In a previous bibliographic note I have pointed out the many internal evidences furnished by the letters of Cortés, of undoubted reliability on most points, in their minuteness, their frank soldierly tone, and other features. They are besides confirmed in all the more essential points by the contemporaneous letters from the municipality of Villa Rica and the army, the sworn depositions before the royal notary by leading officers, the narratives of Andrés de Tápia, and others. Still stronger confirmation is given in the complaints and memorials issued by enemies and rivals of the great captain, who in their efforts to detract from his character and achievements provide the historian with material that enables him to avoid the pitfalls abounding even in the honest narratives of partisans, either from sympathy, from lack of thorough knowledge, or from hearsay. Such testimony is abundant in the residencia investigations of Cortés, Alvarado, Guzman, and others, all which contain voluminous testimony on the most important questions. Prescott’s opportunities for consulting new material were vastly superior to those of his predecessors. If mine have been correspondingly greater, it may perhaps to some extent be due to the example set by him in his earnest researches, and because since the publication of his volumes, private individuals and learned societies have striven with increased enthusiasm to bring to light hidden material, notably from the rich archives of Spain and certain Latin-American states.
From this mass of what may be termed documentary evidence we turn to the regular historians and narrators, beginning with Peter Martyr and Oviedo, who both adhere chiefly to Cortés, though the latter adds other versions by different eye-witnesses. Sahagun’s account contains a strange admixture of native absurdities and vague recollections of converted soldiers. A more complete version is given by Gomara, the biographer of the great captain, who had access to private and public archives and individual narratives now lost; but he frequently colors the incidents to the credit of his hero and his profession. Nevertheless the value of the text is testified to by his Mexican translator Chimalpain, who adds some interesting facts from native records and personal knowledge. The Tezcucan writer Ixtlilxochitl also follows him pretty closely for the Spanish side, while the archives left him by his royal ancestors and different narratives furnish the other side, frequently absurd and highly colored. Camargo gives a rather brief Tlascaltec version. Gomara’s coloring, which, in accordance with the method of most historians, leaves the credit for achievements with the leader, roused the feelings of more than one of the soldiers who had shared in the glories of that period, and Bernal Diaz promptly began to write his celebrated Historia Verdadera, which professes to tell the true story and rectify in particular the so-called blunders of Gomara. Although this profession is not always to be relied on, the story is most valuable from its exceeding completeness, its many new facts, and its varied version. Not long after, Herrera, the official historiographer, began his decades, wherein for the conquest he uses the material already printed, with a leaning toward Gomara, yet with several additional narratives to perfect his own revised version, notably that of Ojeda, a leading officer under Cortés, and also no small mass of material from the archives of Spain. Torquemada copies him for the most part, though he adds much native testimony from Sahagun, from a Tezcucan writer, and others, making his account of the conquest the most complete up to that time. Solis elaborates with little critique, and with a verboseness and grandiloquence that tire. Vetancurt’s version is comparatively brief, with few additions, and Robertson’s is a brilliant summary; but Clavigero, while adding not much to Torquemada’s bulky account, presents it in quite a new form, pruned of verboseness, re-arranged in a masterly manner, and invested with a philosophic spirit altogether superior to anything presented till Prescott’s time. On the above historians and some of Cortés’ letters are founded the immense array of minor accounts and summaries on the conquest, both in separate and embodied form, some of them provided with occasional observations, but for the great part they contain nothing of any value to the student. Those after Prescott’s time follow him as a rule. Mexican accounts might naturally be expected to present useful features, but such is hardly the case. Alaman, Ramirez, Icazbalceta, Orozco y Berra, Bustamante, and certain writers in the Boletin of the Mexican Geographical Society, have brought to light several documents and monographs bearing on particular incidents and features; but no complete account of real value has been written, Carbajal’s pretentious version being almost wholly a plagiarism from Clavigero, Mora’s a hasty compilation, and so on. As for the new bulky Spanish version by Zamacois, it is not only verbose but superficial and narrow in its research, blundering even where Prescott points the way, and representing more a feuilleton issue than a history.
