[295] Robertson, Hist. Am., ii. 38-9; Wilson’s Conq. Mex., 360-70; Benzoni, Hist. Mondo Nvovo, 51. It is seldom that I encounter a book which I am forced to regard as beneath censure. He who prints and pays the printer generally has something to say, and generally believes something of what he says to be true. An idiot may have honest convictions, and a knave may have talents, but where a book carries to the mind of the reader that its author is both fool and knave, that is, that he writes only foolishness and does not himself believe what he says, I have not the time to waste in condemning such a work. And yet here is a volume purporting to be A New History of the Conquest of Mexico, written by Robert Anderson Wilson, and bearing date Philadelphia, 1859, which one would think a writer on the same subject should at least mention. The many and magnificent monuments which to the present day attest the great number and high culture of the Nahua race, and the testimony to this effect offered by witnesses on all sides, are ignored by him with a contempt that becomes amusing as the pages reveal his lack of investigation and culture. Indeed, the reader need go no further than the introduction to be convinced on the latter point. Another amusing feature is that the work pretends to vindicate the assertions of Las Casas, who, in truth, extols more than other Spanish author the vast number and advanced culture of the natives. In addition to this mistaken assumption, which takes away his main support, he states that Prescott worked in ignorance of his subject and his authorities, and to prove the assertion he produces wrongly applied or distorted quotations from different authors, or assumes meanings that were never intended, and draws erroneous conclusions. Thus it is he proves to his own satisfaction that Mexico City was but a village occupied by savages of the Iroquois stamp, and that Cortés was the boastful victor over little bands of naked red men. As for the ruins, they were founded by Phœnician colonists in remote ages. Another tissue of superficial observations, shaped by bigotry and credulous ignorance, was issued by the same author under the title of Mexico and its Religion, New York, 1855, most enterprisingly reprinted in the disguise of Mexico: its Peasants and its Priests, New York, 1856. In common with Mr Morgan, and others of that stamp, Mr Wilson seems to have deemed it incumbent on him to traduce Mr Prescott and his work, apparently with the view of thereby attracting attention to himself. Such men are not worthy to touch the hem of Mr Prescott’s garment; they are not worthy of mention in the same category with him.
[296] Lorenzana, Viage, ix., wherein the appearance of the hill is described as the bishop saw it. Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chich., 292; Camargo, Hist. Tlax., 146. Other authors differ. ‘Teoatzinco, cioè il luogo dell’acqua divina.’ Clavigero, Storia Mess., iii. 44. Duran assumes that the battle was for the possession of this place, which he calls Tecoac. Hist. Ind., MS., ii. 418, 422; Tezozomoc, Hist. Mex., ii. 256. ‘Aldea de pocas casas, que tenia vna torrezilla y tẽplo.’ Gomara, Hist. Mex., 74.
[297] So Cortés distinctly says. Bernal Diaz writes, however, that this day was devoted to rest. Still, a later observation indicates that Cortés is right.
[298] Id. Bernal Diaz, Hist. Verdad., 44, admits only twenty captives, and blames the allies for firing the villages; but Cortés is frank enough about it.
[299] Prescott, Mex., 438-42, gives a pretty description of the army, but is so carried away that he dons it with helmets glittering with gold and precious stones, etc.; and this in spite of the efforts of the chroniclers to exhibit the Tlascaltecs as very poor in anything but rude comforts.
[300] Under five captains, to whom he applies the names of the four lords, as he understands them, and of the ruler of Huexotzinco. Hist. Verdad., 45; Gomara, Hist. Mex., 75. 149,000 men, says Cortés, in his second letter, 62, but this exactness is probably due to a printer’s mistake.
[301] For colors and banners, and how carried, see Native Races, ii. 411-12, and Torquemada, i. 436.
[302] He was detected in this trick afterward. ‘Lo qual fue gran refrigerio y socorro para la necesidad que tenian.’ Gomara, Hist. Mex., 76. Oviedo increases the gift to 700 baskets. iii. 495. Gomara proceeds to relate that in sign of contempt for the small number of the enemy, whom it could be no honor for his large army to overcome, Xicotencatl detached 2000 warriors—200 says Oviedo—to seize and bring him the strangers bound. They attacked, and were routed with an almost total destruction of their number. ‘No escapo hombre dellos, sino los q̄ acertaron el passo de la barranca.’ loc. cit. 76.
[303] Bernal Diaz states that they did not wait for the enemy to attack, but marched forth and met them one eighth of a league from camp. Hist. Verdad., 45. But Cortés says distinctly, ‘Otro dia en amaneciendo dan sobre nuestro real mas de ciento y cuarenta y nueve mil hombres.’ Cartas, 62. Gomara and Herrera also allow Indians to attack the camp first. Cortés is too fond of announcing when he takes the initiative to have failed to say so had he done it in this case.
[304] ‘Son of Chichimeclatecle,’ says Bernal Diaz, a name which should read Chichimeca-tecuhtli.