CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 144Archaeology and ancient environmental studiesLatin American history and cultureAmazonian Archaeology and Ethnohistory

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 11 of the 50 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Dating the Expansion of the Inca Empire: Bayesian Models from Ecuador and Argentina

Open access
Marsh, Erik J, Kidd, Ray, Ogburn, Dennis, Durán, Víctor·2017·Radiocarbon
DOI 10.1017/rdc.2016.118
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The chronology of the Inca Empire has traditionally relied on ethnohistoric dates, which suggest that a northern expansion into modern Ecuador began in AD 1463 and a southern expansion into modern Argentina began in AD 1471. We test the validity of these dates with two Bayesian models, which show that the ethnohistoric dates are incorrect and that the southern expansion began before the northern one. The first model of seven dates shows that the site of Chamical, Ecuador, was first occupied cal AD 1410–1480 (95% probability)and has a high probability of being built prior to the ethnohistoric date. The second is an outlier model of 26 14 C dates and 19 thermoluminescence (TL) dates from 10 sites along the empire’s southeastern limit in northwestern Mendoza, Argentina. Here, the Inca occupation began cal AD 1350–1440 (95% probability), also earlier than the ethnohistoric date. The model also suggests that the Inca occupation of Mendoza lasted 70–230 yr (95% probability), longer than previously thought, which calls for new perspectives on the timing and nature of Inca conquests and relationships with local groups. Based on these results, we argue it is time to abandon the traditional chronology in favor of Inca chronologies based on Bayesian models.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Two Bayesian models of radiocarbon and thermoluminescence dates challenge the traditional ethnohistoric Inca chronology, showing that Inca expansion into Mendoza, Argentina, began before the northern expansion into Ecuador. The authors argue that the traditional Cabello Balboa/Rowe chronology should be abandoned in favor of radiometric, Bayesian-based Inca chronologies.

Key findings

  • At Chamical, Ecuador, the model estimates initial Inca occupation at cal AD 1410–1480 (95% probability), with an 89% probability that the site was founded before Cabello Balboa’s AD 1463 date.
  • In northwestern Mendoza, Argentina, the Inca phase model estimates the start of Inca occupation at cal AD 1350–1440 (95% probability), earlier than the ethnohistoric AD 1471 date by around 70 yr (30–130, 95% probability).
  • The Mendoza model suggests Inca occupation lasted 70–230 yr (95% probability) or 100–190 yr (68% probability), longer than previously thought.
  • The southern expansion into Argentina/Chile began before the northern expansion into Ecuador, which the model dates to cal AD 1430–1460 (68% probability).

Methods

  • Two Bayesian models were run in OxCal v4.2: one for the site of Chamical, Ecuador, using seven dates with stratigraphic priors and a mixed IntCal13/SHCal13 calibration curve; and one for Mendoza, Argentina, using 26 ¹⁴C dates and 19 TL dates from 10 sites with SHCal13.
  • The Mendoza analysis used independent site models followed by an Inca phase model grouping all sites into a single phase; a General Outlier model with 5% prior outlier probability was used, 10 dates were removed as outliers, and 44 dates remained.
  • Dates were rounded by 10 yr; the paper reports posterior probabilities, agreement indices, Difference queries, Order queries, a summed probability distribution, and a tempo plot.

Limitations

  • The paper states that legacy data often lack relevant details, such as δ¹³C values, and that Mendoza sites generally lack enough stratigraphic information to build detailed models, so dates were modeled as single uniform phases.
  • The paper states that the Mendoza ending boundary is heavily influenced by the historical AD 1595 date and “does not offer a robust estimate” of when the occupation ended; site comparisons using the Order function remain tentative because probability distributions overlap.
  • The paper notes that TL ceramic styles could be better identified and described, and that models could be improved with larger samples and more explicit stratigraphic priors; it also states that the Odisa association is “admittedly less than certain.”
  • Evident from the text: five TL dates from Potrero de La Chanchería were not included because their dates and ceramic styles had not been published.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/rdc.2016.118

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

11 of 50 cited sources checked · 3 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Interpretationcitation

    The Chamical date agrees well with the documented-based expectation that the Inca occupied Ecuador before Huayna Capac's birth in Ecuador in AD 1457 or 1458.

