Huascar, Atahualpa and Pizarro's Conquest

I could have this all wrong, and possibly I do, since wikipedia isn't much help and what I know of pre-European American history is iffy at best, so I'm hoping that you learned scholars can help.

I've just finished reading Clive Cussler's book, Inca Gold. In this book, which, for a work of fiction is good (and considering how close to the actual facts of history some of his other books are, I feel there are some nuggets of truth here), he talks of a civil war between Huascar and his bastard half-brother, Atahualpa. It was at the height of this civil war that Pizarro marched in with the Spaniards and used the civil war to his advantage (much as Cortez had done in Mexico) to defeat the Incas. Now from what I can ground in facts, Huascar was succeeded by Atahualpa, and there was a sort of conflict about the succession (perhaps not on the scale Cussler portrays, though). But what if someone in the Inca camp (whichever side, decides that "hey, let's team up, kick these nasty invaders out, and sacrifice them to whichever gods, and then we can go back to killing each other"?).

Also, the book talks that Atahualpa had Huascar killed since he feared that Huascar would offer Pizarro more gold than he could. Now, my question is, why did he think that Huascar (whom he supposedly had on the ropes) could offer Pizarro more (in the midst of a civil war)?

I look forward to your responses
 

trurle

Banned
I could have this all wrong, and possibly I do, since wikipedia isn't much help and what I know of pre-European American history is iffy at best, so I'm hoping that you learned scholars can help.

I've just finished reading Clive Cussler's book, Inca Gold. In this book, which, for a work of fiction is good (and considering how close to the actual facts of history some of his other books are, I feel there are some nuggets of truth here), he talks of a civil war between Huascar and his bastard half-brother, Atahualpa. It was at the height of this civil war that Pizarro marched in with the Spaniards and used the civil war to his advantage (much as Cortez had done in Mexico) to defeat the Incas. Now from what I can ground in facts, Huascar was succeeded by Atahualpa, and there was a sort of conflict about the succession (perhaps not on the scale Cussler portrays, though). But what if someone in the Inca camp (whichever side, decides that "hey, let's team up, kick these nasty invaders out, and sacrifice them to whichever gods, and then we can go back to killing each other"?).

Also, the book talks that Atahualpa had Huascar killed since he feared that Huascar would offer Pizarro more gold than he could. Now, my question is, why did he think that Huascar (whom he supposedly had on the ropes) could offer Pizarro more (in the midst of a civil war)?

I look forward to your responses
The civil war was actually over by the time Pizarro have made a formal encounter with an Inca Empire. Pizzarro in Cajamarca bumped into victorious army of Atahualpa returning from their unification company. Actually this timing is obvious, because succession crisis which brought Atahualpa to power was triggered by previous Emperor of Inca death in epidemic brought by early Spanish explorers and propagating through Inca traders.
 
??? As in, 'not at all'? Really?

Well, considering I was about 13 when I read my first Cussler book, RAISE THE TITANIC, my history knowledge was iffy, and besides knowing that the Titanic was lying in two pieces and that it would be probably impossible to raise her, it seemed reasonably solid.

I'm not talking of the sci-fi/ahistorical aspects involved in the books itself, like Atlantis civilization or the madness forcing the abandonment of the Erebus. I'm referring to his actual use of historical events (Inca civil war, sinking of the Titanic etc) to ground his prologues in, even if he does take liberties with it (it's a work of fiction after all)
 
The civil war was actually over by the time Pizarro have made a formal encounter with an Inca Empire. Pizzarro in Cajamarca bumped into victorious army of Atahualpa returning from their unification company. Actually this timing is obvious, because succession crisis which brought Atahualpa to power was triggered by previous Emperor of Inca death in epidemic brought by early Spanish explorers and propagating through Inca traders.

Oh, shoot.

Is there any way that Pizarro could meet up earlier or that the war could still be ongoing? Like say Huascar NEARLY dies or those rebel tribes preventing Atahualpa's unification defeat him.

The figure given in the book is that the Inca forces would've outnumbered the conquistadors like a thousand to one (obviously, this could be the author taking liberties), but is a defeat of Pizarro possible?
 

trurle

Banned
Oh, shoot.

Is there any way that Pizarro could meet up earlier or that the war could still be ongoing? Like say Huascar NEARLY dies or those rebel tribes preventing Atahualpa's unification defeat him.

The figure given in the book is that the Inca forces would've outnumbered the conquistadors like a thousand to one (obviously, this could be the author taking liberties), but is a defeat of Pizarro possible?
The ratio was about 1000:1 to Inca favor IOTL. If you do not take into account the Indian auxiliaries who joined Pizarro soon after Cajamarca. With auxiliaries, typical ratio was 40:1. The defeat of Pizarro was indeed possible (the Spaniards themselves estimated their chances at Cajamarka as slim).
What i try to say is what any action of surviving Huaskar would made situation for Inca worse. Beacuse more uncertainty about legitimacy of Inca`s government would just bring more Indian auxiliaries to the Spanish, negating any potential advantage of starting anti-Spanish war earlier.
 
Top