Table of Contents:

Abstract
Introduction
Social Organization of Groups to be Compared
Aztec and Mapuche Military Techniques
Aztec and Mapuche Warriors
Tactics and Weapons
Conclusion
Notes

ABSTRACT

This paper analyses the military response to the Spanish conquest of the Indigenous peoples of Chile and Mexico from a comparative perspectives. The main goal of this paper is to highlight the cultural differences and similarities of both culture, and point out why the Mapuches were more successful in the military science than the Aztec.

The Indigenous Peoples of Latin America, historically they were defeated military fairly completely before the outsiders of European origin. Except for the indigenous Peoples of Chile the Mapuches they were the only one in this continent to defeat a European army; and for 350 years keep they autonomy of they territory. The failures of the most civilized cultures in this continent like the Incas and the Aztec to oppose a serious military resistance is evident in retrospect, the Aztec resisted for three years - the Mapuches for 350 years of successful resistance - The Incas of Peru for instance, succumbed without a struggle; Peru was one of the easiest conquest the Spaniards ever made, there does not seem to have been one pitched battle in the field between the Spaniards and the Inca's armies. In a short time the Spanish conquered the only two civilized region of the New World: the Aztec Empire of Mexico, conquered by Cortes in 1521, and the empire of Peru, conquered by Pizarro in 1531-1533. They did it with few casualty in Combat. The only military defeat that the Spanish encountered in the America was in Chile. Don Pedro de Valdivia was defeated by the Mapuches forces, and killed in December 25,1553, with his entire force. How was possible that the most primitive tribe of this continent was able to defeat the best army in the world at that time? There were not settled kingdom with its emperor not stone -built temples and hierarchy, as in Peru and Mexico and the inhabitants were not so far advanced. But it possessed the stoutest warriors in the Americas. Despite these cultural and material differences, important commonalities can be found in this period. They were for the most part self-governing and sovereign peoples.

The Spanish chroniclers Alonzo de Ercilla(1), Gongora Marmolejo(2), Nuñez de Piñeda(3), speak of them in terms of admiration, although the two first fought against them and Nunez de Pineda y Bascunan suffered Happy captivity at their hands. Also the Letters of Pedro de Valdivia(4). Verbalize in terms of admiration and respect. To Chileans, his letters to His Catholic Majesty Charles V, are one of the most precious records in the possession of their country- in the document are to be found the impression of Valdivia of the mapuches people, one of the most remarkable of all the Indian races of America. A record so unique compels respect and with respect academic curiosity. The main goal of this paper is to highlight the cultural differences and similarities of both culture, and point out why the Mapuches were more successful in the military science than the Aztec.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF GROUPS TO BE COMPARED

The Aztecs arrived in the valley of Mexico, what is now called Meso-America, relatively late in the 13th century AD. They were based in central Mexico and finally settled at the site of what became Tenochtitlan in 1345. They emerged as an empire less than a century later. The Aztecs were a city-state, with an emperor, and Tenochtitlan was his capitol city. The government was an elective monarchy(5). There was a division of class based on the social structure, in which the slaves were at the bottom of the social scale. The slaves could buy their freedom if they earned enough money, but this also worked the opposite way if someone was in debt. At the top of the social scale was the nobility, Merchants (pochtecah) and the commoners were ranked before the slaves. At the top of the Aztec society were the ruling nobles who were subdivided into several categories the tlahtoani was the ruler of a province o town, the king was a tlahtoani. The teuclahtoh were nobles who received their offices through hereditary succession. Below the teuclahtoh were the teteuctin or lords. Below the ruling class were the pipiltin (governmental position). There were several ranks within the pipiltin class. Below the pipiltin were the cuauhpipiltin, commoners who had achieved noble status. Below the nobility were the calpolehqueh (sing. Calpoleh) the calpolli (or ward). Below the nobility were the commoners, the macehualtin (sig. macehually) who formed the bulk of Aztec society. Another groups of commoners, the mayehqueh, or tlalmaintin were permanent laborers. And finally were the slaves.

The Mapuches are the off spring of the ancient Hunter of Monte Verde (12000 Years back) and Chan Chan(6) and Quillen (5000 years). They also descend from the people of Pitren (first century of our era) and El Vergel (second millennium of our era).

The Mapuches of Chile were fundamentally hunters and gatherers, although they practiced some basic farming techniques(7). The central organization of the Mapuches was the Lof(8), (has its origin in the extended family structure) a complex and extended kinship lineage of matrilineal origin. It is shaped by their socio-cultural, polical and ideological concepts. The Lof's authority was the Lonko (or head in Mapuche Language). Each of these families lived in a ruca, a kind of long house, where the lonko lived with as many wives as he could handle(9). The Mapuche authorities within the lof were the werken, or messenger, the machi and the nguillatufe. The community's daily way of life was regulated in a code of practice known as Ad-Mapu. It was transmitted by the Ulmen (wise) who, acted as negotiators in the prevention and resolution of internal disputes, or the formation of alliances with others tribes in time of war.