Bernal Diaz del Castillo is, as I have said, the main historian of the conquest, from the exhaustive thoroughness of his material, as compared with other original writers, and from his participation in all its leading scenes, including the discovery voyages. For about half a century he survives, and sees comrade after comrade disappear from the field till but five of Cortés’ original company remain, “all of us very old, suffering from infirmities, and very poor, burdened with sons and daughters to marry, and grandchildren, and with but a small income; and thus we pass our days in toil and misery.” He is not so badly off, however, as he would have us believe, for a comfortable encomienda supplies every want, and numerous descendants throng round to minister to his comfort and listen to his tales. But as he recalls the great achievements wherein he participated, he swells with the importance of the events, and dwelling on the multiplied treasures he has assisted to capture, the reward sinks to insignificance. It is but the chronic grumble, however, of an old soldier that half the continent would not satisfy. Springing from a poor and humble family of Medina del Campo, in old Castile, he had embarked at an early age with the expedition of Pedrarias in 1514 to seek fortune in Darien. Failing there, he drifts to Cuba in time to join the discovery parties of Córdoba and Grijalva. Subsequently he enlists under Cortés as a common soldier, yet somewhat above the mass in the favor of his chief. “Soldado distinguido,” says Juarros, implying higher birth; but this is doubtful. There is hardly a prominent incident of the conquest in which he does not participate, being present in no less than one hundred and nineteen battles, according to his enumeration, whereof many a scar remains to bear witness, and many a trophy to attest his valor. In due time he receives his share of repartimientos of land and serfs, and settles in Goazacoalco as regidor, with sufficient means to feed a taste that procures for him the not ill-esteemed nickname of Dandy. From his life of contentment, though not equal to his claims, he is torn by the Honduras expedition under Cortés, who gives him at times the command of a small party, whence comes the sported title of captain. Afterward for a time he drifts about, and finally settles in Guatemala city with the rank of regidor perpétuo, and with a respectable encomienda, obtained partly through the representations of Cortés to the king. He marries Teresa, daughter of Bartolomé Becerra, one of the founders of the city, and repeatedly its alcalde, and has several children, whose descendants survive to witness the overthrow of the royal banner planted by their forefather. Grandsons figure as deans of the city church, and an historian of the adopted country rises in Fuentes y Guzman. Pinelo, Epitome, ii. 604; Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 177; Memorial de Conquistadores, in Monumentos Admin. Munic., MS.; Juarros, Guat., i. 338, 350; Torquemada, i. 351.
The leisure afforded him in Guatemala, broken by little save the inspection of his estate, gave opportunity for indulging in the reveries of by-gone days. Histories of achievements were nearly all connected with the great Cortés, famed on every lip; yet that fame had been acquired with the aid of soldiers who like himself had been consigned to an obscure corner of the vast domains conquered by them. It did not seem right to the scarred veteran that the fruits of combined toil should fall to one or two alone; that he himself should be regarded far less than hundreds of upstarts whose only deeds had been to reap the field won by him and his comrades. He would tell his tale at all events; and forthwith he began to arrange the notes formed during his career, and to uplift the curtains of memory for retrospective views. While thus occupied he came upon the history by Gomara, and perceiving “his great rhetoric, and my work so crude, I stopped writing, and even felt ashamed to let it appear among notable persons.” But finding that the biographer of Cortés had committed many blunders, and had colored the narrative on behalf of his patron, he again seized the pen, with the double purpose of correcting such errors and of vindicating his slighted comrades. Faithfully he carried out his plan, recording name after name of brave fellows who shed lustre on the flag, who freely risked their lives in gallant encounters, or who gave their last breath for church and king. While dwelling lovingly on humble companions, whose cause he espoused, he detracts little from the leaders and cavaliers. He describes their appearance and traits with a graphic fidelity that seems to bring them before us in person; he freely accords them every credit, and if he spares not their vices they are seldom brought forward in a captious or ill-natured spirit. On the contrary, he frequently covers disagreeable facts in deference to the dead. This general fairness of dealing is particularly noticeable in regard to Cortés, whom nevertheless he sometimes severely criticises; and while Diaz assumes for his side the credit of many a suggestion and deed, yet he is ever the loyal soldier, and frequently takes up the cudgel in behalf of the honored leader when others seek to assail him. He admires the great captain hardly less than himself. Indeed, to say that the old campaigner was vain is stating it mildly. Two licentiates who read the manuscript pointed this out to him, but he