Las Casas Arguments
Though Las Casas does mention specific rights (defense, retribution, freedom), he doesn’t present his experiences in the New World in the context of human rights abuse, as would a modern exposé.
Throughout the document, Las Casas appeals to the compassion and reason of the reader to convince him or her of the cruel practices and false pretexts of the conquest. In doing so he describes how three kinds of law (natural, human, divine) are being broken and defiled in the New World.
Firstly, Las Casas presents the conquest as being in conflict with natural law – the law that demands that humans act compassionately and justly towards one another. It is this law that makes us understand the actions that Las Casas describes (torture, mass-murder, demotion of men to beasts, harsh treatment of women and children) as universally despicable. It is part of natural law that all human life has value and all humans have the right to defend what is valuable in that life.
Secondly, Las Casas presents the conquest as contrary to human law – the laws of human society. Las Casas asserts on page 52 that “At no stage had any order been issued entitling [the Spanish generals] to massacre the people or enslave them”. Not only were the generals committing the crime of falsely acting in the name of the Spanish Crown, but they were acting in contradiction to Spanish law which stated that the indigenous peoples of the New World were free peoples, not to be subjected to extermination or slavery. Furthermore, says Las Casas, people cannot legally be punished, as the indigenous people were, for rebelling against a power that had imposed itself on them.
Thirdly, Las Casas presents the conquest as an affront to divine law. Basically, because the Spaniards had forfeited God for gold and were committing mortal sins, and the indigenous people perished without ever having known of or believed in God, everyone in the New World was damned to go to Hell. Las Casas gives evidence of how the Spaniards earned God’s wrath when their ships sank and their city was ravaged by natural disaster.
The fact that the conquest conflicts with these three laws is how Las Casas frames his opposition to it.
tag: last301
Throughout the document, Las Casas appeals to the compassion and reason of the reader to convince him or her of the cruel practices and false pretexts of the conquest. In doing so he describes how three kinds of law (natural, human, divine) are being broken and defiled in the New World.
Firstly, Las Casas presents the conquest as being in conflict with natural law – the law that demands that humans act compassionately and justly towards one another. It is this law that makes us understand the actions that Las Casas describes (torture, mass-murder, demotion of men to beasts, harsh treatment of women and children) as universally despicable. It is part of natural law that all human life has value and all humans have the right to defend what is valuable in that life.
Secondly, Las Casas presents the conquest as contrary to human law – the laws of human society. Las Casas asserts on page 52 that “At no stage had any order been issued entitling [the Spanish generals] to massacre the people or enslave them”. Not only were the generals committing the crime of falsely acting in the name of the Spanish Crown, but they were acting in contradiction to Spanish law which stated that the indigenous peoples of the New World were free peoples, not to be subjected to extermination or slavery. Furthermore, says Las Casas, people cannot legally be punished, as the indigenous people were, for rebelling against a power that had imposed itself on them.
Thirdly, Las Casas presents the conquest as an affront to divine law. Basically, because the Spaniards had forfeited God for gold and were committing mortal sins, and the indigenous people perished without ever having known of or believed in God, everyone in the New World was damned to go to Hell. Las Casas gives evidence of how the Spaniards earned God’s wrath when their ships sank and their city was ravaged by natural disaster.
The fact that the conquest conflicts with these three laws is how Las Casas frames his opposition to it.
tag: last301
posted by Serena at 11:56 PM
1 Comments:
Hi Serena,
I think you put forward an a great summary of Las Casas arguements...In reading your post I was wondering if Las Casas, is indirectly defending the native's peoples rights even though he does not mention them specifically as you say. I think, however this is his objective of appealing to natural, human and divine laws to show that the indigenous population is just as deserving of the rights bestowed upon the European colonizers- perhaps even more so because of their non-malicious behaviour. Their right to life, freedom from opression, etc is defended in Las Casas assertion that they should have the right to resist their opressors, as you mentioned. I'm wondering if maybe at the time of his appeal there simply wasn't a discourse for defending rights, but he is doing so through his own vocabulary...anyways thanks for your post
Matea
Post a Comment
<< Home