The legacy of the Civil War is profound. Ramifications are felt all the way into our more modern times and today it’s in the fabric of our culture. It certainly was not a matter of “hero” and “villain”—because we all know that in life there is good and evil. It could be said that for some, the envisioning of good and evil is a regional concept. That is, as long as good and evil exist, it will fit into whatever struggle meets an individual or groups own societal political narrative.
While I myself would never condone the Confederacy, it is in our more recent history that American symbols for southern tradition and culture were either destroyed or removed. Whatever the matter, destroying history is a sin. At least in these eyes. General Robert E. Lee actually has a biography that is incredible. I highly recommend reading it if you ever have the time. Lee was a man of prestige, honor, and righteousness—even before and after the American Civil War.
A great example to give is this: In a conversation with a minister one Sunday morning shortly after the start of the war. Lee was asked: “Is it your expectation that the issue of this war will be to perpetuate the institution of slavery?” Lee replied: “The future is in the hands of Providence, but if the slaves of the South were mine, I would surrender them all without a struggle to avert a war.” This is just one fraction of the truthful character General Lee showed not just in public, but during private conversation. And besides virtues, his military record was pretty spectacular regardless of his personal decision and belief to take on the calling as a revered Confederate general.
I think we all have a pretty good idea that the Union was blessed by God throughout the Civil War. God is good, and a confederacy against God (and His ultimate final planning) is evil. Did you know that the Bible speaks of the Confederacy and Confederates throughout the Scriptures? True stuff. The Bible gives the origin and meaning behind “Confederate” and “Confederacy.” Check this out: Isaiah 7:2, and 8:12—speaks of a confederate rebellion . Also, even Genesis 14:13 speaks of those being confederate with Abram. Not convinced yet? Check out Obadiah 7 and Psalm 83:5 too!
The Confederacy was not just the title of a grey-dawning, slave-owning, southern aristocracy—it is a deep seated principle cloaked in rebellion. Ultimately, there was no way God was going to sanction the South to be allowed to continue slavery in a truly free society… especially after God Himself sent Moses to free the Israelites from captivity in Egypt. Answers-in-Genesis, ran by Ken Ham, also the Founder of the Creation Museum, explains that “[From Noah] Ham’s son Mizraim founded Egypt (still called Mizraim in Hebrew). Egypt was the first recorded nation in the Bible to have harsh slavery and it was imposed on Joseph, the son of Israel, in 1728 BC, according to Archbishop Ussher. Later, the Egyptians were slave masters to the rest of the Israelites, and Moses, by the hand of God, freed them.”
Under this same principle, is it not unreasonable to believe that Abraham Lincoln was brought up to his position to ultimately lead the southern slaves to freedom? Is it not unreasonable to believe that God sanctioned the Union’s cause? If America was founded by Divine Providence, that is, through the guidance and intervention of God in its national inception; the last bastion of liberty and freedom on the planet—than just how unreasonable is it to believe that the Confederacy had the hand of God’s protection removed from their final cause?
And look, even further, Romans 8:31 states “If God is for us, Who can be against us?” It’s simple. Providentially, if the Union was sanctioned by God to achieve victory and emancipation, there was absolutely no way outside of a daydream that the South would have won the Civil War in the first place.
“And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.” – Romans 8:28
Daniel L. Smith,
 Dr. Beliles, Mark A., and Stephen K. McDowell. "The War for the Union." In America's Providential History, 3rd ed., 233. Charlottesville, 2010. Print.
 Hodge, Bodie, and Paul K. Taylor. "The Bible and Slavery." Answers in Genesis. Last modified February 2, 2007. https://answersingenesis.org/bible-history/the-bible-and-slavery/.
The U.S. Coast Guard played a key role during World War Two. Here, I clarify the varied and important role the service played in saving lives and contributing to the US and Allied Powers’ war efforts around the globe:
The naval history of World War II is propense, given the size of the war and participation of nations involved. And more often than not, the United States Navy offers a huge and understandingly repetitive presence over the naval history of WWII. More often than not however, it is the United States Coast Guard’s selfless service and true expense that is lost in that large shadow. As an Honorably Discharged U.S. Coast Guard Veteran, I wear a Coast Guard “Excellence” Ribbon, as well as the 9/11 Transportation Medal for service in the 9/11 attacks in 2001. With experience in rough seas, law enforcement, and search and rescue – I am pleased to share this story about the U.S.C.G. in WWII.
