Hmm, so having done more research on this here'd my hot takes:
I do agree with others about the Aztecs being rather unstable to say the least but by the same token we've seen Rome bounce back from some crazy bullshit so there's no saying the Aztec's couldn't even if it'd be hard. Regardless, I think Christianity would be fostered in these area relatively effectively provided the worst excesses of the Spanish were held back it might even be a somewhat smoother process, though be it one steeped in 'heresy' in many areas not directly tied to Spain. I imagine the further out one goes the less its embraced however, with the PurePecha likely not embracing it at all and potentially forming a bulwark against its spread with other allies. Basically, I can see it spreading in some choice city states and slowly being embraced in many areas, but likely quite slowly and with it being tied to political/profitable partnerships with the Spanish but it also likely hitting increasing resistance over time, possibly eventually leading to armed conflicts.
As for the Tawantinsuyu, I don't see it making much penetration at all, while the 'Inca' weren't always popular with their subjects, the Spanish, even if not able to colonize wouldn't present themselves any better. In fact they'd likely come off much worse given their aggressive bigotry regarding homosexuality in all forms, as it was quite comfortably embraced among the South and Christians contempt for women, and the rather casual ideas regarding relationships in general among the Tawantinsuyu. Not helped by the fact their ideas on how to "correct" such behavior usually involved torture and public humiliation, not just for the conquered but their own subjects.
Basically, the faith would look fucking miserable and unpleasant, offering nothing to potential adherents and given the last words of Atahualpa: “You have killed your God, but I see mine every day with the rising of the sun” I feel it'd struggle to make much headway on even a philosophical front. Especially as the Tawantinsuyu had a much more centralized government than the Aztecs, greater focus on stuff like food stability for all subjects and the like, meaning there's little weakness in the system to exploit.
If it took off at all it'd be the same way the Tawantinsuyu utilized any other religion, IE absorbing it into their own, in this case the Christian God would likely just be interpreted as an 'Eastern' equivalent or twin sibling to Viracocha, IE the creator of humanity. Christians would hate this, but some living in the empire might roll with it for the perks of living there and getting good deals for doing so, but otherwise, I don't see it having much appeal or popularity.
As for the Tawantinsuyu, I don't see it making much penetration at all, while the 'Inca' weren't always popular with their subjects, the Spanish, even if not able to colonize wouldn't present themselves any better. In fact they'd likely come off much worse given their aggressive bigotry regarding homosexuality in all forms, as it was quite comfortably embraced among the South and Christians contempt for women, and the rather casual ideas regarding relationships in general among the Tawantinsuyu. Not helped by the fact their ideas on how to "correct" such behavior usually involved torture and public humiliation, not just for the conquered but their own subjects.
Basically, the faith would look fucking miserable and unpleasant, offering nothing to potential adherents and given the last words of Atahualpa: “You have killed your God, but I see mine every day with the rising of the sun” I feel it'd struggle to make much headway on even a philosophical front. Especially as the Tawantinsuyu had a much more centralized government than the Aztecs, greater focus on stuff like food stability for all subjects and the like, meaning there's little weakness in the system to exploit.
If it took off at all it'd be the same way the Tawantinsuyu utilized any other religion, IE absorbing it into their own, in this case the Christian God would likely just be interpreted as an 'Eastern' equivalent or twin sibling to Viracocha, IE the creator of humanity. Christians would hate this, but some living in the empire might roll with it for the perks of living there and getting good deals for doing so, but otherwise, I don't see it having much appeal or popularity.
Using that logic no one would have adopted Christianity given it never matched 1:1 with whatever attitude or social systems people had before.
The idea that religions that equate the sun or other celestial bodies with gods somehow resist more abstract concepts of god is honestly perplexing considering history has shown the opposite trend.
There is a reason why Christianity took over Europe after Rome converted, or why Christianity spread through coastal Africa or made strong headways even in Japan.
The presence of European traders, mercenaries and the general collapse and instability of the post-diseases environment would push many people to convert and create drifts between different communities.
But obviously that goes out of the window if we are thinking in Inca-wank terms where the Inca retain tight control over everything, are barely impacted by diseases and where Spaniards and other Europeans somehow don't play a major role in the region.
I do agree with others about the Aztecs being rather unstable to say the least but by the same token we've seen Rome bounce back from some crazy bullshit so there's no saying the Aztec's couldn't even if it'd be hard. Regardless, I think Christianity would be fostered in these area relatively effectively provided the worst excesses of the Spanish were held back it might even be a somewhat smoother process, though be it one steeped in 'heresy' in many areas not directly tied to Spain. I imagine the further out one goes the less its embraced however, with the PurePecha likely not embracing it at all and potentially forming a bulwark against its spread with other allies. Basically, I can see it spreading in some choice city states and slowly being embraced in many areas, but likely quite slowly and with it being tied to political/profitable partnerships with the Spanish but it also likely hitting increasing resistance over time, possibly eventually leading to armed conflicts.
If Christianity starts getting adopted then it's frankly inevitable that it takes over in a matter of a few centuries at best, because the trend would be that more and more people convert, those people are supported by the Spanish and other Europeans and go on to become more political powerful which convinces other to convert as well, especially in the aftermath of one of the most turbulent period in Mesoamerican history with the coming of new technologies, diseases and new political players in the form of Europeans.
This "the more distant you are from the Spanish the less you convert" paradigm makes 0 sense for this reason.
Basically, the faith would look fucking miserable and unpleasant, offering nothing to potential adherents and given the last words of Atahualpa: “You have killed your God, but I see mine every day with the rising of the sun” I feel it'd struggle to make much headway on even a philosophical front. Especially as the Tawantinsuyu had a much more centralized government than the Aztecs, greater focus on stuff like food stability for all subjects and the like, meaning there's little weakness in the system to exploit.
