Restall’s book gives us the general
outline of misconceptions about the conquest, how these misconceptions came
about, and what happened in the conquest of Latin America in a simple
enjoyable reading book. Whereas, Conrad and Demarest book gives the readers a
more in-depth look of how the experts got their theories about the start and
end civilizations from analyzing 3 types of “ethnohistorical documents” (5). This
book is a high level of college reading compared to the leisure read of Restall’s
book.
Both books analysis multiple
sources and ideas about how the great civilizations of the Aztecs and the Incas
came into existence and how these groups fell into decline after a century. There
are similarities as well as many differences in each book. For example, Conrad
and Demarest book focuses more on how the analysis of the sources they used
tell about the empires. In Restall’s
book the focal point is about the truth of the 7 most common myths of the
Spanish Conquest. Conrad and Demarest book expands upon some of the myths of conquest from Restall's book. Such as The Myth of Exceptional Men that states that Cortez and his few men conquered the Aztecs by themselves (Restall 3), where in reality "..Cortez's handful of men led an army of tens of thousands of Indian allies, most of them vengeful Tlaxcalans"(Conrad and Demarst 70). Thus Comrad and Demarest Book agrees also that it wasn't just the Spanish who were fighting aganist the Aztec Empire but it was those surrounding native tribes like the Tlaxcalans who were enemies and wanted to be rid of the power of the Triple Alliance.
I have noticed that, although they are aimed at a slightly different subject matter, Conrad and Demarest's book and Restall's book do seem to go hand in hand in regards to the messages they display. Restall's myth of Exceptional Men brings up a great argument about the nature of the conquest. He presents strong information to support this idea himself, but if one were to examine Conrad and Demarest's book they would find a plethora of information which would add even further to Restall's argument. It is interesting because Conrad and Demarest, from I can tell, were not aiming to shoot down the myth of Exceptional Men with their book. They were simply trying to analyze and explain the reasons behind the imperialism of the Inca and Aztec empires. In doing so, it was essential that they cover the consequences of continual conquest by the two empires, showing that years of warfare took its toll on the two powers and left them in a highly depleted state by the time Europeans arrived in the New World. This allowed the Spanish to finish off the weakened empires swiftly and efficiently. I think this proves that there is validity in Restall's argument, since the information presented in Conrad and Demarest's book supported Restall's conclusion without the intention of doing so. This case serves as a good example as to why it is important to examine multiple sources when studying history, because doing so allows one to find information which may put down a certain argument, or, as is the case here, support an argument.
ReplyDeleteJoAnn, I agree with your general outline of the misconceptions about the conquest and the rise of such historical inaccuracies. While you sum up Conrad and Demarest’s book by “giving the readers a more in-depth look of how the experts got their theories about the start and end of civilizations from analyzing the three types of ‘ethnohistorical documents’” (Conrad and Demarest, 5)
DeleteYou state that both books analyze multiple sources and ideas about how the two civilizations: Aztecs and the Incas came into existence and how these groups fell into decline after a century. With that, you state the similarities and differences from each book. In particular, you bring up Conrad and Demarest’s focus of how they analyzed the sources, which I follow, that they use a new archaeological approach. Whereas Restall’s book, aims for the same argument as Conrad and Demarest’s but from a different avenue of approach: the seven common myths of the Spanish Conquest. You state that Conrad and Demarest answers a more specific thesis that Restall presents in his book.
You bring up a great example from “They Myth of Exceptional Men,” when Cortez and his few men conquered the Aztecs by themselves (Restall, 3) when as we later learn that Cortez had an entourage of tens of thousands of Indian allies from Conrad and Demarest’s book.
Also, I would like to add the misconception that Conrad and Demarest bring up; the fact that the Black Legend states that the indigenous were at their prime when the Spanish entered. We learn that there were numerous reasons that would explain why the imperial empires fell.
Great post, JoAnn, it was a good preview for our paper
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete