i'm in the second chapter where she's retelling the story of the founding of the triple alliance and it's intensely confusing. There's so many different names and people and she's made it more confusing somehow with alternating of names and descriptions of relationships and also telling it out of chronological order.

It's extra confusing because so far everything appears to be a retelling based on a couple of histories written by people of the region in the century after the Spanish arrived? I don't know much about it because she's the historian! But I'm really unsure of what she pulls from where and to what extent she's crossreferencing over sources of information to make the story more accurate. She also likes to mix in colourful statements about what certain people must have been doing and thinking but said in a way like certainty. Which is fine? But adds to my confusion about what's known and how much editing she's doing of the story told by the histories she's pulling from.

There's then a chapter that sort of talks about the Aztec empire at the height of its power but again so much space is taken up by talk of complicated relationships between lots of cities, most of which are little more than names, but that doesn't really cohere to give a full picture. There's lots of little nuggets of interesting detail but as presented as a narrative it just feels confusing.

Then when the picture moves onto the Spanish conquest the narrative becomes a lot clearer but it still suffer from the I guess inevitable problem that it's so based on Spanish narratives and from their perspective. The description of the book suggests it's partly intended to restore some agency to the Aztecs and the people who allied with the Spanish but instead we get insistent descriptions that the conquest was absolutely inevitable from the moment the Spanish landed because "the Spanish had been farmers longer", all they could do was beg for peace, and the Native allies disappear into the background.

A chapter on the immediate aftermath of the fall of Tenochtitlan moves into "following Cortes around" and not much else, with every other character either disappearing or being defined entirely in relation to him. He attempted to set up an administration then disappeared for nearly a year in a disastrous overland expedition through the jungle. Then he comes back and there's open conflict again. What happened while he was gone? What was the story of the administration in those years? We get no clue at all from the text.

There's a mildly annoying writing style where she starts a chapter introducing a particular character who's chronologically ahead of where the last chapter ended, going back to vaguely fill in the gap, then returning to the character where she left off, which is kind of confusing.

The last couple of chapters talking about the 100 years post conquest have the advantage that there's more detail about the cast of characters, including at the end the story of an annalist who's responsible for preserving much of the history of the Mexica, but it still feels frustratingly narrow focused and missing much explanation of everyday life and how the Spanish were able to so quickly establish total domination. The indigenous population are defined only by their experience of the brutalities of the Spanish. This is obviously a very understandable thing to focus on, given how truly and utterly evil the Spanish were and the absolute horror of their actions, but how the broad mass of indigenous people adapted is invisible except in brief snatches. In these chapters the narrative feels completely focused on what happened in what had then become Mexico City, with minimal talk about even the rest of the central valley outside of incredibly difficult to follow talk of detailed kin relations. The Tlaxcala are mentioned a few times as close allies of the Spanish but the details are barely talked about - apart from a short section in the middle as part of the Hernan Cortes Show showing how his troops were "invincible".

This isn't to say that it was a bad book exactly. There's lots of interesting detail. She does do a good job of sketching out characters even when we can't really know that many details. There's some amazing and some horrific stories. But overall I felt like I was missing both tons of important detail I was looking for to link events AND a good "big picture" look at how things actually were at each point in time. There's only a minimal sketching out of things like Aztec religion and culture. For a short text too much time is spent listing names and relationships between them in a way that doesn't give depth to the players involved and just goes over your head. The Spanish just take up too much space yet without giving a good picture of the conquest and how it happened.

Overall there's stuff to appreciate here and I certainly understand it's hard to cover the whole topic in a shorter book but it just didn't fulfill the promise of the blurb for me ( )