Talk:Spanish conquest of the Inca Empire

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


I have broken this page off from Inca Empire

Cleanup needed[edit]

paragraphs 4 and 5 under the rebellion (section 4) are redundant. They need to be consolidated, and some mention needs to be made of the Inca Victory at Ollantaytambo before the final retreat to vilcabamba. (I don't have enough info, though) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:22, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


Is not this story considered obsolete spanish revisionist history? I thought it was fairly well known at this point that the spanish themselves did very little fighting and that most battles were native/native. Spanish allies verus inca. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

You are correct. The article is based on the Spanish records which were largely propaganda. For example recent research has found that rather than the account in the article of capturing Atahualpa what actually occured was the Spanish arrived during an Inca celebration and found the Incas unarmed. They took advanatage and attacked. There is also the recent discovery of a transcript from a Spanish court case that has first hand indian accounts that indicate the Spanish fought in small groups surrounded by hundreds of Inca allies for protection. Spanish sources say the Inca army numbered in the tens of thousands but Indian sources say several thousands. There were never any battles as we know them but many scattered skirmishes against a greatly outnumbered Inca army trying to run away. A recent find of the bodies of Incas killed in the seige of Lima show that only around 3% have wounds consistant with metal weapons while the wounds of the rest matched stone clubs. Experts speculate that mention of the indian role in the conquest was avoided because the (non Inca) Indians were offered treaties for their help against the Incas that were never honoured. Wayne (talk) 03:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
This is only half-correct. The Spanish themselves did indeed do quite a lot of fighting (the Battle of Cajamarca) without native allies, and fought with only token native assistance against an absolutely incredible number of Indians again after Manco Inca Yupanqui fled to Vilcabamba and launched the famous Inca revolt. After the defeat of Manco Inca, the Spanish were then able to build a large Inca army to consolidate their control of Peru, but it is absolutely incorrect to say that the Spanish themselves did "very little fighting" (they did, however, do very little dying compared to their enemies). --Netparrot (talk) 06:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


The presentation is exposed as in the name of religion have committed heinous crimes to justify only good intentions and struggles against the infidels. About 86'500, 000 people were killed during the conquest. A REAL HOLOCAUST

the truth —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:42, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

How did the spaniarsads conqer the inca king?[edit]

When the Spanish arrived at the borders of the Inca Empire in 1528, the empire spanned a considerable distance.[1] Extending southward from the Ancs Maya (meaning Blue River) which is now known as the Patia River in southern Colombia to the Maule River in Chile, and eastward from the Pacific Ocean to the edge of the Amazonian jungles, the empire covered some of the most mountainous terrain on earth. In less than a century the empire had grown in extent from about 155,000 sq mi/400,000 km2 in 1448, to 380,000 sq mi/980,000 km2 (or about the size of the eastern seaboard of the greatly varying cultures and geography, many areas of the empire were left under local leaders, who were watched and monitored by Inca officials. However, under the administrative mechanisms established by the Incas, all parts of the empire answered to, and were ultimately under the direct control of, the Emperor.[2] Scholars estimate that the population of the Inca Empire probably numbered over 16,000,000.[3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Atahualpas Dead[edit]

this Article here says in this Section, that Atahualpa was killed on August 29, 1533. His own Article says, he died on July 25, the spanish Article says, July 26th, the german and the italian Article says also 26th July. Where does this 29th August came from? -- Hartmann Schedel Prost 21:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

this website is terrible[edit]

''''Bold textBold text''Bold text''Bold text''Italic text''Italic text'Italic text'Italic text'Italic text''Italic text''''Bold text''Italic text''Italic text'''Bold text'hsodiutgd sflghkdshfosg dfshlg'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''Bold text — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:10, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Spanish conquest of the Inca Empire/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.


The statement 'But these native people never foresaw the massive waves of Spaniard imigrants coming to their land and the holocaust that they would bring upon their people' under 'Rebellion and reconquest' seems fairly contentious and disputable

Drobba (talk) 14:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 14:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 06:39, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The Mita[edit]

"Toledo ended the indigenous Neo-Inca State in Vilcabamba, executing the Inca Túpac Amaru. He promoted economic development using commercial monopoly and built up the extraction from the silver mines of Potosí, using slavery based on the Inca institution of forced labor for mandatory public service called mita." So when the Incas do it is forced labor, but when the Spanish do it, under the same circumstances and even relying on the same Ayllus as intermediaries, it is slavery?--Menah the Great (talk) 12:39, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Four grand pre-Columbian civilizations?[edit]

Which exact civilizations are they talking about here? I can think of the Aztects, Maya and Inca, but have no idea what the fourth is supposed to be. I don't think this wording should be used in this article, as it is not explained further and doesn't seem to be a standard expression. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:26, 5 October 2018 (UTC)