Even if the narrative is ornate, elegant, and copious of words
Even if persons, places, and times are conveniently displayed
Even if the shape of towns and the site and order of battles are fully described
Even if the mind of the reader is artfully attracted to the material
If the truth is missing it can never be called history.

The historical writings of Garcilaso Inca de la Vega (1539-1616) have evoked varying responses since they appeared. Consideration of his work has concerned its historical value rather less than it has examined Garcilaso's literary style, indigenist perspective, ambicultural dilemma, and irrepressible imagination. In turn most of this commentary has concentrated on Garcilaso's account of Inca history and customs as embodied in the Comentarios reales. Garcilaso's integrated, coherent, and circumstantial account was long regarded as the orthodox version of Inca matters, if only because it so congenially mirrored European ideas of what historical writing should be all about. Of late, however, it has come under fire as it becomes increasingly apparent that the weight of archeological, ethno-historical, and cultural evidence fails to sustain Garcilaso's projection of imperial status, utopian social norms, and quasi-Christian habits to the very beginnings of the Inca polity.