Part 14 (1/2)
”After saying that, subsequently to the conquest of Mexico, Cortes had not had good fortune either in his Californian or his Honduras expedition, or indeed in anything else he had undertaken, Bernal Diaz adds, 'Perhaps it was that he might have felicity in heaven. And I believe it was so, for he was an honorable cavalier, and a devoted wors.h.i.+pper of the Virgin, the Apostle St. Peter and other Saints. May G.o.d pardon his sins, and mine too, and give me a righteous ending, which things are of more concern than the conquests and victories that we had over the Indians.'”
Writes Mac.n.u.tt:
”His sagacity, his foresight, and his moderation have caused critical historians to rank him higher as a statesman than as a soldier. In virtue of his pre-eminent qualities both as a statesman and as a general, as well as because of the enduring importance of his conquest, Fernando Cortes occupies an uncontested place amongst the heroes of the nations.”
However we may sympathize with the Aztecs, we cannot escape from the fact that it was much better that there should be a Spanish rule instead of an Aztec rule in Mexico, and that the civilization of the former should supplant the so-called civilization of the latter. That does not prevent us from wis.h.i.+ng that the supersession might not have been so harsh and ruthless, but in view of the times, and the men, both Aztecs and Christians, it was not to be expected.
Personally, I love the memory of Guatemoc for his heroism and his devotion. I also have a warm feeling {226} for Cortes. It is true, as has been stated, that he was a child of his age, but he was the best child of his age, and it was not his fault altogether that in some respects it was the worst age. The Spanish rule in Mexico was better than the Spanish rule in Peru, and Cortes and his successors, by the side of Pizarro and his successors, were almost angels of light.
I close with these n.o.ble words of John Fiske in his great and highly valued _Discovery of North America_:
”A great deal of sentimental ink has been shed over the wickedness of the Spaniards in crossing the ocean and attacking people who had never done them any harm, overturning and obliterating a 'splendid civilization,' and more to the same effect. It is undeniable that unprovoked aggression is an extremely hateful thing, and many of the circ.u.mstances attendant upon the Spanish conquest in America were not only heinous in their atrocity, but were emphatically condemned, as we shall presently see, by the best moral standards of the sixteenth century. Yet if we are to be guided by strict logic, it would be difficult to condemn the Spaniards for the mere act of conquering Mexico without involving in the same condemnation our own forefathers who crossed the ocean and overran the territory of the United States with small regard for the proprietary rights of Algonquins, or Iroquois, or red men of any sort. Our forefathers, if called upon to justify themselves, would have replied that they were founding Christian states and diffusing the blessings of a higher civilization; and such, in spite of much alloy in the motives and imperfection in the performance, was certainly the case. Now if we would not lose or distort the historical perspective, we must bear in mind that the Spanish conquerors would have returned {227} exactly the same answer.
If Cortes were to return to the world and pick up some history book in which he is described as a mere picturesque adventurer, he would feel himself very unjustly treated. He would say that he had higher aims than those of a mere fighter and gold-hunter; and so doubtless he had.
In the complex tangle of motives that actuated the mediaeval Spaniard--and in his peninsula we may apply the term mediaeval to later dates than would be proper in France or Italy--the desire of extending the dominion of the Church was a very real and powerful incentive to action. The strength of the missionary and crusading spirit in Cortes is seen in the fact that where it was concerned, and there only, was he liable to let zeal overcome prudence.
”There can be no doubt that, after making all allowances, the Spaniards did introduce a better state of society into Mexico than they found there. It was high time that an end should be put to those hecatombs of human victims, slashed, torn open and devoured on all the little occasions of life. It sounds quite pithy to say that the Inquisition, as conducted in Mexico, was as great an evil as the human sacrifices and the cannibalism; but it is not true. Compared with the ferocious barbarism of ancient Mexico, the contemporary Spanish modes of life were mild, and this, I think, helps further to explain the ease with which the country was conquered. In a certain sense the prophecy of Quetzalcoatl was fulfilled and the coming of the Spaniards did mean the final dethronement of the ravening Tezcatlipoca. The work of the n.o.ble Franciscan and Dominican monks who followed closely upon Cortes, and devoted their lives to the spiritual welfare of the Mexicans, is a more attractive {228} subject than any picture of military conquest. To this point I shall return hereafter, when we come to consider the sublime character of Las Casas. For the present we may conclude in the spirit of one of the n.o.ble Spanish historians, Pedro de Cieza de Leon, and praise G.o.d, that the idols are cast down.”
[1] Cortes applies this name to the province in which the city, called by him Temixt.i.tan, more properly Tenocht.i.tlan, but now Mexico, was situated. Throughout this article the curious spelling of the great conqueror is retained as he wrote.
[2] This is the plant known in this country under the name of the _Century Plant_, which is still much cultivated in Mexico for the purposes mentioned by Cortes. It usually flowers when eight or ten years old.
[3] The original has the word _Mesquitas_, mosques; but as the term is applied in English exclusively to Mohammedan places of wors.h.i.+p, one of more general application is used in the translation.
[4] The t.i.tle invariably given to Muteczuma (or Montezuma) in these dispatches is simply Senor, in its sense of Lord or (to use an Indian word) Cacique; which is also given to the chiefs or governors of districts or provinces, whether independent or feudatories. The t.i.tle of Emperador (Emperor), how generally applied to the Mexican ruler, is never conferred on him by Cortes, nor any other implying royality, although in the beginning of this despatch, he a.s.sures Charles V. that the country is extensive enough to const.i.tute an empire.
[5] Two hundred and fifty pounds weight.
[6] I am not ignorant that it has been a.s.serted that Montezuma received the rite of baptism at the hands of his Christian captors. See Bustamante's notes on Chimalpain's Translation of Gomara (_Historia de las Conquistas de Hernando Cortes_. Carlos Maria de Bustamante.
Mexico, 1826, p. 287). But the objection raised by Torquemada--the silence of some of the best authorities, such as Oviedo, Ixlilxochitl, _Histoire des Chichimeques_, and of Cortes himself; and, on the other hand, the distinctly opposing testimony of Bernal Diaz (see cap. 127), and the statement of Herrera, who a.s.serts that Montezuma, at the hour of his death, refused to quit the religion of his fathers. (”No se queria apartar de la Religion de sus Padres.” _Hist. de las Indias_, dec. II. lib. x, cap. 10), convinces me that no such baptism took place.
[7] These gates they had made themselves. The Aztecs had not learned the art of making gates or doors. The exits and entrances of their houses were closed, if at all with portieres.
[8] It is growing very old and is badly decayed. The newspapers report that efforts are being made by experts to try a course of treatment which will preserve this venerable and interesting forest relic, already nearly four hundred years old, but it is not believed that success will attend their endeavors.
[9] ”Tlaltelulco” was the quarter of the town where the market was situated.
[10] Archbishop Lorenzana, in his note on this pa.s.sage, greatly extols the pious fervor of Cortes, who, he says, ”whether in the field or on the causeway, in the midst of the enemy or toiling by night or day,”
never omitted the celebration of the ma.s.s.
[11] They were Andres de Tapia and George de Alvarado, a brother of the more famous Pedro, Tonatiuh.
[12] Antonio de Quinones was the captain and Francisco de Olea, the youth, according to Gomara; who says that the latter cut off at one blow the arms of the men that had seized Cortes, and was himself immediately slain by the enemy. Cortes was then rescued by Quinones.--_Cron. Nuev. Esp._ cap., 138.
[13] I wonder where it is! There may be a great amount of it somewhere.
{231}