Draft: Deceptive Appearance

De Las Casas, the author of “Destruction of the Indies”, wrote a message in 1542 (published in 1552), sent to King Philip II of Spain, about the result of the Spaniards’ conquest of the Natives (as he defines them, “innocently simple”) in the New World. His stated purpose for the message was actually because of his fear that Spain would be inflicted by divine punishment and his concern for the souls of the Native Americans. Within this message, biblical authority is used to strengthen his message. Also, the provocative insights included in the message lend it a very persuasive power. Destruction of the Indies was more than sufficient in its mission to convince the reader (me) of De Las Casas’ opinion, but why wasn’t it adequate in convincing many readers when it was relevant in the 1600c?

The ethos (to appeal to authority) of this paper is credible to me because De Las Casas is a priest and an eye witness of the agonizing accounts he speaks of. I am persuaded in response to his recollections of his terrible memories of having to stand by and tolerate the literal execution of innocent Natives of the New World. I don’t assume him to be exaggerating in his descriptive resurrection of the horrible occurrences. In fact, his reflection of the account in words is probably an understatement to the actual horrifying experience. It is definite that gruesome executions happened; thus, I think it is reasonable to assume that many of the definitive details furthering an even more evil reminiscence of the occurrence were probably not included. As a result of De Las Casas being a priest, I can assume he isn’t a hypocritical speaker, thus furthering his qualification for speaking on the subject.

The pathos (appeal to the audience’s emotions) of this paper is appealing to my emotions because, as written above, horrifying accounts did occur. I am sensitive to such baseless cruelty, as I know many of us are. I’m not so sure that people of that era (1600c) were nearly as sensitive to open massacre. Inflicting brutality among people was much simpler in that period, and from appearance it looked and was awful. In my perspective, this made people in that period more comfortable to openly commit such seemingly barbaric actions.

The logos (logical appeal) of this paper struck me as valid. The logic was painfully evident. The Spaniards executed a massacre on, as De Las Casas called them, “innocent sheep”. There existed no righteous or justified reasoning for attacking the innocent sheep. The advanced warfare equipment of the Spaniards against the Natives primitive weapons can be likened to me taking a twelve gauge shot gun and shooting it point blank at a squirrel two feet away. Now contemplate, what would be the purpose of me doing that? The Spaniards persistently obliterated the Natives until a population of three million became a dwindling three hundred.

I recognize the content within De Las Casas’ message as being severe injustice. But in the era of 1600c, many Europeans in the New and Old Spain didn’t recognize this injustice as clearly as most would today. I think a combination of factors contribute in helping the people of that time perceive these actions as not so appalling. Their corrupt beliefs in Christianity, an overwhelming sense of power over the Natives, primitive civilization, menacing desire for power in a growingly competitive world, and a daily adaption to a world that generally wasn’t as civilized as today. Was it obscured morals or the simplicity of their nature that allowed them to engage in primitive brutality? I like to think that the world is advancing in evolution toward better quality morals. But in truth, today human actions are simply masked with sophisticated behavior to appear to not be as barbaric.