Chapter XXXIV: The Conquest Achieved (2)

Bernal Diaz del Castillo is, as I have said, the main historian of the conquest, from the exhaustive thoroughness of his material, as compared with other original writers, and from his participation in all its leading scenes, including the discovery voyages. For about half a century he survives, and sees comrade after comrade disappear from the field till but five of Cortés’ original company remain, “all of us very old, suffering from infirmities, and very poor, burdened with sons and daughters to marry, and grandchildren, and with but a small income; and thus we pass our days in toil and misery.” He is not so badly off, however, as he would have us believe, for a comfortable encomienda supplies every want, and numerous descendants throng round to minister to his comfort and listen to his tales. But as he recalls the great achievements wherein he participated, he swells with the importance of the events, and dwelling on the multiplied treasures he has assisted to capture, the reward sinks to insignificance. It is but the chronic grumble, however, of an old soldier that half the continent would not satisfy. Springing from a poor and humble family of Medina del Campo, in old Castile, he had embarked at an early age with the expedition of Pedrarias in 1514 to seek fortune in Darien. Failing there, he drifts to Cuba in time to join the discovery parties of Córdoba and Grijalva. Subsequently he enlists under Cortés as a common soldier, yet somewhat above the mass in the favor of his chief. “Soldado distinguido,” says Juarros, implying higher birth; but this is doubtful. There is hardly a prominent incident of the conquest in which he does not participate, being present in no less than one hundred and nineteen battles, according to his enumeration, whereof many a scar remains to bear witness, and many a trophy to attest his valor. In due time he receives his share of repartimientos of land and serfs, and settles in Goazacoalco as regidor, with sufficient means to feed a taste that procures for him the not ill-esteemed nickname of Dandy. From his life of contentment, though not equal to his claims, he is torn by the Honduras expedition under Cortés, who gives him at times the command of a small party, whence comes the sported title of captain. Afterward for a time he drifts about, and finally settles in Guatemala city with the rank of regidor perpétuo, and with a respectable encomienda, obtained partly through the representations of Cortés to the king. He marries Teresa, daughter of Bartolomé Becerra, one of the founders of the city, and repeatedly its alcalde, and has several children, whose descendants survive to witness the overthrow of the royal banner planted by their forefather. Grandsons figure as deans of the city church, and an historian of the adopted country rises in Fuentes y Guzman. _Pinelo_, _Epitome_, ii. 604; _Gonzalez Dávila_, _Teatro Ecles._, i. 177; _Memorial de Conquistadores_, in _Monumentos Admin. Munic._, MS.; _Juarros_, _Guat._, i. 338, 350; _Torquemada_, i. 351.

The leisure afforded him in Guatemala, broken by little save the inspection of his estate, gave opportunity for indulging in the reveries of by-gone days. Histories of achievements were nearly all connected with the great Cortés, famed on every lip; yet that fame had been acquired with the aid of soldiers who like himself had been consigned to an obscure corner of the vast domains conquered by them. It did not seem right to the scarred veteran that the fruits of combined toil should fall to one or two alone; that he himself should be regarded far less than hundreds of upstarts whose only deeds had been to reap the field won by him and his comrades. He would tell his tale at all events; and forthwith he began to arrange the notes formed during his career, and to uplift the curtains of memory for retrospective views. While thus occupied he came upon the history by Gomara, and perceiving “his great rhetoric, and my work so crude, I stopped writing, and even felt ashamed to let it appear among notable persons.” But finding that the biographer of Cortés had committed many blunders, and had colored the narrative on behalf of his patron, he again seized the pen, with the double purpose of correcting such errors and of vindicating his slighted comrades. Faithfully he carried out his plan, recording name after name of brave fellows who shed lustre on the flag, who freely risked their lives in gallant encounters, or who gave their last breath for church and king. While dwelling lovingly on humble companions, whose cause he espoused, he detracts little from the leaders and cavaliers. He describes their appearance and traits with a graphic fidelity that seems to bring them before us in person; he freely accords them every credit, and if he spares not their vices they are seldom brought forward in a captious or ill-natured spirit. On the contrary, he frequently covers disagreeable facts in deference to the dead. This general fairness of dealing is particularly noticeable in regard to Cortés, whom nevertheless he sometimes severely criticises; and while Diaz assumes for his side the credit of many a suggestion and deed, yet he is ever the loyal soldier, and frequently takes up the cudgel in behalf of the honored leader when others seek to assail him. He admires the great captain hardly less than himself. Indeed, to say that the old campaigner was vain is stating it mildly. Two licentiates who read the manuscript pointed this out to him, but he replied, “Whom does it harm? No one praises an old, broken-down soldier, so I must even praise myself. It is a duty I owe not only to my fair name but to my descendants.” He revives in his narrative and carries us back with him to those stirring days, depicting now the hardships of the march, now the new countries and races that appear; then he enters into the heat of battle with a fidelity that brings the din and turmoil vividly before us; and anon we see the adventurers in camp, in their social relations, relieved by pleasing episodes. He enters thoroughly into their hopes and feelings, deeds and life; he grows eloquent and pathetic by turns, and reveals also the undercurrent of piety and zeal which pervaded the rakish crew. Here is the gossipy frankness of Herodotus, illumined by many a quaint observation and many a blunt sally. Bernal Diaz had but the rudiments of education, which nevertheless was above the average among his fellow-soldiers; but he had evidently read a little in later years, to judge by his allusions to classic history, though not enough to acquire more than a mediocre proficiency in grammar. There is a minuteness of detail at times wearisome, and garrulous digression and repetition; but a simple perspicuity pervades the whole narrative, which makes it easy to follow, while the frankness and frequent animation are pleasing. Much of it appears to have been dictated, perhaps to some one of his children, “cuyo manuscrito se conserva en el archivo de esta municipalidad.” _Jil_, in _Gaceta Nic._, June 24, 1865. It was given for perusal to different persons, and several copies made; but none cared to assume its publication. Sixty years later, however, Friar Alonso Remon, chronicler of the Merced order in Spain, found one set in the library of Ramirez del Prado, of the Council of the Indies, and perceiving the importance of the narrative, he caused it to be printed at Madrid in 1632 under the title of _Historia Verdadera de la Conquista de la Nueva-España_. Remon dying during the publication, Friar Gabriel Adarzo, “nunc Hydruntinus præsul,” _Antonio_, _Bib. Hisp. Nova_, iii. 224, took it in charge. Several discrepancies indicate that revisions have been made, and Vazquez, _Chron. Guat._, 524, whose jealousy as a friar was aroused by allusions to Father Olmedo, Cortés’ companion, compared the print with the original copy and pointed out several differences. A second edition, bearing the date 1632, though published later probably, contains an additional chapter on omens, which appears in others of the many editions and translations issued in different countries, even of late years.

* * * * *

Perhaps the most clear-sighted writer on Mexico during the last century was Francisco Javier Clavigero, himself a native of that country, and born at Vera Cruz in 1731. His father was a Leonese, whose official duties called him to different parts of the country, and young Francisco profited by this to acquire a knowledge of its resources and idioms. After a novitiate of three years at the Jesuit college of Tepozotlan, he passed to that at Puebla, and there studied philosophy and theology, and showed particular fondness for languages, both classic and native. He taught rhetoric and philosophy in the principal schools of the country, though restricted somewhat by the superiors in his too liberal ideas, for which Mexico was not yet considered ripe. Meanwhile his enthusiasm centred on the study of Aztec history and hieroglyphs, which received a serious check in the expulsion of Jesuits from America in 1767. He sought refuge in Italy, staying chiefly at Bologna, where he founded an academy, and having considerable leisure he began to shape the results of his late studies, impelled in no small degree by the writings of De Pauw and Robertson, which grated on his patriotic spirit. They were prepared in Spanish, but the authorities giving no encouragement for their publication in Spain, an Italian translation was made and issued in four volumes, as _Storia Antica del Messico_, Cesena, 1780, dedicated to the university at Mexico. Subsequently a Spanish version appeared, but not before several editions had been published in England and other countries. The first volume treats of resources and ancient history, the second of manners and customs, the third of the conquest, and the fourth consists of a series of dissertations on the origin of the Americans, on chronology, physique, languages, and other points. They have been widely quoted, and Francisco Carbajal de Espinosa has shown such appreciation of it as to copy almost the whole text in what he calls his _Historia de Mexico_, Mex., 1856, 2 vols. Clavigero’s work is based to a great extent on aboriginal records and personal observation, and the old chronicles have been largely used; but their cumbrous and confused material is here arranged in a manner worthy of the liberal-minded philosopher and rhetorician. Indeed, no previous work in this field can at all compare with it for comprehensiveness and correctness, depth of thought and clearness of expression. In the former respect he greatly surpasses Robertson and in the latter he may be classed as his equal. His death, which took place at Bologna in 1787, found him in the midst of a number of literary projects, called forth in part by the success of the _Storia_, and by the different subjects which he had therein touched but lightly. Among these works was the _Storia della California_, issued at Venice two years after his death. It will be noticed in due order.

