# Who really killed Montezuma? Hernando Cortez' army or the Aztecs? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 15, 2013, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968 "2013-03-15T01:57:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2013, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/21 "2013-03-22T12:28:29Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > And you will also see how even more vile the Aztecs were. They practiced human sacrifice on a large scale…some 50,000 in four days. Even the industrialized German national socialists under their community activist couldn’t match that pace at Auschwitz Indeed. Read Michael Harner about Aztec human sacrifice. But that doesn’t mean that Cotes wasn’t a right bastard as well. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2013, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/22 "2013-03-22T12:34:35Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > Hernán Cortés, please, with or without the accents. Cortez is a common overcorrection in some locations including the US, Hernando is just wrong. Anglicized versions of names don’t have to follow the rules of the original language. I very seriously doubt if I were to spend my free time perusing the Spanish-language internet I wouldn’t stumble upon Spanish use of names for English speaking people or use of English loan words that didn’t violate English standards–but who would seriously waste their time nitpicking over that stuff? Cortez has been the spelling in history books for generations, it’s a correct English way to reference the man–and serves its purpose, no one is confused about who you’re talking about so it perfectly satisfies the primary purpose of a name. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2013, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/23 "2013-03-22T12:45:42Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > And you will also see how even more vile the Aztecs were. They practiced human sacrifice on a large scale…some 50,000 in four days. Even the industrialized German national socialists under their community activist couldn’t match that pace at Auschwitz “community activist”? Can’t express my feelings as this is not the Pit. You’ve got the numbers wrong, but I’m not going to defend human sacrifice. However, many other aspects of Aztec civilization were admirable. [Bernal Diaz](http://chnm.gmu.edu/worldhistorysources/unpacking/travelanalysis.html): > [@](#): > > And when we saw all those cities and villages built in the water, and other great towns on dry land, and that straight and level causeway leading to Mexico [i.e. Tenochtitlán], we were astounded. These great towns and cues [i.e., temples] and buildings rising from the water, all made of stone, seemed like an enchanted vision from the tale of Amadis. Indeed, some of our soldiers asked whether it was not all a dream. It is not surprising therefore that I should write in this vein. It was all so wonderful that I do not know how to describe this first glimpse of things never heard of, seen or dreamed of before. . . . > > And when we entered the city of Iztapalapa, the sight of the palaces in which they lodged us! They were very spacious and well built, of magnificent stone, cedar wood, and the wood of other sweet-smelling trees, with great rooms and courts, which were a wonderful sight, and all covered with awnings of woven cotton. > > When we had taken a good look at all this, we went to the orchard and garden, which was a marvelous place both to see and walk in. I was never tired of noticing the diversity of trees and the various scents given off by each, and the paths choked with roses and other flowers, and the many local fruit-trees and rose-bushes, and the pond of fresh water. Then there were birds of many breeds and varieties which came to the pond. I say again that I stood looking at it, and thought that no land like it would ever be discovered in the whole world… But today all that I then saw is overthrown and destroyed; nothing is left standing. As far as spelling names goes, how about **Montezuma, Moctezuma, Moteczoma, Motecuhzoma, Moteuczomah, Mwatazuma**? (From [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montezuma)) “Moctezuma” seems to be the most accepted modern version (unless you’re singing the Marine Hymn). ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2013, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/24 "2013-03-22T21:16:21Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Anglicized versions of names don’t have to follow the rules of the original language. I very seriously doubt if I were to spend my free time perusing the Spanish-language internet I wouldn’t stumble upon Spanish use of names for English speaking people or use of English loan words that didn’t violate English standards–but who would seriously waste their time nitpicking over that stuff? Cortez has been the spelling in history books for generations, it’s a correct English way to reference the man–and serves its purpose, no one is confused about who you’re talking about so it perfectly satisfies the primary purpose of a name. I’d guess that less than half of non-Latino Americans would have a clue if you asked them who Cristobal Colon was. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2013, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/25 "2013-03-23T01:06:13Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Great post, my old friend. I no longer have the energy to engage in these ‘debates.’ I don’t either but I do it out of habit. The same reason I also keep playing with my pizzle but then I forget what the point was. > [@RedFury](#): > > _context_ matters. Indeed. Like the joke goes: - How’s your wife? - Compared to what? I feel no need to feel pride or shame in anything any culture has done. I am a member of humanity and will feel proud of anything good and shame at anything bad any human of any race or nation has done. I believe nationalism together with religion is one of the most destructive influences we have. Cultures can only be judged in their context and their time. Slavery in Roman times is not the same as slavery in 19th century America. What was correct or necessary in one moment may be bad at a different time. For American culture to criticize Cortez is extremely hypocritical. His sin was that he was not English and not Protestant. If he had been he would be regarded as a hero. In 1520 Spain’s policy was to integrate the natives into their empire, not to exterminate them. The idea was to keep and integrate the existing social structures, not to destroy them. The grandson of Moctezuma was created Count of Moctezuma. By comparison the North American Indians were just pushed away into reservations… The Spanish mixed with the natives like the Anglos never did. [Archivo:Tecuichpoch.png - Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre](http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Tecuichpoch.png) This, of course, is obvious just by looking at Mexico and America today. Much consideration was given to their rights and well-being [Laws of Burgos - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_Burgos) [New Laws - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Laws) The English at that time did not even come close to such and enlightened view. In fact, centuries later, when the concept of human and moral rights were much more developed the Americans were massacring Indians (not to mention chattel slavery), and were committing all sorts of atrocities, again, in a very different context, where such things were comparatively much worse. Even in the 20th century America has committed atrocities which were totally contrary to the spirit and enlightenment of the times. But hey, it’s OK if it’s done by us and it’s only an atrocity if its done by others. The atrocities committed in the Philippines: [Jacob H. Smith - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_H._Smith) “kill everyone over ten”, the Moro Crater massacre where more than 600 mostly unarmed Muslim Moro villagers (including many women and children) were killed by the Americans [Operation Condor - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor) [http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cias-operation-condor-dirty-war-death-squads-and-the-disappeared/5327003](http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cias-operation-condor-dirty-war-death-squads-and-the-disappeared/5327003) This was the doing of the American government within our lifetimes. Crimes upon crimes. Torture and disappearances. The American government stands by this to this day. And more recently the atrocities committed in Afghanistan and Iraq, the razing of Fallujah, Guantanamo, renditions and torture… And yet this culture has the nerve to criticize Cortez who lived 500 years earlier. As we say in Spanish: Tell me what you boast and I’ll tell you what you lack. The fact that Americans believe they did so well and Cortez and the Spanish colonization were so bad just shows how easy it is to believe anything convenient against all evidence. So we now learn that Mexican culture was not so bad because even though they carried out human sacrifices for which they raised and fattened their victims in cages, on the other hand they built some nice buildings and pyramids and shit so all was not bad. Umm, Ok, . . . I guess. That of course justifies the extermination of the North American Indians because they never built nice buildings. > [@RedFury](#): > > Shall we meet again in good health. Good health I still have, thank Huitzilopochtli. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2013, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/26 "2013-03-23T05:50:52Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > I don’t either but I do it out of habit. The same reason I also keep playing with my pizzle but then I forget what the point was. LMAO! Who cares what the “point” is/was as long as it (still) works! > [@](#): > > …I feel no need to feel pride or shame in anything any culture has done. I am a member of humanity and will feel proud of anything good and shame at anything bad any human of any race or nation has done. I believe nationalism together with religion is one of the most destructive influences we have. > > Cultures can only be judged in their context and their time. Slavery in Roman times is not the same as slavery in 19th century America. What was correct or necessary in one moment may be bad at a different time. > > For American culture to criticize Cortez is extremely hypocritical. His sin was that he was not English and not Protestant. If he had been he would be regarded as a hero. > > In 1520 Spain’s policy was to integrate the natives into their empire, not to exterminate them. The idea was to keep and integrate the existing social structures, not to destroy them. The grandson of Moctezuma was created Count of Moctezuma. By comparison the North American Indians were just pushed away into reservations… > > The Spanish mixed with the natives like the Anglos never did. > [Archivo:Tecuichpoch.png - Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre](http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Tecuichpoch.png) > This, of course, is obvious just by looking at Mexico and