The Ceque System of Cuzco The Social Organization of The Capital of The Inca - Zuidema, R. Tom

THE CEQUE SYSTEM OF CUZCO
THE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE

CAPITAL OF THE INCA
INTERNATIONAL ARCHIVES OF ETHNOGRAPHY
INTERNATIONALES ARCHIV FUR ETHNOGRAPHLE
ARCHIVES TNTERNATTONAT.ES D’ETHNOGRAPHIE
SUPPLEMENT TO VOL. L
L E ID E N
E. J. BRILL
1964
THE CEQUE SYSTEM OF CUZCO
THE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE
CAPITAL OF THE INCA
BY
Dr. R. T. ZUIDEMA
LEIDEN
E. J. BRILL
1964
Translated by E va M. H o o y k a a s, B.A., F.R.A.I.
The translation of this study has been made possible with the financial support
of the Dutch Ministerial Department of Education, Arts and Sciences
Copyright ig64 by E . / . Brill, Leiden, Netherlands

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or translated in
any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm or any other means without written
permission from the publisher
P R IN TE D IN TH E N ET H ER LA N D S
TABLE OF CONTENTS
In t r o d u c t i o n .....................................................................................................xi
F o r e w o r d ...........................................................................................................xv
M ap of S outhern P e r u ..............................................................facing 1
I. T he point of D eparture of this St u d y ........................................................1
§ 1. The ceque s y s t e m ........................................................................................1
§ 2. The ten panaca and ten ayllu which, according to Molina, con
stituted the population proper of C u z c o ................................................5
§ 3. The ten ayllu, as given by Sarm iento.........................................................7
§ 4. The combination of the data from the three relevant chronicles . 8
II. P reliminary R e m a r k s .................................................................................... 11
§ 1. A short outline of the history of Peruvian cultures . . . . 11
§ 2. Reasons why so few results have been obtained in the study of
Inca c u l t u r e ............................................................. . . . 12
§ 3. Three questions discussed which must be placed centrally if we
are to come to an understanding of the Inca system of socio
political o r g a n i z a t i o n ............................................................................ 14
a) the organization of the 10 panaca and their relation to
Inca h i s t o r y .................................................................................... 14
b) the a y llu .....................................................................................16
c) the decimal o r g a n iz a t io n ............................................................. 17
§ 4. The ceque system chosen as point of departure. Three approaches
which helped to make possible a description and interpretation
of the ceque system .................................................................................... 17
a) the study in the a r c h i v e s ............................................................. 18
b) results of modern ethnological research in Peru . . . 21
c) comparison of the ceque system with systems of social
organization in B r a z il.....................................................................21
§ 5. A method for describing the ceque system ...............................................23
§ 6. Reasons why the study of Inca culture is of importance for
general ethnology and culture history..................................................... 25
a) the importance of the organization of Cuzco for the study
of non-unilineal kinship grou p s..................................................... 25
b) the importance of the agreement between the so-called
higher culture of the Inca and those of so-called primitive
peoples in B r a z i l ............................................................................ 27
§ 7. The restriction that the ceque system is the Inca’s own theory
about their social o r g a n iz a t io n ............................................................. 28
VI CONTENTS
§ 8. A method for making use of the chronicles, with a survey of

the l a t t e r .....................................................................................................29
§ 9. Modern writers on the organization of C u zco............................. 35
§ 1 0 . Final r e m a r k s ....................................................................................38
III. T heoretical Survey of the O rganization of C uzco 39

§ 1. I n t r o d u c t i o n ....................................................................................39
§ 2. The contradictory data in the c h ro n ic le s..................................... 39
§ 3. The division in the groups Collana, Payan and Cayao as the first
principle of organization.............................................................................40
§ 4. The quadripartition as the second principle of organization . . 42
§ 5. The combination of these two principles of organization 43
§ 6. The quinque- and decempartitions as the third principle of
o r g a n i z a t i o n ............................................................................................ 46
§ 7. The different applications in the ceque system of the terms Col
lana, Payan and C a y a o .............................................................................48
§ 8. The relative positions of the groups Collana,Payan and Cayao 49
§ 9. The mutual relationship of the three representations . . . 50
§ 10. The second representation of the organization of Cuzco . . . 50
§ 11. The third representation of the organization of Cuzco . . . 55
§ 12. The first representation of the organization of Cuzco . . . 59
§ 1 3 . A theoretical discussion of the concept of principle of organization 62
IV. T he first R epresentation of the O rganization of C uzco . . 68

§ 1. Myths of a tr ip a r titio n .................................................................... 68
a) in tr o d u c tio n .....................................................................................68
b) the myth of Tambo, Maras and S u tic ...................................... 69
c) the tripartition of the ayllu into Collana, Payan and Cayao 71
d) application of c) and b) to the tripartition in the myth
of Manco Capac and his brothers and sisters . . . . 75
e) the myth of Manco Capac, Tocay Capac and Pinahua Capac 76
§ 2. The bipartition of C o l l a n a .............................................................77
a) the bipartition in the group of Manco Capac (as opposed to
Tocay Capac and Pinahua C a p a c ) ..............................................77
b) the relationship of these four groups to the terms Collana,
Payan and Cayao, and to the four su y u ............................... 81
c) the four groups in C h in ch ay su y u .............................................. 84
d) the four groups in C o lla s u y u ......................................................86
e) the representation of the bipartition in the myth about
Tambo, Maras and S u t i c ............................................................. 88
CONTENTS VII
f) the representation of the bipartition within Chinchaysuyu 89

§ 3. The adaptation of a system of three matrilineal marriage classes
to a system of four matrilineal marriage classes distributed over
two m o i e t i e s ............................................................................................ 91
a) the glossing over of the actual bipartition of Collana in a
system of three l i n e a g e s ............................................................. 91
b) the adjustment of the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao and
the tripartition to the q u a d r ip a r titio n ......................................94
c) the situation in which the fourth group is not classed as
belonging to organized society..................................................... 98
§ 4. Summary of the Collana, Payan and Cayao characteristics . . 101
§ 5. a) use made of three quadripartitions in the organization of
Cuzco. The first and second quadripartitions, however, con
cerned Collana and Payan (themselves groups in the third
quadripartition). There must thus have been another qua
dripartition in C a y a o ...................................................................103
b) the quadripartition of the Chanca traversed by two non
territorial m oieties.......................................................................... 103
c) an identical organization of the In ca............................................. 107
d) the Chanca as Cayao and lower moiety to the Inca as Co
llana and Payan and asuppermoiety.............................................. 110
§ 6. C on clu sion .................................................................................................. 113
V. T he second R e p r e se n t a t io n ....................................................................114
§ 1. The theoretical reconstruction of the second representation of the
organization of C u z c o .......................................................................... 114
§ 2. The reasons why I considered that the history of the Inca, which
provides the material which clarifies the second representation,
is not, properly speaking, h istory...................................... . 122
§ 3. To indicate how the material from § 2 elucidates the second
re p re se n ta tio n ..........................................................................................128
§ 4. The rulers Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui . . . . 129
§ 5. The rulers Pachacuti and Mayta C a p a c ......................................133
§ 6. To indicate how the material ontheother rulers elucidates the
second r e p r e s e n ta tio n .......................................................................... 139
§ 7. The rulers Inca Roca and Sinchi R o ca ............................................. 140
§ 8. The rulers Yahuar Huacac and Tarco H uam an..............................149
§ 9. The rulers Viracocha Inca and Lloque Yupanqui . . . . 150
§ 1 0 . The relationship of suyu I to suyu IV in the second representation 155
Vili CONTENTS
§ 11. The resulting relationship of the upper moiety (I + III) to

the lower moiety (II + I V ) ................................................................... 162
§ 12. The difficulties of the adaptation of a system of three marriage
classes to one of four marriage classes with relation to religion . 164
§ 13. The contrast between the Sun and Viracocha in their relationship
to the upper moiety (I + III) and the lower moiety (II + IV) 166
VI. T he third R e p r e s e n t a t i o n ................................................................... 171

§ 1. The p r o b l e m .......................................................................................... 171
§ 2. The third representation, uninfluenced by the quinquepartition,
in organizations outside C u z c o ........................................................... 172
§ 3. The organization of Hanan-Cuzco (I + III), uninfluenced by
the quinquepartition...................................................................................174
§ 4. The influence of the quinquepartition on the organization of
H a n a n - C u z c o .......................................................................................... 178
§ 5. The organization of Hurin-Cuzco (II + I V ) .................................... 182
§ 6. Evidence that the groups of ceque as marriage classes had an
exogamous function in addition to their endogamous function . 183
§ 7. The position of the pre-Inca population of Cuzco in the group
comprising all the Cayao c e q u e ........................................................... 192
§ 8. The Payan group (all the Payan ceque) and Cayao group (all
the Cayao ceque) as the original population of Cuzco, as opposed
to Collana (all the Collana ceque) as the Inca conquerors . 199
§ 9. The relationship of Hanan-Cuzco to Hurin-Cuzco as that of the
conquerors to the conquered, and that of wordly rulers to priests 203
VII. T he C o -ordination of the three R epresentations . . . 208
V ili. T he Q uinquepartition and the D ecempartition . . . 213

§ 1. I n t r o d u c t i o n ..........................................................................................213
§ 2. The five age classes.................................................................................. 215
§ 3. The five w orlds.......................................................................................... 218
§ 4. The decimal o r g a n iz a t io n ...................................................................220
§ 5. The adaptation of the quinquepartition and the decempartition
to the socio-political organization of Cuzco............................................224
a) the adaptation of the Yanacona’s system of five age classes
to the socio-political organization of Cuzco . . . . 224
CONTENTS IX
b) the adaptation of the decimal organization to the form of

organization which is expressed by the history of the Inca 227
IX. D ata which do not refer directly to any single Represen

tation .....................................................................................................23 6
§ 1. The rulers’ marriages according to Murua and Poma de Ayala . 236
§ 2. Data relevant to more than one representation...............................240
§ 3. The mutual territorial relationships between the suyu and the
m o i e t i e s .............................................................................................241
§ 4. Sister or daughter exch an g e ...................................................................246
B ibliography .................................................................................................... 251
I n d e x ............................................................................................................ 257
INTRODUCTION
There can be no doubt that Dr Zuidema’s The Ceque System of Cuzco is a

difficult book, on account of the complexity of its subject matter as well as of
the involved reasoning which was required for sorting out the vast mass of
conflicting data and re-arranging it according to not one, but three intercon
necting systems. At the same time, I have no doubt that whoever gives this
work the concentrated attention it deserves will find it highly awarding.
Naturally, it will be of interest to Peruvianists in the first place, but I am
convinced its results will be found of importance for Americanist studies in
general. Its implications are relevant for the anthropological study of socio
political systems in other parts of the world as well. Finally, the probems of
method with which Dr Zuidema has had to cope are fundamental in the rapidly
expanding field of ethno-history, where source analysis can no longer be limited
to an assessment of the “historical” validity of indigenous literature and ob
servers’ records, but must be no less concerned with the way in which these
sources reflect the native participants’ outlook on their culture.
It is Zuidema’s contention that it is vain to expect the Spanish chronicles
to give us immediate data on the social and political organization of the Inca
empire. What they can give us, through the myths and the so-called Inca history
they contain, is insight into the ways (not one, but several) in which the
chroniclers’ informants conceptualized their society, and in particular the way
they expressed the dominant hierarchical principles in terms of temporal suc
cession and spatial distribution.
The latter is taken as starting point. As is set forth in one of the very first
pages of this book, the chronicler Bernabe Cobo (1653) described “ some four
hundred holy sites in and around Cuzco... These sites were diveded into groups.
Every group of sites was conceived of as lying on an imaginary line, called a
ceque, and all these lines as converging in the centre of Cuzco. The maintenance
and worship of the sites living on these lines was assigned to certain social
groups. The relationship of any group to its ceque cannot, however, he used as
an indication of the actual residence of the group in or around Cuzco” . I italicize
the last words, as they are of essential importance: the ceque system, in Cobo’s
description, is not a guide to the reality of Cuzco social structure, but to what
Zuidema calls the “ representation” of that structure as created by the social
participants. So in this special sense the social organization of Cuzco, the Inca
capital city, may be said to find its expression in the ceque system. Dr Zuidema
then carries his argument further, and also makes the ceque system the basis
for a study of the organizational principles represented as prevailing in the
XII INTRODUCTION
Inca empire as a whole and in the other cultures of Peru, arguing that this was
precisely what the Inca themselves did: “the whole organization of the state
was extrapolated from the organization of Cuzco, while this was itself based
on kinship and on the application of kinship principles” . Gradually it becomes
apparent that its range of applicability is yet wider: its serves its purpose equally
well in considering Inca religion and mythology, Inca “history” , and modern
forms of Indian social organization in Peru.
It will be clear that Zuidema’s use of the ceque system and the mythical
and pseudo-historical texts as guides to an understanding of Inca concepts, Inca
“ representations” of their social structure, owes much to Levi-Strauss’s article
“ Les organisations dualistes existent-elles?” Vol. 112-2, 1956, and Anthro-
pologie Structural, Paris 1958, pp. 147-180). Zuidema carries the method to
the extreme limits of its applicability, and in addition had to deal with material
that is in many respects much more intractable than that on the Winnebago
and the Bororo. Sixteenth and seventeenth century chronicles require other
handling than nineteenth and twentieth century ethnographies; the sheer mass
of data is overwhelming; the society itself was vastly more complex; and, as
we said, three mutually distinct “ representations” appear to be involved, but
cannot be attributed to discrete social groups. All this must inevitably make the
present work heavy going even for the specialist on Peru, let alone for the
social anthropologist not particularly familiar with Peruvian studies. In addi
tion, I think the author has at times abetted the inherent difficulties when, in a
sudden access of caution, he seems to terminate some particular argument with
a smokescreen of generalities, which grants him some safe escape routes, but is
rather frustrating for the reader.
In general, though, I am convinced that the tortuousness of the argumen
tation, for which Zuidema is bound to be reproached, cannot be laid at his
door, but reflects a situation anthropologists will have to face with increasing
frequency: I mean that not all works of anthropology will continue to be imme
diately comprehensible to all anthropologists. This is already the case when
specialized techniques are employed, e.g. of a statistical nature, or for purposes
of formal kinship analysis. This parallels earlier developments in the sciences,
but even studies which are not the outcome of highly specialized techniques
will demand more concentrated efforts on the reader’s part as the writer strug
gles harder to extract progressively more refined conclusions from ever more
refractory material.
Of such works, Dr Zuidema’s book is an example, and as such it is an experi
ment. It is experimental, too, in its conclusions, which are by no means cut-and-
dried, easily surveyable end products. It is experimental as well in that it seems
to hold considerable promise of possible wider application in future.
INTRODUCTION XIII
In the South American context, one cannot help being struck by the resem
blance between the Inca system and forms of social organization encountered
in Brazil. Although he wisely refrains from developing this theme in the present
book, Dr Zuidema is convinced that by using a similar starting point and the
same methods, it should also be possible to improve our understanding of the
socio-political and religious systems of other regions of “Nuclear America” ,
and of Mexico in particular. That is to say, ceque-like systems, by their distinc
tiveness and their amenability to detailed study, promise to be useful points
of reference in the study of other American forms of social structure, parti
cularly of those based on non-unilineal descent groups.
Here we have another most important theme in Zuidema’s book. In his
enlightening discussion of the nature of the ayllu, Rowe finally reaches the
conclusion that it was “ a kin group with theoretical endogamy, with descent
in the male line, and without totemism. It was, therefore, not a clan in the
classical sense at all” (Handbook of South American Indians, Vol. 2, p. 255).
In Zuidema’s opinion, yet more shades of meaning should be distinguished:
“The ayllu was the group of all people who were descended from one particular
ancestor. This formulation implies that in fact each group to which an indi
vidual was linked by father or mother or both could be considered as an ayllu...
In an exogamous relation a group bore the character of a marriage class in an
asymmetric connubium, whether or not included in an exogamous moiety; in
an endogamous relation the same group bore the character of an ayllu ... Now
the exogamous marriage classes were matrilineal, while the endogamous ayllu
was considered to be patrilineal . . . ” (footnote 10 to Chapter II).
So again we are concerned with the native “ representation” of the diverse
social groups, and in Zuidema’s opinion it may prove to be a general feature
of American kinship organization that unilineal and non-unilineal systems, al
though markedly different, are conceptualized by the native participants in very
similar terms. Studied in this way, American forms of kinship (and in general,
socio-political) organization may prove to have a kind of family likeness such
as also characterizes their Australian counterparts.
However, I would certainly not wish to measure the qualities of the present
book by the promise it holds for future research. As it is, in spite of certain
deficiencies of form and composition (some are inevitable, others perhaps were
avoidable), it has brought an entirely original note of sophistication to Peru-
vianist studies; it has, as it were, added to them a new dimension. I am con
vinced that in studying Inca socio-political organization it will henceforth be
essential to take Dr Zuidema’s The Ceque System of Cuzco into serious con
sideration.
P. E. DE JO SSELIN DE JO N G
Int. Arch. f. Ethn., Suppl. to Vol. L 2
FOREWORD
This study resulted from a doctoral thesis written under the guidance of
Prof. P. E. de Josselin de Jong and defended at Leiden University on June 13,
1962. Its preparation has been much more to me than mere research. It took me
to Spain, Peru and the United States and gave me an opportunity of getting
to know these countries personally and of meeting many people. The experience
has been unforgettable.
In 1951, at the suggestion of Professor J. P. B. de Josselin de Jong, I chose
the social and political organization of the Inca Empire as the subject of my
thesis. The state of Inca studies at the time and the vastness of the subject made
it impossible to cover it in its entirety. It soon became apparent that it was
impossible to understand any account of this organization or, for that matter,
the mental processes of the Inca as expressed, for instance, in religion, economy,
literature or kinship terminology until an explanation had been found for certain
problems of social structure. This thesis, then, which deals with these problems
of social structure, is intended as a point of departure for further studies of the
social organization of the Inca and of their culture in general.
After a preliminary survey of the subject I went to Spain in 1952. During
the academic year 1952-53 I attended lectures in the ‘History of America’ course
at the University of Madrid. The great help and guidance I received in my
studies from Professor Manuel Ballesteros Gaibrois enabled me to present the
preliminary results of my research in a thesis for the University of Madrid
in May 1953.
In September of the same year, the Fonds Vollenhoven of Leiden University
granted me a travelling scholarship for Peru, where I stayed until August 1955.
A subsidy from the Netherlands Organisation for the Advancement of Pure
Research (Z.W .O.) not only enabled me to stay there a second year, but also
allowed me to break my return journey to the Netherlands for a three months’
stay in the United States and a similar period in Seville, Spain.
Many people helped me in Peru. In the first place I wish to thank Mr. and
Mrs. Martini for the way in which they received me at their home during my
long stay in Lima, and to Mr. van der Gaag, then Secretary to the Netherlands
Consulate in Lima, for his assistance.
I cannot thank individually all those who so readily put the archives under
their care at my disposal. Nor can I sufficiently thank the Peruvian, Bolivian
and Ecuadorian anthropologists, historians and others who were interested in
the cultures of the Peruvian Indians and whose help, interest and friendship
XVI FOREWORD
so much stimulated me and who made me feel so much at home in their

