera7012]

@@BlackSunWithin a lack of information can be missinformation, the point i want to share is that he told the conquest of america for those 4 nations as something similar when in fact, at least for the spanish part, was way more complex and different. for example, when he speak about the Cortés conquest of Technotlitcan he mention the armament superiority and smallpox, when in fact the technology advantage wasnt trully a thing but the 50.000 txalcaltecas alied who know the land and supported the cortés expedition. or when he talk about european conquest and slavery he told the spanish case of war slavery (who is correct) but dont mention that the vast mayority were protected by laws as spanish subjetcs, meaning that if someone who dont know about this topic watch this video, he may generate a bad opinion due to this lack of information

[@joeshar.]

Treaty of Tordesillas line was covering slightly little land for Portuga. After Cabral's discovery of Brazil and expading the colonized land, Spain has accepted to shift the line to the west (as shown in the video). In return, Spain got Phillipines in Treaty of Zaragoza.

[@Doyouknowgeography]

**Did you know?** The geography map of America spans incredible diversity! From the towering Rocky Mountains in the west to the vast Great Plains in the center and the Appalachian Mountains in the east, the U.S. landscape is a geographic marvel. It also includes diverse climates, from the arctic tundra of Alaska to the tropical beaches of Hawaii. 🌎

[@Precious-Blood-of-JesusChrist]

What Happened to John Cabot who discovered Newfoundland and Nova Scotia in 1497 ???

[@WhereNextAdventures]

When you consider the timeframe of the whole of human history, its incredible how much happened in this period which influenced the last few hundreds of years. Thanks for this informative video! 👍

[@donribdazz9384]

I'm not anti-european, but why would it be called discovery when people already lived there. Isn't that inhumane.

[@salazarway]

What a question... For example, Isaac Newton discovered gravity, right? But it was there already... I mean literally always. He, Isaac, gave the knowledge of it (made people aware of it) to the hole World and that's a discovery. Simple as that and I could give you millions of examples.

[@salazarway]

In fact, we should be thankful for these discoveries at that time. Otherwise the gap between technology would mean even more, and I mean tremendous, bloodbath of human beings.

[@Almagesto25]

Great edition but... the info you share is over 70 years outdated, especially concerning Brazil. Also, there is no "colony" neither "colonization" in the legislation of the Iberian kingdoms, those settled territories were fully state members of the respective crowns, centuries before Britain immitated our system with their British Commonwealth. The Torre do Tombo national archive has primary documents (I have copies) showing that Brazil was fully known far before 1500 CE. In the video Cabral reaches Bahia at Salvador but he actually reached Porto Seguro which is far southwards -- indeed the Tordesillas meridian was set in 1494 because both Castilla and Portugal knew those lands while the rest of Europe was diligently kept into deep ignorance about them (according to old papers from the 50's by Portuguese historian Jaime Cortesão and Brazilian historian Tito Lívio Ferreira). What you say about the economics is also incorrect (by 7:25), the Portuguese never "lost interest because the red wood was the only asset", they were actually busy on integrating the Indian Ocean into the Portuguese trade net and had many troubles with the Ottomans there, no money left to invest in Brazil (in fact, riches were mostly offered by the Indian Ocean market while Brazil was administrated by a military religious order, the Order of Christ whose symbol stamps the caravels sails). Thus Brazil was never intended for "exploitation" like what the Brit encyclopedia tells, because it was not controled by the king, Brazil was a missionary province up to 1530 controled by religious knights. Well... it's pointless to insist because the Brit encyclopedia simply dominates the narrative over history they don't really understand and actually despite, plus the fact that there are simply NONE English studies on what I just said (again, simply because the Anglosphere despites us).

[@Almagesto25]

Now, concerning the Spanish conquests... damn... I'm really disappointed because I admire your channel but it seems you just copy-past bullshit from others. And this time you have no excuses because there is a lot of English material explaining how the Spanish conquest REALLY happened. What you have done was just copy-past what Dark Legend "historians" tell. I hope in future videos this may be arranged -- instead of just reproducing the Dark Legend that "low historians" tell you can consult directly in the Archivo General de Indias (Spain www.cultura.gob.es/cultura/areas/archivos/mc/archivos/agi/portada.html ), the Arquivo Nacional da Torre do Tombo (Portugal digitarq.arquivos.pt ) and the Itamaraty Library (Brazil atom.itamaraty.gov.br/ )

[@Almagesto25]

though my words may seem rude I'm actually cheering for you because your work is an inspiration for me!

