29,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Serie: Peoples of America
- Sprache: Englisch
The Incas is a captivating exploration of one of the greatest civilizations ever seen. Seamlessly drawing on history, archaeology, and ethnography, this thoroughly updated new edition integrates advances made in hundreds of new studies conducted over the last decade.
• Written by one of the world’s leading experts on Inca civilization
• Covers Inca history, politics, economy, ideology, society, and military organization
• Explores advances in research that include pre-imperial Inca society; the royal capital of Cuzco; the sacred landscape; royal estates; Machu Picchu; provincial relations; the khipu information-recording technology; languages, time frames, gender relations, effects on human biology, and daily life
• Explicitly examines how the Inca world view and philosophy affected the character of the empire
• Illustrated with over 90 maps, figures, and photographs
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 1004
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2014
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
The Peoples of America
Title Page
Copyright
Dedication
Preface to the Second Edition
Preface to the First Edition
Chapter One: Introduction
Investigating Empires
4
Studying the Incas
The Written Sources
Inca Archaeology
Notes
Chapter Two: The Land and Its People
The Natural Setting
Traditional Land Use Today
Human Physiology in the Andean Environment
Predecessors
Languages
Time Frames
Notes
Chapter Three: The Incas before the Empire
Setting the Stage
The Archaeological Picture
A Sketch of Pre-Imperial Inca Society
Notes
Chapter Four: The History of the Empire: Narrative Visions
Expansionist Designs and the Crisis in Cuzco
The Major Expansions: Pachakuti and Thupa Inka Yupanki
Consolidation of the Empire: Wayna Qhapaq
Dynastic War: Waskhar and Atawallpa
Explaining the Inca Expansion
Notes
Chapter Five: Thinking Inca
Part I: Framing the Questions
Part II: Existence
Part III: Numerical Thinking (Not Just Accounting or Arithmetic)
Conclusions
Notes
Chapter Six: The Politics of Blood in Cuzco
Tawantinsuyu: The Four Parts Together
Cuzco's Political Organization
Royal Alliances: Political Marriages and the Power of the Queen
Succession Crises and the Shaping of Political History
Note
Chapter Seven: The Heartland of the Empire
The Setting and Urban Plan
Royal and Aristocratic Estates
Summary
Notes
Chapter Eight: Inca Ideology: Powers of the Sky and Earth, Past and Present
Origins of the Cosmos and Humanity
The Inca Pantheon
Calendrics and Astronomical Observations
A Native View from the Provinces
Concluding Comments
Notes
Chapter Nine: Family, Community, and Class
The Elites
Peasant Communities
The Stages of Life
Making a Living in the Highlands
On the Coast
Notes
Chapter Ten: Militarism
Military Strategy
Fortifications and Garrisons
Military Organization
Scale of the Armies
Recruitment of Personnel
Ritual and Ideology
The Army on Campaign
Battle Tactics and Weaponry
Triumphs and Rewards
Summary
Notes
Chapter Eleven: Provincial Rule
The Administrative System
Establishing and Maintaining Social Order
The Infrastructure: Provincial Installations
The Road System
Resettlement
The Varieties of Provincial Rule
Frontier Relations
Notes
Chapter Twelve: Farmers, Herders, and Storehouses
Labor Service
Farms of the State and the Sun
Ceremonial and Agricultural Cycles
Landed Estates and Grants
The Flocks of the Inca
State Storage
Trickle-down Effects on Households
Notes
Chapter Thirteen: Things and Their Masters
Production for the Incas
Textiles
Stone
Metallurgy
Ceramics
Other Things
Notes
Chapter Fourteen: Invasion and Aftermath
One Account of the Events
Another Account
A Deity in Captivity
On to Cuzco
Cuzco under Co-rule
An Empire Condensed
The Imposition of Spanish Rule
The Inca Reborn
The Inca Legacy
Notes
References
Glossary of Foreign Terms
Index
End User License Agreement
Pages
ix
x
xi
xii
xiii
xv
xvi
xvii
1
2
3
5
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
195
194
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
Guide
Table of Contents
List of Illustrations
Figure 1.1
Figure 1.1
Figure 1.2
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.3
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.3
Figure 2.4
Figure 2.4
Figure 2.5
Figure 2.6
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.2
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.2
Figure 5.3
Figure 6.1
Figure 6.2
Figure 6.3
Figure 6.4
Figure 7.1
Figure 7.1
Figure 7.2
Figure 7.2
Figure 7.3
Figure 7.4
Figure 7.5
Figure 7.3
Figure 7.4
Figure 7.6
Figure 7.5
Figure 7.7
Figure 7.8
Figure 7.9
Figure 7.10
Figure 7.11
Figure 7.12
Figure 7.13
Figure 7.14
Figure 7.15
Figure 7.16
Figure 8.1
Figure 8.2
Figure 8.3
Figure 8.1
Figure 8.2
Figure 8.4
Figure 8.5
Figure 8.3
Figure 9.1
Figure 9.2
Figure 9.3
Figure 10.1
Figure 10.1
Figure 10.2
Figure 10.2
Figure 11.1
Figure 11.2
Figure 11.1
Figure 11.2
Figure 11.3
Figure 11.4
Figure 11.5
Figure 11.3
Figure 11.4
Figure 11.5
Figure 11.6
Figure 11.7
Figure 12.1
Figure 12.1
Figure 12.2
Figure 12.2
Figure 13.1
Figure 13.2
Figure 13.3
Figure 13.4
Figure 13.5
Figure 13.1
Figure 13.6
Figure 13.2
Figure 14.1
Figure 14.2
Figure 14.3
Figure 14.1
Figure 14.2
Figure 14.4
Figure 14.3
Figure 14.4
List of Tables
Table 1.1
Table 3.1
Table 3.2
Table 6.1
Table 6.2
Table 7.1
Table 8.1
Table 8.2
Table 8.3
Table 9.1
Table 11.1
Table 12.1
The Peoples of America
General Editors: Alan Kolata and Dean Snow
This series is about the native peoples and civilizations of the Americas, from their origins in ancient times to the present day. Drawing on archaeological, historical, and anthropological evidence, each volume presents a fresh and absorbing account of a group's culture, society, and history.