    “It also agrees well with the documented-based expectation that the Inca occupied Ecuador before Huayna Capac's birth in Ecuador in AD 1457 or 1458 (Ogburn 2012: 231), also prior to Cabello Balboa's date of AD 1463.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ogburn 2012 source
  • Premisecitation

    The growing body of calibrated 14C and TL dates suggests that Cabello Balboa's chronology underestimates the date of Inca expansions out of Cuzco, especially to the south.

    “The growing body of calibrated 14 C and TL dates hints that Cabello Balboa's chronology underestimates the date of Inca expansions out of Cuzco, especially to the south (e.g.Pärssinen and Siiriäinen 1997;D'Altroy et al. 2007;Cornejo 2014), but Bayesian models have not been used to test this.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Pärssinen and Siiriäinen 1997 source
    • cites D'Altroy et al. 2007

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Cornejo 2014 source

      The Methods and Results sections report calibrated radiocarbon and thermoluminescence dates and conclude that the conventional 1470 CE date is too late for Inca incorporation of parts of Chile. The paper attributes that conventional date to Rowe, not explicitly to Cabello Balboa, and its analysis concerns Chile rather than Inca expansions out of Cuzco generally. (LLM, conf=0.83)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    Statistical treatments of calibrated dates have shown that Inca expansion both north and south of Cuzco was earlier than Cabello Balboa's dates.

    “In recent years, statistical treatments of calibrated dates have shown that Inca expansion both north and south of Cuzco was earlier than Cabello Balboa's dates (Michczyński and Pazdur 2003;Ogburn 2012;Cornejo 2014).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Michczyński and Pazdur 2003
    • cites Ogburn 2012 source

      In the Chamical section (page unavailable), calibrated dates suggest expansion into southern Ecuador at least a decade earlier than the traditional chronology. In “Abandoning the Traditional Chronology” (page unavailable), calibrated dates strongly suggest that at least some southern provinces were incorporated earlier than Cabello Balboa’s chronology indicates. The claim presents these qualified interpretations as a demonstrated finding about expansion both north and south of Cuzco generally. (LLM, conf=0.83)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Cornejo 2014 source

      Cornejo’s analysis places the tentative start of Inca rule in Chile’s Norte Semiárido around 1370 CE, earlier than the conventional 1470 CE date discussed in ‘Antecedentes, datos y método’ (pages unavailable). But the paper studies Chile, south of Cuzco; these passages do not establish earlier expansion north of Cuzco or identify the comparison date as Cabello Balboa’s. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    The IntCal13 and SHCal13 calibration curves differ by around 20 yr for Inca-period dates.

    “The curves differ by around 20 yr for Inca-period dates, which is a small but relevant difference (Adamska and Michczyński 1996: 38;Ogburn 2012: 223).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Adamska and Michczyński 1996

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Ogburn 2012 source

      Ogburn reports that Northern- and Southern-Hemisphere calibrations for Inca-period dates differ by about 15–20 years, and by roughly 20 years for the Chamical samples. However, the paper identifies the curves as IntCal09 and SHCal04, not IntCal13 and SHCal13; it does not establish that difference for the versions named in the claim. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    This range is similar to estimates for northern and central Chile.

    “This range is similar to estimates for northern and central Chile (Schiappacasse 1999;Cornejo 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Schiappacasse 1999 source
    • cites Cornejo 2014 source
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 30
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 18

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    The two previous Bayesian models of Inca dates produced starting dates earlier than Balboa's chronology by 1-2 decades in Ecuador and nearly a century in Argentina.

