Christoffer Columbus found America in 1492. In a very short time after this the life of most of the continent changed dramatically. Spanish conquered huge areas, and thousands of spaniards crossed the Atlantic to the new world. In America spanish were th e nobility. Even the poorest spaniards were there something special, part of the ruling class. Natives were the lower class, as well as those with mixed blood, and soon africans. All the indians were forced to pay tribute to their lords, the spaniards. On e form of tribute was so called encomienda system. This meant that group of indians were given to a spanish, and they had to work for him for free. If indians werenīt part of encomienda, then they paid stright to the crown. In a way encomiendas were a sor t of slavery, because natives had to work without any pay, but the possessor of encomienda never owned them. So in theory indians had the protection of the law. They werenīt nobodyīs property, and the couldnīt be sold to anyone. Encomiendas how ever were only a transitional institution, and eventually crown took them back, despite heavy resistance. This was possible because encomiendas were granted only for a life time. So when the possessor of encomienda died, his sonīs didnīt automatically inherit it.
Besides the tribute to the crown or encomienda, natives also had to pay tribute to clergy. There were also various lesser taxes, for instance to support the special indian courts and other institutions. In many areas all the adult indians were also force d to take part in forced labor drafts. To some of these drafts they were obligated by the law, to some by customs, and to some spanish just forced them. For instance they had to work in local projects, like church buildings. One form of drafts were the jo bs that they ha dtraditionally done to their own nobility, and which the still had to do. Also roads were build by indian labor, as well as forts and public buildings. Natives also were obligated to run a postal service of relay runners from town to town, and maintaining hostels for travelers. The closest thing to a slavery, and the one that indians mostly complained about, was so called servicio personal. Indians were send to work for individual spanish in terms of one week. During this work they were en titled to receive minimum wage, which was really low. But often employers didnīt pay the wage at all, or paid too little. And work terms were sometimes over four weeks long. So the system was gravely abused by the spanish, but nobody seemingly cared.
None of these obligations can actually seen as a real slavery. But there was also a real slavery in America for the natives. Already Christoffer Columbus had brought some indians with him to Spain, where he intented to sell them as slaves. How ever queen Isabella ordered them to be released. She wanted indians to be her subjects, not her slaves. From the beginning spaniards were very conscious about the justification of their actions. They very much relied on ancient rules about slavery. Traditionally th ere were two things that gave you permission to enslave other human being. If you had caught them in a just war, for instance during a rebellion, you could take the prisoners as your slaves. You could also have slaves if you had gained the possession thro ugh legitimely effective purchase. That is, if they had already slave status when you buyed them. The indians that Columbus brought with him were obviously neither prisoners of war or being legitimely purchased from someone else. Columbu shad just simply captured them from their homes. Thatīs why they had to be released. Soon how ever spanish started to trade with indian slaves, who were claimed to be either caught rebells or caribs from Venezuela and Lesser Antillies. Caribs were believed to cannibals, s o they were no really humans, and thatīs why you could enslave them without problems. Soon the enslavement of natives through war became general practice in many areas, for instance in Venezuela, Central America and northern parts of Mexico. Often spanish themself started the war in order to get some slaves. Special kind of slave hunting expeditions were send to the areas outside spanish juristiction. How ever it was made illegal to bring indian slaves to Spain itself already in 1501. The slavery was appr oved only in America. Some indian slaves who in that time were in Spain actually complained when they were returned to America, because slaves were so much better treated in Spain.
In the Antillies and other caribian islands the whole native population was destroyed by forcing them into slavery, to work in the mines and plantations, so that in already in the early 1500s there were no natives left, and spanish started to import slav es from Africa. Lotīs of indians were also captured during slave raids to Bahamas, Florida and other surroundig areas. The great improvement to the desperate situation of the indians came in 1542 with the New Laws. The enslavement of indians was forbidden . Crown also ordered the immediate manumission of indian women and children, and of all the adults whose enslavement could not be proved by necessary legal documents. This new law was bitterly opposed by many spaniards in America, because it caused great economical problems to them. And proved also hard to actually prove how you had acquired your slaves. It was still allowed to have indian slaves if they were truly caught during rebellion. But after 1542 the enslavement of indians became rare. In 1674 the enslavement of any kind of indians became illegal. What was the reason for this forbiding of indian slavery, while in the same time thousands of negro slaves were brought to America, and nobody complained at all.
