Las Casas Were The Barbarians Summary

Some of the disasters that Columbus suffered started when he returned to the island he had named Hispaniola to discover that all of the Spanish settlers he had left behind were dead. Columbus attempted to enslave them and

1. Las Casas argues that although the Indians are barbarians according to certain definitions, it does not follow that others must rule them. Why not?

Bartolomé de las Casas was one of the first major fighters for human rights in the New World. In 1542, Las Casas wrote to the Spanish crown, who at the time was Charles V, “A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies,” which spoke of Spain's treachery towards the native peoples in the Spanish colonies, and asked for it to end.1 During the Spanish conquest of the New World—the region of North America and South America—the Spaniards establish dominance over the natives. They took their land, placed them without consent into the lower social class, and put them into labor. Las Casas was infuriated, especially by the hypocrisy surrounding the treatment of the natives; he felt that a society of Christian belief could never justify the behavior of the Spaniards.2 In Las Casas' letter to the crown, he denotes three key points, indicative of his goals. Las Casas wanted to end the downright enslavement of the natives, he wanted to end the war-like conquering of them, and he wanted the Spanish crown to act upon his requests—in the end, he found grand success.

The word barbarian in the time of the ancient Greeks meant foreigner. In the 1200's it turned into a much more negative term meaning people who were savage and evil. Today Barbarian means a person of a community that doesn’t belong to one of the great civilizations. So the question “How barbaric were the barbarians?” My answer is very, despite some civilized acts, for a multitude of reasons. (Background essay)

Bartholomé de las Casas refers to the Spanish Captains as “Enemies of the human race”. They showed no pity or innate humanity whatsoever as they charged their dogs onto the defenseless Indians, tearing them to pieces and devouring them. Moreover, if a Spaniard fell while committing these atrocities, the Captains vowed to slay one hundred innocent Indians in

They tortured the Indians, who at first, had thought that the Spanish were Gods. They first landed on Hispinaloa, where the slaughter began. De Las Casas wrote such terrifying accounts that truly illustrated how savage, the Spanish really were. “They snatched young babes from the Mothers Breasts, and then dash out the brains of those innocents against the Rocks; others they cast into rivers scoffing and jeering them, and call’d upon their Bodies when falling with derision, the true testimony of their Crustily, to come to them, and inhumanely exposing others to their Merciless Swords, together with the Mothers that gave them Life,(pg. 13).” Diaz del Castillo on the other hand, disagreed with how De las Casas depicted their conquest. His accounts made it seems as though they didn't have a choice, but to fight. He made it seem as though they weren’t savages, just to be savages, but rather,they saw no other opportunity of keeping the peace present itself and so, they had to fight back. “When the three prisoners whom we had sent forward began to speak to the Indians, it only increased their fury and they made such an attack on us that we could not endure it… and we attacked them with such impetuosity that we killed and wounded may of them with our fire and among them three captains.” Castillo made it seem as though they were jaded of war, however, they were left with no choice. I certainly believe that De Las Casas was closer to the truth. In fact, other historians, shared the same accounts. For example, historian, Gomara states in his book Histories of Infamy, “The spaniards slashed open many Indians in the wars and even in the mines…They made them slaves…(1552, 1:18v).” The indians were enslaved and overworked and the Spanish were so in lust with the greed and wealth that had newly fallen upon them, their ambitions took them to another level of cruelty in order to get what they

In the 13th Century, a group of nomadic people known as the Mongols would rise to power. The Mongols invaded and took over many parts of Asia and Europe. They were well-known for their brutal but brilliant tactics. The Mongols gained the reputation of being classified as “barbarians,” but were they really? According to Webster’s Dictionary, the word “barbarian” is defined as, “a person from an alien land, culture, or group believed to be inferior, uncivilized, or violent.”

In this excerpt, Las Casas referenced the work of Trogus Pompey, who referred to the Spanish as “wild and barbaric”. The Native Americans were described as “easy to teach, very talented, ready to observe the Christian religion and correct their sins”. Las Casas believes that before Sepúlveda wrote his statement that contained untruthful evidence, he should’ve consulted the religious followers who lived among the Native Americans. Ethics are elucidated into his argument, because he continuously refers to the Indians ability to cultivate and establish their

separate how De Las Casas might have been an outspoken critic of the Spanish’s treatment of indigenous people, and how he was still a part of a repressive institution. Finally, I

Early on, some opposition against the actions of the Spanish in the New World where the priest, Bartholome de Las Casas, denounced the harsh treatment of natives in the 1530s stated, "From the beginning until now, Spain’s entire invasion of the New World has been wrong and tyrannical. And from 1510 on, no Spaniard there can claim good faith as an excuse for wars, discoveries, or the slave trade.” which portrays the Christian aggression against a race of people who are innocent. Thier only crime was being non-Christian.

They demanded that everyone, even animals and children shall be killed and beheaded. They showed no mercy in killing innocent people whom had done no harm to them. If the meaning of barbaric means to be cruel and brutal, the is a definite example. They were brutal in the way of killing thousands or hundreds of innocent people and children. They were cruel for not caring about the lives the killed. They most definitely should be considered barbaric because their actions show their barbaric ways. This document also shows the number of deaths per year, in 1221 they killed approximately 1,747,000 people. That was the most they killed but the least varied in numbers such as 30,000 and in some cases there were no survivors. By taking the lives of innocent people and resourcing into savagery they clearly display strong actions and characteristics of barbarians.

Any student of history has come to recognize the fact that history is written by the victor and in lieu of this, research becomes essential to uncover where the truth lies. The True History of the Conquest of New Spain, so ironically named, is a personal account for historical events leading up to the conquest of New Spain, formerly known as the City of Mexico. The author, Bernal Diaz, was a soldier of the conquering army who composed the document well after the events took place sometime between 1552 and 1557. Though the document did provide insight in regards to the victor’s perspective, it also served as a tool to rewrite the account of the conquered people.

The approaches Britain and Spain had towards colonization were reflected in their treatment of Native Americans. Ultimately, both countries were primarily interested in the expansion of their empires, the enrichment of their economies and their own political power, and their treatment of the natives is indicative of these aims. As Spain’s only purpose for colonization was to conquer land for their empire, the

The Spaniards were known for their brutality against the Indians. “Everywhere Spain went, Indians died by the millions” (Lecture 6). The

In J.M. Coetzee’s novel Waiting for the Barbarians, a Magistrate and his outpost fall into turmoil subsequent to the Empire’s endeavor to subjugate the barbarians. The Magistrate believes that the Empirespecifically Captain Joll, a higher-ranking officialhas unscrupulously entered his area of power and unjustifiably tortures the barbarians so as to “interrogate” them. During the Empire’s effort to capture the barbarians and forcefully remove them from “their” land, the Magistrate struggles to understand both his and Captain Joll’s behavior as well as the true nature of the Empire. Though the Magistrate and Captain Joll together represent the Empire, they approach the realities of imperial rule discordantly. In