La signification de l’œuvre de Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda, philosophe et historien espagnol du XVIè siècle ne fait aujourd’hui l’objet d’aucun consensus : s’agit-il d’un scolastique attardé au siècle de la Renaissance, d’un précurseur du catholicisme post tridentin, d’un crypto-luthérien, ou de l’un des grands humanistes de son temps ? Quelle est la portée exacte des thèses qu’il formula en 1550-1551 à Valladolid pour défendre la légitimité des guerres espagnoles dans le Nouveau Monde ? Après avoir suivi pas à pas la formation intellectuelle du philosophe, les débats auxquels il prit part (contre Erasme, Luther, ou Las Casas) et analysé son œuvre d’historien, notre recherche fait apparaître l’orientation profondément rationaliste et universaliste de sa démarche. Elle met en lumière l’importance, pour la pensée politique occidentale, de la définition qu’il donne de la barbarie. Dépourvue de toute connotation inégalitaire fondée sur la race ou la religion, cette définition, politique et morale, décrit la barbarie comme résultant d’institutions publiques attentatoires à la loi naturelle. Elle affirme le pouvoir critique de la Raison humaine à l’égard des institutions et des pouvoirs, dans le Nouveau Monde comme dans l’Ancien. / There is currently no consensus as to the significance of the work of sixteenth-century Spanish philosopher and historian Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda: was he an anachronistic scholastic in the century of the Renaissance, a precursor of post-Tridentine Catholicism, a crypto-Lutheran, or one of the great humanists of his time? What is the actual import of the arguments he put forward in Valladolid in 1550–1551 in defending the legitimacy of Spain's conquests in the New World? Founded on step-by-step examination of his intellectual training and the debateshe took part in (against Erasmus, Luther and Las Casas), and on close study of his work as a historian, my research reveals the deeply rationalist and universalist tendency of his approach and sheds fresh light on the importance, for Western political thinking, of his definition of barbarism. Devoid of all inegalitarian connotations based on race and religion, this political and moral definition describes barbarism as produced by public institutions detrimental to naturallaw, and asserts the critical power of human Reason with respect to institutions and constituted authority in the New World as in the Old.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-08-03T12:21:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Juarez Ferreira de Jesus.pdf: 452692 bytes, checksum: 4807659fa6cf84f2343483c21e0abfa0 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-03-08 / Slightly more than half a century after the discovery of the New World, Spanish Conquest in full, would take place in Valladolid in 1550 and 1551, an unprecedented event: a public debate starring two remarkable characters, namely, the Dominican Friar Bartolome de Las Casas and Juan Gines de Sepulveda. This debate is known in history as the Controversy of Valladolid, and had as main objective, to discuss how the Indians of the New World would be treated, what were their rights and their responsibilities. This thesis discusses the context in which this controversy took place, its characters and, of course, itself, in its arguments, exposure mode and constituent structure.(AU) / Pouco mais de meio século depois da descoberta do Novo Mundo, em plena Conquista espanhola, ocorreria em Valladolid, nos anos de 1550 e 1551, um evento sem precedentes: um debate público protagonizado por duas notáveis personagens, a saber: o Frei dominicano Bartolomé de Las Casas e Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda. Este debate ficou conhecido na História como a Controvérsia de Valladolid, e teve, como principal objetivo, discutir o modo como deveriam ser tratados os índios do Novo Mundo, quais eram os seus direitos e as suas atribuições. Esta tese discute o contexto em que se deu essa controvérsia, suas personagens e, é claro, ela própria, em seus argumentos, modo de exposição e estrutura constitutiva.(AU)