Bartolomé De Las Casas

Bartolomé de las Casas: Universal Protector of all Races

HIS-201-G15 Instructor ····· 21 April 2010

Pore 2 Bartolomé De las Casas was an important figure who was as controversial as he was influential to the early stages of colonization of the New World. Without his written accounts of what had happened in that newly discovered region of the world we might not have as complete of anunderstanding of what transpired during such an unprecedented and turbulent time. He spent much of his life defending the freedoms of the indigenous people of Hispaniola and was rightly bestowed the title of “Universal Protector of the Indians” by Cardinal Ximénez de Cisneros.1 However, there still remains a controversy about the price paid as a result of Las Casas' hasty suggestion to replace Nativeslave labor with slave labor imported from Africa. This has led some historians to blame Las Casas for introducing African slave labor into the Caribbean and creating the industry that led to the most unjust system of slavery that mankind has known in its history. Though Las Casas may have marginally contributed to the growth of the African slave trade in the Caribbean, he later repented for histransgressions and was one of the 16th century's few vocal supporters of ending slavery for all races. Much of the indignities attributed to Las Casas regarding the use of African slave labor can be traced back to the writings of Cornelius De Pauw. De Pauw wrote Recherches Philosophiques sur les Américains (1768), which whittled together an extremely critical view of the New World and itsinhabitants.2 De Pauw's scathing take on Las Casas did concede that he had the idea of freeing the Native populations, but condemned Las Casas of being responsible for the beginnings of the African slave trade by distorting lines from a previous historical account of the Indies written by Antonio Herrera.3 This sentiment was sustained by historian William Robertson. Though Robertson took a proSpanish stancefor much of his take on the history of the Indies, his thoughts seemed to echo De Pauw's stance on Las Casas' responsibility for ushering in the African slave trade. Robertson continued the

1 Lawrence Clayton, “Bartolomé de las Casas and the African Slave Trade,” History Compass 7, no. 6 (11, 2009): 1526. 2 Juan Friede and Benjamin Keen, Bartolome De Las Casas in History: Toward anUnderstanding of the Man and His Work, illustrated edition. (Northern Illinois University Press, 2008), 20. 3 Ibid., 20-21.

Pore 3 misconception that Las Casas was a major promoter of African slavery in America, though he did admit that African slaves had existed in the Americas as early as 1503. 4 This removed some of the guilt from Las Casas by conceding that he did not start the practice of importingAfrican slaves but did not absolve him entirely from being responsible for encouraging its growth. This trend of anti-Spanish sentiment continued until the last quarter of the 19 th century when Historian John Fiske started writing in defense of the Spaniards' conquests in Hispaniola. Fiske likened the Spanish conquests to that of the forefathers of the United States who, like the Spanish, hadlittle respect for the proprietary rights of the Native population. He maintained these similar events were unfortunate yet necessary evils to improve quality of life in the Americas.5 Fiske took the time to go into detail to demonstrate that “Las Casas's [sic] suggestion for the importation of Negro slaves had no effect on the development of the institution [of slavery].” 6 He knew there were alreadymany slaves of African origin in the New World and the demand for more was steadily rising regardless of Las Casas' request to import them as a replacement for Native labor. Fiske aligned Las Casas' fight for the rights of the Indians with La Casas' overall views on slavery in a way that no historian had done before. This brought a fresh point of view to the table regarding the thought process...