America today. > > Much consideration was given to their rights and well-being > [Laws of Burgos - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_Burgos) > [New Laws - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Laws) > > The English at that time did not even come close to such and enlightened view. In fact, centuries later, when the concept of human and moral rights were much more developed the Americans were massacring Indians (not to mention chattel slavery), and were committing all sorts of atrocities, again, in a very different context, where such things were comparatively much worse. > > Even in the 20th century America has committed atrocities which were totally contrary to the spirit and enlightenment of the times. But hey, it’s OK if it’s done by us and it’s only an atrocity if its done by others. > > The atrocities committed in the Philippines: [Jacob H. Smith - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_H._Smith) “kill everyone over ten”, the Moro Crater massacre where more than 600 mostly unarmed Muslim Moro villagers (including many women and children) were killed by the Americans > > [Operation Condor - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor) > [http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cias-operation-condor-dirty-war-death-squads-and-the-disappeared/5327003](http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cias-operation-condor-dirty-war-death-squads-and-the-disappeared/5327003) > This was the doing of the American government within our lifetimes. Crimes upon crimes. Torture and disappearances. The American government stands by this to this day. > > And more recently the atrocities committed in Afghanistan and Iraq, the razing of Fallujah, Guantanamo, renditions and torture… > > And yet this culture has the nerve to criticize Cortez who lived 500 years earlier. > > As we say in Spanish: Tell me what you boast and I’ll tell you what you lack. > > The fact that Americans believe they did so well and Cortez and the Spanish colonization were so bad just shows how easy it is to believe anything convenient against all evidence. > > So we now learn that Mexican culture was not so bad because even though they carried out human sacrifices for which they raised and fattened their victims in cages, on the other hand they built some nice buildings and pyramids and shit so all was not bad. Umm, Ok, . . . I guess. That of course justifies the extermination of the North American Indians because they never built nice buildings. Again, masterful if hardly news to me. Glad one of us still has the energy. But does it really matter? Doubt anyone here will change their mind about our Empire vs ‘theirs’ & their respective ruthlessness. > [@](#): > > Good health I still have, thank Huitzilopochtli. I attribute what’s left of mine to [**The Loa**](http://www.angelfire.com/planet/mythguide/voodooloa.html), if only due to their proximity. I’ve been back in Madrid twice since we last met – though I was quite busy, I regret not seeing you, you fuckin’ all-knowing Guru 😉 Take good care. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2013, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/27 "2013-03-23T06:08:31Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > Hernán Cortés, please, with or without the accents. Cortez is a common overcorrection in some locations including the US, Hernando is just wrong. Are you from Spain? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2013, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/28 "2013-03-26T00:01:39Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > Cortez gets a bad rap in the English-speaking world because of the general anti-Spanish slant of English history books. Judging those times by today’s standards makes no sense but by the standards of the times Spain and Spanish customs and mentality were far ahead of anything else in Europe. > > The concern about the morality and justice of the conquest and the rights of the natives was unheard of at the time and even centuries later in other cultures. Exactly. You can’t look at Cortes’s actions from a modern viewpoint. You have to judge him by contemporary standards, and you have to look at the conquest of the Mexicans from those standards, not from our standards, 500 years later. I mean, at the time, nobody had a problem with it. Certainly, there weren’t any Spaniards of the time who complained. > [@Bartholome de Las Casas](#): > > New Spain was discovered Anno Dom. 1517. and in the detection there was no first or second Attempt, but all were exposed to slaughter. The year ensuing those Spaniards (who style themselves Christians) came thither to rob, kill and slay, though they pretend they undertook this Voyage to people the Country. From this year to the present, viz. 1542. the Injustice, Violence and Tyranny of the Spaniards came to the highest degree of extremety: for they had shook hands with and bid adieu to all fear of God and the King, unmindful of themselves in this sad and deplorable condition, for the Destructions, Cruelties, Butcheries, Devastations, the Domolishing of Cities, Depradations, &c. which they perpetrated in so many and such ample Kingdoms, are such and so great, and strike the minds of Men with so great horror, that all we have related before are inconsiderable comparatively to those which have been acted from the year 1518 to 1542, and to this very month of September that we now live to see the most heavy, grievous and detestable things are committed, that the Rule we laid down before as a Maxim might be indubitably verified, to wit, that from the beginning they ran headlong from bad to worse, and