company.
The account of the results of my resarch is perhaps technical and dry. When,
however, I quote the valuable material I was able to consult, for example, on
the organization of the village of Acos, I am reminded of the long, eventful
journeys to and from this village, some 70 KM from Cuzco, of the Indians with
whom I made the journey in the back of a lorry, of the priest who, just before
saying Mass put the church archives at my disposal, of the town councillors,
who proudly showed me the Inca mummy they had just discovered and installed
in the council room, and the brave, idealistic teachers from the many villages
in the neighbourhood who held a meeting, while I was staying in Acos, which
I was permitted to attend.
In 1956 I was appointed to the Rijksmuseum voor Volkenkunde in Leiden.
I owe Dr. P. H. Pott, its director, much gratitude for the time he has allowed
me to devote to working out my material. Last, but not least, I thank my wife
for the great assistance she has given me by typing my manuscript and for her
constructive criticism of what I had written.
Map of Southern Peru
CHAPTER ONE
THE POINT OF DEPARTURE OF THIS STUDY
§ 1. This study is the result of research into the social and political organi
zation of the Inca Empire at the time of the Spanish conquest of about 1530.
In Chapter II, the real introduction to this study, I shall explain why, in this
examination of the organization of the whole of the Inca Empire, I concentrated
my researches on that of its capital Cuzco and described this through the
ceque system. A preliminary description of the ceque system will, I believe,
make this explanation more fruitful.
The principal aim of this study has been to describe and explain the particular
system on which the social and political organization of Cuzco was based.
The best way to achieve this aim proved to be to follow the Relaciot? de los
ceques in the chronicle of Bernabe Cobo (1956, T. II, libro XIII, cap. V p. 158,
cap. XIII-XVI p. 169-186) i) .
The “Relacion de los ceques” is a description of approximately four hundred
holy sites in and around Cuzco, consisting of stones, fountains, or houses which
for some reason or other were of particular significance in Inca mythology
or history. These sites were divided into groups. Every group of sites was
conceived of as lying on an imaginary line, called a ceque; all these lines were
deemed to converge in the centre of Cuzco. The maintenance and worship of
the sites lying on these lines was assigned to certain social groups. The relation
ship of any group to its ceque cannot, however, be used as an indication of
the actual residence of the group in or around Cuzco (see diagram A p. 4).
The “Relacion de los ceques” describes the regional division of Cuzco as
follows. Cuzco was divided into four quarters: Chinchaysuyu, more or less in
the North, Collasuyu, in the South, Antisuyu, in the East, and Cuntisuyu, in the
West. These quarters will be designated by the roman numerals I, II, III and
IV. In every quarter, except for Cuntisuyu, there were nine ceque, divided
into three groups of three. The ceque of each group were called Collana,
Payan and Cayao, indicated henceforth by a, b and c. In a few instances only
were these generic names replaced by specific ones. The meanings of these
latter names, as will appear later, do not conflict with those of the generic
names as one might have expected. I therefore assume that the ceque which1
1) Cobo wrote his “ Historia del Nuevo Mundo” in about 1653 and made use in it of material
from earlier authors. It is possible that the “ Relacion de los ceques” derives from Cristdbal
de Molina.
2 I. THE POINT OF DEPARTURE OF THIS STUDY
had specific names, had generic names as well. In the diagram of the ceque
system I have taken this into account. In Cuntisuyu there were fourteen ceque:
i.e. four groups of three, one ceque one part of which was called Colkna, the
other Cayao, and another ceque which, as will appear later2), was a Payan
ceque and had a specific name.
T h e ceque system
(The arabic numerals outside the circle indicate the sequence of the ceque of each suyu which
Cobo follows in the enumeration in his R e la tio n d e lo s c e q u e s).
Cobo uses the following sequence in his enumeration of the ceque in the
four suyu:
Chinchaysuyu: cba, cba, cba
Antisuyu : abc, abc, abc
Collasuyu : cba, cba, cba
Cuntisuyu : b, cba, cba, (ca), cba, cba
2) See IV § 2b p. 82 and note 23.

I. THE POINT OF DEPARTURE OF THIS STUDY 3
With the aid of Professor Manuel Chavez Ballon, professor of archaeology

at the University of Cuzco, I was able during my stay in Cuzco (1954) to
identify several of the holy sites indicated by Cobo. The sequence of the ceque
in Chinchaysuyu and Antisuyu was, in a clockwise direction, a, b, c in every
group of ceque. In Cuntisuyu and Colksuyu, it was also a, b, c, but in an anti
clockwise direction. That is to say that if one begins the enumeration with the
Chinchaysuyu ceque furthest to the West, one begins with a Collana ceque,
which makes sense because Collana means “ first, most prominent” . I have
indicated the three ceque groups with the arabic numerals 1, 2, 3, they run
in both directions also.
As I shall demonstrate later 3), the solitary b ceque in Cuntisuyu and the
ceque, of which part was called Collana and the other part Cayao, together
form a fifth group of three ceque. These five groups, however, probably derive
from three original groups in the following manner. The first and the third
of these five groups arose from a division into two of group one of the original
three groups; likewise the second and fourth arose from group two of the
original three groups, while group five was identical with group three of the
original three groups 4). Since this subdivision has no relevance to the argument,
I shall, for the sake of simplicity, treat Cuntisuyu as if it consisted of the three
groups 1, 2 and 3. In chapter V ili I shall return to the significance of the
origin of the five groups of three ceque in Cuntisuyu as opposed to only three
in the other suyu.
Cobo names several social groups in connection with the ceque to which they
were linked. Among the names of these social groups we recognise in the first
place those of the panaca of the first, and of the third to the tenth ruler of the
Inca dynasty. The panaca were groups deriving from the descendants of a ruler,
with the exception of the legitimate heir to the throne, who founded his own
panaca (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 14 p. 134).
The panaca known to us descended from the following rulers:
ruler panaca
1) Manco Capac Chima panaca
2) Sinchi Roca Raurau panaca (or Raurahua, Yaura etc.)
3) Lloque Yupanqui Hahuaini panaca (or Haguayin, Ahucani etc.
4) Mayta Capac Usca Mayta panaca
5) Capac Yupanqui Apu Mayta panaca
6) Inca Roca Vicaquirao panaca
3) See IV note 23.

4) For further support for this conclusion see V ili, § 5a pp. 224-227.
D IA G R A M A
HURIN-CUZCO HANAN-CUZCO
Cuntisuyu Chinchaysuyu
Ceque Ayllu Ceque Ayllu
Collana Capac
Payan Payan
Cayao Cayao Capac ayllu (10th Inca)
Collana Collana
Payan Cayao Inacapanaca (9th Inca)
Cayao Payan
Collana,
afterwards
Cayao
Collana Collana
Payan Payan Vicaquirao (6th Inca)
Cayao Chimapanaca Cayao Goacaytaqui
(1st Inca)
Collana
Payan
Cayao Quisco
Anahuarque
Collasuyu Antisuyu
Collana Collana
Payan Payan Gubgupanaca (8th Inca)
Cayao Uscamaita ayllu Cayao
(4th Inca)
Collana Collana Aucaillipanaca (7th Inca)
Payan Payan
Cayao Apumaita ayllu Cayao
(5th Inca)
Collana Yanacora
Payan Haguayni ayllu Ayarmaca
(3d Inca)
Cayao Aquini-aylla Cayao Cari
Relaci6n de los Ceques