Accessible and scholarly, and well illustrated with maps and photographs, the volumes of The Peoples of America will together provide a comprehensive and vivid picture of the character and variety of the societies of the American past.
Already published:
The Tiwanaku: A Portrait of an Andean Civilization
Alan Kolata
The Timucua
Jerald T. Milanich
The Aztecs, Third Edition
Michael E. Smith
The Cheyenne
John Moore
The Iroquois
Dean Snow
The Moche
Garth Bowden
The Nasca
Helaine Silverman and Donald A. Proulx
The Incas, Second Edition
Terence N. D'Altroy
The Sioux
Guy Gibbon
Mixtecs, Zapotecs and Chations: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico
Arthur A. Joyce
The Incas
Second Edition
Terence N. D’Altroy
This second edition first published 2015
© 2015 Terence N. D'Altroy
Edition History: Blackwell Publishing Ltd (1e, 2002)
Registered Office
John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK
Editorial Offices
350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148– 5020, USA
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK
The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK
For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services, and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell.
The right of Terence N. D'Altroy to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.
Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services and neither the publisher nor the author shall be liable for damages arising herefrom. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
D'Altroy, Terence N.
The Incas / Terence N. D'Altroy.— Second edition.
pages cm
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-4443-3115-8 (pbk.)
1. Incas— History. 2. Incas— Social life and customs. I. Title.
F3429.D35 2014
985′.019— dc23
2013047979
Paperback 9781444331158
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Cover image: Photo of Machu Picchu \copyright Terence N. D'Altroy.
Cover design by Nicki Averill
To Mateo, Nicole, and Mariela, with all my love and thanks for the patience
Preface to the Second Edition
A second edition—why bother? Anyone who has seen books go through multiple editions has good reason to raise an eyebrow when a new one appears, so the reader may feel that some justification is in order. I can distill out my rationale for writing this book to three major points. The first is that we know far more about the Incas today than we did a dozen years ago when I was finishing the first edition. Both the documentary and archaeological databases that inform our understanding have grown significantly. On the written side, no great new chronicles have appeared, but archival work by historians has brought many important new documents to light. Archaeologists have also been vigorously conducting field studies throughout the entire Inca domain, sometimes at elevations that defy human existence. Work by scholars in the Cuzco heartland has been especially valuable, because it has vastly enriched our discussions of the Incas' rise to local power, and thus the origins of the empire itself. Scores of projects in the provinces are also enlightening us as to how the Incas put their rule into practice and how their subjects reacted in the face of Cuzco's imposed dominion. Overall, hundreds of new studies have been conducted or published in the last decade, more than enough to draw from to update our account of the Inca realm.
A second reason for a revised edition is that researchers today are asking different kinds of questions, and are using new methods to answer them, which is a sign of a vibrant research community. In the process, they often turn a critical eye to ideas that were broadly accepted in the past. They can also draw on theoretical premises that challenge our understanding of the nature of humanity, its self-perception or self-presentation, and the past. Some of the new answers are forcing us to revisit issues about the Incas' own notions about existence, time, causality, and power. They also invite us to rethink the relationships between the information contained in written sources or archaeological remains, or that never took a substantial material form (speech, for example). In the process, Andean research has increasingly become a laboratory for thinking about humanity's past in general.
In thinking about such topics, I have become increasingly convinced that the available documents and material remains do not provide two windows into precisely the same kinds of knowledge. Instead, they are partial complements, affording overlapping insights into different parts of the Inca world. That idea, which will pop up at various places in this book, leads us to ask questions about how the Incas classified things in their world and how they thought those things interacted. To provide one example, we know that the Incas apparently made almost no physical representations of their rulers or their actions that we can recognize today. They created no statues of them, no grand friezes, murals, or portraits, except for some illustrations sequestered in the main temple in Cuzco. Why not? Was there something about rendering things human in a material form that was dangerous, blasphemous, or even impossible? We know that many other pre-modern societies mastered representation of humans and their endeavors, including some Andean predecessors, such as the Moche. So why not the Incas?
Third, my own interests in the Incas have shifted over time. Most importantly, I have become drawn to the intellectual history that paralleled the physical and organizational projects that created the empire. As we will see in the text to follow, prehispanic Andean societies enjoyed a vibrant intellectual life, including the invention of an array of philosophical notions justifying the Incas' right to rule. It is a tremendous challenge to identify and make sense of those ideas, but if we can make some headway, we will be in a better position to understand how the Incas saw the world and what options lay before them during their run of power.
A note is also in order on a few of the sources cited in this edition of the book. Since the first version appeared, several important early texts have appeared in reliable English translation. The most significant are Sarmiento's (2007) chronicle of 1572, which was an official version of Inca history written for Viceroy Toledo to meet crown interests, and the hospice priest Molina's (2011) exposition on Inca religion. Another key document is the treatise of the neo-Inca ruler, Titu Kusi Yupanki (Titu Cusi 2005), presented to the same viceroy in 1570. That document was intended as an Inca counter-chronicle of the Colonial era, written in the hopes of legitimizing Inca rule and thus allowing the kings to retain status and resources as co-equals with the Spanish crown. I have chosen to cite those publications where possible in preference to the best regarded Spanish texts, because this book has been written for an English-speaking audience.