The machi were people with shamanistic and healing powers who were in charge or the Machitun, a Mapuche religious-magic ritual, due to these powers. The nguillatufe was a religious leader who was the ritual head of the Nguillatun(10), a ceremony that is central to Mapuche religious and shamanistic world. This sacred ceremony is conducted in an area specially allocated by the community Known as Nguillantue. There, at the altar or Rehue in the open air the Mapuches give thanks to Nguinechen, the Mapuche god. Their belief system maintained that that the world was created by a celestial family, who were the creators of all beings as well as holdings the power of nature.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INTRODUCTION

Both the Aztecs and the Mapuche people were warrior nations, with similar methods of warfare and motivations to fight the Spanish domination. The difference between the two societies was in the fact that the Mapuches refused to fall under Spanish control and therefore opposed the Spaniards in fierce resistance for over 350 years. In the Mapuche society there was no concept of slavery and so the Mapuches could not understand becoming servants or slaves to the Spanish. This left little choice for the Mapuche except to fight or to flee the Spaniards. The Aztecs fell under Spanish control for 3 years during 1519 -1521, despite their military power, vast political network, and motivations to conquer. The Aztecs society was different than the Mapuche in that it was based on a class society in which there was slavery. They therefore understood the concept of slavery and being a servant to the Spaniards. They were also much more open to foreign control since the god they worshipped, Quetzalcoatl, was also a foreigner. (Indigenous Revolution Note: This statement is untrue. The belief that Quetzalcoatl was a European was fabricated after the Spanish invasion) The Mapuches on the other hand were against change and would not accept any ideas from outside their society. The mapuche religion believe in the forces of creation (Ngenechen) and destruction (Wakufu) and the ultimate balance between them. And a variation of shamanistic beliefs, the cult of the ancestor to invoke their help - because the Mapuche believe in they cult of the spirit of their ancestor and religious beliefs that the world will end if they no resist the Spaniard the Mapuche established a reputation as a fierce warriors who bravely defend their lands and their way of life. The habitat of the Mapuches during the Inca and later the Spanish conquest was the region of central Chile, from south of the Choapa River (approximately Lat. 32°south). They were divided into three geographically contiguous ethnic groups: the Picunche (Picun = north and Che = people), the Mapuche (Mapu = earth and Che = people), and the Huilliche (Huilli = south and Che = people). The northernmost group the Picunche, was the only one conquered, first by the Incas, and then by the Spaniards. The Mapuche and the Hulliche, on the contrary continue to resist the Spaniard for hundred of years, keeping their independence in the southern region thanks to long guerrilla warfare(11).

Mapuche organization also considered the existence of lof alliances or rewes, for specific purposes. The head of these rewes was the ulmen, a leader who was elected among the lonko due to his wisdom and strength. In time of crisis such a war, alliances of nine rewes, also called aillarewes, were formed. The authority in charge of these aillarewes was the ulmenfvxa lonko during peacetime and the toqui during the time of war. All of the aillarewes together gave origin to the concept of Gvla-Mapu that meant "all the Mapuche Nation".

In the Aztec society there were the upper class elite's and the commoners. This was called the Calpolli system, and it controlled all access to land for the commoners. There was also a merchant class, who was a part of the nobility. In the Calpolli system one could advance in social position as well as move down the social scale. Almost everyone benefited from war, because the more land captured meant the more land there was available to divide up. This system needed a very heavy control by those in power over those that they dominated. For this reason they needed a strong head of state.

The fighting between the Spanish and the Mapuches became known as "la guerra de Arauco" or the "Araucanian War," (1541 -1883). They were the series of military armed conflict from the 16th to the 19th centuries through which the Mapuche Indians of Chile sought to maintain their independence from the Inca, the Spanish, and the government of Chile and Argentina. (Berdichesky, 1975, page 15); the Mapuches from the very beginning of the war With the Spaniards adopted the tactics of their enemy who they soon dominated in warfare(12). The horse played a highly important role in their tactics that were innovative and highly practical. The Aztecs on the other hand were excellent fighters against other tribes, but their tactics were inefficient and did not improve during the fighting with the Spanish.

Therefore the Spanish use of the cavalry and artillery, tactics and weaponry placed the Aztec in a vulnerable position in frontal assault on open terrain(13). The Aztecs were only fighting with the Spaniards for three years, a very short period for training, too short to come out with new military technique. Whereas the Mapuches were at war with the Spanish for over the 350 years, which allowed for flexibility and training for new techniques. Indigenous cultures differed from one another in many ways in this case the wars in which these people engaged to defend such area. Land for these people had a broad meaning.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aztec and Mapuche Military Techniques

Tenochtitlan city was not fortified according to Hassig (1988, page 52) in contrast to most of Mesoamerica town, but is was defensible, and the city position was on an island. The lakes were connected with the mainland by causeways. Consequently the Spanish attacked the city by ships and canoe. On the other hand the Mapuches fought in jungle; mountains, and the military campaigns were during the summer; the rainy season was 8 months In Chile. Central Mexico climatic cycle involves a dry season, around September to May, followed by a rainy season through the summer. Which means it was easier to move large numbers of men and supplies in Mexico than in Chile because the quality of the roads. Also the rivers in Chile during the rainy season were impassable.

Compared to the Aztecs, the Mapuche people were a very closed society, who gained their strength and power through warfare. They would not accept any foreign cultural ideas and domination. War was history for the Mapuches, who had no record of the past events (written history). The Mapuche sought leadership through strength and power within themselves, which was defined through warfare. The Mapuche people believed that through warfare they made History the war was a expression of this belief. The best of the human quality of every Mapuche warrior will expresses in the combat in this unique moment frozen in time were the warrior and the universe are connected, in just one second, calling the name of a friend in order to make sure they are present. The term Culture,in the paper does not refers to fine arts and letters, Mapuche cultural development ocurred only in those which had survival value - Spanish Pressure first and Chilean later was exerted in three areas - military, political, and religious. Mapuche reaction and response followed the same gradient.
They thought that if the Spanish need slave they have to defeated the Mapuche Nation military first.

In contrast, the Aztecs accepted compromise with other nations, for example Spain, and were able to incorporate foreign ideas into their own open society. (La trasformación de la deidad Aztec en la virgen de Guadalupe es un tipo de "Plataforma de entendimiento" impensable en el ambito Mapuche.)

The cult of the virgin Guadalupe by the Aztec is unthinkable for Mapuches Indian; according to Bengoa (1992, Conquista, pag. 26-27)(14). This is a compromise with foreign religious ideas and also they accepted to be servants of the Spaniards because they have the concept in they society, after a fierce war of resistance they yield.

In 1541, Pedro de Valdivia, the first governor of Chile, founded the capital city of Santiago. Six months later Michimalongo(15), an Indian chief from a northern group of Mapuche people, destroyed it. In order to fight the Indians, Valdivia founded a new city in the South, in October 5, 1550 - this city, Concepcion, was used to bring weapons in by sea, but was also lost to the Mapuches in an uprising in 1553. The city was reclaimed but lost again in 1554, to the forces of Lautaro (the Indian leader immortalized in Alonso de Ercilla y Zuñiga's epic poem La Araucana). In 1557 Caupolican was defeated, by the Mendoza's forces, and killed the following year. Finally Lautaro was killed in battle in 1557. The relation with the Spanish was then quiet until the Mapuches killed Don Pedro the Avendano, the man who had killed Caupolican, in 1561. Villagra, the governor of Chile, sent his brother Pedro on a punitive expedition. Colo-Colo (leader or toqui), defeated the Spanish forces, killed the governor's brother, and began the siege of Fort Arauco in 1563(16). The pattern of intermittent warfare was brought into existence. It was characterized by success and defeat for both sides, until peace treaties were made ruling out offensive and defensive tactics. In practice the Spanish army could not defeat the Mapuche in war. Not only can the Spaniards not win, they do not deserve to win according to what is being said by The Spanish chroniclers Alonzo de Ercilla; the moral indictment is much blacker than the military.

Graham Cunninghame (1973)(17) stated: Valdivia wrote to the king of Spain Charles V. March 12, 1550:

"Fifteen hundred to two thousands Indians were killed, and many others lanced, and some taken prisoners, from two hundreds of whom I had the hands and noses cut off for their contumacy when I had many times sent them messengers and given them the commands as ordered by yours Majesty."
Valdivia's Christian view seems strange he has not problems to perpetrate such barbaric act upon his two hundred defenseless prisoners. However, three years later the Mapuche returned, thirsting for revenge in the battle of Tucapel, Valdivia and the entire Spanish forces perished, they were no survivors.

The Mapuche war ritual was demonstrated in the death of Valdivia, (although there are many versions of how the killing took place).(18) According to Ercilla, Valdivia was killed with the blow of a club, with a knife a warrior cut open his breast, ripped his still quivering heart which was handed it to the toqui; he sucked its blood. The heart was passed round from one to another, and a drinking cup was made from his skull. The warriors keep running round the corpse brandishing their lances and uttering weird cries, while the rest of the assembly stamped with their feet until the earth shook (Ercilla, 1979, pag 193). Thus miserably perished Pedro de Valdivia, one of the great figures of the great conquest of the new world.

This was a Mapuche war ritual in order to honor the enemy warrior and get his power, strength, and intelligence. From his long bones, flutes were made. The victory celebration continued with the killing of an animal (guanaco or llama). The heads of the enemies were then stuck up on spears and danced around while singing. The celebration ended with elaborate feasting and heavy drinking (of fermented beverages which were made from maize, quinoa, araucaria nut, and later wheat and barley)(19).

Lewis(20) acknowledging the bravery of the Mapuche in theirs wars against the Spaniards believes that the savage image of the Mapuche became a myth constructed by the newcomers in order to justify theirs defeats in wars with them, as well as to encourage their enslavement in future wars.

