Film Review: Las Casas Even In The Rain

Improved Essays
Las Casas also rebuttals Sepúlveda’s second claim: the Indians need intervention because of their use of barbarous society and practices. First off, Las Casas analyzes whether or not Spain has jurisdiction to intervene in this matter. He claims that under temporal jurisdiction, spiritual matters are not matters of the state for idolaters living in the Christian kingdom. Moreover, idolaters living outside the Christian kingdom are neither problems of the state nor the church. Even when looking at the Indian’s written language, although it is in special characters, Las Casas believed it was proof of a functioning society where the natives were capable of governing themselves at the time, meaning the Christian kingdom has no legitimate reason …show more content…
When doing a comparison of their arguments, it would seem that they are drastically opposed to one another. However, it seems apparent that they are both merely offering different outlooks within the same dominant structure. In the film Even in the Rain, the dominant actors are seen eating dinner and having a heated conversation regarding Bartolomé de las Casas. As some venerate Las Casas as being a radical pro-Indian liberation, Anton provides viewers with a different perspective. Conceding to the fact that Las Casas was looking for the humanization of the indigenous people, he also did seek to limit their freedom by making them answer to the Spanish Crown. Las Casas argues for the integration of the natives as equals to their Spaniard counterparts, assimilating to the dominant culture. It is for this reason that I believe Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda and Bartolomé de las Casas are not as different as they may seem, where the difference lies in the level of oppression for the conquered people. Sepúlveda called for the outright deprivation of the Indian’s rights, using them as a commodity to help the Spaniards. Las Casas called for giving the Indians rights, but forcing them to still abide the Spanish Crown. The oppression of the Indians is still prevalent in both views, because neither Sepúlveda nor Las Casas believe the Indians should be the sovereign entity they once were before the Spaniards invaded. Both still holding onto natural law, their claims are rooted in the idea that the Spaniards and Christianity are superior to anything else in the New World, which is why I would not label Las Casas as the “Protector of the Indians”. Colonization is still the end goal of both debaters, and neither really call for the Indians making their own choice on whether or not to become loyal to this colonial power but rather assume the Indians will become part of their

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    For the Natives it was unreasonable for excess clothing to be worn given the climate, but because the Spanish believed only their version of society was right, the Spaniards forced the Natives to change to adapt to their way of life. Most Europeans believed that those who did not observe the Christian faith were brutes and that they were dumb, but Cortez believed that the Natives were men and they wanted to be converted so they should not be treated harshly (Doc 6). The Natives would be treated as real men and given freedom, if they agreed to be converted. If the Natives did not agree to this, war would be waged against them (Doc 2). Europeans believed that this would not be a problem, as they believed the Natives wanted to be cleansed of their sins and their savage practice of human…

    • 1142 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Emily Feder Western Political Thought Paper Topic 5 The Establishment Clause: Fact or Fiction “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” These words are an integral part of the establishment of the framework of the United States, but does religion really have no place in politics? The debate over the role of religion in civil society dates back to 18th century. The greatest analysis can be found in John Locke’s Letter Concerning Toleration and Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Discourse on Inequality. While the two scholars disagreed on the role of religion, they both agreed that the interaction between the state and the church must be managed. Both Locke and Rousseau had a tremendous…

    • 1880 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Vitoria is against the seizing of land of properties of natives. He argues that the Spanish conquistadors are not morally justified to act in the way that have towards the natives. The argument they present for seizing the land and property of the natives is that it is for their own good and that they have no legitimate ownership of the land. Vitoria argues that is argument is groundless. Also, just because the natives were attacking back in defense or fear of the Spanish does not make Spanish’s actions just for they are the ones who started the attacks.…

    • 1011 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Instead of being at the top of the ethnic hierarchy for being the majority population, Indigenous people were seen below Spaniards. Despite being a Nobleman, Don Felipe Guaman Poma de Ayala was not truly held with the same respect a Spaniard Noble would receive. As an Indigenous Peruvian writer he wrote a letter to the King of Spain, in which he expressed his true feelings about the treatment of his people. His’s letter was intended to let the King know that the Indigenous population should take charge of their own people. Guaman Poma de Ayala included his perspective of how he witness the exploitation of his people (Latin Colonial America, p.83).…

