Best when you C&C, let's say, start with what are the similarities and differences (S&D) btwn the main topic of each book? (i.e. the first book is about the process in which the mita came to be at Potosi, and the second is more focussed on the working conditions at Potosi, for example.). Then you should C&C each of their thesis. (i.e. book one says the mita was fair and great. book 2 says it was inhumane and degrading.) Then you should C&C how effective each book is (let's say, book 1 is better at shedding light into the the process and history of the mita at potosi, but book 2 is better at showing the realities and effects of its implementation.)
Does that make any sense? I'm pulling this out of my ass because I know nothing about the potosi or mita.
first book The Potosi Mita is about the forced indian labor system (mita) that was used in Spanish America, at the silver mine at Potosi. and the second book is about the silver mine in Potosi and how they worked and the problems that they faced that lead from the mita being introduced to the reforms that were made,
"It's not always about you!!!" (But if you think I'm referring to you anyway, then I probably am.)
"Good luck returning my ass!" - Wilhemina Slater
"This is my breakfast, lunch and f***ing dinner right here. I'm not even f***in' joking." - Colin Farrell