3 ms·

One interesting thing is how the Incan organizational capability mostly vanished. The original empire was really extremely well organized, but today's Bolivia a

One interesting thing is how the Incan organizational capability mostly vanished. The original empire was really extremely well organized, but today's Bolivia and Peru don't show any particular aptitude in this direction. There is an interesting contrast to Persia, which, having been conquered by Muslims in the 7th century, was subjugated and converted to a new religion as well - and yet within a few decades the Persian bureaucracy and professional class was very influential within the Caliphate. The difference might be in total mortality. Too many Amerindians died from Old World diseases and their know-how was lost. BTW: " In lieu of taxes, every able-bodied adult male in the Incan Empire was legally required to work for the state for three months per year" Taxes in form of labour are harder to steal or siphon away, even if local tax authorities are corrupt. This might have been the best tax system in pre-modern era, in this regard at least.

graemep 2y ago
I would guess the difference is in survival of institutions and institutional knowledge, and similarity of institutions. The Persian bureaucracy were equipped to work for the conquerors, and the empire would have needed them to run the new conquests. The Arab empires were motivated to rule, and to spread their religion, but seem to have been quite happy to adopt local structures and institutions that were consistent with that AFAIK.
gonzobonzo 2y ago
> One interesting thing is how the Incan organizational capability mostly vanished. The original empire was really extremely well organized, but today's Bolivia and Peru don't show any particular aptitude in this direction. They were relatively well organized compared to neighboring people, but they weren't particularly well organized compared to many other places in the world at the time. The administration of modern Bolivia and Peru is far more advanced than that of the Incan Empire.
- inglor_cz 2y ago
  "they weren't particularly well organized compared to many other places in the world at the time." They were able to introduce a common imperial language (Quechua), build up a very good network of roads and runners, and rule several dozen smaller ethnicities without triggering too many rebellions. They extracted taxes from the population quite efficiently without impoverishing it, and were able to build up massive uniformed armies. I think this counts as extraordinary level of governance for that time. Certainly in the contemporary global top five, especially when taking into account just how big the empire was. The same places aren't even in the global top fifty today.
  - gonzobonzo 2y ago
    Your list proves the point. All of those things were common for governments in Europe and Asia at the time. When people bring up the Safavids or the Timurids, for example, you don't hear people saying "they were able to extract taxes, build roads, and they had an imperial language, they were the top administrators in the world!" These things were considered to be an extremely low baseline for being a functional government.
- lurk2 2y ago
  > They were relatively well organized compared to neighboring people, but they weren't particularly well organized compared to many other places in the world at the time. This isn’t true at all. The Inca were not as technically sophisticated as the Europeans (or the Chinese for that matter), sure, but they were doing things on a scale comparable to the late Roman Republic. The extent of their territory was far larger than anything that existed in Europe at the time. > The administration of modern Bolivia and Peru is far more advanced than that of the Incan Empire. You are making this assertion based on the emergence of technical capacities that had nothing to do with these societies. Haiti is not more organized today than it was 200 years ago just because the government has computers now.
  - gonzobonzo 2y ago
    > This isn’t true at all. The Inca were not as technically sophisticated as the Europeans (or the Chinese for that matter) I'm not sure how it isn't true at all when we agree that other governments at the time had much more sophisticated administration. And it wasn't just Europe and China - many areas of the Middle East, Central Asia, and East Asia had much more sophisticated administrative states at the time.
    - lurk2 2y ago
      > I'm not sure how it isn't true at all when we agree that other governments at the time had much more sophisticated administration. We don’t agree about that. I am saying that they may have lacked technical sophistication insofar as they used stone tools over iron or steel, but this has no real bearing on their merits as organizers; the Incans were well-organized by world standards. Europe did not have anything close to what the Incan Empire was at the time. China may have been better organized, but that just shows the sophistication of the Incans if we’re comparing them with an ancient civilization with an established bureaucracy and a population measured in the tens of millions. > many areas of the Middle East, Central Asia, and East Asia You will need to cite specific examples for this argument to hold any water; Japan and the Ottoman Empire are the only two I can think of.
      - 2y ago
lurk2 2y ago
> One interesting thing is how the Incan organizational capability mostly vanished. The original empire was really extremely well organized, but today's Bolivia and Peru don't show any particular aptitude in this direction. All Iberian colonies follow this trajectory. This stems from a Mediterranean attitude towards wealth and work which privileges politics over industry as a means of personal enrichment; politics here encompassing both the clientelism that characterizes these societies as well as the military adventurism and propensity to revolution that this region is famous for.
pqtyw 2y ago
> even if local tax authorities are corrupt Considering that generally taxes in pre-modern stats were primarily used to fund warfare or fund the lifestyle of the local elite that's not necessarily worth much (the Inca empire was not different) i.e. whether the transfer of wealth is done according to the established law or not might not matter much if the system is inherently unjust)

