Conquist Of Mexico By Hernan Cortez Essay, Research Paper

A child rebels against his father, because he thinks that his father’s rules

are unjust; he thinks that if he rebels then maybe his father will change those

rules. Rebellion may manifest itself itself in many ways: the child may refusr

to eat, do his homework or even throw a temper tanturium. Some historians have

argued that the above situtation was very similar to the latin amerian uprising

against the spainish crown. Although spain thought of the colonies as little

sons, in need protection from revolutionary ideas. However, the sourceof

rebellious grievances differed greatly in each region of the new empire. The

origins and manifsetatins of these grivences can be traced back to the

pre-Columbian rulers in each region: the Aztecs, in what is now Mexico and

Central America; the Incas in the Andean region of South America. These pre-

Columbian rulers lefy an imprint or lack there of on the people of their region;

thus, shaping the indigenous society. Societies that would later rise up against

the outside authority; either trying to replace it with the old Inca regeim, or

they considerd it weak and needed a new central governement.

Frist let us look at the conquist of Mexico by Hernan Cortez. Mexico and the

Yucatan penisular was ruled by the Aztecs. The Aztecs rule was compromised by

the arrival of the spainish. Cortez and his men were seen as Gods, who returned

to save the poor from the tyrannical hands if the Aztecs. The pre-columbina

civilaization was centralized around the war god, Huitzilapochli, which meant

they were constanly at war and the central system was in unrest. The Aztecs

forced upon the people of Mexico, unfair trading practice, forced taxation and

more importantly human scacrafice. They expaned their territories not only

ursurp more and land from the people, but also to scarfice hundreds of people to

their god. This relentess effort to expand their empire was viewed by the people

of Mexico as barbaric and tyrannical. So when Cortez came riding into Mexico on

white horses, promising to overthrow the tyrananicals overlords. The gente

corriente cheered and reviered the Spainish as their saviors, and embraced the

Spainish rule. However, this was not the case in Peru with the Incas.

The Andean rulers although expaned their empire by military means, they were

more widely accepted amoung the people of Peru. The Incas has a very organized

structure of power, that appealed to the people at every level. Unlike their

Mexican counterparts, the Incas did not iradicate the local governmenrt. The

people were allowed to continue their ouwn religious practiced. The social

pymrid now consisted of the Inca at the veru top, followed by the ethnic chiefs,

the ayllus and lastly the families. The close knit infrastructure made

aslimilatin into the Inca society much easier. The people enjoyed the stability

and advanced technology of their new ruler; however, never were their orginail

sense of community ever in danger. The Inca’s legitmization of the orginial

community help tie the people to the old Inca way of living. After Pizarro’s

conquest, this communal tie to the Inca fostered rebellions as earlier as the

sixteenth century. The Andean people wanted to return to what they viewed as the

golden age of the Incas. The important question, however, is how did these

differences were the bases of future rebellions?

In the rebellion in Mexico, such as Chipas and the rural rebellions, one can

find common elements between the two Mexican rebellions. The rural rebellions in

Mexico are characterieistics as being spontaneuous, never having a distant

leader. More importantly, they were small and short lived, never spreading

outside the community. These characterisitics are traced back tot eh communities

ruled by the Aztecs. These communities in central and southern Mexico were

fragmented; there was not a common lanuage nor any power ethnic authorities,

plus the tribes were a lot smaller. The Mexican tribes were seen as small

communities, thrown together under one crown. These characteristics would

manifest themselves later in key Mexican rebellions, which will be explored

later in this essay.

As to Peru, it was based more upon a stable system of intergration into the

ruling society. The constant desire by the people to return to the Inca system

is based upon the highy accepted structure of Inca society. The Andean people’s

beief in community and its leadership played a major role in future rebellions.

Both, the Taki Ongoy and Tupac Amaru rebellions tried to replace Spainsh rule

with the Inca. The people saw the Inca as a source of stability and prosperity,

and wanted to erase the spainish and form a new and improved Inca governement.

Conswquently the Tupac Amaru rebellion of 1780, was accoding to the

participants, a continuation of the Taki Ongoy rebellion of the 16th century.

This essay will focus on two rebellions from each region of the new spainsh

empire. Examining closely how each rebellion originated from the indigenous

structure of sociery. It will also suggest that not only were the rebellions a

consequence of racial pressures , but also a direct example of social violence.

William Taylor defined te ebellions in central and southern Mexico as, "

Localized mass attacks generally limited to restoring a customary equilbrium"