In his "History of the Conquest of Mexico" and it's companion volume, the "History of the Conquest of Peru", William Prescott achieves the remarkable feat of portraying the action and adventures of the Spanish cavaliers in a highly readable format for those with little prior knowledge of the Conquests. The subject matter for these books is basically the clash of cultures that occurred between the Old World (in the form of Catholic Spain) and the New (in the form of the Aztecs in Mexico and the Incas in Peru). It is interesting to note that these books were written by in the early 19th century by a partially sighted American author who had never visited the countries but who had access to all available historical documents. The style of writing is such that the reader is never overwhelmed by detail and is continually impressed by the heroic feats of the Spanish and at the same time shocked by their cruelty to the indigenous poeples.

In the "History of the Conquest of Mexico", Prescott provides an excellent acount of the origin and nature of Mexican civilization at the time of the conquest, describing how the Aztecs dominated the many races of Mexico with savage brutality, indulging in regular human sacrifices. He then goes on to describe the key player in this adventure, Hernando Cortes, and how he and a small party of cavaliers overcame overwhelming odds to defeat the armies of the Aztecs. While it is impossible not to admire the genius of Cortes, the reader is left in no doubt that the Spaniards were motivated by the promise of Aztec gold and not by the desire to "spread the word of God to the heathen". However, Prescott excuses the means by which Cortes overthrew the Aztec empire as it put an end to the Aztec practice of human sacrifice. In the second book, "History of the Conquest of Peru", Prescott finds no excuse for the manner in which Pizarro and Almagro conquered the relatively peaceful empire of the Incas. As with the first book, an interesting description of the Inca way of life precedes the action. While equally enthralling as the conquest of Mexico, Pizzaro accomplished the overthrow of the Incas by brute force, without the finesse of Cortes. The second half of this book deals with the remarkable events which followed the conquest; the two civil wars and their resolution by Pedro de la Gasca on behalf of the Spanish crown. It is difficult to find fault with Prescott's scientific approach to his writings; all of the events are backed up by references to documents written at the time of, or shortly after the conquests and these are given as valuable footnotes on each page. In addition, at the end of some of the chapters, Prescott writes short essays about his sources, describing which are trustworthy and which are prejudiced. If there were to be a fault with Prescott's approach, then it would his sympathy with the Catholic church during the years of the Conquest and his excusing of the Spanish atrocities as a means of spreading Christianity. But then we should bear in mind that Prescott was writing in the 1840s and was obviously a serious Christian. A second problem is that some of the footnotes are left in their original text, i.e. Spanish, Latin or sometimes Greek which presents problems to non-polyglots. The publishers have obviously not thought to translate these. In conclusion, these two books are essential reading for anyone interested in the empires of the Aztecs and Incas, and their overthrow by the Spanish Conquestadors. I have not read any other books on the subject which compare to Prescott's masterpieces.

Prescott shows why Cortes stands beside Alexander the III as a leader of epic campaigns; and he knows that, as with Alexander, there is more substance to the story than more 'pure-bred' academic historians will allow. This book also, obliquely, sheds light on U.S. American history in ways the reader may not expect from the title. Prescott does for America south of the Rio Grande what Francis Parkman (another great, unknown American historian) does for the northern forests. The works of both are treasures to be mined.

One of the military campaigns that changed world history has been rescued from near oblivion by Albert D. McJoynt, editor of this classic work. The fall of Moorish Granada to Spain's Catholic rulers, Ferdinand and Isabella, was a turning point in establishing the boundaries between Christendom and Islam in the West, boundaries which had been in conflict for nearly a millennium. It also allowed the royal couple to launch Columbus' voyage with its well-known impact on the course of human events.

Wh

I concern myself only with the first part only (the Conquest of Mexico), and compare it to its twentieth-century equivalent, Hugh Thomas's THE CONQUEST OF MEXICO. The obvious difference is in language, since Prescott's long clausulae and cadences are, to us moderns, harder to read. (There is an "updated for modern readers" version of Prescott available elsewhere on amazon, which I have not seen.) One might have expected Thomas would have the advantage of modern research, but the sad fact is that we know litle more now than we did 150 years ago -- both Prescott and Thomas had to use the same source material.

