Even though the Inca had a mighty force of 80,000 men and Spain only 168, the Europeans easily defeated them. Why did this happen? Europe conquered the Inca without difficulty, despite their large numbers, because they were more advanced than them. They had many weapons on their side. One of their most deadly being the silent killer: smallpox. They had one of the smartest strategies, proven to work from previous battles. And finally, they had top-notch swords and guns while the Inca had none. To look at this issue further, one needs to look at how European smallpox was one of the most potent weapons in history.
Smallpox played a key role in the Inca’s collapse to Europe. Smallpox was a deadly European disease that killed almost everyone who contracted it. According to Professor Jared Diamond of UCLA, 95% of indigenous Americans were wiped out completely by smallpox. So why didn’t the Spaniards suffer from the same fate? Well, turns out, they did. Smallpox was a disease that came from domestic cows. The Inca had no cows, only llamas. The Spaniards had, over time, built up immunity from smallpox. Over the generations, when smallpox was an epidemic in Europe, only the strongest of people survived to regenerate. So after many centuries, the Europeans had become almost a super-breed; practically immune to smallpox, they could fight wars without danger of a large breakout. However, the Inca had no helpful animal friends to develop any sort of resistance. Their vegetation did not serve as proper feeding grounds for cows. Moreover, they did not allow their llamas into their homes, nor did they milk them. Therefore, since the Inca had no cows, smallpox was a foreign disease. During the war, the Americans were either sick, nursing, or dead. However, while it is important to recognize that smallpox was a vital aspect concerning the Inca’s downfall, it is equally essential to realize that the Spaniard's strategy also played of utmost importance.
The strategy employed by the Spanish was one of the reasons they won over the Americans. What the Spaniards lacked in quantity was redeemed in brains. However, their brilliant strategy would never have come to be had the gift of writing not occurred. According to Professor Diamond, the expedition’s leader had taken a page out of a war strategy from a few years ago. A former conquistador, Hernando Cortez, had written a book containing the surprise attack tactic. The Inca had no writing because of the continent they were placed on. Since the Maya had writing, it should have passed on to the Inca. But since they did not lie on the same latitude, it did not pass on. During the battle, they employed the scheme beautifully. When they fought, their priest showed the Inca’s leader, Atahualpa, their bible in attempt at peaceful conversion. But since Atahualpa had never seen books, he scoffed at the Spaniards and called for his massive army to attack. They obeyed, but foolishly fell apart into a mass panic when the Spanish brought out their guns. They thought the Spaniards were gods, sitting majestically on giant horses with lethally sharp steel swords, compared to their own blunt bronze ones. Now that the army was in a panicked frenzy, the Spanish promptly capture Atahualpa and force him to command his people to obey Spain and give the Spanish 20 tons of gold and silver. After they gather their riches, they kill Atahualpa, realizing that he was of no use to them. The Inca have now been cleverly reformed by Spain. Having examined this brilliant line of attack, it is imperative to note that none of the stratagems utilized here would have worked without Europe’s weapons.
Spain’s development in weaponry was superior to that of their adversary’s. First of all, Europe's guns were top of the line in the world at the time. They were developed because of gunpowder brought from China. The Inca never got to make them because China was an entire ocean away. Steel was also one of Spain’s fineries. They had the best in the planet, while the Inca had no steel at all! Incans did not have the proper climate to have long burning fires required to make steel while Europe had centuries to perfect it. They had inherited all of the Fertile Crescent’s metallurgy. Now that all of these have been examined, it can be concluded that Europe was more advanced than the Inca.
As can be seen, Spain was infinitely more sophisticated than the Inca, which is why they were able to defeat the enormous Incan army relatively effortlessly. Smallpox went on a rampage, making the Spaniard's job simpler by incapacitating most of the Americans. Then, their outstanding strategy involved staging a surprise attack, then capturing Atahualpa. Of course, the strategy depended on Europe’s fine weapons. Finally, on the whole, the reason why Europe’s exiguous cavalry overpowered the Inca’s extensive infantry was because of Europe’s degree of experience and good fortune was vastly superior to that of the Inca’s.
Your post is absolutely riddled with half-truths and Eurocentric beliefs bordering on the fanatical.
ReplyDeleteHaving disease is something desirable? American people were cleaner and on the whole in much better health than the average European, even the Inca were a bit taller than the Spaniards and they developed genetically small and compact in response the altitude, the Spaniards were simply malnourished.
All guns at that time were inferior weapons to bows which had faster reload times, greater accuracy, greater propulsion, no recoil, and required fewer resources to operate. It wasn't until the 16th century guns became effective weaponry and quite ironically it was the Dutch lineaar formations fighting Spanish Tercio formations that proved this.
