Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
A aztec account of the conquest of mexico summary and analysis
Differences between the aztec and incas and how the spanish encountered them essays
Differences between the aztec and incas and how the spanish encountered them essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Looking back into the history of certain events affords the modern researcher the ability to examine a variety of documents and artifacts. It is important, however, to take into account biases, inaccuracies, errors in translation, and overall misinformation when examining primary sources, particularly historical documents. Examining the history of the conquest of the Aztec empire is no different, and in a scenario as tense as it was it is extremely important to consider the authorship of the text. Bernal Diaz’ The Conquest of New Spain and Miguel Leon-Portilla’s The Broken Spears: The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico offer two distinct looks into the same event in history. Both documents offer differing takes of the same events, so when …show more content…
The source discusses many of the same events that The Broken Spears does, however they are more polished and detailed. The more detailed nature of the text itself can be attributed to the fact that The Conquest of New Spain most certainly contained less errors in translation when compared to The Broken Spears. The document was originally written in Spanish, whereas The Broken Spears contains a compilation of documents translated from the Aztec’s native Nahuatl. Another factor to consider when looking at The Conquest of New Spain as a source is the fact that Bernal Diaz himself was a solider under Cortes’ command. His account is perhaps one of the most accurate due to the fact that he was actually present during all of the events he describes in his account. It is also extremely important when looking at this document through the lens of history to consider the differences in faith between the Aztecs and the Spaniards. Diaz and his fellow soldiers were Christian and many of the abnormalities that he attributes to Aztec life, such as human sacrifice, choice of clothing, and their temples, are related to their native religious traditions and were extremely foreign to him. Another interesting aspect of The Conquest of New Spain to highlight is Diaz’ status as a soldier under Cortes’ command. Diaz often depicts Cortes as less of a heroic figure, which is often how Cortes describes himself. In one particular passage Diaz describes Cortes as “…very frightened,” when he sees how numerous the Aztec forces are in their canoes. He goes on to say that Cortes, “…stationed himself in the lake, so that if he his men hard pressed he could sail out freely and hurry to any place he chose.” These types of descriptions of Cortes by Diaz aim to attribute his feats to those of his
The Broken Spears is a book written by Miguel Leon-Portilla that gives accounts of the fall of the Aztec Empire to the Spanish in the early 16th century. The book is much different from others written about the defeat of the empire because it was written from the vantage point of the Aztecs rather then the Spanish. Portilla describes in-depth many different reasons why the Spanish were successful in the defeat of such a strong Empire.
“The Conquest of New Spain” is the first hand account of Bernal Diaz (translated by J.M. Cohen) who writes about his personal accounts of the conquest of Mexico by himself and other conquistadors beginning in 1517. Unlike other authors who wrote about their first hand accounts, Diaz offers a more positive outlook of the conquest and the conquistadors motives as they moved through mainland Mexico. The beginning chapters go into detail about the expeditions of some Spanish conquistadors such as Francisco Hernandez de Cordoba, Juan de Grijalva and Hernando Cotes. This book, though, focuses mainly on Diaz’s travels with Hernando Cortes. Bernal Diaz’s uses the idea of the “Just War Theory” as his argument for why the conquests were justifiable
The passage from Bernal Díaz del Castillo’s The True History of the Conquest of New Spain is a clear example of a narrative source. Díaz is presenting his personal account of Hernan Cortes’s expedition into Tenochtitlan. An interesting aspect of this narrative is that it was written almost 50 years after the events described occurred . Bernal Díaz del Castillo was only 24 years old when on November 8, 1519 he and the rest of Hernán Cortés’s expedition first entered the city of Tenochtitlán . He did not finish his account, titled The True History of the Conquest of New Spain, which many suspect was intended as a slight to Francisco López de Gómara’s accounts of the expeditions , until 1567 . This was not his first travel to the New World, in fact, it was his fourth . Díaz del Castillo was 19 years old the first time he traveled to the Americas, this time was to Panama . Díaz later became a governor in Guatemala, mostly as a reward for his actions as a conquistador . The event that is commonly seen as spurring the not-well-educated Bernal Díaz del Castillo to write of his experiences with Cortés was the publication of Francisco López de Gómara’s Coleccion de historiadores primitivos de las Indias Occidentales, which Díaz saw as seriously flawed and underappreciating the work of the conquistadors . The book this passage comes from languished on shelves until it was published in 1632, posthumously .
Victors and Vanquished by Stuart Schwartz attempts to explore differing perspectives of the conquest of Mexico as the historical narratives are from both the outlook of the Spanish conquistadors as well as the Nahua peoples. In these primary sources, there was a fundamental focus on the encounters between the Spaniards and the Mexica. The first source is an excerpt from The True History of the Conquest of New Spain by Bernal Díaz del Castillo, a Spanish conquistador, who participated as a foot solider in the conquest of Mexico with Hernán Cortés. Although Díaz del Castillo was a witness of the conquest, he wrote his account of what he had witnessed decades after the Spanish victory, in 1521. In his account, Díaz del Castillo concentrated on the ways in which the Spanish viewed the Nahua peoples. The second source is taken from the Florentine Codex and is one which was collected twenty
Throughout history many people write what actually happened but from their point of view. One of them that really common is Eurocentric perspective since they have travelled to new places and wrote down what they saw when they were there. A lot of that has happened with Mesoamerica because they have been taken over by the Spaniards and they wrote what they thought has happened. They thought they were god like compared to them. The Americas wouldn’t be what it is because of them. Also they thought that the Aztecs were more savage like people who like to sacrifice people. All of this was from their point of view and not the Aztecs who are the ones who know better than them.