    “Both are single-phase models that produced starting dates that were earlier than Balboa's chronology by 1-2 decades in Ecuador and nearly a century in Argentina.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Ogburn 2012 source

      In “Chamical: The Inca Incursion in the Southern Highlands of Ecuador” (page unavailable), Ogburn describes a single-phase Bayesian model whose estimated start is 1–2 decades earlier than the traditional chronology. For Argentina and other southern provinces, the Discussion describes an earlier expansion by 3–6 decades, not a Bayesian model with a start nearly a century earlier. The paper therefore supports the Ecuador portion but not the claimed Argentine model or magnitude. (LLM, conf=0.87)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Greco 2012

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Premisecitation

    Sarmiento de Gamboa offers an unrealistic chronology based on a subjective and eclectic mix of dates from the Bible, Greek texts, the Spanish royal line, and interviews.

    “Only two other chroniclers proposed absolute dates for the Inca, most notably Sarmiento de Gamboa (2007), who offers an unrealistic chronology based on a subjective and eclectic mix of dates from the Bible, Greek texts, the Spanish royal line, and interviews (González Díaz 2015: 170-3).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Sarmiento de Gamboa 2007 source
    • cites González Díaz 2015 source

      The Conclusions describe Sarmiento’s use of Hebrew chronology, Plato, Spanish chronicles, and information from Cusco elites; the paper also identifies inconsistencies in his dates. It does not establish that he took dates from the Spanish royal line specifically: the royal succession appears in its discussion of Chávez’s chronology. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Atmospheric mixing near the equator can extend as far south as Lake Titicaca, where IntCal is a better choice than SHCal.

    “The Inca Empire is mostly located in the Southern Hemisphere, so SHCal might seem appropriate, but atmospheric mixing near the equator can extend as far south as Lake Titicaca, where IntCal is a better choice (see Finucane et al. 2007:581;Marsh 2012Marsh : 205-6, 2015: 15-6): 15-6).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Finucane et al. 2007 source

      The Methods and Materials section says the authors chose IntCal04 over SHCal04 for Ayacucho because, during the relevant growing season, the valley lies within the Intertropical Convergence Zone and plant carbon is more likely to reflect Northern Hemisphere air. It does not establish that this reasoning extends as far south as Lake Titicaca or that IntCal is preferable there. (LLM, conf=0.87)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Marsh 2012 source

      The Methods section (page not specified in our copy) says IntCal may be appropriate for the Titicaca Basin because of its proximity to the Intertropical Convergence Zone, and the paper uses IntCal rather than SHCal. It does not explicitly establish that atmospheric mixing reaches Lake Titicaca or conclude that IntCal is categorically the better choice; it also notes evidence supporting SHCal for older dates. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Marsh 2015

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationown data

    These results strongly reinforce Ogburn's (2012: 231) call to abandon the traditional document-based chronology and give priority to 14C dates.

    “Overall, these results strongly reinforce Ogburn's (2012: 231) call to abandon the traditional document-based chronology and give priority to 14 C dates.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ogburn 2012 source
    • The authors state this as an assumption: All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingnone given

    In Mendoza, the three principal Inca sites of Ranchillos, Tambillos, and Tambillitos as well as Cerro Penitentes have relatively shallow stratigraphy and a single occupational layer.

    “In Mendoza, the three principal Inca sites of Ranchillos, Tambillos, and Tambillitos as well as Cerro Penitentes have relatively shallow stratigraphy and a single occupational layer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    The Inca occupation of Mendoza lasted 70-230 yr (95% probability), longer than previously thought.

    “The model also suggests that the Inca occupation of Mendoza lasted 70-230 yr (95% probability), longer than previously thought, which calls for new perspectives on the timing and nature of Inca conquests and relationships with local groups.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    The site model for Agua Amarga estimates the starting boundary at cal AD 660-1560 (95% probability) or cal AD 1360-1500 (68% probability).

