You are on page 1of 234

Paria la Viexa

Pre-Hispanic Settlement Patterns in the Paria Basin, Bolivia,


and its Inka Provincial Center

Jnos Gyarmati
and
Carola Condarco Castelln

Paria la Viexa
Pre-Hispanic Settlement Patterns in the Paria Basin, Bolivia,
and its Inka Provincial Center

Paria la Viexa
Pre-Hispanic Settlement Patterns in the Paria Basin,
Bolivia, and its Inka Provincial Center
by

Jnos Gyarmati & Carola Condarco Castelln


with contributions by

Lszl Bartosiewicz
Rene Bonzani
Alice Choyke
Veronika Szilgyi

Museum of Ethnography
Budapest, 2014

The fieldwork in Bolivia and the publication of this volume was made possible
by generous financial support from
the National Research Fund of Hungary (OTKA)
The Curtiss T. Brennan and Mary G. Brennan Foundation
Heinz Latin American Archaeology Program
Union Acadmique Internationale

Corpus Antiquitatum
Americanensium
Hungary
Volume 2
Field photos
Jnos Gyarmati
Carola Condarco Castelln
Lszl Bartosiewicz
Balzs Szinger
Field documentation
Carola Condarco Castelln
Alvaro Condarco Castelln
Mile Vargas Rosquellas
Artefact photos
Jnos Gyarmati
Eszter Kerk
Krisztina Sarnyai
Richard Jefferies
Lszl Bartosiewicz
Figures and maps
Jnos Gyarmati
va Pillr
Veronika Szilgyi
Lszl Bartosiewicz
Csaba get
Rene Bonzani
Judit Antoni
Desktop editing and layout
Jnos Csiga
Cover design
Jnos Gyarmati
English translation
Magdalna Seleanu (Chapters IIV, IX)
Anna Horvai (Chapter IX) and
The Authors
The Authors, 2014
English translation, Magdalna Seleanu, Anna Horvai, The Authors, 2014
Publisher: Lajos Kemecsi
The Museum of Ethnography is mantained by the Ministry of Human Resources
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any other information storage and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing
from the publisher.
ISBN 978-963-9540-89-7
Printed in Hungary by Btaprint Bt.

Contents
PREFACE .......................................................................................................................................................................
I. THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PARIA BASIN ...........................................................................
II. CULTURAL CONTEXT AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE BOLIVIAN ALTIPLANO.....................................
II.1. The Formative Period .....................................................................................................................................
II.2. The Middle Horizon .......................................................................................................................................
II.3. The Late Intermediate Period ......................................................................................................................
II.4. The Late Horizon ............................................................................................................................................
II.5. Spanish Intrusion and the Creation of the Colonial System ...............................................................
III. SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN .......................................................................................
III.1. Research Goals and Research Methods ...................................................................................................
III.2. The Formative Period ....................................................................................................................................
III.3. The Middle Horizon ......................................................................................................................................
III.4. The Late Intermediate Period .....................................................................................................................
III.5. The Late Horizon ..........................................................................................................................................
III.5.1. Settlements................................................................................................................................................
III.5.1.1. Tampus .............................................................................................................................................
III.5.2. Roads ........................................................................................................................................................
III.5.3. Storehouses ...............................................................................................................................................
III.5.3.1. Group 1 (Site Ce 34) ........................................................................................................................
III.5.3.2. Group 2 (Site Ce 51) ........................................................................................................................
III.5.3.2.1. Surface I ..................................................................................................................................
III.5.3.3. Group 36 (Site Ce 1) ......................................................................................................................
III.5.4. Corrals and other structures ......................................................................................................................
III.5.5. Mines ........................................................................................................................................................
III.6. The Colonial Period .....................................................................................................................................
IV. PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER ...................................................................................
IV.1. Structure BH .................................................................................................................................................
IV.2. Structures BMBM3 .....................................................................................................................................
IV.2.1. Structure BM.............................................................................................................................................
IV.2.2. Structures BM1BM3 ...............................................................................................................................
IV.3. The Finds from the Inka Provincial Center .............................................................................................
IV.3.1. Ceramics ...................................................................................................................................................
IV.3.1.1. Household pottery ............................................................................................................................
IV.3.1.2. Vessels for serving and storing liquids and food ..............................................................................
IV.3.1.3. Other ceramic artifacts .....................................................................................................................
IV.3.1.4. Discussion ........................................................................................................................................
IV.3.2. Lithic artifacts ...........................................................................................................................................
IV.3.3. Metal artifacts ...........................................................................................................................................
IV.3.4. Shell and snail finds ..................................................................................................................................
V. ARCHAEOMETRIC INVESTIGATION OF THE PRE-HISPANIC POTTERY OF THE PARIA
BASIN: PROVENANCE AND TECHNOLOGY ..................................................................................................
V.1. Sampling Strategy ..........................................................................................................................................
V.2. Method ..............................................................................................................................................................
V.3. Comprehensive Petrographic, Mineralogical, and Geochemical Description of the Ceramic
Samples ..............................................................................................................................................................
V.3.1. Petrographic group I ...................................................................................................................................
V.3.1.1. Subgroup I/A .....................................................................................................................................
V.3.1.2. Subgroup I/B .....................................................................................................................................
V.3.1.3. Subgroup I/C ...................................................................................................................................
V.3.1.4. Subgroup I/D ...................................................................................................................................
V.3.2. Petrographic group II ...............................................................................................................................
V.3.3. Petrographic group III ..............................................................................................................................
V.3.4. Adobe samples .........................................................................................................................................

1
3
13
13
15
16
19
25
29
29
29
33
34
44
44
46
48
49
52
52
54
54
55
56
58
59
62
68
68
73
76
76
77
79
84
85
87
88
90
91
91
92
93
93
93
93
94
94
94
94
94
v

V.4. Comparative geological samples from the Paria Basin .........................................................................


V.4.1. Alluvial sediments ....................................................................................................................................
V.4.2. Siliciclastic rocks .....................................................................................................................................
V.4.3. Pyroclastics and volcanites.......................................................................................................................
V.5. Interpretation: Comparison of the Archaeological and Geological Samples ................................
V.5.1. Provenance ...............................................................................................................................................
V.5.1.1. Petrographic group I ........................................................................................................................
V.5.1.2. Petrographic group II .......................................................................................................................
V.5.1.3. Petrographic group III .....................................................................................................................
V.5.1.4. Adobe and building stone samples ..................................................................................................
V.5.2. Technology ...............................................................................................................................................
V.6. Discussion ..................................................................................................................................................
V.6.1. Specialized raw materials .........................................................................................................................
V.6.2. Classical Inka pottery making technology ...............................................................................................
V.7. Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................................
VI. ANIMAL EXPLOITATION IN INKA AND EARLY COLONIAL PERIOD PARIA ....................................
VI.1. Material and Method ................................................................................................................................
VI.2. Evaluation by Animal Taxa .......................................................................................................................
VI.2.1. Camelids .................................................................................................................................................
VI.2.2. Bovids .....................................................................................................................................................
VI.2.3. Dogs........................................................................................................................................................
VI.2.4. Wild animals ...........................................................................................................................................
VI.3. Butchering and Disarticulation ..............................................................................................................
VI.4. Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................................
VII. WORKED SKELETAL MATERIALS FROM PARIA ....................................................................................
VII.1. Introduction ...............................................................................................................................................
VII.2. Technological Context ............................................................................................................................
VII.3. Find Material .............................................................................................................................................
VII.4. Conclusions.................................................................................................................................................
VIII. MACROBOTANICAL REMAINS RECOVERED DURING THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL
INVESTIGATIONS OF THE PARIA BASIN ................................................................................................
VIII.1. Introduction..............................................................................................................................................
VIII.2. Methodology of the Recovery and Analysis of the Macrobotanical Remains ..........................
VIII.3. Results of the Macrobotanical Study ................................................................................................
VIII.3.1. Surface II of Paria ................................................................................................................................
VIII.3.2. Surface I of Paria .................................................................................................................................
VIII.3.3. Structures of Site Ce 51 .......................................................................................................................
VIII.4. Conclusions ...............................................................................................................................................
IX. PARIA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM OFTHE INKA EMPIRE..................
IX.1. State Settlement Hierarchy of the Inka Empire..................................................................................
IX.2. Production ....................................................................................................................................................
IX.2.1. Pottery production ..................................................................................................................................
IX.2.2. Textile manufacture ................................................................................................................................
IX.2.3. Metal production ....................................................................................................................................
IX.2.4. Fine artisanry ..........................................................................................................................................
IX.3. Concentration of Products ......................................................................................................................
IX.4. Storage of Goods .........................................................................................................................................
IX.5. Redistribution and Consumption of Goods ............................................................................................
IX.6. Provincial Centers and the Inka Political Economy ..........................................................................
NOTES ..........................................................................................................................................................................
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................................
Primary Sources ....................................................................................................................................................
Secondary Works: Books and Articles .............................................................................................................
APPENDICES..............................................................................................................................................................
INDEX ..........................................................................................................................................................................

vi

94
95
95
95
95
95
95
96
96
96
97
99
99
100
100
103
103
105
105
109
110
111
111
112
113
113
113
113
117
119
119
119
121
121
126
129
130
133
133
141
142
143
144
145
145
146
150
151
155
161
161
163
181
211

List of Illustrations

Maps
I.
II.
III.
IV.

II.4
Archaeological sites of the Paria Basin
Formative Period and Middle Horizon archaeological sites of the Paria Basin
Late Intermediate Period archaeological sites
of the Paria Basin
Late Horizon and Colonial Period archaeological sites of the Paria Basin

Figures
I.1
I.2
I.3

I.4
I.5
I.6

I.7

I.8
I.9
I.10
I.11
II.1
II.2

II.3

Principal environmental zones and cross-section of the South Central Andes


Relief of the Paria Basin
Overview of the Paria Basin: irrigated fields
at the confluence of the Jacha Uma and Iruma
Rivers. The altiplano overlooks the river valley, with the Cordillera de Azanaques in the
background
Tectonic units of Bolivia and geology of the
Paria Basin
Freshwater layer series of the Paria Basin
Annual average, maximum and minimum
temperatures between 1991 and 2012 in
Oruro, Bolivia
Monthly average, maximum and minimum
temperatures between 1991 and 2012, and in
1889 in Oruro, Bolivia
Annual precipitation between 1991 and 2012
in Oruro, Bolivia
Monthly average precipitation between
19912012 in Oruro, Bolivia
Wild ducks on the bank of the Jacha Uma
River
Carrot harvest
Archaeological sites in the South Central
Andes
Chronological outline of the Bolivian altiplano between the southern basin of Lake
Titicaca and Lake Poop
Symbolic and political regions and ethnic groups of the South Central Andes (after Bouysse-Cassagne 1986 and Sanchez
Canedo 2008)

4
5

6
7
7

8
9
9
10
10
14

15

17

Ethnic lords of the northern and central altiplano (after Platt et al. 2006)
II.5 Model of governance in Kollasuyu
III.1 Overview, plan, and cross-section of Site Ce
83
III.2 Chaqui taqlla point and hoe from Site Ce83
III.3 Formative Period settlement categories in the
Paria Basin
III.4 Changes in the settlement categories from
the Formative Period to the Middle Horizon
III.5 Changes in the settlement categories from
the Middle Horizon to the Late Intermediate
Period
III.6 Framstead at Anocariri, Cercado Province,
Department of Oruro
III.7 Chullpas at Site Ce 19
III.8 Ceiling of a chullpa at Site Ce 19
III.9 Remains of the foundation of an assumed
chullpa, Site Ce 41
III.10 Plan of Site Ce 51
III.11 Structure 2 after excavation, Site Ce 51
III.12 Changes in the settlement categories from
the Late Intermediate Period to the Late
Horizon
III.13 Remains of the Condorchinoca tampu
III.14 Inner side of the western wall of the Condorchinoca tampu
III.15 Remains of the Kullku Pampa tampu
III.16 Satellite photo of the site complex at Paria
(Source: Google Earth)
III.17 Section of the pre-Hispanic road near Falsuri
III.18 The Late Horizon site complex around Paria
III.19 Modern storehouse next Caracollo, Department of Oruro
III.20 Remains of Storehouse Group 6 on the northern boundary of Paria
III.21 Satellite photo of Site Ce 34 (Source: Google
Earth)
III.22 Plan of Storehouse Group 1
III.23 Remains of a round storehouse, Group 1
III.24 Remains of a rectangular storehouse, Group 1
III.25 Excavated rectangular storehouse, Group 2
III.26 Plan and cross-section of the excavated
storehouse, Group 2
III.27 Plan of Storehouse Groups 46
III.28 Enclosed plots on the hills flanking the Khala
Pata River

21
23
30
31
32
33

35
35
37
38
38
39
40

45
46
47
48
49
50
50
51
51
52
53
54
54
55
55
56
57

vii

III.29 Inka copper mine, Site Ce 56


III.30 Changes in the settlement categories from
the Late Horizon to the Colonial Period
IV.1 Location of Paria at the edge of the altiplano,
with the foothills of the Cordillera de Azanaques in the background
IV.2 Surface features and collecting surfaces in
the central zone of Paria
IV.3 Plan of Structure BH
IV.4 Remains of the northern wall of Structure
BH at the beginning of excavation
IV.5 Plan and cross-sections of Surface I
IV.6 Remains of the perished southern wall of
Structure BH and its bedding trench
IV.7 Northeastern corner of Structure BH showing its construction materials and wall structure
IV.8 Plaster surviving on the northern wall of
Structure BH
IV.9 In situ remains of the carnivore uncovered in
Surface III, near Structure BH
IV.10 Fire pit lined with cobbles in Square 16
IV.11 Pit in the northeastern corner of Structure BH
IV.12 Northern wall of Structure BH (left) and the
wall of an earlier adobe structure (right).
Both structures were erected on an infilled pit
IV.13 Section of the northern wall of Surface I (A),
and the north to south baulk of Square 3(B)
IV.14 Plan of Structures BMBM3
IV.15 Interior side of the northern wall of Structure
BM
IV.16 The entrance of Structure BM with its
threshold made from batns and the base of
a taquira on the outer side of the entrance
IV.17 Lower part of the oven of Structure BM with
a round depression for holding round-based
vessels
IV.18 Clay oven in a farmstead building at Incarracay in the Cochabamba Valley (1995)
IV.19 Ash pit and depression lined with clay
(right), and the remains of the oven and the
dividing wall
IV.20 Sandstone ua and quartzite mortar uncovered outside Structure BM
IV.21 Perforated sandstone disc in the debris of
Structure BM
IV.22 Distribution of the weaving implements (A),
adornments (B) and both find types (C) in
Surface II
IV.23 Structures BM2 and BM3 constructed inside
Structure BM
IV.24 Cross-section of Structure BM2
IV.25 Platforms and grinding implements deposited
upside-down in Structure BM2. The curved
line to the left of the stone implements indicates the clay plastering of the ash pit
viii

57
58

59
61
62
62
63
64

64
65
65
66
66

67
68
69
70

70

70
71

71
72
72

73
74
74

74

IV.26 An ua, a mortar, and a batn deposited upside-down on the floor of Structure BM2
75
IV.27 Clay-plastered bin uncovered under the floor
level of Structures BMBM3
75
IV.28 Main vessel forms in the ceramic assemblage
from Paria
78
IV.29 One of the two broken vessels placed one
into the other found between the ash pit and
the grinding implements uncovered on the
floor of Structure BM2
79
IV.30 Collar adorned with silver discs and beads
(after Baessler 19021903, Fig. 413)
88
IV.31 Silver tweezers from Structure BM
88
IV.32 Iron nails from Structure BH (ab) and collecting surface AM (cf)
88
IV.33 Worked Oliva (ad) and Pecten (e) shells,
land snails (fg) and mother-of-pearl discs in
different manufacturing phases (hl)
89
V.1 Geological map of the neighborhood of the
Paria Basin with the geological sampling locations (modified after GEOBOL 1992, 1994) 91
V.2 Chemical composition of ceramics and their
potential raw materials in Paria
97
V.3 Geochemical relationship of ceramic groups
and potential raw materials in the Paria Basin 98
V.4 Phase changes during the firing of a limefree ceramic raw material
99
VI.1 The relationship between NISP and bone
weight (g) in the most important animal taxa 104
VI.2 Overlaps between the live weight ranges
for wild and domestic New World camelids
mentioned in the text
105
VI.3 The percentual distribution of camelid bones
by the meat value categories established by
Uerpmann (1973)
105
VI.4 Dried fetal llamas on sale for Pachamama rituals (La Paz, Bolivia, 2007)
106
VI.5 The percentual age distribution of 2,296 ageable camelid bones
106
VI.6 The size distribution of camelid astragali
107
VI.7 The distribution of llama standard scores
calculated from 389 archaeological measurements, in relation to the mean value and
standard deviations of six modern-day zoo
specimens in the Naturhistorisches Museum,
Vienna
107
VI.8 Llama used as a pack animal as shown in an
illustration by Guaman Poma de Ayala (1980
[1613]: 497)
108
VI.9 Marked mediolateral spreading and asymmetry in the distal end of a metatarsus from a
large camelid
108
VI.10 Exostoses near the distal end of an anterior
proximal phalanx from a llama. Lesions are
visible on the dorsal (left), axial (middle) and
palmar (right) surfaces
109

VI.11 Picture of a sixty years old man with a small


dog (Guaman Poma de Ayala 1980 [1613]:
172)
110
VI.12 Rough, parallel cut marks on the ventral side
of a llama third cervical vertebra
111
VII.1 Dull point made from the proximal half of a
left llama metatarsus recovered from Structure BM
114
VII.2 Artisanal weaver from the village of Paria
using the llama metapodium point shown in
Figure VII.3 for fine design
115
VII.3 Modern-day weaving tool made from the distal end of a split llama metapodium. Grooving and splitting, commonly used during
prehistory in the Old World, is rare on such
camelid tools
115
VII.4 Comb-shaped tools most probably used to
beat down the warp threads beaters
116
VII.5 Ungulate rib-based implements possibly
used in weaving as a thread bobbins
116
VII.6 Beads made from non-identifiable mussel
shell
117
VIII.1 Chenopodium seeds (Chenopodiaceae).
Specimens recovered from Paria, Surface II,
Squares 1 and 2. Diameters ca. 1.5 mm
122
VIII.2 Cactus seed (Cactaceae, cf. Opuntia soehrensii). Specimen recovered from Paria,
Surface II, Squares 1 and 2. Dimensions: ca.
3.52.82.5 mm (LengthWidthThickness) 122
VIII.3 Zea mays cob (Poaceae). Specimen recovered from Paria, Surface II, Square 8.
16-rowed. 2.9 mm in length, 1.0 mm in diameter
124
VIII.4 Zea mays kernel (Poaceae). Specimen recovered from Paria, Surface II, Squares 1and2.
Dimensions: 6.54.03.0 mm (Depth Width
Thickness).
124
VIII.5 Chili pepper seed (Solanaceae, Capsicum
sp.). Specimen recovered from Paria, Surface II, Square 27. Dimensions: 2.72.4 mm
(LengthWidth)
125

VIII.6 Seeds possibly of raz de china (Nyctaginaceae, cf. Boerhavia sp.). Specimen recovered from Paria, Surface II, Square 15.
Dimensions: 3.81.51.2 mm (Length
WidthThickness)
VIII.7 Seed from the Leguminosea/Mimosaceae
families. Specimen recovered from Paria,
Surface II, Square 10. Dimensions: 18
95mm (LengthWidthThickness)
VIII.8 Zea mays cob (Poaceae). Specimen recovered from Paria, Surface I, Square 2.
14-rowed. 1.6 mm in length, 0.7 mm in diameter
VIII.9 Seed from the Cucurbitaceae family. Specimen recovered from Paria, Surface I, Square
12. Dimensions: 9.05.52.7 mm (Length
WidthThickness)
IX.1 State installations and the imperial road system of the Inka Empire
IX.2 Inka state installations and roads in the Paria
Basin and its wider region
IX.3 Principal data of the six storage facilities in
the Paria area
IX.4 Number of state storehouses in different
zones of the Inka Empire
IX.5 Storage capacity of five regions of the Inka
Empire

126

126

129

129
135
137
149
149
150

Tables
IV.1
IV.2

Radiocarbon dates for Structure BH of Paria


Radiocarbon dates for Structures BM and
BM2 of Paria
VI.1 Animals identified at Paria (Site Ce 1)
VI.2 Relationships between the greatest length (x)
and distal breadth (y) of camelid astragali
VI.3 Withers height estimates for the dog skeleton
found outside Structure BH
VII.1 Worked animal remains from the site of Paria

67
76
103
107
110
114

ix

Preface

The ethnohistoric investigations based on written sources


played a decisive role in the study of the Inka Empire
until the mid-20th century. The archaeological research
of this period principally concentrated on the heartland of
the Inka Empire and contributed little to a better understanding of the empires administrative system and the
role played by the conquered areas in the political economy. In this regard, the first change came with Menzels
(1959: 129) analysis, based on the archaeological record
and colonial documents, in which she demonstrated the
different strategies employed by the Inka state in the administration of certain southern Peruvian coastal valleys.
Likewise, the combined evidence from colonial sources
such as the visita of Hunuco (Dez de San Miguel 1964
[1567]) and from archaeological research (Morris et al.
2011; MorrisThompson 1970, 1985) highlighted the
role of Hunuco Pampa, the prototype of provincial centers, in the economic and administrative system of the
Inka Empire, as well as the relationship between Hunuco
Pampa and the regions various ethnic groups. This project marked the start of long-term research which sought
to examine the role of provincial centers functioning as
administrative and economic hubs, and the relation between these centers and the surrounding regions (DAltroy 1992; DAltroy et al. 2000, 2007; DAltroyHastorf
2001; GyarmatiVarga 1999; Idrovo Urigen 2000; Julien 1983; Malpass 1993; MalpassAlconini 2010; Matos Mendieta 1994; MorrisSantillana 2007).
The principal goal of research in this field, recently
summarized by Charles Stanish (2001), was to gain a better understanding of the expansion and administration of
the Inka Empire. The information contained in the ethnohistoric sources turned out to be crucial in many respects
because in addition to contributing to the interpretation
of archaeological findings, these Colonial documents
also shed light on the many dimensions of the relations
between the Inka state and the conquered peoples, and
they also offered tantalizing glimpses of the historic and
social conditions preceding the Inka conquest.
The archaeological-ethnohistoric research project led
by Jnos Gyarmati in the Cochabamba Valley in Bolivia
between 1995 and 1999 was in part based on a set of
these ethnohistoric sources (GyarmatiVarga 1999). The
sources suggested that after the Inka had conquered the
Cochabamba Valley, Wayna Qhapaq had fundamentally
transformed the land tenure system in the valley: following the appropriation and redistribution of the land,
he created a state estate in the valleys western half that

was cultivated by settlers transplanted there from the altiplano, who grew maize for the Inka capital and the Inka
army (Interrogatorio de Juan Polo de Ondegardo 1982
[1563]; Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca Huayna
Capac 1977 [1556]). The witnesses testifying in these
(and other) Colonial documents claimed that the goods
produced in the Cochabamba Valley were transported to
Cuzco through Paria, the Inka provincial center, and we
also know that the Sora, the people living closest to the
valley whose center lay in Paria, represented the largest
group among the resettled peoples and thus played an important role in the regions history.
The role of the Sora living in Paria and in this region
of the altiplano in the late pre-Hispanic history of the Cochabamba Valley as portrayed in the Colonial documents
was the main inspiration for our next research project, focusing on the late pre-Hispanic history of the Paria Basin
and its relation to the Cochabamba Valley. We first conducted a brief survey in 1997, followed by another one in
January 1999 in the area chosen for our later survey. The
location of the site, which we believed could be identified
with Paria, the Inka provincial center, was first proposed
in our book on the Cochabamba research project (GyarmatiVarga 1999: 34) and later investigations furnished
conclusive evidence for this identification. The site of
Paria was first excavated in 2000 (Condarco et al. 2002).
The initial, very promising findings led us to launch an
extensive research project in order to gain a better understanding of the settlement patterns in the Paria Basin
from the Formative Period to the Colonial Period. One of
our priorities was to learn more about the role of Paria,
the Inka Period provincial center, in the regions life and
its connection with the Cochabamba Valley as well as
about the other similar provincial centers and their role
in the administration and economy of the Inka Empire.
Our research saw the happy collaboration between
many specialists from various disciplines, reflected also
in this volume. The Paria Archaeological Project was begun in 2004 through a series of grants from the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA Grants T 047048,
SAB 81555, and PUB-K 109922) and the excavation permit of the Bolivian Direccin Nacional de Arqueologa
(DINAR AUT. No. 27/04, 030/05, COM. EXT. 228/06).
We are grateful to Javier Escalente, the then director of
DINAR, for his support. Following the first season in
which we surveyed the study area, we conducted a series of excavations in the Inka provincial center and on
a few other sites in 2005 and 2006, in part through the
1

generous support of the Curtiss T. Brennan & Mary G.


Brennan Foundation. Rene Bolzanis analyses of the
archaeobotanical samples were funded by a grant from
the Heinz Latin American Archaeology Program (University of Pittsburgh). Special thanks are extended to
Ernest Presher, at the time a student at the Eastern Kentucky University (Richmond, Kentucky), for his work
on developing the transportable flotation device. We are
also indebted to Dr. Richard Jefferies (Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh) for his assistance
in photographing the botanical remains and to Dr. Marc
Bermann (Department of Anthropology, University of
Pittsburgh) who generously shared his knowledge of the
regions vegetation during his own fieldwork in 2007 and
2008. One debt of gratitude is owed to Dr. Barbara Herzig, who provided access to modern reference skeletons
of llamas in the Naturhistorisches Museum in Vienna.
The petrographic and mineralogical study of the ceramic finds was greatly aided by the special analyses
performed by Mria Tth (Institute for Geological and
Geochemical Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Heinrich Taubald (Department of Geochemistry,
Tbingen University), Zsolt Kasztovszky (Institute of
Isotopes, Hungarian Academy of Sciences), and Mrta
Balla (Institute of Nuclear Techniques, Budapest University of Technology). Special thanks are due to Gyrgy
Szakmny (Department of Petrology and Geochemistry,
Etvs Lornd University) for his generous help in identifying the lithic finds collected during our investigations
and to Zsolt Mester (Institute of Archaeological Sciences, Etvs Lornd University) for the functional analysis of the lithic finds. We are indebted to Gyula Radcz
(Geological and Geophysical Institute of Hungary) for
his identification of the mollusk finds and to Csaba get
(Department of Geodesy and Surveying, Budapest University of Technology and Economics) who diligently
prepared the maps of our geodesic surveys. Thanks are

due to va Svingor for the radiocarbon measurements


performed in the Institute of Nuclear Research of the
Hungarian Academy of Sciences in Debrecen.
Our fieldwork would not have been possible without
the support of the local government of Soracachi and of
Mayor Agustn Antonio, or without the hospitality of the
villagers of Khota Chullpa, on whose territory the site
of Paria lay, who provided a building where we could
store the finds from the field surveys and the excavations.
It is thanks to their generosity that we could work with
the finds in 2007, after the conclusion of three seasons
of fieldwork, for which there was no opportunity in later
years. By generously sharing their knowledge, lvaro
Condarco Castelln and Mile Vargas Rosquellas were
instrumental to the success of our fieldwork: they participated in the field surveys and in our excavations, as
well as in the preparation of the excavation plans and the
illustrations of the finds. We wish to thank our excavation crew, amongst them Balzs Kiss, German Condarco
Ramos, Gabriel Mendoza Coaquira, Reinaldo Mendoza,
Ren Espinoza Maldonado, Clemente Mendoza, and
Francisco Mamani without whom this book would not
have been born. We are indebted to the Condarco family, who were living pillars of support to the director of
the research project for dealing with daily life in Oruro,
who provided the necessary storage facilities for the
finds collected during the surveys and unearthed during
the excavations, and who also assisted in the flotation of
the archaeobotanical samples. Carlos Condarco was generous with professional advice to encourage our work.
Finally, our heartfelt thanks go to Edith Nagel and Jorge
Medrano, our spouses, both of whom provided muchneeded support throughout the project and were at our
sides in the field.
Jnos Gyarmati and Carola Condarco Castelln
BudapestOruro, 2014

I. The Environmental Setting of the Paria Basin

The PoopDesaguadero (NavarroMaldonado 2002:


454) or CaracolloOruroVinto (Montes de Oca 1989:
232) region is the easternsoutheastern sub-basin of the
northerly part of the 3,6004,000 msl high altiplano that
extends from southern Peru to northwestern Argentina
and is enclosed by the Andes Mountains (Fig. I.1). The
altiplano is generally divided into three main regions (circumtiticaca, altiplano meridional, and circumpunea:
Arellano 2000: 1718; or northern, central, and southern:
NavarroMaldonado 2002: 454), of which we chose the
area lying 200 kilometers southeast of La Paz, in the Cercado Province of the Department of Oruro, in one of the
basins of the Cordillera de Azanaques as our study region. We named this region the Paria Basin.
In terms of its topography, the investigated section of
the Paria Basin can be divided into two main areas: the
piedmont region lying at an altitude of 3,8004,100msl,
which gradually transitions into the over 4,500 msl high
Cordillera de Azanaques lying beyond the study region,
and the plateau part of the altiplano, lying at 3,700
3,800msl to its west (Fig. I.2).
The basins current landscape is determined by the
rivers flowing to the plateau from the Andes and the
seasonal gullies incised into the piedmont. The major
rivers in this region are the Khala Pata/Soracachi, the
Jacha Uma, the Iruma, and the Obrajes/Huaylluma. The
latter three and the Wila Jakko River, which flows into
the Jacha Uma River at an earlier point, have their confluence at Balneario Obrajes, near the former provincial
center of Paria, and flow on as the Paria River (Fig. I.3).
The known geological history of the Paria Basin
and its surroundings begins in the Palaeozoic. There are
Palaeo-Mesozoic siliciclastic sedimentary rocks (Ordovician-Devonian shales-siltstones-sandstones, JurassicCretaceous sandstones) in the area occurring as products
of flysch formations. Subsequently, Palaeogene-Neogene
clastic sedimentary and volcanic rocks (volcanites-pyroclastics and ores connecting to subduction related Miocene effusive volcanic activity) are found, and finally
Quaternary sediments (fluvial and lacustrine clay-siltsand-gravel) were formed (GEOBOL 1992; 1994). The
consequences of volcanic activity are represented by two
major volcanic areas near Paria: to the west is the Soledad
Caldera, and to the east is the Morococala Volcanic Field
(Fig. I.4). In the former area, sediments (conglomerates,
sandstones) of debris cones and rivers were deposited
during the Middle-Upper Miocene. Later, 5 to 15 million
years ago, a volcanic event terminated the sedimentation

when a caldera rupture resulted in a scattering of dacitic


tuffs (Redwood 1987). The left edge of the caldera was
built up by ignimbrite dacitic tuffs and dacite originating
from the falling ash (RedwoodMacIntyre 1989; Hrail
et al. 1993). The caldera rupture filled up the short-lived
Soledad lake with sediments. The Morococala Volcanic
Field consisting of rhyodacitic tuffs and rhyolite is also
evidence of the ignimbrite volcanic activity. Primarily,
these volcanic formations occurred during the Miocene
(525 million years ago) and the area is now an extremely
eroded plateau of the altiplano (Morgan et al. 1998).
Later in the Quaternary, glacial, lacustrine, fluvial,
and aeolian formations almost entirely covered the area.
The lacustrine sediments, mainly, can be connected to
the Minchin (22,00027,000 years ago) and Tauca lakes
(11,00013,000 years ago), whose formations were related to the withdrawal of the Choqueyapu I and II glaciation phases of the Cordillera Oriental. The colluvial
and alluvial sediments originated from the erosion of
mountains built up from Palaeozoic rocks. The fluvial
sedimentation formed 110 m thick terraces, while the
aeolian sediments shaped dunes (GEOBOL 1992, 1994).
The upper, piedmont sections of the rivers traversing
the area are deeply incised into the bedrock (Silurian
sedimentary rocks); their sediment is made up of sand
and gravel. The grain sizes of the bed and terrace sediments of the Jacha Uma/Paria and Iruma Rivers issuing
from the ignimbrite plateau alternate between silty clay
sandy silt and fine-grained sandgravelly sand. They
were eroded from the old Palaeozoic clastic sedimentary
rocks of the Cordillera Oriental and deposited in the Paria
Basin; the sediments are medium-rounded grain-sized,
well or very well rounded, medium well, or well-sorted,
made up principally of Palaeozoic rock (clay schist-siltstone-sandstone) and mineral inclusions (quartz, mica,
iron minerals). Inclusions of volcanic origin (principally
unrounded fractured, 23 mm large quartz crystals) occur
also in subordinate amounts (~1015%). Their amount
varies according to the distance from their source area.
The medium-rounded gravel is of diverse colors (blackwhite-red-greenish gray) owing to its constituents: predominantly sandstone, often with white quartz and, less
frequently, with calcite veins. The plateaus of the high
river terraces are covered with reddish-brown, loose,
silty-gravelly sand, while the depressions of the plateau
contain seemingly more clayey loose, weakly humified sediments. Alternating, often 810 cm thick layers
ranging from silty sand to coarse-grained gravel can be
3

Paria la Viexa

Figure I.1 Principal environmental zones and cross-section of the South Central Andes
4

THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PARIA BASIN

Figure I.2 Relief of the Paria Basin


noted in the walls of the gullies incised into the terrace
sediments (Fig. I.5). The weathered rocks are clay schist
and siltstone. The bed of the Jacha Uma/Paria River
along the rivers lower course is incised into the earlier
terrace sediments; the bed sediments range from loose
sandy-silty sediments to loose humified varieties.
This sediment, supplied by floods and deposited in
the river valleys, forms the thickest and most productive, nutrient-rich soil of the region. Together with the
irrigation potential of the rivers that offer an unequal but
constant water source, this area provides the best agricultural conditions within the Paria Basin. Small meadows (bofedales) abound in the lower-lying areas of the
river valleys owing to the high groundwater table and
ensure permanent humidity as well as an opportunity for
pasturage all year round. The thinner soil covering the

slopes in the piedmont overlooking the rivers is poorer in


organic matter. The soil is more compact and its porosity
is low, meaning that less rainwater seeps into the soil and
less water is retained, making it less suitable for arable
farming. The region is principally used for pasturage and,
to a lesser extent, for crop cultivation employing sprinkler irrigation combined with the annual rotation of the
land plots. Although the sandy soil extending in front of
the piedmont has a looser structure, the lack of water and
its salinity make it unsuitable for arable farming.
The regions climate is determined by the general conditions on the altiplano: low temperatures owing to the
high altitude, strong diurnal temperature fluctuations and
solar radiation, and low precipitation. The much lower
precipitation than would be expected in view of the distance from the Equator is due to the basin-like nature of
5

Paria la Viexa

Figure I.3 Overview of the Paria Basin: irrigated fields at the confluence of the Jacha Uma and Iruma Rivers. The
altiplano overlooks the river valley, with the Cordillera de Azanaques in the background

the altiplano, being enclosed by mountain ranges and cut


off from precipitation sources. According to core samples taken from the bed of Lake Titicaca and the Quelccaya ice cap, the climate of the South Central Andes was
far from constant during the last three and a half millennia. Compared to the current climate, there were alternating wetter and drier, cooler and warmer periods. Prior
to 1500 B.C., the level of Lake Titicaca rose more than
20 meters, indicating a considerable increase in moisture in the region. This increase contributed to making
agriculture the major subsistence pursuit in the altiplano,
combined with intensive camelid pastoralism (Binford
et al. 1997: 235). An opposite process took place during
the period between 900 and 800 B.C., 400 and 200 B.C.,
and A.D. 0 and 300, when persistently low water levels
occurred (Abbott et al. 1997: 169170). From 50 B.C.
through A.D. 250, this process reached such a degree that
the level of Lake Titicaca dropped 10 meters or more below the outflow level to the Desaguadero River. Thus, the
lake was not able to feed the river, which is so important
for the water supply of the altiplano (McAndrews 2005:
117). According to the samples taken from the Quelccaya
glacier, three different decades-long dry periods followed
between A.D. 540 and 730, a period so important in the
expansion of the Tiwanaku culture. After this, a longer
wetter period took place between A.D. 760 and 1040.
The next dry period occurred in the Late Intermediate
Period between A.D. 1250 and 1310, and its negative
6

impacts on agriculture cannot be excluded as playing a


role in the warfare typical of the period (Thompson et al.
1985: 973). At the turn of the 15th16th centuries, there
began a so-called Little Ice Age (ThompsonMoselyThompson 1987: 105107), which was accompanied by
an increase in precipitation, and this rainy period lasted
until 1720 (Thompson et al. 1985: 973), creating more
favorable conditions for the agriculture of the Late Horizon time period.
The climate data of the past two decades for Oruro,1
the city with a weather station lying closest to the study region, indicate that the annual mean temperature (11.78C)
has been slightly rising (Fig. I.6), with the difference between the coldest (1999: 10.87 C) and the warmest (2010:
12.66 C) years being 1.79 oC. For the purposes of this
study, the comparison of the daily mean maximum and minimum temperatures calculated from the daily maximums
(18.45C) and minimums (0.46 C) of the time period in
question is more informative. It indicates that diurnal temperature variation was extremely high (17.99 C). A review
of the most extreme values of this period shows that there
was a difference of 43.3 oC between the hottest (March 8 of
2004: 30.8C) and the coldest (June 24 of 1994: -12.5 C)
days, illustrating the strong temperature fluctuations that
characterize the region.
Even more instructive and interesting is an overview
of the annual temperature fluctuations. In addition to the
fact that the mean temperature is lowest (8.69 C) May

THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PARIA BASIN

Figure I.5 Freshwater layer series of the Paria Basin

Figure I.4 Tectonic units of Bolivia and geology


of the Paria Basin
through August corresponding to part of the dry season,
falling below the annual mean by 3 oC, the mean minimum temperature during these months is well in the negative range (-5.19 C, Fig. I.7). Even though the mean
monthly temperatures during the months between October and April, the main agricultural growing season, have
positive values for each month, there are many frosty
days both in the first months, critical for the growth of the
crops, and in the months of ripening,2 indicating that of

the crops with a growth period lasting over 45 months,


only species resistant to frost can be cultivated. Figure
1.7 shows that the climate of the time period under study
was warmer by several degrees than that for any single year of the last century for which data are available
(1889, Ogilvie 1922: 70).
Precipitation, the other crucial factor for agriculture,
has an annual mean of 300450 mm in the northerly region of the altiplano (NavarroMaldonado 2002: 457).
The more or less continuous data sets from Oruro for the
past two decades indicate that annual mean precipitation was around 336 mm.3 Considering the driest (2004:
216.42 mm) and the wettest (2002: 752.87 mm) years, it
is apparent that the fluctuation is quite high, almost three
and a half-fold. Looking separately at each year, we find
that every fourth year, the amount of precipitation did not
exceed 250 mm, regarded as the upper limit of a desert
climate, and that precipitation only came near to or exceeded 400 mm every second year (Fig. I.8).
Low precipitation in itself results in low humidity
an average of 43.62% during the studied period and
this is enhanced by the evaporation caused by strong solar radiation as a result of the high altitude, as well as
by the altiplanos sparse vegetation cover and the compactness and porosity of its soil. Another facet of this
multi-component phenomenon is that even though there
is a strong fluctuation in annual humidity (the highest
values for January are 1.65 times higher than the lowest
June values), it is still well below the 34.86-fold difference between the maximum and minimum precipitation
(see Fig. I.8).
The inter-annual distribution of the annual precipitation is at least as crucial as its amount for agricultural
7

Paria la Viexa

25
20
15
10
5
0
-5
Avarege temperature (C)

Max. temperature (C)

production. Similarly to temperature, there is a strong


fluctuation in its distribution (Fig. I.9): in the dry season, the average monthly precipitation is no more than
6.7 mm, partly in the form of snow, and it is around
2.1 mm in June, the driest month. The average precipitation of the two wettest months, January and February,
is 75.58 mm. About 90% of the annual precipitation falls
between October and April, the main growing season,4 but
only 10% falls during the first two months critical to the
sprouting period, which can have a disastrous effect on

Min. temperature (C)

Figure I.6
Annual average,
maximum,
and minimum
temperatures
between
1991 and 2012 in
Oruro, Bolivia

crops. Owing to the strong fluctuations in precipitation,


the discharge of the regions rivers also fluctuates widely:
most are intermittent watercourses, drying out in the dry
season when even the two largest rivers have no more
than a trickle of water. Contributing to the desiccation are
the prevailing northwesterly winds, which are especially
stormy July through September (Ogilvie 1922: 80) and
churn up dust, reducing visibility to as little as ten meters.
The main features of the environment briefly outlined above, especially the low precipitation and the

25
20
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15

Avarege temperature 19912012 (C)

Avarege temperature 1889 (C)

Max. temperature 19912012 (C)

Max. temperature 1889 (C)

Min. temperature 19912012 (C)

Min. temperature 1889 (C)

Figure I.7 Monthly


average, maximum,
and minimum
temperatures
between
1991 and 2012, and
in 1889 in Oruro,
Bolivia

THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PARIA BASIN

800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

Precipitation (mm)

Average humidity (%)

temperature minimums, largely define the natural flora


and fauna, as well as the range of cultivated crops and
breedable animal species. Both are characterized by a
high tolerance for aridity and frost. The current vegetation of the Paria Basin is made up of native grass species:
pako pako (Aciachne pulvinata), ichu or paja comn
(Stipa ichu), paja brava (Stipa pungens), chilliwa (Festuca dolichophylla), chuilliwa (Festuca dissiflora), and
chixi (Distichlis humilis); shrubs: jacha tula, (Baccharis
heterotalamiodes), sacha tula (Baccharis microphyla),
suppu tula (Heterotalamus boliviensis), tula5 (Lepidopophyllum quadrangulare), spiny aawaya (Adesmia
spinosissima), and garbancillo (Astragalus garbancillo);
and small cacti such as ayrampu (Opuntia spp.). Their
distribution in the study area is restricted, conforming to

Figure I.8 Annual


precipitation
between 1991 and
2012 in Oruro,
Bolivia

the two main ecological zones: the sandier, drier meseta


with saline soil is covered with grass punctured by plantfree zones, while the landscape is increasingly covered
with shrubs in the higher-lying areas towards the piedmont.
The data contained in the written sources suggest that
environmental conditions were roughly similar during
the Inka period. Travelling from Lake Titicaca to Villa
de la Plata in 1572, Friar Lizarraga (1968 [15861591]:
73, Book I, Ch. XCI) described the province of Paria as
a fertile land abounding in herds, although he also noted
that tree species for roof thatch are lacking and even firewood is scarce and is substituted with thola (tula shrub).
The plant remains from Paria such as liwi liwi, kora, garbancillo, and other species (see Chapter VIII) that were

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Precipitation (mm)

Average humidity (%)

Figure I.9
Monthly average
precipitation
between 1991 and
2012 in Oruro,
Bolivia
9

Paria la Viexa

Figure I.10 Wild ducks on the bank of the Jacha Uma


River
probably used as fodder, fiber, and construction material
(e.g., paja brava, cf. Festuca sp.) seem to support this, as
do the cultivated species native to the region: the Sora caciques testimonials from 1593 only mention potato and
quinoa among the crops grown in Paria (Del Ro 2005:
140).
Large-bodied wild mammals are lacking in the study
region, which is characterized by a fairly dense settlement network, the single exception being smaller vicua
(Lama vicugna) herds appearing on the more scarcely
occupied western fringes. Aside from camelids, huemul
deer or taruka (Hippocamelus bisulcus) have the highest
proportion (0.8%) of recovered animal bones among the
native mammals from Paria, which also included large
cats, represented by four bones and claws as well as the
burial of a headless predator found beside the western
wall of Structure BH (see Chapter IV.1). However, these
were not part of the native fauna of the Paria Basin (see
Chapter VI). Partridge is the most frequent among the
larger-bodied bird species in the wetter habitats along
river banks, while flamingo (Phoenicopterus andinus)
and wild duck (Anatidae; Fig. I.10) appear in the permanently wet pockets lying by the hot springs. The latter can be found among the depictions recurring on the
bowls and plate handles of Inka Period pottery, as can the
andu, whose current habitat lies south of Lake Poop.

Figure I.11 Carrot harvest


10

Aside from potato (Solanum tuberosum), quinoa


(Chenopodium quinoa), and caahua (Chenopodium
pallidicaule), all native to the region, oats, onions, and
carrots brought from Europe and in part cultivated as cash
crops also play an important role in arable farming (Fig.
I.11). The latter are principally grown in the fertile valley
bottoms, where irrigation is possible, while the higherlying meseta is only suited to cultivation combined with
sprinkler irrigation and only frost-resistant species can be
cultivated from among the crops with a longer growth
period. Moreover, the small parcels drawn into cultivation have to be rotated owing to the poor soils. As regards
stockbreeding, species such as sheep introduced from the
Old World have almost completely ousted native camelids, and llamas can be found only sporadically in the
sheep flocks. The animal bone samples from our excavations were dominated by camelids, although the exact ratios of llamas and alpacas could not be determined owing
to the great similarity of their bones. However, given that
wet bofedales, so crucial to the pasturage of alpaca, can
only be found in certain areas of the two largest river valleys and that the percentage of this species in the region is
minimal, it seems likely that llamas played a more prominent role in the regions pre-Hispanic stockbreeding.
Regarding the environmental traits that set the Paria
Basin apart from other regions of the altiplano, what
must be emphasized is that the river valleys crossing the
Cordillera Real served as excellent corridors between the
Paria Basin and the Cochabamba Valley. In other words,
the Paria Basin acted as an ecological gateway (see Fig.
II.1). It provided a closer link between the vast plateau
of the altiplano and the north to south imperial Inka road
traversing it and the mesothermic valleys to the east and
the tropical slopes of the Eastern Andes than did the more
southerly regions of the altiplano.
The hot springs issuing forth at Balneario Obrajes and
near Soracachi represented another salient environmental
feature, of which the former played a prominent role in
the regions settlement history, owing in part to its hot
(98 C) and abundant waters, and in part to its location
at the confluence of the regions three rivers (the Jacha
Uma, the Iruma, and the Huaylluma). These geographic
features help to explain why the highest settlement concentration within the study region was noted in this area.
Other readily available local resources in the Paria
Basin included schist and sandstone used as building
materials, and a copper mine near Paria (see Chapter
III.5.5) that provided at least some portion of the metal
ores for local copper processing during the Late Horizon. Other copper deposits are known in the Soracachi
area. Even though we did not identify any clay deposits
during our survey, the petrographic examination of the
pottery fragments collected at various sites indicated that
their raw material originated from two clay deposits in
the Paria Basin (see Chapter V). The source of the lithic
raw materials used for the manufacture of agricultural

THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PARIA BASIN

implements (hoes, chaqui taqlla points) and of quern


stones for grinding cereals is less certain. Although sandstone is available locally and basalt-andesite-dacite rocks
occur in the Soledad Caldera lying some 20 kilometers
to the west, these artifacts have not been sourced yet and
thus it remains uncertain whether the artifacts in question

had been made from this local rock or from lithic raw
material obtained from more distant quarries such as the
Queremita quarry, exploited since the Formative Period
(McAndrews 2005: 115), or the basalt outcrops at Casca
Kollu on the southwestern shore of Lake Poop (Michel
2008: 78).

11

II. Cultural Context and Chronology


of the Bolivian Altiplano
II.1. The Formative Period
The first sedentary villages indicating the transition from
the Terminal Archaic to the Formative appeared in the
earlier second millennium in the northern part of the Bolivian altiplano. There is clear evidence that their populations pursued a mixed pastoral and agricultural economy,
with a secondary reliance on hunting and the exploitation
of lacustrine and riverine resources. The first permanent
settlements, spaced more or less evenly apart, took the
form of small nucleated villages, which did not yield any
evidence of corporate architecture or any other indicators
of rank (McAndrews 2005: 35; StanishCohen 2005: 6).
Production of pottery for domestic storage, cooking, and
some serving was common, but there is no evidence that
it was produced for exchange, ritual, or any other use;
however, the exchange of raw materials suitable for the
manufacture of lithic artifacts is detectable from this period. The next phase can be documented in the Middle
Formative Period by the appearance of public structures
erected from plastered and uncut stone, noticeably different from the domestic buildings, and carved monuments.
The latter were stele-like columns (huanca), considered
the symbol of a new common ideology on the shores of
Lake Titicaca, while on the territory of the Wankarani
culture, we find large stone sculptures of llama heads,
possibly used in household rituals (Stanish 2003: 2). The
eponymous site of the Wankarani culture, first investigated in the 1930s, is located in the southern part of the
Department of La Paz (Fig. II.1), in an area representing
the northern boundary of the cultures distribution. Its
southern boundary extends north of Oruro (McAndrews
2005: 35), although according to some researchers, Wankarani sites also occur widely around Lake Poop, up to
its southern shore, and Wankarani-like sites have been reported even as far as northern Chile and Cochabamba in
Bolivia. It would appear that the basalt outcrops located
by the southwestern shore of Lake Poop, mainly the
quarry of Queremita, which was intensively exploited on
the testimony of the scrap heaps surrounding it, played
a role in the wide distribution of the Wankarani cultural
phenomena. The basalt extracted there appeared on the
northern altiplano and in the adjacent valleys as early as
in the Formative, and its exploitation became more intense in the following centuries (Michel 2008: 9597).
Wankarani sites are usually made up of isolated mounds
of circular adobe houses with stone foundations and

tombs. Their size ranges from 0.5 to 20 hectares, with


estimated residential populations of 80400 persons.
Radiocarbon dates for Wankarani sites fall roughly between 1400 B.C. and 200 B.C. (BermannEstevez Castillo 1993: 313314; Michel 2008: 156). The end of this
period and the next one coincided with two dry periods,
indicated by the low water level of Lake Titicaca (Abbott
et al. 1997: 169170), which may have played a role in
the abandonment of Wankarani sites and in the dissolution of the Formative culture of the altiplano.
Unlike the settlements of this southern area, the Titicaca Basins primary regional centers established by the
late Middle Formative were characterized by buildings
arranged around sunken courts, and witnessed stratified
societies led by local elites. By the late Middle Formative
(ca. 500 B.C.), two polities emerged one referred to as
Qaluyu in the north and one called Chiripa in the south
which were replaced by Pucara and Tiwanaku by the
end of the Upper Formative. On the testimony of trophy
heads and the remains of human victims, they acquired
a leading position among the warring and raider chiefdoms, forcing other polities into the own sphere of interest. The collapse of Pucara as a regional polity around
A.D. 200300 owing to yet unknown reasons opened the
way for Tiwanaku to establish the first archaic state of the
region, which represented a new political and economic
phenomenon across the Titicaca Basin around A.D. 600
(Stanish 2003: 37).
In the southerly regions lacking the favorable environmental conditions of the Titicaca area, a similar development did not occur. No regional centers or polities
reaching the threshold of statehood evolved. Although
certain changes can be traced on the few more intensively
investigated sites and in certain regions, research conducted to date is insufficient for drawing more general
conclusions about the developmental processes between
the decline of Wankarani and the southern expansion of
Tiwanaku, or about the polities emerging after the decline of Tiwanaku, which can in part be linked to specific ethnic groups. Recent research in the Department of
Oruro indicates that at least some of the Wankarani sites
in this area were abandoned long before the Tiwanaku
polity rose to power, and the excavation of the Jachakala
site in the La Joya region northwest of Oruro revealed
that a post-Wankarani culture emerged at Jachakala and
a handful of related sites, which was divided into the
Nialupita (A.D. 500800)1 and the Jachakala Phase
13

Paria la Viexa

Figure II.1 Archaeological sites in the South Central Andes


(A.D. 8001200). The former was associated with a
plainware differing from both Wankarani and Tiwanaku pottery, while the latter contained Tiwanku V style
pottery, even though in a very limited quantity. In the
lack of wide-ranging research, it is impossible to establish whether Jachakala was a separate post-Wankarani
culture distributed across the Department of Oruro, a
central settlement of the local settlement hierarchy, or
14

an intrusive settlement of foreign settlers (BermannEstevez 1993; McAndrews 2005: 35).


The ceramic style appearing in the southern basin of
Lake Poop in the Late Formative Period (A.D. 0300)
was related to the painted pottery of Cochabamba from
the same period (Michel 2008: 131). The ensuing Yura
ceramic style (A.D. 300Colonial Period) was widely
distributed along the southeastern shore of Lake Poop,

CULTURAL CONTEXT AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE BOLIVIAN ALTIPLANO

Period
Late Horizon

Late Intermediate Period

Middle Horizon

Formative

Year
1532
1500
1450
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
A.D. 100
0
100 B.C.
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200

Titicaca Basin

La Joya Region

Inka

Inka

Post-Tiwanaku
Post-Tiwanaku
Jachakala
Tiwanaku V
Isahuara
Tiwanaku IV
Nialupita
Tiwanaku III

Wankarani
Formative

in the so-called Intersalar region, and in the valleys of


Cochabamba, Potos, and the Department of Sucre. The
early Puqui pottery style south of Lake Poop had a considerably more limited distribution (A.D. 300700; Michel 2008: 164165).

II.2. The Middle Horizon


The first archaic state emerged on the southern fringes of
Lake Titicaca and began its expansion from its original
core and heartland territory by A.D. 650 at the latest. Tiwanaku incorporated a number of eastern, western, and
northern areas as well as the Sun Island in the Titicaca
Basin, and established colonies as far as Arqueipa in the

Figure II.2 Chronological


outline of the Bolivian altiplano
between the southern basin of
Lake Titicaca and Lake Poop
(after Beule 2002; Stanish
2003; Michel 2008)
north, Moquegua in the west, in the Omasuyu region
in the east, and in Cochabamba in the southeast. Some
areas under Tiwanaku control were colonized and governed directly, while in other regions, the Tiwanaku state
exercised its control through local elites or was merely
engaged in trade. Another curious feature of the Tiwanaku expansion was its mosaic nature: for example, the
Tiwanaku culture can be detected but sporadically in the
vast territory between the heartland and more remote areas such as coastal Peru and Chile, San Pedro de Atacama, and the Cochabamba Valley (Michel 2008: 162;
Stanish 2003: 79). The least known region of the Tiwanaku sphere lies to the south of the capital, in the part of
the Bolivian altiplano discussed here. Tiwanaku cultural
traditions in this area are principally represented by two
15

Paria la Viexa

classes of pottery: drinking and ceremonial offering vessels (keros, tazons, and sahumadors).
Tiwanaku power collapsed on the periphery between
A.D. 900 and 1000. The collapse of the heartland cut off
from its resources occurred in the next century. Ortloff
and Kolata (1993) have argued that the probable cause of
the Tiwanaku collapse was a drought that destroyed the
core territorys raised-field systems, while according to
other models, the invasion of Aymara-speaking peoples
also played a role in the decline of Tiwanaku (Albarracin
Jordan 1996: 319320).

II.3. The Late Intermediate Period


The collapse of Tiwanaku, then, was a slow process,
spanning at least three generations, which was not accompanied by a demographic decline. The surveys conducted in the southern basin of Lake Titicaca testify to a
cultural transition without a break between TiwanakuV
and the Late Intermediate Period, which seems to contradict the contention that the disintegration of the Tiwanaku civilization was caused by the arrival of new ethnic
groups (Torero 1987). The settlement survey data from
both the Tiwanaku Valley and the Juli-Pomata region
suggest that although settlements became smaller (the
average site size barely exceeded 0.5 hectares), their
number increased, and the population of the immediate post-Tiwanaku period either remained the same or
increased slightly. It seems likely that the populations
reaction to the drought causing the desiccation of their
lakeshore raised fields in this period was to disperse from
the large, nucleated centers to smaller villages and hamlets, where they could at least partially make up for lost
resources by expanding stockbreeding (Albarracin Jordan 1996: 320; Stanish 2003: 1213).
The events after the collapse of Tiwanaku led to the
emergence of new polities. On the testimony of the small,
mostly intermittently occupied smaller and larger hilltop
forts (pukaras), these were chiefdoms (seorios) waging
wars against one another. However, in the lack of secular/
ceremonial and elite buildings (such as the platforms and
sunken courtyards used during previous centuries), and
of highly visible symbols of status and rank (such as ceremonial pottery and steles), they can hardly be regarded
as political entities on the threshold of statehood. Aside
from pukaras, the periods most striking cultural element
is embodied by the chullpas, the burial towers suitable
for expressing and displaying status, and for conveying
an ideology shared by all rising societies of the Late Intermediate Period that differed significantly from that of
Tiwanaku. The burial towers built from stone are known
from the region north of the Ro Ilave; in the south, from
the southern Titicaca Basin to the Lipez region in southern Bolivia and to the Upper Loa Valley in Chile, round
or rectangular adobe chullpas were the norm, sometimes
16

adorned with painting in certain regions (Arellano 2000:


205220; Castro et al. 1984: 173174; Prsinnen 2005:
121133; Stanish 2003: 229233). In addition to serving
as burial places, they had other functions too. According
to a Sora Indian from Capinota, chullpas often functioned
as boundary markers; in some places, they denoted the
location of the ancestor cult (A.J.P., Exp. 17001790,
quoted by Del Ro 2005: 93), and in rare instances, they
were also used as storehouses (Lecoq 1997: 6870; NielsenBerberin 2008: 148156).
The fortified settlements appearing across the Andes
are eloquent testimony to the unrest, conflicts, and wars
characterizing the Late Intermediate Period, which is
also borne out by the reports in various Colonial documents. Guaman Poma de Ayala (1980 [1613]: 52, 61 [64,
78]) described this period as one when people began to
leave their towns in the lowlands to settle highlands, hills
and crags and defend themselves and started to make fortresses that they call pucaras. They built walls and fences
around their houses and fortresses and hiding places and
wells to draw water to drink. They started to quarrel and
battle, having many wars and slaughters For that reason they were called Auca Runa [warrior men]. They
killed each other, robbing women and children from each
other and taking each other captive in the many battles
of one king against another king.2 The archaeological
record and the documentary evidence both indicate that
this violent period, sometimes labelled the Altiplano Period in the Central and Southern Andes (Hyslop 1976;
Stanish et al. 1997), can be regarded as a proto-historic
period in the sense that in addition to recording the names
of the periods ethnic groups, the written sources now report actual events and their actors.
The perhaps best example is the account of the
clash between the two largest ethnic groups living on
the western shore of Lake Titicaca. Supported by the
Inka, the Lupaca led by their lord Cari scored a major
victory against the Colla led by Zapana at Paucarcolla
(Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 393, Ch. XLII), as a result
of which the road to the conquest of the Titicaca Basin
and the altiplano to its south lay open before the Inka
(Fig. II.3).
The field surveys conducted in the land of the Pacaje,
the third major ethnic group on the southern fringes of
Lake Titicaca, indicate that there was a substantial rise in
the number of settlements after the decline of Tiwanaku
both in the Lower Tiwanaku Valley in the immediate
neighborhood of Lake Titicaca (Albarracin Jordan 1996:
314) and around Caquiaviri, one of the most important
centers of the Pacaje farther to the south, where Prssinen
documented an explosive increase in the number of unfortified settlements (Prsinnen 2005: 99).
The Pacaje territory also marked the southern boundary of Collao; the immense territory known as the Province of Charcas, so named after one of the largest ethnic
groups residing there, was the homeland of the seven

CULTURAL CONTEXT AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE BOLIVIAN ALTIPLANO

Figure II.3 Symbolic and political regions and ethnic groups of the South Central Andes
(after Bouysse-Cassagne 1986 and Sanchez Canedo 2008)
nations of the altiplano described as a confederation
(Memorial de Charcas 2006 [1582]: 843). The same region was homeland to the Uru, scattered along the Lake
TititcacaRiver DesaguaderoLake PoopSalar de Coipasa axis (Michel 2008: 47) and smaller groups such as
the Casaya, part of the Sora of Paria, and the Azanque,
the neighbors of the Quillaca (Del Ro 1996: 47, 49).

The designation of the seven ethnic groups (the


Charca, the Caracara, the Chicha, the Chui, the Quillaca,
the Caranga, and the Sora) as a nation first appears in
a letter written in 1582 by the lords (caciques, kurakas,
or mallkus) of the peoples of Charcas to the Spanish sovereign, in which they protest the injustices committed
against them and appeal to the king for the preservation
17

Paria la Viexa

of their privileges. The document known as El Memorial de Charcas3 offers a fascinating insight into the life
of the previous four or five generations of the mostly
Aymara-speaking indigenous peoples of the Central and
Southern Andes; even though the Memorial de Charcas
contains many contradictions owing to its genre the
testimonies given by the native lords intent on highlighting the merits of their families and their people during
the previous 100150 years under the scrutiny of their
powerful adversaries and lacks a host of crucial details,
especially regarding the pre-Inka period, it remains one
of the regions most illuminating local sources.
We learn from the document that the nations were
ethnic groups organized into hereditary chiefdoms led
by natural lords (seores naturales mayores) who had
as many as 6,000 to 10,000 subjects (indios y vasallos;
Memorial de Charcas 2006 [1582]: 834; Segunda Informacin hecha por Juan Colque Guarache 1981 [1576
1577]: 259). Based on the population data contained in
this document and in the visitas, which recorded more
accurately the number of the Lupaca, Bouysse (1987:
8384) estimated that the population of the four southern
nations (the Charca, the Caracara, the Caranga, and the
Quillaca) was around 580,000, while the twelve seorios
of Charcas and Collao numbered roughly 1,600,000 people.
The settlement patterns of the ethnic groups in question across the immense territory from the Titicaca Basin to Central Bolivia was quite complex: the principal
division lay along the above-mentioned axis, which
symbolically divided it in two: Urqosuyu in the west
was identified with the uplands, the mountains, dryness,
warfare, and masculinity, while Umasuyu in the east
represented its opposite (Bouysse-Cassagne 1986). The
settlement territory of some Collao and Charcas peoples
was restricted to one or the other part, while other peoples resided in both parts; however, the hanan and hurin
division of the ethnic groups and their settlements can be
observed among all. Additionally, a fourfold division can
also be noted among some peoples, represented by the
Paria, the Caracollo, the Tapacar, and the Sipesipe parcialidads among the Sora, and there was a further Casaya
parcialidad within the Paria parcialidad (Del Ro 2005:
52, 61). Similarly to the other Andean peoples, these ethnic groups were divided into several ayllus.
It seems likely that the general conditions of the
ethnic groups did not differ substantially from the inter-ethnic relations in the Central and Southern Andes, at
least judging from a late source recording the permanent
hostilities and warfare between the Charca and the Caranga (Mendoza 1976 [1665]: 2728, quoted by Platt et
al. 2006: 493). In the case of the Sora, this is confirmed
by a yanacona called Martn Aldana of the Encomendero
Lorenzo de Aldana, who spoke of a fortification in Sorasora where the Sora Indians fought even after the Spanish
conquest (A.H.C. Exp. 54, quoted by Del Ro 1996: 26).
18

Aside from their description in the written sources, the


presence of fortified, usually hilltop settlements of the
type known from the Titicaca Basin as far south as the
Lipez region is confirmed by the archaeological record
too (Lecoq 1997: 6668; Michel Lpez 2008: 168; NielsenBerberin 2008: 151).
Among the chiefdoms competing for the resources,
the Charca, the Caracara, and the other peoples living on
the eastern fringes of the altiplano, well suited to herding,
and in the neighboring mountain region rich in minerals
occupied the most favorable position, and had more direct access to the mesothermic valleys conducive to maize
cultivation and to the more distant ecological niches with
excellent conditions for coca production in Tiraque in
Yungas (Platt et al. 2006: 58). Altiplano peoples such as
the Caranga living west of Lake Poop strove to expand
their resource catchment area towards the Arica valleys,
while the Quillaca and the Azanaque occupying the
lakes southern basin established contacts with the valleys to the east (Michel 2008: 47). The restricted access
to resources probably explains why the Mallku chiefdom
(Arellano 2005: 211) occupying the middle part of the
altiplano meridional, which can probably be associated
with the Lipez ethnic group, did not play as prominent a
role in late pre-Hispanic history as their more northern
contemporaries.
Our sources, principally the Memorial de Charcas and the regions other fundamental document, the
Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca Huayna Capac
(1977 [1556]),4 provide essential information on how the
peoples of the altiplano, growing economically strong
owing to their herds and thus wielding political power
too, had direct access to the resources in the lower-lying
areas, although they do not provide conclusive evidence
that this situation had emerged already in the pre-Inka
period.5 While it seems likely that these resources had
already been exploited in the pre-Inka Period, at least
judging from several references in the Colonial documents to this effect, two major caveats must be borne
in mind. The first, that one of the main agendas of the
Indians testifying in various Colonial documents was to
demonstrate their early presence in niches with diverse
ecological conditions lying beyond their settlement territory, and the second, that following their conquest, the
Inka implemented large-scale resettlements which led to
fundamental alterations in the ethnic conditions in certain economically (Cochabamba Valley), strategically
(frontiers), and ritually (Copacabana) important areas,
which makes the reconstruction of pre-Inka conditions
extremely difficult and can easily lead to the retrojection
of the well-documented Inka Period and Colonial conditions into earlier times.
This uncertainty is illustrated by the case of the Sora,
who had cultivated and used extensive lands in the Cochabamba Valley during the Inka Period and later (Interrogatorio de Juan Polo de Ondegardo 1982 [1563];

CULTURAL CONTEXT AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE BOLIVIAN ALTIPLANO

Interrogatorio contra los indios de Tapacar 1998 [1568];


Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca Huayna Capac 1977
[1556]; Sanchez Canedo 2008), but there is nothing in
the archaeological record to suggest that they had lived
there prior to the Inka conquest. The ceramics from the
Late Intermediate Period sites in the western half of the
Cochabamba Valley are dominated by the valleys typical Ciaco wares (GyarmatiVarga 1999: 2931), in other
words, the periods characteristic pottery of the altiplano
is lacking in the valley section bordering on the mountain
region (see Chapter III.4), the very area where, according
to Colonial sources, the center of one of the four Sora
parcialidads (Paria, Caracollo, Tapacar, and Sipesipe)
lay. Our research in the Paria Basin yielded similar results. One of the buildings dating from the Late Intermediate Period contained solely plant remains typical of
the altiplano, while the botanical finds of the Inka Period from Paria included maize and pepper (see Chapter
VIII.3), both species that do not thrive on the altiplano,
which seems to belie intensive contacts between the Paria
Basin and the Cochabamba Valley during the Late Intermediate Period.
The archaeological evidence thus raises some doubts
whether the Sora group associated with the four main settlements of the Inka Period mentioned above had already
lived there during the Late Intermediate Period. This
scenario is refuted by the radiocarbon dates from Paria,
which suggest that the settlement had been founded
during the Late Horizon (see Chapter IV.1 and IV.2.2). If
this was indeed the case, Paria, which acted as the center
of the Sora during the Late Horizon, can hardly be identical with the original center of the Sora. This is confirmed
not only by our archaeological research, but also by the
written sources, no matter how laconic and ambiguous.
Much is revealed by the testimony of Fernando Agustn,
cacique of Copacallo and the second most important man
in Tapacar, who claimed to be 93 years old and who had
allegedly heard from his father that the named fields of
Sorasora, had been theirs [the Soras] before the Inka set
out to conquer the province of Charcas and before the
kings of the Sora of the mentioned village of Capinota
had departed and the Inka found them there when they
came to conquer the land and these fields were abandoned by the Sora Indians so that together with Condo,
their cacique and governor, they could receive the Inka
known as Topa Inka and the Sora Indians had a fortress in their fields near the water, which this witness had
seen with his own eyes (A.H.C. Exp. 54, quoted by Del
Ro 1996: 27).6 This seems to be confirmed by Lorenzo
de Aldanas yanacona who testified that he had seen a
fort in the land of the said Sorasora which is there to this
day, as it was, and it belonged to the said Sora Indians, a
place where in olden times they raised fortifications and
warred (A.H.C. Exp. 54, quoted by Del Ro 1996: 26).7
According to Mara de las Mercedes del Ro who
published these sources, the pre-Inka center of the Sora

of Paria was the Sora Sora settlement on the northeastern shore of Lake Poop and the mountain called Pucara (Del Ro 2005: 78); however, if the testimonies are
taken at face value, it becomes apparent that we are not
dealing with an actual settlement, but rather a territory
occupied by the Sora known as Sorasora in which there
was a fort. Only systematic field surveys can determine
whether there was a settlement functioning as a regional
center during the Late Intermediate Period and whether
this settlement had been fortified, but even so, a possible
association with the Sora remains dubious. This leads to
the problem of correlating archaeological assemblages
with ethnic groups, to whether the evidence provided by
archaeological research (settlement patterns, settlement
layout, architectural remains, and ceramic wares) can
contribute to the association of a given site with a particular ethnic group and to the determination of the territory
occupied by that ethnic group. For example, the pottery
from the Pirque Alto site lying in the lower section of
the Tapacar Valley, some 15 kilometers south of the Cochabamba Valley, was in part made up of Ciaco wares
typical for the Cochabamba Valley and in part of bowls
(MacAndrewsRivera 2007: 4952) which resembled
the decorated pottery from the Paria Basin more than any
other ornamented ceramics (see Chapter III.4), suggesting that the boundary between the ethnic groups of the
altiplano and of the Cochabamba Valley lay somewhere
in that area. Whether this boundary can be identified with
the one between the Sora and the ethnic groups of the
Cochabamba Valley can be hypothesized from the reports
in the written sources that Tapacar was one of the four
Sora centers.

II.4. The Late Horizon


The Inka conquest and the pax inkaica in its wake brought
a profound change in the overall situation of the chiefdoms, whether independent or part of a confederation,
which on the testimony of the historical and archaeological sources repeatedly warred with one another. The
chronicles suggest two main periods as regards the date
of the conquest: some chroniclers record that the conquest occurred under the reign of Pachakuti Inka Yupanki
and Thupa Inka Yupanki, i.e., around 14601470, while
others claim that it had taken place much earlier.
The latter view can be found in the writings of Garcilaso de la Vega, according to whom Mayta Qhapaq, the
fourth Inka, had already conquered the peoples down to
Caracollo lying near Lake Paria, which marked the border of the Empire until the end of the reign of Pachakuti,
the ninth Inka. His son, Thupa Inka, had to march to Paria
to force into submission two peoples of Kollasuyu who
had again become embroiled in war (Garcilaso 1960: 92
93, 102103, Book III, Ch. VII, XIV). Guaman Poma de
Ayala attributes even greater conquests to Mayta Qhapaq:
19

Paria la Viexa

in his narrative, the Inka rule was extended to Chuquisaca


and Potos (Guaman Poma de Ayala 1980 [1613]: 129,
[152]). The khipu kamayuqs testifying before the Governor Vaca de Castro around 1542 spoke of a later conquest, claiming that Viracocha was the ruler who had
conquered all the Pacaje and Caranga as far as Paria
(Quipucamayos 1920 [ca. 1542]: 15).8 In contrast, Cieza
de Len insists that Inka influence did not extend beyond
the southern part of Lake Titicaca in Viracochas time.
The peace negotiations at Chucuito between Viracocha
and Cari, the Lupaca king winning a decisive victory
over the Colla at Paucarcolla, can be regarded as an indication of the acceptance of Inka supremacy. Pachakuti,
the next Inka, had to quell a rebellion by the Collao people led by Cari, and Cieza de Len reports that Charcas
and Chile were subjugated after this event, during the
reign of Thupa (Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 391394,
415416, 431432, Ch. XLIIXLIII, LIIILV, LVI).
Bernab Cobo and Sarmiento de Gamboa too are among
the chroniclers who attribute the conquest of Charcas and
the southern territories to the last Inka rulers. According
to the former, when Thupa Inka arrived from Tiwanaku
to Charcas, twenty thousand men and their families fled
from the province to the valleys of Oroncota, where they
found a natural fortress walled in by sheer cliffs on every side, much farmland and water on its summit, which
the Inka eventually managed to capture by guile (Cobo
1956 [1653]: 84, Vol. II, Book 12, Ch. XIV). Sarmiento
de Gamboa essentially described the Inka conquest in the
same way, although he added a few more details. According to him, upon learning of the approach of the Inka
armies, the inhabitants of Paria, Tapacar, Cotabamba
(Cochabamba), Pocona, and Charcas retreated to the land
of the Chicha and Chui Indians to fight jointly against the
enemy. The Inka then divided their army into three parts,
as was their custom. One unit of five thousand warriors
advanced from the east, crossing the mountains, the main
army of twenty thousand warriors advanced from the
west, while the rest marched forward until they reached
the fortresses where those who had escaped sought refuge. After occupying these fortresses, they gained control
of the area (Sarmiento de Gamboa 1960 [1572]: 246, Ch.
XLI). The events described by Sarmiento de Gamboa eerily recall the strategy adopted by the peoples of Charcas
in 1538 against the Pizarro brothers intent on the conquest of their lands, when Tisuq retreated to Cochabamba
to assemble the resistant forces, and they surrendered to
the Spaniards only after several lost battles.
Most scholars have accepted John Rowes (1944: 57)
model based on the Inka short chronology regarding
these two, mutually exclusive dates for the Inka conquest.
According to him, the Inka expansion began from 1450
or later, with the exception of the broader area of Cuzco.
However, the contradiction between the two seemingly
irreconcilable dates can be resolved if the Inka conquest
is not conceptualized as a single process or a single act,
20

and if we do not reject the scenario that the successive


Inka rulers had repeatedly conquered a particular territory, either in the course of a genuine military expedition
or in a symbolic form. There may have been several reasons for these recurring conquests (cp. the quoted passages of Garcilaso and Cieza de Len), one of these being that submission by a particular people, and especially
by its lords, had meant the acceptance of the supremacy
of one specific Inka ruler rather than of the Inka Empire,
and a new ruler had to reaffirm his power either through
genuine conquest or symbolically. In addition to the repeated conquests, we must also consider the fact that the
final form of the Inka rule emerged gradually, through
several phases, ranging from asymmetric alliances/marriages based on inequality of power to military conquest,
as demonstrated by Covey (2006) in his study on the
emergence of the Inka heartland.
In addition to the chronicles recounting the general
history of the Inka Empire, an examination of the local
sources seems to support the early and gradual, multiphased submission to the Inka. The testimonies of the
lords of the peoples of Charcas given during the Colonial
Period name Pachakuti as the ruler who had extended
the Inka dominion to Charcas, although they differ as to
whether this was done peacefully or by force. Regarding the dates, there is also indirect evidence in addition
to the statements by the caciques, who paired their own
ancestors with one or another Inka ruler (Fig. II.4). Thus,
for example, in a testimony given in 1575, don Juan
Colque Guarache, a mallku of the Quillaca, claimed that
Yupangue Inga, who conquered the said province of the
Quillaca and then proceeded to conquer the province of the Chicha and Aguito [Diaguita], and took with
him the said Colque, as the captain of the people of his
province, [who] for his bravery was awarded the privilege of the title of Inga Colque and a litter and fifty Indians to carry him.9 He also recounted the role played by
his ancestors in Inka and early Spanish history: after his
great-great-grandfather submitted to Pachakuti Inka, his
great-grandfather, Inga Guarache, received symbols of
power from Thupa Inka: a shirt adorned with silver and
gold and with precious stones called mollo and the right
to be carried on litter by fifty Indians,10 while his grandfather, also called Colque, enjoyed the same privileges
through the favors granted by Wayna Qhapaq. His father
happened to be in Cuzco when the Spaniards arrived in
Cajamarca and his brother was assigned to assist Diego
de Almagro during his journey to Chile (Primera Informacin hecha por Juan Colque Guarache 1981 [1575]:
237238). Considering the genealogy of his family as recounted by don Juan Colque Guarache, it would appear
that the great-great-grandfather of Juan Colque, born in
1521, had probably been born around 14001440, and
that if the Quillaca had submitted to the Inka during his
lordship, this event occurred around the mid-15th century, perhaps in the centurys earlier half, which would

CULTURAL CONTEXT AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE BOLIVIAN ALTIPLANO

Inka ruler / Spanish governor

Colla

Conde de Chinchn, viceroy


(16291639)
Garca Hurtado de Mendoza,
viceroy (15901596)
Francisco de Toledo, viceroy
(15691581)
Lope Garca de Castro, governor
(15641567)
Blasco Nez Vela, viceroy
(15441546)
Vaca de Castro, governor
(15411544)

Lupaca

Sora

Caracara

Charca

Fernando Ayra
Ariutu
Juan Ayawiri
Cuysara
Juan Colque
Guarache
Martin
Cari

Fernando Ayawiri
Cuysara
Francisco Ayra
Kanchi
Muruqu

Francisco Pizarro, (15321541)

Guarache
Arizita,
Apu Cari Achacata

Wayna Qhapaq
Thupa Inka Yupanki

Condo

Pachakuti Inka Yupanki


Viracocha

Quillaca

Zapana

Ayawiri
Cuysara

Colque

Uchatuma

Inga Guarache

Tata Paria

Inga Colque

Ayra Kanchi

Cari

Cohocoho
Copacatiaraca
Haracha

Figure II.4 Ethnic lords of the northern and central altiplano (after Platt et al. 2006)
correspond to the reigns of the rulers as recorded by Cabello, with Pachakuti ruling between 1438 and 1471.
A similar testimony was given in 1638 by don Fernanado Ayra Ariutu, the cacique of Pocoata, the greatgreat-great-grandson of Ayra Canchi on his mothers
side, who had bowed before Inka rule as the lord of
20,000 Caracara Indians and who sent Localarama, Fernando Ayras paternal great-great-great-grandfather, the
then cacique of Pocoata, as an envoy to the Inka. The
Inka ruler sent him a map woven of qumpi cloth11 and
awarded him the tile Janqu Tutumpi (Blossoming White
Flower), while the envoy was given the title qhapaq
(wealthy, mighty, capable; Platt et al. 2006: 7174;
Probanza de don Fernando Ayra de Ariuta 2006 [1639]:
723724, 728). The gift was probably a map depicting
the local system of ceques and wakas of the kind seen by
Polo de Ondegardo in Pocona. These imaginary lines and
locations were also suitable for defining the boundaries
between settlements and ethnic groups.
The local sources containing the testimonies of the
Quillaca and Caracara lords would suggest that the province of Charcas came under Inka rule during Pachakutis
reign and that the lords of the local chiefdoms and their
successors retained their positions and were honored
with various privileges. Fernando Ayras account seems
to imply that by sending envoys, the Caracara entered
into alliance with Pachakuti as equals. However, a closer
look at the narrative clearly shows that the relationship
with the Inka state was, from the very beginning, one of
subordination. When Ayra Canchi received a map woven

in or painted on qumpi cloth, it did not merely confirm


the Caracara lords territory of lordship, but it also symbolized a patron-client relationship, and the same holds
true for the various titles and privileges conferred by the
Inka ruler.
The testimonies of the caciques of Charcas based on
their genealogy confirms the narratives of those chroniclers who recorded that Charcas had come under Inka
domination at a fairly early date; at the same time, their accounts differ radically regarding the mode of submission.
The descendants of the local caciques who had yielded to
the Inka were understandably reluctant to speak about a
defeat that had stripped them of their independence once
and for all, and were inclined to portray the extension of
Inka rule over them as a voluntary submission or, better still, as a relationship between equals. In contrast, the
chroniclers narrating the events of the conquests from
the victors perspective, who drew their accounts from
sources in Cuzco, understandably speak of military victories. To which we may add that it is exactly the same
chronicles that describe the strategies used by the Inka:
before turning to military power, diplomatic means were
employed to cajole the peoples to be conquered into submission. The testimonies of the Caracara and Quillaca
caciques wholly confirm this scenario. Thus, the incorporation of Charcas into the Inka Empire can perhaps
best be reconstructed as a series of events, during which
Pachakuti, or one of his predecessors, first established a
patron-client relationship with at least a part of the peoples living there and thus gained some influence over the
21

Paria la Viexa

territory, while Thupa Inka completed the conquest by a


military campaign, perhaps at the time he was a co-ruler
during his fathers lifetime.
In addition to the Colonial documents, principally the
testimonies of the caciques of Charcas who paired their
ancestors with the Inka rulers, several sites in Collao and
the southerly regions of Kollasuyu have yielded radiocarbon dates from before the 14601470 period that confirm the long chronology of the Inka Empire (DAltroy
et al. 2007: 91; Gyarmati 2001: 5; Meyers 1999; 2007:
245246; PrssinenSiiriinen 1997: 265). Prssinen and
Siiriinen (1997: 266) described the nature of this early
Inka presence between the polities lying beyond Cuzco
and its jurisdiction as reciprocal gift exchanges, embodied by the Inka style wares in the archaeological material. However, we are not simply dealing with the early
appearance of finds made in the Inka style in a foreign
cultural milieu, but also of buildings erected using the
typical Inka pirka technique such as the one excavated
by Prssinen and Siiriinen in Caquiqaviri, as well as of
settlements such as Potrero de Payogasta (DAltroy et al.
2007: 91) and Incarracay (Gyarmati 2001: 5) that were
part of the Inka state infrastructure in other words, we
must consider the presence of the Inka state in some form.
Even though the reliability of the early radiocarbon dates
has been challenged (see, e.g., Burger 2007: 427428),
we should also treat the short chronology with caution,
according to which the expansion of the Inka Empire can
largely be associated with Thupa Inka, based on the royal
succession list recorded by Cabello Valboa. If we try to
reconcile the written sources with the radiocarbon dates
regarding Charcas, it seems likely that the Inka expansion, or at least its first phase, occurred under Pachakuti
and that it can be dated to the earlier or the mid-15th century by the latest. It seems likely that there were several
phases in the extension of the Inka rule.
This leads us to another important question of the
Late Horizon, namely of how the Inka Empire was governed. This issue was addressed in detail by DAltroy and
Schreiber in their book, both published in 1992. Their
starting point was Wallersteins (1974) core-periphery
theory that was later modified by Luttwak (1976) and
Hassig (1984) as a territorial-hegemonic model. Schreiber (1992) later hypothesized a mosaic of different levels
of control for the Wari Empire, while DAltroy (1992)
proposed the model of direct-indirect rule for a more precise description of the administrative system of the Inka
Empire. According to this model, while some conquered
regions were governed directly through provincial centers
established by the Inka state and the governors installed
there, other areas were ruled indirectly by leaving the
chiefs of the earlier polities in their position. In addition
to the Colonial sources, this idea was mainly supported
by the fact that large areas of the empire lacked evidence
of the presence of the state infrastructure (e.g., settlements established by the state, terraces, storehouses, Inka
22

imperial pottery). However, the fact that the most recent


archaeological investigations yielded evidence of direct
control in areas such as northern Chile (Santoro et al.
2010) and the northern Peruvian coast (Heyerdahl et al.
1995; Mackey 2010), which were previously considered
to be indirectly governed areas, calls for a re-examination
of this issue.
According to one group of Colonial documents, the
peak of the provinces administrative hierarchy was occupied by persons who were members of the royal family. Sarmiento de Gamboa (1960 [1572]: 253255, Ch.
LII) and Mura (1962 [1590]: 66, Ch. 26), who drew
from the same sources, speak of two suyuyuq apus in
the Empire, one in Jauja, the other in Tiwanaku, and
we have no reason to doubt that a governor or qhapaq
apu of similar lineage administered the affairs of each
major province of the Empires four quarters (Prssinen
2002: 24). The first governor of Kollasuyu, the southern
province, known by name was Apu Inka Sujsu, grandson of Viracocha, who had been appointed to Copacabana by Thupa Inka. He wore an Inka costume, which
only differed from that of their true lord and sovereign
in that he wore the borla on side, whilst the Inka wore
it in front of his brow12 (Ramos Gaviln 1976 [1621]:
44, 67, Ch. XII, XX), confirming the governors royal
lineage. Regardless of which of the two seats named in
the sources had in fact been the capital, we can be certain
that it lay in the northern part of Kollasuyu, near Lake
Titicaca, in a ritually important location. The next governor was Apu Challku Yupanki, Apu Inka Sujsus son,
who was appointed by Wayna Qhapaq on the occasion of
his visit to Kollasuyu (Ramos Gaviln 1976 [1621]: 44,
Ch. XII); his authority extended to the province and the
ethnic groups of Omasuyu, Orcosuyu, Chucuito, Pacage,
Caranga, Paria, Charcas, Chuiz, Chisca and Copiapo in
Chile (Cceres Chalco Yupanqui Inga 1987 [1599]: 28,
quoted by Prssinen 2002: 34). Seeing that the above list
contains both toponyms and ethnonyms, we have no way
of knowing whether the specification of certain locations
(e.g., Chucuito and Paria) and regions (e.g., Charcas) also
meant all the peoples living there or whether some peoples did not come under the jurisdiction of the Inka governor administering Kollasuyu, which, judging from the
names, extended from the northern Titicaca basin to the
northern and central region of Chile.13 Apu Challku remained in office until the European conquest because we
know that in 1535, he accompanied Diego de Almagro on
the expedition to Chile (Ramos Gaviln 1976 [1621]: 44,
Ch. XII) in order to ensure the support of the peoples of
Collao and Charcas.
Aside from the above, there are several sources,
mainly local testimonies, according to which the top positions of the provincial administration were occupied by
native lords. Cabello Valboa (1951 [1586]: 368, Ch. 21)
records that Apu Cari, a Lupaca lord, was first a captain of Chucuito and later the chief captain of Collao,

CULTURAL CONTEXT AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE BOLIVIAN ALTIPLANO

appointed by Wayna Qhapaq whom he had assisted in extending the boundaries of his realm to Pasto in Colombia.
In the Chucuito visita he is described as the Inkas second man, [who was] master from Cuzco to Chile14 (Dez
de San Miguel 1964 [1567]: 107). One of the caciques of
Tapacar had a similarly high rank. In a lawsuit held in
1586, Achacata is described as a man with outstanding
military prowess, who governed from the province of
Omasuyu and Urqosuyo to Chile, who was carried on litter and who always stayed near the said guayna capa.15
Similarly to other lords of Charcas, he received one of the
suyos of the Anocarairi chacara of the Cochabamba state
estate in return for his services to the Inka (Repartimiento
de tierras por el Inca Huayna Capac 1977 [1556]: 22),
and he also owned a house in the valley (A.H.C. Exp.
17, 52, quoted by Del Ro 1990: 7981).
However, when assessing these sources, we should
bear in mind that these lords, and their descendants testifying during the Colonial Period, came from the ranks of
a conquered population who had good reason to present
and portray themselves as having occupied prominent
positions in the imperial administration; still, considering their origins and seat (whether in Chucuito, Tapacar,
or in the Cochabamba Valley), it is hardly credible that
they had enjoyed the same position as the officials residing in the key ritual places of the Inka royal family. In
other words, they can hardly be regarded as the principal governors of Kollasuyu they were, rather, officials
occupying the third tier of the administrative hierarchy,
subordinate to the Cuzco court and the largest provincial administrative units, who had been raised from the
chieftainship of their own ethnic group and vested with
power over other ethnic groups, in which capacity they
played a key role in ensuring the loyalty of the conquered
peoples and their mobilization in case of war. Tata Paria,
the mallku of the hanansaya of the Caracara, enjoyed a
similar position: according to his great-grandson, he was
governor of the Quillaca, the Sora, the Caranga and the
Chui, and he was also granted the right to be carried on
a litter (Probanza de don Juan de Castro y Paria 2006
[1612]: 772), similarly to Juan Guarache, who was the
head of the Quillaca, the Azanaque, the Sevaruyu, the
Uruquilla, and the Aracapi (Primera Informacin hecha
por Juan Colque Guarache 1981 [1575]: 237). Cuysara,
the Charca lord capable of mobilizing 10,000 warriors,
enjoyed similar privileges and he had his residence near
the house of the cacique Achacata mentioned above
(Del Ro 1990: 81).
In addition to local lords, other positions crucial to
the governance of the Inka state and the maintenance of
its security were performed by individuals from other
conquered peoples and Inka-by-blood (inkas de sangre). The state workshop at Milliraya (Alconini 2013:
281) and the Cochabamba state estates were administered by officials of this type,16 and the governor and
guardian of the forts on the Chiriguano border too had

a similar lineage (Probanza de don Fernando Ayavire y


Velasco 2006 [1583]: 935; Segunda Informacin hecha
por Juan Colque Guarache 1981 [15761577]: 259), as
did Apu Mayta, whom Thupa Yupanki had instructed to
establish and fix the boundaries in Kollasuyu in order to
bring an end to the conflicts (Platt et al. 2006: 502). The
pax inkaica and the redrawing of the borders in its wake
did not simply put an end to the conflicts of the pre-Inka
period, but probably had another dimension too: the Inka
state decided whether or not the regions falling within the
newly-drawn boundaries were assigned to a new community or remained under the jurisdiction of the earlier one.
In sum, we may conclude that the governance of a
particular region in the Inka Empire was neither exclusively direct, nor indirect: the situation, as we shall see
through the example of Paria, was far more complex.
While certain key positions were filled by persons delegated by the Inka state, other posts, which called for
the authority as well as the mediating and mobilizing
capabilities of local leaders (civil and military services
to the state) were left in the hands of the earlier ethnic
lords. Their cooperation with the Inka state was ensured
through material goods (cp. the Cochabamba land given
to various lords), prestige gifts (such as valuable cloths
and vessels crafted from precious metals), and privileges
(the use of a litter and a parasol, and honorific titles such
as qhapaq and Inga). The administrative system (Fig.
II.5) in the study region can best be described as a hierarchy headed by an Inka-by-blood delegated from Cuzco,
under whom there were officials of equal status, in part
the lords who had been raised above their role as leaders
of their ethnic group, and in part non-locals and Inka-byblood in certain key positions, followed by other ethnic
lords on different levels.
Examining the peoples of Charcas according to the
services provided to the Inka state as recorded in the
ethnohistoric sources, we find that there is a strong emphasis on two, ethnically well-separable services: military service and the cultivation of the state estates. The
former is best illustrated by the testimonies given by the

Figure II.5 Model of governance in Charcas


23

Paria la Viexa

caciques in the Memorial de Charcas: We are the four


nations, the Charcas and Caracaras and Chuis and Chichas, distinguishable according to clothing and customs.
We have been soldiers since the time of the inkas, called
Inga Yupangui [Pachakuti], and Topa Inga and Guaina
Capac, whom the Spanish found to pursue this occupation when they entered the land excused from tribute
and all other taxes and personal services like herding
of cattle or from serving the mita at the court in the
great city of Cuzco, and from being masons, weavers of
cumbi and abasca [fine and coarse] cloth, and from
farming the chacaras, carpentry, and quarrying We
were not dancers, nor clowns accustomed to sing victory
songs to the said ingas17 (Memorial de Charcas 2006
[1582]: 841842). The prominent role of these peoples
in the Inka army is indicated by their presence in several
regions where the Inka Empire waged critical wars either during its expansion in Ecuador or when defending
its southeastern border against the Chiriguano. Thus, for
example, Uchatuma, the mallku of Caracara, led 5,000
warriors in the war in Kuntisuyu and Antisuyu, according to the testimony of his great-grandson given in 1639,
and Wayna Qhapaq also entrusted him with raising forts
in Tomebamba. The rulers great esteem for the services
rendered by Uchatuma is illustrated by his gift of a shirt
adorned with gold discs and that he gave Payco Chimbo,
one of his daughters, as his wife (Probanza de don Fernando Ayra de Ariuta 2006 [1639]: 730731). Cuysara,
mentioned in the above, participated in the campaign
against the Chiriguano led by Wayna Qhapaq and built
forts to defend the border (Probanza de don Fernando
Ayavire y Velasco 2006 [1583]: 939).
The other service repeatedly cropping up in the
sources was the cultivation of the state fields, which is
best illustrated by the Cochabamba state estate. Regarding the creation of the estates, the Caranga Indians, who
in 1574 attempted to regain their former lands in Cochabamba, claimed that Guayna Capa carried out the
general distribution of all the fields [our italics] in the
said valley for himself, and he settled fourteen thousand
Indians from many peoples to cultivate these fields
(Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca Huayna Capac 1977
[1556]:28).18 The indirect references in the Repartimiento
show that this event occurred sometime at the beginning
of Wayna Qhapaqs reign. Two of the witnesses who testified between 1556 and 1560, and who according to their
own words were about ninety years old, recalled seeing
the distribution of the fields; another fifty-five years old
Indian also knew about the distribution, even though he
did not recall the event itself, and he also knew about
the khipus which recorded the creation of the chacaras
(Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca Huayna Capac 1977
[1556]: 25). The distribution of the fields and the creation
of the state estate may have been performed on the occasion of Wayna Qhapaqs above-mentioned visit in Kollasuyu, when he noted the fertility of the land and the low
24

number of occupants. He therefore settled mitmaq Indians


from various parts of the empire and made Cochabamba
the capital of the province. He then travelled to Pocona
to put things in order at the border and to rebuild his fathers fort (Cabello Valboa 1951 [1586]: 362, Ch. 21;
Cobo 1956 [1653]: 89, Vol. II, Book 12, Ch. XVI; Mura
1962 [1590]: 7778, Ch. 30; Sarmiento de Gamboa 1960
[1572]: 260). The Repartimiento also lists those peoples
and their original settlements who cultivated five chacaras of the state estate established at the western end of the
valley.19 A closer look reveals that of the seven nations
of Charcas, the four nations which, on the testimony
of their caciques, were exclusively obliged to provide
military service are not mentioned (see above), while the
other three nations all appear among the workers on the
Cochabamba state estate (Repartimiento de tierras por el
Inca Huayna Capac 1977 [1556]). The Sora living closest to the valley represent the highest proportion.20 Taking
the three Charcas nations (the Sora, the Caranga, and
the Quillaca) as well as the few suyos cultivated by subgroups (the Uru, the Casaya, the Azanaque, the Uruquilla,
and the Aullaga) in their territory, we find that they had
been allotted the overwhelming majority of the suyos,
over 85%, while the ethnic groups living by Lake Titicaca, (the Colla, the Lupaca, and the Pacaje) received less
than 15% (GyarmatiVarga 1999: 1524).
The workers laboring on the fields in the Cochabamba
Valley comprised not only the nations mentioned
above, but also peoples of the altiplano, who according
to the sources were only obliged to provide military service to the Inka Empire. According to the caciques testifying in the Memorial de Charcas, Topa Inca Yupangui
and his son Guayna Caba distributed land among us in
the Cochabamba Valley, to all the nations of the province
of Charcas, to the ones called Charca, Caracara, Sora,
Quillaca and Caranga, that we should plant and cultivate
them21 (Memorial de Charcas 2006 [1582]: 837). However, this phrasing, if the testimonies are to be believed,
would imply that the fields in question were cultivated
not for the state, but for their own benefit, meaning that
they had received the fields from the Inka state, probably
in exchange for their services. The fields in question lay
on the fringes and to the east of the state estates described
at length in the Repartimiento (1977 [1556]), for example
in vicinity of El Paso and Tiquipaya, as mentioned by the
witnesses testifying in the Memorial de Charcas (Platt et
al. 2006 [1582]: 85).
The above two sources would suggest that the Inka
state divided the seven largest nations of Charcas into
two groups according to the services expected of them
and that they were only obliged to perform one type of
service (military service and cultivation of state fields);
in other words, they were exempted from the other services imposed on other peoples. The lords of the peoples
obliged to perform military service listed the exemptions
in detail and it would appear that the workers on the state

CULTURAL CONTEXT AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE BOLIVIAN ALTIPLANO

fields were similarly exempted from other obligations.


