¹ The fact that Gómara was not present during the conquest is often cited as a grave defect in his work, especially when comparing it to Díaz’ History. However, Lesley Byrd Simpson, who is Gómara’s panegyrist as Gómara is Cortés’, says that this criteria would cause us to throw out such works as Solís, Muñoz, and Prescott. Surely Simpson is aware that Gómara was trying to present an “official” account of the conquest as if he were there when it happened. Thus, Gómara’s work is more in the vein of a chronicle not a history. See de Gómara, Francisco López, Cortés: The Life of the Conqueror by His Secretary, trans, and ed. by Simpson, Lesley Byrd (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1964), pp. xx-xxi.Google Scholar

² Cortés, Hernando, Hernando Cortés: Five Letters—1519–1526, trans, and intro. by Morris, F. Bayard (New York, 1962), pp. xvi-xvii.Google Scholar

³ Gómara, p. 19.

⁴ Ibid, pp. 18–21.

⁵ Cortés, pp. 2–3.

⁶ de Tapia, Andrés, The Chronicle of Andrés de Tapia, in The Conquistadors: First-person Accounts of the Conquest of Mexico, ed. and trans, by de Fuentes, Patricia (New York, 1963), p. 27.Google Scholar

⁷ de Aguilar, Francisco, The Chronicle of Fray Francisco de Aguilar, in Fuentes, pp. 136–7.Google Scholar To help sort out, or perhaps further confuse, the events surrounding Grijalva’s return and Cortés’ departure, we are able to draw upon the Chronicle of Juan Díaz, a Mercedarian friar and devoted enemy of Grijalva. Juan Díaz tells us that as Grijalva’s expedition was returning home it was met by a ship sent out by Velázquez to look for Grijalva. This ship had given up the search, but there were seven others still searching. (Was this Cortés’ expedition?) See Díaz, Juan, The Chronicle of Juan Díaz, in Fuentes p. 16.Google Scholar

⁸ del Castillo, Bernal Díaz, The Conquest of New Spain, trans, and intro. by Cohen, J. M. (Baltimore, 1963), pp. 44–49.Google Scholar Bartolomé de Las Casas, although in Spain at the time of Cortés’ departure, knew Velázquez and Cortés and, while recounting the events in Cuba, made some interesting remarks about them. To Velázquez, Las Casas attributes an impulsive temperament that surfaced when he unfairly reprimanded Grijalva for following the governor’s orders not to claim the new land. However, the wealth that Grijalva brought back induced Velázquez to spend 20,000 pesos outfitting a new fleet. The governor did notify Spain of the discovery and ask the Jeronymite Fathers for permission to send out a new expedition.

Las Casas pictures Cortés as “an upstart, a poor hidalgo … who would have starved” had it not been for Velázquez. Cortés, eager to become captain of this new fleet, promised the king’s accountant a share of the spoils, if he would help persuade the governor to choose Cortés. Gómara, who received most of his information from Cortés, was wrong in suggesting that Velázquez shared the cost of the expedition. Cortés’ 2,000 pesos were given to him by Velázquez for supplies. Even if the money were Cortés’, it would have been meaningless when compared to the governor’s 20,000 pesos. Besides, Las Casas continues, Velázquez was not humble or generous enough to beg Cortés to become captain. Cortés used some of this money to adorn himself while acting as the captain of a group of men expecting to find great wealth.

When the accountant told Cortés that Velázquez was beginning to question Cortés’ captaincy, Cortés hurried the sailing preparations throughout the night of November 17–18, 1518. In the morning, Velázquez rushed to the harbor; but, when he could not think of a reply to Cortés’ insolent request for orders, Cortés set sail. Las Casas refutes Gómara’s contention that Velázquez tried to stop Cortés. No one, especially Cortés who “dared not breathe before Velázquez and, in appearance at least, always strained to please him,” could have prevented Velázquez from handling the fleet as he desired. Later however, Velázquez’ doubts proved to be well-founded as Cortés usurped Velázquez’ authority by taking control of the fleet and by hanging his opponents. See de Las Casas, Bartolomé, History of the Indies, trans, and ed. by Collard, Andrée (New York, 1971) , pp. 224–230.Google Scholar

⁹ Gómara, pp. 65–69.

¹⁰ Cortés, pp. 16,19, and 25–29.

¹¹ Díaz del Castillo, pp. 100–104.

¹² Tapia, pp. 24–26 and 28.

¹³ Aguilar, p. 138.

¹⁴ Cortés, pp. 73–74. Gómara, p. 168. Tapia, p. 38.

¹⁵ Díaz del Castillo, pp. 242–243. Aguilar, p. 148. According to Cortés, Tapia, and Gómara, Cortés was aware of the Almeria incident before deciding to arrest Montezuma.

¹⁶ Díaz del Castillo, p. 246. Cortés, p. 74. Gómara, p. 170. Tapia, pp. 38–39. Aguilar, p. 148.

¹⁷ Díaz del Castillo, p. 286. Gómara, p. 207. Aguilar, p. 151. As mentioned earlier, Tapia quit writing after the description of Narváez’ defeat and from here on we only have four sources to consider.

¹⁸ Cortés, pp. 113–116. Gómara, pp. 214–218.

¹⁹ Aguilar, pp. 152–153. Díaz del Castillo, p. 296.

²⁰ Gómara, pp. 218–219. Cortés, p. 118. Cortés does admit that the men urged him to leave, but it is clear that Cortés made the final decision.

²¹ Díaz del Castillo, p. 296.

²² Aguilar, pp. 153–154.

²³ Cortés, pp. 119–120. Gómara, pp. 218–222. Díaz del Castillo, pp. 297–300. Aguilar, pp. 154–156.

²⁴ Díaz del Castillo, pp. 264, 390, 368–369.

²⁵ Cortés mentions the problems only in passing, see p. 174. Gómara does not speak of the troubles at all, see pp. 263–296, especially pp. 265–268.

²⁶ Aguilar, pp. 158–159.

²⁷ Cortés, pp. 192–199. Gómara, pp. 279–282.

²⁸ Díaz del Castillo, pp. 378–381.

²⁹ Aguilar, p. 1