Valladolid debate

The Valladolid debate (1550–1551) was the first moral debate in European history to talk
about the right and treatment of an indigenous people by European colonists. Spanish town
of Valladolid in Kolejio de San Gregorio at this America 's victory in an ethical and religious
debate about a month ago , the Catholic religion is the justification for the conversion, and
especially about the relations between the European settlers and those natives of new
world . This included many conflicting views about the integration of the natives into
Spanish society, their conversion to Catholicism, and their authority.

A controversial theologian, the Dominican friar and bishop of Chiapas Bartolome de las

Casas, argued that the Amerindians were free men in the natural order, worthy of the same
consideration as the colonists, despite the practice of human sacrifice and other such
customs.   Opposing this view were many scholars and priests, including the humanist
[1]

scholar Juan Gins de Seplveda , who argued that human sacrifice of the

innocent , cannibalism , and other such "crimes against nature" were unacceptable and any
Either way it should be suppressed. With war possible. 
[2]

Although both sides claim to have won the dispute , there is no clear record to support
either interpretation. The case is considered one of the earliest examples of the ethical
debate about colonialism , the human rights of the colonized people, and international
relations . In Spain, this served to establish Las Casas as the primary, though controversial
protectorate of the Indians.   He and others 1542 new laws have contributed to pass,
[3]

which the Ancomianda system and limited given .  Although they did not completely reverse
[4]

the situation, the laws greatly improved the treatment of Indians and consolidated their
rights granted by earlier laws.   More importantly, the debate reflected a concern for
[4]

morality and justice in 16th-century Spain that only surfaced in other colonial powers
centuries later.

background

Bartolome de las Casas was the main defender of the Indians in the Junta of Valladolido

The colonialism of Spain and the conquest of the Americas stimulated an intellectual
debate, especially regarding the compulsory Christianization of the Indians. Bartolome de las
Casas , a Dominican friar from the School of Salamanca and member of the
rising Christian humanist movement, worked for years to oppose forced conversions and
expose the treatment of the natives in encomiendas .   Their efforts influenced the Papal
[3]

Bull Sublimis Deus of 1537 which established the status of Indians as rational beings. More

importantly, the Las Kas 1542 new laws ( Indies of law), which were designed to end the
Encominda system. 
[4]

Las driven by development and others, 1550 Spain 's King Charles I to be investigating the

issue further in order to end the military expansion.   king assembled a junta (jury)
[4] [5] The

of eminent doctors and theologians to hear both sides and issue a decision on the
dispute .   Las Casas represented one side of the debate. His position received some
[1]

support from the monarchy, which wanted to control the power of the regressors. The other
side was represented by Juan Gins de Sepulveda , whose arguments were used as support
by colonists and landowners who had benefited from this system. 
[4]

Discussion

Juan Gins de Sepulveda , supporter of the "Just" war against the Indians

Although Las Casas tried to strengthen his position by recounting his experiences with the
abuse of the concomitant system with Indians, the debate remained largely on theoretical
grounds. Sepulveda took a more secular approach than Las Casas, basing its arguments
on Aristotle and the humanist tradition to claim that some Indians were subject to slavery
because of their inability to control themselves, and if necessary by war. can be done in
moderation.   Las Casas protested, arguing that Aristotle's definition of barbarians and
[1]

natural slaves did not apply to Indians, all of whom were perfectly capable of reasoning and
brought them to Christianity without force or coercion. should go. 
[4]

Sepulveda put forward a number of arguments from his Latin Dialogue Democrates Alter

Cive de Justi Belli Causis   to claim that the barbaric traditions of some Indians justified
[6]

waging war against them. According to Sipulveda civilized people were bound to punish

evils like idol worship, adultery and cannibalism . War had to be waged "to root out the
crimes that offend nature". 
[7]

The Sepulveda issued four main justifications for a just war against some Indians. At first,
their natural state deemed them incapable of ruling themselves, and it was the responsibility
of the Spaniards to act as lords. Second, the Spaniards were entitled to prohibit cannibalism
as a crime against nature. Third, the same went for human sacrifice. Fourth, it was
important to convert Indians to Christianity. 
[8]

Mendoza Codex in a single drawing showing the arguments used by both sides, advanced
architecture versus brutal murders

Las Casas was drawn to the debate of his opponent, in part because he, upon hearing of
the existence of Sepúlveda's Alter Democrats , wrote in the late 1540s his own Latin
work, Apologia , which he argues by Aristotle The definition of "barbarian" and natural slave
in order to show the true form of their opponent's religious reasoning does not apply to
Indians, who were fully capable of reasoning and should be brought to Christianity without
force. 
[9] [10]

Las Casas pointed out that everyone was bound by international law to prevent the
innocent from being treated unjustly. He also cited St. Augustine and St. John Chrysostom ,
both of whom opposed the use of force to convert others to Christianity. Human sacrifice
was wrong, but it would be better to avoid war anyway. 
[11 1]

The arguments presented for Valladolid's junta by Las Casas and Sepulveda remained
abstract, with both sides relying on their opposite theories, which relied on similar, if not
identical, doctrinal authorities, which were interpreted according to their respective
arguments. 
[12]

Result

In the end, both sides declared that they had won the debate, but neither achieved the
desired result. Las Casas saw no end to the Spanish wars of conquest in the New World,
and Sepulveda did not see new laws limiting the power of the encomienda system. This
debate strengthened Las Casas' position as the principal protector of the Indians in the
Spanish Empire,   and further weakened the Encomienda system. However, this did not
[3]

make any significant change in the Spanish behavior of the Indians. 