There can be no more fitting close to this volume on the conquest of Mexico than a tribute of esteem to William Hickling Prescott. I have noted in a previous volume his amiable weakness, incident to the times rather than to the man, of intensifying the character of prominent personages so as to present the good better and the bad worse than they truly were, in order to render his narrative stronger and more interesting than it would be otherwise; but this is nothing as compared with his general fairness, united with a magnificent style and philosophic flow of thought. I have noted some inaccuracies and contradictions in his history, but these are nothing as compared with his general care and correctness as a writer. I have mentioned material which he lacked, but this is nothing as compared with the great mass of fresh evidence which he brought to enrich his subject. Words fail to express my admiration of the man, the scholar, the author. Apart from the din and dust of ordinary life, he lived as one in the world but not of it, pure of mind, gentle of heart, and surpassingly eloquent.

Mr Prescott was born at Salem, Massachusetts, May 4, 1796. His father, a lawyer of rising reputation, then thirty-four years of age, removed his family to Boston in 1808. At the age of fifteen William entered Harvard College. While engaged in a boyish frolic one day during his junior year a large hard piece of bread, thrown probably at random, struck full in his left eye, forever depriving him of its use. Pursuing his studies with his wonted cheerfulness, he graduated in 1814, and entered upon the study of law in his father’s office. In 1815 a rheumatic inflammation settled in his right eye, now his sole dependence, causing him much pain and anxiety. A change of climate having been determined upon, he embarked for the Azores, on a visit to his grandfather Hickling, then United States consul at Saint Michael. There he remained about six months, confined the greater part of the time to a dark room. In April 1816 he embarked for London, crossed to Paris, made the usual Italian tour, and the following year, his eye becoming worse, he returned home. But hope for the restoration of his sight still lingered, and the marvellous buoyancy of his spirits never deserted him. A devoted sister cheered the long hours of his solitude by readings from his favorite authors. A literary venture made at this time in a contribution to the _North American Review_ failed; his manuscript was returned, and his sister, alone in the secret, was enjoined to silence.

Leaving his darkened chamber and mingling again with society, of which he was ever a bright ornament, he became attached to a daughter of Thomas C. Amory, a Boston merchant, whom he married on his twenty-fourth birthday.

Mr Prescott now abandoned the hope of the entire restoration of his eye. If by restrictions of diet and dieting and by persistent open-air exercise he might preserve a partial use of the organ he would rest content. And thus he passed the remainder of his life. At times he was in almost total darkness, but ordinarily he could read and revise his manuscripts; for the purpose of writing, however, he was obliged to use a noctograph.

Possessing strong literary tastes, and an aversion to law, Mr Prescott determined upon literature as a pursuit, and in 1826, with the aid of a secretary, he began a systematic course of reading for a history of Ferdinand and Isabella. For three years and a half he pursued this preparatory labor; in 1829 he began writing, publishing the work in 1837. Ten of the best years of his life Mr Prescott claims to have devoted to this book; and for the use of the stereotype-plates, which Mr Prescott supplied at his own cost, and the right to publish twelve hundred and fifty copies, the American Stationers’ Company agreed to pay the sum of one thousand dollars. But money was not the author’s object. The publication in London was offered to John Murray and to the Longmans, and was declined by both. Bentley finally became the London publisher. The work was well received on both sides of the Atlantic; it was translated into several languages, and procured for the author at once a world-wide reputation. The _Conquest of Mexico_ was a worthy outgrowth of so splendid a creation as the _Ferdinand and Isabella_. The year following the publication of his first work, and after having sent to Spain and Mexico for materials for histories of the conquests of Mexico and Peru, Mr Prescott learned accidentally that Mr Irving was engaged on similar work. He wrote Irving, acquainting him of the fact, and the latter retired gracefully from the field. In 1843 the _Conquest of Mexico_ appeared, under the auspices of the Harpers, who paid $7500 for the use of the plates and the right to publish 5000 copies. The _Conquest of Peru_ was published in 1847; _Philip the Second_ in 1855-8; and _Robertson’s Charles the Fifth_ in 1856. Mr Prescott died of apoplexy in the sixty-third year of his age.