I warn readers away from some other translations, notably the appallingly inexact works of Sir Clements Markham, which are still reprinted or cited today. Readers of von Hagen and de Onis's edited translation of Cieza's work (Cieza 1959) also need to be aware that the translation, while rendered reliably, conflates two separate books into one running text without systematic acknowledgment of the sources of the passages. For the quotations in the present book in which another translator is not explicitly cited, the translation is mine. Readers may also note that the names of the some of the early Spanish authors have been updated to conform to current understandings of their names. For example, Betanzos is now cited as Diez de Betanzos, Sancho de la Hoz is Sancho, and Polo de Ondegardo is now Polo Ondegardo (see Pillsbury 2008).
It is also worth emphasizing that the other sources cited in this text are largely in English, not because they are the most important available, but because I anticipate that many people reading the book will not be conversant in Spanish and other languages. The writings and insights of Spanish-language authors have been especially valuable to my own understanding, but my goal in the References is primarily to cite works that would be accessible to English-only readers, while giving proper credit to the sources of ideas and information. I have drawn on several times as many works as are listed in the current References in preparing the text, and will cite literature weighted toward the appropriate language in any future translation.
For this edition, I also draw more extensively from the often brilliant studies by modern ethnographers who have been working among both Quechua and Aymara speakers. In the first edition, I resisted using much ethnography for reasons that seem a little less persuasive to me now. One concern was that any discussion of today's Andean peoples treats societies that have been tinged by half a millennium of Christian and Spanish cultural influences, not to mention modern transportation and communication technologies. No matter how deep the traditions, modern peasant communities are in many ways a world apart from their ancestral kin. Recognizing the elements that provide sound insights into prehispanic societies is therefore fraught with all sorts of problems. Not least of those is any researcher's (perhaps unconscious) bias in the choice of the features that can be used as trustworthy analogies for pre-European social order, belief, and practice. It is sometimes easy to decide that an anomalous feature seen in today's communities has to be a post-contact introduction because of an idealized, relatively static notion we often have of life in the past or because of a particular stance we want to defend.
The converse, of course, is assuming that something described in the early Colonial era was not a new introduction. The practices of people forming social groups around an occupation, for example, or bartering or using money, or constantly re-sorting membership in kin groups or the hierarchies among them, or strategically moving about the social landscape and declaring a new history to justify it, are well represented in modern traditional communities. In contrast, they only occasionally figure in discussions of prehistory. A second reason for de-emphasizing studies of societies more than a few decades removed from independent Andean life is the sheer weight of the history and ethnography that has been produced. Its comprehensive inclusion in this work would make it unmanageable for my purposes. That said, so many kinds of insights can be found into prehistory from contemporary peoples that I thought it wise to expand judiciously on my use of ethnography in this edition. My apologies to those for whom this has just made the text a little more unwieldy.
I would like to repeat my thanks to the vast number of people whose hard work and generosity has made this book possible. Among them are many who I recognized in the first edition (see below), and who continued to provide comments, publications, and insight. It is hard to single out particular scholars whose work has made a major difference in my own thinking, but Gary Urton's and Frank Salomon's studies of the khipu knot-records have been a revelation; their work, of course, has been complemented by that of many other scholars. Similarly, the surveys and extensive publications by Brian Bauer, Alan Covey, Steven Kosiba, and others have rewritten the history of the heartland. The work of Peruvian scholars specializing in the archaeology of the Cuzco region has been vital to my understanding; among them are Arminda Gibaja, the late Alfredo Valencia Zegarra, and Ernesto García Calderón.
Other colleagues who helped me with friendship, guidance, and access to unpublished information include Carlo Socuayala Dávila, Joanne Pillsbury, and Gordon McEwan. Kenneth Wright provided access to his work on Inca hydraulic engineering; he also provided a walk-through of the waterworks at Saqsawaman. Chris Small and Yuri Gorokovich provided insights into the physical landscape during a shared trip through the heartland. Gary Urton, Darryl Wilkinson, Kevin Lane, Steven Kosiba, Kathryn Burns, and several anonymous reviewers have read sections of the text, offering advice that has improved it. Rodolfo Cerrón-Palomino graciously clarified a range of issues on Andean languages. Brian Bauer, Alejandro Beltrán-Caballero, David Beresford-Jones, Larry Coben, Kevin Floerke, Chad Gifford, Donato Amado Gonzales, Paul Heggarty, Vincent Lee, Ricardo Mar, John Reinhard, Vicente Revilla, Stuart and Sandy Schueler, Alexei Vranich, Darryl Wilkinson, the American Museum of Natural History, and Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection have made graphics available, which I much appreciate. I would also like to express a heartfelt word of gratitude to the delightful people who brought us electronic journals on line. My life has been much easier for it and this work much better informed as a result.
A special thanks goes to the people at Wiley-Blackwell, who solicited this edition of the book and then patiently encouraged me during its glacial emergence: Rosalie Robertson, Julia Kirk, Mark Graney, and Ben Thatcher. Most particularly, I would like to thank Annie Jackson for her close attention to detail, professionalism, and good cheer during the compacted copy-editing process. As always, the contributors are many, and the errors are mine (as much as I might wish it otherwise).