Don't count out Christianity. Ours is a crafty faith, with a lot of destabilizing ideas.
One could seed the Incan totalitarian monarchy with ideas of freedom and equality as brothers in Christ, and back it up with bloody martyrdoms testifying to Christian dedication. It worked against Rome, it can work here.
Don't count out Christianity. Ours is a crafty faith, with a lot of destabilizing ideas.
One could seed the Incan totalitarian monarchy with ideas of freedom and equality as brothers in Christ, and back it up with bloody martyrdoms testifying to Christian dedication. It worked against Rome, it can work here.
That's a bit of a romanization, ultimately Christianity and even Islam will spread for the same reasons it spread elsewhere, which is 80-90% economical, trade and political benefits associated with converting and a snowball effect associated with missionary/exclusive religions.
Martyrs, displays of piety or even ideas of equality(as if Christian societies were even remotely equal or free, lol) don't matter at all or do so barely.
That's a bit of a romanization, ultimately Christianity and even Islam will spread for the same reasons it spread elsewhere, which is 80-90% economical, trade and political benefits associated with converting and a snowball effect associated with missionary/exclusive religions.
Martyrs, displays of piety or even ideas of equality(as if Christian societies were even remotely equal or free, lol) don't matter at all or do so barely.
If Christianity starts getting adopted then it's frankly inevitable that it takes over in a matter of a few centuries at best, because the trend would be that more and more people convert, those people are supported by the Spanish and other Europeans and go on to become more political powerful which convinces other to convert as well, especially in the aftermath of one of the most turbulent period in Mesoamerican history with the coming of new technologies, diseases and new political players in the form of Europeans.
This "the more distant you are from the Spanish the less you convert" paradigm makes 0 sense for this reason.
I think this is rather presumption, the Europeans also present massive upset, trauma, disease and general instability in the regions, there's tons of reasons for people to also reject it outside of Spain's direct influence and even there you will likely have people resentful of the treatment the traditionally faithful receive or seeking to ferment protests and revolutions.
Using that logic no one would have adopted Christianity given it never matched 1:1 with whatever attitude or social systems people had before.
The idea that religions that equate the sun or other celestial bodies with gods somehow resist more abstract concepts of god is honestly perplexing considering history has shown the opposite trend.
There is a reason why Christianity took over Europe after Rome converted, or why Christianity spread through coastal Africa or made strong headways even in Japan.
The presence of European traders, mercenaries and the general collapse and instability of the post-diseases environment would push many people to convert and create drifts between different communities.
But obviously that goes out of the window if we are thinking in Inca-wank terms where the Inca retain tight control over everything, are barely impacted by diseases and where Spaniards and other Europeans somehow don't play a major role in the region.
Um, no? I was providing one of several reasons it'd struggle to make inroads, and frankly your counter argument feels not so much weak as non existent; especially given much of Christianity's spread relied on stuff like forced conversion.
Again, this seems rather presumptuous and baseless I feel, like you don't back up this claim with anything, and more pointedly, I was highlighting the fact that Christianity is built heavily around having murdered their own god, which would make it fucking weird to outsiders they aren't able to cow or overwhelm and who weave religion into every aspect of everyday life.
Um, it succeeded in Rome because there was a strong missionary effort and then an emperor made it the state religion, Islam is what spread through most of Africa before Christians rolled in with conversion via gun point and it was hardly different in Japan.
Literally the only reason Spain made any inroads among the Tawantinsuyu is cos their leader chose to meet them openly to have discourse and they responded by backstabbing and ambushing him and then propping up a puppet monarch. Without that the Spaniards will lose any invasion attempts because they lost several notable battles in the empire due to struggling with their victims use of the land and strategy to outmaneuver and overwhelm their comparatively small forces. Invading, let alone conquering without the advantage of instantly decapitating the government and having a willing puppet would be insanely expensive and likely not deemed worth it meaning the Europeans are mostly stuck hovering in the periphery and trying to influence things through trade deals and alliances which aren't going to magically win people over to Christianity cos again, its got nothing to offer the Tawantinsuyu and they have no real power to enforce it.
Don't count out Christianity. Ours is a crafty faith, with a lot of destabilizing ideas.
One could seed the Incan totalitarian monarchy with ideas of freedom and equality as brothers in Christ, and back it up with bloody martyrdoms testifying to Christian dedication. It worked against Rome, it can work here.
Given the Spaniards attempt at conquest's, their brutal treatment of heretics, their oppressive abuse of women, and the cornucopia of nightmares they have unleashed in the North, those ideas are going to sound insincere at best, especially when the Christians are still ruled by a king, so they wouldn't look notably difference to the Tawantinsuyu at best.
As it is these responses seem to view Christianity as some sort of special snowflake religion that will succeed because its the true faith, rather than the historical reason it succeeded which was the barrel of a gun and massive amount of destabilizing disease, political assassinations and government sponsored torture programs to make people submit, which can't be happening in the very premise of this TL.
Given the Spaniards attempt at conquest's, their brutal treatment of heretics, their oppressive abuse of women, and the cornucopia of nightmares they have unleashed in the North, those ideas are going to sound insincere at best, especially when the Christians are still ruled by a king, so they wouldn't look notably difference to the Tawantinsuyu at best.
As it is these responses seem to view Christianity as some sort of special snowflake religion that will succeed because its the true faith, rather than the historical reason it succeeded which was the barrel of a gun and massive amount of destabilizing disease, political assassinations and government sponsored torture programs to make people submit, which can't be happening in the very premise of this TL.
Um, thank you? I confess I wasn't expecting that response
I should also scale it back a bit and note that trade, personal profits ETC also did inform other more willing conversions at times.
But that I still maintain that won't have much pull in the Tawantinsuyu given the aforementioned reasons. IE, its a large, powerful state in its own right (as opposed to many of the smaller groups that converted fairly quickly cos what else were they going to do and or they needed the help) with a great deal of wealth and organized governance that makes it a point to try and provide stuff like food, housing and support for its populace and there isn't exactly a merchant or monetary class to appeal to via money.
This means a lot of the subtler, soft power touches for spreading the religion are also limited in their ability to do much and heavily reliant on the people dong so being extremely compelling and as noted, its gonna be a hard sell in a lot of places where Christianity comes hand in hand with a massive reduction in rights. Especially when being offered by people who also brought disease and other strife, as that'd likely make them and anything associated with them of ill omen to most folks.
As noted, it might make some inroads, but I think it'd b through syncretism more than anything, especially as the Sapa Inca and company also have nothing to gain by converting, the Sapa Inca's role in society is heavily predicate on their gods as are the Priests. So even ignoring devoted believe, embracing the faith would also implicitly reduce their ranks in the skein of the cosmos, especially the Sapa Inca's and put them under the nominal authority of some distant dude called a Pope.
It involves surrendering so much that I can't see it being a popular option unless they were being forced to and as we know with Atahualpa at least, he's definitely faithful.
LOL, I understand. I know too much history to deny it, much as I like to think there's a bit more to it than that.
Speaking of which, Christianity's friars do change tactics for places hard to crack. Look at Japan and China, and the way the Jesuits operated there. If Tawantinsuyu doesn't collapse, Christianity could still make its way into the land and its cultural milieu, with missionaries adapting to the ways of the people to more of an extent than IOTL and looking for cracks to seep into. Still, you're spot on that the Incan empire can more easily stamp out the faith than in the north, as I said before on this thread.
LOL, I understand. I know too much history to deny it, much as I like to think there's a bit more to it than that.
Speaking of which, Christianity's friars do change tactics for places hard to crack. Look at Japan and China, and the way the Jesuits operated there. If Tawantinsuyu doesn't collapse, Christianity could still make its way into the land and its cultural milieu, with missionaries adapting to the ways of the people to more of an extent than IOTL and looking for cracks to seep into. Still, you're spot on that the Incan empire can more easily stamp out the faith than in the north, as I said before on this thread.
That's fair, I'm certainly not here to knock on anyone's faith.
That's fair, I can see its direct form being taken to in some mixed ports where 'Incans' who live there may embrace it, either adding it to their list of spiritual concerns or embracing it wholeheartedly and otherwise hugging the periphery of the empire if the preachers adapt. But as you say, the empire overalls got a rather robust system that would make it much harder to catch on and easier to squash out, so I think it'd likely end up as a minority religion by the modern era.
So sorry for the double post but it only just occurred to me, but just as there might be conversions to Christianity even among the Tawantinsuyu we should also consider how their existence may ripple back into Europe, please bear with me.
Presumably the reason the Tawantinsuyu remain independent is cos the ambush failed or simply they never had the opportunity and so Spain had to just take the pill and say "let's be friends" out of concern the Portuguese or someone else may move in on the Tawantinsuyu with a better deal or otherwise get lucky and thus gets all that gold Spain needs to fund is crazy wars. They obviously don't like the 'heathen' religion but so long as the Sapa Inca doesn't repress them or their missionary efforts while trade is happening. These would be tolerated provided they avoided being disruptive (Such as trying to stop religious festivals) destructive (Enacting violence on subjects or places of worship) or devious, (Trying to stoke rebellion) Or in other words, "Don't break any laws and fine, you can tell people about your religion."
But the thing is, word of the Tawantinsuyu's culture would make its way back home, the wealth would also lure people to the trade ports as much or more than religious fervor and with that even more word would travel back and you may well get some people... Thinking
What I mean here is that, I was discussing something along these lines with someone the other day and they noted that even in Medieval Europe you had hidden communities of queer people for example, (along with other repressed groups) So the thought occurs to me, there may also be a slowly increasing number of Europeans who get wind of a legitimately accepting place that's got enough power to cow the advance of the Spanish Empire where you can also make a lot of money and may just... Decide to take a job there, maybe move there full time, maybe appeal to become a subject of the Sapa Inca?
This likely would start small and stay very much under the radar, especially when Spain finds out about it and they may try to force the Sapa Inca to disallow is but they'd then likely be told "If you want me to eject and reject such people, then I should be granted the same right to reject your priests and poachers, make your choice." Money wins out again and the system persists, with a potentially small but growing subculture of Europeans who migrated to the New World to escape oppression and as a result, ended up embracing the beliefs of the Tawantinsuyu.
EDIT: To be more on topic, this may further undermine the spread of Christianity in some areas, as there'd be an unfiltered source of info on it.
Presumably the reason the Tawantinsuyu remain independent is cos the ambush failed or simply they never had the opportunity and so Spain had to just take the pill and say "let's be friends" out of concern the Portuguese or someone else may move in on the Tawantinsuyu with a better deal or otherwise get lucky and thus gets all that gold Spain needs to fund is crazy wars. They obviously don't like the 'heathen' religion but so long as the Sapa Inca doesn't repress them or their missionary efforts while trade is happening. These would be tolerated provided they avoided being disruptive (Such as trying to stop religious festivals) destructive (Enacting violence on subjects or places of worship) or devious, (Trying to stoke rebellion) Or in other words, "Don't break any laws and fine, you can tell people about your religion."