    • 1135 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Dominican bishop attributed European domination not to their inherent superiority over Natives, but to their excessive cruelty. Las Casas viewed the ulterior motives of European conquest--exploitation of a population incapable of resisting their advances. Bartolomé denounced the Spaniard 's treatment of the natives and urged the papacy to pass the New Laws of 1542; the New Laws prohibited Indian slavery and punished individuals responsible for the Peruvian Civil War by stripping away their encomiendas. Las Casas ' objective was to humanize the Native Amerindians, elevating them to the same social status of Europeans, and peacefully guide them to…

    • 813 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    He condemned the colonists by proclaiming them as hypocrites and finished saying that they “can no more be saved than the Moors or Turks.”4 This is because he disputed how they could call themselves Christians if they treated the Native Americans in such a cruel and submissive manner, not showing any signs of love and, as a result, committing sin. Similarly, the Laws of Burgos were written in 1512, outlining laws and regulations that colonists in the New World had to respect and follow or pay a hefty fine. The laws were made to cease “the evils and hardships…which the Indians now…

    • 1187 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    However, he believes in measuring freedom as a basis for civility. The same way he believed that one cannot just go and take land for it would infringe on the rights of the Indians, there still needs to be a placement of limits on liberty; to protect from the inherent unruliness in man. Restoration of the pure church would be accomplished if it were placed in the right of man to desire and select, meanwhile, contributing to the civil government, for if mutual respect were not revered the legitimacy of authority in democracy would fail to function. The commonwealth of the people is to be protected and therefore “the commander or commanders may judge, resist, compel and punish such transgressors…” Liberty is like a fire that is free to roam, consuming the path that was so carefully placed, if not contained or limited we would be allowing the demolition of authority and the introduction of…

    • 855 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    One instance would be Spanish colonialist who justified taking land by proclaiming their “right of discovery” (Bonvillain, 2013, p. 434). Another instance were the British who claimed land could only be owned if it was transformed by labor and the indigenous people only used land, therefore did not have ownership (Bonvillain, 2013, p. 434). However, all the various European colonialist similarly believed they were superior in every way and thus morally responsible to civilize the natives (Bonvillain, 2013, p. 434). This was known as the “white man’s burden” and The American Heritage Dictionary (n.d.) defines it as “the supposed or presumed responsibility of white people to govern and impart their culture to nonwhite people, often advanced as justification for European colonialism”. The “sacred trust” was another justification by the British, which said that a peaceful pacification was the best way to civilize the natives (Bonvillain, 2013, p.435).…

    • 793 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Over the course of history, Native Americans have become interpreted as the subject of periphery by cause of the ill assumptions of how the Christians described them as “Savages”. In the works of Christopher Columbus, Álvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca, and Bartolomé de las Casas, the Natives characterized as positive views in such ways that they were as civilized as the Spaniards. However, negative contexts indicated that Indians created war and show no signs of respect. No matter the view, there will always be one fact for certain, that the Christians wanted the land for themselves; coming from a monarch in Spain in which evoked to show patterns of failure alike Roman Catholic Republics and also the Judeo-Christians which met the same fate. The Christians interpreted the land as a distinguished beginning, a land of opportunity, not to mention the evil that God’s territories had.…

    • 720 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Nahua people, therefore, cannot merely be viewed as victims, but the narrative also cannot be blind to their suffering. However, deconstructing the Eurocentric view of the past, such as in the telling of Malintzin’s vital role in the Spanish conquest, is essential in understanding the concept of victimization of underrepresented communities and praise of the master narrative. Malintzin’s story challenges the idea that history lies in the hands of white male authority, effectively proving that the widely accepted narrative is too often written by those who are biased toward its…

    • 1368 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays