Montaigne And Las Casas Background Essay

Compare and Comparison Las Casas' and Montaigne's family portrait of the folks of Latin America. Would it not make a huge difference to Las Casas' seeks if they were really cannibals, as Montaigne supposed? Would it subject to Montaigne if it turned out that they weren't really cannibals?

On October 12, 1492 Columbus noticed the first island of the Western Indies. The colonization of the New World and the conquest of the local Americans followed. Prior to the arrival of the Europeans, the natives had developed hundreds of varying tribal cultures and perhaps two thousand different dialects. Many of those civilizations were totally damaged, the populace murdered, tortured and enslaved. The conquistadors are to be blamed for the genocide on hundred a large number of native People in america. Bartolom de Las Casas was an eyesight witness of these atrocities. In Short Profile of the Damage of the Indies he provides nearly factual account of some of those acts of assault. He wanted to persuade the Ruler of Spain to do something to avoid them. The conquistadors justified a lot of their cruelties with the claim that native Americans were barbarians. Their key barbarism was cannibalism. Michael de Montaigne addresses indigenous North american cannibalism in his article On the Cannibals. He argues that the recently discovered individuals were not deprived but live well ordered lives. Their society was not inferior compared to western modern culture; in many aspects it was even superior. In this article, I will show that Montaigne's and Las Casas' both idealize the Indian society. However, while Montaigne depicts it as pretty much civilized, Las Casas represents it as juvenile and defenseless. Yet, their purpose is similar, in that they both want to show that in many instances, Europeans act more like uncivilized savages than the Indians.

Montaigne portrays the Indian society as a utopian one. He creates that "it seems to me that what experience has educated us about those peoples surpasses all the information with which poetry has beautifully painted age Gold and all its clever fictions about Man's blesses early status" (Montaigne 232). In Greek mythology, the Age of Gold was a time of perfect peace and agreement. According to Montaigne, the natives reside in a natural state that even surpasses age Gold. They live in harmony and don't even have words for "treachery, resting, cheating, avarice, envy, backbiting or forgiveness" (Montaigne 233). They take part in wars, but when they are struggling, they are fighting for sheer honor. They haven't any affinity for acquiring land or gold, there isn't greed or lust in them. Their wars are similar to duels in which they evaluate their strength. That is why their behavior in battle is more honorable than that of the Europeans. Montaigne says that they don't even know this is of "dread or flight" (235). However, when they have a prisoner during such a battle, they perform a cruel ritual on him. They eliminate the prisoner, "roast him and make a typical meals of him" (Montaigne 235). They don't do it for nourishment, since aspect provides them with enough food, but to "symbolize ultimate revenge" (Montaigne 235). Initially this seems to contradict Montaigne's family portrait of an harmonic Indian contemporary society. One would feel that there is an inconsistency in his picture. However, this inconsistent picture is seen only when one talks about it from an European perspective. Montaigne says that "we have no other criterion of truth or right-reason than the example and form of viewpoints and customs of our own country" (231). Europeans seen cannibalism as especially barbarous since it was a form of cruelty that these were not familiar with. Montaigne does not protect the Indians and he considers that you need to condemn their cannibalism. However, you need to remember that the Europeans take part in habit that is even more barbarous than cannibalism. For example he offers "lacerating by rack and torturing a body still completely able to feel things" (Montaigne 236). Lacerating by rack was a method of execution that was common in Europe in enough time of the Holy Inquisition. Because this practice creates a great deal of pain Montaigne compares it to "eating a man alive" (236). The cannibals are less cruel because they quickly eliminate their victims using their swords and eat them lifeless.

At the end of the article, Montaigne rates an Indian music. He wished to show that the natives can handle producing art. Art work is a sign of civilization and Montaigne explains the Indian culture as wee civilized. Their terms is "a pleasurable one with an agreeable audio and has terminations rather like Greek" (Montaigne 240). The Greek language, the language of Socrates and Plato is also used as a symbol of civilization. Evaluating the Indian vocabulary to Greek is to recognize that the Indian modern culture is an extremely developed one. That their world is well bought can even be seen in their diet plan, their ethic and religion, and their political order. Their days were bought and adopted a routine. They had one single food every morning. During the day, they consumed a lukewarm drink. This drink was produced by the women while the men were out hunting. Their houses were big enough for just two to three thousand people. Husbands slept segregated using their multiple wives. Their ethic basically contains two things: "bravery before their enemies and love because of their wives" (Montaigne 234). Furthermore, the natives also acquired a well developed religion. Just like Christians they presumed in the "immortality of souls" (Montaigne 234). There were priests and clairvoyants. In the end, Montaigne implies that Indians lived in a hierarchical system. There were rulers and themes. When Montaigne talked to 1 of the indigenous rulers in Rouen, it proved that his high get ranking as a armed service official granted him the "privilege of having paths trim for him through the thickets in their forests" (Montaigne 241).

Bartolom de Las Casas provides us with some other picture of the natives. Las Casas was called the "Defender and Apostle of the Indians" (Las Casas xv) because he opposed the gruesome ways that the Spanish colonists cared for them. He developed sympathy for the North american Indians and compassion for his or her suffering. The Brief Profile of the Destruction of the Indies is a collection of incidences that demonstrate the sadism and cruelty of many Spanish colonialists. He explains to those reports very graphically to be able to give the reader an understanding of the horrors of the conquest. He created a romanticized and idealized picture of the natives. Unlike Montaigne, Las Casas did not mention a possible dark side of the Indian character. He detailed them as "so peace-loving, so humble therefore docile" (Las Casas 6). They are simply "gentle lambs" (Las Casas 11) but also "minimal robust of human beings" (Las Casas 10). Their wars were not more "deadly than our jousting or many Western european children's game titles" (Las Casas 14). Las Casas identifies the Indians as very passive people that stay in a state of characteristics. Sometimes it appears as though Las Casas would not even understand them as full human beings. Maybe he made a decision to summarize them as more innocent than he experienced them to maintain order to contradict their gentleness with Western cruelties. He views the turmoil in good and bad dichotomies. The Europeans are slaughtering soft, childlike people that cannot protect themselves. Many Europeans justified this killing with the declare that the Indians were ignorant of Christianity. However, Las Casas says that if they are introduced to the term of God, they quickly adopt the Christian believes. The Spaniards, however, do not bother to teach them Christianity. Most of the time they present them with an ultimatum: "either they adopt the Christian religious beliefs and swear allegiance to the Crown of Castile, or they'll find themselves faced with military action" (Las Casas). Las Casas believes that is contra fruitful. Force cannot make them to Christians. They must be educated in the matters of Christianity because they will themselves take up it as their faith.

Las Casas was a Catholic priest, therefore the question how the Indian match the Christian view of record must have took place to him. In Religious mythology, Noah had three sons who became the forefathers of Africans, Asians and Europeans. There is no mention of Americans in the Bible. This led many Christians to assume that the Indians have little descendent from Noah and therefore not from Adam either. They were either animals or unaffected by the original sin. We can speculate that Las Casas' utopian description of their contemporary society might have integrated the latter. He places a whole lot of emphasis on their innocence and purity. If indeed they were unaffected by the original sin, they would be soft and childlike, unable to hurt anybody, in the same way Las Casas explains them. He also regularly reminds the reader of their unembarrassed nakedness. Montaigne may also have integrated this view in his article. He mentions their nakedness and includes an Indian love track which starts with the lines "O Adder, stay: stay O Adder! From your own colors / let my sister take the style for a girdle" (Montaigne 240). If the natives were unaffected by the snake's seduction in the Garden of Eden, they might not have a challenge with performing a melody about the wonder of snakes.

Montaigne largely uses second hand accounts when he discusses the Indians. He introduces us to a "simple, hard fellow" (Montaigne 231), who provided him with most of the information he had about the natives. By the end of the essay, Montaigne mentions a talk with a native in Rouen. In this conversation he uses a "stupid interpreter" (Montaigne 241) that cannot understand his ideas. Montaigne uses the next palm accounts and invents the interpreter to be able to distance himself from the bill. We can suppose that he intended the story to be cured as fiction somewhat than an accurate report. The essay is not a work of anthropology, whether the Indians really practiced cannibalism is irrelevant to the point it needs to make. Montaigne uses the distinction between the fictional Indian society and the European society to point out flaws in the second option. At the start of the article, he raised the questions whether the " NEW WORLD " could be Plato's Atlantis. He will that in order to create a connection between America and Europe. He used the storyplot about the North american natives to denounce the barbarity of the Inquisition and of the issues in the aftermath of the Reformation. Montaigne made an over-all point about human being tendencies: we assess everything that we are not familiar with. We feel that inside our own country, "we always find the perfect faith, the perfect polity, the most developed and perfect way of doing anything" (Montaigne 231). The environment we develop up in affects our notion of the world. Growing up as a Catholic would make one feel that Catholicism is right, growing up as a Protestant would make one think that Protestantism is right and growing up as a cannibal would make one feel that cannibalism is right. We have to not judge people and force our take on them because our view easily could be incorrect. We ought to not pretend to be more civilized than the cannibals and ignore our own cruelties over their cruelties.

Las Casas views the Indians as 'commendable savages', who have a close connection to mother nature and are essentially good. However, they could lack full use of reason. He argues that the conquistadors are participating in the getting rid of and enslaving of fundamentally innocent and childlike people that cannot protect themselves. Las Casas promises to provide a factual profile of the genocide in South America. However, it is undeniable that he improved the stories a little in order to generate a better debate to persuade the king. He might also left out a few of the less flattering factual statements about the Indians. His goal was to save lots of the Indians from the Europeans and the Europeans from divine judgment. If the Indians would engage in cannibalism, like Montaigne assumed, it would ruin Las Casas' picture of the natives. They would not be innocent any more and that would prove his whole debate to be invalid.

Las Casas and Montaigne have different pictures of the Indians. Modern ethnologists would probably disagree with either picture. However, their pictures provide the purposes of these arguments. They dispute against the views that Indians are dangerous savages or natural slaves. Las Casas' picture of the turmoil between Indians and Europeans is one of victims and culprits. The Indians are innocent and the Europeans will be the barbarians. In contrast, Montaigne argues that we now have degrees of barbarity and Europeans are barbarians to an increased level than the natives.

Work Cited

Casas, Bartolom De Las, and Nigel Griffin. A Short Profile of the Destruction of the Indies. London, England: Penguin, 1992. Printing.

Montaigne, Michel De, and M. A. Screech. THE ENTIRE Essays. London, Britain: Penguin, 1993. Print out.

Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.

How to ...

We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)