For his _Conquest of Mexico_, besides all printed material extant, Mr Prescott drew upon a large mass of new information in manuscript, from several sources, notably from the valuable collection of Muñoz, brought together for an intended history of America; that of Vargas Ponce, obtained chiefly from Seville archives; that of Navarrete, president of the Royal Academy of History at Madrid; and the archives of Cortés’ heirs, all of which shed new light on almost every section of the subject. His deep research, manifest throughout in copious foot-notes, is especially displayed in the very appropriate introduction on Mexican civilization, which enables the reader to gain an intimate knowledge of the people whose subjugation he follows. Good judgment is also attested in the dissertation on the moot question of the origin of this culture, wherein he prudently abstains from any decided conclusions. The fact of occasional inaccuracies cannot be severely criticised when we consider the infirmity under which the author labored. Since his time so great a mass of material has been brought to light that the aspect of history is much changed. This new material consists partly of native records, and it is due to his unacquaintance with these records that a great lack is implied in his pages. The fact that Prescott relied too much on Spanish material may account for the marked bias in favor of the conquerors in many instances where strict impartiality might be expected, and for the condemnatory and reflective assertions which at times appear in direct contradiction to previous lines of thought. At times, as if aware of this tendency, he assumes a calmness that ill fits the theme, giving it the very bias he seeks to avoid. Yet with all this it is safe to say that few histories have been written in which the qualities of philosopher and artist are so happily blended.

FOOTNOTES

[1190] Herrera, dec. iii. lib. ii. cap. ii., lib. i. cap.
xx., places this incident on the third day of entry into
the city.

[1191] ‘Todos los mas principales y esforzados y valientes.’
_Cortés_, _Cartas_, 244. And 2000 captives. _Ixtlilxochitl_,
_Hor. Crueldades_, 43. ‘Tuuieron bien q̄ cenar aquella noche
los Indios nuestros amigos,’ observes Gomara, unctuously.
_Hist. Mex._, 209. Bernal Diaz, who claims to have been
among the 100 select, intimates that Alvarado also formed an
ambuscade that day, though less effective. _Hist. Verdad._,
153-4. In rushing from the hiding-place, says Cortés, two
horses collided, one of them throwing its rider and charging
alone amid the foe. After receiving several wounds it sought
refuge among the soldiers and was conducted to camp, where
it died.

[1192] ‘Fué bien principal causa para que la ciudad mas
presto se ganase,’ _Cortés_, _Cartas_, 245, but this must
be regarded as an exaggerated estimate.

[1193] _Herrera_, dec. iii. lib. ii. cap. ii. Torquemada,
i. 560, 564, wavers, intimating in one place that all were
determined to die. When the people at last inclined to
peace, says Gomara, Quauhtemotzin opposed it on the ground
that they had once decided for war, ‘contra su voluntad y
consejo.’ _Hist. Mex._, 213. Most of the revelation was made
by a woman of rank, it appears. Carried away by his love
for hero-painting, Prescott has either missed or ignored
the facts which now reveal his false coloring.

[1194] ‘Y asi escondidas huvo algunos Principales de las
Provincias cercanas que acudieron con algun maiz para solo
llevar joyas.’ That is, where the cruisers allowed such
smuggling. _Duran_, _Hist. Ind._, MS., ii. 497.

[1195] About 1000 were killed, says Ixtlilxochitl, _Hor.
Crueldades_, 44; but Cortés puts the killed and captured
at more than 800. _Cartas_, 245.

[1196] ‘Osauan nuestros vergantines romper las estacadas
... remauan con gran fuerça y ... a todas velas.’ _Bernal
Diaz_, _Hist. Verdad._, 150.

