United States or Tajikistan ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Bartholomew. Garcilasso had seen the mummy of the Inca Uiracocha, and relates the whole tale from the oral version of his uncle, adding many native comments on the Court revolution described. To Garcilasso, then, the invocations of Uiracocha, in Christoval's collection of prayers, are a native adaptation to Spanish prejudice: even in them Pachacamac occurs.
But to call several or all Spaniards by the name given to the Creator would be absurd. Mr. Tylor and Mr. Markham do not refer to the passage in which Christoval obviously gets hold of a wrong version of the story of the apparition. There is yet another version of this historical legend, written forty years after Christoval's date by Don Juan de Santa Cruz Pachacuti-yamqui Salcamayhua.
Payne appears to prefer Christoval's legend of the Inca crystal-gazer, to the rival version of Garcilasso. The Yunca form of the worship of Pachacamac Mr. Payne regards as an example of degradation. He disbelieves Garcilasso's statement, that human sacrifices were not made to the Sun. Garcilasso must, if Mr.
Uiracocha saw the apparition, as Père Acosta rightly says, and Yupanqui was not the son but the grandson of this Inca Uiracocha. Uiracocha's own son was Pachacutec, which simply means 'Revolution, 'they say, by way of by-word Pachamcutin, which means "the world changes." Christoval's form of the story is peculiarly gratifying in one way.
Interesting as a proof of Inca crystal-gazing, this legend of Christoval's cannot compete as evidence with Acosta and Garcilasso. The reader, however, must decide as to whether he prefers Garcilasso's unpropitiated Pachacamac, or Christoval's Uiracocha, human sacrifices, and all. Mr. Tylor prefers the version of Christoval, making Pachacamac a title of Uiracocha.
Word Of The Day