Final answer:
King Ferdinand saw the encomienda system as a legitimate economic policy, while Bartolomé de las Casas later became a critic after initially participating in it, exposing its abuses through his writings and advocating for significant reforms.
Step-by-step explanation:
The historical accounts of the encomienda system by King Ferdinand and Bartolomé de las Casas highlight contrasting viewpoints. King Ferdinand, as the monarch of Spain, saw the encomienda as a means to reward conquistadors and settlers with the labor or goods of indigenous peoples, thus justifying the system as an instrument of colonial reward and economy development. In stark contrast, de las Casas, an early Spanish settler turned reformer, vehemently criticized the encomienda system after witnessing its brutal realities. Initially, de las Casas participated in the exploitation as a recipient of an encomienda, but after a profound reassessment, he relinquished his encomienda and began advocating for the humane treatment of native peoples. His experience and changing perspective are chronicled in his book, A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies, which exposed the abuses and argued for the implementation of the New Laws to abolish the system. These divergent views emphasize the encomienda inherent violence and exploitation versus its official presentation as a beneficial colonial policy.In conclusion, while King Ferdinand and his administration authorized the encomienda system as a legitimate economic policy to compensate and control colonial territories, de las Casas's work reflects a critical and humanitarian critique that eventually influenced reforms to end the system's excesses and maltreatment of indigenous peoples.