The Expansion Of The Spanish Empire Essay

To what extent was Mexico’s independence from Spain a “full-scale assault on dependency”? This essay will investigate how the Mexican independence from Spain was only slightly a “full-scale assault on dependency”, due to several political and social conflicts. Firstly, Mexico remained a monarchy (but not under the control of Spain) after the insurgency. Secondly, there was still an official state religion in Mexico. Another reason is because social conflicts reduced the desire for independence .On the other hand, it assaulted dependency because there were some changes within the social hierarchy, and because Mexico was free from Spain.

Any student of history has come to recognize the fact that history is written by the victor and in lieu of this, research becomes essential to uncover where the truth lies. The True History of the Conquest of New Spain, so ironically named, is a personal account for historical events leading up to the conquest of New Spain, formerly known as the City of Mexico. The author, Bernal Diaz, was a soldier of the conquering army who composed the document well after the events took place sometime between 1552 and 1557. Though the document did provide insight in regards to the victor’s perspective, it also served as a tool to rewrite the account of the conquered people.

Many people have heard of King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain. However, only some know of all the things they accomplished. They might be best known for funding the voyages of Christopher Columbus, but they also greatly contributed to the unity of Spain (“Isabella l”). Together, they brought many kingdoms on the Iberian Peninsula together to form what Spain is today. Through Spain’s unification, King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella strengthened Spain into an economic and dominant world power, enabling the spread of Christianity and the colonization of a New World.

In 1490 there was no such country as spain, yet within a century it had become the most powerful nation in europe and within another century had sunk to the status of a third rate power. Describe and analyze the major social economic and political reasons for spains rise and fall.

The author argues that the Spanish were completely at fault for the total destruction of the Aztec Empire. In Broken spears, the author explains how many factors other than Spanish power contributed to the downfall of the Aztecs. Not only did the Spanish have many advantages over the Aztecs, but also they also exploited them and took advantage of the cultural difference. The main key aspects to the Spanish victory, is that the Spanish were viewed as gods at first because of their appearance, the Aztecs welcomed the Spanish with gifts and festivities, which showed the Spanish had total control of people. The Aztecs also held a ritual ceremony for the arrival of the “god” that included a human

Throughout the Spanish conquest and exploration of Mesoamerica, religion became a focal point in Spanish observations of indigenous cultures. Influenced by European biases and colonial mindset, the Spanish criticized indigenous religion by condemning their

The ancient Aztec civilization is usually thought of as a barbaric, unintelligent people throughout modern society. This could be an ideal carried down from the Spaniards that concord the native lands or even something as simple as today’s society creating overblown stereotypes because of conjoined lack of understanding and overall knowledge. But, because of the extensive research and studies done by Miguel León-Portilla we are able to discover the true nature of the Aztec peoples way of life. Within the book “Aztec Thought and Culture” the author explains the develop of the Aztec civilization through education and philosophy as well as describing the Aztec people as an advanced society rather than the popular belief of a savage people and culture.

In Victors and the Vanquished, Schwartz poses the question of “How can we evaluate conflicting sources” (ix)? Through reading historical events such as the “Conquest of New Spain” there is an undeniably large amount of destruction of cultural material and bias testimonies of events recorded several years after they occurred. After analyzing the Spanish Conquest of Mesoamerica there is a debatable amount of evidence from the Mesoamericans and Spanish explanations of this event in history. The intentions of each explanation created a conflict to historians, art historians and anthropologists on which viewpoint holds to accuracy. There is also the issue of not only inaccuracies, but the motives behind each bias account. As many of these aspects are taken into consideration, interpreting each justification between both sides of history in Mesoamerica as a clash of ethnocentrism between two different cultures that causes an uncertainty of what actually happened in history.

Miguel Leon-Portilla author of Broken Spears- The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico, tells the story of the Spanish conquest over the Aztecs from the Aztec point of view. It is more familiar in history that the Spanish led by Hernan Cortez defeated the Aztecs with a powerful army and established an easy victory all while having intentions to gain power and greed. However, Leon-Portilla focuses on the Aztec Empire and their story. Leon-Portilla does a great job giving readers the real occurrences and events from Aztec members. This paper argues that history must be told from all sides. It is more common to hear about the Spanish conquest

In the 19th century the scramble for control was under way when the Americans, Japan, and the Germans entered, other countries struggling with their empires. In the late nineteen century became a new age of imperialism in where technology and communications brought empire’s within reach. Many counties were joining the hunt fort new colonies, Americans preferred an indirect imperialism. The concept was first popularized during James K. Polk presidency, where he led the United States into the Mexican-American War of 1846. America’s version was that to “export products, ideas, and influence”, they viewed it as a “pure” version so they can share their values of democracy, and Christianity.

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'

Soldier and conqueror Bernal Díaz del Castillo in his book The True History of the Conquest of New Spain labeled Hernán Cortés “a valiant, energetic, and daring captain” and compared him to the likes of Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Hannibal. Hernán Cortés was an ambitious conquistador and eventually defeated the mighty Mexican empire. A problem, however; emerges when distinguishing between the rational and romanticized versions of Cortés’ exploits. Bernal Díaz was present during the conquest, but his account was written much later and cannot be expected to be unbiased. Modern interpretations of Cortés can piece together all document and find that he stretched the truth to further his own gains. Cortés’ personality, goals, and actions have been interpreted differently since the days of the conquest, and have changed the way the conquest has been understood.

The greed for gold and the race for El Dorado were the main inducements of the Spaniards who, at the peril of their lives, crossed the ocean in unfit vessels in a mad pursuit after the gold and all other precious property of the Indians” (Peace 479). The royal rulers of Spain made it a rule that nothing would jeopardize their ability to rob the land from the native people of Latin America. The missionary process, “had to be encouraged, but the missionaries could not be permitted to dominate the colony at the cost of royal rule” (Gibson 76). The European governments established missionaries to cleanse their minds of any guilt aroused by the slaughtering of innocent men, women, and children. When European “ships arrived in the 16th century to colonize the land and exploit its natural resources, they killed indigenous people and brought black slaves from Africa. Millions of indigenous people were slain and their cultures completely destroyed by the process of colonization” (Ribero). The overall devastations caused by the Christianization of the native inhabitants created a blend of cultures within the indigenous civilizations which gradually isolated old native ways into a small population of oppressed people. The Christianized people became a symbol of loyalty to the European powers and were left alone simply on their religious status. This long term mission of total religious replacement caused very strong and advanced

However, the story of the Aztec defeat and the successful resolution of the Spanish mission against incredible odds raises many questions. Regardless of more advanced technology and weapons, the Spanish force was vastly outnumbered and began a military campaign poorly supplied within an unknown territory against an unknown enemy. This paper explores the possibility that other key factors were at play, which provided the Spanish with a several of advantages and facilitated the successful resolution of their campaign. Furthermore, these factors allowed for an incredibly quick and effective subjugation of millions of people – considering that by comparison it took hundreds of years to expel the Muslim armies from southern Spain, a war ending in 1492 and in which many conquistadores fighting in the new world took part of. This paper will argue that internal religious quarrels, unsustainable tax obligations, and continuing military conflicts weakened the Aztec social fabric by increasing resentment among subjugated towns and cities and diminishing trust among Aztec citizens in their highly centralized government.

Because the Indians and Spanish lived in different areas in Latin America, the Indian culture and society did not change significantly. Or did there society change?