A New Evaluation of Hern?n Cort?s?s Textual Strategies  
in Light of Documents Written by and about Diego Vel?zquez 
by 
Rebecca Antrobius 
 
 
 
A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of 
Auburn University 
in partial fulfillment of the 
requirements for the Degree of  
Master of Arts 
 
Auburn, Alabama 
December 14th, 2013 
 
 
 
Keywords: Hern?n Cort?s, Diego Vel?zquez, Cuba,  
Mexico, Conquest 
 
Copyright 2013 by Rebecca Antrobius 
 
Approved by 
   Pedro Cebollero, Associate Professor of Spanish American Literature 
  Ted McVay, Associate Professor of Spanish Literature 
  David Zuwiyya, Professor of Spanish Literature 
 
 
 
 
ii 
 
Abstract 
 
During the conquest of Mexico, Hern?n Cort?s used textual and political strategies in his 
Cartas de relaci?n that helped him achieve a position of power within the Spanish Empire.  
These strategies have been investigated and written about by historians and literary critics 
alike. Nevertheless, the textual and political strategies used in the Carta de relaci?n of his rival, 
Diego Vel?zquez, have been largely ignored. Diego Vel?zquez was the conqueror of Cuba and 
Hern?n Cort?s?s superior officer.  This investigation focuses on a comparative analysis between 
the textual and political strategies of both Hern?n Cort?s and Diego Vel?zquez. This comparison 
not only reveals a new dimension to this famous rivalry, it also calls into question the origin of 
the textual and political strategies used by Hern?n Cort?s.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
iii 
 
Acknowledgements 
 
 I am grateful to my husband Marcus for his support throughout my time at Auburn 
University. I am also grateful to Dr. Pedro Cebollero for his patience and countless hours of 
counsel. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
iv 
 
Table of Contents 
 
Abstract??????????????????????????????????????????????????..ii 
Acknowledgements???????????????????????????????????????????..iii 
Introduction?????????????????????????????????????????????.??..1 
 Purpose of the Investigation??????????????????????????????????..4 
 Thesis Plan????????????????????????????????????????????..4 
Chapter 1: Defining the Historical Context of Hern?n Cort?s?s Model Conquistador???????.6 
 A Rivalry for Power Develops??????????????????????????????????.9 
Chapter 2: Creating the Model Conquistador???????????????????????..?????17 
 The Use of Formality in Order to Establish Legitimacy??????????.?????????19 
 Adherence to the Code of Medieval Vassalage and the Portrayal of a Christian Knight..25 
 Vel?zquez as the Antithesis of a Christian Knight??????????????????????.32 
 Variations of Distance and the Unreliable Narrator?????????????????????33 
 Authorial Silence and the Selection of Events?????????????.???????????36  
 Conclusion????????????????????????????????????????????37 
Chapter 3: Exploring the Roots of Cort?s?s Model: A Comparative Analysis???????????.43 
 The Use of Formality in Order to Establish Legitimacy???????????????????44 
 Adherence to the Code of Medieval Vassalage and the Portrayal of a Christian Knight..47 
 Francisco Morales as the Antithesis of a Christian Knight?????????????????.51 
   
v 
 
 Authorial Silence and the Selection of Events???????????????????????55 
 Variations of Distance and the Unreliable Narrator???????????????????..59 
Conclusion???????????????????????????????????????????.????62 
Works Cited???????????????????????????????????.???????????.68 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1 
 
Introduction 
 The mere mention of name Hern?n Cort?s brings to mind many forceful and enduring 
images which tell a conflicting story. Fierce and loyal warrior of the Spanish Empire. 
Treacherous outlaw. Crusader for the Army of Christ. Heartless murderer.  Conqueror of the 
mighty Aztec Empire. Who was Hern?n Cort?s?  The answers that we have are based more on 
myth than fact. What we know about him comes to us from a number of chronicles of the time 
and from his own letters to Emperor Charles I of Spain and V of Germany. Although these 
letters were considered legal documents that chronicled the events of the conquest, we must 
pause before accepting them as true and historic fact.  In his chapter titled ?The Historical Text 
as a Literary Artifact,? Hayden White explains his theory as it applies to the presupposed 
distinction between historical documents and literary fiction. He refutes the age old argument 
that myth and history are juxtaposed. White defines the process by which historical narrative is 
created as being the very same process an author uses when creating a work of fiction:  
No given set of recorded historical events can in itself constitute  
a story. The events are made into a story by the suppression or  
subordination of some events and the highlighting of others by  
characterization, repetition, variation of tone and point of view, 
 in short, all of the same techniques that we would normally expect 
 to find in the employment of a novel or a play. (84) 
2 
 
When reading Cort?s?s letters to the Emperor?his Cartas de relaci?n?one must be conscious of 
two things. First, White?s view of history shows us that these documents are in fact subjective 
narratives that were?up to a point?created by an author much the same way a play or novel 
would be created. Secondly, the reader must bear in mind that Cort?s had a political agenda 
that motivated which events he selected to highlight and which events to suppress. We know 
that these letters were a tool used by Cort?s for the purpose of legitimizing his political 
ascendance in M?xico. Within these letters, Cort?s used a variety of textual and political 
strategies in order to solidify his newfound position of power in the burgeoning Spanish Empire.  
In her book The Armature of the Conquest: Spanish Accounts of the Discovery of 
America, 1492-1589, Beatriz Pastor explains how Cort?s used these textual strategies to create 
a fictionalized version of the conquest. According to Pastor, ?The elements that articulate 
Cort?s?s fictionalized reconstructions were: selection of events, reordering of events and 
subjective redefinition of concepts and meanings? (69). She further elaborates on the 
reconstructions by explaining that Cort?s, ?excludes anything that cannot be suited to his 
objective and carefully reworks the material selected for inclusion. Cort?s paints a character of 
himself, which is consistent with literary models to be found in the epic poetry of the time? 
(72). Pastor goes on to define this fictionalized account of the conquest as a ?model? or ?the 
perfect weapon for the acquisition of power, fame and glory? (100). Although Pastor does an 
excellent job of highlighting and defining this ?model,? we must look at Cort?s?s past in order to 
gain a more complete understanding of it. 
3 
 
 Cort?s first rose to prominence on the island of Cuba as the prot?g? and assistant of the 
Governor, Diego Vel?zquez. The two would later become bitter enemies once Cort?s usurped 
his authority and set out on his conquest of Mexico.  Vel?zquez is normally referred to, by 
historians and literary critics alike, within the context of the conquest of Mexico. He has been 
immortalized as Cort?s?s rival for power and as the victim of his textual strategies. However, it 
is important to point out that Vel?zquez was also a conqueror in his own right.  He was the 
conquistador of Cuba before being awarded the governorship of the island.  By taking a look at 
the letters and documents that Vel?zquez wrote during the conquest of Cuba, a new dimension 
of the model Pastor so eloquently defined becomes apparent. Many of the textual strategies 
that Cort?s used during the conquest of M?xico in the year 1519 are noticeably present in the 
writings of Vel?zquez during the conquest of Cuba in 1511.  These similarities shed new light on 
the origins of Cort?s?s model and the relationship between the two men.  
Some outstanding examples of these similarities are the silences that reverberate 
throughout Diego Vel?zquez?s Carta de Relaci?n and Hern?n Cort?s?s Segunda Carta de 
Relaci?n. Both men choose to eliminate horrific and bloody details about their campaigns in 
order to gain the favor of the Emperor Charles IV and King Ferdinand. Vel?zquez and Cort?s 
were both cited, by various chroniclers, as having presided over at least one massacre of Native 
Americans. We know that Cort?s ordered that thousands of Native Americans be slaughtered in 
the great city of Cholula. During the Conquest of Cuba, Vel?zquez presided over a similar 
massacre on the banks of the Caonao River. The importance of these episodes of brutality was 
silenced in their respective narratives. Nonetheless, we are able to reestablish their relevance 
by examining other chronicles from that era.       
4 
 
Purpose of the investigation 
 The purpose of my thesis is to bring about an expanded evaluation of Cort?s as the 
?model conquistador? that is defined by Beatriz Pastor.  The evidence suggests that the origins 
of the model he used to portray himself in writing are broader than has been previously 
discussed. They lie in the culture of the times and the individuals with whom Cort?s came into 
contact throughout his early years in America.  Elements of this model were used by Vel?zquez 
during his rise to power prior to the conquest of Mexico.   I intend to prove that the relationship 
between Cort?s and Vel?zquez was much more complex than a simple rivalry.  We know that 
Cort?s served as a soldier under the command of Vel?zquez and went on to serve as his 
personal secretary following the conquest of Cuba. It is therefore likely that Cort?s was indeed 
a student of the textual and political strategies that were used by his superior, Diego Vel?zquez. 
What is truly extraordinary about Cort?s?s use of these strategies is that he took them to new 
heights of complexity. What can be described as a simple bass line under Vel?zquez was 
remade into a symphony under Cort?s during the conquest of M?xico.    
The Thesis Plan  
This investigation will examine the similarities and differences of the textual and 
political strategies that were used by both conquistadors during their respective campaigns. 
The primary sources of evidence will be selections from the Segunda Carta de Relaci?n by 
Hern?n Cort?s, the Carta de Relaci?n de la Isla de Cuba by Diego Vel?zquez, the Historia de 
Indias  by Bartolom? de las Casas and various other sources that were written by King 
Ferdinand, the Admiral Diego Col?n, and Diego Vel?zquez himself.  
5 
 
The investigation is divided into four chapters. The first chapter is divided into two parts. 
The first is the historical background of the Spanish conquest of America. This section of 
Chapter One aims to give the reader an understanding of the transitional cosmovision in which 
the conquistadors operated. The transition from a medieval mindset to Renaissance humanism 
is here defined, and a clear link is drawn between the cosmovision of the era and the ideology 
of the conquistadors. The second section of Chapter One focuses on the respective rises to 
power of both Diego Vel?zquez and  Hern?n Cort?s leading up to the conquest of Mexico.  The 
chapter seeks to examine the evolving relationship between the two men. Detailing this 
relationship lays the groundwork for a deeper analysis of their writings in the following 
chapters.    
Chapter Two focuses on Cort?s?s fictionalization of the conquest of Mexico. The model 
established by Beatriz Pastor in her The Armature of the Conquest is thoroughly examined so as 
to compare it with the actions of Vel?zquez in the following chapter.  Chapter Three is a 
comparative analysis that details the textual and political strategies used by Vel?zquez during 
the conquest of Cuba. Finally, in the conclusion, a direct link is drawn between the strategies 
used by both men. It is my hope that this investigation will make a contribution to Latin 
American colonial studies by shining a new light on the relationship between the two 
conquistadors, especially the way in which Hern?n Cort?s and his textual strategies were deeply 
influenced by his former superior Diego Vel?zquez.  
 
  
6 
 
Chapter 1 
Defining the Historical Context of Hern?n Cort?s?s Model Conquistador 
 If order to compare the textual strategies of Diego Vel?zquez and Hern?n Cort?s, one  
must  attempt to recreate the historical backdrop that was present when these two actors 
made their debut on the world stage. The objective is for the reader to gain an understanding 
of the transition from the medieval mindset to Renaissance humanism, which had an enormous 
effect on the political climate of the conquest in which these two men participated. This 
chapter will also cover the history of the complex relationship that developed between the two 
conquistadors. Cort?s?s famous manipulation of the written word cannot be understood 
without a careful examination of this twisted rivalry between himself and Vel?zquez. It is a tale 
of two Renaissance men united by their common quest for fame and fortune. It is a tale of two 
ambitious conquistadors that came to see each other as an obstacle to their desires of 
unlimited wealth and power.     
 The Spain of the late fifteenth century was a society in transition. It had recently been 
unified under the control of the Catholic monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabel. Even though Spain 
was about to begin a new chapter in its history, its medieval past was slow to disappear. Seven 
hundred years of war with an Islamic occupier had formed a Christian warrior mentality that 
can only be understood by looking at the history of the Christian reconquest of the Iberian 
Peninsula. 
 After the Islamic invasion of the Visigoth kingdom in the year 711 A.D., most of the 
Iberian Peninsula fell under Muslim control. This new Muslim state was referred to as Al 
7 
 
