|Response sheet 2, for class, Thursday|
1. Whose violence did Sepulveda deem to be just, and why? Whose violence did he deem to be illegitimate, and why?
2. What was the difference between Sepulveda’s and Las Casas’s views of Europeans? Of Native Americans?
3. Did Hariot express any malice or remorse as he pondered the death toll of disease upon Native Americans? If not malice or remorse, what did he express?
4. Had they lived in the same moment of history, Spanish writers like Columbus and English writers like Harriot would likely have viewed each other as implacable imperial enemies, yet both nevertheless shared a peculiar similarity. Spanish and English culture often but not always expressed malice toward Native Americans, yet, with or without malice, both countries sought to justify the infliction of violence on a massive scale against Native Americans. How was it possible for this kind of aggressive violence to become normal in Spain, England, and other European countries, even sometimes without any malice toward the targets of that violence? Violence motivated by malice is perhaps comprehensible in its awful way, but how do you explain this intensity of violence when it happened without any expression of malice?