However, we must bear in mind that both documents contain the testimonies of witnesses who made every effort
to assert their proprietary rights and to emphasize their
privileges received in exchange for military services, and
who had good reason to keep silent about the other obligations imposed on them and their ethnic group.
The Quillaca and Caranga ovejeros, the herdsmen
(Platt et al. 2006: 63) who guarded the Inkas herds and
were responsible for transporting the goods produced in
the Cochabamba Valley to other towns, performed state
obligations (Interrogatorio contra los indios de Tapacar
1998 [1568]: 649). According to don Juan Querapa, who
gave testimony in 1603, the metal-working Indians from
the villages of the province of Paria and Tapacar and
Caracollo [i.e., the Sora] as mitmaq Indians placed there
by Guayna Capac22 working in Tapacar similarly performed state service (A.H.C., Exp. 79, quoted by Del Ro
1996: 75). Our own archaeological research furnished
ample evidence for activities of this and various other
types, indicating that the state services performed by the
peoples of Charcas were indeed as diverse as recorded in
the Chucuito visita (Dez de San Miguel 1964 [1567]),
even if some groups were only obliged to render one service exclusively.
A closer look at the salient features of the structure of
Sora society reveals that from the Inka dominion by the
latest, they were divided into four parcialidads known by
name, among which Paria and Tapacar played the leading role. Each of the four parcialidads was divided in two
(hanansaya and hurinsaya), the latter each made up of
five to seven ayllus, i.e., the entire Sora population was
made up of forty-one ayllus (Del Ro 2005: 5459). It has
already been mentioned in the above that Uru and Casaya
also lived in the territory inhabited by the Sora, sometimes sharing the same settlements. The relation between
the Casaya and the Sora is still debated: some scholars regard them as an independent ethnic group, others believe
they were one of the Sora parcialidads (Del Ro 2005:
60); whichever the case, they came under the jurisdiction
of the Sora lords, and both the Uru and the Casaya cultivating the Cochabamba state estates were described as
originating from Paria (A.G.I., Justicia 429, quoted by
Del Ro 2005: 62; Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca
Huayna Capac 1977 [1556]: 2021).
The leading role of Paria and Tapacar among the four
Sora parcialidads seems to be supported by the fact that
their lords held high posts in the Inka Period administration. For example, Arizita of the Paria hanansaya governed a number of other multi-ethnic (Sora, Casaya, and
Uru) settlements aside from his own; he was called the
captain of Wayna Qhapaq and he was one of the local lords entitled to the privilege of travelling on litter,
similarly to Achacata of the Tapacar hurinsaya (Del Ro
1996: 4145; Probanza de don Fernando Ayavire y Velasco 2006 [1583]: 935).

In addition to other settlements, Arizita is described


as the head of Pariamarca in the cedula de encomienda
issued by Francisco Pizarro on August 1, 1535 (A.G.I.,
Justicia 429, quoted by Del Ro 2005: 104); given that
marka means settlement, town in Quechua, we
may rightly assume that Pariamarca was identical with
the Inka provincial center. If this was indeed the case,
it would imply that the most important Inka center of
Charcas was administered by a local lord, from which we
might conclude that Paria was governed indirectly by the
Inka state. However, given that Paria was an intrusive
settlement regarding its chronology, its architecture, and
its find material (see Chapter IV), and that it appears
among the settlements governed from Copacabana by
Apu Challku Yupanki, there can be no doubt that Paria
was under direct Inka state control, despite the fact that
we find a local lord at the head of the settlement, whose
principal task was probably to ensure the cooperation of
the relocated Sora (see Chapter III.5.1).
The ethnohistoric sources have little to say about
Paria. Betanzos recounts that after the conquest of Copayapo, Lipez, and Charcas, Thupa Inka came to a place
called Paria, where he had a tambo constructed.23 (Betanzos 1987 [1551]: 165, Vol. II, Ch. XXXVI.) Cieza de
Len merely notes that when Thupa Inka conquered the
peoples of Collao and Chile, in Paria, the Inka ordered
edifices to be built (Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 432,
Ch. LXI), which might be interpreted as meaning that the
settlement had already existed. He has little to say about
the Inka settlement, which he had visited while travelling
south on the royal road from Caracollo. He only noted
that there were storehouses and royal lodgings for the
Inka, and a Sun Temple24 (Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]:
267, Ch. CVI). To which the local lords testifying in the
16th century added that the goods produced on the Cochabamba state estates were taken to the storehouses in
Paria, whence they were transported to their final destination (A.H.C. Exp. 16, 1568, quoted by del Ro 1996:
38; Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca Huayna Capac
1977 [1556]: 24).

II.5. Spanish Intrusion and the Creation of the


Colonial System
About a month after occupying Cuzco in November 1533,
Francisco Pizarro sent scouts to the then still unknown
southern lands. The accounts of the scouts (Sancho de la
Hoz 1962 [1543]: 96) returning with samples from the
gold mines in Chuquiabo and La Paz promised a similarly dazzling wealth as the Spanish had found in Peru.
In 1534, Almagros voracious appetite for gold and his
lust for power led him to petition Charles V for the governorship of the then still undiscovered province of Nuevo
Toledo, lying some 200 leguas from the southern border of Nueva Castilla, at the time under the jurisdiction
25

Paria la Viexa

of Francisco Pizarro. Almagro also took care to secure


his position through an agreement signed with Pizarro
on June 12, 1535 (Hemming 1970: 175, 502). This did
not necessarily mean that Pizarro acknowledged the supremacy of his fellow conquistador over the territories to
be conquered because on August 1, 1535, a month after
Almagro set off to the south, he issued an encomienda
grant on Tapacar and Paria, inhabited by the Sora (A.G.I.
Justicia 415, 429, quoted by Del Ro 1996: 8586), and
the same is known to have happened in the case of Sipe
Sipe (Del Ro 2005: 313). Given that the encomienda included all four Sora parcialidads, it is quite obvious that
the Spanish were aware of the regions administrative
system; moreover, they even listed a series of settlements
and their lords by name (such as Arizita who governed
Paria; A.G.I., Justicia 429, quoted by Del Ro 2005: 104)
at a time when the region had not yet come under their
dominion.
In order to explore the governorate granted to him
by the Spanish sovereign, Almagro left Cuzco on July 3,
1535. The members of the expedition were made up of
several groups, who set off with several months difference. One of these was led by Juan de Saavedra, who was
entrusted with the task of founding a settlement at a distance of 150 leguas from Cuzco (Platt et al. 2006: 103
105) with his one hundred soldiers (Zrate 1995 [1555]:
101, Book III, Ch. I), and to wait there until Almagro
arrived. Saavedra chose Paria (Mario de Lovera 1865
[15471594]: 21, Book I, Ch. I), a settlement lying at the
appropriate distance, which had the necessary spacious
buildings to accommodate a larger Spanish contingent
and the Indians accompanying them. Even more importantly, the goods accumulated in the storehouses could
provision the expedition for several months and replenish
the supplies of the expedition before their journey across
the barren land, where there would be no supplies for
several hundred kilometers.25 Almagro obviously needed
the necessary support during his expedition, which was
ensured by Paullu Inka, accompanied by Inka warriors
from Cuzco, and Willaq Uma, the Empires high priest,
as well as Apu Challku Yupanki, governor of Kollasuyu,
who joined the expedition at Copacabana (Platt et al.
2006: 105),26 and several lords of Charcas, one of them
being Juan Colque Guaraches father, the mallku of the
Quillaca, who sent one of his brothers, Caraguaque, with
supplies to Almagro when he was departing from Paria.
Almagro and his expedition received the 6,000 fanegas
of maize and chuo transported on 4,000 pack-llamas,
supplies sufficient for over a thousand men, at the tampu
of Aullaga at the southern end of Lake Poop (Primera
Informacin hecha por Juan Colque Guarache 1981
[1575]: 238, 246), whence they marched to Tupiza and
Salta, returning to Chincha by sea from Copiapo in Chile.
Returning to Peru, Almagro arrived at the last moment
to relieve Cuzco, then besieged by Manco Inka. Subsequently, however, he clashed with Hernando Pizarro
26

and after suffering a defeat in the Battle of Salinas, he


was executed on July 8, 1538. The road lay open to the
Pizarro clan for their conquest of the southern territories,
in which they were aided by Paullu, who supported them
in exchange for the borla of Manco Inka. Manco had retreated to Vilcabamba and appointed Tisuq, the greatest enemy of Christendom (Annimo, sitio del Cuzco
1934 [1536]: 125129), to lead the concerted revolt of
the seven nations of Charcas (Memorial de Charcas
2006 [1582]: 843), the Yampara, and the mitmaq Indians
of Pocona and other provinces. Tisuq tried to persuade
the local lords to turn against the Spaniards by promising them unrestricted freedom (Mura 1962 [1590]: 240,
Book I, Ch. 71).
The first clash between Pizarros 200 Spaniards, the
Indian troops under Paullu (Hemming 1970: 243244)
and the Uru and Pacaje Indians took place by the bridge
of the Desaguadero River. Because the latter were unable to check the Spanish forces, Tisuq retreated to Cochabamba, where he gathered a large army of Chui
and other upper [altiplano] peoples to Chile, and gathered a great many oraora [Sora] and marched against
Pizarro.27 The clash at Tapacar again brought the defeat of Tisuq and the allied forces of Charcas, who then
lost another battle in the Cochabamba Valley, until Tisuq,
Cuysara, lord of the Charca, and Arizita, lord of the Sora
warriors, all surrendered to the Spanish conquerors. By
the end of 1538, the peoples of the altiplano again came
under foreign rule despite joining their forces and mobilizing 60,000 warriors by the seven nations of Charcas
(or eight nations together with the Yampara; Platt et al.
2006: 113117).
Paria is mentioned but once in the fairly detailed accounts of the Cochabamba campaign, perhaps because
the conquerors advancing southward turned towards
Tapacar at Caracollo (Lizarraga 1968 [15861591]: 73,
Book I, Ch. XCII), before reaching the Inka provincial
center, and Hernando Pizarro only passed through the
town when hastily returning to Cuzco after the battle at
Tapacar (Annimo, sitio del Cuzco 1934 [1536]: 130).
The settlement played a more substantial role at Easter
1546, when Francisco de Cavajal and his 300 men rebelling against the Crown marched against Diego Centeno
and his 250 soldiers garrisoned at Paria. Upon receiving
news of the enemy approach, Centeno decided to leave
his camp and march to a small area from the Paria promontory by the river28 (Anonimo 2003 [1550]: 242243);
exploiting the situation, Carvajal set up his camp in the
same Paria tambo, about a legua away from the enemy
(Zrate 1995 [1555]: 289, Book VI, Ch. I).29 The next
day, on Good Friday, their vanguards met, but Centeno
decided to avoid battle and retreated. Carvajal pursued
the royalist army retreating towards Arequipa and eventually returned to Paria. Incidentally, Juan Guarache, the
mallku of the Quillaca, who provided the necessary supplies for Almagros expedition, joined the royalist forces

CULTURAL CONTEXT AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE BOLIVIAN ALTIPLANO

(Primera Informacin hecha por Juan Colque Guarache


1981 [1575]: 238). The sole point of interest regarding
the hostilities between the two from our perspective is the
clear indication that in 1546, several years after the foundation of Villa de la Plata (Sucre), Paria remained a base
for the Spaniards and the very brief reference to the town
suggests that it was still identical with the one-time Inka
provincial center: the promontory by the river conforms
to the location of the Inka Period settlement and differs
from the location of modern Paria on the river itself.
Despite the civil war, Governor Castro continued
with the encomienda grants of the territories inhabited
by the Sora begun by Pizarro, and the issued cedulas
record that Pedro de Varco received 500 Sora of Paria,
Alonso Prez Castillejo was given 850 Sora of Tapacar,
Alonso Mangarres acquired 800 Sora of Caracollo, and
Francisco Negral was allotted 700 Sora of Sipesipe from
among the Sora divided into four repartimientos (Hinojosa 1940 [1548]). It is quite striking that the by far the
lowest number came from Paria, perhaps owing to the
war conditions affecting the region and perhaps because
the regions population, transplanted there by the Inka
state, departed after the empires collapse.
The construction of the first Christian monastery in
Capinota in 1559 reflects the shift of the center of the Sora
territory to the lower-lying Cochabamba Valley (Del Ro
2005: 129). Following the introduction of the Colonial
administrative system, the four Sora encomiendas were
incorporated into three corregimientos charged with the
administration of justice and the collection of the tribute
tax. The Sora of Caracollo became part of the Sicasica
corregimiento together with the Pacaje villages, the Sora
of Sipesipe of the Cochabamba corregimiento, while the
Sora of Paria of the Paria corregimiento together with the
Aullaga, and the population of the villages and towns in

the repartimientos were resettled in the reduccins created by Viceroy Francisco Toledo. Thus, for example,
the population of fifty-three Sora, Casaya, and Uru villages was relocated to five reduccins (Del Ro 2005:
108, 125). The regions original, pre-Hispanic settlement
system and ethnic make-up was drastically altered in
the wake of these measures. The 1573 census of tributary Indians ordered by Toledo lists 420 Sora tributaries
in the population of 17,334 of the Paria repartimiento,
alongside 823 Casaya Sora and 2,558 Uru tributaries. If
the number of registered tributaries in the Paria (3,801)
and Caracollo (853) repartimientos is compared to the
tributaries in the Tapacar (1,173) and Sipesipe (8,219)
repartimientos (Cook 1975: 1529), the shift in ethnic
ratios in favor of the lower-lying areas compared to the
altiplano is quite obvious.
The last reference to the Inka provincial center occurs
in an undated document, of which a copy was made on
October 28, 1593, which records the fixing of the boundaries of the land given to the Sora and the placement of
boundary markers performed on the orders of Wayna
Qhapaq. The location of the boundary markers was determined according to two reference points: the first was
Capinota, the main Colonial center before the foundation
of Villa de Oropesa (Cochabamba) in 1571, the second
was Paria la viexa (Del Ro 1996: 4764). It follows
from the latter toponym that one reference point of the
land distributed or, better said re-organized by the
Inka ruler was the Inka provincial center and that at the
time the original document was drawn up, the name Paria
referred to another settlement. In other words, the provincial center established by the Inka Empire was abandoned sometime between 1546 and the time the original
document was issued, although it still functioned as a
reference point when estate boundaries were determined.

27

III. Settlement Patterns in the Paria Basin

III.1. Research Goals and Research Methods


The primary goal of our investigations in the Paria Basin
between 2004 and 2011 was to identify every archaeological site with surface remains in order to gain a better
understanding of pre-Hispanic settlement patterns and
diachronic changes. Another equally important objective
of our research was the secure identification of Paria, the
one-time Inka provincial center, beyond all reasonable
doubt in order to achieve this, we did not merely review
the sites that had been earlier proposed as potential candidates (Hyslop 1984; Trimborn 1967; Condarco et al.
2002), but we also strove to eliminate other previously
suggested options through the regions systematic survey.
In addition to identifying the former provincial center,
we also wanted to determine the role played by Paria in
the life of the narrower region (the middle part of the
Bolivian altiplano, the mountainous region east of Paria
and the Cochabamba Valley), and in the economic and
administrative system of the Inka Empire.
We chose our survey area in the Paria Basin with
the above considerations in mind: our research area
encompassed the area bounded by the settlements of
Anocariri, Crucero Soracachi, Conchiri, Falsuri, Khota
Chullpa, Condorchinoca, Iruma, Obrajes, and Paria, and
the narrow upper valley sections of a few rivers entering
the Paria Basin (such as the Pisakheri/Wila Jakko up to
Pisakheri, the Jacha Uma up to the settlement of Thola
Palca, and the Obrajes/Huaylluma up to Estancia Umitiri)
in Cercado Province (see Fig. I.2). This roughly 95.5 km2
large, systematically surveyed area incorporated three
different ecological zones of the basin: the piedmonts up
to 4,050 msl, the plain of the altiplano lying west of the
piedmonts, and river valleys traversing these two zones.
We discovered 109 new sites during our field surveys,
to which we must add the earlier published five sites. The
latter are Khota Chullpa (Site Ce 1), identified as Paria,
Site Ce 19, described in Hyslops report on the qhapaq
an research project (Hyslop 1984: 145), the Inka tampu
at Condorchinoca (Site Ce 112),1 Site Ce 43, dating from
the Formative Period excavated by Carola Condarco in
2000 (Condarco et al. 2002), and Site Ce 99 (Ventanani),
first identified by Carlos Condarco and Carola Condarco
(1994). Together with the latter, the total number of sites
adds up to 114. The recorded sites were numbered consecutively with the prefix Ce added for Cercado Province
(Sites Ce 1 to Ce 114; Map I).

During the two-month long survey conducted in


August and September 2004, our team of four walked
in parallel lines spaced 30 to 50 meters apart depending on terrain conditions, with the two outermost team
members recording the covered distances using GPS.2
We also used GPS for recording the exact location and
extent of the identified sites, which were then mapped
on the 1:50,000 scale topographic maps issued by GEOBOL. We recorded the sites (Appendix III.1) on the data
sheets provided by the staff of the Museo Arqueolgico
UMSS of Cochabamba. We collected diagnostic finds on
the sites we discovered in order to precisely determine
the date of each sites occupation; however, our goal was
not to identify functional differences within a site, which
would have been impossible in the case of most sites. At
the same time, we did perform intensive sampling involving the collection of all finds in randomly selected areas
of larger sites, whose number and extent depended on
the sites size and the intensity of its occupation: one to
three 12 m2 large areas on smaller sites and in 21 areas,
totalling one hectare, at Site Ce 1, identified with Paria.3
We also used GPS for recording the location of building
remains, batns, agricultural implements and import artifacts within a site. We used a theodolite for mapping surface building remains on Late Horizon sites (Ce 1, Ce34,
and Ce 51) and we also recorded every datum point using
GPS. Similarly, we made a theodolite survey of the excavated building and other remains, recording every major
architectural and archaeological feature.

III.2. The Formative Period


The fact that we did not find a single site of the Archaic
Period in the surveyed area suggests that the more sedentary agro-pastoral communities of the Formative Period
followed entirely different considerations in their choice
of settlement locations than their mobile hunter-gatherer
predecessors (unless the sites of the Archaic Period lie
concealed under some tell-like settlements of the Formative Period). The most striking evidence of this change
is furnished by the 16 Formative Period sites identified
during our survey (Map II). Typically enough, these
small sites were characterized by a high surface artifact
density, similarly to the Formative Period sites of the Ro
Kochi/La Joya/Beln region lying some 50 kilometers
west of our survey area (McAndrews 2005: 5186).
29

Paria la Viexa

Based on the surface scatter of finds (30100 artifacts/m2), over one-half of the sites (56%) could be classified as nucleated settlements: in several cases (Sites
Ce22, Ce 43, Ce 54, Ce 83), the site, or at least its core,
was a tell-like mound, conforming to most Formative
Period settlements whose occupation spanned several
centuries. At the same time, we also noted one or more
scarcely occupied peripheries beside the densely occupied nucleus on a part of these sites. This occupation
pattern is best illustrated by Site Ce 83, where the surface artifact scatter on the 1.5 hectares large, partly artificial, 7meters high mound in the sites center exceeded
100 artifacts/m2, while the artifact scatter was substantially lower in the surrounding areas, although it must be
borne in mind that in the lack of an excavation, there is no
way of knowing whether this can be attributed to erosion,
a less intensive occupation and/or a shorter occupation
(Fig. III.1). Slightly less than one-half of the identified
sites (44%) had a dispersed layout; these sites were characterized by an artifact scatter of less than 10 artifacts/m2
and most were small sites, no larger than 0.5 hectares.
Owing in part to their age and in part to their construction technique, no surface building remains survived
on most sites, the only exception being Site Ce22, where
we found the remains of a circular building with a diameter of 25 meters constructed from courses of larger
boulders with a fill of smaller stones.4 However, we
found burnt clay fragments bearing the imprint of reeds
or twigs on several sites (Ce 20, Ce 22, Ce 25, Ce 54,
Ce 92, and Ce109), and on one site (Ce 47), we found
burnt remains, perhaps the remnant of a burnt floor or the
burnt debris of a building. The excavation on Site Ce 43
(Uspa Uspa) in 2000 indicated that the round residential
buildings with a diameter of ca. 4.5meters constructed
from clay-plastered, straw-tempered adobe walls on a
foundation of sandstone formed honeycomb-like clusters
(Condarco et al. 2002: 2742).

The ceramic fragments littering the sites indicate


that the Formative Period settlements of the Paria Basin
can be assigned to the Wankarani complex. The vessels
were dominated by pots with various neck and mouth
forms (Plate I). Most pots had a mouth diameter ranging
between 15 to 30 cm or larger and a flaring rim. Some
fragments came from vessels with a curved, flaring neck
and a straight or rounded rim, and short-necked pots with
strongly outturned rim also occurred. Most pots were
provided with strap handles usually springing from the
rim. Although the majority of these vessels could be categorized as coarse ware, most bowls with a diameter of
1617 cm had a fine paste. The paste was fairly porous
and tempered with sand and, occasionally, with pebbles
or mica. Vessel surfaces were usually smoothed; traces of
burnishing could be noted on less than 10%, although this
rarely resulted in an evenly lustrous surface. The burnish
strokes left by the implement used for the vessels surface
treatment can be made out on some fragments. Rim fragments are often covered with engobe, which probably did
not extend to the entire vessel surface. About one-fourth
of the vessel fragments were fully oxidized during firing,
while the rest were partially oxidized and had a grayish
or blackish core accounting for 50 to 90% of the profile.
The vessels were fired to various shades of red (5YR 5/6,
2.5YR 6/6, 10R 5/6), brown (7.5YR 6/4, 2.5YR 6/4, 10R
5/6), and yellow (5YR 6/6), and the engobe too had a
reddish or brownish hue (10R 4/4, 10R 4/6, 10R 5/6).
The other typical find type of Formative Period sites
is represented by lithic artifacts and the debris from their
production. These were principally bifacial tools used in
farming (hoes with or without a tang and chaqui taqlla
points; Fig. III.2, Plate XV.ae), woodworking tools, and
household implements such as scrapers and borers, as
well as grinding stones (manos and metates) used during
food processing. Spears and projectile points used in
hunting were also quite frequent (Plate XIV). Five carved

Figure III.1 Overview, plan, and cross-section of Site Ce 83


30

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

Figure III.2 Chaqui taqlla point and hoe from Site


Ce83
animal heads were brought to light during the 2000 excavation at Site Ce 43 (Condarco et al. 2002: 3738). The
farming tools, the scrapers, and the projectile points were
predominantly fashioned from laminated, glassy andesite, with a smaller portion of the latter made from jasper,
limnic opal, and hydroquartzite. Grinding implements
were mainly produced from sandstone.
The abundance of stone artifacts among the surface finds indicates that the Wankarani population had
equal and unlimited access to the essential raw materials
needed for the production of various tools and implements (McAndrews 2005: 31, 115). However, the abundant occurrence of these implements on almost every
site does not necessarily mean that each settlement was
involved in their manufacture to the same extent. This
seems to be supported by the fact that although we found
tool manufacturing waste on several sites, lithic debris
represented a strikingly high proportion on Site Ce 83,
one of the largest settlements in the survey area, suggesting that it had functioned as a major tool production center and that there had perhaps been some sort of division

of labor among the Formative Period settlements of the


Paria Basin. A similar division of labor has been demonstrated for the La Joya/Beln region to the west, where
settlements specializing in copper processing and the
production of llama heads carved from sandstone were
identified (McAndrews 2005: 81).
We did not find exotic import articles among the surface finds collected on Formative Period sites; however,
several marine shells were recovered during the excavation of Site Ce 43 (Uspa Uspa) in 2000 (Condarco et al.
2002: 31, 44). The scarce occurrence or downright lack
of prestige goods in both the Paria Basin and the Ro
Kochi/La Joya/Beln region (McAndrews 2005: 77) suggests that there was no elite visible through its display
of status and rank in the Wankarani population: the finds
project the picture of a relatively egalitarian society.
A glance at the spatial distribution of Formative Period settlements in the Paria Basin reveals that the largest settlements (Sites Ce 46 and Ce 83) lie along the
middle reaches of the two major rivers flowing through
the surveyed area: one of these, Site Ce 46, is located at
the point where the Iruma and the Obrajes Rivers flow
into the Jacha Uma River and where the thermal spring
of Balneario Obrajes issues, in other words, in the area
where the resource catchment area was the greatest. Site
Ce 43 (Uspa Uspa), lying along the middle reaches of the
Iruma River, had a similar location. These three sites can
be regarded as the parent settlements of the Paria Basin,
an interpretation supported not only by their size and by
their central position in the respective river valley, but
also by the rivers themselves and the alluvial plains flanking them. These rivers provided a constant source of water, even if its amount fluctuated during the year, and the
fact that they left the mountains not too far away meant
that their gradient ensured that they would provide muchneeded water for the alluvial plains with the most fertile
soils, whose greatest extent was in the triangle formed by
the Jacha Uma and the Iruma Rivers.
Several sites represented daughter settlements. One
of these was Site Ce 54, lying 4 kilometers east of Site
Ce 46, on a terrace overlooking the section of the Paria
Basin where the river disappears in the sand of the altiplano and the river valley conducive to farming meets the
altiplano suited to herding. A similar relationship can be
assumed between Site Ce 83, a large settlement along the
middle reaches of the Khala Pata River, and Site 88, a
small settlement covering no more than 0.1 hectare, lying
5.5kilometers to its east, and between Sites Ce46 and Ce
98, the latter located to its south, on a terrace overlooking
the Huaylluma River. The difference in size and distance
between the former and the latter settlement pairs can
perhaps be explained by a more abundant and more constant supply of water in the case of the former; moreover,
the larger tracts of arable land ensured the sustenance of
larger and closer-lying settlements. A parent-daughter
relation can probably be posited between three sites in
31

Paria la Viexa

the upper, narrow valley of the Jacha Uma River, where


we located two smaller settlements, one upstream, the
other downstream, at roughly the same distance from
Site Ce 22: Site Ce 25 lay 2.4 kilometers away, while
Site Ce 111 roughly 3 kilometers away. The fairly small
extent of arable land in the narrow river valley flanked by
mountains and the lack of pastures was not conducive to
the emergence of larger settlements. A similar situation
seems likely in the Wila Jakko Valley where there was
only a single, 0.1 hectare large settlement (Site Ce 92).
No more than small patches of arable land can be found
on the terraces overlooking the river confined between
steep mountains and the closest areas with fertile soils
and pastures can be found northward, in the Pisakheri
area, lying beyond the survey area.
The location of Sites Ce 20 and Ce 72 appears to
have been influenced by other considerations. While the
Formative Period sites are all either directly located on a
riverbank (e.g., Ce 43, Ce 46, Ce 83) or a terrace flanking a river (e.g., Ce 22, Ce 25, Ce 54, Ce 92, Ce 98),
or near some source of water and the fertile alluvium,
Site Ce 20 was found far from the other sites, on the top
and by the foot of a solitary hill range rising above the
altiplano. Its location was undoubtedly motivated by its
strategic position and the fact that sites at the bases of
hill groups had access to fertile soils particularly favorable for arable farming as well as to soils conducive to
pasturing, an observation made during research in the La
Joya region (McAndrews 2005: 56). The Wankarani settlers may have been attracted to this location, lying over
2 kilometers from the rivers, by these two considerations.
The location of Site Ce 72 likewise differed from that of
the other sites: it lay in a strategic position beside one of
the passes through the mountains ringing the Paria Basin
in the west. Its location may also have been influenced by
the Jacha Uta Mayu Quebrada with plots of arable land
under the site and the large rock on the sites territory that
may have served as a waka (the role of the rock as a waka

Number of sites

10
8
6
4
2
0
<0.1 ha 0.1-0.5 ha 0.5-1 ha 1.5-2 ha

2-5 ha

Figure III.3 Formative Period settlement categories


inthe Paria Basin
32

is supported by the chullpas from the Late Intermediate


Period found in the same area).
When attempting to reconstruct the settlement hierarchy of the Formative Period in the Paria Basin based on
site sizes (Fig. III.3), we find that about one-half of the
identified sites does not exceed 0.1 hectare, with only a
few sites falling into the 0.10.5 hectares range or covering roughly 0.5 hectares. The other marked group of sites
is made up of sites with an area of 1.52 hectares, while
the uppermost tier of the Formative Period settlement hierarchy is represented by the sites exceeding 2 hectares
(Site Ce 20: 2.6 ha, Ce 46: 3.8 ha).5
The lowermost tier in the settlement hierarchy is
represented by the sites below 0.5 hectares, which can
be conceptualized as farmsteads or a farmstead groups
made up of a single house or a cluster of houses; the next
tier, represented by sites extending over 1.5 hectares or
more, can be seen as nucleated or dispersed villages,
among which the settlements over 2 hectares probably
functioned as central places and can be regarded as the
uppermost tier of the settlement hierarchy. Although the
size difference between the smallest and the largest settlements is quite substantial, it is a far cry from the size
differences of later periods with clearly ranked societies. In addition to the lack of prestige goods, this trait
again suggests that there were no major social differences
during the Formative Period in the Paria Basin and that
the periods communities lived on two settlement types,
namely farmsteads and villages, regardless of whether
they were nucleated or dispersed.
When trying to estimate the overall population size
of the Paria Basin during the Formative Period, one
good starting point is that the total occupation area of
the 16 identified sites added up to 15 hectares, of which
the occupation area of nucleated settlements accounted
for 13.8 hectares. Another reliable point is the observation made during the excavation of Site Ce 43 (Uspa
Uspa), namely that on at least a part of the Formative Period settlements, the residential buildings were closely
spaced to one another, forming honeycomb-like clusters.
Comparable house types and a similarly dense occupation was noted on the Wanka II (A.D. 13501450) settlements in the Mantaro Valley in highland Peru, where
the particularly well-preserved building remains enabled
reliable population estimates for the settlements. Taking
the minimum of 90 and the maximum of 150 occupants
per hectare calculated for that region (DAltroyHastorf
2001: 89), the Formative Period population of the Paria
Basin can be estimated at 13502250. This figure is only
valid for the heyday of the Wankarani complex, for the
period when perhaps all the sites identified during the
survey were simultaneously occupied, but it can hardly
be assumed for the first few centuries A.D. when, on the
testimony of the environmental studies, there was a series of extremely dry periods, which ultimately played a
role in the disintegration and decline of the Wankarani

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

complex (Abbott et al. 1997: 169170; McAndrews


2005: 117).
The transition between the disintegration of the Wankarani complex and the emergence of the Tiwanaku culture could be demonstrated at Jachakala in the La Joya
region through the successive phases of the ceramic sequence, which comprised pottery differing from Wankarani wares, local pre-Tiwanaku pottery (Nialupita
Phase), and Tiwanaku V style (Jachakala Phase) ceramics
(BermannEstevez 1993). The occurrence of Formative
Period and Tiwanaku pottery, as well as the possible transition (Site Ce 47) between the two was noted on three
sites in the surveyed area of the Paria Basin, suggesting
that the occupation of most Formative Period sites in the
Paria Basin had not extended into the Tiwanaku Period.

III.3. The Middle Horizon


The settlement patterns of the Middle Horizon in the
Paria Basin underwent a profound change compared to
the preceding Formative Period; this transformation was
undoubtedly influenced by the environmental changes at
the close of the Formative Period. This change is reflected
in the substantial decrease in the number of sites: compared to the 16 Formative Period sites, we only found 9
sites yielding pottery of the Middle Horizon (Map II), although these included settlements that had perhaps been
part of another, larger settlement. Thus, for example, Site
Ce 100, covering less than 0.1 hectare, lay immediately
by Site Ce 19, an extensive settlement disturbed by occupation features dating from after the Spanish Conquest,
while Site Ce 85, made up of round corrals and yielding
Tiwanaku and Inka ceramics, was located a few hundred
meters above Site Ce 86, a settlement extending along the
bank of the Khala Pata River that was similarly characterized by Tiwanaku and Inka wares. The latter two sites
were probably also part of the same settlement. In sum,
9
8

Number of sites

7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

<0.1 ha 0.1-0.5 ha 0.5-1 ha

Formative

1.5-2 ha

2-5 ha

>5 ha

Middle Horizon

Figure III.4 Changes in the settlement categories from


the Formative Period to the Middle Horizon

it would appear that the number of sites dating from the


Middle Horizon had halved compared to the Formative
Period (Fig. III.4).
Aside from the substantial decline in the number of
sites, the transformation is also apparent from the fact
that there was only a single site (Ce 47) where, in addition to Formative Period and Tiwanaku pottery, we also
found ceramics reflecting the transition from the Formative to the Tiwanaku style. If we have interpreted the
evidence correctly, this is the single settlement, which
remained occupied after the Formative Period. The other
sites yielding Tiwanaku wares were Sites Ce 46 and
Ce100, but we found no indication that the settlements
had been occupied continuously, without a break. With
the exception of these three sites, all other Middle Horizon sites were established in locations that had not been
occupied during the Formative Period and, more importantly, in contrast to the major Formative Period settlements, the two most significant sites (Ce 10 and Ce 86)
did not lie along the middle section of the rivers flowing
through the Paria Basin, but at the strategic points where
the basins two main rivers left the mountains and entered
the altiplano. Despite their similar locations, the two sites
in question exhibited quite different traits. Site Ce 10,
whose stone structures lay on three terraces overlooking
the Jacha Uma River, was characterized by a dense surface scatter of artifacts, even though it covered no more
than 2 hectares, while Site Ce 86, extending linearly
along the bank of the Khala Pata River, was a dispersed
settlement covering over 5 hectares.6
In view of their location, their size, and the high number of artifacts collected during the survey, the above two
sites can be regarded as the most significant Middle Horizon settlements in the Paria Basin. Site Ce 99, made up
of three round structures, where we collected a handful
of Tiwanaku sherds (less than one sherd/m2), lay opposite these two sites, under the huge, probably man-modified rock7 towering above the Huaylluma Valley. This
site probably had a special, ritual-ceremonial role. Site
Ce 57, lying some 400 meters from the Inka imperial
road leading to Paria, is another noteworthy site because
it raises the possibility that the road had been in use already during the Tiwanaku Period and that similarly to its
later function during the Late Horizon, it connected the
capital with the Cochabamba Valley.
The assessment of the pottery from the Middle Horizon sites identified in the Paria Basin indicated that with
the exception of Site Ce 47, yielding pottery representing the transition from the Formative Period, the ceramics all represented Tiwanaku wares and that ceramic
styles such as Puqui, Cabuza, and Yura or Huruquilla,
distributed in the basin of Lake Poop and in the mountain region to its east and west, are lacking (Lecoq 1997;
1999; 2003; LecoqCspedes 1997; Michel 2008).
This would suggest that the Paria Basin lay beyond the
northern and western boundary of the distribution of
33

Paria la Viexa

these ceramic styles, similarly to the La Joya region,


where the Formative Period was followed by the local Nialupita Phase, which was in turn succeeded by
the Jachakala Phase, characterized by ceramics in the
Tiwanaku V style (McAndrews 2005: 35). Vessel fragments typical for the Tiwanaku V Period were recovered from the Middle Horizon sites of the Paria Basin:
keros, flaring-sided bowls (tazns) and jugs, as well as
punctate-necklace vessels, a particularly common and
widespread ware on highland and non-altiplano sites
(Plate II). Tiwanaku style vessels were usually covered with an engobe of various shades of red (10R 4/6,
10R 5/6) and were decorated with geometric patterns
and wavy lines in red, black and white. The paste of
these vessels was very fine, containing no other obvious
temper than mica, and the vessels include both fully and
partially oxidized pieces, the latter with a black core, in
equal proportion.
In sum, we may say that the total occupation area of
the Middle Horizon sites was no more than about twothirds of the area covered by the sites of the Formative
Period. Given that the occupation intensity of the sites
dating from the Middle Horizon was far below that of
the Formative settlements, we may safely assert that the
population of the Paria Basin during the Middle Horizon
declined substantially compared to the preceding Formative Period. This situation is far from unique: in the
Ro Kochi/La Joya/Beln region, for example, the population in the study area may have decreased by over 50%
after the abandonment of Wankarani sites (McAndrews
2005: 109).
This duality, namely the simultaneous decrease in
the number of sites and the overall population decline in
the Paria Basin, and the location of the two largest sites
(Ce10 and Ce 86) at the basins two key strategic points
is consistent with the current evidence on the Tiwanaku
expansion strategy. Investigations in the areas north of
the capital revealed that in the regions between the core
area and the provinces, every Tiwanaku site larger than
5hectares lay along the periods roads, while the smaller
ones were either located on a road or near a permanent
source of water (Stanish 2003: 712).
Sites Ce 10, Ce 86, and Ce 57 can be regarded as settlements located on the roads leading through the Paria
Basin. The first two were located at strategic points along
the Jacha Uma and the Khala Pata Rivers, in a place
where they acted as gateways between the altiplano and
the mountains, as well as the Cochabamba Valley lying
beyond, the single direct enclave of the Tiwanaku state
southeast of the Titicaca Basin (Stanish 2003: 191),
which apparently played a similarly important role in
terms of producing agricultural goods as at the time of
the Inka state (GyarmatiVarga 1999; Wachtel 1982). If
this was indeed the case, it confirms that the secure and
continuous maintenance of contact with the distant province was a major priority for the Tiwanaku state and thus
34

there were settlements and various installations along the


roads leading there, which ensured and secured the link
with the valley.
We know that Site Ce 112, lying near Site Ce 10, was
one of the tampus along the Inka Period road between
Paria and the Cochabamba Valley, and that the main
role of the road was to ensure the flow of goods from
the valley to empires heartland. The remarkably similar
location of the two sites would suggest that Site Ce 10
lay along a Tiwanaku Period road and that its role was
to control the traffic on that road. While conducting the
survey, we were told that there was an old road along the
Khala Pata River, suggesting that Site Ce 86 lying along
the river had a similar role as Site Ce 10. It is possible
that the corrals (Site Ce 85) found in the sites immediate
vicinity, but by the piedmont with suitable pastures, were
constructed for the llamas transporting the goods.
The settlement history data from the Paria Basin and
the Ro Kochi/La Joya/Beln region thus indicate that
similarly to the altiplano region south of the Titicaca Basin, there was a significantly smaller Tiwanaku presence
compared to the occupation during the preceding Formative Period and the ensuing Late Intermediate Period. At
the same time, there were Tiwanaku settlements in the
key locations ensuring contact between the Tiwanaku
heartland and the enclave in the Cochabamba Valley.

III.4. The Late Intermediate Period


The Late Intermediate Period saw profound changes in
the settlement pattern of the Paria Basin. Both major Tiwanaku settlements occupied during the Middle Horizon
were abandoned, similarly as in the Titicaca Basin, where
Tiwanaku sites larger than 2.5 hectares were no longer
occupied, indicating a sweeping reorganization of the
regions political landscape (Stanish 2003: 253), and a
higher number of settlements than ever before were established.8 Over 40% of the settlements identified during
the survey, 46 sites in all, yielded Late Intermediate Period material (Map III) and 30 of these sites yielded Late
Intermediate Period finds only. The artifacts of two or
more different periods were found at the other 16 sites.
The smallest among these sites yielded no more than
a handful of finds (e.g., a broken vessel), while the largest
site, whose extent could be precisely measured, covered
an area of 6.4 hectares. Apart from this site, we identified
three larger sites (Site Ce 19: 14.3 ha, Ce 46: 25.5ha, and
Ce 63: 37.2 ha) occupied during several periods, which,
however, were heavily damaged by modern intrusions.
Although the exact extent of the Late Intermediate Period occupation could not be accurately determined, it
exceeded 5 hectares in all three cases. The fifteen sites
under 0.1 hectare accounted for one-third of the Late Intermediate Period sites, while the eleven sites falling into
the 0.10.5 hectares range represent 24% of the identified

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

16

Number of sites

14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
<0.1 ha

0.1-0.5 ha 0.5-1 ha

Middle Horizon

1-5 ha

>5 ha

Late Intermediate Period

Figure III.5 Changes in the settlement categories from


the Middle Horizon to the Late Intermediate Period
sites, meaning that over one-half of the Late Intermediate Period settlements in Paria were smaller than 0.5
hectares. Together with the six 0.51 hectares large sites,
the settlements covering less than 1 hectare account for
almost 70% of the Late Intermediate Period sites. Of the
remaining 30%, ten sites fall into the 15 hectares range
and no more than four sites exceed 5 hectares (the latter
representing 9% of the identified sites; Fig. III.5). This
corresponds to the observations made in the region of
Lake Titicaca, where the average settlement size during
the Altiplano Period (corresponding to the Late Intermediate Period) rarely exceeded 0.5 hectares (Stanish 2003:
216).
A contrary tendency can be noted in terms of settlement size: sites below 1 hectare account for roughly 15
20% of the total occupation area, estimated at a minimum
of 52 hectares.9 One remarkable change is the 3.5-fold
increase in the total occupation area of Late Intermediate
Period sites compared to the preceding period.
A closer look at the surface density and distribution
of the finds reveals that the surface density is low and that
the distribution of artifacts is uneven, showing a concentration in a few spots only on some sites. The find density
did not exceed 10 artifacts/m2 on over 90% of the sites,
with 40% of the identified sites having a surface find density of less than 1 artifact/m2, and even sites with higher
densities (150 to 100 artifacts/m2) were settlements
occupied during several periods where the surface find
density was higher owing to the presence of Formative
Period artifacts (Sites Ce 46, Ce 72, and Ce 83). One of
the few exceptions was Site Ce 41, which was the largest
among all the Late Intermediate Period sites and which
also had a high surface find density (120 artifacts/m2).
The proportion of decorated wares was much higher in
the material collected at this site than elsewhere, suggesting that this settlement played an exceedingly important
role during the Late Intermediate Period, an observation

supported also by its location in the valley at a vantage


point on the plateau enclosed by the Jacha Uma River
and gullies, providing easy control of the river valley.
Assigned into five categories based on their sizes, the
Late Intermediate Period sites outline a three- or four-tier
settlement hierarchy. Small sites under 1 hectare with a
low surface artifact density or with find concentrations
indicating possible house locations can probably be interpreted as farmsteads occupied by one or two families, or
as farmstead clusters of several families of the type that
still characterize the settlement pattern of the altiplano
(Fig. III.6). The next tier in the hierarchy is represented
by the well-definable villages below 5 hectares (see, e.g.,
Site Ce 51: 3.3 ha, Ce 53: 2.3 ha, Ce 94: 1.3 ha), usually located along rivers. The uppermost tier comprises
the settlements extending over 5 hectares that played the
leading role during the Late Intermediate Period in the
Paria Basin.
While the size of the Late Intermediate Period sites
in the Paria Basin varies considerably, the difference between the smallest and the largest sites does not differ by
order of magnitude from the one in the Formative Period
and the Middle Horizon. Neither are there any significant
differences in the quantity and quality of surface finds;
remains of buildings indicating marked social differences
are likewise lacking. Taken together, these outline a less
ranked society without a visibly dominant elite, which
can best be described as a simple chiefdom with a minimal political centralization.
The spatial distribution of the sites shows that about
one-half of the settlements lay by rivers providing a constant water supply. Most of these sites, accounting for
about one-third of all the Late Intermediate Period sites,
are located along the section of the Jacha Uma/Paria and
Iruma Rivers where there was an abundance of good
quality alluvial, irrigable soils in the settlements immediate vicinity. Although Late Intermediate Period sites
can be found on both banks of the mentioned rivers along
this stretch, the larger, more extensive settlements all lay
some 5070 meters above the river, on ridges flanked by
steep gullies.

Figure III.6 Farmstead at Anocariri, Cercado Province,


Department of Oruro
35

Paria la Viexa

Aside from Site Ce 41, mentioned above, another site


(Ce 51) lying 4 kilometers to its west occupied a similar
position above the hot springs of Balneario Obrajes at
the confluence of the Jacha Uma, Iruma, and Huaylluma
Rivers (admittedly, the settlement was more easily accessible from the southern and southwestern side). Similarly
to Site Ce 41, this settlement covered an area of 6.4 hectares. Whilst the sites eastern and northeastern sections
(3.1 ha) were occupied by storehouses of the Inka Period,
the other areas that were clearly defined by the surface
finds indicated occupation during the Late Intermediate
Period. Located 1.5 kilometers west of this site was Site
Ce 53 extending over 2.3 hectares, perched atop the ridge
flanking the Paria River, whose approach was impeded
from all directions by steep hillsides.
In contrast to these three sites, Site Ce 46 was located
by the hot springs of Balneario Obrajes at the confluence
of the Huaylluma River with the Jacha Uma and Iruma
Rivers. The choice of location was undoubtedly chosen
with a view to the availability of hot waters in addition
to the constant supply of water. Owing to its strategic
position, the site was continuously occupied from the
Formative Period to the Late Horizon, and it eventually
grew into one of the largest settlements of the Paria Basin (25.5 ha). The settlements occupation conformed to
the changes in the valleys settlement patterns: it was one
of the basins largest settlements during the Formative
Period. In contrast, Tiwanaku material was only discovered over a small part of the settlement. The settlement
reached its greatest extent during the Late Intermediate
Period, sinking into insignificance during the Late Horizon owing to the proximity of Paria. The extent of the
Late Intermediate Period settlement can no longer be accurately determined owing to the baths and the chapel
built by the hot springs.
The sites lying along the Khala Pata River, the other
major watercourse flowing in the study area, make up
another major group of the riverine Late Intermediate
Period settlements. Their number and extent, however,
remain far below those of the settlements along the Jacha
Uma/Paria, Huaylluma, and Iruma Rivers, no doubt owing to the considerably lower availability of water and
good soils along the river. The Late Intermediate Period
sites along the upper reaches of the Jacha Uma and Wila
Jakko Rivers similarly dot the river banks; however, the
occupants of the three small settlements along the former
could only cultivate the small parcels along the narrow
river valley, while the larger settlements on the two sides
of the Wila Jakko River were able to exploit the piedmont
area north of the river.
In addition to the above, we also identified one other
Late Intermediate Period site lying by a permanent watercourse. The finds of Site Ce 63, located by a stream
issuing from a thermal spring, lay scattered over an area
of 37.2 hectares. However, the construction of the building by the thermal spring and of the road leading from
36

Oruro to Cochabamba running across the settlement had


disturbed the site to the extent that its original size can
no longer be determined. The single starting point for the
size of the site with a fairly low surface find density (1
10 artifacts/m2) is the 0.8 hectares large area west of the
thermal spring where we noted an exceedingly high concentration of various lithics, principally grinding stones,
manos, and hoes, alongside projectile points and bola
stones. This concentration is the perhaps best indication
of the settlements one-time location.
In sum, a roughly similar proportion of the Late Intermediate Period sites of the Paria Basin lie along constant
watercourses or no more than one kilometer away from a
source of water, the latter usually sited beside a quebrada
providing a seasonal water supply. One of these is Site
Ce 72 occupied through several periods, located around a
huge rock serving as a waka at the point where the Jacha
Uta Mayu Quebrada with fields suitable for arable farming
at its base pierces the piedmont flanking the Paria Basin.
Although there is no significant difference between the
number of sites near permanent watercourses and those
lying farther away, the latter are considerably smaller and
do not exceed 1 hectare, the single exception being Site
Ce 19 which covers 14.3 hectares and is thus one of the
largest in the study area. While the exact one-time size of
this site cannot be determined owing to the Colonial and/
or Republican buildings erected over it, the settlement
certainly covered a sizeable area of several hectares. This
large size is all the more remarkable because the settlement lay farther from water; it seems likely that its siting
was influenced by the range of hills extending on the sites
western side, which rose above the altiplano and which
probably also influenced the location of Site Ce 20, a Formative settlement. Even considering the larger size of Site
Ce 19, the total occupation area of the settlements lying
farther from a constant source of water was no more than
20 to 25% of the sites located directly on the waterfront.
There is a striking change in the regional distribution
of Late Intermediate Period sites compared to earlier
periods when most settlements lay beside a permanent
watercourse (Formative Period) or on the peripheral, but
nonetheless strategically important points of the Paria
Basin (Middle Horizon), leaving the greater part of the
basins interior unoccupied. In contrast, the number and
size of the Late Intermediate Period settlements multiplied, and in addition to the dense occupation of the river
valleys, settlements were also established on the altiplano
lying farther from permanent watercourses, resulting in
the dispersed settlement pattern still characterizing the
altiplano today. Coupled with the large-scale increase in
the number of settlements and their total occupation area
is a striking decline in the surface find density compared
to the Formative Period, suggesting that settlements were
less built-up and/or occupied more briefly. At the same
time, there are no major differences compared to the
Middle Horizon.

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

It would appear that there was a sizeable population


growth in the Paria Basin after the Middle Horizon, resulting in the full exploitation of the fertile soils along the
rivers and, later, of the areas lying farther from river valleys. The latter no doubt involved some changes in subsistence strategies. While the larger peasant communities
continued to cultivate the alluvial soils in the river valleys
and the greater part of the periods population lived on
waterfront settlements judging from the occupation distribution of the sites (the sites dotting the rivers, which
included the most extensive settlements, account for
7580% of the Late Intermediate Period sites), a mixed
economy based on fallow farming and herding was practiced on the altiplano. In contrast, an economy based on
rain-fed agriculture practiced on less fertile soils could
only be pursued on dispersed and perhaps only seasonally occupied farmstead-like settlements.
This settlement pattern, much more dispersed than
in earlier periods, corresponds to the Late Intermediate
Period patterns observed in neighboring regions such as
the Titicaca Basin (Albarracin Jordan 1996: 314; Stanish
2003: 1215, 216). The emergence of this settlement system involved the appearance of pukaras, fortified settlements protected by walls. Villages of this type are known
from several areas in the Central and Southern Andes,
from the period of Pan-Andean balkanization following the disintegration of the large state formations of the
Middle Horizon (Stanish 2003: 221). Their appearance
can be attributed to the growing conflicts between ethnic
groups (or perhaps even within an ethnic group), and they
can be regarded as the most tangible evidence of these
conflicts. Fortified settlements of this type are known from
the Central Peruvian mountains (ArellanoMatos Mendieta 2007: 22; DAltroyHastorf, 2001: 121123), the Titicaca Basin (Albarracin Jordan 1996: 315; Arkush 2008;
2011; Hyslop 1977; Stanish 2003: 1415), to the south

of Lake Titicaca (Prssinen 2005: 104), from the Poop


Basin (Michel Lpez 2008: 104), and from the Intersalar
(Lecoq 1997: 68) and Lipez regions (NielsenBerberin
2008: 153). While pukaras were widespread during the
Late Intermediate Period, their importance varied from region to region. In the Intersalar region investigated by Lecoq, most sites were large, defended villages established
on peaks or on hilltops near streams (Lecoq 1997: 68),
while most of the settlements in other regions such as the
Tiwanaku Valley and the Caquiaviri area were open villages. The handful of fortified settlements in the latter two
regions was only occupied seasonally (Albarracin Jordan
1996; Prssinen 2005: 103104). At the same time, about
100 pukaras were identified in the 6,800 km2 large zone
of the Colla territory (Arkush 2011: 71)
Fortified settlements of this type are lacking in our
study region:10 although three settlements, principally
Site Ce 41, were located in a well-defendable location
on the ridge flanking the southern bank of the Jacha Uma
River, no traces of any defense works or walls around
the settlement could be identified. The survey in the La
Joya region yielded similar results: only two sites were
identified in defendable locations, neither of which had
any apparent defenses. However, compared to the similar settlements of the Paria Basin, these two sites were
quite small, probably functioning as temporary refuges
(McAndrews 2005: 95).
In contrast to defended settlements, chullpas, the other
typical structures of Late Intermediate Period sites, are
well represented in the Paria Basin. The best preserved
chullpas were observed on Site Ce 19 (Fig. III.7) of the
three settlements featuring constructions of this type. The
largest of the four rectangular adobe chullpas roofed with
a false dome (Fig. III.8) at the northeastern edge of the
settlement measured 8.2 m by 2.25 m, and had a maximum height of 3.1 m and a wall thickness of 0.5 m. The

Figure III.7 Chullpas at Site


Ce 19
37

Paria la Viexa

Figure III.8 Ceiling of a chullpa at Site Ce 19


chullpas had a 0.5 m wide entrance oriented toward the
east. Their location was most likely determined by the
solitary range of hills rising above the altiplano, which
had probably also influenced the siting of the settlement.
The large rock perhaps functioning as a waka in the middle of Site Ce 72 presumably played a similar role. One
chullpa survived in a good state of preservation at the
latter site, another had a foundation of clay and stone, and
four additional chullpas had been erected on a nearby hill
slope. The remains of a strongly decayed chullpa were
identified on Site Ce 33, the third settlement with architectural remains of this type.
The clay soil marks observed on the northern edge of
Site Ce 41 suggested that chullpas had probably stood
on other sites too. We investigated one of these patches
with a 2 m by 2 m test pit (Fig. III.9) which we later
enlarged to 3 m by 3 m.11 A hard layer of adobe debris
lay 5cm under the modern surface, followed by an ashy
layer some 78 cm lower. The edge of the ashy layer
graded into a quarter-circle-shaped ditch-like depression
filled with adobe-like imprints resembling the uppermost
layer in the southwestern part of the test pit. A gray, compact, cracked fill was noted in the southwestern part of
the test pit beyond the curved depression, underneath
which we found a very loose fill down to the virgin soil
which lay at a depth of 15 cm. Human bones, principally
long bones, indicating a secondary burial lay 515 cm
below the modern surface in the area bounded by the
curved depression by the northern wall of the test pit. We
38

interpreted the structure uncovered in the test pit as representing the remains of a Late Intermediate Period chullpa
with round or elliptical groundplan: the ditch-like depression was the bedding trench, while the sloping grayish
layer outside it probably came from the debris and/or the
mortar. The clay patches beside the investigated building
were most likely the remains of similar chullpas. These
mortuary buildings may have been erected on the settlements northern edge facing the Jacha Uma River, where
they were clearly visible from the surrounding area, confirming the suggestion that chullpas did not simply serve
as mortuary structures, but also as boundary markers, justifying the populations claim to a particular area through
the ancestors buried in the mortuary structures.
The foundations of sixteen round structures were
identified on the edge of Site Ce 51 (Fig. III.10) overlooking the valley of the Jacha Uma/Paria River, i.e.,
in a roughly similar location. Although these structures
formed a continuation of the settlements Inka Period
storehouses, both their material and their size differed
from the storehouse foundations (they were twice as
large); moreover, these foundations lay beyond the wall
enclosing the Inka storehouses in the west and south, and
they lay in an area whose surface finds were almost exclusively made up of Late Intermediate Period pottery.
In view of the above, they can hardly be interpreted as
buildings erected in the Late Horizon, but should rather
be seen as the foundations of Late Intermediate Period
structures.
The form and location of these foundations raised the
possibility that the buildings in question were chullpas
erected at the edge of the settlement overlooking the altiplano, although an interpretation that they represented a
typical residential building of the Central and Southern
Andes cannot be rejected out of hand either. We therefore
decided to excavate the easternmost round foundation by
opening a 6 m by 6 m trench (Surface II, Structure 2)12
divided into four 3 m by 3 m squares. The foundation

Figure III.9 Remains of the foundation of an assumed


chullpa, Site Ce 41

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

Figure III.10 Plan of Site Ce 51

appeared as a yellowish-red ring (5YR 4/6, 5YR 7/6)


measuring roughly 5.2 m across. This clay ring represented the remains of the one-time buildings wall (Fig.
III.11); after clearing the area, the schist blocks of the
buildings foundation became visible. A few millimeters
thick brown/gray layer was noted inside the ring, underneath which we uncovered a 12 mm thick ashy layer
mixed with organic remains, from which we took samples for flotation. Underlying the ashy layer inside the
ring was a very compact, homogenous, rough-grained,
ochre-yellow sand; the other part of the ring consisted of
similar material, but mixed with tiny pebbles, containing
also larger stones and ashy stripes. This layer extended
down to the virgin soil, lying 13 cm from the modern
surface. Following the clearing of the buildings interior,
we found that the walls had been erected on a circular
foundation of 10 cm high stone slabs laid in a bedding
of clay mixed with smaller stones. Only one course of
slabs had been placed on the ground, which formed the
4045cm wide foundation of the building.
No finds were recovered from the investigated area.
The single archaeological feature was a roughly 120cm
by 50 cm large pit filled with ash, charcoal and river
stones by the buildings southern side, whose greater
part fell outside the building, although two burnt stones
were recovered from the walls inner side. This feature
was probably a firing pit dug by the wall. In contrast to
the lack of any pottery, bone or lithic finds, the samples
taken from the ashy layer contained a substantial amount

of plant remains compared to the botanical remains in the


samples taken from the settlements Inka Period storehouse (Surface I, Structure 1).13 Almost all of the 367 carbonized and 76 uncarbonized seeds recovered from Surfaces I and II at Site Ce 51 originated from the latter and
represent a broad spectrum of plants (e.g., Amaranthus
sp., cf. Opuntia soehrensii, Chenopodium spp., Atriplex
sp., cf. Juncus spp., cf. Astragalus sp., cf. Malvastrum
sp., and Portulaca sp.; see the detailed analysis of the
macrobotanical remains in Chapter VIII). The Chenopodium, Amaranthus, and cf. Opuntia seeds are especially
noteworthy because they are utilized as food or as food/
beverage/textile dyes or colorants. All thrive at the elevation of the site; in contrast, there was a striking lack of
species cultivated at lower elevations such as maize, chili
pepper, and squash.
Despite the abundant archaeobotanical material, the
lack of any artifacts made the determination of the buildings function impossible. Even though the two buildings
(Structures BM2BM3; see Chapter IV.2.2) uncovered
inside a large Inka structure (Structure BM) at Paria resembled this structure in terms of size, form, and foundation, and the finds from Structure BM2 at Paria and
the observations made during its investigation reflected
its residential function beyond any doubt, the lack of any
utilitarian artifacts in Structure 2 of Site Ce 51 challenges
any interpretation as a residential building. Its location
at the edge of the settlement where the sixteen round
structures were even more visible from every point in the
39

Paria la Viexa

Figure III.11 Structure 2 after


excavation, Site Ce 51

basin than the chullpas of Site Ce 41 suggests that it


had been a mortuary tower, even though traces of a possible burial were also lacking. The plant remains from its
interior suggest that the structure may have had a storage
function, similarly to the tower on the plaza of Laqaya
in Lipez where burnt quinoa packed into sacks had been
found in situ (NielsenBerberin 2008: 156). Lecoq ascribed a similar function to the 34 meters large rectangular and round towers dating from the A.D. 12th century
in the Intersalar region, standing either as solitary structures or in groups, in which plant remains such as quinoa
grains had been found (Lecoq 1997: 68).
In addition to the chullpas, the typical structure of the
Late Intermediate Period, the surface pottery finds collected on the sites identified during the survey provided
the other chronological anchor for dating the settlements.
The evidence from the Paria Basin is consistent with the
observations made by Albarracin Jordan on the southern
fringes of the Lake Titicaca Basin, namely that polychrome ceramics disappeared and none of the earlier typical Tiwanaku forms (kero, tazn, incensario) survived
into the Late Intermediate Period vessel sets. At the same
time, the periods household wares resemble Tiwanaku
vessels, while fine wares are dominated by black painted
bowls (Albarracin Jordan 1996: 311, 314).
The surface pottery finds could be assigned to two
major categories: plainware used for preparing and storing food and liquids, and vessels used for serving and
consuming food and beverages. The former were made
from medium- and rough-grained fluvial sandy clay
(with an average grain size of 175200 m and 3001300
m). The non-plastic rounded components of sedimentary origin account for 3035% of the paste. Two main
pastes could be distinguished: the first with a non-plastic
40

component made up of fine phyllite, argillite, and their


mineral fragments (with a dominant grain size under 30
m), the second characterized by the presence of argillitesiltstone and sandstone (corresponding to petrographic
groups II/A and II/B; see Chapter V). The grains embedded in the matrix are natural components of the clays
used for potting and thus the raw material of this category
of ceramic finds can be regarded as a natural sediment.
Afew pieces were tempered with white pebbles.
The paste of the ceramic fragments assigned to this
category is rather heterogeneous, suggesting that the potters did not devote much care to preparing their clays.
Even so, the paste of most pottery sherds is quite compact. The surface treatment usually meant smoothing; a
slip was not applied. The color of the vessel interior and
exterior differs, with hues ranging from yellow, orange,
red and brown, and their combination (5YR 6/4, 2.5YR
5/4, 2.5YR 5/6, 2.5YR 6/6, 7.5YR 6/4), as well as the
occasional gray colored fragments. Pottery was predominantly fired in an oxidizing atmosphere; the section of
the pottery fragments reveals that the vessels had been
incompletely fired because the cores color differed from
the exterior and interior color to varying extents, with
the proportion of well-fired pieces and vessels with a
gray core accounting for 70 to 80% of the section being very low. The imperfect firing of the vessels is reflected also by the gray mottling on the vessel surfaces.
The diagnostic vessel forms are pots and pitchers with a
wall thickness of 48 mm, strongly outcurving neck, and
a rounded, unthickened rim, although straight rims are
also encountered (Plate III). The fragments indicate that
vessel handles, most often strap handles (2550 mm by
714 mm), spring from the rim. There are a few round
sectioned handles too. Although the pottery fragments

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

collected during the surveys were highly fragmented,


the analogies suggest that the majority of the vessels in
this group came from round-based pots, while the other
part from flat-based jugs.The latter can be divided into
two main groups: the vessels in the first group have an
even, convex wall above the base, while the other group
is made up of vessels with a ring-like base for added stability, above which the vessel wall is initially straight and
gradually flares into a convex or concave form. Vessels
were decorated with 23 cm wide, slightly translucent or
brown bands, or the occasional circle.
The other typical group of pottery on Late Intermediate Period sites is made up of various bowl types with
black on red painted designs (Plate IV). The paste of
these vessels is identical with that of the household pottery (petrograpic groups II/A and II/B; see Chapter V),
although a third paste type could also be distinguished,
characterized by a dominance of more coarse-grained
sandstone (with grain sizes between 80 and 120 m)
among the non-plastic components (petrographic group
II/C; see Chapter V). The fabric is compact, and fine
and coarse vessels are represented in equal proportion.
Their color is dominated by yellowish and reddish hues
of brown (2.5YR 4/4, 2.5YR 5/4). The pottery sections
indicate that these vessels were generally evenly fired:
most sherd profiles are fired throughout, while the remaining pieces have a gray core accounting for 5080%
of the section. About three-quarters of the ceramic fragments assigned to this group have a burnished surface,
the rest are smoothed. Roughly 60% of the painted bowls
have a red-slipped interior (the proportion of vessels
with a slip on the exterior is much lower, around 50%).
These vessels were less strongly burnished than the Late
Horizon wares: the slip is thinner and uneven (the burnish strokes can often be made out), less lustrous, and
cracked. Represented in differing proportions, the bowls
in this group have a diameter of 1118 cm and can be
divided into four main types. Most common are bowls
with flaring side with a concave curve under the rim. The
type with slightly curved, convex profile is less frequent
and a few pieces with an S profile also occur. Bowl rims
are either thinned, thickened, or straight, in roughly the
same proportion, and most are peaked. They are decorated with painted geometric motifs on the rim interior
and, in a few cases, on the exterior. The decorated fragments in the material we collected, accounting for about
one-half of the decorated bowls, usually have a double or
triple wavy line encircling the vessel below the rim and a
straight horizontal line underneath. This ornamental style
could be principally noted in the ceramics from Sites
Ce 41 and Ce 51. Other ornamental motifs such as antithetic semicircles combined with wavy lines on the rim
are rare, representing no more than 46% of the painted
patterns. Fragments of this type have only been found
on Site Ce11. Designs of interlocking wavy lines combined with a straight line below them mostly occur on the

vessel fragments from Site 63; bowl fragments bearing a


design of painted dots were collected on Sites Ce 41 and
Ce 53, the former yielding also a bowl fragment adorned
with concentric circles.
In addition to the pottery wares typical for the Late
Intermediate Period, the vessel fragments included also
bowl and pitcher types whose paste, finish, and ornamentation differ from the typical Late Intermediate
Period ceramics of the Paria Basin. The archaeometric
analyses indicated that disregarding a few Inka fragments the paste of a pitcher fragment with a strap handle (PlateIV.p) differs from the other pottery samples and
that raw materials with similar geochemical properties do
not occur in the study area (petrographic group III; see
Chapter V.3.3). This in itself indicates that the vessel in
question was an import, which is also supported by its
coarse-grained paste, poor in iron, containing metamorphic rock among the non-plastic components. This vessel
was fired at a higher temperature (maximum 850950C)
in a predominantly oxidizing atmosphere. In contrast to
the ceramics from the Late Intermediate Period sites in
the Paria Basin, this vessel is fired to a yellowish-pinkish color throughout. The black painted geometric motifs adorning the sherd suggest that the vessel originated
from the Cochabamba or Potos mountain region east of
the altiplano, or perhaps from the Intersalar region. A few
other fragments were probably imports from the same
region in view of their paste, their reddish-brown color,
and the black geometric decoration covering both sides
(PlateV.lo). Some pieces have their best parallels among
the finds from the largest Late Intermediate Period site
in the Cochabamba Valley. However, the fragments in
question represent a statistically negligible portion in the
material from the Late Intermediate Period sites of the
Paria Basin; virtually all of the decorated wares are made
up of bowls adorned with wavy lines. Seeing that this
pottery can doubtless be equated with the typical pottery
style of the Late Intermediate Period settlements in the
Paria Basin, the use of this pottery can be linked to the
Sora who inhabited the region during this period. At the
same time, it is still open to debate whether the ceramics
in question can be exclusively associated with this ethnic
group, seeing that the use of bowls decorated with black
linear patterns on a red slipped base was widespread in
the Southern and Central Andes.
The northernmost occurrence of comparable pottery
wares lies in the northwestern part of the Lake Titicaca
Basin. Marion Tschopik described the Sillustani Brown
on Cream ware as characterized by unslipped vessels
decorated with painted linear designs and the Sillustani
Black on Red pottery style as ceramics painted with linear patterns on a red slipped base, which he associated
with the Colla and dated to the pre-Inka period in the lack
of any Inka stylistic elements (Tschopik 1946: 27 Figs
11, 12, 51). Frye and de la Vega published pottery recalling the early Pacaje style from the JuliPomata and the
41

Paria la Viexa

ChucuitoCutinbo regions on the western shores of Lake


Titicaca (Fryede la Vega, 2005: 176, Fig.11.2). Portugal
Ortz (1988) distinguished an Early Pacaje style, differing from both Tiwanaku and InkaPacaje wares. Later,
Albarracin Jordan discovered 440 sites yielding pottery
of this type in the Lower Tiwanaku Valley on the southwestern littoral of Lake Titicaca. Dated to the A.D. 12th
century, this pottery is characterized by bowls covered
with a burnished slip decorated with curvilinear designs,
dots, triangles and circles, as well as the occasional single
or double wavy line and llama figures (Albarracin Jordan
1996: 311314). Prssinen collected comparable ceramic
fragments at Pucarpata in the southern Pacaje region, in
part as surface material, and in part from the buildings
whose radiocarbon dates fell between the late 12th and
the late 14th centuries (Prssinen 2005: 115118, Figs
6061).
The Black on Red Tradition style group has been
documented on the Pacific coast, from southern Peru to
the Salado River in Region II of Chile (Romero Guevara
2002). The bowls assigned to the Chilpe style in the Arica
area are either slipped or unslipped and decorated with
spirals, lines combined with triangles, crosses, semi-circles, and sinuous lines on the rim (Dauelsberg 1995
[1959]: 48). Niemeyer and Schiappacasse (1981) correlated the Chilpe style in northern Chile with the Inka
Period and associated it with a late ethnic group, while
Romero Guevara dated it to the Arica II Period beginning
around A.D. 1200 based on his own research in the Lluta
Valley (Romero Guevara 2002). Trimborn found Chilpe
pottery in the Sama Valley of southern Peru; however,
this pottery is mentioned together with Late Horizon
wares and thus it remains uncertain whether the Chilpe
style made its appearance already during the Late Intermediate Period in this region (Trimborn et al. 1975: 48,
Plano 3C). The Chilpe-Caranga style was distinguished
on the basis of the population living on the Bolivian altiplano adjacent to northern Chile and the comparable Late
Intermediate Period ceramics found in the region (Michel
2001).
In view of its distribution, Michel linked the Late Intermediate Period ceramic style in the southern Poop
Basin to the Quillaca-Azanaque confederation (Michel 2008: 141) and regarded the early Quillaca wares
dated between A.D. 900 and 1000 as a continuation of
the Tiwanaku style (Michel 2008: 139). The bowls with
slightly incurving sides and the tazn whose rim form
resembles Tiwanaku pottery are decorated with double
and, more often, triple wavy lines under the interior rim.
These linear motifs are usually arranged in a horizontal
design and even the occasional vertical lines are crossed
by horizontal ones. Pottery in the Quillaca style, dated
roughly between A.D. 1000 and 1460, is less carefully
made, usually unslipped, and fired to various shades of
red and brown. While earlier vessel forms survived into
this period, the most dominant form is the flaring tazn
42

(Michel 2008: 141). Another ceramic ware associated


with the Quillaca confederation is the Taltape type identified by Lecoq, which he labelled Taltape-Quillaca, a
ware visibly influenced by the pottery of the neighboring
Qaraqara region to the east. This ware is eloquent proof
of the close contacts between the two regions (Lecoq
1997: 80).
Moving further to the south, the Hedionda or Mallku
ceramic style is known from three regions: the southern
shores of Salar de Uyuni and the Salar de la Laguna Basin in the north, in the Intersalar region, where it occurs
in isolation together with other ceramic wares (e.g., Taltepe), and in the Lipez region on the Bolivian-Argentinean
border in the south, although pottery of this type has also
been reported from sites involved in interregional traffic
as far as south as Jujuy in Argentina (NielsenBerberin
2008: 157). The Hedionda style was named after a site
on the southern shore of Lake Lipez where Barfield first
distinguished the Dark Brown Painted Buff ware in 1958.
This bowl type is typically decorated with wavy lines or
lozenges set between straight lines on the rim and a yellowish-brown, burnished slip (Barfield 1961: 99100).
Castro, Aldunate and Berenguer described the same bowl
type from the neighboring Upper Loa Valley in Chile as
Hediondia Negro sobre ante whose TL date indicated a
use between A.D. 1000 and 1100; they noted that it was
identical with the Mallku Brown on Cream wares, so
named after its main findspot in Lipez in Bolivia (Castro et al. 1984: 170174). Berberin and Arellano, who
had initially identified this ware, distinguished four other
ceramic styles (Brown on Red, Brown on Gray, Brown
on Natural Surface, Black on Red), all of which were
characterized by an ornamental repertoire made up of
the same decorative motifs. Some pottery fragments
bore two different variants of the patterns distinguished
by them (BerberinArellano 1980: 270). The slipped
or merely polished varieties of these brown, cream, red,
gray or black colored bowls with slightly incurving or
flaring rim, decorated with designs combining wavy and
straight lines, were later described as Mallku Decorated
typical (Arellano 2000: 173175). From his study of the
fabric of Mallku Decorated and Mallku household ceramics, Arellano concluded that while the raw material
used for the manufacture of the latter was available from
the volcanic sediments of the southern altiplano, the raw
material of the former, obtained from Tertiary sediments,
was less readily available in the westerly areas of the
southern altiplano covered with volcanic sediments with
a high mica content, suggesting that even though these
vessels had been produced locally, their raw material
was imported (Arellano 2000: 254255). Other scholars
agree that Mallku Decorated ware was intrusive, but in
their view, it was the finished vessels, rather than their
raw material that was transported by the llama caravans,
which picked up large quantities of products produced
by various groups. The spread of Mallku wares by this

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

mechanism is supported by the fact that it principally occurs on the way stations along interregional routes (NielsenBerberin 2008: 157). The radiocarbon dates for
Mallku pottery indicate that this ware appeared between
A.D. 1235 and 1295 (1 ) or A.D. 12101320 (2 ) and
survived up to the 17th century, and that its spread coincides with a series of major changes on settlements such
as the appearance of rectangular buildings, the growth of
sites accommodating no more than fifty buildings into
larger settlements with up to two hundred buildings, and
the emergence of public plazas, as well as the construction of defensive walls around settlements, an unmistakable sign of intercommunal warfare. Taken together,
these changes reflect the emergence of chiefdoms (NielsenBerberin 2008: 153161).
The ceramic styles discussed above share several
traits regarding their form and ornamentation: certain
bowl types decorated in their interior with designs combining straight and wavy lines occur in all of the above
regions. The patterns incorporating these motifs and
their combinations, however, do not appear across the
entire broader region. The bowls in the northerly areas
typically bear a design of two or, more rarely, three parallel lines under the rim, occasionally combined with
concentric circles and spirals (Pacaje, Chilpe), while the
designs adorning the bowls in the south are dominated
by a combination of wavy and straight lines under the
rim or running diagonally across the vessel body, and
by designs made up of wavy lines enclosed by semicircles (Mallku, Hedionda). Quillaca wares, principally
decorated with diagonal parallel lines, appear to be have
been distributed between the two (Michel 2008: 143, Fig.
7.35). Accompanying this stylistic diversity is the great
variation in the paste, color, surface treatment, and the
application or lack of a slip, and thus we can hardly speak
of a style distributed across the entire region. The shared
traits and the dissimilarities would rather suggest related
styles and stylistic variants that can be traced to a common origin. This raises a spate of other questions, principally the issue of when and where, which can only be
answered provisionally at best.
The question of when these wares appeared, or at least
the date by which this style appeared by the latest, can
be more confidently answered. No matter which smaller
region we examine, this ceramic style appears following
the decline of Tiwanaku and other contemporaneous pottery styles, or at the time of their final transformation.
Radiocarbon dates are available for a few regions only;
the earliest, falling into the late A.D. 12th century, come
from Pucarpata in the north (Prssinen 2005: 118) and
are consistent with Albarracin Jordans chronology, principally based on circumstantial evidence (the disappearance of Tiwanaku polychrome pottery and the appearance of early Pacaje pottery on former Tiwanaku sites),
according to which the production of early Pacaje pottery began in the 12th century (Albarracin Jordan 1996:

311314). Assuming that the pottery described above


had indeed evolved in the southern Titicaca Basin would
imply that this style spread to the other regions from that
area (Arellano 2000: 219); however, this possibility has
been challenged on the grounds that the Late Intermediate Period ceramic styles can be derived from the local
Middle Horizon styles (Lecoq 1997: 79; Michel 2008:
139), which in turn raises doubts as to whether these
styles were indeed related or variants.
The distribution of related Late Intermediate Period
ceramic styles over an enormous territory also raises the
question of the identification of regions where this style
can be regarded as a local cultural element (locally made
wares, part of the local cultural package) and of regions
where this ware appears as imported pottery. It has been
mentioned in the above that Mallku pottery in southern
Lipez and farther to the south can be regarded as imports
from the north. Another interesting phenomenon is that
while these related ceramic styles dominate decorated
wares in some regions (e.g., in our study area and in northern Lipez, where Mallku pottery accounts for the overwhelming majority of decorated wares; Arellano 2000:
157), elsewhere this pottery appears together with other
ceramic styles. This is the case in the southern regions,
as well as in the mountain areas east of the altiplano and
the valleys between them, and in the Chilean regions to
the west. While occurrences together with other ceramic
styles can certainly be interpreted as an indication of imports, a reflection of the local use of pottery wares and,
probably, of other goods originating from other regions,
the possibility that this alien ceramic ware was brought to
the lower-lying regions by groups from the altiplano who
arrived with the intent of exploiting the regions more
favorable agricultural potentials should not be rejected
out of hand. The occurrence of bowl fragments decorated
with double or triple wavy lines alongside other, principally local wares in the Ciaco style on the Late Intermediate Period sites in the Cochabamba Valley (Qu92, Qu
107, Qu 128) supports an interpretation along these lines.
Two of the three sites lie near the modern village of Sipe
Sipe (GyarmatiVarga 1999), a settlement inhabited by
the Sora who, on the testimony of the local documentary
sources of the 16th century, worked on the Inka state estates (Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca Huayna Capac
1977 [1556]: 21). Although only indirectly, the document
hints that the Soras de sipesipe had already occupied
the land prior to the Inka conquest; if this was indeed the
case, the occurrence of bowls decorated with wavy lines
found at these sites confirms the settlement of the Sora
regardless of whether they represented a group arriving
from the altiplano intent on exploiting the differing ecological potentials of a region with a warmer climate than
their homeland, or a Sora group living in the borderland
between various ethnic groups with a different cultural
background, who lived together with population groups
of the Cochabamba Valley.
43

Paria la Viexa

The ceramic material of the Pirque Alto site in the


Lower Tapacar Valley, a settlement which apparently
played a crucial role in linking the middle altiplano and
the Cochabamba Valley, comprised both Ciaco wares
typical to the Cochabamba Valley and bowls (MacAndrewsRivera 2007: 4952) which in view of their paste,
their brownish and orange color, their surface treatment,
the color of their slip, and, above all, their black painted
wavy patterns share many similarities with the decorated wares collected in the Paria Basin. Considering
that Tapacar was the other major center of the Sora beside Paria (Del Ro 2005: 5455), the question arises of
whether the bowls bearing a design of dense wavy lines
under the rim from the Paria Basin and the mountain region to its east (Tapacar), a variant of the pottery wares
typical for the middle and southern altiplano (principally
the bowls decorated with wavy and straight lines), can be
regarded as a ware produced exclusively by the Sora, and
whether we may speak of a Sora ceramic style. Although
there have been some attempts (Michel 2001; 2008) to
associate a ceramic style with a particular ethnic group
(Chilpe-Caranga, Quillaca), the decorative patterns cutting across ethnic boundaries would rather suggest that
decorative styles were shared by several ethnic groups,
perhaps by groups who were part of what were described
as confederaciones in the Colonial sources, and that the
ornamental motifs and decorative elements created by
one particular ethnic group appeared on the pottery of
other groups too, even if in differing proportions (not to
speak of possible imports from other regions). However,
further research is necessary to confirm this hypothesis,
together with detailed studies on the exact proportion
of the different ornamental motifs on various sites and
archaeometric analyses in order to determine whether a
particular vessel was locally made or imported. I would
therefore be extremely cautious in introducing yet another Late Intermediate Period ceramic style, the Sora
style, and would prefer to attribute the ceramic material
of the Late Intermediate Period sites in the Paria Basin
to the Chilpe or Chilpe-Caranga, or the Middle Altiplano
style.

almost without exception, the sites dating from the Late


Horizon also included several sites having a function
other than habitation (storehouse, mine, road, corral) and
a finer distinction could also be drawn between the habitation sites proper (village, tampu, administrative center).
The greater complexity compared to the preceding
period is apparent not only regarding the function of individual sites, but also in terms of the exact chronological
position of the sites assigned to the Late Horizon. Of the
51 sites identified during the survey, 34 yielded artifacts
of the Formative, Tiwanaku, and Colonial Period only
in addition to the Inka style pottery, but no finds whatsoever of the Late Intermediate Period. In other words,
these sites were occupied after the Inka conquest (even if
they had been settled during an earlier period too), while
the other sites on which Late Intermediate Period material was also found can be regarded as sites established
during that period whose occupation continued into the
Late Horizon. It would appear that about one-third of the
settlements occupied during the Late Intermediate Period
survived into the Late Horizon, meaning that the majority
of the population in the Paria Basin lived its life on the
same settlements as earlier. However, during our excavation of the Inka Period buildings in Paria, we found
that pottery in the Late Intermediate Period style survived
well after the Inka conquest and that it was used simultaneously with Inka wares, meaning that if Late Intermediate Period and Inka ceramics both occur among the
surface finds collected on a site, it does not necessarily
signal the continued occupation of a Late Intermediate
Period settlement or the Inka Period re-occupation of a
settlement which has no continuity with earlier occupations it may simply indicate a site established during
the Late Horizon on which ceramics made both in the
Inka and the Late Intermediate Period style were used.
Thus, the distribution and proportion of the finds from
each site must be assessed separately, but even so, the exact time-span of occupation cannot always be accurately
determined.

III.5.1. SETTLEMENTS
III.5. The Late Horizon
We found 51 sites during our survey14 whose finds included a certain number of Inka style vessel fragments,
indicating that they had been occupied during the Late
Horizon. The number of sites is in itself an indication that
the Paria Basin was most intensively occupied during this
period and, also, that no dramatic change in site number
can be noted compared to the Late Intermediate Period,
represented by 46 sites. However, a closer scrutiny of the
sites in question reveals that this picture can and certainly
should be refined in several respects. In contrast to the
sites of the preceding period, which were habitation sites
44

Examining the 44 sites identifiable as settlements whose


finds included a smaller or higher number of finds dating
from the Late Horizon, we found that 31 habitation sites
were established after the Inka conquest. Although these
sites include settlements whose finds contained also pottery in the Late Intermediate Period style (e.g., Site Ce 11
on the southern boundary of Paria), their location and the
proportion of the finds from the two periods suggest that
in these cases we are witnessing the use of Late Intermediate Period pottery during the Inka Period. In addition to
these 31 sites, we identified six other settlements whose
ceramic finds included a significant amount of Late Intermediate Period pottery, although the number and the

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

30
25

Number of sites

distribution of the finds indicated that the settlement had


been established during the Late Intermediate Period.
The finds from seven other settlements dating from the
Late Intermediate Period yielded a minimal, virtually insignificant amount of Inka pottery.15 This would imply
that there were 13 Late Intermediate Period settlements
whose occupation continued after the Inka conquest: six
of these appear to have been lightly occupied, if at all.
This is all the more striking considering that the abovementioned seven sites included settlements which, judging from their spatial extent and the quality and number
of the finds,16 had played an important role during the
Late Intermediate Period, suggesting that these settlements had been abandoned after the Inka conquest.
A look at the spatial patterning of Late Horizon sites
reveals that there were no major changes compared to the
preceding Late Intermediate Period: while settlements
continued to be sited and concentrated along rivers providing a constant water supply and at the confluence of
the Jacha Uma, the Iruma, and the Huaylluma Rivers,
some settlements were located on the altiplano, lying farther from permanent watercourses, although their number decreased visibly. Compared to the previous period,
a settlement concentration can also be noted in the river
valleys. For example, even though three Late Intermediate Period settlements (Sites Ce 81, Ce 82, and Ce 83)
were abandoned in the valley of the Khala Pata River, one
new Late Horizon settlement (Site Ce 86) was identified
at the point where the river leaves the piedmont, in the
same location as an earlier Middle Horizon settlement.
The settlement was founded in a visibly strategic position
and was most likely established in order to control a road
linking the altiplano with the eastern mountains. Even
though we were unable to discover the road itself, our
local informant confirmed the existence of an old road,
as did the corrals (Site Ce 85) overlooking Site Ce 86
extending along the river bank, perhaps for servicing the
llama caravans passing along the road. The finds from
the corral comprised Tiwanaku wares, as well as Late
Intermediate Period and Late Horizon pottery. A similar
concentration of sites or a shift in the location of the settlements could be noted in the Wila Jakko Valley, where
we identified three Late Intermediate Period sites on the
rivers lower terrace near Pisakheri. Although these sites
were no longer occupied during the Late Horizon, a new
Inka Period settlement (Site Ce 92) was founded near an
earlier Formative site in the valleys middle section. The
greatest concentration could be noted at the confluence
of the Jacha Uma, Huaylluma, and Iruma Rivers, where
the number of settlements matched the number of sites
during the preceding Late Intermediate Period and where
Paria, the largest settlement, was established exactly
at the confluence of the three rivers and the Balneario
Obrajes hot springs.
A look at the size of the Late Horizon settlements
(considering also the Late Intermediate Period sites

20
15
10
5
0
<0.1 ha 0.1-0.5 ha 0.5-1 ha

1-5 ha

Late Intermediate Period

>5 ha

>100 ha

Late Horizon

Figure III.12 Changes in the settlement categories from


the Late Intermediate Period to the Late Horizon
on which Inka pottery also occurred, no matter how
sparsely) reveals that over two-thirds of these sites (31)
did not exceed 0.5 hectares and that 17% of the sites (8)
were between 0.5 and 1 hectare large (Fig. III.12). Only
five settlements extended over more than 1 hectare and
no more than two of these (Ce 1, Ce 86) were larger than
5 hectares. Sites Ce 1 and Ce 86 both occupied a strategic position in the Paria Basin. However, Paria eclipses
all the other sites in the region. Its territory is roughly
twenty times larger than the next largest site and its
densely settled residential zone (not taking into account
the peripheries with a low artifact density and occupied
by storehouses) is still ten times as large as any other site.
The difference in size is even more striking if Site Ce50
lying opposite Paria along the Jacha Uma River is also
included, seeing that it was probably part of this occupation zone. Acomparison of the size of Site Ce 1 to the
extent of all Late Horizon sites (130145.5 ha) reveals
that this site accounted for 7585% of the total occupation area of the Late Horizon.
In the light of the above, a settlement hierarchy of three
to four tiers can be assumed during the Late Horizon too,
similarly to the preceding periods. However, one major
difference is that none of the earlier sites appears to have
eclipsed the other settlements regarding its size and finds,
suggesting that it had been the center of a political entity
intent on centralization. In contrast, the Paria settlement
of the Late Horizon was undoubtedly a central settlement
of this type, reflected not only by its size, accounting for
7585% of the total occupation area (87% of the other settlements were below 1hectare), but also by the quantity,
quality, and diversity of the finds found across the settlement. Disregarding Site Ce 1, there are only three other
sites on which Inka Imperial style pottery is amply represented, all three of which played a role in the Inka state
infrastructure and economy: two storage complexes (Sites
45

Paria la Viexa

Figure III.13 Remains of the


Condorchinoca tampu

Ce 34 and Ce 51) lying slightly farther away from Paria,


acting as the administrative center, and a copper mine
(Site Ce 56) on the northern fringes of Paria.17 It would
appear that the ceramic wares suitable for the symbolic
expression of Inka state power hardly reached the rural
Late Horizon settlements, on which the density of finds
did not exceed 10 artifacts/m2 and was often well below
this value. At Paria, on the other hand, the density of finds,
while varying across the site, ranged between 50 to 100
artifacts/m2 in several areas. While the finds collected on
other Late Horizon sites were almost exclusively made up
of ceramics and lithics,18 among which there were hardly
any pottery fragments made in the Inka Imperial style, the
residential zones of Site Ce 1 yielded an abundance of
Inka pottery, sodalite, quartz, bone and shell beads, metal
artifacts, and obsidian fragments, as well as glass beads
and iron nails (indicating the sites Spanish occupation)
which lay not only among the surface scatter of finds, but
also came to light during the excavation of Structure BH.
All this is obvious, prestige goods, whether Inka Imperial pottery made from locally available raw material (see
Chapter V) or locally made from imported raw material
or simply imported, were unevenly distributed on the Late
Horizon sites. All in all, we did not identify a single other
site in the surveyed area beside Site Ce 1 which could be
interpreted as a provincial center of the Inka Period, and
thus Site Ce 1 can be confidently identified with the Paria
of the Inka Period.
In the light of the above, the occupation of the surveyed section of the Paria Basin following the Inka conquest changed significantly compared to the preceding
Late Intermediate Period: while the total occupation area
of the known settlements, which during the Late Intermediate Period amounted to some 52 hectares, increased
over two and a half-fold compared to the Late Horizon,
46

7585% of this area was occupied by a single settlement,


meaning that without Paria, the total occupation area of
the other sites accounted for no more than one-third of the
Late Intermediate Period settlements. Considering that
all the larger Late Intermediate Period settlements (e.g.,
Sites Ce 41, Ce 46, Ce 51, Ce 53, and Ce 63) were either
abandoned or only lightly occupied, at least judging from
the scarce Inka style pottery, it would appear that the Late
Intermediate Period population was replaced by another
one after the Inka conquest. As we shall see, however, local Late Intermediate Period vessels account for a major
proportion in the pottery finds from the buildings uncovered at Paria, suggesting that one part of the population of
the Late Intermediate Period settlements moved to or was
resettled in Paria after the Inka conquest; in other words,
the Inka provincial center absorbed a major portion of
the basins indigenous population, while another part of
the population was resettled in the Cochabamba Valley as
recorded in the Colonial sources (GyarmatiVarga 1999;
Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca Huayna Capac 1977
[1556]), explaining the partial or complete abandonment
of the Late Intermediate Period settlements.