The Spaniards never fought against The Inca or Aztec alone. I'm not even sure you can really credit the Spaniards with much besides looting. It is recognized that the Spaniards forged alliances with local people adverse to the ruling classes. In the Andes there was a civil war at the time the Spaniards arrived caused by the death of the Inca and his successor. Atahualpa by all accounts had a tedious claim to rule since he was the son of the former Inca and one of his concubines. Huascar was his half-brother and rival who was born of the Inca and his wife. You seem to conveniently overlook this.
Beyond the immediate civil war there is also the fact that both Aztec and Inca Empires were quite newly created. the Inca Empire as such only existed for 140 years and marked its beginning by defeating the rival Wanka in the central valleys of Peru. After this their expansion consisted of drawn out accords and military invasion of the Aymara kingdoms to the south and Chimu Empire to the north. Since their empire was new it was also fragile. The Aymara kingdoms revolted several times and never truly submitted, other peoples also were in conflict with the Inca including chachapoya, guarani, and auracanians. Even when the Spaniards made it to the Andes they were led by native peoples of Panama.
Your account of Atahualpa's capture is also misleading. He did not meet Pizarro with his soldiers by his side. His soldiers were camped in a valley below where they met. Atahualpa met Pizarro with a host of servants all of whom were unarmed.
Nobody thought the Spaniards were gods. True, perhaps the horses were foreign and the guns impressive at first glance. But I doubt anybody thinks them gods after seeing them eat, defecate, sleep, and die. Also, horses are relatively useless in mountain terrain the only time they were deployed was during the capture of Atahualpa since it was in a flattened plaza.
Spain was infinitely more sophisticated than the Inca is a clearly erroneous assertion. First, one must buy into the idea there is a single way to develop. Second, one must believe that might equals superiority. third, you ignore the many ways the Inca were equal to or superior to the Spaniards. The Inca had more advanced knowledge of engineering. When the Spaniards arrived they feared crossing Inca suspension bridges believing them to be sorcery and 70 years after conquest buildings founded on Inca ones survived an earthquake while those built solely by Spaniards collapsed. The Spaniards assumed it to be a miracle, but it was really because the Inca foundations were designed to resist earthquakes. The Inca also apparently were masters of textiles and created armor densely woven with bronze plates inside for which the Spaniards abandoned their own armor.
ReplyDeleteThere is also dispute as to how well wrought Iron and Steel was in those times. Some argue it was not until the industrial revolution that Iron and Steel reached a quality superior to bronze and the real reason for abandoning Bronze in Europe was a lack of tin (in the Andes the opposite is true, there is a lot of tin and copper but a lack of Iron).
Mathematically, the Inca seemed to understand important principles for practical math and had a tool called the yupana. The yupana is an early calculator whose use can be modeled in the same way as modern ones using the concept of a fibonacci square (in Europe the fibonacci square concept was developed by roughly 1200).
Astronomic knowledge also seems to have been accurate as the Inca had a 365 day solar calendar. They Inca also knew about freeze-drying food to store it, this was not an Inca invention but was known for thousands of years in the Andes. The word jerky in English drives from this. Jerky comes from Charque in Spanish, which in turn is derived from Quechua and Aymara Ch'arque meaning dried meat. Other technological knowledge held by Inca include gold's ability to redirect infrared (heat) waves though concavity, high intensity raised field agriculture, mountain terracing, and plumbing.
Even that which is held most sacred by historians, writing, should be examined. People seem to assume that writing granted all these wonderful benefits but ask yourself, what is writing? Writing is simply an expression of language. It differs from the spoken word in that it is language in a visual, rather than acoustic, medium. Language itself is the way by which people encode thought. Writing is just one way to encode thought other methods quite clearly known are morse code, smoke signals, the spoken word. Writing has the benefit of being relatively permanent, but does this mean it is they only way to do so? In the Andes it is quite possible quipu kept not only numeric data but also linguistic data through use of color dyes, materials used, and knots. Admittedly, abstract symbols representing phonetics is superior, but even at that time Pizarro was an illiterate pig farmer and so writing would benefit him little. Spoken language itself can be reformed in ways to make it more memorable simple ways people do this is by creating acronyms as well as rhyme and rhythm. Andean languages, specifically Aymara, are more similar to the spoken languages of old before writing. Spoken language then was considered extremely important and kept to a strict standard. Socrates was said to lament at the laxity introduced by written language to the detriment of the spoken. Of course it is impossible to express anything with absolute clarity, but does that mean less clarity is just as good as more clarity?
Your post seems more a recital of what you've heard or believe than anything based on critical thought on inquiry.