[1197] ‘De la Capitana, que èl havia salvado,’ says Herrera,
while asserting that the captain Villafuerte abandoned her;
but this hardly agrees with his own later statements that
Villafuerte remained in charge of the fleet, dec. iii.
lib. i. cap. xxi.; lib. ii. cap. viii. The slain leader
is called the lieutenant-general of Quauhtemotzin, and
his death ‘fue causa, que mas presto se ganase la Ciudad,’
_Torquemada_, i. 558, all of which is doubtful. A similar
reward to that of Lopez was accorded on another occasion
to a soldier named Andrés Nuñez, who after the captain had
abandoned his vessel led her to the rescue of two consorts.
When the commander came to resume his post Nuñez refused
to admit him, saying that he had forfeited it. On being
appealed to, Cortés sustained the brave fellow and gave
him the command, in which capacity he rendered important
service. _Herrera_, dec. iii. lib. ii. cap. i.

[1198] July 25th, according to Clavigero, while Torquemada
less correctly makes it August 5th.

[1199] The Spanish corruption of Quauhtemotzin. ‘La calle
qᵉ ba al tianguiz de Tlatelulco qᵉ se llama de Guatimosa.’
_Libro de Cabildo_, MS., 88.

[1200] Herrera names Magallanes as one of those who succumbed
under the onslaught of a chief, but his death was avenged
by Diego Castellanos, a noted marksman. dec. iii. lib. i.
cap. xx. On this occasion Ixtlilxochitl intimates that his
namesake captured his brother, the usurper king of Tezcuco,
and surrendering him to Cortés, he was at once secured with
shackles. _Hor. Crueldades_, 42-3. ‘De manera que de cuatro
partes de la ciudad, las tres estaban ya por nosotros.’
_Cortés_, _Cartas_, 246.

[1201] At the corner of the street leading to Sandoval’s
quarter. _Id._, 247.

[1202] I knew three of them, writes Bernal Diaz. ‘Las
enterramos en vna Iglesia, que se dize aora los Mártires.’
_Hist. Verdad._, 153.

[1203] For a full description see _Native Races_, ii. 382
et seq.

[1204] Cortés saw the smoke from his camp, from which
he was preparing to start. _Cartas_, 247. Herrera leaves
the impression that Alférez Montaño captured the temple,
dec. iii. lib. ii. cap. i., but he was probably only the
first to step on the summit. Bernal Diaz, who fought under
Alvarado, states distinctly that Badajoz led the party, but
he is no doubt incorrect in adding that the fight on the
top continued till night. _Hist. Verdad._, 153. Torquemada,
i. 565, refers to the temple as the Acatliyacapan. Duran
makes Cortés appeal to the Chalcans, and they ‘tomando
la delantera del Ejército, y con ellos Yxtlilxachitl ...
ganaron el Cue grande.’ _Hist. Ind._, MS., ii. 506. This
must be a Chalcan version.

[1205] _Gomara_, _Hist. Mex._, 210. Cortés calls them wounded
merely. Sahagun’s native version of the plaza fight is very
confusing, and mixed with that of the struggle against the
other divisions, ‘y tomaron los bergantines [two] á los
españoles, y lleváronlos á una laguna que llaman _Amanalco_.’
_Hist. Conq._ (ed. 1840), 202-3. But this must be a mistake.

[1206] ‘Que se llama Atenantitech, donde ahora està edificada
la Iglesia de la Concepcion, junto de la Albarrada.’
_Torquemada_, i. 553. Tetenamitl ward, says Sahagun in one
edition. _Hist. Conq._ (ed. 1840), 209.

[1207] This or a third relic bore the name of Mamalhuaztli.
Sahagun also refers to a divine bow and arrow. _Hist. Conq._,
53-4. But his editions vary in text; see that of 1840,
210-12. The serpent was invoked even after the conquest,
says the pious friar, and he heard Father Tembleque relate
that he one day opened his window during a storm and had his
left eye injured by a ray of lightning, which damaged the
house and adjoining church. This ray, the Mexicans assured
him, was the Xiuhcoatl, conjured up by the sorcerers, for
they had seen it issue in the form of a big snake through
the door. The editor Bustamante tells an equally impressive
story in connection with an attempt to account for the
snake and lightning.

[1208] One being killed and two horses wounded. _Bernal
Diaz_, loc. cit.

