Did the Spanish Conquistadors misrepresent the Aztecs, and how has this affected the enduring legacy of the Aztecs?
[Note of clarification]: This essay is referring to the Aztecs as the Mexicas, due to misinformed terminology popularised by the Spaniards, the name ‘Aztecs’ proved to not be appropriate or correct when referring to the people who controlled the Tenochtitlan region in 1519, when the Spanish arrived. Though the name Mexica still begs some ambiguity in context, it is more respectful when referring to the people of the ‘Aztec Empire’.
The Mexicas were an indigenous Mesoamerican civilisation, prominent within the 16th century, who have incessantly suffered the misinterpretation and misinformation of their society due to the misleading
…show more content…
Since the release of the Spanish Conquistador’s misinforming documents, the public has consistently villainised the Mexica, disrespecting their culture and failing to properly acknowledge their genuine history, often being compared to the Nazis. This view of the Mexicas provided by the public supplies key insight into the misinterpretation of the Mexica culture, though Richard A. Koenigsberg would disagree otherwise arguing that in comparison to the Western world who “frames war to establish that its ideas and beliefs are “real and true”” , the Mexicas acknowledged that sacrifice was for the “purpose of war” endorsing the humanity behind the Mexica’s rituals in contrast to the Western war. The Western perspective in regarding the Mexicas as mass murders is ironic as the Mexica’s are moreover commonly acknowledged as victims of genocide caused by nonother than their colonisers, the Spanish Conquistadors themselves. Additionally, another piece of evidence in the misrepresentation of the Mexica’s span from the name change from ‘Aztec’s’ as well. In the period of 1780, Francisco Javier Clavijero Echegaray published his work, La Historia Antigua de México, evidentially altering the Mexica’s name to the ‘Aztecan’s’, spurring the name ‘Aztec’ to spread throughout Western culture. The disregard of the Mexica’s cultural roots from a Westerner’s perspective, generated interest from historians, revealing that their evidential name is Culhua-Mexica, demonstrating the immense impact the Spanish had onto the legacy of the Mexicas. Though many historians are attempting to restore legitimate
Oleg Kubay Professor Ortega History 23 22 September 2014 Warfare: Aztec & Spanish The fall of the Aztec empire was one of the major events that lead to the Spanish colonization of America. There were many factors contributing to the fall of the Aztec Empire like sacrificing their own people, which significantly lowered them in ranks making them a weaker colony. Also being the first people to sacrifice other people in the name of religion made them a threat to the Spaniards and Tlaxcala and many others. The Aztec and Spanish Warfare lead to the fall o f
Throughout the book, we get a narrative perspective of how the advanced Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan was at its height and how it fell into the hands of the Spanish conquistadors. Leon-Portilla gave a different perspective of history that always tends to be silenced. Many colonized people throughout the world have had their voices silenced and ignored. However, Leon-Portilla shared a different account of the conquest of Mexico. After Leon Portilla's book was published it has received some critiques and criticisms over the
The culture of both the Aztecs and Spaniards have similarities, as many different groups of people do. A main theme that was insinuated between both accounts into the culture of the two groups was respect of authority. “When Motecuhzoma had given necklaces to each one, …” “Then he stood up to welcome Cortes; he came forward, bowed his head low …” (Broken Spears 608).
Latin America Essay 1 In 1521, Hernan Cortes captured the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan, ending the reign of the Aztecs in what is now modern day Mexico. However, does the riches, land, and power gained by the Spanish justify the killing and looting? This vanquishment, as well as the ethical predicament it creates, considerably affected Latin America and Europe. Before we get into the ethical portion of Cortes' conquest, we must first explore the conquest itself.
I knew nothing about Mesoamerican culture—I may not even have been familiar with the term “Mesoamerica” (Preface.) Later Mann picked up an article by William Denevan that started to address what America was like before Columbus. Years went by and he started to learn more about the topic and was waiting for someone to write a book on this so this new information could be widely known. Mann then decided that he would write the book on what he thinks the main ideas of the new findings were so other people could become educated on what America was really like before Columbus. Mann’s point of view came from him first
In this paper, I will cover how Mexico came to be under the rule of the Spanish and how the Spanish conquered the Aztecs and took their land and why the Spanish wanted the land in the first place. The next subject that I will cover is the reasons that sparked the revolution after 300 years of Spanish rule, and the people who helped ignite the flags of rebellion. I will also cover the events that occurred during the revolution and the results of each event. Finally, I will state the conclusion of the revolution; who won, what happened after, and was the colony better off in the end. The Aztec Empire ruled Mexico, a once thriving and established civilization.