8. Meyer, Michael C., et al. The Course of Mexican History, 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Marcus Gravey stated that, “A people without the knowledge of their past history, origin and culture is like a tree without roots.” With that being stated, are the people of the United States, Canada, and Mexico trees without roots? At a young age students learn that Christopher Columbus “sailed the ocean blue in 1492”, a simple song used to assist children remember that America was discovered in 1492. In addition, Thackeray and Findling describe how Columbus’s discovery presented an unimaginable amount of opportunity for Europeans, and therefore, Spanish, French, and later British explores and settlers began to flock to this new world.
The downfall of the Aztec Empire was a major building block of the Spanish colonial empire in the Americas. Spain’s empire would stretch all the way into North America from the Southwest United States all the way up the Pacific Coast. The unfortunate side effect of this was the elimination of many nations of indigenous people. The three major themes shown in this conquest really give deeper look into the anatomy of this important historical event. Without context on the extent of native assistance given to Cortez in his fight with the Aztecs, a reader would be grossly uniformed. The Spanish conquest was closer to a civil war than an actual conquest. Until reading detailed personal accounts of the fighting it is difficult to judge the deadly effectiveness of the Spaniards technological superiority. Without it is difficult to imagine 500 conquistadors holding thousands of native warriors at bay. Once the greed of Cortez and greed in general of the Europeans one understands that if it wasn’t Cortez if would have just been a different man at a different time. Unfortunately fame and prosperity seem to always win over cares about fellow human beings
Jacques Lafaye, a French historian, published a study pertaining to the intellectual history of New Spain and its development of a national consciousness that would facilitate a move towards independence. Lafaye takes a unique approach of examining the formation of Mexico’s national conciseness by pointing to the importance of religious thought in that process. In this ethnohistorical study the author pays special attention to the interaction of Iberian Christianity and Aztec belief system in New Spain. Through careful analysis the author confronts the merging of these two faiths and their role in the transition from the Aztec world to independent Mexico. Lafaye specifically alludes to the syncretic nature of St.Thomas-Quetzalcoatl and Guadalupe-Tonantzin
Francisco Gomara’s version of the story misrepresented Hernan Cortes as the primary reason for the success of the spanish conquest, giving little credit to those who also stood at the side of Cortes. Then you have Bartolome Casas someone waccountho had a completely different angle of perspective compared to Gomara’s. Casas attacked the spanish forces for their cruelty. This alleviated most; if not all space for the spanish to justify themselves for their actions during the conquest. For Commander Cortes account he prettied the story in his writings to the king to make himself look fancy towards the King of Spain. Saying things in regard to giving the king more power and the rule of new land. Cortes also spoke to justify his story. Exaggerating the fact that the natives were taking practice in human sacrifices, so it was necessary to take action in attempt to convert them to the christian view. When comparing Castillo’s “true history” to these narrations you notice his does not lean towards any story more than another. It stands in its own separate
When the Spaniards arrived on the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico in 1519, they encountered the advanced society of the Aztecs. With Tenochititlan at its capital, the Aztec empire was vast. The Aztecs had substantial wealth from trading and extensive payments of tribute from conquered peoples. Bernal Diaz in his The Conquest of New Spain comments, "We were dazzled at the richness of the country that we passed through" (282). The Spaniards encountered a powerful, advanced people in the New World, making Cortes and his crew of approximately 600 seemingly ensured of defeat. The Aztec religion lends much to Spanish success in conquest.
The Conquest of New Spain Cortés came not to the New World to conquer by force, but by manipulation. Bernal Daz del Castillo, in the "Conquest of New Spain," describes how Cortés and his soldiers manipulated the Aztec people and their king Montezuma from the time they traveled from Iztapalaopa to the time when Montezuma took Cortés to the top of the great Cue and showed him the whole of Mexico and its countryside, and the three causeways which led into Mexico. Castillo's purpose for recording the mission was to keep an account of the wealth of Montezuma and Mexico, the traditions, and the economic potential that could benefit Cortés' upcoming conquest. However, through these recordings, we are able to see and understand Cortés' strategy in making Mexico "New Spain." He came as a wolf in sheep's clothing and manipulated Montezuma through his apparent innocence.
Malintzin, also known as La Malinche, played an important and vital role in the European conquest of the Aztec Empire. During her participation in the conquest, Indians and Spaniards alike respected her. Yet in the 19th and 20th century, historians and critics labeled her as a traitor or a victim of Spanish cruelty. In this essay, I will discuss the historical legacy of La Malintzin. I argue that she was not a traitor or a victim, but one of the great “deciders” of history. Without the help of Malintzin, the conquistadors would have never gotten as far as they did. They were in awe of her as evidenced by their annals and even the survivors portrayed her as a powerful figure. In the end, we have made her what we want her to be even though the historical evidence is strong in supporting the idea of her importance in Latin American history.
From 1450 to 1800, the Spanish and Russians utilized economic, environmental, social, and elements in order to build their extensive empires.
The Spanish and the Ottomans were flourishing empires around 1450 to 1800. They both have very different cultures where the same ideas are used just in different ways that changed the courses of the empires. These empires were the breaking point to new and more advanced empires and discoveries down the road. While the Spanish and the Ottomans were two exceptionally strong powers who had similar ideals they also operated and thought in different ways as well about religion, government, and military.