by the stone, which struck him on the head; by the Mexicans, it was on the contrary, asserted that he was put to death by Cortes. The Codex Ramirez, before quoted from the work of Orozco y Berra, states that Montezuma was found stabbed to death by the Spaniards, with the other chiefs who shared his captivity. Acosta accepts this as true, and Father Duran (cap. 76) says "They found him dead with chains upon his feet, and five dagger wounds in his breast, and with him many other of the chiefs and lords who were prisoners." Amongst the nobles were the kings of Tlacopan and Texcoco and the lord of Tlatelolco. Cacamatzin, according to Ixtlilxochitl was stabbed fortyfive times, and he adds that Montezuma died from the wound in his head, "although his vassals say that the Spaniards themselves killed him, and plunged a sword into his fundament" (apud, Orozco y Berra, tom. iv., cap. x.). The murder of the other chiefs was deemed necessary, as it was neither possible to be burdened with them in the flight from the city, nor was it wise to release them. Their bodies were thrown out of the Spanish quarters at a spot called Teayotl, because of a stone turtle which stood there, in the hope that their fate might discourage the people, and also give them occupation in preparing their funerals as required by custom (Sahagun, lib. xii., cap. xxiii.; Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chichimeca). Cortes's account of the wounding and death of Montezuma was naturally followed by Gomara; Oviedo also copies his words, and says that he heard the same account viva voce from Pedro de Alvarado; Herrera asserts that the emperor's wound was not mortal (lib. x., cap. x.), but that he died because he refused all attendance and food; and Bernal Diaz, who relates the same story, adds the affecting detail that Cortes and all the captains and soldiers wept as though they had lost a father (Verdadera Hist., cap. cxxvi.), which those may believe who can. Clavigero refers to the grief of the Spaniards, as described by Bernal Diaz, and says that, in view of the contradictory accounts, it seems impossible to know the truth adding, "I cannot believe that the Spaniards would take the life of a king to whom they owed so many benefits, and from whose death they would derive only evil." He does not say why he cannot believe this; Montezuma's influence was gone; another leader had been chosen by the nation in the person of the brave Quauhtemotzin, and when Cortes announced his death, offering to deliver his body for burial they cried out: "We want Montezuma neither living nor dead!" (Herrera, lib. x., cap. X.) Hence the fallen sovereign's presence was only an embarrassment to Cortes, who was planning to fight his way out of the city with as few encumbrances as possible—even the precious gold was being left behind. The moment the emperor became an obstacle, his doom was sealed, and there was nothing in the character or conduct of Cortes which warrants the belief that he was influenced by sentiments of compassion for the king he had degraded, while his disposal of Cacamatzin at that time, and of Quauhtamotzin later in Yucatan, revealed the absence of any scruples whatever. Prescott joins Clavigero in his