[1209] _Sahagun_, _Hist. Conq._ (ed. 1840), 213. The editor
Bustamante speaks of a similar phenomenon in Michoacan in
1829. _Id._ (ed. 1829), 68.

[1210] ‘De los niños no quedó nadie, que las mismas madres
y padres los comian,’ is the statement of the native
records. _Id._, 210. Yet Torquemada, i. 572, assumes that
the Mexicans would not eat of their own race. Thousands had
already died of starvation without touching the flesh of
countrymen, though priests partook of children sacrificed
during ordinary festivals; but at last the scruple among
the masses was overcome by despair. See _Native Races_,
ii. passim.

[1211] ‘Porque no acabas cõ el que nos acabe?... Desseamos la
muerte por yr a descansar cõ Quetçalcouatlh,’ adds Gomara,
_Hist. Mex._, 210-11.

[1212] The chroniclers call him an uncle of the Tezcucan
king, but this appears to be a misinterpretation of Cortés’
text, wherein he says that such an uncle had captured the
prisoner.

[1213] _Cortés_, _Cartas_, 251. This was partly in accordance
with the law against nobles who returned from captivity,
as already instanced.

[1214] ‘Tenia mucho miedo de parecer ante mí, y tambien
estaba malo.’ _Cortés_, _Cartas_, 253. ‘Empacho,’ explains
Herrera, dec. iii. lib. ii. cap. vii. He feared to be shot.
_Bernal Diaz_, _Hist. Verdad._, 164.

[1215] ‘Ni tenian ni hallaban flechas ni varas ni piedras
con que nos ofender.... No tenian paso por donde andar sino
por encima de los muertos y por las azoteas.’ _Cortés_,
_Cartas_, 254.

[1216] ‘Mataron y prendieron mas de cuarenta mil ánimas.’
_Id._ Ixtlilxochitl, _Hor. Crueldades_, 48, raises the
number to 50,000, while Duran states that over 40,000 men
and women perished while fleeing. _Hist. Ind._, MS., ii.
510. What pained the conquerors most, however, was the sight
and knowledge of what immense quantity of booty eluded them
to pass into the hands of these marauders.

[1217] ‘Entre la Garita del Peralvillo, la place de Santiago
de Tlatelolco et le pont d’Amaxac.’ So says Pichardo.
_Humboldt_, _Essai Pol._, i. 193. ‘Donde se embarcaban para
Atzlapotzalco,’ adds Bustamante. _Ixtlilxochitl_, _Hor.
Crueldades_, 50.

[1218] Chimalpain calls him Tlacotzin, afterward baptized
as Juan Velasquez. _Hist. Conq._, ii. 71. ‘Ciguacoacin, y
era el Capitan y gobernador de todos ellos, é por su consejo
se seguian todas las cosas de la guerra,’ says Cortés,
_Cartas_, 255.

[1219] ‘Porque les queria combatir y acabar de matar.’
_Cartas_, 256. ‘Pues eran barbaros, que no queria dexar
hombre vivo, q̄ se fuessen.’ _Herrera_, dec. iii. lib. ii.
cap. vii.

[1220] The distinguished captive said: ‘Capitan señor,
dáte buena maña, que aquellos indios ... son esclavos de
Guatimuçin, é podrá ser quél va allí huyendo, porque su
bandera ya no paresçe.’ _Oviedo_, iii. 516. A canoe of twenty
rowers and bearing a number of people. _Gomara_, _Hist.
Conq._, 212. See also _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro Mex._, pt. iii.
164; _Clavigero_, _Storia Mess._, iii. 230. A small canoe,
says Duran.