Andalus and in its early years was considered a caliphate of Damascus (Katt?n-Ibarra 40).  In the 
northern and central region of the peninsula, four Christian kingdoms formed which remained 
free of Islamic rule.  These four kingdoms began a slow and steady battle with Al Andalus to 
reclaim the land that once belonged to their Roman and Visigoth ancestors. The Christian 
reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula lasted for centuries. Historian Juan Katt?n-Ibarra explains 
that ?the final nail in the coffin of Al Andalus came in 1492 when the Catholic monarchs 
Ferdinand and Isabel retook the final Muslim kingdom of Granada. This event signaled the end 
of the reconquest and the beginning of a new order in all of Spain? (71).    
  The medieval Spaniard inhabited a world of fervent devotion to the Catholic Church. 
Religion dominated every aspect of public life as it was the ideology that motivated the war 
against the Muslim occupiers. The model medieval soldier was the caballero cristiano or the 
Christian knight. The Christian cross was as much a part of the battles against the Moors as the 
sword. In her book El Cid y otros hombres de la guerra, Magarita C. Torre explains how the 
proximity to a Muslim state helped Spain give birth to successive generations of holy warriors. 
According to Torre, ?La Frontera Castellana result?, a lo largo de los reinados de Fernando I, 
Sancho II y Alfonso VI, tal vez la mejor escuela de combate para formar a un joven caballero?   
(195). She also goes on to describe the Christian knight as one who exudes, ?lealtad, honor, 
fuerza y valor? (196). The character Rodrigo D?az de Vivar from the epic poem El Cantar de Mio 
Cid was a popular medieval hero that embodied these traits.  According to the literary critic 
B?rbara M?jica, ?En muchos episodios El Cid demuestra no solo su fuerza superior, sino su 
generosidad, su sentido de moderaci?n y su lealtad al rey?(6). Characters such as Rodrigo D?az 
de Vivar, otherwise known as The Cid, captivated the Spanish public?s imagination and served 
8 
 
as a standard bearer for what was expected of a Christian warrior. Nevertheless, the Christian 
warriors of the late fifteenth century were slowly being introduced to philosophical, political 
and artistic trends that were taking the rest of Europe by storm. 
 The Renaissance and its humanist ideals were seeping into Spanish society at the same 
time the reconquest was coming to a close.  In her article, ?Algunas cosas de Hern?n Cort?s y 
M?xico: una lectura humanista de la Segunda carta de relaci?n, Dolores Clavero defines the 
humanist?s attitude as placing value  on such things as secularism, the pursuit of fame and 
fortune, individualism and the pursuit of science (213-222). This new cosmovision turned the 
medieval world view on its head. What had been a feudal and theocratic society was now faced 
with the ideas of human individualism, ambition, and scientific exploration usurping the idea of 
a pantocrator God.  These were indeed contradictory times and this mix, of Renaissance and 
medieval worldviews, was what the conquistadors of America brought with them on their 
mission to conquer the New World. We can see evidence of this duality when we look at the 
expedition of the very first explorer and conquistador of the Americas, Christopher Columbus. 
In his article ?The Middle Ages in the Conquest of America? Luis Weckmann states that, ?the 
conquerors were notably Renaissance men in their fondness for visible, material things such as 
grandeur, wealth and fame? (130).   Columbus was a man with a driving ambition to find glory 
through the discovery of a very profitable trade route to the East Indies. At the same time, he 
used medieval maps of Marco Polo and other explorers of Asia as navigation guides. He clung to 
the images and descriptions of Polo even when faced with a new and unknown reality. 
According to Weckmann, ? in all his travels, when navigating through the Antilles or bordering 
the coasts of the American mainland, Columbus thought he was visiting the many islands which 
9 
 
were depicted in the medieval maps at the end of the Asian continent in the vicinity of Cathay? 
(131).  He also signals Columbus?s religiously charged reaction to finding land ahoy as evidence 
of a medieval attitude. Weckmann describes Columbus?s reaction in the following way, ?he 
rejoiced at the thought he had found a new land where the Lord can be served by the 
divulgation of his holy name and faith among so many new peoples? (132). Columbus?s 
juxtaposed realities set the precedent for the conquistadors that followed in his footsteps. 
Amongst this swirling cocktail of dueling cosmovisions, Diego Vel?zquez and Hern?n Cort?s 
entered stage left.  
A rivalry for power develops 
    Historian Juan Miralles describes Diego Vel?zquez?s background in his book Hern?n 
Cort?s: inventor de M?xico. He states that Vel?zquez, ?proven?a del grupo de hidalgos llegados 
con Col?n en su segundo viaje.  Era uno de los sobrevivientes de las hambres de la Isabela, la 
primera ciudad Espa?ola fundada en Am?rica, misma que termin? en desastre total? (19). 
Although Vel?zquez did get off to a rough start in America we know that he eventually met with 
success. If we skip a few pages ahead in our storyline we see that he became a wealthy and 
influential colonist on the now pacified island of Hispaniola. The Historical Dictionary of Cuba 
describes Vel?zquez as, ?an able administrator and former lieutenant to Nicolas de Ovando, 
Governor of Hispaniola,? and it goes on to describe Vel?zquez as, ?one of the wealthiest land 
owners on the island of Hispaniola? (292). It was around this time, when an ambitious young 
man by the name of Hern?n Cort?s came ashore with his own visions of grandeur. He arrived 
penniless but he was astute. The perfect opportunity to make friends in high places fell into his 
10 
 
lap shortly after his arrival on the Island. In his work titled Cr?nica de la Nueva Espa?a Francisco 
Cervantes de Salazar describes the chain of events that led to Cort?s climbing the first rung on 
the ladder of success:  
luego de ah? a pocos d?as de llegar, se rebelaron las provincias de Aniguavagua                      
Guacayarima, a cuya reducci?n y pacificaci?n iba Diego Vel?zquez. Fue con ?l 
Cort?s todo lo mejor aderezado  que ?l pudo, lo cual fue causa que el 
gobernador le diese ciertos indios en  tierra del Dayguao y la escriban?a del 
ayuntamiento de la  villa de Ach?a, donde Cort?s vivi? seis a?os d?ndose a 
granjer?as y  sirviendo su oficio a contento de todo el pueblo. (12) 
  In the year 1511 Diego Vel?zquez was tapped by Diego Col?n, the Governor of 
Hispaniola, to head up an army of conquest into the neighboring island of Cuba. Once again 
Cort?s was quick to volunteer his services. Both men saw this as an opportunity for economic 
advancement and for the acquisition of fame and glory. Vel?zquez saw an opportunity to 
ascend from being merely a wealthy land owner to the rank of a powerful governor.  According 
to Juan Miralles, ?Vel?zquez se encontraba a punto de dar un gran salto al recibir el 
nombramiento de gobernador que lo liberar?a de la subordinaci?n formal a Diego Col?n. 
Aspiraba, adem?s, a la adelantadur?a, lo cual colocar?a bajo su jurisdicci?n todos los terrritorios  
que descubriese ? (22). Cort?s saw the opportunity to move up from a small time farmer and 
scribe to perhaps a wealthy land owner. His hopes were not unfounded considering he and 
most soldiers of conquest received a portion of land and spoils once the conquest was 
complete. 
11 
 
The conquest of Cuba was swiftly executed as the Spaniards met with little organized 
resistance by the natives. Once the Spaniards had established firm control over the Island, 
Diego Vel?zquez was awarded the title of Governor of Cuba. Cort?s?s immediate ambitions 
were also fulfilled.   By the year 1516, Juan Miralles describes Cort?s as a sucessful ?minero, 
ganadero, agricultor, mercador y naviero? (75).  He goes on to say that, ?Su hacienda era de las 
mejores de la isla.  Adem?s estaba dedicado al comercio ultramarino en gran escala, d?ndose el 
caso de que en ese momento, de los cinco barcos que hab?a al ancla en el puerto, tres eran de 
?l. Uno de los nav?os ten?a en sus bodegas un cargamento de vinos, indicio de que reci?n 
llegaba de Europa. Ese era el nivel de los negocios que movia? (75). Not long after the campaign 
ended, Cort?s was also given the prestigious title of personal secretary to Governor Vel?zquez. 
This is significant in that he would have been personally involved with Diego Vel?zquez?s 
political dealings and correspondence. Considering that Vel?zquez?s Carta de relaci?n was 
written three years after the initial invasion of Cuba, it can even be suggested that Cort?s had 
firsthand knowledge of this document. Shortly after being named Vel?zquez?s secretary, Cort?s 
began developing further ambitions. These fresh ambitions sowed the seeds of a new and very 
personal rivalry between these two men. Cort?s soon tired of his role as subordinate to 
Vel?zquez and he began jumping at every opportunity that crossed his path to circumvent or 
undermine him. 
Cort?s seized his first opportunity to undermine the new governor not long after the 
conquest of Cuba.  There was widespread discontent among Vel?zquez?s men. Historian I.A. 
Wright explains that the discontent was caused by, ?Vel?zquez?s disability to assign the cube?os 
to servitude under the repartimiento system? (40).  His soldiers were anxious to receive their 
12 
 
spoils of conquest. Some even felt that the spoils were not distributed fairly. A certain captain 
by the name of Francisco Morales, was a leader among the disgruntled crowd. He became a 
threat to Vel?zquez?s ambitions. The new governor needed to be rid of him but he had to go 
about it astutely. Morales had been appointed by Diego Col?n himself, so a simple dismissal 
was not in the cards. Instead, he cleverly accused him of atrocities commited against the native 
cube?os. Francisco Morales was then shipped back to Hispaniola in order to stand trial for 
these accusations. Even with Morales back in Hispaniola, Velazquez?s political situation among 
his fellow Spaniards was far from stable. Many of them grew even angrier with Vel?zquez over 
his treatment of Morales. A group of Spaniards on the island of Cuba wanted to return to 
Hispaniola in secret to testify in defense of Francisco Morales and to complain about the 
leadership of Diego Vel?zquez. Cort?s, ever the opportunist, took advantage of the situation 
and backstabbed his superior officer. He offered to escape from Cuba by canoe and represent 
the group?s sentiment at the trial. This plot however was discovered and thwarted by Vel?zquez 
himself. In his Historia de las Indias Bartolom? de las Casas relates the entire episode in detail:     
Entre la gente que all? con Diego Vel?zquez estaba, hab?a d?l y de su gobernaci?n 
algunos descontentos, porque no les hac?a, seg?n ellos tan buen tratamiento 
como quisieron, en especial un Francisco de Morales. Diego Vel?zquez no le 
pudiese remover y viendo que su gobernaci?n buena o mala se le perturbaba, 
hizo proceso contra el Morales y envi?le preso al Almirante. Todov?a las quejas 
del teniente Diego Vel?zquez crec?an de cada d?a. En este tiempo vino a Cuba 
[?]los jueces de apelaci?n, y acordaron los quejosos de Vel?zquez de hacer sus 
informaciones secretas y tomar sus firmas para enviar a quejar. Hab?a de pasar a 
13 
 
esta isla en una canoa o barquillo de indio en un mar tan alta. Para llevar a tal 
informaci?n, no hallaron a otro m?s atrevido  a cualquier peligro sino a Hern?n 
Cort?s, criado y secretario de Diego Vel?zquez. Est?ndose para embarcar en una 
canoa de indios con sus papeles, fue Vel?zquez avisado y h?zolo prender y 
qu?solo ahorcar. (527-528) 
This was to be just the beginning of an intense rivalry that would carry on throughout 
the conquest of Mexico and the beginning of the conquest of what is now known as Honduras. 
It seems that Cort?s, once he was caught in the act, was astute enough to know that he needed 
to regain Vel?zquez?s friendship in order to see his ambitions bear fruit.  Historian Juan Miralles 
puts a nice cap on the episode by stating; ?finalmente cuando se pas? el enojo, el gobernador le 
concedi? el perd?n a Cort?s? (62).  Cort?s now lay in wait like a predator waiting for the perfect 
opportunity to pounce. 
He saw his destiny fall into his lap when Vel?zquez tapped him to head an exploratory 
and mercantile expedition along the coast of the newly discovered Yucatan Peninsula. 
Unbeknownst to Vel?zquez, he had just cleared a pathway for Cort?s to blaze his way to fame, 
glory and wealth. The chain of events gained such momentum that Vel?zquez?s efforts to 
thwart them proved futile.  Cort?s did not harbor the simple mercantile and exploratory 
ambitions that Vel?zquez was calling for. His ambitions would later prove to be much grander 
when he usurped Velazquez?s authority and conquered the newly found territory. If he were 
able to legitimize such an act in the eyes of the Emperor, he would be able to swipe the title of 
Adelantado away from Vel?zquez, thus gaining access to wealth and power few could ever 
14 
 
dream of possessing. Cort?s began laying the groundwork for a conquest of unparalleled 
proportions.      
  As soon as he started preparing for the expedition, he began to deviate from the 
standard preparations an exploratory expedition would entail.  An exploratory expedition 
would have required a limited amount of supplies and soldiers because the intention was not to 
colonize but to return to the ship?s original destination with slaves, goods, and information. 
Cort?s however, raised eyebrows with the unprecedented amount of money he was investing 
in this particular expedition. He was aggressively pursuing private investors to fund the 
operation and when that did not suffice he began spending his own money. When his own 
money proved insufficient, he took out loans and even went as far as offering his own hacienda 
as collateral. All this was done with the intention of setting his master plan in motion.  In his 
biography of Hern?n Cort?s, Juan Miralles states that Cort?s indebted himself to the likes of 
Andr?s de Duero, Pedro de Jerez and Antonio de Santa Clara to the sum of 4,000 castellanos, 
which was an extremely large sum of money at that time (75). Not only were his spending 
habits drawing attention, his sheer number of recruits sent speculation about his true 
objectives flying. According to Cort?s in his  Segunda carta de relaci?n, he recruited upwards of 
four hundred men to accompany him (16). Such actions were not lost on Vel?zquez. The gossip 
mill was churning and he was well aware of Cort?s?s strange behavior.  
Vel?zquez was indeed suspicious but the preparations continued right under his nose. 
The whole situation came to a head on the day the expedition was scheduled to set sail. 
Vel?zquez showed up at the port to see the ship off and when he saw with his own eyes the 
15 
 
amount of provisions that were being loaded onto the ships he protested loudly. In his Cr?nica 
de Nueva Espa?a, Cervantes de Salazar paints an interesting picture of the confrontation. ?lleg?  
Diego Vel?zquez, caballero en una mula y dixo ?Hijo que es esto que hac?is?  ?Qu? mudanza es 
?sta? ?Para qu? os embarc?is con tantos hombres y sin tener pan suficiente para la jornada?  
Cort?s contest?,  Se?or Dios queda con vuestra merced, que yo voy al servir a Dios y a mi Rey y 
a buscar con estos mis compa?eros mi ventura? (8).    
With that Cort?s was gone. He had managed to slip through Velazquez?s fingers but he 
had yet to actually be in open contempt of his superior.  Suspicious activity does not a crime 
make. It was not until Cort?s set foot on Mesoamerican soil and founded the town of Veracruz 
that his treasonous act would be complete. The founding of Veracruz made him a criminal 
under Spanish law because it was a direct act of defiance against his superior Diego Vel?zquez.  
His orders were to explore, trade, and capture slaves. He was to immediately report and hand 
over his findings to Vel?zquez upon his prompt return to Cuba. By founding a town Cort?s 
proved he had no intention of returning to Cuba.  To prevent anyone in his army from returning 
to Cuba out of loyalty to Governor Vel?zquez, he destroyed his own ships once all his men were 
on land. He was there to make his own fortune, not add to Vel?zquez?s. Standing in his way 
however, were some pretty sizable obstacles. Not only would he have to wage war on a large 
and highly developed native civilization, but he also found himself to be an outlaw on the run 
from Spanish authorities back in Havana. What Cort?s did to fix this legal predicament required 
some of the fanciest political footwork imaginable. 
 
