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”