Essentially, neither side won nor lost and not much changed after the debate. The current situation remained as is. While the outcome of the debate was inconclusive, it did established two important legacies. The first was that Bartolome de las Casas was officially recognized as protector of the Indians.
What caused the Valladolid debate?
In 1550, alarmed by reports of cruel treatment meted out to natives in Spain’s South American colonies, the Vatican organized a debate in Valladolid, Spain.
What was Sepúlveda’s argument?
Sepulveda rationalized Spanish treatment of American Indians by arguing that Indians were “natural slaves” and that Spanish presence in the New World would benefit them.
How did Sepúlveda justify enslaving natives?
The text justified theoretically following Aristotelian ideas of natural slavery the inferiority of Indians and their enslavement by the Spaniards. He claimed that the Indians had no ruler, and no laws, so any civilized man could legitimately appropriate them.
What did Juan de Sepúlveda do?
He was the adversary of Bartolomé de las Casas in the Valladolid Controversy in 1550 concerning the justification of the Spanish Conquest of the Indies. Sepúlveda was the defender of the Spanish Empire’s right of conquest, of colonization, and of evangelization in the so-called New World.
What was the Valladolid debate quizlet?
The Valladolid debate (1550-1551) was the first moral debate in European history to discuss the rights and treatment of a colonized people by colonizers. a Spanish priest who settled in the New World and was against the torture and genocide of Native Americans.
What are Bartolome de las Casas main arguments?
While the Pope had granted Spain sovereignty over the New World, de Las Casas argued that the property rights and rights to their own labor still belonged to the native peoples. Natives were subjects of the Spanish crown, and to treat them as less than human violated the laws of God, nature, and Spain.
How are Las Casas views different from Sepúlveda?
Their perceptions of the native inhabitants formulated their opposing views on how the Spaniards should treat them. The most obvious difference between the two authors is that Sepulveda thinks very little of the Native Americans, while Las Casas thought of the Indians as people with potential to do great things.
