TEXT ANALYSIS 4/5
DESTRUCTION of the INDIES (1552)
By Malynda O’Neal - Facilitator
1. What is the author arguing?
Bartolome de las Casas was a missionary who wrote an account of what he viewed as barbarous acts of treachery committed by the Spaniards in their search for wealth in America. Casas is making an argument that he witnessed the acts of the Spaniards towards the natives they encountered as cruel and inhumane and that these natives were not given the opportunity to understand Christianity. Casas deplored the acts of the Spaniards and their sacrifice of life which he viewed as wiping out most of the civilization.
2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?
Casas has given an emotional account filled with what he views the Spaniards did to conquer the native people in a very blunt and cruel way. Casas seems to view the natives in a most compassionate way such as stating that they were tender and simple people. Casas wrote this article as if to need to share what he witnessed so that he could deal with the ugliness that he had seen. Casas seemed to have a nonjudgmental view of people in general and that what he had experienced was against his beliefs and morals almost like what he had seen was sort of surreal to him. Casas viewed these acts with emotion and sensitivity.
3. What is the historical significance / relevance of this document?
This document is an eye witness account to what was a quest of Spaniards to increase their wealth and power and basically wipe out any human that they deemed in their way or a disbeliever. The document is worded so honestly and detailed that all those who read it can easily see a picture of what it must have been like to be at this time and place which helps us to understand the historical event that took place at this time.
4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?
Casas’ document is written in such a compassionate and convincing way as the Spaniards being inhumane and morally wrong in their treatment of the natives. Casas documentation of what the people around him were like made the reading of this document very compelling and you wanted to understand what he had experienced at that time.
I liked how you mentioned the compassion of Casas. He did show a tender heart toward them in the way he described the butchering of the Mexicas. One thing I thought was so interesting is how religion was always in the forefront of the Spaniards battle plan yet they did not treat the natives in a very Christian way. They didn't limit their battles to just fighting against soldiers, they massacred women and children also. This piece was disturbing to read and you summed up the major points well.
ReplyDeleteHi, Malynda!
ReplyDeleteI really liked your analysis. I felt that you really grasped what Las Casas was saying, and you understood the historical significance of this piece.
However, there are two things that I'd like to add:
1. I felt that he argued from an ethical/moral standpoint as well. When he mentioned that the natives hadn't even been indoctrinated into the religion he was wanting to share with them, he was attempting to share with Europeans his outrage that there were millions of possible Catholics that had not been converted. This could appeal both to the moral standpoint that murder is wrong, and from the standpoint that each Catholic represents revenue for the church.
2. I don't feel like Las Casas was as compassionate as he appears to be. Yes, if you consider that his company was a bunch of soldiers-of-fortune that most likely had no other thought than to make lots of money, he looks like a complete angel. But at the same time, had he been allowed to minister to the natives beforehand, and had those natives denounced the religion he was trying to sell them, would he have been as upset over their murders? If you look at how the Spanish Inquistion played out, you will see that many "holy" men felt it was perfectly okay to abuse, torture, and even kill people if they were considered "infidels". I don't think he would have gone so far as to dash babies against rocks, but by his using descriptive language that reflected his belief that the natives were simple and almost as beasts, you can see that he didn't really look at them as fellow humans, but rather like dogs. Worthy of compassion, but probably only under certain conditions.
Hello! I just want to start off by saying that I enjoyed reading your analyst and the comments that followed. I, just as Holly believe that you did a great job responding to the reading, and I can tell that the gruesomeness of the reading definitely affected you. I too have a few things that I would like to add to the conversation.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, I would like to agree with Holly. I don’t think that we should give Las Casas a pass. He describes the people of the Indies as “void of … craft, subtlety and malice,…”. Also, he states that the people are easily willed to follow the Spaniards, despite whatever they did, without any thought of revenge. Las Casas goes as far to call them imbeciles who are, paraphrasing here “worthless”, who have no ambition. It seems to me as well that he cares nothing about these people or what happens to them. I think that Holly is exactly right when she says that, he thinks of them as nothing more than animals. I don’t believe that he would have been upset at all about any of the murders, if the people had somehow offended him in anyway before-hand.
Second, an assumption I have is that Las Casas wasn’t truly bothered by the acts of the soldiers told about in #5. If Las Casas was willing to describe the people the way that he did, than why wouldn’t he be willing to treat them as such? Wagers, games of killing, some people would do that while hunting.
I’m not trying to say that Las Casas was a monster, or what he did was nearly as bad as what others did. I just wanted to argue that I think that this excerpt was for more of a statement of frustration (maybe) rather than remorse or compassion for others.
I tend to believe there was more compassion on the part of Casas than we may be understanding. If you consider the term used to describe the natives, imbecile, it's not used as a derogatory term. An imbecile is simply just a lower level of mental functioning, a step above mental retardation. To the educated and traveled explorer, the skills and lifestyle of the natives may have been underestimated by the Spaniards. After all, the Mexica's way of life had sustained them for many, many years prior to the arrival of the Spaniards. I think it also important to note some other language used by Casas to describe the natives; he called them innocently simple, tender, effeminate, and creations of God. To me, words like this speak volumes to the value Casas placed on these people. Perhaps some words that may be a little offensive were to emphasize the timidity of the Mexicas as an attribute, not an impediment.
ReplyDeleteSam & Holly & Anna,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your comments regarding Casas possibly not being as compassionate as maybe I was thinking. This article could be his account of more frustration than maybe feeling sorry for the Mexica's and needing to vent the ugliness that he had seen. Casas does reference the people of the Indies as simple among other things and its tough to make a call of whether this is a generalization or speaking of these people as lower beings. As Anna stated he did call them "tender beings" which to me is someone who is viewing the people with compassion. When I read this paper I was under the impression that Casa was truely bothered but maybe it is all in your perspective of the wording? Great points!
Good job on your Text Analysis.
ReplyDeleteGreat conversation guys!
ReplyDelete