[@Erichev]

Isn't all of this taught in Portuguese speaking nations? Or more specifically, Brazil and Portugal?

[@Almagesto25]

@@Erichev, in most Hispanic countries, yes, this matter is further debated and the Dark Legend is being corned. Unfortunatelly in the Portuguese speaking countries (due to their early ideological ties with Britain and France) the liberal, conservative and marxist narratives rule absolute in those national academies, thus the Dark Legend here is still considered "official" -- despite the vast documentation debunking it.

[@Erichev]

@@Almagesto25 Why do you call it the "Dark Legend"?

[@tony5ify249]

Queen Isabel declared the natives as subjects of the crown and prohibited their enslavement. Spanish colonist intermix with the natives while England just massacrer them, it's not the same. And a lot of aztec vassal rebelled and joined the spanish because their religion of mass sacrifice was objectibly horrible and doesnt need to be preserved.

[@danieladkins5242]

Seems like the Catholics converted and intermarried the natives, while the Protestants preferred pushing them out and killing them. Look at French Canada and Mexico

[@HistoryBeyondBordersTV]

There is considerable debate and ongoing research regarding Columbus's true origins, with questions about whether he was truly from Genoa or possibly from another location. Some evidence suggests he might have been born in Spain, and there is even speculation that he may have had Jewish ancestry, which, as you can imagine, would have posed significant challenges during his era.

[@gmo9172]

awesome video. Hope a sequel is coming soon

[@pl6935]

The fact that you can claim something that isn’t yours just makes you a thief

[@elsapenaloza6317]

Another great vacuum is the rare german colonization of Venezuela by the Welser of Augsburg since 1528 to 1548

[@faenethlorhalien]

There is actually a lot of controversy and actual ongoing research to find out if Columbus was from Genoa or somewhere else. There are strong hints that he was from somewhere in Spain, and even the possibility that he was born Jewish, which, well, don't need to tell you how it could have been a problem in his time.

[@Benito-lr8mz]

Its true is polemical this origin ; Colombus never write postcards for Italians in Italian or Italian languages only in Spanish is a historical fact

[@gustavodiniz6156]

¡ Judío no ! ¡ No hay judíos en España !

[@Tusiriakest]

Unfortunately they didn’t speak about the Portuguese attempts to settle Canada and how, still today, there is a land called Labrador due to a Portuguese explorer, and so many cod recipes in Portuguese speaking countries due to cod being fished in those waters.

[@gustavodiniz6156]

Joao Corte Real, descubridor de Canadá. Cristovao Mendonca, descubridor de Australia.

[@Ragnarok691]

The Vikings got there 300 years before. I'll just leave this here.

[@mrhumble2937]

And did nothing with it.

[@XavierBasurto777]

vikings were native american cousin to the red race, born with red hair, they were completely absorbed by the yellow hair which is why europeans only sometimes are born with red hair

[@tukek88]

@@XavierBasurto777 no

[@TarzanWannaBe7]

Yeah, they pooped then sailed back home.

[@tukek88]

@@TarzanWannaBe7 po-ped on the beach like real indians?

[@alanparker9608]

Britain had the most colonies in world history by around 120 colonies followed by France with 80 colonies, Portugal 53 and Spain 44

[@sendthis9480]

In 1920 British Empire was at its peak, and ruled over appx 23% of the world. In 700 the Umayyad Caliphate was when the Islamic Empire was at its peak, and it ruled over appx 29% of the world. The British didn’t come up with colonization all on their own. They learned it.

[@Green-vf2ty]

From my knowledge, the umayyad caliphate owns only the part of north africa arabia and persia meanwhile britain owns the whole indian subcontinent ALL of australia and most of africa so how the hell did the umayyad, owns more than the british? ​@@sendthis9480

[@bconni2]

true. but what most people don't know, is the Portuguese empire was the first global maritime war machine in world history. long before the British and all the other Europeans finally sailed out of Europe, the Portuguese were already fighting wars across all of planet earth . quite remarkable, actually

[@alexguillen7986]

Spain never had colonies, only ViceRoyalties

[@tukek88]

Britian is the descandants of Joseph/ephraim

[@rvanleersum]

Why was the Viking presence in Greenland and Newfoundland not "significant"?

