[398] Gomara, Crónica, cap. 83.--There is reason to doubt the truth of these stories. “Segun una carta original que tengo en mi poder firmada de las tres cabezas de la Nueva-España en donde escriben á la Magestad del Emperador Nuestro Señor (que Dios tenga en su Santo Reyno) disculpan en ella á Motecuhzoma y á los Mexicanos de esto, y de lo demas que se les argulló, que lo cierto era que fué invencion de los Tlascaltecas, y de algunos de los Españoles que veian la hora de salirse de miedo de la Ciudad, y poner en cobro innumerables riquezas que habian venido á sus manos.” Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chich., MS., cap. 85. [399] Rel. Seg. de Cortés, ap. Lorenzana, p. 84.--Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chich., MS., cap. 85.--P. Martyr, De Orbe Novo, dec. 5, cap. 3.--Oviedo, Hist. de las Ind., MS., lib. 33, cap. 6.--Bernal Diaz gives a very different report of this matter. According to him, a number of officers and soldiers, of whom he was one, suggested the capture of Montezuma to the general, who came into the plan with hesitation. (Hist. de la Conquista, cap. 93.) This is contrary to the character of Cortés, who was a man to lead, and not to be led, on such occasions. It is contrary to the general report of historians, though these, it must be confessed, are mainly built on the general’s narrative. It is contrary to anterior probability; since, if the conception seems almost too desperate to have seriously entered into the head of any one man, how much more improbable is it that it should have originated with a number! Lastly, it is contrary to the positive written statement of Cortés to the emperor, publicly known and circulated, confirmed in print by his chaplain, Gomara, and all this when the thing was fresh and when the parties interested were alive to contradict it. We cannot but think that the captain here, as in the case of the burning of the ships, assumes rather more for himself and his comrades than the facts will strictly warrant; an oversight for which the lapse of half a century--to say nothing of his avowed anxiety to show up the claims of the latter--may furnish some apology. [400] Even Gomara has the candor to style it a “pretext,”--_achaque_. Crónica, cap. 83. [401] Bernal Diaz states the affair, also, differently. According to him, the Aztec governor was enforcing the payment of the customary tribute from the Totonacs, when Escalante, interfering to protect his allies, now subjects of Spain, was slain in an action with the enemy. (Hist. de la Conquista, cap. 93.) Cortés had the best means of knowing the facts, and wrote at the time. He does not usually shrink from avowing his policy, however severe, towards the natives; and I have thought it fair to give him the benefit of his own version of the story.