“The Lost Words of La Malinche“ -2

段11:中英对照翻译:

Paragraph 1

English :
Finally, the argument is further undermined by the parallel case of the Cortés - Moctezuma encounter. Mesoamericans did have writing, forcing Diamond to dispense with the literacy argument and resort to another myth (to be refuted in the next chapter), that “Montezuma miscalculated even more grossly when he took Cortés for a returning god and admitted him and his tiny army into the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán."

Chinese :
最后,Cortés - Moctezuma 接触的类似情况进一步削弱了这一论点。中美洲人确实有书写,这迫使 Diamond 放弃了识字的论点,转而诉诸另一个神话(将在下一章中被驳斥),即“蒙特祖马(Montezuma)更严重地误判了形势,他把 Cortés 当作回归的神,并允许他和他的小部队进入阿兹特克首都特诺奇提特兰(Tenochtitlán)。”

Explanation :
This paragraph points out that the argument about the importance of writing is weakened by the example of Cortés and Moctezuma. The Mesoamericans had writing, so Diamond had to abandon the literacy argument and instead rely on another myth, which will be refuted later.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
What is the main point of this paragraph?
A. The importance of writing in the Conquest.
B. The weakness of Diamond's argument about literacy.
C. The role of Cortés in the Aztec Conquest.
D. The impact of Montezuma's actions on the Conquest.
Answer: B. The weakness of Diamond's argument about literacy.

Paragraph 2

English :
Diamond’s argument about writing is part of a well - entrenched myth going back at least to the Middle Ages and Thomas Aquinas’s assertion that alphabetic writing distinguished civilized people from barbarians. Las Casas claimed that Aristotle had made the same distinction. While the Dominican was wrong, his claim illustrates the deep - rooted validity of the distinction in the European mind. In the late twentieth century, scholars dedicated to rejecting ethnocentrism were still unable to shake completely the belief that alphabetic writing indicates superiority in some sense.

Chinese :
Diamond 关于书写的论点是根深蒂固的神话的一部分,至少可以追溯到中世纪,托马斯·阿奎那斯(Thomas Aquinas)声称字母书写区分了文明人和野蛮人。Las Casas 声称亚里士多德也做了同样的区分。虽然这位多米尼加人是错的,但他的说法说明了这种区分在欧洲人心中根深蒂固的有效性。在 20 世纪末,致力于拒绝种族中心主义的学者仍然无法完全摆脱字母书写在某种意义上表示优越性的信念。

Explanation :
This paragraph discusses how Diamond's argument about writing is part of a long - standing myth that dates back to the Middle Ages. It mentions that even scholars who reject ethnocentrism still believe that alphabetic writing indicates superiority.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
What does the paragraph say about the belief in the superiority of alphabetic writing?
A. It is a new idea.
B. It is a well - established myth.
C. It is only believed by a few scholars.
D. It is a result of ethnocentrism.
Answer: B. It is a well - established myth.

Paragraph 3

English :
Examples are the influential anthropologist Claude Lévi - Strauss—who wrote in 1955 that “of all the criteria by which people habitually distinguish civilization from barbarism, this one should at least be retained: that certain peoples write and others do not”—and more recently, Todorov and Diamond.

Chinese :
例子包括有影响力的 anthropologist 克劳德·列维 - 斯特劳斯(Claude Lévi - Strauss),他在 1955 年写道:“在人们习惯用来区分文明和野蛮的所有标准中,至少应该保留这一个:某些人会书写,而其他人不会。”更近的例子是 Todorov 和 Diamond。

Explanation :
This paragraph provides examples of scholars who have supported the idea that writing distinguishes civilization from barbarism, including Claude Lévi - Strauss, Todorov, and Diamond.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
Who is mentioned as an example of a scholar supporting the idea that writing distinguishes civilization from barbarism?
A. Thomas Aquinas.
B. Aristotle.
C. Claude Lévi - Strauss.
D. Montezuma.
Answer: C. Claude Lévi - Strauss.

Paragraph 4

English :
The Pizarro - Atahuallpa encounter is thus an example of how the myth of miscommunication has been perpetuated and used by scholars to explain the Conquest in colonialist terms—terms that would have made sense to the conquistadors themselves. Yet the differences between Spanish and Andean communicative technologies do not adequately explain the Conquest of Peru.

Chinese :
因此,Pizarro - Atahuallpa 接触是误解神话如何被延续并被学者用来以殖民主义的术语解释征服的一个例子——这些术语对征服者自己来说是有意义的。然而,西班牙和安第斯通信技术之间的差异并不足以解释秘鲁的征服。

Explanation :
This paragraph discusses how the myth of miscommunication has been used to explain the Conquest in colonialist terms. It argues that the differences in communication technologies do not fully explain the Conquest of Peru.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
What is the main point of this paragraph?
A. The importance of communication technologies in the Conquest.
B. The use of the myth of miscommunication to explain the Conquest.
C. The role of colonialist terms in understanding the Conquest.
D. The impact of Pizarro - Atahuallpa encounter on the Conquest.
Answer: B. The use of the myth of miscommunication to explain the Conquest.

Paragraph 5

English :
But what of the actual point of contact, that between the Dominican friar, Vicente Valverde, and the Inca emperor? Was that not a symbolic moment of miscommunication, one that articulated the culture clash in gestures just as the awkward gestures of Cortés and Moctezuma did at their first meeting?

Chinese :
但实际的接触点,即多米尼加修士 Vicente Valverde 和印加皇帝之间的接触呢?那难道不是一个象征性的误解时刻吗,它通过手势表达了文化冲突,就像 Cortés 和 Moctezuma 第一次见面时的尴尬手势一样?

Explanation :
This paragraph questions whether the encounter between Vicente Valverde and Atahuallpa was a symbolic moment of miscommunication, similar to the awkward gestures between Cortés and Moctezuma.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
What is the main question posed in this paragraph?
A. Whether the encounter between Valverde and Atahuallpa was a symbolic moment of miscommunication.
B. Whether the differences in communication technologies explain the Conquest.
C. Whether the myth of miscommunication is a colonialist explanation.
D. Whether the Pizarro - Atahuallpa encounter was significant.
Answer: A. Whether the encounter between Valverde and Atahuallpa was a symbolic moment of miscommunication.

Paragraph 6

English :
The conquistador - chronicler, Francisco de Jerez, who was present at Cajamarca, wrote that Atahuallpa deliberately threw the Bible to the ground out of pride, because he was unable to read its writing. When the friar told Pizarro this, the captain grabbed the emperor and let out the war cry, “Santiago!” as the signal for the general attack.

Chinese :
征服者 - 慢性病患者 Francisco de Jerez 当时在 Cajamarca,他写道,Atahuallpa 出于骄傲故意把圣经扔到地上,因为他无法阅读其文字。当修士把这件事告诉 Pizarro 时,船长抓住了皇帝,并发出了战斗呐喊“圣地亚哥!”作为总攻的信号。

Explanation :
This paragraph describes Francisco de Jerez's account of the incident at Cajamarca. Jerez wrote that Atahuallpa deliberately threw the Bible to the ground, and Pizarro used this as a signal to attack.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
What did Atahuallpa do according to Francisco de Jerez?
A. He accidentally dropped the Bible.
B. He deliberately threw the Bible to the ground.
C. He read the Bible aloud.
D. He showed respect for the Bible.
Answer: B. He deliberately threw the Bible to the ground.

维森特·瓦尔维尔德(Vicente Valverde)印加皇帝阿塔瓦尔帕(Atahualpa) 在西班牙征服印加帝国的历史中有着重要的角色。

维森特·瓦尔维尔德(Vicente Valverde)

维森特·瓦尔维尔德是一位多米尼加修士,他是西班牙征服印加帝国过程中非常关键的人物之一。他在征服印加时起到了重要的精神领袖和宗教推动者的作用。

  • 宗教角色:瓦尔维尔德是随西班牙征服队伍来到新世界的传教士之一,他的主要任务是向印加帝国的人民传播基督教。瓦尔维尔德是西班牙征服者与印加人之间文化和宗教冲突的核心人物之一。

  • 与阿塔瓦尔帕的互动:瓦尔维尔德在西班牙征服印加的初期,曾通过与印加皇帝阿塔瓦尔帕的接触,试图将基督教引入印加帝国。瓦尔维尔德向阿塔瓦尔帕赠送了一本西班牙语的圣经,并要求他皈依基督教,但阿塔瓦尔帕并未理解这本书的意义,最终发生了冲突。瓦尔维尔德为西班牙征服提供了宗教正当性,他的言论和行为影响了西班牙征服的进程。

  • 历史影响:瓦尔维尔德的行动标志着宗教在征服过程中的重要作用,他不仅代表着西班牙的宗教使命,还帮助塑造了西班牙征服者的“神圣使命”观念。

印加皇帝阿塔瓦尔帕(Atahualpa)

阿塔瓦尔帕是印加帝国的最后一位皇帝,也是西班牙征服印加帝国过程中最关键的人物之一。他的命运和决定直接影响了印加帝国的衰亡。

  • 背景:阿塔瓦尔帕是印加皇帝华伊纳·卡帕克的儿子。他在继位时面临着帝国的内战问题,特别是与其兄弟华斯卡尔的争斗。最终,阿塔瓦尔帕成功地夺取了帝位,但帝国的统一已受到挑战。

  • 与西班牙人接触:1532年,弗朗西斯科·皮萨罗和他的西班牙征服队伍到达了印加帝国的首都,阿塔瓦尔帕的印加帝国。阿塔瓦尔帕初时拒绝接受西班牙人的要求并逗留在他的宫殿内,但由于他未能了解西班牙人的威胁性和复杂性,最终与他们发生了冲突。