16 
 
 
Chapter 2 
Creating the Model Conquistador 
 The founding of Veracruz was a bold and audacious move for Cort?s. His thirst for 
power and prestige are obvious to even the most objective of historians. His drive and ambition 
were symptoms of the burgeoning humanist ideals that were reverberating throughout the 
European continent. What followed this bold move was one of the most consequential military 
and political conquests in written history. Cort?s, however, would need more than ambition in 
order to survive. He now found himself in a legal predicament that was tantamount to treason. 
He had defied his superior officer, Diego Vel?zquez. He was officially an outlaw on the run. 
Knowing his rebellion could have serious consequences, he needed to twist reality a bit. 
Somehow he needed to convince the King that his rebellion was not an act against the Crown 
but an act of faithful service to it.  
Cort?s found the perfect vehicle for his fictionalization of reality in the required legal 
correspondence to the Emperor known as a carta de relaci?n. These letters were required by 
the Spanish Crown as a way to stay informed and control an ever expanding empire. Within 
each letter, the conquistador was expected to testify as a witness to the events that took place 
during the exploration or conquest. Because it was considered a legal document, its contents 
were considered to be true and accurate accounts of events as they unfolded (Merrim 59). 
However, Cort?s would use this informative legal document as a vehicle of persuasion that 
would make his rebellion appear to be an act of service. Within his correspondence Cort?s 
17 
 
twisted reality, and according to Beatriz Pastor, in The Armature of the Conquest, created a 
?fictional model? of a conquistador (72).  
The purpose of this chapter is to deconstruct the process of fictionalization within 
Cort?s?s Segunda Carta de relaci?n into various textual tactics. These tactics, when examined 
collectively, make up the complex fa?ade of Cort?s?s model conquistador. This chapter will be 
broken down into five separate sections. Each section will be dedicated to dissecting and 
properly defining said tactics as separate parts that form the sum total of Cort?s?s fictionalized 
persona. The first section will be dedicated to defining the formal fa?ade of Cort?s?s letter and 
how Cort?s used certain forms of rhetoric to give his argument credibility. Section two will 
define the medieval code of vassalage and the concept of the medieval Christian knight. Section 
three seeks to demonstrate how Cort?s used these concepts to discredit his rival Vel?zquez, 
and at the same time characterize himself as the embodiment of the ideal vassal and Christian 
knight.  
 The fourth section discusses two concepts by Wayne C. Booth in his book titled The 
Rhetoric of Fiction known as the variations of distance and the unreliable narrator. These 
concepts will be defined and (through direct examples from Cort?s?s correspondence) we will 
see how he appropriately alternated between first and third person narration in order to 
distance himself from undesired outcomes and at the same time place himself at the forefront 
of all the campaign?s successes. Section five examines the concept of authorial silence, as 
defined by Booth. This section seeks to draw a direct link between Cort?s?s silences and the 
careful crafting of his model. The conclusion of this chapter will be dedicated to exposing the 
18 
 
agenda behind the model, and will focus on the similarity between Machiavelli?s Renaissance 
masterpiece The Prince and Cort?s?s model conquistador.        
The Use of Formality in Order to Establish Legitimacy  
 The time Cort?s spent as an assistant to Vel?zquez in Cuba and as a notary in Hispaniola 
served him well in many regards. In his article ?The Mental State of Cort?s? John Elliott explains 
why. He relates that, ?there is no doubt that Cort?s?s two years of study in Salamanca, followed 
by a long period of training as a notary and secretary gave him a working knowledge of Latin 
and a close acquaintance with the methods of Castillian law? (3). According to Walter Mignolo 
in his essay ?Cartas, cr?nicas y relaciones de descubrimiento? this knowledge helped him create 
a letter that conformed to the standards of the time. Mignolo states that, ?sin lugar a dudas 
que estos informes autodenominados ?relaciones? se conforman al modelo epistolar? (67). By 
conforming to this epistolary model, Cort?s began laying the ground work for his defense. Had 
he not followed the legal and rhetorical standards laid out in said model, his arguments may 
have been dismissed. On the contrary, to abide by them helped establish legitimacy. This 
section will highlight three distinct techniques that helped Cort?s write a letter that complied 
with the necessary legal formalities that were common during the sixteenth century. These 
three techniques are the pillars of formality, which together made up the formal fa?ade of 
Cort?s's defense.      
The first technique Cort?s used was that of portraying himself as a reliable witness. 
During the late medieval era and early Renaissance, a narrative was generally accepted as true 
if the narrator was a firsthand witness of the events he was narrating. To illustrate this point, 
19 
 
we can contrast the works of three well known chroniclers of the time: the priest Bartolom? de 
las Casas, the conquistador Bernal D?az del Castillo, and the historian Francisco L?pez de 
G?mara. Both Las Casas and Bernal D?az were conscious of the fact that firsthand knowledge 
lends itself to credibility. Evidence of their compliance with this widely held view can be found 
throughout their respective works (e.g., Historia de las Indias, Historia de la conquista de 
M?xico, and Historia verdadera de la conquista de la Nueva Espa?a).   
 Las Casas personally accompanied the conquistadors as a Catholic priest during the 
conquest of America. He relates his version of these events in his Historia de las Indias. In her 
recently published article ?The Intellectual Legacy of Bartolom? de Las Casas? Margarita 
Zamora highlights his unusual narrative technique. She states that, ?Las Casas narrates the early 
days of the colonization of Cuba and his personal experiences in the Island from no less than 
three different points of view: the testimonial first person singular, the second person singular 
and the second person plural? (5). Even though Las Casas does not always use the testimonial 
first person to describe the events that he witnessed, he clearly seems to have been aware of 
the prevalent perception of the era that viewed only firsthand witnesses as credible sources of 
information. Even when using the third person plural and singular, Las Casas cleverly inserts 
himself as another participant in the action. In the following passage from Historia de Indias, 
Las Casas narrates a scene in which he begins to consider the misery in which the native 
population is living. Peculiarly, he mentions himself by name as if he were a character in his 
own novel. He states, ?Bartolom? de Las Casas, llegandose la Pascua de Pentecost?s,acord? 
dejar su casa que ten?a en el Rio de Arimao, [?] donde hacia sus haciendas, e ir a decilles misa. 
[?] Comenz? a considerar la miseria y servidumbre que padec?an aquellas gentes? (III: 92). 
20 
 
Bartolom? de Las Casas was most certainly manipulating his narrative point of view for a 
reason. I will explore that reason in the last section of this chapter. The important point here is 
to underline the fact that the priest wanted to leave no doubt in his reader?s mind that he was a 
reliable first hand witness, no matter from what point of view he chose to narrate. 
 Bernal D?az del Castillo also participated in the conquest of the New World, but as a 
soldier in Cort?s's army. Like Las Casas, he is always careful to make himself appear to be part 
of the events he narrates. A clear example of this can be seen in the way he describes the initial 
treatment the Spaniards received from the inhabitants of the city of Cholula and the suspicions 
the Spaniards harbored toward their hosts. According to D?az del Castillo, ?nos aposentaron y 
nos dieron muy bien de comer los dos d?as primeros, y aunque los ve?amos que estaban de paz, 
no dej?bamos siempre de estar muy apercibidos, por la buena costumbre que en ello 
ten?amos? (43). He differs from Las Casas in that he does not refer to himself in the third 
person. However, his careful use of the first person plural has the same effect. It gives him 
credibility to speak not only as a first hand witness, but also as the voice for a group of 
witnesses. Perhaps D?az del Castillo's boldest assertion of reliability can be found in his opening 
lines. He refers to himself as, "Bernal D?az del Castillo, vecino y regidor de la muy leal ciudad de 
Santiago de Guatemala? (1). He goes on to assert his authority and that of his comrades, vis-? 
vis other non-participant narrators, ?por lo que a m? toca y a todos los verdaderos 
conquistadores, mis compa?eros, que hemos servido a Su Majestad as? en descubrir y 
conquistar y pacificar todas las provincias de la Nueva Espa?a [?] lo cual descubrimos a nuestra 
costa  [?] y hablado aqu? en respuesta de lo que han dicho y escrito personas que no 
alcanzaron a saber, ni lo vieron, ni tener noticia verdadera de lo que sobre este material 
21 
 
propusieron, salvo hablar a sabor de su paladar? (1).  
   G?mara, on the other hand, relayed secondhand information in his chronicles. His 
accounts were written some twenty years after the conquest. During the 1540's he worked as a 
chaplain to Hern?n Cort?s. He narrates events that were related to him by Cort?s. While 
reading his work it becomes apparent that he, the narrator, is not present for any of the events 
he is describing nor does he have personal relationships with any of the protagonists other than 
Cort?s. His third person narrative seems distant and removed from the action when he relates 
that, "Los de caballo fueron, y ya que llegaban junto al cerrillo, y los voceaban y se?alaron que 
iban de paz, huyeron aquellos hombres, medrosos y espantados de ver cosa tan grande y alta, 
que les parec?a monstro, y que caballo y hombre era toda una cosa" (103). His distance from, 
and absence from, the events that he narrates are clearly visible. As a result, his credibility as a 
reliable source was dismissed both by Las Casas and Bernal D?az. Las Casas states, ?G?mara, 
cl?rigo, que escribi? la historia de Cort?s, que vivi? con ?l en Castilla siendo ya marqu?s, y no 
vido cosa ninguna ni jam?s estuvo en las Indias y no escribi? ninguna cosa sino lo que el mismo 
Cort?s le dijo? (II: 528). Bernal D?az del Castillo also mentions him by name and accuses him of 
not being a true and accurate witness. D?az del Castillo claims that, ?me rogaron dos licenciados 
que se la enprestase para saver muy estenso, las cosas que pasaron en las conquistas de 
M?xico y Nueva Espa?a y ver en que diferian lo que tiene escrito la coronista Francisco L?pez 
de G?mara [?] porque todo lo que yo escrivo es muy verdadero? (495). In her book The 
Armature of Conquest, Beatriz Pastor explains that, ?this rejection of G?mara's method implies 
that the only valid report is that of the eyewitness? (65). Both men were certainly not alone in 
their assessment of G?mara. This attitude was pervasive throughout the era and Hern?n Cort?s 
22 
 
did not stray from this norm. On many occasions, Cort?s goes out of his way to conform to this 
expectation by mentioning that he has firsthand knowledge of an event or geographical 
location. This is first noticed in the exordium of his Segunda carta de relaci?n, when he reminds 
the Emperor of what they had discussed in a prior correspondence. Cort?s mentions that, ? 
ten?a noticias de un gran se?or llamado Mutezuma, sobre lo cual los naturales de esta tierra me 
hab?an contado? (40). He makes sure to inject that he plans on verifying their accounts by 
seeing them with his own eyes when he states, ?pensara irle ver a doquiera que estuviese? (40). 
Cort?s makes such insertions throughout the letter with the express purpose of characterizing 
himself as a credible firsthand witness.   
The second technique used by Cort?s was the medieval practice of ars dictaminis. La 
Manual de ret?rica espa?ola describes this as, ?el arte de escribir cartas con una modalidad que 
est? integrada por f?rmulas fijas? (Azaustre y Casas 15). Ronald Witt, in his article titled, 
?Medieval ?Ars Dictaminis? and the Beginnings of Humanism: a New Construction of the 
Problem? puts into perspective the expectations the Spanish Crown would have had for any 
correspondence received from a vassal like Cort?s. He states that, ?individuals writing to public 
powers could be expected to observe the rules of official rhetoric. Almost without exception 
the manuals of ars dictaminis devote a large portion of their discussion to fitting the proper 
salutatory formula to the appropriate social or political class of the addressee? (6). According to 
the formula, the letter consisted of four distinct parts known as: the salutatio, the exordium, 
the narratio and the conclusio. The salutatio is basically a greeting to the reader. The exordium 
is the actual starting point of the letter. Its main purpose is to secure the goodwill of the reader. 
The narratio comprises the main body of the letter and it provides a clear account of the 
23 
 
author?s intended purpose. The conclusio provides a summary of the entire discourse of the 
letter. Witt describes the level of importance given to each section by signaling that, ?a large 
portion of every manual is devoted to discussing the salutatio and exordium which consist of 
formulas to cast, to please, and convince the addressee. On the other hand, very little care is 
given to the narratio? (13). Cort?s? Segunda carta de relaci?n is consistent with this formula.  
Walter Mignolo demonstrates this by highlighting Cort?s? apparent use of Latin syntax in the 
salutatio and his subsequent shift to common Castilian syntax in the less regulated narratio. He 
explains that, ?las reminiscencias de la sintaxis latina se encuentran precisamente en la 
salutatio. En el cuerpo eso desaparece y sus frases cobran un rito m?s castellano; lo cual indica 
que Cort?s era muy consciente de las exigencias ret?ricas impuestas en la ep?stola? (67). Latin 
syntax in the salutatio and exordium could be used to please the addressee because of Latin?s 
association with status, classical poetry, and the fine arts. Cort?s?s most obvious examples of 
Latin syntax in the salutatio are the placement of the adjective before the noun. In plain 
Castilian syntax the adjective usually follows the noun; for example, provincia grandisima, 
edificios maravillosos and laguna grande. However, the opening lines of the Segunda carta de 
relaci?n describe, ?grandes lagunas, maravillosos edificios y una grandisima provincia? (39). This 
use of ars dictaminis gives his correspondence an air of compliance that helped to mask his 
rebellion by helping him appear to be a man that follows the established rules in any given 
situation. 
A third technique of Cortes? Segunda Carta can be also be found in the salutatio and 
exordium. It is his use of humilitas in order to appease his lord the Emperor Charles V and put 
him at ease. The Manual de la ret?rica espa?ola defines humilitas as ?un primer grupo de 
24 
 
