The Historia de las Indias de Nueva-España y Islas de Tierra Firme, by Father Diego Duran, is claimed by its author, in the introductory to chapter lxxiv., to be devoted essentially to the life and rule of this monarch, ‘cuya vida é história yo escribo.’ The preparation of the work was more directly prompted by a compassion for the maltreated natives, whose champion he constituted himself, in common with so many of the friars. This spirit led him naturally to color the occurrences of the conquest; and a non-critical acceptance of whimsical legends and statements in favor of his protégés tends further to reduce the value of the work. His deep interest in the aborigines and their history may be explained by the fact that he was born at Tezcuco, of a native mother. Franco wrongly calls him Pedro, and Clavigero, Fernando. He professed as a Dominican at Mexico, in 1556, with missionary aspirations, no doubt, but a delicate constitution and constant suffering confined him rather to the monastery, and directed his efforts to researches and writing. Castellanos, Defensa, 28, attributes several works to him, and Eguiara, Bib. Mex., 324, the compilation of the Dominican history of Dávila Padilla, though not the style and form. Dávila also, ‘scrisse la Storia antica de’ Messicani, servendosi de’ materiali raccolti già da Ferdinando Duran Domenicano da Tezcuco; ma questa opera non si trova.’ Clavigero, Storia Mess., i. 13. But this may be a mistake. A similar rewriting would have greatly improved the Historia de las Indias, which is exceedingly unpolished and slovenly, full of repetitions and bad spelling, and showing great poverty of expression. On the other hand, it is relieved by an admirable portrayal of character and knowledge of human nature, and by a minute study of the effect of conversion on the natives. The work consists of three tratados, the first in 78 chapters, giving the history of Mexico from its origin to the conquest, terminating with the expedition to Honduras. This was completed in 1581, while the other two were finished two years before. The second tratado, in 23 chapters, treats of Mexican divinities and rites, and the third, in two, or more properly nineteen, chapters, of calendar and festivals. Padre Duran died in 1588, leaving the manuscripts to Juan Tovar, Dávila Padilla, Hist. Fvnd. Mex., 653, who gave them to Acosta, then occupied in preparing his Natura Novi Orbis, and other works. The contribution came most opportunely, and was used chiefly for his account of Mexico, as he frankly admits, though giving the credit to Tovar, who may have claimed the authorship. On the strength of this statement Clavigero, with others, confirms the claim to the ‘nobilissimo Gesuita Messicano.’ Torquemada, i. 170-1, ii. 120, himself not spotless, takes advantage of the confession to rail at Acosta for borrowed plumage, mutilated at that. The manuscripts, now in the Biblioteca Nacional de Madrid, are written in double columns and illustrated with numerous plates. Pinelo, Epitome, ii. 711, refers to them as in two parts. A few copies have been taken, mine forming three volumes. A set obtained by José Fernando Ramirez, one of Maximilian’s ministers, was prepared by him for publication, but, owing to the death of the imperial patron, only the first 68 chapters were issued at Mexico, 1867, in one volume, with notes and considerable changes of the style. This mutilation, as some term it, may have been a reason for the seizure of the whole edition, together with the separate plates, by the republican government. Only a few copies escaped this fate, one of which I succeeded in obtaining. Although independent issue was long withheld from Duran, he has at least enjoyed the honor of being associated with one possessed of far greater fame than he himself could ever hope to achieve.
The motives which impelled Joseph de Acosta to write on America were quite pretentious. Among the many Spanish books on the New World, he says: ‘I have not seene any other author which treates of the causes and reasons of these novelties and wonders of nature, or that hath made any search thereof. Neither have I read any booke which maketh mention of the histories of the antient Indians, and naturall inhabitants.’ With a view to repair these omissions he issued De Natvra Novi Orbis libri dvo, et de Promvlgatione Evangelii, apvd Barbaros, sive de Procvranda Indorvm Salvte Libri sex. Salmanticœ, 1589. The first part, De Natura, is a philosophic dissertation on physical features, on the probable knowledge among the ancients of a western hemisphere, and on the origin of the Indians. The second part, in six books, bearing a separate imprint under 1588, though published only in connection with the previous two books, treats entirely of the method and progress of Indian conversion. The Natura was translated into Spanish, and incorporated, with some amendments, in the Historia Natvral y moral de las Indias, Sevilla, 1590, dedicated to Infanta Isabel, which treats also of Indian history and customs, and refers briefly to the conquest. The work achieved great success, and was reproduced in numerous editions, in nearly every language, though often without Acosta’s name, and in distorted form, as in De Bry and some German versions. This may not be considered bad treatment by those who charge Acosta with plagiarism, although he frankly admits following a number of authors, among them ‘es vno Polo Ondegardo, a quien communmente sigo en las cosas de el Piru: y en las materias de Mexico Ioan de Touar prebendado que fue de la Iglesia de Mexico, y agora es religioso de nuestra Compañia de Iesvs. El qual por orden del Virrey hizo dõ Martin Enriquez diligẽte, y copiosa aueriguaciõ de las historias antiguas.’ See p. 396. There is no doubt that the interest and value of the work are owing chiefly to the circumstance that the original authorities have remained sealed, until lately at least; for, despite its pretentious aim, the pages are marred by frequent indications of the then prevalent superstition and credulity. The Procvrando Indorvm Salvte is more in consonance with the character of the Jesuit missionary and scholastic.
