Two items of massive ignorance here. First, the Incas of course were not Mesoamerican. Second, their works were not built by slaves but by a system of mandatory public service. And of course, slavery was very important in the Roman Empire and Greek city-states, so by your criterion they were not civilized.
This is so absurd it doesn’t really require further comment than that.
The Ottomans hit their height a few years later, and I think it was bigger. If you’re restricting it strictly to the year 1532, maybe not, but a few years later, they won some major wars and annexed a lot of land.
And 1532, while it was the Incan empire at its highest point, was a fairly recent thing. Huayna Capac’s conquests had pretty much doubled the size of the Inca Empire by his death in 1527, and the civil war that followed his death between Huayna Capac’s sons was pretty much what let Pizarro take it over. So the date is kind of arbitrary, i think (And I’d put the height of the Inca Empire in 1527, not 1532. From 1527 to 1532, the empire was pretty much divided between Huascar and Atahualpa, who were each ruling their halves pretty much independently, and even after Atahualpa beat Huascar for good, the civil war and smallpox had done some pretty gruesome things to the size of the population.
True, the Inca Empire was short-lived. Certainly there were larger empires both before and after, but the statement that it was the largest of its time can be found on many reputable sites, including the Smithsonian and Nova. But point taken that 1527 might be a better year for the Empire’s peak.
I gave you two cites already in post #211. That they’re not links to pop culture blog dictionaries doesn’t make them not cites.
No, I pointed out the complete non-existence of your source’s source. That’s only an “attack” the way that kid “attacked” the Emperor for pointing out he had no clothes.
Antropology dictionaries no longer having a definition of "primitive’ is kind of the whole point. It’s about as useless a concept to an objective scientific study as if they had a definition of the Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid races (and about as dated).
OK, the Ming Empire lasted from 1368- 1644, during which time it had a area of about 6,500,000 km², three times the Incan and a population of 125,000,000, six times the Incan Empire. Are you actually trying to say that the Mings somehow mysteriously dropped in size by a third just around 1532, and also lost 80% of it’s population? That is simply ludicrous.
The Mughal Empire at that time had a area of 4,000,000 km² and 145,000,000.
Cite? Not that either society had slaves, of course they did, but that they had them in the numbers to “build their empires” on them, rather than commoners.