The Aztecs had similar rituals to sacrifice the captive enemies to the gods. The prisoners of war were led up to pyramids in the Aztecs capital of Tenochtitlan, where their hearts were torn from their bodies and fed to the gods. Huitzilopochtli, the god of war, to whom rattlesnakes were sacred. For the Aztecs it was this demand from the gods that drove them to war against other tribes, but against the Spaniards was a necessity to defend theirs territory. The Aztecs was an open society and accepted compromise with the Spanish people. The Mapuches were a closed society, and did not accept foreigners or any social change. They refused to be servants to the Spaniards and for this reason the only choices they had were to fight the Spaniards or to flee. The Mapuche made their history in the war, which therefore became a sacred ritual for them. The warriors wanted the power and strength, which they gained from the enemies they captured in war (selected enemies only).

The Mapuche were able to defeat the Spaniards(21) in battle with inferior numbers, in even numbers with the Spaniards and also when they have superior numbers of warrior over the Spaniards: these consecutive series of great action is never by pure chance and luck; it is the product of planing, training and genius(22). The Aztec were not able to defeat the Spaniard even when the Indian outnumbered them. At no time was it usual for the Spanish forces to outnumber the enemy anywhere in America. The Spaniards, with or with or without Indian allies, had a tremendous capability for winning military victories with inferior numbers.

By reason of the superior tactic, weaponry of the Spanish army as well as the inability of changes the tactic that they were using. The Mapuche, as previously explained, were able to maintain their political and territorial autonomy in the Auracania until the nineteenth century(23). The Mapuche autonomy was a product of a constant wars in which were engaged with the Spanish throughout most of the colonial period, the wars were not general confrontations as in the past(24), but in the form of local armed conflict or malocas(25). In contrast the Indigenous People of Mexico the Aztec unfortunately were defeated early.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aztec and Mapuche Warriors

Both the Mapuche and Aztec warriors were noted to be very brave, courageous, and ferocious in warfare. The difference was the Mapuche were more innovative and creative. They were very good at coming out with solutions in battle and were always improvising and creating new methods of warfare. The Aztecs wanted to capture the enemy in order to get their hearts to give to the gods, but the Mapuches object was to exterminate the enemy by any means possible. This lead to a very brutal form of warfare used by the Mapuche. It is important to highlight that the battles among the Mapuches and the Spaniards sometimes were in numerical imbalance between the two forces. The Mapuches won battles against a force that was in total superior to their own(26).

The battle of Tucapel, on December 25, 1553(27), demonstrated the ferocity and determination in Mapuche warfare. The war began when the Indian Chief Lautaro planned to engage in battle with the Spaniards continuously until they were worn out. The two armies draw battle lines just South of the Tucapel fortress the fighting was so fierce that not one Spanish soldier survived. During the battle the first governor of Chile, Pedro de Valdivia, ended his days. Valdivia suffered poetic justice, slain by the Indians.

In the same manner the Aztec warrior in la 'noche triste' (the night of sorrows, June 30, 1520) because of the high casualty figures on both sides. As the Spaniard and their Tlaxcalan allies attempted to flee the island of Tenochtitlan on the causeways, Aztec warriors attacked them. Many were killed. And many were drowned in the lake. What was left of Cortes troops made their way to the safety of Tlaxcala territory. Cortez and his men returned in April of 1521, craving for vengeance.

In his correspondence to the King Charles V., Pedro De Valdivia, conqueror of Chile, state:

"Have warred with men of many nations, but never have seen such fighting tenacity as is displayed by these Indian."(28)
This was high praise by a man who was very experienced in combat and who had fought in many wars with the Mapuches. The Mapuches also came up with new methods of warfare and were the first Indians in the continent to use artillery, such as the cannon. They also used infantry combined with horses in order to mobilize faster on the difficult terrain. This method was so successful the Spanish army later copied it.

The Aztecs were also noted as being very brave and courageous warriors. According to Bernal Diaz Del Castillo, who fought for the Spanish:

"Little availed our cannon, or our muskets, crossbows and lances, or the thrusts we gave them, or our good fighting, for although we killed and wounded many of them, yet they managed to reach us by pushing forward over the points of the our swords and lances, and closing up their squadrons never desisted from their brave attack, nor could we push them away from us."(29)
Aztec warriors have not always been considered professional soldiers, despite the existence of military orders, because membership in the army was not full time occupation (Hassig, 1988, page 11).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tactics and Weapons

To a large extent, the striking power of the Spaniard army was the cavalry fast moving counter-attack and hard-hitting formations and the artillery played and immense part in sustaining the morale of the Spanish infantry, to advance toward enemy lines. On the other hand for the Indigenous People was perhaps the worst of all battle experience. Spain had the best army in the World in that period, 16 century. The standard infantry weapon was the musket with all its limitations and unreliability, the sword and the spear. The Mapuches learned very fast How to overcome the cavalry and avoid the carnage of the artillery.