  • 被俘与死亡:在1532年11月,皮萨罗与阿塔瓦尔帕进行了会晤。阿塔瓦尔帕被西班牙军队俘虏,虽然西班牙人要求阿塔瓦尔帕交出大量黄金作为赎金,但他最终仍被西班牙人处死。阿塔瓦尔帕的被捕和死亡标志着印加帝国的崩溃。

  • 历史影响:阿塔瓦尔帕的被俘和死亡对印加帝国的命运产生了深远的影响。印加帝国从此失去了中央领导,西班牙的征服进程加速了帝国的灭亡。

他们的关系

  • 瓦尔维尔德与阿塔瓦尔帕的互动:瓦尔维尔德曾试图让阿塔瓦尔帕接受基督教,认为这是对印加帝国的“救赎”。他将一本西班牙语的圣经交给阿塔瓦尔帕,但因为语言障碍和文化差异,阿塔瓦尔帕并未理解圣经的意义。瓦尔维尔德的宗教使命和西班牙征服者的军事目标最终导致了阿塔瓦尔帕的死亡。

因此,瓦尔维尔德和阿塔瓦尔帕之间的互动不仅反映了西班牙征服过程中的宗教与文化冲突,也揭示了印加帝国在面对西方侵略时的脆弱和无力。

 

弗朗西斯科·皮萨罗(Francisco Pizarro) 是西班牙征服印加帝国的主要领导者之一,也是西班牙征服美洲过程中最著名的征服者之一。

皮萨罗的生平与背景

  • 出生与早年生活:皮萨罗约于1471年出生于西班牙的特鲁希略,他出生在一个贫困的家庭,少年时期没有接受正式教育。年轻时,他加入了西班牙的海军,参与了探索新世界的活动。

  • 征服美洲的经历:皮萨罗最初参与过多次征服和探险行动,尤其是西班牙在中南美洲的探索。1524年,他第一次出征秘鲁,但未能成功。1531年,他再次发起征服印加帝国的远征,并在这一过程中取得了决定性胜利。

征服印加帝国

  • 征服计划:皮萨罗和他的弟弟胡安·皮萨罗(Juan Pizarro)与迪奥戈·德·阿尔马格罗(Diego de Almagro)一同合作,前往印加帝国进行征服。皮萨罗以较少的兵力(约180名士兵)在印加帝国境内展开行动,这也为后来的征服奠定了基础。

  • 与阿塔瓦尔帕的会面:皮萨罗在1532年到达印加帝国的首都库斯科附近,并于11月与印加皇帝阿塔瓦尔帕会面。当时阿塔瓦尔帕因内战刚刚完成对其兄弟的胜利,处于权力巅峰。皮萨罗设下计策,借口和平谈判,将阿塔瓦尔帕俘虏。

  • 黄金与赎金:皮萨罗要求阿塔瓦尔帕提供黄金和银子作为赎金,阿塔瓦尔帕同意了这一要求,并且印加人为赎回皇帝提供了大量的金银。然而,在赎金还未完全交付之前,皮萨罗却以“叛乱”罪名将阿塔瓦尔帕处决,结束了印加帝国的中央领导。

  • 征服进程:阿塔瓦尔帕的死亡标志着印加帝国的灭亡,皮萨罗随后占领了印加的首都库斯科,并建立了西班牙对印加领土的统治。印加帝国的崩溃是由西班牙军队的武力、以及皮萨罗等征服者的战略、外交手段共同促成的。

皮萨罗的遗产与争议

  • 建立西属秘鲁:皮萨罗在征服印加后建立了西属秘鲁(Perú),成为其总督,开始大规模的殖民化。这一地区成为西班牙最重要的殖民地之一,富含金银,推动了西班牙帝国的财富积累。

  • 争议与后期生活:皮萨罗在个人生活上也有许多争议。由于他的残暴行为及对印加人的压迫,他在西班牙本土和美洲的评价不一。1536年,皮萨罗和他的盟友阿尔马格罗发生了冲突,最终阿尔马格罗被杀。皮萨罗在之后继续巩固自己的权力,但他也在1541年遭到一名敌人家族成员刺杀。

Paragraph 7

English :
Thus although Jerez details how the attack was planned all along, it is also a response to Atahuallpa’s blasphemous act—and thus further justified. In contrast is the account dictated in 1570 by Titu Cusi Yupanqui, a nephew of the emperor, in which: “My uncle Atahuallpa . . . received them very well. He gave one of them a drink of the kind we use from a golden vessel, [but] as the Spaniard took it from his hand, he poured it on the ground. And because of this my uncle became very angry.”

Chinese :
因此,尽管 Jerez 详细说明了攻击是如何一直计划好的,但它也是对 Atahuallpa 亵渎行为的回应——因此进一步得到了正当化。与此相反的是 1570 年由皇帝的侄子 Titu Cusi Yupanqui 口述的描述,其中说:“我的叔叔 Atahuallpa……非常友好地接待了他们。他用一个金杯给他们中的一个人喝了我们常用的饮料,但当西班牙人从他手中接过饮料时,他把饮料倒在了地上。因此,我的叔叔非常生气。”

Explanation :
This paragraph contrasts Jerez's account with that of Titu Cusi Yupanqui. Jerez describes the attack as a response to Atahuallpa's blasphemous act, while Titu Cusi Yupanqui describes the initial insult as coming from the Spanish.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
What is the main difference between Jerez's and Titu Cusi Yupanqui's accounts?
A. Jerez says the attack was planned, while Titu Cusi Yupanqui says it was a response to an insult.
B. Jerez says Atahuallpa threw the Bible, while Titu Cusi Yupanqui says the Spanish insulted Atahuallpa.
C. Jerez says the Spanish were justified, while Titu Cusi Yupanqui says they were not.
D. Jerez says the attack was accidental, while Titu Cusi Yupanqui says it was deliberate.
Answer: B. Jerez says Atahuallpa threw the Bible, while Titu Cusi Yupanqui says the Spanish insulted Atahuallpa.

Paragraph 8

English :
In the Inca version, then, the initial insult and blasphemy is committed by the invaders, and the hurling down of the book is a justifiable quid pro quo. The theme of the Jerez and Titu Cusi accounts is not directly that of miscommunication, as in each version one ruler clearly signals his disdain for the other. But what actually happened was sufficiently unclear to permit highly contrasting narratives.

Chinese :
因此,在印加版本中,最初的侮辱和亵渎是由入侵者犯下的,把书扔下去是合理的报复行为。Jerez 和 Titu Cusi 的描述主题并不是直接的误解,因为在每个版本中,一个统治者都清楚地表示了对另一个统治者的轻蔑。但实际上发生了什么足够不清楚,以至于允许高度对比的叙述。

Explanation :
This paragraph explains that in the Inca version, the initial insult was committed by the Spanish, and Atahuallpa's action was a justified response. It also notes that the accounts of Jerez and Titu Cusi focus on the rulers' disdain for each other rather than miscommunication.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
What is the main point of this paragraph?
A. The Inca version of events differs from the Spanish version.
B. The initial insult was committed by the Spanish.
C. The accounts of Jerez and Titu Cusi focus on miscommunication.
D. The actual events are clear and undisputed.
Answer: A. The Inca version of events differs from the Spanish version.

Paragraph 9

English :
In two additional accounts of the incident, miscommunication is placed at the center of the encounter. One is by a seventeenth - century mestizo of mixed Inca - Spanish descent, Garcilaso de la Vega, the other by a sixteenth - century conquistador, Pedro de Cieza de León. Each offers still further variation on the details, and each takes a rather predictable position on Atahuallpa, but both blame a third party (other than the emperor or Pizarro) for a breakdown in communication leading to the Spanish attack.

Chinese :
在另外两个关于这一事件的描述中,误解被置于接触的中心。一个是 17 世纪的混血儿(Inca - Spanish descent)Garcilaso de la Vega,另一个是 16 世纪的征服者 Pedro de Cieza de León。每个人对细节的描述都有进一步的变化,每个人对 Atahuallpa 的立场都相当可预测,但两人都指责第三方(而不是皇帝或 Pizarro)导致了沟通的破裂,从而引发了西班牙的攻击。

Explanation :
This paragraph discusses two additional accounts of the incident, both of which place miscommunication at the center of the encounter. Both accounts blame a third party for the communication breakdown.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
What do the two additional accounts have in common?
A. They both focus on miscommunication.
B. They both blame Atahuallpa for the attack.
C. They both agree with Jerez's account.
D. They both ignore the role of the Spanish.
Answer: A. They both focus on miscommunication.

Paragraph 10

English :
Garcilaso has Atahuallpa taking the initiative in proposing the meeting, but his friendly, even deferential intentions are inadequately conveyed by interpreters both before the meeting and during it. He is especially derisive of Felipillo, whom he characterizes as a low - class Andean whose Spanish was coarse and whose grasp of Christian dogma was virtually nonexistent.

Chinese :
Garcilaso 描述 Atahuallpa 主动提出会面,但他的友好甚至恭敬的意图在会前和会中都没有被翻译人员充分传达。他对 Felipillo 尤其轻蔑,称他为低阶层的安第斯人,其西班牙语粗糙,对基督教教义的理解几乎不存在。

Explanation :
This paragraph describes Garcilaso's account of the meeting, in which Atahuallpa's friendly intentions were not properly conveyed by the interpreters. Garcilaso criticizes Felipillo for his poor Spanish and lack of understanding of Christian doctrine.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
What does Garcilaso criticize about Felipillo?
A. His lack of Spanish skills.
B. His understanding of Christian doctrine.
C. His role in the meeting.
D. His social status.
Answer: A. His lack of Spanish skills.