    “These averages were used in the site's model, which estimates the starting boundary at cal AD 660-1560 (95% probability, starting boundary) or cal AD 1360-1500 (68% probability, Start Agua Amarga).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The sites do not have enough stratigraphic information to build a model like the one used for Chamical.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Findingnone given

    At three other sites, Ciénaga de Yalguaraz, Agua Amarga, and Agua de la Cueva, there were pre-Inca occupations that were excluded from this analysis.

    “At three other sites, Ciénaga de Yalguaraz, Agua Amarga, and Agua de la Cueva, there were pre-Inca occupations that were excluded from this analysis.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    The starting boundary of the Inca phase model is cal AD 1380-1430 (68% probability) and cal AD 1350-1440 (95% probability).

    “The starting boundary of the Inca phase model represents our current best estimate of when the Inca arrived in Mendoza (Figure 3): cal AD 1380-1430 (68% probability) and cal AD 1350-1440 (95% probability, Start Inca occupation).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingnone given

    In an earlier version of that model that included stratigraphic priors, the starting boundary was very similar, but the order of events was different.

    “In an earlier version of that model that included stratigraphic priors, the starting boundary was very similar, but as would be expected, the order of events was different.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    One site, Tambillos, had a diagnostic Colonial sherd (Table 4), though this is quite limited evidence to argue for a post-Inca occupation.

    “One site, Tambillos, had a diagnostic Colonial sherd (Table 4), though this is quite limited evidence to argue for a post-Inca occupation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingnone given

    Despite a presence lasting multiple generations, they did not build imperial centers in the valley bottom nor in the adjacent lowland valleys, both of which are agriculturally fertile areas that were occupied by local Huarpe groups.

    “Despite a presence lasting multiple generations, they did not build imperial centers in the valley bottom nor in the adjacent lowland valleys, both of which are agriculturally fertile areas that were occupied by local Huarpe groups.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    The Bayesian model estimates that the occupation lasted 70-230 yr (95% probability) or 100-190 yr (68% probability).

    “The Bayesian model estimates that the occupation lasted 70-230 yr (95% probability) or 100-190 yr (68% probability).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    At this point, the empire stopped expanding southward and occupied the area for the next 100-190 yr (68% probability).

    “At this point, the empire stopped expanding southward and occupied the area for the next 100-190 yr (68% probability).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    The starting boundaries for the individual Inca sites have error ranges of at least 160 yr, though the medians are within a century of each other.

    “The starting boundaries for the individual Inca sites have error ranges of at least 160 yr, though the medians are within a century of each other (Table 6).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisereasoning

    The radiometric dates from Mendoza have not been critically evaluated nor used to improve understanding of Inca chronology.

    “Despite thorough reference to historical documents (Bárcena 1994;Parisii 1994), the radiometric dates have not been critically evaluated nor have they been used to improve our understanding of Inca chronology.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Bárcena 1994

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Parisii 1994

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The SHCal calibration curve can be safely used for Mendoza because it is well south of the area that may be affected by the Northern Hemisphere's atmosphere.

    “We can safely use the SHCal calibration curve, as Mendoza is well south of the area that may be affected by the Northern Hemisphere's atmosphere.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Mendoza is well south of the area that may be affected by the Northern Hemisphere's atmosphere.

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    Rowe's chronology places the conquest of the southern quarter, Collasuyu, mostly during the reign of Topa Inca, AD 1471-93.

    “Rowe's chronology places the conquest of the southern quarter, Collasuyu, mostly during the reign of Topa Inca, AD 1471-93 (Figure 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Bárcena and his students have consistently relied on Cabello Balboa's date of AD 1471 for the Incas' arrival in Mendoza, often rounded to AD 1470 or 1480, even though radiometric dates from adjacent regions are consistently earlier.