III.5.1.1. TAMPUS
Aside from the provincial center at Paria, the tampus
represented the other settlement type of Inka state installations. One settlement of this type lay in the surveyed area (Site Ce 112) and we also inspected the next
tampu (Kullku Pampa) on the road between Paria and
the Cochabamba Valley. Both were part of the chain of
tampus identified by Hyslop during his survey of the
Inka road leading from Paria to the Cochabamba Valley
(Hyslop 1984: 138149). The nearest tampu (Tambo de

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

Condorchinoca, Site Ce 112)19 lay on a terrace of the Jacha Uma River, 10kilometers east of Paria, the Inka provincial center. It was bounded by the river in the south,
a pair of quebradas in the east and west, and the mountains flanking the river in the north. The settlement lies
in a bend affected by periodic floods and thus the sites
greater part has been destroyed in the three decades since
its discovery. Hyslop (1984: 145) described two and a
half still standing buildings, of which only a single, partially decayed building survived by 20082009, whose
eastern wall was completely destroyed by the locals. The
foundations of four other buildings could be identified in
the profile of the riverbank created by the floods, suggesting that the tampu had originally consisted of five buildings. The single partially surviving building measures
13.5 m by 6.15m (Fig. III.13).
The building had a pitched roof and gable-end eastern and western walls whose foundation and lower part
were constructed of unhewn stone blocks, while the upper gabled sections were raised from adobe. The two
long sides, the northern and southern walls, were in part
also constructed from stone, but these two sides had collapsed. The greatest height of the best-preserved western
wall was 2.23 m from the modern surface; its lower section, constructed of stone, was 1.25 m high (Fig. III.14).
The wall thickness of 8085 cm conforms to the usual
standard of Inka buildings. Three niches had been recessed into the inner side of the eastern and western wall,
of which only the two niches in the western wall remain.
The niches were placed at the meeting point of the stone
and adobe section, with the greater part of the niches recessed into the stone-built part. A monolithic lintel was
placed above the upper section of the niches recessed
into the adobe wall section. The niches were 7580 cm
high and 4550 cm deep. We found the remains of mortar

mixed with thatch inside the niches. Although we did


not find any artifacts on the site, the architectural traits
clearly suggest a date in the Inka Period.
The architectural traits of this tampu (the construction material, the walls of stone combined with adobe
gable-end walls, the wall thickness, the form and size
of the niches, and the use of mortar mixed with chaff)
share many similarities with the architectural features of
the tampu we excavated at Incarracay (GyarmatiVarga
1999), the last tampu on the Inka road leading to Cochabamba (although the identification of the road section itself proved impossible). The single difference was
that the wall sections constructed from stone were much
higher, often as high as 3.3 meters, and thus the niches
were recessed into the stone, while adobe bricks were
used exclusively for the gable-end of the wall. Although
the pirka technique was also used at Incarracay, the outer
face of the cornerstones of the buildings and the niches
were carved smooth. These divergences probably reflect
the differences between the importance and the function
of the two tampus (see, e.g., one of the structures excavated at Incarracay, which was identified as a Sun shrine;
GyarmatiVarga 1999: 6975).
The architectural features of the other tampu at
Kullku Pampa,20 lying 8.4 kilometers (Gutierrez 2005:
98) east of the Condorchinoca tampu, differed markedly
from those of the two tampus described above. While
probably identical with Hyslops tampu at the same site,
instead of the row of rectangular buildings described by
him, we found a single large structure with an elaborate
groundplan (Fig. III.15). The western wall constructed
from unhewn stone blocks using the pirka technique survived to a height of 11.5 meters, while only the foundations remained on the eastern side. Four round structures
whose tiny opening lay almost at ground level stood to

Figure III.14 Inner side


of the western wall of the
Condorchinoca tampu
47

Paria la Viexa

Figure III.15 Remains of the


Kullku Pampa tampu
its north. On the analogy of the regions similar contemporary structures, these can probably be interpreted
as storage facilities. The road passing beside the stone
building can most likely be identified with the one-time
Inka road, an assumption confirmed by the agricultural
terraces lying on the mountainside overlooking the site.
We collected Inka and Inka-Pacaje vessel fragments, as
well as Colonial pottery sherds (the density of finds was
lower than 1 artifact/m2).
A comparison of the three Inka tampus with the other
Inka sites known from the Paria Basin and the Cochabamba Valley revealed a baffling phenomenon for which
we have found no explanation yet. While the tampus
were fairly well preserved (see, e.g., the 2.93.3 m high
walls of Incarracay), they barely contained any finds.21
The exact opposite was noted on several Inka sites, on
which architectural remains did not survive, but which
yielded an abundance of the most diverse finds, amongst
them pottery made in the Inka Imperial style. This phenomenon could be noted not only on the Inka Period sites
located below Incarracay near Sipe Sipe and Quillacollo
in the Cochabamba Valley (see GyarmatiVarga 1999:
3132), but also at Paria, the provincial center, where the
remains of above-ground stone buildings were similarly
lacking.
One the one hand, then, we find settlements with
stone buildings constructed using the pirka technique,
conforming to the provincial standards of Inka architecture, where the minimal finds lying on the surface were
almost exclusively made up of local pre-Inka wares and
pottery imitating Inka ceramics, as at Incarracay. On
the other, there are settlements yielding a rich array of
artifactual material, amongst them Paria, representing
the peak of the provincial settlement hierarchy, whose
buildings were not or only partly constructed from stone,
and even these buildings were well below the general
standard of provincial Inka architecture. These structures perished to the extent that their one-time existence
is indicated by no more than scatters of stones or low
mounds. One possible explanation is that a chronological
48

difference existed between the two settlement types and


the two architectural styles. The settlements with poorer
architectural features were perhaps established immediately after the Inka conquest with the purpose of ensuring domination and administrative control over the vanquished regions, and the higher number of finds can be
attributed to the longer occupation of these sites, while
the tampus, with their virtual lack of finds but superior
architecture, were perhaps established after the creation
of the Inka road network. Although an explanation along
these lines cannot be wholly rejected, our radiocarbon
dates originating from different types of buildings and
sites (Incarracay, Kharalaus Pampa, and Paria) do not
confirm this interpretation. In fact, the radiocarbon dates
indicate an early (GyarmatiVarga 1999: 43; Gyarmati
2001: 5) and, in some cases, a far too early date for the
sites in question. It seems more likely that the differences
can be explained by functional differences: unlike tampus, rural settlements and administrative centers were
continuously occupied by a larger population and they
were also the settings of the most diverse craft activities
involving the use of a wide range of tools and implements
(such as the large vessels necessary for the production
of chicha, bone weaving implements, spindle whorls and
the like). The provincial center also hosted various festivities attracting masses of peoples. Even so, the question remains of why the buildings of a large provincial
center represent a poorer architectural quality than those
of the roadside tampus.

III.5.2. ROADS
When describing how the goods produced in Cochabamba were transported, the Colonial sources mentioning Paria contain indirect references to the main road, the
qhapaq an leading southward from Cuzco that passed
Paria, and to the side-road branching off to Cochabamba.
One of the goals of our survey was to identify the road
sections in the Paria area. However, while we were unable

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

to locate either of the two roads, no doubt owing to the


agricultural activities in the area following the Spanish
conquest, we were able to identify an over 25 kilometers
long section of the qhapaq an from Caracollo to Paria
on satellite photos,22 which indicated that the road bypassed Anocariri and did not run north to south as earlier
assumed (Hyslop 1984: 140), but proceeded in a northwest to southeast direction from Caracollo, passing an
Inka Period copper mine we had identified (Site Ce56)
and entering Paria between storage complexes 5 and 6
(Fig. III.16). The layout of the settlement and a comparison with the layout of other Inka provincial centers such
as Hunuco Pampa and Pumpu (see MorrisThompson
1985: 72; Matos Mendieta 1994: 212) suggest that the
road reached Parias center by the northwestern corner of
the main plaza,23 and probably left the settlements center
by the plazas southeastern corner and ran southward. We
could identify another 3.5 kilometers long section of the
road on the satellite photos, again without finding any
traces of it in the field.
Hyslop (1984: 138149) identified a few sections of
the side-road running from Paria to Cochabamba. The
road was later surveyed again by Gutirrez Osinaga
(2006; 2012). However, the identification of the road
section leading out of Paria is now virtually impossible owing to the intensive agricultural work in the Jacha Uma Valley. Still, knowing that Paria and the first
tampu at Condorchinoca lay on the rivers northern bank,
it seems likely that the road too ran on this side. From

the Condorchinoca tampu the road probably led along the


Sistani Khullku River and then in the Cristan Waykho
Quebrada to the tampu at Kullku Pampa.
In addition to these roads, we also found a small section of a road that is not mentioned in the written sources
(Site Ce 114; Fig. III.17). The 350 meters long road
section24 led southeastnorthwestward near the modern settlement of Falsuri and it no doubt connected the
altiplano with the mountains to the east. The road running along the Thola Phujru Quebrada was edged with
stones, which survived on the side facing the quebrada,
but were completely destroyed by erosion on the opposite side towards the mountains, where we found a series
of corrals. Together with the road running through the
Khala Pata Valley, mentioned by a local informant, there
were at least three side-roads linking the altiplano with
the eastern mountain ranges and valleys passing through
the surveyed area in the Paria Basin. However, it remains
unclear whether these three roads had branched off from
the qhapaq an leading north to south.

III.5.3. STOREHOUSES
One of the pillars of the Inka political economy was the
reciprocation of activities performed for the state (such
as the provisioning of mita workers and aqllakuna, rewards for military feats, and gifts to local leaders) and the
redistribution of the produced goods (the provisioning

Figure III.16 Satellite photo of the site complex at Paria (Source: Google Earth)
49

Paria la Viexa

Figure III.17 Section of the pre-Hispanic road near


Falsuri

of the army and of the participants in state ceremonies,


as well as ensuring the goods needed for rituals). The
produce was collected and stored in state storehouses
(Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 189, Ch. LXVIII, 342, Ch.
XX; Cobo 1956 [1653]: 124126, Ch. XXX; Le Vine
1992; Morris 1986; Pizarro 1986 [1571]; Snead 1992),
and then redistributed for various purposes determined
by the state. State storehouses of this type were erected
around administrative centers which also served as settings of consumption such as Huanuco Pampa (MorrisThompson 1985), Pumpu (Matos Mendieta 1994),
and Hatun Xauxa (DAltroy 1992; DAltroyEarle
1992; DAltroyHastorf 1984), and in the areas where
the goods were actually produced, for example at Cochabamba (Byrne de Caballero 1974; 1975; Gyarmati
Varga 1999) and Campo de Pucara in northwestern Argentina (Snead 1992: 76).
Alongside royal lodgings and the Sun Temple, this
is the third type of state installation mentioned by Cieza
de Len in his description of Paria (Cieza de Len 2005
[1553]: 267, Ch. CVI). Indirect evidence for the existence of storehouses is provided by the report describing
how Almagro rested in Paria before launching his campaign to conquer Chile, lying 700 kilometers from Cuzco
(Mario de Lovera 1865 [15471594]: 21, BookI, Ch. I).
In addition to providing adequate lodgings for his large
retinue, this decision was no doubt influenced by the possibility of replenishing his supplies from the goods stored
in the still existing storehouses. Given the archaeological

Figure III.18 The Late Horizon site complex around Paria


50

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

evidence from other Inka provincial centers and the descriptions and references in the historical reports on Paria,
it is hardly surprising that we located such a high number of Inka Period storehouses in Paria. The storehouses
formed six clusters, which virtually enclosed the former
Inka provincial center. Four of these (Groups 36) lay on
the settlements fringes on the altiplano, while Groups 1
and 2 (Sites Ce 34 and Ce 51) on the hillsides overlooking Paria, some 2.2 and 1.5 kilometers away, and it seems
likely that they were visible from the provincial center
(Fig. III.18).
Similarly to other comparable Inka state installations,
the round and rectangular structures were aligned into
rows. The predominantly round storehouses had a diameter of 2.53 m, while the rectangular buildings, far
smaller in number, measured 45 m by 34 m. Only the
foundations of the storehouses in Paria survived. The size
and architectural quality of the buildings were inferior
to both the similar structures in Peru and the ones we
had excavated in Cochabamba (GyarmatiVarga 1999:
3747). Their foundation was made up of a single course
of stone blocks laid on the ground which, judging from
the debris and the modern storehouses of the region (Fig.
III.19), supported walls of clay mixed with river boulders.
These walls have perished and their one-time presence is
indicated only by the stones and clayey patches inside the
buildings (Fig. III.20). Very often, especially in the case

Figure III.19 Modern storehouse near Caracollo,


Department of Oruro
of the storehouses erected on the hillside, even the stone
rings of the foundation have partially or wholly perished,
and their one-time presence is only indicated by patches
of clay and stone, or the lack of one or more foundations
in a row of evenly spaced foundations. Although we only
recorded the identifiable remains in the course of our survey,25 we also took note of the obvious gaps.

Figure III.20 Remains of Storehouse Group 6 on the northern boundary of Paria


51

Paria la Viexa

Figure III.21 Satellite photo


of Site Ce 34 (Source: Google
Earth)
III.5.3.1. Group 1 (Site Ce 34)
The site lying 2.2 kilometers southeast of Paria extends
over 8.8 hectares, with the storehouses lying on the northern and northeastern side, covering a roughly 3 hectares
large area of the site on a hill known as Chullpapata26
(Fig. III.21). Only the sherds scattered across the larger
part of the site and the flat area in front of the hill indicate
that the site had extended to this area too. The density of
finds is higher (110 artifacts/m2) than in the area where
the remains of the storehouses were recorded, although
this can undoubtedly be attributed to erosion because no
traces of any structures were found in the flat area representing the sites southern and southwestern part. Similarly to Site Ce 56, the Inka Period mine, the proportion
of bowls and plates was remarkably high (54.8%), and
the proportion of arbalos was also quite high (27.4%)
among the identifiable vessel types, conforming to the
sites function as a storage complex.
The storehouses were arranged into seven to twelwe
rows aligned in a northwest to southeast direction on the
gently sloping hillside (Fig. III.22). Similarly to other
storage complexes in the Paria area, only the foundations
of the storehouses survived, usually in a fairly poor state
of preservation. Only in a few exceptional cases did the
larger boulders used for the foundation of the circular or
rectangular storehouses survive along the one-time structures entire perimeter; more often, the former presence
of a storehouses was indicated by patches of adobe and
the river pebbles mixed into it. Sometimes, even these
patches were lacking and thus there were empty spaces,
probably caused by erosion, between the regularly spaced
foundations. Although we recorded 475 securely identifiable foundations, the total number of the storehouses
52

may have reached 592; however, it is quite possible that


some rows were left incomplete or, conversely, that some
had been longer. Some rows were interrupted by a gully
extending across the sites southeastern end.27
The surviving storehouses comprised 366 (max. 455)
round (Fig. III.23) and 109 (max. 137) (Fig. III.24) rectangular structures, the latter erected in the fourth and
in the lowermost row. Their sizes varied between 45 m
by 34 m, while the diameter of the circular storehouses
ranged between 2.5 and 3 m, meaning that they were
smaller than the ones known from the central Peruvian
mountain region (DAltroy 1992; MorrisThompson
1985) and the ones we had excavated in Cochabamba
(GyarmatiVarga 1999: 3747). Their construction was
also inferior: the foundation of 1520 cm large stones did
not rise above the ground and the walls raised from adobe
and river pebbles had completely disintegrated.
Similarly to the other storage complexes in Paria,
this one was also freely accessible. Although we found
the scanty remains of an enclosure wall by the quebrada
bounding the storehouses in the north, its function could
hardly have been to impede access to the storage complex in view of the gully with almost vertical walls. An
enclosure wall with this function would have made more
sense in the area facing the plainland on the western side;
however, no traces indicative of any walls were found in
that area.

III.5.3.2. Group 2 (Site Ce 51)


Another storage facility was established 1.5 kilometers
southsouthwest of Paria, on the hills above Balneario
Obrajes overlooking the one-time Inka provincial center

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

Figure III.22 Plan of Storehouse Group 1

(see Fig. III.10). The site extended over a 6.4 hectares


large area. The western part accommodated the Late
Intermediate Period settlement described in the above,
while the 3.1 hectares large eastern part the Inka Period
storehouses. It seems likely that in this case, the two sites
were merely established in the same location because
there is barely any spatial overlap between the distribution of the finds: while few Inka Period sherds were
found on the Late Intermediate Period settlement, the ceramics from the Inka section of the site were dominated

by good quality Inka pottery, and the ratio of vessels used


for storage was conspicuously high.
The storehouses were arranged in two rows, with the
lower one lying on the hillside and the upper one along
the perimeter of the hilltop plateau. The foundations of 78
storehouses could be identified, although the gaps in the
lower row suggest that there had originally been 88. This
assumption is confirmed by our observations that there
were no gaps between the evenly spaced foundations in
the upper row, unaffected by erosion. The western side of
53

Paria la Viexa

Figure III.23 Remains of a round storehouse, Group 1


the storage complex adjacent to a level area was bounded
by a 230 m long wall, which, judging from the 40 cm
wide foundations, could not have been particularly high.
The foundations of the 68 (max. 78) round storehouses
with a diameter of 4 m on the average were made up of
rings of larger stones. Inside, we found a rubble of clay
mixed with pebbles. The lower row contained 10 rectangular storehouses, one of which we excavated.

III.5.3.2.1. Surface I28


We opened a 6 m by 4 m trench corresponding to the
buildings still visible remains on the southeastward
sloping surface. We cleared the trench in 2 m by 2 m
squares according to the natural layers. Underlying the
scatter of sherds on the surface was a 10 cm thick light
gray (10 YR 7/2) layer, followed by a 7 cm thick layer of
loamy reddish-brown clay (5YR 4/4) mixed with pebbles, which did not extend across the entire building.
We found a patch with grass impressions and specks of
charcoal in Square 5. This layer most likely represents
the remains of an adobe wall mixed with pebbles, which
conforms to a pre-Hispanic construction technique we
documented at several other sites. Underlying this layer
was a loamy layer mixed with charcoal specks extending

Figure III.24 Remains of a rectangular storehouse,


Group 1
54

to the bedrock. This layer was noted at differing depths


owing to the terrains inclination, with the lowermost
depth (35 cm) measured in the buildings southwestern
corner. The exterior size was 5 m by 3.7, the interior
measured 3.7 m by 2.3 m (Fig. III.25). No traces of a
floor, either of stone or of some other material, could be
observed inside the building. The 2040 cm large stones
of the foundation were laid directly on the bedrock. The
foundation had best survived on the side towards the
hill, while erosion had destroyed the sections toward
the slope (Fig. III.26). The few pottery fragments found
inside the building did not come from storage vessels.
The samples from the reddish layer with charcoal specks
taken from Square 5 and from the outer side of the western wall contained a minimal amount of charred wood
and plant seeds (for the detailed analysis of the plant
remains, see Chapter VIII).

III.5.3.3. Group 36 (Site Ce 1)


Three of the four storage complexes (Groups 46; Fig.
III.27) on the fringes of Paria, made up of an impressive
number of storehouses, lay on the settlements northern
and northwestern edge, in the area where the royal road
from Cuzco entered the settlement, where the surface
density of pottery made in the Inka style was much more
lower (less than 1 sherd/m2) than in the central part of the
site. Group 3, made up of a single row of ten structures,
was established on the terrace of the Paria River on the
settlements southwestern edge.
Of the three larger storage complexes, Group 4 comprised three east to west aligned rows. However, the distance between the first and the second row suggests that an
additional row of storehouses had perhaps been planned,
indicated also by the presence of two foundations laid parallel to the other rows at the western end of the area between the two rows. It is also possible that the western end
of the first row and the eastern end of the second and third
rows were unfinished. The number of identifiable foundations totalled 104; however, considering the gaps and
partially surviving foundations in each row, the number of
one-time storehouses may have been as high as 121.
Made up of two rows, Group 5 was aligned perpendicular to the previous rows. The two rows were almost
perfectly north to south oriented, with a divergence of a
few degrees. We identified 96 foundations, although the
original number of storehouses was probably 100 in view
of the gaps in the rows.
With its 776 foundations, Group 6 contained the by
far the highest number of storehouses among the storage complexes we had identified. The storehouses had
been arranged into ten rows aligned east to west with a
divergence of a few degrees. The rows expanded slightly
toward the east. The traces of temporary gullies caused
by periodic heavy rains could be clearly identified,

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

Figure III.25 Excavated


rectangular storehouse, Group 2
especially in the spots where there were missing foundations in the rows. This storage complex is traversed by a
modern road, which cuts through the western end of the
first three rows. We thus estimated that together with the
perished storehouses, this storage complex had originally
been made up of 864 storehouses.

III.5.4. CORRALS AND OTHER STRUCTURES


We found abandoned corrals in several spots in the
surveyed area, usually on the hillsides overlooking the
quebradas. However, only one of these could be securely

dated to the pre-Hispanic period on the testimony of the


pottery finds. Site Ce 85 lay on the hillside above Site
Ce 86 on the bank of the Khala Pata River, occupied
during the Middle and the Late Horizon. Because the
scatter of surface finds was not continuous, we registered
the two concentrations of finds as separate sites, although
it seems likely that Site Ce 85 incorporated the corrals
of Site Ce 86, which had been one of the control points
on the road connecting the altiplano with the mountains
both during the Tiwanaku and the Inka Period. The connection between the two sites is supported also by the
observation that pottery from the same periods was collected in both locations. The largest of the seven round

Figure III.26 Plan and crosssection of the excavated


storehouse, Group 2
55

Paria la Viexa

Figure III.27 Plan of Storehouse Groups 46

corrals erected from quartz stones had a diameter of 44


meters, the smallest a diameter of 16.5 meters. We found
a few similar round corrals on the hillside beside the road
passing by the Thola Phujru Quebrada.
Although we did not see the remains of terraces, we
did identify several plots enclosed by quartz blocks (Fig.
III.28) on the altiplano and the hills flanking the Khala
Pata River in the surveyed area. Even though these plots
lay in areas no longer cultivated today, it seems likely
that they were fenced in to prevent the erosion of the thin
arable soil and were thus utilized for crop cultivation.
The cultivation of these less fertile areas on the hillside,
calling for a greater labor input, can probably be dated
to the period when the area had a larger population that
could not be supported by the alluvial areas adjacent to
the rivers and/or when the yield from these areas had to
support other groups in addition to the local population.
It is therefore possible that the fields in question had been
worked already during the pre-Hispanic period.
56

III.5.5. MINES
During our survey, we found copper-bearing rocks at several sites. The greatest abundance of these rocks was recorded on the southeastern edge of Site Ce 1 lying at the
confluence of the Jacha Uma, Iruma, and Huaylluma Rivers in the assumed workshop zone of the Inka provincial
center. A part of the raw material was no doubt acquired
locally because we found a copper mine on the northern
edge of Paria (Site Ce 56, see Fig. III.18),29 which could
be dated to the Inka Period on the strength of the pottery
fragments around the shaft and the imperial road running
there. The Inka imperial road thus led along the mine,
similarly as in the case of Chuquiabo and Porco, two very
important mines of the Inka Empire (Stanish 2003: 265).
Berthelot (1986) described the two main mine
types operating during the Inka Period. His analysis is
in part based on the report by Sancho de la Hoz, Francisco Pizarros secretary, on the mines around Lake

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE PARIA BASIN

Titicaca, who penned the report of the explorers sent


south by Pizarro in December 1533. The two men observed how the gold mines were operated at Chuquiabo
and also took samples back to Cuzco so that the Spaniards would be able to determine the ore contents of the
mines (Sancho de la Hoz 1962 [1543]: 96). According
to their description, the mines resembled caves and the
miners worked with deer antlers. The ores were packed
into leather sacks and bags. The mines were very deep:
some were 10 fathoms deep, while others were as deep
as 20 fathoms. The largest one at Guarnacabo was 40
fathoms deep; according to one description, they were
not lighted and were no broader than is necessary for one
person to enter crouching down, and until the man who
is in the mine comes out, no other can go in.30 (Sancho
de la Hoz 1962 [1543]: 93.) In addition to these cave-like
mines, there were scattered well-like shafts, no deeper
than the height of a man, which were only worked until the miner was able to hand up the mined ores, after
which they were abandoned (Sancho de la Hoz 1962
[1543]: 94). Based on this report and other Colonial
documents, Berthelot reconstructed the types of mines
operated by the state and by various ethnic groups in
the Carabaya and Chuquiabo regions. The former were
usually concentrated in the mountains and on the mountainsides, and the ores were mined from subterranean
galleries by miners settled in the area either temporarily
or permanently. The state controlled the miners and the
mining operations, and the ores were exclusively used
by the state. Mines exploited by various ethnic groups
were more dispersed. The miners supervised by kurakas
collected the ores from the surface or from a small depth
for their community and its lords for shorter periods
during the year (Berthelot 1986: 81).
In the case of Site Ce 56, a vertical shaft was cut into
the bedrock. A yellowish tabular rock formed its upper
layer, followed by a black rock containing copper ore.
The 67 m wide shaft split into two vertical branches

Figure III.28 Enclosed plots on the hills flanking the


Khala Pata River
at a depth of 5 m, each of which then turned sideways
(Fig. III.29).31 The rocks mined in the shaft were piled
around the mouth of the shaft, where we also found
the stone tools used for extracting the ores, as well as
batns and manos, indicating that the first phase of processing, the crushing of the ores, was performed at the
mine, similarly to the Inka Period silver mines at Porco
(Van BurenPresta 2010: 188). The ores were broken
into 510 cm large lumps as shown by the abundance
of rocks bearing copper encrustations scattered over the
area. We found no other indication of the local processing of the ores. In any case, the location of the mine in a
small depression would have made the place unsuitable
for activities of this type. It seems likely that the crushed
ores were taken to higher ground, as Van Buren and
Presta (2010: 188189) suggested on the basis of their
study on silver mining at Porco. One suitable elevation
of this type can be found near modern Balneario Obrajes
on the other side of Paria, where the chimney of a furnace no longer in use can still be seen. It was no doubt
constructed to take advantage of the stronger winds, but
we did not find any indication of pre-Hispanic activities.
However, we did find evenly spaced heaps of stones on

Figure III.29 Inka copper mine,


Site Ce 56
57

Paria la Viexa

to harvested crops, mined metals were products of the


earth, and that they should therefore be reciprocated with
sacrifices. They also believed that certain rituals must be
performed before the miners entered the mines, which
were regarded as waka and were believed to provide a
link with the hanaqpacha and the ukhupacha (Albornoz
1967 [ca. 1582]: 18; Berthelot 1986: 8283; Cobo 1956
[1653]: Ch. XI). We may therefore assume that the high
proportion of good quality vessels for serving and consuming food can be associated with the rituals conducted
in association with mining that involved feasting and the
offering of food and drink sacrifices.

30

Number of sites

25
20
15
10
5
0

<0.1 ha 0.1-0.5 ha 0.5-1 ha

Late Horizon

1-5 ha

>5 ha

>100 ha

Figure III.30 Changes in the settlement categories from


the Late Horizon to the Colonial Period

the higher lying meseta near the mine, probably the remains of small conical furnaces constructed from rocks
and clay resembling the huayrachinas aligned in rows at
Via del Cerro in the Copiapo Valley in Chile (Salazar
et al. 2001: 62, 67), even though we did not find any
evidence for the processing of metals.
Although the mine we had identified did not conform
to either of the types described above (the entrance of the
shaft was much wider than of the ones described by Sancho de la Hoz), its size, its location beside a provincial
administrative center, and the good quality Inka ceramics
found around the shaft clearly assign it to the category
of state-operated mines.32 The examination of the vessel
types identifiable from the fragments collected on the
surface revealed that 60% came from bowls and plates,
about one-half of which represented painted fine wares.
The other ceramics mostly came from jugs, predominantly from arbalos. This proportion is slightly higher
than the ratio of similar pottery from the two buildings
excavated in Paria (Surface I: 54.6%, Surface II: 54.9%).
Considering the sites function, this higher proportion
compared to the material from the residential and community buildings of the provincial center is especially
striking.
It would appear that the abundance of fine wares can
be linked to the belief of the Andean peoples that similarly

58

III.6. The Colonial Period

Colonial

Twelve of the thirty sites with finds from the post-Conquest period (Map IV) in the surveyed area exclusively
yielded material of this era, while the pottery from the
other sites also included Late Horizon ceramics, meaning that some of the latter had been occupied continuously from the Inka Period onward. The periods sites are
small: two-thirds covered an area of less than 0.5 hectares and only three of the sites occupied from the Spanish Conquest onward extended over an area larger than
1 hectare (Sites Ce 1, Ce 36 and Ce 113, Fig. III. 30).
The total occupation area of the sites fell dramatically
after the Spanish Conquest. The low density of the finds
(110 artifacts/m2) on these sites reflects an extraordinary
population decrease compared to the preceding period,
which is also borne out by the written sources, recording
a large-scale population decline.
The material from the surface collections and our excavations in Paria indicate that the Inka provincial center
remained inhabited to some extent, even though evidence
for occupation remains scarce. A few iron nails, horseshoes, and glass beads were found lying on the surface
and in Structure BH, one of the excavated buildings.
However, we did not find any Colonial ceramics, suggesting that similarly to other Inka colonial centers such
as Hunuco Pampa (MorrisThompson 1985: 57; Morris et al. 2011: 5977), the Spaniards who had perhaps
settled in Paria and occupied a few buildings, had left
the settlement before the appearance of Colonial wares
used in daily life. The written sources quoted in Chapter
II provide ample evidence that the Inka provincial center
had been abandoned in the mid-16th century or during
the centurys latter half.

IV. Paria la Viexa: an Inka Provincial Center

Although the name of Paria crops up in several Colonial


sources, most of these merely mention the name of the
settlement, and even these references generally allude to
the period after the Spanish Conquest (see, e.g., Anonimo
2003 [1550]: 242244). Very often, the relevant passages
speak about the province, rather than the settlement (see,
e.g., Lizarraga 1968 [15861591]: 73, Book. I, Ch. XCI;
Vzquez de Espinosa 1942: [16221630] 572573, 615).
As we have seen in Chapter II, Cieza de Len (2005
[1553]: 267, Ch. CVI, 432, Ch. LXI) is one of the few
chroniclers who offers more information than simply
mentioning its name: Paria is specified as the last provincial center on the Inka royal road from Cuzco to Chile
(Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 342, Ch. XX) and it also
appears on the list of tampus recorded by Vaca de Castro
(1908 [1543]: 435). In his chronicle of Almagros expedition in 1535, Zarate describes Paria as a settlement lying
on the imperial road to the south (Zarate 1995: [1555]
101102). The witnesses appearing in the Cochabamba
trials conducted in the mid-16th century note that Paria
was a settlement through which the maize produced on
the Cochabamba state estates was transported to Cuzco
(Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca Huayna Capac 1977
[1556]: 24).
No matter how laconic the sources, it is quite clear that
Paria was a major Inka provincial center sited at the junction of the imperial road running southward from Cuzco

and the side road from Cochabamba. The Inka settlement


of Paria disappeared from later maps in part because the
above-ground section of the centers buildings perished
owing to the building materials and construction techniques employed, and in part because the exact course of
the Inka roads has only been reconstructed in more recent
times, at least along a few sections. Hermann Trimborns
(1967) attempts to locate Paria in the 1960s were unsuccessful, as were Hyslops (1984) efforts in the next decade. The exact location of the one-time Inka settlement
was finally determined by the surveys we began in 1999
and by our excavations from 2000 (Condarco et al. 2002;
GyarmatiCondarco 2004; 2005; 2007). The dimensions
and the types of the buildings we had uncovered, as well
as the number and quality of the finds recovered from
these buildings and during our surveys, the mapping of
the surface features identified at the site enabling the determination of the sites extent, and, not least, the remains
of at least 1539 Inka storehouses and the identification of
the Inka road traversing the settlement all indicated that
the site could be confidently equated with Paria, a provincial seat of the Inka Empire (see Fig. III.18).
In the light of the above, we might even say that Paria
was sited exactly where it was supposed to be. The settlement lay at the meeting of the dry, barren, and cold
altiplano and the mountains to its east, yet in a location at
the confluence of three rivers, which provided a minimal

Figure IV.1 Location of Paria at


the edge of the altiplano, with
the foothills of the Cordillera de
Azanaques in the background
59

Paria la Viexa

amount of water throughout the year. The area enclosed


by the rivers is the largest tract of irrigable land in the
entire region and the settlement could also enjoy the benefits of an abundant, almost 100 oC hot spring. This location provided environmental advantages, which overruled every other consideration in the choice of the Inka
provincial seat, even a location along the Desaguadero
River or beside Lake Poop.
The settlement was founded on the terrace overlooking
the Jacha Uma/Paria River at the confluence of the three
rivers, at an altitude of 3,8103,815 msl, on an almost
level meseta (Fig. IV.1). The sites northern boundary is
marked by storehouses (Groups 46), where the intensity
of surface finds was very low (less than 1 artifact/m2). The
settlements western and eastern confines were similarly
indicated by the striking decline in the surface find density.
The contiguous main part of the site reaching the Jacha Uma River covers 90 hectares, but the surface finds
reveal that the area enclosed by the Jacha Uma, Iruma,
and Huaylluma Rivers also belonged to the settlement.
The raw sodalite and copper ore pieces, as well as various
semi-finished products found on this part of the site suggest that it may have functioned as one of the settlements
workshop areas and/or outer quarters. If we also include
this area, Paria covered a total of 110 hectares.
The current evidence indicates that the settlement was
established in the Inka Period, even though Late Intermediate style pottery was collected during the surface
survey and ceramics made in that style also came to light
during the excavation. However, the finds from the excavated buildings clearly indicated that Late Intermediate ceramics occur together with Inka Period wares, and
none of the features uncovered during the archaeological
investigations conducted in 2000 (Condarco et al. 2002:
6771) and 20052006 could be dated to the Late Intermediate Period.
Even though the above-ground sections of the settlements buildings had completely perished,1 we nonetheless attempted to broadly reconstruct the settlements
layout by recording certain surface features such as
small mounds rising above the surface, concentrations of
finds and their types or, conversely, a striking absence
of surface finds and depressions covered with vegetation
lacking finds. We therefore recorded these features with
a theodolite survey and GPS, and compared it with the
distribution of surface finds, as well as with the building remains and any other regular features visible on
satellite photos.2 On the basis of the mentioned features,
we divided the site into four zones: (1) peripheral zone,
(2)residential zone, (3) settlement center, (4) administrative/ceremonial core (see Fig. III.18).
(1) The peripheral zone
The storehouses in Groups 46 and the northern and western peripheral zones with a low find density cover roughly
40% of the sites extent. The find density rarely exceeded
60

1 artifact/m2 in these areas, except for the three storehouse areas, where it was slightly higher. A much higher
concentration of finds could be noted in the area of the
810 chullpas lying south of the storehouses in Group6,
which in part extended across the latters two southern
rows. The chullpas are no more than low mounds today,
covered with stones from their construction material and
Inka pottery fragments. Apart from the foundations of
storehouses and the chullpas in this zone of the settlement, we did not identify traces of any other structures.
(2) The residential zone
The residential zone accounts for 60% of the site. The
northern section is located on the meseta, while the
southwestern section covers the slope above the Paria
River. On the testimony of the surface finds, this settlement part did not extend as far as the river. This area is
very strongly eroded, raising the possibility that the finds
on the slope were in a secondary position owing to erosion. However, we uncovered a round building containing Inka pottery during the 2000 campaign (Condarco et
al. 2002: 6771) indicating that the slope was also inhabited. We found that the residential zone was characterized
by a high density of surface finds (over 100 artifacts/m2 in
many cases) and a wide range of artifact types. We also
noted a concentration of certain artifact types in some
areas (ceramics, metal, artfacts made from different types
of stones, shell, and bone), suggesting specialized activity areas. In Surface O, for example, the frequent occurrence of spindle whorls and bronze needles suggested the
production of cloth, while the remarkably high number
of batns and manos in the northern part of Surfaces Y
and K indicated that the area was used for food preparation (Fig. IV.2).
(3) The settlement center
The settlements 6.5 hectares large central zone is virtually free of vegetation and is covered with stones and
finds from the perished buildings. Entering this zone, the
areas densely covered with artifacts become more contiguous to the extent that the buildings could no longer
be distinguished from one another based on their surface
remains. Our excavations indicated that the subsurface
remains of the buildings were often more complicated
than what their surface remains would indicate. In many
cases, the stones formed rows or small mounds of stone
mixed with clay, often with visible foundations, one part
of which had been dug up and removed by the locals. The
other typical features of the settlement center were the
oval depressions covered with grass and surrounded by
shrubs, which had served as seasonal basins for collecting water owing to their lower position or had perhaps
been settings of various activities. Their one-time function can only be clarified by future excavations. The surface finds collected in this zone included artifacts from
the post-Conquest period (iron nails and glass beads),

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

Figure IV.2 Surface features and collecting surfaces in the central zone of Paria
61

Paria la Viexa

Figure IV.3 Plan of Structure BH


found in two areas (Surfaces AM and BI). Similar artifacts came to light from Structure BH lying in this zone,
suggesting that similarly to other Inka provincial seats,
the areas with still extant large buildings at least partially
constructed of stone in the settlements central zone continued to be used after the Spanish Conquest.
(4) Administrative/ceremonial core
A roughly 2.9 hectares large area in the settlements central zone contained the most clearly identifiable buildings, whose remains formed low, no more than 0.50.8 m
high conical mounds, which could exclusively be found
in this area. The excavation of one of the structures (BH)
in this group revealed that they represented the more
carefully built structures in Paria, whose lower section,

Figure IV.4 Remains of the northern wall of Structure


BH at the beginning of excavation
62

constructed of stone, was at least 6080 cm high, and


thus only the wall sections above the stone part of these
structures had collapsed, with the rubble from the upper
wall section forming a low mound which preserved the
lower part. The dimensions of these low mounds ranged
from 20 to 40 m by 8 to 10 m. Some of the buildings
were no doubt kallankas resembling Structure BH. In our
interpretation, this area represented the settlements administrative and ceremonial center. We therefore decided
to investigate two locations: a mound with a regular rectangular groundplan (BH) and an area (BM) where there
was a relatively high concentration of finds reflecting
spinning and weaving activities.

IV.1. Structure BH
Lying on the southern boundary of the settlements assumed administrative and ceremonial center, the building
measuring 40 m by 10 m survived as a low mound covered with stones. The buildings axis was oriented at 78o
east of north. We opened a 16 m by 12 m large trench
(Surface I) on the mounds eastern side, which we hoped
would enable the excavation of the buildings larger part.
Following the excavation of this surface, we opened Surface III (12 m2) by the mounds northwestern corner in
order to determine the buildings length (Fig IV.3). The
204 m2 large area of the two surfaces was excavated in
2m by 2 m large squares according to the buildings natural levels down to the virgin soil.
The buildings northern wall lay at a depth of 05 cm
from the modern surface (Fig. IV.4). The rubble from the
perished building on the walls inner (southern) side lay
at a similar depth. Covering the rubble were the sandstone
and schist slabs that had fallen from the northern wall,
underneath which we found a level of alluvial cobbles
and red (2.5YR 4/6) and light yellowish-brown (10YR
6/4) adobe fragments bearing chaff imprints, mortar, and
earth. This level was the thickest along a 23 m wide
strip along the buildings wall, marking the area onto
which the upper wall sections had collapsed. The levels
thickness varied between 30 to 50 cm. This level was
followed by a 2030 cm thick dark brown (7.5YR 3/2)
sandy level mixed with ash, under which lay a 510cm
thick level made up of loose, ashy patches mixed with
charcoal specks alternating with very hard patches. This
level overlay the reddish, sandy, compact virgin soil lying
at a depth of 6080 cm on the buildings northern side.
As we expected from the dimensions of the low
mound, the northern, eastern and southern wall of Structure BH also fell into Surface I, although only a 2.5 m
long section of the southern wall adjoining the buildings
southeastern corner survived because the rest had been
removed to be re-used as building material after the buildings abandonment (Fig. IV.5). Three types of stone were
used for construction: alluvial cobbles collected from the

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

Figure IV.5 Plan and cross-sections of Surface I


nearby riverbed, locally quarried, dark gray clay schist,3
and dark gray, greenish-gray and yellowish-brown, foliated, micaceous sandstone. The latter probably originated from Saytoco, lying a few kilometers southeast of
the settlement. The upper wall sections were constructed

from two types of adobe bricks: one type was made from
fine-grained clay, the other from more coarse-grained
silty clay loam with 0.55 mm grains, containing a small
amount of pebbles. Both clays were tempered with vegetal matter and all of the analyzed samples contained white
63

Paria la Viexa

Figure IV.6 Remains of the perished southern wall of


Structure BH and its bedding trench
carbonate and/or rusty brown iron oxide concretions. The
plaster covering the walls had a similar composition.
A bedding trench dug into the virgin soil could be observed where the buildings almost completely perished
southern wall had stood (Fig. IV.6). The trench was wider
by some 510 cm than the wall itself on both sides. The

surviving thickness of the stone wall set into the trench


was 0.951 m, although it may have been slightly thinner
originally.
The northern wall was preserved to a height of 70
80 cm. The number and the position of the stone slabs
found in the uppermost level suggest that the wall could
not have been much higher because the observations
made during the excavation indicated that only the stones
missing from the top on the inner side of the double face
wall and the stones of perhaps one additional course had
slipped on top of the debris, and thus the height of the
stone wall did not exceed 1 m. The structure of the surviving wall conformed to the general Inka architectural
tradition: walls were constructed of stone slabs set in
mortar and the gap between the walls inner and outer
face was filled with smaller stones and mortar (Fig. IV.7).
There was a certain pattern to the arrangement of the
stone slabs set in mortar, with the lower courses made
up of sandstone and the upper courses of sandstone and
schist. The upper wall sections above the stone section
had completely perished and thus the buildings height
cannot be determined. On the testimony of the rubble
found inside the building, the upper wall section was constructed from adobe bricks combined with alluvial cobbles, a practice which we observed in several abandoned,
decayed buildings in the study area.
In addition to offering protection against the weather,
the custom of plastering both the exterior and the interior of the buildings was perhaps motivated by an effort
to create a relatively uniform townscape owing to the
different construction techniques. Plaster fragments survived in several spots, most completely on the buildings
northern wall, where a roughly 8 m long, 30 cm high
wall section was covered with a 24 cm thick yellowish-red (5YR 4/6) plaster on the outer face (Fig. IV.8).
It was preserved because the rubble from the building

Figure IV.7 Northeastern corner


of Structure BH showing its
construction materials and wall
structure
64

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

Figure IV.8 Plaster surviving on the northern wall of


Structure BH
had accumulated before the plaster fell off the wall (the
mortar was found as a platform-like melt under the wall
along another section of this wall where the rubble did
not protect it). The practice of plastering both faces of
the walls could be documented on the southern wall,
where the surviving stone section of the wall had been
removed for re-usal and its place had been infilled. After
the removal of the fill, we found the plaster, which had
fallen off the wall and had been preserved by the rubble
(see Fig. IV.6).
While the excavated remains provided information on
building materials and construction techniques, it proved
impossible to determine whether the building also incorporated other elements of the Inka architectural canon in
addition to the double face stone wall filled with rubble.
We found neither the niches typically recessed into the
walls, nor an entrance. The lack of niches can perhaps be
explained by their one-time position in the upper, adobe
section of the wall, as was the case in the tampu at Condorchinoca. The lack of one or more entrances may be
due to the fact that we had uncovered less than one-half
of the building and that the door in the middle of the long
wall fell outside the excavated area, even though this
seems unlikely, given that buildings of this size rarely had
a single entrance in Inka architecture. If the building had
originally been provided with several entrances, these
were probably spaced proportionately. In our case, the
entrance was probably cut into the southern wall because
we found no traces of a doorway in the northern wall.
However, any traces of an entrance in the southern wall
were destroyed when the wall was dismantled together
with its foundation. Our assumption is perhaps confirmed
by the regions prevailing northwesterly wind direction
against which entrances in the northern wall would have
offered virtually no protection.
Because we had no means of excavating the entire
building, we opened another trench (Surface III, see Fig.
IV.3) in a location where, judging from the surface remains, the buildings northwestern corner was assumed

to lie in order to determine the buildings exact dimensions. Although no traces of the buildings corner were
discovered in the first 2 m by 2 m square, we found the
greater portion of a carnivores skeleton laid on its side
35 cm under the modern surface (Fig. IV.9). In order to
uncover the entire skeleton, we opened the second square
on the southern side of the previous one and found the
rest of the skeleton with the exception of the skull and the
two legs. The bones lay in anatomical order, suggesting
that the animals body had been aligned to the southeast
(at 20o of north). The size of the trench was insufficient
for determining with which building the skeleton, probably the representing the remains of a sacrificial animal,
should be associated. Seeing that it lay some 60 cm
higher than the virgin soil, which functioned as the floor
both in the case of Structure BH and Structure BM (excavated later), it seems likely that the burial dates from a
later occupation phase.
A 1015 cm thick layer of debris mixed with stone
and yellow clay lay under the modern surface in Square 3
opened east of Square 2, underneath which we uncovered
4050 cm long rectangular sandstone blocks resembling
the ones found in the buildings northeastern corner. The
section of the squares western side indicated that the

Figure IV.9 In situ remains of the carnivore uncovered


in Surface III, near Structure BH
65

Paria la Viexa

Figure IV.10 Fire pit lined with cobbles in Square 16


wall did not have a continuation in that direction, meaning that the dimensions of Structure BH could be established. The building measured 38 m by 10 m and had a
floor area of 36 m by 8 m assuming the maximum possible wall thickness. Structure BH thus represents one of
the most common types of Inka architecture: a kallanka
with an elongated rectangular groundplan and undivided
interior space (although the possibility of a north to south
internal wall cannot be excluded in view of the fact that

less than one-half of the building was uncovered). The


building had a pitched roof and gabled end walls erected
of adobe mixed with alluvial cobbles. The finds recovered from the structure did not provide any clues for determining its function; however, the Trichocereus seeds
with hallucinogenic properties found underneath a hearth
and a lens of ashes suggest a possible ritual/ceremonial
use (see Chapter VIII).
We did not find any floor remains inside the building. The very compact, natural red sand covering the
area was apparently used as a floor (see Fig. IV.11).
Neither did we find any furnishings such as an oven or
a larger hearth necessary for daily life, a not unusual
feature in the case of kallankas used for the temporary
accommodation of non-permanent residents. Seven of
the eighteen small fire remains with a diameter ranging
between 15 to 30 cm lay on the floor, the others lay
higher and could be associated with various phases in
the buildings decay. One of these was an ash-filled pit
lined with alluvial cobbles measuring 35 cm by 35 cm
uncovered in Square 16. The pit was slightly dug into
the floor and the upper part of an animal skull lay in it
(Fig. IV.10). Although this pit did not appear to represent the remains of a simple fireplace, the intensity of
the fire and the amount of ash in the pit nonetheless
suggest that it had not been used for a particularly long
time. The other fire remains associated with different
levels of the buildings decay do not appear to have been
lit in an even slightly pre-prepared area, but were simply
the remains of a fire lit at some point, occasionally with
a few animal bones. Some fires had been slightly dug
into the ground. Most lay along the buildings southern
wall, where there was more protection from the wind,
suggesting that these had been used at a time when the
building was no longer covered by a roof and only the
wall offered some shelter.

Figure IV.11 Pit in the


northeastern corner of Structure
BH
66

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

a distance of 40 cm (Fig. IV.12). It was almost as long


as the buildings wall and then turned under the stone
wall in line with the adobe wall section in the pit. This
clearly shows that an adobe building had earlier stood
on the spot where Structure BH was erected. The adobe
structure was demolished down to the virgin soil and the
new building was erected in part over it and in part beside
it. The gap between the earlier adobe wall and the level
of the new building was filled with adobe and stone in the
area between the two walls. The finds from the pit, the
earliest feature, also included Inka Period wares and thus
all three features can be dated to the Late Horizon, indicating that three Inka occupation phases can be assumed
in this part of Paria.
We submitted two charcoal samples for radiocarbon
analysis to gain more accurate dates for the structures.
One sample (deb-13014) was collected from the pit under the northern wall of Structure BH to determine the
pits age and the date before which the building could
not have been constructed. The other sample (deb-13020)
was taken from the fire remains in the pit dug into the
floor of the building uncovered in Square 16 to determine
its occupation date. The two samples were virtually contemporaneous and indicated that Paria had been occupied
from the earlier 15th or mid-15th century.
The layer sequence inside and outside Structure BH
enabled the reconstruction of the overall sequence of
the buildings decay, as reflected by the levels described
above and the fire remains found at different depths
above the floor. The 510 cm thick level mixed with
charcoal and ash overlying the floor made up of loose
patches alternating with hard, compact patches probably represents the mortar melt from the walls after the
roof perished or was dismantled, while the overlying
2030cm thick sandy layer mixed with ash represents
an occupation phase during which sand was blown into
the remains of the building. Most of the fire remains can
be associated with this phase, when the buildings still
extant walls offered temporary shelter. This was followed by the collapse of the upper wall section of adobe
and river cobbles, which filled the building and its area,
creating the low mound we had found. By this time, the
little that had survived of the building offered no protection even against the wind.

Figure IV.12 Northern wall of Structure BH (left)


and the wall of an earlier adobe structure (right). Both
structures were erected on an infilled pit
We uncovered a large pit in the buildings northeastern corner (Fig. IV.11), which extended beyond the
northern and eastern wall. It was filled with a mix of red
sand from the virgin soil, yellow clay, ash, and charcoal.
Seventeen holes forming an arc were dug into the pit
(see Fig. IV.5). Most were 1012 cm deep, except for
one, which was dug to a depth of 30 cm and lined with
stones.
A 1.3 m long section of an adobe wall was uncovered inside the pit, which lay at right-angle to the adobe
wall running outside Structure BH. This wall was constructed of red and yellowish-brown adobe bricks and it
extended parallel to the northern wall of Structure BH at

Sample code
deb-13014
deb-13020

13C (PDB)
[]

Conventional
radiocarbon age
(BP)

Calibrated
AD4

Calibrated
AD5

Pit under the northern wall,


Square4, -7090 cm, charcoal

-22.2

530 40

13951440

14101450

Floor, Square 16, fire pit, -70cm,


charcoal

-23.2

540 40

13951430

14101440

Origin of sample

Table IV.1 Radiocarbon dates for Structure BH of Paria


67

Paria la Viexa

IV.2.1. STRUCTURE BM

Figure IV.13 Section of the northern wall of Surface I (A),


and the north to south baulk of Square 3 (B)
The same process could be documented outside the
buildings northern wall as shown by the section of the
northern wall of Surface I and the north to south baulk
between the trench wall and the building (Fig. IV.13).
The first layer on the virgin soil was the yellowish-red
plaster melt from the wall, above which lay a loose ashy
level containing animal bones, indicating the occupation
of the area after the building had perished. Overlying this
level was a ca. 20 cm thick mixed level of earth, stones,
and ash sloping outward to the north from the building,
reflecting its decay. This was overlain by another outward
sloping, 10 cm thick ashy level, indicating the areas continued use. The uppermost level was made up of small alluvial cobbles, earth, and clay, probably the debris of the
walls upper section, which accumulated on the slightly
prominent, northward sloping mound.

IV.2. Structures BMBM3


Collecting surface BM was selected for excavation because it lay in what we assumed to be the settlements administrative/ceremonial core and owing to the unusually
high density of spindle whorls and bronze needles found
during the surface collection and the traces of what were
assumed to be building remains (Structures BMBM3
uncovered in collecting surface BM were named after
the surface; see Fig. IV.2). However, the areas excavation did not confirm the expected location of the architectural remains in this area. The 200m2 large area (Surface II) was excavated in 2 m by 2 m large squares down
to the virgin soil, following the natural layer sequence.
The upper 10 cm of the excavated area was made up
of a light brown (10YR 6/3) loamy-clayey level, under
which lay the remains of four different buildings. The
greater part of the investigated area was occupied by
Structure BM. To its north lay the barely visible remains
of a circular building (Stucture BM1), while the remnants of two superimposed round structures (Stuctures
BM2BM3) were uncovered on the southeastern side
of Structure BM, which in part lay outside the building
(Fig. IV.14).
68

The debris and the finds of this building, as well as the


differing layer sequence inside and outside the building
yielded similar information on the buildings architectural characteristics as in the case of Structure BH and
also indicated the differences between how space was
used inside and outside the building. The strongly elongated oblong building was oriented at 12.5o east of north.
Its western wall extended beyond the buildings northwestern corner, suggesting that the building was perhaps
part of a kancha incorporating several structures and that
the extension of the western wall had functioned as the
kanchas enclosure wall. The buildings original length
could not be determined owing to Structures BM2 and
BM3, which overlay a significant portion of this structure
on the southern side, and neither could its end wall be
located. It also remains unknown whether, similarly to
the entrance at the northern end of the eastern wall, there
had been an entrance at the southern end. The single reference point for the buildings length was the east to west
dividing wall: assuming that it had divided the building
into two equal halves, the exterior dimensions were 20 m
by 7 m and the interior dimensions were 18.8 m by 5.8 m.
The uppermost 10 cm thick level corresponded to the
modern surface. Underneath it we found a level of clay
and stones made up of three layers: the upper and the
lower layers were of yellowish-red (5YR 5/6) and brown
(10YR 7/4) adobe mixed with straw into which 1015 cm
large alluvial cobbles had been set. These two layers enclosed a layer of yellow clay. These can undoubtedly be
identified with the debris of the inward collapsing walls,
erected according to the Inka practice of constructing
walls from two parallel rows of stones filled with rubble
and mortar. This structure is reflected in the three layers.
This roughly 30 cm thick level was followed by a thin,
no more than 5 cm thick ashy layer which lay directly on
the virgin soil of very compact yellowish-red (5YR 5/6)
sand. The ashy layer probably represents the ash accumulated on the floor during the buildings occupation. However, the ashy layer also extended under the buildings
walls, indicating that the area had been occupied before
the buildings construction. The area outside the building
had an entirely different stratification showing a different
pattern: underneath the modern surface lay a 10 cm thick
compact level, followed by a very loose, soft, ashy level,
in which there were clayey lenses, often 15 cm thick.
As mentioned in the above, the wall structure of
Structure BM conformed to the usual double face stone
walls of the Inka Period, even though neither its thickness
(60 cm on average), nor its quality met the usual standard
of Inka walls. The ashy layer under the walls indicated
that they had been constructed without any foundations:
a clay layer was spread over the ash and the lowermost
two courses of the alluvial cobbles used for the walls
were laid on the clay. In contrast to Structure BH, the

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

Figure IV.14 Plan of Structures BMBM3


69

Paria la Viexa

Figure IV. 17 Lower part of the oven of Structure BM


with a round depression for holding round-based vessels
Figure IV. 15 Interior side of the northern wall of
Structure BM
stones used were not relatively regular sandstone and
slate blocks. The sides of the walls clearly revealed that
the walls of Structure BM were not structures set in mortar, but rather adobe walls into which rows of alluvial
cobbles had been set (Fig. IV.15).
Although we found no traces of a wall plastering, its
use cannot be excluded. The much thinner, weaker structure of the walls explains why they survived to an even
smaller height than the walls of Structure BH: the highest
extant section was no more than 50 cm from the floor
level in the northwestern corner and thus no traces survived of the one-time niches, which had perhaps been recessed into the walls. We uncovered the remains of a ca.
80 cm wide entrance in the northeastern corner, indicated
by a threshold of two large batns set 2637 cm above
the floor level. Lying by the entrance on the outer side
of the wall was a bowl fragment (taquira) with stones
set into its interior, used for washing and shelling quinoa
(Fig. IV.16). The position of the entrance indicates that it

Figure IV.16 The entrance of Structure BM with its


threshold made from batns and the base of a taquira on
the outer side of the entrance
70

faced the settlements center and that it had been cut into
the wall that was more protected from the northwesterly
winds. In view of the dividing wall, it seems probable
that there had been a similar entrance in the eastern wall,
at the opposite southern end. Only a 5 cm high section
of the dividing wall could be identified. The 3040 cm
wide wall resembled the house walls: it was more of an
adobe wall into which alluvial cobbles had been set. This
barely surviving dividing wall disappeared at the buildings eastern wall, perhaps an indication of a doorway
between the buildings two rooms, although it is equally
possible that the low remains of the dividing wall can be
ascribed to the fact that the door between the two rooms
was positioned in the middle of the dividing wall and that
its threshold had been higher than the surviving wall remains. The position of the dividing wall indicated that the
northern room measured 9.4 m by 5.8 m.
A few patches of the floor plastering survived in the
area of the oven, indicating that the room and the entire
building had a floor made from a few centimeters thick
yellow clay, over which a 13 cm thick layer of compact
sand was spread. The sand, which probably had a warmer
feel to it than clay, was perhaps colored to a grayish hue
by the overlying ashy level. A less than 0.5 cm thick level
of ash could be noted above the sand level in some spots,
the remains of the ash trodden into the floor.
We found an oven constructed of stone and clay in
this part of the building, immediately by the northern side
of the dividing wall (Fig. IV.17). Although its upper part
had perished, the curve of its wall indicated that it had
been an 80 cm by 45 cm large oval oven with a domed
roof made of alluvial cobbles set in clay. Its opening on
the western side was used for stoking the fire or, conversely, for removing the charred wood and ash. Interestingly enough, the surviving lower part was not particularly burnt, suggesting a shorter use-life (although the
missing upper part may have been more thoroughly burnt
and more worn).

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

The cooking vessels had probably been set in the


openings on the top, as we had observed in the case of
an oven seen in a farmstead building on the fringes of
the Cochabamba Valley (Fig. IV.18). There was a slightly
raised round clay platform beside the ovens opening,
perhaps to utilize its heat and of the ash removed from it.
The round depression on the top of the platform probably
served for holding round-based vessels. An open hearth
with a diameter of 5060 cm lay near the oven. The alternating yellowish-red and ashy layers indicated that it had
been renewed several times.
We uncovered five pits on the inner side of the buildings eastern wall, which in part extended under the wall.
The large amount of ash, maize cobs, bones, and firewood remains found in their fill suggested that the warm
ash still suitable for heating the building had been temporarily placed in these pits. Two phases could be distinguished in the ash pit lying closest to the oven and
the hearth (Fig. IV.19): a depression lined with clay was
created on the floor level above the pit dug into the virgin
soil and the ash was deposited in this depression, perhaps
a reflection of a later, more efficient mode of utilizing
more heat from the burnt firewood.
Although the features described in the above would
suggest that food preparation was performed inside the
building, the finds brought to light outside the building
indicate that the preparation of raw materials was conducted outside the building, as shown by the batn fragment, a finely carved ua, a stone mortar (Fig. IV.20), and
fragments of household vessels found in the sheltered
corner formed by the buildings northern wall and the
extension of the western wall, all of which clearly show
that the area had been used for cereal grinding. Other activities conducted outside the building are indicated by

Figure IV.18 Clay oven in a farmstead building at


Incarracay in the Cochabamba Valley (1995)
the base of a bowl used for shelling quinoa found outside
the entrance.
In addition to the daily activity of preparing food and
beverages, it seems quite certain that Structure BM had
also been used for the production of textiles and adornments, at least judging from the high number of spindle
whorls (45 made from clay or from broken pottery fragments and 14 carved from stone), bronze needles (26)
and other weaving implements (12 wichuas polished
from camelid bones and taruka antler, and the shuttles
and combs carved from bone).6 The spatial distribution

Figure IV.19 Ash pit and


depression lined with clay
(right), and the remains of the
oven and the dividing wall
71

Paria la Viexa

Figure IV.20 Sandstone ua


and quartzite mortar uncovered
outside Structure BM
of these artifacts indicates that they mostly lay in two
areas: about one-quarter (23.7%) was recovered from
three 2 m by 2 m squares in the buildings northeastern corner (twelve from Square 12, six from Square 14,
and five from Square 16) and another cluster of weaving
implements came to light from Square 29 (five spindle
whorls and two bronze needles; 8.75%), where the oven
lay. The spatial distribution of these artifacts indicates
the focus of this activity inside the building and this is
also confirmed by the three perforated stone discs with
a diameter of 1317 cm found in the buildings northern
and northeastern part: two lay in the wall debris and one
was recovered from the eastern wall (Fig. IV.21).7 Stone
discs of this type have been found elsewhere too, for example at the Middle Horizon settlement of Conchopata
(Bencic 2000: 107, Fig. 16) and the Late Intermediate
Period site at Pedregal in the Jequetepeuqe Valley (Cutright 2009: 187, Fig. 6.13). They are usually interpreted
as maceheads, although Keatinge (1975: 225) suggested
a possible use as digging stick weights, while Cutright
(2009: 187188) thought they might have been clodbreakers (called wini in Quechua). Matos Mendieta
(2002: 682683) proposed yet another possible function
for these artifacts on the basis of the stone discs found
in one of the buildings of the Inka tampu at Tarmatambo
in the Central Peruvian mountains. According to Matos
72

description, some of the discs were still in the walls. He


interpreted the discs as being stone rings fixed to the
walls for tying the back strap looms. Unfortunately, Matos report does not specify how the stone discs had been
attached to the wall. We were also unable to reconstruct
the mode of attachment in the case of the pieces found
in a secondary position. Seeing that all three lay in the

Figure IV.21 Perforated sandstone disc in the debris of


Structure BM

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

Figure IV.22 Distribution of


the weaving implements (A),
adornments (B) and both find
types (C) in Surface II
wall debris, it seems likely that they had been fixed to the
upper wall section.
Insofar as our interpretation is correct and the buildings northeastern part served as the primary area for
cloth production (three of the twelve weaving implements came to light from Square 14 by the northern part
of the eastern wall), it is perhaps not mere chance that the
pits into which the warm ash and charred wood remains
had been deposited lay in the same area, along the inner
side of the eastern wall, to provide more comfortable circumstances for the activities performed there.
In addition to the weaving implements, the buildings
function as a textile workshop seems to be further confirmed by the discovery of 35 perforated bronze, silver,
and gold discs, and the 167 beads made from bone, mother-of-pearl, and stone (including quartz, sodalite, turqouise, and lapis lazuli) which had been adornments.8 The
spatial distribution of these finds too showed a concentration in the buildings eastern half and around the oven:
about four-fifths (78.5%) of these finds were recovered
from the 16 squares opened in those areas, while about
one-quarter (24.2%) from Squares 24, 29, and 34, where
the oven lay. The distribution of the finds used as adornments shows a similar pattern as the distribution of the
weaving and spinning implements (Fig. IV.22).
In the light of the above, and in view of the fact that
no more than 20 bone and stone beads and metal discs,
eight copper needles, and two wichua remains were
brought to light from the 48 squares of Structure BH lying nearby, we may rightly assume that Structure BM
functioned as a residential house/workshop (kumpi wasi)
for women specializing in textile and adornment production. In this case, the buildings occupants has perhaps
been aqllas.

In contrast to Structure BH, we found no evidence


of the buildings destruction: traces of small fireplaces
reflecting the buildings later use were entirely lacking
in various parts of the debris. This may perhaps be explained by its poorer architectural quality and its more
rapid decay, making its ruins unsuitable for use even as a
temporary shelter.

IV.2.2. STRUCTURES BM1BM3


The one-time existence of Structure BM1 was indicated
by a single curved row of stones outside the northern
wall of Structure BM. This structure definitely post-dates
Structure BM because its wall virtually lay on the modern surface, extending no deeper than 10 cm underneath
it, and also because it lay on the rubble from Structure
BM.
The same holds true for Structures BM2 and BM3
because both these structures had been constructed inside
Structure BM (Fig. IV.23). Structure BM3 with a circular
groundplan was erected first and Structure BM2 was built
inside it. Interestingly enough, the walls of both buildings were more carefully constructed compared to Structure BM. The wall thickness was 60 cm and the surviving
lower wall sections were built from large sandstone and
slate blocks set into mortar. About one-half of the two
buildings fell into the area excavated in Surface II.
Structure BM3, the earlier of the two, was virtually
erected on the floor level of Structure BM. Similarly to
Structure BM, an ashy level was noted under the walls
of the building with a diameter of 8 m. This ashy level
was either part of the ashy deposit covering the area before the construction of Structure BM or part of its floor.
73

Paria la Viexa

Figure IV.23 Structures BM2


and BM3 constructed inside
Structure BM

Figure IV.24 Cross-section of Structure BM2


The wall of Structure BM3, surviving to a height of
45cm, was erected on a layer of yellow clay overlying
the ashy level. It would appear that the same procedure
was followed as in the case of Structure BM and the wall
did not have a bedding trench sunk into the virgin soil,
but was erected on a foundation of larger stones set into
a clay layer spread over the ground. The greater part of
the buildings interior was taken up by Structure BM2
erected inside it. Because only a ring-like area between

the two buildings survived of its interior, its internal layout and function can no longer be determined. A patch
of yellow clay plastering found 910 cm underneath the
floor of Structure BM2 in the eastern half of the ring-like
area probably represents the floor of Structure BM3. The
single link between the two buildings was indicated by
two rows of stones (perhaps the remains of a wall) which
appeared at the same level as the top of Structure BM3s
surviving wall. Ashy levels and mixed levels of reddish-yellowish clay alternated under this wall, suggesting
that it post-dated the destruction of Structure BM3 and
was contemporaneous with Structure BM2.
The structure of Structure BM2, having a diameter of
6 m, was identical with the former: the lower part of the
60 cm thick wall was made up of large sandstone blocks,
followed by a layer of clay and a course of highly fragmented slate blocks. The remaining wall section was of

Figure IV.25 Platforms and


grinding implements deposited
upside-down in Structure BM2.
The curved line to the left of the
stone implements indicates the
clay plastering of the ash pit
74

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

Figure IV.26 An ua, a mortar, and a batn deposited


upside-down on the floor of Structure BM2
adobe mixed with alluvial cobbles. The wall itself partly
lay on the same levels as Buildings BM and BM3, the
only difference being that the 910 cm thick ashy level
and 7 cm thick hard, compact clay level was overlain by
another 35 cm thick ashy level. The wall of Structure
BM 2 was built atop the latter ashy level (Fig. IV.24). The
buildings floor could be noted at the base of the wall.
The floor of Structure BM2 was made in the same
manner as the floor in Structure BM: a yellow plastering
covered by a 14 cm thick layer of compact sand overlain
by an extremely thin layer of ash, no doubt the remains
of the ash trodden into the floor. This floor did not cover
the entire area of the buildings excavated section, whose
southern end was covered by a loose ashy fill. The excavation of this area revealed that this was a clay-plastered
ash pit containing pottery sherds and bone fragments that
had been dug into the floor, resembling the one found beside the oven in Structure BM. The finds and features in
this area suggested that it had been the kitchen of Structure BM2 (Fig. IV. 25). A repeatedly renewed hearth lay
on the eastern side of the ash pit, which was also visible
in the cross-section of Surface II. Underneath the hearth
lay another pit with a loose ashy fill.
A stone mortar with a perforation through its base
deposited upside-down, a batn, and an ua (Fig. IV.26)
lay by the northwestern edge of the ashy pit; two broken
vessels, a bowl, and a handled pot, placed one into the
other were uncovered next to the batn. The position of
the artifacts suggests that even though the stone artifacts
(whose production called for a considerable labor investment) had been left behind in the abandoned building,
they were intentionally broken, perforated, and deposited
upside down before the occupants left the building.
We uncovered two 20 cm high platforms built against
the wall on the buildings western side. The smaller one
had an oval form and was located immediately beside
the stone implements used for grinding, while the larger,
roughly rectangular one lay to its north. Alluvial cobbles were laid around the upper edge of both platforms.

Remains of an upright wall starting from the platforms


top were identified above the larger one, suggesting the
one-time presence of a domed oven. The ash and the
fragments of larger vessels found on the platform seem
to confirm its function in food preparation.
The number and proportion (37.1%) of spinning
and weaving implements recovered from the twelve
squares across Buildings BM2 and BM3 exceeded by
far the average of Surface II; however, we have no way
of determining how many of these finds can be associated with Structure BM, built earlier, and the two later
structures erected inside it. The same holds true of the
clothing adornments: about one-quarter (28.2%) of the
305 artifacts of this type recovered from Surface II came
to light in Squares 3950. However, one part of these
finds too can probably be associated with Structure BM.
We may probably assume that the twenty-one silver and
bronze discs uncovered in one spot in Square 50 were
either parts of already finished items of clothing or were
an indication of the activity area where these were sewn
onto the garments; they had perhaps been stored in the
clay-plastered bin uncovered under the floor level of
Structures BMBM3 (Fig. IV.27). The architectural traits
and the finds of Structure BM2 assign the building to the
category of round dwelling houses of the altiplano and
the neighboring mountain regions in which daily activities were conducted inside the house; at the same time,
the quality of its finds suggests that its occupants were
not commoners.

Figure IV.27 Clay-plastered bin uncovered under the


floor level of Structures BMBM3
75

Paria la Viexa

Laboratory
code
deb-13916

deb-13910

deb-13915

Origin of sample

13C(PDB)
[]

Conventional
radiocarbon
Age (BP)

Calibrated AD10

Calibrated AD11

16801730
18301890

Structure BM, floor level,


Square 34, oven, -50 cm,
charcoal

-23.8

162 45

1660188012
after 1910

Structure BM2, ash layer


over the floor, Square 49,
-25 cm, charcoal

-24.7

481 45

14101450

14201480

Structure BM2, ash below


the hearth, floor level, Square
49, -4050 cm, charcoal

-23.6

484 46

14101450

14201480

Table IV.2 Radiocarbon dates for Structures BM and BM2 of Paria

The position and stratigraphy of the three main


buildings (Structures BM, BM2, and BM3) uncovered
in Surface II provide a clear indication of their absolute chronology and their date relative to each other.9
Structure BM was constructed first, followed by Structure BM3 and, finally, by Structure BM2. Irrespective of
their relative chronological position, the finds recovered
from the buildings assign all three to the Late Horizon.
In the case of Structure BM, the earliest structure, this
date is unequivocal in view of the Inka style wares and
metal finds, as well as the buildings architectural features and the activities probably conducted in it. The
same holds true for Structure BM2, even disregarding
the small disc adornments for clothing: similarly to the
other excavated features, the pottery finds from this
building included both Late Intermediate Period and
Inka style vessel fragments. The radiocarbon dates for
the samples collected from the buildings also confirm
the date suggested by the finds: although the charcoal
sample from the oven of Structure BM (deb-13916) was
probably contaminated because it yielded a far too late
date, the two samples from Structure BM2 both gave
a date in the earlier Late Horizon and thus the earliest
structure, Structure BM, can hardly be dated later than
the mid-15th century.
The excavated buildings of the Paria settlement indicate that the area which we identified as the administrative/ceremonial zone had functioned as an Inka
settlement from the earlier or the mid-15th century and
that large buildings for communal purposes had been
erected in this area already during the initial Inka Period
occupation. Additionally, buildings with other functions
were also constructed until the close of the 15th century.
However, there is no forthcoming explanation for why
buildings with widely different architectural features
(Structures BH and BM) had been constructed within a
few ten meters of each other at roughly the same time
76

(at least on the testimony of the radiocarbon dates) in


this administrative/ceremonial zone. Their different nature can perhaps be attributed to their differing function.
Neither is it clear why the round residential structures
were also erected alongside the community buildings in
this settlement zone; however, similar dwelling houses
ocurred also in the central kanchas of Hunuco Pampa
(see Chapter IX.1).

IV.3. The Finds from the Inka Provincial


Center
The finds from Paria represent a broader spectrum not
only in terms of artifact types and the raw materials used
for their manufacture, but also regarding the sheer number of finds collected on the surface and from the excavated buildings, which exceeds the material from other
periods by several orders of magnitude. This enables an
overview of the raw materials and the artifact types used
during the Late Horizon, as well as their comparison with
the artifacts from other periods and other sites, alongside
a statistical analysis in the case of certain find categories.

IV.3.1. CERAMICS
The past one hundred years have seen a proliferation of
studies on Inka pottery, many of which described and
grouped the ceramic wares according to formal, stylistic,
and/or functional categories. Some of these studies, especially the early ones, were based on pottery finds from
Cuzco (Fernndez Baca 19721989; Pardo 1957; Rowe
1944; Valcarcel 19341935), from the Inka heartland
(Bingham 1915; Franch et al. 1976), or from sites in areas
where Inka Imperial pottery was dominant or prominent
(Menzel 1959; 1976). More recent works have focused

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

on describing and categorizing Inka ceramics based on


research in a particular area, complemented with a comparison of ceramic products from other regions of the
Inka Empire (Bray 2002; 2003a; 2003b; 2004; Meyers
1975; 1998). The pottery classes proposed by Meyers
were based on the typological system elaborated by Luis
Valcarcel and John H. Rowe, which accorded primacy
to surface treatment and decorative patterns: the seven
classes distinguished by Meyers (and the unique forms
assigned to Class 8) comprised fourteen distinctive forms
based on the most common vessel forms (Meyers 1975;
1998). Matos classification was based on similar principles, with fifty-three vessel forms divided into eleven
main groups (Matos Mendieta n.d.: 117).
While these typological schemes undoubtedly incorporate the basic Inka pottery types, they were based
on intact pieces from burials and the vessels housed in
museums and private collections, and it therefore seems
likely that these classifications do not offer a reliable picture of the pottery used on Inka settlements, in part because undecorated household wares are underrepresented
or poorly documented in these collections and in part because non-Inka ceramic wares are rarely included in the
descriptions (see, e.g., Bray 2002; Costin 1986; Julien
1983) and even more rarely in the statistical analyses.
It is therefore difficult to apply the currently accepted
typological schemes to the ceramic material collected or
excavated by us because disregarding a few intact pieces,
the greater part of the ceramic assemblage is made up
of sherds coming from undecorated household wares and
pottery made in a non-Inka style. Aside from the easily
identifiable Inka wares, the material is dominated by undecorated wares used for storing liquids and raw foodstuffs, and for preparing food and beverages, which at the
most allowed the identification of major vessel groups.
We distinguished a total of seven basic types with their
twenty-seven variants in the ceramic assemblage from
Paria (Fig. IV.28). The analysis presented here is based
on this categorization: in addition to describing the form
and function of various vessel types, we also included a
description of the paste,13 the manufacturing technique,
and the decorative patterns, especially in view of the
fact that this material comes from a provincial area of
the Inka Empire where the ceramic traditions of the Late
Intermediate Period survived into the Inka Period and,
moreover, became a standard part of the pottery wares of
the Late Horizon, at least on the testimony of the ceramic
assemblage from the buildings uncovered in Paria.
The ceramic assemblage from the Paria Basin and
from the provincial center created there during the Late
Horizon can be divided into five main groups in terms
of form, quality, and decoration. The first group comprises vessels made in the Inka Imperial style. The pottery sherds assigned to this group represent the by far
the best quality wares and all come from vessels typical
for Inka culture. We prefer to use the label Inka Imperial

style instead of the Cuzco style because these vessel sets


also include ceramic types whose origins lay beyond
the Cuzco Valley. The best documented example is Inka
Pacaje pottery, whose origin on the southern fringes of
Lake Titicaca has been convincingly demonstrated by
Albarracin Jordan (1996). This ware was distributed over
extensive regions in the empires southern lands following the Inka expansion, and in many cases the quality of
this ware was in no way inferior to Cuzco polychrome
ceramics. The next stylistic group is made up of pottery
copying wares in the Inka Imperial style. Meyers (1998:
7172; 1975: 9) has convincingly argued that this designation is more precise than the earlier used category of
local Inka pottery because most of the vessels made in
the Inka Imperial style had not been imports, but pieces
produced from local raw materials (a point confirmed
also by the petro-mineralogical and geochemical analysis
of the ceramic material from our survey). Thus, the ceramic group characterized by vessels of the same type as
the Inka Imperial wares, but more poorly made and with
less carefully executed decoration should more precisely
be termed Inka imitation wares. The other three stylistic
groups are the mixed style, blending ceramic traits of the
Inka and the Late Intermediate Period, the local styles
surviving into the Late Horizon, and the style represented
by vessels which cannot be assigned either to the Inka
or to local Late Intermediate Period pottery style, which
visibly continues another pre-Inka tradition that is alien
to the Paria Basin.
The following analysis and statistics are based on the
main traits (vessel types and paste quality) of the 21,642
vessel fragments recovered from Surfaces I (5,179
sherds) and II (16,463 sherds) excavated at Paria. Of this
sample, 1,700 diagnostic fragments (807 pieces from
Surface I and 893 pieces from Surface II) were submitted
to more detailed analyses,14 performed according to 20
different indices.

IV.3.1.1. Household Pottery


The fragments assigned to this category, accounting for
roughly one-quarter of the diagnostic vessel types, come
from various types of pots, pitchers, and bowls used for
storing liquids and raw foodstuffs, or for preparing food
and beverages. These coarse vessels are mostly undecorated or adorned with simple painted patterns.
One common type is represented by pots with everted
rim and constricted neck (Plate V). In the most cases, the
rim is thickened and rounded, the wall thickness is between 5 and 8 mm, although pieces with 35 or 812mm
thick walls also occur. The mouth diameter ranges between 12 and 32 cm. The vessel stand with a rounded
indentation found beside the plastered oven in Structure
BM (see Fig. IV.17) and the almost intact pot (Fig. IV.29)
from Structure BM2 suggest that these pots had a rounded
77

Paria la Viexa

Figure IV.28 Main vessel forms in the ceramic assemblage from Paria
78

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

or slightly flattened base, resembling the Mallku alisado


style pot published by Arellano (2005: 181). This form
ensured that the pots lower half was evenly exposed to
heat after they had been placed in the oven provided with
openings for inserting the vessels. The two strap handles
were added accordingly: they either spring from the rim
or are set horizontally on the vessel shoulder. Handles are
generally 911 mm thick and 3336 mm wide, although
the finds include handles measuring 13mm by 46mm.
Most pots (90%) are coarse, their paste is compact with
sand as the non-plastic inclusion, although 20% also contained mica. The surface is smoothed both on the exterior and interior; a slip was rarely applied. Their color
is dominated by gray (2.5YR 3/1, 2.5YR 4/1, 2.5YR
5/1, 2.5YR 6/1, 5YR 3/1, 5YR 4/1, 5YR 7/1) and black
(53.9%), with a smaller part fired to red (10R 3/4, 10R
5/8, 5YR 5/6), orange (10R 6/3), or brown hues. The vessel exterior is often sooty owing to daily use. Their firing
is homogenous in 75% of the cases, i.e., the vessel was
fully oxidized during firing. Some vessels have a black
painted band around the rim or an oblique black band on
the exterior.
In contrast to the above vessels made in the local preInka tradition, the finds from Structure BM excavated
in 2006 included a base fragment from a pedestal-base
cooking pot (Plate V.d), one of the typical Inka wares.
Fragments of handled lids (Plate V.ef), usually used
with these vessels, came to light in Structure BH. The
latter are usually coarse, their paste is compact, but in
contrast to the surface treatment of pots, lids are generally burnished. From her analysis of the ceramic assemblages from thirty different sites, Bray concluded that
this vessel, used for preparing a maize-based stew, was
part of the most common Inka vessel sets (Bray 2003a:
1520): it was one of the four most widespread vessel
types, accounting for 92% in the Inka ceramic assemblages she had examined (Bray 2003b: 176). Our own
pottery studies, however, do not confirm Brays conclusions because this vessel type can hardly be demonstrated statistically in our material, although it must be
added in all fairness that the very fragmented state of
our ceramic assemblage makes the identification of this
vessel type rather difficult.
Jars with strongly everted rim and strap handles
whose base was either flat or had a 0.51 cm high ring
base can likewise be regarded as a continuation of local pre-Inka pottery traditions. These jars have a coarse,
compact paste and they were predominantly tempered
with sand, although about one-quarter of these vessels
also contained mica as a tempering agent. The surface
is smoothed, most are fired to hues of gray and brown
(7.5YR 6/4, 2.5YR 6/4), and about three-quarters of
these vessels were completely oxidized during firing.
Large, thick-walled, coarse dishes form a small,
well-definable group (4.3%) within the diagnostic vessel
types. (Plate V). According to Bray (2003b: 176) these

Figure IV.29 One of the two broken vessels placed one


into the other found between the ash pit and the grinding
implements uncovered on the floor of Structure BM2

dishes, which best resemble Meyers Type 11 (1975:


14), represent one of the four most common Inka vessel
types. The dishes with a diameter of over 20 cm have 7
14mm thick straight or slightly curved, flaring walls and
inturned, generally thickened, straight rim. The knobs
eased the handling of the vessels. Their paste is compact,
the clay was tempered with sand and, more rarely (10%),
with mica. Coming in various colors, most often in various shades of red (2.5YR 6/6, 10YR 5/6, 10R 5/6), the
dishes have a smoothed, usually unslipped surface. 70%
of the bowls in this category have a completely oxidized
profile. They are decorated with a black or brown painted
band on the rim or in the interior (Plates V.kVI.a).
One remarkable group among the vessels used for
preparing food is made up of taquiras. The base of a vessel of this type, used for shelling quinoa, came to light
beside the entrance to Structure BM (see Fig. IV.16 and
Plate V.b). Its coarse, porous paste was tempered with
pebbles and sharp pebbles for shelling quinoa were set
in its interior.

IV.3.1.2. Vessels for Serving and Storing Liquids


and Food
One class of vessels assigned to this group is made up of
jars (Plate VI.cf). The most common type is represented
by pitchers with strongly everted rim and 1820 mm
wide, 1013mm thick strap handles springing from the
rim. Their paste is compact, with a few pieces having a
very compact or porous paste. Sand is the most common
non-plastic inclusion, although the group also includes a
few fragments with a very fine paste, which do not appear
to have been made using any tempering agent visible to
the naked eye. Mica was used as a temper in a greater
79

Paria la Viexa

proportion (30%) than in the case of the previous vessel group. Over 70% of the pitchers were burnished and
slipping could be noted on over 50%, although it must be
noted that rim fragments, which generally had a slip applied to them, are overrepresented in the ceramic material
analyzed by us. The slip has a reddish hue (2.5YR 4/6,
2.5YR 4/8, 2.5YR 5/6, 2.5YR 6/6, 10R 3/6, 10R 4/6, 10R
4/8, 10R 5/6, 10R 5/8) in over two-thirds of the cases, the
rest having shades of brown (10R 4/4), orange (10R 6/6),
yellow, pink, white, gray, and black. While the average
mouth diameter of pitchers is 1116 cm, many considerably smaller pieces (68 cm) also occur. The wall thickness of these vessels is 58 mm, although a few thinner
fragments with a wall thickness of 34 mm also occur.
Pitchers are generally homogeneously fired and 80% of
the fragments have a completely oxidized profile whose
color is identical to that of the vessel exterior, indicating
that these vessels were fired in an oxidizing atmosphere.
The decoration of pitchers is dominated by black painting, usually applied to the vessel exterior, principally the
rim. The motifs include simple lines, lattice patterns, circles, and triangles flanked by parallel lines and intersecting lines. Red and brown painted motifs and black on red
painting were also applied.
Arbalos (Plate VI.ef), representing a particular
variant of jars, account for 6.4% of the diagnostic vessel types, a proportion at variance with the high proportion of arbalos in the Inka imperial center (29%) and its
provinces (55%) published by Bray (2003b: 176). The
sizes of the arbalo fragments from our excavations at
Paria do not enable a reconstruction of the size ranges
of this vessel type, the single information in this respect
being that the rim diameters fall between 13 and 26 cm.
Two-thirds of the arbalo fragments can be assigned to
the category of fine ware. Most have a compact or very
compact paste. The 25 arbalo fragments included in the
petro-mineralogical and geochemical analysis (see Chapter V) have an interesting distribution as regards their fabric. The pieces representing the Inka Imperial style were
made exclusively from Paste I (corresponding to petrographic group I; see Chapter V), more specifically, from
variant B of this paste (with a single exception), a raw
material whose use began in the Inka Period. In contrast,
the pieces classified as imitations of genuine Inka pieces
were made from variants of Paste II (corresponding to
petrographic group II; see Chapter V), a raw material
whose use predates the Inka conquest, suggesting that a
definite distinction was drawn regarding the use of clays
for manufacturing vessels made in the Inka Imperial style
and their imitations. However, it is still unclear whether
the differential use of raw materials can be explained by
technological or social considerations, i.e., whether the
manufacture of better quality ceramic wares called for a
different raw material or whether the use of Paste I was
exclusively restricted to the production of high-prestige
arbalos in the Imperial style. It is also possible that this
80

raw material was only used by potters capable of producing high quality ceramics who had been resettled from
elsewhere.
The paste of arbalos contains sand as a non-plastic
inclusion. In the case of some pieces, the sand is very finegrained and not visible to the naked eye. A remarkably
high proportion (58.3%) of these vessels contained mica,
no doubt owing to the fact that arbalos were vessels with
an obvious link to Inka culture and that in contrast to the
Late Intermediate Period, the use of mica as a tempering
agent became widespread again. The majority (61%) of
the examined arbalo fragments were burnished, a few
were smoothed, and some were very finely burnished.
About one-half (52.7%) were slipped red (10R 4/6, 10R
5/6), usually with darker hues (10R 3/6) grading into
brown (10R 3/3, 10R 4/4), although pink (7.5YR 7/3) and
whitish-pink (7.5YR 8/2) pieces also occur. Two-thirds of
the arbalo fragments have a fully oxidized profile, indicating careful firing. These vessels were fired in an oxidizing atmosphere, reflected also by the orange (10R 6/6),
dark red (2.5YR 4/6, 10R 4/6), reddish-brown (2.5YR
7/4, 10R 5/4), brown (7.5YR 5/4), and pink color of the
vessels. A few pieces were fired to a gray or black color.
Similarly to other arbalos, their decoration is dominated
by black geometric painting alongside a few specimens
with bichrome and polychrome painting in black, white,
orange, dark red, and brown. The decorative motifs range
from simple lines and lattice patterns to parallel lines and
rows of lozenges, circles, and triangles set between them.
It must here be noted that since the fragments classified as
arbalo sherds are dominated by rim and neck fragments,
only a part of the ornamental repertoire typical for this
vessel type occurs on the fragments published here. In addition to geometric patterns, one fragment bears a figural
decoration. A row of llamas with spirals and lozenge rows
separated by black lines underneath encircles the exterior
rim of an arbalo fragment.
The ceramic assemblage recovered from Surfaces I
and II excavated at Paria is dominated by various bowl
types (29.2%), used for serving and consuming food
(Plates VI.gX.h). The following analysis is based on the
293 bowl fragments, which in terms of their form, manufacturing technique, and ornamentation can be assigned
to the Late Intermediate Period, the Inka Imperial style,
the wares imitating Inka pottery, and the mixed style, the
latter blending traits of the other two styles.
About one-half (55.3%) of the analyzed bowl fragments could be assigned to the Late Intermediate Period
styles. About three-quarters of the ceramics in this category are coarse wares dominated by compact pastes.
Only a few fragments have a porous paste. The thirteen
fragments submitted to archaeometric analysis were,
with a single exception, made from Pastes II/A, II/B and
II/C (corresponding to petrographic groups II/A, II/B and
II/C; see Chapter V), the same raw material as the bowls
collected on other sites of the Late Intermediate Period.