Felipillo 是西班牙征服印加帝国过程中一个重要的原住民角色,他是印加帝国的土著人,也在西班牙征服者弗朗西斯科·皮萨罗(Francisco Pizarro)征服印加时扮演了翻译和中介的角色。

Felipillo 的背景与作用

  • 身份与背景:Felipillo 可能是印加帝国的奎楚亚(Quechua)人,在西班牙征服者到来之前,他曾在印加帝国生活,并且可能曾与西班牙人接触过。由于他有一定的语言能力,尤其是能理解和使用西班牙语,他被皮萨罗征服队伍的成员雇佣作为翻译。

  • 在征服中的作用:Felipillo 在西班牙征服过程中,特别是在皮萨罗与印加皇帝阿塔瓦尔帕(Atahualpa)会面时,充当了翻译和中介的角色。作为翻译,他帮助皮萨罗和阿塔瓦尔帕之间进行语言沟通。不过,Felipillo 的翻译工作在某些情况下被认为是有偏差的,甚至有时被认为他故意曲解了印加皇帝的话语,以帮助西班牙人取得对印加皇帝的控制。

  • 与阿塔瓦尔帕的关系:Felipillo 被认为曾在西班牙人和印加人之间传递关键信息,尤其是在阿塔瓦尔帕被俘后,他向西班牙人提供了关于印加帝国的情报。阿塔瓦尔帕当时依赖他的翻译来理解西班牙人提出的要求。然而,Felipillo 并没有完全获得阿塔瓦尔帕的信任。

Felipillo 的争议

  • 作为背叛者的形象:Felipillo 在历史记载中有时被视为背叛者,因为他协助西班牙征服者破坏印加帝国的统一,并帮助他们囚禁和处决阿塔瓦尔帕。许多印加历史学者认为,Felipillo 的行为使他成为自己人民的叛徒,尽管他可能也有自己的生存考虑。

  • 后来的命运:据记载,Felipillo 后来在西班牙人征服印加后并未得到他们的完全信任。由于他曾被认为协助西班牙人压制印加人民,Felipillo 在皮萨罗的部队中并没有获得特别的待遇。最终,他可能因受到西班牙人的怀疑和敌视而遭到杀害。

Paragraph 11

English :
For all Felipillo’s failings, he is not ultimately to blame. Garcilaso instead calls the real culprit “the Indian language” of Quechua, which he derides as the inferior tongue of an ignorant people. Garcilaso’s final verdict anticipates the argument that the natives were defeated by their communicative disadvantages—be it lack of writing, inability to read “signs,” or, in Garcilaso’s crude version, the inferiority of their language.

Chinese :
尽管 Felipillo 有种种不足,但他最终不应受到指责。Garcilaso 反而称真正的罪魁祸首是“印第安语言”克丘亚语(Quechua),他轻蔑地称之为无知民族的低等语言。Garcilaso 的最终判断预示了这样的论点:原住民被他们的沟通劣势打败了——无论是缺乏书写、无法读懂“信号”,还是在 Garcilaso 的粗俗版本中,他们的语言的低等性。

Explanation :
This paragraph explains that Garcilaso does not blame Felipillo for the communication problems but instead blames the Quechua language, which he considers inferior. This supports the idea that the natives were defeated due to their communication disadvantages.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
What does Garcilaso blame for the communication problems?
A. Felipillo's poor Spanish skills.
B. The Quechua language.
C. The Spanish interpreters.
D. The cultural differences.
Answer: B. The Quechua language.

Paragraph 12

English :
In his view of events, the friar’s book falls from his lap by accident and is not the immediate cause of hostilities, which break out because the Spaniards become impatient with the lengthy discussion between the friar and the emperor and begin to harass Atahuallpa’s servants.

Chinese :
在他的事件描述中,修士的书是从他的膝盖上不小心掉下来的,并不是敌对行动的直接原因,敌对行动之所以爆发是因为西班牙人对修士和皇帝之间的长时间讨论感到不耐烦,并开始骚扰 Atahuallpa 的仆从。

Explanation :
This paragraph describes Garcilaso's view that the book falling was an accident and not the direct cause of the conflict. The Spanish became impatient and started harassing Atahuallpa's servants, leading to the outbreak of hostilities.

Multiple - choice Prediction :
What does Garcilaso say was

the cause of the conflict?
A. The book falling from the friar's lap.
B. The Spanish impatience and harassment of Atahuallpa's servants.
C. Atahuallpa's deliberate insult.
D. The failure of the interpreters.
Answer: B. The Spanish impatience and harassment of Atahuallpa's servants.

Here’s a direct repetition of the provided content without any changes:

段12:中英对照翻译:

Paragraph 1

English : Fray Valverde comes off well in Garcilaso’s version, but in Cieza de León’s account he is the villain of the piece. Like most narrators of the meeting, Cieza de León places the fallen book at the center of the encounter, but he adds a unique twist: “Annoyed with so many pages, [Atahuallpa] flung it into the air without knowing what it was, because to have understood it, they should have told him in another way, but the friars never preach around here, except where there is no danger of raised lances.” Not only does the friar fail to open up a dialogue between the emperor and the Spaniards, but he also attempts to cover up his inadequacies by running back to Pizarro to tell him that Atahuallpa was a “tyrant” and “wounded dog” and “that they should attack him.”

Chinese : 在 Garcilaso 的版本中,Fray Valverde 的形象不错,但在 Cieza de León 的描述中,他是反派。像大多数叙述这次会面的人一样,Cieza de León 把掉落的书放在了接触的中心,但他加了一个独特的转折:“对这么多页感到恼火,[Atahuallpa] 不知道这是什么就把它扔到了空中,因为要理解它,他们应该用另一种方式告诉他,但修士们从不在有长矛威胁的地方布道。”修士不仅未能在皇帝和西班牙人之间开启对话,还试图通过跑回 Pizarro 那里告诉他 Atahuallpa 是一个“暴君”和“受伤的狗”,并“应该攻击他”来掩盖自己的不足。

Explanation : This paragraph contrasts two different accounts of Fray Valverde's role in the encounter with Atahuallpa. In Garcilaso's version, Valverde is portrayed positively, while in Cieza de León's account, he is the villain. Cieza de León describes Atahuallpa throwing the book into the air out of annoyance, and Valverde running back to Pizarro to label Atahuallpa a tyrant and call for an attack.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What is the main difference between Garcilaso's and Cieza de León's accounts of Fray Valverde? A. Garcilaso portrays Valverde positively, while Cieza de León portrays him as a villain. B. Garcilaso and Cieza de León both portray Valverde as a hero. C. Garcilaso and Cieza de León both portray Valverde as a villain. D. Garcilaso portrays Valverde as a villain, while Cieza de León portrays him positively. Answer: A. Garcilaso portrays Valverde positively, while Cieza de León portrays him as a villain.

Paragraph 2

English : Thus miscommunication, albeit with a clerical face, causes the collapse of diplomacy and the outbreak of open hostilities.

Chinese : 因此,尽管带有神职人员的面貌,但误解导致了外交的崩溃和公开敌对行动的爆发。

Explanation : This sentence summarizes the impact of miscommunication in the encounter, leading to the failure of diplomacy and the start of open conflict.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What is the consequence of miscommunication in the encounter? A. The success of diplomacy. B. The collapse of diplomacy and the outbreak of open hostilities. C. The strengthening of alliances. D. The resolution of conflicts. Answer: B. The collapse of diplomacy and the outbreak of open hostilities.

Paragraph 3

English : The differences between these accounts—and other versions offering yet further variations—vividly illustrate the difficulties historians have in deducing what “really” happened, in finding “something true” about an event.

Chinese : 这些描述之间的差异——以及其他版本提供的更多变化——生动地说明了历史学家在推断“真正”发生了什么、在寻找关于一个事件的“真实”东西方面的困难。

Explanation : This paragraph highlights the challenges historians face in determining the truth of events due to differing accounts and variations in narratives.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What do the differences between these accounts illustrate? A. The ease of finding the truth about historical events. B. The difficulties historians have in deducing what really happened. C. The lack of interest in historical events. D. The uniformity of historical narratives. Answer: B. The difficulties historians have in deducing what really happened.

Paragraph 4

English : They also show how fertile Conquest history is as ground for the blooming, and cutting down, of myths about the past.

Chinese : 它们还展示了征服历史如何成为关于过去的神话的滋生和破灭的肥沃土壤。

Explanation : This sentence emphasizes how the history of the Conquest is rich in myths about the past, which can both flourish and be debunked.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the history of the Conquest provide? A. A barren ground for myths. B. A fertile ground for the blooming and cutting down of myths about the past. C. A focus on modern history. D. A lack of historical narratives. Answer: B. A fertile ground for the blooming and cutting down of myths about the past.

Paragraph 5

English : But what these narrative differences do not do is clearly demonstrate the applicability of either the analytical theme of communication or that of miscommunication, for both themes, and their myths, are tangled up within those differences.

Chinese : 但这些叙述差异并没有清楚地证明沟通或误解的分析主题的适用性,因为这两个主题及其神话都纠缠在这些差异之中。

Explanation : This paragraph points out that the narrative differences do not clearly show the applicability of the themes of communication or miscommunication, as both are intertwined with the differences.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What do the narrative differences fail to demonstrate? A. The applicability of the themes of communication or miscommunication. B. The importance of historical events. C. The role of historians. D. The impact of myths on history. Answer: A. The applicability of the themes of communication or miscommunication.

Paragraph 6

English : In her interpretation of events, historian Patricia Seed proposes (in part following Garcilaso) that the text read by the friar to Atahuallpa was “presumably” the Requirement, which she describes as exemplifying “an imperialism of speech.”