t?picos tradicionales de persona lo constituyen las f?rmulas para manifestar la humildad 
authorial especialmente utilizado en pr?logos, dedicatorias e inicios de obras? (Azaustre 39). 
Humilitas is normally expressed by the author stating in some way that he is not as wise or 
learned as his Lord but that he hopes his efforts will be acceptable to him just the same. Cort?s 
offers a good example of humilitas when he states that, ?Si de todo a vuestra alteza no diere 
tan larga cuenta como debo, os suplico me mande perdonar; porque ni habilidad (my emphasis) 
ni oportunidad de tiempo tengo para relatarlo todo? (40). Cort?s now appears to be a humble 
man who doubts his own abilities. It should be noted that Cort?s?s use of humilitas was by no 
means original. By all outward appearances, he was merely complying with a standard literary 
technique of the era. What sets Cort?s?s letter apart is the intention behind the ordinary 
compliance. By employing humilitas, Cort?s began to effectively neutralize any charges of 
treason by portraying himself as a humble servant of the Emperor. His use of humilitas was not 
merely for the sake of following proper rules of etiquette and correspondence. It served as an 
important step in the creation of his fictional model. This step served the purpose of 
psychologically disarming the Emperor by appearing to be benign. The use of first person 
narration, ars dictaminis and humilitas make up the first step of the Segunda carta?s formal 
fa?ade. This fa?ade was crucial to establishing his credibility in the eyes of his Lord and Master. 
Adherence to the code of medieval vassalage and the portrayal of a Christian Knight 
The second step in Cortes? creation of a fictional model built on legitimacy that was 
established by the formalities of rhetoric. The appearance of being a faithful servant was 
further enhanced by Cort?s?s adherence to an established code of medieval vassalage and his 
25 
 
self portrayal as an ideal Christian warrior of the Crown. By using these concepts to define 
himself, Cort?s was also able to frame Vel?zquez as his antithesis. This section seeks to define 
both the concepts of medieval vassalage and the Christian knight. It further seeks to identify 
direct textual examples of their use throughout the Segunda Carta de Relaci?n. By identifying 
said textual examples, I will be able to demonstrate how Cort?s effectively used them to 
portray himself as a hero.  
The code of vassalage has a long, complex history in Europe that we need to examine 
closely in order to fully comprehend Cort?s?s motivations for using it. The first logical question 
is, ?what exactly is a vassal?? A vassal is defined by the Diccionario de la Real Academia de la 
Lengua Espa?ola as ?s?bdito de alg?n soberano o una persona que reconoce a otra persona por 
superior.? All vassals owed their faithful allegiance to a superior Lord or monarch, a social 
structure commonly known as vassalage or lordship. In his article titled ?Medieval Lordship,? 
Thomas Bisson traces the roots of lordship back to the Roman Empire. He explains that, 
?lordship was deeply ingrained in the Roman legal and biblical cultures in which the Middle 
Ages began. It persisted tenaciously as an element of elite status and privilege? (746). The 
Roman legal system supported a society based on inequality and privileged nobility. While the 
culture of legal subservience was already well entrenched in western civilization when 
Christianity began spreading throughout Europe, Christianity added a spiritual facet to this 
ideology, reinforcing an existing social structure that had its origins in the Roman legal system.     
The Christian religion of the Middle Ages preached subservience, obedience and 
reverence to God. One example (among many) of this ideology can be found in The Book of 
26 
 
Psalms 40:7: ? Lord, sacrifice and offering you do not want; but ears open to obedience you 
gave me, there is none equal to you.? Once society had embraced this attitude of loyal 
obedience towards the Lord, it mingled with the Roman legal ideology of obedience to one?s 
social superiors. Subservience toward a person of nobility took on a tone of religious devotion. 
Thomas Bisson used the writings of St. Benedict, a monk, about his superior the abbot, to 
illustrate this phenomenon:  
Society spoke of the Dominus Noster Flavius; so that all people were  placed in a 
state of inferiority before the Dominus, a word referring to the chief of the 
household. By the sixth century St. Benedict could speak of the abbot as called 
Lord and Abbot, because he is believed  to act in Christ?s place. (747) 
This way of thinking was not confined to the walls of a monastery. The monarchs of the 
time were revered in much the same way. Thus the boundaries were blurred between royalty 
and divinity. In her book El Cid y otros se?ores de la guerra, Margarita Torre gives a concise 
explanation of what medieval monarchs expected of their vassals. She elucidates that, ?lealtad 
a toda prueba hacia la persona del monarca era la primera demanda del soberano?(197). The 
vassal was an idealized Christian warrior who was expected to go above and beyond all others 
in his loyalty to the Crown.  
 One of the ways Cort?s was able to adhere to these royal expectations was by 
peppering his narrative with words and phrases that conformed to the standard rhetorical 
doctrine of the time. Throughout his letter, Cort?s addresses the king reassuringly as: ?Vuestra 
Alteza? and ?Vuestra Sacra Majestad? (39). In the exordium he goes even further by referring to 
27 
 
the king as ?Muy Alto y Poderoso y muy Cat?lico Principe, Invict?simo Emperador y Se?or 
Nuestro? (39). In their book titled Ret?rica espa?ola, Antonio Aza?stre and Juan Casas refer to 
these types of address as a form of captatio benevolentia which aims to, ?captar la atenci?n y 
ganarse los afectos del auditorio? (73). Although the use of these forms of rhetoric were 
commonplace, Cort?s was able to use them to psychologically disarm a suspicious Emperor and 
advance his political ambitions. 
It is important to note however, that Cort?s?s portrayal of a Christian vassal is much 
more sophisticated than the captatio benevolentia he used to address the Emperor. The 
conquistador?s entire narrative is a carefully crafted document that painstakingly paints a 
fictional portrait of himself as the perfect vassal and Christian knight. In fact, Cort?s?s account 
of events seems to follow the well established themes of the literary genre known as epic 
poetry. This genre is defined by B?rbara M?jica in her book Texto y vida: Introducci?n a la 
literatura espa?ola as, ?un poema extenso, de asunto heroico? (XV). In his book The Hero and 
the King: An Epic Theme, William T.H Jackson defines the various themes of epic poetry. He 
explains that ?one of the most important of all epic themes is the conflict of hero and king. In all 
major epics there is a tension between a ruler and a major figure in the work. The formal 
situation in the epics is often such that loyalty to a ruler is demanded of a young and ambitious 
warrior? (3). We can clearly see this same dynamic between the Emperor Charles V and the 
young and ambitious Cort?s. Another important epic theme that Jackson discusses is the 
chaotic political situation in which the plot develops. He elaborates that, ?When patterns of 
civilization of long standing are being overturned, such as the clash between the Christian and 
Muslim world?.out of this turmoil comes the conflict of the hero and the king? (3). Cort?s?s 
28 
 
conquest of Mexico and the subsequent fall of the Aztec Empire certainly injects the theme of 
turmoil into the Cartas de relaci?n. The third epic theme discussed by Jackson is that of exile: 
?There can be little doubt that one of the most common characters in the period of turmoil is 
the exile from one?s own culture? (5). This theme manifests itself in the Cartas de relaci?n 
through Cort?s?s disobedience of Vel?zquez. Although he was not exiled from Spanish territory 
at the time his expedition launched, he became a fugitive of the Spanish Empire the moment he 
disobeyed Vel?zquez by founding the city of Veracruz. The fourth and final epic theme 
presented by Jackson is ?the intrusion of an outsider who often proves more powerful than the 
ruler to whose court he comes and who must be placated? (4). Prior to the conquest of Mexico, 
Cort?s was not one of the governing elites in the Spanish Empire. By embarking on this 
conquest, Cort?s became both a player and an intruder amongst the Spanish ruling class. 
Because of the great distance between Mesoamerica and Spain, it can be argued that Cort?s 
became a more powerful entity (within Mesoamerica) than the Emperor Charles V. Ultimately 
Cort?s placates the Emperor and successfully usurps Vel?zquez, but not before proving himself 
to be a mighty and powerful warrior.      
To further illustrate just how closely Cort?s?s Cartas de relaci?n follow the mold of epic 
poetry we can compare them to one of literature?s most famous epic poems, El poema de mio 
Cid. This poem, which narrates the heroic triumphs of Rodrigo de Vivar otherwise known as The 
Cid, was well known in Spain during the medieval era. Long before Cort?s was born, The Cid had 
achieved the status of folk hero. The similarities between the story of The Cid and Cort?s?s 
fictionalized version of himself are unmistakable. The Cid was famous for his conquests in 
Moorish territory during the reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula. Much like Cort?s, he waged a 
29 
 
fierce battle against the infidels in the name of Christ and his king. He was also an exiled outlaw 
that was accused of treason. Just as Cort?s did, he set out to prove his loyalty to the Emperor 
through conquest. Whether Cort?s intentionally modeled himself after The Cid is a mystery 
only Cort?s himself can solve. Nevertheless the similarities are worth discussing because they 
were sure to have had an emotional impact on his audience.  
Throughout the epic poem, Rodrigo D?az de Vivar can be found invoking the name of 
God each time he enters battle: ?Firidlos, Cavalleros, todos sines dubdan?a. Con la merced del 
Criador nuestra es la ganancia? (122). Cort?s echoes this sentiment. He attributes each victory 
over the Mesoamericans to divine intervention. ?Nos dio Dios tanta Victoria que les matamos 
mucha gente sin que los nuestros recibiesen da?o? (Segunda carta 49). The Cid not only 
attributes his victories to God, but the descriptions of the battles at certain points take on the 
tone of a holy war. In pushing the Moors out of Spain, The Cid wins a victory for Christ. 
?Viniesse a mio Cid que ? sabor de cavalgar, cercar quiere a Valencia por a christianos la dar? 
(161). Cort?s made use of holy war rhetoric as well. Just as The Cid with the Moors, the 
conqueror of Mexico paints a portrait of the Mesoamericans as the enemies of Christ: ?como 
cristianos ?ramos obligados en pugnar contra los enimigos de nuestra fe? (Segunda carta 51). 
Because the lines between divinity and royalty were blurred, The Cid is exemplified as a loyal 
vassal who fights in the name of God and the king. The spoils of each victory are not just for his 
own sake but are instead gifts to be shared with his men and sent to his lord and master. 
?Grandes son las ganancias quel di? el Criador/ f?vos aqui las senas [?] besavos las manos que 
los prendades  vos/vosi rrazonas por vuestro vassallo e a v?s tiene por se?or? (173). Similarly, 
Cort?s?s fictionalized character is never portrayed as a fortune seeking conqueror. 
30 
 
Mesoamerica and her spoils are laid at the feet of the Emperor Charles V of Spain; ?estab?mos 
en disposici?n de ganar para vuestra majestad los mayores reinos y se?orios que hab?a en el 
mundo? (Cartas 51). 
 By comparing El poema de mio Cid and the Cartas de relaci?n of Cort?s, it becomes 
clear that both works share some key ingredients of epic poetry. However, it is important to 
point out that the process of fictionalization is not unique to the writings of Cort?s. Hayden 
White explains that fictionalization is indeed part and parcel of the universal process of creating 
a historical narrative regardless of the narrator?s credibility standing. According to White: 
The reader, in the process of following the historian?s account of those events, 
gradually comes to realize that the story he is reading is of one kind rather than 
another: romance, tragedy, comedy, satire epic or what have you. The original 
strangeness, mystery or exoticism of the events is dispelled and they take on a 
more familiar aspect, not in details but in their functions as elements of a 
familiar configuration.(86) 
When reading Cort?s?s Cartas de relaci?n, one should consider carefully White?s assertion that 
a work of non-fiction is created by following the format of a work of fiction, That Cort?s?s 
Cartas follow the mold of epic poetry is not in and of itself notable. What is notable is that his 
fictionalization was a deliberate intent to twist reality. Fictionalization was a mere tool that 
allowed him to craft a defense and build an empire. With the use of literary concepts, he was 
further able to create a fictionalized version of himself that was convincing enough to sway the 
course of world history.  
31 
 
 
Vel?zquez as the Antithesis of the Christian Knight 
 Once Cort?s had successfully established his credibility through the use of formal 
rhetoric and his fictionalized portrayal of the perfect medieval vassal, he still had to complete 
the task of discrediting his rival, Diego Vel?zquez. By using the concepts of medieval Christian 
vassalage to define himself, Cort?s was also able to frame Vel?zquez as his antithesis. He would 
have to use his Segunda carta de relaci?n to portray Vel?zquez?s actions as treasonous. This 
section seeks to expose the process by which this was accomplished.  
 According to Beatriz Pastor, ?the very first stage of transforming his rebellion into an 
act of service is aimed at disqualifying Vel?zquez as a legitimate representative of the king? 
(76). Every action that Vel?zquez takes in his own defense is framed (within Cort?s?s letters to 
the Emperor) as an act of treason. In his Segunda carta de relaci?n, Cort?s carefully crafts his 
sentences to portray Vel?zquez?s pursuance of him as a selfish act. Cort?s argues that, ?Diego 
Vel?zquez se hab?a movido con aquella armada y gente contra m? porque yo hab?a enviado la 
relaci?n y cosas de esta tierra a vuestra majestad y no al dicho Diego Vel?zquez? (92). As the 
letter progresses, Cort?s continues to assert this same narrative. However, his descriptions 
steadily become more audacious. He boldly draws a proverbial line in the sand. On one side he 
places those soldiers that are loyal to him. He describes them as being in service to the Emperor 
and being Christians. On the other side he places those that would turn against his conquest 
and side with Vel?zquez. Potential dissenters are described as disloyal infidels. According to 
Cort?s, Vel?zquez wrote, ?cartas de inducimiento a las personas que ten?a en mi compa??a en 
32 
 