7) Yahuar Huacac Aucailli panaca

8) Viracocha Inca Sucsu panaca (or Zoczo, Qibgu, etc.)
9) Pachacuti Inca Hatun ayllu or Inaca panaca (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 47
p. 220)
10) Tupac Yupanqui Capac ayllu
11) Huayna Capac Tumibamba panaca
12) Huascar Inca
13) Atahuallpa
Cobo also mentions a few other social groups beside the panaca, but since
in the case of several ceque he fails to mention which social groups were linked
to them, it can be assumed that his sources did not mention all the social groups
which played a part in the ceque system. Cobo’s data, however, are supplemented
by a remark by Cristobal de Molina, “ el Cuzqueno” , who, as appears from his
chronicle of 1573, did give a complete account of the groups which had a place
in the ceque system and were therefore regarded as belonging to the population
proper of Cuzco.
§ 2. Molina (1943, p. 29-32) mentions the panaca and other groups in

connection with Citua, a feast celebrated in August. At that time of the year
the first rains fell and with the rains came many illnesses. The purpose of the
Citua celebrations was to drive sickness and evil from Cuzco. Before the begin
ning of the celebration all outsiders, that is to say those who did not belong
to the population proper, were removed from the town. For the purpose of
expelling all sickness and evil, a hundred warriors drew up in the centre of the
town, facing Collasuyu, a hundred facing Chinchaysuyu, a hundred facing
Antisuyu and a hundred facing Cuntisuyu. The signal for the beginning of
the celebration was the emergence of the high priest of the sun from the
Temple of the Sun. Then all those present would cry out: “Away with evil” .
The warriors would then speed in the direction of the suyu they were facing,
still shouting “ Away with evil” , until they arrived at a particular spot outside
Cuzco where others stood ready to take over their task. The latter were called
mitimae and were people who had, for various reasons, been removed by the
Inca from their original homes to reside elsewhere, and who did not belong to
the population proper of Cuzco. The task would then be taken over again by
others until a river was reached into which the evil could be thrown to be
carried away.
In his description of the expulsion of evil, Molina mentions to which social
groups in Cuzco the warriors belong. These are the panaca of the first ten
rulers and also ten other groups. Molina calls all the groups ayllu, except for
ON
D IA G R A M B
HURIN-CUZCO HANAN-CUZCO
Cuntisuyu Collasuyu Antisuyu Chinchaysuyu
THE POINT OF DEPARTURE OF THIS STUDY

Panaca Yaura panaca ayllu (2) Uscamayta ayllu (4) Cuzco panaca ayllu (8 ) Capac ayllu (10)
Apomayta ayllu (5) Atun ayllu (9 )
Chima panaca ayllu (1) Ahuaymin ayllu (3) Ancaylli ayllu (7) Vicaquirao ayllu (6 )
Ayllu Masca panaca ayllu Sutic ayllu Tarpuntay ayllu Chavitecuzco ayllu
Maras ayllu Arairaca ayllu
Quesco ayllu Cuicusa ayllu Sano ayllu “ Otros de Uro”
The panaca and Churicalla (10 km from (Angostura de) Aco- Chita Salpina (5 km from
ayllu handed over Cuzco) yapongo (10 km from Cuzco)
the evil to the Cuzco)
mitimae at:
Yaurisqui (5 km from Huayparga Pisa (that are those of Jaquijahuana, Tilca

Mitimae: Cuzco) Antahuailla the Coya and Paullo) (situated above Mar-
Tantar (20 km from Huayrapacha cahuasi nearly 50 km
Cuzco) from Cuzco)
The river into Cusibamba Quiquijana Pisa Apurimac
which the evil
was thrown:
The organization of Cuzco according to Molina.

the panaca of three of the rulers and one other group which did not descend
from a ruler, which he called a panaca. I shall use the word panaca for the ten
groups descending from rulers and the word ayllu for the other ten groups 5)
(see diagram B p. 6).
From Molina’s account one may conclude that the whole of the population
proper of Cuzco consisted of these ten panaca and ten ayllu. I shall discuss
later why the panaca of the eleventh, and later rulers — if they ever existed —
were not mentioned 6). For the purpose of describing and explaining the or
ganization of Cuzco, however, we have to take into account only these ten
panaca and ten ayllu as the population proper of Cuzco.
Molina’s distribution of the panaca (and ayllu) within the suyu, and the
sequence in which he enumerates them, correspond completely with Cobo’s
account of the linking of the same panaca (and ayllu in as far as he mentions
them) to the different ceque. It appears from Cobo’s Relacion that there was
only one panaca to every group of three ceque. Molina enumerates the ayllu
in the same way as he does the panaca. We may therefore assume that the
distribution of the ayllu over the different groups of three ceque was the same
too. The result would be that to one group of three ceque only belonged one
panaca and one ayllu. This assumption can be proved by one example. In order
to do this, however, I have to introduce first the only other source which
mentions all ten of the ayllu of Cuzco.
§ 3. According to Sarmiento’s chronicle of 1572 (cap. 11 p. 119-120),

Manco Capac, the founder of the Inca dynasty and of Cuzco, was accompanied
on his way to the site of this city by ten ayllu. These are enumerated as follows
by Sarmiento:
Hanan-Cuzco Hurin-Cuzco
Chauin Cuzco ayllu Sutic-toco ayllu
Arairaca ayllu Cuzco-cayan Maras ayllu
Tarpuntay ayllu Cuicusa ayllu
Huacaytaqui ayllu Masca ayllu
Sanu ayllu Oro ayllu
5) With this distinction I am merely following the language of the modern literature on the
Inca. The words panaca and ayllu, however, refer to two different functions in the social
organization, i.e. the exogamous and the endogamous one, which both panaca and ayllu could
have (see V § 7c p. 146 and VI § 6 pp. 183-192). In Inca usage the terms probably had
reference only to this difference in function and not to the fact that the panaca descended from
the rulers and the ayllu did not.
6) See V § 3 pp. 128-129, VI § 4b, § 5 pp. 179-183.
The sequence of the ayllu is the same in Sarmiento as in Molina if, at any
rate, one takes into account that in Hurin-Cuzco Sarmiento discusses first the
ayllu of Collasuyu and then those of Cuntisuyu. The only difference between
Sarmiento and Molina is that the former places the Huacaytaqui ayllu after the
Tarpuntay ayllu while the latter places it after the Arairaca ayllu. From all later
data it will appear that Sarmiento made a mistake here 7).
§ 4. Cobo, Molina and Sarmiento all differ about the position of three
of the ayllu in the ceque system. In II 3, Cobo mentions Aquini ayllu where
Sarmiento and Molina have Cuicusa ayllu. This may be nothing more than a
difference of nomenclature of one particular group. Such is not the case, how
ever, with the two other loci. In I 3, Cobo and Sarmiento have Huacaytaqui
ayllu where Molina has Uru ayllu. According to Sarmiento Uru ayllu was linked
to IV 2. For IV 2 Cobo and Molina, on the other hand, both name Quisco
ayllu 8). Thus, every one of the three ayllu first mentioned, occurs in two of
the three chronicles:
position IV 2 position 1 3
Cobo: Quisco ayllu Huacaytaqui ayllu
Molina: Quisco ayllu Uru ayllu
Sarmiento: Uru ayllu Huacaytaqui ayllu
As will appear later, these three ayllu all belonged to one particular class
of people whose position in the organization of Cuzco could be IV — and
more specifically IV 2 — as well as I 3 9).
The difference between Cobo and Molina with regard to the name of the
ayllu linked to I 3 does not arise from mistake by either of these authors. The
observation that to every group of ceque there is always one panaca and one
ayllu, is now illustrated clearly in the case of I 3. For, as appears from diagram
A, in I 3, Huacaytaqui ayllu was linked to the same group of ceque as the
Vicaquirao panaca 10).
The case of I 3 leads us to another conclusion regarding the question whether
the panaca and/or the ayllu must always be conceived of as being linked to a
particular kind of ceque. All the ayllu mentioned by Cobo were linked to
Cayao ceque. Of the nine panaca he discusses, Cobo links one to a Collana
ceque, four to a Payan ceque and four to a Cayao ceque. In the instance which
7) The words Hurin- and Hanan-Cuzco indicate the two moieties into which Cuzco was
divided.
8) See also IV, note 23.
9) See IV § 3c pp. 98-101, V § 10a, b pp. 155-159.
10) See also IV note 23.
can be checked, in which he mentions both the panaca and the ayllu and the
group of ceque to which they were linked, the panaca was linked to the Payan
ceque and the ayllu to the Cayao ceque. Now, the words Collana, Payan and
Cayao were not the names of ceque only, but were also used to designate groups
and particular kinds of groups11). The nature of the panaca corresponded
(0rUruayUu
The ceque system according to Cobo’s Relacidn, supplemented by Molina’s and Sarmiento’s data.
to that of the groups of ceque designated by the name Payan, and the nature
of the ayllu to that of the groups of ceque designated by the name Cayao 12).
One might, I think, therefore say that all the panaca were linked to the Payan
ceque and all the ayllu to the Cayao ceque; indeed, all three ayllu mentioned
by Cobo are linked to a Cayao ceque13). It may be assumed, therefore, that
Cobo was concerned to mention the right group of ceque of each panaca, rather
than of the right ceque within that group.
The only panaca ignored by Cobo is Sinchi Roca’s, which was Raurau panaca.
H ) See III §§ 3-5 pp. 40-46.

