"Rhetoric is the art of ruling the minds of men." - Plato

First things first:

So, what's the Difference?: Primary vs. Secondary Sources

  1. How does Hollitz explain (or historicize) Spain's exploration of the Americas?
  2. What was the source of contention between Las Casas and Cortes?

On Friday, Professor Bray asked you to rhetorically analyze several images. She asked you to look at an image's argument and seek to understand:

  • what the image was trying to convey
  • the context
  • appeal
  • significance

As a class, we will critically and rhetorically analyze Contending Voices Chapter 1: "The Cross and the Sword in Spain's New World: Bartolome de Las Casas and Hernan Cortes," Source 2: ''An Aztec View of the Temple Massacre (ca. 1550)," p. 13.

  1. What is the historical context of this image? (If you were writing about this image, how would you "set it up"?)
  2. What was the artist trying to convey in this rendering?
  3. What stands out to you? What is your eye drawn to?
  4. Is there anything significant or moving in this image?
  5. Now, thinking historically, what effect do you think this had on audiences around the world? Hint: think about what was at stake, and why countries would care about the way Spain conducted their colonization practices
  6. Finally, would the telling of this massacre been more or less powerful in written form? Why do you suppose the Aztec chose to portray the massacre in this way? Therefore, who was their audience and why is this significant?