But the thing is, word of the Tawantinsuyu's culture would make its way back home, the wealth would also lure people to the trade ports as much or more than religious fervor and with that even more word would travel back and you may well get some people... Thinking
What I mean here is that, I was discussing something along these lines with someone the other day and they noted that even in Medieval Europe you had hidden communities of queer people for example, (along with other repressed groups) So the thought occurs to me, there may also be a slowly increasing number of Europeans who get wind of a legitimately accepting place that's got enough power to cow the advance of the Spanish Empire where you can also make a lot of money and may just... Decide to take a job there, maybe move there full time, maybe appeal to become a subject of the Sapa Inca?
an lgbt migration? this would be something different but could probably only occur in the late 16th century due to improvements in navigation.
But it won't be on a large scale, these people have family/friends (I don't know if they would abandon them just for sexual freedom, a father for example abandoning his children to stay with his boyfriend). This could also make europe have a worse view of homosexuality than otl
This likely would start small and stay very much under the radar, especially when Spain finds out about it and they may try to force the Sapa Inca to disallow is but they'd then likely be told "If you want me to eject and reject such people, then I should be granted the same right to reject your priests and poachers, make your choice." Money wins out again and the system persists, with a potentially small but growing subculture of Europeans who migrated to the New World to escape oppression and as a result, ended up embracing the beliefs of the Tawantinsuyu.this may further undermine the spread of Christianity in some areas, as there'd be an unfiltered source of info on it.
I don't know if the Europeans will handle it well. Probably raids, aiding uprisings against the government, demanding trophy quotas and other coastal factors will be required. With the Incas denying it, making the relationship between the two very bad. Even when the relationship normalizes. With some Incas adopting a very bastard form of Christianity, which would make Europeans see them as heretics. There are several things that get in the way of the acceptance of Christianity by the Incas. Their more restricted social customs for example. There was a more direct problem with continuous looting/attacks made by bandeirantes who arrived as far as Quito in otl, which was protected by the Spanish (leaving the city of São Paulo). These attacks will be continuous (last at least a century) and similar to the Viking raids on Europe for riches and slaves. Keeping the flame of hate strong. So if the Incas were not conquered they either create a bastard form of Catholicism/Protestantism or they will simply have intense "nationalism" (probably against Europeans and other indigenous groups).
an lgbt migration? this would be something different but could probably only occur in the late 16th century due to improvements in navigation.
But it won't be on a large scale, these people have family/friends (I don't know if they would abandon them just for sexual freedom, a father for example abandoning his children to stay with his boyfriend). This could also make europe have a worse view of homosexuality than otl
As I said, I think this would be fairly small and under the radar, but it would still likely be a thing and stories of it would still have potential impacts in the East, IE Europe, regardless. Plus, beards are a fairly common things, especially for queer communities in places where its illegal, its entirely possible said gay man with a boyfriend is married to a lesbian and they are fine with moving the entire family somewhere they aren't liable to suddenly be dragged from their homes and tortured cos someone caught them slipping.
I don't know if the Europeans will handle it well. Probably raids, aiding uprisings against the government, demanding trophy quotas and other coastal factors will be required. With the Incas denying it, making the relationship between the two very bad. Even when the relationship normalizes.
I guess, but I doubt none of that is stuff they weren't already doing, this doesn't radically change their negative opinion of the Tawantinsuyu, nor can it realistically change much in policy cos its mostly Europeans being the active agents on this front, so I'd envision it being more like them making life unpleasant for merchants and travelers due to suspicion.
With some Incas adopting a very bastard form of Christianity, which would make Europeans see them as heretics. There are several things that get in the way of the acceptance of Christianity by the Incas. Their more restricted social customs for example. There was a more direct problem with continuous looting/attacks made by bandeirantes who arrived as far as Quito in otl, which was protected by the Spanish (leaving the city of São Paulo). These attacks will be continuous (last at least a century) and similar to the Viking raids on Europe for riches and slaves. Keeping the flame of hate strong. So if the Incas were not conquered they either create a bastard form of Catholicism/Protestantism or they will simply have intense "nationalism" (probably against Europeans and other indigenous groups).
Pretty much agreed with that first sentence and the second, and the follow up I hadn't considered the banditry but yeah that'd definitely be an issue, maybe less effective as the Tawantinsuyu's forces would actually be motivated to deal with the bandits, while the Spanish probably only cared if it impacted them and not the natives, but still a persistent problem tat would, as you say, fan the flames of hate. The last line sort of implies the Tawantinsuyu's faiths aren't being taken into consideration here so I am a little confused on that front, but otherwise agree, honestly the bandeirantes would likely do a good job of making the empire inadvertently more stable because its the Sapa Inca and his army that provide protection from these horrible assholes who keep attacking everyone.
beards are a fairly common things, especially for queer communities in places where its illegal, its entirely possible said gay man with a boyfriend is married to a lesbian and they are fine with moving the entire family somewhere they aren't liable to suddenly be dragged from their homes and tortured cos someone caught them slipping.
in the period I think it is less likely, beards with a homosexual marrying a lesbian is very unlikely for the period. I don't know if the family will follow just because the father/mother wants to be sexually free. Especially going to a non-Christian country. It's not something as simple as a trip to another village. So if there's a case of a family being broken up (a famous case) because of this, LGBT people will be much more frowned and maybe lasting a lot longer. Were the Aztecs lgbt tolerant or not?
I guess, but I doubt none of that is stuff they weren't already doing, this doesn't radically change their negative opinion of the Tawantinsuyu, nor can it realistically change much in policy cos its mostly Europeans being the active agents on this front, so I'd envision it being more like them making life unpleasant for merchants and travelers due to suspicion.
maybe less effective as the Tawantinsuyu's forces would actually be motivated to deal with the bandits, while the Spanish probably only cared if it impacted them and not the natives, but still a persistent problem tat would, as you say, fan the flames of hate.
perhaps, the bandeirantes were a disgusting people to fight. They managed to get the Spanish crown to allow the indigenous people to have weapons to protect themselves. They attacked Spaniards too, from Jesuits and priests to Spanish villages. They almost caused war between Spaniards and Portuguese more than
The last line sort of implies the Tawantinsuyu's faiths aren't being taken into consideration here so I am a little confused on that front, but otherwise agree,
I unfortunately do not have a great knowledge of the Inca religion if you can explain it to me I would appreciate it.I don't know if it is crazy at the Aztec level or is more normal.
honestly the bandeirantes would likely do a good job of making the empire inadvertently more stable because its the Sapa Inca and his army that provide protection from these horrible assholes who keep attacking everyone.
yes, with these continuous attacks encouraging the creation of a professional or at least semi-professional army. Anything less and the Bandeirantes will plunder the entire empire. the Bandeirantes, attacked more than once the officers and bureaucrats of Portugal. They were a difficult group to deal with the Portuguese preferring to push them to attack their enemies/friends than to deal with them. maybe they turn into some kind of Inca bogeyman? Just like the vikings were in europe.
Literally the only reason Spain made any inroads among the Tawantinsuyu is cos their leader chose to meet them openly to have discourse and they responded by backstabbing and ambushing him and then propping up a puppet monarch. Without that the Spaniards will lose any invasion attempts because they lost several notable battles in the empire due to struggling with their victims use of the land and strategy to outmaneuver and overwhelm their comparatively small forces. Invading, let alone conquering without the advantage of instantly decapitating the government and having a willing puppet would be insanely expensive and likely not deemed worth it meaning the Europeans are mostly stuck hovering in the periphery and trying to influence things through trade deals and alliances which aren't going to magically win people over to Christianity cos again, its got nothing to offer the Tawantinsuyu and they have no real power to enforce it.
Given we don't have a single example of such a long-term survival of any American state happening this will always remains just a theory built on a whole host of assumptions, the likely scenario is that as time goes more and more Spaniards would likely flock places like Panama and Colombia and become themselves more aware of the geography and internal politics of their neighbours, while the Andean populations would become more and more impacted by diseases as the 16th century rolls by and only start recover generations afterwards.
Certainly the Spaniards would be able to find allies among the disgrunted subjects of the empire, even if not as allies for a Spanish conquest maybe as potential converts and breakway-groups(I'm not claiming that the Spanish WILL conquer the Inca in all timelines, only that it's more likely than not that they will be able to project enough power to make Christianity an important element in the post-contact Incan society, rather than being somehow so unpopular). To illustrate this one can simply dispel the idea that the Incas were somehow benevolent rulers:
The cliff notes would be that, more than the military exploits, the Spanish did a masterful job of exploiting weaknesses at the foundation of the Incan empire. Those weaknesses grew from its explosive rise from a kingdom under Pacha Kuti (there are myriad spellings of his name) to an empire in the way which almost all empires are built, through the conquest of other peoples. The Inca maintained their empire through a system of (forced) marriage and, from at least some historian's perspective, continued, ritualized terror of their conquered peoples. Their name for their ruler, "Sapa Inca" itself hints at the deeply familial aspect of its government - Inca (or Inka) is the familial name of the supreme royal family of Cuzco. Calling it the Incan empire as compared to the Cuzcan empire would be similar to calling the Roman empire the "Julio-Claudian" empire - . Sapa Inca, the name for the ruler, just means "the only Inca", i.e. the patriarch of the Inca family.
The Inca were excellent conquerors but, as Omar Bradley quote fabulously puts it, "Amateurs discuss strategy. Professionals talk logistics." More than anything, the Inca's ability to construct roads in the rugged Andes to support and transport their large armies was immensely important to their conquest of their neighbors, who were often at similar or in some cases (from what I recall reading) arguably more advanced states of development, such as the Moche (those same roads were invaluable to the Spanish in time).
After conquest, the Inca imposed taxes, which included their religion upon native peoples. This religion, which, to the extent I have read, was in many regards not dissimilar from neighboring cultures in its religious/military/political aspects or utility, but became something of a sticking point with their conquered people, and I've read different commentaries arguing that it wasn't simply imposed as a religion, but became a tool of state sponsored terrorism to keep conquered peoples pacified.
The Incan taxation system was unusual (not for the Americas but in most other cultures) in that, along with ordinary tribute/taxes (jewels, silver, livestock, etc), it included a human taxation. Human taxation has actually been pretty standard throughout time and actually existed in other cultures as well, it took the form of mandatory work time: at a certain time in the year, communities were expected to send workers to maintain the roads, bridges, and forts that were so essential to the Incan military - just, to give a sense of how amazing these roads were, the Incan ability to transmit information via the Chasquis is mind boggling in a society that had no horses and was in many parts mountainous, and that messenger system was a product of the roads, waystations, and forts that the Incan military supported through tax tribute and built by those mandatory labor taxes. But there was another kind of human taxation, a kind of state terror program in which the children of foreign polities like the Moche linked above, were sent to Cuzco to be ritually killed.
The Inca do not seem to have practiced human sacrifice to the scale of the Aztecs, and there is some indication that certain Sapas outlawed the practice at various times, but they archaeological work shows they definitely did practice it in what they called Capacocha consistently over time, even if not continuously, and it was aligned with the Inca Sapa - if he fell sick, or if one died, there would be sacrifices, and people knew where their children were being sent. And what a strong reminder of who your conqueror is - "the king fell sick, we are gonna need a few more of your kids to replace the ones you just sent us we had to kill to bring him back to health, the empire appreciates it". What is interesting, you'll note from that wikipedia link, is that A. the translation is "royal obligation", i.e. a tax, B. most of the children came from outlying (more recently conquered) territories.
Any timeline that involves not only complete Incan independence, but also the preservation of a single Incan state throughout this entire period(which I deem as necessary to prevent Christianity from making major inroads) on top of complete religious continuity is ultimately not the most likely scenario to say the least.
especially given much of Christianity's spread relied on stuff like forced conversion.
I can list many examples of Christianity spreading not through conquest but through diplomacy, ultimately it still relied on the demographic and economic strength of the post-roman state and the pattern of growing complexity in Central and Eastern Europe being associated and carried by Christian states but ultimately something similar would apply here. Similar arguments apply to the spread of Islam in some regions like South-East Asia or even the Eurasian Steppe
before Christians rolled in with conversion via gun point and it was hardly different in Japan.
Forced conversion in Japan? Are you sure?
Also it took a generation after Portuguese contact for the kingdom of Kongo to establish Christianity as the state religion for example.
I think this is rather presumption, the Europeans also present massive upset, trauma, disease and general instability in the regions, there's tons of reasons for people to also reject it outside of Spain's direct influence and even there you will likely have people resentful of the treatment the traditionally faithful receive or seeking to ferment protests and revolutions.
This argument might be sound in vacuum but when compared to what actually happened in similar cases in history one can see that it simply is baseless, the enslaved Africans for example didn't really reject Christianity outright just because it was the religion of the people that enslaved them.
I can list countless examples of people that according to your logic would or should have rejected the culture and religion of their conquerors or oppressors, heck the same argument could be made for the many peoples the expanding Incas conquered, deported and imposed harsh taxation on or even to the many pagans that were adversary of neighboring Christian states for centuries, yet they all converted eventually.
in the period I think it is less likely, beards with a homosexual marrying a lesbian is very unlikely for the period. I don't know if the family will follow just because the father/mother wants to be sexually free. Especially going to a non-Christian country. It's not something as simple as a trip to another village. So if there's a case of a family being broken up (a famous case) because of this, LGBT people will be much more frowned and maybe lasting a lot longer. Were the Aztecs lgbt tolerant or not?
My understanding is that it was far from uncommon as it was safer for both parties like that. I feel the phrasing of 'sexually free' is kind of reductive tot he situation here, its not purely about self, its about freedom, and more pointedly, safety to not be suddenly tortured just for existence and to have your entire life destroyed. Also if they are children then they don't really get a choice in moving. The Aztecs were quite homophobic.
perhaps, the bandeirantes were a disgusting people to fight. They managed to get the Spanish crown to allow the indigenous people to have weapons to protect themselves. They attacked Spaniards too, from Jesuits and priests to Spanish villages. They almost caused war between Spaniards and Portuguese more than
I unfortunately do not have a great knowledge of the Inca religion if you can explain it to me I would appreciate it.I don't know if it is crazy at the Aztec level or is more normal.
It was way more chill than the Aztecs by a million margins, there were only two sacrifices a year that operated on the pretense of sending the chosen teens to be blessed servants of the gods. The process involved the families being highly rewarded and the sacrifices spending a year living in luxury before going to a mountain and drinking beer until they fall asleep and then being killed quickly and cleanly. There might be cases of heightened sacrifice if there's a natural disaster but that was theoretical.
Beyond that it was a pantheon based religion, with Inti as the nominal top dog and with a counterpart in the moon, gold and silver were seen as sweat of the sun & moon, the religion quite like its duality and viewed there as being the material world, a higher world and a sort of world off to the side. There were also evil entities that lived underground Missionaries claimed to be Satan. They had a god who basically made humans and some theorize that god was becoming more important but that seems questionable given how the last independent Sapa Inca died; also the position of Sapa Inca entailed being the, for all intents and purposes, divine child of the sun, so sort of like Pharaoh. They also were big fans of taking local gods ad adding them to the Pantheon, usually as subjects to Inti, but still highly venerated.
yes, with these continuous attacks encouraging the creation of a professional or at least semi-professional army. Anything less and the Bandeirantes will plunder the entire empire. the Bandeirantes, attacked more than once the officers and bureaucrats of Portugal. They were a difficult group to deal with the Portuguese preferring to push them to attack their enemies/friends than to deal with them. maybe they turn into some kind of Inca bogeyman? Just like the vikings were in europe.
I think that makes a lot of sense, this would definitely lead to the permanent deployment of the military in lots of areas and I can see the logic in trying to direct them at people outside the empire, while ever still them becoming more and more of an Incan horror story.
Given we don't have a single example of such a long-term survival of any American state happening this will always remains just a theory built on a whole host of assumptions, the likely scenario is that as time goes more and more Spaniards would likely flock places like Panama and Colombia and become themselves more aware of the geography and internal politics of their neighbours, while the Andean populations would become more and more impacted by diseases as the 16th century rolls by and only start recover generations afterwards.
Certainly the Spaniards would be able to find allies among the disgrunted subjects of the empire, even if not as allies for a Spanish conquest maybe as potential converts and breakway-groups(I'm not claiming that the Spanish WILL conquer the Inca in all timelines, only that it's more likely than not that they will be able to project enough power to make Christianity an important element in the post-contact Incan society, rather than being somehow so unpopular). To illustrate this one can simply dispel the idea that the Incas were somehow benevolent rulers:
The cliff notes would be that, more than the military exploits, the Spanish did a masterful job of exploiting weaknesses at the foundation of the Incan empire. Those weaknesses grew from its explosive rise from a kingdom under Pacha Kuti (there are myriad spellings of his name) to an empire in the way which almost all empires are built, through the conquest of other peoples. The Inca maintained their empire through a system of (forced) marriage and, from at least some historian's perspective, continued, ritualized terror of their conquered peoples. Their name for their ruler, "Sapa Inca" itself hints at the deeply familial aspect of its government - Inca (or Inka) is the familial name of the supreme royal family of Cuzco. Calling it the Incan empire as compared to the Cuzcan empire would be similar to calling the Roman empire the "Julio-Claudian" empire - . Sapa Inca, the name for the ruler, just means "the only Inca", i.e. the patriarch of the Inca family.
The Inca were excellent conquerors but, as Omar Bradley quote fabulously puts it, "Amateurs discuss strategy. Professionals talk logistics." More than anything, the Inca's ability to construct roads in the rugged Andes to support and transport their large armies was immensely important to their conquest of their neighbors, who were often at similar or in some cases (from what I recall reading) arguably more advanced states of development, such as the Moche (those same roads were invaluable to the Spanish in time).
After conquest, the Inca imposed taxes, which included their religion upon native peoples. This religion, which, to the extent I have read, was in many regards not dissimilar from neighboring cultures in its religious/military/political aspects or utility, but became something of a sticking point with their conquered people, and I've read different commentaries arguing that it wasn't simply imposed as a religion, but became a tool of state sponsored terrorism to keep conquered peoples pacified.
The Incan taxation system was unusual (not for the Americas but in most other cultures) in that, along with ordinary tribute/taxes (jewels, silver, livestock, etc), it included a human taxation. Human taxation has actually been pretty standard throughout time and actually existed in other cultures as well, it took the form of mandatory work time: at a certain time in the year, communities were expected to send workers to maintain the roads, bridges, and forts that were so essential to the Incan military - just, to give a sense of how amazing these roads were, the Incan ability to transmit information via the Chasquis is mind boggling in a society that had no horses and was in many parts mountainous, and that messenger system was a product of the roads, waystations, and forts that the Incan military supported through tax tribute and built by those mandatory labor taxes. But there was another kind of human taxation, a kind of state terror program in which the children of foreign polities like the Moche linked above, were sent to Cuzco to be ritually killed.
The Inca do not seem to have practiced human sacrifice to the scale of the Aztecs, and there is some indication that certain Sapas outlawed the practice at various times, but they archaeological work shows they definitely did practice it in what they called Capacocha consistently over time, even if not continuously, and it was aligned with the Inca Sapa - if he fell sick, or if one died, there would be sacrifices, and people knew where their children were being sent. And what a strong reminder of who your conqueror is - "the king fell sick, we are gonna need a few more of your kids to replace the ones you just sent us we had to kill to bring him back to health, the empire appreciates it". What is interesting, you'll note from that wikipedia link, is that A. the translation is "royal obligation", i.e. a tax, B. most of the children came from outlying (more recently conquered) territories.
Source:
Any timeline that involves not only complete Incan independence, but also the preservation of a single Incan state throughout this entire period(which I deem as necessary to prevent Christianity from making major inroads) on top of complete religious continuity is ultimately not the most likely scenario to say the least.
Without the Spanish spreading like a literal plague and fucking over the entire civilization the spread of disease and its impact would be radically reduced, this isn't just me going off the cuff either. I've watched lectures from an expert on the topic noting a major reason the disease impacts were so large is because the Spanish used disease warfare and basically fucked over all the systems that would have helped mitigate the damage, that can't be happening here cos the Tawantinsuyu are still in command and the Spanish can't just swarm over the countryside, cos they aren't in charge.
Not to be blunt but a bunch of violent invading assholes who spread disease and want to be in charge will at best, come off as just a shittier version of the Tawantinsuyu, they have no appeal and nothing to offer. You seem to confuse benevolence for competence, I wasn't saying the Sapa Inca was some beacon of huggy wuggy feels, I'm saying that the way the empire was structured and run was designed and run in such a way that housing, food and security were provided, while European civilizations mostly only offered such things to people who could pay for it, which is also why that "amateur's discuss strategy" thing makes no sense, because the Tawantinsuyu was logistically brilliant.
I can list many examples of Christianity spreading not through conquest but through diplomacy, ultimately it still relied on the demographic and economic strength of the post-roman state and the pattern of growing complexity in Central and Eastern Europe being associated and carried by Christian states but ultimately something similar would apply here. Similar arguments apply to the spread of Islam in some regions like South-East Asia or even the Eurasian Steppe
Forced conversion in Japan? Are you sure?
Also it took a generation after Portuguese contact for the kingdom of Kongo to establish Christianity as the state religion for example.
This completely ignores the fact that this was 100% not how it happened in most places, IE, most of Africa and the Americas, and that this version still relied on being in a massively dominant position and took centuries.
The Europeans forced Japan to open and to run how they wanted, it wasn't gun in face conversion, but it sure as hell wasn't because Christianity was just so cool and fab that everyone wanted to jump aboard.
This argument might be sound in vacuum but when compared to what actually happened in similar cases in history one can see that it simply is baseless, the enslaved Africans for example didn't really reject Christianity outright just because it was the religion of the people that enslaved them.
I can list countless examples of people that according to your logic would or should have rejected the culture and religion of their conquerors or oppressors, heck the same argument could be made for the many peoples the expanding Incas conquered, deported and imposed harsh taxation on or even to the many pagans that were adversary of neighboring Christian states for centuries, yet they all converted eventually.