Spanish Conquest of the Aztecs It was the year of 1521 when Hernán Cortés’ forces had defeated the Aztecs and gained control in the siege of Tenochtitlán. This success was not due to luck, but instead it was due to a few of the cultural traits that Victor Davis Hanson had mentioned in “Carnage and Culture.” A few of the traits in particular that are evident are the “landed infantry” trait, the “technology” trait, and the “decisive battle” trait. These traits are displayed through his strategy planning during the battle as well as the use of superior weapons and allowed Cortés to gain an advantage over the Aztecs, ultimately allowing him to be victorious despite being surrounded in the previous battles by the Aztecs.
The colonisation by the Spanish had a detrimental effect on the Aztec and Inca civilisations.” The remains of these once powerful empires are hardly recognisable due to the impact that the colonisation of their empires had on them. The Spanish motivation behind conquering the Aztec and Inca civilisations was driven by one of the these concepts: desire for wealth, lack of trade, seeking opportunities and an increase in wealth. Spain’s empire had one of these concepts that drove its conquistadors to the expansion of their empire into the Americas.
Eventually when the Spanish arrived, they used brutal force and contaminated many. These contributions led to the collapse of the Aztec Empire due to revolts of tribes, ineffective leadership, the military disadvantages, and spread of diseases. During the Aztec’s reign,
Mele, Bryan M. Magliocca Marie. “Encounters in the Americas.” Fall of the Aztecs, www.watertown.k12.ma.us/cunniff/americanhistorycentral/04encountersintheamericas/Fall_of_the_Az.html. Accessed 2 Oct. 2017.
The author gives insight on how many ways the Spaniards used their power to assist in the downfall of the Aztecs. The reason why the Spaniards became victorious, was because the Spaniards were looked upon as if they were gods because of their outer appearance. The Aztecs broke bread and welcomed the Spaniards with gifts and parties. The Aztecs triggered their relationship with the Spaniards by holding a ritual for the arrival of the god which included a human sacrifice. The Spaniards didn’t agree with the rituals and began to despise the Aztecs.
Perspective can only be gained in hindsight. The accounts draw both on a retelling of events and on emotionality—which cannot be objective. The Aztecs were victims, and their perspective in skewed in this mindset. When the Spanish burned down the Aztecs’ temple, the people “wept and cried out” (p.109), but when they needed to defend their city their “spirits and courage were high; not one of them showed fear” (p.111). Both are possible; yet, they also glorify, romanticize and victimize the Nahua peoples.
Unlike DBC Pierre, Clendinnen has a more rigid contextual application to her history, having studied Anthropology and therefore approaching the Aztecs through the intensely human aspect, in the manner of history from below. In dealing with the reasons for defeat of the Aztec Empire, Clendinnen focuses on the intensely intimate and brutal cultural practices of battle and further war. She focuses intensely on the cultural forces, as defined by humans, in losing the war - and she raises the question of the adaptability of the Aztec Empire to the Spanish terms of engagement. She provides interesting insight into the inability for both the Spanish or the Aztecs to understand one another; clearly influenced by her background in Anthropology. Undoubtedly, her contextualisation of the downfall through the insuperable cultural clash and demands of ritual, that is hand to hand combat only and the criminal death system in battle is reflective of her familiarity with Anthropology - certainly her character dissection of Cortes is done in an intense, anthropological detail.
In central Mexico the Spanish myth of the golden northern land stirred awareness in the legend of Aztlan. According to their own histories the Aztecs had left their homeland in 1168 and journeyed to the lakes where in 1325 where found in Tenochtitlan. By mid-1700’s the Edenic picture of the north had been forgotten in the minds of the authorities in Mexico City. Since most of the settler from the very beginning were Indians and Mestizos and had intermarried with northern natives it wasn’t surprising that eventually saw the border land as their
Octavio Paz, a Mexican poet and essayist, is one of the many philosophers with a written piece regarding his understanding of Lo Mexicano. Paz’s “Sons of La Malinche” was first published in the Labyrinth of Solitude in 1950 and is a rather grim interpretation of the Mexican character, however, it captures the crisis of identity that Mexico was burdened with after the conquest. Paz uses the Spanish term “chingar,” (when literally translated means “to screw, to violate”) and its associated phrases to understand the conquest and the effect