This translation of the work of Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa is both riveting and detailed. As an account of the history of the Incas it is unsurpassed in its accuracy, presenting evidence gained from the Incas themselves circa 1570AD. Events and occurrences are vividly portrayed although the reader is always left with a sense of myth being mixed with fact. Also the annoying use of Italics to mark out the obvious and often contradictory statements forced to be included in the book by the Spanish Viceroy of the time is somewhat demeaning.

Despite this the translation serves as a fascinating read and as a lucid and detailed account of the history of the Incas. The translator has also included an invaluable lexicon of Quechua words and useful maps of the areas in question that add a realism to the book that would be otherwise unachievable.

A stunning and informative read this work is equally capable of being a book of general interest or an accurate academic source. However the prime benefit of this book is not its authenticity but its rich detail that illustrates the lifestyle of the ancient Incas in a truly vivid manner. It is also interesting to note the strong religious superiority that is portrayed by the author and the attitudes of the Spanish conquistadors towards the Incas that were apparent during this period of history and to observe how these factors shaped the type of history that was recorded during this period, a fact that is all to easy to overlook.

Dean's book examines the ambiguity of symbols inherent in the colonial experience. I often wondered-as with most historical reconstructions of "culture" and interpretations of practices long lost from memory-if there was enough "evidence" to make the claims she makes about the representation of sub-alterity. On the one hand, the Indian appears to constructing a colonial self through his/her dress, decoration, mannerisms, artistic expressive forms (such as dance or architecture), etc. But on the other hand, s/he is engaged in the hegemonic forces of "being Indian" within the dominant colonialist ideology. The question is, to what extent did the Indian have the freedom to make choices about dress, dance, decoration, etc. and to what extent was the image of the Indian under the control and creation of the colonialist/church?

I think the pressing need for an academic to take a "politically correct" stance in this day and age must sadly override the ability to present the honest truth in the case of colonial subjectivity. Allowing the indigenous people to speak for themselves is questionable in the case of iconic representation. For instance, where are the depictions of the Indians who carried the massive saints--where are these dark bodies in the paintings Dean examines. And if they are missing, why doesn't the author seem troubled by this?

Read the book and decide for yourself.

This has to be the worst book I have ever read on Peru. The author channels an inka mummy while in the gold museum in lima. This might have been interesting but for the totally bogus bunk that he claims the mummy tells him. For example the story about how the mummy was named by his parents. It was the practice of his tribe for the father to name the baby after the first thing that he sees upon leaving the birth hut, for the mummy green parrot, but his poor brother got the name DOGGY DOODOO, makes one think of the joke about Two Dogs F**king. It goes down hill from there. Futhermore the photos are of the poorest quality.