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

The non-plastic inclusions in these pastes were shale-siltstone, claystone, and sandstone, but in contrast to the
bowls of the Late Intermediate Period, a fairly significant
proportion (15.6%) of mica could also be identified. The
majority of the fragments (60%) are smoothed, the rest
have a burnished surface. About one-third (35.6%) of the
bowls have the interior covered with a slip, usually in various shades of red (10R 3/6, 10R 4/4, 10R 4/6, 10R 4/8,
10R 5/6, 10R 5/8, 2.5YR 5/6, 5YR 7/3). Three-quarters
of the profiles were completely oxidized, indicating that
the vessels had been fired evenly. The fragments virtually
all come from bowls with evenly curved concave sides,
the proportion of rounded (39.3%) and thinned (32.4%)
rims is similar, while bowls with concave or straight sides
are represented by a few pieces only. The diameter of the
bowls whose size could be reconstructed ranges between
11 and 19 cm; there is only one single piece whose size
is considerably larger (32 cm). The usual wall thickness
is 56 mm, with some having a wall thickness of 4 or
89 mm. The decoration of these vessels is made up of
black or brown painted geometric motifs (although the
latter was more likely translucent black painting), usually along the interior rim or, more rarely, in the vessel
interior and occasionally on the exterior rim. The most
common decorative patterns are bundles of wavy lines,
intersecting wavy lines, wavy and straight lines, and concentric circles, all of which were popular during the local
Late Intermediate Period. However, a few ornamental
motifs such stars, lattice patterns in the vessel interior,
lines encircling the vessel interior, and cross-shaped motifs adorning the interior base are lacking from the local
ornamental vocabulary of the Late Intermediate Period.
This material includes bowls decorated by interlocking
B motifs which recall the Vilavila style of northern Chile
(Romero Guevara 2002). This would suggest that in addition to the bowls made in the style current during the
local Late Intermediate Period, pottery made in the style
of other regions during the same period also became part
of the ceramic wares used in the Inka provincial center
following the Inka conquest, irrespective of whether they
were the locally manufactured vessels used by ethnic
groups resettled to Paria from farther regions or import
ware.
The other distinct, although considerably smaller
group of bowls recovered from Surfaces I and II is made
up of fragments representing the Inka Imperial style, including pieces made in the Inka Pacaje style, accounting for 14.3% of the 293 bowl fragments (Plates VII.g
VIII.d). Over 85% could be assigned to the category of
fine ware characterized by a compact or very compact
paste. Even though only four fragments of this bowl type
were submitted to petro-mineralogical and geochemical
analysis, we found that three of these had been made from
a raw material that had not been used during the Late
Intermediate Period: two contained pumiceous pyroclast
(Paste I/A, corresponding to petrographic group I/A; see

Chapter V), another metamorphic schist fragments (Paste


III, corresponding to petrographic group III; see Chapter
V). The petrographic analyses revealed that the proportion of non-plastic inclusions was around 2035% and
that these inclusions were typically fine-grained, rarely
visible to the naked eye. The 42 bowl fragments assigned
to the Inka Imperial style are characterized by pastes with
a high proportion of mica (46.5%). Most (80.9%) were
burnished, some to a pleasing bright luster, and only a
few pieces were merely smoothed. About 70% of these
bowls were covered with a slip, principally in their interior. The slip colors are dominated by shades of red and
orange (2.5YR 5/2, 2.5YR 5/4, 2.5YR 5/6, 10R 4/6, 10R
5/6), and their paste suggests that the slip was prepared
from the clay used for producing the bowls. A few sherds
indicate the use of a pinkish-white slip (7.5YR 7/3,
7.5YR 8/2). The vessels were well fired: over 80% of the
bowls assigned to the Inka Imperial style have a completely oxidized profile, the remaining few fragments
have a gray core, common for Inka pottery. The mouth
diameter of these bowls ranges between 11 and 16 cm,
the base diameters between 4 and 5.5 cm. The bowls in
this category have curved sides with indrawn rim. The
rim is usually of the thinned variety, with a few representing rounded, thickened, or straight rims. The material
excavated by us contains but a single sub-variant of these
bowls. This variant is characterized by slightly curved,
vertical walls and an outturned, wide, straight rim. One
remarkable fragment can be assigned to the Inka Imperial style (Plate VI.g): the white slipped bowl is decorated
with figural motifs resembling the ones published by Fernndez Baca (1989: 220, Fig. 343).
If the bowls assigned to the Inka Imperial style are
grouped according to their distinctive attributes such as
paste, technology and decoration, we find that the largest
group, about 10% of all identified bowls, were locally
made pieces decorated with designs adopted from Cuzco
polychrome wares (red, black, orange, and white painted
triangles, lozenges and zoomorphic motifs such as llamas, and flies (Plate VII.f; see also Fernndez Baca 1989:
Fig. 248). A smaller group (4%) is made up of bowls in
the Inka Pacaje style decorated with strongly stylized
llamas, a ware originating from the Late Intermediate
pottery used on the southern shores of Lake Titicaca,
which survived into the Inka Period and was extensively
distributed across the empires southerly regions. It can
therefore be regarded as having become an integral part
of Inka Imperial wares. This seems to be supported by
bowls, which blend traits of both styles such as the bowl
with a typical Inka style handle covered with orange slip
over one half and red on the other, decorated with painted
stylized llamas (Plate VII.g). Another variant of bowls in
the Inka style that can be assigned here is represented by
pieces bearing stylized llamas in the Inka Pacaje style
whose rim is adorned by black painted dots set between
wavy lines or intersecting zigzag lines (Plate VIII.a).
81

Paria la Viexa

One interesting observation made regarding bowls decorated with llama figures was that the ceramics recovered
from the same structure, the same square, and neighboring squares included less stylized variants and strongly
stylized, cursive llama figures typical for Inka Pacaje
ware, suggesting that the two were used simultaneously.
In other words, even if there were chronological differences between the emergence of the two styles, their
use cannot be exclusively dated to different periods.
The third group of bowls made in the Inka Imperial style, represented by a few fragments only, are the
grayish-white bowls decorated with motifs familiar from
Cuzco polychrome pottery. In contrast to the bowls of the
first group, however, these were made from Paste III, a
non-local raw material alien to the geological conditions
in the surveyed area, and they can thus be regarded as
imports in Paria.
The second major group of stylistically distinctive
bowls (20.4%) comprises the pieces imitating the Inka
Imperial style. The fifteen fragments submitted to petro-mineralogical and geochemical analysis from this
group indicated that 80% could be assigned to a variant
of Paste II whose use could be noted already during the
Late Intermediate Period. Most fragments could be categorized as fine ware, although their proportion (63.5%)
remained well below that of bowls in the Inka Imperial
style. The paste of these bowls is without exception compact, and while the use of mica as a tempering agent is
higher (27%) than in the case of the bowls of the Late Intermediate Period; it is barely one-half of the proportion
of the bowls made in the Inka Imperial style. These bowls
typically have a smoothed surface (85%) covered with a
slip in hues of red and reddish-brown (2.5YR 5/4, 2.5YR
5/6, 10R 3/4, 10R 4/4, 10R 4/6, 10R 4/8, 10R 5/4, 10R
5/6, 10R 5/8). While the bowls made in this style were
fired in an oxidizing atmosphere, the proportion of fully
fired vessel profiles (62%) is well below that of bowls
in the Inka Imperial style; in the other cases, we noted
a grayish core of varying thickness. The concave sided
bowls have a mouth diameter of 1320 cm. Thinned rims
account for 50% of rim forms, about 25% are rounded,
and the rest are divided between thickened and straight
variants in equal proportion. These bowls are typically
decorated with black painted geometric motifs in the
rim region (lines and triangles), although black painting
combined with white also occurs, as do strongly stylized
zoomorphic motifs.
The third large group is made up of bowls in the mixed
style, blending stylistic traits of Inka Imperial wares and
the ceramics of the Late Intermediate Period. The fragments in this category account for 9.9% of the analyzed
bowl fragments. The three fragments submitted to petro-mineralogical and geochemical analysis indicated that
their paste corresponds to the type used during the Late
Intermediate Period (Pastes II and II/A, corresponding
to petrographic groups II and II/A; see ChapterV). The
82

majority of these bowls are coarse pieces (60%), usually


with a compact paste (92%), although few pieces have a
porous paste. One-third was tempered with mica, a proportion about twice as high than the Late Intermediate
style bowls uncovered at Paria, but only about two-thirds
of the bowls made in the Inka Imperial style. They are
generally burnished (71,.4%) and slipped (82.1%), the
latter most often in shades of red and reddish-brown
(2.5YR 6/4. 10R 3/4, 10R 4/4, 10R 4/6, 10R 4/8, 10R
5/6, 10R 5/8). These vessels were fully fired in an oxidizing atmosphere, indicated by the complete combustion of
the vessel profiles in three-quarter of the cases. In terms
of their shape, these bowls differ little from the pieces
assigned to the two other groups: the sides are curved, the
rim is inturned, but in contrast to the Inka Imperial bowls,
the rims are usually rounded and the ratio of thinned rims
is low, while thickened and straight rim forms occur but
rarely compared to the pieces assigned to the first two
groups. The mixed nature of these bowls is reflected by
their decoration and surface treatment. The decoration is
dominated by the black geometric painting of the Late
Intermediate Period, the most popular motifs being the
combination of horizontal and wavy lines, while the slip
is not the thin, translucent type common for the Late Intermediate Period, but resembles the thick, even slips of
Inka ceramics. At the same time, slips are not always lustrous and the burnish strokes left by the implements used
for burnishing can often be made out on the surface.
The second largest group of the pottery brought
to light from Surfaces I and II at Paria, accounting for
25.5% of the diagnostic vessel types, is made up of various plates. Assigned to this category were the vessel
fragments with a rim diameter of 1526 cm, whose diameter was at least eight times as large as their height.
Of the vessel fragments identified as plates, the smallest group of the 199 stylistically diagnostic fragments
was made up of 43 (21.6%) plates in the Inka Imperial
style, including the pieces in the Inka Pacaje style. The
ten fragments submitted to petro-mineralogical and geochemical analysis indicated that they were made in equal
proportion (40%) from Paste II, used already during the
Late Intermediate Period, and from Paste I, which was
first exploited during the Inka Period (the raw material
of one sherd represented Paste I/II/C, while another Paste
III). Three of these were manufactured from Paste II/A
and three from Paste I/C/a, suggesting that local clays exploited already during the Late Intermediate Period and
clay deposits first utilized after the Inka conquest were
both used for the manufacture of plates in the Inka Imperial style at Paria.
All the fragments can be assigned to the category of
fine ware with a compact or very compact paste. Mica
was used as a tempering agent for over one-third (37.2%)
of the examined fragments. Roughly 85% of the plates
assigned to this style is burnished or, in some cases, very
carefully burnished, and about two-thirds are slipped. Two

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

markedly different groups can be distinguished regarding


the color of the slip, both of which are typical for Inka
Imperial wares. In some cases, the difference appears on
the exterior and interior of the same vessel. The first group
is made up of red-slipped pieces (2.5YR 5/8, 2.5YR 6/6,
10R 4/6, 10R 5/6), frequently very dark (10R 3/4, 10R
5/4), the other of white-slipped vessels, often in shades
of pink (7.5YR 7/1, 7.5YR 7/4, 7.5YR 8/2, 10YR 8/3).
The vessels were fully fired in an oxidizing atmosphere as
shown by the completely oxidized profile of almost 80%
of the examined fragments, while the other pieces have the
gray core common in Inka pottery. This firing technique
resulted in red (10R 3/4, 10R 5/6) and reddish-brown
(5YR 6/4, 10R 3/3) colors, although the proportion of
plate fragments fired to various shades of white, usually
a pinkish-white (7.5YR 7/3, 7.5YR 7/4, 7.5YR 8/2), is
also quite striking (4.6%). The petro-mineralogical and
geochemical analysis of one of the latter fragments indicated that the vessel had been made from Paste III, a clay
type that is alien to the Paria Basin. Assuming that the
same raw material was used for the other white colored
fragments (the pinkish hue can no doubt be attributed to
the firing), the hardly surprising implication is that high
prestige import wares principally occur among the plates
made in the Inka Imperial style used for consuming food.
Their paste and color suggests that they had been manufactured in the state ceramic workshop at Milliraya (Alconini 2013); Tschopik (1946: 3132) labelled this ware
as Taraco Polychrome based on its primary distribution.
The non-local origin of the plates found at Paria is also
reflected by their decorative elements, which are alien to
the altiplano. One fragment bears painted ulupica (Capsicum cardenasii) peppers (Plate X.i), while the handle
of another plate fragment was modelled in the shape of a
jaguar head, as shown by the densely painted black dots.
The eyes are marked by concentric reddish-brown circles
and a similar circle encloses the jaguars neck, perhaps
indicating a tamed, rather than a wild creature.
In terms of their shape, these whitish plates do not
differ from the most common plate types made in the
Inka Imperial style. About three-quarters of these plates
have a flat or slightly curved base and low, upward-curving sides. While thinned rims dominate, the number of
rounded rims is also substantial. Plates with slightly
flaring sides represent a smaller proportion (15%) and
straight-sided plates are even fewer. The perhaps loveliest example of the latter is a plate painted with llama
figures set between geometric motifs made up of red and
black triangles above and meanders on a red base below
(Plate XI.m), recalling the Cuzco Polychrome style.
One distinctive group of plates is made up of handled pieces (Plates XI.ak). One type is represented by
vertically set ring handles whose sizes are 68 mm by
2025mm. Horizontally placed semicircular strap handles and zoomorphic handles account for the other types.
In addition to the jaguar head mentioned above, the

zoomorphic handles on plates in the Inka Imperial style


usually take the form of condor and caiman heads, while
the plates imitating Inka wares generally have handles
modelled after local bird species (andu, duck). Parrot
and toucan heads also figure prominently among these
handles. The plates and bowls with bird head handles
usually have a B-shaped protuberance on the opposite
site, an element interpreted as depicting the birds tail
on the basis of similar pieces (see, e.g., BurgerSalazar
2004: 142; Aldunate del Solar 2001: 26). One rare type is
a handle terminating in a disc with a diameter of 2.7cm
whose surface is divided into eight equal segments by
black, white and red geometric painting.
Plates in the Inka Imperial style are decorated with
geometric designs painted in one to three colors, one of
which was sometimes the slip covering the vessel (Plate
XI.ac). Black and (dark) red dominate, most often combined with white and, less rarely, with brown and orange.
The most popular motif is the row of triangles usually
running along the rim, followed by lines and their combinations, as well as various shapes such as X-es and
lozenges. Afew plates bear figural decoration, the most
common being stylized llama figures arranged in concentric bands in the interior (Inka Pacaje style), sometimes combined with intersecting zigzag lines enclosing
painted dots in the lozenges formed by the lines. Another
type of stylized llama figure echoes the Cuzco Polychrome style: the animals body is depicted with a lattice
pattern, while the ears and the tail are marked by upward
curving lines (see, e.g., Bray 2002: 119, Fig. 5.9; Fernndez Baca 1989: 94, Fig. 106). The few plates with vegetal decoration include the above-mentioned piece painted
with ulupica peppers, as well as a few other plates and
bowls bearing similar plant depictions.
Plates in the Inka imitation style account for 34.2% of
the stylistically and technically diagnostic pieces. Twothirds of these can be categorized as fine wares with a
compact paste (although there was one exception). Mica
was used as a tempering agent in 30%. Almost 80% have
a burnished surface and two-thirds are slipped. While
red (2.5YR 5/6, 2.5YR 6/6, 10R 3/4, 10R 4/6, 10R 5/6),
brown (5YR 4/3, 5YR 6/4, 10R 5/3), yellow (5YR 6/8),
and reddish-orange (10R 6/6, 10R 6/8) are the dominant
hues, a few fragments covered with a white slip also occur. The vessels were fired in an oxidizing atmosphere,
as shown by the profiles of three-quarters of the sherds
in this group. The remaining fragments have a gray
core usually observed in Inka pottery. These plates were
fired to various hues of red (10R 4/6, 10R 4/8), yellowish-red (5YR 4/6, 5YR5/6), and different shades of reddish-brown (10R3/2, 10R 4/4, 7.5YR 7/6, 10R 6/6).
Regarding their shape, these plates differ little from
the plates made in the Inka Imperial style. They are
dominated by forms with inturned rim (73%). However,
straight-sided plates account for a markedly higher proportion (19%) compared to Inka Imperial vessels. While
83

Paria la Viexa

the plates imitating similar Inka wares have a thinned


rim, fragments with rounded and thickened rims also
occur. Handles are mostly of the round variety with flat
section, alongside horizontally set semi-circular strap
handles and animal head handles, which take the form of
parrot and suri (andu) heads, the latter a bird indigenous
to the altiplano. Decoration is dominated by black geometric painting known from the Inka Imperial style: the
most common motifs are triangles and lines encircling
the interior rim, usually executed in brown rather than
black.
The largest group of the stylistically diagnostic plates
brought to light from Surfaces I and II at Paria is made
up of pieces in the mixed style (44.2%), which cannot
be assigned to the Inka Imperial style and at the most
adopted a few traits of the latter. Two-thirds of the fragments can be categorized as coarse ware: the paste is
compact with the exception of two porous pieces. The
seven fragments submitted to petro-mineralogical and
geochemical analysis indicated that each was made from
a variant of Paste II whose exploitation began well before
the Inka conquest. The proportion of mica as a tempering
agent is low (12.8%). 57% of the fragments were burnished, a proportion well below that of plates in the Inka
Imperial style and of Inka imitation plates. At the same
time, slip-covered vessels occur in roughly the same
proportion (62.8%), no doubt owing to the function of
these vessels. The examined fragments are covered with
slips in various shades of red (10R 3/6, 10R 4/6, 10R
4/8, 10R 5/6, 10R 5/8) and the occasional reddish-brown
(10R 4/4, 10R 5/4) or reddish-orange (10R 6/6) hue. The
vessels were fired in an oxidizing atmosphere: about 70%
of the fragments have a completely oxidized profile, the
remainder have a gray core of varying thickness. The vessels were fired to a red (2.5YR 4/6, 5YR 5/6, 5YR 6/6,
10R 4/6, 10R 4/8, 10R 5/6), reddish-brown (2.5YR 5/4,
2.5YR 6/4, 10R 4/4, 10R 5/4), and reddish-orange color
(10R 6/6, 10R 6/8).
While the plates assigned to this group include
pieces adorned with designs of straight and wavy lines
which can be derived from the ornamental repertoire of
the local Late Intermediate Period, two very characteristic types could also be distinguished in the ceramic finds
from Paria which lack any precursors in the ceramic material collected on the Late Intermediate Period sites in
the survey area and are also absent from among the types
assigned to the Inka ceramic style (Plates XII.dXIII.a).
One is a flat plate with a diameter of 2226 cm whose
straight sides (occasionally with a slight curve near the
thinned rim) diverge from the horizontal at a minimal
angle. Its decoration is composed of a black painted
lattice pattern enclosed by a semicircle drawn from the
rim, a motif repeated four or eight times. This design
was applied to a bright red slip (10R 4/6) which on most
plates recalls the matte, slightly translucent slips of the
Late Intermediate Period. On some fragments, however,
84

the slip is burnished to bright luster and fully covers the


vessel surface as is typical for Inka ceramics, but the
burnish strokes can be clearly made out. Both the plates
covered with a matte and a lustrous slip include pieces
with B-shaped protuberances on the rim, some bearing
vertical incisions.
A similar lattice design covers the smaller plate type
with a diameter of 1415 cm, whose shape differs from
the previous one (Plate XIII.bf): the base is curved and
the straight walls flare upward. The rounded rim is sometimes thickened. On some pieces, the lattice pattern is
framed by pendent triangles, on others, the design is set
in the center. On the latter, white painting can be made
out under the black lattice pattern which on some pieces
covers the entire base, but on others takes the form of
bands. In the latter case, the design is combined with
painted lines on the vessel rim. Similarly to the previous
plate type, a matte or burnished slip covers the vessel,
indicating that the production of vessels adopted from
the Late Intermediate Period was modified to some extent during the Inka Period in order to conform to the
Inka ceramic traditions. The five fragments submitted to
petro-mineralogical and geochemical analysis indicated
that they were made from local raw material (Pastes II
and II/A), suggesting that they had been made in Paria
or its vicinity despite the fact that their style was alien
to local traditions. The origins of the style can be sought
south of Lake Poop.
Wooden and ceramic keros (Plate XIII.gi) represent another typical Inka vessel type, of which a few
fragments came to light from the structures excavated at
Paria. Their rim diameter ranges between 7 and 12 cm,
and the base diameter of the single measurable fragment
is 9 cm. The fragments can be assigned to the category of
fine ware with a single exception: the paste is compact,
the surface is smoothed or burnished in roughly similar
proportion, and the profiles are completely oxidized. In
contrast to the red and orange color of the other vessel
types, keros were predominantly fired to reddish-brown,
gray, and black hues. In addition to fragments bearing
painted geometric patterns, some fragments are decorated with incised designs recalling the carved motifs of
wooden keros.

IV.3.1.3. Other Ceramic Artifacts


Spindle whorls represent a distinct category of ceramic
artifacts. Several pieces were cut out of broken potsherds,
while others were expressly made for this purpose. The
former include fragments of both fine and coarse wares.
Most spindle whorls are disc-shaped or conical, with a
few biconical pieces. All phases of the manufacturing
process can be noted: in addition to complete, perforated
pieces, there are several semi-perforated and unperforated specimens. A few whorls bear an incised pattern.

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

Their weight ranges between 2 and 28 gr, although the


two ends of the range are represented by a single piece
each, with the majority weighing 611 gr (60% of the 69
ceramic spindle whorls recovered from Surface II excavated at Paria). Their diameter varies between 1.6 and
4.2 cm, the most common being 2.32.8 cm. The size
differences can perhaps be attributed to the varying thickness and quality of the fibers to be spun, a point demonstrated by Smith and Hirth (1988: 350351) for Aztec
spindle whorls.
The single ceramic gaming dice (Plate XIII.j), whose
counterparts can be quoted from Machu Picchu (Burger
Salazar 2004: 155), was part of the surface collection
at Paria. A small oblong artifact (Plate XIII.n) with a
lengthwise incision found in Structure BM is another
unique find. Its paste is porous and it was tempered with
vegetal fibers. The poorly fired artifact contained some
white substance. A good parallel has been reported from
an ashy layer uncovered at Hatunqolla (Julien 1983: 180,
Fig. 97).

IV.3.1.4. Discussion
The diverse function and differing architectural features
of the two main structures (BH and BM) uncovered in
Surfaces I and II at Paria raise the question of whether a
similar difference can be noted in the style, function, and
paste of the ceramic material from the two structures. The
functionally diagnostic vessel types indicate that the proportion of arbalos and aribaloid pitchers was higher by
almost 30% in Structure BH than in Structure BM, while
the ratios are exactly the opposite in the case of coarse
wares (pots and jars) used for processing, preparing, and
serving food. The proportion of coarse wares found in
Structure BM exceeds the ratio of similar vessels from
Structure BH by about 50%, a difference that is especially striking regarding large coarse dishes, and such as
the fragments of a taquira used for shelling quinoa, suggesting that the differences between the two buildings are
also reflected in the ceramic material.
Vessels used for food processing and food preparation were more abundant in Structure BM, which yielded
a wealth of evidence for daily activities in general, than
in Structure BH, a structure interpreted as a kallanka,
which yielded a higher number of vessels used for storing and serving liquids. The higher number of keros in
Structure BH too supports this conclusion. However, no
similar correlation was apparent in the case of plates and
bowls, principally used for serving food (a higher proportion of the former came to light from Structure BM,
while the latter occurred in roughly equal proportion in
both structures). At the same time, bowls made in the
style of the Late Intermediate Period, as well as Inka Imperial and Inka imitation wares occurred in roughly the
same proportion in Structure BH, while the proportion of

bowls made in the style of the Late Intermediate Period


was roughly the double of the other two styles in Structure BM. One possible explanation is that bowls in the
Late Intermediate Period style were predominantly used
for preparing food, while Imperial style vessels and their
imitations were used for serving and consuming food
during various events related to state representation.
The composition of the ceramic assemblage from the
two excavated surfaces indicates that vessels in the Inka
Imperial style account for 1015% of the pottery and that
Inka imitation wares are present in a roughly similar proportion, while vessels blending the stylistic traits of Inka
wares and the Late Intermediate Period style represent
no more than 12%. In other words, pottery made in the
style of the Late Intermediate Period and utilitarian vessels used during successive periods dominated, making
up the bulk of the ceramic material (7080%). The breakdown according to the two buildings reveals that while
the proportion of imitation Inka wares and pottery in the
mixed style was roughly identical in the two buildings,
the ratio of vessels in the Inka Imperial style was only
slightly, but nonetheless perceptibly higher (by about
4%) in Structure BH, providing additional evidence for
the functional difference between the two structures.
The composition of the pottery from Paria, determined
on the basis of the style, the forms, and the quality of
the vessels, differs markedly from ceramic assemblages
brought to light at other Inka provincial centers. Unlike
in Paria, the vast majority of the vessels at Hunuco
Pampa imitated the shapes and forms of Cuzco pottery;
the ceramics of the local peoples were represented in
very small proportion, often less than 1%, and never exceeding 5% in any given building. This shows a dramatic
contrast to the ceramics from the non-state towns and villages of the region, where local pottery imitating Cuzco
wares was represented minimally, and the pottery wares
typically reflected a continuity of pre-Inka traditions
(MorrisThompson 1985: 7374). A similar situation
was found at Hatun Xauxa, where only 78sherds of the
Wanka style were found during the surface collections
(DAltroy 1992: 116). Similarly to Paria, the ceramic
assemblage from Potrero de Payogasta is dominated by
local Inka Phase pottery, rather than by the Inka polychrome style, which only accounted for about 5% of the
collection from excavated deposits (DAltroy et al. 2000:
21). Although all the above-mentioned Inka provincial
centers were established in a formerly unoccupied location, the ceramic material from these sites indicates that
while the two Central Peruvian centers remained intrusive settlements in the regions they dominated, the two
southern state settlements were culturally, and perhaps
also ethnically, more integrated into the surrounding
countryside.
In addition to the conclusions suggested by the typological and stylistic analysis, the archaeometric analysis of the pottery finds too provided some interesting
85

Paria la Viexa

insights (see Chapter V). Of the 176 vessel fragments


from Surfaces I and II submitted to petro-mineralogical and geochemical analyses, 167 could be assigned
to subgroups of Pastes I and II (I/AB, I/C/b, I/D, II),
securely identified as local raw materials, while of the
remaining nine sherds, three fragments came from vessels made in the Inka Imperial style (two of these were
a bowl and plate with pinkish-white paste) whose raw
material, identified as originating from metamorphic
rock (Paste III) did not match any geological sources
in the surveyed area, and the remainig six sherds came
from vessels made from Paste I/C/a, similarly a probably non-local raw material. These vessels can therefore
be regarded as genuine imports, manufactured partly in
the state ceramic workshop at Milliraya. In other words,
9598% of the analyzed pottery had been manufactured
locally, including the vessels previously considered as
import wares from Cuzco.
Although pottery made from both of the raw materials
(Pastes I and II) determined as being of local origin occurred in the material recovered from the two excavated
structures of Inka Period Paria, the vessel fragments collected at sites of the Late Intermediate Period were exclusively made from Paste II (except for the few pieces made
in the Inka Imperial style), suggesting that the use of
Paste I only began after the Inka conquest. However, the
petro-mineralogical and geochemical analysis of a few
pottery fragments of the Formative and Middle Horizon
indicate that this raw material had already been exploited
before the Late Intermediate Period.
Of the 176 fragments submitted to petro-mineralogical and geochemical analysis, 122 proved diagnostic
in terms of form and stylistic traits. 71% of the 38 fragments assigned to the Inka Imperial style were made from
PasteI, a raw material that was not used during the Late
Intermediate Period. The greater part of these vessels,
one-half of the pieces made in the Inka Imperial Style
(19 in all), were made from a variant of this raw material
(Paste I/B). This variant appears to have been predominantly used for the production of arbalos and aribaloid
jars (92.3%), and its proportion remains strikingly high
(78.9%) even if jars are also included. The bulk of the
Inka Imperial style bowls was produced from Paste I/A,
while plates were made from Paste I/C, although almost
one-half of the plates in the Inka Imperial style were
made from Paste II (principally from its subgroup II/A),
a raw material exploited already during the Late Intermediate Period.
The petro-mineralogical and geochemical analysis of
the 37 fragments representing Inka imitation wares indicated that in contrast to the previous group, almost twothirds (64.9%) were made from Paste II. The proportion
of this raw material was conspicuously high (83.3%) in
the case of bowls and plates (the proportion of Pastes I and
II was roughly the same in the case of arbalos and pitchers). The fragments made from Paste I were dominated
86

by pieces made from variant I/B (75%), irrespective of


vessel type. The proportion of vessel fragments representing local pre-Inka styles made from PasteII was even
higher: 80% of these vessels was produced from this raw
material, similarly to the vessel fragments assigned to
the mixed style that were without exception made from
PasteII.
In sum, the raw material (Paste II) used during the
Late Intermediate Period remained in use after the Inka
conquest and was the predominant raw material for potting as shown by the fact that the bulk of the 176 analyzed vessels (59.4%) was made from this paste. This
raw material was specifically used for producing vessels
in the style of the Late Intermediate Period and for undecorated utilitarian pottery, which changed little from
one period to the next, but it was also used for vessels
imitating Inka wares. The analyses revealed that almost
three-quarters of Inka Imperial wares were made from
Paste I, a raw material whose exploitation began after
the Inka conquest. At the same time, the use of this raw
material was more extensive, especially regarding Inka
imitation vessels. While vessels in the Inka Imperial style
made from this paste account for about 1015% in the
ceramic material, the proportion of Inka imitation wares
produced from this raw material was about three to four
times higher.
This raises the question of why a new raw material
source began to be exploited following the Inka conquest.
Even a cursory comparison of the size of the Paria settlement and the density of surface finds with the settlement sizes and the find densities of the Late Intermediate Period reveals that there was a tremendous growth in
the demand for pottery vessels during the Late Horizon,
generated by the emergence of an imperial provincial
center which fulfilled various economic, social, political,
and ideological functions, most of which called for the
use of ceramic vessels. The raw material source(s) exploited in the preceding period were probably unable to
meet the growing demand either in terms of sheer quantity or regarding quality, and it thus became necessary
to utilize new raw material deposits. The fact that this
new raw material was principally used for the production
of Inka Imperial wares and, to a lesser extent, for Inka
imitation wares would suggest that access to this source
was restricted by quality and/or social considerations
and, also, that it was reserved for the potteries producing
good quality, prestige vessels. This is confirmed by the
petro-mineralogical and geochemical analyses indicating
that the arbalos and the aribaloid jars in the Inka Imperial style, the two vessel types which played a key role in
state representation, were exclusively made from Paste I
(with Paste I/B accounting for 92.3% of these vessels).
In contrast, the locally made Inka Imperial style bowls
and plates, and their imitations, were made from some
other variant of Paste I (I/A, I/C) or from Paste II, a raw
material exploited already during the Late Intermediate

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

Period. This, in turn, indicates that in terms of raw material, a distinction was drawn not only between vessels
in the Inka Imperial and other styles, but also that differing raw materials were used for the different vessel types
made in the Inka style.
The petro-mineralogical and geochemical analysis
also revealed, that one part of the vessels manufactured
from Paste I (subgroups I/A/a, I/B/a-b, I/D, I/C/b) were
made with a tempering agent obtained from the Soledad
Caldera, while another part (subgroups I/A/b, I/B/c-d)
with a tempering agent acquired from the Morococala
Volcanic Field (see Chapter V.5.1.1). This would suggest
the possible existence of at least two different workshops,
perhaps potters settlements established near the two raw
material sources or workshops active on the same settlement, but using raw materials from different sources.

IV.3.2. LITHIC ARTIFACTS


The concentration of different artifact types of the Late
Horizon at Paria and in its broader area could also be
noted in the case of lithics, even if not to the same extent
as in the case of other artifacts. Tools and implements
used for cultivation, food processing, and for crushing
ores (Sites Ce 18, Ce 56, and Ce 63), andesite blades
and chips reflecting local manufacture (Sites Ce 18 and
Ce86) as well as obsidian points (Sites Ce 63 and Ce 65)
and grinding stones (Site Ce 28) were found also on sites
lying farther from Paria; however, these were all tools
and hunting implements without exception. The presence of stone artifacts that can be categorized as prestige
goods and import wares on the altiplano (such as various
types of stone beads) were almost exclusively restricted
to Paria, indicating that the Inka provincial center played
a dominant role in access to these goods. The single exception was a lump of sodalite collected on Site Ce 86,
representing the second most important settlement in the
Paria Basin during the Late Horizon, which lay on the assumed road leading to the Cochabamba Valley and linked
the altiplano with the sodalite deposits in the valley.
In contrast to the overwhelming majority of the other
sites, the finds from the surface collection and the artifacts recovered from the excavated buildings of Paria
comprised a rich assemblage of tools and implements
(batns, uas, mortars, hoes, and chaqui taqlla points)
alongside prestige and import goods (quartzite, sodalite,
turqouise, lapis lazuli, and obsidian), even if their distribution was uneven compared to the other artifact types
(Plate XVI).
Unlike Surface I, Surface II yielded a substantial
number of stone artifacts, 24 pieces in all, that had been
used for cultivation. These had been produced from andesite, sandstone, and quartzite. In terms of their intra-site
distribution, their greater part (17 pieces) came to light
outside of buildings and they showed a concentration in

the northwestern zone of Structure BM. Stone tools and


implements were exclusively recovered during the excavation of Surface II. As has already been mentioned in
the above, a set of a batn, an ua, and a mortar were
discovered outside the northern wall of Structure BM
and on the floor of Structure BM2 (see Fig. IV.26). Both
batns conform to the rectangular type with a dished surface known from other sites in the Paria Basin. The intact
specimen from Structure BM2 is 40 cm long. The 43 cm
long ua from Structure BM is an exceptionally finely
carved piece: the side opposite the slightly curved, dished
grinding surface was carved straight and the middle part
was removed, leaving two protruding handles (see Fig.
IV.20).15 The ua from Structure BM2 is a much larger
(69 cm), coarser, and less elaborate piece. A slightly
dished grinding surface was created on the D-shaped
stone which was worn smooth during its long use and/or
due to the coarser substances ground on it. In view of the
differences in the size, weight, and craftsmanship of the
two uas, it is possible that they had been used for grinding different substances. The flattened spherical mortars
found in association with the two uas were both ground
from quartzite. The grinding cavities of both pieces were
worn smooth, reflecting a longer use. The uneven rim of
the hole in the base of the mortar recovered from Structure BM2 suggests that the base of the mortar was perforated after it had been deposited upside-down.
The surface distribution of obsidian showed a striking concentration in Surfaces Y and AK, and we also
noted that they were mostly found on the western edge of
the towns settlement center and to its west, suggesting
that the obsidian workshops lay in this area. Surface I
proved to be devoid of obsidian finds, while the twenty-nine obsidian and glassy volcanite fragments recovered from Surface II had an even distribution; most represented manufacturing debitage, again confirming the
local processing of obsidian. Small discs with a diameter
of 24.5cm made from schist were fewer in number (18
pieces) than the obsidian and volcanite fragments; some
are partially or wholly perforated and can be regarded as
semi-finished or finished spindle whorls.
Beads represent the by far the most frequent lithic artifact type among the surface finds and the assemblages
brought to light from the excavated buildings. In contrast
to the other artifact types, the distribution of beads did
not have marked concentrations in one or another area of
the settlement, and the finds included both finished and
semi-finished pieces as well as their raw materials (Plate
XIV.ln). The latter provide clues as to how the beads
were manufactured: first, cylindrical pieces were made,
which were then sliced up and perforated. While there
was little variation in the diameter of the beads (9.5
12.5mm), irrespective of their material, their thickness
varied to some extent: sodalite beads were 59 mm thick,
quartzite beads had a thickness of 9.513.5 mm, and they
included a 28 mm long tubular piece. The diameter of
87

Paria la Viexa

Figure IV.30 Collar adorned with silver discs and beads


(after Baessler 19021903, Fig. 413)
the string holes ranged from 2.5 to 4.5 mm. In contrast
to the relatively even surface distribution, the proportion
between the beads from the two excavated surfaces varied significantly: over 90% came to light from Surface
II. Over one-half (60%) of the beads from this area were
made from sodalite (33 pieces), alongside six quartzite, three turquoise and three lapis-lazuli beads (Plate
XIV.op) the greater part of the beads was made from
sodalite procured from the Cochabamba Valley, the most
easily accessible raw material.

Figure IV.32 Iron nails from Structure BH (ab) and


collecting surface AM (cf)
IV.3.3. METAL ARTIFACTS

Figure IV.31 Silver tweezers from Structure BM


88

Given the presence of a copper mine in the neighborhood


of Paria (Site Ce 56), it is hardly surprising that finds indicating copper processing and the copper products themselves were recovered from Paria and the neighboring
sites. Copper-bearing rocks and slag were found in Paria
and in the settlement part on the sites southern fringes,
perhaps functioning as the towns workshop zone, and
among the surface finds from Site Ce 28, located along
the Jacha Uma/Paria River in a spot where the chimney of a furnace no longer in use could be seen on the
ridge overlooking the river. The site itself was occupied
during the Colonial Period. Even though it remains unclear whether copper processing was conducted at the
site during the Inka Period, it is nonetheless noteworthy
that evidence for copper processing during the Late Horizon was exclusively found on the sites around the copper
mine, suggesting that metalworking was restricted to the
Inka provincial center and its immediate neighborhood.
The most diverse and direct evidence for metallurgy
was found in Paria: in addition to copper-bearing rocks,
the excavations brought to light a range of artifacts reflecting copper smelting such as melted copper pieces
containing tiny pearl-like bumps on their surface, and an
assemblage made up of a copper ingot, slag, and a small
blackish-gray bowl.16 The form and the coarse fabric of
the broken bowl as well as the gray encrustation covering

PARIA LA VIEXA: AN INKA PROVINCIAL CENTER

its surface resembled the bowls from Faldas de Cerro


(ScattolinWilliams 1992: 7174, Figs 89) and Quillay
(Raffino 2000: 132134, Fig. 83) in northwestern Argentina that had been found in contexts that could be clearly
associated with copper metallurgy (smelting furnaces,
copper slag in the bowls).
The metal finds collected on the surface and the
pieces brought to light during the excavations represent
a wide range of metal types (Plate XIV.ck). The metal
finds are dominated by needles and metal discs used as
adornments. The former account for one-third of all the
metal artifacts collected on the surface of the Paria site.17
This proportion (26,4%) is not much lower if the number
of needles (37) recovered from Surfaces I and II is compared to the overall number of metal artifacts recovered
during the excavations. In terms of their spatial distribution in the buildings uncovered in the two excavation
surfaces, there was a concentration of metal finds in

Structure BM: the 38 squares associated with Structure


BM in Surface II yielded 25 bronze needles, while the
12 squares of Structures BM2BM3 erected inside the
former contained ten bronze needles. In contrast, only
three needles were found in Surface I where Structure
BH was uncovered. The strongly disproportionate intra-site distribution of needles used in textile production
again confirms the functional differences between the
buildings, indicated also by their other finds. Although
most of the needles were broken, the few intact pieces
suggest that they represented two main size categories:
one made up of 6070 mm long needles, the other of
needles measuring 100110 mm. Their diameter in their
current corroded state is 1.52.5 mm. The end with the
eye widens: a longitudinal groove was made along this
end to lessen wear from the threaded cord and the oval
or oblong eye for threading the thick cords was cut into
the groove.

Figure IV.33 Worked Oliva (ad) and Pecten (e) shells, land snails (fg) and mother-of-pearl discs in different
manufacturing phases (hl)
89

Paria la Viexa

The other most frequent metal artifacts were the 70


bronze, silver and gold discs recovered from the excavation surfaces. Bronze pieces accounted for two-thirds
of the discs; a glance at their spatial distribution shows
that over 90% had come to light in Surface II, again indicating the functional differences between Structure BH
and Structure BM. The discs can be assigned to three
main size categories: roughly 90% have a diameter of
911 mm (the single gold disc had a diameter of 12mm),
while a part of the remaining discs had a diameter of
1719 mm, and the rest a diameter of 2426 mm. While
it proved impossible to determine whether each had been
perforated owing to their corroded condition, a small perforation for attachment could be made out near the edge
on most pieces. Thus, irrespective of their size, these
small objects can be interpreted as ornaments sewn onto
or attached to clothing by means of a cord or a thin metal
wire, or as adornments of accessory pieces of clothing
such as the collar in the Museum of Ethnology of Berlin whose upper and lower edge was trimmed with similar metal discs and tubular beads resembling the pieces
found in Paria (Fig. IV.30).
Shawl pins (tupus; Plate XIV.f) too accounted for a
significant portion of the metal finds. Similarly to other
female costume accessories, most of these artifacts came
to light from Structure BM or Surface II where the building lay: we found 15 intact and broken bronze tupus
and a silver artifact that may have been the shaft of a
silver tupu. Most were broken; only in two cases could
the length of the pins be determined (80 and 110 mm,
respectively). The diameter of the shafts was 45 mm.
Inka Period tupus come in many forms (see, e.g., Idrovo
Urigen 2000: 253254): the pieces found at Paria had
an oval, round, or triangular head, and about one-half
were perforated. Owing to their highly fragmented condition, two or perhaps three fragments were tentatively
interpreted as tumis in view of their size, curved form,
and thin, blade-like nature. Other metal artifacts were
represented by one or two pieces in the excavated material: these include two bronze bells (Plate XIV.cd; a
good parallel has been reported by BurgerSalazar 2004:
186, Fig. 145), a clasp (Plate XIV.j; similar pieces were

90

published by Idrovo Urigen 2000: 256), a finger-ring,


and silver tweezers (Fig. IV.31).
Although their number was low, the excavated buildings contained a few iron artifacts too. With the exception of the horseshoe brought to light in Structure BH,
these were all nails (Fig. IV.32). The iron finds showed a
concentration in Structure BH and in the nearby collection surface AM, divided into 16 collection units: the 13
iron nails were collected in five squares lying close to one
another. These finds provide archaeological confirmation
for what is indirectly implied by the written sources,
namely that the Inka provincial center remained occupied until at least 1546, when the Conquistadors rebelled
against the Spanish Crown. It would appear that the occupation was restricted to the settlements central area.

IV.3.4. SHELL AND SNAIL FINDS


Similarly to other find types, shells and snails were exclusively found at Paria among the Late Horizon sites (Fig.
IV.33). A total of 27 specimens were collected from the
one-hectare large area in the sites middle zone; 10 from
Surface I and 68 from Surface II. Land snails of the Plectosylus genus dominated the sample, although several marine shells could also be identified, among them fragments
originating from the Pecten genus. While some of these
mollusks were part of the diet, others were made into ornaments and jewellery, as shown by the round mother-ofpearl plaques with a diameter of 12 cm produced from
marine shells of the Mytilidae family, some of which had
been perforated. The grooved or perforated Oliva shells
were probably semi-finished pieces for necklaces. The
seven-fold difference between the number of shells and
snails recovered from Surfaces I and II can no doubt be
explained by the functional differences between the buildings uncovered in the two areas: Structure BM was the
setting of food preparation and was occupied/used by
females, as shown also by the eight costume ornaments
made from shells and snails found in the building, contrasting sharply with no more than three such finds from
Structure BH.

V. Archaeometric Investigation of the Pre-Hispanic


Pottery of the Paria Basin: Provenance and Technology
Veronika Szilgyi
V.1. Sampling Strategy
The principal goals of the archaeometric analysis were
(1) to determine the raw material(s) of the ceramics representing different styles (e.g. Inka Imperial style vs. Late
Intermediate Period pottery) and to examine whether the
raw materials used for pottery making had changed in
the Inka Period or whether the same sources were exploited as in the former periods; (2) to identify the source
of these raw materials (whether they were local or not);
(3)to obtain a better knowledge about the finer details of
the ceramic manufacturing processes (such as raw material preparation, firing, and decoration).
Samples for the archaeometric investigations were selected from both the surface collection and the excavated
material. The selected samples were as follows: 95 vessel fragments from the fieldwork in 2004, 138 from the
excavation in 2005, and 38 from the excavation in 2006.
In each case, the main criteria of the selection of the ceramic samples were archaeological considerations, i.e.,
to choose vessels with different functions (pots, bowls,
plates, jars, etc.) representing three, relatively distinct

styles (pre-Inka, Inka Imperial, Inka imitation). In addition, some sherds reflecting pottery styles differing from
the pre-Inka or Inka traditions of Paria (such as the socalled white, Formative, and Tiwanaku ceramics) were
also selected. In order to examine also the unquestionably local materials used in the Inka Period, four adobe
samples (Nos 4/36) were taken from an adobe structure
next to Structure BH (Surface III) and four fragments of
building stones (Nos 4/12, 4/78) from Structure BH
were analyzed alongside the ceramic fragments.
In addition to the archaeological finds, 47 comparative
sediments and hard rocks were also collected. Based on a
knowledge of the geological setting (see Chapter I), this
sampling targeted the potential sources of the clay pastes
and tempering agents used in pottery production. These
were the fine-grained alluvial sediments of the Paria Basin
and of the eastern fringes of the altiplano (four samples from
modern brick clay mines), the Silurian shale-siltstone-sandstone ridges of the Eastern Cordillera, the pyroclastics-volcanites of the southeastern Morococala Volcanic Field, and
the western Soledad Caldera (see Fig. V.1 for the sampling
locations and Appendix V.1 for their description).

Figure V.1 Geological map of the neighborhood of the Paria Basin with the geological sampling locations
(modified after GEOBOL 1992, 1994)
91

Paria la Viexa

V.2. Methods
The following procedures were applied during the archaeometric investigations: petrographic microscopic
(PM) analysis performed at the Department of Petrology
and Geochemistry of the Etvs Lornd University of
Budapest, instrumental mineralogical analyses (X-ray
powder diffraction, XRD) conducted at the Institute of
Geological and Geochemical Research of the Hungarian
Academy of Sciences, and chemical (X-ray fluorescence,
XRF, neutron activation, INAA, and prompt gamma activation, PGAA) analyses carried out at the Department of
Geochemistry of the University of Tbingen, the Institute
of Nuclear Techniques, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, and the Nuclear Analysis and Radiography Department in the Centre for Energy Research of
the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in Budapest.
The microscopic petrographic investigations were
carried out on a Nikon ALPHAPHOT-2 polarizing microscope. The mineral phase analyses were done on a
Philips PW 1730 diffractometer with a Bragg-Brentano
alignment and graphite monochromator (other parameters: CuK radiation, 45 kV tension, 35 mA intensity,
0.050.01 2 step size, 1 s time constant).
The INAA measurements were conducted in the pooltype reactor of the Budapest University of Technology
and Economics. The samples were irradiated with a thermal neutron flux of 2.41012 ncm-2s-1 for 8 hours. Gamma-spectrometric measurements were performed by a
HPGe Well-type detector (resolution 1.95 keV, relative efficiency 20.5%). For the evaluation of spectra, Sampo90
software was used. Standardization was made by the single-comparator method (De Corte 1987), using gold as
comparator. The thermal/epithermal flux-ratio was monitored by zirconium foils. The accuracy of the measurements was monitored by analyzing samples of the NBS
SRM 1633a Coal Fly Ash Standard Reference Material.
The XRF analyses were performed with a wavelength
dispersive X-ray fluorescence analyzer (Bruker AXS S4
Pioneer X-ray spectrometer, Rh tube at 4 kW, Hahn-Weinheimer et al. 1984) on homogenized fused beads with 1.5g
of dried sample powder (dried at 1050C overnight) mixed
with 7.5 g of Li2B4O7. Loss on ignition was determined at
1050C externally and is displayed as LOI. Analytical error and detection limits vary and depend on element and
sample composition. The samples were measured using an
internal rock calibration curve with 35 international standards, compiled by Govindarau (1989).
The PGAA facility of the Budapest Neutron Centre is operated on an external cold neutron beam at the
10MW Budapest Research Reactor (5107 cm2s1 flux;
for a detailed description, see LindstromRvay 2004;
RvayBelgya 2004; Rvay et al. 2008). Gamma-ray
spectra were measured using a calibrated HPGe detector (BelgyaRvay 2004; Fazekas et al. 1999; Molnr et
al. 2002). For the spectrum evaluation, the Hypermet PC
92

software was used (Fazekas et al. 1997; PhillipsMarlow


1976; Rvay et al. 2001a; Rvay et al. 2005). The quantitative analysis is based on the k0 principle (Molnr et al.
1998). The element identification was performed using
the spectroscopic data libraries developed at the Institute
of Isotopes of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (Choi
et al. 2007; Rvay et al. 2004; RvayMolnr 2003; Rvay et al. 2000; Rvay et al. 2001b). The composition
was determined following the method described by Rvay (2009), while the uncertainties of the concentration
values were determined according to GUM (1993) and
Rvay (2006). Since this method is able to measure hydrogen, the H2O content (which is not equal with LOI) of
the samples could be calculated.
The petrographic observations provided information
both on the provenance (i.e., employed raw materials)
and the manufacturing technology (i.e., raw material
mixing, tempering). Data gained by the instrumental
methods are helpful for identifying the source of the raw
materials and the estimation of firing temperatures.
The employed analytical methods were chosen for the
following reasons: (1) to create comparable data for both
the archaeological and the geological samples; (2)to gain
information about the raw materials (their provenance)
and manufacturing technologies (fortunately, invasive
methods could be employed on a part of the selected archaeological finds).
During the provenance investigations, the most relevant data are fabric-mineralogical composition and chemical composition. This information is necessary to identify
the employed raw materials (e.g., whether one or more
components were used, and their source). The fabric-mineralogical data are gained primarily from the polarizing
(petrographic) microscopic examinations and secondarily
from the XRD analyses. The advantage of the first method
is that all components of the pottery (clayey matrix, natural lithoclasts, temper, and pores) can be observed simultaneously. This enables fabric investigations in order to
observe whether different clays were mixed, and whether
tempering agents were used, and if so, to determine the
tempering material. During microscopic petrographic
investigations, a very thin (~30 m thick) section of the
potsherd is transluminated with polarized light in a microscope to study the optical behavior of the minerals.
The XRD analysis is based on the interaction of the powdered sample with X-rays. Due to the diffraction of the
X-rays on the crystal lattice of the matter, it is possible to
determine the mineralogical composition of the ceramic
material. The evaluation of the chemical composition was
performed using various methods (XRF, INAA, PGAA).
The chemical measurements provided concentrations for
11 major and 29 trace elements. Since the element data
detected with various methods overlapped in the case of
different samples, the most sensitive method was used
for certain elements in each case. The XRF and PGAA
provided the major element concentrations (SiO2, TiO2,

ARCHAEOMETRIC INVESTIGATION OF THE PRE-HISPANIC POTTERY OF THE PARIA BASIN

Al2O3, Fe2O3, MnO, MgO, CaO, Na2O, K2O, P2O5, H2O/


LOI). In the case of the trace elements, XRF results were
applied for Rb, Sr, Ba, Zr, Nb, Y, V, and Zn. For most of
the other trace elements, the INAA measurements were
used (Th, U, Hf, Ta, La, Ce, Nd, Sm, Eu, Yb, Lu, Sc, Cr,
Co, As, Sb, Cs), while PGAA provided B, Cl, and Gd concentrations. If one of the methods could not be applied on
a sample, the data were obtained by using the second most
sensitive measurement.

V.3. Comprehensive Petrographic,


Mineralogical, and Geochemical Description
of the Ceramic Samples
The grouping of the ceramics during the archaeometric
investigation was based on the petrographic examination.
The principal distinguishing petrographic characteristic
was the mineralogical composition of the aplastics (siltsand-sized [>10 m] mineral and rock fragments). In the
second step, the color and optical behavior of the plastic
matrix, the fabric (linking of clasts and pores to the matrix), the average grain size, the grain size distribution,
and the roundness and sphericity of the grains were also
considered.
The following mineralogical and geochemical examinations supported the petrographic classification and the
homogeneity of the groups (the internal heterogeneity of
the groups is smaller than among the groups). In addition, these instrumental examinations provided information about the possible raw material sources and about
the technological parameters, too.
As a result of the petrographic grouping, three different ceramic groups can be distinguished on the basis
of their mineralogical composition and origin: (I) pyroclastic and volcanic rock, (II) sedimentary rock, and
(III) metamorphic rock. The first two groups (I and II)
displayed similar ratios (41% and 49%) in the analyzed
sample set. Group III is subordinate (3%). In addition,
there are some specimens (7%) with a transitional composition.
Appendix V.9 contains the distribution of the analyzed
sherds according to petrographic groups and subgroups.
The petrographic, mineralogical, and geochemical characterization of the main petrographic groups and their subgroups is presented in Appendices V.27, showing not only
the average petrographic, mineralogical, and geochemical
data, but also their possible interpretation. The chemical
composition data are summarized in Appendix V.8.

V.3.1. PETROGRAPHIC GROUP I


This group contains fine- to coarse-grained (50-275 m),
dense, hard-fired pottery of well-elaborated paste and of
2035 weight% pyroclastic and/or volcanic litho- and

mineral fragments as temper. During their manufacturing, a relatively pure (or purified?) silty clay paste was
intentionally mixed with pyroclastic and/or volcanic
rock and mineral fragments. The tempering material was
dominantly freshly crushed rock chips, although subordinately naturally eroded, grounded, and deposited, but
still relatively fresh sand-sized sediment was also used
(for a more detailed petrographic description of this pottery group, see SzilgyiSzakmny 2009). The firing
conditions were varied as shown by the color changes
observable in the cross-sections of the vessels (optically
weakly anisotropic or isotropic paste). In general, these
vessels were fired in a dominantly oxidizing atmosphere.
On the basis of the mineralogical composition by XRD,
the maximum firing temperature was around 600800C.
From a geochemical point of view, petrographic
groupI has homogeneous subgroups with the exception of
subgroup I/C (see Appendix V.8). In some cases, a correlation could be noted between the different chemical-mineralogical composition and different archaeological stylistic
features. The similar geochemical behavior and mineralogical compositions in this petrographic group indicate
that the employed raw materials were genetically related
to each other (for a more detailed geochemical interpretation, see Szilgyi et al. 2011). The subgroups of this group
I of ceramics can be distinguished from each other by the
petrography of their dominant tempering material.
V.3.1.1. Subgroup I/A
This subgroup consists of pots with dominantly pumiceous acidic (rhyolitic-dacitic) tuff lithofragments as
temper. These lithoclasts contain small-sized (~30 m)
amphibole and large-sized (~120 m) biotite (I/A/a) or
large-sized (~700 m) biotite (I/A/b) fenocrysts accompanied by plagioclase and quartz. The fresh appearance
of the glassy groundmass of these tuffs indicates that the
lithofragments could not be natural constituents of the
clayey sediment (since the reactive glassy phase would
be more weathered in that case). It supports the possibility of an intentional artificial tempering (Appendix V.2).
V.3.1.2. Subgroup I/B
This subgroup consists of fine-grained pots with dominantly pumiceous acidic (rhyolitic-dacitic) tuff lithofragments as temper, but this tuff type is more glassy
than that of subgroup I/A. These lithofragments have
less fenocrysts (subgroups I/B/a and I/B/d are similar,
the difference between the two subgroups is the shape
of the glass shards). In addition to the fine glass shards,
there are different amounts of pumiceous tuff fragments
(subgroup I/B/b) or fine-grained sedimentary rock clasts
(subgroup I/B/c). The rare but specific fenocryst content
(quartz, plagioclase, biotite, and amphibole) indicates
the genetic connection between the two (I/A and I/B) tuff
93

Paria la Viexa

sources. Similarly to the previous group, the unweathered condition of the glass shards supports the possibility
of tempering (Appendix V.3).
V.3.1.3. Subgroup I/C
This subgroup consists of pots with dominantly volcanic rock fragments as temper. The varied fabric and
fenocryst content of the volcanite clasts indicate a different chemistry (from dacitic to andesitic) and origin of
the tempering materials. It means that this subgroup is
not homogeneous. A part of the tempering material has
sharp edges, an angular shape, and a fresh appearance
(I/C/a), while another part is rounded, spheric, weathered
clasts (I/C/b). It means that both freshly crushed rocks
and alluvial sandy sediment were used for tempering by
the potters (Appendix V.4).
V.3.1.4. Subgroup I/D
This subgroup is strongly under-represented in petrographic group I. The vessels assigned here have aplastic
inclusions, which are exclusively angular mineral fragments. There are no complex rock fragments. The mineralogical composition is similar to the other subgroups of
petrographic group I. This suggests a genetic relationship
with the other subgroups, but the used raw material could
be a finer-grained (50100 m) sediment which was not
tempered or mixed with other components (Appendix V.5).

V.3.2. PETROGRAPHIC GROUP II


This group contains medium- to coarse-grained (with
170200 m and 3001300 m average dominant grain
sizes), less compact, hard-fired, porous pottery of weakly
sorted, weakly elaborated paste (heterogeneous fabric)
and of 3035 weight% fine- to medium- grained sedimentary rock (claystone-siltstone-sandstone) and mineral
fragments as aplastics. During their manufacturing, a sandy-silty alluvial clay was used as paste without any preparation (levigation or tempering). The heterogeneous fabric
of the ceramics suggests that the potters did not prepare
(knead) the raw material with care. In general, these vessels were fired in a predominantly weakly oxidizing atmosphere (brownish hues of the vessel body). On the basis
of the mineralogical composition measured by XRD, the
maximum firing temperature was around 600800 C.
The subgroups of petrographic group II of ceramics
can be distinguished from each other by the average grain
size of the aplastic rocks (II/A: claystone-shale, II/B:
claystone-siltstone, II/C: siltstone-sandstone) which is
not equal to the grain size of the clasts (Appendix V.6).
Geochemically, the group has a homogeneous composition, especially in the case of the trace elements. This
indicates the genetic relationship between the employed
94

raw material of the subgroups. The most variable element (calcium and phosphorous) distributions are due to
post-depositional events such as precipitation and dissolution from soil solutions (for a more detailed geochemical interpretation, see Szilgyi et al. 2011).

V.3.3. PETROGRAPHIC GROUP III


This pottery group is strongly under-represented in the
analyzed samples. Potsherds belonging to this group
have coarse-grained (200300 m) fabric with exclusively metamorphic (mica schist) rock and mineral fragments as aplastics. Despite the coarse fabric, tempering
can be excluded from the manufacturing process. This
is supported by the fact that the vessels are made from
the mica schist components (muscovite, quartz, opaque
phases) from the clay to the sand fraction. This phenomenon rather suggests the use of a primary clayey weathering product (deposited close to the source; Appendix V.7).
The paste is optically isotropic which indicates a
higher maximum firing temperature than in the case of
groups I or II. The mineral assemblage (measured by
XRD) indicates a roughly 850950C maximum firing
temperature. These ceramics are white-pale gray colored, suggesting a reducing firing atmosphere. However,
hematite is present as a trace component of the paste in
almost every case, which supports an oxidizing atmosphere. Only one sherd belonging to this group was analyzed chemically. The element distribution indicates a
raw material composition differing fundamentally from
petrographic groups I and II (for a more detailed geochemical interpretation, see Szilgyi et al. 2011).

V.3.4. ADOBE SAMPLES


The analyzed adobe samples were made from finegrained (from 1030 m to 50 m average grain sizes),
quite dense, limonitic, partly micaceous, secondarily
carbonized silty clays. The average mineralogical composition (quartz, plagioclase, carbonate, limonite, mica,
opaque phases) and the occasionally appearing argillaceous rock fragments indicate the siliciclastic sedimentary rock origin of the used sediment. The remnants of the
plant tempering can be observed as characteristic shaped
pores or sometimes as phytoliths. The adobe samples are
clearly consistent with the geochemical composition of
the second ceramic group.

V.4. Comparative Geological Samples from


the Paria Basin
The analyzed geological samples were separated according to the sampling criteria and the geological setting.

ARCHAEOMETRIC INVESTIGATION OF THE PRE-HISPANIC POTTERY OF THE PARIA BASIN

V.4.1. ALLUVIAL SEDIMENTS


These sediments of the Paria Basin and the eastern
fringes of the altiplano (18 samples: Nos SED/0104,
Nos 1/23, 5/13, 5/58, 7/12, 7/45, 7/7) ranged
from silty clay to fine gravely sand and all could have
originated from the fluvial weathering of the Palaeozoic clastic sedimentary unit of the Eastern Cordillera.
These weakly to medium layered, medium sphericity,
rounded to well-rounded, medium to well-sorted sediments mainly consist of rock and mineral fragments
of the above-mentioned Palaeozoic sedimentary rocks
(shales/claystones-siltstones-sandstones) and in lower
proportion of varying quantities of weathered volcanic-volcaniclastic rock clasts (their content depends on
the locality and its distance from the nearest volcanic
sources). The major mineral phases of sedimentary origin are quartz, feldspars, mica (muscovite-biotite),
and clay minerals. The volcanic related constituents
are mainly devitrified, weathered volcanic glass with
crystallites and phenocrystals of feldspar, biotite (rarely
hornblende), and quartz (for a detailed description, see
Szilgyi et al. 2011).

V.4.2. SILICICLASTIC ROCKS


Samples from the Silurian sedimentary ridges of the Eastern Cordillera (two samples: Nos 3/12a-2b) are weakly
to well-layered, medium to well-sorted shales-siltstones-sandstones mainly consisting of quartz, feldspars,
muscovite-biotite, and probably clay minerals invisible
under the microscope (for a detailed description, see
Szilgyi et al. 2011).

V.5. Interpretation: Comparison of the


Archaeological and Geological Samples
V.5.1. PROVENANCE
Based on the petrographic analysis of the archaeological
ceramics, it was possible to characterize the most probable raw materials. It was concluded that the three main
petrographic groups of pottery were manufactured from
three different raw materials. The pure (or perhaps purified) silty clayey paste of petrographic group I was, with
the exception of subgroup I/D, tempered with pyroclastic
and/or volcanite rock and mineral fragments. The tempering material was dominantly freshly crushed, while
in some cases it was weakly rounded sandy sediment.
In the case of petrographic group II, the sandy-silty alluvial clayey raw material naturally contained fine- to
medium-grained (shale-claystone-siltstone-sandstone)
siliciclastic rock fragments. The possibility that the raw
material was prepared in some way (levigation or tempering) can be excluded. The under-represented petrographic group III of pottery was also made directly from
the raw material, a clayey sediment with metamorphic
mica schist fragments (primary, probably in situ weathering product).
The aim of the study of the comparative geological samples was to identifiy the local sources of the
above-described raw materials or to establish their import
nature. The fieldwork in the Paria Basin found evidence
for the presence of pyroclastic-volcanic and siliciclastic
sedimentary rocks similar to the aplastics of the ceramics (petrographic groups I and II). In addition, the eroded
sediments of these primary rocks also occur. There are
no metamorphic rocks (except for the Silurian metasedimentary shales-claystones) in the region.

V.4.3. PYROCLASTICS AND VOLCANITES

V.5.1.1. Petrographic Group I

The pyroclastics of the southeastern Morococala Volcanic Field (two samples: Nos 6/45) are weakly welded
dacitic tuffs (ignimbrites) with highly vitric, pumiceous
matrix and feldspar (mainly plagioclase and less K-feldspar), quartz, and biotite phenocrysts. Low quantity of
accessories is represented: opaque minerals, apatite and
zircon.
The tuffs and volcanites of the western Soledad Caldera (13 samples: Nos 8/13 and 8/56 with subsamples)
have acidic-intermediate composition too. Welded dacitic-rhyodacitic tuffs have feldspar (mainly plagioclase),
biotite, hornblende, and minor quartz content in the vitric, pumiceous matrix. Volcanites are dacites-rhyodacites with vitroporphyric fabric and similar phenocrysts
as volcaniclastics. The most abundant accessory is titanite (for a detailed description, see Szilgyi et al. 2011;
SzilgyiSzakmny 2009).

The sources of the potential tempering agents of this


group were the tuffs and volcanites of the Morococala
Volcanic Field and the Soledad Caldera. The physical appearance (dominant grain size and shape, optical
features) and the general mineralogical composition as
principal distinguishing factors were taken into consideration. Concerning the mineralogy, the main diagnostic characteristics were the mafic phase content (biotitehornblende) and their crystal size, the plagioclase
composition, and its optical behavior (twinning, zoning).
Pottery samples of petrographic group I have ~25%
felsic components (feldspar and quartz) and <15% mafic
components (biotite and hornblende). Similarly, the tuffs
have <25% felsic and <20% mafic constituents. The differences can be explained by the fact that the vessels
also contain other fragments (e.g., sedimentary rock).
The most significant differences are in the amounts of
mafic phases. There are clearly distinct hornblende-free
95

Paria la Viexa

(subgroups I/A/b and I/B/c-d) and 110% hornblende


containing (subgroups I/A/a, I/B/a-b, I/C/a-b, I/D) ceramic types. Similarly, the hornblende-free Morococala
tuffs and the ~10% hornblende containing Soledad tuffs
can be differentiated from each other. In addition, the
hornblende-free subgroups (I/A/b and I/B/c-d) contain
plagioclase with oligoclase composition, while hornblende containing subgroups (I/A/a, I/B/a-b, I/C/a-b, I/D)
have plagioclase with andesine composition. Similarly,
the Morococala tuffs with oligoclase and the Soledad
tuffs with andesine can also be distinguished from each
other.
Similarly to the previously mentioned qualitative parameters, quantitative data also play an important role in
the comparison. The ceramic groups can be characterized
by certain ratios of the crystalline constituents that can
be partly compared to that of the geological samples. Ceramic groups with a temper of glassy groundmass (subgroups I/A and I/B) have similar (~50%) glassy phase
content as the pyroclastic rocks. The only exception is
subgroup I/B/a that has ~70% glassy phase content.
Based on the above, it is highly probably that subgroups I/A/a, I/B/a-b, I/D, and I/C/b comprise ceramics
that were manufactured from dacitic tuff-dacite of the
Soledad Caldera (of andesine-biotite-hornblende composition). Subgroups I/A/b and I/B/c-d are made up of vessels which were probably made with temper originating
from the Morococala Volcanic Field (of oligoclase-biotite composition). One interesting observation is that the
Soledad temper was always crushed finer (50175 m)
than the Morococala one (100275 m). Concerning subgroup I/C/a, it consists of ceramics with a more variable
petrography, suggesting that their raw materials cannot
be connected either to Morococala or to Soledad, and that
they are imports.
V.5.1.2. Petrographic group II
Aplastic clasts of this group of pottery share close petrographic similarities with the local siliciclastic rocks
and sediments. The fine- to medium-grained sedimentary rocks (shale-claystone-siltstone-sandstone) and their
alluvial eroded products have the same mineralogical
composition as the ceramics (quartz, muscovite-sericite [rarely biotite], plagioclase, turmaline, secondary
goethite-limonite). The subordinated volcanic plagioclase crystals in the ceramics are similar in size and
shape to the plagioclases in the alluvial sediments.
Based on the above, it is highly probable that petrographic group II comprises pottery made directly from
the local alluvial sediments of the Paria Basin.
V.5.1.3. Petrographic Group III
There are no mica schist outcrops identical to the raw
material of petrographic group III in the Paria Basin.
96

V.5.1.4. Adobe and Building Stone Samples


Petrographically (mineralogical composition, especially
accessories), the adobe samples of Site Ce 1 are almost
identical with the fine-grained sediments collected from
the terraces of the Paria Basin. The only difference is the
finer grain size (1050 m) and the better sorting of the
adobes. This indicates the careful selection of raw materials for adobe making and maybe their levigation before
the preparation of adobe bricks. This is also supported by
the absence of volcanic lithofragments (which are concentrated in the coarse grain fraction of the local sediments) and the presence of organic temper (pores after
the burning out of plants). Petrographically (fabric, grain
size, mineralogical composition, especially accessories),
the samples taken from the building stones of Site Ce 1
are almost identical with the Silurian siliciclastic sedimentary rocks of the Paria Basin.
These conclusions are based on the microscopic petrographic studies. Similar statements can be made on the
testimony of the geochemical analyses. A comparison of
the element concentration values and element ratios of
the archaeological and geological samples yielded the
following results: Figure V.2a shows that ceramics are
characterized by a low SiO2 and high Al2O3 content,
meaning that they were produced from clay with a high
mineral content. Petrographic group III represented by
one measurement has the lowest SiO2 and the highest
Al2O3 concentrations. Within the cluster of ceramics, petrographic group I shows a lower K2O and higher Na2O
content, while group II has a higher K2O and lower Na2O
content. Adobe samples can be characterized with low
SiO2/Al2O3 and high K2O/Na2O ratios. Based on the
major element ratios, rock types of the Morococala and
the Soledad volcanic regions cannot be distinguished
(see Fig. V.2a). Both sources can be described with low
SiO2/Al2O3 and K2O/Na2O ratios. The alluvial sediments
and Silurian sedimentary rocks of the Paria Basin show
a wide scatter concerning their major element ratios.
There are two main clusters: one with low SiO2/Al2O3
and high K2O/Na2O ratios, and another with high SiO2/
Al2O3 and low K2O/Na2O ratios. Taking into consideration the macro- and microscopic features of these samples, the differentiation is based on the dominant grain
size. The higher Al2O3 content is typical for fine-grained
sediments and rocks. The higher SiO2 content is coupled
with coarser grain size. One-half of the modern brick
clay samples (CLAY-02, -04) shows low SiO2/Al2O3 and
high K2O/Na2O ratios, while the other half (CLAY-01,
-03) has high SiO2/Al2O3 and low K2O/Na2O ratios.
Similar observations can be made concerning the
trace element distributions (see Fig. V.2b). The ceramics cluster into a tighter range with medium TiO2/Al2O3
(0.030.05) and Y (2040 g/g) values. Within the cluster
of ceramics, petrographic group II shows a slight enrichment in Y and lower TiO2/Al2O3 ratios than group I. This

ARCHAEOMETRIC INVESTIGATION OF THE PRE-HISPANIC POTTERY OF THE PARIA BASIN

Figure V.2 Chemical composition of ceramics and their potential raw materials in Paria on the basis of K2O/Na2O vs.
SiO2/Al2O3 (a) and TiO2/Al2O3 vs. Y (b) diagrams (1: clayey-silty alluvial sediments of the Paria Basin, 2: sandy alluvial
sediments of the Paria Basin, 3: adobe materials of Site Ce 1, 4: Silurian siliciclastic sedimentary rocks of the Paria Basin,
5:modern brick clays of the Paria Basin, 6: pyroclastic and volcanic rocks of the Soledad Caldera, 7: pyroclastic rocks of
the Morococala Volcanic Field, 8: petrographic group I of ceramics, 9: petrographic group II of ceramics, 10:petrographic
group III of ceramics; A: field of the most probable tempering materials, B: field of the most probable paste materials,
C: field of ceramics (petr. group I) manufactured with the mixing (tempering) of two (A and B) raw materials, the
horizontal dotted line in Fig. V.2a delimits the compositions used (ceramics) and potential (fine-grained sediments) for
the ceramic manufacturing).
is consistent with the fact that the composition of group
I of ceramics is affected by a volcanic constituent in
contrast to the purely sedimentary group II. The adobe
samples have widely scattered (especially TiO2/Al2O3)
values. The volcanic raw material types can be characterized with low-medium TiO2/Al2O3 and low Y values.
Although their differentiation is weak, the Morococala
pyroclastites have lower TiO2/Al2O3 ratios than the Soledad ones (though these data scatter a lot). The trace element composition of the alluvial sediments and Silurian
siliciclastic rocks of the Paria Basin is dependent on the
grain size. The higher TiO2/Al2O3 ratio and the lower Y
concentration are connected to the coarser-grained sediments. The lower TiO2/Al2O3 ratio and the higher Y concentration are related to the finer-grained sediments and,
also, to the modern brick clays.
The diagrams of Figure V.2a-b indicate a similar relationship between the ceramics and the geological samples. The geochemical composition of pyroclastic-volcanic rock tempered group I of pottery (marked with C in
the diagrams) clusters between (and partly overlaps with)
the fields of the potential (Morococala and Soledad) tempering materials (marked with A in the diagrams) and
the potential paste materials (marked as B in the diagrams). The horizontal dotted line in Figure V.2a delimits
the compositions of the used (ceramics) and the potential (fine-grained sediments) for pottery making. The siliciclastic petrographic group II is clearly separate from
group I in both diagrams and its composition fits to the
field marked with B.

There are major and trace element distributions similar to the above-mentioned in Figure V.3 and for most
of the elements. Based on these results, the geochemical data of petrographic group I of pottery always scatter
between the pyroclastics (both Morococala and Soledad)
and the fine-grained sediments of the Paria Basin. Geochemical data of petrographic group II overlap with the
fine-grained sediments and Silurian siliclastic rocks of
the Paria Basin. Within this cluster, there is a more direct
chemical similarity between petrographic group II and
the adobe samples and modern brick clays of the eastern fringes of the altiplano (CLAY-02, -04). In addition,
finer- and coarser-grained local sediments can be clearly
distinguished based on their chemistry. Both ceramics
and adobes resemble the finer-grained sediments. The
two potential pyroclastic sources of the investigated territory do not differ from each other concerning their bulk
chemistry.

V.5.2. TECHNOLOGY
It was not possible to study the complete manufacturing
process of the ceramics. We focused on the raw material
preparation and the firing. During the reconstruction of
the firing conditions, it was assumed that the raw material (paste) was the local fine-grained, lime-free illitic-sericitic, kaolinitic, chloritic sediment. In the theoretically resulting materials (petrographic groups I and II
of ceramics), lime-free, illitic-sericitic composition was
97

Paria la Viexa

Figure V.3 Geochemical relationship of ceramic groups and potential raw materials in the Paria Basin on AFM (alkali
oxides iron and manganese oxide magnesia) diagram (a) and Y-Sr-V triangular diagram (b).

detected. To obtain this final product (qualitatively and


quantitatively), the hypothetical raw materials had to be
fired at a 700900C maximum temperature (above the
stability range of both kaolinite and chlorite; see Fig. V.4)
for a reasonably long soaking time, in an oxidizing atmosphere.
Although some pottery workshops have been identified on the basis of the presence of pottery production remains (see, e.g., Donnan 1997; Hayashida 1998; Mackey
2010), and evidence for firing pits has been found (Hayashida 1995), the lack of firing structures supports the
idea of open pit firing. The firing temperatures estimated
above do not contradict this model, which has also been
suggested by other scholars (Hayashida 1998; Ixer
Lunt 1991). Another technique would involve the use of
open bonfires. A bonfire theoretically means a short and
rapid firing process with a wide range of temperatures
(Livingstone Smith 2001). In contrast, pit firing involves
a more closed structure, which enables a more homogeneous temperature range and heating up, and a longer
firing time. However, there are some exceptions to these
general observations. During his ethnographic fieldwork
on the altiplano in Peru and Bolivia, Sillar (1997) described a bonfire type firing process that is widespread
in that region. The predominant fuel is llama dung and
the firing structure could be operated for a longer time
(as long as 2.5 hours) with a steady and medium-high
temperature (as high as 850900C) in an oxidizing atmosphere (although the presence of organic matter can
influence the redox state). This special phenomenon is
due to the structure of the llama (and, also, sheep) dung,
which is a fine-grained substance and has a dense internal structure keeping the material together and the
98

pores opened even after its burning out (Winterhalder


et al. 1974). In contrast to loose, flat cattle dung, this
feature enables a continuous oxygen supply during the
entire firing process and prevents the formation of black
mottling on the surface of the vessels. The stable structure also provides porous ash, which as an insulator
supports the longer soaking process. This is the reason
for the steady temperature distribution during the whole
process. In addition, llama dung has a high fuel value.
Sillar (2000) found that bonfires with llama dung as
fuel were especially appropriate for oxidizing, medium
temperature, long-lasting firing without the need for a
permanent firing structure. The bonfire is usually built
directly on the ground or in a shallow pit. The lowest
layer is made up of fine-grained llama (or sheep) dung.
Vessels are placed directly on the dung. The whole pile
is covered with cattle dung, or packed with dung sheets,
or dried grass and broken potsherds. The use of llama
dung as fuel for ceramic firing in the pre-Hispanic period has been recorded by Bernab Cobo (1956 [1653];
RavinesVillinger 1989).
The above detailed ethnographic observations
are consistent with our findings. The estimated firing temperature of ceramics in Paria is 600800 C.
This medium firing temperature can be attained with a
bonfire fuelled with llama dung. The adequate (long)
firing-soaking time is evidenced by the color changes
in the ceramic sections and by the homogeneous mineralogical composition (especially concerning the ferrous
phases). This enabled potters to manufacture hard-fired,
intact, and predominantly oxidized pottery. These firing
circumstances could also be produced with bonfires fuelled by llama dung.

ARCHAEOMETRIC INVESTIGATION OF THE PRE-HISPANIC POTTERY OF THE PARIA BASIN

Figure V.4 Phase changes during the firing of a lime-free ceramic raw material. The detected mineral phases of the
samples are indicated with stars (potential raw materials collected in the Paria Basin), circles (petrographic groups I and
II of ceramics), and squares (petrographic group III of ceramics). The estimated firing temperature ranges are indicated
with frames (modified after BrindleyBrown 1980; Cultrone et al. 2001; Fldvri 2011; Maggetti 1982, 1994; Maritan
etal. 2006; Nemecz 1973; Pintr 2005; Rye 1981).
V.6. Discussion
V.6.1. SPECIALIZED RAW MATERIALS
The exploited raw material (temper) sources of the first
ceramic group can be identified as the pyroclastic areas
of both the Morococala Volcanic Field and the Soledad
Caldera. These sources lie some 1030 kilometers away
from Site Ce 1, and can thus be regarded as close sources.
On the one hand, this contradicts Arnolds claim (Arnold
2005) that raw material for pottery was obtained from
deposits lying at a distance of no more than 7 kilometers
(assuming that pottery was manufactured at Paria and not
somewhere outside the settlement). On the other hand,
it is consistent with recent findings indicating that the
source area of ceramic materials could lie at greater distances (Alden et al. 2006; Valera Guarda 2002).
The provenance of the raw material used for the second ceramic group (untempered silty clay paste) came
from the alluvial plain of the Paria Basin. This type of
source could be found at a maximum of 5 kilometers from
Site Ce 1 and it can therefore be considered a local source.

There is no potential source for the third ceramic


group, either in the immediate neighborhood of Site
Ce1, or in its broader environs (~50 kilometers). Taken
together with the fact that the third ceramic group is represented by a very low ratio in the pottery assemblage,
this suggests a foreign (imported) origin of petrographic
group III. It has already been noted (Bray et al. 2005) that
not only the shape and decoration of the Inka Imperial
pottery represented value, but the material itself (and its
source) too. Moreover, we know that volcanic and tuff
rocks were used as pottery temper across the Andes in
space and time (IxerLunt 1991; VeldeDruc 1999a) and
this practice can be traced up to present-day traditional
handicrafts too (Arnold 1972). Thus, it is possible that in
the case of Paria, the use of volcaniclastic rocks was not
mere chance among the potters producing Inka wares,
but a conscious selection of a more prestigious material.
When identifying a local source, it must be borne in
mind that the Palaeozoic siliciclastic sedimentary rocks
and their weathered sediments have a wide surface distribution. These raw materials, which are present as
the principal sediment in the Paria Basin, provided raw
99

Paria la Viexa

material for petrographic group II. However, they are


also present over a large territory in the Eastern Cordillera, for example in the Cochabamba Valley, located
on the eastern slope of the mountain range, the implication being that the possible presence of imported pottery from Cochabamba in the Paria ceramic assemblage
cannot be excluded. Some sherds with Cochabamba style
decoration or shape and a paste related to petrographic
groupII may have been imports from Cochabamba rather
than local products.

V.6.2. INKA POTTERY MAKING TECHNOLOGY


The first group of ceramics was formed from a mixture of artificially added temper and a relatively pure
clay paste which proved to be a high quality, fine- to
medium- grained raw material. The pumiceous clasts
of subgroup I/A are artificially added (temper) since
fresh, angular grains would not have survive as natural
components of a clayey sediment (weathering product).
Unweathered, angular clasts of subgroup I/B were also
added to the paste as temper. The only exceptions are the
representatives of subgroup I/D (these samples have an
almost serial fabric, making it unlikely that it was created
intentionally). The utilization of unweathered rock fragments has modern analogies (IxerLunt 1991; Velde
Druc 1999b). Similarly to the present-day techniques,
the method of the preparation could be the exploiting,
crushing, sieving, and mixing with the clay paste.
The second ceramic group is made up of vessels manufactured from untempered silty clay which was a natural mixture, and potters used this lower quality, coarser-grained material without any significant modification.
The clastic components of group III are natural parts
of the mixture, and the fabric suggests the exploitation
of the primary weathering product near the rock outcrop
as the raw material, meaning that the third group of pottery was made from a natural (untreated), coarse-grained,
sandy-silty clay which could be exploited from the immediate vicinity of the rock outcrop.
We did not study the potting technique of vessels.
However, our macroscopic observations support the general view that Inka vessels were coil-built as established
by Ixer and Lunt (1991) as being more probable than
other proposed techniques (Hayashida 1998).
Based on the firing conditions of the ceramic production, it is not possible to make significant distinctions
between the first and second petrographic groups of ceramics. Characterizing these pottery groups together, we
may say that the majority of the ceramics from Paria was
fired under the same or similar circumstances, namely at
600800C maximum firing temperature and in a dominantly oxidizing, but varying atmosphere.
Our observations are partly consistent with earlier
findings on Inka pottery. Wagner et al. (1989) suggested
100

a higher, 8501000C firing temperature for coastal and


Lake Titicaca region ceramics based on their Mssbauer
spectroscopic analysis. The atmosphere of the pottery
firing in Paria was similar to the typical Inka Imperial
style, which is hard reduction fired with surface oxidation
(sandwich structure) or oxidized throughout in cross-section (MenzelRiddell 1986).
In contrast, the third petrographic group of pottery can
be distinguished from the former ones concerning even the
firing conditions. The presence of the neoformed, high temperature phase suggests a higher, 850950C maximum
firing temperature. The final surface color is white with a
white, light gray, or pale rose cross-section. Together with
the use of non-local raw materials, this suggest a pottery
making technology different from the Inka Imperial style
or the typical highland traditions (IxerLunt 1991). However, the vessel shapes and principally their decorations are
typical Inka forms (plates), which would rather indicate a
separate, well-defined Inka pottery workshop.

V.7. Conclusions
Our findings described in the above represent the first
archaeometric investigations of Inka Period ceramics
from Bolivia (further details see in the Chapter IV.3.1).
In order to gain information to gain information on raw
material usage and the manufacturing techniques employed by potters, we undertook a comparative analysis
of ceramic fragments, other archaeological artifacts (adobes/plasters, building stones) and potential raw materials
(fine-grained sediments for the clay paste and clastic materials for the temper).
(1) Raw materials and sources used during the Late
Intermediate Period continued to be utilized during the
Inka Period. However, other raw materials, sources, and
techniques also came in fashion, some of which may
have already been utilized in the Formative Period and
the Middle Horizon. The reason for the introduction of
new materials and techniques may have been the demand for a larger amount and higher quality of vessels in
the imperial system.
(2) Except for the special white ware, neither the Inka
Imperial, nor other Inka Period ceramics proved to be
imported products. Their raw material sources could be
identified in the neighborhood of Paria or in the Paria
Basin. This supports the model that instead of transporting vessels, imperial handicraft techniques and/or artisans were transplanted to Paria from other regions of the
empire to meet the demands of high-level, standardized
pottery manufacture, as was the case also in the Lake
Titicaca region (Murra 1978; Spurling 1992).
(3) Inka Imperial and local-style vessels show clear
differences in their material. For Inka local pottery manufacturing, the nearest local raw material sources, lying
no more than 5 kilometers away were used (petrographic

ARCHAEOMETRIC INVESTIGATION OF THE PRE-HISPANIC POTTERY OF THE PARIA BASIN

group II). These sources had been exploited already in


the Late Intermediate Period and the tradition stayed
alive even after the Inka conquest of the Paria Basin, and
during the standardization process that influenced local
ceramic manufacture. For Inka Imperial pottery making,
two additional near sources lying 1030kilometers away
supplied tempering materials (petrographic group I).
These volcanic related materials (similarly to the tempering technique itself) played an important role in the

pottery making during the Inka Period, most probably because of the quality requirements and/or the high demand
for the newly introduced, empire-related ceramic style.
An important finding is that a limited group of pottery
with unique appearance (group III of ceramics) proved to
have a foreign origin, suggesting a long-distance connection with a different region of the Inka Empire. In sum,
we found that the pottery supply system of the Paria region was rather complex.

101

VI. Animal Exploitation in Inka and Early Colonial


Period Paria
Lszl Bartosiewicz
VI.1. Material and Method
A total of 11,297 animal remains (weighing almost
85kg), were analyzed from the excavations of Surfaces
IIII of Paria. The identification of animal remains could
be carried out at various levels of taxonomic precision.
Due to the often cited difficulties of species-level identification of heavily fragmented bones from even-toed
ungulates the following collective taxonomic terms were
used in Table VI.1:

sheep and/or goat: Caprinae subfamily,


vicua and/or alpaca: small Camelidae family,
vicua/alpaca/sheep/goat: small ungulate,
llama/deer/cattle: large ungulate.

Bone remains representing the Camelidae family could


be relatively easily distinguished from those of European
Taxon

Latin name

domesticates on the basis of their general morphological characteristics (Bartosiewicz 1996). Identifications
have been verified in the literature (Pacheco Torres et
al. 1986). Although antler fragments evidently originate
from huemul deer, they were not counted with the bones
as it is impossible to decide whether they originate from
hunted individuals, i.e. represent meat consumption, or
had been gathered as shed antler. In the absence of a
reference collection, sporadically occurring bones from
wild birds could not be identified to species.
The general state and surface preservation of the finds
was uniformly good. On the other hand, due to the high
degree of fragmentation, a considerable number of the
small bone splinters had lost all morphological characteristics, resulting in only 5,760 identifiable specimens
(NISP, 65kg). On the other hand, while half of the fragments could not be identified beyond the size category
of the animal as large or small ungulate, these pieces
NISP

Weight (g)

Mean Weight (g)

5449

95.4

62851

95.2

11.5

Llama

Lama glama

Small camelid

Camelidae sp.

0.1

65

0.1

9.3

Sheep/goat

Caprinae

90

1.6

775

1.2

8.6

Cattle

Bos taurus

42

0.7

1194

1.8

28.4

Dog*

Canis familiaris

115

2.0

353

0.5

3.1

Huemul deer

Hippocamelus bisulcus

48

0.8

380

0.6

7.9

Medium-size felid

Felidae

0.1

11

0.0

2.8

Large felid

c.f. Felis concolor

0.0

0.0

2.0

Hare or rabbit

Lagomorpha sp.

0.1

0.0

0.8

Total NISP

5760

100.0

65634

100.0

Deer antler

230

57.5

Large ungulate

2521

12297

0.2

Small ungulate

3003

5893

0.1

0.8

11297

84061

Bird indet.
Grand total

Table VI.1 Animals identified at Paria (Site Ce 1)


* including two partial skeletons

103

Paria la Viexa

Figure VI.1 The relationship


between NISP and bone
weight(g) in the most important
animal taxa. A decimal logarithm
scale was used to reduce the
95% dominance of camelid
bones
made up only 20% of the assemblage in terms of weight
(18kg).
Aside from short bones (such as elements of the basipodium), very few specimens were preserved in full,
measurable length. They included four scapulae and two
metapodials of llamas as well as a sheep metacarpus. On
the other hand, several long bones of the two partial dog
skeletons recovered were complete, suggesting not only
that these animals were not eaten, but also that the rest of
the domesticates were heavily butchered in comparison.
Figure VI.1 shows the relationships between NISP
values and weight data for the most important animal
taxa. Note that a decimal logarithm scale had to be used
in order to accommodate the several orders of magnitude
difference between the quantities of camelid bones (over
95% both in terms of NISP and weight) in comparison
with only sporadically represented other taxa.
Given the mass of animal bones brought to light at
the site, calculating the minimum number of individuals (MNI) would have made little sense. The majority of
remains evidently represented food refuse; the bones of
rarely exploited animals or worked specimens were relatively few. Dogs represent a remarkable exception: most
of the bones listed in Table VI.1 and Figure VI.1 originate
from the partial skeletons of only two individuals.
Meat consumption was reconstructed in part by classifying skeletal elements of the best represented camelid
family into meat value categories after Uerpmann (1973).
These categories are based on the meat-bearing capacity
of bones, ranging from A (best meat along the axial skeleton and proximal limb segments), through B (including ribs, the head, and central leg segments) to C (facial
skull, teeth, and terminal, dry limb bones of limited food
value).
The few osteometric measurements available on the
fragmented bones were taken following the internationally used protocol developed by von den Driesch (1976).
104

Although that handbook recommends standard measurements only for camel bones, the overwhelming osteomorphological similarity between Old and New World
camelids made the adoption of these measurements possible. Withers heights for sheep were estimated using the
coefficients for long bone lengths developed by Teichert
(1975). Similar calculations for dog remains were carried
out using the algorithm by Koudelka (1885).
The scarcity of measurable bones from archaeological
sites has inspired a number of methods by which fragment sizes can be pooled to provide a greater sample size
for morphometric analyses (for a summary see Meadow
1999). Recently, the standard scores of various Neolithic
sheep bone measurements from Hungary, calculated from
the parameters of modern Shetland sheep (Davis 1996),
have been successfully used in enhancing sample sizes in
fragmentary archaeological materials (Bartosiewicz 2007:
294, Fig. 14.8). The same method was chosen here in the
tentative size-related classification of camelid bones. The
basis of reference was the set of univariate statistical parameters (mean values, standard deviations, and coefficients of variation) of six adult llama skeletons kept in the
Vienna Museum of Natural History (Sugetiersammlung,
Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Inv. nos 21010, 21011,
22706, 22744, 31404, 59071). These represent both females and males, originating from zoos. It must be emphasized, however, that statistical parameters for all bone
measurements from this small group of randomly collected individuals served only as a technical standard, a
common denominator, against which individual measurements of the camelid bones from Paria could be pooled
within the same diagram. By comparing any archaeological measurement to the relevant mean value and standard
deviation of the reference collection (Appendices VI.12),
different measurements can be uniformly converted into
compatible standard scores. It must be stressed, however,
that using complete zoo skeletons does not imply any

ANIMAL EXPLOITATION IN INKA AND EARLY COLONIAL PERIOD PARIA

relation or direct comparison between the archaeological


specimens and those kept in the museum.
A special problem was posed by the identification of
a partial carnivore skeleton whose bones were not available for autopsy by the author. This work was carried out
by using a series of in situ as well as laboratory photographs supplied by the excavator, J. Gyarmati. Identification criteria for canids and felids were compared in the
literature (Kolda 1951).