were overcome in their Diabolical acts and wickedness only by themselves. > [@Antonio Montesinos](#): > > With what right, and with what justice do you keep these poor Indians in such cruel and horrible servitude? By what authority have you made such detestable wars against these people who lived peacefully and gently on their own lands? Are these not men? Do they not have rational souls? Are you not obliged to love them as yourselves? ---
**Author:** ![Gagundathar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a183cd/32.png) [@Gagundathar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gagundathar)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2013, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/29 "2013-03-26T01:51:36Z")
Thank you for the de Las Casas quote, **Captain**. As a man of primarily Northern European extraction who was raised in the American South in the middle of last century, I can report that as a child I was taught that Spain was brutal in its conquest of Mexico. But, I was also taught that Spain brought Christianity to the pagan Aztecs. So, it all balanced out in the end. We were taught little about the similar deplorable conquest of North America by the men from other parts of Europe. That was, of course, because those men were “Americans” from sea to shining sea. And so it goes. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2013, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/30 "2013-03-26T02:12:46Z")
Well, I’ve never understood why any conquerors and empire builders who engaged in mass murder should be glorified whether Cortez, Columbus, or others and think the genocide committed against Native Americans was a great stain on the histories of all the countries in Latin America. Also, while I’m certainly not an apologist for the Aztecs, I want to throw up every time people try to excuse the mass murder against them based on their own brutality. It reminds me of all the apologists for Anglo conquerors trying to excuse the slaughter of the Zulus by wild tales of Chaka Zulu. Spain had just finished with La Reconquista during which they engaged in mass murder, genocide, and ethnic cleansing on a grand scale and the Northern Europeans would have, if anything, been even more brutal. That was certainly one of history’s more forgotten atrocities because the victims were Muslims. Cortez would have done what he did regardless of who he faced and the same is true of the British and the Boers. Beyond that, I find the idea that the Aztecs were committed 50,000 human sacrifices in four days to be utterly preposterous and comparisons of them to the Nazis to be beyond disgusting. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2013, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/31 "2013-03-26T02:15:43Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > Exactly. You can’t look at Cortes’s actions from a modern viewpoint. You have to judge him by contemporary standards, and you have to look at the conquest of the Mexicans from those standards, not from our standards, 500 years later. I mean, at the time, nobody had a problem with it. Certainly, there weren’t any Spaniards of the time who complained. Ah yes, Las Casas, one of history’s forgotten heroes. It’s also a worthwhile reminder that whenever people talk about “presentism” they ignore that many at the time did disagree. Another good example is when people try and excuse slavery being allowed in the Constitution and forgetting that many both inside and outside the US objected to the idea of slavery(not that being anti-slavery meant being non-racist). ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2013, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/32 "2013-03-26T12:06:53Z")
The point is that whatever Cortez did in his time America has done much worse much later on when moral standards had developed. You cannot criticize Cortez and praise America. That’s all. Being immoral or being an asshole are moral judgments and very subjective but if you whip out your measuring tape and Cortez comes out as “immoral abuser” then necessarily the whole American history is a long list of immoralities and only Mary Poppins has a tape that would show America to be “Almost perfect in every way”. Cortés did whatever he did but I have already cited a list of things done by America which are much worse including their own treatment of the natives. So, if you say Cortez was an immoral asshole and then say America is much worse then I have to agree on the relative scale if not with the absolute. What I cannot accept is that Cortez was terrible and by the same measuring stick America is great. Which is what most of Cortez’s critics say and that is just unsustainable. Las Casas criticism is mainly of the abuses committed by the Spanish which were already against the king’s laws and directives. He was not criticizing the right to conquer nor defending the right of the natives to be left alone with their human sacrifices and all. It is like today someone condemning acts committed in Iraq which are already illegal. It is silly to say Cortez had to know what he was doing was wrong because Las Casas criticized the conquest. American history is full of acts which went contrary to the established moral values of the time and plenty of people wrote against them at the time. Plenty was written at the time against slavery and against the treatment of North American Indians and yet it was all done centuries after Cortez. Mark Twain wrote often and strongly against American imperialism and atrocities in the Philippines and those atrocities went much more against the moral values of the time than what Cortez