Compare And Contrast Cortes Vs Sundiata

Q: What were Cortes' and Bernal Diaz's motives for writing their accounts of the conquest? How did these motives color their narratives of the conquest?

Imagine that you are living in a jungle in the middle of central day Mexico. You are part of an indigenous group that call themselves the Mexica. Nowadays they go by the name Aztec and live in modern day Mexico. Although the Spanish lived across the ocean from the Aztec, they had many similarities and differences in their warfare. Weaponry, tactics, and worldview are all important elements of the Aztec and Spanish.

The Aztec and Inca Empires arose 1000 to 1500 century C.E. in Mesoamerica and South America. The Aztecs arrived in central Mexico approximately the fifteenth century. The Incas settled in the region around Lake Titicaca about mid-thirteenth century and by the late fifteenth century, the Incas had built an enormous empire stretching more the 4,000 kilometers. Both empires were enormous, the Incan Empire ended up being the largest state in South America. Neither empire had developed a written language, but they did come up with a way to remember things and keep records.

The Aztec and Mayan civilizations were two important, early civilizations that settled in Mesoamerica. The Mayan and Aztecs were two civilizations that lived in two different time periods, but they shared many physical and mental characteristics of one another. The Aztec and Mayan civilizations were different but they were more similar. The Aztecs and Mayans were more similar in their location, religion, writing system, government, social structure, gender roles, technology, and sporting activities.

Even if an account is emotionless, one must consider if the relevant facts are present. Pigafetta’s account does most of the relevant facts concerning the events of the voyage and the Easter Mutiny. In order to see if these facts can be trusted, one must look for any opinions. Pigafetta’s undoubtedly had his own opinions, but he did not mention them in his account, thereby ensuring its validity. One can tell if an account is true if it is corroborated by other sources. Pigafetta's account is corroborated by both Documents D and E. It can be noted that Pigafetta neglected some details about the reasoning for the mutiny out of his loyalty to Magellan, but perhaps he did not know the exact reasoning as the men planning the mutiny would have likely avoided speaking in front of him as they knew of his loyalty to Magellan, who they were planning to kill and later discredit. Furthermore, Pigafetta is said to have kept the best record of the journey in Document B. If a modern historian has said that Pigafetta’s report is the best record they have, one can assume that said report is factual and therefore reliable.

The primary intended audience was Charles V to in an attempt to gain support from him to have authority over the territory of New Spain. Cortés wanted to set up a position where he did not have to answer to the governor of Cuba but only had to address himself to the Emperor. The audience of the document was not only meant to be for Charles V, but most people in Spain were able to read. Cortez went into great detail about the power of the Aztecs to add to his glory of how he was able to conquer a whole nation. As a result, Cortés did his best to relate what he was experiencing to cities in Spain and the old world to allow readers get an idea how the cities and culture functioned in the new world. Cortés also made sure to touch a lot on the culture and the traditions of the natives in an effort to convey the Aztecs way of life. As result anyone who would end up doing the research on the Aztec culture would see this source as a helpful primary document.

Leon-Portilla based the stories told in this book upon old writings of actual Aztec people who survived the Spanish massacres. The actual authors of the stories told in this book are priests, wise men and regular people who survived the killings. These stories represent the more realistic view of what really happened during the Spanish conquest. Most of the history about the Aztec Empire was based on Spanish accounts of events, but Leon-Portilla used writings from actual survivors to illustrate the true history from the Indians’ point of view.

Second, Diaz’s account written after a while of the event that builds it more reliable because usually who write during the war tends to his group on his writing. Moreover, in a time of a huge debate about Spain as an empire and treating Indians Diaz wrote his documents based on his memories and notes. Indeed, he was old when he wrote his book. So, it was possible that he missed some information or details, but not the main points and that one of the reason for using “it seems to me” frequently in his paper. In contrast, Cortez wrote his letter during the mission that let him use the warriors’ language that made him avoid mentioning the Aztec’s advantages. But, The Broken Spears is a recollection of Spanish by Indians’ records from the 16th century but, the exact dates are missed which are important to evaluate the information. In brief, Diaz’s account is more believable because he wrote it after a while of the event that let him revised his point of view.

Broken Spears was first published in 1959 in the Spanish language and then in 1962, when it was translated and written in English. What was interesting about the Aztec Empire was it included diversity by involving numerous tribes. Broken Spears includes strong and promising statements that hold high accountability for the information passed along to the readers. For example, in the forward passage of the book, “This history . . . was written at a time when those who took part in the very Conquest were alive. . . . And those who gave this account [were] principle persons of good judgment, and it is believed they all told the truth (xviii). With their good judgement and honesty, it still didn’t prepare them for what they would face against the

and fame. The accounts are based on the Aztec’s perception of the invasion and include the

Because Schreffler is arguing that Díaz, López de Gómara, Solís and González created a misconstrued view of Aztec painting, imagery is a vital component of this essay. The visuals strengthen his argument by giving viewers a clear sense of the difference between typical Aztec panting and the painting that the accounts describe. For example, Schreffler includes two images of paintings done by the

Cortés came not to the New World to conquer by force, but by manipulation. Bernal Díaz 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'

Cortés was intelligent and proficient in law and knew that he was committing treason when he first departed Cuba for the unknown. Frank Ross wrote in “The Codex Cortés: Inscribing the Conquest of Mexico” that Cortés had “conceived of his defense as a legal case which depended on showing that his sense of personal loyalty to the King motivated his actions.” He had to provide evidence that his expedition into the unknown was for the benefit of Spain, especially economically. In the Second Letter of Hernán Cortés to Charles V, Cortés describes the Tenochtitlan market as packed with sixty thousand people

In every historical event there tends to be conflicting sides, each member has their own point of view based on a plethora of statistics. These statistics include but are not limited to, socio-economic classes, race, geographical boundaries, gender, etc. When two cultures interact for the first time there is bound to be some discrepancies over what truly occurred. These discrepancies are portrayed quite well through Bernal Diaz’s The Conquest of New Spain and The Broken Spears: The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico, either side showed similarities, but at the same time they showed even more metamorphoses, making it nearly impossible to say either account holds more water than the other.

Content: My Primary source is the Letters of Cortes, written by Hernan Cortes during his leadership over the Aztecs in the 1520s. The main idea of these Letters was to help Cortes gain control over Spain. Citation: The creator of the Letters of Cortes is Fernando Cortes, also known as Hernan, written from his perspective on why he did the things he did in 1519-1526. However, the book I was able to find the letters in was written by Francis Augustus MacNutt in 1908.