[1221] Torquemada, i. 570-1, followed by Clavigero, mentions
besides Tetlepanquetzaltzin, king of Tlacopan, the fugitive
king of Tezcuco; but this is doubtful, as we have seen.
He enumerates several dignitaries. Brasseur de Bourbourg
names Tlacahuepan, son of Montezuma, while his authority,
Ixtlilxochitl, states that his namesake captured him
and Tetlepanquetzaltzin in another canoe, and in a third
Papantzin Oxomoc, widow of Emperor Cuitlahuatzin. _Hor.
Crueldades_, 50. ‘Quahutimoc se puso en pie en la popa de
su canoa para pelear. Mas como vio ballestas ... rindiose.’
_Gomara_, _Hist. Mex._, 213. This probably assumed fact
has been elaborated by some writers into an heroic act.
The incident has been placed by tradition as occurring near
the later Puente del Clérigo. But this can hardly be. See
note 27. According to Bernal Diaz, Sandoval came up shortly
after, on learning the news, and demanded the surrender of
the captives to him as the commander of the fleet, who had
ordered Holguin to pursue the canoes. The latter refused,
and a delay occurred, during which another crew hurried to
bear the tidings to Cortés and claim the reward granted
for first reports. Two captains were now sent to summon
the disputants and captives. _Hist. Verdad._, 155. Cortés,
while according in his letter the credit of the capture to
Holguin, promised to refer the claim to the king. Holguin
figures some years later as regidor and estate owner in
the city.

[1222] ‘Esta casa era de un principal tlatilulcano que se
llamaba Aztaoatzin.’ _Sahagun_, _Hist. Conq._, 55.

[1223] The versions of this remarkable speech vary greatly.
‘Habia hecho todo lo que de su parte era obligado para
defenderse á si y á los suyos hasta venir en aquel estado,
que ahora ficiese dél lo que yo quisiese.’ _Cortés_,
_Cartas_, 257. ‘Diçiéndole que le diesse de puñaladas é lo
matasse, porque no era raçon que viviesse en el mundo hombre
que avia perdido lo que’l avia perdido,’ adds Oviedo, iii.
422. ‘Preguntáronle por los chripstianos, é dixo: No me
preguntés esso; é si me quereys matar; matadme ya: que harto
estoy de vivir,’ says another version. _Id._, 517. ‘Iria mui
consolado adonde sus dioses estaban, especialmente haviendo
muerto à manos de tal Capitan.’ _Herrera_, dec. iii. lib.
ii. cap. vii. ‘Why so stubborn?’ is the way Duran opens the
conversation on Cortés’ part. _Hist. Ind._, MS., ii. 509.
‘Toglietemi con questo pugnale una vita, che non perdei nella
difesa del mio Regno.’ _Clavigero_, _Storia Mess._, iii.
230. See also Ixtlilxochitl and others. Writers generally
go into ecstacy over this utterance. ‘Magnanimo,’ exclaims
Peter Martyr, dec. v. cap. viii. ‘Heroic,’ ejaculates
Bustamante in support of Chimalpain’s encomium. _Hist.
Conq._, ii. 75. ‘Ce trait est digne du plus beau temps de
la Grèce et de Rome.’ _Humboldt_, _Essai Pol._, i. 193.
‘A spirit worthy of an ancient Roman,’ echoes Prescott,
_Mex._, iii. 206. Bernal Diaz says the emperor wept, and
with him his chiefs. _Hist. Verdad._, 155.

[1224] Made a few years later by order of the city council.
It was not, as many suppose, the original standard, for
this was hidden during two centuries among rubbish in the
university, as stated in its records. It now exists in the
museum, forming a piece about a yard square, which shows
on one side the Virgin of the Immaculate Conception with
hands joined in prayer, and bearing on her head a crown
of gold surrounded by a halo and a circle of stars; on
the other are the royal arms. _Boturini_, _Idea_, 157.
In his _Catálogo_, 75, this author assumes it to be the
standard given to the Tlascaltecs, but Carbajal states
that at Tlascala exists another standard of Cortés’, with
royal arms, _Hist. Mex._, ii. 637, with a picture of the
above named virgin. See also _Beaumont_, _Crón. Mich._, ii.
345-6. By order of July 31, 1528, the city council orders
bull-fights and other entertainments in honor of the day,
‘e q todos cabalguen los q tovieren bestias.’ _Libro de
Cabildo_, MS., 127, 234. Mexicans are never seen to share
in the procession. ‘Tan profundo está en sus ánimos la
herida.’ _Cavo_, _Tres Siglos_, i. 3; _Humboldt_, _Essai
Pol._, i. 192. A minute account of the ceremonies on the
occasion is given in _Monumentos Hist. Admin. Colon._, MS.,
365, copied from the _Archivo General_.

[1225] Counting from May 30th, _Cartas_, 257, and so it is
stated in the grant to Cortés of Escudo de Armas. Duran
and Ixtlilxochitl extend it to 80 and Bernal Diaz to 93
days. ‘Despues de muchos combates, y mas de sessenta peleas
peligrosisimas.’ _Acosta_, _Hist. Nat. Ind._, 525.

