Francisco de Vitoria

Francisco de Vitoria

What right?

By what right did the Amerindians fall under the control of the Spanish? Accounts of atrocities committed half a world away troubled many within Spain’s legal and theological community. They began to question the morality of their countrymen’s actions. Francisco de Vitoria was one such man; a Dominican Friar and chair of Theology at the Universidad de Salamanca, Vitoria delivered a lecture entitled De Indis (On the American Indians), in 1539, a presentation Anthony Pagden called, “the most detailed and far-reaching of the subject.” Influenced by the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, Vitoria sought to answer a pressing contemporary issue: that of the Spanish arrival in the Americas, and their conduct and treatment of the natives they encountered. He raised three questions: 1. “By what right were the barbarians subjugated to Spanish rule?”; 2. “What powers has the Spanish monarchy over the Indians in temporal and civil matters?”; and 3. “What powers has either the monarchy or the Church with regard to the Indians in spiritual and religious matters?”

The first question centers on the assumption that Amerindians peoples did not have true dominion, both public and private, over their lives and societies. Vitoria defines this as, “whether they were true masters of their private chattels [property] and possessions, and whether there existed among them...men who were true princes and masters of the others.” In the eyes of the Spanish, the Tainos of the Caribbean (who wore loincloths, and lived in villages devoid of established cities), were primitives, without a firm grip upon their own affairs. This argument fell apart when the Spanish came across the empires of Meso and South America. Here, states with clearly defined hierarchies and complex societies denoted dominion, in both private and public spheres; therefore, “it would be harsh to deny to them, who have never done us any wrong, the rights we concede to Saracens and Jews...unless it be in the case of Christian lands which they have conquered.”

The Aztec and Inca, for example, while conquerors in their own right, were only ever fighting wars of self-defense against the Spanish and their native allies. Furthermore, because these people had congregated in ordered societies, built cities, established hierarchies, cultivated the arts and sciences, as well as the crops of the earth, they (Amerindian empires) were adhering to natural law - universal principles recognized by all mankind. In his earlier lecture, On Civil Power, Vitoria established the notion of communal necessity. Mother Nature gave mankind “reason and virtue,” but otherwise left him “frail, weak, helpless, and vulnerable.” Congregating in societies centered on cities enabled mankind to grow in strength and purpose, relying upon his neighbors and countrymen for support in times of strife. The public power that arose from this social organization was known to all human societies, and derived from natural law, provided by God. Therefore, the likes of the Aztec, Inca, Tarascans, and Maya, “possessed true dominion, both in public and private affairs,” long before Columbus.

In answering his second question, Vitoria discusses several ‘unjust titles’ which the Spanish used as justifications for their conquests. The most egregious of these titles was the idea that possession came by ‘right of discovery.’ The glaring problem was that, as soon as Columbus came ashore, he was met by native people. Discovery is a non-starter, Vitoria asserts, “any more than it would if [be] they had discovered us.” Likewise, belief in native religions was not sufficient to deprive them of their sovereign independence. Even if Christianity had been proclaimed and rejected by them, “this is still no reason to declare war on them and depoil them of their goods.” Not even the Pope, or any Christian prince, has the right to do such things, because they possess no sovereign power over them. These sentiments were echoed by Pope Paul III in his encyclical of 1537:

"The said Indians and all other people who may later be discovered by Christians, are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, even though they be outside the faith of Jesus Christ...should the contrary happen, it shall be null and have no effect."

Regarding his third question, Vitoria claimed the Spanish had a right to travel and trade throughout the Americas. This descended from the old Roman notion of ius gentium, ‘the law of nations.’ Descending from natural law, the ‘law of nations’ are those principles governing the interactions of men from different polities. Foreigners, unless visibly hostile, are to be treated with hospitality. Christian missionaries can indeed preach among the Amerindian nations; Spaniards can dwell within them, and even step in, in defense of the ‘innocent,’ regarding their possible elimination, through “nefarious customs or rite[s].” Rituals like human sacrifice were abhorrent, and Vitoria had no hesitation in condemning them and legitimizing actions to prevent their occurrence.

The conquests themselves were largely unjust in his eyes. His reasoning helped spur comprehensive legal reforms, as it related to the Spanish empire in America. The Nueva Laws of 1542 curbed the power of Spanish landowners in the Americas, ordered people illegitimately enslaved to be immediately set free, and made the well-being of Spain’s indigenous subjects of paramount importance. The problem, however, was enforcement. No matter how much theologians and philosophers agonized over what was being done in their name across the Atlantic, no matter what the Pope declared, nor what the crown authority enacted in comprehensive reform through legislation, the enforcement of these edicts in the Americas was no easy feat. The Pizarros of Peru, for example, had risen to heights none of them had even dreamt possible; their conquest of the Inca empire was a private enterprise funded by them, and them alone. Who had the right to deprive them of the fruits of their labor? Such thinking plagued enforcement of these reforms, leading to outright civil war between the Spanish in Peru. But the fact that they bloomed into legal action at all is startling, when one considers the mainstream narratives of a Spain united in its persecution of indigenous America. It shows you the power of a man, like Vitoria, who fulfilled his sacred duty as a teacher, by presenting to some of Spain’s most impressionable citizens (his students), another way of looking at a complex national issue.

Spanish opponents of their countrymen’s conduct in the Americas have largely gone unnoticed. Bartolome de las Casas is known, to a degree, but his condemnation of Spanish actions was one-sided; every Spaniard in the Americas was the devil incarnate, and every action committed was done with evil intent, while the natives are idyllic primitives, ignorant and in need of guidance, like children. Francisco de Vitoria, however, was an instructor at the Universidad de Salamanca, his lectures focusing on the moral foundations upon which these conquests developed (including forced conversion to Christianity, whether the natives possessed agency of their own, etc.). His lectures around these themes influenced some of Spain’s most impressionable citizens: his students. This is the power of a teacher: to guide the development of their charges in such a way as to cause them to question the moral rightness of their nation’s actions a world away. Teachers are everywhere along the roads we travel; how have they influenced you, your way of thinking, or your worldview? Focus on your teachers. Pinpoint one, or several, who you deem most influential. What did they say, do, and instill within you, and how were you changed by the experience? If you can, visit them and thank them for the impact they had on your life. To behold the power of a teacher, look here:

• Book 1
• Book 2

• Website 1