The Mapuche innovative and creative techniques also aided them in tactics and weapon use. They chose their battles carefully, fighting only when they felt they could win. They accepted servitude when Spanish forces seemed strong. But once the conquerors military vigilance declined, they would rise again in rebellion. The Aztecs on the other hand did not create any new methods or use any new weapons. The main reason was possibly the short length of time (only three years) that they were fighting with the Spanish, whereas the Mapuche were fighting for over 350 years. New tactics and weapons need a lot of training and understanding of the new concepts of war, when to retreat, when to move forward and when to move to new terrain. In 350 years of fighting the Mapuche had time to invent and test new tactics and weaponry. For this reason they incorporated the horse, guerilla tactics, artillery cannon, infantry on horses, espionage, fortress, camouflage trenches, armor and helmet, and the use of porcupine as weaponry against cavalry. This consisted in a group infantrymen with 3-meter long lances or pikes (Bonilla, 1988, pag 294-295).

Steward (1988, page 730) notes that the Mapuches "as early as 1568, the Araucanian had begun to use cavalry in battle on a fairly large scale; later, they used it much more frequently. In battle formation, the infantry advanced in the center and the cavalry on the wings. The use of advance guards, sentinels at night, trenches protected with thorn branches, pitfall and ditches with sharp stakes at the bottom, spies and fifth-column work, and log forts and palisades (Pucara) was common."
By the end of 16th century, the Mapuche had learned to use horses in large formation. The great chief Namcunahuel was the creator and organizer of the Mapuche cavalry. However in the battle of Tucapel they used the horse for the first time by the great chief Lautaro, but in limited numbers and not yet well organized. The Mapuche chief Butapichun created the Mapuche infantry in horses, he stressed the imperativeness of moving so as always to achieve local superiority, even against a force that was in total superior to his own. Generally speaking, the Mapuches retained their own weapons in the war against the Spanish. Strategy was more important than weapons. Their weapons had improved although they still depend on Lance, the long club with weighted heads slings, bow and arrow, and the pike. On the contrary the Aztec never used the horse, but the Spaniard noted their tenacity in fighting in closed hand-to hand fighting. They pretended to retreat, but merely to induce the Spaniards to follow them and cut off for the fortress. According to Nuñez de Piñeda -on 15th of May 1529- in the battle of Las Cangrejeras, de Mapuche charged them with battle formation of line extended in a semicircle and horse on either wing, the riders leaping over those on foot, throwing themselves to the ground to avoid Spanish fire. They had little to fear because the rain and the wind. The fury of the mapuche assault was tremendous that the Spanish cavalry turned and fled, leaving eighty infantry men, who were overrun straightway. The men all stood their ground, fighting- most of them dying. Lientur an Indian leader interpose to save Nuñes life and he fall prisoner of the mapuches.

According to Hassig (1988, pag. 114), "Taking captives was extremely important to the social, military, and political aspirations of the warrior." A warrior gained honors only when he had captured his fourth enemy soldier on the field of battle. However, the price of failure was harsh. The warrior had only two or three campaigning seasons in which to capture a prisoner. The punishment for failure was loss of his warrior status for the next one or two campaigning seasons.

The Spanish technique did not improve during the years at war with the Mapuches and this resulted in a great advantage and superiority in techniques and armory by the Mapuches. The Spanish were forced to sign a treaty in Quillin(30) on January 6, 1641, endorsing their failure to defeat the Mapuche people. As a result with this treaty, Spain recognized the independence of the Mapuche nation. The sovereignty of the Mapuche within their territory south of the Bio-Bio was clearly acknowledged in its provisions by affirming that not Spanish forces could enter Indigenous territory. It was agreed that the Bio-Bio River was the border(31).

The Chilean professor José Aylwin (1999)(32) state that, it was not only through the parlamentos, but also through warfare, that the Mapuche were able to maintain their independent from the Spanish conquerors until the end of the colonial regime. We can conclude by affirming that although the Spanish were not able to finish their conquest campaign throughout all of the territory of Chile, they would alter the existence of indigenous people who live there forever. When one investigate the devastating consequences that Spanish conquest had for indigenous people of Chile and Mexico, among these commonalties are that they were reduce to the category of servants and slaves, savages or barbarian of an inferior nature. These peoples were depicted by the newcomers as infidels or pagans, peoples without law or order. Another difference existing between Chile and Mexico is that, on the contrary the Spanish in Mexico never recognized the independence of the Aztec Nation because the failure of the Aztec to defeat the Spanish's army and the Tlatcalan allies. A major strategy in Aztec warfare was to capture rather than to kill the enemy. The offensive weapons of the Aztec included bow and arrows, darts, spears, slings, swords, clubs and atlatls, and spear-throwers, used to throw "darts" with greater force and longer distance than spears could be hand thrown (Steward, 1946, page 730). Defensive weapons, included body armor, helmets, and shields. The Aztec's main offensive arms were projectile weapons and shock weapons such as spears and clubs. Aztec army generally tried to surround the enemy and assail it from all sides. Attacking the flank while engaged in a frontal assault was practice. They took advantage of their numerical superiority envelope the enemy troops and cut them from of reinforcement and re-supply. The Aztec did not use firearms and cavalry at all in warfare. For this reason the cannon as well as cavalry were very effective weaponry for the Spanish, but not decisive factors in the outcome of the war(33). The Aztec minimized the use of the horse in combat by chosen the terrain in which they have to fight the Spaniards in the end of the war, but they also did not come up with new weaponry as the Mapuche did. Most of the Aztecs advantages were not gained through offensive measures, but rather through defensive techniques.