12) See VI §§ 6-8 pp. 183-202.
13) See diagram A p. 4.
IO I. THE POINT OF DEPARTURE OF THIS STUDY
As no other panaca is mentioned in IV 1 b 14) (the position where one might

have expected this panaca in the ceque system), I assume that this was the
position of Raurau panaca. Finally, Cobo mentions Cari ayllu (III 3 c) which,
together with a panaca, was not, or perhaps could not be, linked to a group
of ceque. As neither Molina nor Sarmiento mention this ayllu, it may be assumed
that Cari ayllu was not regarded as belonging to the population proper of Cuzco,
and that no social groups of Cuzco were linked to the ceque III 3 or to IV 3 15).
So far, the Collana ceque have not been discussed. There is good evidence
on which to assume 16) that the ruler-founders of the panaca were linked to the
Collana ceque of the same groups of ceque to which their panaca were linked.
14) I expect Raurau panaca at the place IV 1 b for the following reasons:
1) in suyu IV, because Molina places it there (see diagram B p . 6 );
2) at ceque b, because all panaca are included in ceque b = Payan;
3) in group 1, because group IV 2 was occupied by Chima panaca.
15) I assign group IV 3 also to the outsiders, because Cobo does not report a single name
of a panaca or ayllu under this group (see diagram A p. 4).
16) See VI § 8 pp. 199-202.
CHAPTER TWO
PRELIMINARY REMARKS
§ 1. The ceque system of Cuzco, the capital of the Inca Empire, was a
method of dividing and organizing some four hundred holy sites in and around
the capital into groups (ceque). The care and maintenance of these groups
of sites was assigned to the different social groups into which the population
proper of Cuzco was divided. This ceque system can therefore serve to throw
light on the social organization of Cuzco. This choice of subject arose, because
I needed a point of departure for further research into questions of the social
and political organization of the Inca Empire and of Inca culture in general.
At the time of the Spanish conquest in ± 1530, the Inca Empire extended
from Colombia in the North, across Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, to northern Argen
tine and central Chile in the South. O f these countries the Inca had actually
conquered only the Andes region (which consists mainly of high mountain
ridges of which the highest peaks reach 7000 M, running parallel, from North
to South, and are separated by valleys and plateaux), and the coastal region
along the Pacific. In Peru and in Chile these arid coastal regions are traversed
by small streams, forming oases. In Ecuador and Colombia there is jungle along
the coast, and neither here nor in the jungles to the East of the Andes, did the
Inca make great conquests. The capital of the Inca Empire was Cuzco. This
city lies at approximately 3200 M altitude at the northern end of a fertile
valley, built partly against the slopes of the mountains. From here the Inca
conquered their empire.
Before the Inca had subjected this region to their rule, there probably already
existed many other states. At the time of the arrival of the Spanish these had
lost their identities to such an extent that their existence can largely be deduced
only from accounts of their conquests which the Inca gave to the Spanish chro
niclers of the 16th and 17th centuries. The chroniclers limited themselves
almost exclusively to giving descriptions of the Inca themselves and their history,
and of the culture of the Indians in their empire in general. The people of
Peru did not have a script nor a system of ideograms. Archaeology is perforce
our main source of information about the cultures which once flourished in
the different regions of the Inca Empire. Thus we know, for instance, that in
northern Peru the Chavin, the Mochica and Chimu cultures succeeded each
other until the Chimu were conquered by the Inca. On the south coast of Peru
the Paracas, Nazca and lea and Chincha cultures succeeded each other. The
Tiahuanaco culture centred around Lake Titicaca before the arrival of the Inca,
12 II. PRELIMINARY REMARKS
and extended its influence far into Peru and Bolivia. The realistic art of the
Mochica and of the Chimu, and the arts of the other cultures, throw light on
many aspects of their cultures and enable us to make certain assumptions, for
instance as to their religion and social organization. The results of archaeological
research, which might have thrown light on Inca culture and its origin and
development, are, however, very scanty. The first and most important research
was done by Rowe (1944) in 1941 and 1942. Archaeological data, however,
hardly serve to corroborate history as handed down by the Inca themselves.
Research into Inca culture in the last century for that reason had to be based
almost exclusively on the Spanish chronicles.
§ 2. In spite of the great interest which Inca culture aroused both among
the chroniclers and contemporary scholars, the results of research into this
culture have been most scanty. There is virtually no unanimity of opinion nor
reasonably accurate description of any part of this culture. This state of affairs
can probably be explained as follows.
The first reason is that students of Inca history have hitherto laboured under
certain misconceptions. Most of the Spanish chroniclers employed the frame
work of Inca history — as they considered, on the basis of accounts from their
Inca informants, that it should be reconstructed — not only to give an account
of the origin of the Inca and of the extension of their empire, but also to throw
light on such other aspects of Inca culture as religion and social organization.
The histories written by these chroniclers were based on accounts of the deeds
of the thirteen or so rulers of the Inca dynasty. The last two rulers were the
two brothers Huascar and Atahuallpa who, about six years before the Spanish
conquest, were engaged in civil war. Atahuallpa, the subsidiary son of the last
ruler, Huayna Capac, who had held the whole country united under his sway,
had imprisoned his primary brother Huascar and had him murdered after he
himself had been taken prisoner by the Spanish, by whom he too was to be
killed soon afterwards. Every one of the preceding rulers were said to have
founded his own panaca, a social group consisting of all his descendants with
the exception of his heir. These panaca had an important function in the organi
zation of Cuzco. This simple western explanation of the origin of the panaca,
however, contains no hint of the significance which their remarks about the
panaca had to the Inca informants themselves. As I hope to demonstrate, the
panaca were never formed in the manner described by the chroniclers. More
over, their interpretations of the exploits ascribed to the imperial dynasty,
cannot as such be used as the basis of a description of the history and culture
of the Inca. A few authors, Uhle, Jijon y Caamano and Latcham, already
suspected the non-historical nature of so-called Inca history. Owing to the lack
II. PRELIMINARY REMARKS 13
of evidence supporting their suspicions, however, these authors saw themselves

forced to include the dynasty into their accounts of the origins of the Inca.
Rowe (1944, 1945, 1946) based his chronological arguments concerning the
origin and expansion of the Inca empire wholly on the existence of the dynasty
and the assumed correctness of the accounts of the chroniclers about the suc
cession of the individual rulers within the dynasty. The great eminence which
the dynasty has enjoyed in old as well as in modern descriptions of Inca culture
has often resulted in obscure and improbable explanations of many of its aspects.
If, on the other hand, these questions are viewed in the light of a simul
taneous origin of all the panaca and the causes of the fabricated presentation
of the dynasty can be understood, it may then be possible to make a beginning
at a more balanced examination of the culture of the Inca and to describe it in
a more rational fashion.
The second reason why, in our opinion, so few results were achieved in
research into Inca culture, is the nature of the Spanish chronicles and the
methods by which scholars have studied this culture. Although the contemporary
chroniclers and linguists command the greatest admiration for their observations
on the cultures of Peru, for their descriptions and for the profound and warm
interest they showed in these people, their work fails to meet at least two of
the demands of the modern ethnologist. These demands were, however, hardly
felt on account of the greater knowledge of and closer contact with the Inca
civilization that these contemporary scholars had. In only a few instances do we
know in detail, for instance, to which group of Indians a particular remark
in the chronicles refers. Thus, the material rarely informs us of possible local
differences or of differences between groups and it therefore lacks much, if
not all of the significance it might otherwise have had.
Some of the material of the greatest significance was either presented in so
inconspicuous a manner, or misrepresented to such an extent — probably because
the chroniclers themselves did not fully realise the importance of their material
— that it was simply overlooked, or its significance not at first sight recognised
by later scholars. Even in recent research this situation has given rise to endless
discussions which have led nowhere. The main cause of the futility of these
discussions, in as far as they were based on the chronicles, was the absence of a
touchstone with which the material could be tested; there were no detailed,
reliable descriptions of actual situations. Such a touchstone, one detailed and
reliable description, might have made it possible to test the reliability of the
other data.
The methods which have, since the last century, been applied to the study
of the Inca civilisation have been another cause of the lack of results in these
studies. To begin with, the generally very wide scope of these studies inevitably
brought to light many internal contradictions. The second cause of the lack of
real results in Inca studies has, paradoxically, been the great interest which they
had aroused in the West. For the Spanish chroniclers had projected a most
suggestive image of the organization of the Inca Empire which bore directly
on ideas alive in the western world. The Comentarios Reales (a chronicle written
by the Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, the son of a Spanish noble and a grandson,
on his mother’s side, of the Inca ruler Huayna Capac) in particular, had this
effect on western minds. Some people in Europe and in America credited the
Inca Empire with the utopian character of a centralised welfare state, in which
the wellbeing of all subjects is looked after. With the rise of socialism many
people recognised a socialist or communist state in the Inca Empire. To others,
however, the Inca Empire was a country ruled by dictatorial methods, a no
torious example of a country in which there was no personal liberty for any
body. This kind of interest has been one of the causes of the backward state
of scientific research into the Inca civilisation as compared with the results
achieved with people who did not evoke the same emotions as the Inca.
Finally, the fact that the material for research on the Inca has been limited
almost exclusively to Spanish chronicles of the sixteenth and seventeenth cen
turies, may be said to have been another cause of the unsatisfactory state of
these studies. The very rich material from the Peruvian and Spanish archives
which could have been used fruitfully to increase our knowledge of the Inca civi
lisation, has been scarcely touched. Too little use was made of the results of
research into the more recent history and civilisation of the Indians in Peru,
probably because it was assumed too easily and dogmatically that with the
Empire the civilisation of the Inca had also disappeared. Finally, not enough
research was done into the question of how far the Peruvian data could be
related to the complex of South American civilisations as a whole.
The result is that the image projected by many of the descriptions of the
Inca civilisation is founded almost entirely on assumptions and conclusions
based on far too little factual data and on the blind acceptance of opinions
of former authors on the subject. The degree of reliability of these opinions
was a function of the long succession of authors who had handed them on.
§ 3. a) In 1953 I laid down in a study (Zuidema 1953) the first results

of my investigations into the social organization of the Inca. I was enabled
to continue these investigations later in Peru. At that time I had not been able
to acquire a reliable knowledge of any aspect of the subject. My attention was
directed to particular problems, whose solution seemed to me of prime import
ance to procure insight in the social structure. Three problems I will mention
here.
The history of the Inca, as portrayed by the Spanish chroniclers as well as

