Antonio de Nebrija’s observation that language and empire go hand in hand has become a classic for most writers interested in exploring the connections between language, translation and empire (Rafael 1988, 23; Durston 2007, 32; Mignolo 2003 [1995]; Valdeón 2014a, 25). When, in 1492, Christopher Columbus set sail to find an easier route to Asia, he was aware of the importance of languages. Consequently, in his first voyage, he took two interpreters, Domingo de Jérez and Luis de Torres, who would eventually prove useless (Giambruno 2008, 30). Columbus acknowledged this in the writings that have come down to us. In his third letter, for example, he recorded that he had taken a few Indians by force in order to be informed about the lands (1870, 12). Later he returned to Europe with some natives that he had kidnapped with a view to teach them Spanish before returning to the Caribbean. This has been called “the primal crime in the New World” (Greenblatt 1976, 563), which was performed in the interest of communication. For his part, Rafael (1988, 26) reminds us that Spanish still uses “dominate a language” when we refer to speaking a foreign language well, although this can be applied to other European languages.