As the city was built in the middle of the lake, Cortes ordered the building of thirteen brigantines for himself he keep the command of the flotilla, each one of which carried twenty-five Spaniards and twelve native rowers. Cortez decided to attack the city from three sides and divided his forces into three groups, entrusting the command of each of these forces to his lieutenants, Pedro de Alvarado, Gonzalo de Sandoval, and Cristobal de Oleda. The Spanish forces numbered one hundred and eighty-four arquebusiers, crossbowmen, and men-at arm, eighty-six horsemen, eighteen artillery pieces, and a tremendous display of native's allies.

(Hassid, 1988, pag. 238-250): "Eventually, the combined pressure of the enemy forces, the gradual destruction of Tenochtitlan, the starvation of the city's populace, and the smallpox epidemic recently introduced into the capitol led to the final defeat. On August 13, 1521, after three months of combat, King Cuauhtemoc was captured as he tried to flee the city by canoe."
The Aztecs were generally unsuccessful against the Spaniards because they were unable to improvise and come out with new military techniques. Having converted many potential enemies into allies, the Spaniards and their Tlaxcaltec allies converted neighboring cities from Tezcoco. Without internal support the Spaniards could not have defeated the Aztecs. The Spanish casualties in Mexico were only 160 soldiers(34).

But in Chile the Spaniards allies were the Picunches Indian and Yanaconas from Peru and the cost to the Spanish army during the Araucanian war was around 50. 000 soldier and an estimate 60. 000 indios auxiliaries casualties of war (the web, Rehue, 1998). According to Spanish historian who recognize that the Spanish's loss in soldier and resources in Chile was greater than losses through all other conquests throughout the Americas combined. The mapuches losses are unknown, according to Berdichewsky (1975, pag. 15): the indecisive and bloody warfare between Spaniards and Mapuches. Which earned the captaincy-general of Chile the epitaph cementerio de Los Españoles, the Spanish soldier's cemetery of the Americas.

Sergio Villalobos(35), a historian, has portrayed the colonial period as one where peace largely prevailed over war in the frontier. According to his interpretation, the Mapuche were defeated by the Spanish not by war, which only occurred initially, but mainly trough a process of assimilation by the Spanish relation, mission and their blending with Spanish settlers.

In addition to the losses in the battlefield the Aztecs and Mapuche People also suffered the effect of the diseases such as yellow fewer, measles and smallpox against which the Aztecs and Mapuches had not defense. The effect of the diseases caused major epidemic throughout the Americas.

The arrival of the Spanish conqueror in the America drastically altered their lives forever. The imposition of the encomienda system, Indigenous population decimation, enslavement, domination of Indigenous peoples and dispossession of their land and resources. This, as if this lands were empty or vacant, or as if the peoples living in them were unable of governing themselves. Differents doctrines, including discovery and terra nullius, were used by Spain to justify the appropriation of Indigenous lands. In accordance with the papal bulls, Spanish conqueror claimed dominium over the lands and the people they found in the new world.

Another commonality in both colonial Chile and Mexico was the effort to convert Indigenous population into Christianity. War, torture, mistreatment, disease, did nothing to make the Mapuche change their minds.

Notwithstanding the commonalities underline above, important differences can be found:

1 - Cultures which agree with the Conquistador discourse or paradigms imposed by Euro centric thinking-Dispossession and domination, conversion to Christianity, intermarriage, large mixed blood population, assimilation for (example Aztec and Inca);
2 - And cultures, which don't agree with the conquistador, discourse because they don't have platforms understanding with the Spanish forces "Plataforma de Entendimiento" con el invasor. (War, autonomy, conflict and confrontation, disappeared, fierce resistance, for example, Mapuches.)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION

Although in fighting skills and bravery the Aztecs were very similar to the Mapuches, Aztec culture and societal beliefs were very different from the Mapuches. This contrast in beliefs and societal systems lead to different outcomes in the wars against the Spaniards. The Aztecs were easily defeated because they had a centralized system, in which there was an emperor and a capital city. This system was based on a class society similar to that of the Spaniards, whereas the Mapuche system was the opposite. There was no class, no central figure or city and therefore the whole nation made its livelihood through warfare. When the main chief was killed a new one was elected to continue the fight. An essential weakness of Spanish occupation was its desperate need of peace. Exploitation of this weakness became a foundation of Mapuche strategy. Whenever the Indian found it advantageous to themselves to live in peace -weather because of famine or disease or military weakness- they willingly surrendered themselves to temporarily armistice. During the 350 years of war with the Mapuches, the Spaniards military techniques did not evolve. They began and ended the war with the same use of the horse cavalry and were very soon at a disadvantage against the Mapuche who had created superior military techniques. The Mapuche army did not just become even with the Spanish army but they became far superior. Compared to the Spanish armor, Mapuche armor, made of leather and with helmets, was much more efficient. The Mapuche developed techniques to resist the Spanish cavalry and were undefeatable. The Spaniards underestimated the Mapuche power and thought they had similar ideas and techniques to other tribes such as the Incas and the Aztecs. The Mapuches eventually defeated the Spaniards, but the outcome of the Spanish war with the Aztecs was quite different. This was a result of the lack of innovation by the Aztecs during war. Most of the innovative tactics adopted were static, however; the Spaniard had to be drawn into an appropriate position or maneuver (feints).

