The War of Chupas

by Pedro de Cieza de León

Quite recently three of the volumes on the Civil Wars of Peru by Cieza de León have been discovered in manuscript, and published at Madrid. "The War of Quito," covering the period from the arrival of the Viceroy Blasco Núñez Vela to his death at Anaquito, was translated and edited by me, forming one of the Hakluyt Society's volumes for 1912. I have also translated and edited the "War of Las Salinas," giving a detailed account of the dispute between Pizarro and Almagro, which ended with the battle of Las Salinas and the execution of Almagro by Hernando Pizarro.

The present volume, by Cieza de León, is entitled "The War of Chupas," and contains a detailed narrative of events from the battle of Las Salinas to the final overthrow of the Almagro faction at the battle of Chupas, including the murder of Pizarro, the arrival of Vaca de Castro as governor, the campaign against Almagro the younger, the promulgation of the New Laws, and the appointment of Blasco Núñez Vela as viceroy to enforce them.

These Civil War volumes contain a great deal that is of geographical interest, especially in the detailed accounts of expeditions of discovery into the forests to the east of the Andes, which to this day are not fully explored. Cieza de León gives connected narratives of the expedition of Pedro de Candía into the montaña of Paucartambo, of that of Pedro Anzures de Camporredondo who entered by Marcapata and returned by one of the Caravaya ravines, of Diego de Rojas into the Gran Chaco, of Alvarado and Mercadillo in the valleys of the Marañón and the Huallaga, and of Gonzalo Pizarro into the "land of cinnamon." I translated and edited for the Hakluyt Society in 1858 the account of this last expedition in the Royal Commentaries of Garcilaso Inca de la Vega. The independent account by Cieza de León contains many details obtained by him at Quito from members of the expedition very soon after the event, and is therefore of special interest.

The present volume opens with an account of the extensive journey from Cuzco to the Collao made by Francisco Pizarro, who had been created a Marquis for his great services, and treats of his visit to Arequipa when he founded that city. He had founded Guamanga previous to this journey. He returned, prematurely old and broken with disease, to welcome rest in his house at Lima, or Los Reyes, as the city was then called, devoting himself mainly to business connected with the grants of estates to his followers and with the improvement of the city he had founded, interesting himself in the introduction and cultivation of new plants, the erection of mills, and the supply of provisions.

Cieza de León then, in the next fifteen chapters, makes a digression which must be acknowledged as such, for these chapters have nothing to do with the war of Chupas. They contain a narrative of discoveries and conquests in the region of the Upper Cauca, with Popayán and Cali as bases of operations, chiefly conducted by a leader named Jorge Robledo. They are to a certain extent connected with the history of Peru, because Pizarro nominated the governors who despatched the expeditions. The real cause of the digression was that Cieza de León was serving in these expeditions himself. He was an eye-witness of the events he describes in detail. This gives them a very special interest, and may well be accepted as a sufficient excuse for the digression. The story of the famous expedition of Gonzalo Pizarro follows, and our author then enters upon the events at Lima which led up to the murder of the Marquis Pizarro.[3]

In the question between Pizarro and Almagro our author strove hard to be impartial, as well as in his account of the murder of the Marquis; but his bias on the side of Almagro is apparent. In the case of Pizarro he tells the authentic story, but he adds any lying gossip that reaches his ears. In the case of Almagro he never does.

I should be the last to defend Pizarro as the destroyer of the Inca empire. As such I execrate his memory. He had no right to execute Atahualpa, although that ruthless usurper and fratricide richly deserved his fate. Pizarro was guilty of several acts of cruelty, his worst crime being the order to put Manco's wife to a cruel death when he was enraged at receiving defiance from the Inca; but I feel that in affairs connected with his countrymen his memory should receive even justice, and that he has been misjudged.

Pizarro was no longer the ruthless soldier of the days of Pedrarias. With great responsibilities and a great position he rose to the occasion. His proceedings were statesmanlike; his efforts to govern wisely the country entrusted to him were able and judicious. In the question which arose when the Spanish king resolved to divide the vast conquered area between Almagro and himself, he was in the right throughout. Almagro, with a number of captains anxious for opportunities to enrich themselves, had set out on an expedition to Chile. Before starting Almagro took a solemn oath on the Sacrament that he would maintain his friendship for Pizarro and never injure him or his interests. Meanwhile there was a great native rising. Pizarro himself was besieged in Lima, while his three brothers held Cuzco against a great army led by the Inca Manco. Pizarro received aid from Mexico and Santo Domingo. The siege of Lima was raised, and Pizarro sent a force under Alonso de Alvarado to help his brothers at Cuzco, of whom he had received no news.

It was at this time that the royal order arrived for the division. The northern part of the conquered empire was to be called New Castille, and to be governed by Pizarro. The southern half, to be called New Toledo, was to be Almagro's government. The boundary between them was to be fixed by a royal arbitrator, not of course by one of the parties concerned. The rules for the guidance of the arbitrator were clear and precise. A certain position on the coast north of the equator was to be fixed by observations for the latitude. A direct line was then to be taken on a meridian due south for a given number of leagues; at the end of that line there were to be other latitude observations, and from the point thus fixed the line west to east was to be the boundary. Mr. Prescott says that there was ambiguity in the document, that it was not clear whether the line was to be along the coast or on a meridian, and he appears to think there were, therefore, excuses for Almagro's conduct; but there was no ambiguity. The instructions were quite clear, and it is distinctly stated that the line was to be on a meridian.[4] Mr. Prescott could not have seen the original document, which is given in full by Cieza de León. Besides, this begs the question. The point is that the boundary was to be decided by a special arbitrator, not by Almagro.