by more recent authors, like Prescott (1950), Markham (1911) or Means
(1931), was entwined with that of the dynasty of the thirteen rulers. Every
ruler was supposed to have founded his own panaca. These panaca were social
groups which were said to consist of the descendants of the ruler, with the
exception of the son who succeeded him. No panaca are mentioned of the last
two rulers, Huascar and Atahuallpa, two brothers who were engaged in a civil
war at the time of the Spanish conquest. The panaca of the eleventh ruler,
Huayna Capac, had no place in the organization of Cuzco, unlike those of the
first ten rulers, and the name of his panaca was also different in nature. The
panaca of the first five rulers were said to belong to one half of the population
of Cuzco, which was called Hurin-Cuzco, or Lower Cuzco, and the panaca of
the next five to Hanan-Cuzco, or Upper Cuzco.
These premises, which were at any rate generally accepted as such, seemed
to me to raise several questions to which I could not find answers anywhere.
What was the basis of this principle of bipartition of Cuzco? How was Cuzco
organized before the reign of the tenth ruler, i.e. before all the panaca were in
existence? For it can surely be assumed that if at the time of the Spanish con
quest five panaca in Cuzco belonged to Hurin-Cuzco and five to Hanan-Cuzco,
this was the expression of a particular structural concept of the organization of
Cuzco. One might also ask: did Hanan-Cuzco not exist before the sixth ruler
belonged to it? Or, what was the reason for the change-over from Hurin-Cuzco
to Hanan-Cuzco? Markham does indeed give an explanation for this situation,
but this is founded on a mis-interpretation of a myth related by a Spanish
chronicler without any connection with this question, and thus nothing was in
fact said about this change-over. The presentation of Inca history by the Spanish
chroniclers was nevertheless generally accepted in reconstructions of the history
of the development of the Inca Empire. The dates recorded by one chronicler,
Cabello Valboa, of Inca history after the great battle of the Inca against the
Chanca people, are on the other hand wholly acceptable. This battle is supposed
to have been fought by the man who was to become the ninth ruler, Pachacuti,
in order to protect Cuzco. Rowe (1944, 1945, 1946) considered that the accep
tability of the dates justified not only the acceptance of them as correct but
also of the events related to these dates. Taking these dates and events as his
points of departure, he reconstructed a history of the origin and expansion of
the Inca Empire which can be said to be reasonable. In this reconstruction he
also assumed that the list of kings who had ruled before Pachacuti was also
correct. In her book on Pachacuti, Maria Rostworowski de Diez Cansero (1953)
also gives a historical reconstruction in which she, like Rowe, presents Pacha
cuti as being in the centre of Inca historical events. Both assume that the facts
quoted by them are real historical facts. This picture has not, however, been
proved to be correct because there is no evidence supporting it whatsoever.
In spite of all the logic of their arguments, there is no evidence as to the reality
of this presentation. Although I could produce no proof but only many objec
tions to their arguments, they nevertheless failed to impress me with their
reliability. These objections could be reduced to one main one: that these authors
did not take at all into account that the panaca together appeared to form a
structural part of a particular form of organization which was that of Cuzco.
If this assumption, however, is accepted, this would reduce the whole of Inca
history as it has hitherto been presented, to an absurdity. The only possibility
of achieving a well founded evaluation of the historical image projected by
Rowe and Rostworowski seemed to me to be to clarify the real nature of the
organization of Cuzco and subsequently to see how far the material used by
them in their historical reconstructions can be interpreted differently.
b) The second point to which I should like to draw attention, is the nature
of the ayllu. In his book, Inca culture at the time of the Spanish conquest, the
best description of the Inca civilisation, Rowe (1946) discusses this problem
as well as what former writers have written about it. The most varied meanings
of the word ayllu can be quoted from the relevant literature. The ayllu could
be a group of kin, but it is not known how this group of kin was organized.
The panaca was also an ayllu. The group belonging to a certain territory, even
if it consisted of different, unrelated families, was also called an ayllu, although
the members of a panaca could hardly be assumed to have been tied to a
particular territory. An ayllu could be subdivided into other ayllu. Moieties
were also called ayllu, but moieties could occur at any level, from that of the
village to that of the province. Rowe writes that in the Inca ayllu there existed
“ theoretical endogamy, with descent in the male line” . Instances of obligatory
exogamy, however, can be quoted as well. Betanzos, perhaps, gives the clearest
example of this last possibility when he records that Pachacuti’s envoys made
the boys of one village or province marry the girls of an other village or
province and vice versa. It is generally accepted that matrilineality did exist on
the North coast of Peru. But there are also examples of matrilocality as well
as of matrilineality from the mountain area of North, Central and South Peru.
According to a census of 1647, in Otuzco, a village in North Peru, all the
children whose fathers came from outside, belonged to their mothers’ groups
(A.N.L. Legajo 6, cuaderno 116). In the Calliejon de Huaylas, the mountain
valley of the Santa river in Central Peru, in the seventeenth century the husband
always came to live with his wife if the land of her ayllu was better than that
of his own ayllu 1). Diego de Leon Pinelo, the brother of the famous Antonio
! ) As shown by a census belonging to the archives of the notary public Alvarado, in Huaraz.
de Leon Pinelo, mentions in a letter attached to the census of 1665 of Conde-

suyos province in South Peru (A.H.L. 1228), that it is a well-known fact that
when a man marries a woman of another ayllu, he moves in with her. Because
the ayllu was also the group which belonged to a particular territory, locality
in these instances also implies lineality. In fact, nothing concrete is known
about the ayllu in general and about certain ayllu nothing is known at all.
For this reason alone, the clear and quite detailed description Kirchhoff (1949,
p. 294-299) gives of the ayllu is of no use and cannot be trusted, especially
because he does not give the sources of any of his material. It can only be
assumed that his opinion reflects an impression which bears no relation to actual
situations.
In contrast with these negative results in research on the nature of the ayllu
it appears that in fact the actual organization of Cuzco was the expression of
a well defined structure. Side by side with the ten panaca in Cuzco, there
existed ten other ayllu which were distributed over two moieties in the same
manner as the panaca. Previous research into the nature of the ayllu, then, had
produced no results. One might also conclude that the methods of this research
could never extract much new evidence from the chronicles. One way of escaping
from this deadlock, therefore, seemed to me to examine the nature of the whole
of the organization of Cuzco. If this problem could be solved, there might be a
chance of finding out something more general about “the ayllu” .
c) The third point to which I wish to draw attention is the form of organi
zation in which ten men liable to taxation were placed under one headman,
and groups of fifty, a hundred, five hundred, a thousand, ten thousand and
finally forty thousand men liable to taxation were likewise formed. This, at any
rate, is how this form of organization is described in the chronicles, but in
fact nothing much is known about it. How, for instance, was this form of
organization combined with those of the ayllu, the moieties, the provinces etc.?
Were these numbers really adhered to and were family ties broken when
necessary for this purpose? These questions have, of course, been asked before,
but no answers to them were found in the chronicles.
§ 4. With the discussion of these three points I hope to have given an

impression of the state of my own research at the time of my arrival in Peru.
My aim was to find an actual situation within the scope of my subject which
could serve as a point of departure, as a lead, for my further researches into
the social organization and civilisation of the Inca. This point of departure
was provided by the ceque system, for this furnished me with the necessary
material. One result of this choice of the ceque system as my own point of
departure was the discovery that to the Inca themselves it was in fact the focus
of their own conceptions of the organization of society. I collected the material