Chinese : 历史学家 Patricia Seed 在她对事件的解释中提出(部分遵循 Garcilaso 的观点),修士读给 Atahuallpa 的文本“可能是”《要求》,她将其描述为“言语帝国主义”的一个例子。

Explanation : This paragraph introduces Patricia Seed's interpretation that the text read by the friar to Atahuallpa was likely the Requirement, which she sees as an example of “an imperialism of speech.”

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does Patricia Seed propose about the text read by the friar to Atahuallpa? A. It was a random text. B. It was the Requirement. C. It was a personal letter. D. It was a religious sermon. Answer: B. It was the Requirement.

Paragraph 7

English : The Requirement is usually viewed as a paragon of miscommunication or, in Las Casas’s words, communicational “absurdity.”

Chinese : 《要求》通常被视为误解的典范,或者用 Las Casas 的话来说,是沟通的“荒谬性”。

Explanation : This sentence explains that the Requirement is generally seen as a prime example of miscommunication, described by Las Casas as “absurdity” in communication.

Multiple - choice Prediction : How is the Requirement generally viewed? A. As a successful communication tool. B. As a paragon of miscommunication. C. As a religious document. D. As a political treaty. Answer: B. As a paragon of miscommunication.

Paragraph 8

English : Equally absurd were the circumstances under which the text was delivered.

Chinese : 同样荒谬的是该文本被传达的情况。

Explanation : This sentence highlights the absurdity of the circumstances surrounding the delivery of the Requirement.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What is described as equally absurd? A. The content of the Requirement. B. The circumstances under which the text was delivered. C. The reaction of the natives. D. The intentions of the Spanish. Answer: B. The circumstances under which the text was delivered.

Paragraph 9

English : According to intellectual historian Lewis Hanke: “It was read to trees and empty huts. . . . Captains muttered its theological phrases into their beards on the edge of sleeping Indian settlements, or even a league away before starting the formal attack. . . . Ship captains would sometimes have the document read from the deck as they approached an island.”

Chinese : 根据知识历史学家 Lewis Hanke 的说法:“它被读给树木和空无一人的小屋听。……船长们在沉睡的印第安人定居点边缘或甚至在开始正式攻击前一里外,对着他们的胡须低声念叨其神学短语。……船长们有时会在接近一个岛屿时从甲板上宣读这份文件。”

Explanation : This paragraph describes the absurd circumstances under which the Requirement was delivered, including reading it to trees, empty huts, and from a distance before attacks.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What did Lewis Hanke describe about the delivery of the Requirement? A. It was delivered in formal settings. B. It was read to trees and empty huts. C. It was only read to high-ranking officials. D. It was delivered with great respect. Answer: B. It was read to trees and empty huts.

Paragraph 10

English : In addition to Las Casas, other sixteenth - century Spaniards denounced the delivery of the Requirement in terms ranging from the wry to the scathing.

Chinese : 除了 Las Casas,其他 16 世纪的西班牙人也谴责了《要求》的传达方式,从讽刺到尖锐批评不等。

Explanation : This sentence mentions that other 16th - century Spaniards, besides Las Casas, criticized the delivery of the Requirement, using a range of tones from sarcastic to scathing.

Multiple - choice Prediction : How did other sixteenth - century Spaniards react to the delivery of the Requirement? A. They praised it. B. They ignored it. C. They denounced it. D. They were indifferent. Answer: C. They denounced it.

Paragraph 11

English : For example, Charles V’s official court historian, Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo, described how the text was delivered during the early decades of the Caribbean conquest, when natives were still routinely enslaved: “After [the captured Indians] had been put in chains, someone read the Requirement without knowing their language and without any interpreters, and without either the reader or the Indians understanding the language they had no opportunity to reply, being immediately carried away prisoners, the Spaniards not failing to use the stick on those who did not go fast enough.”

Chinese : 例如,查理五世的官方宫廷历史学家 Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo 描述了在加勒比海征服的最初几十年里,当原住民仍经常被奴役时,该文本是如何被传达的:“在[被捕的印第安人]被戴上镣铐后,有人在不懂他们的语言且没有任何翻译的情况下宣读了《要求》,由于宣读者和印第安人都不懂对方的语言,他们没有机会回应,立即被带走成为囚犯,西班牙人对那些走得不够快的人毫不犹豫地使用了棍棒。”

Explanation : This paragraph provides an example of how the Requirement was delivered during the early Caribbean conquest, with the text being read to captured natives who did not understand the language, and the Spanish using force on those who did not comply.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What did Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo describe about the delivery of the Requirement? A. It was delivered with the help of interpreters. B. It was read to captured natives who did not understand the language. C. It was delivered in a formal setting. D. It was ignored by the natives. Answer: B. It was read to captured natives who did not understand the language.

Paragraph 12

English : Here the wielding of the “stick” suggests that even if the content of the Requirement could not be communicated, the violent context of its delivery communicated its broader message of menace and hostility.

Chinese : 在这里,“棍棒”的使用表明,即使《要求》的内容无法被传达,其传达的暴力背景也传达了其更广泛的威胁和敌意信息。

Explanation : This sentence explains that even though the content of the Requirement could not be understood, the violent context of its delivery conveyed a broader message of threat and hostility.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What did the violent context of the Requirement's delivery communicate? A. A message of peace. B. A message of menace and hostility. C. A message of cooperation. D. A message of friendship. Answer: B. A message of menace and hostility.

Paragraph 13

English : In another study, Seed persuasively showed how the message of the Requirement was rooted in Iberian Islamic tradition, specifically in the summons to acknowledge the superiority of Islam or be attacked.

Chinese : 在另一项研究中,Seed 有说服力地展示了《要求》的信息是如何植根于伊比利亚伊斯兰传统的,特别是要求承认伊斯兰教的优越性或面临攻击的召唤。

Explanation : This paragraph discusses Seed's research showing that the message of the Requirement was based on Iberian Islamic traditions, specifically the call to acknowledge the superiority of Islam or face attack.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What did Seed show about the message of the Requirement? A. It was unique to the Spanish Conquest. B. It was based on Iberian Islamic traditions. C. It was a purely Christian message. D. It was unrelated to religious traditions. Answer: B. It was based on Iberian Islamic traditions.

Paragraph 14

English : Part of the Requirement’s apparent absurdity is that it seems to demand that natives will not be forced to convert, provided that they convert.

Chinese : 《要求》看似荒谬的一部分是,它似乎要求原住民不会被迫改宗,前提是他们改宗。

Explanation : This sentence points out the apparent absurdity of the Requirement, which seems to say that natives will not be forced to convert as long as they convert.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What is part of the Requirement's apparent absurdity? A. It demanded that natives convert. B. It stated that natives would not be forced to convert if they converted. C. It ignored religious differences. D. It focused on cultural integration. Answer: B. It stated that natives would not be forced to convert if they converted.

Paragraph 15

English : Like its Islamic antecedent, it leaves matters of conversion for later, demanding only a formal recognition of the religious and political superiority of the invader.

Chinese : 与它的伊斯兰前身一样,它将改宗问题留到以后,只要求正式承认入侵者的宗教和政治优越性。

Explanation : This sentence explains that the Requirement, like its Islamic predecessor, postpones the issue of conversion and only demands a formal recognition of the invader's religious and political superiority.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What did the Requirement demand? A. Immediate conversion. B. A formal recognition of the invader's superiority. C. Cultural assimilation. D. Political cooperation. Answer: B. A formal recognition of the invader's superiority.

Paragraph 16

English : This acknowledgement in the Islamic world was expressed in the form of a head tax, essentially the same manifestation of conquest as the tribute first claimed by Queen Isabella in 1501 and levied on every individual Native American in the Spanish empire for over three centuries.

Chinese : 在伊斯兰世界中,这种承认表现为一种人头税,本质上与 1501 年由伊莎贝拉女王首次提出的、在西班牙帝国对每个美洲原住民征收了三个多世纪的贡品是相同的征服表现形式。

Explanation : This paragraph explains that the acknowledgement in the Islamic world was shown through a head tax, similar to the tribute imposed by Queen Isabella in 1501 on every Native American in the Spanish empire for over three centuries.

Multiple - choice Prediction : How was acknowledgement expressed in the Islamic world? A. Through a head tax. B. Through religious conversion. C. Through cultural assimilation. D. Through political cooperation. Answer: A. Through a head tax.

Paragraph 17

English : The Requirement’s assertion that acceptance of papal and royal authority would bring protection and privilege seems absurd in the context of conquest violence and colonial exploitation, but the concern of Spanish officials for native population levels (expressed in numerous colonial laws) was genuine, albeit based on economic interests.

Chinese : 《要求》声称接受教皇和王室权威将带来保护和特权,在征服暴力和殖民剥削的背景下显得荒谬,但西班牙官员对原住民人口数量的关注(在众多殖民法律中表达)是真诚的,尽管是基于经济利益。

Explanation : This paragraph discusses how the Requirement's claim that accepting papal and royal authority would bring protection and privilege seems absurd in the context of conquest and exploitation, but Spanish officials' concern for native populations was genuine, though based on economic interests.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What was the Spanish officials' concern for native population levels based on? A. Humanitarian reasons. B. Economic interests. C. Religious beliefs. D. Political strategies. Answer: B. Economic interests.

Paragraph 18

English : From the crown to local Spanish community leaders, the empire depended upon native tribute, whether paid in cash, goods, or labor.

Chinese : 从王室到地方西班牙社区领袖,帝国依赖于原住民的贡品,无论是以现金、货物还是劳动力的形式支付。

Explanation : This sentence explains that the Spanish empire relied on native tribute, which could

be in the form of cash, goods, or labor, from the crown to local leaders.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What did the Spanish empire depend on? A. Native tribute. B. European trade. C. Colonial agriculture. D. Indigenous labor. Answer: A. Native tribute.

