To kick things off for this year’s CLAH roundtable on the Future of the Andean Past/Futuro del Pasado Andino, we offer the first of a few polls of Andean “historians” of the Andean Past. We start with the sixteenth century, and a handful of chroniclers from the early days of the Spanish empire in the Andes. Please vote for the “historian” you think most important, and feel free to add your reasons with the comment link below.
First, highlights from the past of the Andean Past
September 27, 2009 by andeanstudies
[...] the vein of gearing up for those essays, I’ve put up a poll of 16th-century Andean Historians, with Titu Cusi Yunpanqui, Juan de Betanzos, Cieza de Leon, and Sarmiento de Gamboa. Also [...]
Since the question includes the limitation of “best historian” it would be Cieza de León. He worked as an historian, taking evidence from all quarters, from native and European eyewitnesses, to written accounts in the possession of contemporary functionaries, and weighed the evidence for veracity. As he writes, he was attempting to provide a balanced account, as best as possible. And in his multi-volume work he covered the setting, the realm of the Incas, the conquest, and the civil wars. Sarmiento’s account is a commissioned government apology designed to delegitimize the Inca; Titu Cusi’s a narrow native voice, requesting rewards for services; and Betanzo’s a view of the past of one line of the Inca ayllu.
[...] now, “historians” of the 17th century. In deference to Noble David Cook’s comments on the first poll, I’ve added scare quotes to the word -Historian- to broaden its [...]