Informacija

Cortes


Cortes je bio španjolski parlament. Na izborima 1933. CEDA je osvojila najviše mjesta u Cortesu. Predsjednik Niceto Alcalá Zamora odbio je zatražiti od svog čelnika Joséa Maria Gila Roblesa da sastavi vladu. Međutim, sedam članova CEDA -e služilo je kao ministri tijekom sljedeće tri godine.

Na izborima u veljači 1936. 34,3 posto glasova pripalo je Narodnoj fronti, 33,2 posto konzervativnim strankama, a ostatak regionalnim i središnjim strankama. Time je Narodna fronta dobila 271 mjesto od 448 u Cortesu, a Manuel Azaña je zamoljen da sastavi novu vladu.

Nova vlada odmah je uzrujala konzervativce shvativši sve lijeve političke zatvorenike. Vlada je također uvela agrarne reforme koje su kaznile zemljoposjedničku aristokraciju. Druge mjere uključivale su premještanje desničarskih vojnih vođa, poput Francisca Franca, na položaje izvan Španjolske, zabranu Falange Españole i davanje Katalonije političke i administrativne autonomije.

Dana 10. svibnja 1936. konzervativni Niceto Alcala Zamora zbačen je s mjesta predsjednika, a zamijenio ga je ljevičarski Manuel Azaña. Ubrzo nakon toga časnici španjolske vojske, uključujući Emilio Mola, Francisco Franco i José Sanjurjo, počeli su planirati rušenje vlade Narodne fronte. To je rezultiralo izbijanjem Španjolskog građanskog rata 17. srpnja 1936.

Procjenjuje se da je tijekom prvih nekoliko mjeseci rata 28 pripadnika Cortesa ubijeno u republikanskoj zoni, dok je 59 ubijeno u nacionalističkoj zoni.

Kad je vlada napustila Madrid u studenom 1936., Cortes je preseljen u Valenciju. Međutim, nakon što je Juan Negrin postao premijer u svibnju 1937., najavio je da će njegova vlada vladati dekretom. Cortesi su se sada sastajali samo šest mjeseci kako bi razgovarali o temama koje je odabrala vlada.

Kad su Negrin i njegova vlada pobjegli u Francusku, Cortesi su se sastali u Parizu. Posljednja sjednica republičkih kortesa održana je 31. ožujka 1939. godine.

Nakon rata general Francisco Franco uspostavio je pomno kontrolirani Cortes koji je djelovao na temelju zakona koji su izradili njegovi ministri.


Cortes

Naši urednici će pregledati ono što ste podnijeli i odlučiti trebate li izmijeniti članak.

Cortes, Španjolski i portugalski sudovima, Katalonski Kortezi, predstavnička skupština ili parlament srednjovjekovnih iberijskih kraljevstava i, u moderno doba, nacionalno zakonodavno tijelo Španjolske i Portugala.

Cortes se razvio u srednjem vijeku kada su izabrani predstavnici slobodnih općina stekli pravo sudjelovanja u raspravama Curia Regis (latinski: "Kraljevski dvor") o određenim pitanjima. Oni su primljeni zbog potrebe krune za financijskom pomoći izvan one koju predviđaju njeni uobičajeni nameti i zbog nedostatka zakonskog prava krune da nametne dodatno oporezivanje bez pristanka općina.

I u Leonu i u Kastilji Cortes su postojali do početka 13. stoljeća. Njihove su funkcije i postupci bili slični te su, nakon ujedinjenja dviju kruna 1230., često održavali zajedničke sastanke - što je uobičajena procedura nakon 1301. Parlamenti su djelovali i u Kataloniji od 1218, Valenciji (1283), Aragonu (1274) i Navarra (1300). Leonski i Kastiljki kortesi sastojali su se od tri posjeda: plemića, svećenstva i procuradores (odvjetnici ili gradski činovnici) concejos (utvrđene općine), koji su rodili poderes (pisane upute) od svojih birača. Kralj je sazivao sastanke Cortesa kad i gdje je htio. Tijekom 14. stoljeća procuradores dominirali Kortesom jer su samo oni mogli odobriti posebno oporezivanje potrebno kruni. Sastanci su se sastojali od pregovora, a ne od istinskih rasprava.

U Kastilji, nakon neuspjele pobune mještana poznatih kao comuneros (1520-21), hidalgos (niže plemstvo) bili su jedina preživjela sila u Cortesu, pa čak i oni su prestali vršiti veliku stvarnu moć. U Portugalu su Cortesi ratificirali nasljedstvo Avisove kuće (1385) i Filipa II (1580), a bili su aktivni nakon obnove neovisnosti (1640). No, u Španjolskoj se Katalonski kortesi nisu sastali nakon pobune 1640. godine, kao ni ona Valencije nakon 1645. ili Kastilje poslije 1685. 1709. Korteti Aragona i Valencije spojeni su s Korzilom Kastilje, kao i Katalonije u 1724, iako su se sastanci održavali samo radi priznavanja nasljednika krune. U 18. stoljeću portugalski Cortes uopće se nije susreo.

1812. španjolski se Cortes sastao u Cádizu i donio prvi liberalni ustav. Iako je srušen 1814., Cortes je obnovljen 1820., a iste godine ga je usvojio Portugal. U obje zemlje riječ je odsada primijenjena na nacionalni parlament.

Tijekom vladavine Francisca Franca, naziv Cortes Españolas ("španjolski sudovi") koristio se od 1942. za gumeno, nedemokratsko zakonodavno tijelo. Nakon prijelaza na demokraciju 1970 -ih, službeni naziv zakonodavnog tijela promijenjen je u Cortes Generales („Opći sudovi“).


Godine u Hispanioli i na Kubi

U Hispanioli je postao farmer i bilježnik u gradskom vijeću prvih šest -ak godina, čini se da se zadovoljio utvrđivanjem svog položaja. Zarazio se sifilisom i, kao rezultat toga, propustio je nesrećne ekspedicije u Diego de Nicuesa i Alonso de Ojeda, koje su plovile prema južnoameričkom kopnu 1509. Do 1511. se oporavio i plovio je s Diegom Velázquezom kako bi osvojio Kubu. Tamo je Velázquez imenovan guvernerom, a Cortés službenikom blagajnika. Cortés je dobio repartimiento (dar zemlje i indijske robove) i prvu kuću u novom glavnom gradu Santiagu. Sada je bio u poziciji neke moći i čovjek kojem su se disidentski elementi u koloniji počeli okretati za vodstvom.

Cortés je dva puta biran za alcaldea ("gradonačelnika") grada Santiaga i bio je čovjek koji je "u svemu što je radio, u svom prisustvu, držanju, razgovoru, načinu prehrane i odijevanja davao znakove da je veliki gospodar". Stoga se Velázquez obratio Cortésu kad je, nakon što su stigle vijesti o napretku napora Juana de Grijalbe da uspostavi koloniju na kopnu, odlučeno da mu pošalje pomoć. Ugovor o imenovanju generalnog kapetana Cortésa za novu ekspediciju potpisan je u listopadu 1518. Iskustvo u grubim politikama Novog svijeta savjetovalo je Cortésa da se brzo kreće, prije nego što se Velázquez predomislio. Njegov osjećaj za dramatično, njegovo dugogodišnje administratorsko iskustvo, znanje stečeno na toliko neuspjelih ekspedicija, prije svega sposobnost govornika okupilo mu je šest brodova i 300 ljudi, sve u manje od mjesec dana. Velázquezova reakcija bila je predvidljiva i njegova ljubomora je odlučila staviti vodstvo ekspedicije u druge ruke. Cortés je, međutim, žurno krenuo na more kako bi podigao više ljudi i brodova u drugim kubanskim lukama.


Hispaniola

Cortés je bio dobro obrazovan i imao je obiteljske veze pa je, kad je 1503. stigao u Hispaniolu, ubrzo pronašao posao kao bilježnik i dobio parcelu zemlje te niz domorodaca prisiljenih na nju raditi. Zdravlje mu se popravilo i trenirao se kao vojnik, sudjelujući u potčinjavanju dijelova Hispaniole koji su se borili protiv Španjolaca.

Postao je poznat kao dobar vođa, inteligentan administrator i nemilosrdni borac. Ove su osobine potaknule Diega Velázqueza, kolonijalnog administratora i konkvistadora, da ga odabere za svoju ekspediciju na Kubu.

Velázquezu je dodijeljeno pokoravanje otoka Kube. Krenuo je s tri broda i 300 ljudi, uključujući mladog Cortésa, službenika dodijeljenog blagajniku ekspedicije. Na ekspediciji je bio i Bartolomé de Las Casas, koji će na kraju opisati strahote osvajanja i osuditi osvajače.

Osvajanje Kube obilježeno je brojnim neizrecivim zloupotrebama, uključujući masakre i spaljivanje živog poglavice domorodaca Hatueyja. Cortés se istaknuo kao vojnik i administrator te je postavljen za gradonačelnika novog grada Santiaga. Njegov utjecaj je rastao.


Ekspedicija u Honduras

Od 1524. do 1526. Cortes je ratovao s Cristóbalom de Olidom - čovjekom koji je za sebe tvrdio da je Honduras. Cortes je izašao kao pobjednik. Uperio je prst u Velázqueza zbog njegove navodne uloge u Olidovoj pobuni. Stoga je Cortés zamolio kralja Charlesa da uhiti Velázqueza pod optužbom za izdaju.

Nakon svojih podviga u Hondurasu, Cortes se vratio u Meksiko samo kako bi saznao da mu je baza moći narušena. Brzo je krenuo prema Španjolskoj kako bi preklinjao kralja Charlesa. Međutim, Charles je malo obraćao pozornost na političku situaciju u Novom svijetu. Kralju je jedino bilo stalo do njegove kvinte, tj. Poreza iz američkih kolonija. Charles je ipak dodijelio red Santiaga Cortésu 1529. Cortés je također dobio titulu markiza od Oaxace (Marqués del Valle de Oaxaca). Na povratku u Meksiko Charles ga je zadužio za vojsku u Meksiku.


Astečko Carstvo

Godine 1518. Cort és trebao je zapovijedati vlastitom ekspedicijom u Meksiko, ali Vel ázquez ju je otkazao. U pobunjenom činu prkosa, Cort és ignorirao je naredbu, te je te godine otplovio u Meksiko s više od 500 ljudi i 11 brodova.  

U veljači 1519. ekspedicija je stigla do meksičke obale. Prema nekim izvještajima, Cort és je tada uništio sve svoje brodove osim jednog, koji je poslao natrag u Španjolsku. Ova drska odluka eliminirala je mogućnost bilo kakvog povlačenja.

Cort é su postali saveznici s nekim starosjedilačkim narodima s kojima se susreo, ali s drugima je upotrijebio smrtonosnu silu za osvajanje Meksika. Borio se protiv ratnika Tlaxacana i Cholule, a zatim se usmjerio na preuzimanje astečkog carstva.  

Marširao je u Tenochtitl án, prijestolnicu Asteka i dom vladara Montezume II. Nakon što su pozvani u kraljevsku palaču, Cort és su uzeli Montezumu kao taoca, a njegovi vojnici opljačkali su grad.  

No ubrzo nakon toga, Cort és žurno su napustili grad nakon što su saznali da ga španjolske trupe dolaze uhititi zbog nepoštivanja naredbi iz  Vel ázqueza.

Nakon što su odbili španjolske snage, Cort és su se vratili u Tenochtitl án kako bi pronašli pobunu koja je u tijeku, tijekom koje je  Montezuma ubijen. Asteci su na kraju istjerali Španjolce iz grada, ali Cort se opet vratio kako bi ih pobijedio i zauzeo grad 1521. godine čime je zapravo okončano Aztečko carstvo.  

Procjenjuje se da su u svojim krvavim borbama za prevlast nad Astecima Cort é i njegovi ljudi ubili čak 100.000 domorodačkih naroda.  Kralj Karlo I. od Španjolske (također poznat kao car Svetog Rima Karlo V.) imenovao ga je guvernerom Nova Španjolska 1522.


Fernando Cortés, zvani Moses

Tvrdim, suprotno ortodoksnoj povijesti i teologiji da:

1) priče povezane s prvih pet knjiga Starog zavjeta (Petoknjižje) napisane su početkom 16. stoljeća i odnose se na događaje usredotočene na istjerivanje Židova iz Španjolske i osvajanje Meksika.

2) Biblijski Mojsije prvenstveno se temelji na liku konkvistadora Fernanda Cortésa.

3) svi događaji opisani u Bibliji zbili su se, ako su se dogodili, u Americi (posebno na američkom jugozapadu).

4) protestantska reformacija i izum tiskare dali su priliku i sredstva za ubrizgavanje gore navedenih tekstova (i drugih) u standardni biblijski kanon.

GORE: Zašto se Cortésa stalno uspoređuju s Mojsijem?


Prije nego što iznesem pozitivne dokaze za ove tvrdnje, podsjećam vas da tradicionalno gledište, smještajući ove događaje na područje Bliskog istoka i oko njih, počiva samo na podudarnosti sličnih geografskih naziva mjesta i (pretpostavljam) na percepciji nevjerojatnosti lažiranja nešto kao to. Drugi oblici dokaza za tradicionalno gledište, kakvi biste očekivali da će biti prisutni posvuda, očigledno su odsutni.

Najupečatljivije je da tlo u "Svetoj zemlji", prema uobičajenom položaju, nije dalo nikakve arheološke dokaze za mnoge događaje, bitke, oblike zemljišta, gradove, građevine ili osobe opisane u zavjetima Starog zavjeta. I nije zbog nedostatka da ih netko pokuša pronaći. Istraživači su stoljećima tražili nešto što bi znanstveno legitimiralo biblijsku priču u Palestini. Istinski vjernici u tim nastojanjima spremni su tolerirati standard dokaza koji je doista minimalan, ali čak ni oni ne mogu učiniti ništa bolje nego da se ispričaju svoja ograničena nagađanja.

Vidjet ćete mnogo ovakvih izjava, preuzetih iz Fineganovih Arheološka pozadina hebrejsko-kršćanske religije, što je tipično za žanr:

Apologeti poput Finegana moraju se pretvarati da ti problemi predstavljaju poseban oblik dokazivanja. Pljačka Jeruzalema, kaže on u ovom retku, & quotis se previše jasno odrazila u arheološkom području zbog nedostatka važnih materijala. & Quot; A što se tiče osvajanja Caanana, on primjećuje da je & quot; Joshua očito napravio temeljit posao uništenja. & Quot; Tautologije poput ovih i povremeno iskopanih izvora koje nitko ne može dokazati nije bio onaj iz kojeg je Josip crpio vodu je otprilike sve što povezuje Bibliju sa "biblijskim zemljama".

Osim ako, dakle, ne računate lažne starine. Ja ne. Jedini način na koji su svitci s Mrtvog mora mogli izgledati više lažni bio je ako su pronađeni punjeni u bočici Bud Light. Čini se da su čak i piramide u Gizi moderne tvorevine, izgrađene tijekom Napoleonove egipatske kampanje. Većina slavnih egipatskih relikvija navodno je pronađena u isto vrijeme, a isto tako moraju biti pod sumnjom.

GORE: More Cortez (Kalifornijski zaljev)


U Americi nemamo ovaj problem. Dokazi su nam pred očima. Čak su i zemljopisni oznake mjesta za biblijske događaje još uvijek prisutni. Samo pogledajte bilo koju kartu. Upravo ću objaviti nekoliko primjera zgrada u Kaliforniji čiji su graditelji i izvorni stanovnici nestali. Mislim da su svi upoznati s tim stvarima pa neću sumnjati u to. Pojedinačno to ne ukazuje nepogrešivo na osvajanje Mozaika, ali ako ih proučite zajedno s imenima okruga, gradova i drugih naziva mjesta u Kaliforniji i Arizoni, pojavljuje se vrlo uvjerljiv obrazac. Zašto na zapadnoj obali ima toliko egipatskih naziva mjesta? Odnosi li se Izlazak XV: 27 na Palm Springs?

GORE: Skup čudnih zgrada u okrugu Kings u kalifornijskoj dolini San Joaquin. Je li ovo bio poprište biblijske bitke?

Dakle, identificirajući Mojsija kao Cortésa, nije nužno da postoji jedna povijesna osoba koja ima ime i koja točno odgovara povijesnoj osobi Fernanda Cortésa kakvog ga poznajemo. U vrijeme kad su konkvistadori marširali Meksikom, samu je Španjolsku potresao revolucionar comunero (komunističkog) ustanka pokreta, koja je grupa identificirala svoje vladine pretenzije i pod imenom & quotcortés & quot. Teško je (ako niste povjesničar) ne zaključiti konspirativnu vezu između ta dva događaja, osvajanja u inozemstvu i revolucije kod kuće. No, je li jedno ime dobilo drugo ime ili oboje u vezi s konceptom značajnim za uzrok, ne utječe na moje tvrdnje. Pod & quotCortés & quot ne mislim ništa drugo nego & quot; vođu osvajanja. & Quot


Naravno, postoji nekoliko očiglednih sličnosti između dvojice muškaraca. Mojsije je zauzeo svoj utjecajni položaj među Egipćanima putem infiltracije. Cortés se također poslužio intrigama kako bi postigao svoju vodeću poziciju u osvajanju. Nadalje, njegova znatiželjna navika pripisivanja sudova "kršćanima" ukazuje na značajnu suprotnost i na vjerskoj osnovi. Za Mojsije se kaže da je napisao pet knjiga. Cortés je napisao pet slova. Obojica su nosili štap itd.

