Yazeed K. Abughaliah Feb 13, 2014 Prof.

Scott, Paper #1: The Spanish Conquest of the Aztec Empire The Spanish Conquest of the Aztec Empire In the sixteenth century, there were many important events and conquests going on in the world. One of the notable and important events is the conquest and discovery of the Americas. Early in the 1500s, the Spanish discovered the Aztec Empire, which is now Mexico, and their goal was to conquer it and create colonies there. Three primary sources written by Hernan Cortez, Bernal Diaz, and the Broken Spears account can give more information about the conquests and what happened during that time. Therefore, the specific purpose of this paper is to compare the similarities and differences of the three letters in order to present which account is the most reliable and believable among the other ones. After looking at those primary sources and identifying the similarities and differences, Diaz's account seems to be more believable and reliable because of the audience to whom he was writing, the objectivity of his tone, and the great deal of information he provided. One of the differences that makes Diaz's account more reliable and believable than the other ones is the audience to whom he was writing. Diaz was one of the Spaniards who witnessed the event with Cortez, the leader of the mission, and he wrote his account many years after the event took place. His motive of writing this account is because he was really impressed by what he saw in the Aztec empire, and he also wanted to share with people the story of this great conquest in history that he witnessed. In other words, Diaz's account was not written to any authority. He was just telling and informing the people in his generation who did not witness that event or anyone else interested to know more about the conquest. That means he would be providing his audience with more realistic information because he knew this he would not be
1

punished by his audience eventually if he mentioned the bad things they did in the time of the conquest, which I believe makes his more believable compared to the other two. Again, one of the reasons that makes Cortez's account less believable than Diaz's account is the audience. Cortez was sent by the king of Spain, King Charles. He was commanded to discover the new world and conquer the Aztec Empire and create Spanish colonies there. While he was there, he kept King Charles informed about what was going on. Every time Cortez sent a letter to his king, all he stated was positive, and he was informing the king only about their victories without showing that they had any encounters against the Aztecs. One of the things he said to his king was Before it was dawn I attacked two towns, where I killed many people, but I did not burn the houses lest the fires should alert the other towns nearby (Cortez, p.1). His motive of writing this was to show the king how great he was, and everyone one else was afraid of him in order for the king to keep supporting him and supplying him with funds. Otherwise, the king would have stopped supplying him.Therefore, the audience Cortez was writing to is an element that might make his account less believable because he did want to cause problems to himself with the king. Diaz might have exaggerated a little bit too when he wrote his account, but it was because he wanted to show the audience that the Spanish are great warriors in history and never fear anything, which does not affect his believability because this is true based on the fact that they conquered the Aztec Empire. An example of that is when he explained the situation of the Aztecs after they saw the horses and the soldiers the Spanish had, which made the Aztecs surprised (Diaz, p.1). Moreover, The Broken Spears was a collection of the Aztecs and Indians talks who witnessed the conquest. Similar to Diaz's account, its audience was not any authority, but all their focus was to show the audience that the Spanish were very great and irresistible against

them. They did not introduce to the audience anything that relates to their strength or how they confronted against the Spanish, which might make the audience question the believability of the account. Additionally, another reason that makes Diaz's account more believable is his objectivity in tone. As mentioned earlier, Diaz did not write to specific audience, so he would rather be objective than subjective. He would be telling the good things and the bad things they faced. In contrast, Cortez's tone was very subjective, ironic and arrogant. To demonstrate that, both Diaz and Cortez talked about almost the same story, but in different ways. Diaz said And it seems to me that Corts, through Doa Marina, offered him his right hand, and Montezuma did not wish to take it (Diaz, p.2). However, Cortez said it differently several men of rank of the town came to me and begged me to do them no more harm, for they wished to be Your Highness's vassals and my allies (Cortez, p.1). From these two quotes, it can be noticed how objective Diaz's tone was and how ironic Cortez's tone was. Cortez's tone is less believable also because the purpose of his tone was to show the king that he was the best. Another example is that Cortez used words like ''they begged me, they wished to be my allies, and they were wrong in not having been willing to assist me,'' and his tone was exaggerating like that just to convince his king, so it might make his account less believable than Diaz's (Cortez, p.1). Furthermore, differently from Diaz's and Cortez's accounts, The Broken Spears tone sounded very fearful, and it showed that the Mexicans were very intimidated by the Spaniards. An example of that is when Cortez said to them I have heard that the Mexicans are very great warriors, very brave and terrible (The Broken Spears, p.1). Their reaction to this was that they held back and did not want to confront. Another example of that is when Montezuma heard about the cannon, he was very frightened and, ''it was as if his heart had fainted, as if it had

shriveled.'' Moreover, in his account, Cortez said that They had tried with all their forces both by day and by night to avoid being subject to anyone, but the fearful tone of The Broken Spears only shows that the Mexicans were afraid and did not even try to free themselves, which is contradictory to Cortez and makes these two accounts less believable than Diaz's (Cortez, p.2). Also, the fearful tone of The Broken Spears can be because the Aztecs or Indians wanted to justify or find an excuse of why they did not fight for their empire so that no one blames them. An example is when they talked about the disease. They said It began to spread during the thirteenth month and lasted for seventy days, striking everywhere in the city and killing a vast number of our people (The Broken Spears, p.2). The reason why it specifically talked about the disease killing many of their people is to justify and find a good excuse why they could not resist and why they lost against the Spaniards, which might not be true and can affect the believability of this account. The third reason that can determine the believability of Diaz's account is the informative and descriptive details he provided. Diaz was extremely descriptive, and he almost talked about the whole conquest. This makes one follows the experience one by one without missing any event. Unlike Cortez, he only talked about his accomplishments without giving any details of how he won or how he achieved what he wanted in order to be very superior in the eyes of his audience. Diaz also gave description to everything he saw. For instance, he described Montezuma to the audience in a lot of details saying that The Great Montezuma was about forty years old, of good height and well proportioned (Diaz, p.6). These details increase the level of the account's believability because it can still tell that he remembers a great deal of what happened at that time although he wrote it many years after the event. Since it is a big, important and great event in history and in Diaz's life, he would be more likely to remember even those

little details. Similar to Cortez's account, The Broken Spears lacks some more details that can help the readers know more about the conquest. It did not explain how the Aztecs tried to resist and fight against the Spaniards, and that affects its believability. In conclusion, the Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire is a great event that happened during the sixteenth century and was explained by many. Hernan Cortez had a motive to write this letter, which is to inform his king and that weakens the believability of his account, and the same for his tone, which sounded exaggerated. Also, The Broken Spears' believability is still questioned due to the fact that it had a fearful and justifiable tone, contradictory points and lack of details. Therefore, Diaz's account stands out as the most believable among the other two due to the audience to whom he was writing, his objective tone, and his descriptive details.