In November of 1941 the Coast Guard went from the Treasury Department to the Department of the Navy; so perhaps this was why the histories of WWII usually look past or only shortly mention the Coast Guard’s priceless role in the great event. The United States declared war after the Japanese surprise bombing of Pearl Harbor, and spent four years and eight months in the fray of internal and external conflict. It was this catalyst that the Coast Guard’s accountabilities to its service to country extended significantly, being valued more than just search-and-rescue, and law enforcement; now it was seen completely integrating militarily.
The Coast Guard was actually involved in some very significant events in World War II. How effective were they? Seaman John Cullen, for instance, was walking the beach performing routine night patrol on the 13thof June of 1942. During his walk Seaman Cullen observed four Germans landing ashore, on a saboteur mission code-named Operation Pastorius. Seaman Cullen of the U.S. Coast Guard was actuallythefirstAmerican who came into contact with the enemy on the shores of mainland USA during WWII.Another incident, CGC Icarus (WPC-110), a 165-ft patrol boat that once had been a rumrunner chaser during Prohibition, put a German U-352 under water on 9 May 1942, off the south coast of Charleston, South Carolina.The Icarus crew took on 33 prisoners that day. They were the first German nationals taken in combat as prisoners by any U.S. armed force.
During the entire length of WWII, U.S. Coast Guard elements sent 12 German and two Japanese submarines to the bottom of the ocean, and would end up capturing two German warships. Finally, Signalman 1stClass Douglas A. Munro was the only Coast Guardsman to be awarded the Medal of Honor. It was at the 2ndBattle of the Matanikau, Petty Officer Munro was tasked with leading the extraction of 400 United States Marines that had been beaten and overrun on the Japanese island. Munro used a 7.62 mm deck-mounted machine gun aboard his “Higgins Boat” to direct a suppressing fire against the Japanese positions as the other recovery boats took on the beaten and battered American Marines. He would end up selflessly putting himself between heavy fire from the Japanese forces and the U.S. Marines – leading the ten landing craft and saving all five-hundred U.S. Marines, including 25 wounded, all escaped.
A DRIVING FORCE
The United States Coast Guard wasand continues to remain to be the most professional, elite, and underappreciated service out of the 5 branches of the U.S. Armed Forces. In WWII history, evidence suggests the U.S. Coast Guard was more involved than the history books lead on. So, justhow effective was the U.S. Coast Guard during World War II? Admiral Chester Nimitz highly praised the valuable and selfless performance of Coast Guard men and women in World War II by stating: “I know of no instance wherein they did not acquit themselves in the highest traditions of their Service, or prove themselves worthy of their Service motto, ‘Semper Paratus’—‘Always Ready.’”
It was back in 1837 that the Coast Guard went even further with the order to save lives and property. The main functions of the service were no longer just law enforcement related, but now relied upon as the saviors of life and property with maritime safety taking up an equally important role. For a branch of service that has less peopleserving in it than the New York City Police Department, it always seems it is the U.S. Coast Guard that always stands out at the end of their long days. The Coast Guard has been involved in every single one of our nations wars at sea –along the side of their Navy counterparts. These brief aforementioned illustrations stand as evidence to the examples of the Coast Guard, its crew, and its mission capabilities. Of course, all of this centered around being a 5thmilitary branch of service, with all privileges entitled.
There is another historical event that would equal silenceto the incredible effectiveness of the Coast Guard’s mission capabilities. Signalman 1st Class Douglas A. Munro, is the aforementioned Coast Guardsman who would equally compare in this quiet and unpromoted glory in while their service. Its interesting in part to think about just how unrecognized the service is. Proof? Half of my recruit training company didn’t even know the Coast Guard was a seagoing service when asked about it by the Company Commanders.If recruits are naïve about the mission, is it unreasonable to assume that the general public wouldn’t have an idea of Coast Guard’s mission effectiveness? Of course not.
