While often grouped together as early, pre-European civilizations in the Americas, the Aztec and Inca empires were separate and distinct civilizations. Although they shared some similarities, there were significant differences between the two empires. These differences can be seen when looking at the political systems used, the methods of rule and socialization, warfare, religion, and concepts of advanced culture each empire displayed.
To begin, the Aztec and Inca empires did share some common features. Both empires exhibited an agricultural based economy controlled by a ruling elite.1 Social stratification in each empire was composed of a small ruling elite and a large population of commoners.2 There existed strong social units based on kinship which were called calpulli in the Aztec empire and ayllu in the Incan.3 The Incas claimed to be the “children of the sun” and direct descendants of the gods.4 Likewise, the Aztecs claimed to be the “people of the sun.”5 In each case, a single tribe among many evolved to rule an empire.6 Each empire ruled for approximately one hundred years until both were conquered by the Spanish, the Aztecs in 1521 and the Incas in 1532.7
Given these similarities, distinct patterns emerge when looking at each civilization. Politically, the Incan empire was highly centralized with all decisions coming from the Inca, or king, himself.8 Dynastically, the succession of the throne was passed to the eldest son.9 The main focus of the empire was the subjugation and control of the population from the work they performed to the clothing allowed to wear.10 The Incas, who composed the whole of the ruling elite, firmly believed that they had the right to rule given that they were the original people, the children of the sun.11
In contrast, the Aztec empire was an alliance of three powerful city-states with each having various periods of greater influence.12 The Aztecs used an “uncertain” succession system in which the ruler was selected from a pool of eligible royals.13 The Aztec empire was composed of over four hundred communities conquered by the Aztecs who were linked to the empire by the promise of paying tribute to the Aztecs.14 Furthermore, these communities often retained their own leaders as long as the tribute was paid.15 The Aztecs held power over their subjects and believed in their right to rule because they passionately felt they had a mission as a people to prevent the destruction of the world by the forces of darkness.16
That each empire had a clearly defined ruling elite is of no question but the methods used by the ruling elite to maintain their rule and socialize their subjects was vastly different. In the Inca empire, all land and livestock was owned by the Inca and divided into three parts for the provision of the Inca, religion, and common use.17 Everything that was produced of the labor of the commoners was for the Inca, at his will for disposal, and consequently stimulated little commerce outside the empire.18 Even though all goods belonged to the Inca, it was a very important responsibility of the Inca to keep the people well fed.19 To maintain order the Incas moved parts of different ethnic tribes they conquered to other similar areas of the empire and replaced them with people already acculturated into the Inca empire.20 These relocated people were called mitimaes and those who already were part of the empire helped socialize the newly conquered subjects to the laws and religion of the Incan empire.21 By the labor of the commoners, the Incas also constructed massive public works projects such as roads, irrigation systems, temples, and storehouses throughout the empire as a symbol of their rule and authority.22
Although the Aztec ruling elite, the pipiltin, was economically far better off than the mass of commoners, the macehualtin, there was some basic sort of land ownership through the calpulli.23 There were trading markets in the Aztec empire with a massive open market in Tenochtitlan and the extensive trade networks of the Aztecs spread throughout Mesoamerica including the Caribbean Islands.24 The organization and socialization of Aztec society by the ruling elite was aimed to reinforce the Aztec world view of renewal to maintain their dominance over their neighbors.25 Balance and equilibrium in all things was the main socialization education and conducted in the home and schools.26 Notably, the Aztecs did not build extensively in the areas they conquered; all energy was focused towards the rituals of renewal at Tenochtitlan.27
The practice of warfare points to two divergent civilizations. To the Incas, warfare was a sacred event and included formal rituals even prior to the assembling of the army.28 Although the Incas amassed huge numbers of troops to conduct their conquests and put down rebellions, they had no standing army as such save the royal bodyguard but conscripted the troops out of the populace and all able-bodied men were available for this conscription.29 In the Aztec empire warfare evolved into a ritualized event with staged battles called the “flowery wars” to which the main purpose was to secure prisoners for sacrificial rites of renewal.30 The Aztecs also had a distinct warrior class composed of both pipiltin and macehualtin and at the top of this warrior class were the jaguar and eagle warriors.31
Religion was a key component of both civilizations and tied to the ruling elite. The Incas imposed their religion of nature gods upon their conquered subjects, building temples in the newly acquired lands and taking the idols of the local gods to Cuzco, the center of the Inca empire.32 Sacrificial rites were practiced to the health and well-being of the Inca and children were used for these rites.33 The Aztec sacrificial rites were a reflection of their world view of needing to constantly renew the world in order to postpone the destruction of the world.34 Given that they believed the human body was sacred and a container of cosmic forces with the heart being the most potent holder, they then offered the hearts of healthy prisoners of war to sustain their god, Huitzilopochtli, and the world.35 Women were also included in the ranks of the priesthood.36
The most striking differences between the Incan and Aztec civilizations can be seen in the examples of advanced culture that each displayed. The Incas used a language called Quechua which is still common in the Andes region today.37 The Aztec language was called Nahuatl.38 These were separate and distinct languages, Quechua belonging to the Andean-Equatorial Indian language group while Nahuatl belonged to the Aztec-Tanoan group.39 The Incas did not develop a written or symbolic glyph system of the Quechua language to record events but rather used the quipu, a mnemonic device of knotted cords.40 The Aztecs did develop a written version of Nahuatl in the form of glyphs to record time and events.41 With regards to counting and measurement the Incas used a base ten system.42 The Aztec system of counting was based on units of twenty.43
The Incas measured time but only followed the solar year and had no notion of a leap year to compensate for errors.44 The Aztecs developed a full 365 day calendar with the concept of a correcting leap year.45 The Incas did not place an importance on time, the dating of events, or counting of the years.46 The Aztecs believed in a cyclical nature of time and placed great importance on dates and the timing of events.47 Architecturally, the Incas constructed buildings and roads as a reflection of the Inca’s ability to rule.48 In the case of the Aztecs, the building and continual rebuilding of their temples was a reflection of their religious belief of renewal and the orderly cosmos.49
In summary, although the Inca and Aztec empires shared some common
characteristics of agrarian societies, they were two distinct civilizations.