did in his time. > [@](#): > > “I thought it would be a great thing to give a whole lot of freedom to the Filipinos, but I guess now that it’s better to let them give it to themselves.” > Mark Twain, --Anti-Imperialist Homecoming, 1900 > Mark Twain’s Weapons of Satire: Anti-Imperialist Writings on the Philippine-American War. > > * * * > > My Country, Right or Wrong > > I pray you to pause and consider. Against our traditions we are now entering upon an unjust and trivial war, a war against a helpless people, and for a base object – robbery. At first our citizens spoke out against this thing, by an impulse natural to their training. To-day they have turned, and their voice is the other way. What caused the change? Merely a politician’s trick – a high-sounding phrase, a blood-stirring phrase which turned their uncritical heads: Our Country, right or wrong! An empty phrase, a silly phrase. It was shouted by every newspaper, it was thundered from the pulpit, the Superintendent of Public Instruction placarded it in every school-house in the land, the War Department inscribed it upon the flag. And every man who failed to shout it or who was silent, was proclaimed a traitor – none but those others were patriots. To be a patriot, one had to say, and keep on saying, “Our Country, right or wrong,” and urge on the little war. Have you not perceived that that phrase is an insult to the nation? > > Mark Twain, “Passage from ‘Glances at History’ (suppressed.),” a sketch he left unpublished in 1901. Mark Twain was an outspoken opponent of U.S. imperialism and the Philippine-American War and served as a vice president of the Anti-Imperialist League from 1901 until his death in 1910. Quickly labeled a “traitor,” he was sensitive to calls to blind patriotism embodied in such phrases as “my country, right or wrong.” > > * * * > > To the Person Sitting in Darkness > > Shall we? That is, shall we go on conferring our Civilization upon the peoples that sit in darkness, or shall we give those poor things a rest? Shall we bang right ahead in our old-time, loud, pious way, and commit the new century to the game; or shall we sober up and sit down and think it over first? Would it not be prudent to get our Civilization-tools together, and see how much stock is left on hand in the way of Glass Beads and Theology, and Maxim Guns and Hymn Books, and Trade-Gin and Torches of Progress and Enlightenment (patent adjustable ones, good to fire villages with, upon occasion), and balance the books, and arrive at the profit and loss, so that we may intelligently decide whether to continue the business or sell out the property and start a new Civilization Scheme on the proceeds? > > Extending the Blessings of Civilization to our Brother who Sits in Darkness has been a good trade and has paid well, on the whole; and there is money in it yet, if carefully worked – but not enough, in my judgement, to make any considerable risk advisable. The People that Sit in Darkness are getting to be too scarce – too scarce and too shy. And such darkness as is now left is really of but an indifferent quality, and not dark enough for the game. The most of those People that Sit in Darkness have been furnished with more light than was good for them or profitable for us. We have been injudicious. > > Mark Twain, To the Person Sitting in Darkness > > * * * > > We were sent to provoke a fight, but it was essential that Mexico should commence it. It was very doubtful whether Congress would declare war; but if Mexico should attack our troops, the Executive could announce, “Whereas, war exists by the acts of, etc.,” and prosecute the contest with vigor. Once initiated there were but few public men who would have the courage to oppose it. Experience proves that the man who obstructs a war in which his nation is engaged, no matter whether right or wrong, occupies no enviable place in life or history. Better for him, individually, to advocate “war, pestilence, and famine,” than to act as obstructionist to a war already begun. The history of the defeated rebel will be honorable hereafter, compared with that of the Northern man who aided him by conspiring against his government while protected by it. The most favorable posthumous history the stay-at-home traitor can hope for is—oblivion. > > Ulysses S. Grant (1822–85). > Personal Memoirs. 1885–86. Plenty has been written against the atrocities committed by America in Vietnam, in South America, in Afghanistan and Iraq. Plenty has been written against torture, renditions, indefinite imprisonment without trial. These are things that are clearly against the moral values of the times and yet plenty of Americans support them. How about all the aggressive wars America has started just because it could? They were criticized plenty. How about the destruction of Fallujah? Was it not criticized as a huge crime against humanity? And it happened five centuries after Cortez. With the support of the American people. How about the covering up of the crimes at Abu Ghraib? Americans who are so ready to condemn the catholic Church for covering up cases of pedophilia are equally ready to cover up crimes committed by the American Government. It is just a case of using a different yardstick to measure them versus us. That is all it is. How about the death penalty? It is considered immoral in pretty much all the civilized world and is strongly criticized and yet America goes against the world in this. So, what I am saying is that you can put Cortez and the Spanish conquest anywhere you want on the scale and that is subjective but what you cannot do is say America is any better than that. No, it is a thousand times worse. Mother