The mission effectiveness pre-dating our modern era is apparent when looking back in the historical entries. The Revenue Cutter Service (as it used to be known) was re-named United States Coast Guard in 1915, after the U.S. Government observed justhoweffective they were as a wartime andnon-wartime entity.It is amazing that with such successes in the field and low publicity, both publicly and within the other four military branches, the Coast Guard still continues to remain the mostunderappreciated branch of the services.
UNDERAPPRECATED, MOST EFFECTIVE
Overall, the Coast Guard performed valiantly with statistics of their own military accomplishments during WWII. 12 submarines were sunk in the Atlantic Theater by Coast Guard Cutters, Coast Guard Anti-Sub Planes, and Coast Guard-crewed naval vessels. The U.S. Coast Guard documented that from 1941, to the end of the war, Coast Guard crews had served successfully on board Navy attack transports (APs & APAs) and with personnel to spare. They continue on to say, “It was an obvious choice to let the Coast Guard continue to assist in manning various ships of the ever-increasing Navy fleet. They readily took to all of the various types of landing craft utilized by the Navy, including the Landing Craft Infantry, Large, or LCI(L)s, beginning in 1943.”
Technologically, the Coast Guard headed a cooperative effort between scientists and the U.S. Navy, to develop the Long-Range Navigation (LORAN) system. The Coast Guard stated that, “Pulse transmission of radio waves permits LORAN to measure the time a signal travels. This allows an infinite number of lines of position to be placed over the Earth’s surface by radio. Using special charts and a simple receiver, a plane or ship could determine its general location within a few miles by longitude and latitude. LORAN is the first use of electronic navigation, precursor to Global Positioning System (GPS).”
In June of 1942, legislation in the Executive Branch changed the face of the U.S. Coast Guard forever sealing their fate as a military service. Further, the presidential decree allowed for the centralization of the Coast Guard as the premier multi-mission branch of service.
According to the U.S. Coast Guard Historians Office:
“The President delegates port-security to the Coast Guard. Responsibilities included: Control of anchorage and movement of all vessels in port; Issuance of identification cards and the supervision of access to vessels and waterfront facilities; Fire-prevention measures including inspections, recommendations and enforcement; Firefighting activities, including use of fire-boats, trailer pumps and other extinguishing agents; Supervision of the loading and stowage of explosives and military ammunition; Boarding and examination of vessels in port; Sealing of vessels' radios; Licensing of vessels for movement in local waters and for departure; Guarding of important facilities; Enforcement of all regulations governing vessels and waterfront security; Maintenance of water patrols; General enforcement of federal laws on navigable waters and other miscellaneous duties.”
Handling and piloting these small boats in the rough surf is most certainly a specialized skill. Additionally, this type of emphasized skillset was not common among men in the Navy. Not guys in the Coast Guard though. Many of the coxswains (small boat handlers) had learned this skill from pushing boats through the surf at coastal lifesaving stations. Coast Guard small boat handlers were actually only at lifesaving stations. Most were highly seasoned small-boat handlers, as this proved valuable to the service. Maneuvering landing craft through strong currents, reefs, sand bars and heavy surf, is what these lifesavers excel at. Further, their aid to amphibious operations during the entirety of the war is infinite.
The experience of these surf-men were priceless during amphibious operations. The Coast Guard's surf-men acted as trainers and coaches to the U.S. Navy small boatmen trying to learn the complexities of controlling craft in the rough waters and heavy seas. During the early period of WWII, thousands of Coast Guard and Navy personnel were skilled and apt to handle landing craft in preparation for the beaches.
Part of that landing craft mission was landing troops at D-Day, but, given the sheer size of the operation, the Navy and Army asked that the Coast Guard also provide a flotilla of ships to rescue Americans stranded in the water. The Coastie’s punctually rose-up to complete the challenge, pulling from their daily experience in saving lives for over a century. The Coast Guards Cutters and other small-craft went to war on D-Day. They were literally behind the first wave of landing craft hitting the beaches of Normandy. They had been told to stay two miles away from the shoreline, but most of the Coastie’s took their craft closer to shore where they could rescue more lives.