[@alt1f4]

because they never estabilished permanent colonies, or the colonies were so insignificant they just disapeared later on

[@arnulfo267]

Because their settlements didn't last and they were forgotten and it wasn't until the 20th century that we found out the Vikings had been in the Americans. That's why they insignificant.

[@jussim.konttinen4981]

​@@alt1f4Iceland was also occupied by Denmark until 1944.

[@misterkittyandfriends1441]

If they were significant then people wouldn't need to hunt through artifacts and do ground x-rays to know about it. Being significant means "noticeable" or "having a big effect". You're talking about an event so significant the people who did it basically forgot about it.

[@GBOAC]

Your misunderstanding of the definition of the term “significant” is significant

[@lerneanlion]

Will this one get a sequel of sort that is known as the Beavers War? No, I mean it. The tribes of Native Americans and Native Canadians actually fought against each other because of their alliances with Britain and France and to secure hunting grounds to hunt beavers because both European powers that they allied with desired goods made from beavers.

[@jtom2958]

Something that isn’t often mentioned is Spain’s failed expansion further into North America, they had multiple missions around the southeast and southwest. Georgia, which was inhabited by the Guale was one attempt where Spain did attempt to colonize the land. In the 1590 however the natives revolted and eventually drove the Spanish out. This uprising was so deadly that it depopulated certain regions so badly that by the time the English arrived over a century later the coast of what became Georgia was virtually uninhabited. This period also saw failed attempts in places like Alabama and South Carolina and one settlement in SC was even the capital of Spanish Florida… but they all failed for various reasons like hurricanes, disease, and uprising. Just gotta love that Spain could conquer the jungle but not the South lol

[@Benito-lr8mz]

In the 60% of U.S ruled Spain but is few populated in U.S for the enormous size of Spanish Empíre

[@jtom2958]

@ the southeast (excluding Florida) was never held by Spain for more than a few decades and by the time the English arrived the Spanish were long gone. Also roughly half of that 60% was Louisiana which Spain never conquered but took from France and again only held it for a few decades before giving it back to France who then sold it to the U.S. and this region has little lasting Spanish influence while many cities retain some French elements most notably New Orleans. The land that was eventually part of Mexico had very little Spanish presence outside of Texas, California, and New Mexico. Successful colonization means that region will have lasting influence from the colonizer, this certainly applies to Florida, and certain parts of the South West. For the rest, Spain simply claimed the land but never exerted great influence over it… if they ever even visited it. Spain’s colonization in Georgia, Alabama, and South Carolina completely failed as natives never converted, no settlements were successful, and no Spanish names for the region are in use today. Georgia is not called Guale but has an English name whereas Florida who was successfully colonized maintains a Spanish name.

[@WanderingPassports]

@@jtom2958the French quarter in New Orleans burned down and was rebuilt by the Spanish, still called the French quarter but a lot of Spanish/Mediterranean colonial period architecture.

[@jtom2958]

@ yes but still the city is much more French influenced. Its name is French, its culture is way more French influenced, Louisiana French is way more widely spoken than Louisiana Spanish. And mind you the Louisiana territory was way than just the state. Sure you do have cities founded by Spain such as new Madrid but they were settled by American immigrants into the territory who were Protestant English speakers. You also have cities like St Louis that was French and settled by the French and Missouri French was a dialect that used to be spoken and still has a few speakers. I’m not saying that Spain wasn’t here. However they completely failed to have lasting influence in the south east and had minimal in Louisiana. To say they controlled 60% of the US is a vast oversimplification of reality as they never actually enforced any control over most of that regions that they claimed. On the map it was Spain on the ground is wasn’t.

[@LJ.613]

There was at least one European colony in Canada 450 years before Columbus was born, with quite a bit of evidence that others existed. Santo Domingo is much, much, much later than L'Anse aux Meadows. It's founding is as close to today as it was to when the first known European settlement in the Americas was founded.