Neobične varijacije koje su povjesničari nametnuli Cortésovom imenu (& quotHernan & quot) pružaju još jedan trag. Ne čini li se bizarnim promijeniti muško ime? Svi suvremeni izvještaji nazivaju ga Fernandom, s povremenim Ferdinandom ili Fernandusom. No danas je to uvijek & quot; Hernan & quot; Zašto? Predlažem da oblik varijante ima za cilj označiti Mojsijeva brata & quotAaron & quot (španjolski h šuti).

GORE: More Kortesa poznato je i kao "Crveno more"

Druga točka slučajnosti nalazi se u imenovanju Kalifornijskog zaljeva ili "Sea of ​​Cortez", koje je povijesno bilo poznato kao "Crveno more", ili "Vermilionsko more" (vermilion je grimizno crveno) pod kojim se nazivima pojavljuje na starim kartama . Može se prigovoriti da se radi o donekle općenitom opisnom pojmu. No, postoje dobri razlozi da se ta okolnost smatra značajnom.


Prvo, osim poznatog koje se nalazi uz Sinajski poluotok, ne postoji nijedno drugo vodno tijelo koje se zove "Crveno more". Drugo, Eusabije Kino (pravo prezime Kuhn), isusovački rektor Sonore, Meksiko koji je nakon ponovnog potvrđivanja kontinuiteta Kalifornije sa sjevernoameričkom kopnom 1702. godine (većina je ljudi mislila da je Kalifornija tada otok-a možda je i bio) izjavio da je njegovo otkriće potvrdilo Mojsijev egzodus kako je zapisano u Bibliji. Da nije izjednačio Mojsija s Cortésom, to bi bilo smiješno reći, zar ne?

GORE: Je li Kalifornija stvaran & quotholy land & quot?

Tvrdim da se biblijska imena navedena u donjem desnom stupcu zapravo odnose na odgovarajuće srodne oblike Novog svijeta s lijeve strane:

Kralj Ferdinand Faraon

Karipsko more Arapsko more

Tihi ocean Sredozemno more

GORE: Što predstavljaju ti plamteći crveni dvorci?

Najočitiji prigovor mojim tvrdnjama je prioritet starozavjetnih spisa. Međutim, kao i obično, dokazi za ovu & navodnu istinu & quot raspadaju se pod kontrolom. Glavne vlasti uvijek tvrde da je za Petoknjižje velika starina, ali najstarije moguće sačuvano izdanje, koliko mogu reći, datira iz 1537. godine. A to izdanje nije nešto što bih mogao pronaći na internetu. Wycliffeova Biblija, koja je prethodila osvajanju, trebala bi sadržavati Stari zavjet, ali opet, koliko mogu reći, Wycliffeova Biblija nikada nije uključivala ništa osim samo Novog zavjeta. Ako sam ovdje u pravu, tvrdnja Wycliffeovog Starog zavjeta je vrsta laži koja bi snažno svjedočila o mojoj tezi. Također mi se čini da je Stari zavjet izvorno napisan na drugom jeziku osim hebrejskog, ali nisam siguran.

ISPRED LIJEVO: Wycliffeova Biblija-nema Starog zavjeta

Zatim imate navodno drevnu umjetnost koja prikazuje događaje iz Starog zavjeta. Reći ću samo da su okolnosti koje su dovele do istrage ovih tvrdnji uvelike iste kao gore navedene.


Implikacije ovih tvrdnji, pretpostavljajući njihovu istinitost, duboke su i dalekosežne. Imam još puno toga za reći na tu temu, ali ovaj ću post završiti s još nekoliko starih isječaka iz novina.

*Mislim na vrstu slobodnog zidarstva koje uništava stvari, a ne na & quotoperative & quot koji teoretski gradi stvari.

Privitci

Trismegistus

Moderator

Nedavno sam proveo neko vrijeme na američkom Zapadu, a moj ukupni zaključak iz mog iskustva je da su se ovdje dogodila & quotome starozavjetna sranja & quot

Na primjer - kanjon Bryce u Utahu. Čini se kao da je tamo nešto namjerno uništeno, zapravo ne izgleda kao rezultat & quotprirodnih & quot procesa. Dok sam snimao, uhvatio sam ono za što vjerujem da su ostaci neke vrste kompleksa hramova i piramida.

S desne strane koja se pomiče lijevo možete vidjeti hram sa kipovima, piramidu, još jedan hram i zidine u prvom planu. Dok sam snimao vani, čuo sam mormona koji je razgovarao s njegovim sinom - objašnjavao je kako svjetlost sunca baca sjene u različito doba dana i otkriva hramovima. Mislio sam da je to tada bio vrlo zanimljiv izbor fraze, sve dok to nekoliko minuta kasnije nisam vidio na svom monitoru.

Oh, i nije iznenađujuće da ova značajka ne postoji na Google Earthu. Crveni krug je mjesto gdje sam stajao u odnosu na fotografiju.

Ima još jedna zanimljivost koju sam imao sreće uhvatiti na svom zum objektivu s prozora kombija koji je vozio niz I40 u Novom Meksiku. To je nesumnjivo stepenasta piramida s hramom na vrhu.

A zar to ne biste znali - oni potpuno mijenjaju način na koji izgleda na Google Earthu!

Ne samo da ova piramida i kvota postoji & quot - ona također boravi u Cibola županija, NM. Topografske karte doista imaju naziv za tu značajku - zovu je Timia. Nisam kopao u podrijetlu ovog imena, iako se početna pretraživanja nisu pokazala mnogo.

Odlična nit, OP. Ova vrsta istraživanja već neko vrijeme luta između istraživačkih skupina i definitivno zaslužuje potpunu raspravu ovdje.

Privitci

Srebrno

Poznati član

To me tjera na razmišljanje o sličnosti španjolske riječi cortes s rimskim kohorta (Latinski cohors). Kohorta je bila vojna jedinica čiji se broj navodno mijenjao tijekom povijesti, ali se obično kaže da je sastavljena od 480 do 600 naoružanih ljudi i podijeljena u šest centuriae (pet za prvu kohortu legije) koje su bile baza za Centuriate Assembly, jedna od glasačkih skupština u rimskom ustavu. Legija nije bila samo borbeni sustav, već i glasački.

U ovom slučaju, broj naoružanih ljudi koji slijede Cortesa je upravo onaj iz kohorte (oko 500 ljudi), a u Pobuni španjolskih Comunerosa govore o cortesima u odnosu na zakonodavstvo, pri čemu su comuneros naoružano tijelo. Možda ovo ima više od onoga što se na prvi pogled čini

Armouro

Član

Vratit ću se uskoro, da saznam neke stvari.

Solarni bard

Aktivni član

Emperornorton

Aktivni član

Utah je pun ovakvih stvari, a povijest mormonskih pionira uvelike je nastavak osvajanja. Veliko Slano jezero (zajedno s ostalim slanim jezerima Sjeverne Amerike) gotovo je sigurno povezano sa događajem koji je u Bibliji opisan kao odvajanje Crvenog mora, a čini se da se oboje ponovno odnosi na Kalifoniju-as-an -ostrvski fenomen.

Najstarije karte Amerike prikazuju Kaliforniju duž zapadnog ruba kontinenta, jednako kao što se pojavljuje na modernim kartama. Međutim, karte objavljene od kraja 16. stoljeća do početka 18. stoljeća prikazuju Kaliforniju kao otok. Očekuje se da vjerujemo da je stoljetni kalifornijski otok bio samo kartografska greška koja je postala viralna. Unatoč činjenici da je vrvjelo biserima, očito se nitko nije potrudio ploviti uz Kalifornijski zaljev više od stotinu godina. Mogu vjerovati u sve osim u ovo.

Mislim da je Kalifornija doista postala otok u 16. stoljeću, nedugo nakon što su Cortés i njegovi saveznici marširali tamo pustinjom. Naknadna poplava zemlje istočno od planine Sierra Nevada-koja je poznata kao "veliki bazen"-bio bi događaj opisan u Bibliji kao uništenje faraonske progoniteljske vojske.

Prema isusovcima najjači potres zabilježen u Americi, do tog trenutka, dogodio se 1687. To se dogodilo malo prije nego što je Eusabije Kino ponovno otkrio put kopnom od Meksika do Kalifornije, a možda je to bio i događaj koji je to omogućio. Ovaj ili kasniji potres mogao je također biti odgovoran za stvaranje zaljeva San Francisco. Izvanredno je da niti jedna plovidbena ekspedicija, pa čak ni istraživači na kopnu nisu bili svjesni najveće luke na zapadnoj obali kontinenta do 1769. Profesionalno objašnjenje za to je magla.