The United States Coast Guard pulled over 400 men out of the water that day. One small-boat named "Homing Pigeon," manned by the Coast Guard, rescued 126 lives in one day.It was the Coast Guard Cutters Eastwind and Southwind that would end up capturing the Nazi vessel Externsteine off the coast of Greenland doing weather and supply duty after a brief fire-fight with nobody killed. The Coast Guardsmen gave the newly captured Nazi ship the name USS Eastbreeze and placed 37 men on board to man the vessel. Eastbreeze would end up sailing to Boston where the U.S. Navy renamed her USS Callao. Nazi supply vessel Externsteine was the only enemy ship captured while at sea by any U.S. naval forces during World War II.
What was the scope of the Coast Guard’s rescue operations in WWII? A thorough examination of the United States military’s records in the European phase of the war will reveal just how operationally effective the small services were outside of battle. 4,243 servicemen and merchant mariners were saved, and of these 1,658 survivors were picked up from being torpedoed along the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean. 810 souls were saved in the North Atlantic, and in the Mediterranean 115 saved. Further, 1,660 were saved from rescue cutters from the English Channel at D-Day. The fact is almost four and a half million fighting soldiers would embark by ship, to fight the enemy in Europe and Africa. Of all who were deployed , 3,954 were lost at sea.
THE TOUGH KEEP GOING
Over the course of World War Two, the U.S. Coast Guard remained completely active with the remaining landing forces until Japan surrendered. Other operations that contributed to the Coastie’s efforts were mine-sweeping off the coasts during occupation. At the finish of major military operations in the Pacific, the soldiers., sailors, and airmen being ferried home by the Coast Guard would come to know the last ride home as… “Magic Carpet” rides. These rides home would have to have been one of the most relieving moments of any war wearied serviceman.
The Coast Guard contributed as much as any other branch of service to the war effort as part of the amphibious forces in the Pacific theatre of war. The men of this nation's smallest branch of service, – smaller than the N.Y.P.D. to be exact – proved as heroic and valiant as the men in the other branches. The Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal, in 1946, would stand on the podium and publicly state that during the war the United States Coast Guard "earned the highest respect and deepest appreciation of the Navy and Marine Corps. Its performance of duty has been without exception in keeping with the highest traditions of service."
The fact of the matter is…“Their experience in operating in all types of surf conditions as well as on the high seas made the Coast Guard crews a valuable addition to the Allied invasion fleets.”The United States Coast Guard continues to be the most elite branch of service operational today, also making the Coast Guard statistically, the best the five branches of military has to offer. The truth is that for being the most underappreciated branch of service; the men and women of the Coast Guard display their moral and ethical principles in the line of duty.They truly were mission effective in WWII.
Happy Memorial Day 2020 and God Bless Our Armed Forces!
Daniel L. Smith,
Bishop, Eleanor C. 1989. Prints in the sand: the U.S. Coast Guard Beach Patrol in World War II. Missoula, Mont: Pictorial Histories Pub. Co. https://archive.org/details/printsinsand00bish_0.
Walling, Michael G. 2008. “Dangerous Duty in the North Atlantic.” Naval History http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=khh&AN=31947742&site=eds-live&scope=site.
Ibid., pp. 204-207.
Ibid., p. 208.
Quesada, Alejandro de. 2011. US Coast Guard in World War II. Oxford: Osprey Publishing Ltd. WorldCat Reference Center, Online. p. 97.
U.S. Coast Guard, Statistical Division/Historical Section, Public Information Division, The Coast Guard At War (Washington: Public Information Division, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 30 June 1944–1 January 1954), (monograph 7).
“USCG Basic Training Experience, Delta-162” Daniel L. Smith, 2002.
U.S. Coast Guard, Statistical Division/Historical Section, Public Information Division, The Coast Guard At War (Washington: Public Information Division, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 30 June 1944–1 January 1954), (Monograph 17)
"U.S. Coast Guard Manned LCI(L)'s." U.S. Department of Defense. Accessed April 1, 2019. https://media.defense.gov/2017/Aug/08/2001789793/-1/-1/0/LCIS.PDF.
"Time Line 1900's - 2000's." United States Coast Guard (USCG) Historian's Office. Accessed April 19, 2019. https://www.history.uscg.mil/Complete-Time-Line/Time-Line-1900-2000/.
Ibid.(USCG) Historians Office.