When you have your entire culture, society and systems of support taken away from you and actively sabotaged, and you need to be Christian to even have a chance of being perceived as being human, then you cling to whatever you have left that might be of some use; this situation does not apply in this version of the Americas.
The Tawantinsuyu didn't actually take away other people's religion, they just added it to their own, its a rather different system to "Everything you believe is wrong".
EDIT:
Like I feel I have to note, Christianity is not some special snowflake religion that spread super easy. It spent generations as little more than a minority faith, its spread in Rome was heavily reliant on the increasing corruption of those at the top and even then it still needed an emperor to mandate it as the state religion and eventually forcing out all others. Its spread was not some widely, enthusiastically embraced thing following Jesus's death, it took time, effort, and a whole lot of bodies to get anywhere and benefited greatly from a weakening and increasingly corrupt state it could rally people against. In a surviving Tawantinsuyu, pretty much none of that applies, and resentment for the Sapa Inca, is not going to make people think "I should throw away my beliefs for these assholes cos they also hate this other asshole."
Without the Spanish spreading like a literal plague and fucking over the entire civilization the spread of disease and its impact would be radically reduced, this isn't just me going off the cuff either. I've watched lectures from an expert on the topic noting a major reason the disease impacts were so large is because the Spanish used disease warfare and basically fucked over all the systems that would have helped mitigate the damage, that can't be happening here cos the Tawantinsuyu are still in command and the Spanish can't just swarm over the countryside, cos they aren't in charge.
Not to be blunt but a bunch of violent invading assholes who spread disease and want to be in charge will at best, come off as just a shittier version of the Tawantinsuyu, they have no appeal and nothing to offer. You seem to confuse benevolence for competence, I wasn't saying the Sapa Inca was some beacon of huggy wuggy feels, I'm saying that the way the empire was structured and run was designed and run in such a way that housing, food and security were provided, while European civilizations mostly only offered such things to people who could pay for it, which is also why that "amateur's discuss strategy" thing makes no sense, because the Tawantinsuyu was logistically brilliant.
Show us that the Spanish uses biological warfare and that if they that is the main reason why diseases spread.
Every single time someone claimed this, the evidence they fell back to was both extremely sporadic and very controversial in how to interpret it, it's just wrong to claim with such certainty that this is the case.
You clearly have a fantasy almost utopic understanding of the Inca(despite you claiming otherwise, they just were socially, economically and logistically superior to everyone!) and I don't care enough to disprove each claim you make, but at least you should try to corroborate some of your claims with something.
Show us that the Spanish uses biological warfare and that if they that is the main reason why diseases spread.
Every single time someone claimed this, the evidence they fell back to was both extremely sporadic and very controversial in how to interpret it, it's just wrong to claim with such certainty that this is the case.
You clearly have a fantasy almost utopic understanding of the Inca and I don't care enough to disprove each claim you make, but at least you should try to corroborate your claims with something.
While not the Americas specifically, we do know Spain:
Mixed wine with blood of leprosy patients to sell to their French foes, Naples, Italy.
Beyond that, one of my main sources is history professor Al Carroll, who covers this stuff in more detail in his works though I can't provide specific book quotes due to the nature of how I watched his lectures.
Though there is also this, which is more what I was talking about in terms of the Spanish actively fucking over any attempts to mitigate the harm they wrought upon the people they conquered: "Cook's judgement on the effects of U.S rule upon the native Californians is harsh: "The first (factor) was the food supply... The second factor was the disease. ...A third factor, which strongly intensified the effect of the other two, was the social and physical disruption visited upon the Indian. He was driven from his home by the thousands, starved, beaten, raped, and murdered with impunity. He was not only given no assistance in the struggle against foreign diseases, but was prevented from adopting even the most elementary measures to secure his food, clothing, and shelter. The utter devastation caused by the white man was literally incredible, and not until the population figures are examined does the extent of the havoc become evident." Cook, Sherburne F. 1976b. The Population of the California Indians, 1769–1970. University of California Press, Berkeley|p."
You've provided no evidence for your claims either, while ignoring any and all context regarding the social structures of the empire or how even the basics of trade and travel would work and then blandly insisting Christianity will just spread, so to me you come off as the one with the fantasy visions that aren't worth disproving. But here, these videos talk about the impressive logistics of the empire and also the fact that those who could not work still had their lands worked for them as well as food and shelter supplied to them.
They also make it clear the empire was not utopic which I also never argued, I just noted it lacks the weaknesses of the increasingly unstable and hedonistic roman empire, a leadership that would embrace and enforce it, or massive subjugation that would make spreading Christianity easy, while also not really offering anything material and how the people proposing it would logically be at best, just as hated as the Sapa Inca, if not logically more-so.
Though there is also this, which is more what I was talking about in terms of the Spanish actively fucking over any attempts to mitigate the harm they wrought upon the people they conquered: "Cook's judgement on the effects of U.S rule upon the native Californians is harsh: "The first (factor) was the food supply... The second factor was the disease. ...A third factor, which strongly intensified the effect of the other two, was the social and physical disruption visited upon the Indian. He was driven from his home by the thousands, starved, beaten, raped, and murdered with impunity. He was not only given no assistance in the struggle against foreign diseases, but was prevented from adopting even the most elementary measures to secure his food, clothing, and shelter. The utter devastation caused by the white man was literally incredible, and not until the population figures are examined does the extent of the havoc become evident." Cook, Sherburne F. 1976b. The Population of the California Indians, 1769–1970. University of California Press, Berkeley|p."
