The Truth September 25, 2009

Even though it is slightly disturbing to realize everything we have been taught about history during our lives most likely came from some sort of biased source, it actually makes complete sense. It is amazing to me, truly, that we have surviving documentation of any ancient historical events in our modern world. The fact that we are able to preserve and utilize ancient manuscripts and learn anything from them is really impressive. Perhaps that is a vital aspect of “history” in general.

Everyone embellishes stories as they are told more and more- it is human nature. It is hard to even know whether or not a story someone tells you about their night last weekend is entirely true. Based on this logic, I can’t believe I ever blindly trusted history being taught to me. History is useful and important regardless of the exact “truth” of it, though.

The various perspectives seen in the essays we read this week say a lot about the society and time. Even though they have their own ideas and views of the world, they all account for an aspect of their world at that time. Maybe there is “truth” in all of these accounts regardless of their historical accuracy. We learn about individuals in this way and can actually piece together a lot of the differing thoughts to make a broader picture. 

I suppose the point I am making is just that maybe it is unnecessary to qualify documents and writings based upon their accuracy alone. It has become apparent to me that you can truly learn a lot from them regardless.

The Demise of the Inca September 18, 2009

Coming into this class, I had very little background knowledge about civilizations in the early Americas besides the stereotypical European view of history and new world conquests. I was always under the impression, based on what I was taught growing up in school, that the European conquerers were so strong, advanced, and great that they easily overpowered the primitive, barbaric native tribes. This is truly very far from the truth.

In the first few weeks of this class I grew much more aware of the complexity of the early Andean people and their society. They were brilliant builders and road constructors, politically minded, devoutly religious, and relatively advanced technologically. The Incan Empire stretched across a vast region and was an incredible feat in itself. The documentary shown in class this week took the story from here, addressing how in the world a small group of Spanish conquistadors could have overcome this?

The obvious first thought is better weaponry. The Spanish must have had the advantage with their guns and metal swords. This could not have been it, though, because there are very few instances seen where a native was killed by a European weapon. It is also easy to think it was because of their horses or the diseases that they brought along with them. Interestingly enough, it is a whole other element that was certainly never addressed to me in a classroom growing up.

The Spanish, very strategically I might add, recruited native Andean people to fight on their side. It had never really occurred to me that even though it is unfortunate that this great empire was taken down, of course not everyone was happy there. It is easy to consider them as a small, easy target that was wrongly destroyed; but truly they had just as much dissension, civil war, and unhappiness as any civilization. The revolters of the empire were looking to the Spaniards to help them just as much as the conquistadors were eliciting their help.

I find all of this aspect of the history in the Andes very fascinating. Credit should be given to the natives that fought. I really think it could be seen just as much or more as a revolution than as an enemy conquest. This just shows me all the more the way that everything is biased. The history I have grown up learning was written by the white Europeans, not the South American natives. How interesting to feel as if you are finally uncovering some real truth.

The Nature of Pre-Hispanic Andean Society September 11, 2009

Based on the Karl Marx quote mentioned in class from The German Ideology, it is interesting to consider whether or not the nature of pre-Hispanic Andean society confirms this. Marx says, “The nature of individuals thus depends on the material conditions determining their production.” I think this hints at the idea of people being a product of their environment, but it goes further than that. The whole success or unsuccess of our existence is dependent upon the nature of our environment.

In Andean society everything was set up in gender parallels; from the father and mother to the Inca and Coya to the sun and the moon. Their whole political/empirical system was based from this balanced idea. Even their planting required a male to dig the hole and a female to plant the seed. This kind of structure hugely reflects on them as individuals and how they lived. Marx words it perfectly saying, “As individuals express their life, so they are.”

A society’s system for division of labor is vital to its success. The early Andeans obviously divided up labor based on gender, but in many other ways as well. The Ayllu is yet another example. The small groups of individuals connected by cultural myth and kinship would participate in trade with each other. They followed rules of reciprocity or mutual obligation; one group needs llamas and another group needs corn so they both benefit.

This intricate structural system in early Andean society provided the means for expanding territorial control and conquering in the Incan empire. It provided the method by which the Inca could control this extremely large territory. It is actually an amazing feat that without any extensive writing system and no empirical history to pull from that these people were able to attain such a methodical empire.

Their Ayllu structure along with their engineering brilliance were vital to expansion. They built thousands of miles worth of roads connecting all parts of the empire. They also came up with a sound building system using mortarless stone techniques.

All of these aspects of early Andean society absolutely confirm Karl Marx’s statement. They were a highly skilled, intelligent group of individuals who were aided greatly by the way they built upon ideas from their ancestors and predecessors and were able to successfully pass along their systems to subsequent generations. The only thing they were truly missing was a way to counteract the strength of the Spanish conquistadors who soon would come.

Archaeology and Ethics September 4, 2009

Our discussion in class following the Lost Warriors of the Clouds video really interested me, in terms of the moral and ethical considerations involved in archaeology. Scholars certainly need artifacts, mummified remains, and gravesites in order to fully develop the knowledge and history of early Andean culture; is there a line that should not be crossed, though? These Andean people meticulously prepared their dead according to ritual and tradition, and would frequently return with food and items to honor them. At what point is it okay to disregard their spiritual convictions and religious rites?

 

In our modern day society, it would be highly disrespectful to dig up a dead body or tamper with a grave or a gravestone in any way. There are American people buried in our country from the 1700s and are left untouched, in peace; yet people 200 years earlier evidently do not deserve the same treatment. Are we allowed to disturb the dead of cultures that are out of existence? Perhaps scholars are on the correct side of the line, but it is definitely a complicated issue.

 

One complicating factor is the fact that looters have almost always gotten to burial sites before archaeologists are able to. This tampering perhaps justifies going in and salvaging the remains, but maybe that is actually just stooping to the same level as the looters.

 

Even with all of these ethical issues, maybe it is best to disregard them for the sake of history. From these Andean mummies and artifacts found in the area, it is much clearer to see the structure of society, the religious practices, and even the effects of the Incan conquest. These burial practices did not even exist in the area until the Inca came in and took over- evident in the dramatic shift from masses of bones being found to the later well preserved mummies.

 

I obviously do not stand strongly on one side or the other, but these issues should definitely be considered during these kinds of archaeological excavations. Perhaps it has been long enough to consider the sites primarily historical, but I do not think there is a time limit on giving them our respect.