“Victors and Vanquished” “Victors and Vanquished” was written in 2000 by Stuart Schwartz. He received his Ph.D. from Colombia in 1968 specializing in the History of colonial Latin America. Schwartz’s writing on the Mexican empire is a compilation of individual’s accounts of the Spanish victory. “Victors and Vanquished” provides an outlook on the influences behind these events. Personal interests, class biases, and political views are just some of the influences for different interpretations. Following the introduction, there are chronologically organized sections detailing the events. Through the many accounts, there are different sides of each story and that is shown in each piece. Throughout Schwartz’s introduction, he presents both sides of the story, but also includes that there will be cultural differences. To begin, Schwartz mentions the different versions of the events from the Mexican side and the Spanish side. Schwartz is very careful to include everyone’s side of the story, which adds to his ethical appeal. He is providing an unbiased account, proving his credibility as an author. With his background in Latin American history, one could imagine “Victors and Vanquished” would only focus on the Spanish accounts.
…show more content…
This introduction is separated into multiple sections for Mexican accounts and Spanish accounts. The introduction provides an unbiased view of what occurred during the Spanish victory. Schwartz is able to include accounts from both sides that inform the reader. About halfway through the introduction, Bernal Diaz is introduced. His recall of the Spanish conquest is described to be one of the best, with Schwartz stating that it is “generally agreed that the great chronicle of the Spanish conquest of Mexican was written by Bernal Diaz del Castillo” (Schwartz 14). Diaz wrote his book “The True History of the Conquest of New Spain” as a way to provide the truth. He wrote this in response to Hernan Cortes’ biography. Diaz took it upon himself to offer the “truth”.
Diaz’s account outlines his recollection of the events, but also includes the political and personal struggles. The importance of communication and translators is also stressed throughout the book. Unlike Schwartz, Diaz accounts for the technological differences between the Spanish and the indigenous people. With the different advantages, the Spanish may have had an upper hand. Because Diaz was a part of the events, he is able to offer more personal accounts. In my opinion, his personal accounts make his piece more interesting to read and believe. Diaz mentions his respect for the soldiers who tested the army in Mexico. The opposing soldiers did not have the weapons Cortes’s army did. They used cotton armor and weapons such as slings, darts, and arrows. The Spanish army had much more advanced weapons, including swords, crossbows, firearms, cannons, and horses. Diaz provides a much different view on the victory than the other historical sources. He constructs his work as an account of what happened according to him and the other soldiers that were part of his journey. According to Bernal Diaz, Cortes did not tell the truth of what occurred, so Diaz added his personal view from being on the inside and not being the leader. Cortes offers insight as a leader, but does not involve what the soldiers went through. He attempted to defend his decisions as a leader and tried to justify his actions
This introduction is separated into multiple sections for Mexican accounts and Spanish accounts. The introduction provides an unbiased view of what occurred during the Spanish victory. Schwartz is able to include accounts from both sides that inform the reader. About halfway through the introduction, Bernal Diaz is introduced. His recall of the Spanish conquest is described to be one of the best, with Schwartz stating that it is “generally agreed that the great chronicle of the Spanish conquest of Mexican was written by Bernal Diaz del Castillo” (Schwartz 14). Diaz wrote his book “The True History of the Conquest of New Spain” as a way to provide the truth. He wrote this in response to Hernan Cortes’ biography. Diaz took it upon himself to offer the “truth”.
Diaz’s account outlines his recollection of the events, but also includes the political and personal struggles. The importance of communication and translators is also stressed throughout the book. Unlike Schwartz, Diaz accounts for the technological differences between the Spanish and the indigenous people. With the different advantages, the Spanish may have had an upper hand. Because Diaz was a part of the events, he is able to offer more personal accounts. In my opinion, his personal accounts make his piece more interesting to read and believe. Diaz mentions his respect for the soldiers who tested the army in Mexico. The opposing soldiers did not have the weapons Cortes’s army did. They used cotton armor and weapons such as slings, darts, and arrows. The Spanish army had much more advanced weapons, including swords, crossbows, firearms, cannons, and horses. Diaz provides a much different view on the victory than the other historical sources. He constructs his work as an account of what happened according to him and the other soldiers that were part of his journey. According to Bernal Diaz, Cortes did not tell the truth of what occurred, so Diaz added his personal view from being on the inside and not being the leader. Cortes offers insight as a leader, but does not involve what the soldiers went through. He attempted to defend his decisions as a leader and tried to justify his actions