failed. . . . Sarmiento de Gamboa, on the other hand, . . . gives quite a different picture. In his work the Inca appear as greedy beyond all else of power . . . their wars were wars of aggression pure and simple . . . towards their subjects they were cruel and unmerciful, holding them fettered in the bonds of a miserable oppression. . . . No doubt the Inca, as the Spaniards themselves, used the name of religion as a pretext for extending their power, but the power once gained was not abused, and the laws by which they governed, though strict, were not unnecessarily harsh, and were well suited to the psychology of their subjects.”[1]
“The condition of the people under the Incas, though one of tutelage and dependence, at the same time secured a large amount of material comfort and happiness. . . . This was indeed socialism such as dreamers in past ages have conceived, and unpractical theorists now talk about.”[2]
The deeds of the Inca Pachacutec epitomise the Inca policy, “he completely reformed the empire, as well as regards their vain religion, which he provided with new rites and ceremonies, destroying the numerous idols of his vassals, as by enacting new laws and regulations for the daily and moral life of the people, forbidding the abuses and barbarous customs to which the Indians were addicted before they were brought under his rule.”[3]
He thus anticipated, but by more humane and states-manlike methods, the ruthless subjugation of the Peruvians by the Spaniards. The culture of the Incas was destroyed and their beneficent worship of the sun, which was gradually integrating the religions of the various peoples, was forcibly replaced by an unholy triple alliance of the sword, the cross, and the lust for gold.
- ↑ T. A. Joyce, South American Archæology. London, 1912, pp. 86, 87.
- ↑ Sir Clements Markham, The Incas of Peru. London, 1910, pp. 167, 169.
- ↑ Royal Commentaries, ii. p. 202.