Preface to the First Edition
The Inca empire, called Tawantinsuyu (“The Four Parts Together”), was the grandest civilization ever created in the Andes and perhaps in the entire prehispanic Americas. Spanning over 4,000 km of western South America and encompassing more than ten million inhabitants, Tawantinsuyu was a century-long latecomer to Andean civilization, built on more than three millennia of complex societies. It was a land in which the lines were blurred between the past and the present, and between the quick and the dead, where living and mummified rulers vied for authority with one another and with the deities of the landscape and the cosmos. Inca power, as with so many of their predecessors, arose from a blend of genealogy, myth, mutual obligation, and coercion, all legitimized by a cultural vision that was constantly being reinvented, even after the empire had collapsed.
For all practical purposes, resistance by subject groups within the known world had been quashed, yet this most powerful of Andean societies fell to a relatively small brigade of Spanish invaders in 1532–3. How could that have happened? The Europeans certainly had some technological advantages in horses and armaments, but those alone were insufficient to account for the empire's demise. Instead, we need to look for Tawantinsuyu's fragility in its internal makeup, its political history, and the rifts that existed among its royalty and extraordinarily diverse peoples. This book is an exploration of that society, its history, strengths, and divisions, drawn from both historical and archaeological sources compiled over hundreds of years by eyewitnesses, travelers, and scholars.
I was drawn into research on the Incas almost against my will. Having spent a number of years doing archaeology on simpler societies in the United States, Mexico, and Peru, I was not ready to take up study of such a vast empire, especially one that hundreds of scholars had already been studying for well over a century. Even more daunting was the fact that overviews of the Incas and interpretation of particular archaeological remains were based on a large corpus of historical documents, many of them written in sixteenth-century Spanish peppered with Quechua, the native language of the Incas. I was well versed in anthropological archaeology, but not documentary analysis. When I set out to do fieldwork for my doctoral dissertation, I had intended to study the societies of central Peru in the epoch just before the advent of Inca rule, but my doctoral adviser gently pushed me forward in time, largely because we didn't understand the late pre-Inca chronology very well.
My background meant that I came into the field with a different perspective than that which prevailed in Inca studies, but it also meant that I had an enormous amount of catching up to do and came to rely on the goodwill and support of scores of friends and colleagues. I therefore owe an enormous debt of gratitude to the people who assisted by providing information, reading drafts, and preparing illustrations. Although it would be convenient to blame them for the mistakes that are found here, they probably would not let me get away with it. Brian Bauer has been a great help in a variety of ways. He read the entire manuscript and provided a number of the photos and other illustrations found here. His trenchant comments helped me recognize both the wheat and the chaff and persuaded me to remove most of the latter. Elena Phipps, Luis Jaime Castillo, and Tim Earle read sections of the book and convinced me to set aside as many of the professional debates as I could bear to part with. Special mention must go to the late John Hyslop, who was the first scholar to produce comprehensive archaeological overviews of Inca settlements and the road system, based on fieldwork throughout the empire. John first drew my attention to the southern part of the empire and generously shared his information and ideas with me, as he did with all of his colleagues. Similarly, Craig Morris has been more than gracious in sharing ideas and information, and access to the resources of the American Museum of Natural History. My discussions with Ana María Lorandi pointed me in directions with the historical literature and Andean societies that I would never have considered otherwise. Ramiro Matos and Jeff Parsons also deserve particular thanks for having introduced me to the archaeology of the Andes and for having shared their unpublished data on central Peru.
Many people generously provided information, unpublished manuscripts, references, and publications. Among them are Félix Acuto, Juan Albarracín-Jordan, Sonia Alconini, Roberto Bárcena, Monica Barnes, Brian Bauer, Robert Bradley, M. Constanza Ceruti, Ricardo Céspedes Paz, Antonio Coello, Miguel Cornejo, Beatriz Cremonte, Pío Pablo Díaz, Ian Farrington, Antonio Fresco, Alberto Rex González, Pedro Guibovich, Andrés Gyarmati, Frances Hayashida, Lee Hollowell, Flor de María Huaycochea, Jaime Idrovo, Catherine Julien, Ann Kendall, Miguel León, Ana María Lorandi, Albert Meyers, Eleanora Mulvany de Peñaloza, Patricia Netherly, Axel Nielsen, Susan Ramírez, Glenn Russell, Dan Sandweiss, Juan Schobinger, Katharina Schreiber, Izumi Shimada, Chip Stanish, Rubén Stehberg, Steve Tomka, Debbie Truhan, and Verónica Williams. Christine Flaherty and Sumru Aricanli both assisted with the illustrations, Christine by preparing many of the maps and Sumru by facilitating access to the wonderful collection of images at the American Museum of Natural History. Scott Kremkau helped with a close reading of the text for citations. Thanks also go to the various sources of funding that have supported my research in the upper Mantaro valley, Peru, and the Calchaquí valley, Argentina, where I have studied the effects of Inca rule on provincial societies for more than twenty years. Those sources include the National Science Foundation, Columbia University, UCLA, the UCLA Friends of Archaeology, and the H. John Heinz III Charitable Trust. I would also like to extend a special thanks to Ken Provencher of Blackwell, who showed enormous patience and support in seeing this manuscript through a prolonged period of writing and editing. In addition, I am most grateful to Margaret Aherne, who paid close editorial attention to the text and lent wise counsel in bringing the book to its final form.
Finally, I owe a special debt to my family, first to my parents for exciting my initial interest in archaeology through trips to the Egyptian wing of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. And most of all to my wife and daughter, who put up with me patiently while I finished this book.
