Medley 1!

Zach Medley

Tressie Norton

AP Language

21 August 2016

How a Few Spaniards Took Down an Empire

During the 1500s, Spanish explorers called conquistadors took over various lands

throughout Mesoamerica and overthrew the Native American empires that resided on the land

they desired. The Aztec empire, like many others, fell victim to the Conquistadors. In the early

1500s, the Aztec civilization dominated the area around central Mexico (The Enduring Vision

8). However, between 1519 and 1521, Hernan Cortes, along with a band of Spanish soldiers and

disgruntled Native American tribes, overthrew the Aztec empire and its emperor: Montezuma II

(The Enduring Vision 40). In 1521, Cortes began to build Mexico city on the ruins of the former

Aztec capital, Tenochtitlan (The Enduring Vision 40). There are many theories and debates

circulating about how Cortes and his army of conquistadors destroyed the Aztec empire. The

most likely reasons are that the Spaniards had superior technology and weaponry, gained the

admiration of the Aztec empire, and that the Aztecs wanted an alliance with the Spaniards instead

of animosity. Evidence that these caused the Aztecs downfall is conveyed in The Enduring

Vision, a reliable textbook, Cortes and the Downfall of the Aztec Empire, by John Manchip

White, Conquistador, by Buddy Levy, Aztecs Under Spanish Rule, by Charles Gibson, and two

websites dedicated to analyzing conquistadors and how they conquered Mesoamerica.

The most obvious reason for the Spanish conquest of the Aztec empire is that the

Spaniards had a superior war strategy and arsenal of weapons. The gun, which was fairly new in
 Medley 2!

the sixteenth century, was still somewhat awkward to use in battle. However, the very presence

of a weapon as loud and threatening as the gun was enough to intimidate the Aztec soldiers

(Technology of the Spanish Conquistadors 1). Plus, the Spaniards had a style of warfare that was

unfamiliar to the Aztecs: cavalry (Technology of the Spanish Conquistadors 2). Cavalry, which

involved fighting on horses, allowed Spanish soldiers to combat soldiers more often and move

more quickly (Technology of the Spanish Conquistadors 3). Plus, the Aztec strategy of capturing

prisoners of war instead of killing them contributed to their downfall. They kidnapped Cortes

before he had taken the entire city of Tenochtitlan and they could have killed him and possibly

disbanded the entire conquest. However, they kept him alive because it was their custom and

Cortes was rescued by a man from his army (Conquest of the Aztec Empire 3). Furthermore,

while the Aztecs didnt tend to unite with other local tribes, the Spanish united tribes across

Mesoamerica who had a vendetta against the Aztecs (Gibson 25). The Spanish strategy, which

involved trapping people in their own city without access to proper food or water and murdering

as many people as possible (Conquest of the Aztec Empire 3), proved to be more effective in the

end. By 1521, only 56 Spanish soldiers had died, as opposed to 100,000 Aztecs (Conquest of the

Aztec Empire 3). While superior weaponry was the most overt cause of the fall of the Aztecs,

Aztec admiration of the Spaniards also affected the outcome of this conquering.

The Spaniards greater advancement impressed the Aztecs, and made the Aztecs less

willing to attack them. Their massive boats, which the Aztecs referred to as water houses, were

impressive to the Aztec people (Levy 33). Additionally, the horses and dogs that the Spaniards

had were very new to the Aztecs (Levy 33). Tendile, an ambassador sent by Montezuma to greet

Cortes, even wondered if the Spaniards were teules, or gods, due to their weapons and animals
 Medley 3!

that provided such power and novelty (Levy 33). This admiration of the Spaniards may have

made it more challenging to be more suspicious of them. While Montezuma did send runners to

keep track of Cortess people when they started roaming around in order to avoid them getting

too close to Aztec territory (Levy 40), this sort of mercy is not characteristic of the Aztecs. They

would have reason to dislike the Spaniards, since Cortes greatly insulted Tendile by demanding

to meet Montezuma right after Tendile introduced himself as part of the Aztec empire (Levy 32).

In addition, they were the antithesis of merciful or forgiving, since they conquered surrounding

nation-states, demanded exorbitant tributes, seized copious numbers of victims for human

sacrifices (Levy 45), enslaved surrounding people, and even enslaved their own people for debt,

theft, or political offenses (White 104). In summary, it would have been very characteristic of the

Aztecs to attempt to conquer the Spaniards, but they didnt out of admiration and fear that they

could be some sort of deities. Not only were the Aztecs in awe of the Spanish, but also they were

unwilling to have an animosity with the Spanish.

Contrary to popular belief, the Aztecs and Spaniards actually started out on friendly

terms. When Hernan Cortes and his exploration group first landed in the New World on Good

Friday of 1519, they were greeted warmly by ambassadors of Montezuma and reciprocated the

greetings with kindness and hospitality (Levy 31). In fact, that Easter, an ambassador of

Montezuma named Tendile even exchanged gifts with Cortes (Levy 32). Despite Montezuma and

Tendiles suspicions about the intentions of the conquistadors, they still acted very friendly

towards them. In fact, they even granted Cortess request to meet Montezuma, which they

originally found to be very rude (Levy 94). This was after Cortes and his men conquered Cholla

and burned most of it down (Levy 92). In this case, it was both because this somehow convinced
 Medley 4!

Montezuma that Cortes was a god and that he could have the Spaniards on this side. He was so

committed to these ideas that he invited these men whom he knew to have burned an entire city

into his city with little security. However, unbeknownst to Montezuma and the Aztecs, the

Spaniards did not want a friendship or alliance of any sorts. Montezumas original gifts, which

were meant to assert Montezumas extensive wealth and power, sparked the greed of the

Spaniards and made them thirst for more, thus igniting their passion to conquer the Aztec empire

for gold (Levy 36). However, this effect was entirely unintentional on the part of the Aztecs.

Obviously, since the Aztec Empire fell to the Spaniards in 1521 (White 123), the Aztecs were

wrong about this.

Between 1519 and 1521, Hernan Cortes, along with a band of Spanish soldiers and

Native Americans who disdained the Aztecs, took down the Aztec Empire (The Enduring Vision

40). The Aztec empire was only one of many empires that fell victim to conquistadors during the

period of 1492 to 1607. Although the Aztecs once dominated central Mexico (The Enduring

Vision 8), they couldnt stand up to the conquistadors that took over their land. There are

numerous possible explanations as to how the Spanish conquered these people so quickly and

viciously. The way they did so was through superior weaponry and battle strategies, through

gaining the admiration of the Aztec people, and because the Aztecs sought an alliance with the

Spanish. Evidence that these caused the Aztecs downfall is conveyed in Conquistador, by

Buddy Levy, Cortes and the Downfall of the Aztec Empire, by John Manchip White, The

Enduring Vision, a reliable textbook, Aztecs Under Spanish Rule, by Charles Gibson, and two

websites dedicated to analyzing conquistadors and how they conquered Mesoamerica. (1,211

words)
 Medley 5!

Works Cited

Conquest of the Aztec Empire. The Spanish War History. Spanish Wars. 2008. Web. Accessed

21 Aug. 2016.

Gibson, Charles. Aztecs Under Spanish Rule. Stanford University Press: Stanford, 1964. Print.

Houghton Mifflin Company. The Enduring Vision. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston: 2008.

Print.

Levy, Buddy. Conquistador. Bantam Dell: New York, 2008. Print.

Technology of the Spanish Conquistadors Gettysburg College. Web. 21 Aug. 2016.

White, Jon Manchip. Cortes and the Downfall of the Aztec Empire. St. Martins Press: New York,

1971. Print.