CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 123Archaeology and ancient environmental studiesLatin American history and cultureAmazonian Archaeology and Ethnohistory

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 7 of the 29 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Reconceiving the Chronology of Inca Imperial Expansion

Open access
Ogburn, Dennis E·2012·Radiocarbon
DOI 10.2458/azu_js_rc.v54i2.16014
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The basic chronology of Inca imperial expansion in Andean South America derives from historical accounts from the Spanish Colonial era, but several issues with this traditional chronology have arisen in recent decades. Advances in radiocarbon dating and calibration now give us some ability to refine or rebuild the chronology, and guidelines for obtaining the most useful dates are discussed. Dates recently obtained from the site of Chamical in the southern highlands of Ecuador are evaluated according to those guidelines, and they suggest Inca expansion to the north began 1 to 2 decades earlier than allowed in the traditional chronology. The chronology of Inca expansion presented in the Spanish chronicles is called into question by these and other dates, and by a reconsideration of the nature of sources of Inca history utilized by Spanish writers. Evidence suggests a primary Inca form of recording provincial conquests resulted in lists that were ordered geographically. However, those records were interpreted by colonial writers as being chronologically ordered, which led to written histories of Inca expansion that are not consistent with the actual historical sequence of events. As a result, the preferred approach to building a chronology of Inca expansion should be based on 14 C dates, with historical sources used to supplement rather than structure the timeline.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Ogburn argues the traditional Inca expansion chronology based on Cabello Balboa and Rowe is unreliable because Inca conquest records were ordered geographically, not chronologically. New AMS 14C dates from Chamical, Ecuador, and southern-province dates suggest Inca expansion occurred earlier, supporting a 14C-first chronology with historical sources supplemental.

Key findings

  • Seven AMS 14C dates from Chamical, in the southern highlands of Ecuador, produced a Bayesian start boundary for the Inca occupation phase of AD 1432–1451 (1σ) and AD 1412–1457 (2σ) using IntCal09; with SHCal04 the ranges were AD 1446–1477 (1σ) and AD 1416–1495 (2σ). Ogburn interprets this as Inca expansion into southern Ecuador 1 to 2 decades earlier than the traditional mid-AD 1460s timeframe.
  • The paper concludes Inca expansion into southern Ecuador occurred sometime in the range of AD 1440–1455, and that parts of Argentina and Chile were incorporated sometime prior to AD 1440, which is 3 to 6 decades earlier than the traditional chronology.
  • The traditional chronology, derived from Cabello Balboa and promoted by Rowe, places Pachacuti’s imperial campaigns from AD 1438, Topa Inca’s campaigns from AD 1463–1471, and Huayna Capac’s death at AD 1525. Ogburn argues this sequence is undermined because Inca conquest lists were structured by the four imperial quarters—Chinchaysuyu, Antisuyu, Collasuyu, and Condesuyu—rather than by chronological order, and colonial writers misinterpreted them as chronological.
  • Ogburn recommends abandoning the traditional chronology as the structuring framework and building a chronology primarily from 14C dates, using historical sources supplementally rather than as the timeline’s backbone.

Methods

  • Design: a methodological critique and case study of Inca imperial chronology, combining proposed criteria for useful 14C dating with a new radiocarbon series from the Inca site of Chamical in the southern highlands of Ecuador.
  • Data and sample: seven samples from test excavations at Chamical, a small fieldstone compound at 1225 m, 14 km west of Oña, with Inca imperial-style ceramics and no evidence of pre-Inca activity; samples were dated by AMS at the University of Georgia Center for Applied Isotope Studies.
  • Analysis: dates were calibrated with OxCal v4.1 using both IntCal09 and SHCal04; Bayesian modeling in OxCal estimated the start boundary of the Inca occupation phase, assuming six dates represented a single occupation phase and the most recent date postdated Inca occupation. The paper also reviews published 14C dates from Argentina and Chile and critiques colonial historical sources.

