58; Cieza de Leon, I, 312-315, II, 150-154; Joyce, 1912, p. 107; Markham, 1912, p. 178.

[48] Sancho is vague in his use of the words _caballo_ and _ligero caballo_. The latter means "light horse" or "light-armed cavalry." But he uses the word _caballo_ when he means _caballero_. In the present instance he really means _caballo_.

[49] The veracity of this story is certainly open to question.

[50] Here the text says _caballos_, although it is plain that _caballeros_ is the word intended.

[51] See Squier, 1877, p. 177; Cieza, Tr. p. 355; Velasco, 1840, p. 22; Joyce, 1912, pp. 210-212.

[52] This speech can hardly be regarded as verbatim, of course.

[53] Sancho's imagination was drawn upon throughout this section.

[54] Limatambo (correctly, Rimactampu).

[55] Xaquixaguana or Sacsahuana.

[56] The text has: "_y que riendo el Gobernador partirse sin aguardar a que pasaran los indios amigos, ..._"

[57] _tuvieron tiempo de retraerse al monte_ really means, "they had time to withdraw to the mountain," but the obvious sense is better preserved in the translation I have given.

[58] Possibly this means Huascar, whom Atahualpa had caused to be put to death.

[59] In Spanish they always say "el Cuzco." I believe that the reason for this is that "Cuzco" comes from a Quichua word meaning "navel." If this is so, "el Cuzco" has the significance of "the Navel" (of the World). In English, of course, we use the word simply as a place-name.

[60] The official designation of the Emperor was: S. C. C. M., or Sagrada Cesarea Catolica Majestad.

[61] The modern village of Limatambo. When I was there the fine walls so often spoken of were in a bad condition from neglect on the part of the natives. Yet, in spite of the refuse piled around them and the throngs of pigs all about, one could see that the masonry was of the finest Cyclopean type. Cf. Squier, 1877, p. 535; Markham, 1912, pp. 286 and 319; Cieza, Tr., p. 320; Sarmiento, pp. 119 and 209. Garcila.s.so tells us that it was founded by Manco Capac and that it was the place where Viracocha waited for the Chanca. Garcila.s.so, I, p. 80, and II, p. 52.

[62] Now called Zurite. It was the site of a palace of Viracocha, who added it to his realm once more by a victory (won by Pachacutec) over the Chanca. Cf. Sarmiento, p. 85; Garcila.s.so, I, p. 53; Cieza, Chr., p.

128; The "Finca de los Andenes" is doubtless the site of the palace.

[63] The truth of this statement is very questionable.

[64] Valverde.

[65] Pachacamac.

[66] In the days before the Incas the Creator-G.o.d (under the names of Pachacamac, Viracocha, Irma, etc.) was worshipped without idols. He was conceived as being superior to all other G.o.ds and as being invisible.

To judge from all accounts, his cult, at this stage, was an advanced type of religion. Later, however, the custom of having idols sprang up.

As their attributes were the same, there can be but little doubt that Pachacamac and Viracocha were the same deity. Pachacamac's chief shrine was on the coast, at Pachacamac. Inca Pachacutec conquered Cuismancu, lord of Pachacamac, about 1410, and built a Sun Temple there. The chief temple to Viracocha was at Cacha south of Cuzco, and it was probably erected by the Inca Viracocha to celebrate his defeat of the Chanca confederacy. Both these temples (under Inca influence) had idols. Cf.

Blas Valera, 1879, pp. 137-140; Sarmiento, pp. 28-29; Garcila.s.so, II, pp. 69, 185-193, 428, 460; Cieza, Tr., pp. 161-163, 251-254; Cobo, 1892, III, pp. 320-323; Uhle, 1903; Markham, 1912, pp. 41, 97, 181, 233-234; Joyce, 1912, pp. 150-152; Beuchat, 1912, pp. 615-616.

[67] Another obvious fabrication.

[68] Huayna Capac, ruled ca. 1500-1525.

[69] This was Manco Inca, a son of Huayna Capac by his third wife. Manco died in 1544, leaving a grand-daughter, Coya Beatriz, who married Don Martin Garcia Loyola. Their daughter, Lorenza, became Marquesa de Oropesa.--Note by Sir C. R. M. Cf. Garcila.s.so, II, pp. 352 and 526.

[70] A half-brother only.

[71] The story of Manco Inca is one of the most pathetic in South American history. Although our author describes some of the events in the young Inca's life, I will give a brief resume of it here.

Manco was "crowned" with the _borla_ or fringe on March 24, 1534, at Cuzco. To please him, Almagro the elder killed his two brothers (who might have become his rivals) in order to get Manco on his side in the quarrel which he had with the Pizarros as to which ought to control Cuzco. After Almagro went to Chile, the _Villac Umu_ (High Priest) urged his brother Manco to rise in revolt against the Spaniards, who were divided among themselves. On April 18, 1536, Manco revolted at Yucay. He laid siege to Cuzco with a very large force and attacked the small Spanish garrison mercilessly, setting fire to the roofs of houses by means of arrows tipped with blazing tow and otherwise hara.s.sing them.