[@MTTT1234]

At 13:20 You said 1841, yet wrote 1541 correctly. Slight mistake of the tongue there.

[@WhoefWhoef]

The Dutch???

[@Someperson217]

He should make a part 2

[@miliba]

Didnt exist yet

[@GBOAC]

They didn’t settle until 1615

[@salander1631]

about french colonization in America: France had some presence in Brazil, in the 16th century they created a colony in Rio de Janeiro called "França Antártica". Because of this, Portugal send governor Mem de Sá to Brazil, wich send his nephew Estácio de Sá to Rio de Janeiro, founding the city, expelling the french and dying in battle. The french pressure was very important to Portugal start the colonization of Brazil, we learn this in our schools (im brazilian and majoring in History at college)

[@salander1631]

and in the 17th century they created a colony in Maranhão, São Luis (Saint Louis). They were expelled by Portugal, but the city of São Luis its today the capital of Maranhão

[@gamediverbr]

To add: there were two relatively large attempts by the French to establish themselves in the region that, according to the Treaty of Tordesillas, belonged to the Portuguese: Antartic France (in the region of Rio de Janeiro) and Equinoctial France (current city of São Luíz do Maranhão, this was shortly after the chronological cut of the video). Great video!

[@bconni2]

true. what's also very interesting, is at one point in colonial history down in South America the Portuguese empire fought the biggest wars in the Western hemisphere against the French, Dutch, British & Spanish.

[@gustavodiniz6156]

@@bconni2 ¡ Con los británicos no ! Portuguéses y británicos eran y son aliados desde 1380.

[@Dante-wp8mi]

It's unbelievable how rapid this conquest went in the first half of the 16th century. 🙂

[@alanparker9608]

90% of the world's countries have suffered a British invasion at some point in their history, with only 22 spared. France is the nearest rival to Britain's record with 80% of the world’s countries invaded by France with only 43 spared

[@teviottilehurst]

And 65 countries celebrate their independence from the UK.

[@darthparallax5207]

And the UK mostly made their colonies better. 100% of the world has been invaded by sky water. That's generally been considered to be a good thing.

[@darthparallax5207]

In America we celebrate our love of explosions but it is not freedom we are actually celebrating but the inheritance of the British Empire. We celebrate being an Empire and realized we were wrong to knock it before we tried it.

[@somethingunscripted]

And forced the world to stop slavery something that doesn't match the racist CRT policy

[@Hiwind994]

​@@darthparallax5207so now we just rank who has the best colonizer?

[@alanparker9608]

The British and French colonial empires had enormous impact on world history, over 50% of the world's borders today, were drawn as a result of British and French imperialism crazyyyy

[@wtfa2910]

I wonder how many lines humans are going to draw when they conquer the universe there's enough galaxies out there for everyone

[@gimpytheimp]

@@wtfa2910 Not really. While there's billions of stars and even more planets in the galaxy only a small portion will be good for humans to live in. Out of the thousands or more we've seen so far, not one planet has been shown to be supportive of life. So a supportive world in a solar system that's supportive will be like finding a diamond in a sea of zircon and everyone will jump on the chance to colonize it.

[@darthparallax5207]

Bernard's Star and Alpha Centauri likely don't have habitable planets. Tau Ceti and Sirius maybe have asteroids but they won't be as worth mining as the Oort Cloud. Olympus Mons on Mars is a good place to redo the Cavendish experiment on the gravitational constant and get a better idea of the density and mass of the Earth. (We may be as much as 1 Ceres asteroid larger or smaller than we think we are). Europa, Callisto, Ganymede and Io have resources and exploration worth sending people out there and we can feasibly get there without generation ships. I think the European Union has a right to colonize Europa but they'll be competing with US and Chinese capabilities and interests. I expect that human navigation and colonization will take another 100 years from the Dragonfly mission to Titan to determine how to establish a permanent base on Mars that is functionally like the ISS: for temporary occupation by scientific researchers but not for new residential neighborhoods. In that century though shuttles between the Moon and Mars will go, and we might develop fusion engine craft that can transport people round trip (including mission on the surface of Mars) in under 10 years. Transiting from Mars to a body further away than Earth would mean Ceres or Vesta, and from there maybe to the Moons of Jupiter. It's not likely to be able to set up refueling on Ceres or Vesta in just 100 years. It's unlikely but impossible propulsion will skip the asteroid belt and get to the moons of Jupiter and Saturn in 100 years. Science research bases only. The Moon will likely have affluent people who live on it in 100 years. In 200 years we may be shipping water to and from Earth and Mars. But that is 200 years away at least.

