[396] Ibid., loc. cit.
[397] “We Spaniards,” says Cortés, frankly, “are apt to be somewhat unmanageable and troublesome.” Rel. Seg., ap. Lorenzana, p. 84.
[398] Gomara, Crónica, cap. 83.—There is reason to doubt the truth of these stories. “Segun una carta original que tengo en mi poder firmada de las tres cabezas de la Nueva-España en donde escriben á la Magestad del Emperador Nuestro Señor (que Dios tenga en su Santo Reyno) disculpan en ella á Motecuhzoma y á los Mexicanos de esto, y de lo demas que se les argulló, que lo cierto era que fué invencion de los Tlascaltecas, y de algunos de los Españoles que veian la hora de salirse de miedo de la Ciudad, y poner en cobro innumerables riquezas que habian venido á sus manos.” Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chich., MS., cap. 85.
[399] Rel. Seg. de Cortés, ap. Lorenzana, p. 84.—Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chich., MS., cap. 85.—P. Martyr, De Orbe Novo, dec. 5, cap. 3.—Oviedo, Hist. de las Ind., MS., lib. 33, cap. 6.—Bernal Diaz gives a very different report of this matter. According to him, a number of officers and soldiers, of whom he was one, suggested the capture of Montezuma to the general, who came into the plan with hesitation. (Hist. de la Conquista, cap. 93.) This is contrary to the character of Cortés, who was a man to lead, and not to be led, on such occasions. It is contrary to the general report of historians, though these, it must be confessed, are mainly built on the general’s narrative. It is contrary to anterior probability; since, if the conception seems almost too desperate to have seriously entered into the head of any one man, how much more improbable is it that it should have originated with a number! Lastly, it is contrary to the positive written statement of Cortés to the emperor, publicly known and circulated, confirmed in print by his chaplain, Gomara, and all this when the thing was fresh and when the parties interested were alive to contradict it. We cannot but think that the captain here, as in the case of the burning of the ships, assumes rather more for himself and his comrades than the facts will strictly warrant; an oversight for which the lapse of half a century—to say nothing of his avowed anxiety to show up the claims of the latter—may furnish some apology.
[400] Even Gomara has the candor to style it a “pretext,”—achaque. Crónica, cap. 83.
[401] Bernal Diaz states the affair, also, differently. According to him, the Aztec governor was enforcing the payment of the customary tribute from the Totonacs, when Escalante, interfering to protect his allies, now subjects of Spain, was slain in an action with the enemy. (Hist. de la Conquista, cap. 93.) Cortés had the best means of knowing the facts, and wrote at the time. He does not usually shrink from avowing his policy, however severe, towards the natives; and I have thought it fair to give him the benefit of his own version of the story.
[402] Oviedo, Hist. de las Ind., MS., lib. 33, cap. 5.—Rel. Seg. de Cortés, ap. Lorenzana, pp. 83, 84. The apparition of the Virgin was seen only by the Aztecs, who, it is true, had to make out the best case for their defeat they could to Montezuma; a suspicious circumstance, which, however, did not stagger the Spaniards. “Assuredly all of us soldiers who accompanied Cortés held the belief that the divine mercy and Our Lady the Virgin Mary were always with us, and this was the truth.” Bernal Diaz, Hist. de la Conquista, cap. 94.
[403] “Paseóse vn gran rato solo, i cuidadoso de aquel gran hecho, que emprendia, i que aun á él mesmo le parecia temerario, pero necesario para su intento, andando.” Gomara, Crónica, cap. 83.
[404] Diaz says, “All that night we spent in prayer, beseeching the Father of Mercies that he would so direct the matter that it should contribute to his holy service.” Hist. de la Conquista, cap. 95.
[405] According to Ixtlilxochitl, it was his own portrait. “Se quitó del brazo una rica piedra, donde está esculpido su rostro (que era lo mismo que un sello Real).” Hist. Chich., MS., cap. 85.