servicio de vuestra Majestad, para que se levantasen contra m? y se pasasen a ?l, como si 
fu?ramos los unos infieles y otros cristianos, o unos vasallos de vuestra alteza y otros sus 
deservidores? (93). In framing his rival as an untrue vassal, Cort?s provided the Crown with a 
plausible justification for his disobedience to Vel?zquez. With the tip of a quill Cort?s was able 
to successfully convert his rebellion into an act of faithful service to the Crown. 
Variations of Distance and the Unreliable Narrator 
Unreliable narrators are commonplace throughout the literary world. The term was first 
coined by Wayne C. Booth in his book The Rhetoric of Fiction. He identifies a story as being told 
by an unreliable narrator when, ?those stories are narrated, whether in the first person or third 
person, by a profoundly confused, basically self-deceived, or even wrong-headed or vicious 
reflector? (Booth 340). Cort?s?s narrative in his Segunda carta most certainly qualifies as such. 
His Machiavellian quest for power and his creation of a fictional model as a tool for empire 
building, make the motive behind his narrative both unreliable and questionable. According to 
Wayne C. Booth, one of the identifying factors of an unreliable narrator is the fact that their 
?characteristics change in the course of the works they narrate? (156). One way this can be 
achieved is through the alternation between a third and first person narrative style within a 
single work. Indeed, Cort?s was particularly adept at using changing perspectives and variations 
of distance to his distinct advantage. However, it is not his mastery of varying distances that 
separates the Segunda carta from so many literary classics; it is his use of them to achieve a 
political objective that makes his model conquistador truly extraordinary. Cort?s?s reasons for 
changing the characteristics of his narrative are straightforward.  The concept of the unreliable 
33 
 
narrator can be used to manipulate the perceived distance the author has in relation to the 
events of the narrative. Emile Beneviste asks us to, ?consider the effect on the meaning 
produced by changing certain verbs. We notice the nature of opposition between the pronouns 
of the verb. The third person exists and is characterized only by its opposition to the person I? 
(732). The following questions must then be answered. Why would an author want to be in 
opposition to the person I? Under what kind of circumstances would an author find it useful to 
distance him/herself from the events of the narrative? 
An illustrative example of such circumstances can be found in the Historia de las Indias 
by Bartolom? de las Casas. He begins his account of the conquest and pacification of the island 
of Cuba in the first person plural. He describes his own participation in the Christianization of 
the island in the following way, ?explanado queda lo que tuvimos entendido de la Isla de Cuba y 
de las gentes que la moraban o habitaban, resta ya referir de la pasada que a ella hicimos los 
cristianos? (II: 522). As the narrative progresses, a dramatic shift in narrative person takes place. 
In fact, the timing of the shift to third person can be traced to the description of the massacre 
of the natives at Caonao. Las Casas painstakingly describes how he attempted to halt the 
brutality that took place. However, he curiously refers to himself as ?el clerigo? as if he were 
just another protagonist at the scene and not the one relating the story. ?El clerigo, movido a 
ira, va contra ellos reprendi?ndolos asperamente a estorbarlos y ellos que le tenian alguna 
reverencia, cesaron de lo que iban hacer? (II: 536). What happened to cause such a shift in 
narrative technique? In her article ?The Intellectual Legacy of Bartolom? de las Casas,? 
Margarita Zamora suggests that this narrative shift paralleled Las Casas?s shift in attitude about 
the conquest. She explains that, ?Las Casas came to the realization that he had been complicit 
34 
 
with the abuses of the conquest. He furthermore realized that he was living in a state of moral 
contradiction by keeping the encomienda he had been awarded. This led him to radically 
reorient his activities [?] to the public criticism of the colonial system and advocacy of Indian 
rights? (112). Las Casas was clearly uncomfortable with his connection to the brutal events at 
Caonao. The shift to a third person narrative allowed Las Casas to distance himself from events 
in which he had participated, thus he was able to maintain his integrity as a spokesman for the 
cause he later adopted.  
Cort?s was equally adept at alternating between points of view. He proudly boasts of his 
leadership during the Spaniards? confrontation with the Tlascaltecans. His use of the first 
person singular is prominent. He describes his actions this way; ?Y por ser yo el que acomet?a 
sal? a ellos con los de a caballo y 100 peones y 400 indios de los que traje de cempoal y antes 
que hubiese lugar de juntarse, les quem? cinco o seis lugares? (48). His use of the first person 
plural clearly aids him in portraying himself as the sole commander of the Spanish forces in 
Mesoamerica. According to Beatriz Pastor, ?The use of the first person singular creates a 
fictitious division between Cort?s and the rest of the men. Cort?s gives the appearance of being 
isolated, always successfully solving things thanks to one of his particular qualities? (87). 
Curiously, when things don?t go so well for the Spaniards in Tenochtitlan, he adjusts his 
narrative. When one of his officers suffered severe wounds and several of his men were killed 
in action, Cort?s never mentions that they were acting on his orders. Gone is his commanding 
first person narrative that he used during the battle with the Tlascaltecans. In fact, he seems to 
place the blame on the officer that sustained the wounds. He describes the action using the 
third person singular which makes it appear that the officer went, of his own accord, into the ill 
35 
 
fated engagement: ?Las flechas y tiraderas eran tantas que todas las paredes y patios estaban 
llenos...un capit?n sali? con 200 hombres y antes que se pudiese recoger, le mataron cuatro e 
hirieron a ?l y a muchos de los otros? (102). The third person singular allows him to strike a 
passive tone in his writings. He appears to be reporting what he observes and not that for 
which he is responsible. Unlike the case of his contemporary Bartolom? de las Casas, Cort?s 
does not make use of variations of distance solely as a means of distancing himself from acts 
that made him uncomfortable. Cort?s uses them as persuasive tools that could make or break 
his case for conquest in the eyes of the Emperor. 
Authorial Silence and the Selection of Events 
The fourth component of Cort?s?s fictional model was the careful selection of which 
events to include in his letter to the Emperor and which ones to omit. The prior sections of this 
chapter have been dedicated to analyzing the content that Cort?s chose to include. This section 
seeks to expose his silences. One of the most famous albeit horrific events of Mesoamerican 
conquest was the massacre at Cholula. The city was an ally of the Aztecs and its leadership was 
involved in a plot to ambush the Spaniards on their way to the Mesoamerican capital. In 
retaliation for their cooperation with Moctezuma, Cort?s unleashed his fury on the native city 
of Cholula. In his book Historia de la conquista de M?xico, Francisco L?pez de G?mara gives a 
detailed account of the events:  
Hizo desparar la escopeta, que era se?a, y arremetieron con gran impetu y enojo 
todos los Espa?oles y sus amigos a los del pueblo. Hicieron como en el estrecho 
en que estaban y en dos  horas mataron seis mil m?s [?] quemaron todas las 
36 
 
casas y torres que hac?an resistencia. Echaron fuera toda la vecindad, quedaron 
tintos de sangre. No pisaban sino cuerpos muertos. (160) 
 According to Las Casas, the primary source for G?mara?s account was Cort?s himself (II: 
528). To have received such detailed information about the massacre from the conquistador is 
revealing. The event certainly made enough of an impression on Cort?s that he was able to 
relate it to G?mara years later in such detail. Strangely, the massacre at Cholula was not even a 
footnote in Cort?s?s Segunda carta. No matter how bloody, Cholula was both a strategic and 
psychological military victory. According to historian Hugh Thomas in his book Conquest: 
Montezuma, Cort?s, and the Fall of Old Mexico, ?this punishment was thought appropriate to 
secure the pacification of the island [?] when they (the Aztecs) knew what had transpired, the 
Emperor and the city returned to their mood of panic? (263-264). Why then did Cort?s not 
include such an important event in his correspondence to Charles V? The answer is a simple 
one. It added nothing to the fictional model he was creating. According to Beatriz Pastor he, 
?excludes anything that cannot be suited to his objective and carefully reworks the material 
selected for inclusion (The Armature of the Conquest 72). Bloodlust and massacres would not 
have been helpful in convincing the Emperor Charles V that he was a holy warrior for God and 
the noble crown. 
Conclusion 
Cort?s was undoubtedly both a man of his times and an astute opportunist. He was able 
to weave a fictitious web as the model conquistador. The model was created by following a 
complex process of fictionalization. If we consider Hayden White?s assertion that all historical 
37 
 
accounts are created using a process of fictionalization, then we would have to conclude that 
Cort?s?s fictionalized narrative is unremarkable. Cort?s however, sets himself apart. His 
fictionalized account is the carefully thought out product of a purpose. There is an agenda 
behind the fa?ade. Beatriz Pastor states that, ?The fictionalization is deliberate and oriented 
toward certain highly political rather than literary objectives? (The Armature of the Conquest 
82). Cort?s created a model conquistador as a means to an end. The motivation for the creation 
of such a model is the acquisition of political power, fame, glory, and wealth. 
The fa?ade and the motivating agenda behind it are associated with opposing 
ideologies. This duplicitous nature was indeed indicative of the times. The fa?ade conformed to 
an inherently medieval mold while the agenda behind it was the embodiment of Renaissance 
humanism. The fictionalized version of Cort?s is submissive to the will of God and king. The real 
Cort?s behind the curtain used an approach that was both rational and secular. The appearance 
of the model is reminiscent of the epic hero The Cid. In actuality, the model has more in 
common with Machiavelli?s Renaissance Prince. According to Beatriz Pastor, ?both Cort?s?s 
model conquistador and Machiavelli?s model prince represent the very foundation of the 
political realism of the Renaissance? (The Armature of the Conquest 83). Machiavelli did not 
publish his work until well after the conquest of Mexico, therefore Machiavelli?s work did not 
directly influence Cort?s. However, the political realism of the Renaissance behind Machiavelli?s 
book most certainly did influence him. Cort?s?s process of fictionalization reads like a written 
example that follows Machiavelli?s road map to power. In fact, Machiavellian concepts are 
found throughout each of the five textual tactics that have been discussed in this chapter.  
38 
 
Shifting narrative perspectives allowed Cort?s to portray himself as a military genius. 
Through a first person narrative of the battle with the Tlaxcaltecans, Cort?s puts his courage 
and valor on display. Beatiz Pastor has commented that, ?Cort?s?s undeniable personal valor 
appears as the sole factor leading to the success of the enterprise to the exclusion of all others? 
(The Armature of the Conquest 86-87). Cort?s appears to us as a fierce warrior who has earned 
his command by the power of his own sword and the skill of his mind. These actions parallel the 
Machiavellian concept of the rise to power through the art of war. According to Machiavelli, ?a 
prince ought to have no other aim or thought, nor select anything else for his study than war 
and its rules and discipline. This is the sole art that belongs to him who rules. It is of such force 
that it not only upholds those who are born princes, but it often enables men to rise from a 
private station to one of rank? (66). Cort?s was most certainly conscious of the fact that war 
would help him rise in rank, but he was also conscious of the fact that characterizing himself as 
a mighty warrior in his Cartas de relaci?n would help him gain renown with his intended 
audience as well. This can be evidenced by the fact that Cort?s distanced himself from 
situations that did not support this characterization. This was accomplished by switching to a 
third person and/or a first person plural narrative when the situation at hand was going poorly. 
Thus any culpability was shifted onto others or shared with them. Silences reverberate 
throughout Cort?s?s Carta de relaci?n. He selectively eliminated events (such as the massacre at 
Cholula) from his narrative that did not serve his purpose. Machiavelli offers a possible motive 
for such silences: 
A prince ought to take care that he never lets anything slip from his lips that is 
not replete with fidelity and religion, that he may appear to him who sees and 
39 
 
hears him altogether merciful, faithful, humane, and religious. Everyone sees 
what you appear to be. Few really know what you are. For that reason, a prince 
will have the credit of conquering and holding his state. The means will always 
be considered honest and he will be praised because the vulgar are always taken 
by what a thing seems to be and by what comes of it. (81-82) 
Cort?s?s portrayal of an epic hero similar to the Cid was a means to an end. The 
objective was not literary but political in nature. What would have motivated Cort?s to base his 
narrative on the antics of epic heros? Machiavelli provides a possible answer. He promotes the 
emulation of great men from history for the purpose of acquiring and maintaining power. He 
suggests that:  
to exercise the intellect the prince should read histories and study there the 
actions of illustrious men, to see how they borne themselves in war, to examine 
the cause of their victories and defeat, so as to avoid the latter and imitate the 
former; and above all do as illustrious men did ?whose achievements and deeds 
he always keeps in his mind. As it is said, Alexander the Great imitated Achilles, 
and Caesar imitated Alexander the Great. (68) 
Such a self characterization allowed Cort?s to present himself as the perfect Christian vassal 
and Vel?zquez as its antithesis.  
Cort?s was also careful to present himself as a reliable witness that observes the rules of 
official rhetoric. This former was achieved by Cort?s mentioning throughout his Carta de 
relaci?n that he has firsthand knowledge of an event or geographical location. The latter was 
40 
 
achieved through his use of ars dictaminis and humilitas. Such concepts aided the conquistador 
in conforming to the expectations of the era. This gave his correspondence an air of compliance 
that helped to mask his rebellion. Machiavelli claims that such appearances are of the utmost 
importance. He states that, ?it is unnecessary for a prince to have all good qualities, but he 
must do things that make himself appear to have them? (80). 
By using Renaissance concepts such as these, Cort?s was able to formulate not just a 
fictionalized fa?ade, but a powerful political tool that had earth shattering consequences on 
world history. This political tool aided him in turning his rebellion into a service and establishing 
him in the annals of history as the model conquistador. While it brought him personal fame and 
glory, the model had tragic consequences for the Native American societies. By creating a work 
of fiction, Cort?s contributed to the cultural blindness of his intended European audience. They 
were not able to see the Native American civilizations through any other reality save the 
fictional one. In her article ?Silencio y escritura: la conquista de Am?rica? Beatriz Pastor sums 
up the situation perfectly: 
El problema est? en que la formulaci?n de esas leyes de  ficcionalizaci?n 
aseguran el control de la realidad americana  por  el conquistador europeo quien 
lleva consigo la aprehensi?n y clasificaci?n de esa realidad en t?rminos del 
pensamiento europeo. De hecho, esa misma raz?n que se presenta como v?a del 
conocimiento objetivo funciona en relaci?n a Am?rica  como un instrumento de 
dominaci?n m?s. Dominaci?n que categoriza en terminos ajenos la realidad del 
Nuevo mundo, reduci?ndola e instrumentaliz?ndola. (142-43)  
41 
 