[@wtfa2910]

@gimpytheimp every sun in the universe is valuable yet uninhabitable if humans fight over dirt they'll fight over a sun as well

[@sendthis9480]

@@gimpytheimp Look dude… You’re born with the star you’re born with. You can better yourself and make a change in your life…but you’ll need to pull up your space-boot straps and get to work!

[@trackgt]

Several relevant facts are omitted from the video. This omission appears deliberate, aiming to tarnish Spain's role in the Americas while overlooking England's, who were the true perpetrators of genocide on the continent. Firstly, the Spanish who arrived in the Americas did not simply "conquer" native populations; they formed alliances with native groups who were enslaved or even consumed by stronger native powers such as the Aztecs and the Taíno. Many historians downplay the fact that numerous native groups practiced cannibalism and anthropophagy (regularly consuming human flesh). It is also crucial to emphasize that the "conquest" was comprised of over 90% native individuals; therefore, Spain's arrival in the Americas was more akin to a liberation from cannibalistic dictatorships than a series of attacks. It is inconceivable that a campaign consisting of only a few hundred or a few thousand Spaniards could control millions of native people. In the time it took to reload and fire a Spanish firearm, the Spanish could be subjected to hundreds of arrows or attacks. Alliances with oppressed tribes (which led to intermarriage between natives and Europeans) were key to their success. In fact, the first Spanish universities in the Americas offered courses in native languages to facilitate communication and learning. Furthermore, the Spanish Crown laid the foundation for international law by recognizing native people as human beings. Queen Isabella of Castile herself stipulated in her will that the lives and property of native people should be respected, a principle formalized in the "Laws of Burgos," which also included advanced provisions such as the prohibition of child labor. Institutions like the Inquisition were established to monitor Spaniards who committed abuses against native people. Additionally, the importation of African slaves was a residual (and illegal) activity in Spanish America compared to the massive trafficking conducted by the Portuguese, French, and especially the English. It is noteworthy that while France espoused liberty, fraternity, and equality, they held slaves in Haiti, and England perpetrated vast genocides that did not occur in Spanish America. This is not mentioned in the video, demonstrating a clear bias against Hispanic culture. Moreover, by encouraging intermarriage, the new upper classes in Spanish America consisted of Spaniards and mestizos (people of mixed European and Indigenous ancestry) resulting from marriages between Spanish men and noblewomen from native upper classes. This contrasts sharply with Anglo-Saxon colonization, which committed large-scale genocides (offering bounties for "dead Indians"), whereas there was never such a motivation in Spanish America. Another aspect is that the Spanish brought their culture to the Americas, building hospitals and universities. In fact, the first university in the Americas was founded in Santo Domingo in 1538. By the time the English founded Harvard University, there were ten Spanish universities already established in the Americas. Another relevant point is that the Spanish did not interfere with pre-Hispanic customs as many attempt to claim. For example, the Mita was a pre-Hispanic mining practice, and the Spanish ensured that the native people working in these mines were not subjected to a greater workload than they were accustomed to. They were paid wages, paid taxes, could retire or receive compensation for grievances, and had a couple of days a week to collect any minerals they found for themselves. A common myth is that Spain stole gold from America. Spain only collected a tax, as all nations do, but this was 20% of what was produced. Mort of the richness remained in America. Moreover, this taxed money returned to the Americas to create infrastructure for the Americans. Spain retained little of what it supposedly sought, which supports the thesis that the Spanish enterprise, in contrast to the English campaigns that sought natural resources, was primarily a religious undertaking.

[@MataMoros-x2o]

Latin America war of independence was supported by Britain to fight against Spain. Many expelled from Spain became pirates against the spanish.usa and Britain had to fight wars to end slaves being brought out of Africa. Spain tried to invade britain during the Inquisition. The Inquisition is why Spain destroyed the natives.