Indijanci imaju tradiciju da je zaljev nastao-tj. otvorena prema moru-blizu kraja 17. stoljeća, tijekom potresa. Prije tog vremena, kažu, tamo je jednostavno bilo veliko jezero u unutrašnjosti. Doista, velik dio dolina Sacramenta i San Joaquina također je bio prekriven jezerima u unutrašnjosti do vremena građanskog rata.

Sve me to navodi na sumnju da je riječ o potresu koji je Kaliforniju odvojio od kopna, bilo slijeganjem pustinjskih zemalja istočno od Kalifornije, bilo možda uništavanjem brane na rijeci Colorado. Vrijedi napomenuti da se čini da američka novčanica od pedeset dolara (neki kažu) prikazuje Hoover branu (pukne?) I da je ove godine 500. godišnjica osvajanja Meksika.

Armouro

Član

Prema riječima Shang Tsunga, & quotOkus stvari koje slijede & quot.


Tako. Otvaranje salve u ratu za vas protiv vas.

Imam mnogo toga za reći i pitati, ali moram početi tako što ću vam reći DOBRO. Mogao bih o ovim stvarima govoriti mjesecima. Godine!
Zapravo jesam, i još uvijek to radim.
Dah je svježeg zraka vidjeti drugu perspektivu kako bi se izborili s tim uglavnom neospornim konceptima s nekim čvrstim izvorima i nekim jednostavnim ispitivanjem pod kojim se čini da čak i stoljeća neosporne, užurbane priče propadaju.

1: Egipatski relikviji.
“Čini se da su čak i piramide u Gizi moderne kreacije, izgrađene tijekom Napoleonove egipatske kampanje. Većina slavnih egipatskih relikvija navodno je pronađena u isto vrijeme i isto tako mora biti pod sumnjom. ”
Tvrdnje o oporavku relikvija sumnjive su jer su to bila desetljeća kada je USACE najčešće radio između američkog jugozapada i Aegipta. Terenski izvještaji iz tih desetljeća ističu to piktom.

2: Imena mjesta.
Zanemarite ovo! Mnoga se mjesta uvijek iznova imenuju. U svakom većem gradu postoji bulvd ili ulica MartinLuther King Jr.
Povijesno gledano, postoji 12 Jeruzalema. 8 Moscows. 3 Rima.
Ta je veza u najboljem slučaju slaba.

Pogledajte ovo i pročitajte dotične članke.

Will Scarlet

Poznati član

protestantska reformacija i izum tiskare dali su priliku i sredstva za ubrizgavanje gore navedenih tekstova (i drugih) u standardni biblijski kanon.

. Glavne vlasti uvijek tvrde da je za Petoknjižje velika starina, ali najstarije moguće sačuvano izdanje, koliko mogu reći, datira iz 1537. godine.

Kodeks Alepa i Lenjingradski kodeks najstarije su potpune verzije, koje su Masoreti napisali u 10. odnosno 11. stoljeću. Rukopis Ashkar-Gilson nalazi se između prvih svitaka i kasnijih kodeksa.& quot (članak)

Comunero znači zajednica, a ne komunist. Imate li izvor za riječ 'cortés' u odnosu na comuneros? Zajednice su se ujedinile i formirale 'hunte' - što bi se moglo usporediti s 'sudovima'.

Zapravo, comuneros je predložio oblik Konfederacije, a ne komunizam, što je bilo slično situaciji u Talijanskoj Republici u to vrijeme. Ustank Comuneros ima mnogo više od 'komunističke pobune':

'Cortés' se prevodi kao 'ljubaznost', tj. Bonton suda.

Čak i ako su Hernàn i Aaron zvučali neodređeno slično (što im nije poznato), zašto bi on dobio ime po Mojsijevu bratu ako je trebao biti sam Mojsije?

Mislim da ovdje postoji još jedna slična tema prema kojoj bi Stari zavjet trebao biti povijest Bugarske.

Daniel

Član

U Fomenkovim spisima Mojsije je osmanski Musa iz 15. stoljeća.

Joshua, sin Nuna je Mehmet II. Osvajanje "obećane zemlje" osmansko je osvajanje Bizantskog Carstva. A Jerihon je Carigrad.

Onijunbei

Izbrisano

Fabiorem

Aktivni član

Will Scarlet

Poznati član

Corte je druga riječ i dolazi od glagola cortar - rezati, tj. El Corte Inglés (engleski rez, poznata robna kuća u Španjolskoj i Portugalu.)

Cortés je pridjev - eres cortés = ljubazni ste/učtivi. Množina je Corteses iz Cortesanosa - članova kraljevskog dvora (Courtiers.)

& quotCortés (apellido)
Cortés o Cortes es un apellido originario de la realeza española y portuguesa. Se deriva del cortê y označava gobernante de masas. Se deriva del francés antiguo & quotcurteis & quot, que signific & quotamable, cortés, o bien educationado & quot y es análogo al Curtis inglés, aunque la forma inglesa se ha utilizado más ampliamente como nombre propio.
Referencia

Percy Hide Reaney, Richard Middlewood Wilson, Rječnik engleskih prezimena (1991.), str. 121. & quot

Prijevod:
& quotCortés (prezime)
Cortés ili Cortes izvorno je prezime španjolskog i portugalskog plemstva. Potječe iz cortê i znači vladar masa. Potječe iz starofrancuskog & quotcurteis, & quot značenje & quotkind, ljubazan ili dobro odgojen & quot; i analogan je engleskom Curtis, iako se engleski oblik upotrebljavao šire kao vlastita imenica.

Referenca
Percy Hide Reaney, Richard Middlewood Wilson, Rječnik engleskih prezimena (1991.), str. 121. & quot (Izvor)

Ne mogu pronaći vezu između cortara i cortesa na španjolskom, ali to ne znači da ga nikad nije ni bilo. Bataljon na španjolskom je batallón. Priličan je skok tvrditi da ovo "ukazuje na nasilno podrijetlo plemićkih kuća", po mom mišljenju.

Emperornorton

Aktivni član

Mislim da je ime & quot; Fernando Cortes & quot;, prema najvelikoj ustupak vjerojatnosti, otprilike u skladu s imenom poput & quotStonewall Jackson. & Quot; Lopez De Gomara, u jednoj od svojih knjiga, kaze nesto poput & quotFerdinando Cortes, tzv. traži zlato u sudnici. & quot Mislim da nema sumnje da to ime znači suds, bilo etimološkim slučajem ili podrugljivom dosjetkom, iako pretpostavljam da postoji neka udaljenost između kraljevski i pravni nijanse konotacije koje treba imati. U svakom slučaju, čini mi se da se igra veća igra obmane.

Imajte na umu da je u starim knjigama & quotcortes & quot često nekapitalizirano (mislim, slijediti & quotFernando & quot i očito se odnositi na iste) i nikada s acento agudo na drugom samoglasniku. Zatim postoje divlje varijacije u pravopisu, unutar jedne knjige, pa čak i na istoj stranici.

Ovo je sve iz jedne knjige (Ugodna povijest osvajanja Zapadne Indije.) Osim pravopisnih varijacija, imajte na umu da su istaknuti izrazi tiskani drugačijim, modernijim fontom od ostatka knjige, kao da su postavljeni na ranije, zasebno djelo.

Ali kao što sam ranije rekao, kada govorim o & quotCortés, & quot, samo želim naznačiti vođu osvajanja. Nadalje, tvrdim da je Cortés bio primarni temelj za Mojsijev lik, ali ne i samo jedan. Cijenim komentare.

Will Scarlet

Poznati član

Da, ima mnogo sumnji. Ako ćemo jednostavno izmišljati stvari, kako smo onda bolji od Scallinger & amp Co.? Mislim da nema sumnje da mislite da ime znači 'sudovi', ali to ne čini činjenicu. Zaista ne vidim važnost čak i ako to znači 'sudovi'.

Primjećujem da je ovo duplikat posta na web stranici .org.

Ako je Ferdinand II bio ekvivalent egipatskog faraona, onda je trebao barem živjeti uzastopno s 'Mojsijevim' Cortésom ili mi nešto nedostaje? Je li egzodus Židova bio izvan ropstva u Španjolskoj? Poklapa li se to s njihovim progonstvom 1492. godine?

Ako se priča o egzodusu pojavljuje u izvornoj hebrejskoj Bibliji, znači li to da je to bila slutnja navodnog američkog događaja nekih 500 godina kasnije? Oh ne, oprosti što sam zaboravio da tvrdiš da su svi krivotvorine. Međutim, najstarija kopija Tore napisana je: između 1155. i 1225. godine i nalazi se na Sveučilištu u Bologni u Italiji. Sadrži potpunu Toru (Petoknjižje). (Izvor)

Will Scarlet

Poznati član

Imao sam još nekih razmišljanja o ovoj Cortésovoj temi. Pitam se, s obzirom na to & quotCortés ili Cortes izvorno je prezime španjolske i portugalske kraljevske obitelji & quot if the courtesy/courtly reference of the surname is related to the concept of 'Chivalry'?

