Spanish Conquest Of Mexico Analysis

February 20, 2012
HIST 125
Comparison of the Spanish Conquest
After the Spanish Conquest, many written document have become used as sources that help recount major events from the past. Therefore, it becomes that job of historians to analyze sources and determine their accuracy and relevancy. “The Conquest of New Spain” written by Bernal Díaz and “The Broken Spears: The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico” are two sources whose themes can be compared and contrasted in order to determine their accuracy as primary sources. There are several themes portrayed throughout both sources such as: the civility of Cortez and Montezuma, initial encounters, the difference between the perception of gift versus greed, and the variation of religious
The account written by Díaz, “The Conquest of New Spain”, does not perceive the Spaniards visit as threatening and demanding as the Broken Spears account claims it to be. “Montezuma had ordered his stewards to provide us with everything we need for our way of living” (Díaz, 601) shows how the Spaniards viewed Montezuma as welcoming and generous. From the Spaniards point of view, they showed Montezuma the up most respect and civility in every one of their encounters. Not once did it mention any form of disrespect or any hostility between the two clans. However, from the Aztec’s point of view the Spaniards were greedy and disrespectful from the very beginning. “The placed Montezuma under guard and kept him under their vigilance…. the Spaniard fired one of their cannons, and this caused great confusion in the city…They were all overcome by terror” (Broken Spears, 609” depicts the amount of disrespect Cortez and his men were showing the aspects. Cortez also tells Montezuma what supplies he needed, and Montezuma ordered that the supplies be sent to him. In the Spaniard’s account, never once did they mention that the Spaniards initially requested the supplies Montezuma ordered his stewards to supply. This is a prime example of how bias and who
Both “The Conquest of New Spain” and “The Broken Spears: The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico” share unique perspectives of the same series of events. They are both primary sources that were written by witnesses, and both sources are written with bias. However, there are a few strong differences between them that make the Aztec account more reliable than the Spaniards account. The Aztec account was written by numerous priests and wise men, meaning more perspectives and more accurate recounts of certain situation, it was written in a shorter amount of time after the conquest than the Spaniards was, therefore the memory of what happened could not have been altered so much, and the significantly larger amount of details and descriptions that went into the Aztec account reiterate how the many perspectives of the authors allows for a more accurate and spot on narrative. By comparing major themes, such as initial encounters and civility, greed versus gift, and religion, one can analyze the sources in order to determine their accuracy while taking into account potential bias, the amount of time it took to write the account after the events occurred, who wrote the document, and the perspective of certain events, in order to conclude which account has more plausibility and more