which made me realise its importance from three sources.
a) To begin with, by examining the archives I collected material on the
organizations at a local level, which made it possible to place the ceque system
in this context. Secondly, material on the present-day Indians of South Peru
enabled me to interpret that on the Inca. In the third place, organizational
forms in Brazil which are comparable to that of the ceque system, enabled
me to see the latter from this point of view. With these three different kinds
of material I was able to interpret the ceque system and to lend new meaning
to the material from the chronicles.
Below, I shall briefly say something more about my examination of the
archives, of the material on the present-day Indians of Peru and that on the
peoples of Brazil.
Most of the time during my two year sojourn in Peru, Bolivia and Ecuador
was taken up with research in the archives. After a preliminary survey, I worked
mainly in two archives in Lima, from the end of 1953 to May 1954. The
archives I used first was the Archivo Historico of the Ministry of Finance
and Commerce. The records which were of most use to me were the Matriculas
de lndigenas, which were the books of registration of births, marriages and
deaths of the Indians of most provinces of Peru. These registers were composed
for taxation purposes from 1821, the year of Peru’s independence, until 1854,
the year in which the Indians were relieved from paying taxes. In the villages
which still preserved the organization into ayllu, the names of the ayllu into
which they were divided were recorded. The existence of a few other forms
of organization of which the ayllu formed part, can be suspected from these
records. Certain ayllu names occur repeatedly. These were mostly generic names
and included names which related one ayllu in a particular way to one or more
other ayllu. The other ayllu had place names. Although these records date
from about three hundred years after the Spanish conquest, many of the pre
conquest ayllu appeared to have survived. It is not known, however, how far
these ayllu had preserved their original nature.
The second archives I perused in Lima, was the Archivo Nacional del Peru.
This contained documents of the colonial period, from 1530 to 1821. These
documents were far more varied in nature than those of the first archives. The
documents of prime importance to me where those relating to the censuses of
the Indians. The Spanish instituted these censuses almost immediately after
their arrival in the country, partly for taxation purposes. Some very important
documents are included among these records, like, for instance, that from
Otuzco, mentioned above (A.N.L. Legajo 6, Cuaderno 116). As in other docu
ments from North Peru, the matrilineal groups mentioned in this document
are called pachaca or huaranca, which are terms for groups of a hundred and
of a thousand payers of taxes. The term ayllu did not occur in this document,
in contrast with others, from South Peru, in which the terms pachaca and
huaranca occurred only sporadically.
I came upon one, very important, document about which I wish to say a
little more because it ideally met the demands of an ethnologist in search for
factual data about Indians of the Inca Empire at the time of the Spanish con
quest. This document was the census record of the Huanuco province in Central
Peru, instituted in 1562 by Inigo Ortiz de Zuniga at the request of a few Indian
chiefs. They were of the opinion that taxes, assessed at a previous visit, had
become too high because the population had since decreased. The investigation
Ortiz de Zuniga instituted comprised not only a new census but also an ela
borate examination of the economic situation in the province. Village by
village, the composition of every family was described as well as the land it
possessed and its products and the tax assessment. The village chiefs and higher
chiefs had to fill in questionnaires with a mainly anthropological content:
questions about the history of the village, the economic and political situation
of former times, the religion, social organization, marriage customs etc. As a
result of Ortiz de Zuniga’s investigations it has become clear, for instance, how
defence, and worship in the temples of the region were organized, how the
co-existence of the Inca conquerors, the conquered population and others trans
ported into the region, was regulated; which land had formerly been assigned
to the temple, which to the Inca and which to the indigenous population;
how a pachaca, i.e. a group of a hundred payers of taxes, was subdivided
economically and socially and how it functioned in these fields. The whole
census records originally consisted of four manuscripts of about two hundred
and fifty leaves each, but of these four manuscripts two have been lost. Of
the remainder, one was published in the journal of the Archivo Nacional
between 1920 and 1925, and the other between 1955 and 1961. I entirely agree
with John Murra — who argued elsewhere that the whole of the Inca civilisation
should be described anew, taking documents with factual material as the basis
of such a description — when he writes “ that after Huaman Poma’s Coronica
this is the most important single source on Inca social and economic structure
published in the last forty years” (Murra 1961).
Another important collection of documents from the Archivo Nacional del
Peru consisted of records of court cases of Indians, or which concerned Indian
interests. Some of these cases were about succession rights of chiefs. Chiefs’
families which had been demoted by the Inca, collateral lines of chiefs’ families,
or families in which succession was matrilineal, tried to regain influence. In
the last instance the cases were brought against chiefs who had acquired power
through patrilineal inheritance as a result of Spanish influence. Then there

were cases about land. There was one case between two villages near Lima
each of which had a completely different view as to the line of a particular
road, which came from Cuzco and ran through both villages; consequently each
claimed for itself that it lay nearer Cuzco. The village nearer to Cuzco could,
in keeping with the gradations of the ceque system, make claim to greater
importance in relation to the other village.
After a journey along the North coast, to Cajamarca in the mountains and
through the Callejon de Huaylas, the mountain valley of the Santa river in
North Peru, which I undertook for the purposes of examining municipal, legal
and church records, I stayed in Cuzco from August 1954 to January 1955.
There especially, in the Archivo Historico of the University of Cuzco, are still
many important documents relating to Indians. Thus there are, for instance,
documents about rights to, and transfers of, land or houses of Indians. In the
church archives I examined mainly the registers of births, marriages and deaths.
Private papers also proved to be of the greatest significance, as for instance
those of hacienda owners or of Indians, relating to the lands of their ayllu,
for these often included very ancient documents which referred to pre-conquest
conditions. In the case of these papers, however, it was often very difficult to
get permission to peruse them on account of the owners’ distrust. For there
are many instances of cases against Indians or hacienda owners by which they
were deprived by illegal means of their lawful property. The defense was also
wont to demand pieces of land for payment. Acquaintance with the chronicles,
however, made it possible for me to give direction to my researches in the ar
chives of Cuzco and its surroundings. The best results were achieved by a
journey to a village named Acos, which I undertook specially because the
material from the Archivo Historico in Lima suggested that in Acos an impor
tant type of village organization had better than elsewhere survived the destruc
tive influences after the Spanish conquest.
I was able to continue this research in the archives in Bolivia, for instance
in the Archivo Nacional at Sucre, and in Ecuador. More recently, in 1955,
I also examined archives in the United States and the Archivo de Indias in
Seville, Spain.
One of the very first results of this research work in the archives was the
emergence of the variety of the different types of organization at the village as
well as at the provincial level as they had existed at the time of the Inca Empire,
of their geographical limits and individual distinctiveness. Hitherto nothing
has been published about this great variety. It also appeared that, mainly in
South Peru, there were types of organization which bore a great resemblance
to the organization of Cuzco as we know it from the chronicles. As regards
the documents dating from shortly after the Spanish conquest, it can be as
sumed that these reflect a type of social organization which varies little or not
at all from pre-conquest conditions, especially because there is more than one
instance of these types of organization.
b) In the end, only a small fraction of the abundant material collected from
the archives could be used in this study. Before further specifying this, I propose
to outline the results of the anthropological study of the present-day Indians of
Peru and of the comparison of the Inca civilisation with that of the peoples of
Brazil.
I shall be brief about the first subject. I lacked time for doing extensive
anthropological fieldwork in any one place. My studies did, however, enable
me to realize the significance for my own work of many of the data to be
found in modern anthropological literature. Although the development of
Indian society since the Spanish conquest must certainly be taken into account,
it is nevertheless most noticeable how much of the pre-conquest culture has
been preserved. I found modern anthropological and folkloristic descriptive
literature most useful for obtaining greater insight into the old culture, although
in this study I used it only sporadically. Some results of this use of contem
porary anthropology can be seen in chapters IV and V, where I refer to Argue-
das’ study of the village Puquio (Arguedas 1956). The division of present-day
Puquio into four ayllu bears in several respects a great resemblance to the old
division of Cuzco into four quarters. Myths explaining this form of organization
in Puquio had assumed a pseudo-historical character among the Inca. Comparison
with Puquio revealed the true nature and significance of these myths from
Cuzco.
c) As early as 1953 I was struck by the very great superficial resemblance
between the ceque system of Cuzco and the village organization of the Bororo
from the Matto Grosso and that of several of the Ge tribes from East Brazil 2 *).
This resemblance then appeared to extend to several aspects of the social
organization. Thus, the suspicion that the organization into age groups among
the Inca could be interpreted in the same way as that among the Canella
2) Taken generally, the organization of a Bororo village is as follows: The houses stand in a
large circle, in the centre of which is the men's house. The village is divided into two exogamous
moieties, one of which occupies the northern and the other the southern half of the circle.
Besides this, the village is divided in still another way into two halves: the eastern and the
western. These halves are not exogamous. In each quarter there are two clans, and each clan is
divided into an upper, a middle and a lower part. If these are numbered 1, 2 and 3 respectively,
the sequence of the 12 clan parts in each exogamous moiety is, from East to West: 123 123 123
123. From all the houses, each of which belongs to a clan section, paths run to the men’s
house. These paths are comparable to the ceque in Cuzco, while the clan sections of the Bororo
could be identified with the panaca and ayllu of Cuzco. Among the Ge peoples the houses are
also placed in a circle and paths run from them to the centre of the circle.
(Nimuendaju 1946, p. 90-91), drew my attention to relevant facts which

proved the existence of a similar organization among the Inca (Zuidema 1953).
As a result it was possible to explain the Inca material in a way which was
far more in agreement with what was likely to have been the case in this non-
European civilisation. The typically western explanation hitherto accepted was
that the Inca had invented this organization themselves for the purposes of
efficient administration and division of labour3).
The systems in Brazil had already been the subject of theoretical observations
by Levi-Strauss (1952a, 1952b). His third article (Levi-Strauss 1956) 4) was
particularly important to me because it dealt not only with the Brazilian systems,
and that of the Bororo in particular, but because it also contained a discussion
of a question of social structure with which I was at the time particularly pre
occupied. After I had read this article I reached the conclusion that the Inca
material was better able to solve the problem than the data Levi-Strauss had col
lected concerning Melanesia, Indonesia, North America and South America 5).
3) See V ili.
All three articles appeared also in Levi-Strauss 1958.
5) I will attempt very briefly to indicate the subject of the three articles. In the first article,
entitled L a notion d ’arch aism e en eth n o lo gie Levi-Strauss wonders whether it may actually be
said of certain tribes, namely the Ge tribes and the Bororo, that they are more primitive or more
archaic than other South American tribes, that is to say that their development has taken place
more slowly. This has been an accepted fact up to the present. Levi-Strauss suggests, however,
that concerning the Ge and the Bororo it may only be said that they are pseudo-archaic or
pauperised. Two of the reasons he advances for this are: firstly, that these cultures are only
more primitive at certain points but that they know, for instance, a very complex social organi
zation, and, secondly, that the cultures possess certain internal discrepancies, discrepancies which
could not have originated in the cultures themselves.
The second article is entitled L e s stru ctu res so c iale s d an s le B r e sil cen tral et o rien tal. Here
too he discusses the Ge and the Bororo. All these tribes have a complex system of various
moieties which transect each other and each of which has its special function. Levi-Strauss
argues that these dualistic systems, which are placed too much in the foreground by the native
inhabitants and by the investigators, often carry an illusory character because these systems
actually often function quite differently from pure bipartite systems; in addition, other elements
of the social organization such as the kinship system are not in agreement with the moieties.
He assumes that both the Sherente, a Ge tribe, and the Bororo originally knew a system of three
patrilineal and patrilocal groups, besides which a system of matrilineal moieties was introduced.
Among the Sherente this led, among other things, to the addition to the three patrilineal groups
of a fourth: the so-called captive tribe. (A similar phenomenon is found among the Inca). At
the same time, the matrilineal moieties became patrilineal and the four patrilineal groups became
men’s societies. These men’s societies, however, behaved as if they were exogamous patrilineal
groups linked by an asymmetric connubium. The, essentially, identical problem, namely that of
the relationship of the tripartition to the bipartition, is approached by Levi-Strauss from a more
general ethnological point of view in his third article, L e s o rg an isatio n s d u a liste s e x is te n t- e lle s l .
The author’s point of departure is that among various peoples — and sometimes in one and the
same people — in North and South America, Indonesia and Melanesia examples are encountered
of two kinds of dualistic oppositions in society, which he calls diametric structure and concentric
structure. The former is composed, for example, of two exogamous moieties in a village which
This conclusion and the great superficial resemblance of the organization of a