[1226] Over 60 soldiers were lost in the great defeat, and
small numbers now and then, while the auxiliaries, less
skilled in fighting and chiefly unarmored, succumbed in
hordes. Gomara says about 50 soldiers, 6 horses, and not many
Indians; Herrera modifies to ‘a little over’ 50; Torquemada
advances to ‘less than 100,’ and Clavigero to ‘more than
100 Spaniards.’ Hernandez, in his _Estadist. Méj._, 232,
computes such curiously exact figures as 107 Spaniards,
18,915 Tlascaltecs, and 33,240 Aztecs. Ixtlilxochitl, ever
eager to enlarge upon the services of his race, claims
that 30,000 Tezcucans fell out of 200,000 employed, _Hor.
Crueldades_, 51; but this is evidently exaggerated.

[1227] ‘En que murieron infinitos.’ _Gomara_, _Hist. Mex._,
213; _Herrera_, dec. iii. lib. ii. cap. viii.; _Clavigero_,
_Storia Mess._, iii. 232-3. Bustamante raises the number
killed to ‘150,000 at least.’ _Chimalpain_, _Hist. Conq._,
ii. 74; Ixtlilxochitl, loc. cit., to 240,000, including most
of the nobles; while Torquemada, i. 577, observes ‘que de
veinte partes, no quedò vna, aviendo perecido, y muerto las
diez y nueve,’ he and several others allowing the estimate
of fully 300,000 inhabitants. The survivors are estimated
at from 30,000 persons, by Torquemada to 70,000 warriors
by Oviedo, iii. 516.

[1228] ‘Hiço herrar algunos Hombres, y Mugeres por Esclavos;
à todos los demàs dexò en libertad.’ _Torquemada_, 573. ‘À
muchos indios é indias, porque estaban dados por traydores,’
says Oviedo, iii. 517. Cortés stayed and punished those
who took slaves, ‘aunque todavia herraron en la cara á
algunos mancebos y mugeres.’ So states the native record of
Sahagun, _Hist. Conq._ (ed. 1840), 231. But if he punished
slave-takers it was for not declaring the capture to
the royal official. Duran reduces his account of Spanish
liberality to an absurdity, but more from politic reasons
than because he had not at hand better evidence, _Hist.
Ind._, MS., ii. 510.

[1229] _Hist. Verdad._, 156. ‘Io sospetto, che da’ Messicani
lasciati fossero a bella posta insepolti i cadaveri, per
iscacciar colla puzza gli Assediatori.’ _Clavigero_, _Storia
Mess._, iii. 231. But this is unlikely. A severe siege will
produce such results.

[1230] Bernal Diaz relates that although wine and provisions
from Cuba were abundantly dispensed at the banquet, yet
there was not room for one third of the soldiers, and much
discontent grew out of it, partly from the utterances of
drunken men. A dance followed. Father Olmedo complained of
so much revelry before the rendering of due thanks to God.
Cortés pleaded that soldiers must be allowed some license,
but the following day was set apart for religious services.
_Hist. Verdad._, 156.

[1231] Bustamante comments on the non-fulfilment of the
promises to Tlascala, saying that the republic was rightly
served for lending herself to the invaders. _Sahagun_,
_Hist. Conq._, 144. On their way home, says Ixtlilxochitl,
the Tlascaltecs and their neighbors plundered Tezcuco and
other towns. With the slaves carried home by his namesake,
he adds consolingly, the destroyed palaces of Tezcuco were
rebuilt. _Hor. Crueldades_, 52-3. The Tlascaltecs ‘aun
lleuaron hartas cargas de tasajos cecinados de Indios
Mexicanos, que repartieron entre sus parientes ... por
fiestas.’ _Bernal Diaz_, _Hist. Verdad._, 157.

[1232] ‘Non dubitamus quin justa sint bella ... in eos qui
humanam carnem epulantur,’ etc. _De Jure Belli_, lib. ii.
cap. xx.

[1233] Alvarado was Ajax; Maxixcatzin, Nestor; Quauhtemotzin,
Hector. _Chevalier_, _Mex. Ancien_, 232-41.