It is true that cannon, guns, steel blades, horses play a roll to the advantages on the Spanish side; but it was not an overwhelming factor in the defeated of the Aztec.
Another factor was also the different way of thinking, socialization, cultural adaptation of the Mapuche people play a roll in the outcome of the war.

In 1883 the Chilean army assumed total control of the Araucania, ending up with Mapuche political and territorial autonomy. Despite the general Mapuche uprising, on November 5, 1881, the Mapuches arose one last time in a general insurrection. According to José Bengoa(36), a prominent Chilean historian, it was the first time in their entire history that all the groups of the very decentralized Mapuche Nation had joined in a single insurrection. They did not engage in this act to secure their political and military independence -that was now lost beyond recovery. As Bengoa notice, "the Mapuche knew perfectly well that they were going to lose and that the majority of them would die in this general uprising." So why did they make the last stand? Once again, to quote Bengoa, the last insurrection was "a cultural imperative"(37) that compel (the Mapuches) to appear with their lances, in front of the huinca forts and cities and say: "We are still an independent people and we will cease to be such only in a ritual act of combat and death."

In addition to, the Argentine army in the Pampas defeated Namuncura in 1883,which was known as the "desert war". The Argentinean government occupies the Mapuche territory of the Pampas and the Patagonia. In 1883, in Patagonia, both armies finally defeated the Mapuche people, and many were place in reservations.

We can conclude by assert, that although the Spanish Conquistador's were not able to finish their Conquest throughout all of the territory of Chile, they distorted their lives forever, the impact of the colonial regimen in Chile and Mexico was overwhelming due to the impact that disease brought by the Spaniard, or mistreatment by the colonists, had on them. As a consequence of their fusion and cultural assimilation with the dominant population.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes

(1) Alonzo de Ercilla y Zuñiga. Wrote the Epic poem La Araucana rhyming historical chronicle. The author was in Chile. Experienced in military science, and his work is invaluable for Mapuche History and Literature. Ercilla came to Chile a few years after Valdivia was killed.

(2) Alonzo de Gongora Y Marmolejo. Served under Valdivia's orders and knew him and his sucesor, Villagra, personally. Historia de Chile desde su descubrimiento hasta el año de 1575 (in coleccion de historiadores de Chile y documentos relativos a la historia nacional, 49 vol. Santiago, 1861-1942), II: 33-34.

(3) Francisco Nuñes de Piñeda y Bascuñan (Hereinafter), was a prisoner of War of the Mapuche for several months and wrote a book Cautiverio Feliz. He was captured in the battle of las Cangrejeras near Chillan May 15, 1529. The Spanish ideals of chivalry had some effect on them in later years and they would repay debts of honor to their Spanish enemies, to which Francisco Nuñez owed his survival in captivity. Toqui Lientur and Mulican protected him from the deadly intent of the Pehuenche tribus; this was just to repay the kindness shown the Mapuche warrior by Nuñez's father years before when Lientur had been captured. His father had a reputation throughout Araucania as a dangerous enemy but also as decent in his treatment of captives.

(4) Pedro de Valdivia. Born in Extramadura, Spain, the cradle of the conquest. He was killed in combat against the Mapuche on December 25, 1553 with his entire forces. He set his seal upon the Chile of his day.

(5) Prescott, W., History of the Conquest of Mexico.

(6) Berdichesky, Personal communications. Vancouver, 1999.

(7) Bengoa, Historia Mapuche. According to this autor the abundance of resources existing in the heartland of the Mapuche territory (Araucania) was such, that it sustained a population of half a million at the time of contact with the Spaniards.

(8) The term Araucanian corresponds to the denomination given by the Spanish to the indigenous people living in the Araucanian territory in southern Chile. It is used instead of the term Mapuche, which means "People of the Land".

(9) Bengoa, Historia Mapuche. According to Bengoa, the community on the basis of merits elected the Lonko. Nevertheless, due to influences introduced by contact and the concentration of power within Mapuche society, the Lonko became and hereditary authority.

(10) According to Berdichesky, the term "nguillatun" literally means "a petition action".

(11) Berdichewsky B., The Araucanian of Chile, page 19.

(12) Lewis Hanke, 1966, Readings in Latin American History, Volume 1, pages 242-243.

(13) Ross Hassig, Aztec Warfare, page 87.