graemep 2y ago

I would guess the difference is in survival of institutions and institutional knowledge, and similarity of institutions. The Persian bureaucracy were equipped to work for the conquerors, and the empire would have needed them to run the new conquests. The Arab empires were motivated to rule, and to spread their religion, but seem to have been quite happy to adopt local structures and institutions that were consistent with that AFAIK.

gonzobonzo 2y ago

> One interesting thing is how the Incan organizational capability mostly vanished. The original empire was really extremely well organized, but today's Bolivia and Peru don't show any particular aptitude in this direction. They were relatively well organized compared to neighboring people, but they weren't particularly well organized compared to many other places in the world at the time. The administration of modern Bolivia and Peru is far more advanced than that of the Incan Empire.

inglor_cz 2y ago
"they weren't particularly well organized compared to many other places in the world at the time." They were able to introduce a common imperial language (Quechua), build up a very good network of roads and runners, and rule several dozen smaller ethnicities without triggering too many rebellions. They extracted taxes from the population quite efficiently without impoverishing it, and were able to build up massive uniformed armies. I think this counts as extraordinary level of governance for that time. Certainly in the contemporary global top five, especially when taking into account just how big the empire was. The same places aren't even in the global top fifty today.
- gonzobonzo 2y ago
  Your list proves the point. All of those things were common for governments in Europe and Asia at the time. When people bring up the Safavids or the Timurids, for example, you don't hear people saying "they were able to extract taxes, build roads, and they had an imperial language, they were the top administrators in the world!" These things were considered to be an extremely low baseline for being a functional government.
lurk2 2y ago
> They were relatively well organized compared to neighboring people, but they weren't particularly well organized compared to many other places in the world at the time. This isn’t true at all. The Inca were not as technically sophisticated as the Europeans (or the Chinese for that matter), sure, but they were doing things on a scale comparable to the late Roman Republic. The extent of their territory was far larger than anything that existed in Europe at the time. > The administration of modern Bolivia and Peru is far more advanced than that of the Incan Empire. You are making this assertion based on the emergence of technical capacities that had nothing to do with these societies. Haiti is not more organized today than it was 200 years ago just because the government has computers now.
- gonzobonzo 2y ago
  > This isn’t true at all. The Inca were not as technically sophisticated as the Europeans (or the Chinese for that matter) I'm not sure how it isn't true at all when we agree that other governments at the time had much more sophisticated administration. And it wasn't just Europe and China - many areas of the Middle East, Central Asia, and East Asia had much more sophisticated administrative states at the time.
  - lurk2 2y ago
    > I'm not sure how it isn't true at all when we agree that other governments at the time had much more sophisticated administration. We don’t agree about that. I am saying that they may have lacked technical sophistication insofar as they used stone tools over iron or steel, but this has no real bearing on their merits as organizers; the Incans were well-organized by world standards. Europe did not have anything close to what the Incan Empire was at the time. China may have been better organized, but that just shows the sophistication of the Incans if we’re comparing them with an ancient civilization with an established bureaucracy and a population measured in the tens of millions. > many areas of the Middle East, Central Asia, and East Asia You will need to cite specific examples for this argument to hold any water; Japan and the Ottoman Empire are the only two I can think of.
    - 2y ago

lurk2 2y ago

> One interesting thing is how the Incan organizational capability mostly vanished. The original empire was really extremely well organized, but today's Bolivia and Peru don't show any particular aptitude in this direction. All Iberian colonies follow this trajectory. This stems from a Mediterranean attitude towards wealth and work which privileges politics over industry as a means of personal enrichment; politics here encompassing both the clientelism that characterizes these societies as well as the military adventurism and propensity to revolution that this region is famous for.

pqtyw 2y ago

> even if local tax authorities are corrupt Considering that generally taxes in pre-modern stats were primarily used to fund warfare or fund the lifestyle of the local elite that's not necessarily worth much (the Inca empire was not different) i.e. whether the transfer of wealth is done according to the established law or not might not matter much if the system is inherently unjust)