JH-APPARTS+Method+Primary+Source+Responses

__Hernan Cortez Conquers Mexico__ (pp. 9-12) //**Author**// – The author of this document is Hernando Cortez, who was an eyewitness to the events he is describing. His point of view can be seen as one of a proud Spaniard. //**Place and Time**// – Cortez wrote this letter at Segura de la Frontera on October 30, 1520 to the King of Spain. This was no more than a year after the events described. //**Prior Knowledge**// – Cortez was one of the conquistadors sent from Spain to explore and claim lands in the New World. In his journeys, he came upon the Aztec empire, which was then being ruled by Moctezuma. The Aztecs were rich in gold and had a very sophisticated civilization. //**Audience**// – Cortez’s letter is address to the “Emperor” (or king) of Spain. Thus, it is likely that Cortez will be more optimistic and maybe skim over problems he or his men encountered, instead choosing to dwell on their successes and the wealth they have found. //**Reason**// – This letter seems to have been written as an update about what was happening in the New World exploration. Also, Cortez probably was anxious to secure the King’s money that was invested in his voyage (hence the confident and reassuring tone of the letter). //**The Main Idea**// – Cortez, in this portion of his letter, is primarily concerned with his dealings with and observations of the Aztec civilization. //**Significance**// – This is a very significant source, being an eyewitness account of this meeting between two great nations. It is important not only to knowing what Cortez saw and what amazed him, but also to knowing how this conquistador would write and why it might not be completely honest.

__Aztec Chroniclers Describe the Spanish Conquest of Mexico__ (pp. 12-15) //**Author**// – The author is the Spanish Franciscan friar Bernardino de Sahagún. His account is collected from various Aztecs who spoke with him about their civilization and history. He has a surprising anti-Spain point of view. //**Place and Time**// – This account was written a decade after the events described. They were recorded somewhere in Mexico where de Sahagún was living. //**Prior Knowledge**// – Cortez was one of the conquistadors sent from Spain to explore and claim lands in the New World. In his journeys, he came upon the Aztec empire, which was then being ruled by Moctezuma (named “Motecuhzoma” in this account). The Aztecs were rich in gold and had a very sophisticated civilization. //**Audience**// – It is unknown whom the intended audience was that de Sahagún had in mind. Therefore, it is also unknown how his audience might have affected his account. //**Reason**// – De Sahagún seems to have had an interest in the history of the Aztecs and this undoubtedly prompted him to delve deeper into what might have actually happened upon Cortez’s arrival. //**The Main Idea**// – The main idea is that Cortez’s visit to the Aztecs was not the glorified negotiation it was thought to be. Cortez, according to this account, was deceitful and wicked in his interaction with the Aztecs. //**Significance**// – This source is significant if only because it so strongly contradicts Cortez himself. It makes a bold claim, and one that is quite horrifying. It also might bring us closer to the truth of what actually happened at that fateful meeting.

__Comparison of these two documents__ These accounts are similar in many ways. Besides being concerned with the same event and period in history, they are both written by Spaniards and both as given in the book are translations and somewhat abridged. They also are similar in their thinking that the other party (not the author) was murderous. Cortez describes the bloodthirsty sacrifices performed by the Aztecs, while the Aztec accounts detail how Cortez brutally massacred that country’s people. However, these sources are different in that one is a primary source (the Cortez letter) and the other is at the least a secondary source (it could be a third or fourth or even fifth depending on how close the Aztecs who told de Sahagún were to the actual events).

__**Summer Source Book Work**__ //A Young African Boy is Taken into Slavery//
 * 1) The most disconcerting part of Smith’s capture in Africa must have been the violence and brutality he describes his captors using. Especially vivid in his memory seems to be the torture of his father.
 * 2) Once in America, Smith’s adjustment to his new life was helped by his year-long stay at his master’s sister before beginning to actually work.

//The Intolerant Act of Toleration//
 * 1) Catholics seem to be specifically protected by the rules concerning “any reproachful words or speeches concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of our Savior,” as Catholics see Mary and her divinity in a different light than Protestants.
 * 2) Nothing would have happened to the Jews and atheists according to what is written here, unless they chose to publicly blaspheme or use “reproachful words” concerning Christian beliefs, or “wrong, disturb, trouble, or molest” any Christian (although there were most likely rules to this effect concerning any person—atheist, Jew or not).

//Framing the Mayflower Compact//
 * 1) The Mayflower Compact does not seem to be much of a constitution as it does nothing really to “limit” the functions of government. Instead, it seems to allow for future laws to be made for the colony’s good.
 * 2) It foreshadows the development of democratic institutions in the way it highlights the colony as being a government for the people by the people for the colony’s own good.

//Anne Hutchinson is Banished//
 * 1) This record reveals the Puritan ways of thinking in its show of the willingness they have to accept the supernatural in their courts (which are thought in our day to be secular institutions). The proceedings appear to be just according to the laws, standards, and values of that community.

//The Connecticut Blue Laws//
 * 1) These punishments are based on the assumption that there are some things of spiritual significance great enough to merit death or else where death would be a lesser penalty than what is actually deserved. Thus, it is not so much the punishments that have changed over time as the view of these actions’ severity.
 * 2) Of the laws recorded, numbers 4, 5, 6, and 11 are still considered criminal, and in some places in this country are still punished in the same way.