Theresa may have had her faults and many people consider her a bad person but on any good/evil scale you use Mother Theresa has to come up as better than Stalin or the whole measuring system is defective. If you say America is a benevolent empire in tune with the moral standards of the times I have to disagree. America goes against moral standards accepted by the civilized world and even proclaimed by America itself. Cannot claim ignorance. America openly defies and contradicts the community of nations and even will not fullfill treaties it has signed voluntarily if that is what is convenient. And with plenty of support from the American people including many on this board. The same people who criticize China for doing X, Y or Z feel America has a perfect right to do X, Y and Z. And the same people who say Cortez had no right to do what he did say America has the right to do that and worse. Those who criticize Cortez and the Spanish empire are generally those most vocal in their support for the American empire and most willing to overlook all the crimes committed by America. They are the ones who defend America’s right to invade and destroy a country because their ruler was “bad”. It is not a question of right or wrong, it is “my country right or wrong” no matter what. Different yardstick, that’s what it is. **Red** , you’re right, I don’t have the energy for this shit. It’s taking longer than we thought, it’s taking forever. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2013, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/33 "2013-03-26T16:41:11Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > The point is that whatever Cortez did in his time America has done much worse much later on when moral standards had developed. You cannot criticize Cortez and praise America. That’s all. Sure you can. You just can’t condemn Cortez and excuse the comparable atrocities by other people and it would be ridiculous to ignore the fact that other contemporary Europeans were just as horrible. Similarly, it’s very possible to condemn Columbus without condemning both Canada and the US and one can certainly condemn La Reconquista without condemning modern day Spain. Now, are you correct that there’s often a double standard? Certainly, all one has to do is look at how many people scream about what happened to the Armenians while ignoring the vastly worst atrocities committed against Muslims who were cleansed from Southern Europe and Greece(not that this justifies the ethnic cleansing of the Armenians). Frankly, if you’re complaining about double standards against Spaniards I think you’d be better off complaining about how much criticism there is of the Inquistion while comparable atrocities in Northern Europe occurring at the same time is largely ignored. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2013, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/34 "2013-03-27T00:31:25Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > Those who criticize Cortez and the Spanish empire are generally those most vocal in their support for the American empire and most willing to overlook all the crimes committed by America. They are the ones who defend America’s right to invade and destroy a country because their ruler was “bad”. It is not a question of right or wrong, it is “my country right or wrong” no matter what. Where do you get that from? The people who criticize Cortes and the Spanish Empire are generally left wing academics and people involved in native/indigenous rights issues; hardly American exceptionalists. The people who criticize Cortes’s treatment of the Aztec tend to make it part and parcel of general European/American treatment of the natives. So you have people like Howard Zinn who say: > [@](#): > > What Columbus did to the Arawaks of the Bahamas, Cortes did to the Aztecs of Mexico, Pizarro to the Incas of Peru, and the English settlers of Virginia and Massachusetts to the Powhatans and the Pequots. And Cortes’s actions in Mexico were moral or immoral independent of Aztec human sacrifice or American foreign policy. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2013, 7:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/35 "2013-03-27T07:05:58Z")
Great read: [**Conquest: Cortes, Montezuma, and the Fall of Old Mexico**](http://www.amazon.com/Conquest-Cortes-Montezuma-Fall-Mexico/dp/0671511041/ref=sr_1_16?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1364366829&sr=1-16&keywords=Hernan+cortes). Just not for most… … Figures, **sailor**. Just not worth it as I said. Facts alone, mostly as described _and cited by you_, earned me a Pit thread as a racist and a ‘Spanish apologist’ way back when I still believed this place was about “fighting ignorance” -though to be fair, said thread backfired on the OP, the hypocrisy drained the hell out of me. But still: not worth the effort. Those who wish to educate themselves will do so…those that don’t. Well, so be it. USA #1! History & facts be dammed. Take good care. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2013, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968/36 "2013-03-27T15:02:07Z")
If anyone wishes to discuss either the relative ethics of various societies or the quality of history as it is taught in various educational systems, you should probably take it to a different thread. We are pretty far afield from discussing the actual topic of the OP and, however informative posts such as #25 (for example) are, they deserve their own thread to be pursued. [/Moderating] [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-really-killed-montezuma-hernando-cortez-army-or-the-aztecs/652968.md?page=1)