replied, “Whom does it harm? No one praises an old, broken-down soldier, so I must even praise myself. It is a duty I owe not only to my fair name but to my descendants.” He revives in his narrative and carries us back with him to those stirring days, depicting now the hardships of the march, now the new countries and races that appear; then he enters into the heat of battle with a fidelity that brings the din and turmoil vividly before us; and anon we see the adventurers in camp, in their social relations, relieved by pleasing episodes. He enters thoroughly into their hopes and feelings, deeds and life; he grows eloquent and pathetic by turns, and reveals also the undercurrent of piety and zeal which pervaded the rakish crew. Here is the gossipy frankness of Herodotus, illumined by many a quaint observation and many a blunt sally. Bernal Diaz had but the rudiments of education, which nevertheless was above the average among his fellow-soldiers; but he had evidently read a little in later years, to judge by his allusions to classic history, though not enough to acquire more than a mediocre proficiency in grammar. There is a minuteness of detail at times wearisome, and garrulous digression and repetition; but a simple perspicuity pervades the whole narrative, which makes it easy to follow, while the frankness and frequent animation are pleasing. Much of it appears to have been dictated, perhaps to some one of his children, “cuyo manuscrito se conserva en el archivo de esta municipalidad.” Jil, in Gaceta Nic., June 24, 1865. It was given for perusal to different persons, and several copies made; but none cared to assume its publication. Sixty years later, however, Friar Alonso Remon, chronicler of the Merced order in Spain, found one set in the library of Ramirez del Prado, of the Council of the Indies, and perceiving the importance of the narrative, he caused it to be printed at Madrid in 1632 under the title of Historia Verdadera de la Conquista de la Nueva-España. Remon dying during the publication, Friar Gabriel Adarzo, “nunc Hydruntinus præsul,” Antonio, Bib. Hisp. Nova, iii. 224, took it in charge. Several discrepancies indicate that revisions have been made, and Vazquez, Chron. Guat., 524, whose jealousy as a friar was aroused by allusions to Father Olmedo, Cortés’ companion, compared the print with the original copy and pointed out several differences. A second edition, bearing the date 1632, though published later probably, contains an additional chapter on omens, which appears in others of the many editions and translations issued in different countries, even of late years.
Perhaps the most clear-sighted writer on Mexico during the last century was Francisco Javier Clavigero, himself a native of that country, and born at Vera Cruz in 1731. His father was a Leonese, whose official duties called him to different parts of the country, and young Francisco profited by this to acquire a knowledge of its resources and idioms. After a novitiate of three years at the Jesuit college of Tepozotlan, he passed to that at Puebla, and there studied philosophy and theology, and showed particular fondness for languages, both classic and native. He taught rhetoric and philosophy in the principal schools of the country, though restricted somewhat by the superiors in his too liberal ideas, for which Mexico was not yet considered ripe. Meanwhile his enthusiasm centred on the study of Aztec history and hieroglyphs, which received a serious check in the expulsion of Jesuits from America in 1767. He sought refuge in Italy, staying chiefly at Bologna, where he founded an academy, and having considerable leisure he began to shape the results of his late studies, impelled in no small degree by the writings of De Pauw and Robertson, which grated on his patriotic spirit. They were prepared in Spanish, but the authorities giving no encouragement for their publication in Spain, an Italian translation was made and issued in four volumes, as Storia Antica del Messico, Cesena, 1780, dedicated to the university at Mexico. Subsequently a Spanish version appeared, but not before several editions had been published in England and other countries. The first volume treats of resources and ancient history, the second of manners and customs, the third of the conquest, and the fourth consists of a series of dissertations on the origin of the Americans, on chronology, physique, languages, and other points. They have been widely quoted, and Francisco Carbajal de Espinosa has shown such appreciation of it as to copy almost the whole text in what he calls his Historia de Mexico, Mex., 1856, 2 vols. Clavigero’s work is based to a great extent on aboriginal records and personal observation, and the old chronicles have been largely used; but their cumbrous and confused material is here arranged in a manner worthy of the liberal-minded philosopher and rhetorician. Indeed, no previous work in this field can at all compare with it for comprehensiveness and correctness, depth of thought and clearness of expression. In the former respect he greatly surpasses Robertson and in the latter he may be classed as his equal. His death, which took place at Bologna in 1787, found him in the midst of a number of literary projects, called forth in part by the success of the Storia, and by the different subjects which he had therein touched but lightly. Among these works was the Storia della California, issued at Venice two years after his death. It will be noticed in due order.
