Compare And Contrast Columbus And Las Casas

498 Words1 Page

Utilizing primary sources, historians interpret the past. Primary sources are the documents that were written or created by someone with immediate knowledge of the occurrence or time- period. Therefore, Christopher Columbus's and Bartolome de Las Casas's documents were considered primary sources for multiple reasons. First, both men lived and experienced the harsh voyages over to the Caribbean island of Hispaniola. Also, during the voyages, Columbus documented the date, which specifies that his documents were accounted during the designated time-period; on the other hand, Las Casas’ Brief Account of Devastation of the Indies did not specify the date, but the account was documented during the time-period (Shmoop, 2015). Columbus and Las Casas had many purpose for writing the documents. For example, since Columbus and Las Casas were funded by the Crown of Castille and Spain, with …show more content…

Also, for himself, Columbus may have written a journal to follow the date, so that he knows the duration of the voyage. Lastly, both men’s documents could serve as evidence, in case of disappearance. Nevertheless, the documents serve as evidence and an account for historians to gather information. In the two sources, Columbus’s views majorly contrast to those of Las Casas’, regarding the native inhabitants of the island. For instance, Las Casas, indirectly, praised the natives by explaining that the natives were content without beds, not covetous for materialistic items unlike their slayers, had bright and impartial minds, and free of evil and hatred (Brief Account of Devastation of the Indies). However, Columbus, fueled by the motive to bring his nation riches, writes that he easily could, “conquer the whole of them [native population] with fifty men, and govern them as I pleased” (Christopher Columbus: Extracts from Journal).

Open Document