[4]

Both Sepulveda and Las Casas maintained their positions long after the end of the debate,
but when the Spanish presence in the New World became permanent, their
retribution subsided . 
[13]

Sepulveda's arguments contributed to the policy of "war with fire and blood", which was
implemented by the Third Mexican Provincial Council in 1585 during the Chichimeca
War .   Lewis Heinke by, while Juan Ginns D Sepuleveda conquered became the hero of
[14]

the match, their success was short-lived, and their work in Spain was never published again
during their lifetime. 
[15]

The ideas of Bartholomew de las Casas had a more lasting impact on the decisions of
King Philip II , as well as on history and human rights .   Las Kas Ankomianda criticized
[16]

the system instead of Ridukiyns contributed with.   His testimony on the peaceful nature
[17]

of Native Americans also encouraged nonviolent policies concerning religious conversion of

Indians in New Spain and Peru . This helped convince more missionaries to come to the
Americas to study indigenous peoples, such as Bernardino de Sahagun., who learned native
languages to learn more about their cultures and civilizations. 
[18]

The effect of the Las Casas doctrine was also limited. In 1550, the king ordered that the
conquest should end, as the Valladolid debate was to decide whether the war was
justified. With little respect for government orders, conquistadors such as Pedro de
Valdivia began waging war in Chile during the first half of the 1550s . The expansion of
Spanish territory into the New World was allowed again in May 1556, and a decade
later, Spain began its conquest of Asia in the Philippines . 
[16]

atlantic slave trade

After the Valladolid debate, and the establishment of new laws protecting Native Americans
from slavery , the Atlantic slave trade increased significantly. Historians such as Sylvia
Winters have argued that through protecting the Native Americans of Las Casas, they
encouraged the use of African slaves for labor in the New World.   In a nineteenth-century
[19]

text, the French priest and revolutionary, Henri Gregoire , dismissed the implications of Las
Casa in the Atlantic slave trade . He said that the practice of enslavement of people in
Africa was started by the Portuguese at least 30 years ago .  The slave trade was never
[20]

explicitly mentioned in Las Casa's works, as he advocated freedom and equal rights for all

men, regardless of country or skin colour .   this text, Gregoire explained that the idea
[21] In

of Las Casas, which supported the slave trade to keep Indians enslaved , originated from
the Spanish historian Antonio de Herrera y Tordecillas .   Their claims were confirmed
[22]

by the posthumous publication of the Historia de las Indias in Las Casas in 1875 . In this
book, Bartholomew de las Casas expressed his regret for not being more aware of the
injustice with which the Portuguesetook Africans and enslaved them. He explained that he
was careless in believing that Africans were rightfully enslaved, and declared that
the treatment of African slaves was unfair and inhumane to Indians . 
[19]

black legend

In the Brevísima Relacion de la destrucción de las India (1552), Las Casas' critique of the

Spanish military forces in the New World , was one of the starting points of the Spanish
colonization of the Black Legend . The black narrative was an anti-Hispanic anti-Catholic
historiographic trend which portrayed a highly negative image of Spanish colonization. The
text became highly popular in the Netherlands and Great Britain , where it was used to
portray Spain as a backward and obscene country.   Later translations of Las Casas' work
[23]

were carried out by the Spanish Council of the Indies.in response to their use as anti-
Spanish propaganda.   But the fact that Valladolid was debated indicates that the
[16]

Spanish were concerned about the moral consequence of their conquest , often more so

than the invading forces in North America where the destruction of the Native
Americans was publicly discussed until much later. was accepted. 
[24]

modern reception

In recent years, the Valladolid debate has been noted for its role, though marginal, in the
concept of international politics in the sixteenth century.   Las Casas' ethical
[25]

arguments offer a reflection on the question of jurisdiction , asking whether the law can be
enforced internationally, especially in so-called 'rogue states'. 
[26]

The debate also holds a place in contemporary justice warfare theory , as scholars aim to

expand jus ad bellum within war studies . 
[26]
reflection in art

In 1938 the story of German writers Reinhold Schneider Las Casas and Charles V ( Las

Kas vor Karl V.   [d] ) was published.

In 1992 the Valladolid debate became a source of inspiration for Jean-Claude Carrire ,

who published the novel La controvers de Valladolid ( Valladolid  in Dispute ). The novel
was filmed for television with the same name. Director – Jean-Daniel Verren , Jean-
Pierre Marielle as Las Casas, Jean-Louis Trintignant as Sepulveda. The play was played on
a stage in Spokane, WA in January 2019