Robert McCaa Aleta Nimlos Teodoro Hampe-Mart í nez hist.umn/~rmccaa/aha2004

1. Why Blame Smallpox?The Death of Huayna Capac & the Demographic Destruction of Tawantinsuyu (Ancient Peru) Robert McCaa Aleta Nimlos Teodoro Hampe-Martínez www.hist.umn.edu/~rmccaa/aha2004 Why Blame Smallpox?

2. The 11th Inca, Huayna Capac Why Blame Smallpox? I. Aleta Nimlos Introduction Ancient chronicles and modern histories II. Robert McCaa Early Quechua dictionaries Absence of pockmarked survivors New insights from eradicating smallpox III. Aleta Nimlos (for Dr. Hampe-Martínez) The Mummy of Huayna Capac Reflections Why Blame Smallpox?

3. Ramses V, d. 1157 BC Mummy of Huayna Capac Overview I. The historical canon blames smallpox for: killing Huayna Capac and destroying much of the population of Tawantinsuyu before Pizarro’s conquest Evidence is based on a few, selected chronicles (Table 1) and rests almost solely on the episode of Huayna Capac II. Recent histories (Table 2) do not give due regard to a broad range of evidence (or lack thereof): linguistic (Tables 3 and 4) narrative (lack of descriptions of pockmarked survivors) archaeological nor to new epidemiological findings on smallpox Significance of pockmarked survivors to determine presence of the disease Low communicability of the disease III. Finally, there is the mummy: descriptions, depictions, and, perhaps, the remains IV. Reflections: Exceedingly unlikely that smallpox was responsible: For the death of Huayna Capac Or, before 1558, for the demographic destruction of Ancient Peru There is an alternative explanation (Assadourian 1994): decades of civil war, devastation and destruction Why Blame Smallpox?

4. I. Ancient Chronicles and Modern Histories Why Blame Smallpox?

5. Chronicles (Table 1—1533-57) The historical canon blames smallpox for: killing Huayna Capac and destroying much of the population of Tawantinsuyu before Pizarro Evidence is based on a few, selected chronicles and refers solely to the episode of Huayna Capac (Table 1) Recent histories (Table 2) do not take into account a broad range of evidence (or lack thereof): linguistic (Tables 3 and 4) narrative (lack of descriptions of pockmarked survivors) archaeological nor new epidemiological findings on smallpox Low communicability of the disease Significance of pockmarked survivors to determine presence of the disease Finally, there is the mummy: descriptions, depictions, and, perhaps, de remains Why Blame Smallpox?

6. Discussion of chronicles(see table 1) The death of Huayna Capac was central to the Christian conquest, because Pizarro took advantage of the war of succession between Atahualpa and Huascar to defeat the divided empire. Table 1 summarizes key texts of 19 chronicles 3 accounts based on best native testimony do not indicate smallpox: Francisco de Xerez (1533): “aquella enfermedad” Juan de Betanzos (1557): “una sarna y una lepra” Garcilaso de la Vega (1613): “enfermedad de calenturas” Accounts are contradictory Of 19 most frequently cited/important chronicles, 6 state solely smallpox 13 others, various causes: perlesia, pestilencia/lepra incurable, mortales calenturas, epidemia de romadizo, sarampion, melancolia, bubas Cieza de Leon (1550) conditions the smallpox story with “cuentan que” Martin de Murua (1590) “unos dicen…de calenturas, y otros dicen…de viruelas” Garcilaso discounts smallpox: “aunque otros dicen de virguelas y sarampion” Why Blame Smallpox?

7. Modern Histories(see table 2) Table 2 classifies principal modern histories by sources cited. The more skeptical histories note that evidence is scanty and contradictory Polo (1913) Lastres (1951, 1954, 1957): “inclined” toward smallpox Hemming (1970), Assadourian (1987/94), Guerra (1999) The Virgin Soil School explains away contradictions and writes as though a virgin soil epidemic engulfed the Andean peoples before 1531 Dobyns (1963), Crosby (1972), Cook (1998), Alchon (2003) Assadourian’s well-documented counter-argument (1987/94) is ignored Meta-narratives blame smallpox, without equivocation McNeill (1976) Plagues and Peoples Diamond (1997) Guns, Germs and Steel Oldstone (1998) Viruses, Plagues and History Tucker (2001) Scourge: The Once and Future Threat of Smallpox Why Blame Smallpox?

