Did the European conquerors of the Americas in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, mainly the Spanish and their use of conquistadors, know and understand the impact their conquests had on indigenous peoples? The Valladolid Debate in 1550 provides insight into the moral and ethical questions asked by the theological and scholarly elite in Spain over this exact question. What was the context of this debate? Why did it happen, and what were the results and implications of the Valladolid Debate?
Valladolid Debate: Summary
As the repercussions of the Spanish conquest of the Americas began to reach the shores of Spain, the moral question over the treatment of the indigenous peoples of the Americas became a topic of heated discussion in society and the royal courts.
1550 Valladolid Debate:
Instructed by the King of Spain, Bartolome de las Casas and Juan Sepulveda debated the moral rights and treatment of indigenous populations by Spanish colonizers in Spanish Court in 1550 in the city of Valladolid. A moral, theological, and ethical debate about the justification for the Catholic conversion of natives, the conquest of the Americas, and the relationship between the indigenous people and the Spanish invaders.
Historical Context of the Valladolid Debate
Strongly influenced by the abuses of the encomienda system used to control, profit from, and subjugate the indigenous peoples of America, Bartolome de las Casas, a Dominican friar in Spain, worked to convince Charles I, the King of Spain, that the use of the encomienda system was morally wrong. At the time, the system designed to protect the native peoples of America became a method of enslavement and abuse that saw the deterioration of the indigenous population through disease, death, and forced labor.
His efforts to convince the King to stop the practice were somewhat successful, as King Charles I was so influenced by Bartolome’s argument that in 1550 he ordered the forced expansion of Spanish territories in the Americas to stop until the King was convinced of its moral implications.
La leyenda negra (the Black Legend)
Historiography can often be used as an ideological instrument for exploring topics such as the Valladolid debate, the Black Legend is a prime example of this. Follow along as we deep dive into the Black Legend, and how the history that we learn is often history obscured!
The Black Legend is a term that dates back to the 16th century, referring to the Spanish conquerors who were seen as cruel and intolerant to the indigenous people. The abusive system that was designed to protect the native people of America that took place before the Valladolid Debate in 1550 resulted in a cruel life for the indigenous people whilst Spanish territories were expanding into their land. The lack of moral certainty and the amount of pain and suffering was the inspiration behind the La leyenda negra, the Black Legend.
Fig. 1: Spanish Black Legend illustration
Did you know?
The Image seen above originates from the American-Spanish War of 1898 in Cuba. Its purpose was to discredit and stain the image of the Spanish troops by depicting them as having a murderous and animal-like nature in their tactics and practices.
As the leading European power in the 16th century, Spain had become a formidable force, giving its rivals a reason to try and discredit them in their intercolonial conflict.
The Black Legend is worse than simplistic: it is malicious propaganda. It is simplistic because all imperialist conquests have taken an equally traumatic form and continue to do so..."
- Alejandro Lipschutz1
The Black Legend was created to utilize Spain's Moorish history in the hopes of tainting Spain's appearance with a racially immoral perspective. The anti-Spanish propaganda was originally formed as a psychological and political tool that was essentially used to demonize the Spanish empire and its culture. By doing this, Spanish rivals hoped to restrict Spain's expansion, power, and influence across the world by destroying its image.
1550: Valladolid Debate
King Charles I ordered a debate in the Spanish courts to help settle and resolve the moral and theological issues that involved the encomienda system and the treatment of the Indigenous peoples of America. He assembled a jury consisting of scholars, doctors, and theologians who would oversee a debate between Bartolome de las Casas and Juan Gines de Sepulveda.
The Debaters and their Positions |
Bartolome de las Casas | Juan Gines de Sepulveda |
 Fig. 2 Bartolome de las Casas
|  Fig. 3 Juan Gines de Sepulveda
|
A Dominican friar, he argued for the defense of the Indigenous peoples of America and the end of the encomienda system. | A prominent philosopher and theologian, he argued in support of the colonists, landowners, and conquerors who benefitted from the encomienda system. |
Bartolome mainly argued on theoretical grounds. He claimed that: Labeling the Americas as barbarians was incorrect as they were capable of reason and thus, could be converted without force. He reinforced the international law of treating the innocent justly. He cited Catholic Saints and teachings that opposed conversion by force. He also argued that even with the practice of human sacrifice, any war that would erupt through forced conversion would be more harmful than ritual practice.
| Sepulveda argued on secular and humanist grounds, stating that the natives should be enslaved because they could not govern themselves. His evidence was the natives had barbaric tendencies such as idolatry, cannibalism, and human sacrifice. He maintained four central points: The nature of the natives made it so they could not morally rule themselves. The Spaniards, as devout Catholics, had the responsibility to stop crimes against nature such as Cannibalism. The same went for crimes such as human sacrifice. It was the moral duty of the Spanish to convert the natives to Christianity, which may have to be done by force.
|
But what personal experiences molded the opposing perspectives of these two important figures?