Specifically looking at the famous event of July 1 1520, the "Noche Triste", I see that Prescott and Thomas differ (in the following I will put Thomas inside parentheses). Prescott says the Spaniards chose to retreat on the Tlacopan causeway which was different from the one they came on (Thomas calls it the Tacuba causeway and says that it's the one they came in on); Prescott says Cacama the Lord of Texcoco came along (Thomas says Cacama was killed a month earlier); Prescott says Tlaxcalans were distributed throughout the column (Thomas says they were in the centre); Prescott says "several Indian sentinels" saw the Spaniards leaving (Thomas says it was one woman fetching water); and finally Prescott says that Pedro de Alvarado pole-vaulted over a break on the causeway (Thomas says that can't be true). Also Prescott's passage on the Noche Triste is longer than Thomas's, not just because he's more verbose (which he is), but because he includes details that Thomas omits. Now, for the question "which account is true?" I am unqualified to judge two such thorough scholars, but I know that Prescott is right about Cacama, more believable about the sentinels, and less believable about Alvarado's Leap, so I'd call it a tie in that respect. And so, which account was simply more interesting? Prescott.

I'm not a historian. I just like to read history and historical fiction. I first discovered William Prescott's Conquest of Peru in the back of a used bookstore. My kids are from Peru so I decided I should check it out. The first section was about the Inca civilization; their society, customs, politics, and more. It was certainly interesting and readable, but a bit dry. Once the narrative turned to Pizzaro and his band of adventurers, however, I was hooked. They don't call Prescott a romantic historian for nothing. He blends detailed accounts of absolutely outrageous courage, hardship, audacity, greed, ignorance, politics, faith, slaughter, naiveté, and more with vivid insights into the lives, characters and motives of the people involved. The story reads like excellent historical fiction, and yet it's meticulously researched fact.

Prescott's Conquest of Mexico is every bit as good as Conquest of Peru. The book starts with a section on the Aztec civilization, then turns to Cortez and his men. These adventurers behaved as though they were invincible, they believed their faith in God made them so, and one almost comes to believe that they were as they beat unimaginable odds over and over and over again. I was on the edge of my seat through all three volumes.

No offense to Lewis & Clark (or Stephen Ambrose), but Prescott's Conquest of Mexico and Conquest of Peru make Undaunted Courage sound like a family picnic. Remarkable events told by a remarkable author. It's no wonder these books are still popular more than one and a half centuries after they were written.

My review concerns only the first part of the book, "The Conquest of Mexico." What a treat, to read this after reading Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, I think that only this book, could've made my transition from the ethereal realm of great books to the earthly realm of good books. Prescott's Conquest of Mexico is a long read, but a rewarding one. It is an excellent narrative history, where depth and pathos are brought to Cortez, his men, Montezuma and the many more that are an intrigal part of this history. A recount of a band of a few hundred Spainards, commanded by a man, Cortez, who is alternatively driven by proselytizing the indians of the central mexico and his lust for gold. Slowly and in a beautiful, novel-esque way, Prescott, reveals the heart of Cortez and the 16th century conquistadors, the clash of cultures and the terrible outcomes the result. Neither are the Indians ignored, and much time (especially for a 19th century author) is spent on the rituals, customs, habits and political and religious life of the Natives. A truly dramatic tale with a tragic ending, all told with the poetic elegance of Prescott, it's a great read.

There's a lot of information here but the book is often slow and dull and too wordy and pretentious for my tastes. Less is more.

A wonderful book! It reads like great fiction but the events aren't fiction-- they actually happened! This book kept me captivated, I couldn't put it down! Prescott does a marvelous Job!

The conquest of the mighty Inca empire by a small contingent of Spanish adventurers, and their subsequent civil wars fought for control of the region, is a story so dramatic and improbable that it's hard to believe it actually happened. Prescott's artistic style, meticulous attention to detail, and brilliantly structured narrative bring out all the drama and excitement. Unlike many histories, this work has nothing about it that is tedious or dry--particularly remarkable since Prescott never visited South America and developed his sweeping account exclusively from literary sources. The author's ability to reconstruct the attitudes and motivations of the key characters gives the reader a much deeper understanding of the events. Before reading the book, I knew next to nothing about the Incas or the settlement of the region. Upon finishing it, I felt as though I'd received a thorough (and most enjoyable) schooling.