(14) Bengoa in Conquista y barbarie: "Sociedades abiertas y sociedades cerradas, el Dios rubio que viene de afuera anunciando cambios por ejemplo Quetzalcoaatl del antiguo Mexico. La Mapuche, en cambio, era una sociedad de linajes, una sociedad; en que los antiguos difuntos se les aparecían en la noche diciéndoles a los vivos: no te apartes de la tradición, o se va acabar el mundo. No hay Mesías que viene de afuera, no se espera el cambio, no se espera que venga un dios con una cruz de símbolo,con la figura traspuesta que nos cambie el modo de vivir.
En la sociedad Mapuche a diferencia de la Incaica, no había tiempo para la Historia, para el cambio político o social, para el acontecimiento diferente que podía provocar el cambio total...
La sociedad Mapuche no tenía un concepto de acumulación, tanto económica como temporal, que normalmente van juntas; no tenía una multiplicidad de dioses, que permitiera establecer con el Invasor Plataformas culturales de comunicaciones. Era una cultura dotada de gran fuerza interna, pero cerrada al extranjero; por ello, también cerrada a la servidumbre, al cambio. Solo le quedaba el sometimiento forzoso, la huida, o la guerra."

(15) Michimalongo was the Leader of the Picunches (people of the North Araucanian from the Aconcagua Valley). They were under Inca control.

(16) Villalobos, Sergio, 1992, La Vida fronteriza en Chile, Editorial Mapfre, Spain, page 227-228.

(17) Graham Cunninghame, 1973, Pedro de Valdivia Conqueror of Chile, Milford House, Boston.

(18) Ercilla Alonso, La Araucana, page 192. Canto Ediciones clásicos de Castalia, Madrid, 1979. All the historian concur in one respect, in that Valdivia was killed with a club.

(19) Mapuche drink chicha (muday), made of corn and strawberry.

(20) Lewis Stephen, E., "Myth and the History of Chile's Araucanians",1994, 58 Radical History Review, 112.

(21) Tellez, I., Una Raza Militar in page 228. The battle was in neighbourhood of Chillan, on the tenth of April 1629. The Spanish forces one hundred, the Mapuches eighty at most, also the batlle of Budenco in Concepcion August of 1660 in which the Spanish forces were 200 soldiers and the Indian forces under the famed commander El Mestizo Alejo were 300 warriors with inferior weapons won that battle. In addition to see: The Happy captive, 1973, Nuñez de Bascuñan, page 13, in which he describe the battle as first-hand witness.

(22) Tellez, I., Una Raza Militar (hereinafter). Tellez describe the battles in detail.

(23) The prevalence of war among Spanish and Mapuches in the history is supported by prestigious historian which include Mario Gongora, Ensayo Historico sobre la Noción del Estado en Chile en los siglos XIX y XX., 4 ed., Santiago: Universitaria, 1986. And José Bengoa (see Bengoa, Historia Mapuche).

(24) Gongora put its number at fifty thousands, but it is hardly credible. Its very unlikely that an army of that size could have been keep together for more than a few days.

(25) Malocas, were surprised attacks to towns and farm made by Mapuches chiefs in the frontiers lands of Chile and Argentine. Their main objective was robbing animals, fundamentally cattle and horse, as well as women, who were made captive and taken to their territory's. Leonardo León, Maloquero y Cochavadores en Auracanía y las Pampas 1700-1800, Temuco, Chile: Universidad de la Frontera, 1991.

(26) Telles, I., Una Raza Militar. The general describe various battles won by the Mapuche in inferiority in number (hereinafter Tellez, Una Raza militar).

(27) Tellez, I., Una Raza Militar, 1944, said in pag 18. that in the battle of Marigueño the Mapuches use for the first time the artillery, 6 cannons. The second battle in which the artillery was used by the Mapuches was in the fortress of Quiapo.

(28) Pocock, H., The conquest of Chile, pag 237, Stein and Day, New York.

(29) Steward, Julian, Handbook of South American Indians, page 730.

(30) Bengoa state since the parliament o treaties of Quillin in 1641, all of these documents acknowledged the existence of the frontier among the two peoples and of independent Mapuche territory, which went from the Bio-Bio in the north to the Toltem River in the south. Bengoa affirms, this was a territory not dependent from the Capitania General de Chile, which related directly, as independent nation. In Bengoa, Historia Mapuche.

(31) Moreover, the legal status of the parlamentos, the Chilean legal scholar, José Aylwin, who has reflected on this matter, has argued that, was that of an international treaty among two sovereign nations. This argumentation, according to the author, is consistent with the growing application of Jus Gentium (law of Nations).

(32) José Aylwin, 1999. In Master Thesis, UBC, Canada.

(33) Steward, 1946, page 730.

(34) Tellez, Una Raza Militar, page 48.

(35) Villalobos, Sergio, 1992, La Vida Fronteriza en Chile, Colección Realidades Americanas, Spain.

(36) Ibid. Bengoa José, Historia Mapuche. Despite the general Mapuche uprising which took place those years 1881, which caused thousands of deaths to both parts in conflict. The Chilean army was able to control most of Mapuche Territory in 1881. In 1882 and 1883 military raids were made to the Andes in order to take control of Pehuenche territory. The 'Occupation of Villarrica' in 1883 is considered to be the last military episode of the Araucanian war.

(37) The term 'Culture', in the present case does not refers to fine arts and letters. Mapuche cultural development ocurred only in those which had survival value - Spanish Pressure first and Chilean later was exerted in three areas - Military, political, and religious. Mapuche reaction and response followed the same gradient.