Amerindians (Wright) What Is Your

¶ … Amerindians

(Wright) What is your gut reaction to this reading? That once again, a comedy of errors turned into a serious situation when confronting another culture. The Europeans did not understand the Amerindians, the Amerindians did not understand the Conquistadores. The mighty empires fell because they had no guns, germs, or steel (with apologies to Jared Diamond). Numerous similarities exist between the conquest of the Aztec and Inca, and one or two different actions could have changed history completely. There was arrogance on both sides. Atawallpa thought he could use the "others" to enhance his position, Pizzaro was confident that Spanish might and religious destiny would prevail.

Give the date, place and basic elements of the successful confrontation the Spanish had with Inca Atawallpa and his soldiers. November 15-16, 1532; Cajamarca. Each side misunderstood what the other side was saying -- and, according to eyewitness accounts; "abused what the other held dear." Atawallpa was so confident in meeting the Spanish he came in with no weapons, and insisted that the Spanish repay all the damage they had done. The Spanish were insulted, gunfire erupted and the Spanish began massacring estimates up to 10,000 people. The Spanish then took Atawallpa hostage for gold and silver.

According to Wright's account, what do you think is the main reason or reasons that Inca Atawallpa lost this confrontation? Wright points out that it was not just Spanish arrogance, but more their technology. Atawallpa could not conceive that any human would treat him with disrespect, and therefore was arrogant to the extreme about most every issue incurred. It was really a fluke that the Spanish were place in such a tight area, where gunpowder and steel could do the most damage. The confrontation occurred over cultural misunderstandings and was won simply by the differences in tactics and technology.

(Mann) What's your gut reaction to this reading? The book, 1491, is really not so much about what occurred during the year before Columbus landed, but what it stands for -- that Columbus was not the first to visit the Americas, that the Mesoamerican populations were more advanced than assumed, and that they were not as harmonious with nature as we thought. It seemed to me that this is a revisionist look at a sociological, cultural and anthropological viewpoint; speculative in nature because of surviving evidence and the requirements of inference. In something akin to the H.G. Well's WAR OF THE WORLDS, the conquest of an entire civilization occurred not because of might, but because of small microbes -- disease, and the indigenous population's inability to combat European viruses.

Mann challenges the belief that superior weaponry was the main factor in the Inca loss to the Spanish. Give two examples of Inca weaponry or strategy that was viable in warfare against the Spanish. 1) Huge roadway system connecting all parts of the Incan Empire; 2) Versatility and ability to fight at high altitudes; 3) Overwhelming population; 4)Large stone fortifications; 5) No gunpowder, but an abundance of weapon: clubs, spears, bows, lances, slings that were accurate at shorter distances.

Mann argues that the rivalry for power in the Andes among the Inca and other native groups was a major factor the Spanish conquest. Explain at least one of these rivalries. Who were the two, three or four players involved? Who were they allied with and what role did they play in the Spanish victory? Because Atawallpa's clan had been so authoritarian and destructive in subjugating other populations (e.g. those from the forests or the southern regions), some were eager to help the Spanish thinking that they could assume the power vacuum. Atawallpa had to fight Washkar in what is now Ecuador, but Washkar's relatives and political descendants never forgave him, and this helped the Spanish wherever the could. Since the Spanish really had no idea about the geography of the country, any outside help was a decided strategic advantage.

Explain the role that disease played in weakening the Inca ability to respond effectively to the Spanish. Smallpox from the Europeans wiped out a number of ruling Inca, which led to the survivors clamoring for control -- weakening the system from within, causing extreme factionalism, reducing the warrior population, and placing focus on retaining local power rather than responding to an invasion.