Paragraph 19

English : The Requirement’s offer of privilege seems risible because the document also appears to promise destruction.

Chinese : 《要求》提供的特权似乎可笑,因为该文件似乎也承诺了毁灭。

Explanation : This sentence points out the irony that the Requirement offered privileges but also seemed to promise destruction.

Multiple - choice Prediction : Why does the Requirement's offer of privilege seem risible? A. It was not genuine. B. It was based on false promises. C. It also appeared to promise destruction. D. It was ignored by the natives. Answer: C. It also appeared to promise destruction.

Paragraph 20

English : In fact, Spanish colonial rule confirmed and relied upon the integrity of native communities, for it was there that tribute was generated and collected.

Chinese : 事实上,西班牙殖民统治确认并依赖于原住民社区的完整性,因为正是在那里贡品被产生和收集。

Explanation : This sentence explains that Spanish colonial rule relied on the integrity of native communities, as tribute was generated and collected there.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What did Spanish colonial rule rely on? A. The destruction of native communities. B. The integrity of native communities. C. The assimilation of natives. D. The conversion of natives. Answer: B. The integrity of native communities.

 

段13:中英对照翻译:

Paragraph 1
English:
Seen in this light, the Requirement becomes less absurd. In fact, in the context of open and blatant conquistador hostilities, it becomes irrelevant. More than that, it becomes an invader’s ritual less potentially confusing to the invaded precisely because it cannot be understood. As “babble” it can more easily be ignored and the nature of the Spanish threat be more clearly contemplated.
Chinese:
从这个角度来看,《要求》显得不那么荒谬了。事实上,在公开且明目张胆的征服者敌对行为的背景下,它变得无关紧要。更重要的是,它成为了一种入侵者的仪式,对被入侵者来说不太可能引起困惑,因为它根本无法被理解。作为“呓语”,它更容易被忽视,西班牙威胁的本质也更容易被清晰地考虑。
Explanation:
This paragraph suggests that the Requirement, when viewed in the context of the conquistadors' open hostilities, becomes less absurd and irrelevant. It serves as a ritual that is easily ignored by the natives, allowing them to focus on the real threat posed by the Spanish.
Multiple-choice Prediction:
What does the paragraph suggest about the Requirement?
A. It was a crucial tool for communication.
B. It was a source of confusion for the natives.
C. It became irrelevant in the context of open hostilities.
D. It was a symbol of Spanish superiority.
Answer: C. It became irrelevant in the context of open hostilities.

Paragraph 2
English:
We cannot be sure whether the Requirement was indeed read or explained to Atahuallpa by fray Valverde, nor can we be sure of the emperor’s words, or even his tone—whether welcoming and deferential, haughty and hostile, or arrogant and dismissive. But we can ponder the similarities and differences between narratives of the event, place them in larger cultural and historical contexts, and come to a reasonable speculation as to the friar’s words—a basic explanation of Christian dogma and its immediate political relevance, as expressed in a summary of the Requirement—and Atahuallpa’s reply—a recognition both of the absurdity of the friar’s speech and of its irrelevance to the immediate political situation.
Chinese:
我们不能确定《要求》是否确实由修士 Valverde 读给或解释给 Atahuallpa,也不能确定皇帝的言辞,甚至他的语气——是欢迎和恭敬的,还是傲慢和敌对的,或是傲慢和轻蔑的。但我们可以思考不同叙述之间的相似之处和差异,将它们放在更大的文化和历史背景中,并对修士的言辞进行合理的推测——即对基督教教义及其直接政治相关性的基本解释,如《要求》的概要所述——以及 Atahuallpa 的回应——对修士言辞的荒谬性和其与当前政治局势无关性的双重认识。
Explanation:
This paragraph discusses the uncertainty surrounding the actual reading or explanation of the Requirement to Atahuallpa. It suggests that while we cannot be certain of the exact words or tone, we can analyze the narratives and their cultural and historical contexts to make reasonable speculations about the content of the conversation.
Multiple-choice Prediction:
What does the paragraph suggest about the narratives of the event?
A. They are entirely reliable.
B. They are completely fictional.
C. They can be analyzed for cultural and historical context.
D. They are irrelevant to understanding the event.
Answer: C. They can be analyzed for cultural and historical context.

Paragraph 3
English:
Within all this there was miscommunication, to be sure, but also a threat successfully communicated.
Chinese:
在这一切中,确实存在误解,但也有成功传达的威胁。
Explanation:
This sentence acknowledges that while there was miscommunication, the Spanish threat was successfully conveyed to the natives.
Multiple-choice Prediction:
What does the paragraph suggest about the communication between the Spanish and the natives?
A. It was entirely successful.
B. It was entirely unsuccessful.
C. There was both miscommunication and a successfully communicated threat.
D. There was no communication at all.
Answer: C. There was both miscommunication and a successfully communicated threat.

Paragraph 4
English:
An illuminating parallel is offered by the speeches made by Cortés and Moctezuma on the day of their first meeting. As with the details of the encounter in Cajamarca, there are different versions and many possible interpretations of what Moctezuma said and meant. But in contrast to the Atahuallpa incident, in which a message was successfully conveyed through apparent miscommunication, Moctezuma’s speech was an act of apparently successful communication that contained within it the seeds of miscommunication, seeds that would germinate a deep-rooted myth.
Chinese:
Cortés 和 Moctezuma 在他们初次见面的那天发表的演讲提供了一个发人深省的类比。与 Cajamarca 接触的细节一样,对 Moctezuma 的言辞和意图有许多不同的版本和可能的解释。但与 Atahuallpa 事件不同,后者通过明显的误解成功传达了一个信息,而 Moctezuma 的演讲则是一种表面上成功的沟通行为,其中包含了误解的种子,这些种子将孕育一个根深蒂固的神话。
Explanation:
This paragraph draws a parallel between the speeches of Cortés and Moctezuma and the encounter with Atahuallpa. It highlights that while Moctezuma's speech appeared to be a successful communication, it contained elements that led to misunderstandings and the creation of a lasting myth.
Multiple-choice Prediction:
What does the paragraph suggest about Moctezuma's speech?
A. It was entirely successful and clear.
B. It was entirely misunderstood.
C. It appeared successful but contained seeds of misunderstanding.
D. It was irrelevant to the event.
Answer: C. It appeared successful but contained seeds of misunderstanding.

Paragraph 5
English:
Cortés recorded the Mexica emperor’s speech in a letter to the Spanish king, and although other Spanish chroniclers wrote down very similar versions, the speech shows signs of evolving as it passed through Spanish hands. From the very start, with the version reported by Cortés, the speech seems to have been spun in a way that turned the emperor’s words of welcome into a statement of submission.
Chinese:
Cortés 在给西班牙国王的信中记录了墨西加皇帝的演讲,尽管其他西班牙编年史作者也写下了非常相似的版本,但这篇演讲在经过西班牙人之手时显示出演变的迹象。从一开始,Cortés 报道的版本就似乎被处理成了一种方式,将皇帝的欢迎言辞变成了屈服的声明。
Explanation:
This paragraph discusses how Cortés recorded Moctezuma's speech in a letter to the Spanish king. It notes that while other chroniclers wrote similar versions, the speech evolved as it was passed through Spanish hands, with Cortés's version presenting the emperor's welcoming words as a statement of submission.
Multiple-choice Prediction:
What does the paragraph suggest about the recording of Moctezuma's speech?
A. It was entirely accurate and unchanged.
B. It evolved as it passed through Spanish hands.
C. It was ignored by other chroniclers.
D. It was completely fictional.
Answer: B. It evolved as it passed through Spanish hands.

Paragraph 6
English:
Most improbably, Cortés has Moctezuma telling the Spaniards that his people had always awaited the arrival from overseas of a lord descended from their original ruler, and that they now believed the king of Spain to be that lord.
Chinese:
最不可能的是,Cortés 让 Moctezuma 告诉西班牙人,他的人民一直期待着从海外到来的一位领主,这位领主是他们原始统治者的后裔,而现在他们相信西班牙国王就是那位领主。
Explanation:
This sentence highlights the unlikely claim by Cortés that Moctezuma told the Spanish that his people had always awaited a lord from overseas, believing the Spanish king to be that lord.
Multiple-choice Prediction:
What does the paragraph suggest about Cortés's recording of Moctezuma's speech?
A. It was entirely accurate.
B. It contained unlikely claims.
C. It was ignored by other chroniclers.
D. It was completely fictional.
Answer: B. It contained unlikely claims.

Paragraph 7

English : So be assured that we will obey you and hold you as our lord in place of that great sovereign of whom you speak; and in this there shall be no betrayal or offense whatsoever. And in all the land that lies in my domain, you may command as you will, for you shall be obeyed; and all that we own is for you to dispose of as you choose. Thus, as you are in your own country and your own house, rest now from the hardships of your journey and the battles which you have fought.

Chinese : 所以请放心,我们将服从你们,并将你们视为我们的领主,取代你们所说的那位伟大君主;在这方面将没有任何背叛或冒犯。在我统治的所有土地上,你们可以随心所欲地指挥,因为你们将被服从;我们所有的一切都由你们随意处置。因此,就像你们在自己的国家和自己的家中一样,现在从你们的旅程和战斗的艰辛中休息一下。

Explanation : This paragraph provides a quote from Moctezuma's speech, as recorded by Cortés, in which Moctezuma assures the Spanish of obedience and submission, offering them control over his land and possessions.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does Moctezuma's speech, as recorded by Cortés, suggest? A. He refused to submit to the Spanish. B. He offered the Spanish control over his land and possessions. C. He was hostile towards the Spanish. D. He ignored the Spanish. Answer: B. He offered the Spanish control over his land and possessions.

