[852] ‘Una torre y aposento fuerte.’ Cortés, Cartas, 136. ‘Vnas caserias q̄ en vn cerro estauan, y alli jũto a vn Cu, e adoratorio, y como fortaleza.’ Bernal Diaz, Hist. Verdad., 107. ‘A este templo llamaron de la Vitoria, y despues nuestra Señora de los remedios.’ Herrera, dec. ii. lib. x. cap. xii. Sahagun calls the rise Acueco, and places upon it the Otomí village of Otoncapulco. Hist. Conq. (ed. 1840), 122. Vetancurt follows, Teatro Mex., pt. iii. 143, while Camargo calls it Tzacuyocan. The variations in Sahagun’s editions lead Torquemada to say that the Spaniards moved the same day from Otoncalpulco pueblo to Acueco, an Otomí village, i. 504-5. This, Brasseur de Bourbourg follows. The Spaniards may have passed through it on departing, but would hardly move from a stronghold to a probably open village while surrounded by enemies. If food was the object, the able-bodied soldiers would have made a sally for it. It appears that the army camped for the night on the hill now occupied by the Remedios shrine, and in the fortress-like temple, to which a small village was attached. Alzate, however, who took pains to inquire into the subject, found that the natives applied the name Otoncapulco, not to the Remedios hill, but to the mountain, three fourths of a league off. On this mountain he found the ruins of a strong building, and none on the hill, whence he assumes that the camp was not made on the site of the shrine, but on the mountain. Gacetas de Lit., ii. 457-9. Bustamante accepts this view, but Archbishop Lorenzana, whose testimony in the matter must be reliable, says: ‘Se conservan aun algunos vestigios de la antigua Fortaleza, y esta se ha convertido dichosamente en el célebre Santuario de N. Sra. de los Remedios.’ Cortés, Hist. N. España, p. xiii. He also intimates that the Otoncapulco name is misapplied. Hence it may be assumed that the common application of Otoncapulco to this hill is due to a misinterpretation of Sahagun’s versions, which have been greatly tampered with, for that matter, and that the ruins mentioned by Lorenzana had disappeared by the time Alzate examined the place.
[853] Cartas, 136; Cabrera, Escudo Armas, 110. ‘Aqui se señalò mucho Gonçalo Dominguez, hombre diestro y valiente.’ Herrera, dec. ii. lib. x. cap. xii. Prescott makes several blunders and omissions in connection with this day.
[854] A few stragglers managed to reach the camp, and among them one Sopuerta, who had escaped death by feigning it. Herrera, ubi sup. Sahagun states that Otomís from Teucalhuican, and from the immediate neighborhood, no doubt, brought food, and invited the Spaniards to the former town, a few leagues from there. Hist. Conq., 33. Torquemada follows him, but the story is probably an exaggeration.
[855] It has been shown previously, by testimony not accessible till later years, that the image placed in the great temple was a picture on a tablet, while that of Remedios is a doll. But, of course, the image that could move through the air could also transform its shape. Bernal Diaz assumes, as we have seen, that Montezuma had ordered the image to be cared for; yet many believe that Rodriguez secured it before or after the massacre, while the more pious prefer to suppose that he could not find it, for want of time, perhaps, and that it moved miraculously to the camp. Acosta, Hist. Ind., 524; Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chich., 302. After the departure of the troops the image hid itself on the spot, or Rodriguez, tired of the burden which had saved his life, ungratefully left it there. It is also supposed to have been carried to Tlascala ere it reappeared on its later site. Cabrera, Escudo Armas, 106 et seq.; Alaman, Disert., i. 122. Lorenzana accepts it as the image from Mexico’s temple. Cortés, Hist. N. España, 138.
[856] It has frequently been brought to Mexico, and is still brought to avert epidemics and other ills, to bring rain or other blessings. When detained it would travel back of its own accord to the shrine, a proof of which was afforded by the travel stains on the dress. One rainy night it arrived covered with mud. Latrobe’s Rambler, 133. Thompson describes it as ‘a little alabaster doll, with the nose broken, and the eye out ... about eight inches high.’ Her wardrobe and jewels are valued at over $1,000,000. Recollections, 103-9. He gives an account of the veneration for the image and its miraculous power. The history of its origin and worship is to be found in a multitude of books, among which may be mentioned, Medina, Chrón. S. Diego Mex., 30 et seq.; Cabrera, Escudo Armas, 106 et seq.; Bustamante, Mem. Piedad Mex., 1-52.
