The treatment of the native inhabitants varied among the three explorers. The worst treatment of the natives was seen in great detail through the perspective of De Las Casas. During his expedition in the Indies, he and his comrades killed millions of the natives to take everything and anything they wanted. He stated, “And thus they have deprived the Indians of their lives and souls, for the millions I mentioned have died without the Faith and without the benefit of the sacraments. This is a well-known and proven fact which even the tyrant Governors, themselves killers, know and admit. And never have the Indians in all the Indies committed any act against the Spanish Christians, until those Christians have first and many times committed countless cruel aggressions against them or …show more content…
All the Spaniards had done was killing of innocent lives for personal greed and acquiring as much goods as they could for their Majesty, doing so for the money was their justifications for killing the natives. Then we have Cortes, who instead of killing off the Natives of Tenochtitlan, he opened their eyes to the horrors of their religious ways and gave them the revelation of Christianity. Cortes didn’t mention any genocide of the natives, he spoke about the geography and religious views of the natives. He stated, “I will simply say that the manner of living among the people is very similar to that of Spain, and considering that this is a barbarous nation shut off from a knowledge of true God or communication with enlightened nations, one may well marvel at the orderliness and good government which is everywhere mentioned” (SB, 8). Cortes is only praising the natives and their life style because he feels the people have everything figured out in terms of being dominant and true government but, lacked in religion which he left them