Diaz del Castillo's version is what he has witnessed with Cortes during the conquest and he wants to fix the works of other historians such as Gomara about the Spanish conquest because they have no knowledge of the campaign. “ Gomara says that the soldiers wanted to mutiny and rebel,… I say never in the world was a captain obeyed with more respect and punctuality, as will be seen further on” (263, The True History of the Conquest of New Spain), this is an example that Diaz del Castillo says Gomara's works are not true according to his eye-witness. Therefore, Diaz del Castillo is closer to the truth than De Las Casas because his version of the Spanish conquest of the Americas is to fix all the mistakes of other historians’ …show more content…
Smith supports his thought by saying “ No regulation of commerce can increase the quantity of industry in any society beyond what its capital can maintain. It can only divert a part of it into a direction into which it might not otherwise have gone; and it is by no means certain that this artificial direction is likely to be more advantageous to the society than that into which it would have gone of its own accord” (113, The Great Political Theories). He does not want the government to interfere in commerce activities instead of leaving people to their own business. According to this quote “ Every individual is continually exerting himself to find out the most advantageous employment for whatever capital he can command. It is his own advantage, indeed, and not that of the society, which he has in view” (113, The Great Political Theories), it is advantageous for people to trade with others. People can make their best products and trade with others to get the products they are not good at. By this method, the economies are more efficient than using regulation of