Christy, Gabe. "How 60 Coast Guard Cutters Saved Over 400 Men On D-Day." WAR HISTORY ONLINE. Last modified September 14, 2017. https://www.warhistoryonline.com/world-war-ii/60-coast-guard-cutters-saved-400-men-d-day.html.
"What’s in the Coast Guard’s Secret Sauce for High Retention?" Federal News Network. Last modified January 16, 2018. https://federalnewsnetwork.com/dod-personnel-notebook/2018/01/whats-in-the-coast-guards-secret-sauce-for-high-retention/.
"From the Homefront: Top 10 Things We Wish People Knew About Coast Guard Life « Coast Guard All Hands." Coast Guard All Hands. Last modified February 5, 2014. https://allhands.coastguard.dodlive.mil/2014/02/05/from-the-homefront-top-10-things-we-wish-people-knew-about-coast-guard-life/.
“The purpose of history is the building of the church of God, and the glorification of God. History has a beginning – it began on day one of the creation week – and it has an ending – the final consummation of the earth at the end of time. History is not just the story of mankind, it is the story of God working out His sovereign purpose for mankind and glorifying Himself. It is not just about names, dates, places and events. It is about God Himself.” It’s critical to understand that humanity is essentially a tool of God’s, and as His creation, we all move to His final end.
At the Tower of Babel sometime before 3200 B.C. human beings looked to unite as one force, or one power, to create a way to play “God,” that was based upon their own ways of rules and standards. God saw that this combined strength in unity which mankind had formed was false. It was a fake sense of unity because Babel and mankind’s hopeless attempt to achieve glory was not based upon His glory. In other words, humankind did not do this for God, they did it for their own power and glory—their own common faith in self-reliance and not for God’s.
God came at this point to intervene. He came not only to break apart mankind’s unholy attempt at “playing God,” but He came down with a curse for that particular generation of mankind at Babel, and even for the generations of family thereafter. He broke apart the common traits of mankind. Disparate languages confused mankind. Groups separated and dispersed across the world. It was at this point after the global events of Babel that human “tribal” cultures were born.
God lifted His hand of protection and cast blessings off of tribal mankind. Dr. Stephen Leston, Author and President of To Every Tribe (a mission training and sending agency), mentions that God “obstructed the development of technology,” as well as “hindering mankind’s ability to work together at an advanced pace.” From this point on, peoples of tribal nations across the globe were equally limited in their advancements. It is because of this that God would only give tribal peoples ‘just enough’ knowledge to use the basic technology that they were already given.
Tribalism became an almost ground-zero starting off point for mankind. It was seen as the most universally basic of primitive culture. Most tribal elements retained the internal idea of the One Almighty Creator, however further devolved into spiritual Animism and Pagan religion in spite of God. Most tribes across the world would survive in just about the same manner—living off of raw substances, wearing basic garments (if any at all), and engaging in an almost animistic regalia of customary behaviors and ritualistic tendencies. The tribal political and social nature of the indigenous societies across the world prohibited and restricted economic, social, and technological growth substantially (as Genesis 11:4-7 states). It was not meant to happen, as He had ordained for His ultimate plan.
Today people fault God for not giving the indigenous natives of the world His word, and for allowing the plagues and atrocities to pile up. The fact of the matter is this: unlike the Fall of Man, where mankind was cursed with the knowledge (of good and evil)—tribal peoples took on a new curse after the Fall of Babel. The deal here is that it was, and is, part of God’s larger plan for the entirety of mankind. He would not be ready to spread His word until the European missionaries would show up thousands of years later. The indigenous natives of North America prior to European contact was not a glamorized “Pocahontas” Disney movie.
On the contrary actually. The world Columbus discovered was full of slavery, murder, genocide, sodomy, sexual exploitation, and general barbarity. Even after first European contact, the trials and tribulations that the indigenous natives were shocked into dealing with were catastrophically life changing. It is this honest realization that must be made when understanding the detrimental effects tribal groups were feeling on a mass scale in the years leading up to colonization, settlement, and formal reservations. God took His hand off the indigenous natives, and would continue to do so until His time came to pass.