There can be no more fitting close to this volume on the conquest of Mexico than a tribute of esteem to William Hickling Prescott. I have noted in a previous volume his amiable weakness, incident to the times rather than to the man, of intensifying the character of prominent personages so as to present the good better and the bad worse than they truly were, in order to render his narrative stronger and more interesting than it would be otherwise; but this is nothing as compared with his general fairness, united with a magnificent style and philosophic flow of thought. I have noted some inaccuracies and contradictions in his history, but these are nothing as compared with his general care and correctness as a writer. I have mentioned material which he lacked, but this is nothing as compared with the great mass of fresh evidence which he brought to enrich his subject. Words fail to express my admiration of the man, the scholar, the author. Apart from the din and dust of ordinary life, he lived as one in the world but not of it, pure of mind, gentle of heart, and surpassingly eloquent.
Mr Prescott was born at Salem, Massachusetts, May 4, 1796. His father, a lawyer of rising reputation, then thirty-four years of age, removed his family to Boston in 1808. At the age of fifteen William entered Harvard College. While engaged in a boyish frolic one day during his junior year a large hard piece of bread, thrown probably at random, struck full in his left eye, forever depriving him of its use. Pursuing his studies with his wonted cheerfulness, he graduated in 1814, and entered upon the study of law in his father’s office. In 1815 a rheumatic inflammation settled in his right eye, now his sole dependence, causing him much pain and anxiety. A change of climate having been determined upon, he embarked for the Azores, on a visit to his grandfather Hickling, then United States consul at Saint Michael. There he remained about six months, confined the greater part of the time to a dark room. In April 1816 he embarked for London, crossed to Paris, made the usual Italian tour, and the following year, his eye becoming worse, he returned home. But hope for the restoration of his sight still lingered, and the marvellous buoyancy of his spirits never deserted him. A devoted sister cheered the long hours of his solitude by readings from his favorite authors. A literary venture made at this time in a contribution to the North American Review failed; his manuscript was returned, and his sister, alone in the secret, was enjoined to silence.
Leaving his darkened chamber and mingling again with society, of which he was ever a bright ornament, he became attached to a daughter of Thomas C. Amory, a Boston merchant, whom he married on his twenty-fourth birthday.
Mr Prescott now abandoned the hope of the entire restoration of his eye. If by restrictions of diet and dieting and by persistent open-air exercise he might preserve a partial use of the organ he would rest content. And thus he passed the remainder of his life. At times he was in almost total darkness, but ordinarily he could read and revise his manuscripts; for the purpose of writing, however, he was obliged to use a noctograph.
Possessing strong literary tastes, and an aversion to law, Mr Prescott determined upon literature as a pursuit, and in 1826, with the aid of a secretary, he began a systematic course of reading for a history of Ferdinand and Isabella. For three years and a half he pursued this preparatory labor; in 1829 he began writing, publishing the work in 1837. Ten of the best years of his life Mr Prescott claims to have devoted to this book; and for the use of the stereotype-plates, which Mr Prescott supplied at his own cost, and the right to publish twelve hundred and fifty copies, the American Stationers’ Company agreed to pay the sum of one thousand dollars. But money was not the author’s object. The publication in London was offered to John Murray and to the Longmans, and was declined by both. Bentley finally became the London publisher. The work was well received on both sides of the Atlantic; it was translated into several languages, and procured for the author at once a world-wide reputation. The Conquest of Mexico was a worthy outgrowth of so splendid a creation as the Ferdinand and Isabella. The year following the publication of his first work, and after having sent to Spain and Mexico for materials for histories of the conquests of Mexico and Peru, Mr Prescott learned accidentally that Mr Irving was engaged on similar work. He wrote Irving, acquainting him of the fact, and the latter retired gracefully from the field. In 1843 the Conquest of Mexico appeared, under the auspices of the Harpers, who paid $7500 for the use of the plates and the right to publish 5000 copies. The Conquest of Peru was published in 1847; Philip the Second in 1855-8; and Robertson’s Charles the Fifth in 1856. Mr Prescott died of apoplexy in the sixty-third year of his age.