Such is the account of the settlement of Upper and Lower Cuzco. Any one acquainted with the general principles on which the division of Indian tribes into phratries took place, can not help concluding that these divisions were simply two phratries. The inhabitants of each traced their descent back to a supernatural personage. They were equal in power to each other as elder and younger brothers. Polo Ondegardo simply remarks that “the lineage of the Incas was divided into two branches, the one called Upper Cuzco, the other Lower Cuzco.”24 There ought to be no objection to substituting for the word branches used above the scientific term our scholars now employ; that is, phratry. Each tribe of the Iroquois confederacy was divided into two phratries, and their name for this division was a word which meant brotherhood.25
Whatever doubt we may have on this point vanished when we come to examine into the customs of the Incas. We must not forget that the most prominent way a phratry shows itself is in matters of religion, and in the play of social games. “The phratry, among the Iroquois,” says Mr. Morgan, “was partly for social and partly for religious objects. . . . In the ball game, for example, they play by phratries, one against the other. Each phratry puts forward its best players, usually from six to ten on a side, and the members of each phratry assemble together, but on opposite sides of the field in which the game is played. The members of each phratry watch the game with eagerness, and cheer their respective players at every successful turn of the game.”
Let us see how it was among the Incas.26 Like all Indian tribes, the Incas were very fond of ceremonious feasts. Nearly every month they celebrated one or more. We gather from Molina that on occasions when the whole tribe participated in such religious observances, the people of Upper Cuzco sat apart front Lower Cuzco. In the month corresponding to August they had a celebrated feast, the object of which was to drive out all evil from the land. We read: “All the people of Cuzco came out, . . . richly dressed, sat down on benches, each man according to the rank he held, those of the Upper Cuzco being on one side, and those of Lower Cuzco on the other.” And of another feast we read: “They brought out the embalmed (?) bodies of the dead Incas, placing those who had belonged to Upper Cuzco on the side where that lineage was stationed, and the same with those of Lower Cuzco.” Other examples could be given, but this point is well established. In games this same division was observed, since we read that in the month of December, “on the first day of the month, those who had been armed as knights—as well those of the lineage of Upper Cuzco as those of Lower Cuzco—came out into the square with slings in their hands, . . . and the youths of Upper Cuzco hurled against those of Lower Cuzco.” We may therefore consider it well established that the Incas were a tribe of Indians having two phratries.
Let us now see how the matter stands in regard to gens. This division follows almost as a matter of course, but it is well to see what separate grounds exist for the assertion. Garcillasso, in his description of Cuzco, after a reference to the division into Upper and Lower Cuzco, tells us further that it was divided into twelve wards. Mr. Squier gives us a map of the ancient city. From this we see that the twelve wards were arranged in an irregular oval around the principal square. Seven of them belonged to the division of Upper Cuzco, the other five to Lower Cuzco.
This division is utterly unintelligible to us, unless we suppose them to be subdivisions of the phratries. It makes no difference what name we bestow upon them, in effect they can be nothing else than gentes. As to the number of them, it is well to notice a coincidence in the statement of an Indian writer, Salcamayhua.27 On a certain very important occasion there were assembled “all the councilors. The governor entered the chamber, where twelve grave councilors were assembled.”28 The most reasonable explanation that can be given for the number twelve is that each gens had one representative in the council. The Incas are thus seen to be very probably, at least, no exception to the general rule of Indian tribes.
From our present standpoint what can we learn as to their government? It is, of course, well known what the position of the early writers on this subject is. They all agree that the government of the Incas was a monarchy of the strictest type. We have seen what a wonderful empire they bestowed on the Mexicans. The Peruvian Empire is painted in still brighter colors. Modern writers have not allowed the early accounts to suffer by repetition. Rivero uses the following language: “The monarchs of Peru, . . . uniting the legislative and executive power, the supreme command in war, absolute sovereignty in peace, and a venerated high-priesthood in religious feasts, . . . exercised the highest power ever known to man.”29 Even so cautious a writer as Mr. Squier speaks of the Incas as ruling “the most thoroughly organized, most wisely administered, and most extensive empire of aboriginal America.”30
It is freely admitted that there is much that is indeed wonderful in the culture of the Incas; but it has, undoubtedly been greatly exaggerated. To deal with this question as it should be would require an entire volume of itself, and would require far more extensive research than the writer has been able to make, or is, indeed, prepared to make. It will do no harm to see what we can learn by comparing the statements of some of the early writers with what we have now learned of Indian society.
Let us first inquire as to the council. There is no question as to the existence of a council. Garcillasso and all the early writers refer to it in an accidental sort of way. To show the force of this statement, we will give a few quotations. Garcillasso, speaking of the movements of the Inca Viracocha, says: “Having passed some years in making journeys, he returned to Cuzco, where, with the advice of his councilors, he resolved on war.” And, in another place: “Having consulted with his council” he assembled his army. Talking about the son of the foregoing, he says: “In fine, this king, with the advice of his council, made many laws, rules, ordinances,” etc.31 In the foregoing we are made aware of the existence of a council, but are not told as to its size or powers. Each gens would of course be represented in the council. We have spoken in one place of the number twelve. Mr. Bandelier tells us that the council consisted of sixteen members.32 As to its power we are also left in the dark; but, judging from what we have learned of the council among the Mexicans and Indian tribes of the North, who can doubt but that it was the supreme governing body?33