I remember that KD had some ideas regarding Chivalry back on SH1, for example:

Silveryou

Well-Known Member

I have had some additional thoughts on this Cortés subject. I wonder, given that "Cortés or Cortes is an original surname of the Spanish and Portuguese royalty," if the courtesy/courtly reference of the surname is related to the concept of 'Chivalry'?

I remember that KD had some ideas regarding Chivalry back on SH1, for example:

Will Scarlet

Well-Known Member

Ponygirl

Aktivni član

Some people say freemasonry* has been around for five hundred years or so. Others, however, claim to trace freemasonry all the way back to Moses. What if they're both right?

I claim, in contravention of orthodox history and theology that:

1) the stories related in the first five books of the Old Testament (the Pentateuch) were written in the early 16th century and relate events centered on the explusion of Jews from Spain and the Conquest of Mexico.

2) the Biblical Moses is primarily based on the figure of conquistador Fernando Cortés.

3) all the events described in the Bible took place, if they took place, in the Americas (specifically the American Southwest).

4) the Protestant Reformation and the invention of the printing press provided the opportunity and means of injecting the aforesaid texts (and others) into the standard Bible canon.


View attachment 10465
ABOVE: Why is Cortés constantly compared to Moses?


Before I adduce positive evidence for these claims, I remind you that the traditional view, placing these events in the area of the Middle East and thereabouts, rests merely on the correspondence of like geographic placenames, and (I guess) the perceived implausibility of faking something like that. The other forms of evidence for the traditional view, the kind that you'd expect to be all over the place, are conspicuously absent.

Most strikingly, the ground in the "Holy Land," per its conventional location, hasn't yielded any archaeological evidence for the many events, battles, landforms, cities, structures, or persons described in the Old Testament scriptures. And it's not for lack of anybody of trying to find them. Researchers have spent centuries looking for something to scientifically legitimate the Biblical narrative in Palestine. The true believers in these efforts are willing to tolerate a standard of evidence that is minimal indeed but even they can't do better than submit their constrained conjectures apologetically.

You'll see a lot of statements like these, taken from Finegan's The Archaeological Background of the Hebrew-Christian Religion, which is typical of the genre:

Apologetes like Finegan end up having to pretend that these problems constitute a special form of proof. The sacking of Jerusalem, he says in this line, "is reflected only too clearly in the archeological realm by the paucity of important materials." And as for the Conquest of Caanan, he notes that "Joshua evidently did a thorough job of destruction." Tautologies like these and the occasional excavated well that nobody can prove wasn't the one Joseph drew his water from is about all there is connecting the Bible to the "Bible lands."

Unless, that is, you count the fake antiquities. Ja ne. The only way the Dead Sea scrolls could look any more fake was if they were found stuffed in a Bud Light bottle. Even the pyramids of Giza appear to be modern creations, constructed during Napoleon's Egyptian campaign. Most of the famous Egyptian relics were allegedly found at the same time and must likewise come under suspicion.


View attachment 10467
ABOVE: The Sea of Cortez (Gulf of California)


In America we don't have this problem. The evidence is right in front of our faces. Even the geographic place-markers for the scriptural events are still around. Just look at any map. I'm just going to post a couple examples of buildings in California whose builders and original residents have disappeared. I think everyone is familiar with these things, so I won't belabor the point. Individually these don't point infallibly toward Mosaic conquest, but if you examine these along with the names of counties, cities and other place-names in California and Arizona a very compelling pattern emerges. Why are there so many Egyptian place-names on the West Coast? Does Exodus XV: 27 refer to Palm Springs?


View attachment 10472
ABOVE: A cluster of strange buildings in Kings County in California's San Joaquin Valley. Was this the scene of a Biblical battle?

Now, in identifying Moses as Cortés, it is not necessary that there be a single historical individual having the name and corresponding precisely with the historical personage of Fernando Cortés as we know him. At the very time the conquistadors were marching across Mexico, Spain herself was rocked by the revolutionary comunero (communist) movement uprising, which group identified its governmental pretensions by the name of "cortés" as well. It is hard (unless you're an historian I guess) not to infer a conspiratorial link between the two events, the conquest abroad and the revolution at home. But whether one was named for the other or both in reference to a concept significant to the cause doesn't affect my claims. By "Cortés" I mean nothing more than "the leader of the Conquest."


Of course there are several obvious similarities between the two men. Moses assumed his position of influence among the Egyptians by means of infiltration. Cortés likewise made use of intrigue to attain his leadership position for the conquest. Furthermore, his curious habit of attributing judgments to "the Christians," suggests substantial versimilitude along religious lines as well. Moses is said to have written five books. Cortés wrote five letters. They both carried a staff, etc.

The unusual variation historians have imposed on Cortés' first name ("Hernan") provides another clue. Doesn't it seem bizarre to change the man's name? All contemporary accounts refer to him as Fernando, with the occasional Ferdinand or Fernandus thrown in. But nowadays it's always "Hernan." Why? I suggest that the variant form is intended to signify Moses' brother "Aaron" (the Spanish h is silent).


View attachment 10469
ABOVE: The Sea of Cortés is also known as the "Red Sea"

Another point of coincidence is found in the naming of the Gulf of California, or "Sea of Cortez," which was historically known as the "Red Sea," or "Vermillion Sea" (vermillion is a scarlet red) under which names it appears on the old maps. It may be objected that this is a somewhat generic descriptive term. But there are good reasons to regard this circumstance as significant.


First, there is not, besides the familiar one located along the Sinai Peninsula, any other body of water, to my knowledge, that is named the "Red Sea." Second, Eusabius Kino (real last name Kuhn) a Jesuit rector of Sonora, Mexico who upon reconfirming the continuity of California with the North American landmass in 1702 (most people thought California was an island at the time--and maybe it was) declared that his discovery gave confirmation to the Exodus of Moses as recorded in the Bible. If he didn't equate Moses with Cortés then that would be a ridiculous thing to say, right?


View attachment 10471
ABOVE: Is California the stvaran "holy land"?

I contend that the Biblical names listed in the right-hand column below refer in fact to the corresponding New World cognate-forms on the left:

King Ferdinand Pharaoh

Carribean Sea Arabian Sea

Pacific Ocean Mediterranean Sea


View attachment 10474
ABOVE: What do those flaming red castles represent?

The most obvious objection to my claims is the priority of the Old Testament scriptures. As usual, however, the evidence for this "obvious truth" crumbles under inspection. Mainstream authorities invariably claim very great antiquity for the Pentateuch but the oldest possible extant edition, as far as I can tell, is from 1537 or so. And that edition is not something I could find a copy of on the Internet. The Wycliffe Bible, which predates the conquest, is supposed to contain the Old Testament, but again, as far as I can tell, the Wycliffe Bible never included anything but the New Testament alone. If I am correct here, the claimed Wycliffe Old Testament is the sort of lie that would testify strongly for my thesis. It also looks to me like the Old Testament was originally written in a language other than Hebrew, but I'm not sure.


View attachment 10475
ABOVE LEFT: The Wycliffe Bible--No Old Testament

Then you have the supposedly ancient art depicting the events of the Old Testament. I will just say that the circumstances attending an investigation into these claims are much the same as related above.


The implications of these claims, supposing their truth, are deep and far-reaching. I have a lot more to say on the topic but I will end this post with a few more old-time newspaper clippings.

*I mean the kind of freemasonry that destroys things not the "operative" kind that theoretically builds things.


Hernán Cortés: Master of the Conquest

On Aug. 13, 1521, Cortés and his reinforced army swarmed across the causeways of Tenochtitlan to complete the conquest he had begun less than three years earlier.

Lebrecht Music & Arts Photo Library/Alamy Stock Photo

On Aug. 13, 1521, Spanish conquistador Hernán Cortés received the surrender of Cuauhtémoc, ruler of the Aztec people. The astonishing handover occurred amid the ruins of Tenochtitlan, the shattered capital of a mighty empire whose influence had stretched from the Atlantic to the Pacific and extended from central Mexico south into parts of what would become Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. After an 80-day siege Cortés had come to a terrible resolution: He ordered the city razed. House by house, street by street, building by building, his men pulled down Tenochtitlan’s walls and smashed them into rubble. Envoys from every tribe in the former empire later came to gaze on the wrecked remains of the city that had held them in subjection and fear for so long.

But how had Cortés accomplished his conquest? Less than three years had passed since he set foot on the shores of the Gulf of Mexico, yet he had destroyed the greatest power in Mesoamerica with a relative handful of men. His initial force comprised 11 ships, 110 sailors, 553 soldiers—including 32 crossbowmen and 13 bearing harquebuses (early firearms)—10 heavy guns, four falconets and 16 horses. The force size ebbed and flowed, but he never commanded more than the 1,300 Spaniards he had with him at the start of the final assault.

On its face such a victory would suggest Cortés was a commander of tremendous ability. Yet scholars of the period have long underrated his generalship, instead attributing his success to three distinct factors. First was the relative superiority of Spanish military technology. Second is the notion smallpox had so severely reduced the Aztecs that they were unable mount an effective resistance. And third is the belief Cortés’ Mesoamerican allies were largely to credit for his triumph.

That the Spaniards enjoyed distinct technological, tactical and cultural advantages over their Mesoamerican foes doesn’t mean Cortés’ victories came easy

The conquistadors’ military technology was unquestionably superior to that of every tribe they encountered. The warriors’ weapons and armor were made of wood, stone and hide, while those of the Spaniards were wrought of iron and steel. Atlatls, slings and simple bows—their missiles tipped with obsidian, flint or fish bone—could not match the power or range of the crossbow. Clubs and macuahuitls—fearsome wooden swords embedded with flakes of obsidian—were far outclassed by long pikes and swords of Toledo steel, which easily pierced warriors’ crude armor of cotton, fabric and feathers. And, finally, the Spaniards’ gunpowder weapons—small cannon and early shoulder-fired weapons like the harquebus—wreaked havoc among the Mesoamericans, who possessed no similar technology.

The Spaniards also benefitted from their use of the horse, which was unknown to Mesoamericans. Though the conquistadors had few mounts at their disposal, tribal foot soldiers simply could not match the speed, mobility or shock effect of the Spanish cavalry, nor were their weapons suited to repelling horsemen.

When pitted against European military science and practice, the Mesoamerican way of war also suffered from undeniable weaknesses. While the tribes put great emphasis on order in battle—they organized their forces into companies, each under its own chieftain and banner, and understood the value of orderly advances and withdrawals—their tactics were relatively unsophisticated. They employed such maneuvers as feigned retreats, ambushes and ambuscades but failed to grasp the importance of concentrating forces against a single point of the enemy line or of supporting and relieving forward assault units. Such deficiencies allowed the conquistadors to triumph even when outnumbered by as much as 100-to-1.

Deeply ingrained aspects of their culture also hampered the Aztecs. Social status was partly dependent on skill in battle, which was measured not by the number of enemies killed, but by the number captured for sacrifice to the gods. Thus warriors did not fight with the intention of killing their enemies outright, but of wounding or stunning them so they could be bound and passed back through the ranks. More than one Spaniard, downed and struggling, owed his life to this practice, which enabled his fellows to rescue him. Further, the Mesoamerican forces were unprepared for lengthy campaigns, as their dependence on levies of agricultural workers placed limits on their ability to mobilize and sustain sufficient forces. They could not wage war effectively during the planting and harvest seasons, nor did they undertake campaigns in the May–September rainy season. Night actions were also unusual. The conquistadors, on the other hand, were trained to kill their enemies on the field of battle and were ready to fight year-round, day or night, in whatever conditions until they achieved victory.

That the Spaniards enjoyed distinct technological, tactical and cultural advantages over their Mesoamerican foes does not mean Cortés’ victories came easy. He engaged hundreds of thousands of determined enemies on their home ground with only fitful opportunities for reinforcement and resupply. Two telltale facts indicate that his success against New World opponents was as much the result of solid leadership as of technological superiority. First, despite his sparse resources, Cortés was as successful against Europeans who possessed the same technology as he was against Mesoamerican forces. Second, Cortés showed he could prevail against the Aztecs even when fighting at a distinct disadvantage.

Cortés proclaimed his victories in letters to Holy Roman Emperor Charles V and included this detailed map of the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan. (Le Monde.fr)

In April 1520, as the position of the conquistadors in Tenochtitlan became increasingly precarious, then Aztec ruler Montezuma II—whom the Spaniards had held hostage since the previous November—was informed Cortés’ ships had arrived at Cempoala on the Gulf Coast bearing the Spaniard’s countrymen, and he encouraged the conquistador to depart without delay. While Cortés’ troops were elated at what they assumed was impending deliverance, the commander himself rightly suspected the new arrivals were not allies. They had been sent by Diego Velázquez de Cuéllar, governor of Cuba, whose orders Cortés had disobeyed in 1519 to launch his expedition, and their purpose was to punish rather than reinforce.

Reports from the coast indicated the fleet comprised 18 ships bearing some 900 soldiers—including 80 cavalrymen, 80 harquebusiers and 150 crossbowmen—all well provisioned and supported by heavy guns. The captain-general of the armada was Pánfilo de Narváez, a confidant of Velázquez, who made no secret of his intention to seize Cortés and imprison him for his rebellion against the governor’s authority.

Cortés could not afford to hesitate and thus allow Narváez time to gather strength and allies. Yet to march out of Tenochtitlan to engage the new arrivals also presented significant risks. If Cortés took his entire force, he would have to abandon the Aztec capital. Montezuma II would reassume the throne, and resistance would no doubt congeal and stiffen, making re-entry a matter of blood and battle, in contrast to the tentative welcome he had initially received. But to leave behind a garrison would further reduce the size of the already outnumbered force he would lead against Narváez. With the swift decision of the bold, a factor indeterminable by numerical calculation, the Spanish commander chose the latter course.

Cortés marched out with only 70 lightly armed soldiers, leaving his second-in-command, Pedro de Alvarado, to hold Tenochtitlan with two-thirds of the Spanish force, including all of the artillery, the bulk of the cavalry and most of the harquebusiers. Having done all he could to gain an edge over Narváez by feeding his couriers misinformation and undermining the loyalty of his officers with forwarded bribes of gold, Cortés marched with all speed. He crossed the mountains to Cholula, where he mustered 120 reinforcements, then marched through Tlaxcala and down to the coast at Veracruz, picking up another 60 men. Though still outnumbered more than 3-to-1, Cortés brought all his craft, daring and energy to bear and, in a rapid assault amid heavy rain on the night of May 27, overwhelmed his foes. Narváez himself was captured, while most of his men, enticed by stories of Aztec riches, readily threw in their lot with Cortés. Soon after his surprise defeat of Narváez, the bold conquistador proved himself equally capable of defeating Mesoamerican forces that held a numerical advantage.

The bold conquistador proved himself equally capable of defeating Mesoamerican forces that held a numerical advantage

On his return to Tenochtitlan, Cortés discovered Alvarado had indulged in an unprovoked massacre of the Aztecs, stirring the previously docile populace to murderous fury. The Spaniards quickly found themselves trapped and besieged in the capital, and hard fighting in the streets failed to subdue the enemy. Not even Montezuma could soothe his people, who met their emperor’s appeal for peace with a shower of stones that mortally wounded him. With the Spanish force growing short of food and water, and losing more men by the day, Cortés decided to withdraw from the city on the night of June 30–July 1. After a brutal running fight along a causeway leading to shore, the column was reduced to a tattered remnant, leaving Cortés with no more than one-fifth of the force he had originally led into Tenochtitlan. The overnight battle—the worst military disaster the conquistadors had suffered in the New World—would go down in Spanish history as La Noche Triste (“The Night of Sorrows”).

The debacle left Cortés with few materiel advantages. Only half of his horses survived, and the column had lost all of its powder, ammunition and artillery and most of its crossbows and harquebuses during the retreat. Yet the Spanish commander managed to hold together his flagging force. Skirting north to avoid a cluster of hostile villages, he headed toward Tlaxcala, home city of his Mesoamerican allies.

Over the days that followed Aztec skirmishers shadowed Cortés’ retreating column, and as the Spaniards neared the Tlaxcalan frontier, the skirmishers joined forces with warriors from Tenochtitlan and assembled on the plain of Otumba, between the conquistadors and their refuge. The trap thus set, on July 7 the numerically superior Aztecs and beleaguered Spaniards met in a battle that should easily have gone in the Mesoamericans’ favor. Again, however, Cortés turned the tables by skillfully using his remaining cavalry to break up the enemy formations. Then, in a daring stroke, he personally led a determined cavalry charge that targeted the enemy commander, killing him and capturing his colors. Seeing their leader slain, the Aztecs gradually fell back, ultimately enabling the conquistadors to push their way through. Though exhausted, starving and ill, they were soon among allies and safe from assault.

One long-standing school of thought on the Spanish conquest attributes Cortés’ success to epidemiological whim—namely that European-introduced smallpox had so ravaged the Aztecs that they were incapable of mounting a coherent defense. In fact, Cortés had defeated many enemies and advanced to the heart of the empire well before the disease made its effects felt. Smallpox arrived in Cempoala in 1520, carried by an African slave accompanying the Narváez expedition. By then Cortés had already defeated an army at Pontonchan won battles against the fierce, well-organized armies of Tlaxcala entered the Aztec capital at Tenochtitlan and taken its ruler hostage.