8. Why Blame Smallpox?

9. II. New Evidence plus New Insights from the Eradication of Smallpox Why Blame Smallpox?

10. New Evidence—and lack thereof Linguistic evidence from early Quechua dictionaries (Table 3) Santo Domingo (1560)—compiled in 1540s, no Quechua term for smallpox “Ricardo” (1586)—muru oncoy, Quechua term for smallpox, also for measles (Ricardo was the publisher; author = Padre Alonso de Barzana) Gonzalez Holguin (1608)—distinguished smallpox (huchuy muru vncuy) from measles (hatun muru vncuy) and recorded 3 literal descriptors Analysis by historians Lastres (1954): lack of smallpox term in Santo Domingo proved the disease did not exist in Peru before 1492 (to counter contrary thesis by a contemporary) Might the lack of a term also signal the absence of smallpox before 1557? Cook (1998): uses Ricardo dictionary to interpret Betanzos’ “sarna y lepra” (77: “symptoms of severe skin rash and inflammations”) The terms may also refer to any of a number of other diseases. Why Blame Smallpox?

11. New Evidence—and lack thereof:Indeed there is no term for smallpox in Santo Tomas vs. later dictionaries (Table 3—abridged) Why Blame Smallpox?

12. Huncuy vs. Viruelas(noted by Cook 1998) 3:0 6:1 10:3 Why Blame Smallpox?

13. Descriptions and depictions of pockmarked individuals Será hombre como de cuarenta años, de mediana estatura, moderno y con unas pecas de viruelas en la cara…—description of Inca Titu Cusi Yupanquiby Oidor Lic. Don Juan de Matienzo (1565) • Tawantinsuyu, before 1558: no descriptions of any pock-marked survivors in the Andes • Tenochtitlan, 1520: No Spaniard witnessed the epidemic, yet decades later they were still writing about pockmarked survivors Why Blame Smallpox?

14. Codice Florentino Tenochtitlan: this illustration depicting pockmarked individuals from 1520 epidemic is widely reproduced: Less well known are texts on Mexico written decades after the epidemic that continued to remark on ugly, pockmarked faces: • Motolinía writing in the 1530s noted “hoy día en algunos que de aquella enfermedad escaparon, parece bien la fortaleza de la enfermedad, que todo el rostro les quedo lleno de hoyos” • López de Gomara completed History of the Conquests of Cortes in 1552. He too remarked on pockmarked faces: “los que quedaban vivos quedaron de tal suerte feos por haberse rascado, que espantaban á los otros con los muchos y grandes hoyos que se les hicieron en las caras, manos y cuerpo.” Why Blame Smallpox?

15. Insights from Global Eradication of Smallpox: pockmarks • Descriptions of pockmarked survivors is an effective means of establishing the presence or absence of smallpox • Used by WHO to authenticate the eradication of smallpox in areas with poor record keeping • Historians have also used such evidence to date the occurrence of epidemics (e.g., Fenn, Pox Americana) • Until there is evidence of pockmarked individuals in the Andes should we not discount the presence of smallpox prior to 1558? Why Blame Smallpox?

16. Insights from Global Eradication of Smallpox: low communicability • Smallpox was eradicated precisely because of its “fairly low communicability” • Historians have wildly exaggerated the communicability of smallpox • Scabs readily lose their potency in high heat, humidity or sunlight • As a bioterror weapon: “least suitable” because it is “not readily transmitted from one person to another” (Behbehani 1988:183) • Wholly improbable that smallpox leaped ahead of Europeans through the Darien or Amazon Basin • Difficulties of travel by land, sea or streams • Little evidence of trans-isthmian contact even over the millennia • Native settlements in the region were: “linguistic islands” • According to the WHO, corpses were heavily contaminated and posed a serious occupational hazard • Preparation of the mummy of Ramses V (1157 BC) interrupted due to the death of his embalmers? • Huayna Capac’s mummy was prepared without notable incident • Atahualpa kept a bit of flesh as a talisman, yet suffered no harm • The mummy was worshipped on the road to Cuzco and remained on display for years—no one ever remarked that people died from viewing it Why Blame Smallpox?