 In the following chapter, I will highlight the writings and documented actions of the 
conquistador of Cuba: Diego Vel?zquez. Through a comparative analysis, I will lay out the 
similarities, and a few differences, between the works of Diego Vel?zquez and Hern?n Cort?s. 
Thus, the reader will gain a more profound perspective on the model conquistador as defined 
by Beatriz Pastor in her work The Armature of the Conquest (81).   
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
42 
 
Chapter 3 
Exploring the Roots of Cort?s?s Model: A Comparative Analysis 
 Much has been made of the fictional model conquistador that Hern?n Cort?s created in 
his Cartas de relaci?n.  Cort?s?s conquest of Mesoamerica and his narrative concerning said 
conquest, are among the most written about and researched subjects in Spanish American 
history. This is with good reason. His ability to employ rhetorical techniques to aid in his rise to 
power is unmatched by any of his contemporaries. Yet the analysis of his political maneuvers 
gains a fresh and enhanced perspective when we focus on the political environment from which 
he launched his conquest. We are all products of our environment and Cort?s is no exception. 
Our lives are shaped and influenced by the people close to us and the environments in which 
we live.  Therefore, it is necessary to consider Cort?s in the context of his relationship with 
Vel?zquez and the conquest of Cuba. In this final chapter I will draw a direct link between the 
political environment during the conquests of Cuba and Cort?s?s political techniques during the 
conquest of Mesoamerica. This will be done through a comparative analysis between the 
writings and political tactics of Diego Vel?zquez and those of Hern?n Cort?s. On the 1st of April 
1514, Diego Vel?zquez penned a letter to King Ferdinand of Spain. Said letter, known as the 
Carta de relaci?n de la isla de Cuba, narrates Vel?zquez?s version of events that transpired 
during the Spanish conquest and colonization of the island of Cuba.  This letter, along with 
various letters authored by King Ferdinand will serve as a tool of comparison to the model 
found in Cort?s?s Segunda carta de relaci?n. 
43 
 
 It is certainly true that the conquest of Cuba simply cannot compare to the conquest of 
Mesoamerica in terms of complexity and the size of the campaign. It is also true that the 
narrative written by Vel?zquez cannot compare to the narrative written by Cort?s in terms of 
literary value, complexity, and length. I do not suggest that the actions of both men are an 
exact match. However, there are underlying themes that unite them.  These common themes 
will be thoroughly explored in the five sections of this chapter. The first section will be 
dedicated to examining the formal fa?ade of Diego Vel?zquez?s Carta de relaci?n de la isla de 
Cuba and the way in which he used certain forms of medieval rhetoric to establish a credible 
narrative. The second section will focus on Vel?zquez portraying himself as a loyal vassal and 
Christian knight. The third section will analyze how Vel?zquez used the concept of the loyal 
Christian knight to eliminate his political foe. Section four discusses Vel?zquez as an unreliable 
narrator that distances himself from potentially damaging situations. Section five will focus on 
Vel?zquez?s authorial silence concerning a large scale massacre of Native Americans.  Within 
each section, a direct link will be drawn to the same themes found in the narrative of Hern?n 
Cort?s during the conquest of Mesoamerica. 
The Use of Formality in Order to Establish Legitimacy 
 During the conquest of Mexico, Hern?n Cort?s began penning a narrative to the 
Emperor with the express purpose of turning his rebellion into a service for the Crown. He was 
operating outside of the realm of Royal authority and his letters reflected this reality.  He 
desperately needed to portray himself as a conformist to the expectations of the Spanish 
Crown. The legal and rhetorical standards of the time offered him an opportunity to legitimize 
44 
 
his image in the eyes of Charles V. Cort?s went out of his way to carefully conform to the 
epistolary model of the era as will be evidenced in this section. This formal fa?ade set the stage 
for his defense and gave his narrative an air of credibility.  
 The conquest of Cuba took place under very different circumstances than the conquest 
of Mexico. Diego Vel?zquez was executing the orders of his superiors, not rebelling against 
them. In the Carta de relaci?n de la isla de Cuba, his narrative tone is much simpler and more 
subdued than that of Cort?s. This is partly due to the fact that the conquest of Cuba was a 
much simpler endeavor than the conquest of Mexico. Mostly however, it is due to the fact that 
Vel?zquez had already obtained the royal blessing prior to the commencement of his military 
campaign. Cort?s?s use of reliable witness techniques, ars dictaminis, and captatio benevolentia 
is at times exaggerated, perhaps even over the top, when compared to the narrative of many of 
his contemporaries. For example, Francisco L?pez de G?mara begins his narrative by simply 
stating the official title of the Emperor Carlos and dedicating the chronicle to him. He writes, ? A 
Don Carlos, emperador de Romanos, Rey de Espa?a, Se?or de las Indias y Nuevo Mundo? (39). 
However, Cort?s opens his Carta de relaci?n with much more hyperbole and colorful adjectives. 
He addresses the Emperor as, ?Muy alto y poderoso y muy cat?lico pr?ncipe, invictisimo 
emperador y se?or nuestro? (39). Although on a lesser scale, we can see that Diego Vel?zquez 
did indeed adhere to some of these techniques as well. Just like Cort?s, he was participating in 
a financial endeavor on behalf of the Spanish Crown. Both men were operating in territory that 
was half a world away from the Spanish center of power. The political situation of the 
conquistadors was precarious because the distance and autonomy could have easily given the 
Crown good reason to become suspicious of anyone who did not give the impression of 
45 
 
absolute loyalty. Therefore, it was in the interest of both men to make good use of the 
epistolary models of the era. 
 Vel?zquez adheres to the standard practice of ars dictaminis.  Within his Carta de 
relaci?n de la Isla de Cuba, the salutatio/exordium, the narratio and the conclusio can be easily 
identified. Unlike Cort?s in his exordium, Vel?zquez uses neither fancy wording nor Latin syntax. 
However, he does give thanks and reverence that is due a king. He opens his correspondence 
with a simple, ?Gracias por la merced de la tenencia de la Asunci?n [the first capital of Cuba, 
founded by Vel?zquez] y por el poder para repartir los indios?Gracias en nombre de la isla por 
la merced que gocen todos franquicias que la expuesta? (1). If the purpose of the exordium is to 
establish goodwill with the recipient and reaffirm his loyalty as a vassal, then Vel?zquez?s 
exordium certainly accomplishes the objective. He had nothing to gain from exaggerated 
overtures of royal devotion. Vel?zquez is also compliant with the expectation that he be a 
reliable witness for the events he narrates.  He carefully employs the first person when 
describing even the most mundane events concerning the conquest of Cuba. Thus, he gives 
himself an air of credibility by placing himself at the scene of the events in question. He 
narrates that, ?ya que prove? en la Asunci?n lo conveniente, part? el 4 de octubre ?513 con 15 
hombres por mar en canoas por la costa N.  Llegu? a las provincias de Bany i Bacaxagua, do 
estuve 4-5 d?as porque acudieron caciques e indios. Part? por las provincias de Guaimaya i del 
Mayee haciendo lo mismo? (7). It is important to note that these rhetorical techniques were 
standard operating procedure for society at that time. What makes the narratives of these two 
conquistadors unique is that they both share a common political motive. Both men had 
46 
 
everything to gain from establishing credibility and everything to lose for portraying the lack 
thereof.  
Adherence to the code of medieval vassalage and the portrayal of a Christian Knight 
 Although the conquests of both Cuba and Mexico were ambitious expressions of 
Renaissance Humanism, the culture remained rooted in the religious dogma of the medieval 
era (Weckmann 130). This culture caused the conquistadors to cloak their ambitions behind 
religiously charged rhetoric. Although the theme of self advancement was present in the 
actions of both Cort?s and Vel?zquez, it was masked by a word selection that portrayed a 
devoted vassal that conquered only for God and the Spanish Crown. 
 Both narratives follow the established themes of the literary genre of epic poetry per 
the definition of William T. H. Jackson in his book The Hero and the King. The first epic theme 
outlined by Jackson is that which demands loyalty to a superior lord or monarch from a young 
and ambitious warrior (3).  Just like Cort?s, Vel?zquez is careful to never portray his own 
interests. All actions are for and on behalf of King Ferdinand. When he addresses the natives, 
he narrates that, ?les hable de parte de Vuestra Alteza? (8).  When he sends his troops inland 
he writes that, ?fuesen por la tierra para reconocer i pacificar con  instrucciones para les hablar 
sobre la superioridad de Vuestra Alteza para que le reconociesen? (9). Although Vel?zquez?s 
personal ambition cannot be denied, the picture he paints in his narrative is that of a selfless 
and loyal vassal to the Crown.  
 The second and third theme of epic poetry as defined by Jackson has to do with the 
narrative taking place in a situation of political turmoil and exile from one?s own culture (3). Just 
47 
 
like Cort?s, Vel?zquez arrived on foreign soil with the intent of disrupting the established 
political order and establishing a new one. He was at the head of a small army of a few hundred 
Spanish soldiers that were far from their home and their native culture. As the Spaniards came 
to shore on the island of Cuba, the clash of civilizations began. The enemy forces were headed 
by the Taino chieftain Hatuey, who had already been exposed to the ruthlessness of the 
Spanish forces. Historian I. A. Wright describes the situation as follows: 
Hatuey, accompanied by his many subjects, had fled Hispaniola for  eastern 
Cuba. He was there established as a chieftain [?] Immediately upon arrival,       
he commenced to incite the Cube?os to resistance. He maddened them with 
relation of what the Haytians had endured, outrage, slaughter and slavery [?]   
as a result, Cuba showed itself hostile to Vel?zquez and his men. They found 
themselves involved soon after their landing in an active campaign against the 
natives whom they hunted into the mountains. (26). 
Hatuey was eventually caught and burned alive by Vel?zquez and his men.  Historian Jos? de 
Alc?zar gives a solid illustration of the conflict?s ending once their leader had been executed. 
?Este castigo termin? la resistencia de los naturales: los caciques fueron rindi?ndose uno tras 
otro, y de esta suerte 300 espa?oles se hicieron due?os de aquella rica y extensa isla? (14).  The 
descriptions of these events are relevant because they illustrate the similar situation both 
conquistadors found themselves in when they put pen to paper. Although Vel?zquez?s Carta de 
relaci?n de la isla de Cuba is not as long nor as complex as Cort?s? Segunda carta de relaci?n, it 
should be noted that both men were writing against a backdrop of turmoil and violence. 
48 
 
 Jackson?s final theme of epic poetry is the intrusion of an outsider to the reins of power 
(3). The outsider, in this case Vel?zquez, often gains great power through the course of the 
narration. However, he must first placate the established ruler.  Evidence of Vel?zquez?s 
growing authority and his placation of King Ferdinand can be seen in the letters that the king 
himself sent to Vel?zquez. In a letter dated December 15th 1512, King Ferdinand expressed the 
following: 
He sido informado del cuidado y buena manera y recaldo que os  habe?s dado e 
da?s en el buen tratamiento e conversi?n de los indios de la dicha isla?por 
relaci?n del dicho Pasamonte, he sido informado cuan buen servidor eres, y cuan 
celoso de las cosas del servicio de nuestro se?or. Ans? vos encargo e mando lo 
continu?is.  Procurar de  aprovechar las cosas de nuestra facienda en esa dicha 
isla lo mejor  que se pueda. (Documentos in?ditos 31) 
The king has been placated and the authority to continue his reign of power in Cuba has been 
given. Although it is not as illustrious and detailed as Cort?s? Segunda carta de relaci?n,  
Vel?zquez?s narrative conforms to the norms of epic poetry as laid out by Jackson. Like the Cid 
before him and Cort?s after him, Vel?zquez attributes his victory to divine intervention. His 
spoils are not for his own sake but for his Lord and Master, King Ferdinand. Vel?zquez narrates 
the consecration of Cuba?s new Catholic church like this, ?Nombr? la iglesia S.  Salvador, porque 
all? fueron libres los cristianos del cacique Yahatuey, porque con la muerte suya se asegur? y 
salv? mucha parte de la isla: se?al? solares para las granjer?as de Vuestra Alteza? (8).  Here 
Vel?zquez is implying that their Lord and Savior (Salvador) was responsible for saving them 
49 
 
from the native attacks led by Yahatuey. Although the Spaniards are the invaders and the 
aggresors, Vel?zquez uses powerful imagery to frame his narrative. His description of the 
Christians being freed from Yahatuey gives the reader the psychological frame of reference that 
harkens to the then recent Christian Reconquest of Al-Andalus. In their book Colonial Latin 
America, Mark Burkholder and Lyman Johnson illustrate said frame of reference by stating that: 
The Reconquest created a cultural legacy that the conquistadors and settlers 
carried to the New World [?]The final triumph over the Muslims in Granada 
reinforced the booty mentality that the Iberian Christians had developed during 
the long Reconquest. Victorious Christians enslaved fifteen thousand Muslim  
inhabitants  of M?laga alone [?] Conveniently, the Christians saw their triumph 
as evidence that God actively supported their cause, a belief that they carried 
into battle against the native civilizations of the Americas. (23-24)  
Vel?zquez is no exception. All of his actions are justified because he is doing the work and the 
will of God. He ends his Carta de relaci?n de la Isla de Cuba by summing up the good work he is 
continuing with the now conquered cube?os. ?Algunos caciques e indios muestran m?s 
inclinaci?n que los de la Espa?ola a las cosas de la fe. Ay de ellos que saven el Pater Noster, Ave 
Mar?a, Credo i Salve. Ago poner en ello cuidado i con que se apliquen al trabajo? (13). 
 Vel?zquez never shows himself to be a soldier of fortune, even though he was indeed 
motivated by fortune and power.  He has, through his narrative, created a fictional warrior for 
Christ. Of course, Hayden White?s theory about the process of fictionalization applies here as 
well as it does in the writings of Hern?n Cort?s.  According to White, ?the process of 
50 
 