Paragraph 8

English : The emperor then denied that “my houses are made of gold,” or that he “was, or claimed to be, a god,” exposing his torso to show that he was made of flesh and blood.

Chinese : 随后,皇帝否认了他的“房子是用黄金建造的”,或他“是或声称是神”,露出他的躯干以表明他是血肉之躯。

Explanation : This sentence describes how Moctezuma denied being a god or having houses made of gold, emphasizing his humanity by showing his flesh and blood.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What did Moctezuma deny in his speech? A. He denied being a god and having houses made of gold. B. He admitted being a god. C. He claimed his houses were made of gold. D. He ignored the Spanish. Answer: A. He denied being a god and having houses made of gold.

Paragraph 9

English : In Gómara’s version, written three decades later, the same speech is recorded (probably drawn from Cortés’s letter) with the addition of a preamble that introduces the notion that Mexico’s natives at first took the Spaniards to be gods. The added paragraph gave the speech a new symmetry, with Moctezuma recognizing that Cortés is not a god and affirming that neither is he, Moctezuma, that he is “mortal . . . like you.”

Chinese : 在 Gómara 三十年后写的版本中,记录了同样的演讲(可能取自 Cortés 的信),增加了一个前言,引入了墨西哥原住民最初将西班牙人视为神的概念。增加的段落使演讲有了新的对称性,Moctezuma 认识到 Cortés 不是神,并肯定他自己也不是神,他是“像你们一样的凡人。”

Explanation : This paragraph discusses Gómara's version of Moctezuma's speech, which includes an additional preamble suggesting that the natives initially thought the Spanish were gods. This addition creates a symmetry in the speech, with Moctezuma acknowledging that neither Cortés nor himself are gods.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does Gómara's version of Moctezuma's speech include? A. A denial of being a god. B. An admission of being a god. C. A claim that the Spanish were gods. D. A denial of having houses made of gold. Answer: A. A denial of being a god.

Paragraph 10

English : But it also built upon the theme introduced by Cortés, that the Spaniards represented the return of an ancestral lord or his descendent, and was thus a step closer to the full - blown myth of Cortés as the returning Mexica god, Quetzalcoatl.

Chinese : 但它也进一步发展了 Cortés 引入的主题,即西班牙人代表了一位祖先领主或其后裔的回归,因此更接近于 Cortés 作为回归的墨西加神 Quetzalcoatl 的完整神话。

Explanation : This sentence explains that Gómara's version of the speech builds on Cortés's theme that the Spanish represented the return of an ancestral lord, contributing to the myth of Cortés as the returning god Quetzalcoatl.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does Gómara's version of the speech contribute to? A. The myth of Cortés as the returning god Quetzalcoatl. B. The idea that the Spanish were gods. C. The denial of Moctezuma's divinity. D. The claim that the Spanish were not gods. Answer: A. The myth of Cortés as the returning god Quetzalcoatl.

Paragraph 11

English : The version by Bernal Díaz, although written down later in the sixteenth century, is closer to that of Cortés, and emphasizes Moctezuma’s alleged claim that his ancestors had said that “men . . . would come from the direction of the sunrise to rule over these lands.”

Chinese : Bernal Díaz 的版本虽然在 16 世纪后期写成,但更接近 Cortés 的版本,并强调 Moctezuma 所谓的声称,他的祖先曾说过“男人……将从日出的方向来统治这些土地。”

Explanation : This paragraph discusses Bernal Díaz's version of Moctezuma's speech, which is closer to Cortés's version and emphasizes the claim that Moctezuma's ancestors predicted the arrival of men from the east to rule over their lands.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does Bernal Díaz's version of Moctezuma's speech emphasize? A. The claim that Moctezuma's ancestors predicted the arrival of men from the east. B. The idea that the Spanish were gods. C. The denial of Moctezuma's divinity. D. The claim that the Spanish were not gods. Answer: A. The claim that Moctezuma's ancestors predicted the arrival of men from the east.

Paragraph 12

English : Díaz makes no mention of gods, Spanish or Mexica, but the tale of the prodigal returning lord still smacks too much of biblical themes (the Prodigal Son, the Second Coming of Christ) and of the classic conquistador claim of completion to be viewed without suspicion.

Chinese : Díaz 没有提到任何神,无论是西班牙的还是墨西加的,但浪子回头的领主故事仍然太多地带有圣经主题(浪子回头、基督的第二次降临)和经典的征服者完成使命的声称,不能不带怀疑地看待。

Explanation : This paragraph notes that while Díaz does not mention gods, the story of the returning lord in his version still resembles biblical themes and the classic conquistador claim of fulfillment, suggesting that it should be viewed with suspicion.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about Díaz's version of the story? A. It is entirely free from biblical themes. B. It resembles biblical themes and should be viewed with suspicion. C. It is entirely fictional. D. It is entirely accurate. Answer: B. It resembles biblical themes and should be viewed with suspicion.

段14:中英对照翻译:

Paragraph 1

English : How does the Nahuatl version of this speech, recorded in the Florentine Codex, compare to the Spanish ones? The Conquest narrative in the Codex was written down several generations after the events described, and was the product of a Franciscan - Nahua collaboration. In addition, Moctezuma’s reputation had suffered in the decades between his death and the compilation of the Codex, and this may be reflected in this version of the speech.

Chinese : 记录在佛罗伦萨手抄本中的这篇演讲的纳瓦特尔版本与西班牙版本相比如何?手抄本中的征服叙述是在事件发生后几代人写下的,是方济各会士和纳瓦人合作的产物。此外,莫克特祖马(Moctezuma)的声誉在他去世和手抄本编纂之间的几十年里受到了损害,这可能反映在这篇演讲的版本中。

Explanation : This paragraph discusses the Nahuatl version of Moctezuma's speech recorded in the Florentine Codex and compares it to the Spanish versions. It notes that the Codex was written several generations after the events and was a collaboration between Franciscans and Nahuas. It also mentions that Moctezuma's reputation had declined over the years, which might be reflected in this version.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What is the main point of this paragraph? A. The Nahuatl version is more accurate. B. The Codex was written by Franciscans. C. Moctezuma's reputation had declined. D. The Codex version is similar to the Spanish versions. Answer: D. The Codex version is similar to the Spanish versions.

Paragraph 2

English : Still, the Codex version is close enough to the Cortés - Díaz versions to suggest that the Spanish accounts were interpretations of what Moctezuma actually said. The Nahuatl version read:

Chinese : 尽管如此,手抄本版本与 Cortés - Díaz 版本足够接近,表明西班牙版本是对莫克特祖马实际所说内容的解释。纳瓦特尔版本如下:

Explanation : This paragraph states that the Codex version is similar enough to the Spanish versions to suggest that the Spanish accounts were interpretations of Moctezuma's actual words. It then provides the Nahuatl version of the speech.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about the Codex version? A. It is completely different from the Spanish versions. B. It is a direct translation of Moctezuma's words. C. It is similar to the Spanish versions. D. It is more accurate than the Spanish versions. Answer: C. It is similar to the Spanish versions.

Paragraph 3

English : O our lord, be doubly welcomed on your arrival in this land; you have come to satisfy your curiosity about your altepetl [city - state] of Mexico, you have come to sit on your seat of authority, which I have kept a while for you, where I have been in charge for you, for your agents the rulers—Itzcoatzin, the elder Moteucçoma, Axayacatl, Tiçocic, and Ahuitzotl—have gone, who for a very short time came to be in charge for you, to govern the altepetl of Mexico. It is after them that your poor vassal [myself] came. Will they come back to the place of their absence? If only one of them could see and behold what has now happened in my time, what I now see after our lords are gone! For I am not just dreaming, not just sleepwalking, not just seeing it in my sleep. I am not just dreaming that I have seen you, have looked upon your face. For a time I have been concerned, looking toward the mysterious place from which you have come, among clouds and mist. It is so that the rulers on departing said that you would come in order to acquaint yourself with your altepetl and sit upon your seat of authority. And now it has come true, you have come. Be doubly welcome, enter the land, go to enjoy your palace; rest your body. May our lords be arrived in the land.

Chinese : 哦,我们的主,您在这片土地上的到来受到双重欢迎;您来满足您对您的 altepetl(城邦)墨西哥的好奇心,您来坐在您的权力宝座上,我为您暂时保留了这个位置,在那里我为您负责,因为您的代理人——统治者 Itzcoatzin、年长的 Moteucçoma、Axayacatl、Tiçocic 和 Ahuitzotl——已经离开,他们曾短暂地为您负责,统治墨西哥的 altepetl。您的穷仆人(我自己)是在他们之后来的。他们会不会回到他们离开的地方?如果他们中的任何一个能看到并目睹现在在我时代发生的事情,我在我主离开后现在看到的事情!因为我不是在做梦,不是在梦游,不是在睡梦中看到。我不是在做梦,我看到了您,看到了您的面容。一段时间以来,我一直在关注,望向您来的神秘之地,那里云雾缭绕。统治者在离开时说,您会来熟悉您的 altepetl 并坐在您的权力宝座上。现在这一切都实现了,您来了。受到双重欢迎,进入这片土地,去享受您的宫殿;休息您的身体。愿我们的主已经到达这片土地。

Explanation : This paragraph provides the Nahuatl version of Moctezuma's speech, which welcomes the Spanish and acknowledges their authority, while also expressing his own role as a temporary ruler.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What is the main theme of Moctezuma's speech in the Nahuatl version? A. He refuses to submit to the Spanish. B. He welcomes the Spanish and acknowledges their authority. C. He expresses hostility towards the Spanish. D. He ignores the Spanish. Answer: B. He welcomes the Spanish and acknowledges their authority.