VI.2. Evaluation by Animal Taxa


VI.2.1. CAMELIDS
Osteological distinctions between the four species,
vicua (Lama vicugna), guanaco (Lama guanico), and
alpaca (Lama pacos) as well as llama (Lama glama) are
extremely difficult, frequently impossible. While these
four species may all have contributed to the faunal assemblage in different proportions, their overlapping
sizes exacerbated by sexual dimorphism form a continuum. The wild vicua and guanaco are native to the arid,
mountainous regions of the altiplano. Alpaca and llama
are the domestic forms (Flores Ochoa 1982). Although
some thought that the guanaco was the wild ancestor
of both llama and alpaca, Kadwell et al. (2001) have
recently used both mitrochrondial and microsatellite
DNA analysis to demonstrate that the alpaca originated
from the vicua. Although a tentative distinction is possible by live weight (Franklin 1982), overlaps between
the size ranges of the four species are evident in Figure
VI.2. Distinguishing on the basis of bone sizes is even

Figure VI.2 Overlaps between the live weight ranges


for wild and domestic New World camelids mentioned
in the text

Figure VI.3 The percentual distribution of camelid


bones by the meat value categories established by
Uerpmann (1973)
more difficult. The taxonomy of New World camelids,
however, has not yet been completely understood, as the
size ranges outlined in Figure VI.2 are further modified
by geographical variability, sexual dimorphism as well as
hybridization between the four forms (Fernndez Baca
1971; Wheeler et al. 1995). Some differences in overall
skeletal morphology and proportions may be causally related to size, i.e. display allometric relationships.
Similarly to other mammals, increasing size variation
in alpacas and llamas is also a result of domestication
(Wing 1972). Distinct breeds of domestic camelids had
emerged in the New World long before the Spanish conquest (Wheeler Pires-Ferreira et al. 1976: 489, Fig. 6).
The complexity of this problem is compounded by herd
mobility. Historical sources mention that the Inka pursued a policy of granting herds to settlers in conquered
territories (Murra 1983a: 178). Llamas widely used as
beasts of burden in long-distance trade were thus spread
and mixed over a great geographical area.
In the group of wild forms, the withers height of
vicuas ranges between 70 and 110 cm, while guanacos
vary from 90 to 130 cm (Petzsch 1966: 363). Almost
all camelid remains from Paria (probably representing
thousands of individuals judging from the discovery of
over 1,500 of storage buildings in Paria) originate from
relatively large individuals, with a major contribution of
clearly identifiable llama remains. This is in contrast with
the small coeval assemblage studied from Incarracay in
the Cochabamba Valley, where the remains of smaller
bodied camelids were more common among the food refuse (Bartosiewicz 1999). Although the hunting of wild
vicua cannot be ruled out, the relative robusticity of some
105

Paria la Viexa

neonate
0.4%

juvenile
10.3%
subadult
13.6%

mature
61.1%

adult
14.6%

Figure VI.5 The percentual age distribution of 2,296


ageable camelid bones

Figure VI.4 Dried fetal llamas on sale for Pachamama


rituals (La Paz, Bolivia)
small camelid bones makes identification as alpaca a more
likely possibility in the material under discussion here.
Evidently, the secondary exploitation of these animals (llamas as pack animals and for wool as well as
alpacas for wool) was important in the Inka Period.
Since, however, the primary osteological evidence at this
settlement represents meat consumption, it seemed reasonable to classify bones by perceived economic value
(Uerpmann 1973). The percentual distribution of NISP
and bone weights between meat value categories (A to
C, in the order of decreasing quality) is even (Fig. VI.3).
On the basis of this balanced picture, the consumption of fresh meat may be hypothesized. Less muscular
body parts, such as the head and feet, may have been
106

used in preparing salted/sun-dried charqui (Miller 1981).


Ethnographic parallels show that this has been a popular
form of storing meat for future use in soups and stews
at residential sites (Madero and Yacobaccio 1994: 78).
Amoderate degree of heterogeneity was observed among
pre-Hispanic households in terms of bone packets defined on the basis of meat utility by Aldenderfer (1998) at
the Nialupita, Isahuara, and Jachakala Period settlement
of nearby Jachakala occupied before the Inka colonization from ca. A.D. 170 to 1200 (Beaule 2002). Some of
the spatial patterning may have been related to carcass
processing in different areas of that large site.
Considering the hypothesized ritual functions organized at the provincial center of Paria, the use of camelids
as sacrificial animals must also be hypothesized, even
in the absence of unambiguous osteological evidence.
Iconographic reference to such rites is known from
about A.D. 1600 (Guaman Poma de Ayala 1980 [1613]:
240). This picture shows a small camelid marked as a
black ram, confirming the animals domestic status
as this color variety would not occur in the wild. Many
pre-Christian beliefs survived colonization by the Spanish. Llama fetuses would be of interest here, as they are
considered sacred even today (Fig. VI.4).
According to popular knowledge, if one were to dig
up rural homes in the area, fetal llamas would be found
buried beneath many a house foundations as a sacrifice
to Pachamama, Mother Earth. Unfortunately, in spite of
good bone preservation, the bones of young camelids
are altogether underrepresented in the archaeological
assemblage from Paria (Fig. VI.5). Even relatively resistant bones of subadult individuals make up less than
one-fifth of the ageable skeletal remains. Fetal bones
have not been encountered in the archaeological material

ANIMAL EXPLOITATION IN INKA AND EARLY COLONIAL PERIOD PARIA

Figure VI.6 The size distribution of camelid astragali


from Paria and only very few neonatal remains were
found. These data fall in line with age distributions observed in a smaller assemblage of 419 ageable camelid
bones by Prez (2005) at the Late Inka site of Huari near
Lake Poop (150km south of Paria), where some 80%
of the remains originated from adult individuals (quoted
by Michel 2008: 147). Likewise, the 543 identifiable remains of juvenile camelids represented only 5.7% in the
first occupation phase of the Nialupita Period assemblage from nearby Jachakala (Beaule 2002). Although
caution is always due given the likely taphonomic loss of
young animal bone, these archaeologically estimated age
profiles are reconfirmed by ethnographic observations. In
modern herds, females are usually kept alive until they
are culled because of old age or disease. They are rarely
slaughtered for other reasons such as the primary need
for meat. The average age at culling was thus recorded
as 8.9 years based on 36 interviews by Markemann and
Valle Zrate (2010) in the Ayopaya region, Department of
Cochabamba, Bolivia.
As a result of heavy fragmentation, very few camelid
long bones were preserved in full length. They include
four scapulae, a metacarpus and a metatarsus. Thanks to
their stout, geometric shape, short bones are more likely
to be found in a measurable condition. Of these, astragali,
forming the hinge within the hock joint of the hind leg,
were found in rather great numbers. Their length and
width measurements are plotted against each other in Figure VI.6. The bones shown in the graph were assigned to
a priori size groups during identification on an intuitive
basis. Astragali attain adult size at a relatively young age,

Figure VI.7 The distribution of llama standard scores


calculated from 389 archaeological measurements, in
relation to the mean value and 1 standard deviation
(sd, gray zone) of six modern-day zoo specimens in the
Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna
therefore they potentially show taxonomic differences.
However, the only conclusion that can be drawn from
this diagram is that the smallest bones possibly originate
from vicua and/or young alpaca, while the largest specimens are certainly those of llama stallions or castrates.
Since the remains of wild animals occur only in small
numbers at this site, one may presume that only a few
vicua astragali were included within the group of small
specimens, the rest are early maturing bones of relatively
small-size domestic camelids, including subadult llamas.
While some small bones may be likewise attributed to
alpacas, it is worth noting that mixed keeping of llamas
and alpacas can give rise to hybrids (huarizos) that are
not considered desirable livestock by modern breeders.
In any case, the massive dominance of bones from llama
cannot be disputed. This falls in line with the observations made in the light of the comparative measurements
taken in the modern reference collection.
Although arbitrary distinctions were made between
the astragali of small, medium-size, and large llamas in
Figure VI.6, the measurements form a continuum across

Number of astragali

Regression equation

Coefcient of determination

Small

21

y = 0.435x + 4.121

0.595

Medium

30

y = 0.768x 9.333

0.557

Large

17

y = 0.729x 7.664

0.111

Table VI. 2 Relationships between the greatest length (x) and distal breadth (y) of camelid astragali
107

Paria la Viexa

mean value and standard deviation of the respective bone


measurement as calculated in the small reference material (Appendices VI.12). Figure VI.7 shows a sample of
389 individual bone measurements from Paria plotted in
the form of standard scores around the normalized mean
value (0) of the modern data set.
The overall outline of the resulting plot largely shows
a Gaussian distribution centered around the mean value
of the modern zoo specimens. The variability, however,
is far greater than that of the limited reference sample.
The distribution of archaeological measurements deviates from the symmetric bell-shape in two remarkable
features:
As often seen in similar plots made for Old World domesticates, a relatively small contingent of large stallions (some possibly castrates) lend a clear bimodality
to the curve on its positive, right hand side, while adult
females may form the peak more or less corresponding
to the mean value in the center.
The overall negative skew is also a common phenomenon. The left side of the curve is more elongated than the
right side and the bulk of the values (possibly including
all adult llamas) lie more to the right side. This shape
results from the inevitable inclusion of smaller subadults
or young adults in the graph whose early fusing bones
cannot be distinguished on the basis of articular ends.
Figure VI.8 Llama used as a pack animal as shown in
an illustration by Guaman Poma de Ayala
(1980 [1613]: 497)
the graph. This is consonant with the overlapping ranges
between live weights presented in Figure VI.2. Even a
slight progressive tendency may be observed: the largest
astragali are relatively broader. The longitudinal growth
of bones decelerates in older animals, while the robusticity (i.e. transversal dimensions) of skeletal elements
keeps increasing. This natural trend is shown by the following regression equations, calculated for the three size
groups separately (Table VI.2).
Coefficients of regression (boldface print in the table)
clearly show that larger astragali become proportionally wide. A decline in the strength of this relationship,
expressed by the steady decrease in the coefficients of
determination, also follows a natural trend: large bones
show greater variation in absolute terms. This is called
the heteroscedasticity of data, a phenomenon commonly
observed in osteological measurements.
The virtual lack of spontaneous grouping by size
observed in the relatively small set of astragali was further investigated by comparing all camelid bone measurements available from the site against the parameters
established on six adult individuals in the Vienna Collection. The advantage of this method is that measurements taken on different skeletal elements from Paria
can be cumulated within the same graph, relative to the
108

Figure VI.9 Marked mediolateral spreading and


asymmetry in the distal end of a metatarsus from a large
camelid

ANIMAL EXPLOITATION IN INKA AND EARLY COLONIAL PERIOD PARIA

Figure VI.10 Exostoses near the distal end of an


anterior proximal phalanx from a llama. Lesions are
visible on the dorsal (left), axial (middle) and palmar
(right) surfaces
What is distinctive in this figure, however, is the third,
small peak among the small measurements, falling far
left of the mean value, outside the -10 standard deviation
range. It is this handful of measurements that may represent the minority contingent of small camelids (alpacas
or vicuas), as also identified among the non-measurable fragments on a morphological basis.
The fact that over two-thirds of the ageable bones originate from mature animals and many of the bones rival
those of modern llamas in size confirms the possibility
that llamas were used as beasts of burden. This is hardly
surprising, given the settlements importance in long-distance trade and military provisioning, and the fact that
working llamas have been widely documented. In Figure
VI.8 native llama may be seen juxtaposed to the mount of
the Spanish colonial supervisor as a token of otherness:
in Mediterranean Europe, mules and especially hinnies
were highly valued for smooth riding (Bartosiewicz
Gyngyssy 2006: 294). Moreover the two large, red,
saddled and harnessed sheep, as well as the twenty
pack sheep referred to in Candide (Voltaire 1978 [1759]:
123) probably also mean cargo llamas, commonly used in
the Inka military and transport system. Almost the same
year, Carl Linn correctly described llama (Camelus
glama) and alpaca (Camelus pacos) as different species
of the Camelidae family.
Llama stallions weigh between 140 and 200kg and
can carry approximately one-fourth of their live weight
(3550kg) for about 30km a day. Llama caravans travel
about 15 to 20km per day, but the maximum load and
distance strongly vary with the terrain (slope, width of
the path, natural obstacles). Today, cargo bearers tend

to be castrated male llamas, although alpacas are sometimes also used over short distances. In modern herds,
males are castrated after reaching an age of over 2 years,
the time of sexual maturity (MarkemannValle Zrate
2010). On long journeys, individual animals carry loads
between only 20 and 30kg (Tripcevich 2008). So much
loading should not cause osteological deformations in itself. Secondary exploitation for work, however, almost
by definition means longevity, i.e., the using of numerous old individuals, as has also been observed in the age
structure of the assemblage from Paria and other sites in
the region. In the case of these animals, therefore, it is not
simply excess strain that contributes to the development
of pathological lesions on some of the bones. All pathological specimens in the material represent mature large
camelids, i.e., llamas. One of the symptomatic deformations occurred on the distal end of a metacarpus, broadly
spread in a mediolateral direction at the joint of the phalanges (Fig. VI.9), reminiscent of the marked asymmetry described as a rather reliable symptom of draught
exploitation in working oxen (Bartosiewicz et al. 1993).
A large proximal phalanx with periostitic exostoses
on the plantar surface near its distal articular end may
also originate from a pack llama (Fig. VI.10). It must be
stressed again that old age and several diseases may also
cause similar lesions (e.g. periostitis, arthrosis), therefore
individual observations should not be seen as unambiguous evidence of working llamas. It is the repeated occurrence of symptoms which, in light of the demographic
structure of animals, may be seen as an indication of pack
animals.

VI.2.2. BOVIDS
Bovids, that is, hollow-horned artiodactyls are not native
to South America. As has been mentioned, in addition to
Structure BM, the remains of three small buildings were
excavated. One of these (Structure BM2) may have survived up to the Spanish conquest, although it contained
pottery dated to the Late Horizon. Early Colonial features
have yielded some non-distinguishable bone fragments
of sheep (Ovis aries) or goat (Capra hircus) belonging
to the Caprinae subfamily, in addition to those of cattle
(Bos taurus), offering osteological evidence of Spanish
colonial occupation. The contribution of these bones,
numbering a total of 132 for all three species (Table
VI.1), however, was negligible at this high mountain road
post. It may be reasonably hypothesized that masses of
non-identifiable large and small ungulate bone fragments
also contained some remains of Old World domesticates;
however, their small numbers remain only indicators of
external influence during early Colonial times.
Most caprine bones found at this site could not be
unambiguously assigned to either sheep or goat. It was
undoubtedly sheep, however, that eventually replaced
109

Paria la Viexa

declining camelid herds. The native population adopted


sheep keeping rapidly, possibly under administrative
pressure by the conquerors (Martnez 1985). During the
Colonial Period beginning in 1535, the Spanish conquerors began dismantling the indigenous socio-political
structures maintained by the landowning commoners of
the Inka Empire. The Spanish conquest thus had a detrimental effect on the sophisticated camelid husbandry
that had developed during the Inka Period and the decline
has never been reversed (NovoaWilson 1992; Wheeler
1991). According to Tichit and Genin (1997), the sheepcamelid ratio in modern herds is highly correlated with
the dominant plant community and the size holdings. Today, llamas are preferred only in either extensive areas of
low quality forage (pajonales) or above 4,000 msl, often
characterized by steep slopes.
Goat cannot be meaningfully discussed due to the
lack of its unambiguously identifiable bones in this large
assemblage. The present-day Criollo breed supposedly
originates from Spanish goats and has maintained considerable similarity to that traditional form throughout
Latin America (RamrezMellado 1996).
While cattle bones could not be measured, a complete
radius and two metacarpal bones, identified as those of
sheep, yielded withers heights of 64 cm and 59 cm, respectively. Since the latter value was obtained both from
the radius and one of the metacarpal bones, it is possible
that they originate from the front leg of the same animal. These bones were recovered inside Structure BM
(Surface II, Squares 11 and 16, Level 3, 3040 cm). It is
worth mentioning that sheep kept in Peru before 1537 are
thought to have originated from Castlia and, as opposed
to the fine-wooled Merino breed, may have had coarse
hairy fleece typical of the unimproved Latxa and Churra
breeds today (Chvez et al. 1989).

VI.2.3. DOGS
A relatively complete skeleton of an adult dog came
to light outside the wall of Structure BH. This form of
Skeletal element

Figure VI.11 Picture of a sixty years old man with a


small dog (Guaman Poma de Ayala 1980 [1613]: 172)
deposition would be typical of an animal not killed for
its meat. Although the skull did not survive in a measurable state, several long bones of this individual have been
preserved in full length, offering the following withers
height estimates using the algorithm by Koudelka (1885;
Table VI.3):
The resulting 40 cm withers height is typical of gracile, unimproved dogs, similar to modern fox terriers in
terms of body conformation, often found at sites where
no particular emphasis was placed on dog breeding. It is
this size to which neglected dog populations revert to in

Side

Greatest length, mm

Withers height, mm

Humerus

dex.

126.1

425.0

Humerus

sin.

122.9

414.2

Radius

dex.

120.0

386.4

Ulna

dex.

142.2

379.7

Femur

dex.

133.2

400.9

Tibia

dex.

131.9

385.1

Average estimate

398.5

Table VI.3 Withers height estimates for the dog skeleton found outside Structure BH
110

ANIMAL EXPLOITATION IN INKA AND EARLY COLONIAL PERIOD PARIA

the absence of conscious selection for smaller or taller


withers height (Bartosiewicz 2002). Naturally, the animal
may have played a special role as a pet, but the possibility
that it was a commensal scavenger seems more likely.
Although iconographic sources can be deceiving in terms
of animal size, the small dog shown in the company of
an old man by Guaman Poma de Ayala is of some relevance here (Fig. VI.11). The small dog in this picture even
seems to have curved legs, an inherited trait not observed
in the Paria specimen under discussion here.
The headless axial skeleton and the articulated hind
legs of another medium-size predator came to light at
the end of Structure BH (Surface III), but only its photographs were available for identification. During the
excavation, this animal was first thought to have been
a medium-size felid. Such a specimen is known from
the nearby site of Uspa-Uspa (Condarco et al. 2002: 89,
Photo 45). In the absence of the skull and humerus (with
the diagnostic foramen entepicondyleum characteristic of
felids), however, the photograph of the right pelvis was
best suited for tentative identification. Morphological criteria deemed most reliable in this work (small spina ischiadica, small, oblique foramen obturatum, and a broad
ilium) revealed that the skeleton originated more probably from a relatively small dog. A withers height estimate
of approximately 46 cm was calculated on the basis of
long bone measurements read from the photographs of
individual bones.
Although the rest of the sporadically occurring dog
remains were mixed in the food refuse at the site of Paria,
no modification (cut marks, burning) is directly indicative
of dog meat consumption. It is more likely that these dog
remains ended up in secondary deposits. The relatively
few, eight marks of rarely occurring dog gnawing were
all discovered on camelid bones. This is understandable
given the overwhelming numerical dominance of llama
remains in the assemblage.

VI.2.4. WILD ANIMALS


The wild fauna was best represented by a small set of
remains from a medium-size deer species, locally called
taruka, corresponding most probably to huemul (Hippocamelus bisulcus), commonly encountered at this altitude in the high Andes. Even shed antler (including a
meager, but almost complete, two-point rack) was found
in addition to the few skull and long bone fragments.
Some non-identifiable specimens from the few hunted
individuals may also have been included in the category
of small ungulate bones. An upper molar tooth from
an adult huemul displayed dental hypoplasia, the formation of enamel rings usually indicative of environmental
stress on the wild-living population.
A single distal phalanx, representing a carnivore
talon, came to light in Surface II (Square 12, Level 2,

Figure VI.12 Rough, parallel cut marks on the ventral


side of a llama third cervical vertebra
2030 cm). It belonged to a large felid, possibly puma
(Felis concolor). The presence of these finds is extremely
important from a cultural point of view: they probably
did not belong to the realm of everyday life at the settlement, but illustrate the ritual/high status nature of Structure BM.
The four Lagomorph remains could not be identified
to species. Today, the Eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus) is hunted in some semi-arid regions in northern
South America. Toward the south, hare (Lepus capensis)
and European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) are hunted
(MaresOjeda 1984). However, these species are exotic
to the region. They were introduced at various stages of
Colonial history.
The evaluation of bird remains requires special skills
and preferably a local reference collection. The nine
avian bones therefore could not be identified. Importantly, however, they do not originate from domestic hen,
whose bones were identified at the contemporaneous site
of Incarracay in the Cochabamba Valley as an evident
sign of European influence (Bartosiewicz 1999).

VI.3. Butchering and disarticulation


Given the overlap of pre- and post-Conquest presences
at this important provincial center, the relatively few unambiguous marks of primary (carcass partitioning) and
secondary (food preparation) butchering are of special
interest. In addition to providing information on the ways
animals were dismembered, the presence of certain cut
marks may be explained by European cultural influence.
This possibility has already been highlighted by a special
case of a small camelid, presumably alpaca, atlas from
the Inka Period site of Incarracay (Cochabamba Valley)
damaged by transversal cut marks (Bartosiewicz 1999:
102). The anatomical location of those cut marks was tentatively brought in connection with the modern, Christian way of slaughtering llamas (Bartosiewicz et al.
2008). At the site of Paria, similarly repeated transversal
cuts were identified on the ventral side in the cranial half
of a third cervical vertebra from a llama recovered from
Surface II (Square 12, Level 3, 4045 cm). Although
111

Paria la Viexa

cut marks on the ventral sides of cervical vertebrae are


widely seen as perimortem (i.e. inflicted during the killing of the animal), this bone shows multiple parallel cuts,
far more numerous than would have been necessary to
kill the animal. These multiple cut marks may have been
left by simple post mortem decapitation/dismemberment
(Fig. VI.12).
In addition to intentional fragmentation aimed at the
extraction of marrow, a small number but great variety of
large camelid bone displayed cut marks in the Paria assemblage. Some marks of disarticulation by metal blades
were best preserved on bones in otherwise robust articulations (distal humerus, radius and astragalus). Elements of
a complete hock joint (Surface II), evidently deposited as
a single cut, show dismemberment by hacking across the
diaphysis of the tibia, rather than trying to cut through the
robust articulations. A finer disarticulation mark left by a
metal blade was also found on a llama astragalus in the
same structure (Surface II, Square 7, Level 2, 1025cm).
Marks of defleshing were identified on large flat
bones, such as a scapula and two pelvis (ilium) fragments, and smaller cuts probably related to food processing were found on a dozen camelid bones. Given the
large size of this assemblage, however, such occurrences
should only be considered sporadic.
Some two dozen bones were burnt, showing different degrees of carbonization. They originated from various body regions of camelids. Extreme exposure to fire
cannot be explained only with cooking or roasting (Condarco et al. 2002: 86) as carbonization would have made
the meat inedible. It is possible that some of these bones
were disposed of in the immediate proximity of fires or
were intentionally burnt as fuel in an environment where
trees are small and scarce.

VI.4. Conclusions
The overwhelming majority of the hand-collected animal bones brought to light at Paria originated from New
World camelids, especially llamas, whose taxonomic status could be established on the basis of the phenotypic
size of bones. This dominance of llama remains in the

112

assemblage reflects pre-Inka tradition. For example,


the site of Jachakala, located some 40km from Paria in
the same natural environment, yielded almost exclusively camelid bones from occupation layers dated to ca.
A.D.170 to 1200 (Beaule 2002). The overwhelming dominance of camelid bones among the food refuse clearly
indicates the importance of Paria at a strategic point of
the Inka Royal Road: llamas, to a large extent, must have
been used as pack animals and slaughtered only at the
end of their working lives. It seems reasonable to quote
local ethnographic analogies to this practice.
The subsistence economy around Paria is in sharp
contrast with the Cochabamba Valley which became Inka
state property approximately at the same time. Restrictions
of the cold and dry environment at this high altitude probably favored the maintenance of traditional llama herding, and replacement by European livestock was far less
intensive than in other, more favorable ecological zones
newly colonized by the Spanish. In the latest features
of Paria, European food habits began to be represented
by the first but sporadic appearances of sheep and cattle
bones. However, Colonial influence on domestic stocks
seems to have been far more pronounced in the diversity
of domestic animals at the contemporaneous site of Incarracay in the Cochabamba Valley (Bartosiewicz 1999).
Spanish rule probably motivated, if not pressured, people
to adapt their social identities or at least reinterpret their
ethnicity to address the challenges of new Colonial conditions. The impetus to play out these ideological needs in
animal husbandry practices, however, may have been less
pressing in the studied area as even today its environment
is characterized by a high altitude and a semi-arid steppe
vegetation, best utilized by traditional extensive camelid
grazing. The altiplano in western Bolivia was not only a
center for camelid domestication (NovoaWheeler 1984:
123), but also one of the main ranges of alpaca, a smaller
species of more limited geographical distribution than
llama. Osteological evidence of these animals seems negligible in the archaeozoological assemblage from Paria
and even the few bones cannot be safely distinguished
from those of the similarly small-sized wild vicua. The
latter may have been brought to the site as prey from otherwise very limited hunting activities.

VII. Worked Skeletal Materials from Paria


Alice M. ChoykeLszl Bartosiewicz
VII.1. Introduction
The animal bone assemblage of 5,760 identifiable bone
specimens studied from the excavations of Surfaces III
of Paria was dominated by the remains of llamas (95% of
both specimen numbers and bone weights; see Chapter
VI). Altogether 65 tools and bead ornaments (45 specimens) made from bone, antler, and shell have also been
analyzed from the archaeozoological assemblage. In accordance with the preponderance of llama remains in the
food refuse, even taxonomically non-identifiable Ungulate bones used as raw material probably originate from
this species as has been seen at Late Formative sites in
the region (Moore 2013: 176). The few identifiable exceptions include a worked piece of deer antler and beads
made from one or more non-identifiable fresh or marine
shell species.

Inka. It was, however, probably less frequently woven


for common purposes (Jimnez Daz 2006: 106107).
In addition, stocks of alpaca breeds with fine wool seem
to have dwindled as a consequence of the conquistadors
decimating both native Andean herders and their flocks,
which may even have led to a genetic bottleneck in these
domesticates during the 16th century (Wheeler et al.
1995). The manufacturing of vegetable fibers, especially
of cotton, was likewise important.
As is shown by other types of finds, including spindle
whorls, textile production was an important craft activity,
especially in Structure BM. The rich inventory of various
pre-Hispanic artifacts, including jewellery (beads and
plates of copper as well as silver), shows that this building was inhabited by a special group of young women
called aqlla, who were in charge of producing quantities
of patterned tapestry work both for Inka state celebrations and eventual redistribution (Gyarmati 2008).

VII.2. Technological Context


VII.3. Find Material
Firstly, cut marks on all worked specimens were examined carefully for the use of metal in their production.
None of the objects display any evidence of metal cutting or chopping traces. Thus, all the tools were cut and
scraped using flaked stone tools. Beads and perforations
may well have been made with fine stone drills.
The pin-beaters, sometimes heavily worn weaving
combs, yarn bobbins, and the spindle whorls associated
with weaving complex designs on horizontal looms as
well as shell beads were formed by scraping abrasion
and drilling. While this may simply be an indication of
surviving archaic pre-Hispanic bone manufacturing traditions, the majority of implements were recovered from
indubitably Inka Period contexts.
The overwhelming majority of bone artifacts from
the site were probably used in weaving. Due to the good
preservation of organic materials in the dry and cold climate at high altitudes, pre-Hispanic finds of textiles woven using wool from domestic camelids are well known
from a number of sites. Although distinctions between
the coarse fibers originating from llama and fine-wooled
alpaca are not always possible, these two species provided the majority of animal raw materials, including
bone, sinew, hide, and wool. According to a 1653 reference by Bernab Cobo, the finest fiber originating from
the wild vicua was held in the highest esteem by the

The assemblage of worked animal remains consisted


of 65 specimens, including a relatively great number of
beads made from mussel shell. The distribution of this
material by loosely defined types and forms of manufacturing is summarized in Table VII.1.
The most characteristic bone tool type is represented
by several broken metapodium and long bone points
(probably originating from llamas), likely the remains
of weaving tools for lifting the weft threads to permit
the passage of bobbins carrying threads of various colors. Izeta et al. (2013) note that Miller (1979) carried out
ethnoarchaeological research in the Central Andes showing that modern Aymara weavers use a particular bone
tool called wichua and they prefer llama bones over
alpaca, and adult camelid bones rather than bones from
younger animals (Izeta et al. 2013: 52). These bone tools
used as a picks and beaters are invariably called wichua
(aname reminiscent of the small, wild camelid, vicua).
Even today, they belong to a weavers basic tool kit. The
dominance of weaving tools at Paria differs from what is
described by Moore (2013: 179) for Late Formative assemblages from the sites of Kumi Kipa, Kala Uyuni, and
Sonaji. In that case, long bone scrapers, rib end scrapers,
and narrow scrapers made on scapula blades comprise
the bulk of the bone tools with a consistent but much
113

Paria la Viexa

Types

Number found

Waste bone with traces of grooving and splitting

Bone with use wear (polish on rippled surface) probably a tool fragment

Flat (marine?) shell beads

44

Fragments of mollusk shell possible refuse from working

Flat camelid long bone beads

Large massive tibia and long bone-based points without articular end probably used to
lift weft threads in weaving designs

Large metapodium-based dull pointed weaving tool probably used to lift weft threads
and move the bobbins in creating weaving designs

Medium-sized long bone based point without articular end probably used to lift weft
threads and move the bobbins in creating weaving designs

Double pointed rib-based spatulate bobbins

Spindle whorl from the caput femoris of a small camelid

Table VII.1 Worked animal remains from the site of Paria

Figure VII.1 Dull point made from the proximal half of


a left llama metatarsus recovered from Structure BM.
Left: anterior aspect, right: plantar aspect
114

lower proportion of weaving tools. beads and weaving


implements dominate the assemblage.
A complete specimen weaving pick was recovered
within Surface II (Square 14, Level 3, 3040 cm; Fig.
VII.1). It was prepared from the proximal two-thirds of a
left metatarsus and carved into a dull tip. A similar, massive point made from the proximal end of a right metatarsus of an adult small camelid was found in the eastern
section of Building 3 at Incarracay in the Cochabamba
Valley (Choyke 1999). Notably, although camelids are
artiodactyls whose metapodia consist of the fused 3rd
and 4th extremity rays, these bone tools were not produced by splitting. Structurally similar, halved metapodia
of deer, sheep, and cattle were regularly turned into tools
using the groove and split technique throughout Old
World prehistory.
Almost certainly, the llama metapodium points recovered from Paria were used as weaving picks, either
as heavier heddle-like implements (to lift and separate
weft threads when making textile designs; Choyke 1999)
or pin beaters. They may be seen as functionally important tools with a fundamentally ad hoc, non-personalized character. This possibility seems supported by local
ethnographic parallels, something also noted by Miller
(1979). An artisanal weaver from the village of Paria was
interviewed by the second author (Fig. VII.2).
She gave an account specifically on manufacturing
and use attitudes to such bone artifacts. Traditional weaving implements are today still made from llama metapodials, neatly split down the median line along the diaphysis and distal epiphysis (Fig. VII.3). In the case observed,
a simple back strap loom comprising two wooden bars
was used. Evidently of pre-Hispanic origins, this loom

WORKED SKELETAL MATERIALS FROM PARIA

Figure VII.2 Artisanal weaver from the village of Paria


using the llama metapodium point shown in Figure VII.3
for fine design
type is also known from iconographic sources (Guaman
Poma de Ayala 1980 [1613]: 191, 535; Jimnez Daz
2006: 110, Fig. 3/a). The warps are stretched between the
two bars. One of these is fixed and the other is attached
to a strap around the back of the weaver by which the
loom is tensioned when she leans back. Simple and complex textiles, often decorated with subtle pick-up patterns
woven in complementary and supplementary warp techniques, can be equally produced on this simple, portable loom. The bone points discussed here have remained
instrumental in creating the intricate patterns that had
carried complex meaning in ancient times. Weavers combine the use of several wichua points with different tip
thicknesses for the same piece of weaving as mentioned
above. They can be easily made from bone retrieved from
the food refuse; newly made pieces inspected during the
interview still had bits of dried skin and flesh remaining
on them. If one of them breaks, my husband will look
for a new bone in the garbage. Today, therefore, there is
little sense of personal attachment connected with such
easily available artifacts produced on a household level,
despite the importance of this tool in a craft activity of
pivotal significance.
Interestingly, archaeological specimens from the
pre-Conquest/Conquest Period in the 16th century, made
without the benefit of metal tools, seem even less carefully produced (Choyke 1999; Fig. 3) than the modern
ethnographic specimens, directly reflecting the expedient character of this tool type. These weaving tools
from Bolivia have parallels in the simple, slightly modified objects from Hungary clustering around the less
well-planned, Class II half of the manufacturing continuum (Choyke 1997). Little energy or planning went into
such objects. The consistent selection of skeletal element
for manufacturing depended somewhat on serendipitous
bone fragmentation during carcass processing, although
traditions in using metapodia for pointed tools evidently
developed due to the fact that these long bones produced

Figure VII.3 Modern-day weaving tool made from the


distal end of a split llama metapodium. Grooving and
splitting, commonly used during prehistory in the Old
World, is rare on such camelid tools. Left: lateral aspect,
right: anterior aspect
115

Paria la Viexa

Figure VII.5 Ungulate rib-based implements possibly


used in weaving as a thread bobbins

Figure VII.4 Comb-shaped tools most probably used to


beat down the warp threads beaters
reasonably predictable standardized fragment shapes
(ChoykeDarczi Szab 2010: 240). However, as opposed to the European examples, there seems to be little
relationship between the degree of planning and care that
went into the manufacture of these weaving tools and
their importance as tools in the centrally important craft
of weaving in Inka (and present-day Bolivian rural) society.
The archaeological material also included an artificially pointed antler tine that was probably used like one
of the heddle-like llama metatarsal based tools. It came
to light in Surface II (Structure BM1, Square 32, Level3)
where two heavily used and re-worked comb-shaped
tools, perhaps serving as weaving combs to pull down
and condense the warp thread, were also found (Fig.
VII.4). They were dulled by heavy use and re-working,
until their teeth were greatly reduced.
The most carefully made, large ungulate rib-based
tools probably served in weaving as thread bobbins (Fig.
VII.5). They may have held quantities of thread in particular colors for making intricate textile designs. There
are two bobbins in this material. One is a short double
pointed bobbin at a 59.0 mm greatest length, 15.0 mm
greatest width, and 2.0 mm greatest thickness. There is a
larger thread bobbin with a greatest length of 112.4mm,
a greatest width of 21.0 mm, and a greatest thickness
of 2.2 mm. Wool thread was wrapped around them and
hung from the weaving surface until the color thread was
needed in the warp line. These bobbins were made from
split llama rib. Their cortical and spongiosa surfaces
116

were abraded to remove the perishable periosteum and


smoothen the rough spongious inside so it would not
catch on the weaving. The edges and pointed ends were
abraded to shape. The manufacturing marks on the archaeological specimens were rounded and worn from
the extensive use (20 magnification) that also produced
a honey brown polish over the whole tool, well visible
to the naked eye. Thus, the more carefully executed ribbased weaving tools are well worn and in some cases
display signs of curation. They stand out within the entire assemblage as being well-thought out objects manufactured in several stages. They may have functioned
together with the weaving heddles and combs. In order
to slip the thread from the bobbin, it would have been
necessary to use rounded symmetrical teeth that could
be easily inserted between warp threads without jagged
edges catching on the fabric. The comb would then be
used to beat down the bobbin thread.
Weaving combs from this material seem to have been
made on llama long bones, including tibia. Like the other
weaving tools, they were found within Surface II. The
teeth were dulled and used until they were totally reduced. The same type of tool, made from a large camelid
femur diaphysis fragment, was found at the Formative
Period site of Uspa-Uspa (Site Ce 43; Condarco et al.
2002: 72, 173, Photo 29). The width and length of the
comb teeth were carefully measured and marked out as
may be seen in the remains of horizontal (length of teeth)
guiding incisions beneath the tooth row and fine guiding incisions crossing over the horizontal line, below the
tooth row on the tibia-based comb.
There are two weaving combs in this assemblage.
One was broken towards the grip and along one edge.
The teeth, with multiple U-shaped cut marks indicating
the use of a chipped stone blade, were worn down from
use to small rounded points. The average width of the
teeth was 2.3 mm. It is made from a longitudinal proximal tibia fragment. The greatest length is 111.7 mm. Its
greatest width is 39.4 mm and greatest thickness 7.7 mm.
One edge has fresh abrasion marks, indicating it had been
re-worked. The entire tool appears somewhat abraded,

WORKED SKELETAL MATERIALS FROM PARIA

suggesting that it lay on the surface of the ground before


being buried.
The second such tool is a longitudinal fragment from
a weaving comb. The teeth in this second case were totally worn down to base line. The comb was formed on an
unidentified long bone fragment, probably llama. There
is abrasion on the existing edges and surfaces. The teeth
in this case as well were cut using a chipped stone tool.
The beveled edge of the teeth points were formed and reworked by abrasion forming a beveled end. The re-working appears very fresh and suggests that these short teeth,
in some cases worn down to the base, were continuously
curated as they broke or wore during use. The greatest
thickness of this object is 4.2 mm.
The final bone object associated with weaving is a
spindle whorl made from the proximal caput of a small
camelid. The caput was sawn off, probably with a stone
blade. The periostium was removed from the cortical surface of the bone by scraping with a chipped stone tool.
Finally, the object was drilled from a proximal to distal
direction creating a hole for a narrow spindle of some
sort. The greatest length (height) of the spindle whorl
is 12.6 mm. Its greatest width is 25.3 mm and greatest
depth 25.0 mm.
Other bone tools include diaphysis-based handles or
handle refuse made on a small camelid femur and a llama
proximal phalanx (both from Surface II, Structure BM3,
Levels 2 and 3, respectively). These are very simple objects, carefully sawn around their diaphyses and snapped,
with no other sign of manufacturing. A camelid femur
diaphysis tube, cut at both ends, was also found at the site
of Uspa-Uspa (Condarco et al. 2002: 173). They seem
to represent, however, a generic type, invented and reinvented around the world in many different time periods
and social circumstances.
Finally, there are two examples of worked ribs (Structure BH, Surface I; Square 29, Level -3070 cm) whose
anterior-posterior edges have been removed. The remaining longitudinal surfaces do not display wear, suggesting
that this manufacture wear is only a stage related to the
production sequence for another type of tool of unknown
function perhaps these are preforms for bobbins or
spatulate tools. Another rib tool of unknown function has
a broad notch taken out of the medial edge towards the
caudal end of the rib. No manufacturing marks are visible, but the edge of the semi-circular notch is polished
and rounded from use recalling similar working edges on
tools made on the aboral end of Ungulate mandibles from
the Eneolithic of Europe and Eurasia. These objects have

Figure VII.6 Beads made from non-identifiable


mussel shell
experimentally been shown to be leather thong-smoothers (Olsen 2001; Choyke 2010: 27).
Of the 46 beads studied from Paria, all but two (N=44)
were made from a thick, probably marine, shell whose
origins could not be exactly identified (Fig. VII.6). They
were produced following a consistent technique. Rough
shapes were cut out of the shells wall. The beads were
drilled from both sides and then strung closely together
to grind the irregular pieces to even, nice shapes. Similar finds, as well as unworked marine snail shells, came
to light at the site of Uspa-Uspa as well (Condarco et al.
2002: 11, 13, Photos 34). The mollusk shell disk beads
almost all show some wear at the hole edge and range in
size from 10.0 mm to as small as 4.3 mm in diameter. The
thickness of these shell beads ranges between 3.0 mm and
3.5 mm. There are two large bone disk beads from the
site. One is complete and the other broken in half. They
were made from the cortical bone of a camelid long bone.
In both cases, the hole is well worn from use. They range
from 7.07.3 mm in width and 2.93.0 in thickness.

VII.4. Conclusions
Most of the worked animal bones originate from llamas
whose remains in the food refuse provided an abundant
source of raw materials. Points and combs made from
metapodials and flat bones (ribs) in all likelihood were
associated with fiber processing and weaving as suggested by both contextual evidence at the site and ethnographic parallels representing a continuous history of
use. Associating these artifacts with textile manufacturing is indirectly supported by the immense importance of
Andean textiles in representation and symbolic conduct,
especially prior to Christian influence on social and religious life (Jimnez Daz 2006: 112113).

117

VIII. Macrobotanical Remains Recovered during


theArchaeological Investigations of the Paria Basin
Rene M. Bonzani
VIII.1. Introduction
This chapter on the Paria Archaeological Project utilizes
the macrobotanical remains recovered during the excavation of Paria in 2005 and 2006, and one smaller site (Site
Ce 51) in 2005, to determine site function, subsistence
strategies, and redistribution indicators at the sites. Macrobotanical remains include carbonized and desiccated
remains of seeds, fruits, tubers, and wood. Specific research questions that were addressed with the recovered
material include evidence of use and/or trade between the
different ecological zones, of redistribution of important
plant resources during the Inka occupation, and of indicators of social/ethnic identities and/or ritual/ceremonial
associations of plant materials.

VIII.2. Methodology of the Recovery and


Analysis of Macrobotanical Remains
Palaeoethnobotanical investigations involving the analysis of macro-botanical remains, pollen, phytoliths, and
starch grains have become a growing and indispensable
part of archaeological investigations in the United States
and elsewhere (Bruno 2008; Dillehay et al. 2010; Hastorf
1999; Oyuela-CaycedoBonzani 2005; Pearsall 2000,
2003; PipernoPearsall 1998; Pozorski 1983; Rossen et
al. 2010). Given this, the importance of incorporating
techniques for the recovery of such remains is obvious.
In particular, the recovery of macrobotanical remains can
be difficult during the actual excavation of sites due to
preservation conditions, time constraints, and limited
identification and recognition techniques by excavating
field crews, to name but a few. One of the methodologies
used increasingly for the recovery of macro-botanical remains is the use of flotation systems.
One commercially available flotation system, the
Flote-Tech machine-assisted system, has drawn the attention of archaeologists and palaeoethnobotanists mainly
because it is pre-fabricated (already constructed and
ready to use when purchased), it can process relatively
large volumes of soil in a day, and has high efficiency
rates. However, as with all flotation systems, it has its
merits and merits and flaws, which have been have been
thoroughly reviewed by Hunter and Gassner (1998) and
Rossen (1999). Two of the potential problems with the

Flote-Tech system as noted by Rossen (1999) are its expense and difficulty in transporting to on-site field locations. To overcome these limitations, a flotation device
was specifically designed to ease transport and use in
field locations outside the United States.
The machine utilized for the flotation at the site of
Paria is constructed of stainless steal. It weighs 18.79kg
and holds 37.85 liters of water when full. Its dimensions
are 30.530.561 cm. A metal piano hinged and hasped
lid fitted with a handle for lifting and moving was added
to one side to allow the machine and its components
to be sealed for transportation. Two 5 cm wheels were
attached to its base to allow it to be pulled. An additional expandable handle for pulling, the same as seen
on luggage, was added also to ease transport from cars
or in bus or airport terminals. At the base of the machine,
there are two outlet plugs or holes (one for draining and
the other for the water source) for common inline valves.
One allows for a hose to be attached and for water pressure entering the machine to be controlled. This intake
tube is connected at right angles to another tube to which
a showerhead is attached, directing water pressure up
into a metal catch basin that is designed to fit snugly
into the top of the machine. The metal catch basin has
holes in the bottom and a metal slew way on one side
out of which the carbonized light fraction floats. All the
attachment parts can be removed, bagged, and stored inside the basket of the tank for transportation. The light
fraction can be caught in a student sieve or other device
placed just below the slew way. A fine mesh or cloth
and clothes pins were utilized in this case to catch the
light fraction, which was then sealed in the cloth with
a rubber band and plastic marking tape with the provenance information for drying. In the metal catch basin,
another wire or fiberglass mesh (in this case with 1.5mm
openings) was fitted into the catch basin to collect the
heavy fraction or components that do not float for each
sample. This mesh was also connected to the tank with
clothes pins and can be removed with each sample and
labeled for drying. The other outlet tube with valve was
utilized to discharge water and sludge upon cleaning the
machine. A metal bottom that sloped toward the outlet
plug also facilitated cleaning. In this particular case, a
1.5 horsepower pump was connected to the inlet hose
and another hose was added to the intake valve of the
pump from the source of water.
119

Paria la Viexa

After the flotation of the samples, they are ready to


undergo laboratory analysis. In this report, only the light
fractions were further analyzed due to the weight of the
heavy fractions which made it economically prohibitive
to move them. The heavy fractions are currently being
stored near the site of Paria. The light fractions of each
sample from Surface II of Paria and Structures 1 and 2 of
Site Ce 51 were submitted to complete analysis (404.1
grams from Surface II and 154.7 grams from Structures 1
and 2). Due to time constraints, a random sub-sample of
each light fraction was analyzed from Surface I of Paria
(Appendices VIII.1 through VIII.6). Of the 1,511.3 grams
of light fractions recovered from Surface I, 510.7 grams
(33%) were analyzed for this chapter.
Prior to sorting, all light fractions of the samples are
weighted. The light fractions from each sample are then
gently sifted through a nested series of geological sieves
(mesh sizes >2 mm, 1 mm, and 500 m). This procedure facilitates sorting by producing three fragment size
classes: >2 mm, 12 mm, and <1 mm. When analyzed,
heavy fractions are also processed in the same manner
utilizing only the >2 mm and 12mm geological sieves
and size fractions.
All carbonized material in the >2 mm size screen was
sorted by count and weight into constituent material categories (e.g., nutshell, wood charcoal, seeds, fruits). The
material is then quantified by family, genus, and species.
Carbonized plant materials retained in the 1 mm and
500m mesh screens and catch basin were then scanned
using an Olympus binocular microscope at a magnification of 10. Any seeds, fleshy fruits (e.g., Cucurbita
rind), etc. were removed, counted, and weighted by taxon
and type of material.
Identification of plant remains was done by using
an Olympus binocular microscope at magnifications of
7 for materials >2 mm and at 10 to 20 for materials
<2 mm. Identifications were substantiated with use of
the reference collection in possession of the author. Secondary sources included various identification manuals
(Bird 1985; Castaeda 1965, 1991; Galeano 1991; GaleanoBernal 1987; Hather 1993, 2000; Honores FernndezRodrguez 2007; LentzDickau 2005; Martin
Barkley 2000; Montgomery 1977; Morcote Ros 1996;
Perez-Arbelaez 1978; Rocas 1989; Smith 1986; Towle
1961; UgentOchoa 2006; YoungYoung 1992).
A number of factors can affect the preservation of
plant remains at an archaeological site. These include
human cultural factors as well as non-human factors including animal perturbations, soil type, post-depositional
geological activities, plant preservation differences, and
others. To adjust for these factors, a number of statistical
measures are utilized when presenting the results of ecofactual analysis and these help to build the interpretations
presented in any report on these types of remains. The
most common statistical measures found in palaeobotanical analyses include density, ubiquity, and in some cases,
120

diversity indexes. All of these measures can be used to


overcome problems in the quantification of ecofacts
(LennstromHastorf 1992, 1995; Johannessen 1984;
Jones et al. 1986; Lopinot et al. 1991; Pearsall 1983).
Density ratios represent the raw count of plant remains
or their weight divided by the total liters of processed fill
for a cultural context. They are used in an effort to standardize sample data. Density ratios give abundance values that allow for the comparison of count or weight of
a plant taxon per volume of soil processed. These ratios
are often used for comparisons between sites and through
time to discern changing plant use strategies. Ubiquity
is a measure of the presence or absence of a given type
or taxa in each sample (HastorfPopper 1988; Thompson
1994). Ubiquity scores account for differential preservation factors affecting archaeological plant remains. In
general, they are not used for comparisons between sites,
but within a site or archaeological assemblage, they can
be meaningful in determining the importance of a plant
taxon or in addressing the type of site under study (Asch
Asch 1981). The diversity index is a measure of two factors. The first factor is the quantity of the number of types
of taxa at a site, referred to as richness. The second factor,
referred to as evenness, indicates how many individuals
of each type occur. A diversity index can be measured by
the following equation (see Magurran 1988: 3940):
Simpsons Index:

L=

n1 (n1 1)
;
N (N 1)

1L

Where n1 = number of individuals in a particular taxa,


N= total number of individuals in a sample, and 1 = most
diverse.
The diversity index allows for the determination of
the redundancy or similarity of remains (including ecofacts, features, etc.) within a site or of remains between
sites (Binford 1980, 1983; Bonzani 1997, 1998; Kelly
1995; Oyuela-Caycedo 1998). Redundancy or similarity of ecofacts in an assemblage would be indicated by
their low diversity index. Low diversity indicates either
the use of a few species to the exclusion of others or the
greater use of few species with other species occurring
in lesser quantities. The ubiquity for the most important
types would be high (>75% of units sampled), while secondary types would have lower ubiquity scores (<25%
of units sampled). Redundant sites in terms of ecofacts
are usually those with some type of special purpose activity being carried out such as logistic special purpose
food processing sites or sedentary sites where the diet
becomes focused on a few domesticated plants (Binford
1980). Non-redundant ecofactual use is indicated by high
species diversity, in that many species are being utilized
and in the same proportions. Non-redundant sites would
include logistic base camps or locations of a sedentary
nature where many plants are being used or sites being
utilized for purposes other than the collection/processing

MACROBOTANICAL REMAINS

of ecofactual remains for a specific purpose (i.e., food).


A high diversity of plants may also occur at sedentary
sites when numerous weeds in the vicinity of the location
become incorporated into the archaeological record by
various means (mixed with agricultural products, found
in animal dung, for other purposes besides being a major food source). The following results incorporate these
statistical measures in the interpretations of the data obtained.

environmental setting of these sites in the Late Intermediate Period and the Late Horizon. The types of macrobotanical remains also help to differentiate between possible plants that were utilized for food and other purposes
grown at higher elevations compared to those that would
have been involved in exchange/redistribution networks
from lower altitudes.

VIII.3.1. SURFACE II OF PARIA


VIII.3. Results of the Macrobotanical Study
The analysis of the macrobotanical remains for this report included those from Surfaces I and II of Paria and
two structures identified at Site Ce 51. The total number of carbonized seeds recovered from the flotation of
these locations is 3,602. One hand-collected sample from
Structure BM yielded only two carbonized seeds. Other
remains recovered include 26 bone fragments, 75 insect
remains, three shell fragments, one possible carbonized
nutshell, one carbonized unidentified fruit fragment,
one carbonized seed fragment, 14 carbonized unidentified botanical fragments, 21 carbonized bracts/culms of
grasses (Poaceae), five carbonized probable tuber fragments (type unidentified), and 90 uncarbonized seeds,
most likely of recent origin (Appendices VIII.1 through
VIII.6). At Surface II, a total of 1,339 pieces of carbonized wood (59 grams) were recovered from the >2 mm
fraction in the light fractions. At Surface I, a total of
1,883 pieces of carbonized wood (129.1 grams) were recovered from the >2mm fraction in the light fractions. At
Site Ce 51, a total of 140 fragments of carbonized wood
(4 grams) were recovered from the >2mm fraction of the
light fractions (Appendices VIII.1, VIII.2 and VIII.3). The
density of wood and seeds recovered from Surface II was
almost two times greater than that from Surface I and
about four times higher or more for wood density than
that from the structures at Site Ce 51 (Appendix VIII.4).
These results indicate a focus on cooking/burning activities, particularly in Surface II, although evidence of food
sources and burning also occur at Surface I and potentially Structure2 of Site Ce 51. Structure 1 of Site Ce 51
had little carbonized wood or other plant remains verifying its identified use in the field as serving for storage
(Bonzani 2007).
These remains are analyzed in terms of the locations
where they occur. Surface II yielded 1,307 carbonized
seeds and five carbonized unidentified tuber fragments,
while 1,928 carbonized seeds were recovered from Surface II. From the storage structures, 367 carbonized seed
remains were recovered. Surfaces I and II and Structure2
yielded a high diversity of botanical remains, possibly indicating long-term habitational and other uses (Appendices VIII.1 and VIII.2). The comparison between these
structures helps to determine structure use and the general

From Surface II, 1,307 carbonized seeds were recovered


as were 11 bone fragments, nine insect remains, one
mollusk shell, seven unidentified carbonized fragments,
five carbonized grass bracts/culms, five probable carbonized tuber fragments, and six uncarbonized seeds. The
carbonized seeds included 13 families, 12 genera, and
two species. Five carbonized seeds representing different
types were unidentified. These remains are broken down
into crop plants and other wild or weedy plants found
above 3,000 msl, and crop plants, fruit trees and other
wild and weedy plants known to grow at elevations below
2,500 msl.
The potential crop plants grown above 3,000 msl
recovered from Surface II include Chenopodium spp.
(n=243) (potentially two different species with the initial analysis not differentiating between probable quinoa
[Chenopodium cf. quinoa] and other types; Fig. VIII.1)
and Amaranthus sp. (n=66). Two types of Chenopodium
may have occurred at the site based on differences in size
and morphology, with the first type most likely being
quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa). These remains in general had pronounced truncate margins, smooth surfaces,
prominent beaks, and diameters over 1.5mm. This type
was most commonly encountered in Surfaces II and I,
with a tentative species identification given for the specimens from the latter location. The other type may be a
wild or weedy Chenopodium type (i.e., kaiwa [C. pallidicaule], paiko [C. ambrosioides], or llipecha [C. petiolare]) with more lens-like to truncate cross-sections and
diameters less than 1.5mm. Another new morphological
type has also been recently identified from La Barca, an
archaeological site in the Department of Oruro dating to
the Formative Period (1800 B.C.A.D.400) (Langlie et
al. 2011; also see Bruno 2005; Smith 1984). Quinoa is a
well-known crop grown in the Andes from elevations of
2,770 to 3,800 msl. The crop is sown broadcast in September, October, and November, and is ready for harvesting in 150180 days. A preference for the ashes of
quinoa as a lime in coca chewing is also noted (Gade
1975: 153156). The use of quinoa extends back at least
into the Formative Period (by 1500 B.C.) in the Andes
of Bolivia (BrunoWhitehead 2003). Kaiwa is also
planted sparingly above 3,800 msl in the months of November, December, and January, and harvested in 120
days. It requires less heat for successful growth. Paiko
121

Paria la Viexa

Figure VIII.1 Chenopodium seeds (Chenopodiaceae).


Specimens recovered from Paria, Surface II,
Squares 1 and 2. Diameters ca. 1.5 mm

has medicinal uses, with the seeds used against worms


and the leaves used to cure stomach disorders. It is a
strong smelling weed growing above ca. 2,600 msl. Llipecha is a weed in grain fields and the leaves are eaten
and consumed boiled (Gade 1975: 156). Quinoa and
kaiwa were frequently seen being sold in the markets
and by street vendors in Oruro in 2006, 2007, and 2008.
Kiwicha (Amaranthus caudatus) is a domesticated
herbaceous species cultivated sparingly from 2,500 to
3,000 msl. Another weed, hatako (A. quitensis) grows
in all kinds of fields at all elevations and is used for the
leaves that are boiled and eaten as a potherb. One cultivated plant known as kiwillo yields edible seeds and the
ash is made into a lime for coca chewing. A red dye can
also be made (Gade 1975: 156). Kiwicha was also sold in
the markets in Oruro though its prevalence seemed to be
less frequent than the Chenopodium types with the seller
in 2008 indicating that the seeds came from Las Salinas
de Lago Poop.
Other positively and tentatively identified plants
which grow well in the high Andes (Gade 1999: 49) include members of the cactus family (cf. Opuntia soehrensii [n=22]) (Fig. VIII.2) and pasakana (Trichocereus
sp. [n=20]), liwi liwi (Chenopodiaceae, Atriplex sp.
[n=1]), kora (Malvaceae, cf. Malvastrum sp. [n=469]),
garbancillo (Leguminosea, cf. Astragalus sp. [n=45]),
and chiwa (Juncaceae, cf. Juncus spp. [n=44]). Members of the grass family (Poaceae) were also recovered,
but specific genera and species could not be identified
at the time of the analysis. Opuntia is a common cactus
growing below 3,750 msl (Gade 1975: 15). There are a
number of species that occur in this genus. However, reference seed collections from the farm of the Condarco
family, located about 200 m from the site, were made
during the field season of August 2006. One of these seed
collections came from a low-growing, yellow flowering
122

cactus. These seeds matched the carbonized seeds recovered from Paria and Site Ce 51. Given the description of
this cactus and tentative identifications in the field (C.
Condarco, pers. comm., December 2006), the archaeological specimens most likely represent ayrampu (Opuntia soehrensii). Reference collections of the seeds of this
cactus were collected directly from the yellow fruits on
the Condarco farm at the beginning of August 2006. Further, specimens were photographed and bought from the
marketplace in Oruro in July 2007 where they were being
sold by indigenous women to be used as a dye along with
other plants used for ritual purposes. Based on field observations, the availability of the seeds and fruits of this
cactus would be in July and August, though the length
of the fruiting period was not ascertained. Ayrumpu is
a prostrate cactus with yellow flowers that grows wild
in the area (Gade 1975: 192; see Anderson 2001 for further information on the cacti family). Its seeds yield a
reddish-purple dye for food coloring and they have also
been used to make a violet dye for textiles. The seeds that
are coated with dried red juice are also noted to color
beverages, medicines, and foods such as gelatins, jellies and puddings (Antnez de Mayolo 1989: 188; Gade
1975: 192). Farther away, in the Cochabamba Valley, the
fruits of a species of Opuntia also called airampu (O. sulphurea, O. soehrensii, and another unidentified type) are
also incorporated into chicha (a fermented maize drink)
to obtain a deep reddish-purple color. A red to nearly
black colored maize type known as culli is used to make
this type of chicha (CutlerCrdenas 1981: 250). Given
this ethnographic information, it is very likely that the
seeds and/or fruit of this cactus were also being utilized

Figure VIII.2 Cactus seed (Cactaceae, cf. Opuntia


soehrensii). Specimen recovered from Paria, SurfaceII,
Squares 1 and 2. Dimensions: ca. 3.52.82.5 mm
(LengthWidthThickness)

MACROBOTANICAL REMAINS

for either a food, dye, perhaps in chicha making, or as a


textile dye in the vicinity of Surface II during Inka times.
In the case of pasakana (Trichocereus sp.), the macrobotanical remains from the site were identified using the
photographs presented in Morn (2006a: 65, 2006b). At
the times of the field seasons (June through August), the
cactus does not flower or fruit, and this type of reference
material was not obtained. However, field observations
noted a large number of these cacti growing on the hills
near the Desaguadero River. The cactus can be found in
temperate to cold, arid to semi-arid areas of South America. The major period of fruiting is from December to
March when the number of days below the freezing point
is between one and four, though the fruit reaches its greatest weight in January and this is indicated to be the time
of collection. The fruit can be stored for up to seven days
in areas with good ventilation and low humidity (Morn
2006a: 7071, 84, 123124). Ethnobotanically, the fruits
are principally consumed. In zones where trees do not
grow, the large cacti stems are used as wood in carpentry
and furniture-making (Zeballos et al. 2003: 60). Picture
frames of this cactus were also on sale in art galleries in
Oruro in 2007. The plant also has many uses in traditional
medicine, including for diarrhea, as a diuretic, to heal
contusions, for pulmonary infections, and for personal
hygiene. In the months of December through March, as
indicated, the fruits are consumed, as are the fresh flowers. In extreme cases of forage shortages, the stems or
trunks are charred to eliminate the spines and are used
as animal fodder. The cactus can also be used as a fence
to enclose domestic animals or to protect cultigens from
wild animals. Of ritual and ceremonial significance, the
trunk or stem (tallo) of species of Trichocereus (such as
Trichocereus pachamoi) are utilized for their hallucinogenic affects, being high in alkaloids such as mescaline.
Other members of this genus found in the Departments
of La Paz, Cochabamba, and Chuquisaca are also noted
to contain alkaloids. This type of ceremonial use is practiced by certain altiplano indigenous groups, though these
groups are not identified (Morn 2006a: 161164). Many
more seeds of this genus were recovered from Surface I
of Paria than from Surface II and none were recovered
from the structures of Site Ce 51. Although the recovery
of the seeds of this genus cannot be verified to indicate a
use of hallucinogenic drugs, their restricted location, particularly within Surface I (recovered from below a hearth
and lens of ashes in Squares 18 and 26, respectively, Appendix VIII.2), is very different from that of the recovered
Opuntia cactus seeds and this may be due to ritual/ceremonial contexts for Trichocereus use as opposed to that
of the Opuntia fruits/seeds.
Below 3,750 msl, the rushes or chiwa (Juncus spp.)
are commonly found in poorly drained areas. Cattle are
known to graze on this in the dry season (Gade 1975:
15, 145) and numerous Native American groups of
North America use the stems for fiber (Moerman 2000:

281282). Although potentially utilized for fodder, fiber,


or building material in Inka times, these tentative identifications as well as those for liwi liwi, kora, and garbancillo, indicate that the environment was probably similar
in Inka times to that of today. Given the context of site
location near the juncture of three rivers, the recovery of
plant remains which are indicative of wetter areas is also
not surprising.
Liwi liwi (Atriplex deserticola) is also a common
member of the vegetation of soils with low organic context and high salt levels such as are found in the Department of Oruro. No uses are listed for this plant, but it is in
the inventory of those collected in the community of Cochiraya in Cercado Province along with cauchi (Suaeda
foliosa), the cactus, airampu (Opuntia soehrensii), and
the grasses cebadilla (Bromus catharticus), paja brava
(Festuca orthophylla), and chiji negro (Muhlenbergia
fastigiata, Cuenca et al. 2005: 2327).
A common family represented by the recovered seed
remains is Malvaceae. Only one plant taxon, that of cf.
Malvastrum sp., was tentatively identified. Reference
collections of this plant were not found during the field
seasons of 2006, 2007, and 2008, although the seeds
are similar in appearance to those identified as Malvastrum americanum by Lentz and Dickau (2005: 155). In
the Bolivian altiplano, kora (Malvastrum sp.) is a common component of the pajonales de iru ichu, the open
grasslands dominated by iru ichu or paja brava (Festuca
orthophylla). Other vegetal components of these areas
include llapa (Bouteloua simplex), llapa orko (Muhlenbergia peruviana), Stipa spp., and Calamagrostis spp.
(Brockmann 1986: 85). Again, the soils are noted to be
poor and high in sand content. These seeds were also
recovered from modern llama dung and may represent
a component of the camelid diet at the site (Bonzani
2009). Alongsie Chenopodium and Amaranthus species,
Malvastrum species was also identified at the Formative
Period Chiripa site by Whitehead (1999). Seeds of the
genus were also recovered archaeologically from Pachamachay Cave, a hunting base camp in Peru, although
the uses are unknown (Pearsall 1980). Gentry (1993:
591) notes that the genus Malvastrum is comprised of
12 species of herbs found in dry inter-Andean valleys.
Perez-Arbelaez (1978: 476477) notes that members of
the genus are found in the lowlands as well as in colder
climates in Colombia. The plants are rich in mucilage
and the stalks enclose strong useful fibers. In Tocaima in
Colombia, the leaves are used as brooms for sweeping
(Perez-Arbelaez 1978: 476477) and this use has been
reported for other species of the family in Peru (SchultesNemry 1998: 78). In the Department of Bolvar in
Colombia, one member of the genus Malvastrum americanum is identified as a shrub and is noted to be found
in areas disturbed by natural and human factors, e.g., by
railroad tracks (Castaeda 1965: 232233; see Oyuela-CaycedoBonzani 2005).
123

Paria la Viexa

2 cm

Figure VIII.3 Zea mays cob (Poaceae). Specimen


recovered from Paria, Structure BM, Square 8.
16-rowed. 2.9 mm in length, 1.0 mm in diameter
Another botanical family recovered from the sites is
the Leguminosea (Fabaceae). The majority of the seeds
from the archaeological sites identified to this family
were tentatively identified as cf. Astragalus sp. (n=45).
These seeds were compared to reference collections of
plants identified as garbancillo (Astragalus micranthellus) (Zeballos et al. 2003: 6465) by informants on the
Condarco farm from the banks of the Jacha Uma River
(Alvaro and Carola Condarco, pers. comm., 2008). The
seed shape in both cases is reniform with a typical hilum
notch to one side with smooth surfaces. The archaeological specimens measure ca. 1.5mm in length by 1.1mm
in width by 0.8mm in thickness. The modern reference
material had both large and small seeds recovered from
the existing pods. The largest seeds were 2.83.0mm in
length by 2 mm in width by 1.01.5 mm in thickness,
while the smaller seeds were ca. 1.2 mm in length by
1.0mm in width and thickness. Based on similarities in
morphology, a tentative identification to this genus was
made for the archaeological specimens. Garbancillo,
also known as tala tala (Astragalus micranthellus), is
ethnobotanically used as a medicinal plant, as are other
members of this genus such as Astragalus garbancillo
(Franquemont et al. 1990, quoted by UgentOchoa 2006:
143) including to boil the plant in alcohol for application to the legs to relieve pain. However, other species of
Astragalus are recognized as toxic plants to animals due
to the high selenium content (Zabellos et al. 2003: 65).
The plant is common in over-grazed zones of Argentina
and Bolivia. Another species, Astragalus garbancillo, is
also typical in grasslands of ichu (Stipa ichu) and rapidly
invades agricultural areas. It is found in areas of moderate salt content and this particular species is considered a
toxic plant for livestock (Brockmann 1986: 85).
From the other remains positively identified from
Surface II of Paria, two crop plants are particularly important: maize (Zea mays [n=14, including 11 kernel or
kernel fragments and three cob fragments recovered in
situ in Surface II]; the nomenclature for maize measurements follows Wagner 1986, Table 6; Figs VIII.3 and
VIII.4) and chili pepper (aj, uchu, rokoto) (Capsicum sp.
124

[n=29, all seeds of Capsicum were recovered from the


light fractions in a desiccated state except for one carbonized seed from Flot 7]; Fig. VIII.5). These crops are
not typically grown at the elevation of the site of Paria
(3,8103,815 msl), but instead are known to be lower elevation growing crops beginning at about 3,300 msl and
lower for maize, and below 2,800 msl with best results
below 1,500 msl for chili pepper (Gade 1975: 95107,
201; LentzDickau 2005: 215). Maize has been known
to grow at an elevation of 3,600 msl as, for instance, in
the Vilcanota Valley in Peru (Gade 1975: 118) and different varieties of maize are grown depending on varying
environmental factors. This variation is sometimes also
reflected in maize remains from archaeological sites, as
demonstrated for the Middle Horizon (ca. A.D. 500
900) at Tiwanaku in Bolivia (Hastorf et al. 2006). It has
also been well documented that the Inka grew maize in
the Cochabamba Valley at about 2,5002,600 msl which
was later transported on the Inka road system to Paria for
storage (DAltroy 2002: 74, 273; GyarmatiVarga 1999;
Higueras 1996, 2001; La LoneLa Lone 1987; Rowe
1946; Wachtel 1982).

Figure VIII.4 Zea mays kernel (Poaceae).


Specimen recovered from Paria, Surface II,
Squares 1 and 2. Dimensions: 6.54.03.0 mm
(DepthWidthThickness)

MACROBOTANICAL REMAINS

Figure VIII.5 Chili pepper seed (Solanaceae, Capsicum


sp.). Specimen recovered from Paria, Surface II, Square
27. Dimensions: 2.72.4 mm (LengthWidth)
Maize has a number of sowing cycles, with the main
one being in September and October (hatun tarpuy).
Alate sowing (kepa tarpuy) in mid-October to late November and an early sowing (miska tarpuy) in July and
early August are also known to occur in the Andes (Gade
1975: 124). Seven methods are utilized by peasants in
the Andes to prepare maize. These include boiling, boiling and drying, parching, soaking and drying, popping,
milling, and brewing. Different varieties of maize are
also utilized for these different purposes. Not all peasant households make chicha but, most commonly, there
are women who specialize in brewing and selling in the
different communities (Gade 1975: 127128). Maizes
origin is known to have occurred in Mesoamerica, most
likely in the Balsas River drainage of central Mexico and
may be related to the attractive sweetness of the stalk
and, later, the production of fermented beverages such
as chicha (BonzaniOyuela-Caycedo 2006; Iltis 2000;
SmalleyBlake 2003; see Staller et al. 2006 for multidisciplinary research on maize and its origins).
Regarding to the recovered pepper seeds, the exact reason for the desiccated nature of these seeds remains to be
determined. It is possible that they are present-day inclusions in the archaeological record. However, one pepper
seed was recovered in a carbonized form from Surface II
(as were eight others from Surface I), indicating peppers
probable use at the site during Inka times. Also, pepper
is not grown locally at this altitude in this region and no
settlements or gardens occur in close proximity to the
excavations that could account for the desiccated seeds.
Potentially, their desiccated nature is related to their use
in Inka times at these locations. In some instances, the
remains of chili peppers are associated with ritual contexts as at the La Galgada site (ca. 22001200B.C.) in
the Ro Santa drainage of Peru where they were recovered from fire pits in the mound-top chambers of the site
(Moseley 1992: 113114). At other archaeological sites,

an association between maize, chili peppers, and evening


primrose (Oenothera sp., Onagraceae) has been noted in
probable high status contexts such as at En Bas Saline,
Haiti (dated from A.D. 1150 until the early historic era:
Newsom 2006: 330). Further research on the uses and
associations of chili pepper at ancient Paria is required.
Presently, chili pepper is noted to be the main condiment
for indigenous and peasant groups in the Andes (Gade
1975: 201). The origins of the domestication of a number
of the Capsicum species (i.e., C. baccatum, C. chinense,
and C. frutescens) are believed to be in the Andes Mountains and eastern Bolivia (Pearsall 1992, 2008; Pickersgill 1969).
Based on their normal growing habitat, the possibility
does exist, therefore, that these maize and pepper remains
indicate the functioning of the Inka state redistribution
system whereby crops from lower growing elevations
were brought to Paria via a state redistribution network.
On the other hand, members of the same ayllu, or kinship structure, are known in the Andes to often maintain
separate communities in different ecological zones (Bastien 1978; Murra 1972, 1980; Allen 1988). These kinship
groups maintain reciprocal exchange networks in which
lower growing crops such as maize and peppers might be
exchanged with kinship members for products found at
higher elevations (e.g., llama wool, quinoa).
However, of note, Structure 2 of Site Ce 51, that may
have also housed people belonging to a pre-Inka local
ethnic group, did not yield any evidence of maize or chili
pepper remains. Potentially, this may lend support to the
hypothesis that the occupants of Paria proper had access
to maize that was transported to the site from lower elevations and distributed through elite Inka contacts. Occupants of the circular Structure 2 dated to the Late Intermediate Period may not have had access to maize as
easily through ayllu networks. These results may concur
with the model developed by Hastorf (1993; DAltroy
Hastorf 2001) using the Xauxa populace of the Upper
Mantaro Valley in the central Peruvian highlands. This
model predicts a shift toward the intensification of the
use of fewer agricultural products, such as maize (Zea
mays) and quinoa (Chenopodium sp.), with increasing
Inka control over an area.
In the case of the Late Horizon Structure 1 of Site
Ce 51, the lack of maize remains is not unexpected as
maize or other food sources would not normally have been
carbonized (cooked) or eaten in these types of structures.
Further, rectangular qollqas such as Structure 1 at Site
Ce 51 are usually associated with the storage of tubers
such as potato, while circular ones were used for maize
storage (DAltroy 1992: 66; MorrisThompson 1985). In
any case, these plants normally grow below 2,500 msl
and would have been brought to the site through the Inka
redistribution system or through exchanges between
ayllu members residing in different altitudinal zones.
These various possibilities and the commodity status of
125

Paria la Viexa

Figure VIII.6 Seeds possibly of raz de china


(Nyctaginaceae, cf. Boerhavia sp.). Specimen recovered
from Paria, Surface II, Square 15. Dimensions:
3.81.51.2 mm (LengthWidthThickness)
maize (Haugerud et al. 2000) need to be more fully explored with further excavations of various types of structures in the Paria Basin.
The recovery of a few other tentatively identified
seed remains are of interest. Although these identifications are based on morphological similarities with photographs published by Lentz and Dickau (2005: 68, 152),
cf. Boerhavia sp. (Nyctaginaceae, n=18) (Fig. VIII.6) is
an herb that commonly grows in cultivated fields only up
to 1,400 msl. It is used for food and medicine in Central
America and would indicate, again, exchange networks
between the altiplano and lower elevations. Furthermore,
kallawayas, healers that use herbal medicines in the Bautista Saavedra Province of the Department of La Paz in
Bolivia, also use the plant (called raz de china [Boerhavia caribaea]) with others to purify the blood, as a diuretic and to cleanse the kidneys, urethra, and remove
kidney stones. It is also used with other plants to make a
tea to treat venereal diseases such as syphilis and gonorrhea (Bastien 1987: 50, 150, 155). Roots of raz de china
were being sold by indigenous women in the medicinal
marketplace in Oruro in 2008, with the seller indicating
that the root is the useful medicinal part of this plant. No
fruits, seeds, or other plant parts were being sold. Given
the recovery of similar seed remains at Paria, it is possible that this plant was brought to the site for its medicinal
properties, particularly those concerning treatments for
the urinary and reproductive systems.
Three other types, that of cf. Anacardiaceae, Leguminosea/Mimosaceae and cf. Nyctaginaceae, also require
126

further research for positive identifications as these may


be indicative of fruit or medicinally used trees found
at lower elevations. Particularly in the case of the single Leguminosea/Mimosaceae seed, further research is
necessary as it bears many morphological similarities
to Inga seeds (although it is smaller in length, measuring 1895 mm, L.W.Th. than the commonly cultivated Inga edulis measuring 2427910.45.5 mm,
L.W.Th.; see LentzDickau 2005: 96; Fig. VIII.7). In
the lower valleys of the Andes, shade trees such as Inga
are often planted and the genus occurs in the forest inventories of the Bolivian Amazon region (Boom 1986).
Kusillo pakay (Inga adenophylla) grows below 1,900msl
in a cultivated or volunteer situation with the pulp around
the seeds eaten. Pakay (Inga Feuillei, possibly the same
as I. edulis) is a tree cultivated in house gardens below
1,500 msl and the type most often eaten for the sweet
white pulp found around the seeds. Pakay is found archaeologically along the coast of Peru (Towle 1961: 47
48) and may have been used as tidbit delicacies of the
Incas (Gade 1975: 163164).

VIII.3.2. SURFACE I OF PARIA


From Surface I, 1,928 (<0.7 grams) carbonized seeds
were recovered as were nine bone fragments, 54 insect remains, one shell, seven unidentified carbonized

Figure VIII.7 Seed from the Leguminosea /


Mimosaceae families. Specimen recovered from
Paria, Surface II, Square 10. Dimensions: 1895 mm
(LengthWidthThickness)

MACROBOTANICAL REMAINS

fragments, 17 carbonized grass bracts/culms, one possible


carbonized nutshell, one carbonized seed fragment, and
eight uncarbonized seeds. The carbonized seeds included
18 families, 20 genera, and five species. Eleven carbonized seeds representing six different types were unidentified. These remains are broken down into crop plants and
other wild or weedy plants found above 3,000msl, and
crop plants, fruit trees, and other wild and weedy plants
known to grow at elevations below 2,500 msl.
As with Surface II, the potential crop plants grown
above 3,000 msl recovered from Surface I include probable quinoa (Chenopodium cf. quinoa) (n=565), other
types of Chenopodium spp. (n=170), Amaranthus sp.
(n=194), and probable tarwi (Leguminosea, Lupinus
cf. mutabilis [n=9 with eight of the specimens having
tentative identifications due to the fragmentation of remains]). Tarwi is mainly a subsistence crop grown for
its seeds in the Andes and is indicated to have a wide
ecological niche grown from 2,630 to 3,830 msl (Gade
1975: 96) and with as wide a range as 1,5004,500 msl
(UgentOchoa 2006: 156). The author also collected
reference specimens being sold in the marketplace in
Cochabamba in 2007 and grown in this altitudinal zone
(2,5002,600 msl). The plant is an erect herbaceous annual and may have been domesticated in Peru, although
definitive archaeological evidence of the species remains
lacking in Peru, while possible specimens of the genus
were recovered from Ancn (UgentOchoa 2006: 156).
The first identified historical reference to tarwi was in
1539 when in a letter to the king, Fr. Vicente Valverde
(1865 [1539]) suggested a tax on this crop. It is noted to
be still grown around Lake Titicaca, although its importance has declined possibly due to the work involved in
its processing. The seeds must be boiled and then soaked
in running water for 3 to 4 days to rid them of their bitter flavor. They are then often served in a fresh salad
with capsicum pepper, onions, and herbs, or eaten as a
confection. It is often found as a small crop alongside
maize or as ground cover for its nitrogen-fixing properties (Gade 1975: 168).
From Surface I, other positively and tentatively identified plants which grow well in the high Andes were also
recovered, with many being the same as those recovered
from Surface II. These include cf. Opuntia soehrensii
(n=41), pasakana (Trichocereus sp. [n=251]), liwi liwi
(Atriplex sp. [n=7]), kora (cf. Malvastrum sp. [n=162]),
garbancillo (cf. Astragalus sp. [n=33]), and chiwa (cf.
Juncus spp. [n=150]). Other recovered remains include
possible mata conejo (Brassicaceae, cf. Lepidium sp.
[n=1]), known to be a plant that is toxic to cattle and
other animals in the area (Cuenca et al. 2005: 68), and cf.
Scirpus sp. (n=1). It must here be noted that considerably
more pasakana seeds were recovered from Surface I than
from Surface II (none were recovered from Site Ce 51),
with the majority being recovered from below a hearth
and an ash lens layer identified in Surface I.

For Surface I, an attempt was made to identify possible types of grass seeds recovered from this location.
These identifications are tentative, but are based on reference collections made on the Condarco family farm in
2008. Six different types of grasses (Types 4, 32, 33, 34,
35, and 40) were recovered from the archaeological site.
Two of these grass types (Types 32 and 35) were also
recovered from modern llama dung samples analyzed for
their seed content (Bonzani 2009; see HastorfWright
1998 for a more extensive analysis of dung from various
animals in the Andes). Three of these (Types 33, 34, and
35) could be tentatively identified mainly based on comparisons to modern day reference collections of grasses
made near Paria on the Jacha Uma River in 2008. Comments on one other of these grasses for possible future
identifications are also provided.
The first type (Type 34) of grass seed is possibly
that of cebadilla (cf. Bromus sp. [n=6]). This is a large
grass seed variety measuring up to 5.0mm in length by
1.1 mm in width and thickness. Many of these seeds
were fragmented, possibly indicating some form of processing (i.e., grinding into flour) and heating (cooking)
(see Moore et al. 2007). As indicated, cebadilla (Bromus
catharticus) is found along the Desaguadero River and
Lake Uru Uru in poor soils with high salt contents along
with other plants recovered from the archaeological site,
including Atriplex sp., the cactus, airampu (cf. Opuntia
soehrensii), and potentially the grasses, paja brava (cf.
Festuca sp.) and chiji negro (Muhlenbergia fastigiata),
although the latter was not positively identified (Cuenca
et al. 2005: 2327). Cebadilla grows in cultivated and
abandoned plots, and in fertile locations. During times
of scarcity or dry epochs, the grains are noted ethnobotanically to be threshed, ground, and prepared into
types of bread known as mazamorras (pito or lawa). It is
also indicated to be good forage for cattle (Cuenca et al.
2005: 54). Harlan (1975) indicates that Bromus mango
is a high elevation cultivated grass. Specimens of Bromus have also been recovered from Late Archaic sites in
central Chile, although it is not clear if these seeds came
from selectively manipulated (cultivated and/or domesticated) plants (PlanellaTagle 2004). Carbonized seeds
that probably correspond to Bromus and possibly Bromus
mango, as well as quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) and
maize (Zea mays) have also been identified at sites from
the Arauncanian region (south-central) of Chile dated to
A.D. 12001400 (Snchez et al. 2004). Given these current ethnobotanical uses and archaeological recoveries,
it is possible that this grass was also being collected and
possibly cultivated for the preparation of foods during
Inka times. Interestingly, this grass type was not recovered from modern llama dung samples, which may indicate that its occurrence at the archaeological site, along
with grass Type 33, was due to human use as opposed to
llama dung fuel use. The plant flowers in January and
February (Cuenca et al. 2005: 54). However, reference
127

Paria la Viexa

collections of the seeds of Bromus sp. were made on the


Condarco farm along the banks of the Jacha Uma River
in June 2008, indicating that seeds from the plant are
still available into the winter or dry season.
The second grass type (Type 35) is tentatively identified as cf. Festuca sp. The seeds are apiculate, faintly
longitudinally striate, and measure ca. 2.1mm in length
by 0.6mm in width by 0.5mm in thickness. Paja brava,
also known as iruya and iru wichu (Festuca orthophylla)
again is a common component of the vegetation found
along the Desaguadero River and its recovery from the
archaeological site as well as that of the other plants currently found in the area indicates that the environment at
the time of the sites occupation would have been similar
to the areas present-day environment and ecological setting. Ethnobotanically, the grass is used as a combustible
in rainy seasons without needing to be dried. It is a medicinal plant used to treat bile problems and it is also eaten
as forage by cattle. It is also considered an important
plant for the protection of soils and wild flora and fauna,
decreasing the evaporation of humidity from the soils and
acting against erosion (Cuenca et al. 2005: 64). Festuca
grains have been recovered from Preceramic sites in the
Junin puna of Peru (Pearsall 1992: 190). The grass flowers also in January and February (Cuenca et al. 2005: 64);
reference collections of the seeds identified along the Jacha Uma River were made in June 2008. Seeds of this
grass type were also recovered from the modern llama
dung samples, indicating that it may have been part of the
diet of camelids also at the archaeological site. The grass
itself may also have been used as a fuel.
Grass type 32 had very similar appearances (surface
glabrous, seed shape apiculate and slightly curved, 1.2
1.40.40.3 mm, L.Th.W.) to photographs (Lentz
Dickau 2005: 15) and reference collection material of
Muhlenbergia sp. However, after closer examination of
other reference materials of grasses, particularly of ichu
(Stipa sp.), this type could not be positively identified at
this time.
The fourth type of grass (Type 33) had a similar appearance to specimens of Hordeum spp. (this early cultigen in North America is called little barley [Hordeum
pusillum, see Hunter 1992; Simon 2000; Wymer 1992]).
These include measurements of ca. 2.5 mm in length,
1.0mm in width, and 0.5mm in thickness; a prominent
attachment scar located at the base of the seed; and ventral mid-line running the length of the seed. Discussion
with local inhabitants in the area around Paria initially
indicated that no wild barleys grew in Bolivia probably
due to the predominant current cultivation of barley or
cebada (Hordeum vulgare) which is an introduced cereal
from the Old World and sold extensively in local markets
as fodder for horses and cattle. However, it was possible
to meet with Dr. Stephan Beck of the Herbario Nacional
de Bolivia in La Paz in 2008 who confirmed that two
species of Hordeum are native to the altiplano region
128

of Bolivia (see Renvoize 1998). Hordeum is also identified as a common component in arbustales de cauchi,
areas where cauchi (Suaeda foliosa) is commonly found
in soils with high salt content and frequent inundations
as along the Desaguadero River (Morn 2006b: 1819).
Hordeum muticum is also associated with Bromus unioloides in areas that are flooded during the rainy season
and these locations are identified as excellent foraging
areas for pastoral animals since the grasses are of high
nutritional value (Brockmann 1986: 85). Unfortunately,
reference collections of Hordeum could not be found and
were not obtained along the Jacha Uma River in 2007 or
2008, making the actual identification of this grass type
only tentative at this time. Similarly to grass type 34 (cf.
Bromus sp.), this grass type was not recovered from the
modern llama dung samples (Bonzani 2009).
From the other remains identified from Surface I,
three crop plants, maize (Zea mays [n=23, <0.4 grams,
including 19 kernel or kernel fragments, one cupule fragment and four cob fragments, with one cob fragment being hand-collected from the structure]; Appendix VIII.6,
Fig. VIII.8), chili pepper (aj, uchu, rokoto, Capsicum
sp. [n=13, eight of these were carbonized]), and probably, squash (Cucurbitaceae, cf. Cucurbita sp. [n=1];
Fig. VIII.9) are particularly important. As indicated,
these crops are not typically grown at the elevation of
the site of Paria, but are instead known to be lower elevation growing crops beginning at about 3,300 msl and
lower for maize, below 2,800 msl, with best results below 1,500msl for chili pepper, and below 2,600 msl for
best results and rarely over 3,000 msl for squash (sapallu, Cucurbita maxima and lakawati or calabaza, Cucurbita moschata, Gade 1975: 95107, 201, 216217; Lentz
Dickau 2005: 215). Species of Cucurbita have a long
history of domestication and use in South America as
well as exhibiting independent evidence of domestication
in Mesoamerica and eastern North America. A variety of
squashes have been cultivated for food. These include
Cucurbita maxima, cultivated throughout the western
Andean slopes, Cucurbita ficifolia, a high altitude and
cold tolerant species that thrives from Mexico to Bolivia, with wild species occurring in Bolivia, Cucurbita
moschata, a lowland species found in northern Colombia, but also with evidence of cultivation in Mesoamerica,
Cucurbita mixta, a variety cultivated in the United States,
and Cucurbita pepo, a species found in Mesoamerica and
eastern North America with independent domestication
events (CutlerWhitaker 1961; Dillahey et al. 2007; King
1985; McClung de Tapia 1992; Pearsall 1992, 2008; PipernoPearsall 1998; Simon 2009; Smith 1992, 1997).
Since a specific genus and species determination for the
one seed recovered could not be made at this time, it is
possible that the specimen could represent either a lower
growing taxon of possibly Cucurbita (i.e., Cucurbita
maxima) or the cold tolerant taxon of Cucurbita ficifolia
which in the latter case may indicate that the plant could

MACROBOTANICAL REMAINS

Figure VIII.8 Zea mays cob (Poaceae). Specimen


recovered from Paria, Surface I, Square 2. 14-rowed.
1.6mm in length, 0.7 mm in diameter
have been cultivated around the Inka site at Paria. Further investigations are necessary to determine the likelihoods of these possibilities. As indicated for Surface II
and based on their normal growing habitat, the possibility
does exist, therefore, that the maize, pepper, and possible
squash remains indicate the functioning of the Inka redistribution system whereby crops from lower growing elevations were brought to Paria through the state redistribution network. Further investigations at the site and the
excavation of households and sites with non- or pre-Inka
associations/contexts should help to clarify this issue.
The recovery of a few other tentatively identified seed
remains are of interest. Although these identifications are
based on morphological similarities with photographs
published by Lentz and Dickau (2005: 68, 152), one
tentatively identified seed of cf. Boerhavia sp. (Nyctaginaceae, n=1) was recovered from Surface I, although it

Figure VIII.9 Seed from the Cucurbitaceae


family. Specimen recovered from Paria, SurfaceI,
Square 12. Dimensions: 9.05.52.7mm
(LengthWidthThickness)

was smaller in size than the specimens from Surface II


(Flot8; Appendices VIII.1 and VIII.2).
One other specimen from the Annonaceae family was
also tentatively identified as chirimoya (cf. Annona cherimola). The seed measured 1286.5mm (L.W.Th.)
and even in a carbonized state, it was morphologically
similar to carbonized reference specimens of the seeds
of chirimoya collected from fruits being sold by a street
vendor in La Paz in 2008. The fruit has large seeds surrounded by an edible sweet, white flesh and comes from
a tree that normally grows below 1,800 msl (Gade 1975:
157158). Archaeological use of chirimoya extends from
the Preceramic Period (2100 B.C. at the site of Huarmey)
up through references of the fruit/tree during the Colonial Period (16th17th centuries) (UgentOchoa 2006:
5051). With further verifications of this identification,
it does appear that fruits of chirimoya were being transported to the Inka site of Paria during its occupation from
elevations that may even have been below that of Cochabamba (below 2,500 msl).

VIII.3.3. STRUCTURES OF SITE CE 51


The botanical remains recovered from Structures 1 and 2
at Site Ce 51 include 367 carbonized seeds, six bones, 12
insect remains, one mollusk shell, one carbonized fruit
fragment, and 76 uncarbonized seeds (Appendix VIII.3).
These remains represent nine families, eight genera, and
one possible species. No remains were recovered that are
ethnohistorically and archaeologically known to have
been stored in qollqas, such as maize in the circular
structures and potatoes or other tubers in the rectangular
structures (Cobo 1956 [1653]; DAltroy 1992: 66; LeVine
1992; MorrisThompson 1985). Structure 1, the rectangular Inka Period qollqa, yielded only two carbonized
seeds and 14 carbonized wood fragments, verifying its
use only for storage where human activities of burning/
cooking would not be occurring.
The Late Intermediate Period Structure 2, on the
other hand, yielded many of the same remains as were
found in Surface II of Paria, located in the center of the
ancient site of Paria. These remains include Amaranthus
sp., cf. Opuntia soehrensii, Atriplex sp., Chenopodium
spp., cf. Juncus spp., cf. Astragalus sp., cf. Malvastrum
sp., and Portulaca sp., as well as others. Particularly of
note was the recovery of Chenopodium, Amaranthus and
cf. Opuntia seeds which are utilized for food or for food/
beverage/textile dyes or colorants. The potential that people belonging to local pre-Inka ethnic groups occupied
Structure 2 for part of its existence during the Late Intermediate Period may be borne out by the recovered botanical remains. However, none of the botanical remains recovered from Structure 2 indicates growth habitats from
elevations different from that in which the site is located
(ca. 3,830 msl). Two alternative reasons may be given
129

Paria la Viexa

for this. The first is that the inhabitants of Structure 2 did


not maintain exchange networks with other groups (i.e.,
ayllu members) in lower altitudes. The second possibility
is that these remains indicate accidental inclusions in the
archaeological record during the use-life of Structure 2
and, therefore, represent indicators of the naturally occurring environment at the time. Again, further investigations of other structures found at Sites Ce 1 and Ce 51
may clarify this issue.

VIII.4. Conclusions
This chapter presented the macrobotanical remains recovered from Surfaces I and II, both associated with the
Inka Period site of Paria, and two structures identified
as part of Site Ce 51. The total number of carbonized
seeds recovered from these locations is 3,602 (Appendices VIII.1 through VIII.6). From Surface II, 1,307 carbonized seeds were recovered as were five probable carbonized tuber fragments. The carbonized seeds included
13 families, 12 genera, and two species. From Surface
I, 1,928 (<0.7 grams) carbonized seeds were recovered.
The carbonized seeds included 18 families, 20 genera,
and five species. The botanical remains recovered from
Structures 1 and 2 at Site Ce 51 include 367 carbonized
seeds and represent nine families, eight genera, and one
possible species.
At Surface II, a total of 1,339 pieces of carbonized
wood (59 grams) was recovered from the >2 mm fraction
in the light fractions. At Surface I, a total of 1,883 pieces
of carbonized wood (129.1 grams) was recovered from
the >2 mm fraction in the light fractions. At Site Ce 51, a
total of 140 fragments of carbonized wood (4grams) was
recovered from the >2 mm fraction of the light fractions
(Appendices VIII.1, VIII.2, and VIII.3). The diversity indexes for all of the locations analyzed were all relatively
high (>0.8 with 1 being the highest diversity). Surface II
actually had the lowest diversity of the locations, probably reflecting the large number of Chenopodium and
possible Malvastrum seeds recovered, while Surface I
had high numbers of these two types of plants as well as
Amaranthus and Trichocereus cactus seeds. The density
of wood and seeds recovered from Surface II was almost
two times higher than that from Surface I and about four
times higher or more for wood density than that from the
structures at Site Ce 51 (Appendix VIII.4). These results
indicate a focus on cooking/burning activities, particularly in Surface II, although evidence of food sources and
burning also occur at SurfaceI and potentially Structure
2 of Site Ce 51. Structure 1 of Site Ce 51 had little carbonized wood or other plant remains verifying its identified use in the field as being for storage.
Evidence of agricultural production and storage at
Paria comes from plant remains that grow at the elevation of the site and those that grow at lower elevations
130

(below 3,300 msl or lower). Probable locally grown


plants utilized for food include Chenopodium spp. (of
at least two different types), Amaranthus sp., and tarwi
(Lupinus cf. mutabilis). Two types of Chenopodium may
have occurred at the site based on differences in size and
morphology, with the first type most likely being quinoa
(Chenopodium quinoa). The other type may be a domesticate, wild, or weedy Chenopodium type (i.e., kaiwa
[C. pallidicaule], paiko [C. ambrosioides], or llipecha
[C. petiolare]). Quinoa is a well-known crop grown in
the Andes from elevations of 2,770 to 3,800 msl (Gade
1975: 153156). Kiwicha (Amaranthus caudatus) is a domesticated herbaceous species cultivated sparingly from
2,500 to 3,000 msl (Gade 1975: 156). Tarwi is mainly a
subsistence crop grown for its seeds in the Andes and is
indicated to have a wide ecological niche, being grown
from 2,630 to 3,830 msl (Gade 1975: 96) and as wide
a range as 1,5004,500 msl (UgentOchoa 2006: 156).
From Surfaces I and II, other positively and tentatively identified plants which grow well in the high Andes
were also recovered. These include cf. Opuntia soehrensii, pasakana (Trichocereus sp.), liwi liwi (Atriplex sp.),
kora (cf. Malvastrum sp.), garbancillo (cf. Astragalus
sp.), and chiwa (cf. Juncus spp.). Members of the grass
family (Poaceae) were also recovered from all of the analyzed structures. Tentative identifications which need to
be verified with further fieldwork and collection of reference specimens include the grasses of cf. Bromus sp., cf.
Hordeum sp., and cf. Festuca sp. Given the ethnobotanical information on the first two, it is possible that they
were being collected and even cultivated for food during
Inka times. All three of these grasses have been identified
in modern day vegetation surveys in this general region
of Bolivia (Cuenca et al. 2005; Morn 2006b; Renvoize
1998). Other recovered remains include possibly mata
conejo (Brassicaceae, cf. Lepidium sp.), known to be a
plant that is toxic to cattle and other animals in the area
(Cuenca et al. 2005: 68), and cf. Scirpus sp.
Opuntia is a common cactus growing below 3,750msl
(Gade 1975: 15). Given the similarity to seed reference
collections of this cactus and tentative identifications in
the field (C. Condarco, pers. comm., December 2006),
the archaeological specimens most likely represent
ayrampu (Opuntia soehrensii). Given the ethnographic
information on this plant, it is very likely that the seeds
and/or fruit of this cactus were also being utilized for
either food, dye, perhaps in chicha making, or as a textile dye in Surfaces I and II during the Late Horizon. In
the case of pasakana (Trichocereus sp.), the cactus can
be found in temperate to cold, arid to semi-arid areas of
South America. Ethnobotanically, the principal use is to
eat the fruits, although other uses such as building material, medicine and hallucinogenic drugs have been noted
(Morn 2006a: 161164). Many more seeds of this genus were recovered from Surface I than Surface II, and
none were recovered from the structures of Site Ce 51.

MACROBOTANICAL REMAINS

Although the recovery of seeds of this genus cannot be


taken to indicate a use as hallucinogenic/medicinal drugs,
their restricted location, particularly within Surface I (recovered from below a hearth and lens of ashes in Squares
18 and 26, respectively; Appendix VIII.2) is very different from that of the recovered Opuntia cactus seeds from
Surfaces I and II and this may be due to ritual/ceremonial
contexts for Trichocereus use in Surface I.
The remains from Surfaces I and II definitely indicate
the existence of redistribution or exchange networks with
other altitudinal zones. These botanical remains include
two or possibly even three crop plants, namely maize
(Zea mays, Appendix VIII.6), chili pepper (Capsicum
sp.), and squash (cf. Cucurbita sp.). None of these crops
were recovered from Site Ce 51. The crops of maize,
chili pepper, and squash are not typically grown at the
elevation of the site of Paria, but instead are known to
be lower elevation growing crops (Gade 1975: 95107,
201; LentzDickau 2005: 215), although one species of
squash (Cucurbita ficifolia) is noted to grow at high elevations and is cold tolerant (Pearsall 2008). The maize remains may represent those grown by the Inka in the Cochabamba Valley at about 2,5002,600 msl which were
later transported on the Inka road system to Paria for storage and use as food or to make chicha (DAltroy 2002:
74, 273; GyarmatiVarga 1999; Higueras 1996, 2001; La
LoneLa Lone 1987; Rowe 1946; Wachtel 1982). These
remains verify the use of maize for food or fermented
beverages at the ancient site of Paria during Inka times.
The actual use of chili pepper at the site and particularly in Surface I needs to be further explored as seven
of the eight carbonized Capsicum seeds were recovered
from Feature 4, a hole in the pit under Structure BH (see
Figs IV.5 and IV.11). The majority of the maize remains
from Surface I (three cob fragments, 17 kernel fragments,
and one cupule fragment) were also recovered from this
same feature and there appears to be a tentative association of the use of maize and pepper seeds in this location
that is not as apparent as in Surface II. In fact, the ubiquity of both maize and particularly pepper seeds is higher
in Surface II than Surface I, indicating a more focused
or different use of the two crops in Surface I (Appendix
VIII.5).
A few other tentatively identified plant remains (cf.
Annona cherimola, cf. Boerhavia sp., cf. Anacardiaceae,
Leguminosea/Mimosaceae, and cf. Nyctaginaceae) may
also indicate altitudinal exchange networks and the use
of medicinal plants, fruit trees, and fibers, but these need
to be verified. Particularly in the case of raz de china
(cf. Boerhavia sp.), it is likely that this plant was brought
to the site from lower elevations for its medicinal properties, specifically those concerning treatments for the
urinary and reproductive systems (Bastien 1987: 50, 150,
155). In the case of chirimoya (cf. Annona cherimola)
and the seed from the Leguminosea/Mimosaceae families that may be pakay (Inga sp.), these trees normally

grow below1,800 msl and 1,500 msl, respectively (Gade


1975: 157158, 163164). With further verifications of
these identifications, it does appear to be that fruits from
trees that grow at lower elevations were being transported
to the Inka site of Paria during its occupation, potentially
even from locations below that of Cochabamba (below
2,500 msl).
Based on their normal growing habitats, the possibility does exist, therefore, that some of these remains
(maize, capsicum pepper, possibly squash, and other potential tree fruits and medicinal plants) indicate the functioning of the Inka redistribution system whereby crops
from lower growing elevations were brought to Paria via
a state redistribution network. If this was indeed the case,
the incorporation of local indigenous/ethnic groups into
the Inka Empire may have been, at least partially, due
to the Inkas ability to supply products that could not
otherwise be as easily obtained (Menzel 1959). On the
other hand, members of the same ayllu, or kinship structure, are known in the Andes to often maintain separate
communities in different ecological zones (Allen 1988;
Bastien 1978; Harris 1982; Masuda et al. 1985; Murra
1972, 1980; Platt 1986). These kinship groups maintain
reciprocal exchange networks in which lower growing
crops such as maize and peppers might be exchanged
with kinship members for products found at higher elevations (e.g., llama wool, quinoa). Given that the exact
functions of Surfaces I and II and the ethnic affiliations of
their occupants remain to be determined, neither of these
possibilities can yet be ruled out. Further excavations of
these locations as well as others at ancient Paria need to
be performed to clarify this issue.
Evidence of the plant use of the pre-Inka Sora ethnic
group may be indicated by the plant remains recovered
from Structure 2 at Site Ce 51. Structure 1, the rectangular Inka Period qollqa, yielded only two carbonized
seeds and 14 carbonized wood fragments, verifying its
use for storage only, where human activities of burning/
cooking were not performed. On the other hand, Structure 2 yielded many of the same remains as were found
in Surfaces I and II at Paria, particularly Chenopodium,
Amaranthus, and cf. Opuntia soehrensii seeds that are
utilized for food or for food/beverage/textile dyes or colorants. The possibility that local ethnic groups occupied
Structure 2 for part of its existence during the Late Intermediate Period may be borne out by the recovered botanical remains. However, none of the botanical remains recovered from Structure 2 indicates growth habitats from
elevations different from that in which the site is located.
Two alternative reasons may be given for this. The first
is that the inhabitants of Structure 2 did not maintain exchange networks with other groups (i.e., ayllu members)
living at lower altitudes, for instance for plant products.
The second possibility is that these remains indicate accidental inclusions in the archaeological record during the
use-life of Structure 2 and, therefore, represent indicators
131

Paria la Viexa

of the naturally occurring environment in this area at the


time.
Interestingly enough, Structure 2 of Site Ce 51 did not
yield any evidence of maize, chili pepper, squash or possible fruit tree remains. Potentially, this may lend support
to the hypothesis that the occupants of the Inka site proper
(Paria) had access to maize and other products that were
being transported to the site from lower elevations and
distributed through elite Inka contacts. Occupants in the
Late Intermediate Period circular household structures
representing local ethnic groups may not have had access

132

to maize or other crops/fruits as easily through ayllu networks, potentially indicating some of the positive effects
of being incorporated into the Inka Empire. In any case,
a number of the plants identified during this analysis
normally grow below 2,500 msl and would have been
brought to the site through the Inka redistribution system
or through exchanges between ayllu members residing
in different altitudinal zones. These various possibilities
need to be more fully explored with further excavations
of various types of structures at ancient Paria and other
sites in the Paria Basin.

IX. Paria in the Administrative and Economic System


ofthe Inka Empire
IX.1. State Settlement Hierarchy of the Inka
Empire
In the previous chapters, we focused on the most important aspects of the surface features and the excavated
buildings of Paria and their finds. This chapter seeks to
set Paria in a broader context and to examine how this
Inka settlement fitted into the network of provincial centers, the settlements that functioned as the nodes of the
Inka Empires economic and administrative system and
were the most obvious installations of the states operation. In order to do so, we must first clarify the seemingly straightforward question of which settlements can
be regarded as provincial centers, as well as the position
of these centers in the Empires settlement network, the
shared features of these centers, and their actual function.
We can hardly hope to understand how the Inka Empire
functioned or the role of Paria without a knowledge of
their approximate number and their role.
Our best starting point is provided by the Colonial
authors who either recorded a list of the Empires settlements fulfilling state functions and/or defined the basic
criteria of these settlements, or offered a brief description
of actual settlements known to them that they assigned
to this category. According to Juan de Betanzos, this settlement system was created by Thupa Inka, who ordered
tampus to be built every forty leagues1 from the city of
Cuzco until they reached the limits of the empire so that
the Inka army marching to conquer or pacify provinces
could be supplied from the state storehouses built in these
settlements (Betanzos 1987 [1551]: 113114, Ch. XXII).
However, we can consider this rigid system of evenly
spaced settlements as a theoretical construction at best
because the archaeological record reflects a very uneven
spatial distribution of the state-founded settlements, belying Betanzoss description. Moreover, his account would
also imply that the tampus created on the Inka emperors orders all enjoyed ther same status and there was no
multi-tiered state settlement system of the type described
by other Colonial writers.
The perhaps most comprehensive picture of the Inka
settlement hierarchy was painted by Guaman Poma de
Ayala, who placed five settlements at the top of this hierarchy. According to him, settlements like Cuzco were
built at Thupa Inkas command. Of these, Quito, Tumi
[Pampa], and Guanoco [Pampa] lay in Chinchaysuyu,
while Hatun Colla and the still unidentified Charcas

were located in Kollasuyu (Guaman Poma de Ayala 1980


[1613]: 160162, 182 [184], 185 [187]). These settlements had probably represented the peak of the provincial administration, and Quito and Tomebamba [Tumi
Pampa] may indeed have been intended to function as
new capitals judging from the written sources. Idrovo
Urigen (2000: 7987) attempted to confirm the role of
Tumi Pampa as a new capital based on the archaeological
evidence, while Hyslop (1985: 48; 1990: 303) asserted
that Inkawasi in the Caete Valley should be identified
with one of the new Cuzcos mentioned by Cieza de
Len (2005 [1553]: 209, Ch. LXXVII, 429430, Ch.
LX), who recorded that Thupa founded two settlements
of this type, one at Quito, the other in the Guarco Valley on the coast. Hyslop believed that Inkawasi could be
identified with the latter.
From our point of view, the centers representing the
second tier below the other or new Cuzcos assumed
to represent the peak of the provincial administrative system are far more important because they probably played
a considerably more crucial role in the economic and
political administration of the Inka provinces. There are
two lists of these settlements, one drawn up by Guaman
Poma de Ayala at the turn of the 16th17th centuries, and
a much earlier one by Vaca de Castro, penned in 1543.
Guaman Poma de Ayala listed a total of 181 installations from Columbia to Chile,2 which he divided into
four categories (Guaman Poma de Ayala 1980 [1613]:
10001007, 1084 [1094]1093 [1103]). Most of the
eighteen mezn reals described as a villa or ciudad (city)
were either settlements that played an important role in
the Colonial Period or were towns founded during that
period. Royal tampus (tanbo rreal) make up the by far
largest category (131) in Guaman Poma de Ayalas list:
about one-half of the tampus (67) were associated with a
town (pueblo), while the others were simply way-stations
(rrecaudo) and inns (pulpira). This network could, theoretically, be identified with the settlements controlling the
life of the provinces. However, it is unclear from Pomas
categorization what exactly he meant by each term, and
the archaeological record also indicates that the settlements he assigned to the same category had in fact represented various tiers of the settlement hierarchy. A closer
look at the settlements in the Central Peruvian highland
reveals that Guaman Poma de Ayalas pueblo tambo real
category includes Pumpu (Bombn), sprawling over 79
hectares, Tarmatampu, extending over 20 hectares, and
133

Paria la Viexa

Warawtampu (Uarau), covering no more than 12 hectares. At the same time, Poma assigns Hunuco Pampa,
the classical example of a provincial center which, in
contrast to Pumpu, accommodated buildings of elaborately carved stones, to the category of tanbillo.3 The
thirty-one installations assigned to this category are all
made up of a single barrack,4 they lacked any personnel,
and neither did they function as way-stations (rrecaudo)
or inns (pulpira; Guaman Poma de Ayala 1980 [1613]:
1002, 1084 [1094]). Guaman Pomas tambillos can best
be identified with the tampus consisting of a handful of
buildings, the sites lying along the side-roads branching
off the Inka highways.
Research conducted during the past few decades indicates that Guaman Poma de Ayalas list, drawn up several decades after the Spanish conquest, does not wholly
reflect the one-time Inka settlement network. Some of
the settlements only rose to prominence after the Spanish conquest, while others such as Hunuco Pampa faded
into insignificance or were wholly abandoned, and were
thus not included in Guaman Poma de Ayalas list.
Paria is not mentioned by name in the list; at the same
time, the settlements to the north can be accurately identified down to Caracollo, the last settlement before Paria,
lying some 30 kilometers to the northwest.5 The next settlement after Caracollo is Cipultura (Guaman Poma de
Ayala 1980 [1613]: 1006, 1092 [1102]), the settlement
which can perhaps be identified with one-time Paria,
which had by that time been abandoned and its name
transferred to the settlement lying some 3 kilometers to
the west, the ancestor of modern Paria. The name Cipultura perhaps refers to the chullpas whose remains were
identified in the northwestern part of Paria.
In view of its date, the tampu list compiled by Cristbal Vaca de Castro is probably a more accurate reflection of the situation during the Inka Period. Paria is mentioned by name in this list (Vaca de Castro 1908 [1543]:
435), which is hardly surprising, given that in 1546, the
royalists and the rebels clashed for gaining control over
the one-time Inka settlement (Anonimo 2003 [1550]:
242243; Zrate 1995 [1555]: 289, Book VI, Ch. I). At
the same time, it must also be borne in mind that Castros list was not compiled with the aim of presenting an
accurate picture of the past, but for providing a comprehensive itinerary of the way-stations and their use for the
Colonial administration. Castro uses the term tambo or
pueblo in his catalogue, although without any consistency, and thus despite its undeniable source value, his
list is unsuitable for reconstructing the hierarchy of the
Inka Period state settlements.
In contrast to the previous lists, the greatest merit of
the ones compiled by Cieza de Len and Bernab Cobo
is that in addition to describing different settlement types
which they linked to existing settlements, they also took
pains to record the various functions of these settlements.
These lists thus offer a glimpse into the nature of the state
134

settlement network. When describing the towns representing the level below the new Cuzcos mentioned by
him, Cieza de Len lists fifteen provincial centers (cabecera de provincia) by name, strung along the imperial
road in the highland: Vilcas [Vilcashuamn, 210 km],6
Xauxa [Jauja, 270 km], Bombn [Pumpu, 130 km],
Guancabamba [Hunuco Pampa, 130 km], Caxamalca
[Cajamarca, 350 km], Tomebamba [Cuenca, 470 km],
Latacunga [220 km], Quito [80 km], and Carangue to the
north of Cuzco, and Hatuncana [Canamarca?, ca. 90km],
Ayavire [Ayaviri, ca. 70 km], Hatuncolla [100 km],
Chucuito [37 km], Chuquiabo [La Paz, 215 km], and
Paria [190 km] to the south. He also noted that there were
other provincial centers, which he did not name, down to
Chile (Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 342, Ch. XX).
Whilst Cobo lists fewer Inka provincial centers by
name although he does add that there were several others in all four suyus of the empire he specifically notes
that centers of this type were established both along the
highland and the coastal road.7 Cobo also mentions that
the distance between the centers was 2030 leagues8 in
the mountains, and that there was a center in each larger
valley along the coast (Cobo 1956 [1653]: 113114,
Book XII, Ch. XXV, 129131, Book XII, Ch. XXXII).
The data contained in the chronicles tally neatly with
the archaeological and historical record (see, e.g., DAltroy 1992; Julien 1983; Hyslop 1984; Matos Mendieta
1994; MorrisThompson 1985; Stanish 2001, 2003)
that the distribution of provincial centers within the
empire was rather uneven. The highest number can be
found along the highland Inka road between Cuzco and
Hunuco Pampa, and Cuzco and Lake Titicaca, as well
as in the Chincha (La Centinela, Tambo Colorado) and
the Caete (Inkawasi) Valleys in the coastal region. Their
number was strikingly lower along the northern coast and
in the regions south of Central Bolivia. The number, size,
and location of the provincial centers was probably influenced by the demands of the state tailored to local ecological and ethnic conditions, as well as by the time that
had elapsed since the regions integration into the empire.
The currently available evidence would suggest that there
were at least forty to fifty such settlements in the coastal
and highland region.
Cieza de Len and Cobo are our best sources for
identifying the salient features of the settlement type in
question. Together with Molina, they offer the best description of their functions and the various installations
in them. We are told that the empires provincial centers functioned as the seat of the chief representatives
of the state administration, officials variously called
delegates (delegado, tuqrikuq), major-domos (mayordomo mayor), captains (capitn general), and governors
(gobernador), and that these settlements offered more
spacious and better accommodation for the Inka ruler and
his retinue when he passed that way than any other settlement (Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 189, Ch. LXVIII, 220,

PARIA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM OFTHE INKA EMPIRE

Figure IX.1 State installations and the imperial road system of the Inka Empire

135

Paria la Viexa

Ch. LXXXII, 342, Ch. XX; Cobo 1956 [1653]: 113114,


Book XII, Ch. XXV; Molina 1968 [1553]: 68).
Judging from their recurring mention, the Sun Temples of the state cult were standard elements of provincial
centers, as were the aqllawasis housing the mamakunas
(Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 189, Ch. LXVIII, 224225,
Ch. LXXXIV, 342, Ch. XX; Molina 1968 [1553]: 68),
although Cobo (1956 [1653]: 191, Book XIII, Ch. XVIII)
notes that temples were erected to other major gods too.
A description of the craft production in the provincial
centers (Cobo 1956 [1653]: 114, Book XII, Ch. XXV),
first of all the production of precious metals objects
(Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 224225, Ch. LXXXIV,
328, Ch. XIV, 342, Ch. XX), and the storage of various
products (Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 189, Ch. LXVIII,
342, Ch. XX; Cobo 1956 [1653]: 124126, Ch. XXX) is
another recurring element in the chronicles.
Although the Colonial authors rarely drew a distinction between provincial centers and tampus, and Cieza
de Len (2005 [1553]: 220, Ch. LXXXII) is no exception
in this respect, especially since his wording is suitable
for blurring the differences between the two settlement
types, Cobo definitely distinguishes the two when he
notes that in addition to [these] large and many smaller
settlements lying along the royal roads or not too far from
them, there were tambos and well-stocked storehouses at
four to six leagues9 (Cobo 1956 [1653]: 129131, Book
XII, Ch. XXXII). Their typical buildings were 100300
feet long and 3050 feet wide unpartitioned galpns10 for
quartering the army and high-ranking officials (gobernadores, ministros reales), which, similarly to the provincial centers, had their own storehouses (Cobo 1956
[1653]: 129131, Book XII, Ch. XXXII). Cobo also
mentions another level of the settlement hierarchy: the
huts or small houses (chozas or casillas) built in pairs at
every quarter of a league which were suitable for lodging
two messenger-runners (Cobo 1956 [1653]: 129131,
Book XII, Ch. XXXII). Hyslop (1984: 304308) identified these as the chaskiwasis found at intervals of one to
eight kilometers.
The documentary evidence thus provides the broad
outlines of a multi-tiered state settlement hierarchy that
can be filled with finer details based on the observations
made during the archaeological investigation of various
settlements and the surveys conducted in various regions.
Two regions of the Peruvian Andes are especially suitable for providing a more nuanced view because the archaeological exploration of major administrative centers
was embedded into a regional survey, even if the intensity
of the research varied from region to region.
Three settlements in the Central Peruvian highland, namely Hatun Xauxa (66 ha), Pumpu (79 ha), and
Hunuco Pampa (200 ha)11 lying at roughly the same
distance from each other (ca. 130 km) can without doubt
be classified as Inka provincial centers in view of their
description by Colonial authors, their size, the number
136

and nature of their buildings, as well as the number of


state storage facilities and their location at major junctions of the Inka road which linked each provincial center with different ecological zones to the east and west
(DAltroy 1992: 97; EarleDAltroy 1989: 189; Hyslop
1984: 120, 126; Matos Mendieta 1994: 118). In addition
to these three settlements, Arellano and Matos Mendieta
(2007: 11) also assign two other settlements, Tarmatampu
(20 ha) and Chakamarca (10.9 ha) lying between Hatun
Xauxa and Pumpu, to the largest Inka installations of
the central highland, even though their size was much
smaller. In addition to the above, there were also several
smaller-ranking state settlements (ArellanoMatos Mendieta 2007: 11) such as Chancha, Telarnioc, Pukatampu,
Qochas, and Ingapirca between Hatun Xauxa and Pumpu,
and Ninaqaqa, Warawtampu, Tunsukancha, Tamborajra,
and Pueblo Viejo (MorrisThompson 1985: 113114)
between Pumpu and Hunuco Pampa, as well as smaller
installations of no more than two or three buildings (Hyslop 1984: 299; Programa Qhapaq an n.d.: 202203).
What we see, then, is a hierarchy at whose peak we find
three large centers, followed by a second tier represented
by regional settlements such as Tarmatampu, a third tier
of tampus such as Tunsukancha, and a fourth tier of tambillos with one or two buildings. Thus, if the imperial capital and the other Cuzcos be they the main provincial
centers for the administration of the four suyus or settlements in part intended to function as new capitals are
regarded as two separate tiers, we can assume a six-tiered
state settlement hierarchy in the Inka Empire.
The other noteworthy region of the highland from
our perspective is the western Titicaca Basin. As in the
Mantaro Valley, the regions systematic survey (Albarracin Jordan 1996; Arkush 2011; Fryede la Vega 2005;
Julien 1983; Stanish 2003; Stanish et al. 1997; 2005)
was designed to register not only the installations constructed in the Inka architectural style built for various
state purposes, but every settlement that yielded evidence
for Inka occupation. Hatuncolla (originally probably Hatun Collao or Great Collao) represented the highest tier
in the settlement hierarchy reconstructed on the basis of
the regions research. Stanish (2003: 241) claimed that
the settlement was the seat of Kollasuyu, the southern
quarter of the empires four suyus. Although a more extensive investigation of the site whose size was estimated
at 5080 hectares was not possible because the site is
covered by buildings from later periods, the settlement
listed by Guaman Poma de Ayala (1980 [1613]: 162, 185
[187]) as one of the five other Cuzcos and described
as the principal place in Collao accommodating a Sun
Temple, elaborate buildings, and countless storehouses
(Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 260, Ch. CII) may have
fulfilled this function; it was most certainly one of the
provincial centers. Beside Hatuncolla, Stanish (2003:
239240) assigned Chucuito, a roughly similar sized settlement which also appears in Cieza de Lens list, to

PARIA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM OFTHE INKA EMPIRE

Figure IX.2 Inka state


installations and roads in the
Paria Basin and its wider region
the same level as Hatuncolla, immediately below Cuzco;
he contends that Paucarolla (25 ha), Acora (25 ha), and
Juli (20 ha), much smaller sites, belonged to this level
too. Stanish (2003: 239240) noted that the size of the
tertiary urban centers which, with a few exceptions, all
lay along an Inka road, was around 5 hectares, although
these sites included a few larger settlements too, such as
Zepita (11ha), Lundayani (10 ha), Guaqui (6 ha), Pucarani (48ha), and Taraco (510 ha).
Looking at the Bolivian altiplano from the perspective of the two best-documented highland regions, we
find that Paria is the single currently known site that
can be likened to the above-mentioned large centers in
several respects. This comparison is warranted not only
by Parias size (90110 ha), the high number of storage
facilities (min. 1539), and its location along the imperial road, but also by its position at the junction of roads
linking various ecological zones. One of these roads led
eastward to the subtropical regions, while another sideroad probably ran to the western altiplano. These roads
provided access to agricultural resources (maize, chili

pepper, and coca from the east, wool, quinoa, and tubers
from the altiplano) and industrial raw materials (copper
and tin from the highland, sodalite from Cochabamba,
and marine mollusks from the west), and it was exactly
these features that made Paria suitable for becoming a logistic and administrative center between various regions.
At the same time, a glance at the regions infrastructure reveals that it lagged far behind that of the more
northerly regions. Nothing is known about the exact location, size, and nature of the nearest tampu at Caracollo,
lying some 30 kilometers northwest of Paria along the
imperial road according to the lists drawn up by Guaman
Poma de Ayala (1980 [1613]: 1006, 1092 [1102]), Pablo
Humiro, cacique of Moromoro (Primera Informacin
hecha por Juan Colque Guarache 1981 [1575]: 242), and
Vaca de Castro (1908 [1543]: 434). We found a single site
(Ce 49) on the road section between Paria and Caracollo
during our survey that may have been part of the imperial
infrastructure: this site lacked surface traces of any buildings and may thus be interpreted as a chaskiwasi at most
in view of its small size (0.1 ha).
137

Paria la Viexa

Five sites belonging to the imperial infrastructure


were identified on the side-road leading from Paria to the
Cochabamba Valley, on the section known to Tapacar
(Gutierrez 2005; 2012; Hyslop 1984: 138149). The next
section of the same road, extending from Tapacar to
Cochabamba, is currently unknown, but its last state installation was probably Incarracay, which we excavated
in 1996 (GyarmatiVarga 1999: 5586). The currently
known settlements consist of three to eighteen buildings
erected partly from fieldstone and partly from adobe in
the Inka provincial style, and the largest site, Incarracay,
covers a 1.5 hectares large area. The only larger Late
Horizon site, which may have formed the part of the imperial infrastructure in the surveyed area, was Site Ce 86
located on an assumed side-road running in the Khala
Pata Quebrada toward the Cochabamba Valley. In sum,
we may say that the state installations in the broader zone
of Paria, identified as the provincial center, included sites
functioning as tampus (Caracollo, Incarracay, and perhaps Site Ce 86) and tambillos or chaskiwasis made up of
no more than three or four buildings (e.g., Site Ce 112).
Moving southward from Paria, the next settlement
with Inka imperial buildings along the imperial road running on the eastern shore of Lake Poop is Tambo de
Sevaruyo, lying some 170 kilometers away. Although the
settlement itself covers some 36 hectares, no more than a
5 hectares large area with a 39 meters by 14 meters large
kallanka was occupied during the Late Horizon.12 The
Inka occupation at San Miguel de Uruquilla, the other
major Late Horizon period settlement in the southern
Poop Basin, was more extensive (20 ha). Michel (2008:
90, 172) considers this site to be identical with the tampu
of Aullagas mentioned in the Colonial documents, which
according to Juan Colque Guarache, the mallku of the
Quillaca, was the seat of his ancestors, where his father
had collected supplies for Almagros expeditionary corps
arriving from Paria (Primera Informacin hecha por Juan
Colque Guarache 1981 [1575]: 238, 246).
Of the settlements discussed thus far, Paria was undoubtedly the most important Inka period settlement of
the Bolivian altiplano region, and it was part of a settlement hierarchy which, however, was far less complex than in the more northerly regions. This tallies with
the general observation that there are only a handful of
Late Horizon sites south of Central Bolivia whose size
exceeds 35 hectares (DAltroy and Schreiber 2004:
268). The extent of Inka Period sites in Argentina such
as Puerta de la Paya (12 ha), tentatively identified with
the provincial center of Chicoana, Potrero de Payogasta
(9 ha), and Shinkal (12 ha), which have kallankas and
storage facilities, remain far below this figure (DAltroy
et al. 2007: 102, 105, 107).
Following the correlation of the settlement types described in the written sources with archaeological sites,
the next task is the examination of the layout and internal
organization of these sites, as well as the identification
138

of the buildings with different function as described by


Colonial authors.
The examination of these features runs into several
difficulties, the greatest of which is that the majority of
the regional centers such as Tomebamba, Hatun Xauxa,
and Hatuncolla mentioned in the Colonial sources are
overlain by modern settlements or that their ruins are buried, as at Paria. Another problem lies in the uniformity
of Inka architecture, which encumbers the interpretation
of a particular buildings function. The few buildings
and compounds (rectangular or circular structures built
separately, or kanchas and kallankas) with a securely
identifiable function do not represent the entire range of
the functional diversity of the buildings and the written
sources offer few clues in this respect.
The association with the Inka main roads, invariably
stressed by Colonial authors (e.g., Molina 1968 [1553]:
68), is quite obvious in the case of provincial centers
whose layout can be studied in the field. This is most
clearly visible at Hunuco Pampa, where the imperial
road from Cuzco traversed the huge, 19.25 hectares large
rectangular plaza in the settlements center in a southeast
to northwest direction (MorrisThompson 1985: 5458).
A similar situation can be assumed in Hatun Xauxa, Vilcashuaman (DAltroy 1992: 99), and Pumpu, although in
the latter case only the entry of the imperial road at the
southeastern corner of the similarly large plaza covering
17 hectares could be documented (Matos Mendieta 1994:
205212).13 The same pattern could be noted at Paria
where the qhapaq an from Caracollo to the northwest
led through the settlement center. At Paria, however, the
settlements plaza and the ushnu typical for other Inka
state settlements (see, e.g., DAltroy 1992: 99; Molina
1968 [1553]: 68) could not be identified because the
buildings had perished entirely, and neither has it been
possible to identify the road section leading out of the settlement.14 It is therefore uncertain whether Paria too was
arranged around a central plaza as was the case in other
provincial centers such as Hunuco Pampa, Pumpu, and
Tambo Colorado. However, knowing that the kallankas
at the edge of the plaza played a prominent role in the
centers with a layout of this type, this seems to have been
the case at Paria too, at least judging from Structure BH.
Considering the elongated mounds (BJ, BY) representing
the remains of other buildings, the presence of several
kallankas can be assumed at Paria.
The size of Structure BH, a probably unpartitioned
structure measuring 38 m by 10 m, the striking lack of
finds, the continuous occupation, and the features reflecting daily activities strongly suggested that this building
was a kallanka. While Gasparini and Margolies (1980:
196219), Hyslop (1984: 285286), and Morris and
Thompson (1985: 89) defined the basic criteria for identifying certain building types as the kallankas typical for
provincial centers, which accommodated several structures of this type and for the solitary buildings that can

PARIA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM OFTHE INKA EMPIRE

be assigned to this category identified on a few tampus,


a few points still await clarification. Morris specified the
absolute minimum size for a rectangular, one-room structure to be considered a kallanka. Cobo (1956 [1653]:
129131, Book XII, Ch. XXXII) gave a minimum length
of 30 meters for the galpn, while Muoz (2007: 257)
spoke of a minimal length of 40 meters. A more fundamental problem than the question of size is the diversity
of functions ascribed to kallankas, ranging from community festivities and religious ceremonies to temporary lodgings for mita workers, travellers, and the army
(GaspariniMargolies 1980: 199200; Hyslop 1990:
154; Morris 1971: 140). In many cases, it is the lack of
distinctive artifact types that prove the greatest obstacle
to determining the function of a particular building.
In the case of the royal and the governors palaces, the
situation is exactly the opposite: very rarely can an actual
building or compound be correlated with this specific
function even though the Colonial sources describe these
buildings as fundamental elements of the provincial centers. However, only in a few cases has it been possible to
archaeologically identify a royal or a governors palace.
At Hunuco Pampa, for example, Compound II B was
interpreted as an administrative palace serving as the setting of a broad range of social and political interactions
based on the number and quality of the structures in the
compound and the composition of the pottery finds. Six
buildings constructed of especially finely carved stones
were interpreted as the residence of the Inka when he visited Hunuco Pampa or of the governor representing him,
while Compound III C-4 was regarded as the residence
of the imperial administrator or a local kuraka (MorrisCovey 2006: 142143; Morris et al. 2011; Morris
Thompson 1985: 90). Another well-documented example
is the administrative palace and religious complex uncovered in coastal La Centinela (Sector III), which clearly
represents the seat of the Inka ruler or his representative
in the capital of the Chincha Kingdom incorporated into
the Inka Empire (MorrisSantillana 2007: 142143).
The least identifiable structures in the archaeological
record are the Sun Temples which are regularly mentioned in the sources, even if indirect evidence for their
one-time presence comes from the aqllawasis mentioned
together with the temples (Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]:
189, Ch. LXVIII, 224225, Ch. LXXXIV, 342, Ch. XX;
Molina 1968 [1553]: 68). The aqllawasis can be easily
recognized archaeologically, both in terms of their architecture (walled compounds made up of regularly spaced,
more or less similar sized buildings) and their finds. One
classical example of an archaeologically identified aqllawasi is Compound V B-5 made up of fifty buildings
located on the edge of the plaza in Hunuco (Morris
Thompson 1985: 7071). The identification of this complex as an aqllawasi contributed much to the recognition
of similar compounds in other provincial centers for what
they were. One case in point is Pumpu, where a complex

of twenty similar sized buildings arranged in two rows of


ten was found (Matos Mendieta 1994: 260266). The dimensions of Structure BM at Paria, far exceeding the size
of an average dwelling, and the unusually high number
of artifacts associated with spinning, weaving, and cloth
production suggest that this structure had probably been
part of an aqllawasi.
In addition to the above-described traits, Colonial
authors often mention additional features of provincial
centers that can be archaeologically identified. Beside the
storage facilities and metal workshops (to be discussed at
greater length below), mention must be made of the baths
regularly described in the written sources. Cieza de Len
speaks of the baths in connection with the Inkas palace
at Cajamarca. At Xauxa, the baths were apparently also
part of the Inkas residence, and the baths in Vilcashuaman had been built for the nobles (Cieza de Len 2005
[1553]: 208, Ch. LXXVII, 227, Ch. LXXXV, 235, Ch.
LXXXIX). Several state settlements such as Tomebamba
(Idrovo Urigen 2000: 202), Hunuco Pampa, Tunsucancha, Warawtampu (Matos Mendieta 1994: 112; MorrisThompson 1985: 60, 89, 112), and Tambo Colorado
accommodated baths, whose location within the settlement and architectural quality varied from settlement to
settlement. At Hunuco Pampa, the baths were part of
the elaborately constructed buildings with fine masonry
in the settlements center, while at Pumpu, the baths were
simple ashlar cisterns (Matos Mendieta 1994: 154). Although we did not find any traces of baths at Paria, the
Balneario Obrajes hot springs near the settlement is an
indication that the availability of the spring probably
played an important role in the provincial centers life.
Even though the Spanish chroniclers paid little attention to buildings that were not associated with the provincial centers elite, the archaeological investigations at
several sites have shown that these dwellings accounted
for a substantial number of a settlements buildings and
that their residents formed a significant portion of a
provincial centers population. Although Morris firmly
emphasized the difficulties of identifying such buildings (Morris 1971: 139), the 3,700-4,400 buildings of
Hunuco Pampa included over a thousand circular structures, used largely as residences, mainly scattered around
the edges of the settlement (Morris et al. 2011: 12). Many
of these circular structures were small, having an average
diameter of 6.3 m. They had a single door and usually
lacked windows or niches. Frequently, a very low standing wall combined with the dearth of fallen stone about a
structure suggests that the upper part of the construction
was once made of a material now decomposed. The other
part of the dwellings were formed by kanchas consisting
of three to eight rectangular structures, measuring 12 m
by 5 m on the average, placed more or less symmetrically around a small courtyard and usually surrounded
by an enclosing wall. The compounds are indicated by
cooking hearths, and the pottery found in and near the
139

Paria la Viexa

structures was a typical domestic mixture of jars, plates


and cooking pots (MorrisThompson 1970: 360, 1985:
56, 6263).
At Pumpu, the settlements layout and the architectural quality of the buildings clearly revealed that the
commoners quarter lay in the settlements western half.
Some 1,715 separate buildings could be found in the
29 hectares large settlement part: 62% (1,062) of these
were round structures with a diameter of 3 to 7 meters.
The archaeological investigations also revealed that
small subterranean storage facilities (0.8 m diameter and
1 m deep) were associated with the buildings of the residential quarter (Matos Mendieta 1994: 184203).
Our excavations also revealed round buildings at
Paria: some of these lay in the settlements southwestern
part (Condarco et al. 2002: 6770), but round buildings
could be identified in the administrative/ceremonial core
too (Structures BM1BM3), and thus a similarity can be
noted with Hunuco Pampa in the sense that these buildings were not restricted to the settlements periphery, but
were also part of the central kanchas. The round dwellings of Paria resemble the similar buildings at Hunuco
Pampa not only regarding their dimensions (the inner and
outer diameter of Structure BM2 was 4.8 m and 6m, respectively, those of Structure BM3 were 6.8 m and 8m,
respectively) and construction technique (the lower part
of the walls was built of stone, while the upper part was
made of a material now decomposed), but also in the
sense that they were not restricted to the peripheral zones
of Paria and occurred also in the central kanchas (MorrisThompson 1985: 6370; Morris et al. 2011: 31, Fig.
1.7). In the case of Paria, we have no way of estimating
the number of buildings in the one-time settlement, and
we can therefore only consider the area accommodating the commoners residential quarter and the assumed
workshop area. The two add up to roughly 4060 hectares if the area of the central sector is subtracted from
the entire residential quarter (the higher figure also includes the assumed workshop zone of Paria located on
the southern side of the Jacha Uma River).
When estimating the population of Inka provincial centers, spatial data and the number of identifiable
buildings are the best starting points, together with the
Colonial documents, principally the visitas (although it
should be borne in mind that the Colonial documents not
only reflect a later state but, as in the case of Paria, they
usually refer not only to the provincial center, but to the
whole repartimiento).
Dez de San Miguels visita drawn up in 1567 records
that there were 3,464 tributaries in Chucuito, a town
described as being on par with Paria, a description confirmed by the field surveys (Stanish 2003: 241), which
indicated that the two settlements were more or less the
same size. Written at roughly the same time, the census
taken under Viceroy Francisco Toledo in 1573 records a
more or less similar number of 3,801 tributaries for Paria
140

out of a total population of 17,334 (Cook 1975: 15);


however, this figure probably refers to the entire repartimiento because the Inka provincial center had probably
been abandoned by that time and thus this figure is irrelevant for Paria during the Inka period.
In contrast to Chucuito and Paria, Pumpu survived
fairly intact and thus the type and number of buildings
documented at the site enabled estimates of the towns
population. Matos Mendieta (1994: 202203) assumed
three occupants for the round buildings and five for the
larger, rectangular ones, calculating a population of 4,400
for the commoners residential quarter and a population
of five thousand for the entire town.
Likewise basing their estimates on the citys buildings, Morris and Thompson (1985: 96) calculated a population between 10,000 and 15,000 for Hunuco Pampa.
Taking these figures and the population of the Wanka III
settlements of the Upper Mantaro Valley estimated as 150
persons per hectare as a starting point, DAltroy (1992:
107) calculated 7,000 inhabitants for Hatun Xauxa. In the
light of the above and the extent of Parias total residential zone (5070 ha), we reckoned that a population of
5,000 to 8,000 was permanently housed there.
In addition to estimates and calculations regarding
the population size of Inka provincial centers, one of the
many other questions concerns the composition of their
residents, such as the proportion of permanent residents
and the number of temporary town-dwellers. We have
little information on what proportion of the population
lived there permanently or on the number of temporary
residents. According to Cieza de Len (2005 [1553]: 215,
Ch. LXXX), there were always over thirty thousand Indians serving in Hunuco Pampa, a figure that is at least the
double of Morris estimate based on the number of buildings, which also included the temporary residents. This
figure seems unproportionately large compared to Cieza
de Lens number of eight thousand Indians serving in
the palaces and temples of Hatun Xauxa (Cieza de Len
2005 [1553]: 225, Ch. LXXXIV). Even though the social
make-up of the population in the provincial centers (such
as nobles and officials of Cuzco, retainers, aqllakuna,
mitmaq colonists, and mita workers) is mentioned in
several Colonial sources, we only have indirect data as to
their occupational breakdown. Based on the research carried out in the Lake Titicaca Basin, Stanish (2003: 239)
concluded that a large percentage of the population of the
urban settlements established in the Late Horizon were
non-agriculturalists and principally consisted of craft
specialists and Inka administrators.
Although the frequent occurrence of stone hoes at
Paria suggests that the range of activities practiced in the
provincial centers varied from region to region, the other
artifacts unearthed at the site confirmed the practice of a
variety of craft activities too. On the other hand, the recovered ceramic finds and the changes in the settlement
patterns of the Paria Basin (see Chapter III.5.1.1) indicate

PARIA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM OFTHE INKA EMPIRE

that a significant part of the provincial centers population belonged to the local Sora ethnic group, altough
other groups from farther-lying regions could have been
represented too (see Chapter IV.3.1.2).

IX.2. Production
When the changing dynamism of the Inka political
economy is examined in the light of the ethnohistorical
record and the findings of archaeological research, the
states endeavors to intensify the exploitation of human
and natural resources is almost immediately apparent. In
addition to the corve labor imposed on subjugated communities, the former is also reflected by the greater role
accorded to the labor performed by special status groups
(mitmaq colonists, aqllakuna, yanakuna), as well as by
the growing importance of production in centers created
by the state (DAltroy 1992: 147), be they centers specializing in agriculture or craft industries. Both involved
the more intensive exploitation of natural resources.
This is borne out by the written sources in some cases,
for example in the case of the state estates established
in the Cochabamba Valley (GyarmatiVarga 1999) and
Abancay in the southern Peruvian highlands (Gyarmati
1998), while in other cases it is supported by archaeological research. Thus, for example, state farms have been
identified archaeologically at Coctaca in the upper Quebrada de Humahuaca in Argentina, where a vast terraced
field system established around an Inka settlement covers
6km2 in an earlier unoccupied area (DAltroy et al. 2007:
114). Similar state fields existed in the Lerma Valley at
La Poma and Palermo (DAltroy et al. 2000: 4, 16). The
more intensive exploitation of raw material resources is
also indicated by the growth of silver mining in Porco in
Bolivia (Van BurenPresta 2010).
The ethnohistorical and regional archaeological record thus show that even in the most remote provinces,
large public work programs were implemented. Julien
(1993: 189) concluded that the Inka state organized similar productive activities in each province: for example,
productive enclaves of fine weavers and potters were established across the empire.
In the following, we shall focus on whether various
craft activities were linked to provincial centers, given
that there were several different dimensions to producing
various goods. Thus, in the case of mass ceramic production, which required immense amounts of heavy raw
material, one decisive factor in selecting the location of
specialized settlements was that they be sited near the
source of raw materials. The situation was more complex in the case of textile production. Regarding the production of lower-quality textiles manufactured in bulk,
it would hardly have made sense to relocate even a part
of the manpower available in every rural settlement, and
the easily transportable raw material itself was widely

available, at least in the highland. The fine quality cumpi


textiles represented an entirely different case. Their valuable, but easily transportable raw material and the similarly valuable commodities needed for their adornment
(dyes such as cochineal, decorative beads, and metal
discs), as well as the advanced skills needed for their
production called for specialized workshops. An even
more direct state control can be assumed in the case of
metalwork because the prestige of the raw materials and
the ritual role of the artifacts made from them probably
outweighed every other rationale when choosing the location of their production.
This would explain why, aside from the obvious keen
interest of the Spanish conquerors in precious metals,
several Colonial writers reported in detail the metal processing in the provincial centers, as if other craft activities had not been conducted there (see, e.g., Cieza de
Len 2005 [1553]: 225, Ch. LXXXIV, 342, Ch. XX).
The Spanish officials preparing the visitas, who interviewed the native lords, provide a much more realistic
picture about life in these centers. For example, Dez de
San Miguel, who interviewed Martin Cari, the lord of the
Hanansaya of Chucuito, mentioned a silversmith and a
potter ayllu operating at Chucuito and five ayllus specializing in fishing (Dez de San Miguel 1964 [1567]: 14).
Still, the early archaeological investigation of the
provincial centers seemed to confirm the claims of the
Colonial writers. Indeed, in spite of all efforts, no evidence of a major weaving industry was found at Hatun
Xauxa, or any traces of pottery making and metal processing (DAltroy 1992: 115116). Research conducted
at Hunuco Pampa also suggested a similar picture. At
that site, the full-time brewing of chicha and the production of textiles indicating the existence of large-scale craft
activities were documented only in a well-circumscribed
area. Morris and Thompson (1985: 9192) concluded
that the provincial centers administrative functions were
complemented by the production of cloth.
However, investigations conducted in other state
centers brought to light evidence suggesting far more
intensive and/or complex activities. One example of the
former is the scale of pottery and textile production in
La Via (Hayashida 1999: 341343) and Farfn (Mackey
2010: 234241) on the northern Peruvian coast, while the
finds reflecting copper, gold and mica, atacamit, bone,
marine shell, and land-snail working in Potrero de Payogasta in northwestern Argentina can be cited for the latter
(DAltroy et al. 2007: 119). Our investigations in Paria
too yielded evidence for a wide range of activities: the
finds not only testified to various craft industries, but also
to the provincial centers role in agriculture, reflected by
the presence of various artifacts (such as different types
of stone hoes and chaqui taqlla points) in different parts
of the settlement. The wide range of functions fulfilled
by provincial centers in state production indicated by the
examples cited in the above can be explained by a variety
141

Paria la Viexa

of factors. These include the resources available in a particular region, the areas suitable for intensive crop cultivation or animal husbandry, the availability or lack of raw
materials (such as metals and precious stones), and the
local demands made by the state (such as provisioning
the army). In the following, we shall briefly review the
basic craft activities linked to provincial centers.

IX.2.1. POTTERY PRODUCTION


Accepting the axiom that ceramic wares were one of the
most common artifacts in pre-industrial societies and that
they were also most prone to damage, as well as that the
raw material necessary for their production was freely
available almost everywhere, we could reasonably presume that the place of production and use of pottery more
or less coincided. At the same time, it was also tacitly
assumed owing to the stylistic and technical uniformity
of certain ceramic wares that the manufacture of Inka
imperial style pottery could be linked to the heartland of
the Inka Empire, and the finished products then reached
the distant regions where they were actually distributed
through state channels.
This assumption was clearly refuted by the archaeometric analyses begun in the 1980s. The comparative
analyses carried out by DAltroy and Bishop on Inka
Period pottery from four areas in the Central Andes, including the Titicaca Basin, the Mantaro Valley, Tarma,
and Cuzco, indicated that virtually none of the imperial
Inka pottery tested from the Upper Mantaro or Lake Titicaca areas was produced at Cuzco and shipped out; instead, it was probably produced from local raw material
(DAltroyBishop 1990: 128132). The petrographic
study of pottery uncovered at Farfn on the northern
Peruvian coast yielded similar results: only one arbalo
sherd was of highland manufacture, while the rest was
locally made (Mackey 2010: 240). The archaeometric
analysis of the pottery vessels used in capacocha ceremonies, carried out in very distant points of the Inka
Empire (e.g., at La Plata in Ecuador and Llullaillaco in
Argentina), yielded similar results. Although mainly vessels originating from Cuzco and the Lake Titicaca region
were used in these ceremonies, crucial elements of the
state cult, vessels produced from local raw material were
also identified in several cases (Bray et al. 2005: 9497).
As we have seen, the compositional analysis of the pottery from Paria yielded fundamentally similar results (see
Chapters IV.3 and V). The 176 analyzed sherds included
no more than nine fragments (e.g., bowl and plate fragments fired to a white or pink color made from Paste III
and vessels manufactured from Paste I/C/a) not typical for
the region. Although it was not possible to perform comparative analyses, the paste, decoration, and surface treatment of the white or pink vessels suggested that they had
presumably been produced in the Milliraya state ceramic
142

workshop (see Alconini 2013). It would appear that in the


case of these vessels, their raw material and/or the prestige
of vessels manufactured from this raw material ceramics
overrode the difficulties caused by transportation. In contrast, 95% of the analyzed Inka Period sherds were produced from two different local clay types (the source of
Paste II lay 5 kilometers from Paria, while that of Paste I
was located 1030 kilometers away from the site), which
is consistent with Stanishs statements concerning the Juli-Pomata region of the Titicaca Basin, where virtually
98% of the known samples of Inka Period sherds were
locally manufactured from a raw material used both prior
to the Inka occupation and in the Early Colonial Period
(Stanish 2003: 267268). This confirmed the results of
earlier archaeometric studies which testified to the local
manufacture of Inka wares and of pottery made in the Inka
Imperial style. Our findings, however, differ to some extent
because unlike in the Mantaro Valley (DAltroyBishop
1990: 128132), there was no sharp divide between the
raw materials used for Inka and non-Inka ceramics. The
analyzed pottery samples from the Paria Basin indicated
that Paste II was used not only for Late Intermediate Period style wares typically found on Late Intermediate Period sites, ceramic types which also remained in use later,
but for two-thirds of Inka imitation wares too, meaning
that the exploitation of earlier raw material deposits was
continuous and that they were also used for the manufacture of Inka pottery after the Inka conquest, even if a new
source was also exploited because of the growing demand
for pottery and/or better-quality wares.
In addition to the earlier published Colonial documents, several archaeological studies have been devoted
to the location and activity of the pottery workshops producing ceramic wares for the Inka state, as well as to the
identity of the potters working in the workshops. We now
know from the written sources that the state established
potters colonies in various parts of the empire and that in
some cases, potting was performed by mitmaq colonists
re-settled from distant regions. According to the Colonial documents, state-established potters colonies were
active near provincial centers too, as at a potters colony
near the provincial center of Cajamarca, to where potters
were relocated from coastal Collique (Espinoza Soriano
1970: 915), who brought with them a craft tradition different from the Cuzco one, even though their task was
to produce pottery conforming to the Inka state canon.
A similar settlement accommodating a hundred potters
has been identified at Cupi and another one at Milliraya
near Lake Titicaca (Alconini 2013: 208; Murra 1978:
418). Given the nature of pottery manufacture described
above, communities of this type, well documented in
the ethnohistoric sources, may have been located in the
immediate neighborhood of Inka centers; one has been
identified near Cajamarca, another one at Cupi, a settlement located midway between Chuicuito and Acora lying
15 kilometers away from each other (Julien 1993: 189).

PARIA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM OFTHE INKA EMPIRE

Another settlement with the same name near the provincial center of Ayaviri may have played a similar role, assuming that the name Cupi15 indicates the potters occupation (Julien 1993: 189). Marca provides archaeological
evidence for the settlements supplying regional centers
with pottery. It operated in the region of Hatun Xauxa,
where neither pottery dumps, nor scattered wasters were
observed during the mapping and surface collection performed at the site (DAltroy 1992: 115). The situation
may have been similar in Paria, where we did not find
any traces of pottery workshops, but the use of local clays
clearly indicates that these ceramics were made somewhere in the Paria area, and on the basis of the different types of tempers used for the vessels manufactured
from Paste I (see Chapter V.5.1), there may have been at
least two different potters settlements or workshops (see
Chapter IV.3.1.4).
The state settlements at Farfn (Mackey 2010), La
Via, and Tambo Real (Hayashida 1999: 341343) on
the northern Peruvian coast, all of which produced an
impressive volume of Inka Period pottery, represent a
different pattern of state pottery production. Farfn and
La Via were probably provincial centers in view of their
size and their location on the Inka imperial road, similarly to El Potrero-Chaquiago, the perhaps best documented craft center in northwestern Argentina (DAltroy
et al. 2007: 118).
Archaeological evidence for the pottery workshops
established in the provincial centers comes from a workshop uncovered in Farfn, where a one meter high pile
made up exclusively of wasters from jars used for storing
chicha (Mackey 2010: 241) testifies to intensive, high
volume production and to specialization in one particular ware. A similar situation can be assumed in La Via
and Tambo Real, where the potters working in different
workshops produced ceramic wares in various styles, although no more than 15% represented pottery in the Inka
style and even these were made according to the potting
traditions of the northern coast (Hayashida 2003: 311).
It would seem, then, that depending on the location
of the available clay deposits, the Inka state established
potters workshops or colonies partly in the provincial
centers and partly in their vicinity, in which the potters
either mita workers or specialized full-time craftsmen
re-settled by the state (CostinHagstrum 1995: 621)
produced vessels that in part conformed to the state standards and in part to local traditions. The fabric, the design, and the type of the ceramics from Paria suggest that
pottery production was organized along similar lines in
this provincial center too.

IX.2.2. TEXTILE MANUFACTURE


The Colonial documents and the archaeological record
both suggest that similarly to pottery production, textile

manufacture was also completely reorganized during the


Inka Period. However, textile production differed from
pottery manufacture in that it was not restricted to specific
locations and that a much larger portion of the population
was involved. Textile products ranged from mass-produced coarse cloth to the finest textiles embellished with
feathers, precious metals, shell discs, and valuable stone
beads, and thus the organization of textile production
was much more complex. Colonial writers record that,
aside from certain exceptions, every village community
was required to participate in cloth production for the
state and that each family had to spin and weave a certain
amount of cloth each year as part of its annual corve labor obligations for the state (see, e.g., Cobo 1956 [1653]:
Ch. XXIX; Murra 1983a: 113116). The archaeological investigations in the Mantaro Valley indicated that
compared to the preceding period, the number of spindle
whorls multiplied on the settlements of the Late Horizon
(the number of spindle whorls rose from 1.8 to 7.2 per m3
in the common households; EarleDAltroy 1989: 192
193). While coarse cloths were produced on the household level, the state founded colonies where, similarly to
the potters settlements, mitmaq workers transplanted by
the state not only satisfied the increased demand for textiles, but also catered to the demand for luxury textiles.
One of these was Milliraya, where Wayna Qhapaq re-settled 1000 kumpi kamayuqs specializing in the production
of cumpis (Murra 1978: 418).
In contrast to pottery, the Colonial documents regularly mention textile production in the provincial centers,
probably owing to the great prestige of these products
and the special status of the aqllas producing the textiles.
Textile production in the provincial centers is regularly
described as places where the mamaqunas create the
finest cloths made of vicua wool (Cieza de Len 2005
[1553]: 281, Ch. CXIV); actual examples are occasionally quoted, as for example Tmbez and Cajamarca,
where the virgins serving in the Sun Temple were tasked
with weaving cloth from the finest wool (Cieza de Len
2005 [1553]: 154, Ch. LIII, 208, Ch. LXXVII, 215, Ch.
LXXX). The first evidence substantiating the descriptions
in the chronicles was found at Hunuco Pampa: in contrast to small-scale domestic spinning and weaving practiced in other parts of the town, the weaving implements
brought to light from the compound identified as an aqllawasi in the settlements center indicated full-time chicha
and textile production by the residents of the aqllawasi.
Based on the evidence from Hunuco Pampa, the aqllawasis walled compounds and the associated textile
production were regarded as a standard feature of provincial centers (MorrisThompson 1985: 7071, 9192).
Matos Mendieta (1994: 260266) identified a compound
with a similar plan made up of twenty rooms at Pumpu
as an aqllawasi which, on the testimony of the weaving
implements, specialized in weaving and thus resembled
the one at Hunuco Pampa. Differing from the above, a
143

Paria la Viexa

solitary building at Tarmatampu was also interpreted as


a weaving house in view of the stone rings attached to
the upper part of the walls (Matos Mendieta 2002). The
excavations at Farfn brought to light bins containing
spinning and weaving implements, although they may
also have served as receptacles for the finished textiles;
other evidence for textile production is represented by
the graves containing the burials of women interred with
their implements and bolts of textiles (Mackey 2010:
240241). Similar finds were recovered from an Inka Period building complex at Huaca Larga in Tcume, where
the probably last Inka governor of Tcume was buried
with nineteen aqllakuna and their weaving implements
(Heyerdahl et al. 1995: 9396).
Evidence for textile production was also found at
Paria. The finds from the systematic surface collection conducted over a one hectare large area included
seventeen spindle whorls and eleven bronze needles, as
well as 134 bone and 23 stone beads from all parts of
the surveyed area. Textile production was not merely a
household activity at Paria because there was at least one
workshop specializing in the production of high quality
textiles as shown by Structure BM (see Chapter IV.2),
which, apart from a notable concentration of spinning
and weaving implements, yielded a high number of perforated metal discs (twenty-one copper and silver discs
came to light from a single 2 m by 2 m square of Structure BM). This concentration of metal discs indicates the
local embellishment of the finished products, confirming
the association between metalwork and textiles described
by Cieza de Len: at the chief places in the provinces
... there were many workers in metals who made these
things ... In the palaces and in their inns there were plates
of these metals [silver and gold], and even their dress was
covered with gold and silver embroidery, emerald, turquoise and other precious stones.16 (Cieza de Len 2005
[1553]: 328, Ch. XIV.)

IX.2.3. METAL PRODUCTION


Disregarding the earlier polities on the northern Peruvian
coast, the number of metal artifacts and their role in the
economic, political, and ritual sphere grew dramatically
in the Central Andes after the Inka conquest (Lechtman
2007: 320). This would explain the outstanding importance of the southerly regions of the Inka Empire (northern part of Bolivia and Chile, northwestern Argentina,
Porco, Potos, and the eastern and southern basin of Lake
Titicaca), where major deposits of these raw materials
(copper, silver, and gold) were to be found. Set against
this background, it is not surprising that some researchers even came to the conclusion that the principal goal of
the Inka ventures into northern Chile (Salazar et al. 2013:
98) and the southern Andes (DAltroy et al. 2007: 117)
was to obtain mineral wealth. Bearing this in mind, it is
144

understandable that similarly to the best agricultural lands,


the Inka state strove to control the most promising mineral
sources too, as has been convincingly demonstrated in the
case of the mines lying east of Lake Titicaca (Berthelot
1986) and in the Loa Valley of northern Chile (Salazar et
al. 2013), and by our own research in Paria (see Chapter
III.5.5). Furthermore, in order to substantially increase the
amount of mined metal ores, the Inka invested immense
labor both in the infrastructure of ore extraction and in
ensuring adequate conditions for the laborers, as shown
by the investigations at El Abra and San Pedro de Conchi in northern Chile (Salazar et al. 2013: 9192) and at
Porco, where Inka installations outnumbered by far those
of earlier periods. Moreover, the finds uncovered at Porco
yielded evidence for a wide range of metalworking activities. In addition to the crushing and separation of the ores,
smelting and refining was also performed near the mines
(Van BurenPresta 2010: 179190).
In contrast, the copper mine identified by us on the
fringes of Paria yielded only evidence for the extraction
and the crushing of the ores. Similarly as in Porco, we
did not detect any evidence indicating the manufacture of
finished products; it would appear that metalworking was
spatially separated from the place of extraction as at Cerro
Huaringa and in the Mantaro Valley in Peru, and at several
northwestern Argentinean sites such as Ingenio de Arenal,
Faldas del Cerro, and Quillay (DAltroy et al. 2000: 20;
Earle 1994: 452; Raffino 2000: 132134, Fig. 83; ScattolinWilliams 1992: 7174, Fig. 89; Van BurenPresta
2010: 185). Research in the Calchaqui Valley revealed that
the different production stages were conducted in three
different locations. The moulds found at Valdz would
suggest that following the preparation of the ores in the
mines, copper ingots were made first and the final products
of tin bronze were produced in Potrero de Payogasta, the
regions provincial center (DAltroy et al. 2000: 22; Earle
1994: 452456). It seems likely that mineral extraction
was performed at the mines in order to eliminate the cost
of transporting bulk raw materials to production centers.
At the same time, one of the main priorities of the Inka
state was to gain control over the manufacture of valuable,
prestigious, but less voluminous (precious) metal objects
and to produce the finished objects at least in part where
their consumption and distribution took place.
The manufacture of finished objects under state control may have ocurrred partly on settlements located in
the neighborhood of state centers, as in the case of pottery and textile production. The visita drawn up by Garci
Dez de San Miguel records that there was an ayllu of
silversmiths in Chucuito, which Julien (1983: 75) identified with the modern town of Platera located between
Chucuito and Acora. However, the provincial centers undoubtedly also contributed to the production of finished
objects. The chronicles invariably record activities of this
type in connection with provincial centers. Cieza de Len
recounts that in all these capitals the Inka had temples of

PARIA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM OFTHE INKA EMPIRE

the Sun, mints, and many silversmiths who did nothing


but work rich pieces of gold or fair vessels of silver.17
(Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 342, Ch.XX.)
One of the provincial centers mentioned by name
in Cieza de Lens work is Pumpu, where Matos Mendieta discovered molten copper lumps among what he
assumed to be the remains of a smelting furnace, which
he regarded as proof for local metalworking (Matos Mendieta 1994: 38). Evidence for copper and goldworking
has been reported from Potrero-Chaquiago and Potrero
Payogasta too. At the latter site, it could be demonstrated
that the finished products were manufactured from ingots
received from Valdz in the residential quarter of the Inka
elite and in the nearby buildings (DAltroy et al. 2007:
119; Earle 1994: 452457). In addition to the location of
the metal workshops, the high prestige of metalworking
was also reflected by fragments of vessels imported from
the Lake Titicaca region (DAltroy et al. 2000: 21).
Because of their proximity to Paria, the mine (Site Ce
56) and the metal workshops were not spatially discrete,
although it is also possible that raw material from other
mines was also processed, considering that copper-bearing rocks, slag, melted copper pieces containing tiny
pearl-like bumps on their surface, and the fragments of
smelting bowls were found in different parts of Paria (see
Chapter IV.3.3). We may be justified in assuming that the
abundance of metal artifacts found at Paria, such as the
disc-shaped adornments, shawl pins (tupu), and needles
found in Structure BM interpreted as a textile workshop,
were in part produced locally.
The collation of the ethnohistoric and archaeological evidence suggests that valuable metal artifacts with
a high prestige and, often, a ritual role, were produced
under state control, no matter how limited their quantity,
possibly by full-time specialist workers re-settled in the
provincial centers.

IX.2.4. FINE ARTISANRY


While the Spanish chronicles only contain indirect references to the association between the provincial centers
and the production of adornments and articles functioning as symbols of status, such as Cieza de Lens abovequoted passage on clothing embellished with precious
metals and valuable stones (Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]:
328, Ch. XIV), conclusive proof for the link between the
two comes from the archaeological record. Similarly to
metal processing, evidence for the production of the small
decorative items of shell, stone, and mica was uncovered
near the elite residential sector of Potrero de Payogasta,
where finds reflecting obsidian manufacturing also came
to light (DAltroy et al. 2000: 20; Earle 1994: 453455).
The situation in Paria differed inasmuch as the
raw materials and the semi-finished products were
found in different parts of the settlement. The greatest

concentration was noted on the settlements periphery, in


the area enclosed by the Jacha Uma, Iruma, and Huaylluma Rivers. Evidence for the local manufacture of finished products was found in the case of sodalite, obsidian,
and marine shells (Pecten genus, Mytilidae family). The
local processing of raw materials procured elsewhere was
indicated by the concentration of obsidian in areas Y and
AK, and the obsidian debitage and chips found in Surface
II. All three locally produced artifact types were made
from raw materials obtained from distant sources whose
distribution was organized by the state. In addition to
controlling the raw material deposits, the state also maintained its control over the production and the circulation
of the finished products by ensuring that the goods were
manufactured in one of the provincial centers.

IX.3. Concentration of Products


Aside from the various types of craft industries mentioned in the above, the empires provincial centers also
played a key role in the concentration of goods produced
elsewhere. This is evidenced by the storage facilities
found near all major state installations that may, in theory at least, have been exclusively used for storing locally produced goods; however, the Colonial documents
and the archaeological evidence tell us otherwise. Several chronicles describe how the goods produced elsewhere were collected in provincial centers: one of these
was written by Sancho de la Hoz, who arrived to Peru as
Francisco Pizarros secretary, and described how tribute
paid in maize, textiles, and other goods was transported
to the provincial capitals from the smaller towns (Sancho
de la Hoz 1962 [1543]: 87). The same observation was
made by Cieza de Len, when he spoke of the provincial centers: and from every so many leagues around,
the tributes were brought to one of these capitals, and
from so many others, to another.18 (Cieza de Len 2005
[1553]: 342, Ch. XX.)
Cieza de Lens general observation relating to the
entire Inka Empire is borne out by the information contained in the visitas referring to the broader Hunuco area,
most notably in a document drawn up in 1549, in which
the khipu kamayuq recording the services performed for
the Inka state speaks of forty potters who took their wares
to Hunuco Pampa, and of sixty Indians who similarly
transported a part of the coca leaves they had collected to
Hunuco Pampa and to Cuzco (Murra 1983b: 81). Perhaps the best account of the most diverse goods flowing
into the provincial centers is contained in a visita from
1562, according to which the Chupaychu living in the
Huallaga Valley tributed to him [the Inka] maize that
they put in Hunuco Pampa it took them seven days to
the storehouses from where they harvested it and
they tributed coca that they harvested in the montaa and
they put it in nine days in the said Hunuco Pampa and
145

Paria la Viexa

the fine cloth that they put half in Hunuco Pampa and
the other half in Cuzco; and in the same way they tributed salt and peppers and sandals and feathers from the
montaa and they put them in the said Hunuco Pampa
and the very good ones they took to Cuzco (Ortiz de
Zuiga 1967 [1562]: 2526). The same visitas record that
the goods produced by the Chupaychu and the neighboring Yacha were taken not only to Hunuco, but also to
Pumpu and that the settlement provided eighty Indians
for this task (Ortiz de Zuiga 1967 [1562]: 307). These
documents thus allow a glimpse into the wide range of
products tributed to the Inka state and they also document
the fact that most products were stockpiled in the nearest
major centers, although some goods were taken directly
to the capital.
The archaeological identification of various goods
from other regions concentrated on a particular settlement
runs into various difficulties despite the extensive archaeological investigation of a site, principally because many
of the goods in question were perishable commodities.
However, even these can sometimes be found under exceptionally good conditions. The maize and chili pepper
remains surviving under the cold, dry conditions of the
well-preserved storage facilities at Hunuco Pampa and
Pumpu bear witness to the accuracy of the information
contained in the Hunuco visita because these products
could hardly have been grown locally (Matos Mendieta
1994: 249, 254; MorrisThompson 1985: 101103).
As regards Paria, there are several highly informative
Colonial documents for this settlement, describing conditions in the regions where various goods were actually
produced (i.e., the Cochabamba Valley, see Gyarmati
Varga 1999; Wachtel 1982), while the archaeological investigations offer indirect evidence from the actual place
where various goods were stockpiled and used. In this
respect, the most important documents are the testimonies given by Hernando Asacalla and his fellow caciques
of Paria who were questioned in the lawsuit over their
lands in Cochabamba, and who stated that everything
that was planted in the said Potopoto and Yllaurco and
Colchacollo and Coachaca and in this Viloma chacara19
was harvested and transported to the Paria tambo and
then to Cuzco on the Inkas llamas (Repartimiento de
tierras por el Inca Huayna Capac 1977 [1556]: 24).
The reliability of this statement can be challenged on
the grounds that the transportation of goods into Cuzco
through Paria would have meant a major detour. There
can be no doubt that Pedro Nampa, a mitmaq Indian from
Chilque, gave a more accurate description of the situation, and of the flow and consumption of the goods from
Cochabamba. According to his testimony recorded in
1568, he himself had witnessed how maize was transported to the storehouses in Paria from the said Cochabamba Valley and from there to Lurucache, and those
travelling to Quilca on the road passing through Tapacar
took with them everything found in the neighborhood
146

of Hayohayo [Ayo Ayo], whence they transported them


to Cuzco20 (A.H.C. Exp. 16, 1568; quoted by del Ro
1996: 38). The chief caciques of Cochabamba, Francisco
and Gernimo Cuyo, and Diego Tanquiri gave a similar
testimony: they stated that the storehouses of Paria and
Tapacar had been expressly built for stockpiling various goods from Cochabamba and that the goods were
then taken to Luricachi [sic!] and thence to Cuzco by the
Inkas llamas without consuming anything of them (Interrogatorio contra los indios de Tapacar 1998 [1568]:
649). These testimonies i.e., that various goods had
been transported to Paria for stockpiling are archaeologically borne out by the animal bone sample from
Paria, which revealed that over two-thirds of the animals
were mature llamas, while their pathological lesions suggested that they may have been pack animals (see Chapter VI.2.1).
The testimonies thus indicate that the goods from Cochabamba were transported to two different destinations
along two different routes. The road to Cuzco turned northwestward toward Ayo Ayo after leaving Tapacar, perhaps
through Caracollo, most likely corresponding to the route
taken by Hernando Pizarro to Cuzco after the Battle of
Tapacar (Annimo, sitio del Cuzco 1934 [1536]: 130; see
Chapter II), while the goods taken to Paria travelled southeastward. The two roads probably separated at Tapacar.
While the testimonies agree that all the goods produced in
Cochabamba were ultimately destined for Cuzco, it seems
likely that a part of these goods had not only been stored,
but also consumed and used at Paria. That Paria was not
simply a collection point, but also a redistribution center is
suggested by the assertion that the goods (or at least part of
them) were transported to Lurucache.
The macrobotanical remains brought to light during
the excavations conducted in Paria and on the neighboring site (Ce 51) provide further archaeological evidence
for the concentration of goods produced elsewhere in
Paria. While Structure 2 of the Late Intermediate Period
at Site Ce 51 yielded the solely the remains of plants typical for the altiplano, the maize and chili pepper remains
from the buildings uncovered in Paria clearly indicate
that there were major changes in access to agricultural
produce from regions beyond the altiplano after the Inka
conquest (see Chapter VII.3), and the same holds true for
metals, obsidian, marine mollusks, and precious stones
(especially sodalite). The appearance of these non-local
commodities during the Inka Period, principally in Paria,
indirectly confirms the concentration of these goods in
the Inka provincial center.

IX.4. Storage of Goods


The perhaps most striking features of the provincial centers both with regard to their architectural configuration and their function were the storage facilities for

PARIA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM OFTHE INKA EMPIRE

stockpiling locally produced goods and produce from


other regions that were transported there. This salient
feature of the Inka state infrastructure piqued the interest
of all Colonial authors and we can take our pick of the
descriptions of the state storage facilities (see, e.g., Cieza
2005 [1553]: 128, Ch. XLIV; Guaman Poma de Ayala
1980 [1613]: 308; Molina 1968 [1553]: 68; Pizarro 1986
[1571]: 9596; Polo de Ondegardo 1916 [1571]: 6077;
Sancho de la Hoz 1962 [1543]: 91).21 The perhaps most
eloquent account of these structures is to be found in Cobos chronicle. Cobo did not simply record the obvious
features visible even to the most casual visitor, that the
tower-like round and rectangular buildings were erected
outside the settlements along the royal road and that the
evenly spaced storehouses were arranged into rows on
the breezy hillsides, but also the system whereby the Inka
state regulated the flow of produced goods and their concentration in storage facilities created by the state. According to his description, by order of the Inka, large
storehouses and granaries were made which the Indians
called colcas. They were located in all the provinces of
Peru; the tribute and goods belonging to the king and
Religion were enclosed and stored in them. These royal
and sacred storehouses were located particularly in three
places. First, in the lands of the king and of Religion
in each province where the products and tributes were
stored immediately as they were collected; second, others were in the capital cities of the jurisdiction, where
the viceroys resided, and third, storehouses were located
in the city of Cuzco. ... All of the grain, seeds and fruits
gathered from the fields of Religion and the Inka, and
everything else that the villages contributed in kind was
put by the Indians of the community in the first storehouses so that the Inka and his governors could distribute
it as they wished. The collectors of the royal revenue and
the revenue of Religion would gather from these storehouses at certain times the amount of goods that were
ordered, and they had part of it taken to the storehouses
of the provincial capital cities, and part of it to the city of
Cuzco.22 (Cobo 1956 [1653]: 124, Vol. II, Book XII, Ch.
XXX, our italics.)
Cobos description of the architectural features and
the location of the state storage facilities in the highland
region have been verified by the archaeological record,
and our own investigations in Paria have also confirmed
the accuracy of his report (see, e.g., DAltroy 1992;
GyarmatiVarga 1999; Matos Mendieta 1994; Morris
1971; MorrisThompson 1985; see also Chapter III.5.3).
Even more important are Cobos remarks on how the
system worked. He drew a clear distinction between the
storehouses in the regions where the goods were actually produced and the storage facilities established in the
places where the goods were consumed and redistributed
(while, at the same time, distinguishing the storehouses
of the state and the state cult), and he also describes the
flow of goods from the former to the latter, regardless of

whether they were produce grown on state estates or the


fields of the state cults, or other finished products. The
regional distribution of the largest currently known state
storage facilities confirms Cobos categorization: the
storehouses in the Cochabamba Valley and at Campo de
Pucara in northwestern Argentina are linked to the state
estates, while the overwhelming majority of the storage
facilities at Hatun Xauxa, Pumpu, Hunuco Pampa, and
Paria to the provincial center. Cobos general observations also tally with the testimonies mentioning the flow
of goods from the Cochabamba Valley to Cuzco. The first
stop was represented by the storehouses in Cochabamba.
If we accept the accuracy of the above characterization of the overall system of the storage facilities, we
may justifiably assume that the storehouses erected at the
locations of production served for stockpiling the produce and goods grown and manufactured there, while the
spectrum of commodities accumulated in the storage facilities near the provincial centers was much wider, ranging from raw materials for the craftsmen working there
and the goods they produced to the foodstuffs needed for
provisioning permanent residents and temporary visitors
alike. It seems likely that the storehouses also contained
various locally produced goods and commodities received from other regions that were distributed as part of
the state hospitality.
Cieza de Len lists a fairly wide range of stored products, describing storehouses filled with all necessary
supplies. This was to provide for their soldiers, for in one
of these depots there were lances, and in another, darts,
and in others sandals, and in others, the different arms
they employed. Likewise, certain depots were filled with
fine clothing, others, with coarser garments, and others
with food and every kind of victuals.23 (Cieza de Len
2005 [1553]: 128, Ch. XLIV.) Other authors penned
very similar lists whose items ranged from foods, raw
materials (such as salt, wool, and colored feathers), tools
(such as looms), clothing (footwear and coarse textiles),
prestige objects (such as fine textiles, metal objects), and
weapons (see e.g. Molina 1968 [1553]: 68; Xerez 1891
[1534]: 56), to such specialized goods as hundreds of
thousands of dried birds stored in a warehouse of Cuzco
(Sancho de la Hoz 1962 [1543]: 91).
Most of the many different types of goods described
by Colonial authors as having been stockpiled in the
state storage facilities can only be archaeologically documented under exceptional circumstances. Until now, only
the presence of various plants could be demonstrated.
Six of the ninety-five storehouses uncovered at Hunuco
Pampa contained charred maize, while the remains of
charred tubers were recovered from three storehouses
(Morris 1981: 333, 339). The six storehouses excavated
at Pumpu contained maca, pepper, charred chuo, and
burnt ichu thatch which was probably used for packing
tubers (Matos Mendieta 1994: 249). Of the twenty-three
investigated storehouses in the Upper Mantaro valley,
147

Paria la Viexa

three yielded maize and quinoa, two tubers and one lupine remains (DAltroy 1992: 173). 113 charred Papillionaceae, perhaps Phaseolus aboligineus seeds were
recovered from the soil sample taken from the floor of
Building 5 of Kharalaus Pampa in the Cochabamba Valley (GyarmatiVarga 1999: 40). A rectangular qollqa
(Structure 1), excavated in one of the storage facilities
(Site Ce51) located near Paria, yielded only two carbonized seeds (remains of Leguminosea cf. Astragalus sp.)
and fourteen carbonized wood fragments (see Chapter
III.5.3.2.1).24
The currently available samples solely bear witness
to the one-time presence of locally grown crops and produce from other regions, and thus it is impossible to determine the entire range of the goods stockpiled in the
storage facilities or their proportion to each other because
the latter probably changed from one site to the other,
depending on local environmental conditions, the grown
crops, and local demands.
The architectural traits of the Paria storage facilities
and the layout and arrangement of the storehouse groups
have already been discussed in Chapter III.5.3. Let us
now see how the storage facilities at Paria compare with
those at other provincial centers and how they fitted into
the overall storage system of the Inka Empire.
The majority of the currently known Inka state storage facilities are located along the highland imperial road
where storage conditions would be ideal, given the dry
climate and low temperatures during a significant portion of the year, but agricultural production is marginal
(3,3004,100 msl). In other words, agricultural production and the storage of the produce were spatially discrete. In the Hunuco region, for example, the richest
agricultural lands and the primary local population in the
Huallaga Valley were located some 50 to 90 kilometers
away from the storage center at Hunuco Pampa in the
barren puna, lying at 3,800 msl (Earle 1992: 332).
The two above-mentioned large state storage installations in the Cochabamba Valley and at Campo de Pucara
lie east of this highland-altiplano zone; the number of
state storehouses is negligible on the coast compared to
the number found in the highland. Most storehouses, 202
in all, were identified at Inkawasi (Snead 1992: 93), one of
the new Cuzcos (Cieza de Len 2005 [1553]: 209, Ch.
LXXVII, 429430, Ch. LX; Hyslop 1985: 48). However,
we should not forget that in the coastal Inka centers, the
storehouses tended to be dispersed within the main body
of the settlement (Eeckhout 2012; Morris 1971: 137)
rather than forming a separate cluster (presumably continuing an earlier local tradition, see Mackey 2010: 240),
undoubtedly making their identification more difficult.
The concentration of state storage facilities in the
highland region was undoubtedly influenced by environmental factors, as well as by the logistic rationale that
by concentrating the available goods along the imperial
road acting as the empires backbone, the storehouses
148

would be located at reasonable distances from each other


towards the east and the west, and they would provide
the necessary provisions for the labor crews and the army
moving northward and southward on the highland road.
A closer look at the location of the major highland storage facilities reveals that the boundary of the large storage facilities lay at Hunuco Pampa or perhaps Huamachuco (Cajamarca) in the north and at Paria in the south,
marking the two extreme points of the altiplano, beyond
which the climate was too wet towards the north and too
cold towards the south.
Looking at the storage facilities in the Paria area (Fig.
IX.3), we find that Groups 46 on the northwestern periphery of the provincial center were wholly integrated
into the settlements overall layout, as were the storage
facilities on the fringes of Hunuco Pampa and Pumpu,
while Groups 1 (Site Ce 34) and 2 (Site Ce 51), lying at
1.5 to 2.2 kilometers from Paria, resemble the system of
storage facilities encircling the provincial center at Hatun
Xauxa and Pumpu (the storehouses located on the top
of Shongoymarca Hill lying 800 m away from Pumpu;
Matos Mendieta 1994: 243). The usual explanations for
siting the storehouses on hillsides (adequate ventilation,
a location less vulnerable to frosts) seem valid for a part
of the storehouses at Paria too (Groups 1 and 2), although
about two-thirds of the storehouses (Groups 36) lay on
flat terrain on the settlements fringes as at Pumpu (Matos Mendieta 1994: 243). It is possible that the goods
stored in these facilities (such as the wool of camelids,
particularly typical for the region, and the various goods
produced in Paria itself) were less sensitive to environmental damage. Another remarkable feature of the Paria
storage facilities is that the storehouses built on the flat
terrain flanking the settlement were all round and that the
proportion of round structures was much higher (around
93%) than in the Mantaro Valley (41%). Moreover, their
storage capacity (78.4%) was greater by far than of the
round storehouses in the Mantaro Valley (41%) and at
Hunuco Pumpu (38%), perhaps again owing to the
commodities kept in them and their overall proportion
to other goods.
If we compare the number of storehouses located in
Paria and on the nearby hillsides (totalling a minimum
of 1,539) with the 11,190 storehouses currently known
from the territory of the Inka Empire, we may conclude
that 13.7% of the currently known storehouses are concentrated in Paria (Fig. IX.4).25 Their number exceeds
the number of storehouses located next to all three major
provincial centers of the central Peruvian highland: Hatun Xauxa has 1,218 storehouses in eight groups within a
radius of 2 kilometers (the largest of these groups is made
up of 479 storehouses; DAltroy 1992: 165), Pumpu has
510 storehouses (Matos Mendieta 1994: 255), while
Hunuco Pampa has 496 storehouses (Snead 1992: 90).
The remains of the 1,717 storehouses at Campo del Pucara in Argentina, sited in three distinct groups, lying

PARIA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM OFTHE INKA EMPIRE

Group
(Site)

Number of storehouses

Form

Min. oor
area (m2)

Max. oor
area (m2)

Min. storage
capacity (m3)

Max. storage
capacity (m3)

Min.

Max.

Round26

366

455

646.5

803.7

1293.1

1607.4

Rectangular27

109

137

654

822

1308.1.

1644.1

Round28

68

78

480.4

551

960.8

1102.1

Rectangular29

10

10

85

85

170.1.

170.1

3 (Ce 1)

Round30

10

10

31.4

31.4

62.8

62.8

4 (Ce 1)

Round

104

121

326.6

379.9

653.2

759.8

5 (Ce 1)

Round

96

100

301.4

314

602.8

628.1

6 (Ce 1)

Round

776

864

2436.6

2713

4873.2

5426.1

1539

1775

4961.9

5700

9923.8

1 (Ce 34)

2 (Ce 51)

Total

11,400

Figure IX.3 Principal data of the six storage facilities in the Paria area
total of 325 storehouses and a capacity of 24,503 m3 for
Pumpu, the third major administrative center of the Central Peruvian highlands. Taking the above proportion as a
starting point, the overall capacity of the 510 storehouses
published by Matos Mendieta (1994: 255) from Pumpu is
38,451 m3. Together with three other sites, Chakamarca,
La Cioma, and Telarnioc (11,742 m3; LeVine 1992:
117), the total capacity of the region can be estimated at
50,193m3.
A minimum storage capacity of 50,144 m3 and a
maximum one of 79,323 m3 was calculated for the five
storage complexes of the Cochabamba Valley (GyarmatiVarga 1999: 50), while in the case of Paria, the
minimum and maximum capacity was 9,923.8 m3 and

3500,00
3500
3000,00
3000
2500,00
2500
2000,00
2000
1500,00
1500
1000,00
1000
500,00
500
0,000

Ca Coc
mp ha
o d bam
el ba
Pu
ca
Ha P ra
tun ari
Xa a
Hu
u
n P xa
uc um
oP p
Ot ampu
he a
rs
ite
s

some 2.5 kilometers from each other (Snead 1992: 76),


more or less equal the number of storehouses found in
Paria. Only in the Cochabamba Valley are there significantly more storehouses (2,499) lying close to each other
in five different groups (GyarmatiVarga 1999: 51). If
the two latter regions are taken together in view of the
close relationship between Paria and Cochabamba, the
number of storehouses exceeds 4,000 and thus represents
the largest storage concentration of the Inka Empire. Unlike in Hunuco Pampa and Pumpu, the storage of the
produced goods was divided between the place of production and the provincial center which certainly played
an important role in their consumption and distribution.
Although a better knowledge of the exact number of
storage facilities established across the Inka Empire is
essential to reconstructing the extent to which the state
concentrated various goods and commodities, the storage
capacity of the facilities created for this purpose probably provides a better idea of the one-time amount of the
goods stockpiled in these storehouses. Estimates of this
kind are available for the storage facilities in five regions
which, disregarding now Campo de Pucara, represented
the most important ones in the Inka Empire. Storage facilities with the highest storage capacity were concentrated
in the Upper Mantaro valley. The thirty sites lying within
a radius of 17 kilometers around Hatun Xauxa had a total capacity of 123,716 m3 (DAltroy 1992: 164165);
if the 44,329 m3 capacity in the southern section of the
valley and the 3,147 m3 capacity of the storehouses at
Tarmatambo (LeVine 1992: 117) are also added to this
figure, the overall storage capacity of the region adds
up to 171,192 m3. At Hunuco Pampa, the total capacity was 37,948 m3, but together with the Inka settlements
at Tunsukancha and Taparaku, the overall capacity of the
region was 38,748 m3. LeVine (1992: 117) suggested a

Figure IX.4 Number of state storehouses


in different zones of the Inka Empire
149

Paria la Viexa

its subjects with the necessary commodities from the


goods stored in the storehouses.
200000,00
200,000
150000,00
150,000
100000,00
100,000

50,000
50000,00

M
an
tar
oP
Co um regio
ch pu n
ab -re
am g
Hu ba- ion
n val
u c le
o-r y
eg
io n
Pa
r ia

0,000

Figure IX.5 Storage capacity of five regions


of the Inka Empire
11,400m3, respectively. Considering the lower estimate
for the latter two, the storehouses of Paria account for
3% of the overall capacity of the five main regions (Fig.
IX.5), while the joint capacity of the closely related Paria
and Cochabamba regions add up to 18.8% of the five regions in question.31
On the basis of these calculations, the overall storage
capacity of the five regions was 320,200 m3, although we
must add that this figure corresponds to only 80% of the
currently known state storage facilities. In the light of the
above, we may assert that the Inka state implemented an
unprecedented concentration of the goods produced on
its territory.
In addition to the sheer quantity of the stored goods
and their special features, there was another unique
dimension to the state storage facilities: the highland
storehouses accounting for the majority of the storage
facilities were concentrated on the fringes or outside a
particular settlement, in a location that was visible from
afar, and access to them was not restricted. It would appear that the Inka state did not regard the spatial isolation of storage facilities a necessity, but rather strove
to make them a visually well-identifiable element of
the imperial infrastructure. This meant a radical break
with the policy of other Andean polities such as Moche
(Chapdelaine 2001: 75; Shimada 1994: 216), Tiwanaku
(Chapdelaine 2009: 154155), Wari (Isbell 2009: 212),
and Chim (Mackey 2009: 327) whose storage facilities
were located in the inner, well-defendable areas of the
centers. Even though the highland regions, where most
of the storage facilities lay, were not threatened by external attacks, rebellions by the subjugated peoples were
to be reckoned with; still, to all appearances, the security
of the state storehouses was overridden by the need to
make state storehouses part of the imperial propaganda:
in addition to their economic function, the storage facilities were to convey the idea that the state would supply

150

IX.5. Redistribution and Consumption of Goods


The location of most state storehouses on the fringes of
or near the provincial centers in itself reflects the role
played by these settlements in consumption and state redistribution, which is also confirmed by the quantity of
finds such as pottery and animal bones recovered from
these sites. At Hunuco Pampa, for example, the roughly
three hundred investigated buildings yielded fifteen tons
of pottery (MorrisThompson 1985: 73), reflecting the
scale of local consumption. Although we have no cumulative figures for Paria, the excavated areas yielded
an average of 144 pottery sherds/m2 (1.43 kg/m2),32 and
a similarly high number of animal bones (see Chapter
VI). These figures say little in themselves; however, they
can be set in perspective through a comparison with our
investigations at Incarracay, where the 135 m2 large excavated area yielded a total of 686 ceramic fragments
(GyarmatiVarga 1999) and the number of animal bones
was similarly low (120 pieces, Bartosiewicz 1999: 101).
Compared to Paria, the number of finds was also incomparably lower from the excavation of the other tampu
(Site Ce 112) between the Cochabamba Valley and Paria
(Gutierrez 2012: 75, 96).
The density of finds from Paria exceeded by far the
density of the regions other state settlements and reflected an infinitely higher consumption that can in part
be explained by the daily subsistence needs of the settlements permanent residents. However, the Colonial
sources record that the goods consumed by the masses
who visited the town on the occasion of various festivities
after the seasons work was finished accounted for a major portion of the consumption in the provincial centers.
Polo de Ondegardo (1916 [1571]: 60) recounts that after
the harvested crops were deposited in the storehouses,
the people ate and drank at the cost of the Inka and of
the Sun [the state cult] ... all the inhabitants went forth,
sometimes an entire village.33 The army troops passing
through the provincial centers also received various provisions as shown by the testimony of the caciques in the El
Memorial de Charcas, who recounted that their warriors
first assembled in Macha and Sacaca, from where they
moved on and met in the town and tambo of Paria ...
then continued their journey ... until they arrived to the
great town of Cuzco. And as soldiers of the Inka, they received mita and provisions in each town and tambo: food
and drink and charqui [dried llama meat] and sandals,
clothes and great portions of quinua flour and llamas and
women.34 (Memorial de Charcas 2006 [1582]: 842843.)
The provincial centers also played a key role in the
distribution of goods as part of a state reciprocity through
which the services rendered to the state were rewarded

PARIA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM OFTHE INKA EMPIRE

with various gifts on festive occasions, which also ensured the loyalty of the recipients of the gifts. These
gifts ranged from the food and chicha provided for the
masses of people during larger festivities to prestige
goods given to high-ranking individuals. The latter included the magnificent shirts and tunics, gold and silver
cups, necklaces, bracelets and other jewels of emerald,
turquoise and precious stones set in gold35 mentioned
by Cobo (1956 [1653]: 124126, Ch. XXX). Miguel de
Estete recounts the gifts disbursed as part of a festivity
held in Atawalpas encampment in Cajamarca, in which
there were tents filled with garments that had been distributed after the victory over Waskar and at Atawalpas
coronation (Estete 1924 [1534]: 3233). The most valuable among these were the garments embroidered with
gold and silver and precious stones of the kind described
by Cieza de Len (2005 [1553]: 328, Ch. XIV). It seems
likely that garments of this type were produced in Structure BM at Paria and that the metal discs and the sodalite
and other stone and bone beads found across the settlement had been the adornments of valuable clothing. The
discs and beads thus testify to the festivities held in Paria
and to the gifts given to the warriors passing through the
town on these occasions or to other local dignitaries.

IX.6. Provincial Centers and the Inka Political Economy


In the above, we focused on the different dimensions of
the provincial centers of the Inka Empire and on the place
of Paria in the overall administrative system. The provincial centers shared numerous similar features, even if
these traits were not articulated to the same extent. The
functional and formal differences between individual settlements (reflected by the size of a settlement, its layout,
and its architectural configuration) can in many cases be
traced to the fact that the highland centers were most often newly-established settlements, while the coastal ones
such as La Centinela, Farfn, and Tcume were already
existing ones which the Inka adjusted to their needs.
Other factors contributing to the differences were the
strength and persistence of local traditions, the duration
of the Inka rule, and the role of a particular region in the
empire. Provincial centers thus include large settlements
such as Hunuco Pampa accommodating some 3,500 to
4,000 buildings, many of them built in the Cuzco style
(MorrisThompson 1985), Paria, whose buildings were
constructed from fieldstones and a combination of adobe
and river cobbles which have almost completely perished, La Centinela, featuring both the local and the Inka
architectural canon (MorrisCovey 2006; MorrisSantillana 2007), Chiquitoy Viejo on the northern coast whose
buildings were without exception built in the local style
(Conrad 1977; Hyslop 1990: 250), and the centers in the
southern Andes which rarely exceeded 12 hectares or had

no more than one to two hundred buildings (DAltroy et.


al. 2007: 96).
Even more substantial than the formal differences
in size are the functional divergences, namely, to what
extent the provincial centers partook in the production
of goods needed by the state and their storage and distribution in addition to performing administrative and
religious functions. Morris and Thompson (1985: 81,
91) contended that Hunuco Pampa was not a particularly important production center and principally functioned as an administrative center. In contrast, Mackey
(2010: 240) noted that the Inka instituted major changes
in Farfn, the former Chim center, by increasing storage areas and introducing full-time textile and pottery
production, two activities that also played a major role
in La Via (Hayashida 1999). Similar changes were implemented in the Inka centers of northwestern Argentina
as regards craft production. At Paria, however, we found
evidence not only of various craft activities, but also of
crop cultivation, indicated by the high number of stone
hoes recovered from Structure BM and other parts of the
site. It seems that the agricultural production conducted
for the empire in the northern Calchaqui Valley was also
directly related to the state settlements (DAltroy et al.
2000: 16). Similarly to the differences in the scale of various production activities, the prominence of a particular
provincial center in stockpiling goods for the state varied,
but there can be no doubt about the close association between these settlements and state storage.
The Inka provincial centers thus fulfilled several
functions, ranging from administration (seats of the
representatives of the state) and the tending of the state
religious cults (temples dedicated to the Sun and other
deities), as well as the provisioning of the army and other
contingents providing services for the state to the production of various goods and the collection, storage, and
redistribution of products from other regions. This being
the case, the question arises as to why the Inka created a
network of provincial centers as part of the infrastructure
essential to the operation of every territorial state which,
in addition to the usual activities of a state bureaucracy,
also controlled the entire spectrum of economic activities. Considering that the activities performed in the
provincial centers represented only one, although the
perhaps most crucial measure taken by the Cuzco administration for the transformation of the economy, it might
be instructive to identify those components of the interlocking elements in the system created by the Inka state
that differed from the administrative practices of other
pre-industrial polities and were designed to maximize the
resources available to the state in addition to the usual
revenues (taxes, trade, and booty).
(1) State control of key resources (good agricultural
lands, mines, livestock, marine shells, and guano) and the
reorganization of the property rights over these resources
and access to them. As mentioned in the above, the
151

Paria la Viexa

principal goal of the Inka ventures leading to the southern expansion of the Inka Empire was to obtain mineral
wealth; control over distant resources was an important
consideration from the very birth of the Inka Empire.
Several sources indicate that the first Inka territorial conquests were made to gain access to coca-producing lands
in the Andes and to procure exotic birds (Covey 2006:
117).
(2) Investment in the more efficient exploitation of
the acquired resources through the labor force mobilized
by the state (e.g., for the construction of terrace and irrigation systems, and the opening of mines).
(3) Organization of production, (a) partly through
the creation of special state estates (e.g., Abancay in the
southern Peruvian sierra, the Cochabamba Valley in Bolivia, and Coctaca in northwestern Argentina), and (b)
partly through the creation of the infrastructure of state
mines (e.g., Porco in Bolivia, and El Abra and Conchi
in Chile), and (c) partly through the production of craft
goods (distribution of raw material for villagers and the
establishment of specialized craft settlements and craft
workshops in provincial centers).
This shows that similarly to other pre-industrial
states, the Inka state partook not only in the production
of prestige goods, but also that the amount needed of staples and ordinary carft products could be only ensured
through its involvement.
(4) The transformation of settlement patterns and
ethnic conditions in the regions incorporated into the
Inka Empire, through (a) the re-settlement of the populations from fortified hilltop settlements to dispersed
settlements near valley floors more suited to crop cultivation (Arkush 2011; DAltroy 1992: 69, 189), (b) the
permanent re-settlement of mitmaq colonists, and (c) the
temporary mobilization of mita laborers in order to maximize production by concentrating labor in the place of
production.
(5) Collection of the produced goods by state assistance: transportation of the goods on llamas from the
Inkas herd (Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca Huayna
Capac 1977 [1556]: 24) or as part of mita labor (Ortiz de
Zuiga 1967 [1562]: 307).
(6) Storage of the collected goods in state storage
complexes.
(7) The redistribution of the goods produced under
the states control in order to maintain Inka power and to
ensure the continuity of production.
The Inka state thus controlled resources, labor, and
production, as well as the flow, consumption, and redistribution of the produced goods, while market and
money were lacking from the regulation of economic activities. Trade was restricted, appearing only in the form
of long-distance exchanges on the fringes of the empire
(Salomon 1986; Smano 1985 [1527]). Stanish (1997,
2001: 231) has aptly noted that the lack of price-fixing
markets in the Andes promoted the emergence of more
152

direct, labor-intensive strategies. Continuing Stanishs


line of reasoning, we could well ask why a market was
lacking, as was even a rudimentary form of money, even
though both can be demonstrated to some extent in most
pre-Capitalistic states (see Smith 2004: 7880), including the Aztec Empire, the other major state of pre-Hispanic America.
When seeking an answer to this question, we must
draw a sharp distinction between the Peruvian coast (and
especially its northern section) and the Central Andean
highlands where the heartland of the Inka Empire lay.
There was a concentration of natural resources in the
coastal river valleys, meaning that an intensive production
could be maintained with the necessary labor investment
(irrigation systems, fertilization with guano collected
from the nearby islands) and that its territory could be expanded (inter-valley irrigation canals). This enabled the
continuous production of a considerable surplus, which
in turn led to a high population density, an intensive division of labor, and a developed craft industry, as well as an
urban settlement system and an extensive exchange system (as reflected, for example, by the impressive amounts
of Ecuadorian marine shells and locally produced copper
sheets in the noble burials at Sican; Shimada et al. 2004:
386). In this sense, the northern Peruvian coast can be
likened to Mesoamerica, rather than the Central Andean
highland where the above preconditions were lacking.
Resources were dispersed, quite scarce, and unevenly
distributed in the highland (poor quality soils, dry climate,
frost, and limited irrigation options) where the Inka Empire was born and whence it began its expansion, meaning
that a significant agricultural surplus and a higher population density could only be achieved in some regions and in
a restricted manner (e.g., in the Cuzco Valley and the Titicaca Basin). As a result, there did not emerge a regional,
social (from part-time workers to full-time specialists), or
an occupational division of labor and a developed, occupational craft specialization. This in effect inhibited the
emergence of market exchange and the rise of a genuine
urban society,36 and contrasted sharply both with the situation on the Peruvian coast and with the Mesoamerican
world system with its diverse craft industries, market exchange, and a dense network of towns where the Aztec
state was born (Chase et al. 2009; Smith 2001: 128).
In contrast to the post-classic Central Mexican conditions, the Inka state was born in an entirely different
cultural milieu. Even though there existed several generations of Andean states during the preceding centuries the
Inka Empire is assigned to the fourth-generation Andean
states by Marcus (1998: 76) it can be better described as
a first or new-generation state. Challenging the claims
that the Inka state can be regarded as a continuation of the
Wari state (e.g., McEwan et al. 2002), Bauers (1999) and
Coveys (2006) research in the Cuzco region indicated
an independent process of Inka state formation, rather
than some kind of continuation of a previous one. During

PARIA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM OFTHE INKA EMPIRE

the 14th century, the Inka state emerged from a Cuzco


chiefdom that was surrounded by similar polities, which
included complex chiefdoms such as the Wanka of the
Central Peruvian sierra, powerful and rich seorios in the
Lake Titicaca region, and confederations of several ethnic
groups on the Bolivian altiplano. The quantity, quality,
and range of goods produced by these polities probably
barely exceeded the amount necessary for supplying their
own population and for providing their elite with prestige
goods, and was hardly sufficient for meeting the demands
of an expanding state, which called for the provisioning
of an army that would conquer more distant lands, the investments necessary for increasing production intensity,
the resources for creating and maintaining an imperial
infrastructure, the rewarding of individuals performing
military and administrative tasks, as well as the compensation, both symbolically and with material goods, of the
local elites who had lost their former power and influence
in order to ensure their loyalty to the Inka Empire.
A chiefdom capable of mobilizing only a minimal internal surplus would have been unable to ensure the necessary resources for fulfilling the above tasks, this being
the reason that the emerging Cuzco state acquired external sources through marriage alliances, alliances based
on uneven power relations, and military expeditions
for booty (Covey 2006). Meeting snowballing demands
became an increasingly difficult task as the empire expanded: the more territories and the more ethnic groups
were conquered, the more resources were needed to develop and maintain the system for meeting the demands
described above.

The challenge of raising the necessary resources


called for responses diverging from the traditional Andean ones one example being Tiwanaku and, later, the
seorios of the Titicaca Basin, which exploited resources
beyond their core area without drawing the territories
in-between under their control as well as for the acquisition of additional resources. In the lack of the necessary economic institutions for maintaining a territorial
empire (and at least a partially full-time craft industry
with occupational specialization, markets, and developed
exchange systems), the Inka state was forced to create the
necessary conditions by expanding the range of resources
under its control and by their more intensive exploitation,
by the organization and management of the full scale of
production from basic foodstuffs to prestige goods, and,
finally, by regulating the flow of produced goods during
their consumption.
The provincial centers played a key role in this process: they were involved in the production of a variety
of craft goods and in regulating the movement of the labor force, the raw materials, and the finished products,
as well as in the storage and consumption of the latter.
This would explain why the Inka state created a system of provincial centers which, despite several shared
traits, cannot be regarded as towns in the classical sense
because their emergence was not the result of a natural
socio-economic and political development. These centers
were artificially created by an expanding state and in the
lack of genuine towns, they were designed to fulfill certain necessary functions that were absent from the greater
part of the Inka state.

153

Notes

Notes to Chapter I
1

Although the www.tutiempo.net/en/Climate/Oruro/852420.


htm website contains data from 1958 onward, the data are very
patchy for the first few decades and thus we only used the data
for the past twenty years in our analysis, even though there are
a few gaps in these series too.
2
For example, there were 20 frosty days in October 1991; frost
was also recorded on two to eight days in the November months
of the 22-year-long period, one to four days in the December
months, one or two days in the March months and three to
twenty-one days in the April months..
3
In this case, we only considered the average of 21 years because the quoted statistics recorded 0 mm of precipitation for the
first eight months of 1999, even though the mean precipitation

for January and February, the two wettest months of the rainy
season, was 80 mm between 1991 and 2010, and with the exception of 1999, there were only four years when the amount of the
mean monthly precipitation remained below 30 mm in January
and February. The actual amount of precipitation was probably
slightly higher compared to the mean of the 19 years because
there are several months for which there are no data (February
1992) or only patchy data (six days for November 2005).
4
This proportion is probably higher if we assume a precipitation typical for the December months of the other years instead
of the 0 mm specified for December 1998.
5
This species is at risk of extinction due to its excessive use
as firewood.

Notes to Chapter II
1

On the basis of a 14C sample taken from Jachakala, Beaule


(2002: 2326) dated the Nialupita Phase much earlier, between ca. A.D. 150500, and she introduced a new phase (Isahuara, A.D. 500800) preceding the Jachakala Phase.
2
De sus pueblos de tierra baja se fueron a poblarse en altos y
serros y peas y por defenderse y comensaron a hacer fortalezas
que ellos les llaman pucara. Edificaron las paredes y zerco y
dentro de ellas casas y fortalezas y escondedixos y pozos para
sacar agua de donde beuan. Y comensaron a rreir y batalla y
mucha guerra Y por eso les llamaron Auca Runa; cmo se
matauan y acauuanse y se quitauan a sus mugeres y hijos y se
cautiuauan unos y con otros por la mucha batalla un rrey y con
otro rrey.
3
A.G.I., Charcas 45. The document was partially published by
Waldemar Espinoza Soriano in 1969. Later, Platt et al. (2006)
published the complete text with a new transcription. The text
of the latter publication is used in the present volume.
4
The document published by Morales in 1977 includes the
testimonies of the Sora, Caranga, and Quillaca caciques litigating for the fields of Cochabamba between 1556 and 1575.
The claims of their opponents, the Spanish encomenderos,
were summarized by Polo de Ondegardo in the form of an Interrogatorio (AR 1540), published by Wachtel (1982), while
the closely related Interrogatorio taken in 1568 against the
Tapacar indians was first published by Urquidi in 1949 and
then by Villaras Robles and de Mamn in 1998.
5
Thus, for example, don Fernanado Ayra Ariutu of the Caracara,
the cacique of Pocoata, recounts how his great-great-grandfather conquered as far as the Chui, and advanced to the land
of Paspaya and Pilaya [the Cliza region in the Cochabamba
Valley], where he constructed certain forts. (sujet hasta los
Chuis y que corri las tierras de Paspaya y Pilaya donde puso
algunas fortalezas (Probanza de don Fernando Ayra de Ariuta

2006 [1639]: 737). However, it remains unclear whether this


was part of Pachakutis conquest or whether it had occurred
earlier.
6
Las dichas tierras de sorasora donde antes que los yngas viniesen a la conquista desta provincia de los charcas y fuesen reyes de all haban sido de los soras del dicho pueblo de capinota
las haban puseydo [sic!] los susodichos y en ellas los haban
hallado los dichos yngas cuando vinieron a la dicha conquista
y de estas dichas tierras haban salido los dichos yndios soras a
recibir con su cacique y gobernador Condo al dicho ynga que se
nombraba Topa Ynga y tenan en las tierras los dichos yndios
soras una fortaleza cercada de agua la gual vio este testigo por
vista de ojos.
7
Considering the witnesss age (66) and the fact that Lorenzo
de Aldana administered the Paria encomienda between 1548
and 1568, Martn Aldana was born sometime between 1483 and
1502, meaning that he could well have seen the fortifications,
no matter how dilapidated they had become by that time (un
pocara y fortaleza en las dichas tierras de sorasora y el da de
hoy est all que era y es de los dichos yndios soras adonde
antiguamente se haca fuertes y peleaban).
8
conquist hasta Paria, todos los Pacajes y Caranga.
9
Colque, su predecesor, que fue el que dio obedencia al Yupangue Inga, el cual conquist la dicha prouincia de los Quillacas luego fue a conquistar a las prouincias de los Chichas
y Aguitos [sic], y llev al dicho Colque por capitn general de la
gente de su prouincia, por su valor le di licencia que se pudiese
llamar Inga Colque, y que asimismo pudiese traer cincuenta indios en andas.
10
The silver, gold, and Spondylus discs adorning the shirts represented the three most valuable materials that also appear in
the sacrificial assemblages of the Inka Period.
11
un mapa tejido en ropa de cumbi.

155

Paria la Viexa
12

andaba en traje de inca, y solamente se diferenciaba de


verdadero seor y rey de ellos en traer la borla a un lado solo al
Inca perteneca traerla sobre la frente.
13
Whichever the case, one point emerges clearly: the Inka provincial system was structured both vertically and horizontally,
confirming Juliens conclusion (1983: 929; 1993: 186187)
based on the early Colonial administrative system that the Inka
Empire was made up of different types of provinces: some coincided with the territory occupied by a particular local people,
while others were inhabited by several ethnic groups, and there
were also artificial formations (Cochabamba Valley) with ethnic groups that had been resettled from other regions.
14
como segunda persona del ynga y mandaba desde el Cuzco
hasta Chile.
15
govierno desde la provincia de omasuyo e urcosuyo hasta
chile e que andava e le trayan en andas y siempre asistia con el
dicho guayna capa.
16
They can be probabably identified with those two Inka
captains and governors, who were settled by Wayna Qhapaq in
the valley in order to plant, clear, and harvest the fields, and put
the maize to the storehouses, guard it, and transport the corn to
Paria (Interrogatorio de Juan Polo de Ondegardo 1982 [1563]:
232; Wachtel 1982: 214).
17
Primeramente, los cuatro naciones somos los Charcas y
Caracaras y Chuis y los Chichas, diferenciados en los trajes y
hbitos, hemos sido soldados desde el tiempo de los Incas llamados Inca Yupanqui, y Topa Yupanqui, y Guaynacara [sic], y
Guascar Inca, y cuando los espaoles entraron en esta tierra los
hallaron en esta posesin y hemos sido reservados de
todas las dems tasas y servicios personales, que se entiendie
de guarda de ganados y de hacer la mita en la corte de la
gran ciudad del Cuzco, y de ser canteros, tejedores de la ropa de
cumbe y de abasca, y de ser chacareros, albailes y canteros
no ramos gente bailadores ni truhanes, que estos tales tenan
de costumbres de cantar canciones delante de los dichos Incas.
18
guayna capa hizo rrepartimiento general de todas las tierras
de dho valle para s, y meti en benefficio de las dichas chacaras
catorze mill yndios de muchas naciones.
19
In the case of the sixth chacara (Potopoto), only the workers
of a single suyo (narrow plot) are known. They were Uru.

20

They cultivated 42.37% of the suyos in the five chacaras described in detail in the Repartimiento.
21
El Inca Topa Inca Yupangui y su hijo Guayna Caba nos
repartieron tierras en el valle de Cochabamba a todas las naciones de esta provincia de los Charcas llamadas Charcas, Caracaras, Soras, Quillacas y Carangas, para que en ellas sembrsemos y cultivsemos.
22
yndios yauricamayos plateros que eran de los pueblos de la
provincia Paria y de Sipesipe y Tapacar y Caracollo que eran
yndios mitimais a los que les tenia puesto en las tierras el ynga
Guayna Capac.
23
sali a un sitio do llaman Paria, y all mando edificar un
tambo.
24
y haba depsitos y aposentos reales para los Ingas, y templo del Sol.
25
The number of Spaniards participating in the expedition
was quite high according to the written sources. In addition to
Saavedras contingent of one hundred, the reports mention the
fifty soldiers accompanying Rojas, who had arrived to Collao
earlier and then joined Almagros 570-strong force. Considering that no more than one and a half years had elapsed since
the Spanish conquest of Cuzco, these figures are highly dubious. Still, if we add the large number of Indians accompanying
the Spaniards, the expeditionary force was undoubtedly fairly
large.
26
Manco Inka, who had turned against the Spaniards, moved
swiftly to make the most of the temporary division of the Spanish forces and of Almagros ambition to explore distant lands.
According to some chroniclers, Manco Inka had instructed his
brother and the high priest to murder Almagro and his men
during the expedition (Zrate 1995 [1555]: 107, Book III,
Ch.V).
27
hizo un buen ejercito de Chuis y Charcas y de otras naciones de las arriba hasta Chile, y junt un buen nmero de
oraoras (Soras) y sali Hernando Pizarro al encuentro.
28
determino de alar su real y pasarse vn pequeo trecho
desse cabo de Paria, junto al rio.
29
asent su campo en el mismo tambo de Paria, una legua del
enemigo.

Notes to Chapter III


1

Instead of Pisakheri, specified by Hyslop, we used the name


of the next settlement in the case of the mentioned tampu.
2
We used a Garmin eTrex Venture GPS. Two members of our
research team, Carola and Alvaro Condarco, as inhabitants of
the region, had excellent first-hand knowledge of the research
area and knew of many, previously unpublished sites.
3
The pottery sherds from the surface collection were catalogued with a combination of the site number and the sherd
identification number (e.g., 41.12, sherd 12 from Site Ce 41),
while the pottery fragments from the excavations at Paria
were catalogued with a combination of the surface number,
the square and the sherd identification number (e.g., II.49.30,
sherd 30 from Square 49 of Surface II). These catalog numbers
appear in Appendix V.9 in the case of the sherds submitted to
various archaeometric analyses.

156

4
Three similar buildings with a probably ritual/ceremonial
function yielding Tiwanaku style ceramics were found under
the Ventanani rock (Site Ce 99).
5
In the case of larger sites occupied during different periods,
we only considered the settlement part inhabited during the
Formative Period.
6
Although Sites Ce 19 and Ce 46 were both extensive sites
yielding an abundance of artifacts, the proportion of Tiwanaku
ceramics was minimal.
7
There is a large hole in the rock, hence its name, Ventanani.
For its description, see CondarcoCondarco 1994.
8
This is hardly unusual. For example, a similarly sudden increase in the number of Late Intermediate Period settlements
was noted by Prssinen (2005: 99) in the Caquiaviri area and
by Stanish (2003: 253) in the Titicaca Basin, both lying north
of the Paria Basin.

NOTES
9
It must here be noted that the total occupation area of the Late
Intermediate Period sites cannot be accurately determined because of the uncertainties in the extent of the three large settlements, whose size can be estimated between 5 and 10 hectares.
10
It must here be noted that our survey did not include the
mountain region ringing the Paria Basin.
11
Its geograhical coordinates are as follows: Lat. -17 48'
44.75281", Long. 66 57' 52.91565".
12
Its geograhical coordinates are as follows: Lat. -17 49'
32.68066", Long. 66 59' 53.57300".
13
A similar volume of soil samples was collected from Surfaces I and II.
14
These sites account for roughly 44.7% of the all identified
sites.
15
The following settlements were established after the Inka
conquest: Sites Ce 1, Ce 8, Ce 12, Ce 16, Ce 17, Ce 20, Ce 21,
Ce 24, Ce 28, Ce 30, Ce 37, Ce 39, Ce 42, Ce 48, Ce 49, Ce 50,
Ce 58, Ce 61, Ce 65, Ce 70, Ce 73, Ce 74, Ce 77, Ce 86, Ce 91,
Ce 92, Ce 96, Ce 97, Ce 109, Ce 110, Ce 112; Late Intermediate
Period settlements with a major Inka component: Sites Ce 7,
Ce 11, Ce 19, Ce 29, Ce 31, Ce 72; Late Intermediate Period
sites with an insignificant amount of Inka pottery: Sites Ce 38,
Ce41, Ce 46, Ce 53, Ce 62, Ce 63, Ce 89.
16
Sites Ce, 19, Ce 41, Ce 46, Ce 53 and Ce 63. Site Ce 51,
playing an important role during both periods, was not taken
into consideration because the finds of the two periods were
spatially clearly separated, and on the basis of the currently
available data, the site functioned as a storage centre in the Late
Horizon.
17
In this case, Site Ce 18 was not taken into account, even
though Inka ceramics dominated the finds collected from the
8hectares large area. However, the very low artifact density and
the lack of any architectural or other features made it impossible to determine the nature of the site.
18
One exception was Site Ce 86 where we found a piece of
sodalite; another was Site Ce 92 yielding a green mineral fragment (perhaps malachite).
19
On the basis of his description, this tampu is identical with
the Pisakheri tampu mentioned by Hyslop (1984: 145), but
since the tampu is located at a distance of four kilometers from
the village of Pisakheri, but only two kilometers from Condorchinoca, it seemed more appropriate to use the latter name.
20
This tampu does not appear on our map because it is located
outside our survey area. Its geographic coordinates are as follows: -17 48' 20.5", -66 49' 36.1".

21
The excavated area of 135 m2 at Incarracay yieleded less than
700 sherds.
22
We are greatly indebted to Mr. Daniel Gutierrez Osinaga
who investigated the qhapaq an on the Bolivian altiplano and
kindly helped us identify this section of the road.
23
Sadly, agricultural work involving a tractor on the northwestern edge of the site has made the identification of the point
where the road entered Paria impossible once and for all, even
on satellite photos.
24
Its geographic coordinates are as follows: -17 46' 02,17";
-66 56' 32,77".
25
The mapping of the storehouse groups was carried out parallely by theodolite and GPS. The plans published here were
prepared on the basis of the theodolite survey, but it seemed
expedient to use also the data obtained by GPS.
26
It seems likely that the name comes from the once still standing storage structures assumed to have been chullpas.
27
The figures specified here represent a minimum number,
based on the clearly identifiable storehouses, while the maximum number includes also the hardly identifiable and assumed
missing storehouses (in brackets) destroyed by erosion. At the
same time, we did not take into account the storehouses missing from the end of a row that was visibly shorter than the
others, assuming that those rows were left unfinished.
28
Its geographic coordinates are as follows: -17 49' 32,70";
-66 59' 53,60".
29
A direct and close relationship can be demonstrated between
the Inka provincial center of Cerro Verde and the copper mine
in the northern Chilean Loa Valley, where evidence of pre-Hispanic mining was identified 300 meters away from the provincial center (Salazar et al. 2013: 8891, 98). While the presence
of copper undoubtedly played a decisive role in the location
of Cerro Verde, the other aspects mentioned in the above were
equally imporant in the case of Paria.
30
unas diez brazas, y otras veinte: y la mina mayor que se
llama de Guarnacabo entra cuarenta brazas. No tienen luz ninguna, ni mas anchura que para que pueda entrar una persona
agachada, y hasta que este no sale no puede entrar ningun
otro.
31
This shaft is located next to two other incipient shafts which,
however, were abandoned after having been dug down to about
1 m, roughly to the level of the metalliferous rock.
32
In addition to the copper mine identified by us, other old copper mines can be found north of Soracachi, but these lay beyond
the study area.

Notes to Chapter IV
1

The site is currently sparsely covered with grass and used as


pastureland. Certain parts of the sites peripheral areas, where
there are fewer stones from the one-time buildings, are seasonally cultivated. One part of the sites northwestern fringe area
was being ploughed with a tractor at the time of our excavation
in 2005, endangering Group 6 of the storehouses. The sites
southern part is traversed by the northeast to southwest road
between Estancia Jacha Uma and the village of Paria, and a
road from Falsuri joins this road at the sites eastern edge. One
large and several smaller robber pits represent later intrusions,
and we also found evidence for the removal of the stones from
the subsoil foundations of the one-time buildings, no doubt for

re-use as construction material as shown by the corral at the


nearest farmstead near Khota Chullpa.
2
The 74 features were marked by letters from A to BX. These
features ranged from identifiable building remains (areas
bounded by stone rows, low mounds, and clayey patches) to
areas outlined by a concentration of finds, where surface collection was performed, or, conversely, areas devoid of any finds. In
addition to the letter combination, the features were designated
either as an area or a building. In 23 cases, we made a complete
surface artifact collection. Totalling 1 ha, the sampling area was
divided into 5 m by 5 m units providing a northeast to southwest transect of the residential zone covering the meseta. The

157

Paria la Viexa
assessment of the enormous body of finds collected from the
surface is still in progress.
3
The samples of the construction materials were analysed by
Veronika Szilgyi, who also performed the petro-mineralogical and geochemical analysis of the ceramic finds (see ChapterV).
4
Calibrated by Radiocarbon Calibration Program Rev 5.0.1
software (Copyright 19862005 Minze Stuiver and Paula J.
Reimer; StuiverPolach 1977). The results were rounded according to StuvierReimer 1993 and calibrated for the Northern
Hemisphere (Reimer et al. 2004).
5
Results calibrated for the Southern Hemisphere (McCormac
et al. 2004).
6
In this case, we only considered the finds from Squares 138
of Surface II, corresponding to that part of Structure BM, where
there were no traces of later structures. We did not include the
similar finds from the area of Structures BM2 and BM3, both
erected later inside Structure BM, even though a part of these
artifacts had probably been used during the activities conducted
in the latter building.
7
Similar stone discs occurred among the surface finds from the
southern part of Parias central zone.
8
Again, we only considered the finds from Squares 138 and
disregarded the artifacts from Squares 3950, in which we had
uncovered Structures BM2 and BM3, erected inside Structure
BM. However, it seems likely that the high number of perforated metal discs lying on the lower level of the former two
buildings (27 pieces in all, of which 20 had lain in one heap)
should in fact be associated with Structure BM, in which case

these should be added to the number of clothing adornments


recovered from that building.
9
The floor level of Structure BM lay at a depth of 57 cm, that
of Structure BM3 at 54 cm, and that of Structure BM2 at 48cm,
measured from the northeastern upper corner of Surface II.
10
Results calibrated for the Northern Hemisphere (Reimer et
al. 2004).
11
Results calibrated for the Southern Hemisphere (McCormac
et al. 2004).
12
The charcoal sample taken from the floor of Structure BM
was contaminated.
13
These descriptions are based on Veronika Szilgyis examination of roughly 300 vessel fragments. Her findings are presented in Chapter V.
14
Rim and base fragments, as well as sherds bearing incised,
painted or moulded decoration were regarded as diagnostic
pieces. The following attributes were considered in the case of
the vessel fragments analysed in greater detail: vessel type, rim,
handle, and base type, quality (coarse or fine ware), compactness, temper, exterior, and interior surface treatment, exterior,
interior, and core colour, exterior and interior slip, firing, style,
decoration, thickness, and weight.
15
A fragment of a similar ua was found at the southern edge
of the site.
16
The silver fragment found in Square 25 of Surface II suggests that this metal may also have been proceseed in Paria.
17
It is especially striking that about one-half of the bronze needles (5 pieces) had been found in collecting surface AM, representing no more than 45% of the entire surface collection area.

Notes to Chapter IX
1

Counting in Spanish leagues, this would correspond to a


minimum distance of 167.6 kilometres and a maximum one of
235.56 kilometres.
2
Meaning that the list does not cover the southernmost areas
of the Inka Empire.
3
At the same time, it was also described as one of the other
Cuzcos.
4
Galpn, the term used by Guaman Poma de Ayala, is generally identified with the kallanka, a long hall, often with a gabled
roof.
5
This settlement may have been an important way station on
the CochabambaLa Paz road both in the Colonial Period and
today; however, Paria did not lie on this route, and the other
considerations determining its establishment in the Inka Period
were no longer relevant in the Colonial Period.
6
The original name is followed by the modern place-name and
its distance from the previous centre.
7
In addition to the centres listed by Cieza de Leon, he mentions Tumbez, Chimu, Pachacamac, and Chincha on the coast.
8
This meant a minimum distance of 84 km and a maximum
one of 178 km, although Cobo adds that the distance between
two provincial centres was sometimes more and sometimes
less, obviously depending on the Andean terrain. Similarly to
Cobo, Sancho de la Hoz (1962 [1543]: 87) too records that the
distance between the major towns acting as provincial centres
(ciudades principales cabezas de provincia) was 20 leagues and
that there were smaller settlements providing lodgings lying
one or two leagues apart.

158

Sin estos pueblos grandes y otros muchos pequeos que


caian en estos caminos reales o no muy desviados dellos, habia tambos y depositos bien provistos en cada jornada de cuatro y seis leguas This corresponds to a minimum distance of
16.8kilometres and a maximum of 35.5 kilometres.
10
Counting in Spanish feet, it is a 29.5788.71 m by 8.87
14.78m large kallanka.
11
It must be borne in mind that estimates on settlement sizes
are principally or exclusively based on the distribution of
surface finds, as in the case of Hatun Xauxa (DAltroy 1992:
106) and Paria, or on the area covered by the still extant buildings (Pumpu, Hunuco Pampa), and that the area occupied
by storehouses and other, mostly residential buildings are
also included in these figures. If the latter were excluded, the
extremely large area of Hunuco Pampa would be reduced
by at least 50 hectares (covered by the storehouses); in fact,
DAltroy (1992: 107) reported only 90 hectares for Hunuco
Pampa. The size of Pumpu is 64 hectares without the storage
area.
12
Mara del Pilar Limas kind written communication, November 22, 2010, and July 28, 2012.
13
We find a basically similar situation in three coastal centres
too. The diagonal road linking Vilcashuamn with Tambo Colorado on the coast, and the coastal trunk road crossing La Via
and Tambo Real (Hayashida 1999: 341) passes also through the
plaza of the mentioned Inka centres.
14
The continuation of the road toward the south was identified
by Daniel Gutierrez (written communication, 2011).

NOTES
15

The word ccopi means potter in the Aymara language (Bertonio 1956 [1612]: Vol. I, 339, and Vol. II, 54).
16
en las cabeceras de las provincias donde haba muchos
plateros, los cuales trabajaban en hacer estas piezas en los
palacios y aposentos suyos haba planchas de estos metales y
sus ropas estaban llenas de argentera y de esmeraldas y turquesas y otras piedras preciosas de gran valor.
17
en todas estas cabeceras tenan los reyes templos del Sol
y casa de fundicin y muchos plateros que no entendan en
todo el tiempo en ms que labrar ricas piezas de oro y grandes
vasijas de plata.
18
de tantas a tantas leguas venan los tributos a una destas
cabeceras, y de tantas a tantas iban a otra
19
Plots belonging to the state estate established by Wayna
Qhapaq. todo lo que sembraban en la dha chacara potopoto
e yllaurco y colchacollo y coachaca y esta de viloma lo cogian
y llevaban al tambo de paria y de alli al cuzco, en ganados del
ynga...
20
lo llevaban a los depositos de paria desde este valle de Cochabamba y de all lo llevaban a Lurucache y los que ivan por el
camino de Tapacar lo llevaban a Quilca que es junto o cerca de
hayohayo y desde all lo llevaban al Cusco por los trminos de
cada tierra cada nacin
21
Murra (1983: 48) found 287 references to stockpiling in the
works of 28 chroniclers.
22
Estaban hechos por mandado del Inca grandes depositos y
graneros, que los indios llaman colcas, en todas las provincias
del Peru, en que se encerraban y guardaban los tributos y hacienda del rey, y de la religion. En tres partes sealadamente
habia estos depositos reales y sagrados; primeramente, en las
tierras realengas y de la religion de cada provincia, donde se
encerraban inmediatamente los frutos y tributos como se iban
recogiendo; los segundos estaban en las cabeceras de las gobernaciones donde residian los virreyes, y los terceros en la ciudad
del Cuzco ... Todo el grano, semillas y frutos que se recogian
de las tierras de la religion y del Inca, con todo lo demas que
en especie contribuian los pueblos, lo ponian los mismos indios
de la comunidad en los primeros depositos, para que el Inca y
sus gobernadores lo distribuyesen a su voluntad. Destos depositos iban recogiendo a sus tiempos los cobradores de las rentas
reales y de la religion lo que se les ordenaba, y lo hacian llevar,
parte a los depositos de las cabeceras de provincias, y parte a la
ciudad del Cuzco.
23
depsitos llenos de todas las cosas necesarias, lo cual era
para provisin de la gente de guerra. Porque en uno de estos
depsitos haba lanzas, y en otros dardos, y en otros ojotas,
y en otros las dems armas que ellos tienen. Asimismo unos

depsitos estaban provedos de ropas ricas, y otras de ms bastas, y otros de comida, y todo gnero de mantenimiento.
24
It should here be noted that the identification of stored products is greatly influenced by the sampling and testing methods.
Of the five regions in question, analyses based on flotation were
only conducted in the Upper Mantaro Valley and Paria.
25
Our figure is based on the number of storehouses (9,167)
published by Snead (1992: 67) which was modified on the basis
of the research conducted in Cochabamba (Gyarmati and Varga
1999: 54) and Pumpu (Matos Mendieta 1994: 255). The storehouses we located in Paria and the ones published from various
other sites after 1992 (Chacaltana Cortez 2010; Eeckhout 2012:
215; Huaycochea 1994; Ogburn 2001: 320323; Prssinen
Siirinen 2003: 182183; Schjellerup 2005: 235237; Valdez
Valdez 2000: 16) were added to the quoted figure.
26
We calculated with a 2.5 m average diameter, 0.5 m wall
thickness, and 2 m inner height.
27
We calculated with 3m by 4 m external dimensions, 0.5 m
wall thickness, and 2 m inner height.
28
We calculated with a 4 m average diameter, 0.5 m wall thickness, and 2 m inner height.
29
On the basis of our excavations, we calculated with 3.7 m
by 2.3 m interior dimensions, 0.5 m wall thickness, and 2 m
inner height.
30
In the case of the Groups 36, we calculated with a 3 m average diameter, 0.5 m wall thickness and 2 m inner height.
31
If we calculate with the maximum capacity of the Cochabamba and Paria storage facilities, these two regions represent
25.9% of the overall storage capacity of the five regions.
32
These figures are 249 pieces per excavated cubic metre, or
2.46 kg of ceramic sherds.
33
comyan y vevan a costa del ynga y del Sol, y este benefiio
no se haa por parcialidades ny se contaua la gente que a ello
ava de yr, sino que todo el pueblo como se hallavan presentes
salan a ello
34
se solan juntarse en el pueblo y tambo de Paria Y as
iban prosiguiendo su viaje los dichos capitanes y soldados,
de pueblo en pueblo y tambos, hasta llegar a la gran ciudad
del Cuzco. Y as en cada pueblo y tambo les hacan mita y camarico, como a soldados de los Incas, as en dar comidas y la
bebida y charques y ojotas, vestidos y mucha harina de quinoa
y ganado y mujeres
35
camiseta y mantas ricas y vasos de oro y plata, collares,
brazaletes y otras joyas de esmeraldas, turquesas y de otras piedras preciosas guarnecidas en oro
36
The emergence of Tiwanaku and Wari as a result of local development can be regarded as an exception to this general rule.

159

References

Primary Sources
Albornoz, Cristbal de
1967 [ca. 1582] La instruccin para descubrir todas
las guacas del Pir y sus camayos y haziendas.
Journal de la Socit des Amricanistes 56 (1):
1739.
Annimo
2003 [1550] Relacin de las cosas aceecidas en
las alteraciones del Per despus que Blasco
Nez Vela entr en l. Lima: Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per.
Annimo, sitio del Cuzco
1934 [1536] Relacin del sitio del Cuzco y principios
de las guerras civlies del Peru. Coleccin de los
libros y documentos referentes a la historia del
Per. Vol. X. Lima: Librera Gil.
Bertonio, Ludovico
1956 [1612] Vocabulario de la lengua aymara.
La Paz: Don Bosco.
Betanzos, Juan de
1987 [1551] Suma y narracin de los Incas. Madrid:
Ediciones Atlas.
Cabello Valboa, Miguel
1951 [1586] Miscelnea antrtica. Lima: Instituto de
Etnologa, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San
Marcos.
Cceres Chalco Yupanqui Inga, Pablo de
1987 [1599] Informacin de los servicios que prestaron a los espaoles los antepasados de don
Alonso Viracocha Inca y don Pablo de Cceres
Chalco Yupanqui, caciques de Copacabana.
Coleccin de Folletos Bolivianos de Hoy 3 (24):
2730.
Cieza de Len, Pedro
2005 [1553] Crnica del Per El Seorio de los Incas. Caracas: Fundacin Biblioteca Ayacucho.
Cobo, Bernab
1956 [1653] Historia del Nuevo Mundo. Biblioteca
de Autores Espaoles Vol. 9192 Madrid: Ediciones Atlas.
Dez de San Miguel, Garci
1964 [1567] Visita hecha a la provincia de Chucuito
por Garci Dez de San Miguel en el ao 1567.
Documentos Regionales para la Etnologa y
Etnohistoria Andina, Vol. 1. Lima: Casa de la
Cultura.

Estete, Miguel de
1924 [1534] Relacin que del descubrimiento y conquista del Per hizo el capitn Miguel de Estete
al Supremo Consejo de las Indias. Coleccin de
los libros y documentos referentes a la historia
del Per Ser. 2, Vol. 8. Lima: Sanmarti.
Garcilaso de la Vega, Inca
1960 [1609] Comentarios Reales. Biblioteca de Autores Espaoles, Vols. 132135. Madrid: Ediciones Atlas.
Guaman Poma de Ayala, Felipe
1980 [1613] El primer nueva cornica y buen gobierno. Edited by John V. MurraRolena
Adorno with translation by Jorge L. Urioste. 3
Vols. Mxico D.F.: Siglo XXI.
Hinojosa, Pedro de
1940 [1548] Memoria de los repartimientos que hai
en los trminos de la Villa de Plata que tienen
dueos i estn vacos Publicado por Rafael
Loredo. Revista de la Universidad Catlica de
Lima Vol. 8, No. 1.
Interrogatorio contra los indios de Tapacar
1998 [1568] In Villaras Robles, Juan J. R.tala de
Mamn: El encomendero Polo de Ondegardo
y los mitimaes del valle de Cochabamba los
interrogatorios contra los indios de Paria y Tapacar. Anuario de estudios americanos 55 (2):
648651.
Interrogatorio de Juan Polo de Ondegardo
1982 [1563] In George Allen CollierRenato I. RosaldoJohn D. Wirth (eds.): The Inca and Aztec
States 14001800, 229235. New York: Academic Press.
Lizarraga, Reginaldo
1968 [15861591] Descripcin breve de toda la tierra del Per, Tucumn, Ro de la Plata y Chile.
Biblioteca de Autores Espaoles Vol. 216. Madrid: Ediciones Atlas.
Mario de Lovera, Pedro
1865 [15471594] Cronica del Reino de Chile. Dirijida al exmo. Seor don Garcia Hurtado de
Mendoza. Coleccin de Historiadores de Chile
y Documentos Relativos a la Historia Nacional
Tomo VI. Santiago: Imprenta del Ferrocarril.

161

Paria la Viexa

Memorial de Charcas
2006 [1582] In Tristan PlattThrse Bouysse-CassagneOlivia Harris: Qaraqara-Charka Mallku,
Inka y Rey en la provincia de Charcas (siglos
XV-XVIII), 828854. Lima, La Paz: Instituto
Francs de Estudios Andinos (IFEA), University of St. Andrews, Fundacin Cultural del
Banco Central de Bolivia.
Mendoza, Diego de
1976 [1665] Chrnica de la provincia de San Antonio
de Charcas del orden de Nuestro Serphico P.S.
Francisco en las Indias Occidentales. La Paz:
Casa Municipal de Cultura Franz Tamayo.
Molina, Cristbal de, El Almagrista
1968 [1553?] Relacin de muchas cosas acaecidas
en el Per. Biblioteca de Autores Espaoles
Vol. 209. Madrid: Ediciones Atlas
Mura, Martin de
1962 [1590] Historia General del Per: origen y
descendencia de los Incas. Madrid: Coleccin
Joyas Bibliograficas.
Ortiz de Zuiga, Iigo
1967 [1562] Visita de la provincia de Len de
Hunuco. Hunuco: Universidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizn.
Pizarro, Pedro
1986 [1571] Relacin del descubrimiento y conquista
de los reinos del Peru. Lima: Fondo Editorial de
la Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per.
Polo de Ondegardo, Juan
1916 [1571] Informaciones acerca de la religin y
gobierno de los Incas. Lima: Sanmarti.
Primera Informacin hecha por Juan Colque Guarache
1981 [1575] In Waldemar Espinoza Soriano: El
Reino aymara de Quillaca-Asanaque, siglos
XV y XVI. Revista del Museo Nacional 45:
237251.
Probanza de don Fernando Ayavire y Velasco
2006 [1583] In Tristan PlattThrse Bouysse-CassagneOlivia Harris: Qaraqara-Charka Mallku,
Inka y Rey en la provincia de Charcas (siglos
XV-XVIII), 908943. Lima, La Paz: Instituto
Francs de Estudios Andinos (IFEA), University of St. Andrews, Fundacin Cultural del
Banco Central de Bolivia.
Probanza de don Fernando Ayra de Ariuta
2006 [1639] In Tristan PlattThrse Bouysse-CassagneOlivia Harris: Qaraqara-Charka Mallku,
Inka y Rey en la provincia de Charcas (siglos
XV-XVIII), 721755. Lima, La Paz: Instituto
Francs de Estudios Andinos (IFEA), University of St. Andrews, Fundacin Cultural del
Banco Central de Bolivia.
Probanza de don Juan de Castro y Paria
2006 [1612] In Tristan PlattThrse Bouysse-CassagneOlivia Harris: Qaraqara-Charka Mallku,
162

Inka y Rey en la provincia de Charcas (siglos


XV-XVIII), 767781. Lima, La Paz: Instituto
Francs de Estudios Andinos (IFEA), University of St. Andrews, Fundacin Cultural del
Banco Central de Bolivia.
Quipucamayos
1920 [ca. 1542] Discurso sobre la Descendencia y
Gobierno de los Incas [Quipucamayos de Vaca
de Castro]. Edited by C. A. RomeroH. Urteaga. Coleccin de libros y documentos referentes a la historia del Per 2. serie, Vol. 3.
Ramos Gaviln, Alonso
1976 [1621] Historia de Nuestra Seora de Copacabana. La Paz: Academia Boliviana de Historia.
Repartimiento de tierras por el Inca Huayna Capac
1977 [1556] Versin Paleogrfica de don Adolfo de
Morales, Universidad Mayor de San Simon,
Cochabamba.
Smano, Juan de
1985 [1527] Relacin de Smano-Xerez. In Francisco Xerez: Verdadera relacin de la conquista
del Per. Madrid: Biblioteca Historia.
Sancho de la Hoz, Pedro
1962 [1543] Relacin de la Conquista del Peru. Madrid: Ediciones Jose Porrua Turanzas.
Sarmiento de Gamboa, Pedro
1960 [1572] Historia Indica. Biblioteca de Autores
Espaoles Vol. 135: 193297. Madrid: Ediciones Atlas.
Segunda Informacin hecha por Juan Colque Guarache
1981 [15761577] In Waldemar Espinoza Soriano:
El Reino aymara de Quillaca-Asanaque, siglos
XV y XVI. Revista del Museo Nacional 45:
237251.
Vaca de Castro Cavellero, Cristbal
1908 [1543] Ordenanzas de tambos. Revista Histrica 3: 427492.
Valverde, Fr. Vicente
1865 [1539] Carta dirigida al Emperador Carlos V.
Coleccin de documentos inditos relativos al
descubrimiento, conquista y colonizacin de las
posesiones espaolas en Amrica y Oceana.
Madrid Vol. III.
Vzquez de Espinosa, Antonio
1942 [16221630] Compendium and Description of
the West Indies. Translated by Charles Upson
Clark. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections
Vol. 102. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
Xerez, Francisco de
1891 [1534] Verdadera relacin de la conquista del
Per. Madrid: Biblioteca Historia.
Zrate, Agustn de
1995 [1555] Historia del descubrimiento y conquista
del Peru. Lima: Pontificia Universidad del Per.

REFERENCES

Secondary Works: Books and Articles


Abbott, Mark B.Michael W. BinfordMark Brenner
Kerry R. Kelts
1997 A 3500 14C High-Resolution Record of Water-Level Changes in Lake Titicaca, Bolivia/
Peru. Quaternary Research 47: 169180.
Albarracin Jordan, Juan
1996 De Tiwanaku a UmaPacajes: Continuidad y
Cambio Cultural. Beitrge zur Allgemeinen
und Vergleichenden Archologie 16: 301333.
Alcina Franch, JosMiguel RiveraJesus GalvanM.a
Carmen Garcia PalaciosMercedes GuineaBalbina
Martinez-CaviroLuis J. RamosTito Varela
1976 Arqueologa de Chinchero 2 Cermica y otros
materiales. Misin Cientfica Espaola en Hispanoamrica, Madrid: Ministerio de Asuntos
Exteriores.
Alconini, Sonia
2013 El territorio Kallawaya y el taller alfarero de
Milliraya: evaluacin de la produccin, distribucin e intercambio interregional de la cermica inka provincial. Chungar 45 (2): 277
292.
Alden, John R.Leach MincThomas F. Lynch
2006 Identifying the sources of Inka period ceramics from northern Chile: results of a neutron
activation study. Journal of Archaeological
Science 33: 575594.
Aldenderfer, Mark S.
1998 Montane Foragers: Asana and the south-central
Andean Archaic. Iowa City: University of Iowa
Press.
Aldunate del Solar, Carlos
2001 El Inka en Tarapac y Atacama. In Carlos
Aldunate del SolarLuis Cornejo (eds.): Tras
la Huella del Inka en Chile, 1934. Santiago:
Museo Chileno de Arte Precolombino.
Allen, Catherine J.
1988 The Hold Life Has: Coca and Cultural Identity
in an Andean Community. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Anderson, Edward F.
2001 The Cactus Family. Portland: Timber Press.
Antnez de Mayolo, Kay K.
1989 Peruvian Natural Dye Plants. Economic Botany 43 (2): 181191.
Arellano, CarmenRamiro Matos Mendieta
2007 Variations between Inka Installations in the
Puna of Chinchayqocha and the Drainage of
Tarma. In Richard L. BurgerCraig Morris
Ramiro Matos Mendieta (eds.): Variations in
the expression of Inka power: a symposium
at Dumbarton Oaks, 18 and 19 October 1997,
1143. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection.

Arellano Lopez, Jorge


2000 Arqueologa de Lipes Altiplano Sur de Bolivia.
Quito: Museo Jacinto Jijn y Camao, Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Ecuador.
Arkush, Elizabeth
2008 War, Chronology, and Causality in the Titicaca
Basin. Latin American Antiquity 19 (4): 339
373.
2011 Hillforts of the Ancient Andes: Colla Warfare,
Society, and Landscape. Gainesville: University
Press of Florida.
Arnold, Dean E.
1972 Mineralogical analyses of ceramic materials
from Quinua, Department of Ayacucho, Peru.
Archaeometry 14 (1): 93102.
2005 Linking society with the compositional analyses of pottery: a model from comparative ethnography. In Alexandre Livingstone Smith
Dominique BosquetRmy Martineau (eds.):
Pottery Manufacturing Processes: Reconstruction and Interpretation, 1521. BAR International Series 1349. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Asch, Nancy B.David L. Asch
1981 Archaeobotany of Newbridge, Carlin and
Weitzer Sites The White Hall Components.
Appendix B. In Bonnie Whatley Styles: Faunal Exploitation and Resource Selection: Early
Late Woodland Subsistence in the Lower Illinois Valley, 275291. Northwestern University
Archeological Program Scientific Papers, Number 3. Evanston, Illinois.
Baessler, Arthur
19021903 Altperuanische Kunst. Beitrge zur Archologie des Inca-Reichs. 4 vols., Berlin,
Leipzig.
Barfield, Lawrence
1961 Recent discoveries in the Atacama Desert and
the Bolivian Altiplano. American Antiquity
27(1): 93101.
Bartosiewicz, Lszl
1996 Camels in Antiquity: The Hungarian Connection. Antiquity 70 (268): 447453.
1999 Animal bones from the Cochabamba Valley,
Bolivia. In Jnos GyarmatiAndrs Varga: The
Chacaras of War. An Inka State Estate in the
Cochabamba Valley, Bolivia, 101110. Budapest: Nprajzi Mzeum.
2002 Dogs from the Ig pile dwellings in the National
Museum of Slovenia. Arheoloki Vestnik 53:
7789.
2007 Mammalian bone. In Alasdair Whittle: The
Early Neolithic on the Great Hungarian Plain:
investigations of the Krs culture site of
Ecsegfalva 23, County Bks, 287325. Varia
163

Paria la Viexa

Archaeologica Hungarica 21. Budapest: Institute of Archaeology of the Hungarian Academy


of Sciences.
Bartosiewicz, LszlGergely CsikyJnos Gyarmati
2008 Emberiessgi szempontok s a hagyomnyos
llatvgs kt pldja (Humane considerations
and two examples of traditional slaughtering).
Animal welfare, etolgia s tartstechnolgia 4
(3): 130149. http://www.animalwelfare.szie.
hu/cikkek/200803/AWETH2008130149.pdf
Bartosiewicz, LszlMrton Gyngyssy
2006 The Khans mule. In Sandra L. OlsenSusan
GrantAlice M. ChoykeLszl Bartosiewicz
(eds.): Horses and Humans: The Evolution of
Human-Equine Relationships, 289299. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, International Series, no. 1560. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Bartosiewicz, LszlWim Van NeerAn Lentacker
Metapodial asymmetry in cattle. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 3 (2): 6976.
Bastien, Joseph W.
1978 Mountain of the Condor: Metaphor and Ritual
in an Andean Ayllu. New York: West Publishing
Co.
1987 Healers of the Andes: Kallawaya Herbalists
and Their Medicinal Plants. Salt Lake City:
University of Utah Press.
Bauer, Brian S.
1999 Las antiguas tradiciones alfareros de la regin
del Cuzco. Centro Bartolom de las Casas:
Cuzco.
Beaule, Christine
2002 Late Intermediate period political economy and
household organization at Jachakala, Bolivia.
Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
Belgya, TamsZsolt Rvay
2004 Gamma-ray spectrometry. In Gbor L. Molnr (ed.): Handbook of prompt gamma activation analysis with neutron beams, 71111. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Bencic, Catherine M.
2000 Industrias Lticas de Huari y Tiwanaku. In
Peter KaulickeWilliam Isbell (eds.): Huari y
Tiwanaku: Modelos vs. Evidencias. Boletn de
Arqueologa 4: 89118.
Berberin, Eduardo E.Jorge Arellano Lpez
1980 Desarrollo cultural prehispnico en el Altiplano Sur de Bolivia (Prcias. Nor y Sud Lpez
Depto. Potos). Revista do Museu Paulista
Nova Srie XXVII: 259281.
Bermann, MarcJos Estevez Castillo
1993 Jachakala: A New Archaeological Complex of
the Department of Oruro, Bolivia. Annals of
the Carnegie Museum 62 (4): 31140.

164

Berthelot, Jean
1986 The extraction of precious metals at the time of
the Inka. In John V. MurraNathan Wachtel
Jacques Revel (eds.): Anthropological History
of Andean Polities, 6988. Paris, Cambridge,
New York, New Rochelle, Melbourne, Sidney,
London: Cambridge University Press & Editions de la Maison des Sciences de lHomme.
Binford, Lewis R.
1980 Willow smoke and dogs tails: hunter-gatherer
settlement systems and archaeological site formation. American Antiquity 45 (1): 420.
1983 Working at Archaeology. New York: Academic
Press.
Binford, MichaelAlan L. KolataMark BrennerJohn
W. JanusekMatthew T. SeddonMark B. AbbottJason
H. Curtis
1997 Climate Variation and the Rise and Fall of an
Andean Civilization. Quaternary Research 47:
235248.
Bingham, Hiram
1915 Types of Machu Pucchu pottery. American
Anthropologist 2: 257271
Bird, Junius B.
1985 The Preceramic Excavations at the Huaca
Prieta Chicama Valley, Peru. Anthropological
Papers of the American Museum of Natural
History, Vol. 62, Part 1. New York: American
Museum of Natural History.
Bonzani, Rene M.
1997 Plant Diversity in the Archaeological Record:
A Means Toward Defining Hunter-Gatherer
Mobility Strategies. Journal of Archaeological Science 24: 11291139.
1998 Learning from the Present: The Constraints
of Seasonality on Foragers and Collectors. In
Augusto Oyuela-CaycedoJ. Scott Raymond
(eds.): Advances in the Archaeology of the
Northern Andes, 2035. Monograph 39, The Institute of Archaeology, University of California,
Los Angeles.
2007 Report on the Archaeological Investigations of
Settlements along the Inka Royal Roads of the
Paria River Basin, Department of Oruro, Bolivia. Informe ineditado.
2009 Botanical Analysis for the Formative Period
Site of Pukara 2, Bolivia. Manuscript in possession of the author.
Bonzani, Rene M.Augusto Oyuela-Caycedo
2006 The Gift of the Variation and Dispersion of
Maize: Social and Technological Context in
Amerindian Societies. In John StallerRobert
TykotBruce Benz (eds.): Histories of Maize:
Multidisciplinary Approaches to the Prehistory,
Biogeography, Domestication, and Evolution of

REFERENCES

Maize, 343356. New York: Elsevier/Academic


Press.
Boom, Brian M.
1986 A Forest Inventory in Amazonian Bolivia.
Biotropica 18 (4): 287294.
Bouysse-Cassagne, Thrse
1986 Urco and Uma: Aymara Concepts of Space.
In John V. MurraNathan WachtelJacques Revel (eds.): Anthropological History of Andean
Polities, 201227. Paris, Cambridge, New York,
New Rochelle, Melbourne, Sidney, London:
Cambridge University Press & Editions de la
Maison de Sciences de lHomme.
1987 La identidad aymara: Aproximacin histrica
(siglo XV, siglo XVI). La Paz: Institut Franais
dtudes Andines. IFEA - HISBOL.
Bray, Tamara L.
2002 To Dine Splendidly. Imperial Pottery, Commensal Politics, and the Inca State. In Tamara
L. Bray (ed.): The Archaeology and Politics of
Food and Feasting in Early States and Empires,
93142. New York, Boston, Dordrecht, London, Moscow: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
2003a Inka Pottery as Culinary Equipment: Food,
Feasting, and Gender in Imperial State Design. Latin American Antiquity 14 (1): 328.
2003b Los efectos del imperio incaico en la frontera norte. Una investigacin arqueolgica
en la sierra septentrional del Ecuador. Quito:
ABAYA YALA.
2004 La alfarera imperial inka: una comparacin
entre la cermica estatal del rea de Cuzco y la
cermica de las provincias. Chungar 36 (2):
365374.
Bray, Tamara L.Leah D. MincMara Constanza CerutiJos Antonio ChvezRuddy PereaJohan Reinhard
2005 A compositional analysis of pottery vessels
associated with the Inca ritual of capacocha.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 24:
82100.
Brindley, George W.George W. Brown
1980 Crystal structures of clay minerals and their
X-ray diffraction. Mineralogical Society, Monograph 5, London: Mineralogical Society.
Brockmann, Carlos E., ed.
1986 Perfil Ambiental de Bolivia. Instituto Internacional para el Desarrollo y Medio Ambiente.
Agencia de los Estados Unidos para el Desarrollo Internacional, La Paz.
Bruno, Maria C.
2005 Domesticado o Silvestre? Resultados de la
Investigacin de Semillas de Chenopodium
Chiripa, Bolivia (1500-100 A.C.). Textos Antropolgicos 15 (2): 3950.
2008 Etnobotnica y las investigaciones sobre la
agricultura prehistrica en la Cuenca del lago

Titicaca. In Claudia Rivera Casanovas (ed.):


Arqueologa de las Tierras Altas, Valles Interandinos, y Tierras Bajas de Bolivia, 2734. Memorias del I Congreso de Arqueologa de Bolivia. La Paz: Universidad Mayor de San Andrs
Instituto de Investigaciones Antropolgicas y
Arqueolgicas.
Bruno, Maria C.William T. Whitehead
2003 Chenopodium Cultivation and Formative Period Agriculture at Chiripa, Bolivia. Latin
American Antiquity 14 (3): 339355.
Burger, Richard L.
2007 The Archaeology of Inka Power: Concluding
Thoughts. In Richard L. BurgerCraig MorrisRamiro Matos Mendieta (eds.): Variations
in the expression of Inka power: a symposium
at Dumbarton Oaks, 18 and 19 October 1997,
423437. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks
Research Library and Collection.
Burger, Richard L.Lucy C. Salazar, eds.
2004 Machu Picchu Unveiling the Mystery of the Incas. New Haven: University of Yale, Peabody
Museum of Natural History.
Byrne de Caballero, Geraldine
1974 Los Misteriosos Crculos de Cotapachi Los
Tiempos, March. 11.
1975 La arquitectura de almacenamiento en la logstica incaica Diario, Nov. 30.
Castaeda, Rafael Romero
1965 Flora del Centro de Bolivar. Bogot: Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Instituto de Ciencias Naturales.
1991 Frutas Silvestres de Colombia. Second edition.
Bogot: Instituto Colombiano de Cultura Hispnica.
Castro, VictoriaCarlos Aldunate del SolarJos Berenguer
1984 Orgenes altiplnicos de la Fase Toconce. Estudios Atacameos 7: 159178.
Chacaltana Cortez, Sofia C.
2010 El rol de los sistemas de almacenamiento de
Camata Tambo y Camata Pueblo, un tambo
Inca. Tesis de licenciatura. Lima PUCP.
Chapdelaine, Claude
2001 The Growing Power of a Moche Urban Class.
In Joanne Pillsbury (ed.): Moche Art and Archaeology in Ancient Peru, 6987. Washington:
National Gallery of Art.
2009 Introduction to Andean Examples. In Linda
R. ManzanillaClaude Chapdelaine (eds.): Domestic Life in Prehispamc Capitals A Study of
Specialization, Hierarchy, and Ethnicity, 153
157. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology
University of Michigan Number 46 Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology.
165

Paria la Viexa

Chase, Arlen F.Diane Z. ChaseMichael E. Smith


2009 States and Empires in Ancient Mesoamerica.
Ancient Mesoamerica 20 (2): 175182.
Chvez, Juan F.Prspero CabreraEdgar Olivera
1989 El ovino Criollo y su sistema de crianza. In
Jorge GamarraJuan F. Chvez (eds.): Sistemas
propios de manejo de tierras y animales en comunidades campesinas, 5468. Lima: Lluvia
Editores.
Choi, Hee DongRichard B. FirestoneRichard M.
LindstromGbor L. MolnrSaid F. MughabghabRaquel Paviotti-CorcueraZsolt RvayAandrej Trkov
Viktor ZerkinZhou Chunmei
2007 Database of prompt gamma rays from slow neutron capture for elemental analysis. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
Choyke, Alice M.
1997 The bone manufacturing continuum. Anthropozoologica 2526: 6572.
1999 Worked animal bone. In Jnos GyarmatiAndrs Varga: The Chacaras of War. An Inka State
Estate in the Cochabamba Valley, Bolivia, 110
112. Budapest: Museum of Ethnography.
2010 Not the Plastic of the Past: The significance of
worked osseous materials in the past. In Jnos
Gmri (ed.): Csont s br. Az llati eredet
nyersanyagok feldolgozsnak trtnete, rgszete s nprajza, 1930. Material Culture in
the Carpathian Basin 4, Sopron, MTA VEAB.
Choyke, Alice M.Mrta Darczi-Szab
2010 The Complete and Usable Tool: Some Life
Histories of Prehistoric Bone Tools in Hungary. In Alexandra Legrand-PineauIsabelle
SideraNatacha Buc (eds.): Ancient and modern bone artefacts from America to Russia:
cultural, technological and functional signature,
235248. BAR International Series, no. 2136.
Oxford: Archaeopress.
Condarco Castelln, CarolaEdgar Huarachi Mamani
Mile Vargas Rosquellas
2002 Tras las huellas del Tambo Real de Paria. La
Paz: Fundacin PIEB.
Condarco, S. CarlosCarola Condarco Castelln
1994 Ventanani Un sitio ceremonial en la cuenca
de Paria? Anales de la Reunin Nacional de
Etnografa y Folklore 7592.
Conrad, Geoffrey, W.
1977 Chiquitoy Viejo: an Inca Administrative Center in the Chicama Valley, Peru Journal of
Field Archaeology 4: 118.
Cook, Noble David, ed.
1975 Tasa de la Visita General de Francisco Toledo.
Lima: Universidad Nacional Mayor de San
Marcos.

166

Costin, Cathy Lynne


1986 From Chiefdoms to Empire State: Ceramic
Economy among the Prehispanic Wanka of
Highland Peru. Ph.D. Dissertation, University
of California Los Angeles.
Costin, Cathy LynneMelissa B. Hagstrum
1995 Standardization, Labor Investment, Skill, and
the Organization of Ceramic Production in Late
Prehispanic Highland Peru. American Antiquity 60 (4): 619639.
Covey, R. Alan
2006 How the Incas Built Their Heartland: State Formation and the Innovation of Imperial Strategies in the Sacred Valley, Peru. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Cuenca Sempertegui, AngelaEva Garnica BahozElizabeth Lpez CanelasIsabel Marca Cceres
2005 Ms all de las pajas y espinas: Biodiversidad
en el Municipio de Oruro (Comunidades Cochiraya Iroco Chuzekery). Oruro: Latinas Editores.
Cultrone, GiuseppeCarlos Rodriguez-NavarroEduardo
SebastianOlga Cazalla Maria Jose de la Torre
2001 Carbonate and silicate phase reactions during
ceramic firing. European Journal of Mineralogy 13: 621634.
Cutler, Hugh C.Martn Crdenas
1981 Chicha, Una Cerveza Sudamericana Indgena. In Heather LechtmanAna Mara Soldi
(sel.): La Tecnologa en el Mundo Andino.
Runakunap kawsayninkupaq rurasqankunaqa,
247259. Mxico, D.F.: Universidad Nacional
Autnoma de Mxico/ Instituto de investigaciones Antropolgicas.
Cutler, Hugh C.Thomas W. Whitaker
1961 History and Distribution of the Cultivated Cucurbits in the Americas. American Antiquity 26
(4): 469485.
Cutright, Robin E.
2009 Between the Kitchen and the State Domestic
Practice and Chim Expansion in the Jequetepeque Valley, Peru. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
DAltroy, Terence N.
1992 Provincial Power in the Inka Empire. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.
2002 The Incas. Malden: Blackwell Publisher.
DAltroy, Terence N.Ronald L. Bishop
1990 The Provincial Organization of Inka Ceramic
Production. American Antiquity 55 (1): 120
138.
DAltroy, Terence N.Timothy K. Earle
1992 Inka Storage Facilities in the Upper Mantaro
Valley, Peru. In Terry Y. LeVine (ed.): Inka
Storage System, 176205. Norman: University
of Oklahoma Press.

REFERENCES

DAltroy, Terence N.Christine Hastorf


1984 The Distribution and Contents of Inca State
Storhouses in the Xauxa Region of Peru. American Antiquity 49 (2): 334349.
DAltroy, Terence N.Christine Hastorf, eds.
2001 Empire and Domestic Economy: Transformation in Household Economics of Xauxa Society
Under the Inkas. New York: Kluwer Academic.
DAltroy, Terence N.Ana Mara LorandiChristine A.
HastorfElizabeth De MarraisMelissa B. Hagstrum
2000 Inka Rule in the Northern Calchaqui Valley,
Argentina. Journal of Field Archaeology
27(1): 126.
DAltroy, Terence N.Katharina Schreiber
2004 Andean Empires. In Helaine Silverman (ed.):
Andean Archaeology, 255279. Malden: Blackwell Publisher.
DAltroy, Terence N.Vernica WilliamsAna Mara
Lorandi
2007 The Inkas in the Southland. In Richard L.
BurgerCraig MorrisRamiro Matos Mendieta (eds.): Variations in the expression of
Inka power: a symposium at Dumbarton Oaks,
18 and 19 October 1997, 85134. Washington
D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and
Collection.
Dauelsberg, Percy
1995 Cermica del Valle de Azapa. Boletn del Museo Regional de Arica (re-edition of Boletines
del 1 al 7, 195961) 3: 4752.
Davis, Simon
1996 Measurements of a group of adult female Shetland sheep skeletons from a single flock: a baseline for zooarchaeologists. Journal of Archaeological Science 23: 593612.
De Corte, Frans
1987 The k0-standardization method a move to optimization of NAA. Ph.D. Dissertation, University
of Gent.
Del Ro, Mara de la Mercedes
1990 Simbolismo y poder en Tapacar. Revista Andina 8 (1): 77113.
1996 Relaciones intertnicas y control de recursos
entre los aymaras del macizo de Charcas. Los
Soras del Repartimiento de Paria: estrategias
de acceso a tierras. Siglos XVIXVII. Ph.D.
Dissertation, Facultad de Filosofa y Letras,
Universidad de Buenos Aires.
2005 Etnicidad, territorialialidad y colonialismo en
los Andes: Tradicin y cambio entre los Soras
de los siglos XVI y XVII. La Paz, Lima: IFEA,
IEB.
Dillehay, Tom D.Jack RossenDonald UgentAnathasios KarathanasisVctorVsquezPatricia J. Netherly
2010 Early Holocene Coca Chewing in Northern
Peru. Antiquity 84: 939953.

Donnan, Christopher B.
1997 A Chimu-Inka Ceramic-Manufacturing Center
from the North Coast of Peru. Latin American
Antiquity 8 (1): 3054.
Driesch, Angela von den
1976 Das Vermessen von Tierknochen aus vor- und
frhgeschichtlich Siedlungen. Mnchen: Institut fr Paloanatomie, Domestikationsforschung und Geschichte der Tiermedizin der
Universitt Mnchen.
Earle, Timothy
1992 Storage and the Inka Imperial Economy. Archaeological Research. In Terry Y. LeVine(ed.):
Inka Storage Systems, 327342. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
1994 Wealth Finance in the Inka Empire: Evidence
from the Calchaqui Valley, Argentina. American Antiquity 59 (3): 443460.
Earle, TimothyTerence N. DAltroy
1989 The political economy of the Inka empire: the
archaeology of power and finance. In Clifford
Charles Lamberg-Karlovsky (ed.): Archaeological thought in America, 183204. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Eeckhout, Peter
2012 Inca Storage and Accounting Facilities at Pachacamac. Andean Past 10: 213239.
Espinoza Soriano, Waldemar
1970 Los mitmas yungas de Collique en Cajamarca,
siglos XV, XVI y XVII. Revista del Museo Nacional 36: 957.
Fazekas, BlaJzsef strZoltn KisGbor L. MolnrAndrs Simonits
1997 The new features of Hypermet-PC. In Gbor
L. MolnrTams BelgyaZsolt Rvay (eds.)
Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium
on Capture Gamma-Ray Spectroscopy and Related Topics, 774778. Budapest: Springer Verlag.
Fazekas, BlaZsolt RvayJzsef strTams
BelgyaGbor L. MolnrAndrs Simonits
1999 A new method for determination of gamma-ray
spectrometer nonlinearity. Nuclear Instruments and Methods A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment
422 (13): 469473.
Fernndez Baca, Sal
1971 La alpaca. Reproduccin y crianza. Boletn de
Divulgacin No. 7. Lima: Centro de Investigacin, Instituto Veterinario de Investigacines
Tropicales y de Altura.
Fernndez Baca Cosio, Jenaro
197289 Motivos de ornamentacin de la cermica
inca Cusco III.

167

Paria la Viexa

Flores Ochoa, Jorge A.


1982 Causas que originaron la actual distribucin
espacial de las alpacas y llamas. In Luis MillonesHiroyasu Tomoeda (eds.): El hombre y su
ambiente an los Andes Centrales, 6392. Senri
Ethnological Studies 10, Osaka: National Museum of Etnology.
Fldvri, Mria
2011 Handbook of Thermogravimetric system of Minerals and its use in geological practice. Occasional Papers of the Geological Institute of
Hungary, volume 213. Budapest. https://www.
mfgi.hu/sites/default/files/files/K%C3%B6nyvtar/Alkalmi_teljes/Fodvari_egyben.pdf.
Franklin, William L.
1982 Biology, ecology and relationship to man of
the South American camelids. In Michael
A. Mares (ed.): Mammalian Biology in South
America, 457489. Pymatuning Laboratory of
Ecology Special Publication Series 6.
Franquemont, ChristineTimothy PlowmanEdward
FranquemontSteven R. KingChristine Niezgoda
Wade DavisCalvin R. Sperling
1990 The ethnobotany of Chinchero, an Andean
community in southern Peru. Fieldiana, Botany (Nuevas Series) 24: 1126.
Frye, Kirk L.Edmundo de la Vega
2005 The Altiplano Period in the Titicaca Basin. In
Charles StanishAmanda CohenMark Aldenderfer (eds.): Advances in the Titicaca Basin
Archaeology-I, 173184. Los Angeles: Cotsen
Institute of Archaeology.
Gade, Daniel W.
1975 Plants, Man and the Land in Vilcanota Valley of
Peru. Dr. W. Junk B.V., The Hague.
1999 Nature and Culture in the Andes. Madison: The
University of Wisconsin Press.
Galeano, Gloria
1991 Palms in the Araracuara Region. Bogot: Tropenbos.
Galeano, GloriaRodrigo Bernal
1987 Palmas del Departamento de Antioquia: Regin
Occidental. Bogot: Universidad Nacional de
Colombia.
Gasparini, GrazianoLuise Margolies
1980 Inca Architecture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Gentry, Alwyn H.
1993 A Field Guide to the Families and Genera of
Woody Plants of Northwest South America (Colombia, Ecuador, Peru). Washington D.C.: Conservation International.
GEOBOL
1992 Carta Geolgica de Bolivia, Hoja Oruro (1:100
000). Publicacin SGB Serie I-CGB-11 (Pgina 6140).
168

1994 Carta Geolgica de Bolivia, Hoja Bolivar


(1:100 000). Publicacin SGB Serie I-CGB-27
(Pgina 6240).
Govindarau, Kuppusami
1989 Compilation of working values and sample
description for 272 geostandards. Special Issue
of Geostandards Newsletter 13: 1113.
GUM
1993 Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement. Geneva: ISO.
Gutierrez Osinaga, Daniel Jos
2005 Avances en la Arqueologa de Caminos Precolombinos en Bolivia Tramo: PariaTapacar.
Arquebolivia Nuevos Aportes 3: 93114. www.
arqueobolivia.com/revista.php.
2012 El Camino Precolombino PariaTapacar: Una
aproximacin arqueolgica al sistema de tambos incas a travs de los sitios Pisakheri Tambo
y Huaylla Tambo. M.A. Thesis, Rheinische
Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitt Bonn.
Gyarmati, Jnos
1998 Tierras de la guerra. Chacras militares en el
Tawantinsuyu. Anales 6: 147164
2001 Proyecto Arqueolgico del Valle de Cochabamba, Bolivia (PAP), Sequilao 13: 111.
2008 Pariai trtneti kutatprogram. Szakmai zrjelents [Historical Research Program in Paria.
Final Report]. Budapest: Unpublished manuscript.
Gyarmati, JnosCarola Condarco Castelln
2004 Informe de la temporada de 2004. Proyecto Arqueolgico de Paria. Manuscript, DINAR, La
Paz.
2005 Informe de la temporada de 2005. Proyecto Arqueolgico de Paria. Manuscript, DINAR, La
Paz.
2007 Proyecto Arqueolgico Paria (PAP) Informe de
la Temporada III 20062007. Manuscript, DINAR, La Paz.
Gyarmati, JnosAndrs Varga
1999 The Chacaras of War. An Inka State Estate in
the Cochabamba Valley, Bolivia. Budapest:
Nprajzi Mzeum.
Hahn-Weinheimer, Paula F.Alfred V. HirnerKlaus
Weber-Diefenbach
1984 Grundlagen und praktische Anwendung der
Roentgenfluorezenzanalyse (RFA). Braunschweig: Vieweg-Verlag.
Harlan, Jack R.
1975 Crops and Man. Madison: American Society of
Agronomy.
Harris, Olivia
1982 Labor and Produce in an Ethnic Economy,
Northern Potosi, Bolivia. In David Lehmann
(ed.): Ecology and Exchange in the Andes, 70
96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

REFERENCES

Hassig, Ross
1984 The Aztec Empire: A Reappraisal. In Ronald
SporesRoss Hassig (eds.): Five Centuries of
Law and Politics in Central Mexico, 1524.
Publications in Anthropology 30. Nashville:
Vanderbilt University Press.
Hastorf, Christine A.
1993 Agriculture and the Onset of Political Inequality before the Inka. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
1999 Recent Research in Paleoethnobotany. Journal of Archaeological Research 7 (1): 55103.
Hastorf, Christine A.Virginia S. Popper, eds.
1988 Current Paleoethnobotany: Analytical Methods
and Cultural Interpretations of Archaeological
Plant Remains (Prehistoric Archeology and
Ecology series). Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press
Hastorf, Christine A.William T. WhiteheadMaria C.
BrunoMelanie Wright
2006 The Movements of Maize into Middle Horizon Tiwanaku, Bolivia. In John StallerRobert
TykotBruce Benz (eds.): Histories of Maize,
429448. New York: Academic Press.
Hastorf, Christine A.Melanie F. Wright
1998 Interpreting Wild Seeds from Archaeological
Sites: A Dung Charring Experiment from the
Andes. Journal of Ethnobiology 18 (2): 211
227.
Hather, John
1993 An Archaeobotanical Guide to Root and Tuber
Identification. Volume I: Europe and South West
Asia. Oxbow Monographs in Archaeology 28.
Exeter: The Short Run Press.
2000 Archaeological Parenchyma. London: Archetype Publications.
Haugerud, AngeliqueM. Priscilla StonePeter D. Little
2000 Commodities and Globalization: Anthropological Perspectives. New York: RowmanLittlefield Publishers.
Hayashida, Frances M.
1995 State pottery production in the Inka provinces.
Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor.
1998 New insights into Inka pottery production. In
Izumi Shimada (ed.): MASCA Research Papers
in Science and Archaeology. Andean Ceramics:
Technology, Organization, and Approaches,
313335, Supplement to Vol. 15. Philadelphia:
Museum Applied Science Center for Archaeology.
1999 Style, Technology, and the State Production:
Inka Pottery Manufacture in the Leche Valley,
Peru. Latin American Antiquity 10 (4): 337
352.

2003 Leyendo el registro arqueolgico del dominio


inka: reflexiones desde la costa norte del Per.
In Peter KaulickeGary UrtonIan Farrington
(eds.): Identidad y transformacin en el Tawantinsuyu y en los Andes coloniales. Perspectives
arqueolgicas y etnohistricas. Boletn de Arqueologa PUCP 7: 305320.
Hemming, John
1970 The Conquest of the Incas. New York: A Harvest Book.
Hrail, GrardPierre SolerMichel BonhommeJos
Luis Lizeca
1993 Evolution geodynamique de la transition entre
lAltiplano et la Cordillere Orientale au Nord
dOruro (Bolivie): Implications sur le deroulement de lorogenese andine. Comptes Rendus
de lAcadmie des sciences 317: 515522.
Heyerdahl, ThorDaniel H. SandweissAlfredo Narvaez
1995 Pyramids of Tcume: The Quest for Perus Forgotten City. London: Thames and Hudson.
Higueras-Hare, Alvaro
1996 Prehispanic Settlement and Land Use in Cochabamba, Bolivia. Ph.D. Dissertation, University
of Pittsburgh.
2001 El Periodo Intermedio (Horizonte Medio) en
los valles de Cochabamba: una perspectiva del
anlisis de asentamientos humanos y uso de
tierras. Boletn de arqueologa PUCP 5: 625
646.
Honores Fernndez, Alejandro M.Eric F. Rodrguez
Rodrguez
2007 Etnobotnica del Per Pre-Hispano. Trujillo:
Universidad Nacional de Trujillo Ediciones
Herbarium Truxillense.
Huaycochea Nuez de la Torre, Flor de Mara
1994 Qolqas bancos de reserva andinos Almacenes
Inkas. Cusco: Universidad Nacional de San Antonio Abad.
Hunter, Andrea A.
1992 Utilization of Hordeum Pusillum (Little Barley)
in the Midwest United States: Applying Rindos
Co-evolutionary Model of Domestication. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia.
Hunter, Andrea A.Brian R. Gassner
1998 Evaluation of the Flote-Tech Machine-Assisted Flotation System. American Antiquity
63: 143156.
Hyslop, John
1976 An Archaeological Investigation of the Lupaca
Kingdom and Its Origins. Ph.D. Dissertation,
Columbia University.
1977 Hilltop Cities in Peru. Archaeology 30 (4):
218225.
1984 The Inka Road System. Orlando: Academic
Press.

169

Paria la Viexa

1985 Inkawasi, the New Cuzco: Caete, Lunahuan,


Per. Oxford: BAR International Series Vol.
234.
1990 Inka Settlement Planning. Austin: University of
Texas Press.
Idrovo Urigen, Jaime
2000 Tomebamba Arqueologa e Historia de una Ciudad Imperial. Cuenca: Banco Central del Ecuador.
Iltis, Hugh H.
2000 Homeotic sexual translocations and the origin
of maize (Zea mays, Poaceae): A new look at an
old problem. Economic Botany 54: 742.
Isbell, Willaim H.
2009 Huari: A New Direction in Central Andean
Urban Evolution. In Linda R. Manzanilla
Claude Chapdelaine (eds.): Domestic Life in
Prehispanic Capitals A Study of Specialization,
Hierarchy, and Ethnicity, 197219. Memoirs
of the Museum of Anthropology University of
Michigan Number 46, Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan, Museum of Anthropology.
Ixer, Rob A.Sarah Lunt
1991 The Petrography of Certain Pre-Spanish Pottery from Peru. In Andrew MiddletonIan C.
Freestone (eds.): Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology, 137164. Occasional Paper 81,
British Museum Publications.
Izeta, AndresRoxana CattneoCristina Maria ScattolinLeticia I. Corts
2013 Changed into Tools. Camelid Bones from the
Southern Calchaques Valleys (Formative Period, North-western Argentina). In Alice M.
ChoykeSonja OConnor (eds.): From These
Bare Bones: Raw materials and the study of
worked osseous objects, 5058. Oxford: Oxbow Press.
Jimnez Daz, M. Jess
2006 Textiles prehispnicos andinos. In Y llegaron
los Incas, 103115. Exhibition Catalogue. Madrid: Museo de Amrica.
Johannessen, Sissel
1984 Paleoethnobotany. In Charles J. BareisJames
W. Porter (eds.): American Bottom Archaeology, 197214. Urbana: University of Illinois
Press.
Jones, GlynisKenneth WardlePaul HalsteadDiane
Wardle
1986 Crop storage at Assiros. Scientific American
254 (3): 96103.
Julien, Catherine J.
1983 Hatunqolla: A View of Inca Rule from the Lake
Titicaca Region. Los Angeles, Oxford: University of California Press, Berkeley.
1993 Finding a Fit. In Michael A. Malpass (ed.): Provincial Inca: Archaeological and Ethnohistorical
170

Assesment of the Impact of the Inca State, 177


233. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
Kadwell, MirandaMatild FernandezHelen F. Stanley
Ricardo BaldiJane C. WheelerRaul RosadioMichael
W. Bruford
2001 Genetic analysis reveals the wild ancestors of
the llama and the alpaca. Proceedings of the
Royal Society Biological Sciences. Series B.
268 (1485): 25752584.
Keatinge, Richard W.
1975 Urban Settlement Systems and Rural Sustaining Communities: An Example from Chan
Chans Hinterland. Journal of Field Archaeology 2: 215227.
Kelly, Robert L.
1995 The Foraging Spectrum: Diversity in Hunter-Gatherer Lifeways. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.
King, Frances B.
1985 Early Cultivated Cucurbits in Eastern North
America. In Richard I. Ford (ed.): Prehistoric
Food Production in North America, 7397. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan
Anthropological Papers No. 75. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology.
Kolda, Jan
1951 Osteologick atlas [Osteological atlas]. Praha:
Zdravotnick Nakladetelstv v Praze.
Koudelka, Florian
1885 Das Verhltniss der Ossa longa zur Skeletthhe bei den Sugertieren. Verhandlungen der
Naturforschenden Vereins Brnn 24: 127153.
La Lone, Mary B.Darrell E. La Lone
1987 The Inka State in the Southern Highlands:
State Administrative and Production Enclaves.
Ethnohistory 34: 4762.
Langlie, Brie Anna S.Christine A. HastorfMaria C.
BrunoMarc BermannRene M. BonzaniWilliam
Castelln Condarco
2011 Diversity in Andean Chenopodium Domestication: Describing a New Morphological Type
from La Barca, Bolivia 1300-1250 B.C. Journal of Ethnobiology 31 (1): 7288.
Lechtman, Heather
2007 The lnka, and Andean Metallurgical Tradition. In Richard L. BurgerCraig MorrisRamiro Matos Mendieta (eds.): Variations in the
expression of Inka power: a symposium at
Dumbarton Oaks, 18 and 19 October 1997,
313356. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks
Research Library and Collection.
Lecoq, Patrice
1997 Patrn de asentamiento, estilos cermicos y
grupos tnicos: el ejemplo de la regin intersalar en Bolivia. In Thrse Bouysse-Cassagne

REFERENCES

(ed.): Saberes y Memorias en los Andes. In Memoriam Thierry Saignes, 5989. Paris, Lima:
Institut des Hautes tudes de lAmrique Latine
and Institut Franais dtudes Andines.
1999 Uyuni prhispanique. Oxford: BAR International Series 798.
2003 La ocupacin en los valles de Yura y de los
alrededores de Potos durante los perodos Intermedio Tardo e Inka, a la luz de nuevos descubrimientos arqueolgicos. Textos Antropolgicos 14 (2): 105132.
Lecoq, PatriceCspedes, Ricardo
1997 Panorama archeologique des zones meridionales de Bolivie (Sud est de Potosi). Bulletin
de lInstitut franais dtudes andines 26 (1):
2126.
Lennstrom, Heidi A.Christine A. Hastorf
1992 Testing old wives tales in paleoethnobotany:
a comparison of bulk and scatter sampling
schemes from Pancan, Peru. Journal of Archaeological Science 19: 205229.
1995 Interpretation in context: sampling and analysis in paleoethnobotany. American Antiquity
60 (4): 701722.
Lentz, DavidRuth Dickau
2005 Seeds of Central America and Southern Mexico:
The Economic Species. Memoirs of the New
York Botanical Garden Vol. 91. New York: The
New York Botanical Garden.
LeVine, Terry
1992 The Study of Storage Systems. In Terry Y.
LeVine (ed.): Inka Storage System, 328. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Lindstrom, Richard M.Zsolt Rvay
2004 Beams and Facilities. In Gbor L. Molnr
(ed.): Handbook of Prompt Gamma Activation
Analysis with Neutron Beams, 3158. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Livingstone Smith, Alexandre
2001 Bonfire II: The Return of Pottery Firing Temperatures. Journal of Archaeological Science
28: 9911003.
Lopinot, Neal H.Lucretia S. KellyGeorge R. Milner
Richard Paine
1991 The Archaeology of the Cahokia Mounds ICT-II:
Biological Remains. Illinois Cultural Resources
Study No. 13. Springfield: Illinois Historic Preservation Agency.
Luttwak, Edward N.
1976 The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Mackey, Carol
2009 Chim Statecraft in the Provinces. In Joyce
MarcusPatrick R.Williams (eds.): Andean
Civilization A Tribute to Michael E. Moseley,

325349. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Los


Angeles: University of California.
2010 The Socioeconomic and Ideological Transformation of Farfn under Inka Rule. In Michael
A. MalpassSonia Alconini (eds.): Distant
Provinces in the Inka Empire. Toward a Deeper
Understanding of Inka Imperialism, 221259.
Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
Madero, Celina M.Hugo D. Yacobaccio
1994 El registro faunstico del pastoreo actual y sus
implicaciones arqueolgicas. In Zooarqueologa de Camlidos 1/1, Perspectivas Tericas y
Metodolgicas (1o Parte) , 7394. Buenos Aires:
Grupo de Zooarquaeologa de Camlidos.
Maggetti, Martino
1982 Phase Analysis and its Significance for Technology and Origin. In Jacqueline S. OlinAlan
D. Franklin (eds.): Archaeological Ceramics,
121133. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
1994 Mineralogical and Petrological Methods for
the Study of Ancient Pottery. In Francesco
BurragatoOdino GrubessiLorenzo Lazzarini
(eds.): 1st European Workshop of Archaeological Ceramics, 2235. Roma: Dipartimento
Scienze della Terra, Universit degli studi di
Roma La Sapienza.
Magurran, Anne E.
1988 Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement.
Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Malpass, Michael A., ed.
1993 Provincial Inca: Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Assesment of the Impact of the Inca
State. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
Malpass, Michael A.Sonia Alconini, eds.
2010 Distant Provinces in the Inka Empire. Toward
a Deeper Understanding of Inka Imperialism.
Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
Marcus, Joyce
1998 The Peaks and Valleys of Ancient States: An
Extension of the Dynamic Model, In Gary M.
FeinmanJoyce Marcus (eds.): Archaic States,
5994. Santa Fe: School of American Research
Advanced Seminar Series.
Mares, Michael A.Ricardo A. Ojeda
1984 Fauna commercialization and conservation in
South America. Bioscience 34: 580584.
Maritan, LaraLuca NodariClaudio MazzoliAlberto
MilanoUmberto Russo
2006 Influence of firing conditions on ceramic products: Experimental study on clay rich in organic matter. Applied Clay Science 31(12):
115.

171

Paria la Viexa

Markemann, AndrAnne Valle Zrate


2010 Traditional llama husbandry and breeding
management in the Ayopaya region, Bolivia.
Tropical Animal Health and Production 42:
7987. DOI 10.1007/s11250-009-9388-6
Martin, Alexander C.William D. Barkley
2000 Seed Identification Manual. Second edition.
Caldwell: The Blackburn Press.
Martnez Castilla, Domingo
1985 Produccin de ovinos en el Per: problemas
estructurales. In Asociacin Peruana de produccin animal, 112, Huancayo: B. II Curso
Internacional de Produccin Ovina.
Masuda, ShozoIzumi ShimadaCraig Morris, eds.
1985 Andean Ecology and Civilization: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on Andean Ecological
Complementarity. Tokyo: University of Tokyo
Press.
Matos Mendieta, Ramiro
n.d. La cermica inca. In Los Incas Arte y Simbolos, 109167. Lima: Banco de Crdito del Per.
1994 Pumpu: Centro Administrativo Inka de la Puna
de Junn. Lima: Editorial Horizonte.
2002 El awana wasi de Tarmatambo: una aproximacin etnoarqueolgica. In Javier Flores EspinozaRafael Varn Gabai (eds.): El hombre
y los Andes Homenaje a Franklin Pease G. Y,
679694. Vol. II. Lima: Pontificia Universidad
Catlica del Per, Instituto Francs de Estudios
Andinos.
McAndrews, Timothy. L.
2005 Wankarani Settlement Systems in Evolutionary
Perspective. Pittsburgh, La Paz: University of
Pittsburgh, Plural Editores.
McAndrews, Timothy. L.Claudia Rivera
2007 Proyecto Arqueolgico Parotani. Sociedades
Aldeanas Tempranas y Trayectorias Socio-Culturalas Posteriores en Cochabamba, Bolivia.
Primer Informe de Trabajo. Temporada de
Campo 2005.
McClung de Tapia, Emily
1992 The Origins of Agriculture in Mesoamerica
and Central America. In C. Wesley Cowan
Patty Jo Watson (eds.): The Origins of Agriculture, 143171. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian
Institution Press.
McCormac, F. GerryAlan G. HoggPaul G. BlackwellCaitlin E. BuckThomas F. G. HighamPaula J.
Reimer
2004 SHCal04 Southern Hemisphere Calibration
0-11.0 cal kyr BP. Radiocarbon 46: 1087
1092.
McEwan, Gordon M.Melissa ChatfieldArminda
Gibaja O.
2002 The Archaeology of Inca Origins Excavations
at Choquepukio, Cuzco, Peru. In William
172

IsbellHelaine Silverman (eds.): Andean Archaeology I. Variations in Sociopolitical Organization. New York, Boston, Dordrecht, London, Moscow: Kluwer Academic.
Meadow, Richard H.
1999 The use of size index scaling techniques for
research on archaeozoological collections from
the Middle East. In Cornelia BeckerHenriette
ManhartJoris PetersJrg Schibler (eds.): Historia animalum ex ossibus. Beitrge zur Paloanatomie, Archologie, gyptologie, Ethnologie und Geschichte der Tiermedizin. Festschrift
fr Angela von den Driesch, 285300. Rahden/
Westf: Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH.
Menzel, Dorothy
1959 The Inca occupation of the south coast of
Peru. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology
15 (2): 125142.
1976 Pottery Style and Society in Ancient Peru: Art as
mirror in the Ica valley. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Menzel, DorothyFrancis A. Riddell
1986 Archaeological investigations in Tambo Viejo,
Acar Valley, Peru 1954. Sacramento: Institute
for Peruvian Studies.
Meyers, Albert
1975 Algunos problemas en clasificacin del estilo
incaico. Pumapunka 8: 725.
1998 Los Incas en el Ecuador Anlisis de los restos
materiales. Quito: AbiaYala.
1999 Reflexiones acerca de la periodizacin de la
cultura Inka: Perspectivas desde Samaipata,
Oriente de Bolivia. In Cristina M. Diez (ed.):
Actas del XII Congreso Nacional de Arqueologa Argentina Vol. I: 239251.
2007 Toward a Reconceptualization of the Late Horizon and the Inka Period: Perspectives from
Cochasqui, Ecuador, and Samaipata, Bolivia.
In Richard L. BurgerCraig MorrisRamiro
Matos Mendieta (eds.): Variations in the expression of Inka power: a symposium at Dumbarton Oaks, 18 and 19 October 1997, 223254.
Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research
Library and Collection.
Michel Lpez, Marcos R.
2001 El Seorio prehispnico de Carangas. Anales
de la XIV Reunin Anual de Etnologa 1: 191
207.
2008 Patrones de Asentamiento Precolombino del
Altiplano Boliviano. Lugares Centrales de la
Regin de Quillacas, Departamento de Oruro,
Bolivia. La Paz: Instituto de Investigaciones
Antropolgicas y Arqueolgicas Universidad
Mayor de San Andrs and Uppsala: African
and Comparative Archaeology Department of

REFERENCES

Archaeology and Ancient History Uppsala University.


Miller, George R.
1979 An Introduction to the Ethnoarchaeology of Andean Camelids. Ph.D. Dissertation, University
of California.
1981 Subsistence and social differentiation at Chavin
de Huantar: some insights from the preliminary
analysis of the faunal remains. Paper presented
at the 46th Annual Meeting of SAA.
Moerman, Daniel E.
2000 Native American Ethnobotany. 3rd ed. Portland: Timber Press.
Molnr, Gbor L.Zsolt RvayTams Belgya
2002 Wide energy range efficiency calibration method for Ge detectors. Nuclear Instruments and
Methods A 489: 140159.
Molnr, Gbor L.Zsolt RvayRick L. PaulRichard
M. Lindstrom
1998 Prompt-gamma activation analysis using the k0
approach. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 234: 2126.
Montes de Oca, Ismael
1989 Geografa y recursos naturales de Bolivia. La
Paz: Imprenta de Editorial Educacional del Ministerio de Educacion y Cultura.
Montgomery, Frederick Howard
1977 Seeds and Fruits of Plants of Eastern Canada
and Northeastern United States. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Moore, Jerry D.
2013 Economic and Social Context of Bone Tool
Use, Formative Bolivia. In Alice Choyke
Sonja OConnor (eds.): From These Bare Bones: Raw Materials and the study of worked osseous objects, 174186. Oxford: Oxbow Press.
Moore, KatherineMaria BrunoJos CaprilesChristine Hastorf
2007 Integrated Contextual Approaches to Understanding Past Activities Using Plant and Animal
Remains from Kala Uyuni. In Bandy MatthewChristine Hastorf (eds.): Kala Uyuni: An
Early Political Center in the Southern Lake Titicaca Basin, 113133. Berkeley: Archaeological
Research Facility.
Morcote Ros, Gaspar
1996 Evidencia Arqueobotanica de Cultigenos Presentes en Grupos Muiscas de la Sabana de Bogota en los Siglos VIII y XI. In Enciso Braida
Monika Therrien (eds.): Bioantropologa de
la Sabana de Bogot, Siglos VIII al XVI D.C,
5983. Bogot: Instituto Colombiano de Antropologa-ICAN, Colcultura.
Morgan, George B.David LondonRobert G. Luedke
1998 Petrochemistry of Late Miocene Peraluminous
Silicic Volcanic Rocks from the Morococala

Field, Bolivia. Journal of Petrology 39 (4):


601632.
Morn Ros, Erick Hugo
2006a Pasakana: Fruto del Ecosistema Altiplnico.
Oruro: Latinas Editores.
2006b Halofitas: Plantas Tolerantes a la Salinidad.
Oruro: Deposito Legal No. 1-040/2007.
Morris, Craig
1971 The Identification of Function in Inca Architecture and Ceramics. Revista del Museo Nacional XXXVII: 135144.
1981 Tecnologa y organizacin inca del almacenamiento de vveres en la sierra. In Heather
LechtmanAna Mara Soldi (sel.): La Tecnologa en el Mundo Andino. Runakunap kawsayninkupaq rurasqankunaqa, 327375. Mxico,
D.F.: Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico/Instituto de investigaciones Antropolgicas.
1986 Storage, supply, and redistribution in the economy of the Inka state. In John V. MurraNathan WachtelJacques Revel (eds.): Anthropological History of Andean Polities, 5968.
Paris, Cambridge, New York, New Rochelle,
Melbourne, Sidney, London: Cambridge University Press & Editions de la Maison de Sciences de lHomme.
Morris, CraigAlan R. Covey
2006 The Management of Scale or the Creation of
Scale Administrative Processes in Two Inka
Provinces. In Christina M. ElsonR. Alan
Covey (eds.): Intermediate Elites in Pre-Columbian States and Empires, 136153. Tucson:
University of Arizona Press.
Morris, CraigAlan CoveyPat Stein
2011 The Hunuco Pampa Archaeological Project
Volume I: The Plaza and Palace Complex. Anthropology Papers of the American Museum of
Natural History Number 96, New York: American Museum of Natural History.
Morris, CraigJulin Idilio Santillana
2007 The Inka Transformation of the Chincha Capital. In Richard L. BurgerCraig Morris
Ramiro Matos Mendieta (eds.): Variations in
the expression of Inka power: a symposium
at Dumbarton Oaks, 18 and 19 October 1997,
135163. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks
Research Library and Collection.
Morris, CraigDonald E. Thompson
1970 Huanuco Viejo: An Inca Administrative Center. American Antiquity 35 (3): 344362.
1985 Hunuco Pampa. An Inca City and its Hinterland. London: Thames and Hudson.
Moseley, Michael E.
1992 The Incas and Their Ancestors. The Archaeology of Peru. New York: Thames and Hudson.
173

Paria la Viexa

Muoz, Mara de los Angeles


2007 The Kallanka at Samaipata, Bolivia: an Example of Inca Monumental Architecture. In Richard L. BurgerCraig MorrisRamiro Matos
Mendieta (eds.): Variations in the expression of
Inka power: a symposium at Dumbarton Oaks,
18 and 19 October 1997, 255266. Washington
D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and
Collection.
Murra, John V.
1972 El control vertical de un mximo de pisos
ecolgicos en la economa de las sociedades
andinas. In Iigo Ortiz de Zuiga: Visita de la
Provincia de Len de Hunuco, 429468, Vol.
II, Hunuco: Universidad Nacional Hermilio
Valdizan.
1978 Los olleros del inka: hacia una historia y arqueologa del Qollasuyu. In Francisco Miro
Quesada C.Franklin Pease G. Y.David Sobreville A. (eds.): Historia, Problema, y Promesa: Homenaje a Jorge Basadre, 415423.
Lima: Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Peru.
1983a La organizacin econmica del Estado Inca.
3ra edicin. Mxico D.F.: Siglo XXI.
1983b La mita al Tawantinsuyu: prestaciones de los
grupos tnicos. Chungar 10: 7794.
Navarro, GonzaloMabel Maldonado
2002 Geografia Ecolgica de Bolivia. Cochabamba:
Centro de Ecologia Simn Patio
Nemecz, Ern
1973 Agyagsvnyok. [Clay Minerals] Budapest:
Akadmiai Kiad.
Newsom, Lee A.
2006 Caribbean Maize. First Farmers to Columbus. In John StallerRobert TykotBruce Benz
(eds.): Histories of Maize: Multidisciplinary
Approaches to the Prehistory, Linguistics, Biogeography, Domestication, and Evolution of
Maize, 325335. New York: Academic Press.
Nielsen, Axel E.Eduardo E. Berberin
2008 El senorio mallku revisitado. Aportes al conocimiento de la historia tarda de Lpez. In Claudia Rivera Casanovas (ed.): Arqueologa de las
Tierras Altas, Valles Interandinos, y Tierras
Bajas de Bolivia. Memorias del I Congreso de
Arqueologa de Bolivia, 145166. La Paz: Universidad Mayor de San Andrs Instituto de Investigaciones Antropolgicas y Arqueolgicas.
Niemeyer, HansVirgilio Schiappacasse
1981 Aportes al conocimiento del Perodo Tardo
del extremo Norte de Chile: Anlisis del sector
Huancarane del Valle de Camarones. Chungar 7: 3103.

174

Novoa, CesarJane C. Wheeler, J.


1984 Llama and alpaca. In Ian L. Mason (ed.): Evolution of domesticated animals, 116127. London, New York: Longman.
Novoa, CesarTrevor Wilson
1992 A global review of the genetic resources of
Camelidae. The management of global animal
genetic resources. FAO Animal Production and
Health Paper 104: 189203.
Ogburn, Dennis E.
2001 The Inca Occupation and Forced Resettlement
in Saraguro, Ecuador. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara.
Ogilvie, Alan G.
1922 Geography of the Central Andes. New York:
American Geographical Society.
Olsen, Sandra
2001 The importance of thong-smoothers at Botai,
Kazakhstan. In Alice ChoykeLszl Bartosiewicz (eds.): Crafting Bone: Skeletal Technologies through Time and Space, 197206. BAR
International Series 937. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Ortloff, Charles R.Alan L. Kolata
1993 Climate and Collapse: Agro-Ecological Perspectives on the Decline of the Tiwanaku State.
Journal of Archaeological Science 20: 195221.
Oyuela-Caycedo, Augusto
1998 Seasonality in the tropical lowlands of northwest South America: the case of San Jacinto 1,
Colombia. In Tom R. RocekOfer Bar-Yosef
(eds.): Seasonality and Sedentism: Archaeological Perspectives from Old and New World
Sites, 165180. Peabody Museum Bulletin 6,
Cambridge: Peabody Museum of Archaeology
and Ethnology.
Oyuela-Caycedo, AugustoRene M. Bonzani
2005 San Jacinto 1: A Historical Ecological Approach to an Archaic Site in Colombia. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
Pacheco Torres, Victor R.Alfredo Altamirano Enciso
Emma Guerra Porras
1986 The Osteology of South American Camelids.
Archaeological Research Tools, Vol. 3, Los Angeles: Institute of Archaeology UCLA.
Pardo, Luis A.
1957 Historia y arqueologa del Cuzco Tomo II.
Cuzco.
Prssinen, Martti
2002 Confederaciones interprovinciales y grandes
seores intertnicos en el Tawantinsuyu.
Boletn de Arqueologa 6: 2341.
2005 Caquiaviri y la provincia Pacasa: Desde el Alto-Formativo hasta la conquista Espaola (1
1533). La Paz: Producciones CIMA.

REFERENCES

Prssinen, MarttiAri Siiriinen


1997 Inka-Style Ceramics and Their Chronological Relationship to the Inka Expansion in the
Southern Lake Titicaca Area (Bolivia). Latin
American Antiquity 8 (3): 255271.
2003 Andes Orientales y Amazonia Occidental. Ensayos entre la historia y la arqueologa de Bolivia, Brasil y Per. La Paz: Producciones CIMA.
Pearsall, Deborah Marie
1980 Pachamachay Ethnobotanical Report: Plant
Utilization at a Hunting Base Camp. In John
W. Rick (ed.): Prehistoric Hunters of the High
Andes, 191231. New York: Academic Press.
1983 Evaluating the stability of subsistence strategies by use of paleoethnobotanical data. Journal of Ethnobiology 3 (2): 121137.
1992 The Origins of Plant Cultivation in South
America. In C. Wesley CowanPatty Jo Watson (eds.): The Origins of Agriculture, 173
205. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution
Press.
2000 Paleoethnobotany: A Handbook of Procedures.
Second edition. New York: Academic Press,
Inc.
2003 Plant Food Resources of the Ecuadorian Formative: An Overview and Comparison to the
Central Andes. In J. Scott RaymondRichard
L. Burger (eds.): Archaeology of Formative
Ecuador, 213257. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection.
2008 Plant Domestication and the Shift to Agriculture in the Andes. In Helaine Silverman
William H. Isbell (eds.): Handbook of South
American Archaeology, 105120. New York:
Springer.
Perez-Arbelaez, Enrique
1978 Plantas Utiles de Colombia. Bogot: Litografa
Arco.
Prez Arias, Maribel
2005 Informe de anlisis de la coleccin arqueofaunstica de Huari 2005. Informe interno presentado al Instituto de Investigaciones Antropolgicas y Arqueolgicas. La Paz: Universidad
Mayor de San Andrs.
Petzsch, Hans
1966 Urnia llatvilg. Emlsk [Urania Animal
World. Mammals]. Budapest: Gondolat Kiad.
Phillips, Garry W.Keith W. Marlow
1976 Automatic Analysis of Gamma-Ray Spectra
from Germanium Detectors. Nuclear Instruments and Methods 137: 525536.
Pickersgill, Barbara
1969 The Archaeological Record of Chili Peppers
(Capsicum spp.) and the Sequence of Plant Domestication in Peru. American Antiquity 34:
5461.

Pintr, Farkas
2005 Provenance study of the Early Iron Age
Knobbed ware in Troia, NW Turkey and the Balkans. Petrographic and geochemical evidence.
Ph.D. Dissertation, Tbingen: Eberhard-KarlsUniversitt.
Piperno, Dolores R.Deborah M. Pearsall
1998 The Origins of Agriculture in the Lowland Tropics. San Diego: Academic Press.
Planella, Mara TeresaBlanca Tagle A.
2004 Inicios de Presencia de Cultgenos en la Zona
Central de Chile, Perodos Arcaico y Agroalfarero Temprano. Chungar, Vol. Especial:
387399.
Platt, Tristan
1986 Mirrors and Maize: The Concept of Yanantin among the Macha of Bolivia. In John V.
MurraNathan WachtelJacques Revel (eds.):
Anthropological History of Andean Polities,
228259. Paris, Cambridge, New York, New
Rochelle, Melbourne, Sidney, London: Cambridge University Press & Maison des Sciences
de lHomme.
Platt, TristanThrse Bouysse-CassagneOlivia Harris
2006 Qaraqara-Charka Mallku, Inka y Rey en la
provincia de Charcas (siglos XV-XVIII). Lima,
La Paz: Instituto Francs de Estudios Andinos
(IFEA), University of St. Andrews, Fundacin
Cultural del Banco Central de Bolivia.
Portugal Ortz, Max
1988 Excavaciones arqueolgicas en Titimani (II).
Arqueologa Boliviana (La Paz) 3: 5158.
Pozorski, Sheila
1983 Changing Subsistence Priorities and Early Settlement Patterns on the North Coast of Peru.
Journal of Ethnobiology 3: 1538.
Programa Qhapaq an
n.d. Informe por cuencas hidrogrficas del registro
de tramos y sitios campaas 2003 2004. Lima:
Instituto Nacional de Cultura.
Raffino, Rodolfo
2000 El Shincal de Quimivil. Catamarca: Ediciones
Sarquis.
Ramrez Lozano, Roque G.Miguel Mellado
1996 Current developments in the management of
small ruminant genetic resources: The American Continent. Proceedings of the IGA/FAO
Round Table on the Global Management of
Small Ruminant Genetic Resources, 6874.
Ravines, RoggerFernando Villinger, eds.
1989 La cermica tradicional del Per. Lima: Editorial los Pinos.
Redwood, Steward D.
1987 The Soledad Caldera, Bolivia: A Miocene caldera with associated epithermal

175

Paria la Viexa

Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn mineralization. Geological


Society of America Bulletin 99 (3): 395404.
Redwood, Steward D.R. Mitchell McIntyre
1989 K-Ar dating of Miocene magmatism and related epithermal mineralization of the northeastern Altiplano of Bolivia. Economic Geology 84: 618630.
Reimer, Paula J.Mike G. L. BaillieEdouard Bard
Alex BaylissJ. Warren BeckChanda J. H. BertrandPaul G. BlackwellCaitlin E. BuckGeorge S.
BurrKirsten B. CutlerPaul E. DamonR. Lawrence
EdwardsRichard G. FairbanksMichael Friedrich
Thomas P. GuildersonAlan G. HoggKonrad A.
HughenBernd KromerGerry McCormacSturt ManningChristopher Bronk RamseyRon W. ReimerSabine RemmeleJohn R. SouthonMinze StuiverSahra
TalamoF. W. TaylorJohannes van der PlichtConstanze E. Weyhenmeyer
2004 IntCal04 terrestrial radiocarbon age calibration, 0-26 cal kyr BP. Radiocarbon 46: 1029
1058.
Renvoize, Stephen A.
1998 Graminaes de Bolivia. London: Royal Botanical Gardens, KEW.
Rvay, Zsolt
2006 Calculation of uncertainties in prompt gamma
activation analysis. Nuclear Instruments and
Methods A 564: 688697.
2009 Determining Elemental Composition Using
Prompt Gamma Activation Analysis. Analytical Chemistry 81: 68516859, DOI:10.1021/
ac9011705.
Rvay, ZsoltTams Belgya
2004 Principles of PGAA method. In Gbor L.
Molnr (ed.): Handbook of Prompt Gamma
Activation Analysis with Neutron Beams, 130.
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Rvay, ZsoltTams BelgyaPter Pl EmberGbor L.
Molnr
2001a Recent Developments In Hypermet-PC.
Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 248: 401405.
Rvay, ZsoltTams BelgyaGbor L. Molnr
2005 Application of Hypermet-PC in PGAA. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry
265: 261265.
Rvay, ZsoltTams BelgyaLszl Szentmiklsi
Zoltn Kis
2008 Recent developments in prompt gamma activation analysis in Budapest. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 278: 643646.
Rvay, ZsoltRichard B. FirestoneTams BelgyaGbor L. Molnr
2004 Catalog and Atlas of Prompt Gamma Rays.
In Gbor L. Molnr (ed.): Handbook of Prompt
Gamma Activation Analysis with Neutron
176

Beams, 173364. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic


Publishers.
Rvay, ZsoltGbor L. Molnr
2003 Standardisation of the prompt gamma activation analysis method. Radiochimica Acta 91:
361369.
Rvay, ZsoltGbor L. MolnrTams BelgyaZsolt
KasztovszkyRichard B. Firestone
2000 A New Gamma-Ray Spectrum Catalog for
PGAA. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 244: 383389.
Rvay, ZsoltGbor L. MolnrTams BelgyaZsolt
KasztovszkyRichard B. Firestone
2001b A New -Ray Spectrum Catalog And Library
For PGAA. Journal of Radioanalytical and
Nuclear Chemistry 248: 395399.
Rocas, Anbal Niembro
1989 Semillas de Plantas Leosas: Morfologa Comparada. Mexico: Limusa Noriega Editores.
Romero Guevara, lvaro Luis
2002 Cermica domstica del Valle de Lluta: cultura
local y redes de interaccin inka. Chungar 34
(2): 191213.
Rossen, Jack
1999 The Flote-Tech Flotation Machine: Messiah
or Mixed Blessing? American Antiquity 64:
370372.
Rossen, JackMara Teresa PlanellaRubn Stehberg
2010 Archaeobotany of Cerro del Inga, Chile, at the
Southern Inka Frontier. In Michael A. MalpassSonia Alconini (eds.): Distant Provinces
in the Inka Empire: Toward a Deeper Understanding of Inka Imperialism, 1443. Iowa
City: University of Iowa Press.
Rowe, John H.
1944 An Introduction to the Archaeology of Cuzco.
Papers of the Peabody Museum of American
Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. XXVII No. 2,
Cambridge, Massachusets: Harvard University.
1946 Inca Culture at the Time of the Spanish Conquest. In Julien Steward (ed.): Handbook
of South American Indians, Vol. 2, 183330.
Washington D.C.: Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 143.
Rye, Owen S.
1981 Pottery technology Principles and reconstruction. Washington D.C.: Taraxacum Press.
Salazar, DiegoJos BerenguerGabriela Vega
2013 Paisajes minero-metalrgicos incaicos en Atacama y el altiplano sur de Tarapac (Norte de
Chile). Chungar 45 (1): 83103.
Salazar, DiegoCarolina Jimnez C.Paulina Corrales E.
2001 Minera y metalurgia: del cosmos a la tierra, de
la tierra al Inka. In Carlos Aldunate del Solar
Luis Cornejo (eds.): Tras la Huella del Inka en

REFERENCES

Chile, 6170. Santiago: Museo Chileno de Arte


Precolombino.
Salomon, Frank
1986 Native Lords of Quito in the Age of the Incas.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Snchez, MarcoDaniel QuirozMauricio Massone
2004 Domesticacin de Plantas y Animales en la
Araucana: Datos, Metodologas y Problemas.
Chungur Vol. Especial: 365372.
Sanchez Canedo, Walter
2008 Inkas, flecheros y mitmaqkuna Cambio social y paisajes culturales en los Valles y en los
Yungas de Inkachaca/Paract y Tablas Montes
(Cochabamba-Bolivia, siglos XV-XVI). Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet.
Santoro, CalgeroVernica I. WillimasDaniela
Valenzuelalvaro RomeroVivien G. Standen
2010 An Archaeological Perspective on the Inka
Provincial Administration of the South-Central
Andes. Distant Provinces in the Inka Empire.
In Michel A. MalpassSonja Alconini (eds.):
Toward a Deeper Understanding of Inka Imperialism, 4474. Iowa City: University of Iowa
Press.
Scattolin, Cristina M.Vernica Williams
1992 Actividades minero-metalrgicas prehispnicas en el Noroeste Argentino. Nuevas evidencias y su significacin. Bulletin de lInstitut
franais dtudes andines 21 (1): 5988.
Schjellerup, Inge
2005 Incas y espaoles en la conquista de los chachapoya. Lima: Pontificia Universidad Catlica
del Per, Instituto Francs de Estudios Andinos.
Schreiber, Katharina J.
1992 Wari imperialism in Middle Horizon Peru. Anthropological Papers No. 87. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology.
Schultes, Richard EvansMara Jos Nemry von Thenen
de Jaramillo-Arango, translators
1998 The Journals of Hiplito Ruiz: Spanish Botanist
in Peru and Chile 17771788. Portland: Timber
Press.
Shimada, Izumi
1994 Pampa Grande and the Mochica Culture. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Shimada, IzumiKen-ichi ShinodaJulie FarnumRobert CorrucciniHirokatsu Watanbe
2004 An Integrated Analysis of Pre-Hispanic Mortuary Practices: A Middle Sicn Case Study.
Current Anthropology 45 (3): 369398.
Sillar, Bill
1997 Reputable pots and disreputable potters: Individual and community choice in present-day
pottery production and exchange in the Andes.
In Christopher G. CumberpatchPaul W. Blinkhorn (eds.): Not so much a pot, more a way of

life: current approaches to artefact analysis in


archaeology, 120. Oxbow Monograph Series
83. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Simon, Mary L.
2000 Regional Variations in Plant Use Strategies
in the Midwest during the Late Woodland. In
Thomas E. EmersonDale L. McElrathAndrew C. Fortier (eds.): Late Woodland Societies: Tradition and Transformation across the
Midcontinent, 3775. Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press.
2009 A Regional and Chronological Synthesis of
Archaic Period Plant Use in the Midcontinent.
In Thomas E. EmersonDale L. McElrathAndrew C. Fortier (eds.): Archaic Societies: Diversity and Complexity across the Midcontinent,
81114. Albany: SUNY Press.
Smalley, JohnMichael Blake
2003 Sweet beginnings: Stalk sugar and the domestication of maize. Current Anthropology 44:
675703.
Smith, Bruce D.
1984 Chenopodium as a prehistoric domesticate in
Eastern North America: evidence from Russell
Cave, Alabama. Science 226: 165168.
1992 Rivers of Change: Essays on Early Agriculture
in Eastern North America. Washington D.C.:
Smithsonian Institution Press.
1997 The Initial Domestication of Cucurbita pepo
in the Americas 10,000 Years Ago. Science 276
(5314): 932934.
Smith, C. Earle, Jr.
1986 Preceramic Plant Remains from Guil Naquitz. In Kent V. Flannery (ed.) Guil Naquitz:
Archaic Foraging and Early Agriculture in
Oaxaca, Mexico, 265279. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
Smith, Michael E.
2001 The Aztec empire and the Mesoamerican
world system In Susan E. AlcockTerence N.
DAltroyKatheleen D. MorrisonCarla Sinopoli (eds.): Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History, 128154. New York: Cambridge University Press.
2004 The Archaeology of Ancient State Economies. Annual Review of Anthropology 33: 73
102.
Smith, Michael E.Hirth, Kenneth. G.
1988 The Development of Prehispanic Cotton-Spinning Technology in Western Morelos, Mexico.
Journal of Field Archaeology 15 (3): 349358.
Snead, James E.
1992 Imperial Infrastructure and the Inka State
Storage System. In Terry Y. LeVine (ed.): Inka
Storage System, 62106. Norman: University
of Oklahoma Press.
177

Paria la Viexa

Spurling, Geoffrey
1992 The Organization of Craft Production in the
Inka State: The Potters and Weavers of Milliraya. Ph.D. Dissertation, Cornell University.
Staller, JohnRobert TykotBruce Benz, eds.
2006 Histories of Maize: Multidisciplinary Approaches to the Prehistory, Linguistics, Biogeography, Domestication, and Evolution of
Maize. New York: Academic Press.
Stanish, Charles
1997 Nonmarket Imperialism in the Prehispanic
Americas: The Inka Occupation of the Titicaca
Basin. Latin American Antiquity 8 (3): 118.
2001 Regional Research on the Inca. Journal of Archaeological Research 9 (3): 213241.
2003 Ancient Titicaca: The Evolution of Complex
Society in Southern Peru and Northern Bolivia.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Stanish, CharlesAmanda B. Cohen
2005 Introduction to Advances in Titicaca Basin
Archaeology-1. In Charles StanishAmanda
B. CohenMark S. Aldenderfer (eds.): Advances in Titicaca Basin Archaeology-1, 111.
Los Angeles: University of California.
Stanish, CharlesAmanda B. CohenMark S. Aldenderfer, eds.
2005 Advances in Titicaca Basin Archaeology-1. Los
Angeles: University of California.
Stanish, CharlesEdmundo de la Vega M.Lee Hyde
SteadmanKirk Lawrence FryeCeclia Chvez J.Luperio OnofreMatthew Seddon
1997 Archaeological Survey in the Juli-Desaguadero
Area, Lake Titicaca Basin, Peru. Fieldiana Anthropology New Series No. 29. Chicago: Field
Museum of Natural History.
Stuiver, MinzeHenry A. Polach
1977 Discussion: reporting of 14C data. Radiocarbon 19(3): 35563.
Stuiver, MinzePaula J. Reimer
1993 Extended (super 14) C data base and revised
CALIB 3.0 (super 14) C age calibration program. Radiocarbon 35: 215230.
Szilgyi, VeronikaJnos GyarmatiMria TthHeinrich TaubaldMrta BallaZsolt KasztovszkyGyrgy
Szakmny
2011 Petro-mineralogy and geochemistry as tools of
provenance analysis on archaeological pottery:
Study of Inka Period ceramics from Paria, Bolivia. Journal of South American Earth Sciences
36: 117.
Szilgyi, VeronikaGyrgy Szakmny
2009 Comparison of volcaniclastic-tempered Inca
Imperial ceramics from Paria, Bolivia with potential sources. In Patrick Sean Quinn (ed.):
Interpreting Silent Artefacts: Petrographic

178

Approaches to Archaeological Ceramics, 211


225. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Teichert, Manfred
1975 Osteologische Untersuchungen zur Berechnung der Widerristhhe bei Schafen. In Anneke T. Clason (ed.): Archeozoological studies,
5169. Amsterdam, New York: North Holland
and American Elsevier.
Thompson, Gillian B.
1994 Wood charcoals from tropical sites: a contribution to methodology and interpretation. In
Jon G. Hather (ed.): Tropical Archaeobotany:
Applications and New Developments, 933.
New York: Routledge.
Thompson, Lonnie G.Ellen Mosely-Thompson
1987 Evidence of Abrupt Climatic Change During
the Last 1500 Years Recorded in Ice Cores from
the Tropical Quelccaya Ice Cap. In Wolfgang
Helmut BergerLaurent Labeyrie (eds.): Abrupt
Climate Change: Evidence and Implications,
99110. New York: D. Reidel.
Thompson, Lonnie G.Ellen Mosely-ThompsonJohn F.
BolzanBruce R. Koci
1985 A 1500-year Record of Tropical Precipitation
in Ice Cores from the Quelccaya Ice Cap, Peru.
Science 229: 971973.
Tichit, MurielDidier Genin
1997 Factors affecting herd structure in a mixed camelid-sheep pastoral system in the arid Puna
of Bolivia. Journal of Arid Environments 36:
167180.
Torero, Alfredo
1987 Lenguas y pueblos altiplnicos en torno al Siglo XVI. Revista Andina 5 (2): 329405.
Towle, Margaret A.
1961 The Ethnobotany of Pre-Columbian Peru. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology 30.
New York: Wenner-Grenn Foundation for Anthropological Research.
Trimborn, Hermann
1967 Das verwunschene Dorf in Carangas. Archologische Studien in den Kordilleren Boliviens
Baessler Archiv, Beitrge zur Vlkerkunde neue
Folge 5: 5262.
Trimborn, HermannOtto KleemannKarl J. Narr
Wolfgang Wrster
1975 Investigaciones Arqueolgicas en los Valles del
Caplina y Sama (Dep. Tacna, Per). Studia Instituti Anthropos Vol. 25. Bonn: Anthropos-Institut.
Tripcevich, Nicolas
2008 Llama Caravan Transport: A study of mobility
with a contemporary Andean salt caravan. 73th
Annual Meeting of the Society for American
Archaeology, Vancouver, B.C., Canada. http://
works.bepress.com/tripcevich/7

REFERENCES

Tschopik, Marion H.
1946 Some Notes on the Archaeology of the Department of Puno, Peru. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology
Vol. 27, No. 3.
Uerpmann, Hans-Peter
1973 Animal bone finds and economic archaeology. World Archaeology 4 (3): 307322.
Ugent, DonaldCarlos M. Ochoa
2006 La Etnobotnica del Per; Desde la Prehistoria al Presente. Lima: Consejo Nacional de
Ciencia, Tecnologa e Innovacin TecnolgicaCONCYTEC.
Urquidi, Jos Macedonio
1949 El origen de la Noble Villa de Oropesa. Cochabamba: H. Municipalidad de Cochabamba.
Valcarcel, Luis E.
1934a Sajsawaman redescubierto. Revista del Museo Nacional III 12: 12, 336.
1934b Los trabajos arqueolgicos del Cusco. Revista del Museo Nacional III 13: 211223.
1935 Trabajos arqueolgicos en el Dep. del Cusco.
Revista del Museo Nacional IV 1: 636, 180
233.
Valdez, Lidio M.Ernesto J.Valdez
2000 Las sistemas de almacenamiento inka de Tinyaq, Ayacucho Per. Bulletin de lInstitut franais dtudes andines 29 (1): 1327.
Valera Guarda, Varinia
2002 Enseanzas de alfareros toconceos: tradicin
y tecnologa en la cermica. Chungar 34:
225252.
Van Buren, MaryAna Mara Presta
2010 The Organization of Inka Silver Production in
Porco, Bolivia. In Michael A. MalpassSonia
Alconini (eds.): Distant Provinces in the Inka
Empire. Toward a Deeper Understanding of
Inka Imperialism, 173192. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
Velde, BruceIsabelle C. Druc
1999a Prehistoric Peru. In Bruce VeldeIsabelle C.
Druc (eds.): Archaeological Ceramic Materials Origin and Utilization, 225237. Berlin:
Springer.
1999b Modern Ceramic Production in the Andes. In
Bruce VeldeIsabelle C. Druc (eds.): Archaeological Ceramic Materials Origin and Utilization, 237247 . Berlin: Springer.
Villaras Robles, Juan J. R.tala de Mamn
1998 El encomendero Polo de Ondegardo y los mitimaes del valle de Cochabamba los interrogatorios contra los indios de Paria y Tapacar.
Anuario de estudios americanos 55 (2): 631
651.

Voltaire
1978 [1759] Candide. Budapest: Eurpa Knyvkiad.
Wachtel, Nathan
1982 The Mitimaes of the Cochabamba Valley:
The Colonization Policy of Huayna Capac. In
George A. CollierRenato I. RosaldoJohn D.
Wirth (eds.): The Inca and Aztec States 1400
1800, 199235. New York: Academic Press.
Wagner, Gail
1986 The Corn and Cultivated Beans of the Fort Ancient Indians. The Missouri Archaeologist 47:
107135.
Wagner, UrsulaS.V. BrandisBenjamin MarticorenaR.
Salazar, R.R. SchwabeJosef RiedererFritz E. Wagner
1989 Mssbauer studies of ceramics from the Inca
Period. In Yiannis Maniatis: Archaeometry:
Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Archaeometry, 159168. Amsterdam:
Elsevier.
Wallerstein, Immanuel
1974 The Modern World-System, Vol. 1. New York:
Academic Press.
Wheeler, Jane C.
1991 Origen, evolucin y status actual. In Sal Fernndez Baca (ed.) Avances y perspectivas del
conocimiento de los camlidos Sudamericanos,
1148. Santiago de Chile: FAO.
Wheeler, Jane C.Anges J. F. RusselHilary Redden
1995 Llamas and alpacas: pre-conquest breeds and
post-conquest hybrids. Journal of Archaeological Science 22: 833840.
Wheeler Pires-Ferreira, JaneEdgardo Pires-Ferreira
Peter Kaulicke
1976 Preceramic animal utilization in the central Peruvian Andes. Science 29 October, 194: 483
490.
Whitehead, William T.
1999 Paleoethnobotanical Evidence. In Christine
A. Hastorf (ed.): Early Settlement at Chiripa,
Bolivia, 95103. Contributions of the Archaeological Research Facility 57. Berkeley: Archaeological Research Facility.
Wing, Elizabeth
1972 Animal remains. In Seiichi IzumiKazuo
Terada (eds.): Andes 4. Excavations at Kotosh,
Per, 327353. Tokyo: University of Tokyo
Press.
Winterhalder, BruceRobert LarsenR. Brooke Thomas
1974 Dung as an essential resource in the highland
Peruvian community. Human Ecology 2 (2):
89104.
Wymer, Dee Anne
1992 Trends and Disparities: The Woodland Paleoethnobotanical Record of the Mid-Ohio Valley.

179

Paria la Viexa

In Mark F. Seeman (ed.): Cultural Variability


in Context: Woodland Settlements of the MidOhio Valley, 6576. MCJA Special Paper No. 7.
Kent: The Kent State University Press.
Young, James A.Cheryl G. Young
1992 Seeds of Woody Plants in North America. Portland: Dioscorides Press.

Zeballos Montes de Oca, MnicaEmilia Garca E.


Stephan G. Beck
2003 Contribucin al Conocimiento de la Flora del
Departamento de Oruro. La Paz: Herbario Nacional de Bolivia. Artes Grficas Latina.

Abbreviations
A.H.C. Archivo Histrico de Cochabamba
A.G.I. Archivo General de Indias (Sevilla)
A.J.P. Archivo Judicial de Poop (Bolivia)

180

MH Middle Horizon
LIP Late Intermediate Period
LH Late Horizon

APPENDICES
APPENDIX TO CHAPTER III
III.1 Sites identied by the Paria Archaeological Project
Site number

Latitude

Longitude

Surface remains and features

Ce 1

-174850

-665930

Remains of stone and adobe structures and round storehouses

Ce 2

-174823.07

-665809.50

Ce 3

-174828.24

-665825.70

Ce 4

-174815.89

-665931.80

Ce 5

-174852.15

-665837.86

Ce 6

-1748

-6658

Ce 7

-174847.81

-665953.86

Ce 8

-174834.55

-665954.05

Ce 9

-174829.07

-665836.20

Ce 10

-174854.56

-665513.61

Ce 11

-174846.88

-665908.07

Ce 12

-174922.27

-665952.00

Ce 13

-174924.07

-665945.71

Ce 14

-174847

-670106

Ce 15

-174856.14

-670099.87

Ce 16

-174912.12

-670059.10

Ce 17

-174917.69

-670048.50

Ce 18

-174901

-670219

Ce 19

-174822

-6747

Ce 20

-174821.75

-670300.59

Ce 21

-174900.87

-665355.96

Stone foundations, remains of two tapia structures

Ce 22

-174936.22

-665303.18

Remains of a circular structure, burnt clay fragments

Ce 23

-174954.67

-665243.40

Ce 24

-174920.87

-665301.97

Ce 25

-175040.75

-665143.99

Ce 26

-175046.05

-665147.18

Ce 27

-175001.06

-665231.67

Stone foundations

Ce 28

-174918.42

-665917.51

Foundations and remains of structures

Ce 29

-174913.67

-665900.87

Ce 30

-174920.00

-665815.00

Three mounds, probably remains of structures

Tapia structures, foundations of stone structures, four chullpas

181

Paria la Viexa

Site number

182

Latitude

Longitude

Surface remains and features

Ce 31

-174913

-665755

Ce 32

-174919.48

-665733.85

Ce 33

-174913.42

-665811.34

Remains of a chullpa

Ce 34

-174858

-665823

Foundations of round and rectangular storehouses

Ce 35

-174808

-665828

Ce 36

-174900.14

-665826.51

Ce 37

-174857.11

-665833.53

Ce 38

-174903.96

-665843.75

Ce 39

-174912.86

-665644.33

Ce 40

-174904.73

-665707.81

Ce 41

-174847

-665750

Ce 42

-174925.65

-665858.34

Ce 43

-174931.51

-665842.07

Ce 44

-174959.00

-665709.21

Ce 45

-174949.89

-665911.41

Ce 46

-174936.84

-665930.56

Ce 47

-175013.50

-665840.90

Burnt floor of an adobe structure

Ce 48

-17 49 25,48

-66 59 04,24

Foundations of five stone structures

Ce 49

-17 48 23,44

-67 00 11,54

Ce 50

174916.36

-665920.00

Ce 51

-174935

-665955

Ce 52

-174939.38

-670024.36

Ce 53

-174932.55

-670038

Ce 54

-174925

-670140

Burnt clay fragments

Ce 55

-174816.32

-670114.13

Ruins of tapia structures

Ce 56

-174829.12

-670003.54

Pre-Hispanic mine

Ce 57

-174742.16

-670119.43

Ce 58

-174743.34

-670057.01

Ce 59

-174740

-670049.10

Ce 60

-174720.97

-665836.97

Ce 61

-174659.00

-665943.57

Ce 62

-174658.43

-665954.40

Ce 63

-174700

-670120

Ce 64

-174655.67

-665997.61

Ce 65

-174639.39

-665934.15

Foundations of round and rectangular storehouses and buildings

Remains of a tapia structure

APPENDICES

Site number

Latitude

Longitude

Surface remains and features

Ce 66

-174636.99

-665922.95

Ce 67

-174623.10

-665857.93

Ce 68

-174608.16

-665837.85

Ce 69

-174515.46

-665746.52

Ce 70

-174453.32

-665729.27

Ce 71

-174446.94

-665720.01

Ce 72

-174440

-665710

Chullpas

Ce 73

-174453.68

-665717.59

Remains of stone and adobe structures

Ce 74

-174658.56

-665954.59

Ce 75

-174625.73

-665748.71

Ce 76

-174558.35

-665726.71

Ce 77

-174622.84

-670129.21

Ce 78

-174614.16

-670105.37

Ce 79

-174559.81

-670032.13

Ce 80

-174602.91

-670051.00

Ce 81

-174608.68

-670128.00

Ce 82

-174556.96

-670105.70

Ce 83

-174550.24

-670058.14

Ce 84

-174537.14

-665954.34

Ce 85

-174457.50

-665845.32

Remains of a rectangular stone and tapia structure

Ce 86

-174441.62

-665858.37

Foundations of rectangular stone structures

Ce 87

-174450.14

-665916.91

Ce 88

-174422.53

-665815.60

Ce 89

-174721.74

-665823.79

Ce 90

-174711.44

-665755.99

Ce 91

-174623.54

-665716.69

Ce 92

-174710.93

-665414.31

Ce 93

-174648.30

-665340.80

Ce 94

-174652.20

-665334.27

Ce 95

-174647.40

-665359.15

Ce 96

-175032.36

-665903.33

Ce 97

-175101.41

-665826.94

Ce 98

-175114.26

-665828.46

Ce 99

-175054.94

-665820.10

Ce 100

-174817.92

-670242.90

Remains of seven corrals erected from quartz stones

Remains of stone foundations

Remains of a rectangular stone structure

Modified rocks and three circular stone structures

183

Paria la Viexa

Site number

Latitude

Longitude

Surface remains and features

Ce 101

-174752.09

-670253.94

Ce 102

-174734.87

-670250.86

Ce 103

-174612.39

-670250.86

Ce 104

-174735.08

-670211.26

Ce 105

-174649.10

-670142.69

Ce 106

-174736.38

-670151.84

Ce 107

-174801.11

-670129.92

Ce 108

-174841.98

-670146.51

Ce 109

-174844.76

-670136.87

Ce 110

-174916.72

-665322.18

Ce 111

-174936.39

-665401.71

Ce 112

-174836.39

-665423.65

Ce 113

-174850.35

-665424.94

Ce 114

-174602.17

-665632.77

Adobe structures

Remains and foundations of five stone structures

APPENDIX TO CHAPTER V
V.1 Geological samples collected in the Paria Basin
Sample

Site

Type of site

Petrographic denition

Analyses

2/1

Jacha Uma Valley

River bed

Sand

xrd, xrf

6/8

Jacha Uma Valley

Primary (bedrock) outcrop

Siltstone

xrd, xrf

7/1

Jacha Uma Valley

River bed

Fine sand

pm, xrd, xrf

SED-01

Jacha Uma Valley

River bed

Fine sand

pm, xrd, pgaa, inaa

3/1

Wila Jakko Valley

Primary (bedrock) outcrop

Claystone

pm, xrd

3/2/a

Wila Jakko Valley

Primary (bedrock) outcrop

Claystone

pm, xrd, xrf

3/2/b

Wila Jakko Valley

Primary (bedrock) outcrop

Sandstone

pm, xrd, xrf

5/1

Paria Basin

Elevated river terrace

Silty medium sand

pm, xrd

5/2

Paria Basin

Elevated river terrace

Pebbly silty-sandy clay

pm, xrd, xrf

5/3

Paria Basin

Elevated river terrace

Silt-fine sand

pm, xrd, xrf

5/4

Paria Basin

Intermittent river bed (Jacha Uta


Mayu)

Sand-pebble

xrd, xrf

5/5

Paria Basin

Intermittent river wall (3 fingered


Silt-fine sand
stream)

pm, xrd, xrf

5/6

Paria Basin

Intermittent river bed (3 fingered


Fine-medium sand
stream)

pm, xrd

5/7

Paria Basin

Intermittent river wall (3 fingered


Silty fine sand
stream)

pm, xrd, xrf

184

APPENDICES

Sample

Site

Type of site

Petrographic denition

Analyses

5/8

Paria Basin

Intermittent river bed (3 fingered


Sandy silt
stream)

pm, xrf

SED-02

Paria Basin

Elevated river terrace (close to site


Fine sand
Ce 1)

pm, xrd, pgaa, inaa

SED-03

Paria Basin

Elevated river terrace (Anocariri)

Fine sand

pm, xrd, pgaa, inaa

SED-04

Paria Basin

Elevated river terrace (Anocariri)

Fine sand

pm, xrd, pgaa, inaa

CLAY-01 Edge of the altiplano

Brick clay mine

Silty clay

xrd, xrf

CLAY-02 Edge of the altiplano

Brick clay mine

Silty clay

xrd, xrf

CLAY-03 Edge of the altiplano

Brick clay mine

Silty clay

xrd, xrf

CLAY-04 Edge of the altiplano

Brick clay mine

Silty clay

xrd, xrf

6/4

Morococala Volcanic
Field

Primary (bedrock) outcrop

Dacitic tuff

pm, xrd, xrf

6/5

Morococala Volcanic
Field

Primary (bedrock) outcrop

Dacitic tuff

pm, xrd, xrf

7/2

Iruma Valley

Elevated river terrace

Pebbly silt-coarse sand

pm, xrf

7/3

Iruma Valley

Primary (bedrock) outcrop

Siltstone

xrd, xrf

7/4

Lateral valley of Iruma Canyon wall

Silt

pm, xrd

7/5

Lateral valley of Iruma Canyon wall

Silt-fine sand

pm, xrd, xrf

7/6

Lateral valley of Iruma Canyon wall

Clay

xrd, xrf

7/7

Lateral valley of Iruma Canyon wall

Clay

pm, xrd

7/8

Lateral valley of Iruma Canyon bed

Claystone-siltstone

xrd

8/1

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Sand

pm, xrd, xrf

8/2/A

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacitic tuff

pm

8/2/B

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacitic tuff

pm, xrd, xrf

8/2/D

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacitic tuff

xrd, xrf

8/3

Soledad Caldera

Primary (bedrock) outcrop

Dacitic tuff

pm, xrd, xrf

8/5/B

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacitic tuff

xrd, xrf

8/5/C

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacitic tuff

pm

8/5/D

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacitic tuff

pm

8/6/A

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacite

pm, xrf

8/6/B

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacite

pm, xrf

8/6/C

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacitic tuff

pm, xrd, xrf

8/6/D

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacite

xrd, xrf

8/6/E

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacitic tuff

pm

8/6/F

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacitic tuff

pm

8/6/G

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacitic tuff

pm, xrd, xrf

8/6/H

Soledad Caldera

Eroded sediment

Dacite

pm, xrf
185

Paria la Viexa

V.2 Average petrographic, mineralogical and geochemical characteristics of petrographic subgroup I/A

186

APPENDICES

V.3 Average petrographic, mineralogical and geochemical characteristics of petrographic subgroup I/B

187

Paria la Viexa

V.4 Average petrographic, mineralogical and geochemical characteristics of petrographic subgroup I/C

188

APPENDICES

V.5 Average petrographic, mineralogical and geochemical characteristics of petrographic subgroup I/D

189

Paria la Viexa

V.6 Average petrographic, mineralogical and geochemical characteristics of petrographic group II

190

APPENDICES

V.7 Average petrographic, mineralogical and geochemical characteristics of petrographic group III

191

Paria la Viexa

Appendices

V.8 Chemical composition of the analyzed samples


Sample

Type

SiO2 TiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 MnO MgO CaO Na2O K2O P2O5

LOI
(H2O)

Sum
(%)

ppm
Rb

Sr

Ba

Th

Zr

Hf

Nb

Ta

La

Ce

Nd Sm Eu Tb Yb

CERAMICS 

Lu

Sc

Cr

Co

Ni

Zn

n.d.

As

Sb

Cs

Cl

Gd

CERAMICS

P/12.20

I/A/a

64.00 0.85 18.80 6.70

0.08

1.90

1.00

1.29

4.00

n.d.

0.81

99.43

165

n.d.

890 16.4

4.5 n.d. 5.2 n.d. 1.6 n.d. 47

103

38

8.1 1.5 n.d. 3.4 0.36 16.1 n.d. 102 16.4

104 13 22.2 60 117 600

6.8

I.19.8

I/A/a

59.48 0.75 19.45 6.78

0.10

2.54

1.88

1.72

4.55 0.33

2.14

99.96

194

466

918

n.d. 155 n.d. 14.0 n.d. 30

108

51

8.7 1.6 n.d. 2.8 n.d. n.d. 120 56 16.0 44.0 143 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

n.d.

57

I.20.18

I/A/a

61.00 0.82 18.89 6.31

0.10

2.01

4.01

1.86

4.05 0.35

0.79

100.39

136

377

818

n.d.

n.d. 173 n.d. n.d. n.d. 28

39

78

36

4.8 1.2 n.d. 2.5 n.d. n.d. 134 34 16.0 37.0 121 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

I.29.1

I/A/a

60.29 0.83 18.67 6.27

0.09

1.98

4.03

1.82

4.02 0.25

0.79

99.26

132

363

824

n.d.

n.d. 171 n.d. n.d. n.d. 28

39

75

52

5.3 1.2 n.d. 2.5 n.d. n.d. 129 35 15.0 39.0 120 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

PA/4

I/A/b

62.00 0.64 19.40 4.80

0.06

2.20

1.90

2.13

4.80

n.d.

2.15

100.08

216

n.d. 1220 20.1

6.1 n.d. 6.0 n.d. 1.6 n.d. 61

121

50

8.8 1.7 n.d. 2.2 0.32 12.6 n.d. 51 11.2

n.d.

98

13

3.2

42 109 350

6.0

PA/6

I/A/b

62.21 0.73 17.98 4.95

0.05

1.49

2.08

1.93

4.87 0.39

n.d.

96.91

251

400 1132 19.7

5.5 206 5.7 16.2 1.4

122

52

9.3 1.5 n.d. 1.6 0.21 9.8

9.2

n.d.

109 72

2.9

30 118 400

6.0

P/12.17

I/A/b

63.00 0.62 18.70 5.10

0.08

2.00

1.40

2.51

5.20

n.d.

1.40

100.01

228

n.d.

P/34.88

I/A/b

61.04 0.77 18.55 5.13

0.08

1.68

1.74

1.45

4.70 0.29

n.d.

95.75

208

384 1829 19.9

810 19.8

18

60

82

62

4.5 n.d. 3.6 n.d. 1.7 n.d. 45

82

33

5.8 1.1 n.d. 1.7 0.26 12.5 n.d. 65 10.2

n.d.

138 30 30.1 29 143 430

5.0

4.2 208 5.5 17.2 1.5

30

126

74

9.6 1.8 1.2 2.5 0.36 13.8 82

70 12.5

n.d.

83

13

2.5

22 n.d. n.d.

n.d.

68 13.5 15.8

95

21

1.7

12 104 582

6.4

83 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

61

P/92.4

I/A/b

55.45 0.86 22.08 6.40

0.06

2.14

2.72

1.87

3.64 0.19

n.d.

95.73

146

485 1743 23.3

2.4 294 8.2 18.4 1.3

25

69

137

62

9.2 1.9 0.8 1.6 0.22 13.3 97

I.10.24

I/A/b

62.65 0.80 20.22 5.39

0.06

1.85

1.86

1.86

4.04 0.20

1.03

100.16

220

327

n.d. 173 n.d. 19.0 n.d. 23

61

109

41

7.5 1.1 n.d. 2.4 n.d. n.d. 116 64 12.0 42.0

763

n.d.

I.16.24

I/A/b

60.95 0.88 22.38 5.92

0.06

1.85

1.62

1.66

3.83 0.22

0.77

100.36

210

309

850

n.d.

n.d. 178 n.d. 19.0 n.d. 29

57

116

50

8.2 1.2 n.d. 2.7 n.d. n.d. 140 85 15.0 70.0

95 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

I.15.7

I/B/a

67.78 0.59 17.11 4.79

0.08

1.61

1.60

1.93

3.75 0.24

0.76

100.42

169

233

718

n.d.

n.d. 162 n.d. 18.0 n.d. 28

46

94

30

7.2 1.0 n.d. 2.6 n.d. n.d.

85

38 11.0 53.0

77 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

n.d.

n.d. 189 n.d. 18.0 n.d. 28

42

98

57

9.2 1.1 n.d. 2.6 n.d. n.d.

83

43 10.0 35.0 170 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

6.7 254 6.8 15.4 1.3

43

92

35

7.3 1.3 0.9 2.8 0.36 13.5 104 72 11.5

I.20.6

I/B/a

59.64 0.57 17.04 5.19

0.09

1.90

4.15

1.52

5.04 0.26

3.90

99.48

201

200

839

P/34.1

I/B/b

63.36 0.68 17.57 5.29

0.04

1.72

1.26

1.10

4.09 0.15

n.d.

95.46

197

251

868 21.1

29

8.8

n.d.

92 133 9.5

37 n.d. n.d.

n.d.

40 n.d. n.d.

n.d.

86 205 18.8 41 205 295

5.1

P/34.2

I/B/b

62.41 0.68 19.01 5.85

0.04

2.00

0.97

1.08

4.57 0.15

n.d.

96.97

223

236

818 21.6

6.7 205 6.1 14.4 1.4

26

48

101

35

7.8 1.3 1.1 2.8 0.37 15.5 116 88 13.8 20.0 103 154 7.2

P/34.143

I/B/b

61.65 0.67 17.92 5.27

0.04

1.82

1.31

1.00

4.30 0.17

n.d.

94.34

209

238

838 19.9

6.0 221 6.5 15.4 1.5

25

44

93

39

7.0 1.2 0.8 2.3 0.35 14.2 105 74 10.4

I.14.6

I/B/b

64.57 0.68 18.77 5.36

0.04

1.97

1.20

1.21

4.84 0.23

1.19

100.25

220

207

595

n.d.

n.d. 217 n.d. 15.0 n.d. 29

49

104

47

6.5 0.8 n.d. 2.6 n.d. n.d. 111 47 12.0 63.0

87 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

I.15.1

I/B/b

64.11 0.71 19.21 5.54

0.04

2.20

1.29

1.21

4.54 0.18

0.89

100.11

217

242

626

n.d.

n.d. 216 n.d. 17.0 n.d. 25

50

111

40

8.7 1.1 n.d. 2.4 n.d. n.d. 124 51 13.0 49.0

89 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

n.d.

BA/1

I/C/a

58.00 0.97 21.00 7.10

0.19

2.50

2.60

1.86

4.50

n.d.

1.07

99.79

187

n.d. 1600 15.5

3.2 n.d. 4.4 n.d. 1.1 n.d. 43

84

43

7.6 1.5 n.d. 2.7 0.42 22.6 n.d. 118 19.0

n.d.

118 23

8.3

15

154

6.4

P/1.166

I/C/a

57.99 0.76 18.41 6.27

0.11

3.21

3.26

1.93

4.36 0.25

n.d.

96.82

137

580 1257 15.5

3.4 190 5.5 n.d. 0.9

98

52

7.9 1.8 n.d. 2.4 0.32 15.8 111 60 14.8

8.4

124 14

1.4

12 n.d. n.d.

n.d.

27

49

94

P/33.5

I/C/a

59.42 0.97 17.75 6.35

0.10

3.15

2.99

1.85

3.67 0.39

n.d.

96.92

119

628 1152 15.7

3.8 219 5.9 n.d. n.d. 29

51

112

47

8.7 2.1 n.d. 2.6 0.31 16.6 134 118 19.6

1.3

170 10

1.6

18 n.d. n.d.

n.d.

P/48.101

I/C/a

58.75 0.73 19.25 6.31

0.07

2.38

2.08

1.70

4.25 0.20

n.d.

95.93

185

371

4.0 183 4.7 14.0 1.4

49

103

49

8.1 1.8 1.2 2.5 0.35 15.9 110 120 16.5

n.d.

111 16

3.6

32 n.d. n.d.

n.d.

834 15.9

28

I.30.5

I/C/a

59.71 0.78 18.66 6.22

0.14

3.80

3.47

2.20

4.18 0.34

1.07

100.84

138

623 1304 n.d.

n.d. 187 n.d. n.d. n.d. 26

61

119

44

6.9 1.8 n.d. 2.2 n.d. n.d. 126 32 16.0 46.0 123 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

P/1.186

I/C/b

60.36 0.79 18.64 5.97

0.06

1.73

1.86

1.31

4.09 0.34

n.d.

95.37

224

439 1069 16.9

4.5 157 5.0 16.6 1.7

50

98

45

7.4 1.4 n.d. 1.8 0.24 13.0 103 52

6.9

n.d.

123 53

61 n.d. n.d.

n.d.

9.0

39.0

80 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

87

78

6.0

9.2 163 n.d. n.d.

n.d.

6.3

6.4

19

I.16.1

I/C/b

61.35 0.87 20.89 4.29

0.06

1.91

2.60

3.19

3.57 0.44

1.05

100.60

91

1084 1630 n.d.

n.d. 250 n.d. n.d. n.d. 25 108 182

77

9.2 2.9 n.d. 1.9 n.d. n.d.

P/12.13

I/D

63.27 0.73 18.32 5.36

0.10

2.27

3.02

1.13

3.81 0.17

n.d.

98.41

191

483

3.2 212 5.6 14.2 1.2

33

44

38

7.3 1.5 0.9 2.7 0.38 14.0 108 70 13.2 28.9

31

811 15.2

92

92

71

P/42.9

I/D

61.23 0.76 17.62 5.82

0.09

1.88

3.31

1.02

3.72 0.15

n.d.

95.81

178

377

829 14.9

3.3 220 5.8 14.6 1.5

43

93

41

7.3 1.4 1.0 2.7 0.39 14.2 106 79 13.7 13.6

85

P/53.79

II/A

61.09 0.79 20.82 7.04

0.10

2.07

1.16

0.88

4.68

1.27

n.d.

183

n.d.

730 14.6

2.9 n.d. 5.9 n.d. 1.5 n.d. 44

89

38

7.6 1.4 1.0 3.1 0.46 16.6 163 93 16.1

110 23

n.d.

n.d.

3.4

2.0 260 149


43 136

86

I.10.68

II/A

60.06 0.82 21.53 7.45

0.07

2.26

1.70

0.69

4.13 0.25

1.21

100.35

206

142

658

n.d.

n.d. 196 n.d. 21.0 n.d. 40

45

105

51

6.2 0.7 n.d. 3.7 n.d. n.d. 141 82 20.0 89.0 101 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

I.20.14

II/A

57.73 0.75 21.95 8.66

0.06

1.79

1.71

0.75

4.35 0.97

1.28

100.22

197

270

760

n.d.

n.d. 194 n.d. 15.0 n.d. 38

51

103

42

6.7 1.0 n.d. 3.5 n.d. n.d. 144 75 17.0 14.0 407 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

752

n.d.

n.d. 190 n.d. 16.0 n.d. 37

I.20.20

II/A

57.31 0.74 21.73 8.77

0.07

1.79

1.71

0.74

4.23 0.97

2.14

100.50

198

272

PA/1

II/B or C

64.00 0.94 19.00 6.70

0.11

2.00

0.38

1.01

4.70

1.28

100.12

202

n.d. 1100 18.5

n.d.

51

95

36

8.4 1.2 n.d. 3.4 n.d. n.d. 148 73 18.0 22.0 409 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

4.4 n.d. 7.2 n.d. 1.6 n.d. 58

130

48

9.7 1.8 1.2 4.1 0.57 17.8 n.d. 92 17.5

9.0

n.d.

120

1.5

12

91

60

P/1.21

II/C

58.08 0.78 22.03 8.00

0.10

2.46

1.39

0.99

4.64 0.26

n.d.

98.94

215

237

827

n.d.

n.d. 177 n.d. 15.6 n.d. 37

52

112

45

7.2 1.0 n.d. 3.4 n.d. n.d. 137 74 20.0 49.8 133 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

P/53.108

II/B

58.80 0.80 20.65 7.28

0.08

1.97

0.56

0.75

4.17 0.18

n.d.

95.42

199

136

804

n.d.

n.d. 191 n.d. 16.8 n.d. 38

44

92

48

7.1 0.8 n.d. 3.6 n.d. n.d. 129 80 16.8 15.3

n.d.

P/63.7

II/B

58.84 0.75 22.57 7.20

0.10

1.91

0.52

0.77

4.60 0.16

n.d.

97.63

232

142

872 16.1

3.1 209 5.9 18.0 1.5

36

46

95

42

7.8 1.5 1.0 3.0 0.42 17.8 128 87 15.3 54.5 117 26

41.125

II/B

61.48 0.82 21.39 5.93

0.05

1.64

1.62

0.61

4.24 0.25

2.21

100.47

207

187 1255 n.d.

n.d. 221 n.d. 19.0 n.d. 39

37

113

41

6.1 0.8 n.d. 3.5 n.d. n.d. 149 70 14.0 82.0

92 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.


94

6.2

57 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

3.8

46 130

n.d.

I.7.18

II/C

61.16 0.79 22.04 8.02

0.10

1.39

0.78

0.68

3.92 0.14

1.09

100.36

216

138 1237 n.d.

n.d. 224 n.d. 21.0 n.d. 51

45

129

47

9.1 1.0 n.d. 4.6 n.d. n.d. 158 75 21.0 105.0 89 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

I.13.9

II/B

60.57 0.69 19.70 7.07

0.06

2.14

1.52

0.98

3.99 0.51

2.96

100.38

175

196

625

n.d. 207 n.d. 16.0 n.d. 38

48

97

45

6.8 0.9 n.d. 3.4 n.d. n.d. 130 64 18.0 82.0 106 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

PA/5

III

59.00 1.23 29.80 2.50

0.03

0.70

0.34

0.83

4.10

1.49

100.02

189

n.d.

850 24.7

6.6 n.d. 5.4 n.d. 2.4 n.d. 72

159

56 12.4 2.5 1.5 5.1 0.62 25.4 n.d. 138 8.5

n.d.

n.d.

n.d.

n.d. 10

1.6

19 129 n.d.

10.7

Appendix V.8 contd on the next pages

192

193

Paria la Viexa

Sample

Type

SiO2 TiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 MnO MgO CaO Na2O K2O P2O5

LOI
(H2O)

Sum
(%)

ppm
Rb

Sr

Ba

Th

Appendices

Zr

Hf

Nb

Ta

La

Ce

Nd Sm Eu Tb Yb

ADOBES 

Lu

Sc

Cr

Co

Ni

Zn

As

Sb

Cs

Cl

Gd

ADOBES

Field 4/3

adobe

62.07 0.83 16.13 4.92

0.09

1.61

2.55

1.31

3.55 0.19

6.26

99.51

172

205

n.d.

n.d. 203 n.d. 19.2 n.d. 37

41

86

33

6.5 0.9 n.d. 3.4 n.d. n.d. 112 46 12.6 51.9

67 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 4/4

adobe

46.27 0.46 21.82 7.09

0.07

2.24

4.56

0.72

4.18 0.22

11.91

99.56

220

282 2297 n.d.

n.d. 140 n.d. n.d. n.d. 26

34

93

30

4.6 0.9 n.d. 2.4 n.d. n.d. 134 51 13.8 67.8

97 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

612

Field 4/5

adobe

59.78 0.69 18.65 6.16

0.12

1.63

0.89

1.21

3.82 0.20

6.41

99.55

181

211

757

n.d.

n.d. 194 n.d. 13.3 n.d. 33

48

106

39

5.7 0.9 n.d. 3.0 n.d. n.d. 118 49 16.4 58.6

89 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 4/6

adobe

58.20 0.80 19.47 6.12

0.09

1.85

1.53

1.04

4.01 0.22

5.28

98.62

193

179

712

n.d.

n.d. 183 n.d. 16.5 n.d. 34

47

106

38

7.3 0.9 n.d. 3.1 n.d. n.d. 134 62 17.3 49.4

85 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

CLAY-01

brickclay

71.91 0.94 13.24 5.17

0.07

1.14

2.78 0.20

3.17

100.14

129

130

358

n.d.

n.d. 379 n.d. 28.0 n.d. 57

35

91

48

6.7 0.8 n.d. 5.0 n.d. n.d.

54 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

SEDIMENTS
1.02

0.35

SEDIMENTS
93

51 39.0 83.0

CLAY-02

brickclay

54.17 0.92 23.41 8.05

0.12

1.75

0.45

0.50

4.82 0.18

5.94

100.50

239

263

561

n.d.

n.d. 154 n.d. 22.0 n.d. 35

62

124

53

9.2 1.2 n.d. 3.3 n.d. n.d. 157 86 37.0 83.0

80 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

CLAY-03

brickclay

75.14 0.62 11.90 4.53

0.04

1.06

0.90

1.33

2.12 0.11

2.87

100.79

103

197

376

n.d.

n.d. 372 n.d. 19.0 n.d. 37

29

76

28

3.7 0.7 n.d. 3.1 n.d. n.d.

56 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

CLAY-04

brickclay

56.83 0.83 21.05 7.27

0.12

2.11

1.90

0.85

3.66 0.16

5.84

100.77

194

94

566

n.d.

n.d. 154 n.d. 18.0 n.d. 38

36

90

39

7.6 0.8 n.d. 3.5 n.d. n.d. 148 76 19.0 87.0

88 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

SED-01

river sediment

77.00 0.53 10.20 4.20

0.07

0.80

0.91

1.49

2.41

2.42

100.03

77

n.d.

500

7.2

2.2 n.d. 3.6 n.d. 0.9 n.d. 23

49

17

3.5 0.9 0.4 1.3 0.19 6.2 n.d. 30

48

4.2

n.d.

82

40 11.0 88.0
7.8

n.d.

12 18.2 23

61

69

SED-02

river sediment

75.00 0.60 10.60 4.20

0.07

1.40

0.95

1.33

2.52

n.d.

2.97

99.64

95

n.d.

550

9.0

2.8 n.d. 5.3 n.d. 1.0 n.d. 28

59

21

4.4 1.0 0.6 1.7 0.25 7.3 n.d. 40

9.0

n.d.

55

16 14.9 24

93

400

4.9

SED-03

river sediment

88.00 0.34

4.70

2.78

0.32

0.31

0.30

0.44

1.13

n.d.

1.72

100.04

84

n.d.

370

6.7

2.1 n.d. 3.9 n.d. 0.9 n.d. 19

40

14

3.7 0.8 0.6 1.7 0.23 5.4 n.d. 24

7.2

n.d.

61

22

4.6

17

74

95

2.8

7.45

5.2

n.d.

42

34

9.5

13 n.d. n.d.

n.d.

49 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

SED-04

river sediment

70.56 0.35

3.61

0.05

0.52

0.54

1.11

1.83 0.12

n.d.

86.14

92

146

422

5.1

1.5 163 7.0 n.d. 0.6

14

15

31

13

2.5 0.6 0.4 1.5 0.23 4.1

38

21

Field 2/1

river sediment

74.03 0.53 11.99 4.57

0.05

1.04

0.92

1.42

2.62 0.17

2.53

99.87

118

238

575

n.d.

n.d. 200 n.d. n.d. n.d. 24

32

76

21

6.6 1.0 n.d. 2.2 n.d. n.d.

74

38 11.2 60.2

Field 5/2

river sediment

50.62 0.44 21.39 7.13

0.07

2.30

2.82

0.66

4.03 0.20

10.21

99.87

215

276 2175 n.d.

n.d. 167 n.d. n.d. n.d. 25

28

89

33

5.0 0.9 n.d. 2.3 n.d. n.d. 131 54 13.4 77.3 102 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 5/3

river sediment

66.08 0.55 15.09 6.53

0.08

1.25

0.60

0.90

2.57 0.14

5.74

99.53

141

146

n.d. 263 n.d. 14.6 n.d. 32

38

90

34

4.6 0.7 n.d. 2.8 n.d. n.d. 101 55 14.4 72.2

75 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

484

n.d.

Field 5/4

river sediment

70.41 0.57 10.83 9.56

0.10

0.92

0.24

0.57

1.99 0.18

3.87

99.24

100

61

503

n.d.

n.d. 210 n.d. 15.2 n.d. 33

24

69

27

4.6 0.7 n.d. 2.9 n.d. n.d.

91

57 18.5 79.3

90 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 5/5

river sediment

72.85 0.57 12.06 5.22

0.07

1.21

1.03

1.06

2.25 0.12

3.49

99.93

108

185

522

n.d.

n.d. 375 n.d. 17.9 n.d. 36

35

82

36

5.2 0.8 n.d. 2.9 n.d. n.d.

87

42 12.1 83.9

58 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 5/7

river sediment

61.32 0.73 16.58 8.14

0.14

1.29

1.45

0.87

3.18 0.68

4.74

99.11

157

141

520

n.d.

n.d. 230 n.d. 16.8 n.d. 57

67

96

53

8.6 1.0 n.d. 5.2 n.d. n.d. 120 63 17.5 70.3

74 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 5/8

river sediment

76.15 0.60 10.43 5.22

0.06

0.78

0.63

1.04

1.95 0.12

2.69

99.67

89

145

572

n.d.

n.d. 356 n.d. 18.1 n.d. 34

31

71

27

5.3 0.8 n.d. 2.8 n.d. n.d.

52 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

79

38 11.5 77.0

Field 7/1

river sediment

78.24 0.51

9.84

3.68

0.05

0.90

0.97

1.35

2.15 0.16

2.09

99.94

93

233

512

n.d.

n.d. 296 n.d. n.d. n.d. 27

28

71

25

5.8 0.9 n.d. 2.3 n.d. n.d.

62

34

7.3

65.8

34 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 7/2

river sediment

80.68 0.45

7.16

5.82

0.06

0.45

0.68

1.31

1.59 0.14

1.64

99.97

66

204

529

n.d.

n.d. 303 n.d. n.d. n.d. 24

30

71

23

3.9 0.8 n.d. 1.8 n.d. n.d.

65

38

7.2

76.1

39 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

75

27

9.2

48.5

Field 7/5

river sediment

66.12 0.65 16.57 4.63

0.06

1.42

1.30

1.91

3.21 0.16

3.63

99.65

171

289

635

n.d.

n.d. 245 n.d. 19.4 n.d. 30

43

86

40

8.0 1.1 n.d. 2.6 n.d. n.d.

73 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 7/6

river sediment

60.56 0.90 19.77 6.03

0.06

1.72

0.68

1.02

4.01 0.12

4.46

99.31

229

140

667

n.d.

n.d. 191 n.d. 20.0 n.d. 38

44

107

43

7.6 0.8 n.d. 3.6 n.d. n.d. 144 64 40.1 50.5 100 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 3/2a

sedimentary rock 39.43 0.82 16.85 23.31 0.11

2.81 0.10

11.03

98.96

147

64

362

n.d.

n.d. 141 n.d. 17.4 n.d. 39

52

91

38 12.4 1.5 n.d. 3.3 n.d. n.d. 144 116 43.6 206.0 136 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 
2.52

1.44

0.54

SEDIMENTARY ROCKS

Field 3/2b

sedimentary rock 65.48 0.54 11.95 8.33

0.17

2.38

2.57

1.14

1.27 0.17

5.93

99.93

65

53

213

n.d.

n.d. 167 n.d. 11.5 n.d. 32

16

46

16

3.8 0.7 n.d. 2.9 n.d. n.d.

45 22.9 81.5

68 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 6/8

sedimentary rock 57.67 0.87 21.25 7.39

0.05

2.61

0.27

0.86

4.52 0.14

4.21

99.83

227

47

609

n.d.

n.d. 154 n.d. 16.3 n.d. 36

39

94

37

5.8 0.5 n.d. 3.4 n.d. n.d. 169 86 13.4 79.1

78 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 7/3

sedimentary rock 67.84 0.77 14.33 5.23

0.06

2.07

0.48

1.95

2.85 0.16

2.68

98.40

140

68

388

n.d.

n.d. 256 n.d. 16.6 n.d. 37

34

86

42

5.5 0.6 n.d. 3.4 n.d. n.d.

48 12.6 40.6 116 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

VOLCANOCLASTIC ROCKS 

85
94

VOLCANOCLASTIC ROCKS

Field 6/4

Morococala tuff

67.74 0.46 16.00 2.61

0.04

0.90

2.04

3.44

4.75 0.26

1.16

99.40

258

517

894

n.d.

n.d. 196 n.d. n.d. n.d. 14

65

115

42

7.5 1.4 n.d. 1.2 n.d. n.d.

47 n.d. n.d.

19.9

53 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 6/5

Morococala tuff

66.96 0.46 16.45 2.52

0.03

1.26

2.10

3.24

4.64 0.26

1.52

99.45

231

526

941

n.d.

n.d. 194 n.d. n.d. n.d. 14

69

118

45

6.3 1.4 n.d. 1.2 n.d. n.d.

47 n.d. n.d.

20.4

51 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 8/1

Soledad tuff

68.24 0.92 15.54 2.60

0.04

0.94

4.13

3.32

2.50 0.16

0.97

99.37

57

658 1023 n.d.

n.d. 328 n.d. n.d. n.d. 46 691 1123 381 67.4 6.4 n.d. 3.8 n.d. n.d.

66 n.d. 1.4

27.6

52 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 8/2b

Soledad tuff

62.82 0.82 15.77 4.05

0.06

2.08

3.20

2.57

4.16 0.32

4.11

99.94

152

547 1287 n.d.

n.d. 256 n.d. n.d. n.d. 19

91

6.5

34.7

82 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

51

114

39

6.2 1.5 n.d. 1.4 n.d. n.d.

23

Field 8/2c

Soledad tuff

63.14 0.82 15.50 4.22

0.06

1.85

3.19

2.72

4.33 0.32

3.53

99.66

156

553 1305 n.d.

n.d. 248 n.d. n.d. n.d. 21

59

120

51

7.8 1.7 n.d. 1.7 n.d. n.d.

91

27

4.4

28.3

88 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 8/3

Soledad tuff

68.46 0.50 15.08 2.26

0.03

0.96

2.39

3.35

3.43 0.18

2.52

99.15

122

490 1246 n.d.

n.d. 154 n.d. n.d. n.d. 18

59

109

39

6.5 1.4 n.d. 1.7 n.d. n.d.

55

19

1.5

4.2

71 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

0.03

n.d. 29 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. 45

n.d.

n.d. 2.1 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

16 n.d. n.d.

n.d.

16 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

n.d. 181 n.d. n.d. n.d. 15

49

91

34

7.4 1.7 n.d. 1.0 n.d. n.d.

81

53.0 107 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 8/4

Soledad tuff

5.89

Field 8/5b

Soledad tuff

49.38 0.61 11.69 14.44 0.07

0.07

1.73

0.59

1.74 45.64 0.32

0.40 0.40

40.36

97.18

16

994

1.17

3.77 0.37

12.18

98.56

123

539 1286 n.d.

2.15

2.72

589

n.d.

42

8.7

Field 8/5c

Soledad tuff

66.67 0.63 15.14 3.13

0.05

1.47

2.92

2.97

4.58 0.26

1.88

99.69

166

515 1337 n.d.

n.d. 212 n.d. n.d. n.d. 19

55

112

35

6.2 1.4 n.d. 1.5 n.d. n.d.

73

18

2.1

25.2

62 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 8/5d

Soledad tuff

67.13 0.69 16.09 3.56

0.04

0.83

3.00

3.48

4.43 0.31

0.48

100.02

164

568 1284 n.d.

n.d. 227 n.d. n.d. n.d. 17

43

97

33

4.1 1.4 n.d. 1.3 n.d. n.d.

59

27

2.9

40.6

67 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 8/5g

Soledad tuff

65.16 0.68 16.39 4.29

0.05

1.64

2.62

2.29

3.97 0.26

1.77

99.12

154

522 1576 n.d.

n.d. 223 n.d. n.d. n.d. 26

57

124

54

8.9 1.7 n.d. 2.3 n.d. n.d.

77

13

9.8

5.1

213 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 8/6a

Soledad tuff

68.61 0.69 15.38 3.09

0.04

1.32

2.47

3.51

4.84 0.10

0.43

100.70

151

525

n.d.

n.d. 234 n.d. n.d. n.d. 12

62

105

36

7.4 1.6 n.d. 0.8 n.d. n.d.

65

20

5.0

48.0

56 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 8/6b

Soledad tuff

66.31 0.69 15.51 3.33

0.05

1.39

2.82

3.27

4.06 0.27

1.88

99.84

165

545 1264 n.d.

n.d. 226 n.d. n.d. n.d. 15

64

121

52

7.4 1.6 n.d. 1.2 n.d. n.d.

68

3.0

26.0

75 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

Field 8/6h

Soledad tuff

66.52 0.69 15.42 3.38

0.04

1.39

2.73

2.94

4.79 0.27

1.92

100.35

164

535 1370 n.d.

n.d. 230 n.d. n.d. n.d. 17

53

115

49

6.2 1.5 n.d. 1.3 n.d. n.d.

66

3.0

35.0

73 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d.

194

862

195

Paria la Viexa

V.9 Analyzed sherds according to the petrographic groups


Petrographic Group I
I/A
I/A/a

I/A/b

I/B
I/A

I/B/a

I/B/b

I/C
I/B/c

I/B

I/C/a

I/D
I/C/b

1.108

11.23

II.3.21

18.59

1.136

1.259

II.2.143

1.166

1.186

5.4.

1.260

12.17

II.3.59

49.2

1.214

11.22

II.3.33

18.21

12.23

12.13

12.20

34.88

II.8.26

85.46

1.258

99.49

II.3.72

33.5

18.24

41.13

34.31

41.69

I.3.34

34.1

I.2.20

II.3.110

48.101

I.16.1

42.9

56.8

48.58

I.15.7

34.2

I.4.8

II.3.111

99.2

56.11

56.16

I.20.6

34.143

I.5.2

II.4.31

I.18.76

72.1

92.4

42.5

I.6.9

II.4.32

I.30.5

I.10.4

110.2

48.80

I.10.3

II.5.66

I.27.2

I.19.8

110.25

50.17

I.12.26

II.5.113

II.1.3

I.20.18

I.2.10

86.61

I.14.11

II.5.116

II.7.69

I.29.1

I.3.10

I.2.16

I.16.18

II.6.24

II.8.106

K.P.1

I.5.3

I.3.1

I.16.20

II.6.86

BA/1

PA/2

I.10.24

I.6.1

I.16.22

II.6.87

PA/3

I.16.24

I.14.6

I.38.2

II.8.1

PA/4

I.15.1

II.8.39

PA/6

I.15.10

II.35.1

I.15.25
I.16.23
I.20.22
I.28.2
I.30.3

196

71.1

APPENDICES

Petrographic Group II
II/A

II/B

II/C

Petrographic Group III

Other

II

1.167

I.7.17

41.110

1.21

34.91

II.2.29

1.252

1.250

I.10.11

41.116

41.191

41.9

II.2.112

1.253

10.220

1.251

I.10.15

41.125

96.10

41.101

II.2.131

1.254

41.31

41.49

I.10.26

41.226

I.3.39

41.161

II.2.155

1.256

41.303

41.104

I.10.48

41.244

I.7.1

41.292

II.3.23

1.257

77.2

41.238

I.10.55

41.294

I.7.18

41.301

II.5.85

41.300

77.4

41.242

I.10.68

53.108

I.12.28

41.302

II.5.95

I.18.74

96.14

48.8

I.10.90

63.7

41.304.

II.6.29

II.1.5

I.2.5

53.79

I.11.1

I.2.13

41.305.

II.8.81

II.9.10

I.2.11

I.2.22

I.11.7

I.2.19

62.10

II.9.38

PA/5

I.2.41

I.3.7

I.11.8

I.3.13

I.2.4

II.33.1.

I.4.4

I.3.8

I.15.16

I.3.32

I.2.37

II.36.1.

I.4.5

I.3.16

I.16.3

I.4.1

I.3.4

II.44.1B.

I.6.12

I.3.22

I.16.7

I.4.30

I.3.26

II.46.3.

I.6.23

I.3.25

I.16.16

I.6.14

I.3.40

PA/1

I.14.31

I.3.30

I.18.1

I.6.19

I.4.26

I.18.23

I.3.50

I.18.41

I.6.26

I.5.10

I.29.10

I.4.2

I.18.73

I.9.2

I.7.4

I.4.12

I.20.14

I.10.34

I.10.13

I.4.23

I.20.20

I.10.39

I.10.53

I.4.29

I.20.23

I.10.92

I.10.95

I.6.3

I.27.18

I.11.9

I.11.10

I.6.8

I.27.8

I.13.9

I.16.8

I.6.20

I.28.55

I.18.26

I.18.25

I.6.24

I.28.64

I.18.65

I.18.6

I.6.27

I.29.4

I.28.42

I.28.20

I.6.29

I.28.44

I.28.21

I.6.35

I.38.11

I.38.10

I.8.8

I.38.9

197

Paria la Viexa

APPENDIX TO CHAPTER VI
VI.1 Statistical parameters of the six zoo specimens used as standard (Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna)
Mean value (mm)

Standard deviation (mm)

Coefficient of variation

Atlas
greatest breadth

66.9

10.3

0.1 54

greatest length

60.6

7.0

0.116

115.6

13.8

0.119

48.1

6.5

0.135

230.5

33.5

0.145

smallest length of the collum

35.7

5.6

0.157

breadth of the glenoid cavity

34.3

5.4

0.157

greatest length of the glenoid process

52.2

7.4

0.142

239.2

21.2

0.089

proximal breadth

61.0

9.2

0.151

proximal depth

62.6

6.0

0.096

smallest diaphysis breadth

24.1

4.4

0.183

smallest diaphysis depth

26.8

3.2

0.119

distal breadth

49.2

6.0

0.123

distal depth

40.9

4.6

0.112

266.6

13.8

0.052

proximal breadth

45.8

5.2

0.114

proximal depth

27.6

4.3

0.156

smallest diaphysis breadth

28.0

5.0

0.179

smallest diaphysis depth

15.7

1.9

0.121

distal breadth

44.9

4.6

0.102

distal depth

32.4

4.9

0.151

219.9

10.4

0.047

proximal breadth

37.3

5.0

0.134

proximal depth

25.1

2.1

0.084

smallest diaphysis breadth

20.2

2.7

0.134

smallest diaphysis depth

12.6

2.1

0.167

distal breadth

45.8

5.4

0.118

distal depth

22.9

2.4

0.105

Axis
greatest corpus length
breadth of the cranial articular surface

Scapula
greatest length

Humerus
greatest length

Radius
greatest length

Metacarpus
greatest length

198

APPENDICES

VI.2 Statistical parameters of the six zoo specimens used as standard (Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna), continued
Mean value (mm)

Standard deviation (mm)

Coefcient of variation

Acetabulum pelvis
length of the acetabulum

37.0

3.2

0.085

22.7
8.6
3.8
3.9
3.2
7.6
6.0

0.075
0.119
0.114
0.165
0.124
0.129
0.094

15.5
6.9
5.8
3.7
1.4
4.5
2.8

0.051
0.106
0.102
0.142
0.081
0.104
0.093

3.8
3.2
2.4
2.7

0.087
0.081
0.097
0.097

7.4
3.3
4.7

0.083
0.096
0.118

225.5
10.3
33.4
3.4
29.9
2.7
18.6
2.3
12.9
1.6
43.6
4.8
21.5
2.2
Proximal phalanx. anterior
70.7
5.9
20.9
2.2
19.8
2.1

0.046
0.102
0.090
0.124
0.124
0.110
0.102

Femur
greatest length
proximal breadth
proximal depth
smallest diaphysis breadth
smallest diaphysis depth
distal breadth
distal depth

304.6
72.3
33.3
23.6
25.9
59.1
63.7
Tibia

greatest length
proximal breadth
proximal depth
smallest diaphysis breadth
smallest diaphysis depth
distal breadth
distal depth

304.5
65.2
57.0
26.0
17.2
43.1
30.0
Astragalus

greatest lateral length


greatest medial length
medial depth
distal breadth

43.9
39.4
24.7
27.9
Calcaneus

greatest length
greatest breadth
greatest depth*
Metatarsus
greatest length
proximal breadth
proximal depth
smallest diaphysis breadth
smallest diaphysis depth
distal breadth
distal depth
greatest length
proximal breadth
proximal depth
Proximal phalanx. posterior
greatest length
proximal breadth
proximal depth

89.2
34.3
39.8

66.6
20.2
18.8

6.6
2.3
2.2

0.083
0.105
0.106
0.099
0.114
0.117

* measured at the sustentaculum calacanei. Not listed in von den Driesch 1976

199

Paria la Viexa

APPENDIX TO CHAPTER VIII


VIII.1 Macrobotanical remains from Surface II of Paria
Flotation Number

Provenance

Square
1

Square
10

Square
21

Square
1

Feature
7

Level

40 cm 30-50 cm 50-60 cm 45 cm 30-40 cm 40 cm

Dry Weight of Sample (kg)

15

Total

Square Square Square Square


6
15
21
27

20-40
cm

40 cm Ash pit

5.98

ca. 4.55

ca. 4.8

4.4

4.25

5.54

9.6

4.5

ca. 4

3.5

40

Weight of Light Fraction


(g) (100 percent analyzed)

36.1

50.9

63.4

19.4

20.8

24.9

95.1

58.5

35

404.1

Carbonized Wood > 2mm


No.

147

212

94

129

29

36

123

573

96

1339

Carbonized Wood > 2 mm


Weight (g)

6.7

9.3

4.1

4.7

1.1

1.2

5.2

21.3

5.4

59

Volume floated

ca. 4.3 ca. 4.1 47.52

Specimen Type Number

Number/weight of macrobatanical remains

Amaranthaceae
Amaranthus sp.

44

cf. Anacardiaceae

16

20

66

21 15 (0.2g)

5 (0.1g)

20

cf. Asteraceae

15

Cactaceae cf. Opuntia


soehrensii

14

22

Cactaceae
Trichocereus sp.

13

20

Chenopodiaceae

19

43

25

57

155

Chenopodiaceae
Atriplex sp.

Chenopodiaceae
Chenopodium spp1

17

37

25

15

11

21

10

86

16

22

243

Juncaceae cf. Juncus


spp.

10

16

44

Leguminosea cf.
Astragalus sp.

11

10

18

45

Leguminosea/
Mimosaceae

26

1 (0.1g)

cf. Malvaceae

16

16

16

Malvaceae cf.
Malvastrum sp.

78

21

13

98

67

78

101

469

cf. Nyctaginaceae

30

200

APPENDICES

Flotation Number

Specimen Type Number

15

Number/weight of macrobatanical remains

Total

Nyctaginaceae cf.
Boerhavia sp.

29

18

18

cf. Onagraceae

16