fictionalization is not unique to the writings of any one person? (86).  All narrators, whether 
they intend to or not, create fiction when trying to write history. What makes the narratives of 
both Cort?s and Vel?zquez unique is that they molded their narrative into a fiction so that they 
could be used as tools for empire building.  
Francisco Morales as the Antithesis of the Christian Knight and Vassal 
 Although Cort?s?s fictionalized caricature of himself as the ideal Christian knight was an 
important part of his success, he still had an important obstacle to overcome. Diego Vel?zquez 
posed a serious threat to his objectives. Cort?s used his narrative to the Emperor to politically 
neutralize his opponent. He achieved this by painting a fictionalized caricature of Vel?zquez as 
the antithesis of a Christian knight and vassal. He painted this portrait masterfully and 
ultimately achieved his goals. Was this tactic unique to Cort?s?s situation or had Cort?s been 
previously exposed to other conquistadors dealing with internal opposition in a similar manner?  
 Eight years prior to Cort?s?s arrival in Mesoamerica, he was a mere soldier under the 
command of Diego Vel?zquez during the conquest of the island of Cuba. He would later serve 
as his secretary during the time that Vel?zquez was consolidating his power and authority. 
Vel?zquez?s rise to power in Cuba was not without its challenges.  Once the conquest was 
complete, he began to face internal challenges to his leadership. Some of the soldiers under his 
command began to grow impatient with Vel?zquez. Many felt that they were not receiving the 
gold and slave labor they had hoped for in a timely fashion. In her book The Early History of 
Cuba, historian Irene Aloha Wright describes the situation like this: ?his men insisted they must 
have their loot, especially those who remained at Baracoa engaged in the unromantic drudgery 
51 
 
of building up a town while Vel?zquez and Narv?ez [Vel?zquez?s second in command] fared 
blithely forth to shed blood and perhaps to find more gold than they were finding [?] they 
threatened to abandon his dull camp at Baracoa and to leave the island, returning to Hispaniola 
whence they had come with anticipations of pleasanter things? (39). The ringleader of this 
discontent group of soldiers was Francisco Morales.  As Morales? influence grew Vel?zquez took 
note. He recognized that Morales was a threat to his objective of consolidating his power and 
influence in the newly acquired territory of Cuba.  
In his book Historia de las Indias, Bartolom? de Las Casas describes just how great a 
threat this situation posed: ?las quejas del teniente Vel?zquez crec?an de cada dia [?] en este 
tiempo vino a Cuba [?]  los jueces de apelaci?n y acordaron los quejosos de Diego Vel?zquez de 
hacer sus informaciones secretas y allegar sus memoriales y tomar sus firmas, para se enviar a 
quejar a los dichos jueces, como a justicias superiores que enviaba el rey? (II: 528). Vel?zquez 
knew that this movement had to be decapitated if he hoped to achieve the governorship of 
Cuba. He would have to build a narrative that would frame Morales as the antithesis of a 
proper vassal and Christian knight in the eyes of the King. His opportunity came when Francisco 
Morales ran into trouble in the Cuban settlement of Maniab?n. Morales attempted to capture 
some of the natives in this area with the intent of using them as slave labor. The natives 
rebelled against him and fighting broke out. The Spaniards, under the command of Morales, 
apparently punished the natives severely for their rebellion.  Several dozen of them were put to 
death. This action was consistent with the behavior of all the men participating in the conquest 
of Cuba, Diego Vel?zquez included. For example, Vel?zquez had ordered the chieftain Hatuey to 
be burned alive for similar transgressions. In his narrative to King Ferdinand, he barely mentions 
52 
 
a similar massacre that took place at Caonao. Despite the fact that hundreds of natives were 
murdered at Caonao, not one Spaniard ever stood trial for that tragic event.   
Vel?zquez clearly was no great defender of the Native Americans, yet he chose to 
inform the Royal Court of a massacre that took place under Morales in the province of 
Maniab?n. Not only does he inform the court of the incident, but he conveniently pins the 
blame on Francisco Morales. He used this incident in Maniab?n to his advantage so that he 
could politically eliminate Francisco Morales.  We know for a fact that Vel?zquez had Morales 
arrested following the events in Maniab?n. He was taken prisoner and returned to the island of 
Hispaniola for the purpose of standing trial for atrocities and abuses of the native population. 
Unfortunately, the letters that Vel?zquez wrote to the Spanish authorities accusing Morales of 
unethical treatment of the natives have been lost to history. However, King Ferdinand?s letter 
of response to Vel?zquez?s accusations has survived. It does a good job of filling in the blanks 
that were left by Vel?zquez?s missing correspondence. Through the King?s letter, we gain very 
good insight into what the content of Vel?zquez?s original letter would have been. Based on his 
correspondence with Vel?zquez, King Ferdinand now believes that Morales is a violent and 
bloodthirsty man who was only interested in his own acquisition of wealth.  On Dec 10th 1512, 
King Ferdinand penned his instructions to Vel?zquez as pertained to the legal situation of 
Francisco Morales. This document provides ample evidence of just how successful Vel?zquez 
was in making Morales appear to be untrue to Christian principles and the mission of the 
Crown: 
53 
 
Yo he sido informado que Francisco Morales, a quien vos enviastes  a la provincia 
de Maniab?n por vuestro logartentiente, ha fecho muchos excesos en el viaje 
que hizo, faciendo fuerzas e robos a personas de las  que consigo llevaba, e 
alborotado los indios, e llev?ndolos atados por fuerza, e maltrant?ndolos a 
dondequiera, e hizo otros muchos males e da?os dignos de mucha punci?n e 
castigo [?]e de todos ellos diz que fue acusado ante vos por los alcaldes e 
procuradores de la dicha provincia [?] proceded contra su persona e bienes por 
todo rigor de justicia. (?Colecci?n de Documentos,? 32) 
Even though we are not able to see the original wording of Vel?zquez?s letter, the 
results are identical to the results Cort?s achieved during his subsequent campaign in Mexico. 
Cort?s was able to eliminate the threat that Diego Vel?zquez posed to him in much the same 
way that Diego Vel?zquez was able to eliminate the threat that Francisco Morales posed. Both 
men effectively used narrative to neutralize their opposition by framing them as the antithesis 
of the Christian knight. What is on full display here is an effective Machiavellian tactic that uses 
religious dogma for the purpose of eliminating a political foe. This tactic was an important part 
of Cort?s?s fictional model conquistador. However, he did not invent such a maneuver. He had 
previously been exposed to it during the time he was under the command of Diego Vel?zquez 
on the island of Cuba. Ironically, the tactic that had worked so well for Vel?zquez in his own 
quest for power and wealth would be used against him later on during the conquest of Mexico.  
Authorial Silence and the Selection of Events 
54 
 
 Hern?n Cort?s?s time in Mesoamerica was fraught with internal turmoil. He was, however, 
adept at selectively eliminating any political and/or military misstep that did not conform to his 
fictional model. The massacre of the natives at Cholula tells us that Cort?s was a ruthless 
warrior that was skilled in the tactics of terrorism. His authorial silence on the matter tells us 
even more.  Cort?s?s omission of the events in Cholula from his Segunda carta de relaci?n tells 
us that these tactics, while effective on the battlefield, would not have suited his political 
objectives in relation to the Emperor Charles V.  The selective elimination of events allowed 
Cort?s to maintain his image as a Christian knight in the eyes of the Crown.  
Elements of this same tactic can be found in the correspondence Diego Vel?zquez had 
with King Ferdinand during the conquest of Cuba.  Vel?zquez presided over at least one known 
massacre of natives that was similarly edited for royal consumption.  The massacre took place 
along the banks of the Caonao River. Bartolom? de las Casas describes the bloody incident like 
this: 
Estando El Capit?n en su yegua y los dem?s en las suyas a caballo y el mismo 
padre mirando c?mo se repart?a el pan y pescado, s?bitamente sac? un Espa?ol 
su espada, en quien se crey? que se le revisti? el diablo, y luego  todos ciento sus 
espadas, y comienza a desbarrigar y a cuchillar y matar de aquellas ovejas y 
corderos, hombres, y mujeres, ni?os y viejos, que estaban sentados descuidados, 
mirando las yeguas y los espa?oles pasmados y dentro de dos credos no queda 
hombre vivo de todos cuantos all? estaban. Entran en la gran casa, que junto 
55 
 
estaba [?] y comienzan lo mismo a matar a cuchilladas y estocadas cuantos all? 
hallaron. (II: 536)   
Although the events that Las Casas describes are astoundingly brutal, they were more 
than likely not out of the ordinary. The realities of a war of conquest in unfamiliar territory, 
where they were outnumbered, were sure to have kept the Spaniards permanently on edge. 
Drastic measures of intimidation and terror were sure to have proven useful in a multitude of 
circumstances.  However, the religious nature of the conquest complicated matters for these 
soldiers of fortune. King Ferdinand, the Catholic monarch who had successfully expelled the 
Moors from the Iberian Peninsula, was always mindful to attach the cross to any conquest 
made in his name. There was a clear contradiction between the violence necessary to pull off 
such an endeavor and the human compassion that Christianity espouses. One only needs to 
read the correspondence between Vel?zquez and the king to see evidence of this duality. The 
Real Academia de la Historia Espa?ola maintains a collection of such correspondence. In one of 
the letters, dated 12 December 1512, King Ferdinand clearly dictates his expectations for the 
treatment of the natives to Vel?zquez. He states, ?Teng?is mucho cuidado y vigilancia en el 
buen tratamiento y conversi?n de los Indios de la dicha isla? (?Colecci?n de Documentos,? 31). 
Vel?zquez was expected to conform to the preexisting model known as the Christian warrior 
and vassal. However, when crafting his required Carta de relaci?n de la isla de Cuba, he found 
himself in a predicament that was very similar to what Cort?s would experience just a few years 
later.  The truth would have to be tweaked and the contents of his Carta de relaci?n edited 
accordingly. 
56 
 
 Vel?zquez begins his version of the events in question with the departure of a rescue 
mission. He sends one hundred soldiers to the banks of the Caonao River in search of nine 
missing Spaniards who had disappeared after their ship capsized off the coast of Cuba in 1509. 
Vel?zquez makes a concerted effort to highlight the good intentions his men had toward the 
natives at the onset of their expedition: 
Embie a la costa abaxo 100 ombres en busca de 9 christianos que se han 
ausentado de la gente que iva con Seb. d? Ocampo. Mandeles todo buen comedo 
con los naturales: estos en el No Vo [Nombre Vuestro] les hicieron mui buen 
acogimiento, les dieron de comer como si fueran  deudos por decilles seg?n les 
previne que en el N de V.A. [Nombre de Vuestra Alteza] les enviaba a  ver aquella 
provincia y que todos hav?an de ser vasallos y servidores de V.A. i tuvieron buen 
prop?sito y voluntad orque la intenci?n no era  da?arlos sino de tornarlos 
cristianos para que sirvieran a Dios  y a V.A. (1)  
  His good and peaceful intentions were expressed to satisfy the expectations of the King 
and soften the blow for the event that follows. His narrative takes a sudden and jolting turn 
following the initial departure of his troops. Vel?zquez receives a letter from his soldiers in 
Caonao stating that they were in distress and that they feared for their lives because of the high 
population of natives. According to Vel?zquez, his soldiers recommend a preemptive strike and 
he responds by sending reinforcements.  He moves from good intentions to the lack of mention 
of a massacre in a single sentence. He omits any details and instead offers a vague excuse for 
sending reinforcements. He writes, ?Tuve cartas dellos [?] y pensaron que tanta corr?a de 
57 
 
Indios era por les matar sobre seguro [?] y les envie socorro de 50 ombres y 10 cavallos ques 
cosa q. han mucho miedo? (2).  He never explains what the natives did to scare them nor how 
any of the events transpired. The massacre of hundreds of Native Americans is reduced to a 
skeletal explanation of four sentences that offers nothing more than a dubious justification. 
What we can be sure of, is that his silence is no accident. For both Cort?s and Val?zquez, these 
silences were a powerful tool that allowed them to shape a fictional narrative to suit their 
political objectives.   
Variations of Distance and the Unreliable Narrator  
 In the previous chapter, Wayne C. Booth?s unreliable narrator was defined as a narrator 
that should not be trusted either because he/she is confused or because they are intentionally 
deceitful. One of the hallmarks of this type of narrator is the changing characteristics 
throughout the narrative. I have discussed Hern?n Cort?s as fitting of this description and his 
alternation between first person and third person narrator as a symptom of his unreliability.  
When events are unfolding favorably he uses only the first person singular to narrate.  This 
gives him the appearance of a hero, such as the Cid, that is always in command of the situation. 
However, he switches to third person as soon an unfavorable situation unfolds. This was done 
to manipulate the perceived distance Cort?s had in relation to the events.  
 Diego Vel?zquez also fits the mold of the unreliable narrator because of his underlying 
motives to adapt his story. During the time of the conquest of Cuba, he was a man with his 
sights set on a governorship and a large fortune. His Carta de relaci?n de la isla de Cuba would 
have to be worded carefully to further his rise to power. The events in question and how they 
58 
 
were portrayed would have been of the utmost importance. In this aspect, his situation was 
very similar to that of Cort?s. Just as Hern?n Cort?s?s success depended on the good graces of 
the Emperor Charles V, Diego Vel?zquez depended on the good graces of King Ferdinand. While 
Vel?zquez probably never used the first person to portray himself as a hero, he did indicate that 
he was responsible for events that unfolded in a favorable manner for the Spanish Crown. He 
credits himself alone for resolving the rather pesky issue of the natives fleeing following 
massacres. He portrays himself as the hero and the only Spaniard the natives trusted. He alone 
convinces them to come out of hiding once the other Spaniards had scared them. He testifies, 
?se fueron a los montes con sus mujeres, hijos i haciendas, pero yo fui a la provincia de 
Guamuhaya i los asegur?? (2). He is the lone resolver of all problems on the island, yet he 
mysteriously manages to remain distant from anything that goes awry. He manipulates his 
narrative to distance himself from certain events. Both Cort?s and Vel?zquez shared a powerful 
motive for distancing themselves from events that did not suit their purpose.     
Cort?s uses the third person to shift blame and absolve himself from culpability; so too 
does Vel?zquez. Cort?s used the third person for the setbacks during the battle for 
Tenochtitlan. Vel?zquez carefully chooses to employ the third person while narrating the events 
that transpired along the Caonao River.  However, he distinguishes himself a bit from Cort?s in 
that he actually says outright that the massacre was done against his orders. Cort?s implies that 
he was not responsible by using the third person narrative. Vel?zquez goes one step further and 
flatly denies any involvement. He states, ?les guiaron por el Puerto [?] do havia celada de 
mucha gente; aunque contra mi orden les fue forzado pelear i mataron 100 indios ?(2). This 
massacre happens once Vel?zquez has received word that his soldiers are fearful and he sends 
59 
 
reinforcements. His own soldiers even request a preemptive strike before he sends 
reinforcements. Is it probable that a commanding officer, sending reinforcements as an answer 
to a terrified plea for help, would somehow be sending them on a good will mission? Is it 
probable that a commanding officer would have such little knowledge of the situations his 
troops were encountering? Vel?zquez was living and fighting in the same conditions as the 
soldiers under his command. I believe it is not probable that Vel?zquez innocently sent 
reinforcements to secure the peace. In all probability, he reacted with the instincts of a 
battlefield commander who sent additional soldiers to secure the mission at all costs.  There 
was a small problem when it came time to report the events to the king. The King?s orders 
pertaining to the treatment of the natives and the punishment for those that violated his orders 
was not unknown to Vel?zquez. It is very likely that he adapted his story to fit the model the 
king desired. The truth about the extent of Vel?zquez?s involvement in the massacre has 
unfortunately been lost to history. What is clear however, is that the narrative Diego Vel?zquez 
used to describe the events at Caonao helped him  effectively distance himself from a 
potentially career ending situation.  
After having explored how Vel?zquez?s narrative may have served as an example for 
Cort?s?s Segunda carta de relaci?n, the following chapter will be dedicated to gathering 
conclusions about the link between these two men and their respective narratives. 
 
