Studies of state-formation and political regime creation in Latin America generally focus on the period following the revolutionary wars. Reference to the colonial era is sometimes presented in such studies, but typically in a summary form. Thomas Ward's book alerts us to the fact that prior to the arrival of the colonizers there was a large population, divided into distinct nations, and that their earlier and subsequent transformations as nations greatly affected the Spanish process of colonization. Failure on the part of analysts to account for the impact of those nations on the evolution of the Americas during the colonial period has led them to present an incomplete and biased portrayal of the worlds that emerged there. Equally as significant, Ward's work warns us that by not accounting for the histories and cultures of the inhabitants of the Americas during the precolonial period, we are marginalizing and dehumanizing them.

To bring to light the important role Amerindians have played in the history of the Americas, Ward strives to depict the nations that different peoples formed prior to the arrival of the colonizers. His concept of the premodern nation is erected on a number of interconnected factors. The idea of a kinship group associated with biological reproduction is essential to the propagation of the nation. The group is differentiated within according to lineage, class, and gender. As a nation, the group is connected to a territory, real or claimed, and relies on its own army to protect itself or to enlarge its power. Each nation develops its own set of religious beliefs and culture to create an identity. Legends, history, and language help create and sustain through time each nation's identity.

A hierarchically organized nation, adds Ward, does not exist without a state apparatus, which consensually and coercively influences the nature of the nation. Moreover, each nation evolves. It searches into its own past (vertical appropriation) to identify its exceptional components, and adopts ideas and cultures from adjacent nations. These actions transform each nation in ways that depend on particular circumstances. The principal focuses of his analyses are the nations created by the Aztecs and Incas (and to a lesser extent the Maya), some of the inhabitants of present-day Colombia, and the Chimú in northern Peru.

As a political scientist who relies extensively on the works of historians, economists, anthropologists, and ethnographers, I had hoped to be both informed and enlightened by Ward's work but found myself repeatedly asking: How do I disentangle his work in order to derive relatively clear ideas of his arguments about the various precolonial nations? I cannot complete such a task in the summary form of a book review. Ward's book is not, as Christopher Conway claims on its cover, one of those rare studies that appeals to “specialists and non-specialists alike.” Quite bluntly, the non-specialists would have great difficulty deciphering Ward's arguments. He inundates nearly every page with quotes from a wide range of authors, utilizes technical language that often requires access to a dictionary, and presents relatively simple arguments in overly complex ways. This type of writing has become too common among academicians, and, regrettably, seems to be expected and accepted by Ward's academic peers. My frustration could have been partially remedied if at the end of each chapter Ward had summarized his arguments in terms common to the non-specialist.

I have a final critical comment. The last chapter “Migrations, Trade, and Other Human Interactions,” seems to have been inserted without careful consideration of its relationship to the chapters that preceded it. Throughout the chapter, Ward constantly refers to earlier passages and arguments, forcing the reader to go back and forth. Such a chapter could have been redesigned to set a foundation for the chapters that focus on the various indigenous nations he analyzes throughout the book.

As one of my professors in graduate school used to say: “It is easy to critique a bad book; it is disheartening to critique a book with great potential that fails to fulfill its potential.” Ward's book fits into the latter category.