Once missionaries and pastors arrived into the “New World” to spread the Word of God; the humankind was forever changed. It was the documented historical events to follow that would be considered God’s perfect and final timing of Redemption for the indigenous native peoples. To bring closure and finality to the tribalistic and pagan chapter of humanity. Christianity would take root in many places around the world. In North America, Catholics and Protestants would forever etch their marks in bringing the uncivilized tribes in its entirety of the world context into a Christianized, civilized, and orderly world.
History is all purely on God’s timing…
Daniel L. Smith,
 Mullon, Caitlin. "What is a Providential View of History?" - Presenting & Defending a Biblical Perspective of History. Last modified August 28, 2014. https://www.providentialhistory.org/?page_id=100.
 Dr. Leston, Stephen. "From Creation to the Tower of Babel." In The Bible in World History, 38. Uhrichsville: Barbour, 2011.
 Barton, David. "No Noble Savage: The World Columbus Found." Complex America (excerpt: WallBuilders.com). Accessed May 20, 2020. https://www.complexamerica.org/blog/no-noble-savage-the-world-columbus-found.
All arguments making Christopher Columbus a villain comparable with Adolf Hitler[i] or Saddam Hussain [ii] start with the premise that the world he discovered was populated by peaceful inhabitants who lived in a golden age. It was only with the introduction of the white man, critics claim, that this paradise was destroyed by the tyrannical oppression perpetuated by the European Christians.
The current romanticized presentation of the native cultures is the underlying assumption which permits the narrative that Columbus was a villain. Academics push this to justify tearing down statues of the explorer and removing his name from the calendar. Proponents of the alternative to Columbus Day—which they call Indigenous People’s Day—are also proponents of alternative history.
Howard Zinn, in his massively influential yet famously inaccurate work A People’s History of the United States, propagated this myth of the noble savage:
So, Columbus and his successors were not coming into an empty wilderness, but into a world which in some places was as densely populated as Europe itself, where the culture was complex, where human relations were more egalitarian than in Europe, and where the relations among men, women, children, and nature were more beautifully worked out than perhaps any place in the world.[iii]
According to Zinn (and most if not all of the modern outcry against Columbus can be traced to his book), the indigenous people were far more advanced in their social morality than the Europeans. This, of course, leads to the conclusion that the white man was (and still is) a racist tyrant oppressing whomever he might. This leads to the conclusion that America was (and still is) one of the worst nations in all of history.
What Zinn and his followers fail to account for are the facts. The world Columbus discovered was full of slavery, murder, genocide, sodomy, sexual exploitation, and general barbarity. Zinn only mentions the famous atrocities of the Aztec culture in passing to say that, “the cruelty of the Aztecs, however, did not erase a certain innocence.”[iv] Let’s take a look at the “certain innocence” prevalent in the cultures encountered by Columbus and the other pre-Columbian natives.
Although the first tribe (led by the chieftain Guacanagari) was extremely friendly to Columbus—so much so that the Columbus even declared that, “a better race there cannot be, and both the people and the lands are in such quantity that I know not how to write it”[v]—they were not the pacifistic society often portrayed. This first tribe was part of the Taino community which occupied many of the islands in the West Indies. They held those islands, however, because they themselves had conquered, driven out, and replaced the earlier Siboney culture. The Taino domination was so complete that Columbus only ever encountered one such Siboney native.[vi]
The Taino’s warrior culture was noticeably lacking when compared to the truly savage culture of the Carib (or Canib) tribes. These indigenous peoples (from whose name we derive both the words “Caribbean” and “cannibal”) were feared by the Taino because of the constant raids and attacks. During his first voyage, the Taino told Columbus about “extremely ferocious…eaters of human flesh” who “visit all the Indian islands, and rob and plunder whatever they can.”[vii]
Columbus and his shipmates had extensive encounters with the Caribs during the subsequent voyages. The things they saw corresponded exactly with the description giving by their Taino friends, and many other atrocities which they had failed to mention.
