Through the three different primary sources we read in class, we were able to see three very different perspectives on the motives, thoughts, and even actions in the Spanish conquest of Mexico. One of the most important lessons that we learned is that language is a limitation to what a person is able to communicate through written material. This can be seen most evidently in the description of Tenochtitlan given by Bernal Diaz del Castillo. He uses words such as causeways and “cities and villages built on the water” to describe a style of city building that was absolutely foreign to him and all Spainards. While it bears some similarities to Venice, the city of Tenochtitlan, a city built on a drained lake, was totally unique. Adding to its grandeur was the fact that it was the largest city in the world. Thus, we can see the sense of wonder from a Spainard’s eyes towards the city of Tenochtitlan, but it is difficult to get a true description of the city because he is describing it from a European perspective. From his description, it would be possible to imagine a city much like Venice, even though Tenochtitlan was nothing of the sort.
I guess I need to get my Che opinion out of the way, even though it is not the most informed opinion in the world. I am probably one of the few truly ambivalent people towards Che. On one hand, he truly believed in his political doctrine more than anyone obvious example in recent history; I cannot think of another person who fought for their beliefs against such daunting odds over and over again, from Guatemala to Cuba to Angola to Bolivia. On the other hand, I happen to disagree with said political doctrine, even though I also disagree with the political doctrines of his enemies at the time (I would have definitely been a member of the Non-Aligned Movement during the Cold War). So, I am interested in reading more about him, even though I look at any documents from the CIA with a very wary eye.