[@felipevalfer]

Cabral actually thought it was a island, the first name of Brazil was Ilha de Santa Cruz (island of sacred cross)

[@cmlopez1982]

You used a portrait of Isabella of Portugal instead of Isabella I of Castille

[@gustavodiniz6156]

Isabel de Portugal era Castellana.

[@cmlopez1982]

@ Isabel de Portugal era Portuguesa y despues reina de Castilla. Él usó una foto de esta para referirse a Isabel La Católica que era abuela de Isabel de Portugal

[@MartijnJansen-ms9ww]

Would you please make a video about Zheng He, the Chinese discoverer. His travels and his famously large ships are interesting to hear about.

[@BrunoNunes83]

You forgot Netherlands

[@kylvinmiller2978]

OH, I did not even they was part of it

[@miliba]

They only got started in the 17th century. Before that they were part of Spain

[@GBOAC]

You forgot the video is titled 1492-1600, the Dutch didn’t land until 1615 (Fort Nassau)

[@BrunoNunes83]

they got in Brazil before the 1600s, there was a battle over in Recife in 1595, but before that they were all over Brazil's Northeast. major invasions were on the XVII century, but Dutch people searched for commerce before that.

[@leonardoespino9780]

I mean, you could at least have mentioned Bartolomé de las casas in the topic of how the Spanish changed slowly in protecting the indigenous people. He was within the 100 years that you were supposed to cover of the colonization of América and probably more important what ever pope julios III had to do

[@joknaepkens]

Maybe you should switch to a different library and torch the current one. Columbus never knew he 'discovered' a new continent. He died still believing he went to Asia. Claiming he set sail to discover new land s is pure nonsense. His goal was a shorter route to Asia.

[@orirotem2298]

He was not the one who discovered america.. it was leif erikson

[@jcornell9944]

He said the first significant contact with the americas, not the first ever.

[@orirotem2298]

@jcornell9944 because erikson was "forgotten"

[@arnulfo267]

Leif Erickson didn't start the modern age of colonization and he didn't know he landed in the Americans. So, he doesn't count.

[@orirotem2298]

@arnulfo267 typical... nwither colombus knew he still thought he found india

[@dariusalexandru9536]

the person who count as discovering sm in the field of geography is usually the first person who makes a of the place

[@RockSmithStudio]

Glad the comment sections are calling out this pseudo-history

[@Bellephrontos]

In 1492 they had not "seen off" the last muslims. They had conquered the last muslim state in Iberia

[@ValleyProud916]

When the Portuguese first visited Sub-Saharan Africa they found people lost in time. While Europe, the middle and far east were building castles, developing languages and sciences the primates were still banging little rocks into big ones. Even the natives in North and South America were building pyramids and had written language.

[@MataMoros-x2o]

Citadel in Haiti proves ya wrong a top wonder of the new world. People still don't know how they built that. Constant invasions cause a slow recovery for black people.

[@fabiancarrascalsalazar5793]

Mali, one of the subsaharan countries and the one with the singular monarch with most riches in history laughs at your comment. as does great zimbabwe and the swahili city states. only a fool would call subsaharan africa primates or underdevelop.

[@WanderingPassports]

@@fabiancarrascalsalazar5793and where are they now?

[@jacktar-d3k]

@@fabiancarrascalsalazar5793 The Swahili city states were controlled by muslim Sultans though

[@tukek88]

Yes, however if not for them we never would have had lip disks.

[@mohammedsaysrashid3587]

Informative and truthful historical coverage episode about European ambitious to colonials American contents

[@Nathan-u4p1t]

What about the Vikings.

[@XavierBasurto777]

vikings were absorbed into white race

[@gustavodiniz6156]

Los vikingos eran unos ladones, borrachos y pobres del mar del norte.

[@fcy802]

What is Coloneization

[@kingbullyrock8739]

The advancement of mankind.

[@SquidMonke4]

@@kingbullyrock8739”mankind” yea just dont look at the average poverty rate of an african or where those indigenous guys went.

[@sendthis9480]

@@SquidMonke4 In order to make an omelette you need to crack a few eggs…or something.

[@SquidMonke4]

@@sendthis9480 colonialism is like cracking your neighbours eggs and keep all the omelettes

[@eckobrown7902]

Imagine if the native people came together and explored the world on their own they wouldn’t gotten taking advantage of

[@kingbullyrock8739]

That's the same as typing imagine if Cats or Dogs could speak English.

[@eckobrown7902]

@ everyone in Europe used to be native/barbaric and they became modern

[@environmentalsoup]

The first known contact with Europeans was with Vikings almost 500 years earlier

[@arnulfo267]

This video is about modern European exploration and colonization that began in the late 1400s. The Vikings had nothing to do with all that.

[@environmentalsoup]

@@arnulfo267there was inaccurate information stated in this video

[@inhalejemkem2534]

@@environmentalsoupwhat was the inaccurate information in the video?

[@environmentalsoup]

@@inhalejemkem2534 the incorrect statement was Christopher Columbus was the first significant European to come to North America when he was not. Also no Europeans discovered North America.

[@WanderingPassports]

That is insignificant as they never subdued the natives to colonize them, the Spanish and Portuguese were the first to instill Western European culture and religion in the Americas.

[@carlo_berruti]

Well done, with some flaws… the “Santa Domingo” at 04:05 - 04:20 (and later) is involuntarily comical (Santa notoriously lives in Finland, not in the Caribbean)

[@Someperson217]

Part 2 please

[@augustdanellhakansson7400]

What I don't understand is that the conquest of Constantinople in 1453 is specifically given as the reason as to why new trade routes to India were coveted. I understand that the Ottoman empire might have imposed heavy tariffs etc, making the silk route unstainable. But prior to 1453 the Ottoman empire controlled large territories both in Anatolia and in Europe, encircling the Byxantine holdings. So, even before 1453 it seems very difficult to have a trade route passing through the region without passing through the Ottoman empire and having them impose said tariffs. So what I fail to understand is why the conquest of Constantinople specifically is so significant. Why is this?

[@jussim.konttinen4981]

Turks began to enslave every person who came their way. They relied primarily on their large crews to overpower enemy vessels through boarding. Europeans were sold at the slave market in Algiers. By the 15th century, the area of modern-day Tunisia had already been almost completely Arabized. However, naval supremacy in the Cape Route boosted the economy of the Portuguese Empire.

[@TRAVELZILLA]

Too much focusing on Spain, Portugal kept on growing its territory and transformed Brazil in the world’s largest center of sugar production. They brought in thousands of slaves and hundreds of thousands of immigrants and colonists from Europe.

[@ThinkTwice2222]

What would've happened if the natives had a smallpox vaccine?

[@tukek88]

blood clots?

[@tukek88]

they would have started having heart problems?

[@RADSIKEGORILLAGEM-pz5qr]

I thought christopher colombus landed in hispaniola

[@adonaiyah2196]

Glad to be among the first here, like how Columbus was the first in America

[@HSingingTree]

Leif Erikson. The Natives. Sailors from Bristol.

[@bmcmillian69]

Noticed Sri Lanka was in the wrong side of India on the map.

[@80sdreamzlast68]

You can listen to this @ 1.5x speed.

[@tukek88]

I listen to everything atleast 1.5

[@iveBENwatchin]

So every country basically got invaded because of 1 man

[@generalpatton838]

Any traces of Woke-washing in this clip?

[@XavierBasurto777]

just the part at the end were it says they were mildy curious... they came in graping everything on altered pillars with plagues of darkness

[@jerryjohnson2421]

excellent video

[@SB-qm5wg]

French in New Quebec: No one told us about lake-effect snow. We're out of here 🌬

[@TheSuperVideoRey1]

There were no spanish colonies but viceroyalties. The first universitites, roads and grammars for indigenous languages were created by the spanish.

[@IanBaluwa-b9t]

This is the best and most informative video by Knowledgia I've seen since I began watching this channel 2 years ago. I like this video because it clearly and accurately summarizes European settlement in the Americas, something I've read about for two years. I've read so many articles on the internet about this topic, but watching this one video feels as if everything has all been summarized in brief. Please make a sequel.

[@quimera7012]

tell me you dont have any idea of how the spanish conquest was withouth telling me:

[@theawesomeman9821]

Answer(s): Germs, guns, and steel.

[@JPJ432]

What if Mansa Musa's Mali Empire discovered Brazil in 1324 when they voyaged West to see what was there? Which would make sense as to why the Portuguese were able to conquer so much land being such a small nation in comparison and why they didn't have troubles with the Indians since disease would have already spread leaving it mostly empty for them to conquer. The Amazon and the Andes Mountains would have acted like a wall preventing disease to spread. Also what if they brought the Black Death back from the New World on their voyage just in time for it to spread soon after? They supposedly did find gold tipped spears in S. America which are only found in Africa. Mansa spoke his predecessor did indeed travel to new found lands.

[@JPJ432]

The Portuguese asked to pope to amend the treaty of tordesillas to include more of the western hemisphere for Portugal. It could be possible that the Portuguese were already aware of Brazil due to their extensive presence in West Africa so they asked the pope to give them more of the western hemisphere only to "discover" Brazil "coincidentally" Also if you look on a map the shortest 2 points of the 'New World' and 'Old World' are exactly were the Mali Empires coast is todays Senegal and Guinea Bissau to Brazils Cities of Natal and Recife. Since the Portuguese colonized Guinea Bissau that is where the could have got the idea. Both the Trade Winds and the Ocean Currents make it ideal to travel as they both circulate from those 2 points. Also I don't see Mansa Abu Bakr taking a Royal Expedition of 500 ships into the Atlantic ocean without having prior knowledge that something was there first.

[@SillyCatGoofy]

Lo siento pero la versión de tu historia de la conquista de hispanoamerica esta super sesgada, básicamente estas de la versión oscura de la conquista española creada por los holandeses y amplificada por los anglosajones.....por favor lea bien o investigue bien antes de hacer un vídeo o sobre la conquista española.

[@joricmalolic3723]

Lmao! Someone’s ancestors didn’t fought hard enough.

[@gimpytheimp]

Right cause not having the same access to materials as someone else means you didn't fight hard enough. It was disease they had no immunity to like small pox that wiped out indigenous groups across the Americas. What a dumbass thing you said.

[@Ntll.k]

We won 2 of those battles tho

[@عبدالرحمنمصطفى-د1ط]

Bro why are you happy these humans died also the disease killed most of native Americans not strong brave idiots like you they were strong warriors and most Europeans knowed that so they would kill them by disease like cowards

[@ez8la]

Spain England Portugal and France ( Netherlands included ) a history full of blood of innocents

[@stuartribblett9185]

Christopher Columbus's Discovery of the Americas". He was following maps! The Vikings had landed in North America centuries before Columbus. He may have started the immigration of the Americas by Europeans, but he didn't discover anything.

[@KyoushaPumpItUp]

Is this a compilation?

[@ThingsToKnow5]

Very well-crafted video. These animations take a lot of time. I wonder how many people work on those animations. Or whether they are created directly for this yt channel or taken from another medium. This channel definitely deserves a SUBSCRIBE! Have a nice day.🎉

[@elsapenaloza6317]

Falto el trrcer viaje de Colon cuando en 1498 descubre la isla de Trinidad, las bocas del Orinoco, Venexuela, la isla de Margarita enfin descubrio el continente americano

[@johanparedes6322]

the time machine is invented - the girls: at last I will meet my grandparents - the boys: Christopher Columbus; don't take that road maybe he'll disguise your ship as a Turkish vessel

[@chicagolandnation635]

When is the next video

[@celdur4635]

Terrible video, 90% of the victory of the Spanish was Diplomatic, with tens of thousands of native allies to fill the ranks to actually win the battles.

[@MataMoros-x2o]

It was the Inquisition Spain even tried to invade britain to inquinize them

[@celdur4635]

@@MataMoros-x2o Look up the actual facts. Inquisition did not apply to Indigenous people only against protestants or heretics. And in 300 years killed like 20 people, mostly pirates.

[@MataMoros-x2o]

Spreading the Catholic faith was same as Inquisition. That's why Spain tried to invade britain.

[@celdur4635]

@@MataMoros-x2o What does Britain have to do with the Americas? Yes protestant where the enemy. Natives where not protestan. Different laws. INquisition in Peru in 300 years killed like 20 people mostly pirates.

[@danielfraga5756]

Very good.