[857] Cortés prudently limits, and we must add untruthfully, the loss to 150 soldiers and some 2000 allies. It is with a view to this estimate that he reduced the force brought into Mexico to 570 men, to which must be added the 140 composing the garrison. Deducting the 150 lost, 560 remain, and since he would hardly overestimate the number, for obvious reasons, this figure is probably near the truth. Bernal Diaz musters 1300 at Tlascala, and has 80 at Mexico. Deducting from this 800 men stated to have been lost before entering Tlascala, not counting those who fell in other provinces, leaves about 580; yet he acknowledges only 440 alive. Hist. Verdad., 108 et seq. Herrera is also contradictory, admitting in one place 500, and in another ‘less than’ 400 soldiers and 600 allies. Oviedo reduces the soldiers to 340. iii. 513. Vetancurt adopts Bernal Diaz’ 440 soldiers and Herrera’s 600 allies. Prescott hastily declares Gomara as nearest to the truth, yet he departs from him in the result. With regard to the allies, he reckons the full number of all who were brought to Mexico, while it is pretty obvious, from figures and facts, that a portion must have been allowed to return home during the inaction of the emperor’s captivity. The list of losses, as given by different authorities, stands as follows: 150 soldiers, over 2000 allies, Cortés; over 200 soldiers, over 2000 allies, Lejalde, Probanza; nearly 200 soldiers, over 1000 allies, Solis; 300 soldiers, over 2000 allies, at one bridge, Sahagun, 122; 450 soldiers, 4000 allies, Gomara, followed by Ixtlilxochitl, Clavigero, Camargo, and others; over 500 soldiers in all New Spain, Carta del Ejército; over 600 soldiers, Robertson; over 600 soldiers, B. V. de Tapia, in Ramirez, Proceso contra Alvarado, 38; 800 soldiers in all New Spain, Cortés, Residencia, i. 42; 870 soldiers in all New Spain, Bernal Diaz; 1170 soldiers, 8000 allies, Cano, in Oviedo, iii. 551.
[858] The loss in horses varies from 45, in Cortés, to 56, in Lejalde, Probanza, both acknowledging 24 left.
[859] ‘Perdidose todo el oro y joyas y ropa,’ etc. Cortés, Cartas, 135. It had been confided to Tlascaltecs, and was nearly all lost, says their chief. Camargo, Hist. Tlax., 169-70. The officers testified afterward before public notary: ‘Se perdió todo el dicho oro é joyas de SS. AA., é mataron la yegua que lo traia.’ Lejalde, Probanza, in Icazbalceta, Col. Doc., i. 425. Two witnesses during the residencia of Cortés stated that the general had two mares, one given to carry the royal treasures and the other laden with his own. The latter being lost, he claimed the other to be his, and in this manner appropriated 45,000 pesos or more which belonged to the king. Cortés, Residencia, i. 69, 101-2. Not long after the retreat he called on all to declare, under penalty, what gold they had saved of that taken from the unappropriated piles. From those who did so the treasures were taken, although it was understood that they had been given to them. All this Cortés kept. Id., 101-2, 241-2; ii. 402. Many refused to surrender, and since the leaders had also secured shares from the common pile, the order to reveal possession thereof was not enforced, says Bernal Diaz. He adds that one third was to be retained by the possessor as a reward. Cortés kept as a forced loan what had been surrendered. Hist. Verdad., 117-18. The loss of treasure, that thrown away by carriers and pressed soldiers, or sunken with their bodies, has been estimated at from several hundred thousand pesos to over two millions, in the values of that time; to which Wilson sarcastically objects, that ‘nothing was really lost but the imaginary treasure, now grown inconveniently large, and which had to be accounted for to the emperor. The Conquistador was too good a soldier to hazard his gold; it was therefore in the advance, and came safely off.’ Conq. Mex., 412-13.
[860] ‘Si esta cosa fuera de dia, por ventura no murieran tantos,’ adds Gomara, Hist. Mex., 161. While grieving he recognized ‘el manifiesto milagro que la reyna de los angeles su abogada, el apostol San Pedro, y el de los egércitos Españoles Santiago, habian hecho en haberse escapado él.’ Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chich., 302. Vetancurt moralizes on the flight as a chastisement by God, who saved the remnant to spread the faith. Teatro Mex., pt. iii. 145-6.
[861] On a later page Bernal Diaz says he fell at Otumba. Hist. Verdad., 107, 246.