    “Bárcena (1979Bárcena ( , 1994Bárcena ( , 1998aBárcena ( , 2008) ) and his students (Cahiza and Ots 2005;Parisii 1994Parisii , 2005;;Ots and Cahiza 2013) have consistently relied on Cabello Balboa's date of AD 1471 for the Incas' arrival, often rounded to AD 1470 or 1480, even though radiometric dates from adjacent regions are consistently earlier (Stehberg 1992;Muñoz Ovalle and Chacama Rodriguez 1”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Bárcena 1979

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Bárcena 1994

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Bárcena 1998a

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    A series of 14C and TL dates from Inca ceramics and sites in Mendoza have been processed, but they have only been used in equivocal comparisons to Rowe's chronology.

    “A series of 14 C and TL dates from Inca ceramics and sites in Mendoza have been processed, but they have only been used in equivocal comparisons to Rowe's chronology (Bárcena 1998a).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bárcena 1998a

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    TL dates can directly date Inca-style ceramics and are free of the potentially ambiguous association between diagnostic ceramics and 14C samples.

    “It is important to include TL dates when they are available because they can directly date Inca-style ceramics and are free of the potentially ambiguous association between diagnostic ceramics and 14 C samples (Waterbolk 1971;Greco and Palamarczuk 2014).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Waterbolk 1971 source
    • cites Greco and Palamarczuk 2014 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Study design and conductcitation

    Dates were manually removed if they had a >0.05 (5%) posterior probability of being outliers and models were rerun to test for additional outliers.

    “Dates were manually removed if they had a >0.05 (5%) posterior probability of being outliers and models were rerun to test for additional outliers, following Bronk Ramsey (2009b: 1023-4).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bronk Ramsey 2009b

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisenone given

    Inca architecture has been identified at only three sites in the Uspallata Valley, and there is little evidence of direct Inca presence at other sites.

    “Inca architecture has been identified at only three sites in the Uspallata Valley, and there is little evidence of direct Inca presence at other sites.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Multiple runs of the models presented were robust, showing minor differences of no more than a decade.

    “Multiple runs of the models presented were robust, showing minor differences of no more than a decade.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    A mixed IntCal13/SHCal13 curve provides more accurate dates, even though they are less precise in some parts of the curve.

    “We adopt a mixed curve because it provides more accurate dates, even though they are less precise in some parts of the curve (C Bronk Ramsey, personal communication, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites C Bronk Ramsey, personal communication, 2015

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • Rests on an assumption: Currently, there are insufficient data to identify which calibration curve is most appropriate for the northern and central parts of the Inca Empire.
    • Rests on an assumption: The Inca Empire is mostly located in the Southern Hemisphere.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    An outlier model was appropriate for quantitatively evaluating the legacy data from Mendoza.

    “An outlier model was appropriate for quantitatively evaluating the legacy data from Mendoza.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Study design and conductown data

    These comparisons involve highly overlapping probability distributions, so they remain tentative.

    “These comparisons involve highly overlapping probability distributions, so they remain tentative.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Study design and conductown data

    Ten dates were removed as outliers in the Inca phase model.

    “The 10 dates removed and their posterior probabilities of being outliers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationown data

    The two largest sites, Ranchillos and Tambillos, were probably founded last, suggesting increasing imperial interest during the 15th century.

    “The two largest sites, Ranchillos and Tambillos, were probably founded last, suggesting increasing imperial interest during the 15th century, as implied by the tempo plot (Figure 5).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Just south of Lake Titicaca at the Inca provincial capital Tiquischullpa, a preliminary Bayesian model of radiocarbon dates suggests that the Inca occupation, associated with three 14C dates, took place between cal AD 1310-1350 (medians of the First and Last dates of the Inca phase, with overlapping 68% probabilities of cal AD 1270-1400), estimated with IntCal13.

