Talk:Bartolomé de las Casas

Two of them

I have been exasperated by the fact that, when I search the net, I find that there are mentions of two distinct persons, living far apart in time, with this same name. This article deals with the first and more famous man. But the references to Las Casas or to Bartholome de las Casas in many places, such as the Catholic Encyclopedia 1907-1913 is evidently to a later person. This later person wrote on Napoleon Bonaparte, for example, so it is physically impossible that he is the same person as the subject of this article. I want information on the later Bartholome de las Casas. Can anyone help? WikiSceptic 08:52, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Controversy over the Humanity of the Amerindians

Unexact, this article is biased by a modern point of view. The most important fact is that he defended the fact the that indians were humans having a soul when some catholic theoligist believed they were non-human, finally the pope agreed with. Of course he was also considering that the Spanish colons committed crimes against the indians... but this is not essential in reguard of the importance of the question of the human nature of the indians.

Well I didn't know his book so the article was not wrong but I'm sure of whatI write before too. I'm not how should I call the debate about human nature of the Indian : Contreverse de Valladolid in french (Valladolid controvesy ?????)

birthdate

There seems to be some controversy about the year of his birth (1474 or 1484). Here is the source for the 1484 date: Helen Brand Parish and Harold E Weidman, S.J., "The Correct Birthdate of Bartolomé de Las Casas," Hispanic American Historical Review 56, no. 3 (August 1976): 385-403. I include this since it's been reverted once. Antandrus 01:50, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

De thesauris in Peru

Anybody know more about "De thesauris in Peru"?--Dynamax 19:56, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Converso?

Could someone give a reference to the 'claim that Las Casas was descended from a converso family'? Many thanks. --House of Shin 08:11, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

There are some references about it in the The Spanish Empire of Hugh Thomas.--Menah the Great 19:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Marxist claim

His first hand interpretations of Taíno cultures as feudal have been criticized 500 years later by Marx-influenced historians since it does not fit into their theoretical vision of the progress of society.

This seriously needs to be sourced, particularly the rationale given. I quite doubt that a Marxist who believed this would consider a characterization of himself as having an artifically constricted worldview as neutral. --Saforrest 21:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

There was no theological debate over the humanity of the indigenous peoples of the Americas in Spain: it was never in question. what was debated at Valladolid and at all the disputations organized by the crown (1513, 1542, 1550-51) was the right to self-governance and the larger issue of whether or not the Amerindians had sound exercise of the faculty of reason. Ratiocination was the key to the debate, not humanity. There would be no point in the Evangelical project that undergirded the justification for empire and the encomienda system if any actual theologians or officials of the Crown doubted the humanity of the natives.

This a random thought of some editor overly obsessed with a particular idealogy (and therofore against NPOV policy). It is completely irrelevant what Marxists think about Bartolome De Las Casas so I removed it. This is not an article about Marxist ideaology. If Bartolome De Las Casas had been a Marxist, then it might be worth mentioning, but obviously thats not the case (he wasn't even a proto-marxist. He has nothing to do with Marxism). I can't believe anyone saw this as worth discussion whether or not it actually he has been critisized--when something is so obviously out of place delete it! Fundamentalist Christians have critisized Mickey Mouse, should we include their criticisms in the Mickey Mouse article? --Brentt 04:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Bartolomeu Casaus was a Catalan

[[Image:As you can see in this picture, Bartolomeu do not sign as Bartolome de las Casas. He signed as "Bartomeu Casaus". It means that like Cristòfor Colom, he was from Barcelona, Mallorca or Valencia, in general from the catalan kingdom. I thing that this shoud be understanded in the context of the fight castillians-catalans for the control of new world wich hapened at the end of the sixteen century. This document is a part of a sentence he wrote when he was bishop of Chiapas (México).

You can see the image in:

http://www.histocat.com/htm/secc_inv_11_02.htm

The signature of Bartomeu Casaus.

According to Catalan chauvinism, all people involved in American discovery (except bloody conquistadors like Cortés and Pizarro, of course) were Catalans. They name Collumbus as "Colom", Vespuccio as "Despuig"... and now Las Casas is "Casaus"? LOL! The reality is that he was born in Seville in 1484, son of Pedro de las Casas, a possible converso merchant from Tarifa, and his wife Isabel de Sosa. Other well-known relative of Las Casas is his uncle Francisco de Peñalosa (they had different surnames because in 15th Century, Spaniards used to choose one of the four of their grandparents), that also travelled to Hispaniola in Ovando's journey. If that signature is authentic, the word "Casaus" may be just a poor latinization, like the signature "Siliceus" of Toledo's Bishop Guijarro. I don't see any "Bartolomeu" in the image.

By the way, there was never a "Catalan kingdom" (at the time, modern day Catalonia was only the County of Barcelona, the only one of the four parts of Crown of Aragon that was not a kingdom) and there was not any "fight" between Castilians and Catalans in the New World. Ferdinand II decided that Italy was part of Aragon and the West Indies part of Castile, but both Castilian and Aragonese people were able to emigrate or fight in both territories. Well known Catalans in the New World include the friars Bernal Buyl and Pere Margarit, strong enemies of Collumbus in Hispaniola; Joan Orpí, 17th Century founder of Barcelona, Venezuela; and Gaspar de Portolà, 18th Century conquistador of California. None of these few examples had to hide his origins.--Menah the Great 20:10, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Journal of Christopher Columbus

Editor of the Journal of Christopher Columbus? According to King's College London, the personal Journal has disappeared along with the only know copy. Bartolome de Las Casas at some point DID have access to a copy of the work, which he quotes in many places in the Historia. But I don't think that this should be grounds for calling him an "editor", especially of an as-of-yet published (much less, recovered) Journal.

Influence on Montaigne

Could the author please document the evidence of Las Casas' direct influence on Montaigne? Various scholars (Marcel Bataillon, William Hamlin, Tom Conley) have said there is no evidence that Montaigne ever read Las Casas, although it is not impossible.