The problem with the indians was, that when America was found nobody actually knew who were these people living in there. There didnīt seem to be any room for them in the european world view. Because spaniards didnīt knew who indians where, they also did nīt know how they should be treated. What was their nature and capacity for christians? The strange thing about spanish was, that they were always so worried about the justification of their actions, in the same time as they killed and pillaged all over t he world. So they had to determine the nature and capacity of indians before they could legitimately pursue conquest. They had to know why exactly spanish had the right to conquer and enslave the people in areas that Spain had no previous claim to, and of which existence they hadnīt even known a short time before.
There were many kind of theories about the origin of the indians. Some thought they were descendants from the ten lost tribes of Israel, which assyrians had exiled from Israel. Others said they were welsh, or a remnants of some lost colony of Carthage. M any didnīt start to speculate with their origins at all. It was more important what indians were when they were found. From the beginning of colonial period the castilian crown started to employ well know professors from the universities to advice and cou ncel the crown in the matters of legitimacy. Some of them were quite famous, like Melchor Cano and Domingo De Soto. In time these professors formed a council, which king could call to give itīs opinion. This council was called junta. For the first time it was called by king Ferdinand in 1504. The junta decided that spanish had the right to conquer and enslave indians, because the human and divine law said so. The junta also believed that popes bullīs of donation in 1493 gave spaniards the right to enslave indians, while it actually only stated that Spain had the right to conquer the new lands if they would also convert the inhabitants to christianity. So this gave spaniards the right to be in America and take it to their possession. But the legitimacy to enslave indians had to came from somewhere else.
The human and divine law that gave spaniards the right to enslave indians was one of the doctrines of Aristotle. It was his idea that part of the humans are born to be natural slaves. They are kind of semi-humans. Their mental capacity is so low that the y canīt get along alone. They simply must have a master to tell them what to do. Natural slave donīt have any kind of organisation in his society, and he doesnīt do any work. Natural slave is lazy by nature. Thatīs why his enslavement is beneficial to bot h master and slave. It is more like a good thing to enslave a natural slave. Itīs only for his own good. When spanish came to America, by change the first place they ended up were the islands of Antillies. And in these islands lived arawak-indians, who ha ppened to live very primitive life. They had no technology, no great leaders, no personal property, and often they had no clothes. They lived very simple life, and it was really easy for the spaniards to think that these people were the natural slaves Ari stotle was talking about. In every part they fitted to the theory. And Aristotle was really big name in the world in those times. Thanks to the fact that church had made an alliance with his philosophy, his works and views were now practically part of the official chuch doctrine. So if Aristotle said there was natural slaves, then there was! And spanish had just found them from the America. So it was allright to enslave them, which was promtly done in Antillies.
The first objections against the indian enslavement came when spanish practically destroyed the whole population in the islands. It became clear to some that it perhaps wasnīt actually beneficial for the indians to be slaves. And it was impossible to con vert them when they all just died. The crowns position was all the time compromising. Indians were crowns subjects, so in theory they had many rights. But in the other hand spanish in America were strongly against the freeing of indians, so crown usually didnīt do anything. Even if some decisions were made, it was almost impossible to enforce them. When all the indians had died in the island, slave hunters started to get slaves from the surrounding areas. Presumably cannibalistic caribs were a fair game, but also peacefull indians were taken. The opposition against the slavery really begin in a large scale when spanish found the great native empires in the American continent. After Cortes had conquered aztecs, and Pizarro had done the same to incas, it wa s quite difficult to claim that indians were some kind of semi-humans, and borne to be slaves. Already in 1520s there started to be books that describet the wonders of the new world. They told about highly developed native american cultures. These indians had all the marks of civilization. They had a strigh hierarchy, with a ruling nobility. They also had an economy with markets, clear merchant class and means of exchange. They waged well organised wars against their neighbours, with real armies in the fi eld. They also obviously had their own religion and church. They had a cult, places of worship, and a very powerfull priesthood. Great cities like Tenochtitlan were found, and pyramids and other magnificent buildings. People who created cultures like this couldnīt be the natural slaves that Aristotle spoke of. And when many learned people realised this, the opposition against the enslavement of indians really started. Of course a difference was made between some tribes, so that no one opposed the enslave ment of caribs, for instance.