 
 
60 
 
 
Conclusion 
 The complex and volatile relationship that developed between Diego Vel?zquez and 
Hern?n Cort?s played out against a backdrop of a society in transition. Spain?s medieval past 
was slow to disappear. At the dawn of the sixteenth century, Spain had just completed the 
religious reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula after several hundred years of warfare against an 
Islamic occupier. The nation was now unified under King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, the 
Catholic monarchs. The Spaniard of the sixteenth century maintained the fervent religious 
devotion to the Catholic Church that had been present during medieval times. At the same 
time, the Renaissance and its humanist ideals were spreading across the European continent. 
The concepts of individualism and human ambition had suddenly appeared next to an all-
powerful medieval God. It was against this backdrop of Renaissance humanism and medieval 
religious dogma, that Cort?s and Vel?zquez set sail for America.  It was against this backdrop 
that both men would participate in a religious and military conquest of the New World that 
would carry them both to new heights of fame, fortune and glory.  
 In the New World, a model for success was established. Because the conquest of Mexico 
involved a large geographic area and more complex military and political maneuvers, most 
historians have focused on Cort?s as having set the precedent. In her book The Armature of the 
Conquest Beatriz Pastor eloquently dissects the fictional model that was followed by Cort?s. 
She states: 
61 
 
In the Letters, the fictionalization of events and characters is governed entirely 
by Cort?s?s need to legitimize his venture and consolidate his power. Its 
structure is calculated and impeccably rational. The narrative takes a form 
usually associated with an official document, suggesting a direct equivalence 
between the content narrated and the truth. At the same time, the philosophy 
implicit between the lines appeals to a Renaissance ideology that would hold 
from Machiavelli to St. Ignatius of Loyola that the end justifies the means and 
that legitimacy of an action is determined by its success. Within this framework, 
Cort?s creates a fiction by selecting, reorganizing, and reelaborating the 
material. (99) 
Although Pastor provides an insightful and accurate description of Cort?s?s model conquistador, 
I believe that we can gain even more insight into this model when we delve into Cort?s?s past 
and the environment from which he launched his famous conquest of Mesoamerica. The roots 
of Cort?s?s model can partly be found in the conquest of the Caribbean islands of Hispaniola 
and Cuba. During his time on both of these islands he worked under the command of Diego 
Vel?zquez. On the island of Hispaniola, he soldiered under Vel?zquez during the native 
rebellions in the provinces of Aniguavagua and Guacayrima. He fought alongside him during the 
conquest of Cuba and later served as his personal secretary.  Cort?s had a personal connection 
to Vel?zquez?s ascendance to power. It should come as no surprise that the ambitious Cort?s 
observed and learned a few lessons along the way. When observed closely, Cort?s?s model 
conquistador bears a striking resemblance to the path that Vel?zquez followed to power. Both 
men made use of reliable witness techniques, ars dictaminis, and captatio benevolentia as a 
62 
 
means of establishing the appearance of legitimacy. Both conquistadors, through their 
narrative, carefully crafted an image of an obedient Christian vassal. Within their narratives 
they painted their enemies as the antithesis of a loyal vassal, with the express purpose of 
politically eliminating them. When crafting their respective narratives, both men carefully 
included only the events that enhanced their fictional images as model conquistadors. 
Liabilities, such as the massacres at Cholula and Caonao were either eliminated entirely or 
glossed over to make them palatable to a royal audience.  When total elimination of these 
negative events was not possible, both conquistadors used narrative techniques to distance 
themselves from the action. Thus, they escaped responsibility for any events that did not fit the 
model. They also shared a very powerful motive for creating this fictional model conquistador. 
In his book The Prince, Nicolo Machiavelli  sheds light on the agenda behind the model: 
It is unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities I have enumerated 
but it is very necessary to appear to have them. I shall dare say this also, that to 
have these qualities and  to always observe them is injurious and that to appear 
to have them is useful. For this reason a prince ought to take care that he never 
lets anything slip  from his lips that is not replete with these qualities, that he 
may appear to him who sees and hears him altogether merciful, faithful,humane, 
upright, and religious. There is nothing more necessary to appear to have than 
this last quality, inasmuch as men judge generally more by the eye than by the 
hand, because it belongs to everybody to see you, too few to come in touch with 
you. Everyone sees what you appear to be, few really know what you are. (81) 
63 
 
The model conquistador was a fiction that masked a Machiavellian plot for the acquisition of 
fame, power and wealth. Although The Prince was published after the conquest of Mexico, 
Cort?s no doubt absorbed the spirit of the Machiavellian tactics that were being employed by 
his superior, comrade in arms, and fellow conquistador Diego Vel?zquez. However, both men 
were acting out a wider dynamic that belonged to the conquest of the New World as a whole. 
In her article titled ?The first fifty years of Hispanic New World historiography: the Caribbean, 
Mexico, and Central America? Stephanie Merrim sums up this dynamic perfectly: 
Failure required justification, trespasses reparation, errors and confusions 
explanation, inequities redressing. Many of the earliest historiographical writings 
from the New World were motivated not only by the desire to recount victories 
but to an important degree by the need to seek pardon, legitimation, power, and 
reward, which needs would lend special urgency to their writings. Special 
urgency and narrative interest-for out of necessity the actor-chroniclers of the 
New World contrived complex verbal strategies in mounting their self defenses 
and petitions. Rather than being ancillary to action, writing was an essential form 
of action. A sense of what their words would do weighed heavily upon these 
early writers. So it was that men of arms, at times ill prepared for the task, 
became men of letters, who could create texts as nuanced and strategically 
crafted as many works of literature. Carefully couched in the language of 
success, they would proffer their failures. (58-59) 
64 
 
Much of what we see in Cort?s?s fictional model was already part of the culture of the 
New World conquest as a whole. However, the complex political situation specifically 
surrounding the conquest of Mexico required a more complex narrative than had been 
previously used. Cort?s simply rose to the occasion.  
I expect this thesis to contribute a more expansive view of the previously defined model 
conquistador in Beatriz Pastor?s The Armature of Conquest: Spanish Accounts of the Discovery 
of America 1492- 1589. While the tactics Cort?s used may not have been original?owing much 
to Vel?zquez and to literary and political traditions, the size, scope, intricacy and detail of his 
narrative put him into a class all his own. Hern?n Cort?s?s Cartas de Relaci?n stand alone both 
for their literary value and for their political outcome. Cort?s?s fictional model conquistador was 
as important as the sword in the execution of one of the most consequential military conquests 
in world history. 
 
 
                        
                 
       
                          
  
 
  
65 
 
                                                            Works Cited 
 
Alc?zar, Jos? De. Historia de Espa?a en Am?rica (Isla de Cuba).Madrid: Herres, 1898. Print.  
Aza?stre, Antonio, and Juan Casas. Manual de la ret?rica espa?ola. Barcelona: Ariel, 1997.      
 Print. 
Benveniste, Emile. ?The Nature of the Linguistic Sign.? Critical Theory Since 1965. Ed. 
 Hazaed Adams and Leroy Searle. Tallahasee: Florida State UP, 1986.725-727. Print. 
Bisson, Thomas. ?Medieval Lordship.? Speculum, 70 (1995): 743-758. JSTOR. Web. 12  
 November 2009. 
?The Book of Psalms.? The New American Bible. New York: Catholic Book Publishing,  
1992.Print. 
Booth, Wayne. The Rhetoric of Fiction. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1961. Print. 
Burkholder, Mark, and Lyman Johnson. Colonial Latin America. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2004. Print. 
Cervantes de Salazar, Francisco. Cr?nica de la Nueva Espa?a. Ed. Manuel Magall?n.  
 Madrid: Atlas, 1971. Print. 
Clavero, Dolores. ?Algunas cosas de Hern?n Cort?s y M?xico: una lectura humanista de la  
 Segunda Carta de Relaci?n.? Revista Canadiense de Estudios Hisp?nicos 22 
 (1996): 213-222. Print. 
Cort?s, Hern?n. Cartas de relaci?n. M?xico D.F.: Grupo Editorial Tomo, 2005. Print. 
Colecci?n de documentos in?ditos relativos al descubrimiento: Isla de Cuba .Madrid: 
 Real Academia de la Historia, 1885. Print. 
D?az del Castillo, Bernal. Historia verdadera de la conquista de la Nueva Espa?a. Ed. Dav?d  
  Carrasco. Albuquerque: U of New Mexico P, 2008. Print. 
Diccionario de la lengua espa?ola.22nd ed. 2 vols. Madrid: Real Academia Espa?ola, 2001. 
66 
 
 Print. 
Elliott, John H. ?The Mental World of Hern?n Cort?s.? Transactions of The Royal Historical  
 Society 17 (1966): 41-58. JSTOR. Web. 17 September 2008. 
Jackson,William Thomas. The Hero and the King. New York: Columbia UP, 1982. Print. 
Katt?n- Ibarra, Juan. Perspectivas culturales de Espa?a. Chicago: National Textbook 
 Company, 1995. Print. 
Las Casas, Bartolom? de. Historia de las Indias. Ed. Guillermo Pi?a Contreras. 3 vols.  
 Santo Domingo: Ediciones del Continente, 1985. Print. 
L?pez de G?mara, Francisco. Historia de la conquista de M?xico. M?xico: Oc?ano, 2003. Print. 
Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince.  Trans. W.K. Marriott. New York: Random House, 1992. Print. 
Merrim, Stephanie. ?The first fifty years of Hispanic New World historiography: the Caribbean, 
 Mexico, and Central America.? The Cambridge History of Latin American Literature. 
  Ed. Roberto Gonz?lez Echevarr?a and Enrique Pupo Walker. Cambridge: U of Cambridge  
 P,  Vol. 1, 1996. 58 -100. Print.       
Mignolo,Walter. ?Cartas, cr?nicas y relaciones del descubimiento.? Historia de la literatura  
 hispanoamericana. Vol. 1, 1992. 57-116. Print. 
Miralles, Juan.  Hern?n Cort?s: Inventor de M?xico. Barcelona: Tusquets, 2001. Print. 
M?jica, B?rbara. Texto y vida: introducci?n a la literatura espa?ola. New York: Harcourt, 
 1990. Print. 
Pastor, Beatriz. The Armature of Conquest: Spanish Accounts of the Discovery of America.  
 Trans. Lydia Longstreet Hunt. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1992. Print. 
---. ?Silencio y escritura: la historia de la conquista.? Cr?tica y descolonizaci?n:  
 El sujeto colonial en la cultura latinoamericana.  Ed. Beatriz Gonz?lez Stephan and  
 L?cia Helena Costigan. Caracas: Academia Nacional de la Historia, 1992. 129-163. Print. 
67 
 
Poema de mio Cid.  Ed. Ian  Michael. Madrid: Cl?sicos Castalia P, 1984. Print. 
Suchlicki, Jamie. Historical Dictionary of Cuba. London: The Scarecrow Press, 1988. Print. 
Thomas, Hugh. Conquest: Moctezuma, Cort?s and the Fall of Old Mexico. London:  
 Hutchinson, 1993. Print. 
Torre, Margarita. El Cid y otros hombres de la guerra. Le?n: Eds. U de Le?n, 2000. Print. 
Vel?zquez, Diego De. Carta de relaci?n de la conquista de Cuba. New York: C?rculo de cultura 
panamericano, 1965. Print. 
Weckmann, Luis. ?The Middle Ages in the Conquest of America.? Speculum  26 (1951): 
 130-141. JSTOR. Web. 9 July 2009. 
White, Hayden. Tropics of Discourse: Essays in Cultural Criticism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins 
 UP, 1978. Print. 
Witt, Ronald. ?Medieval Ars Dictaminis and the Beginnings of Humanism: a new construction of  
 the problem.? Renaissance Quarterly 1(1982): 1-35. JSTOR. Web. 26 April 2009. 
Wright, Irene.Aloha. The Early History of Cuba. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1916. Print.  
Zamora, Margarita. ?The Intellectual Legacy of Bartolom? de Las Casas.? Hispanic Issues On Line 
 8 (2011): 111-125. JSTOR. Web. 17 December 2011.     
                   
 
 
 
 
 
 
68