Discuss the controversy between Las Casas and Sepulveda. What were their differing positions on the rights and obligations of Spaniards vis-à-vis Indians? How did both authors characterize indigenous Americans? On what basis did they frame their arguments?
The question of Spanish responsibility for and over the people of The New World raised theological, political, and philosophical discussion and debate—most notably between Juan Gines de Sepulveda (1490-1573), a Spanish humanist scholar who had never visited The New World, and Bartolome de las Casas (1474-1566), who himself had been an early Spanish Resident in the Americas. Their Debate at the Council of Valladolid (1550-51) exposed stark differences in their opinions of Spanish responsibility to the natives. Where Las Casas argued that the Indians were inherently good, Sepulveda presumed that they were barbaric, and barely human. Thus, Sepuveda argued, the Spanish had made a "Just War", because the Indians were truly less than human. But, while Sepulveda's opinion was based upon the writings of classical authors like Aristotle, it was Las Casas who had based his opinion on personal experiences, and was ultimately "correct" in his assertions.
2.Discuss the various factors at play in the "Spanish conquest" of the Aztec Empire. Evaluate the significance of each. How important were: great men, religious beliefs, technology, the nature of Spanish and Aztec cultural contexts, the nature of Aztec imperial rule, disease, and other factors?
There were a number of significant factors involved in the Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire; the Spanish exploited the weaknesses of the Aztec Empire to their advantage. Disease – namely smallpox and measles, had weakened the Aztec Empire certainly, but the Spanish utilized other weakness as well. The Aztec Empire was essentially in crisis, with severe physical and psychological problems abound in the empire. For their part, the Spani...