One of the first spaniards to resist the enslavement of indians was Bartoleme De Las Casas. He spend practically his whole life in America converting indians. He was among the first ones to go to Antillies, where he owned a plantation for a short time. H e was the first one to say that africans should be brought to America to work as a slaves, so that indians could spared from the hard labor. Later in his life he how ever started to oppose the enslavement of africans as well. So De Las Casas was there, an d he saw what the slavery did to indians, and for the rest of his life he fought against it. And his voice was well heard. He had even a lot of influence to the crown itself. De Las Casas simply said that popes donation gave America to Spain, but only if they would convert indians. So that was supposed to be their main purpose for the spanish in America. Slavery was clearly making the convertion more difficult. De Las Casas thought that the process should be peacefull. Indians were rational beings whose s ouls could be, and should be saved. He even contacted pope in this matter, and in 1537 pope Paul the third gave his bull, called Sublimis Deus. The bull clearly said that indians were human beings just like spanish, and they should not be enslaved. Obviou sly pope had believed De Las Casas when he claimed that people who had created such a marvellous cultures in America couldnīt be barbarians. And clearly they couldnīt be infidels because they hadnīt ever before even heard about the christianity. When afri cans were enslaved one of the main argument for it was that they were not christians. But their slavery was also lawfull because they were purchased from citizens of other countries. It wasnīt the problem of the spaniards from where these others had acqui red their slaves.
So called school of Salamanca had even more influence than De Las Casas had. It was a group of top professors in Spain, which formed loose movement in theology, logic and law. The unifying thing for them was, that they had all been or were in the univers ity of Salamanca, and their leading figure, Francisco De Vitoria, had been a teacher to practically all of them. Other most important members were Domingo De Soto, Melchor Cano and Luis De Molina. This group of great thinkers started to support the opposi tion to the enslavement of indians. And they had a lot of influence. Their arguments were mainly the ones already given. People with such a great culture as indians couldnīt be natural slaves, so it was basicly against the law to enslave them. Even the cr own started to consider the facts, and the result was the great debate in Valladolid in 1550. The debate was between De Las Casas and Juan Gines De Sepulveda, who was relatively famoust humanist. The junta was listening their arguments, and then itīs memb ers would give their opinions separately to the king. Among the members of the junta were De Soto and Melchor Cano. Sepulveda spoke for several hours, but De Las Casas is said to have spoken for five days. Sepulvedas arguments were clearly based on Aristo tle, whose books he had translated to spanish. Basicly he said that the indians were the natural slaves that Aristotle was talking about, and they should serve their betters, the spaniards. He also said that the use of force while converting indians was n ot only approvable, but also necessarily. He gave all kind of proves to support his claim. For instance indians were giving human sacrifices, and were eating human flesh, which was a clear sign that they were not rational human beings. De Las Casas answer ed to this by telling about his own experiences in America, and about the culture of indians. He also told how hard working they often were. In his opinion indians clearly fulfilled all the civilization conditions of Aristotle.
This was the great climax in the fight for indian rights. As a result neither side could actually claim a victory. Government clearly couldnīt free indians from all their work obligations without causing a rebellion in America, but after that the laws t owards indians started steadily to became milder, and their enslavement became more rare. Even more so because in the end of 16th century Jose De Acosta published his theory about the origins of indians, and this finally gave an explanation that sounded r ight. De Acosta simply said that indians had migrated to America from Asia. No one knew wether there was a land bridge between Asia and America or not, so it was impossible to deny the possibility that De Acosta was right. The theory about the migration o f indians from Asia effectively made indians as a part of mankind, and ended the discussion about them being semi-humans. This together with the influence of school of Salamanca and many others changed the attitude of Spain towards the indians, and made t hem end the enslavement of indians, although it wasnīt untill 1674 that the enslavement of rebels and cannibals was forbidden.