    “Just south of Lake Titicaca at the Inca provincial capital Tiquischullpa (Figure 1), a preliminary Bayesian model of radiocarbon dates published by Pärssinen and Siiriäinen (1997: Table 1) suggests that the Inca occupation, associated with three 14 C dates, took place between cal AD 1310-1350 (medians of the First and Last dates of the Inca phase, with overlapping 68% probabilities of cal AD 1270-”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Pärssinen and Siiriäinen 1997 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Premisecitation

    The span suggested by Cabello Balboa (1945) is currently used in Inca research in Mendoza.

    “The white vertical bar indicates the span suggested by Cabello Balboa (1945) that is currently used in Inca research in Mendoza.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cabello Balboa (1945)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The Aconcagua mountain sacrifice may have marked the beginning of a greater commitment to the valley.

    “This sacrifice may have marked the beginning of a greater commitment to the valley.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Study design and conductown data

    The Inca phase model for Mendoza used 44 dates.

    “Inca Occupation | | | 1400 | 1350-1440 106 | 44 | 10 |”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationown data

    The shape of the tempo plot curve suggests a rapid accumulation of events, that most sites were occupied or founded during the 15th century, and that 6-9 events occurred before AD 1471 (at 1σ).

    “The shape of the curve suggests a rapid accumulation of events, that most sites were occupied or founded during the 15th century, and that 6-9 events occurred before AD 1471 (at 1σ).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dye 2016 source
    • The authors state this as an assumption: All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Better chronologies can improve understanding of the Inca empire's history, internal workings, the nature of expansion, and interactions with local groups.

    “Better chronologies can improve our understanding of the empire's history, internal workings, the nature of expansion, and interactions with local groups.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationown data

    The emerging archaeological chronology of the Inca expansion confirms that dates in documentary sources are incorrect and strongly supports the argument to build an Inca chronology with radiometric dates and Bayesian models.

    “The emerging archaeological chronology of the Inca expansion confirms that dates in documentary sources are incorrect and strongly supports the argument to build an Inca chronology with radiometric dates and Bayesian models.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The agreement index is no more than a diagnostic for outlier models, as it is affected by down-weighted outliers.

    “the agreement index is no more than a diagnostic for outlier models, as it is affected by down-weighted outliers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationnone given

    Despite their rapid and early expansion to Uspallata, they did not continue farther south, despite negligible armed resistance.

    “Despite their rapid and early expansion to Uspallata, they did not continue farther south, despite negligible armed resistance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Interpretationnone given

    Next are the three smaller Inca sites with multiple dates (Ciénaga de Yalguaraz, Tambillitos, and Agua Amarga), perhaps reflecting a cautious investment in site-building.

    “Next are the three smaller Inca sites with multiple dates (Ciénaga de Yalguaraz, Tambillitos, and Agua Amarga), perhaps reflecting a cautious investment in site-building, followed by the Aconcagua mountain sacrifice.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Empires conquer people, not territories, and would have stopped where there were no more people worth conquering.

    “This is a reminder that empires conquer people, not territories (Schreiber 1992: 11), and would have stopped where there were no more people worth conquering.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schreiber 1992 source

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    It also supports the idea that the conquerors moved rapidly through large territories and then consolidated gradually, at least in the southern part of the empire where there was little armed resistance.

    “It also supports the idea that the conquerors moved rapidly through large territories and then consolidated gradually, at least in the southern part of the empire where there was little armed resistance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    One historical document hints the Inca explored as far south as the Diamante River in central Mendoza, where they left a marker and turned around.

    “One historical document hints the Inca explored as far south as the Diamante River in central Mendoza (Figure 1), where they left a marker and turned around (Bibar 1966: 155, cited in García 2011a: 158; see Ots and Cahiza 2013: 39).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Bibar 1966

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites García 2011a

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Ots and Cahiza 2013

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

42 of 42

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Bayesian models had not been used to test whether Cabello Balboa's chronology underestimates the date of Inca expansions out of Cuzco.

