1. Understanding the Conquest of Mexico through Documents
(a.k.a. Mrs. G is making you learn about this to justify the dozens of hours she spent on her graduate final research paper. #becauseIsaidso)

2. The Military Conquest of Mexico
How did a few hundred Spaniards conquer the greatest empire in Mesoamerica?
When I was growing up, I was told that Cortes was a god, the Aztecs were inferior, and it was an easy conquest because of the military might of the Spanish.

3. The Traditional Narrative: History of the Conquest of Mexico (1843)
900 pages – a lot of people read this book and agreed with it and loved it. Definitive conquest – written by a blind American historian and came up with an epic narrative of the conquest.
Traditional: Cortes is the daring hero who came in with a ragtag team of conquistadores who easily defeats the magnificent, but backwards, Aztec Empire. It was the superiority of the Spanish and nothing else. It was inevitable. There was never the idea that the Spanish could have lost – very Eurocentric.
Let’s look at when this book was written - What was going on in US history in the 1840s? (Manifest Destiny – eve of the Mexican-American War) Mexican Cession – ha! Really, we conquered it. Bringing tech and light to the dark and barbaric west. Destiny and fate that white Europeans conquered everyone and civilized the west.
The traditional story:

4. Prescott’s narrative – of Cortes being supremely powerful, the Aztecs being defeated so easily because of weakness, and Montezuma being weak, superstitious, and backward – all of this played into American exceptionalism and the belief that, like the European conquerors, they were DESTINED to conquer the continent. (Mexican-American War). Aztecs are barbarians.

5. Historiography of the Conquest
Historiography: the study of how historians write history and how those interpretations change over time (a history of history).
Predict: Do you think the story of the Conquest of Mexico has changed since the 1840s? How?
History is written by the winners and is always biased. However, over time, especially recently, a lot of historians are going back and changing what they believe about what happened in Mexico. It’s META – the history of history. We don’t write new history – we analyze histories that have been written in the past. CCOT exists in real life. Continuity – Spanish won. But what might get rethought by historians from ? Expand the narrative – look at the Aztec perspective. We can’t just look at the winners anymore – we look at the sub-altern (the losers). We need to start looking at the sub-altern, the people who lost.

6. Ex: The Quetzalcoatl Myth
For centuries, historians and teachers have told the traditional story: Montezuma believed Cortés to be a god and that is why he allowed him into Tenochtitlan.
When you hear this version, what does it make you think about Montezuma?
Toltecs – pre-Aztecs. In the same way that the Romans looked to the Greeks as their founders, the Aztecs did that the Toltecs, and took a lot of their gods and myths. Human sacrifice – it was practiced because they literally believed the sun wouldn’t rise unless they appeased the gods through blood letting. One of these gods was Quetzalcoatl, who was a feathery snake serpent god. Myth: a Toltec king argued against human sacrifice and was cast out. Wandering in exile, he came across Quetzalcoatl, a serpent god, and they merged and became one. Beards and hairy skin – like feathers. He sailed to the east, vowing to return one day, on the day 1-Reed (every 52 years) to retake his rightful place as ruler. On that day, supposedly, Cortes lands, with his mountain ships and armor and horses and glimmering steel and guns and cannons. It’s said that he rounds them all up and shoots guns in the air to show off his power. Montezuma believes Cortes is Quetzalcoatl, so invites him to live in his palace for six months. A year and a half later, the Aztec empire fell.

7. Consider the Source
The first stories of the Quetzalcoatl myth, and his possible connection to Cortes, are all written AFTER the Conquest by young men, sons of the Aztec elite, who had been educated in Catholic monasteries and schools.
There are two possible explanations for why this myth popped up:
It was true. Montezuma really did believe Cortés was a god.
What’s the second explanation?
BE CYNICAL! Pick this apart. Why might the Aztec men write this story? Anything symbolic? Isn’t it convenient that this was the ONE ruler who argued against human sacrifice – something the Church would have been still trying to eliminate from Aztec culture. Isn’t the year 1-Reed a little too coincidental? Do you really think that Montezuma, after spending months sharing his palace with Cortes, would have still believed him to be the reincarnation of the feathered serpent god? We will *never* know for sure – but, we can assume certain things… but really, there’s no wrong answer.