Besides the fundamental change in the ideology of the spaniards, there can also be found some other reasons for the governments unwillingness to enslave indians. For instance in some frontier areas, especially in northern Mexico, the slavery had disrupti ng effects to the peace in the area. Soldiers often started wars deliberately in order to get a change to get prisoners, whom they then sold to the slavery. And it was perfectly legal. Sometimes soldiers were also slow to end wars and rebellions, because it would have meant an end to their profitable slave trade. Missionaries often complained about this, and it was hard for the crown to ignore their complaints. The other, and even more important reason was of course money. In 16th and 17th century spanish crown was constantly needing more money. From 1494 till 1550s they were practically all the time fighting against France. There was also turkish attack against Austria, and even Wien was under siege in 1529. In the Mediterranian they were also fighting a gainst the turks, for the most of the 16th century. Netherlands started a rebellion in 1560s, and only in 1648 Spain acknowledged their independence. During the Thirty Years War between 1618 and 1648 spanish troops were also fighting in Germany. There was also spanish attack against England in 1588, and they also get involved to the french civil war in 1580s. Portugal was annexed in 1580s, and many rebellions in Spain itself and in Italy were suppressed. So there were wars everywhere. And they became bigg er and more expensive all the time. New empire also brought more expenses, when new areas had to be protected, and new sea routes secured. All this demanded a lot of money.
So it is only natural that spanish crown was mostly interested about how to get as much money out of America as possible. For instance the first royal decrees of Charles the second for Mexico in 1519-1524 were aimed at securing crowns share of the profi ts, to imposing tribute payments, import duties and traditional taxation. Charles ordered that indians were to be free, direct, taxable royal subjects. It was the taxation that he was mostly interested about. The spaniards who went to America were mostly interested about getting free workforce, but it was for the crowns interest that indians would retain their own incomes, so that they could pay taxes to the crown. Of course if indians would be slaves, they wouldnīt have any incomes or property, so they c ouldnīt be taxed. There was also the horrible example of Antillies. When indians were made slaves, they had died out really quickly. There were no indians left in the islands. And dead donīt pay taxes either. So it was vital for the crown to keep indians free. A compromise was done with the spanish settlers, who needed free labor force, and tribute paying system and encomienda system were introduced. Actually this was even more profitable for the spaniards than importing black slaves. Thatīs why for insta nce in the inland of Mexico there were hardly any africans. When you had african slaves, you had to buy them, and when they died you lost your investment. But with indians it was different. You didnīt had to buy them, and usually you didnīt had to pay the m anything. They had their own homes and fields so you didnīt even had to take care of them. It was a lot better system than slavery. So crown was against slavery because it needed free indians to pay taxes for it, and this also suited land owners in the inland just fine.
So, to add it all up, the reason why the spaniards prohibited indian slavery was mainly ideological one. They were very worried about the justification of their actions. In the first half of the 16th century new view about indians started to spread, most ly influenced by men like De Las Casas and those from the school of Salamanca. This new view clearly showed that indians couldnīt be semi-humans, like it was widely believed before, and established them as a part of the mankind. Once it became acknowledge d that indians were same kind of people as spaniards, they no longer had any justification to make them slaves, especially because slavery was against crowns interests too. So the enslavenment of indians was prohibited because it was shown and then believ ed that they were humans, and it destroyed the justification to enslave them.
Sources:
Farriss, Nancy M.: Maya Society Under Colonial Rule. Princeton University Press. 1984. Princeton.
Gongora, Mario.: Studies In The Colonial History of Spanish America. Cambridge University Press. 1975. Cambridge.
Hanke, Lewis.: Aristotle and The American Indians. Indiana University Press. Blomington, USA. 1959.
Liss, Peggy K.: Mexico under Spain, 1521-1556. The University of Chicago Press. 1975. Chicago.
Pagden, Anthony.: The Fall of Natural Man. Cambridge University Press. 1982. Cambridge.
ears War between 1618 and 1648 spanish troops were also fighting in Germany. There was a