    “The growing body of calibrated 14 C and TL dates hints that Cabello Balboa's chronology underestimates the date of Inca expansions out of Cuzco, especially to the south (e.g.Pärssinen and Siiriäinen 1997;D'Altroy et al. 2007;Cornejo 2014), but Bayesian models have not been used to test this.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Currently, there are insufficient data to identify which calibration curve is most appropriate for the northern and central parts of the Inca Empire.

    “Currently, there are insufficient data to identify which curve is most appropriate for the northern and central parts of the Inca Empire.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The Inca Empire is mostly located in the Southern Hemisphere.

    “The Inca Empire is mostly located in the Southern Hemisphere, so SHCal might seem appropriate, but atmospheric mixing near the equator can extend as far south as Lake Titicaca, where IntCal is a better choice (see Finucane et al. 2007:581;Marsh 2012Marsh : 205-6, 2015: 15-6): 15-6).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Mendoza is well south of the area that may be affected by the Northern Hemisphere's atmosphere.

    “We can safely use the SHCal calibration curve, as Mendoza is well south of the area that may be affected by the Northern Hemisphere's atmosphere.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    All the dates and sites belong to the same Inca phase.

    “The Inca phase model groups the site models within a single Inca phase, adding a simple but significant assumption to the model: all the dates and sites belong to the same phase.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The sites do not have enough stratigraphic information to build a model like the one used for Chamical.

    “The sites do not have enough stratigraphic information to build a model like the one used for Chamical, so all dates from each site were modeled as a single uniform phase (Bronk Ramsey 2009a: 343).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The sites were in ruins by AD 1595.

    “This boundary is heavily influenced by the historical date that the sites were in ruins by AD 1595”
7 of 7

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Radiocarbon total exceeds the site counts

    Minor

    The ten site-level radiocarbon counts in Table 2 sum to 25, not the reported total of 26.

    Reported 26 · recomputed 25

  • Modeled dates are not all rounded to 10 years

    Minor

    The paper says dates were rounded to 10 years, but Table 6 reports modeled starting-boundary values ending in 5, including 1395 and 1495.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 34

  1. Durán, 1989, Ocupaciones agroalfareras en el sitio Agua de la Cueva sector norte (NO de Mendoza), Estudios Regionales, 3, 29
  2. García, 2011, El control incaico de las tierras bajas cuyanas. Una evaluación del modelo de encalves, Sociedades de Paisajes Áridos y Semi-áridos, 4, 39
  3. Bárcena JR , Terraza VV , Sabatini G , Da Peña G . 2013. Investigaciones arqueológicas recientes en el área del antiguo Potrero de La Chanchería (Valle de Uspallata, noroeste de Mendoza, Argentina). Paper presented at the 18th Conference of Argentine Archaeology, La Rioja, Argentina.
  4. Bárcena, 1994, Datos e interpretación del registro documental sobre la dominación incaica en Cuyo, Xama, 4–5, 11
  5. Greco C . 2012. Integración de los datos arqueológicos, radiocarbónicos y geofísicos para la construcción de una cronología de Yocavil y alrededores [PhD dissertation]. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires.
  6. Bárcena, 1990, Funcionalidad diferencial de las estructuras del tambo de Tambillos: Resultados de la excavación de los recintos 1 y 2 de la unidad A del sector III, Anales de Arqueología y Etnografía, 41–42, 7
  7. Bibar, 1966, Crónica y relación copiosa y verdadera de los Reynos de Chile
  8. Leibowicz, 2012, La conquista Inka de Humahuaca, Jujuy, Argentina. Nuevos fechados y visiones desde los desarrollos regionales, Inka Llaqta, 3, 191
  9. Schobinger, 2001, El santuario incaico del cerro Aconcagua
  10. Parisii, 1994, Algunos datos de la poblaciones prehispánicas del norte y centro oeste de Mendoza y su relación con la dominación inca del área, Xama, 4–5, 51
  11. Canals Frau, 1956, La cultura de Agrelo (Mendoza), Runa, 7, 169
  12. Cabello Balboa, 1945, Obras, Volume 1, 451
  13. García, 1999, Alcances del dominio incaico en el extremo suroriental del Tawantinsuyu (Argentina), Chungara, 29, 195
  14. Bárcena, 1998, Arqueología de Mendoza. Las dataciones absolutas y sus alcances, 413
  15. García, 1992, Acerca de la cultura material durante el período de dominio incaico en Mendoza: dos casos de influencia Diaguita chilena en la alfarería Viluco, Anales de Arqueología y Etnología, 46–47, 41
  16. D’Altroy, 2007, Variations in the Expression of Inka Power, 85
  17. 10.2458/azu_js_rc.v54i2.15826 · DOI
  18. Parisii, 2005, Dominación incaica en Mendoza, según un modelo de área periférica en la extensión de la conquista al Qollasuyu y a Cuyo
  19. Bárcena, 1998, El tambo real de Ranchillos, Mendoza, Argentina, Xama, 6, 1
  20. Tantaleán, 2015, El imperio inca: indicadores arqueológicos de un estado expansivo andino, Inka Llaqta, 4, 9
  21. Canals Frau, 1946, Etnología de los Huarpes. Una síntesis, Anales de Arqueología y Etnología, 7, 9
  22. Ots, 2013, Fronteras y periferia en arqueología e historia, 30
  23. Muñoz Ovalle, 1988, Cronología por termoluminiscencia para los períodos Intermedio Tardío y Tardío en la sierra de Arica, Chungara, 20, 19
  24. Ots MJ . 2007a. La presencia incaica en el Valle de Uco, Mendoza [PhD dissertation]. Mendoza: Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad Nacional de Cuyo.
  25. Ots, 2007, Actas del XVI Congreso de Arqueología Argentina, Volume 2, 479
  26. Prieto Olavarría, 2015, GlobalPottery 1. Historical Archaeological and Archaeometry for Societies in Contact, 273
  27. Rusconi, 1967, Restos indígenas hallados en una excavación de Las Heras (Mendoza), Revista del Museo de Historia Natural de Mendoza “Juan C. Moyano”, 19, 3
  28. Bárcena, 1979, Actas del VII congreso de Arqueología de Chile, 661
  29. Cahiza, 2005, La presencia inka en el extremo sur oriental del Kollasuyo. Investigaciones en las tierras bajas de San Juan y Mendoza, y el valle de Uco—-Rca. Argentina-, Xama, 15–18, 217
  30. Stehberg, 1992, El límite inferior cronológico de la expansión incaica a Chile, Xama, 4–5, 83
  31. Morales Guiñazú, 1938, Primitivos habitantes de Mendoza
  32. Williams, 1998, El sur del Tawantinsuyu: un dominio selectivamente intensivo, Tawantinsuyu, 5, 170
  33. García, 1996, La dominación incaica en el centro oeste argentino y su relación con el origen y cronología del registro “Viluco”., Anales de Arqueología y Etnología, 48–49, 57
  34. García, 2010, Arqueología Argentina en el bicentenario de la revolución de mayo, 1771

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Marsh, E. J., Kidd, R., Ogburn, D., & Durán, V.
Affiliations
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (AR)
Corresponding author
Marsh, Erik J
ORCID
Marsh, Erik J
Venue
Radiocarbon
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2017-01-30
Volume
59
Issue
1
Pages
117-140
ISSN
  • 0033-8222 (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-5755
DOI
10.1017/rdc.2016.118
OpenAlex
W2580449103
Cited by
144
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5
FWCI
15.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified)
Locations
  • Radiocarbon (publishedVersion)
  • Conicet (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
  • Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
  • Institut National Du Cancer
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Latin American history and culture
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Amazonian Archaeology and Ethnohistory
Keywords
Inca Empire, Bayesian chronology, Mendoza, radiocarbon dating, thermoluminescence dating, Inca conquest, Ecuador, Argentina

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review