8. “The trauma of Conquest”
“Broken spears lie in the roads;
we have torn our hair in our grief.
The houses are roofless now, and their walls
are red with blood…
We have pounded our hands in despair
against the adobe walls,
for our inheritances, our city, is lost and dead.
The shield of our warriors were its defense,
but they could not save it…
Weep, my people:
know that with these disasters
we have lost the Mexican nation.
The water has turned bitter,
our food is bitter!
These are the acts of the Giver of Life… ”
- from The Broken Spears: The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico
SO TRAUMATIC – it’s so sad. We skip over war sometimes. Father, brothers, mothers, dying in front of you. Major PTSD. You want to figure out another explanation - BLAME THE LEADER AND BLAME THE SUPERNATURAL. They need a scapegoat!
Second explanation: Young Aztecs trying to make sense of the Conquest. How could the incredible Aztec Empire have been defeated so easily? They turn to the supernatural for comfort and they scapegoat their leader. Montezuma becomes superstitious and paranoid – it’s his fault. By connecting Cortes with Quetzalcoatl, the Conquest seems FATED to occur. It was INEVITABLE and, thus, should not be opposed.

9. Historiography of the Conquest
YOU will become the historian and analyze the change over time.
Your group has a few different documents all talking about Montezuma’s thoughts on Cortes and his possible connection with the god Quetzalcoatl. These are excerpts from well-respected history books about the Conquest.
Read through each of the documents as a group.
Discuss what each one is saying and how it may be similar to or different from the original narrative.
Put the documents in chronological order – from the earliest to the latest published.

10. Document C: 1955 Maurice Collis, Cortes and Montezuma
“Once convinced of the truth of the astrological prophecy by the visible fact of Cortés’ appearance at the prescribed time, he was obliged to identify him with Quetzalcoatl. He could no more deny that Cortés was the god than he could deny that Cortés was there. To suppose that his mind wavered at this time and that he doubted Cortés’ divinity is to suppose the impossible.” (p. 112)
He gives Montezuma no AGENCY – everything is out of his hands. Early history talks about Montezuma weeping – and that he was always high on mushrooms and tripping and couldn’t handle anything. Makes Montezuma seem weak.The Conquest is inevitable, even to Montezuma – the leader of the most powerful empire on the continent. Really? A band of a few hundred criminals and fortune seekers?

11. Document A: 1993 Hugh Thomas, Cortes, Montezuma and the Fall of Old Mexico
“Given Montezuma’s position as supreme ruler with religious duties, given his natural superstitiousness, and given that there was no action in Mexican life which did not have religious connotations, it is hardly odd that the Emperor, for a time at least, thought that the strangers by the sea might be gods of some kind.” (p. 186)
Montezuma might have believed it for some time – but it was LOGICAL based on his worldview. Cortes lived with Montezuma for a year. Just like the Catholic Church believed the earth was the center of the universe or absolute monarchs believed they were ordained by god to rule – Montezuma is no more superstitious than contemporary European powers.

12. Document B: 1993 Richard Marks, Cortes: The Great Adventurer and the Fate of Aztec Mexico
“Montezuma was happy to regard Cortés and the Spaniards, who came from the east, as descendants of Quetzalcoatl…he thought it was likely that the great king of whom Cortés spoke was, in fact, the direct descendant of Quetzalcoatl, Montezuma’s forebear, especially since Cortés said that the great king knew of Montezuma and the Aztec people. Montezuma was careful to add, ‘if you are not deceiving or tricking us.”
“Great king” = Charles V; this is a RATIONAL explanation and Montezuma is wary of the outsiders – he is not superstitious at all. This allows that maybe their religious beliefs played a role, but it was a logical conclusion – just like Montezuma saw himself as a descendant of the great gods, maybe Cortes was too? Saw Cortes as an equal – that they were cousins.

13. Historiography of the Conquest
Continuity:
The Spanish win.
Change:
Montezuma: superstitious and paranoid  refined statesman
The role of native people:
Malintzin: woman who betrayed “her people”  enslaved woman who used her intelligence to survive and prosper against “her people’s” enemy, the Aztecs
The role of Cortes’s Indian allies: an afterthought  THE main reason he was able to win
Ma-lin-cine. La Malinche. Most important person in the history of the conquest. Native woman, captured and sold into slavery by the Aztec. Taken by the Spanish to be a mistress, but then Cortes liked her, so she became his mistress and eventual translator. She knew native and Aztec. There was a priest who had learned Spanish and Aztec and could translate – he was the middle man. Malintzin learned Spanish from that in a year – she was so brilliant. Malintzin translated his speech to also make it more diplomatic – he was brutish and mean, she made him seem a lot bette.r NEVER talked about in history books. She worked her way out of slavery and became super successful – her kids with Cortes were believed to be some of the first mesitzos. Also acknowledgement of the natives – a civil war between tribes, and Cortes came in at the end.

14. Exit Ticket Pick another major event in history. ANY event.
On a piece of paper, predict how you think historians might explain that event differently over time. Think about: 1 year after; 100 years after; 1000 years after, etc.

15. Redefining “The Conquest”
When we say “The Conquest of Mexico” we typically mean the Military Conquest. What other types of Conquest are there?
You’ve conquered it – great. But how do you actually gain control over Mexico? What are other types of conquest?

16. Types of Conquest? The Easy Types: The Difficult Types:
Military – you defeat their military
Political – you take over their government
Economic – you control the sources of wealth and make them pay tribute to you (taxes)
The Difficult Types:
Spiritual – you convert them to your religion
Cultural – you assimilate them into your way of life (food, clothing, arts, ideas, etc.)
I want to demonstrate an example of another type of conquest…

17. Important: Conquest doesn’t happen overnight.
(Well, sometimes Military Conquest does. But that’s easy to reverse. The harder, more long-lasting types of conquest take years or even centuries.)

18. By creating this extremely detailed social order, everyone has a place and people are divided. AND, the Church was at the center of this system – they were the ones in charge of determining your race at birth and noting it on your baptism document. What are some other examples of societies that have used social hierarchy to control the population? (Confucianism in China; caste system in India; feudalism in Europe and Japan; segregation in the U.S., etc.)

19. ¡Extrapunkte!

20. El Requerimiento
On behalf of the King of Spain, master of the barbarous nations, we tell you that God created Heaven and Earth, and a man and a woman, of whom you and we, every man in the world, are descended. Of these men, God gave charge to the Pope and all obey him and he will be the head of the human race.
Because God gave power over the world to the Pope, it is our responsibility to take the land and serve to spread His faith. If you accept our faith, then we will welcome you in all love and charity. But anyone who does not accept our faith, we will come forcefully into his country and make war against him in all ways and means that we can. We will submit you to the yoke and obedience of the Church and Kings; you and your wives and your children will be taken and made slaves. The deaths and losses that come from this are your fault, and it's not our fault, nor our kings.
Do you accept our God as your God, forsaking all others as false gods? Do you agree that the land belongs to us as representatives of the Pope - the voice of God on Earth? Do you accept?
Consider: the first generation of conquered people would not have thought much about this. But what about their children? Grandchildren? Who would be educated by the Church, work the lands for a Christian encomienda owner, get social services through the Church, etc. If you can convert them to your religion, then you have it made. You don’t have to hold a vast military over them, you can just hang the threat of eternal damnation! Basically, the Spanish Crown recreated the Middle Ages in New Spain – the Church at the center of life, etc. Counterpoint: sacrifice continued for a long time, evidence of “pagan” rituals continued (and STILL continue) in Mexico – Latin American Catholicism is VERY different from European Catholicism. Many Aztec gods were just given new, Catholic names – Tonantzin becomes The Lady of Guadalupe, etc.

21. The Conquest of Mexico
How did a few hundred Spaniards conquer the greatest empire in Mesoamerica?