The evolution and process of their political systems were different as
were the methods employed to control the masses of their empires.
The similarities in warfare and religion, for conquest and sacrifice, were
overshadowed by the composition of the military and the purposes of the
sacrifices. In areas of higher culture, the Incas and Aztecs spoke
different languages and viewed the world differently with respect to time
and architectural meaning.
Endnotes:
1. George A. Collier, Renato I. Rosaldo, and John D. Wirth, eds., The
Inca and Aztec States, 1400-1800. (New York: Academic Press, 1982),
25.
2. Ibid., 28.
3. Ibid., 29.
4. Bernabe Cobo with Roland Hamilton, History of the Inca Empire.
(Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1979), 187.
5. Miguel Leon-Portilla, The Aztec Image of Self and Society.
(Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press, 1992), 36.
6. Collier, Inca, 34.
7. William J. Duiker and Jackson L. Spielvogel. World History,
Second Edition. (Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company,
1998), 203.
8. Collier, Inca, 33.
9. Cobo, History, 244.
10. Ibid., 239.
11. Ibid., 187.
12. Collier, Inca, 56.
13. Ibid., 70.
14. David Carrasco with Scott Sessions. Daily Life of the Aztecs.
(Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1998), xi.
15. Leon-Portilla, The Aztec, 151.
16. Ibid., 101.
17. Cobo, History, 211.
18. Collier, Inca, 37.
19. Cobo, History, 211.
20. Susan A Niles. The Shape of Inca History. (Iowa City,
Iowa: University of Iowa Press, 1999), 229.
21. Cobo, History, 191.
22. Niles, The Shape, 74.
23. Leon-Portilla, The Aztec, 146.
24. Ibid., 155.
25. Carrasco, Daily, 185.
26. Ibid., 106.
27. Collier, Inca, 37.
28. Niles, The Shape, 97.
29. Collier, Inca, 161.
30. Leon-Portilla, The Aztec, 101.
31. Carrasco, Daily, 137.
32. Collier, Inca, 108.
33. Cobo, History, 237.
34. Carrasco, Daily, 57.
35. Ibid., 53.
36. Ibid., 115.
37. Cobo, History, 191.
38. Leon-Portilla, The Aztec, 3.
39. Merwyn S. Garbino, “Indian, American,” The World Book Encyclopedia,
22 Volumes. (Chicago: Field Enterprises Educational Corporation,
1977), 10:125.
40. Niles, The Shape, 4.
41. Collier, Inca, 395.
42. Cobo, History, 255.
43. Leon-Portilla, The Aztec, 45.
44. Cobo, History, 251.
45. Leon-Portilla, The Aztec, 47.
46. Cobo, History, 253.
47. Leon-Portilla, The Aztec, 101.
48. Niles, The Shape, 74.
49. Carrasco, Daily, 68.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Carrasco, David with Sessions, Scott. Daily Life of the Aztecs. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1998.
Cobo, Bernabe with Hamilton, Roland. History of the Inca Empire. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1979.
Collier, George A., Rosaldo, Renato I., and Wirth, John D., editors. The Inca and Aztec States, 1400-1800. New York: Academic Press, 1982.
Duiker, William J. and Spielvogel, Jackson L. World History, Second Edition. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1998.
Garbino, Merwyn S. “Indian, American,” The World Book Encyclopedia, 22 Volumes. Chicago: Field Enterprises Educational Corporation, 1977.
Leon-Portilla, Miguel. The Aztec Image of Self and Society. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press, 1992.
Niles, Susan A. The Shape of Inca History. Iowa City, Iowa:
University of Iowa Press, 1999.