Bartolome de las Casas
Bartolomé spent 50 years of his life fighting against the colonial abuse of indigenous people and slavery, advocating for a humane policy of colonization.
Spanish priest and bishop, Bartolome de las Casas is known as a social reformer of the 16th century. In his earlier days, Las Casas was one of the first Spanish settlers in the Americas and participated in the colonial abuse against the indigenous peoples at the time. The year 1515 marked a period of change for Las Casas, what would be considered making a strong statement at the time, Las Casas freed his enslaved people and changed his viewpoint on all forms of slavery.
Las Casas believed that indigenous people were no less human than himself, influencing his argument during the Valladolid Debate that forcefully subjugating them was wrong. Las Casas is described to have a humble beginning as the son of a small merchant. A combination of this, his enrollment in the army in 1497, and his first-hand experience witnessing the Spanish treatment of the indigenous population would have been influential on his respect and views about those around him as he was not influenced by the philosophy taught in higher education in this time but instead experienced the practices in real life.
Juan Gines de Sepulveda
Born in Pozoblanco, Spain in 1490, Juan Gines de Sepulveda was born into a similarly humble beginning to Las Casas. So what influenced their later viewpoints to be so different? Sepulveda differed from Las Casas through his following of Aristotelian ideas surrounding slavery. Sepulveda grew up around many forms of education, he was schooled in Cordova and by 25 he had studied at two establishments, Henares university, and Colegio de Siguenza. His highly-educated lifestyle continued when he left for the very prestigious Colegio de San Clemente.
Juan Gines de Sepulveda's arguments during the Valladolid debate claimed that the indigenous people of the Americas were not civilized. With no law or leader, Sepulveda believed that they were freely available to be appropriated.
And so it is with the barbarous and inhumane peoples [the Indians] who have no civil life and peaceful customs. It will always be just and in conformity with natural law that such people submit to the rule of the more cultured and humane princes and nations."
— Juan Gines de Sepulveda2
Aristotle believed that certain groups of people that were 'natural' enslaved people and that slavery were a beneficial transaction for all parties involved. It is this Aristotle-like perspective that Sepulveda picked up through his education, highly influencing his arguments and beliefs surrounding colonialism. Having never visited the American continent, Sepulveda's opinions were based purely on his education, rather than La Casas' first-hand experience with the Spanish treatment of indigenous people.
Fig. 4: Aristotle
Results of the Valladolid Debate
The results of the Valladolid Debate were a theoretical draw, as neither side earned an outright moral victory, and neither side saw the outcome they desired.
Bartolome de las Casas sought to end the Spanish conquest of the Americas, which did not happen. Juan Sepulveda wanted the New Laws of 1542, which restricted and reformed the encomienda system, overturned–which did not happen. Both saw their positions weaken over time as the Spanish settlement in the New World became more permanent.
Impact of the Valladolid Debate
Though neither side got the result they wanted, both sides impacted Spanish views and actions in America.
Sepulveda’s views were championed by conquistadors and Spanish settlers and heavily influenced the Spanish's violent and forceful policies in the conquest of central Mexico in 1585.
Las Casas’ views had a more influential impact. His views influenced King Phillip II to replace the encomienda system with a system of reducciones–settlements created by Spain, in which indigenous peoples would be relocated to be converted and assimilated into Spanish culture. His views also had a strong moral influence, convincing many Spanish missionaries to go to New Spain to study the native cultures and languages to find more peaceful means of conversion.
Las Casas’ influence, however, was limited. Even though King Charles I halted Spanish expansion in 1550 until the moral issue was resolved, the order to stop the expansion was mainly ignored. Then the order reversed in 1556 as Spain expanded its territory in North America and the Philippines.
The Valladolid Debate - Key takeaways
- The repercussions of the Spanish conquest of the Americas formed the moral question over the treatment of the indigenous peoples of the Americas.
- King Charles I ordered a debate between Bartolome de las Casas and Juan Gines de Sepulveda to help settle and resolve moral and theological issues.
- Bartolome de las Casas argued for defending the indigenous peoples of America and ending the encomienda system whereas Juan Gines de Sepulveda argued for the colonists, who benefitted from the encomienda system.
- The results of the Valladolid Debate were a theoretical draw, as neither side earned an outright moral victory.
- Though neither side got the result they wanted, both sides impacted Spanish views and actions in America.
References
- Juan Gines de Sepulveda, (1547). The Second Democrats.
- Alejandro Lipschutz, (1963). El problema racial en la conquista de América y el mestizaje.
Explanations 
Exams 
Magazine 
