Note XVIII-37 — Chapter XVIII · MARCH OF CORTÉS TO HONDURAS. 1524-1525.

'Y sin auer mas prouãças, Cortes mandò ahorcar al Guatemuz, y al señor de Tacuba.... Y fue esta muerte que les dieron muy injustamente dada, y pareciò mal a todos los que ibamos aquella jornada.' Bernal Diaz, Hist. Verdad., 200. But his account of all this expedition is questionable, and his testimony loses force through the evident fact that he is carried away by sympathy for the kings, who had often favored him, and for the natives to whom his later condition in life bound him rather closely. He certainly admits the strong accusation and the confirmatory admission of the victims, the king of Tlacopan stating, for instance, that he and Quauhtemotzin had declared one death preferable to the daily deaths suffered. Torquemada adopts the version of a Tezcucan manuscript, which relates that Cohuanacoch on one occasion remarked to his royal confrères that, if they chose to be disloyal, the Spaniards might have to regret past injuries. Quauhtemotzin hastened to silence him by observing that walls had ears, which might misunderstand such expressions. A plebeian native reported them, and that very night those who had been present at the conversation, three kings and five caciques, were found hanging from a ceiba-tree. Torquemada will not believe that the Indians intended to revolt, especially since their country was now divided, but that Cortés regarded the kings as a burden, i. 575-6. Cavo, Tres Siglos, i. 46-8, agrees, and Gomara even intimates something to this effect in saying that Cortés ought to have preserved so prominent and brave a captive to point the triumph of his victories, but that the dangerous circumstances must have prevented him. Hist. Mex., 259. 'Es notorio, que Quauhtemoc y los demás señores murieron sin culpa, y que les levantaron falso testimonio.' Indeed, continues Ixtlilxochitl, when the Indians complained to the kings of maltreatment, they counselled submission. But his story is so full of glaring misstatements and absurdities, and so evident is the desire to relieve his kinsmen from the traitor's brand, that he cannot be relied on. Horribles Crueldades, 82, etc.; Id., Relaciones, Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq., ix. 440, etc. Brasseur de Bourbourg follows him implicitly of course, as he does almost any record from native source. There was no witness except the spy, and the princes were not allowed to defend themselves. Hist. Nat. Civ., iv. 608. He evidently pays no attention whatever to the Spanish versions. Bustamante accepts even more implicitly the records of those whom he prefers to regard as his ancestors. See his edition of Gomara, Chimalpain, Hist. Conq., ii. 135-6. Cano, who married the cousin and widow of Quauhtemotzin, calls the execution of the three kings a murder, as may be expected from his dislike of Cortés. Oviedo, iii. 549. Carried away by hyperbolic flights of fancy, wherein he surpasses even Solis himself, Salazar condemns the deed as based on false testimony, and blames Cortés for irritating the natives by resorting to so rash a measure. Conq. Mex., 240-3. Father Duran emphasizes this with well-known sympathy for the native cause. 'Y levantándose contra él algunos testigos falsos le mandó á horcar.' Hist. Ind., MS., ii. 522. On imperfect evidence and without a trial, says Robertson, Hist. Am., ii. 138. Prescott sympathizes with Quauhtemotzin and regards the testimony as insufficient, while Helps, Cortés, 208-9, doubts the statements of Bernal Diaz, and refers to the act as cruel practical wisdom. The chief ground for this view is that Cortés, as an hidalgo, would not lie, and can therefore be relied upon. It has not been my fortune to acquire such faith, and I fancy that a closer study of his hero might have changed Sir Arthur Helps' views. Alaman, a Mexican with Spanish sympathies, believes in the conspiracy, but regards the execution as a blot on Cortés. Quauhtemotzin, at least, should have been sent to Spain after the fall of Mexico. Disert., i. 214. This certainly would have been the best way to secure and make use of him. Pizarro y Orellana, Varones Ilvstres, 114-16, regards the evidence as clear and the execution as just; so does Revilla, although his reasons are not the best. Solis, Conq. Mex. (ed. 1843), 508.