Mexica Analysis

Accounts of the conquest of the Mexica, or Aztecs, vary widely, often depending on which perspective they are told from. The same event can be interpreted in wildly different ways simply due to the side it was experienced from. For example, one can compare and contrast the experience of the Cholula massacre from the perspective of the Mexica as well as from the perspective of the Spanish. The Florentine Codex, compiled through the work of Bernardino de Sahagún, describes the Mexica perspective on the massacre. The Spanish perspective on the massacre comes from the memoirs of Bernal Diaz del Castillo, who was subordinate to conquistador Hernan Cortes during the conquest and published his recollections years later in 1581. These two perspectives are parallel in some ways, but notably distinct in others. The Mexica perspective on the Cholula massacre within the Florentine Codex is presented more as an academic …show more content…
The author begins by describing Cortes’ questions to the Cholulans through Doña Marina, their translator: Why had they been barricading their homes? Why had they removed women and children from the area? Cortes then accused the Cholulans of attempting to trap the Spaniards on their way to Tenochtitlan, and claimed that their god Quetzalcoatl was a false idol who would have no power against the Spanish. The Cholulans responded by saying that they had indeed been planning to spring a trap, but that they had been directed to do so by Moctezuma. At this point, Cortes declared that the Cholulans must die for their treason, and the massacre began. The Tlaxcalans were especially vicious towards the Cholulans: “These men, fierce enemies of the Cholulans, did great damage; seeing this, Cortés and the other captains, filled with pity, restrained the Tlaxcalans from doing further damage”