[lit-ideas] Hernando Cortez, Evangelist
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Lit-Ideas " <Lit-Ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 14:21:35 -0700
Cortez was warned that if he took his troops into Mexico, he and all of them
would be killed, some of whom would be sacrificed to idols and most would be
eaten. Despite that he and his 550 men entered Mexico and were welcomed by
Motecusuma. Motecusuma earlier sent word that Cortez should not come, but
when Cortez told him that he needed to come to complete his mission,
Motecusuma had his priests consult the Aztec gods and their response was
that Cortez should be allowed to come. Motecusuma got along fine with
Cortez and most of his men. One or two were disrespectful to Motecusuma and
Cortez had them whipped. Most like Bernal Diaz treated Motecusuma with
great respect, even to the point of saying that he and the others loved
Motecusuma. And Motecusuma reciprocated. Motecusuma was eventually taken
prisoner by Cortez, but it was a gentle imprisonment. Motecusuma had the
freedom to carry on his business as usual, he just had to do it in the
Spaniards quarters and presence. When Motecusuma' s nephews plotted to
attack the Spaniards and free Motecusuma, he informed on them to Cortez.
His argument was that if the Nephews attacked there would be a great
slaughter which he wanted to avoid, but his actions do sound as though he
were experiencing the Stockholm Syndrome.
One doesn't see religion mentioned prominently in modern historical
references, or perhaps I didn't notice it as much, but it is extremely
prominent in Bernal Diaz's The Conquest of New Spain. William Prescott and
perhaps most moderns will make light of the conquistadores and say their
primary motive was loot, but it is hard to see that in Diaz's narration.
Gold is important but less so than the commission they were on and even less
so than religion. Wherever Cortez went he preached to the natives telling
them they should quit human sacrifice and that there gods were false and
their statues needed to be pulled down. A priest was along with Cortez and
kept telling him to curtail his evangelism, and that more time was needed,
but he kept on, despite being overwhelmingly outnumbered in Moctecusuma's
Mexican city. One day in Moctecusuma's holiest shrines, Cortez preached to
him again telling him that all the gods there were false and Motecusuma took
terrible offense. Cortez's priest urged Cortez to give it up and return to
his quarters; which Cortez did. I thought this would have been an ideal
time for Motecusuma to escape to his generals and order them to annihilate
the Spaniards, but he didn't. He returned to captivity.
If one doubts the sincerity of Diaz and Cortez; which seems a very difficult
thing to do if one actually reads The Conquest of New Spain - at least in
Kindle which has the complete narration. An abridgement exists published by
Penguin Books which may have some of the religious accounts deleted, I don't
know, but what about the religion of the Aztecs. Not only did the Aztec
priests sacrifice humans, but afterwards they and the population at large
perhaps, or at least the upper classes, ate the remains. Something like a
butcher shop existed where those allowed to eat these remains (which may
have been everyone) picked out the cuts they wanted.
Cortez ordered the Motecusuma and the Mexicans to stop their human
sacrifices. Motecusuma agreed, but the sacrifices went on anyway and Diaz
wrote that they had to turn a blind eye because they were in no position to
force them to stop.
It is common to day to scoff at religious motivation: the Conquistadors must
have been in it for the gold. Crusaders must have been in it for the loot,
but post-modern (not intended as a technical term) theory suggests
otherwise. Nicholas Wade in 2009 wrote The Faith Instinct, How Religion
Evolved and Why it Endures. He isn't the first to hypothesize that we all
have a religious instinct. This isn't to say that it can't be denied or
rejected, but it is there and it does provide its adherents with an
advantage. Where is the war where one or both sides weren't motivated by
their religion? And lest the non-religious are inclined to feel superior,
the sincerely religious will fight with more single-mindedness and
self-sacrifice than the modern-day (or any previous day) sceptic. Thus, if
sceptics ever did mount an army, believers would be sure to beat it
(everything else being equal).
But, someone might object, the sincerely believing human-sacrificing Aztecs
far outnumber the sincerely believing Roman Catholic Spaniards, a million
plus to about 550; how is it that Cortez and his conquistadores survived?
Well to some extent it was due to their being an Aztec prophesy which
foretold that men would one day arrive from the direction of the rising of
the sun and conquer them. Motecusuma and who knows how many other Mexicans
had no doubt but that Cortez's arrival fulfilled that prophesy; so what good
would it do to fight them? The Gods had foretold that they would lose.
One in my opinion shouldn't disparage the intense religious conviction of
the Conquistadors. They prayed fervently, especially when they had to fight
against the enormous numbers that the Indians and especially the Aztecs
could bring against them. Cortez knew in whom he believed and felt the
obligation to confess Him in the presence of his enemies. There is a verse
some place where Jesus says something like, "if you confess me before men,
then I'll confess you before my heavenly father, but if you will not confess
me before men I will not confess you before my heavenly father." That
Cortez would preach to Motecusuma is, I suspect, an application of that
verse.
Lawrence
Other related posts:
