took part in battles. A chief strategy was to use the forests as
cover, luring in enemies and then ambushing them. Some-
times canoes were used to approach enemy cities located on
rivers and lakes.
Among the Mesoamericans, warfare was very much a
religious ritual activity. Warfare was sanctioned by the gods,
and leaders were men of religious authority. Warriors called
on help from the gods by singing, blowing horns and whis-
tles, and beating drums as battles began. Religious items
were carried into battle. Death in battle was regarded as a
far more desired fate than capture by the enemy, for it was
common for captured soldiers, especially their leaders, to be
degraded with cruel treatment and for their religious sym-
bols to be desecrated.
Mesoamerican warfare was much more sophisticated
than warfare among more northerly Native Americans. Very
oft en Mesoamericans fi elded large armies, perhaps as many
as 20,000 troops and oft en more. Th e Mesoamericans con-
ducted warfare in a way that seems more modern. Armies
sacked cities, but very oft en, too, they conducted fi eld opera-
tions in open areas; in other words, while northern Native
Americans conducted more guerrilla-type warfare, Me-
soamericans conducted war based on superiority of forces.
Further, Mesoamericans trained for war. Many young boys
went to schools that emphasized not only academic subjects
but the arts of warfare as well, particularly the use of weap-
ons, such as the spear, the shield, and the others discussed
earlier. When they turned 17, they were assigned to military
regiments. Armies were highly organized, with trained gen-
erals, units, couriers, porters, fl ag bearers, bodies of foot sol-
diers, bodies of archers, and the like. Like modern armies,
Mesoamerican armies had ranks of soldiers; a person moved
up through the ranks by showing courage and skill, and a
soldier’s rank was indicated by an elaborate fl ag on his back
that identifi ed his clan, family, or city.SOUTH AMERICA
Historians and archaeologists long believed that warfare in
ancient South America was not common. Th ey pointed to the
fact that South American societies tended to be small and de-
centralized. Th us, dominant societies did not mount armies
of conquest. However, much of the archaeological record
shows defensive remains, such as walls, moats, ditches, and
parapets, though some archaeologists question whether these
“defenses” could possibly have been eff ective and suggest that
they served more ritualistic purposes. For example, they note
that “ forts” had no source of water, suggesting that they could
not have been used as refuges for armies for more than brief
periods of time. Further, the forts had numerous points of
entry and even gaps, making them inadequate for defense.
However, more recent archaeological thinking suggests
that warfare may have been more common than was previ-
ously thought. Th ese scholars emphasize, though, that South
American warfare tended to be prosecuted not by large armiesin open fi elds of battle. Rather, it was conducted more like
the wars of Native North Americans, with emphasis on guer-
rilla tactics. Further, warfare tended to be ritualistic and even
relatively bloodless—more a form of social negotiation rather
than an eff ort to destroy an enemy. Th e word used to convey
this idea is tinku, which means something like “ritual battle.”
Scholars draw these conclusions by looking at the archaeologi-
cal remains, which include many pictures of ritualized war and
in particular ritualized confl ict between people who are not
adult males. Th is record shows that the most common weapons
in ritualized warfare were clubs, slingshots, and even whips.
Th e practice of capturing enemy soldiers for ritual sacri-
fi ce was common in South America. Among the Moche, for
example, the purpose of warfare was not to conquer enemies
so much as it was to obtain captives for ritual sacrifi ces con-
ducted by warrior-priests. Surviving decorations on pottery,
for example, show these sacrifi ces being conducted, with
enemy soldiers having their throats slit and warrior-priests
drinking goblets of the soldiers’ blood. In conducting war
South Americans used weapons that were in most respects
similar to those used in North America and Mesoamerica:
knives, lances, and particularly clubs. Bows and arrows do
not seem to have been as widely used.
South America also provides a clear example of the rela-
tionship between warfare, resources, and climatic conditions
among the Andean people of Peru. Recent archaeological
fi ndings show that the Andeans developed a complex, thriv-
ing civilization beginning in about 3000 b.c.e. Th ey built cit-
ies, including the city of Caral, pyramids, monuments, and
plazas that have only begun to be explored fully. For about
1,200 years the Andeans lived peaceably with their neighbors.
Very early on ocean currents provided rich marine life along
the coast as well as a climate for growing fruits and vegeta-
bles. But at some point the climate turned much drier, so the
Andeans built canals to irrigate what was becoming desert.
Th eir problem was that over time the soil became progres-
sively less productive, leading to a decline in their civiliza-
tion. By about 1800 b.c.e. the region had been conquered by
neighboring states.See also adornment; agriculture; architecture; bor-
ders and frontiers; building techniques and mate-
rials; children; cities; death and burial practices;
economy; education; empires and dynasties; family;
festivals; foreigners and barbarians; gender struc-
tures and roles; government organization; hunting,
fishing, and gathering; inventions; literature; met-
allurgy; migration and population movements; mili-
tary; nomadic and pastoral societies; religion and
cosmology; roads and bridges; seafaring and navi-
gation; settlement patterns; ships and shipbuilding;
slaves and slavery; social organization; towns and
villages; trade and exchange; transportation; weap-
onry and armor.war and conquest: The Americas 11550895-1194_Soc&Culturev4(s-z).i1155 1155 10/10/07 2:31:16 PM