Born at Medina del Campo about 1539, he had in his fourteenth year joined the Society, to which four brothers already belonged. After studying and teaching theology at Ocana, he proceeded in 1571 to Peru, where he became the second provincial of his order. Returning to Spain seventeen years later—‘post annos in Peruano regno exactos quindeciem, in Mexicano & Insularibus duos,’ says the dedication of 1588 to Philip II., in De Natvra of 1589—he gained the favor of the king, occupied the offices of visitador and superior, and died as rector at Salamanca, February 15, 1600. Several other works, in print and manuscript, chiefly theologic, are attributed to him—see Camus, 104-13—among them De la criança de Cyro, dedicated to Filipe III. in 1592, which was also a borrowed text, from Xenophon, and remained a manuscript in the Royal Library.
CHAPTER XXVI.
LA NOCHE TRISTE.
June 30, 1520.
The Captive-King Drama Carried too Far—Better had the Spaniards Taken Montezuma’s Advice, and have Departed while Opportunity Offered—Diplomatic Value of a Dead Body—Necessity for an Immediate Evacuation of the City—Departure from the Fort—Midnight Silence—The City Roused by a Woman’s Cry—The Fugitives Fiercely Attacked on All Sides—More Horrors.
And now what must have been the feelings of the invaders, who, like the ancient mariner, had killed the bird that made the breeze blow! For assuredly they were responsible for the emperor’s death. Indeed, the direct charge of murder against Cortés has not been wanting, even among Spanish chroniclers; but this was owing greatly to the effort of the general to extricate the army from its desperate situation while the enemy was supposed to be distracted by grief and engaged in solemn obsequies. We may be sure, however, that the Spaniards did not kill Montezuma; that they did not even desire his death; but regarded it at this juncture as the greatest misfortune which could happen to them.[808] For in the vast evolvings of their fast, unfathomable destiny, they were now all like sea-gulls poised in mid-air while following a swiftly flying ship.
It is interesting to note the manœuvring on both sides over the dead monarch, who having ministered so faithfully to his enemies while living, must needs continue in the service after death. The hostile chiefs were called and informed of the sad consequences of their outrage on the emperor. The body would be sent to them, so that they might accord it the last honors. The leaders replied curtly that they had now a new chief, and cared no longer for Montezuma, dead or alive. The corpse was nevertheless carefully arrayed in fitting robes and given in charge of two prisoners, a priest and a chief,[809] with instructions to carry it to the Mexican camp, and explain the circumstances of the death and the grief of the Spaniards. On appearing outside the fort a leader motioned them back, and would probably have used force but for the priestly character of the bearers, behind whom the gate had been closed. A few moments later they disappeared from view. The disrespect shown the living was not spared the dead. As the corpse was borne through the streets jeers and insults fell from lips which formerly kissed the ground on which the monarch had stood. Many declared that a coward like Montezuma, who had brought so many misfortunes on the country, was not worthy of even ordinary burial.[810] The imperial party managed, however, to secure the body, and, assisted by those to whom the royal blood and high priestly character of the deceased outweighed other feelings, an honorable though quiet cremation was accorded in the Celpalco, where Sahagun intimates that the ashes remained.[811]
Shortly after the body had left the Spanish quarters Cortés sent a fresh message to the Mexicans, believing that by this time the presence of the august dead might have had its effect on them. He pointed out the respect due to the remains of a sovereign, and proposed a cessation of hostilities with that view, and till they had elected a successor, one more worthy than the present leader, who had driven them to rebel.[812] The chiefs replied that the Spaniards need trouble themselves about nothing but their own safety. They might come forth, they added tauntingly, to arrange a truce with their new leader, whose heart was not so easily moulded as that of Montezuma. Respect for the emperor, the Spaniards replied, had made them hitherto lenient toward his people, but if they remained obstinate no further mercy would be shown, and not one Mexican would be spared. “Two days hence not one Spaniard will be alive!” was the retort.