Paragraph 4

English : The theme of a long - anticipated returning lord is not only clearly present, but is the device upon which the speech is constructed. It is easy to imagine how these words could become in Spanish minds a declaration of submission, especially if one takes into account the filter of Malinche’s translation, Spanish ignorance of the Mexica cultural context, and Spanish wishful thinking on the day of the meeting for a friendly reception.

Chinese : 长期期待的回归领主的主题不仅清晰存在,而且是演讲构建的手段。可以想象,这些话在西班牙人看来可能成为屈服的宣言,特别是如果考虑到 Malinche 翻译的过滤、西班牙人对墨西加文化背景的无知以及西班牙人在会面当天希望得到友好接待的一厢情愿。

Explanation : This paragraph explains that the theme of a returning lord is central to the speech and how it could be interpreted as a declaration of submission by the Spanish, considering the translation by Malinche, their ignorance of the Mexica culture, and their hopeful expectations.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about the Spanish interpretation of Moctezuma's speech? A. They saw it as a declaration of war. B. They saw it as a declaration of submission. C. They ignored its content. D. They were confused by its meaning. Answer: B. They saw it as a declaration of submission.

Paragraph 5

English : Furthermore, Cortés was concerned to project to the king a positive scenario at the time he wrote down the speech (that was the following year, when the Spaniards had been defeated in the first battle in Tenochtitlán and expelled from the city). He makes no mention of the speech of surrender made by the Iberian peninsula’s last Muslim lord to King Ferdinand outside the gates of Granada in 1492, but the Granada speech was a famous one and the Muslim surrender seen as a great milestone in Spanish history. Cortés might have imagined he was witnessing a similar event and expected Charles V likewise to hear an echo of that moment in Moctezuma’s “surrender.”

Chinese : 此外,Cortés 在写下演讲时(那是第二年,西班牙人在特诺奇提特兰的第一场战斗中被击败并被赶出城市)非常关心向国王展示一个积极的情景。他没有提到 1492 年伊比利亚半岛最后一位穆斯林领主在格拉纳达城门外向费迪南德国王投降的演讲,但格拉纳达的演讲非常著名,穆斯林的投降被视为西班牙历史上的一个伟大里程碑。Cortés 可能想象他正在目睹类似事件,并期望查理五世也能在莫克特祖马的“投降”中听到那一刻的回声。

Explanation : This paragraph discusses Cortés's intention to present a positive scenario to the king when he recorded the speech. It mentions the famous surrender speech in Granada and suggests that Cortés might have seen Moctezuma's speech as a similar event.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about Cortés's intentions? A. He wanted to present a negative scenario to the king. B. He wanted to present a positive scenario to the king. C. He ignored the historical context. D. He was indifferent to the king's opinion. Answer: B. He wanted to present a positive scenario to the king.

Paragraph 6

English : However, this does not explain why Moctezuma’s speech was so seemingly deferential. In Mexica culture—as indeed in most Mesoamerican cultures—the language of polite speech was highly developed. Élite children were taught the skill of address appropriate to the age, gender, and social standing of the addressee, and the circumstances of the meeting. This type of elaborate Nahuatl is usually called huehuehtlahtolli (ancient discourse or sayings of the elders) and a considerable amount is known about such speech and its model dialogues because many were written down in the late sixteenth century (60 alone in the Florentine Codex).

Chinese : 然而,这并不能解释为什么莫克特祖马的演讲显得如此顺从。在墨西加文化中——确实,在大多数中美洲文化中——礼貌言辞的语言高度发达。精英儿童被教导根据被称呼者的年龄、性别和社会地位以及会议的情况使用适当的称呼。这种复杂的纳瓦特尔语通常被称为 huehuehtlahtolli(古代话语或长者的格言),关于这种言辞及其典范对话有很多了解,因为许多在 16 世纪后期被记录下来(仅佛罗伦萨手抄本中就有 60 个)。

Explanation : This paragraph explains that Moctezuma's seemingly deferential speech was due to the highly developed language of polite speech in Mexica culture, known as huehuehtlahtolli, which was taught to elite children and used in formal situations.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about Moctezuma's speech? A. It was a sign of weakness. B. It was a result of cultural norms. C. It was a personal choice. D. It was a political strategy. Answer: B. It was a result of cultural norms.

Paragraph 7

English : Within the larger genre of huehuehtlahtolli, the only style of address that could be used in Moctezuma’s presence would have been tecpillahtolli (lordly speech), in which Nahuatl words are heavily laden with reverential prefixes and suffixes and sentences are built upon the principles of indirection and reversal. In other words, to be polite and courteous one must avoid speaking bluntly or directly, which requires saying the opposite of what one means. Thus Moctezuma’s assertion that he and his predecessors were just safeguarding the rulership of the Mexica empire in anticipation of Cortés’s arrival is not to be taken literally. It is a rhetorical artifice meant to convey the opposite—Moctezuma’s stature and multigenerational legitimacy—and to function as a courteous welcome to an important guest.

Chinese : 在 huehuehtlahtolli 的大类中,唯一可以在莫克特祖马面前使用的称呼风格是 tecpillahtolli(主的言辞),其中纳瓦特尔词带有大量的尊敬前缀和后缀,句子基于间接和反转的原则构建。换句话说,要礼貌和客气,必须避免直白或直接地说话,这需要说与自己意思相反的话。因此,莫克特祖马声称他和他的前任只是在期待 Cortés 到来时保护墨西加帝国的统治权,不应被字面理解。这是一种修辞手法,旨在传达相反的意思——莫克特祖马的地位和多代合法性——并作为对重要客人的礼貌欢迎。

Explanation : This paragraph explains that the speech style used in Moctezuma's presence, tecpillahtolli, involved indirect and reversed language to convey respect. It suggests that Moctezuma's words should not be taken literally but as a rhetorical device to express his status and legitimacy.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about Moctezuma's speech? A. It was meant to be taken literally. B. It was a rhetorical device. C. It was a sign of weakness. D. It was a personal choice. Answer: B. It was a rhetorical device.

Paragraph 8

English : It is a royal mi casa, su casa welcome whose offer of courtly hospitality would be utterly undermined if taken as a literal handing over of the keys to the kingdom. Even the claim to be poor and as mortal as any man, not included in the Nahuatl or Spanish texts of the Codex but in the Cortés - Gómara versions, was very possibly delivered by Moctezuma as a piece of contrived humility intended to underscore his imperial status.

Chinese : 这是一种皇家的“我的家就是你的家”的欢迎,如果被字面理解为交出国土的钥匙,那么宫廷款待的提议将完全被破坏。甚至声称自己贫穷且与任何人一样凡人,这一说法没有包含在手抄本的纳瓦特尔或西班牙文本中,但在 Cortés - Gómara 版本中,很可能被莫克特祖马作为一件精心制作的谦卑之举,旨在强调他的帝国地位。

Explanation : This paragraph continues to explain the rhetorical nature of Moctezuma's speech, comparing it to a royal welcome and suggesting that his claims of humility were intended to emphasize his imperial status.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about Moctezuma's claims of humility? A. They were genuine. B. They were a rhetorical device. C. They were a sign of weakness. D. They were a personal choice. Answer: B. They were a rhetorical device.

Paragraph 9

English : Malinche was able to understand tecpillahtolli, a legacy of her noble birth, and she had been translating it into Spanish for months leading up to the Cortés - Moctezuma meeting. Otherwise, Moctezuma’s speech could not have been conveyed to Cortés and his colleagues with any degree of fidelity. But even with the benefit of Malinche’s education, when rendered in Spanish, with the polite adornments of Nahuatl prefixes and suffixes gone, and the principle of courteous reversal lost by the lack of a genuine equivalent in Iberian culture, the speech does indeed seem to be one of surrender.

Chinese : Malinche 能够理解 tecpillahtolli,这是她贵族出身的遗产,她在 Cortés - Moctezuma 会面前几个月一直在将其翻译成西班牙语。否则,莫克特祖马的演讲就无法以任何程度的忠实传达给 Cortés 和他的同事。但即使有 Malinche 的教育背景,当翻译成西班牙语时,纳瓦特尔前缀和后缀的礼貌修饰消失了,由于伊比利亚文化中缺乏真正的等价物,礼貌反转的原则也失去了,演讲确实似乎是一种屈服。

Explanation : This paragraph discusses Malinche's ability to understand and translate tecpillahtolli, which allowed Moctezuma's speech to be conveyed to Cortés. It notes that in Spanish, the speech lost its original nuances and appeared as a surrender.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about Malinche's role? A. She was unable to translate the speech. B. She played a crucial role in conveying Moctezuma's speech. C. She ignored the cultural context. D. She was indifferent to the translation. Answer: B. She played a crucial role in conveying Moctezuma's speech.

Paragraph 10

English : Unlike the Atahuallpa - Pizarro encounter, there was that first day the Spaniards entered Tenochtitlán no fallen or hurled book to symbolize or make blatant the failure of cross - cultural communication. Moctezuma delivered a speech that Malinche seemed to understand, and thus translate faithfully, and that clearly pleased the Spaniards. Successful communication took place. Or did it?

Chinese : 与 Atahuallpa - Pizarro 接触不同,西班牙人进入特诺奇提特兰的第一天没有掉落或投掷的书来象征或明显表明跨文化交流的失败。莫克特祖马发表了一篇演讲,Malinche 似乎理解了,并因此忠实地翻译了,这显然让西班牙人很高兴。成功的沟通发生了。还是没有?