For instance, the Caribs would spend up to a decade plundering any particular island until they completely depopulated it through slavery and cannibalism.[viii] Specifically, on these campaigns they would cannibalize the men and enslave the women and young boys. One of Columbus’s crew member left us with a description of what the Caribs would do to their captives, saying that he found:
"twelve very beautiful and very fat women from 15 to 16 years old, together with two boys of the same age. These had the genital organ cut to the belly; and this we thought had been done in order to prevent them from meddling with their wives or maybe to fatten them up and later eat them. These boys and girls had been taken by the above mentioned Caribs;"[ix]
The testimony by the Taino of cannibalism was confirmed by the amount of human bones and even cooking limbs found in the villages.[x] Another shipmate on the voyage, the lead doctor, also related in depth the terrible acts of the Caribs. He explained:
"In their wars upon the inhabitants of the neighboring islands, these people capture as many of the women as they can, especially those who are young and handsome, and keep them as body servants and concubines; and so great a number do they carry off, that in fifty houses we entered no man was found, but all were women. Of that large number of captive females more than twenty handsome women came away voluntarily with us.
When the Caribbees take any boys as prisoners of war, they remove their organs, fatten the boys until they grow to manhood and then, when they wish to make a great feast, they kill and eat them, for they say the flesh of boys and women is not good to eat. Three boys thus mutilated came fleeing to us when we visited the houses."[xi]
The same doctor describes another instance where they came to a Carib slave camp and:
"As soon as these women learned that we abhor such kind of people because of their evil practice of eating human flesh, they felt delighted…. These captive women told us that the Carribbee men use them with such cruelty as would scarcely be believed; and that they eat the children which they bear to them, only bringing up those which they have by their native wives. Such of their male enemies as they can take away alive, they bring here to their homes to make a feast of them, and those who are killed in battle they eat up after the fighting is over. They claim that the flesh of man is so good to eat that nothing like it can be compared to it in the world; and this is pretty evident, for of the human bones we found in their houses everything that could be gnawed had already been gnawed, so that nothing else remained of them but what was too hard to be eaten. In one of the houses we found the neck of a man undergoing the process of cooking in a pot, preparatory for eating it."
This authentic eyewitness picture of the indigenous people is radically different that the one presented by Zinn. If this is what he means by “certain innocence” what does guilt looks like? Remember, these are the people of whom he proclaimed that their “relations among men, women, children, and nature were more beautifully worked out than perhaps any place in the world.” It may comes as a shock to Zinn, but no one ought to consider slavery, sexual exploitation, and infant cannibalism as “beautifully worked out.”
This is the New World which Columbus discovered. It wasn’t filled with friendly, peaceful, tribes, but people numerous and warlike. It is against this backdrop that we must evaluate the actions of Columbus and not the fabricated history created by fake historians like Howard Zinn and his followers.
[i] Russel Means, quoted by Dinesh D’Souza in “The Crimes of Christopher Columbus,” First Things (November 1995), at: https://www.firstthings.com/article/1995/11/the-crimes-of-christopher-columbus.
[ii] Eric Kasum, “Columbus Day? True Legacy: Cruelty and Slavery,” Huffington Post (October 10, 2010), at: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-kasum/columbus-day-a-bad-idea_b_742708.html
[iii] Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States (New York: Harper Collins, 2015), p. 21.
[iv] Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States (New York: Harper Collins, 2015), p. 11.
[v] Christopher Columbus, translator Clements Markham, The Journal of Christopher Columbus (London: Hakluyt Society, 1893), p.131. (here)
[vi] Samuel Morrison, Admiral of the Ocean Sea (New York: MJF Books, 1970), p. 464.
[vii] Christopher Columbus, translator R. H. Major, “Letter sent by Columbus to Chancellor of the Exchequer, respecting the Islands found in the Indies,” Select Letters of Christopher Columbus (London: Hakluyt Society, 1870), p. 14. (here)
[viii] Michele de Cuneo, translator Samuel Morrison, “Michele de Cuneo’s Letter on the Second Voyage, 28 October 1495,” Journals and Other Documents on the Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus (New York: Heritage Press, 1963), p. 219.
[ix] Michele de Cuneo, translator Samuel Morrison, “Michele de Cuneo’s Letter on the Second Voyage, 28 October 1495,” Journals and Other Documents on the Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus (New York: Heritage Press, 1963), p. 211-212.
[x] “Letter of Dr. Diego Alvarez Chanca,” Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections (Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1907), Vol. 48, p. 438, 440.
[xi] “Letter of Dr. Diego Alvarez Chanca,” Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections (Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1907), Vol. 48, p. 442.