it; Acosta contradicting most of the early writers, argues that it must have been the court of the palace where Montezuma was. It nowhere appears, however, that Montezuma was present, and, as the dance was a religious rite, the temple court would seem more indicated for its celebration. Alvarado, who was wounded on the head by a stone, appeared before Montezuma crying: "See what your subjects have done!" but the Emperor answered that had he not begun the disturbance the Mexicans would have remained peaceable, adding, "You have undone yourself and me." Nor did Alvarado's explanations satisfy Cortes, who openly showed his anger upon his arrival.
Indeed, his conduct seems destitute of any reasonable excuse, and his efforts to exculpate himself at his trial were weak and confused; at best he had but the word of a captive, an intended victim, and that wrung from him under torture. Replying to Art. IV., of the accusations against him he alleged, (i) that it was common report in the city that, during Cortes's absence, the reduced garrison would be crushed; (2) on the morning of the festival he had seen a large number of sharp pointed sticks, with which the Mexicans openly boasted they would kill him and his men; (3) the admission of the captive victim, which was confirmed by a native of Texcoco; (4) that a skirmish had already taken place in the palace, in which he himself was wounded, and one Spaniard was killed, and that all would have shared the same fate. Torquemada adds the detail that huge cauldrons were prepared in which to cook the Spaniards. Las Casas advances the theory usual with him, that Alvarado wished to strike such a blow as would terrorise the Indians. Herrera admits that a revolt may have been brewing, but deprecates the wholesale massacre and the taking of jewels from the dead bodies. Clavigero scouts the idea of a conspiracy, and affirms that this was an invention to shield Alvarado. Oviedo, Sahagun, and Fr. Duran, all exempt the Indians of rebellious intentions. Setting aside the weighty unanimity of these authorities on the question of the alleged conspiracy, Alvarado's conduct would still be without justification, even had there been an intention to attack him, for his proper course would have been to collect all the Spaniards and Tlascalans in his quarters, with sufficient provisions, hold Montezuma and the court nobles as hostages, notify Cortes by messenger, and stand strictly on the defensive until help or instructions came. The situation cannot be properly paralleled with that of Cortes in Cholula, for the conditions were entirely different. Alvarado was the most violent of all the Spanish captains, and his brutality culminated in this inhuman massacre, which drove the long suffering Mexicans to desperation; it destroyed the last illusion about the celestial origin and character of the white men, and brought on the tragedy of the Sorrowful Night, and the siege, with its long train of misery and destruction. From that day forward, the Mexicans were deaf to all overtures from the Spaniards; regardless of suffering, and indifferent to death, they sought only vengeance.