The Inca and his forces were, for a time, successful. They captured the great fortress of Sacsahuaman, which was, however, retaken by Juan Pizarro and Gonzalo Pizarro. Disheartened by this, the Inca retired to the fortress of Ollantaytampu, where he successfully combatted the attempts of Hernando Pizarro to capture him. Later, Manco was forced by Orgonez to withdraw to the mountainous region of Vilcapampa. The last Inca capital was set up at Viticos, and there Manco held his court for several years. He often raided the Spanish travellers between Cuzco and Lima. His court became a place of refuge for all Spaniards who fell out with their fellows. One of these refugees, Gomez Perez, either killed Manco himself in a brawl over a game of quoits or helped to kill him as the result of a plot. The Inca, at all events, was murdered by Spaniards whom he had befriended. That was in 1544. In 1911 Professor Hiram Bingham visited Vitcos the situation of which is clearly shown on the map, dated 1907, that accompanies Sir Clements Markham's translation of Sarmiento and Ocampo (Hakluyt, 2d Series, no. XXII, p. 203). Professor Bingham's description of the site is adequate, and, I think, unique.

At about the same time as the siege of Cuzco, another Inca force, led by t.i.tu Yupanqui, marched on the newly founded Spanish capital (the Ciudad de los Reyes or Lima). It was driven off by the Marques Francisco Pizarro.

A brother of Manco, Paullu, was christened under the name of Don Cristoval Paullu. He lived in the Colcampata palace (which had been the great Pachacutec's), and the small church of San Cristoval was built near at hand for his use. He died about 1550, being survived by Sayri Tupac, Cusi t.i.tu Yupanqui, and two other children of Manco (who all lived on at Viticos) and by his own sons Carlos and Felipe. It was on the occasion of a particular request made by the Viceroy, Don Andres Hurtado de Mendoza, Marques de Canete, that Sayri Tupac's aunt, Princess Beatriz, successfully urged him to come and live in Cuzco. Sayri Tupac died in 1560. Cf. Cieza, Tr., pp. 304-307; Garcila.s.so, II, pp. 104-105, 526; t.i.tu Cusi Yupanqui, apud Cieza's "War of Quito," pp. 164-166; Montesinos, 1906, I, pp. 88-93; Cobo, 1892, III, pp. 203-210; Markham, 1892, pp. 93-96; Markham, 1912, pp. 254-259; Appleton's Cyclopaedia, 1888, IV, pp. 186 and 682; Cabildos de Lima, I, pp. 1 ff.; Bingham, 1912, entire.

[72] Manco Inca.

[73] Contrast this version with that given by Prescott in Book III, Chapter 10. It is hardly necessary to say that Prescott's is the correct one.

[74] Here, it is not difficult to read between the lines and see what sort of treatment Manco got.

[75] Vicente de Valverde.

[76] An involved and unimportant clause here.

[77] This is all for the benefit of the Emperor, whose policy it was to deal fairly by his new subjects.

[78] Vilcas.

[79] I do not know who is meant by this name.

[80] Llamas.

[81] Possibly these figures were the embalmed bodies of the coyacuna or "queens" which, according to Garcila.s.so, were placed in Curicancha--the Sun Temple.

[82] _en su mismo ser_.

[83] _Casa_ really means house.

[84] "Che vi corcorsero a.s.sai in tre anni," says the original, which can only be translated as I have done it above. But when the secretary wrote his relation, no such three years had gone by since the foundation of Cuzco, but only four months, so it is necessary to suppose that the Italian translator did not understand his original well, _or_ that it is an interpolation made later on.--Note by Icazbalceta.

[85] The civilized inhabitants of the Chilca region came originally from the interior, probably from the Yauyos region. This event occurred, presumably, somewhere about 800-900 of our era, for, by the time the Incas were founding Cuzco (ca. 1100), they found themselves strong enough to make raids into the interior. Joyce points out that these raids may have occurred even earlier, at a time when the Tiahuanacu empire still flourished. At any rate, there was an important contact with the interior cultures at an early date. The Chincha also were constantly at war with the Chimu, Chuquimancu and Cuismancu who each ruled large and civilized coast states. The Chincha were conquered by the Inca either in the reign of Pachacutec or in that of Tupac Yupanqui (more probably the former) somewhere about 1450. According to Estete, their ruler (under Inca tutelage) in the time of the Conquest was Tamviambea. The cultural development of the Chincha was, artistically speaking, not so high as that of the Chimu. It was, however, in pre-Inca times, relatively complex. They practised trephining successfully (an art derived from their Yauyu ancestors), and they also frequently indulged in the anterio-posterior type of cranial deformation. Their general physical condition was good. They numbered about 25,000. Cf.

Cieza, Tr., p. 228; Garcila.s.so, II, pp. 146-149; Joyce, 1912, pp. 95, 187; Markham, 1912, pp. 237-239; Tello, 1912; Hrdlicka, 1914, pp. 22-24; Lafone-Quevedo, 1912, p. 115.

[86] This may have been the chief Taurichumbi mentioned by Estete. Cf.

Markham, 1912, p. 239.

[87] This was before Alvarado and Pizarro met and came to an agreement.

[88] Possibly Riobamba, Tumebamba, or some other place in the "Kingdom"

of Quito.

[89] Probably Sana.