Limitations

  • Stated: 14C dating cannot establish the actual order of provinces conquered within the same decade; the paper says differences of 30 to 40 years should be discernible, and under the best circumstances differences of about 20 years.
  • Stated: calibration is complicated by the hemispheric offset—during the period of interest, IntCal09 dates can be 15–20 years earlier than SHCal04 dates—by ITCZ-driven mixing of Northern and Southern Hemisphere air, by no consensus on curve choice, and by poorer calibration resolution after about AD 1470.
  • Stated and evident: the Chamical interpretation depends on calibration-curve choice and comes from a single small site with limited test excavations and a limited occupation; the paper also states that refining the traditional chronology by selecting among inconsistent historical facts is problematic and could produce conflicting chronologies.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2458/azu_js_rc.v54i2.16014

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

7 of 29 cited sources checked · 5 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    For the Ayacucho region of Peru, due to the southward shift of the ITCZ in the primary growing season, much of the CO2 absorbed by plants should represent the Northern rather than the Southern Hemisphere.

    “As Finucane et al. (2007) argue for the Ayacucho region of Peru, due to the southward shift of the ITCZ in the primary growing season, the austral summer, much of the CO 2 absorbed by plants should represent the Northern rather than the Southern Hemisphere.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Finucane et al. (2007) source
  • Premisecitation

    In some regions, the seasonal movement of the ITCZ brings CO2 from the Northern Hemisphere for part of the year and from the Southern Hemisphere during the other part.

    “This complicates choosing the appropriate calibration for 14 C dates because in some regions the seasonal movement of the ITCZ brings CO 2 from the Northern Hemisphere for part of the year and from the Southern Hemisphere during the other part (McCormac et al. 2004(McCormac et al. :1088)).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites McCormac et al. 2004 source
  • Premisecitation

    During the timeframe of interest (~AD 1400-1532), dates calibrated with the Northern Hemisphere curve IntCal09 can be between 15 and 20 years earlier than those calibrated with the Southern Hemisphere curve SHCal04.

    “As a result of the offset, during the timeframe of interest (~AD 1400-1532) dates calibrated with the Northern Hemisphere curve (IntCal09; Reimer et al. 2009) can be between 15-20 yr earlier than those calibrated with the Southern Hemisphere curve (SHCal04; McCormac et al. 2004).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Reimer et al. 2009 source
    • cites McCormac et al. 2004 source

      The Introduction and Calibration Curve Construction sections describe a variable interhemispheric radiocarbon offset, and the Discussion identifies SHCal04 as a Southern Hemisphere calibration curve. But the paper compares SHCal04 with IntCal04, not IntCal09, and does not establish that calibrated dates for AD 1400–1532 are 15–20 calendar years later with SHCal04. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Findingown data

    Inca imperial-style ceramics were found distributed on the surface outside the compound walls at Chamical, including polychrome sherds, neck fragments, and rope nubbins from aribalo-style vessels.

    “Inca imperial-style ceramics were found distributed on the surface outside the compound walls, which included sherds with polychrome decoration (Figure 2) as well as neck fragments and rope nubbins from aribalo-style vessels.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    One date (UGa-3460) was associated with rubble that blocked the entrance into the compound and appears to represent activity during the early Colonial era.

    “One date (UGa-3460) was associated with rubble that blocked the entrance into the compound and appears to represent activity during the early Colonial era.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 40
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 24

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    The division between hemispheric air masses is the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), not the Equator, and the ITCZ moves seasonally as influenced by the sun and topography.

    “Moreover, the division between the hemispheric air masses is not the Equator, but the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), where tradewinds from north and south converge and mix the air masses.The ITCZ is not fixed, but moves seasonally as influenced by the position of the sun and the topography of the landforms it passes over.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites McCormac et al. 2004 source

      The Discussion says the atmospheric distinction lies along the thermal equator or ITCZ rather than the geographic Equator, and describes a seasonal shift in the ITCZ. It does not say that the sun and landform topography drive that shift, or explain the boundary in terms of converging trade winds. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Because Chamical lies within the climatic zone of the highlands greatly influenced by the ITCZ, the Northern Hemisphere calibration curve IntCal09 is seen as the most suitable for interpretation of the dates.

    “Because Chamical lies within the climatic zone of the highlands that is greatly influenced by the ITCZ, the Northern Hemisphere calibration curve IntCal09 (Reimer et al. 2009) is seen as the most suitable for interpretation of the dates.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Reimer et al. 2009 source

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    The hemispheric offset exists because the greater extent of ocean in the Southern Hemisphere leads to greater exchange of CO2 between ocean and atmosphere, and the offset varies over time rather than staying constant.

    “This difference exists because the greater extent of ocean in the Southern Hemisphere leads to a greater exchange of CO 2 between ocean and atmosphere compared to the Northern Hemisphere.This produces an offset between calibrated ages, which varies over time rather than staying constant (McCormac et al. 2002).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites McCormac et al. 2002 source

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingnone given

    The choice of calibration curve makes a difference of roughly 20 years in the Chamical dates, with the Northern Hemisphere calibration producing dates earlier than the Southern Hemisphere curve.

    “The choice of calibration curve makes a difference of roughly 20 yr in these dates, with the Northern Hemisphere calibration producing dates earlier than the Southern Hemisphere curve.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    The three earliest dates at Chamical cluster together and likely represent the construction phase of the site.

    “Of most relevance are the 3 earliest dates, which cluster together and likely represent the construction phase of the site.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    The second most recent date (UGa-8802) falls mostly within late Inca imperial times, suggesting limited use of the site may have continued for several decades.

    “The second most recent date (UGa-8802) falls mostly within late Inca imperial times, suggesting limited use of the site may have continued for several decades.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    There were no traces of Inca roads leading to Chamical, making it unlikely that Chamical served as an administrative site.

    “There were no traces of Inca roads leading to the site, making it unlikely that Chamical served as an administrative site.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    Test excavations within the main compound at Chamical in 2008 uncovered shallow deposits with few remains, indicating a limited occupation with no evidence of pre-Inca activity.

    “Test excavations conducted within the main compound in 2008 uncovered shallow deposits with few remains, indicating a limited occupation with no evidence of pre-Inca activity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This calibration limit impacts dating of expansion during the latter part of Topa Inca's reign, and the entire reign of Huayna Capac seems to fall in the calibration black hole.

    “This impacts dating of expansion during what is thought to be the latter part of Topa Inca's reign, and the entire reign of Huayna Capac seems to fall in this calibration”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisereasoning

    The nature of the materials dated and whether they were exposed to Northern Hemisphere air while growing is an issue for calibration.

    “Another issue to consider is the nature of the materials dated and whether they were exposed to Northern Hemisphere air while they were growing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisenone given

    Any individual site or building could have been constructed at any time during the Inca occupation of an area, and the lowest excavated Inca strata will not necessarily date the Inca arrival.

    “This can be challenging to determine because any individual site or building could have been constructed at any time during the Inca occupation of the area, and the lowest excavated Inca strata will not necessarily date the Inca arrival.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Premisenone given

    Much of Inca territory lies within transitional areas, such as the Peruvian western slopes near the coast, which fall between climate regimes heavily influenced by the seasonal movement of the ITCZ and those dominated by Southern Hemisphere air masses.

    “Plus, much of Inca territory lies within transitional areas, such as the Peruvian western slopes near the coast, which fall between climate regimes heavily influenced by the seasonal movement of the ITCZ and those dominated by Southern Hemisphere air masses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

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

    Premisecitation

    The traditional chronology focuses on four phases of Inca imperial expansion and dominance, beginning with the creation of the empire by Pachacuti after AD 1438 and ending with the death of Huayna Capac in AD 1525.

    “The heart of the traditional chronology (Table 1, Figure 1) focuses on 4 phases of Inca imperial expansion and dominance, beginning with the creation of the empire by the Inca leader Pachacuti (Inca Yupanqui) after he assumed rule from his father in AD 1438, and ending with the death of his grandson, Huayna Capac in AD 1525.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cabello Balboa (1945)

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

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    The Little Ice Age ITCZ shift would have encompassed most, if not all, of the duration of Inca imperial expansion, but not all of Inca territory.

    “This would have encompassed most, if not all, of the duration of Inca imperial expansion, but not all of Inca territory.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Refining the traditional chronology is very problematic because it hinges on arguing that specific pieces of information are more accurate than others.

    “In the end, however, this approach is very problematic because it hinges on arguing that specific pieces of information are more accurate than others.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Premisenone given

    At present, radiocarbon dating is the only method with the potential to provide data of sufficient precision and accuracy for improving the Inca chronology.

    “At present, radiocarbon dating is the only method that has the potential for providing data of sufficient precision and accuracy.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    The traditional chronology of Inca expansion is based on John H. Rowe's work, which used Cabello Balboa's dates for the reigns and conquests of the last several emperors, assuming that dates supplied for earlier rulers were not credible.

    “For decades, scholars have relied on the chronology of Inca expansion proposed by John H Rowe (initially in Rowe 1944, then more fully developed in Rowe 1945).”
    • Also stated in: § HISTORICAL FRAMEWORK OF THE TRADITIONAL CHRONOLOGY · plain
      “Rowe proposed a chronology of the Inca Empire based on Cabello Balboa's dates for the reigns and conquests of the last several emperors, with the assumption that dates supplied for earlier rulers were not credible.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Rowe 1944
    • cites Rowe 1945 source
    • cites Cabello Balboa (1945)

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

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Most historical accounts agree that the southern highlands of Ecuador were conquered by Topa Inca during the reign of Pachacuti.

    “Most historical accounts, including chronicles whose authors gathered most of their evidence from Cuzco sources (e.g.Betanzos 1987; Sarmiento de Gamboa 2007) and others who had first-hand experience in Ecuador (Cabello Balboa 1945;Cieza de León 1985), agree that the southern highlands of Ecuador were conquered by Topa Inca during the reign of Pachacuti.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Betanzos 1987

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

    • cites Sarmiento de Gamboa 2007 source
    • cites Cabello Balboa 1945

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

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

    Interpretationreasoning

    If Cabello Balboa's dates are not grossly inaccurate and most Inca conquests outside Cuzco occurred during the reigns of Pachacuti and Topa Inca, then much of Inca imperial expansion would have occurred within the optimal calibration window of AD 1410/15 to AD 1460/70.

    “However, if Cabello Balboa's dates are not grossly inaccurate and most Inca conquests outside the Cuzco region occurred during the reigns of Pachacuti and Topa Inca, as most historical accounts suggest, then much of Inca imperial expansion would have occurred within the optimal calibration window of AD 1410/15 to AD 1460/70.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Refinements in 14C dating and calibration methods, a growing database of dates from diverse parts of the former Inca realm, and a reconsideration of the sources used to create accounts of Inca expansion together point to a need to take a different approach to Inca imperial chronology.

    “But refinements in 14 C dating and calibration methods, a growing database of dates from diverse parts of the former Inca realm, and a reconsideration of the sources of information used to create accounts of Inca expansion in the Spanish Colonial period together point to a need to take a different approach to Inca imperial chronology.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Because the conquests were grouped in a formalized geographical order and the list lacked chronological references, we have no way of knowing if the conquests in one quarter were conducted before or after those in another quarter.

    “Most importantly, because the conquests were grouped in this formalized geographical order and the list lacked chronological references, we have no way of knowing if the conquests in one quarter were conducted before or after those in another quarter.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    The conflict between the early 14C dates and the traditional chronology cannot be easily explained by other historical information and indicates a need to reconsider the nature of Inca history and the reliability of recorded accounts for archaeological reconstructions.

    “The conflict between those 14 C dates and the traditional chronology cannot be easily explained by drawing from other historical information, and indicates a clear need to reconsider both the nature of Inca history (D'Altroy et al. 2007) and the extent to which we can reliably draw from the recorded accounts for our archaeological reconstructions of Inca imperial expansion.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites D'Altroy et al. 2007

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

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

    Premisenone given

    The basic chronology of Inca imperial expansion in Andean South America derives from Spanish Colonial historical accounts, but several issues with this traditional chronology have arisen in recent decades.

    “The basic chronology of Inca imperial expansion in Andean South America derives from historical accounts from the Spanish Colonial era, but several issues with this traditional chronology have arisen in recent decades.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Colonial writers interpreted the geographically ordered Inca records as chronologically ordered, which led to written histories of Inca expansion that are not consistent with the actual historical sequence of events.

    “However, those records were interpreted by colonial writers as being chronologically ordered, which led to written histories of Inca expansion that are not consistent with the actual historical sequence of events.”
    • Also stated in: § INTRODUCTION · plain
      “This resulted in data that were mismatched with the linear narratives of Inca history that writers sought to create D E Ogburn during the Spanish Colonial era, i.e. this created fundamental problems with the accounts that have been our principal sources for understanding the chronology of Inca expansion.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationown data

    The dates from Chamical indicate an earlier Inca expansion into southern Ecuador, pointing to a need to revise the traditional chronology, but not necessarily to dismiss it entirely.

    “Because the dates from Chamical indicate an earlier Inca expansion into southern Ecuador, they point to a need to revise the traditional chronology, but not necessarily to dismiss it entirely.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisereasoning

    Not all Inca forts were associated with expansion; many were constructed to defend the borders of the empire, house garrisons, or maintain control over strategic locales over the long term.

    “Furthermore, not all Inca forts were associated with expansion.Many were constructed to defend the borders of the empire, house garrisons, or maintain control over strategic locales over the long term, and would not necessarily mark the arrival of the Incas in an area.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisereasoning

    The Incas moved massive quantities of foods, clothing, and other materials between different climatic zones, so sometimes we will not know if the same calibration curve can be applied to all excavated remains within a single Inca site.

    “Also, the Incas moved massive quantities of foods, clothing, and other materials between different climatic zones, which means sometimes we will not know if the same calibration curve can even be applied to all excavated remains within a single Inca site.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    That timespan could allow for much greater integration of a region and its people into the Inca state, another generation to grow up under imperial control, and more time for imperial forms of organization to become embedded in local culture.

    “In particular, it could allow for much greater integration of a region and its people into the Inca state.It also allows for another generation to grow up under imperial control, and provides more time for imperial forms of organization to become embedded in local culture.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The historicity of the chronicles and other sources treating the Inca Empire has been subject to much debate.

    “Possible approaches to that problem vary depending on how much credence is given to details of recorded Inca history, which is a challenging question because the historicity of the chronicles and other sources treating the Inca Empire has been subject to much debate (e.g.Zuidema 1964;Julien 2000).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Zuidema 1964 source
    • cites Julien 2000

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

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisereasoning

    The upper limit restricts the potential for refining dates for provinces incorporated much later than ~1460-1470 and makes it difficult to distinguish early Spanish Colonial era events from late Inca imperial times.

    “The upper limit restricts the potential for refining the dates for provinces incorporated much later than ~1460-1470 and also makes it difficult to distinguish events of the early Spanish Colonial era from late Inca imperial times.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Interpretationnone given

    Inca expansion into parts of Argentina and Chile occurred sometime prior to AD 1440.

    “Also, we could add that they expanded into parts of Argentina and Chile sometime prior to AD 1440.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • 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

    For many regions, including the Peruvian and Ecuadorean highlands, the air represents some level of mixture between Northern and Southern Hemisphere atmospheres, but we currently have no way of gauging the level of mixture.

    “For many regions, including the Peruvian and Ecuadorean highlands, the air is going to represent some level of mixture between the Northern and Southern Hemisphere atmospheres, but we currently have no way of gauging the level of mixture.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • 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

    The southern highlands of Ecuador area was populated by a subgroup of Cañaris, who apparently resisted incorporation into the Inca Empire.

    “This area was populated by a subgroup of Cañaris, who apparently resisted incorporation into the Inca Empire.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisereasoning

    The statistical nature of 14C dating will not give the precision to establish the actual order of incorporation of provinces conquered within the same decade, but differences of 30 to 40 years, and under the best circumstances about 20 years, can be discerned.

    “Of course, the statistical nature of 14 C dating will not give us the level of precision to be able to establish the actual order of incorporation of different provinces that may have been conquered within the same decade.But we should be able to discern differences of 30 to 40 yr, and under the best circumstances we may be able to discern differences in the range of 20 yr or so.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If Chamical was constructed during the Inca military advance rather than as a later internal control point, it could help establish the date of imperial expansion into the southern sierra of Ecuador.

    “Thus, if it were constructed during the Inca military advance rather than as a later, internal control point, Chamical could help to establish the date of imperial expansion into the southern sierra of Ecuador.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Interpretationreasoning

    The historical record can neither be accepted uncritically nor dismissed outright.

    “Thus, the historical record can neither be accepted uncritically nor dismissed outright.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

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

    Premisenone given

    Archaeologists have seldom relied significantly on 14C dates for understanding Inca imperial chronology on the larger scale, though numerous dates have been obtained from excavated Inca contexts.

    “Archaeologists have seldom relied to any significant extent on 14 C dates for understanding Inca imperial chronology on the larger scale; nonetheless, numerous dates have been obtained from excavated Inca contexts.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    Inca historical narratives were clearly subject to alterations because of the passage of time before being written down, translation and filtering through differing languages and cultures, manipulation by competing Inca factions, and alteration to fit differing agendas of Spanish writers.

    “On one hand, Inca historical narratives were clearly subject to a variety of alterations because of the passage of time before being written down, translation and filtering through differing languages and cultures, manipulation by competing Inca factions, and alteration to fit differing agendas of Spanish writers, among other things.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Interpretationreasoning

    The more practical approach is to obtain as many 14C dates as feasible and to fill in the blanks by critically analyzing the historical record to ascertain which provinces were conquered together in specific campaigns.

    “The more practical approach would be to obtain as many 14 C dates as feasible, and try to fill in the blanks in the map by critically analyzing the historical record to ascertain which provinces were conquered together in specific campaigns, similar to the analysis of Pärssinen (1992).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Pärssinen 1992

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    There appears to have been a mismatch between a primary Inca form of record keeping and Spanish forms of historical narrative, which led to a standard history of Inca expansion that is more disordered or imprecise than inaccurate.

    “In essence, there appears to have been a mismatch between a primary Inca form of record keeping and Spanish forms of historical narrative, which led to a standard history of Inca expansion that is actually more disordered (or imprecise) than inaccurate.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisereasoning

    A single calibration curve is not appropriate for all parts of the Inca empire, and no consensus has emerged on how to deal with this situation.

    “Clearly, the geographical spread of the Inca realm means that a single calibration curve is not going to be appropriate for all parts of the empire, but no consensus has emerged on how to deal with this situation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    According to the traditional chronology, the Inca conquest of the southern highlands of Ecuador would have been between AD 1463 and 1471.

    “According to the traditional chronology, this would have been sometime between AD 1463 and 1471.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial 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 may give no reason why it holds.

    Premisenone given

    We do not have a good sense of how long after conquest the Incas began constructing imperial administrative sites, way stations, and similar facilities within a province.

    “Moreover, we do not have a good sense of how long after conquest the Incas began constructing imperial administrative sites, way stations, etc. within a province-it could have been immediate, or after a delay of a decade or more.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

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

    Premisenone given

    The great majority of Inca territory was incorporated by Topa Inca, both during the rule of Pachacuti and after Pachacuti's death.

    “The great majority of Inca territory was said to have been incorporated by Topa Inca (Figure 1), both during the rule of his father, Pachacuti, and after the latter's death.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

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

    Interpretationreasoning

    A difference of a few decades is not major in many archaeological contexts, but in terms of Inca expansion and the implementation of imperial strategies of control, that timespan can be quite significant.

    “A difference of a few decades is not major in many archaeological contexts.But in terms of Inca expansion and the implementation of imperial strategies of control, that timespan can be quite significant.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Estimates of Huayna Capac's birth run counter to the post-AD 1463 date from Cabello Balboa but are consistent with the AD 1440-1455 range indicated by the 14C dates from Chamical.

    “In both cases, the estimates of Huayna Capac's birth run counter to the post-AD 1463 date from Cabello Balboa, but are consistent with the AD 1440-1455 range indicated by the 14 C dates from Chamical.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The AD 1438 date for the commencement of imperial conquests led by Pachacuti outside the Cuzco region needs to be reassessed.

    “Pushing this stage of expansion back in time suggests the need to reassess the AD 1438 date for the commencement of imperial conquests led by Pachacuti outside of the Cuzco region.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationnone given

    The lower limit for good resolution in calibrated dates could be problematic for improving the chronology of Inca expansion if any conquests outside Cuzco occurred prior to ~AD 1410; there is little to suggest significant expansion at such an early date.

    “The lower limit for good resolution in calibrated dates could be problematic for improving the chronology of Inca expansion if any conquests outside the Cuzco region actually occurred prior to ~AD 1410; fortunately, there is little to suggest any significant expansion at such an early date.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This resistance could have led to the construction of temporary outposts by the Inca army.

    “This resistance could have led to the construction of temporary outposts by the Inca army.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    The ITCZ may have shifted to its southernmost position during the Little Ice Age, from about AD 1420 to 1560/1640, and subsequently retreated to its current position.

    “But on a finer scale, it appears the ITCZ may have shifted to its southernmost position during the Little Ice Age, from ~AD 1420 to 1560/1640 (Sachs et al. 2009) and subsequently retreating to its current position.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sachs et al. 2009 source

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The compilation of multiple campaigns within each quarter creates a chronological problem: even if campaigns were ordered in time within each quarter, we have no way of comparing the sequence of campaigns between the different quarters.

    “It is this compilation of multiple campaigns within each quarter that creates another significant chronological problem: even if the military campaigns and resulting conquests were basically ordered in time within each quarter, we have no way of comparing the sequence of campaigns between the different quarters.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The AD 1410-1440 estimate is a significant deviation from the post-AD 1471 timeframe of the traditional chronology and points to a sequence of provincial expansion out of line with most accounts.

    “This is a significant deviation from the post-AD 1471 timeframe of the traditional chronology and points to a sequence of provincial expansion out of line with that described in most accounts.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Interpretationreasoning

    We must base our chronology of Inca expansion on 14C dates and evaluate the historical record in relation to them.

    “Instead, we must base our chronology on 14 C dates, and evaluate the historical record in relation to them.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
53 of 53

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The main body of six dates from Chamical represented a single occupation phase.

    “The only assumptions included in the Bayesian modeling were that the main body of 6 dates represented a single occupation phase and that the most recent date (UGa-3460) postdated the Inca occupation.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The most recent date (UGa-3460) postdated the Inca occupation at Chamical.

    “The only assumptions included in the Bayesian modeling were that the main body of 6 dates represented a single occupation phase and that the most recent date (UGa-3460) postdated the Inca occupation.”
2 of 2

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • 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).”

    From Dating the expansion of the inca empire: bayesian models from Ecuador and Argentina (2017) · cites this paper as Ogburn 2012

    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

  • 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.”

    From Dating the expansion of the inca empire: bayesian models from Ecuador and Argentina (2017) · cites this paper as Ogburn 2012

    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

  • 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).”

    From Dating the expansion of the inca empire: bayesian models from Ecuador and Argentina (2017) · cites this paper as Ogburn 2012

    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

  • 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.”

    From Dating the expansion of the inca empire: bayesian models from Ecuador and Argentina (2017) · cites this paper as Ogburn 2012

  • 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.”

    From Dating the expansion of the inca empire: bayesian models from Ecuador and Argentina (2017) · cites this paper as Ogburn 2012

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Levillier, 1940, Don Francisco de Toledo, supremo organizador del Perú; su vida, su obra (1515-1582), Tomo II, 646
  2. Cabello Balboa, 1945, Obras,, Volume 1, 451
  3. Williams, 1998, El sur del Tawantinsuyu: un dominio selectivamente intensivo, Tawantinsuyu, 5
  4. D'Altroy, 2007, Variations in the Expression of Inka Power, 85

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Ogburn, D. E.
Venue
Radiocarbon
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2012
Volume
54
Issue
2
Pages
219-237
ISSN
  • 0033-8222 (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-5755
DOI
10.2458/azu_js_rc.v54i2.16014
OpenAlex
W2087556780
Semantic Scholar
305997c12757ddde3077c76c045df651d890a8f6
Cited by
118
References
34
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
FWCI
7.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 1660 d)
Locations
  • Radiocarbon (publishedVersion)
  • UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Institut National Du Cancer
  • University of North Carolina at Charlotte
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
chronology, radiocarbon dating, Spanish colonial chronicles, Ecuadorian highlands, colonial historiography

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