Justification for the conquest of America: The "Requirement"

Abstract

Immediately after columbus' discovery of America, a hot controversy is in Spain itself that is passionate about theologians and jurists of the time, about the so-called righteous titles of the discovering nation over the new and vast Indian territories. That is, on the lawfulness or lawfulness of conquest.

The debate soon acquires notable highlights, and it includes prominent personalities from 16th-century Spain, including the eminent theologian and humanist Francisco de Vitoria, who is rightly recognized as the founder of international law.

Opinions on such a hot topic, the justification for conquest through war, passionate about each other. While some claim that the Crown has no right to seize the new territories, conquering them from their rightful owners, others instead claim otherwise. In any case, the controversy on the righteous titles greatly honors the Motherland, the only conquering nation that wonders whether its action is in accordance with law and justice.

"It honors 16th-century Hispanic thought that even against state reason this debate may have been raised," Venezuelan historian Mariano Picón Salas categorically states in his book From Conquest to Independence.

Despite centuries since the discovery and conquest of America, the issue of the legitimacy or illegitimacy of war has lost no interest or topicality. Even today, when the controversy that appealed to so many select spirits has been forgotten, it is disputed whether the Spanish company was the fruit of a crusade of prey and violence – as the propagators of black legend declare to denigrate Spain – or whether, on the contrary, it was a great civilizing crusade, the epic of a people who sacrifice everything , until his own life, for the sake of the magna company.