Chapter OneIntroduction
On Friday, November 15, 1532, Francisco Pizarro brazenly led a force of 168 frightened Spaniards into the maw of the most powerful empire ever seen in the Americas. Late that afternoon, the brigade entered the plaza at Cajamarca, an imperial Inca center in the Peruvian highlands. They had every reason to be dismayed by the sight that lay before them, since the Inca prince Atawallpa was savoring his recent victory in a dynastic war in the midst of an 80,000-man army camped just outside town. Because he was completing a fast at the hot springs of Kónoj, Atawallpa declined an invitation to disrupt his solemn duties. He would not meet his unwanted guests in the city that afternoon, but agreed to receive them after a night's rest. Astonishingly, he was Pizarro's prisoner by the next evening, captured during a surprise strike that was underpinned by equal parts of bravado, armaments, and faith.
Over the next eight months, the Spaniards extracted a ransom fit for an earthly deity in exchange for a promise of Atawallpa's freedom. An enormous amount of treasure was melted down from the empire's architectural dressings, personal jewelry, idols, and service ware hauled off from temples, aristocratic households, and perhaps even graves. By today's standards, the value would have been an astonishing US$335 million in gold and US$11 million in silver.1 Once the ransom had been paid, Pizarro ordered Atawallpa to be tried and then executed on July 26, 1533, overriding the grave misgivings voiced by some members of his party. The power that the Inca had wielded over his vast domain even while captive had apparently convinced the Spaniard that decapitating the state was his best hope of staying alive and asserting his own control. In light of the divisions that had already riven the empire, his decision touched off the collapse of Tawantinsuyu, or “The Four Parts Together,” as the Incas called their realm.
Fittingly, the Incas already had a word for such a cataclysmic change. They called it a pachakuti, a “turning over/around of time/space”—a moment when history ended and then began again. In their eyes, it was not the first time that the world had been destroyed, nor might it be the last. The mestizo chronicler Guaman Poma (1980) explained that all of creation had been wiped out four times in the ancient past, each time after a cycle of a thousand years (Urton 1999: 41). The first age was a time of darkness when the world was inhabited by a race of wild men. In each successive epoch, humans progressed, as they learned to farm, to make crafts, and to organize themselves for war and peace. The fifth “sun” was the age of the Incas. In their self-promoted vision, it was a glorious era during which they brought civilization and enlightened rule to a chaotic world. And under the circumstances, it was only right that the man who had created the empire took Pachakuti as his title. After all, he was the son of the Sun, a living divinity who remade the world.
Less than a century after Pachakuti died and ascended to join his celestial father, Atawallpa's forces closed the war with his half-brother Waskhar. According to one native account, his generals declared that it was time for another pachakuti (Callapiña et al. 1974). To help move the process along, they massacred Waskhar's extensive family and several other royal kin groups who had cast their lot with him. They also killed all the historians they could find and destroyed the knot-records called khipu (see chapter 5) on which history was recorded, so that the era could begin unburdened by its past. But before he could properly launch the new epoch, Atawallpa fell into Spanish hands and a century of rule by gods on earth came to an end.
The Spanish encounter with the Incas, despite its impact, was not a complete surprise to either people. In 1519, Hernán Cortés had overthrown the Aztec empire of central Mexico through a similar attack on the ruler with the aid of allies made in the new land. The descriptions of Mexico's cities and riches that made their way back to Spain fired enthusiasm for more adventures in the Indies. Many of the men who accompanied Pizarro to the Andes had already seen action in Central America and the Caribbean, while others had just come over to seek their fortunes. Pizarro himself had been in the Americas for thirty years and was hungry to make his mark in an uncharted land called Pirú. In the 1520s, a few Spaniards or Portuguese had actually penetrated the Inca domain, but left no significant impression on the Andes or reported back to the Europeans. A tangible glimmer of what the Spaniards were to find reached them in 1527, when an expedition captured a boat off Ecuador filled with cloth, metal ornaments, and other riches. Even so, they were not prepared for the grandeur of Peru.
In 1532, Tawantinsuyu was the largest polity the native Americas had ever seen (figure 1.1). Its ruler was a hereditary king who the Incas claimed had descended in an unbroken string from a creation separate from the rest of humanity. Though a powerful monarch, the Sapa Inca (“Unique Lord”) did not rule alone. He was counseled by mummies of his immortal ancestors and their other descendants, who all joined him in Cuzco's most solemn ceremonies and drunken revelry. Totally unpersuaded by the Incas' assertions of divinity and appalled at their heresies, the Spaniards were still dazzled by the dynasty's riches and achievements. The early writers often drew on familiar referents to convey images of the realm for their countrymen, but some practices defied a search for analogy. Pedro Sancho and Pedro Pizarro, both members of the original expedition, have left us some impressions of the capital (plate 1.1):
There is a very beautiful fortress of earth and stone with big windows that look over the city [of Cuzco] and make it appear more beautiful…[The stones] are as big as pieces of mountains or crags…The Spaniards who see them say that neither the bridge of Segovia nor other constructions of Hercules or the Romans are as magnificent as this. (Sancho 1917: 193–4)
Most of the people [of Cuzco] served the dead, I have heard it said, who they daily brought out to the main square, setting them down in a ring, each one according to his age, and there the male and female attendants ate and drank. The attendants made fires for each of the dead in front of them…and lighting [them], burned everything they had put before them, so that the dead should eat of everything that the living ate. (P. Pizarro 1986: 89–90)
Everywhere they traveled, the invaders saw the imperial imprint, whether it was in Cuzco's spare but grand architecture, the roads that traversed 40,000 km of rugged terrain, thousands of provincial installations, stocks of every supply imaginable, works of artistry in precious metal, stone, and cloth, or the government designed to manage the whole affair. About twenty years after the conquest, the soldier Pedro Cieza de León (1967: 213–14; translation from Hyslop 1984: 343) expressed his admiration for the empire's order:
In human memory, I believe that there is no account of a road as great as this, running through deep valleys, high mountains, banks of snow, torrents of water, living rock, and wild rivers…In all places it was clean and swept free of refuse, with lodgings, storehouses, Sun temples, and posts along the route. Oh! Can anything similar be claimed for Alexander or any of the powerful kings who ruled the world?
