Difference In The Details

The Spanish conquest of the Aztecs in the 1520s was met with fighting and killing. Both groups created their own histories of the event, and both have key similarities and differences. The Broken Spears by Miguel León-Portilla compiles the Aztec side of the Mexican conquest from many Aztec works. Also, the Cortés letter written to a King provides insight into the Spanish side of the conquest.

In The Broken Spears, the accounts of the attacks were depicted in a contrasting manner as opposed to the accounts in the Cortés excerpt. In the Aztec account, the acts of aggression began with the Spaniards, and they were unprovoked and often came without warning. During the fiesta, everyone was dancing and celebrating Huitzilopochtli, and suddenly the Spaniards had an "urge to kill the celebrants" and then according to the Aztecs went on a mass killing spree (p. 74). In the Cortés letter, the attacks began on the part of the Aztecs, were also unprovoked, and the Aztecs came in full onslaught against the Spaniards (p.72). Also in the end, the Spaniards in the Cortés letter are content with the conquest up to that point (p. 88), but in The Broken Spears, Conquest wasn't enough. They wanted to humiliate the Aztecs, and they went through and killed for gold and only gold (p. 118-120). In general, the differences come from the details of the battles, and the description of the opposing group. Both try to paint themselves in an innocent light, and any acts of aggression are only because the other group went crazy and attacked for no reason. Each group wanted their history to be about making them look good, and the other like savage killers of an innocent people.

Both the Cortés reading and Broken Spears have common elements. The easiest similarity to identify is that each group identifies the other as the primary aggressor, and that their acts of aggression are only in retaliation. The Cortés readings begin with the Aztecs attacking after they raised the bridges in the city (p. 72). In the book the Spaniards attack in towns as they go and when they arrive in Tenochtitlan they go and speak to Montezuma and imprison him (p. 65). Both groups referred to the other as their enemy, and they both mention the Tlaxcala, the native group that assisted the Spanish during the conquering of the Aztecs. The Broken Spears goes into more detail about the Spanish interaction with the Tlaxcala, but in general the Aztec account comes to the conclusion that they were allies with the Spanish (p. 39), where in Cortés' letter the Tlaxcala (which the Spanish pronounced Tlascalans) were subordinates to the Spaniards and they served as a supplement to the Spanish army (p. 77). Also the Aztec initial reaction was described in a similar manner. Cortés states that the Aztecs "received us with as great joy as if we had restored their lives to them" and also according to Cortés they believed "that peace had again returned" (Cortés 71). In the Aztec account, they believed for a time that the Spaniards were actually Quetzalcoatl returning to Mexico, and met them with gifts and reverence (p. 25). Overall, the general timeline of events is similar in both accounts.

In both works the Aztec king Montezuma factor into the telling of the event in a similar way. The point in time when the Cortés reading begins and during the Spanish arrival in The Broken Spears mentions the imprisonment of Montezuma. Also, while imprisoned, both accounts mention a time when Montezuma attempted to speak with a number of Aztec citizens about halting the attacks. Also in both accounts, the Aztecs did not respond to the plea well. In Cortés, the request ended with a stone being thrown at Montezuma while he was on the garrison, and that ultimately caused his death (p. 75). On the Aztec side,

...