by the way Spain is Europe=Europeans too. check the map, you will see.

I'm not sure how true this is, but I have heard that Columbus was wanted to Christianize the Indian Indians, but the Asians wouldn't let any Christians through to the indies, so Columbus, believing that the earth was round, and not knowing about the continent of America, decided to go west and find India that way. He then sailed under funding from King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Portugal, and found the Americas, and believed the people there to be Indians.

Long back the Europeans started realizing that there is lot of wealth in India (the country in Asia). All wanted to do trade with India and make money and get their pie of the Indian wealth. Just like there was a race to the moon between some of the countries like US and USSR a few decades back, there started a race between the countries like France, Britain, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands etc to find short sea routes to India. The only searoute known during those days from Europe to India was coming down the south of Africa and making a turn and heading straight for the Indian West Coast. The turn at South tip of Africa is hence named the Cape of good hope. This is because the seafarers were taking that voyage with a lot of good hopes and aspirations. During these days the concept that earth is round was not really very popular. However, some believed that it may be the case that as per some scientists of those days Earth may be actually spherical in shape. One who wanted to believe this was a Spaniard called Columbus. The popular theory those days were that the sea comes to an end if you go Westward from Europe and fall down from Earth as if Earth is like a Table or something. Columbus tried to convince the Spanish king that they need to find a shorter route to India as soon as possible or else will lose out the advantage with other European countries who according to him are trying to find really shorter sea routes to India. According to Columbus there was no known land Westward of India. So he felt it may occur that India maybe really near if you go Westward and you may touch the East Coast of India. The king wasn't very happy about funding his project of trying to go westward from Europe and try to find a shorter route. So he permitted him to take some prisoners with him instead of seasoned sailors. As prisoner were anyways a waste of Public funds according to the king. So he risked the ship and few prisoners for his project. Columbus travelled many days Westward from Spain but did not find land for many days and the prisoners he had taken as his sailors feared soon they would reach the end of Earth and fall from there. So they revolted and took charge of the ship. However they decided they would travel 3 (not very sure) more days and return back. But on the second day or so they found a wooden log floating in the ocean which suggested there is land nearby and they traveled a day more and started seeing land. They landed there and saw the people there. The people did not look exactly like what they thought Indians should look like. They found them a bit reddish in colour. So they called them red Indians. Excited to tell the tale of finding a new route to India back in Spain within few days they traveled back to Spain and said, we saw red Indians. The name Indians formed like this for Native Americans. Later a traveler called Amerigo Vespucci took a similar route and came to the Americas and he realized that it is not India but some other place and he reported this to the world(those days world means just Asia and Europe). Ever since those lands (American continent) started being called the Americas.

I wonder if the same lines of argument and reasoning can be applied to what happened on the African continent. It however appears the situation is different in that the Africans have then gone on to successfuly reclaim their land, though in some cases it has been disastrous as is the case with Zimbabwe.

Indians are from India. The folks that were here in the Americas before the Europeans came, are made up of many different tribes and cultures. The Europeans gave them the name "Indians", and the defeated tribes of the present day Americas know their place and have accepted whatever labels their conquerers have given them.

I can't believe the guy who answered first. First of all, the Europeans have decimated the native american population to near extinction. This is what they don't teach in history. It's like the pink elephant in the room. The big difference is that Native Americans from different tribes fought each other. It wasn't like some outside force with guns, ships and man power totally took over a population. Do research.

man -- no wonder. India was and always be a mystical land for many.

Good Columbus came to canary Island and North America or else they would have blamed the syphillis on the Indians ( Asian )

oh, and the Spaniards were the first ones to come here after the indians were already here.. so many blame the europeans, but either way, a lot of people were still killed through biological warfare.

Could the name "Indians" that is used for native Americans be related to the word "indigenous" and perhaps be derived not from a mistake by Columbus, but from an an English translation of the Spanish word "indigenes"?

Hindustan was the Urdu name for India. India was always called India. Its name comes from the river Indus which separates it from the rest of the subcontinent. I don't know what it was called in Italian but I don't see how that is significant. It is also called Bharat in Hindi. Still, the English always called it India. And yes, Indians from India are also called Indians. Which is pretty confusing for the Americans apparently because when you tell people in America that you're an Indian they start calling you Native American.

If you call them Indians, what about the people from India sub-continent? They are also called Indians..(As in Americans, Russians and Canadians).

if we came from some land bridge from asia or something like that.. how did we get there? from somewhere else? if so, then how did we get there?

What the heck?!?!?! Why do the darn Indians change their PC name every 5 years? What the heck is the difference between Native Americans and First Americans anyway? They didn't even want to be "Americans" in the first place!!!

The original inhabitants of this land (the now called "Americas") came to this continent over 50,000 years ago; over the Bering Straights which connected what is now Russia to Alaska. They were the first inhabitants of the land and did not come killing and raping the people for their land and gold. Yes thousands of years later once they were more settled, some of the original people of the land did decide they wanted to explore new territories and become inhabitants of the land, so they did kick out whatever tribe was in control at the time.

This was not at all like the genocide committed by the Europeans on the Indigenous people of the land. European invasion killed millions more than the concentration camps the Nazi's built for the Jews. Over 95% of the Indigenous population of the Americas was murdered by European rape, murder, and disease. The "America's" was not discovered by Columbus, it was discovered over 50,000 years ago.

"It's strange to think that such an entrenched word is most likely based on a mistake."

Strange indeed that something caught within hours would stick, especially since in English that country was called Hindustan in 1492 and called something else in Italian at the time than it is now in Columbus's Native Italian.

He called them People "in god " or "in Dio" which came to sound like "Indians"

Sound more logical? Probably because it is.

I have wondered why "Indians" or "Native Americans" are said by many to have a claim to ownership of America, and many people believe that the Spanish and Anglos took their land.

From what I have read Indians were not here originally, but just like the rest of the people living in America, came here in waves of immigration over thousands of years. So, are the first "Indians" who came here the ones that laid claim to the land and are the original "owners"? There were many waves of immigration and later waves took the land of others who were there first. This happened in Asia and then in the "new world". So, who has the best claim for the land called America? Various Indian tribes were always fighting each other for the land.

For years the Apache tribe dominated much of what is currently Texas, as far east as the present day city of San Antonio. The Comanches lived in what is now Colorado. For some reason the Comanches decided to move south into the land of the Apaches. The Comanches dominated and drove the Apachies out or most of Texas toward New Mexico.

So, who has the better claim on Texas? The Apachies? The Comanches? The Spanish? Or the Anglos from the US?

How did the Spanish and Anglos do anything different than what waves and waves of immigrants had done over the centuries? They just happend to have done it more recently. Why is not the Anglos ownership of the US not as valid as the first wave of immigrants who came thousands of years ago but were then destroyed or pushed out by other immigrants?

Just wondering.