The Incas' feats seemed all the more fabulous when the conquistadores heard that the realm was only about four generations old. As the Incas explained it, the empire was launched when Pachakuti usurped the throne from his father Wiraqocha Inka and began to annex the peoples around Cuzco. His successes and organizational genius were followed only by those of his son Thupa Inka Yupanki and grandson Wayna Qhapaq, and then by the final dynastic war (table 1.1).
Table 1.1 The conventional Inca king list.
Name as ruler
Gloss
Given name
1
Manqo Qhapaq
Powerful [Ancestor]
–
2
Zinchi Roq'a
Warlord Roq'a
–
3
Lloq'e Yupanki
Honored Left-handed
–
4
Mayta Qhapaq
Royal Mayta
–
5
Qhapaq Yupanki
Powerful Honored
–
6
Inka Roq'a
Inka Roq'a
–
7
Yawar Waqaq
He Who Cries Bloody Tears
Inka Yupanki, Mayta Yupanki
8
Wiraqocha Inka
Creator God Inca
Hatun Thupa Inka
9
Pachakuti Inka Yupanki
Cataclysm Honored Inca
Inka Yupanki, Kusi Yupanki
10
Thupa Inka Yupanki
Royal Honored Inca
–
11
Wayna Qhapaq
Powerful Youth
Titu Kusi Wallpa
12
Waskhar Inka
Golden Chain Ruler
Thupa Kusi Wallpa
13
Atawallpa
–
–
Figure 1.1 The Inca road and provincial installation (tampu) system, after Hyslop (1984): frontispiece; the four parts of the Inca realm are shown in the inset map.
Plate 1.1The Saqsawaman complex, on a rocky promontory above Cuzco.
For their part, the Incas were taken aback by the Spanish invasion, although they would later recount legends that had predicted the return of white, bearded strangers from the sea. Even so, their initial response was less one of awe than of anger and disbelief at the invaders' arrogance. Who were these men who dared to kill the Sapa Inca's subjects and seize the holy women for their carnal pleasures? Rather than wipe them out directly as they so richly deserved, the Incas let their curiosity get the better of them and allowed the interlopers to ascend the Andes to be examined first-hand. To Atawallpa's fatal regret, the Spanish incursion could not have been more propitiously timed. The prince, contemplating his recent victory and anticipating reunification of the empire, seemingly had nothing to fear from a small band of foreigners, as outrageous as their conduct may have been. He couldn't have been more wrong.
My goal in this book is to describe the Incas, their emergence as rulers of an empire, and the nature of their domain. That sounds straightforward enough, but the Incas have proved to be remarkably malleable in the hands of historians and archaeologists. Let a social theorist or two get involved and things become even more baffling. Depending on the author, Tawantinsuyu has been held up as an exemplar of almost every form of political society except representative democracy. The Inca Garcilaso de la Vega (1966), son of an Inca princess, immortalized Tawantinsuyu in 1609 as a supremely well-run, homogeneous monarchy ruled by an omnipotent and benevolent king. Although he was writing to exalt the glories of his ancestors to a Spanish audience, Garcilaso's vision is still popular today. His efforts aside, other commentators have seen the realm in radically different lights—as a type of primitive communism, a feudal society, a despotic Asiatic state, and a territorial empire. Some modern scholars even doubt that an empire existed and instead see a patchwork of ethnic groups that were never truly unified.
How could one polity inspire such contradictory views? Part of the answer lies in the fact that no one who grew up in an independent Tawantinsuyu ever wrote about it.2 Although they had the tools to record information precisely, the Incas had no writing system that we have been able to recognize and decipher. Instead, history was kept as oral tradition, supplemented by mnemonic registers. In Cuzco, poet-historians called amauta3 and knot-record masters called khipu kamayuq (figure 1.2) recited sagas of the royal past at the bidding of the court. The khipu themselves seem to have encoded information about the past in ways that had as much to do with cultural visions of hierarchy, power, and space as with sequences of events. Aristocrats also memorized epic poems, some of which they recited to the Spaniards. Not surprisingly, the descendants of different rulers called up versions of the past that favored their own ancestors, while public recitations by the amauta were tailored to please the audience (Rostworowski 1999: vii–ix). Cieza (1967: 32) explained things this way:
and if among the kings one turned out indolent, a coward, given to vices and a homebody without enlarging the domain of his empire, it was ordered that of such [kings] there be little remembrance or almost none at all; and they attended to this so closely that if one [king] was found [in the histories] it was so as not to forget his name and the succession; but in the rest they remained silent, without singing the songs [as they did] of the others who were good and valiant.