Explanation : This paragraph contrasts the Moctezuma - Cortés encounter with the Atahuallpa - Pizarro encounter, noting that there was no symbolic failure of communication like the thrown book. It suggests that Malinche's translation seemed successful, but questions whether true communication occurred.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about the communication between Moctezuma and Cortés? A. It was a complete failure. B. It was successful. C. It was misunderstood. D. It was ignored. Answer: B. It was successful.

Paragraph 11

English : Something of the theme of Double Mistaken Identity appears in the contrasting accounts of the Moctezuma - Cortés and Pizarro - Atahuallpa first encounters. Each side saw the meetings as displays of dignity by their leaders and crudeness or weakness by the other leader, even interpreting in this way the very same exchanges and moments. This would seem to suggest that communication between the invaders and the invaded did indeed amount to little more than a “groping in the darkness,” to use Las Casas’s phrase.

Chinese : 双重误认身份的主题出现在 Moctezuma - Cortés 和 Pizarro - Atahuallpa 第一次接触的对比描述中。每一方都将会议视为他们领导人的尊严展示和对方领导人的粗鲁或软弱,甚至以这种方式解释相同的交流和时刻。这似乎表明,入侵者和被入侵者之间的沟通确实只不过是一种“在黑暗中摸索”,借用 Las Casas 的说法。

Explanation : This paragraph discusses the theme of double mistaken identity in the contrasting accounts of the first encounters between Moctezuma - Cortés and Pizarro - Atahuallpa. It suggests that both sides interpreted the meetings as displays of dignity by their own leaders and crudeness by the other, indicating limited communication.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about the communication between the Spanish and the natives? A. It was clear and effective. B. It was limited and often misunderstood. C. It was ignored by both sides. D. It was successful. Answer: B. It was limited and often misunderstood.

Paragraph 12

English : However, these interpretations followed the events they describe, some immediately and others decades later. Certainly there was plenty of miscommunication during the Conquest, but to argue that such miscommunication was so imbalanced and benefited the Spaniards to such an extent that it explains the Conquest ignores the complexity of Spanish - native interaction. Furthermore, forms and moments of miscommunication were more than equaled by more or less successful readings of the statements and intentions of the foreigners. Eventually, Columbus understood that the Native Americans on the river bank were hostile toward him. It made no difference to the natives in the plundered village or in the wooden cage that the Requirement was incomprehensible to them—Spanish actions conveyed their purposes more clearly than the text did anyway. Atahuallpa and Moctezuma learned of Spanish intentions and methods too late to save their own lives, but their successors led campaigns of resistance hampered not by lack of information but by crippling epidemics, native disunity, differences in weaponry, and other factors.

Chinese : 然而,这些解释是在描述的事件之后出现的,有些是立即出现的,有些则是在几十年后。当然,在征服过程中有很多误解,但认为这种误解如此不平衡且如此有利于西班牙人以至于可以解释征服的观点忽视了西班牙人与原住民互动的复杂性。此外,误解的形式和时刻被对外国人言论和意图的或多或少成功的解读所抵消。最终,哥伦布明白了河岸边的美洲原住民对他是敌对的。对于被掠夺村庄或木笼中的原住民来说,《要求》对他们来说是不可理解的,这没有区别——西班牙人的行为比文本更清楚地传达了他们的目的。Atahuallpa 和 Moctezuma 太晚了解到西班牙人的意图和方法,无法拯救自己的生命,但他们的继任者领导的抵抗运动并非因缺乏信息而受阻,而是因毁灭性的流行病、原住民的不团结、武器的差异和其他因素。

Explanation : This paragraph argues that while there was significant miscommunication during the Conquest, it was not the sole factor explaining the Spanish victory. It highlights that both sides had some understanding of each other's intentions, and other factors like epidemics and weaponry played a role.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about the role of miscommunication in the Conquest? A. It was the primary factor in the Spanish victory. B. It was a significant but not the only factor. C. It was ignored by both sides. D. It was a minor issue. Answer: B. It was a significant but not the only factor.

Paragraph 13

English : Sooner or later, one way or the other, Spaniards understood what they needed to, and natives understood what that meant. As Betanzos observed in 1551, at first the invaders “were not so much concerned with finding things out as with subjecting and acquiring.” As the conquistador Bernardo de Vargas Machuca indicated in the frontispiece to his 1599 book on the “Indies,” Spaniards had acquired “By the sword and the compass / More and more and more and more” (see Figure 12). The word—the instrument by which Vargas Machuca wrote his book—would ultimately be almost as important, maybe more so. As one of the prefatory sonnets to Vargas Machuca’s book declared, the Conquest was a theme that only “arms and the pen could develop.”

Chinese : 迟早,西班牙人和原住民都明白了他们需要明白的事情。正如 Betanzos 在 1551 年观察到的,最初入侵者“不太关心发现事情,而是更关心征服和获取。”正如征服者 Bernardo de Vargas Machuca 在他 1599 年关于“印度”的书的扉页上所指出的,西班牙人通过“剑和罗盘”获得了“越来越多的东西”(见图 12)。文字——Vargas Machuca 写书的工具——最终几乎同样重要,甚至更重要。正如 Vargas Machuca 书的序言中的一首十四行诗所宣称的,征服是一个只有“武器和笔才能发展的主题。”

Explanation : This paragraph concludes that both the Spanish and the natives eventually understood each other's intentions. It quotes Betanzos and Vargas Machuca to emphasize that the Conquest was achieved through both force and communication, with the pen playing a crucial role.

Multiple - choice Prediction : What does the paragraph suggest about the role of communication in the Conquest? A. It was irrelevant. B. It was a minor factor. C. It was crucial. D. It was ignored. Answer: C. It was crucial.

 

Summary of Key Figures and Their Perspectives

Key Figures
  1. Cortés (Hernán Cortés):

    • Perspective: Cortés recorded Moctezuma's speech in a letter to the Spanish king, presenting it as a statement of submission. He aimed to project a positive scenario to the king, emphasizing the friendly reception and cooperation of the natives.

    • Role: Conquistador who led the Spanish forces in the conquest of the Aztec Empire.

  2. Díaz (Bernal Díaz del Castillo):

    • Perspective: Díaz's version of Moctezuma's speech is closer to Cortés's version, emphasizing the claim that Moctezuma's ancestors predicted the arrival of the Spanish. He does not mention gods but focuses on the idea of a returning lord.

    • Role: Conquistador and chronicler who wrote one of the most detailed accounts of the conquest.

  3. Gómara (Francisco López de Gómara):

    • Perspective: Gómara's version includes an additional preamble suggesting that the natives initially thought the Spanish were gods. He builds on Cortés's theme of the returning lord, contributing to the myth of Cortés as the returning god Quetzalcoatl.

    • Role: Historian and chronicler who wrote about the conquest, often drawing from Cortés's accounts.

  4. Malinche (La Malinche):

    • Perspective: Malinche, a Nahua woman who served as Cortés's interpreter, was able to understand and translate the complex Nahuatl speech (tecpillahtolli) into Spanish. Her translation allowed Moctezuma's speech to be conveyed to Cortés and his men.

    • Role: Interpreter and cultural mediator who played a crucial role in the communication between the Spanish and the Aztecs.

  5. Moctezuma (Moctezuma II):

    • Perspective: Moctezuma's speech, as recorded in the Florentine Codex, is a complex and polite discourse that welcomes the Spanish and acknowledges their authority. His words are filled with cultural and rhetorical nuances that can be misinterpreted as a declaration of submission.

    • Role: Aztec emperor who initially welcomed the Spanish but whose speech and actions were subject to various interpretations.

  6. Atahuallpa:

    • Perspective: Atahuallpa's encounter with Pizarro is contrasted with Moctezuma's. His speech and actions are interpreted as a display of dignity and resistance, rather than submission.

    • Role: Inca emperor who was captured by Pizarro and later executed, leading to the fall of the Inca Empire.

  7. Pizarro (Francisco Pizarro):

    • Perspective: Pizarro's encounter with Atahuallpa is marked by a lack of communication and a focus on force. His actions, including the capture of Atahuallpa, are seen as a display of Spanish power and aggression.

    • Role: Conquistador who led the Spanish forces in the conquest of the Inca Empire.

  8. Las Casas (Bartolomé de las Casas):

    • Perspective: Las Casas criticized the Spanish actions and the lack of effective communication, describing the conquest as a "groping in the darkness." He emphasized the cultural and linguistic barriers that led to misunderstandings.

    • Role: Dominican friar and chronicler who advocated for the rights of the indigenous peoples and criticized the Spanish conquest.

  9. Betanzos (Juan de Betanzos):

    • Perspective: Betanzos observed that the Spanish were more concerned with conquest and acquisition than with understanding the natives. He noted that the Spanish actions conveyed their purposes more clearly than the Requirement.

    • Role: Conquistador and chronicler who wrote about the conquest of the Inca Empire.

  10. Vargas Machuca (Bernardo de Vargas Machuca):

    • Perspective: Vargas Machuca emphasized that the conquest was achieved through both force and communication, with the pen playing a crucial role. He highlighted the importance of both arms and the pen in the conquest.

    • Role: Conquistador and author who wrote about the conquest of the "Indies."

Final Perspective

The final perspective presented in the text is that the conquest involved a complex interplay of communication and misunderstanding. While there were significant instances of miscommunication, the Spanish and the natives eventually understood each other's intentions, albeit often too late to prevent the outcomes. The Requirement, while often misunderstood and misinterpreted, played a role in the conquest, but it was not the sole factor. The Spanish actions, including the use of force and the spread of epidemics, were crucial in the conquest. The text also emphasizes the importance of cultural and linguistic context in understanding the events of the conquest, highlighting the role of figures like Malinche in bridging the communication gap. Ultimately, the conquest was a result of a combination of factors, including force, communication, and the complex interactions between the Spanish and the indigenous peoples.

评论
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值