Smallpox had ravaged the populations of Hispaniola and Cuba and indeed had equally disastrous effects on the mainland, killing an estimated 20 to 40 percent of the population of central Mexico. But as horrific as the pandemic was, it is by no means clear that smallpox mortality was a decisive factor in the fall of Tenochtitlan or the final Spanish victory. The disease likely reached Tenochtitlan when Cortés returned from the coast in June 1520, and by September it had killed perhaps half of the city’s 200,000 residents, including Montezuma’s successor, Cuitláhuac. By the time Cortés returned in the spring of 1521 for the final assault, however, the city had been largely free of the disease for six months. The conquistadors mention smallpox but not as a decisive factor in the struggle. Certainly they saw no perceptible drop in ferocity or numbers among the resistance.

On the subject of numbers, some scholars have suggested the conquest was largely the work of the Spaniards’ numerous Mesoamerican allies. Soon after arriving in the New World, Cortés had learned from the coastal Totonac people that the Aztec empire was not a monolithic dominion, that there existed fractures of discontent the conquistadors might exploit. For nearly a century Mesoamericans had labored under the yoke of Aztec servitude, their overlords having imposed grievous taxes and tributary demands, including a bloody harvest of sacrificial victims. Even cities within the Valley of Mexico, the heart of the empire, were simmering cauldrons of potential revolt. They awaited only opportunity, and the arrival of the Spaniards provided it. Tens of thousands of Totonacs, Tlaxcalans and others aided the conquest by supplying the Spaniards with food and serving as warriors, porters and laborers. Certainly their services sped the pace of the conquest. But one cannot credit them with its ultimate success. After all, had the restive tribes had the will and ability to overthrow the Aztecs on their own, they would have done so long before Cortés arrived and would likely have destroyed the Spaniards in turn.

For his overthrow of the Aztec empire Hernán Cortés earned royal appointment as governor of the conquered territory, dubbed New Spain. (AKG-Images)

To truly assess the Spanish victory over the Aztecs, one must also consider the internal issues Cortés faced—logistical challenges, the interference of hostile superiors, factional divides within his command and mutiny.

Cortés established coastal Veracruz as his base of operations in Mexico and primary communications link to the Spanish empire. But the tiny settlement and its fort could not provide him with additional troops, horses, firearms or ammunition. As Cortés’ lean command suffered casualties and consumed its slender resources, it required reinforcement and resupply, but the Spanish commander’s strained relations with the governor of Cuba ensured such vital support was not forthcoming. Fortunately for himself and the men of his command, Cortés seems to have possessed a special genius for conjuring success out of the very adversities that afflicted him.

After defeating the Narváez expedition, Cortés integrated his would-be avenger’s force with his own, gaining men, arms and equipment. When the Spaniards lay exhausted in Tlaxcala after La Noche Triste, still more resources presented themselves. Velázquez, thinking Narváez must have things well in hand, with Cortés either in chains or dead, had dispatched two ships to Veracruz with reinforcements and further instructions both were seized on arrival, their crews soon persuaded to join Cortés. Around the same time two more Spanish vessels appeared off the coast, sent by the governor of Jamaica to supply an expedition on the Pánuco River. What the ships’ captains didn’t know is that the party had suffered badly and its members had already joined forces with Cortés. On landing, their men too were persuaded to join the conquest. Thus Cortés acquired 150 more men, 20 horses and stores of arms and ammunition. Finally, a Spanish merchant vessel loaded with military stores put in at Veracruz, its captain having heard he might find a ready market for his goods. He was not mistaken. Cortés bought both ship and cargo, then induced its adventurous crew to join his expedition. Such reinforcement was more than enough to restore the audacity of the daring conquistador, and he began to lay plans for the siege and recovery of Tenochtitlan.

While the ever-resourceful Cortés had turned these occasions to his advantage, several episodes pointed to an underlying difficulty that had cast its shadow over the expedition from the moment of its abrupt departure from Cuba—Velázquez’s seemingly unquenchable hostility and determination to interfere. Having taken leave of the governor on less than cordial terms, Cortés was perhaps tempting fate by including of a number of the functionary’s friends and partisans in the expedition. He was aware of their divided loyalties, if not overtly concerned. Some had expressed their personal loyalty to Cortés, while others saw him as their best opportunity for enrichment. But from the outset of the campaign still other members of the Velázquez faction had voiced open opposition, insisting they be permitted to return to Cuba, where they would undoubtedly report to the governor. Cortés had cemented his authority among the rebels through a judicious mixture of force and persuasion.

But the problem arose again with the addition of Narváez’s forces to the mix. While headquartered in Texcoco as his men made siege preparations along the lakeshore surrounding Tenochtitlan, Cortés uncovered an assassination plot hatched by Antonio de Villafaña, a personal friend of Velázquez. The plan was to stab the conquistador to death while he dined with his captains. Though Cortés had the names of a number of co-conspirators, he put only the ringleader on trial. Sentenced to death, Villafaña was promptly hanged from a window for all to see. Greatly relieved at having cheated death, the surviving conspirators went out of their way to demonstrate loyalty. Thus Cortés quelled the mutiny.

Whatever advantages the Spaniards enjoyed, victory would have been impossible without his extraordinary leadership

But hostility toward the conquistador and his “unlawful” expedition also brewed back home in the court of Spanish King and Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. In Cortés’ absence his adversaries tried every means to undermine him, threatening his status as an agent of the crown and seeking to deny him the just fruits of his labors. The commander was forced to spend precious time, energy and resources fighting his diplomatic battle from afar. Even after successfully completing the conquest, Cortés received no quarter from his enemies, who accused him of both defrauding the crown of its rightful revenues and fomenting rebellion. On Dec. 2, 1547, the 62-year-old former conquistador died a wealthy but embittered man in Spain. At his request his remains were returned to Mexico.

Setting aside long-held preconceptions about the ease of the conquest of Mexico—which do disservice to both the Spanish commander and those he conquered—scholars of the period should rightfully add Cortés to the ranks of the great captains of war. For whatever advantages the Spaniards enjoyed, victory would have been impossible without his extraordinary leadership. As master of the conquest, Cortés demonstrated fixity of purpose, skilled diplomacy, talent for solving logistical problems, far-sighted planning, heroic battlefield command, tactical flexibility, iron determination and, above all, astounding audacity. MH

Justin D. Lyons is an assistant professor in the Department of History and Political Science at Ohio’s Ashland University. Za daljnje čitanje preporučuje Aztec Warfare: Imperial Expansion and Political Control, by Ross Hassig The Spanish Invasion of Mexico 1519–1521, by Charles M. Robinson III and Conquest: Cortés, Montezuma, and the Fall of Old Mexico, by Hugh Thomas.


Burn the Ships: Hernán Cortés and the Order that Changed the New World

Columbus Day approaches, and we will soon be subjected to the now commonplace rants from mainstream outlets and far-left rags about the horrors of colonialism. You can expect a revived debate on the relative merits of celebrating Christopher Columbus and other explorers to the Americas. This is likely to be particularly vitriolic this year with the added fuel to the fire of the sex abuse scandal in Pennsylvania.

There are legitimate qualms about colonization and how the original regions were governed. There were accusations of forced labor and tyranny in areas controlled by the Spanish Empire. But what many people tend to do is exaggerate the negatives of the Conquista of the Americas in order to demonize the brave men and women who left everything to come to the New World. The calls against conquistadors (and the fact that we still use that word) speak to the persistence of many of the Black Legends surrounding this era and the Holy Catholic Church.

Cortés was an early settler in modern Cuba and was commissioned to explore the Mexican coastline but not to settle there. He decided to conquer the place for several reasons, but a predominant one was the conversion to Catholicism of the natives. In fact, it was the practice of the Spanish to encourage marriage to the natives. While the settlers of North America largely brought women with them and discouraged marriage with the native populations, the intermarriage between the Spanish and the natives would greatly influence future generations and win an entire region for the faith.

The Aztec Empire

The Aztec Empire, the primary opponent of Cortés, was known for its barbarism. The Aztecs had subjugated many other tribes in the region and demanded tribute (slaves) for their religious practices in the temples. Some tribes under Aztec rule, it is commonly believed, were left not fully conquered so that the Aztecs could capture more slaves and on a more regular basis. This was linked to the practice of “flower warfare” and was a way for both the Aztecs and other tribes to obtain human sacrifices. [2] Montezuma actually admitted to this, according to Andrés de Tapia. The emperor, asked why the Aztecs did not finish off their enemies, replied: “We could easily do so but then there would remain nowhere for the young men to train [militarily], except far from here and, also, we wanted there to always be [nearby] people to sacrifice to our gods.” [3] This horrific practice went on from approximately 1450 to 1519, when Cortés and his troops found allies among the Tlaxcala and other rival powers.