Early Spanish writers thus had to choose among a variety of stories in composing their chronicles. Many resolved the problem by favoring information provided by their oldest and most aristocratic witnesses and by dismissing reports by common Indians. Those circumstances mean that the documentary history of the Incas has been filtered through competing native views, translators, scribes, conflicting mores, and differing notions of the nature of the past. Conversion of Andean narratives into a European-style history is therefore an uncertain task; similar obstacles face us when we try to understand Andean social order, economics, or world views. Fortunately, archaeological research into the Incas has been active in recent years, along with art historical studies, so that the material residues of Tawantinsuyu and documentary accounts written down after its demise can be viewed as complementary sources of information in ways that were thought impossible a short time back. Even so, we still have less direct information to work with than do scholars who have studied many of the great empires of the Old World. In this introduction, then, I would like to sketch out how we can come to an understanding of the Incas, beginning by outlining how scholars have thought about empires and then by describing the information that we have for the Incas themselves.
Figure 1.2Khipu kamayuq with his khipu, yupana (counting tray, see pp. 160–1) in lower left corner; Guaman Poma's (1936) chronicle.
Investigating Empires4
Empires like Tawantinsuyu were the largest and most heterogeneous of the pre-modern societies, which makes studying them confoundedly difficult. By the term empire, I am referring to an extensive polity—often containing millions of subjects and covering hundreds of thousands of square kilometers—in which a core polity gains control over a range of other societies. The dominion may be political, military, or economic, and it may be remote or immediate, but the essence of an empire is that the core society is able to assert its will over the other peoples brought under its aegis. In the pre-industrial world, only a relative handful of such polities can be named. In the Old World, the Qin and Han Chinese and their successors, Middle and New Kingdom Egypt, the Macedonians maybe, the Assyrians, Neo-Assyrians, Romans, Parthians, Sassanians, Persians, Mongols, Mughals, Mauryas, and Vijayanagara, among others, can fairly be considered to have been empires. In the Americas, the Aztecs, Tarascans, Incas, and Wari qualify, although scholars occasionally dispute the status of each of them. The scale and diversity of those polities make their analysis an enormous challenge. Anyone studying the Romans, for example, might have to consider evidence drawn from more than forty modern countries, written in dozens of archaic, medieval, and modern languages. Even the Inca empire took in lands that now fall within six countries, whose native inhabitants spoke scores of languages.
Scholars have devised several ways to reduce this kind of research to manageable concepts that foster informed comparison (Sinopoli 1994; Alcock et al. 2001). Over the last few decades, the most widely used approach in anthropology and history divides empires into their core and periphery. The core is envisioned as the political, economic, and cultural heartland of the empire, while the periphery consists of the societies that are ruled and exploited by the core. Frequently, the relationship between the core and the periphery has been seen in terms of both power and space. The societies of a centrally located core were visualized as having been more complex politically and economically and more sophisticated culturally than the often barbaric peripheral societies. As the power of one core waned, it would be replaced by another center, often at the margins of the previous heartland. This view owed much to the nature and histories of the Roman and Chinese empires, in which heartland areas were periodically beset by troublesome borderlands peoples (e.g., Lattimore 1988).
As historians became more discerning in their analysis of empires as complex systems, they focused less on the layout of empires and more on the relations of inequality between the heartland and surrounding areas. Immanuel Wallerstein's (1974) world-systems model has been widely applied to early empires, even though the scholars who use his concepts often think that he downplayed the complexities of pre-modern empires. Wallerstein observed that macro-regions are often organized by economic relations that exceed political boundaries. Labor organization, resource extraction, accrual of wealth, and market relations, for example, result from relationships that integrate vast areas and, frequently, many politically independent states and even continents. Archaeologists have adapted this general idea to study relations between the heartlands of ancient states and neighboring regions (e.g., Chase-Dunn and Hall 1991; Algaze 2005).
An alternative conception focuses on strategies of imperial rule according to their intensity and mix of different kinds of power. The sociologist Michael Mann has proposed an influential model, in which he views an empire as being constituted by “multiple overlapping and intersecting sociospatial networks” of military, economic, political, and ideological power (Mann 1986: 1). Alternatively, strategies of rule have been portrayed as lying along a continuum from low to high intensity (Luttwak 1976; Hassig 1985: 100–1; D'Altroy 1992: 18–24). At the low end of the continuum is a hegemonic strategy, which produces a fairly loose, indirect kind of imperial rule. A hegemonic polity is built by a core state society that comes to dominate a series of client polities through diplomacy or conquest. An overriding goal of a hegemonic approach is to keep the costs of rule low. The downside is that a low investment in administration and physical facilities is offset by a relatively low extraction of resources and by limited control over subject peoples. The Aztecs provide a classic case of this kind of empire (Hassig 1985; Smith 2012).
At the other end of the continuum is a territorial strategy, which is an intense, direct kind of rule. That approach to governance is costly, since it requires a heavy investment in administration, security against external threats, and the physical infrastructure of imperial rule, such as roads, provincial centers, and frontier defense. The costs may be necessary to ensure the empire's continued existence, however, or to satisfy the demands of the upper classes. Rome of the first century ad and the Han Chinese provide good examples of territorial empires. Those two poles grade into each other, of course, and may be applied selectively in different regions or at different times as the situation warrants. Numerous factors may contribute to a particular choice of strategy: the organizations of the central polity and its various subject societies, historical relations between the central society and subjects, political negotiation, the distribution of resources, transport technology, and the goals of the imperial leadership.
