Israelite9191
You should be reading
I disagree. There were many moments when the Inka were just barely supressed. The Great Rebellion of Tupac Amaru II was really small compared to the fighting that occured in prior rebellions and the Spanish conquest (post killing of the emperor). Also, horses weren't really an advantage in the Andes. In fact, the Spanish insistence on using horses nearly cost them their victories. While it is true that the Inka had the best developed infrastructure network to be seen up until the later half of the 20th century, it was utterly useless for horses. Designed for the sure-footed lamas of Peru, horses were constantly tripping, falling, and getting injured in innumerable ways. The advantages of speed etc. associated with horses were not only balanced by the disadvantages, but were completely nullified. The fall of the Inka was not inherent and un-preventable. Their fall was due to three things: disease, civil war, and just plain bad luck. if even one of these factors was removed, the Inka would have crushed their European opossition.