History of the Inca Empire

Bernabe Cobo's History of the Inca Empire, translated by Roland Hamilton, includes an introduction by Rowe praising the author. According to Rowe and Hamilton, the Jesuit Cobo, though writing in the 17th century and mainly relying on older chronicles, exhibited greater discernment and judgment in his interpretation of the sources. In addition, Cobo also lived for several years in Peru and was able to personally witness the ruins of Inca buildings and discuss related matters with Cuzco informants, such as Alonso, a grandson of Guayna Capac. The longevity of his stay in Peru and his access to several earlier chronicles, including some which have not survived, make Cobo one of the great synthesizers of the Spanish chronicle historiography on the Incas. However, he seems to have especially relied on Polo de Ondegardo, so we will have to consult his works later. 

However, the first part of the text is mainly about the indigenous peoples of the Americas, including lengthy sections on why Peru was not Ophir and why the ancient Hebrews were not the populators of the Americas. Furthermore, Cobo spent several pages describing the allegedly barbaric and backwards customs of the Indians, clearly reflecting a colonialist and Catholic perspective on the Indians. To his credit, despite the alleged similarities across the entirety of the Americas in terms of barbaric customs and similar features, Cobo at least acknowledged 3 different types of Indian communities or polities. Those of the behetrias lived without caciques, those of an intermediate level who did possess caciques and some degree of political centralization beyond a community level (like our Indians of Hispaniola and the nearby Antilles), and then the third stage, achieved by the Aztecs, Incas, and the Muiscas. However, these last three, despite their superior stage of civilization, remained barbarians. 

Part of Cobo's colonialist and anti-Indian bias also appears near the end of his description of the Inca rulers, portraying their reign as one of pure tyranny and unceasing exploitation of their subjects. The Inca ruling class, according to Cobo, prevented their subjects from owning their own land or possessions, imposed heavy labor tribute obligations, imposed heavier punishments for commoners, seized children for sacrifices to the huacas, and otherwise oppressed their subjects to be even more oppressive than the colonial regime. Of course, Cobo's also admitted that the Inca rulers did try to ensure their subjects were able to live at least at a subsistence level and that their practice of relocating communities to new provinces usually aimed at resettling them in areas with similar environments. Nonetheless, Cobo's colonial and Christian biases perhaps forced him to portray the Incas as despots and cruel pagans. Fortunately, did not prevent him from occasionally expressing admiration for their achievements in other fields. Architecture, textiles, mining, the accuracy of khipu records, the effectiveness of Inca postal services and roads, and the rulers' successes in creating an orderly system across a huge swath of South America warranted praise from the biased Cobo.

What is particularly useful in Cobo's relatively scientific or rationalist approach to the study of Inca history is his judicious judgment of Inca history. According to him, the history of the Incas (and most Indians) probably reached back no further than around 400 years. In addition, unlike El Inca Garcilaso, Cobo did not claim that all Inca rulers married their sisters, a custom which more likely arose among later kings, beginning with Tupa Inca Yupanqui. Moreover, Cobo's account includes references to several moments of rebellions and conflict within the Inca aristocracy. For example, conflict between the ruler and "bastard" brothers over the throne occurred more often than El Inca Garcilaso indicated. The greater ruler Pachacutic, for instance, had to have a brother, Inca Urco, murdered for trying to rebel. Guayana Capac also had to defeat a usurper supported by his uncle, Gualpaya. Even more disastrous, the conflict between Atahualpa and Huascar for the throne involved military leaders who had participated in the conquest of the Quito provinces aligning themselves with the former. They believed Huascar, ruling from Cuzco, would have favored others over them and therefore offered their greater military experience to Atahualpa. In other words, conflict over the throne and internal discord were present among the Inca elites. Unsurprisingly, the Inca empire's instability was therefore a consistent problem. Imposing the worship of the Sun, Cuzco huacas and the incorporation of the huacas of other regions into the Cuzco-centered pantheon must have consolidated this sociopolitical system in which the administration was based on the labor tribute, or mita, of commoners while using curacas and others appointed to office or recognized by the Inca. Unfortunately, the intricate details of moments of threat to this order are not always clear, besides pivotal moments like the Chanca rebellion that nearly took Cuzco. 

As for the Incas and our ongoing obsession with the Taino, one sees more possible commonalities. The Taino cacicazos perhaps shared the similar revenue system, one in which subjects were expected to provide labor for caciques. Like the Peruvian example, the Spanish likely adopted or adapted aspects of this precolonial structure into the colonial encomienda system. The two also shared the similar practice of the rulers exchanging or gifting women, since the Inca was said to have gifted maidens to favorites or those who performed wondrous feats. Human sacrifice among the Taino has not been incontrovertibly proven, but both Tainos and Incas shared a similar veneration of the bones of ancestors. For the Taino, human bones and cranium could become cemis. Cobo also wrote of mummies of Inca rulers which had eyes made of thin golden cloth, such as that of Pachacutic. One wonders if this may have a similar connection with gold-encrusted eyes in duhos of Hispaniola. Last, but certainly not least, the use of duhos, a word not used by Peruvians, was an important symbol of chiefly authority. Indeed, the Inca gave duhos to caciques appointed by him. Just as duhos were symbols of chiefly power among the Taino, the Inca and caciques or curacas in Peru also used similar stools.