A widely cited political science approach, described initially by Doyle (1986), organizes theories of empire into three categories, based on where the stimulus for development arose and on the motivations driving the core polity. The first of those categories, called metrocentric theories, argues that the central polities were driven by their own economic, military, or political interests in self-aggrandizement. As applied to pre-modern empires, the Romans of the Republican era (Harris 1979) and the Aztecs of central Mexico would stand out. In pericentric theories, the expansion of the core polity is catalyzed by the difficulties of maintaining stable relationships with surrounding societies. From this perspective, imperial expansion can be seen as a defensive effort to protect the core. The Roman annexation of Greece through transformation of client polities into provinces can be cited as an example here. The last kind of model, the systemic, tends to be focused on more modern cases. It suggests that great powers engage in imperial ventures in an effort to dominate and contain their rivals. Interventions by European powers through their colonialist ventures during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries are often seen in this light.
Recent network modeling builds more formally and quantitatively on some of the same ideas that fueled Mann's (1986) sociological approach. Network theorists argue that imperial relationships may be arrayed generally along economic, political, social, military, or ideological lines, or may be structured more narrowly around technologies like transport and communication (e.g., Smith 2005; Glatz 2009; Brughmans 2013). The approach emphasizes that such relationships were never static. They changed constantly, targeting links between key people or places, and leaping over intermediary spaces or societies, as conditions demanded. In this light, treating polities as neatly bounded territories misleads us as to how they actually worked. Even in the most intensively occupied lands, the hand of rule could be applied unevenly. The flows of ideas, people, and materials moved in both directions, from the central powers to subjects and back.
If we take the Inca case, the location of any place looks different in relation to Cuzco if we analyze relationships along the system of roads and provincial facilities or as spaces falling within geographic expanses (Jenkins 2001). Similarly, lines of communication (e.g., for military needs) may have been built on differing networks than lines along which valuable commodities flowed or foodstuffs were supplied locally. Moreover, the hundreds of radial arrays of sacred places on the landscape that lay at the heart of Andean societies' self-images may have had essentially nothing to do with imperial political networks or the movement of commodities. John Hyslop (1984) made this point explicit some time ago in his book on the Inca road system, when he argued that Inca rule really consisted of a series of overlapping networks, rather than a single integrated system. Where the new analyses often prove most valuable is in their quantitative and graphical formalities of spatial data. Approaches applied through geographic information systems (GIS), for example, can provide startling insights into how affairs ranging from daily practice to imperial strategy played out (Kosiba and Bauer 2012).
A final influential set of ideas about how to think about empires has arisen from post-colonial theory, which appeared as a kind of intellectual resistance to the Western domination of much of the world (e.g., Said 1978). The literature on this subject is too vast to do justice here, but a couple of guiding ideas can be highlighted. One is that people or social groups in positions of power often get to decide what constitutes knowledge and how it can be legitimated (Estermann 2009). Since elites determine what history is told publicly (Dietler 2005), they often cast it in a way that makes themselves the inevitable—and desirable—outcome of natural progress. Spencer (1974), Tylor (1958), and other nineteenth-century British social philosophers, for example, saw their nation's supremacy as a natural consequence of the progress of history. Britain's role as an imperial power was therefore entirely justified.
From the vantage point of the post-colonial critique, the study of the past and of non-Western societies by Western intellectuals may itself be part of the process of political domination. So the present book could be treated as part of an intellectual imperialism. It seeks to impose a particular analytical perspective on the world, one that prefers comparative study to explanation that makes sense exclusively within a particular society.5 By analogy, archaeology as a professional discipline can be cast historically as a Euro-American project that helped to pillage the world's patrimony in the name of saving it. In this light, justifications for modern archaeological practice are little better than the sense of rectitude that the Spaniards brought to bear in overthrowing Inca claims to legitimate rule.
A second important idea that underpins post-colonial thought is that colonial or imperial leaders often apply derogatory concepts of “the other” to their subjects or peoples beyond their reach.6 Societies outside the core can be safely dismissed as inferior in their intellectual capacities and accomplishments. As a logical consequence, those peoples would surely benefit from being civilized by more advanced societies. That kind of thinking underpinned the Christian imperative in the conquest of the Americas, for example, and Kipling's notion of “the white man's burden.” Sweeping terms like Latin America, the Oriental, and the Third World are examples of western colonialist categories that post-colonial theory attempts to counter. The simplifications and caricatures inherent in colonial rule, it is argued, have been used to justify vast damage and exploitation in the name of superior humanity. As we will see, the Incas were no strangers to such ideas. They readily dismissed people outside the empire as barbarians, while the societies of the north coast were dog-eaters and sexual deviants, and the Uru people of the Lake Titicaca area were worthless vagrants.
As useful as they are, all of the broad approaches described here have some weaknesses. One common concern is that the conceptual division of an empire into a complex, cosmopolitan core and a less developed periphery is simply wrong on empirical grounds in several cases. Some imperial societies dominated peoples who surpassed them in urbanization, urbanity, population, social hierarchy, and economic specialization. The Incas are among the most prominent of the counter-examples, which also include the Mongols, Mughals, and Macedonians. A second concern is an unwarranted overemphasis on the power of the core society. Historical records indicate that many empires rose to power through coercive means—often conquest coupled with diplomacy that was backed by not so latent force. Even so, relations between imperial elites and peripheral societies were far more negotiated and dynamic than often thought not too long ago. To take just one counter-intuitive example, Barfield (2001) points out that, rather than extracting resources, Chinese rulers at times paid tribute to the steppe nomads to keep them at bay. They didn't call it that, of course, but the flow of wealth was often from the empire to the exterior.
Another concern is that general models often heavily focus our attention on the imperial elite or on interactions between them and subject elites. As research in provincial regions has advanced, especially within local communities, it has become increasingly clear that many important activities in ancient empires occurred without the intervention, interest, or awareness of the central authorities. Historians have long recognized that the grandiose