The mention of sacrifice to the gods was in reference to the widespread practice of the Aztecs of human sacrifice. The practice was so prevalent that Cortés estimated that up to four thousand humans were sacrificed in the empire every year. The Aztecs served cruel pagan gods who wanted human sacrifices often and in brutal fashion. There were many gods in the Aztec world, and almost all of them required both animal and human sacrifices. The chief god, Huitzilopochtli, had a temple in the capital at Tenochtitlan that was decorated with skulls and painted blood red. The rain god, Tlaloc, considered one of the most ancient deities in Mesoamerica, relished the cries and tears of children. Babies and children were sacrificed to this god regularly.

The preferred method of human sacrifice was to use an obsidian knife to slice downward from the base of the neck to the navel. The person doing the offering would then remove the still beating heart of the victim as well as the bowels and place them on a fire at the base of an idol. This was described by those who had seen it as “the most terrible and frightful thing to behold that has ever been seen.”

I set this up and use graphic descriptions of the Aztecs’ practices to show what exactly the Spaniards were up against.

The Conquest

The conquest of Mexico by Cortés and his men is legendary. The tales of the sacking of Tenochtitlan have passed through the ages down to today as a turning point for the region of Central America.

The conquest did not begin until 1519, officially with the taking over of Veracruz, the coastal region on the other side of the Gulf of Mexico from Cuba. The conquest of Mexico was twofold. The first was the military conquest of the land and people, and the second was the spiritual conquest for the Catholic Church of the hearts and souls of the nation.

One of the first actions of Cortés, on capturing Veracruz, was to order the sinking of his own ships – commonly thought to be burning, but that is contested – so there would be no option for his men but to continue. What is certain is that the sinking would set an irreversible course for the conqueror.

The conquistadors skirmished with some local tribes while seeking alliances against the Aztecs in 1519. One of these was the Tlaxcalans, mentioned above, who first fought the Spanish. Once they realized that the Spanish wanted peace and an alliance, they decided to join the conquerors. The larger force then, in October 1519, marched on Cholula, the second largest city in the region.

There was a massacre of the Cholulan nobles scholars disagree as to the motivation. The view one takes on the issue largely depends on one’s view of Cortés himself. He claimed it was due to treachery, and others claim it was to send a message. There is a record of the speech Cortés gave formally accusing the assembled nobles of treachery and his claim to be following Spanish law (see previous link). The nobles said they were acting on behalf of Montezuma. The city was taken, and its altars and temples were burned.

The Bible has a history of God using armies of men to bring his vengeance on idolaters, as we see in the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites.

After taking over Cholula, the conquistadors undertook their first march on Tenochtitlan, where they arrived in November of 1519. They were admitted to the city by Montezuma so the Aztecs could learn the weaknesses of the Spanish. This would be a poor move for the Aztec emperor, as Montezuma’s soldiers on the coast had killed many Spaniards, and word quickly reached Cortés, who decided to take Montezuma hostage.

The conquest might have ended there, but Velázquez still wanted to take the land himself and sent an army to confront Cortés in April of 1520. Cortés and most of his men, leaving Montezuma in the capital as the hostage of his garrison, departed to deal with the army of Velázquez. They were outnumbered, but they prevailed, and they convinced the soldiers of the losing side to join their forces in returning to Tenochtitlan. This setback lasted from April of 1520 until July of 1520.

As Cortés returned to the capital after dealing with Velázquez, Montezuma was stoned to death by his people in general revolt, thus shaking the tenuous hold the Spanish had on the city. The conquistadors were forced to flee to Tlaxcala and regroup. On their way, they suffered major losses in the Battle of Otumba. The won the battle against all odds as their force was approximately 1,300 men against upwards of 10,000 Aztec warriors. Fewer than 500 in the Spanish and Tlaxcalan forces escaped with their lives once Cortés had his mounted soldiers take out the leader on the field.

Once the Spanish regrouped, they laid siege to Tenochtitlan. Tenochtitlan was an island city, which greatly aided Cortés. The conquest officially ended when the Spaniards captured Cuauhtemoc, who had replaced Montezuma as the head of the city in August of 1521. The city was officially renamed Mexico City, and the conversion was set to begin.

The armies of the Catholic Empire had conquered the demon gods of the Aztecs, and Cortés himself was known at the time for piety. He was concerned about the Church sending official priests to Mexico and instead requested friars of the Dominican and Franciscan orders. His concern was the negative reflection the priests and their “vices” would have on the natives and the harm it would bring to the Church. [4] This was the same period of corruption in the Church that had led to the breaking off of Luther just four years prior in 1517. Cortés was concerned that the practices of the officials of the Church would turn off the natives, and his judgment was sound. Due to his actions and those of his “Twelve Apostles of Mexico,” the conversion of Mexico began. By 1540, an estimated 9 million souls were brought to Holy Mother Church via the Virgin of Guadalupe and the longstanding Catholic monasteries, some of which still stand today.

Cortés made a special request in his letters to the emperor for special powers to be granted by the pope to the friars he requested for evangelization. He was greatly concerned for the souls of the natives as well as the souls of his men. He sought the dispensation of powers for the Franciscans and Dominicans because his people and the natives were “so far from the proper remedies of our consciences,” but he feared the damage normal clerics may cause. [5] Cortés is shown in the writings of Díaz del Castillo, who was with him on the conquest, to have regularly and publicly given speeches and thanks to God to encourage the conversion. One such example is recounted in thorough detail in the Historia Verdadera, Vol. 2, Chapter 77, where Cortés is personally attempting to convert the Tlaxcalans. He is recounted as explaining the mission of the Spaniards to convert the natives and end human sacrifice as well as venerating the Blessed Virgin Mary before them. He also showed deference to the priest, Father de la Merced, which enabled the Spanish to obtain from the Tlaxcalans a newly constructed temple for Our Lord. [6]

The spiritual aspect of Cortés’s conquest was far more important than the terrestrial aspect. The gods of the Aztec peoples along with those in the remainder of Mexico demanded cruel and regular sacrifices. The Aztecs diligently provided them in cooperation and in conflict with their neighbors, and they have stood out as one of the most brutal empires in the history of the world. Thousands were offered up to the gods every year, including women and children.

The conversion of the New World started with the order from Cortés to burn his ships and take over the nation. His passion for the conversion to Christ led Bartolomé de Las Casas, a Dominican friar, to write: “Through this captain, God opened the door for us to preach his holy gospel, and it was he who caused the Indians to revere the holy sacraments and respect the ministers of the church.” [7]

Trying times lie ahead in the Church, and many will be tempted to leave the faith due to the abuses of our times. The burning of ships by Cortés reminds us that the Catholic faith is a commitment for life. Nema povratka. We need to redouble our efforts to defend and spread the faith while cleaning out the Church of those who corrupt her. Take Cortés as an example in courage and piety from a time in many ways much more brutal than our own, and remember: the gates of Hell cannot prevail against the Church.

[1] The Conquest of New Spain, Bernal Diaz del Castillo, 1963

[2] Isaac, Barry L. “The Aztec ‘Flowery War’: A Geopolitical Explanation.” Journal of Anthropological Research 39.4 (1983): 415–432. Mreža.

[4] Cortés, Hernán. Hernán Cortés: Letters from Mexico. Translated and edited by Anthony R. Pagden. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1971. Letter IV. Page 333.


Noche Triste

Cortés remained in the city for five months and virtually governed the kingdom. In April, Cortés learned of a Spanish force landing on the Gulf Coast by Pánfilo de Narváez, who was sent by Velázquez to relieve Cortés of his command and bring him back to Cuba for trial. He left Pedro de Alvarado in charge, defeated Narváez, and returned with his soldiers, thus increasing the size of Cortés’s force. Upon his return, he found Motecuhzoma’s palace besieged by the Aztecs after Alvarado had massacred many leading Aztec chiefs during a festival. This action prompted retaliation by the Indians against the Spanish. It was during this time that members of the Aztec elite decided to replace Motecuhzoma with his brother, Cuitlahuac. In late June, Motecuhzoma was killed it is still not known by whom. Angry and without food, on June 30, 1520, Cortés decided to leave the city under the cover of darkness, later to return. However, before his soldiers could complete their escape, the people of Tenochtitlán discovered their plot. As a result, many men on both sides lost their lives in the canals that surrounded the city that night. Cortés’ men had attempted to escape with gold in their pockets and were found drowned in the waters the following day. This night was later called the Noche Triste, The Night of Sorrows.

Cortes Triumphant

Cortés and his men withdrew and rejoined their allies, the Tlaxcalans. Cortés returned in December with a better-prepared contingent, more reinforcements from Cuba and Jamaica, new ships, cannons, a layout of the city and a siege mentality. In the interim, an epidemic of smallpox had broken out in the city and many people died, one of which was the ruler Cuitlahuac, who had been replaced by Cuauhtémoc. Upon Cortés’ return, he cut off the water and food to the city, combined an assault by lake and land and fought for 3 months. The city finally fell with the surrender of Cuauhtémoc on August 13, 1521.