To enter a land that is not yours and demand war on those that are living in it is crazy, especially when you compare it to the standards in North American society today. The contrasting views of Bartolome de Las Casas, a bishop of Chiapa, and Juan Gines de Sepulveda a humanist, were made into a debate on whether or not what the Europeans did when exploring the New World were morally correct. The Indians suffered greatly in the hands of the Europeans, who believed they were doing them a huge favor. The Black Legend happened during the late 15th through the early 16th centuries it became a huge movement in attempt to dominate Europe by conquering lands. Lands in Mexico and areas near the Yucatan are known as New Spain which became the focal point the Spain conquest. Being the first country to spread their colonies throughout the New World, Spain was made fun of by neighboring countries like England and France. However this type of issue was largely …show more content…
He would say that all they needed was a little guidance and help from the Europeans. On the other hand Sepulveda believed that the Spanish had a right to rule the new world because they were “superior”. He said that the Spaniards were wise, talented, humane, and also religious. He called the Indians rude names such as barbarians, cannibals, murderers, and cowards. Sepulveda subscribed to the Aristotelian hierarchical theory on nature, which states implies a natural order of superiority. He connects this thoughts by saying that the Indians are not important and are in-superior like "children to adults, or as women to men." He also goes ahead and says that the Indians and Spaniards are very different and compares them to apes and men. Sepulveda was totally fore Indian enslavement and believed they deserve