Relativity in Historical Discourse (PDF)

Seminar paper from the year 2004 in the subject American Studies - Literature, grade: 2,0 (B), University of Freiburg (English Seminar 1), course: Revisionist histories in American and Canadian Literature, 24 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: When Hernán Cortés invaded the Aztec empire in 1519, he was thought to be the returned god Quetzalcontl. The emperor Montezuma II. was blinded by his people’s prophecy and thus did not realize the danger crawling along with the Spaniards towards the capital Tenochtitlán and his entire kingdom. The genocide started with the imprisonment of Montezuma and ended in 1522.

This brief summary is one version of the happenings in the Mexican area around 1520. Others may focus on Cortés’ loyalty to Charles V., king of Spain, or his deep belief in being a soldier of God, sent on his mission to Christianize the heathens in the New World. One could also stress the cleverness of Montezuma pretending the return of a god to uphold his status as a ruler all the while knowing about Aztec’s inferiority to this new enemy and the impossibility of resistance or even victory. The first paragraph comes up with some words that manipulate the reader’s attitude1 but obviously revise the Spanish-Aztec war “wie es eigentlich gewesen ist”2. Although there are several other aspects involved, some are mentioned above, this text mediates facts about the Spanish invasion. But are those facts true? What is a reader supposed to believe when he wants to acquire specific knowledge about this historical period?