Túpac Amaru II y Andrés González de Barcia frente al Inca Garcilaso: el cierre de una restitución inconclusa

Abstract

This essay analyzes Inca Garcilaso’s historical treatment of the notion of restitution, the legal obligation to restore ill-gotten goods to their lawful owners. It argues that this concept allows Garcilaso to endow his reconstruction of the history of Peru with potential influence over ongoing and future petitions for legitimate restitution on behalf of Indians and Inca descendants. In his Comentarios, conquistadors are said to be aware of their need to make reparations for stolen goods and harm inflicted against natives in conquest warfare. In addition, Garcilaso addresses the subject of restitution of sovereignty. He presents it through his recounting of the repeated appeals of Inca Huaina Capac’s descendants, who appear persuaded of the legitimacy of their right to the restitution of Inca sovereignty, but they failed to obtain it from viceregal authorities. This article maintains that by emphasizing the unfinished restitution of Inca sovereignty Garcilaso sought to favorably influence petitions for restitution. This study also suggests that the incomplete restoration of Inca sovereignty could be the reason why in the eighteenth century the editor González de Barcia (1643-1743) tried to cancel the possibility of Inca restitution in his introductory study to his edition of the Comentarios, and why Tupac Amaru II (1738-1781) attempted to attain it through his revolution