Customer Reviews

The American Indian in Western Legal Thought: The Discourses of Conquest

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Having studied, taught and practiced Federal Indian law for nearly twenty years, I believe that this is the finest examination of the historical roots of legal colonialism in the Americas yet written. Williams is masterful in his research and examination of the Christian, European foundations for the invasion of the Western Hemisphere. Although I disagree with Williams' conclusions about the writings of Franciscus de Victoria, his discussion of the Elizabethan colonization of Ireland and, through extension of the same legal doctrines, native North America, is excellent.

This book is a methodically brings the legal thought of the western world into context of how it relates to the American Indian, a necessary background to the subject. This is done by reviewing medival and reform period of history, the seperation of church and state and land laws, and followed up by the occupation of North America. How this subjecation came to be and how laws not used equally facilitated the holocast in North America. I am glad i read it and have considered doing a second MA at the institution Robert A Williams teaches and have bought his second book and look forward to reading it AFTER i reread the american indian in western legal thought (ps keep a dictionary handy).

The biggest problem I had with this book is the author's constant reliance on secondary sources. Not only that, many of these sources are out of date such as Morison's Admiral of the Ocean Sea. Numerous primary sources from the colonial era were available at the time of this publication--some in easily accessible works. The author also does a poor job of providing context to his discusions and continuosly makes basic errors. For instance, Ferdinand of Aragon didn't rule Spain on his own after Isabella's death, Philip the Fair shortly did. After Philip's death, Ferdinand ruled on behalf of Juana La Loca as regent not as king. The author also refers to the kingdom of Spain. There was no such thing in Ferdinand's lifetime: Spain was a geographic region consisting of the kingdoms of Castile, Aragon, and Navarre. Arguably, these kingdoms were united under Charles V, but they retained separate laws and separate identies. Even so, the author gets this wrong most of the time.

Another problem is the author's reliance on the work of Lewis Hanke. Yet, in doing this, he misses the point of most of that historian's work. The author discusses the Laws of Burgos and the Requirimiento as if this was the alpha and omega of Spanish law in the New World. The Recopilacion, which contained laws that superceded nearly everything in the Laws of Burgos, is not discussed at all. This type of research might be acceptable in law schools, but, to a historian, this will come across as a deliberate omission and fabrication in the line of Ward Churchill. The author's discussion on Vitoria also lacks context and merely cites the same quotes that Hanke used over and over again. The author's discusion, conclusions, and distortions are clealy slanted on this point as well. Lastly, the tone of this book seeps with anti-European sentiment to the point that the reader will quickly realize that the book isn't about scholarship but passing judgment on the European countries that colonized the New World.