Talk:Valladolid debate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Spain Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

A caricature of cultural history. Not worth working on. --Wetman 08:50, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

6 months later and it's not much better. I removed these substantial sections as unsourced speculation, but I hesitated to delete them entirely, so I moved them here. If someone could provide sources for any of this feel free to add it back in, but as is it reads like unbacked apologetics that has little to do with the actual debate. (I bolded the section headers, I didn't know what else to do.)--Cúchullain t/c 17:20, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Conquests As Crusade

It should be noticed that the debate was over two distinct notions - the legitimacy or lack thereof of the Conquests, and the other being the treatment of the natives of the New World.

While the Church's attitude is that Las Casas was right on the second question, there was strong support for the belief that, despite the unacceptable misbehaviour of the Conquistadores, the Conquests were theologically legitimate as part or extension of the Luso-Spanish Reconquistas, with the same basis as that of the Bull Inter Cunctas, etc.

It is to be noted that this theology has fallen into disuse in the last few centuries.

Protestantism

Calvinism and Jansenism were to revive the Sepulvadian opinion, rejecting the idea that black peoples possessed souls and could attain to salvation.

While in practice this was diluted, nevertheless, this was the basis of the Dutch South African Calvinists' Apartheid policy in South Africa.

It was also the cause for the Anglo-Saxon settlers in North America, Australia, etc. to follow the policy of land clearances forcing out the aborigines into reservations or Bantustans, and for the refusal of England to grant the same rights of true self-government to British India that it had extended to its white colonies of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc.

Catholicism Largely as a result of the Valladolid Debate and its conclusions, which helped clarify Catholic thought on the controversy, colonists from Catholic countries in the New World tended to settle amongst and intermarry with the natives rather than expel or reduce them to ghettos.

The significant exceptions are Costa Rica and Argentina.

In the later case, European colonists and the newly independent Argentinians were more influenced by Evolutionary and Calvinist ideas imported via England, so that, rejecting the aborigines as subhuman species, they insisted on expelling and reducing the Amerindians, especially in Argentinian Patagonia, resorting to genocide.

These ideas also caused the Argentinians to harbor the conceit of being a White society surrounded by Creole or Aborigine-dominated states.

The removal has improved the article - better for it to stick to its immediate subject Provocateur 05:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What about souls?

It is hard to believe the beginning of this article. I'm sorry to cite wikipedia in spanish, but we have put this:

  • No discurría en torno a si los indígenas de América eran seres humanos con alma o salvajes susceptibles de ser domesticados como animales. Eso hubiera sido herético, y ya estaba resuelto por la bula papal Sublimis Deus (1537). Algunas veces se entiende esta bula como respuesta a opiniones que pusieran en entredicho la humanidad de los naturales; pero el papa (Paulo III, incitado por dos dominicos españoles) no pretendía definir la racionalidad del indígena, sino que suponiendo dicha racionalidad en cuanto que los indios son hombres, declaraba su derecho a la libertad y la propiedad, así como el derecho a abrazar el cristianismo, que debe serles predicado pacíficamente. El propósito declarado de la discusión era ofrecer una base teológica y jurídica segura para decidir cómo debía procederse en los descubrimientos, conquistas y población de las Indias.

In my bad english: not about indians was humang beings with soul... that should be heretic, and already resolved by papal bula Sublimus Deus 1537... The proposal of the discussion was offer a safer teological and juridic base for... conquer. Please, change.--Ángel Luis Alfaro 18:09, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

This guy seems to be right. First of all, different wiki pages say different things about who won the debate. This guy says there's no reliable record of a resolution. And Sublimis Deus did establish full humanity of the natives. See Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda for the perspective that it was about Aristotle's concept of "natural slaves," not an issue about souls. Jonathan Tweet 21:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Since the article cites no references, I added factual accuracy and unreferenced tags. Hopefully someone can sort this all out.--Cúchullain t/c 22:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I found one reference that looks pretty good and modified the text to match. I wouldn't mind if someone triple-checked me. Jonathan Tweet 22:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I did some work on the article based on the source you provided. I also removed the tags. Thanks for finding that and amending the text, this was an embarassment before.--Cúchullain t/c 00:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the changes, the article is well enough now. Perhaps you must add a link to Leyes de Burgos that talk about the Junta de Burgos, the precedent of the Junta de Valladolid in 1511. If you want improve more the article, I suggest add images (in spanish we have put three with comments very ilustratives, in my opinion). I dont dare doing myself.--Ángel Luis Alfaro 16:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jesuit

De Sepulveda was not a Jesuit. He may have been a Dominican. The Spanish side about him says that. My professor told me that he was a normal diocesan priest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.78.136.132 (talk) 08:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)