Cortes and the Conquering of the Great Aztec Empire
Essay Preview: Cortes and the Conquering of the Great Aztec Empire
Report this essay
Billy Edwards
12-11-07
ANT 305A
Cortes and the Conquering of the Great Aztec Empire
When Cortes heard of a vast and wealthy empire deep within the Mexican interior, the conquest of Mexico had already begun. The Aztec empire was what the ambitious Cortes had been looking for since his departure from Spain; he most certainly hoped that his wish to discover the empire would come true. The Aztecs, on the other hand, did not know Cortes. The empire was as it always had been; the Aztecs had no serious premonition of war. Cortes knew nothing of the size and power of the Aztec empire and if he did, his decision to bring only a few hundred men was certainly a gross misjudgment. The conquest of Mexico remains surprising for this reason: it seems puzzling that such a huge conflict could stem from two opposing forces, one of which was so terribly ill-prepared for war. As Inga Clendinnen states; “How was it that a motley bunch of Spanish adventurers, never numbering much more than four hundred or so, was able to defeat an Amerindian military power on its home ground in the space of two years?”
The victory of the Spaniards has typically been associated with Cortes qualities as a leader, and in earlier accounts, with the idea that the culturally superior mental and moral qualities of the Spanish gave way to the defeat of the Aztecs. Moreover, the accounts of Cortes and Diaz point to a Spanish victory led by a God whose determination seemed to have been the eradication of an “empire which did so little to promote the happiness of its subjects, or the real interests of humanity.” (2) It is remarkable that such an “uncivilized” civilization could impress the Spanish conquerors to the extent to which they did. The conquerors were, in a very real sense, in awe of the Aztec empire. They “beheld the evidence of a crowded and thriving population, exceeding all they had yet seen.” (3) To explain the defeat of the Aztecs in terms of the ideas of manifest destiny purported by Cortes and Diaz is to ignore an important point: The Aztecs cannot have been swiftly defeated by a band of poorly equipped Spaniards simply for reasons of moral superiority.
Prescotts account paints a picture of Spanish forces greatly impressed by the hidden empire. Upon seeing the Tianguez (open market) of Mexico, the Spaniards saw the various evidences of mechanical skill, of domestic industry, the multiplied resources, within the compass of the natives. It could not fail to impress them with high ideas of the magnitude of these resources, as well as of the commercial activity and social support by which the whole community was knit together; and their admiration is further shown by the grandiosity found their descriptions.
It is unlikely that the Spaniards who held in such great esteem the feats of the Aztecs would be so confident of their own strength. Thus, it is reasonable to say that the theological and moral justifications of Cortez and Diaz played no factual role in the defeat. It is true that Cortes believed he was led “with the help of God and his Blessed Mother” (4), but it is equally true that the Mexicans were led by “the feared and venerated Brothers of Huitzilopochtli”. (5) To attribute the success of the Spaniards to moral superiority is to argue an impossible argument. Both warring parties undoubtedly believed that their respective religious beliefs would lead them to safety.
The defeat of the Aztecs is the result of a series of more complicated circumstances: the nature an ambitious Cortes, native and Spanish opinion of Montezuma, differences in belief and attitude, and the Spanish use of the Tlaxcalan allies. Cortes role in the conquest cannot be ignored. However, his qualities as a leader and his reputation as one of historys most notorious figures, plays a part in the outcome of the conquest. Because of the differences in languages, cultures, and religion between the Spanish and the Aztecs there were often errors in communication which usually led to Spanish abuse of Aztec hospitality. Finally, from a strategic point of view, the decision of the Tlaxcalans to ally themselves with the Spanish proved to provide Cortes forces with a powerful advantage; they had at their disposition an army of natives who had the will to exact revenge on hated enemies. The combination of these circumstances eventually proved to work against the Aztec desire to rid the empire of its interlopers.
It is often said that history is the story of great leaders. This dictum can be loosely applied to the case of Hernan Cortes. His “greatness”, however, remains a point of some debate. He was personally brave, he knew who to pay in flattery, whom in gold, the men he bought usually stayed bought, and he knew how to stage a theatrical event for maximum effect. The driving force behind Cortes effective leadership was, however, less rooted in an intrinsic talent for leadership, but more in his wish to justify his invasion of Mexico to the King of Spain. He was, after all, acting in complete defiance of the orders of the Spanish Crown. In his Letters, Cortes describes a majority of his actions in terms of their benefit to the King. Six days after his entrance into the city of Tenochtitlan, Cortes explains his decision to capture Montezuma in the following manner: “I decided from what I had seen that it would benefit Your Royal service and our safety if Montezuma were in my power and not in complete liberty, in order that he should not retreat from the willingness he showed to serve Your Majesty.”(6) Furthermore, Cortes describes his courage and the courage of his soldiers to King, stating:
Thus from the day we laid siege to the city, which was on the thirtieth of May of that same year, until it fell, there passed seventy-five days, during which time Your Majesty will have seen the dangers, hardships and misfortunes which these, Your vassals, endured, and in which they ventured their lives. To this, their achievements will bear testimony. (8)
The arrival of the forces of Panfilo De Narvaez was certainly enough to remind Cortes of what awaited him in Spain if he did not make clear to the King that the conquest of the Aztec empire was not a fruitless undertaking. Prescott accurately points out that Cortes and the Spanish forces only hopes of regaining their sovereigns favour, and of pardon for their irregular proceedings, were founded on success.
Along with his need to justify his actions to the Spanish King, Cortes ambition played an important role in his success as a leader. He undoubtedly wished to make a name