The+Decline+of+the+Inca+Empire+-+Essay

 By Kathryn McKay

- In 1532, Francisco Pizarro arrived on the coast of Ecuador with a small group of men in search of gold (Lewis 68). The Inca Empire stretched from Maule, Chile to Quito, Ecuador (Lewis 24) and numbered approximately seven million people (Lewis 24). Within 40 years of the Spaniards’ arrival, the Empire had virtually been destroyed. __There are many lessons we can learn from the fall of the Inca Empire. Superior weaponry combined with timing, discontent among the Incas due to years of oppressive rule and avarice, are all contributing factors to the decline of the Inca Empire and from these we can learn valuable lessons on how to avoid a similar fate__.

- Regardless of the size of a civilization's army, if they are in turmoil, they can be defeated by a vastly smaller force. When Pizarro landed in 1532, he brought with him 180 men and 30 horses (Lewis 68). Although he was vastly outnumbered, his men were well trained and had far superior weaponry (Bernand 21 - 26). The Incas had never seen horses or guns before (Bernand 21 - 26). Nevertheless, had Pizarro invaded in 1527, when he landed in South America for the second time ([]), rather than 1532, he likely would have met more resistance. In the intervening five years, the Incas had been severely ravaged by civil war and disease. The fratricidal civil war, pitting Huáscar against Atahualpa, was a brutal affair, which killed one in every twenty men (Smith 453) and left the Empire severely weakened and in political turmoil. In addition, the Empire had been absolutely decimated by smallpox, brought earlier by Columbus (Cook 60). The smallpox epidemic claimed two-thirds of the population ([]), killing entire villages and wiping out whole families. The lesson to be learned is that countries that are unstable due to political, religious or other reasons outside their control, such as disease, are susceptible to attacks from outside forces. In Iraq for example, the country had been weakened by years of secular fighting between the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds. As a result, the U.S. was able to march into Iraq with relatively little resistance.

- In civilizations where the population is oppressed, it leaves the nation prone to an uprising of the people or an incursion from outside forces. The Incas were exasperated and demoralized by the cruelty that the Sapa Inca showed his people (Bernand 40 - 49) and they were incensed by the heavy tribute imposed by the government (Lewis 13 - 18). Not only did the government levy a large portion of everything the people produced, but it also demanded that children be sacrificed to it every year (Bernand 10 - 17). As a result, when the Spanish conquistadors arrived in 1532, they met little resistance from the Inca people who aided the conquistadors and fought alongside them. The Spaniards were welcomed as conquering heroes upon their arrival (Bernand 31 - 43). The populace thought that if the Spaniards gained control of the nation they would no longer be oppressed (Hyams 193). The lesson to be learnt from this is that an oppressed nation is susceptible to uprisings. Today we see a similar pattern occurring in Iraq. The Iraqi people had been downtrodden and subjugated by Saddam Hussein. He oppressed the nation for over two decades based on secular divisions. In 2003, when the Americans invaded Iraq, they were seen in the same light as the Inca people saw the Spaniards: as conquering heroes.

- Greed or avarice is often the underlying reason for exploitation of civilizations. The entire reason why the Spanish conquistadors invaded the Inca Empire was for their gold (Bernand 34 - 37). The avarice of the Spanish deadened all of their feelings towards the Incas (Bernand 34 - 37). They were not interested in the well being of the Inca people, their culture or their land (Bernand 72 - 76). The Inca government was also greedy. The fratricidal civil war was based solely upon the greed of the two brothers ([|http://www.workmall.com/wfb200/peru /peru_his tory_the_incas.html]). They each wanted the spoils and privileges which came with being Sapa Inca, and were willing to start a civil war that was detrimental to the civilization in order to obtain this. Furthermore, the Inca civilization was extremely avaricious in territorial matters ([|http://www.britannica.c om/EBchecked/topic/555947/South-American-Indian/57770/Central-Andean-irrigation-civilizations]). They expanded by taking over other civilizations, disregarding their cultures and languages and forcing the Inca culture upon them (Smith 57 - 62). The lesson learnt from this is that avarice is a strong motivator for both the conqueror and conquered. Once again, there are many parallels to Iraq today. Prior to the U.S. invasion, Saddam Hussein exploited the people for his own personal gain. It could also be argued that one of the main reasons that the U.S. invaded Iraq was to protect their oil interests in the region.

- Pizarro was able to conquer the Inca Empire with relatively little resistance due to the following factors: superior weaponry combined with timing, oppressive rule and avarice. The lessons that we can learn from the decline of the Inca Empire are vital to our civilization's survival. Throughout history, civilization after civilization has fallen due to these same factors. Have we, as a civilization, learnt anything from the Inca's fall or do we disregard these lessons, under the notion that our nation is indestructible and will never fall.

- --- [|http://photos.igougo.com/images/]  -- [|http://63.134.213.17/_media/imgs/articles]   - [|http://travel.webshots.com/photo] -- [|http://www.flickr.com/photos/thoi]<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span class="wiki_link_ext">--