17. III. The mummy of Huayna Capac: Descriptions, depictions, and de remains --drawings fromGuaman Poma, El primer Nueva Corónica y buen gobiernohttp://www.kb.dk/elib/mss/poma/index-en.htm Why Blame Smallpox?

18. Mummy of Huayna Capac Tawantinsuyu: the best known drawing of Huayna Capac’s mummy does not depict pockmarks (Guaman Poma): Why did no Andean cronista remark on what would have been an agreeable anecdote? Eye-witness descriptions of Huayna Capac’s mummy, but neither mentions pockmarks: • Sancho de la Hoz (1543) referred to the mummy of Huayna Capac as being intact, “envuelta en suntuosas ropas y que le faltaba nada más que la punta de la nariz...” • Garcilaso de la Vega (1613): “Acuérdome que llegué a tocar un dedo de la mano de Huayna Capac; parecía que era de una estatua de palo, según estaba duro y fuerte” (vol 1:274). Why Blame Smallpox?

19. 379: The mummy of Huayna Capac enroute to Cuzco • Guaman Poma’s depiction—no signs of pockmarks • Yet, GP often depicts facial features Why Blame Smallpox?

20. 379: The mummy of Huayna Capac enroute to Cuzco • 558: Note stigmata on Christ’s face/torso • And absence of marks on HC’s face. Why Blame Smallpox?

21. Guaman Poma, El primer Nueva Corónica y buen gobierno:http://www.kb.dk/elib/mss/poma/index-en.htm • p. 453: “The execution of Tupac Amaru Inka by order of the Viceroy Toledo, as distraught Andean nobles lament the killing of their innocent lord” • Note depiction of tears. Why Blame Smallpox?

22. Guaman Poma, El primer Nueva Corónica y buen gobierno:http://www.kb.dk/elib/mss/poma/index-en.htm • p. 659: “Wrathful, arrogant Dominicans force native women to weave for them.” • Note the stubble on his unshaven face and the tears flowing from the weaver’s eyes. Why Blame Smallpox?

23. Mummified remains reveal tell-tale pockmarks Naples, 16th century Mexico, 19th century Why Blame Smallpox?

24. Real Hospital de San Andres:locating the mummy of Huayna Capac History • Ground penetrating radar illuminates the most promising spots: “grade 1 anomalies” Why Blame Smallpox?

25. No pockmarked mummies have been found anywhere in Peru.As more remains are studied: • Will it be possible to identify Huayna Capac? • Will there be sufficient tissue to identify smallpox? • Will any mummies be found with pockmarks? • Will a DNA test be developed to ascertain smallpox even where no tissue samples have survived? Why Blame Smallpox?

26. Reflections: Why Blame Smallpox? Too many… Contradictions and contingencies in the chronicles Silences in the historical record No mentions of pockmarked survivors No mention of smallpox in the earliest dictionary Improbables That the disease would leap ahead of the Spaniards—through one of the most impenetrable regions on the planet That Huayna Capac would die, but not his embalmers or his son Atahualpa who kept some of his father’s flesh • There is a convincing, alternative explanation for the destruction of Tawantinsuyu: • decades of war, marauding bands and wanton rapine (Assadourian) • The issue is the demographic catastrophe, not Huayna Capac • Until there is more persuasive evidence (texts or remains) • the smallpox/virgin soil hypothesis should be discounted for the Andean region—before 1558 Why Blame Smallpox?

27. Thank you Why Blame Smallpox?The Death of Huayna Capac and the Demographic Destruction of Tawantinsuyu (Ancient Peru) Robert McCaa Aleta Nimlos Teodoro Hampe-Martínez http:/www.hist.umn.edu/~rmccaa/aha2004 Why Blame Smallpox?

28. Guaman Poma, El primer Nueva Corónica y buen gobierno:http://www.kb.dk/elib/mss/poma/index-en.htm • p. 310: “The Inka's punishments in Anta Caca of youthful fornicators, thaskikuna waqllispa huchallikuqkuna” • Tears drawn on cheeks demonstrate Guaman Poma’s concern with details. Why Blame Smallpox?