Bororo village with the ceque system, led to my increased interest in the latter.
I perceived how the clarification of this system could make possible discussion
of the most important structural questions of the social as well as of the religious
systems of organization of the Inca. The advantage of the ceque system was also
that it was a real, detailed and well described system which the chroniclers, as
became increasingly clear, had recorded wholly reliably, even if not completely.
It became apparent too that the conclusions reached on the basis of comparison
with the Brazilian cultures could be wholly proved by the Inca material. My
working method in this study has therefore been to avoid as consistently as
possible reference to the Brazilian systems and to deal with such comparisons
with the ceque system in another article. It will be possible there to enter
further into the agreement as well as the differences between the peruvian and
brazilian systems.
§ 5. With these three types of material at my disposal I was finally able to

make the ceque system the point of departure and the object of this study. The
material which was necessary for making the system intelligible but was lacking,
could be supplemented by that from the perusal of archives and by material on
village and province organizations in South Peru. As Kirchhoff (1949) pointed
out, the generic names of the ayllu into which the villages of Collaguas province
were divided in the sixteenth century, were the same as the names of the ceque
in Cuzco. The material I collected in certain villages in Collaguas and on the
organization of Acos, a village mentioned above, which was not, it is true,
situated in Collaguas but near Cuzco, clarified the material cited by Kirchhoff.
Thus, one of the aspects of the ceque system could be explained. Other aspects
each occupy equal and opposite halves of the area. In the concentric structure the opposition
in the village or area is constituted by the centre in relation to the circumference. In addition
to these two kinds of dualism in these regions, tripartitional organizations are also found.
Levi-Strauss wonders what relationships are to be found between these three kinds of organi
zation. He closes his article with the remark that the study of the so-called dualistic systems
according to current theory raises so many inconsistencies and conflicts that there is a temptation
to consider the apparent forms of dualism as superficial distortions of structures whose true
nature is quite different and often more complex.
Although Levi-Strauss has in my opinion seen the problem very clearly, I do not entirely
agree with his elaboration of the data. I cannot here, however, enter into a critical discussion
of this subject. I would only remark that it seems to me that with his third article Levi-Strauss
undermines the first and second. In the first he explained the internal opposition of these cultures
in terms of pseudo-archaism. These oppositions, which in the second article he carries over to
that between bipartition and tripartition, he explains by means of a hypothetical, specific
historical development. In the third article, finally, he explains this opposition by means of a
general theory. The actually irreconcilable opposition between the bipartite and tripartite situa
tions also occurred in Cuzco; but there it must be explained on the basis of the system of
organization.
could be touched on by referring to the organizations of other villages and

provinces. In this manner many of the formal aspects of the ceque system were
traced 6) 7).
The formal analysis of the ceque system would, however, have been im
possible or without any significance if it had not been possible also to invest it
with some meaning. As it appeared, certain factual data from the chronicles
were shown to be most valuable because they were in complete agreement with
the ceque system 8). It then became possible to interpret other material on the
Inca civilisation which turned the social organisation of Cuzco into a living
system and which was in complete agreement with the formal analysis of the
6) I would like to offer a few examples to clarify what the method, followed here, actually
is. The ceque of each group of three ceque are called Collana, Payan and Cayao. The villages
in the province of Collaguas were consistently divided into three ayllu, also called Collana,
Payan and Cayao. These ayllu, each of which comprised 300 taxpayers, were in turn divided
into three sub-ayllu of 100 men each, again called Collana, Payan and Cayao. The organization
of the village of Acos, organized like the villages in Collaguas, made it possible to demonstrate
that in Cuzco the three groups of three ceque each, indicated as 1, 2 and 3 in each of the four
suyu, were mutually related as Collana, Payan and Cayao as well (see V § 1 pp. 114-122).
The comparison of the organization of Cuzco with that of the villages in the environs, composed
of four ayllu called Collana, Payan, Cayao and an, in every instance different, fourth name,
lastly made it possible to prove that the names Collana, Payan and Cayao were also applicable
to three of the four suyu of Cuzco (see IV § 2b pp. 81-84).
7) I must, however, refer to one point in this connection. Only a very small part of the very
large amount of material available in the archives concerning the organization of villages and
provinces in southern Peru, dealing primarily with their division into moieties, ayllu, sub-ayllu,
etc., could be used for the purposes of the present study. Very few organizations showed a
clearly recognizable structure which could be compared to the ceque system. It may be assumed
that during the Spanish conquest all the existing organizations in southern Peru knew, at least
as an ideal, a form of organization comparable to that described in this study for the ceque
system. The spontaneous formation or preservation of these forms of organization was broken
off or severely obstructed under Spanish influence. Various reasons for this may be indicated:
the necessity for this formation was absent; Spanish influence had a destructiveeffect on it;
the population was decimated, so that certain parts of the organizations died out; Spanish
territorial or social units such as villages, repartimientos, encomiendas, haciendas were formed,
which did not take into account the existing native social units; pre-conquest ayllu broke up
into multiple ayllu. Another fact which made the data from the archives unsuitable was that
ayllu bore not only generic names but also place names. In many cases the Spanish sources
give only the place names. Both names were known for a number of ayllu, but for the minority
only the generic names. Only the latter name could provide an indication of the organization
of which the ayllu was a part. In view of all these factors it may indeed be considered remarkable
that there was a sufficient quantity of data suitable for my purpose.
8) To illustrate this too with an example: Formal analysis has shown clearly that Chinchay-
suyu (I) and Collasuyu (II) could be indicated as Collana and Payan. The chronicles indicate
that the primary kin of the ruler were considered as belonging to Chinchaysuyu and the sub
sidiary kin to Collasuyu and at the same time that Chinchaysuyu and Collasuyu were also
indicated by Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco. It was therefore possible to equate the Colana-
Payan relationship with that of primary-subsidiary and of Hanan-Hurin. These identifications
were of the greatest value for the explanation of the ceque system and could be confirmed
with various examples (see IV § 2a, b pp. 77-84).
ceque system. This new approach did, however, necessitate a wholly new
examination of the chronicles, which produced a picture of the Inca civilisation
of which the ceque system was the best and clearest expression. This is not sur
prising, for Levi-Strauss (1955, p. 228-229) made a similar observation with
regard to the significance of the village lay-out in the whole of the Bororo
culture.
For these reasons the ceque system was made the point of departure of this
study. The formal analysis of the ceque system and factual data from the
chronicles confirmed each other completely. It always proved to be possible to
check the facts against each other. The foundation of this point of departure
consisted of solid facts and could gradually and justifiably be broadened. It also
proved to be possible now to solve many problems, like that of the nature of the
organization of Cuzco, the function of the panaca and of the ayllu within this or
ganization; the significance of the so-called history and of the mythology within
the Inca civilisation; the internal structure of the ayllu and its relationship to
other social groups, not only in Cuzco but also certainly in the whole of South
Peru if not beyond; the nature of the organization into moieties and of the orga
nizational forms in which the divisions into three, into four and into five ap
peared; the nature and structure of the religious system; the function in Inca
society of social groups like those of the yanacona, the aclla and the mamacona.
There is also much, however, which can be regarded as being directly connected
with the subjects under discussion which have to remain outside the scope of
this study, like, for instance, the influence of the Inca forms of organization on
the kinship system and kinship nomenclature; the organization of the whole Inca
Empire as a direct extension of the organization of Cuzco; the economic situation.
§ 6. a) I want to draw attention to two reasons why this type of examination

of Inca civilisation can be significant for anthropology and cultural history in
general. The first reason was already indicated by Levi-Strauss (1958,
p. 143-145) in three conclusions in his article “Les structures sociales dans le
Bresil central et oriental” . In his first conclusion he says:
“ II n’est pas douteux que Bororo, Canella, Apinaye et Sherente ont systematise,
chacun a leur maniere, des institutions reelles qui sont, a la fois, tres voisines, et
plus simples que leur formulation explicite. Bien plus: les divers types de groupe-
ment qu’on rencontre dans ces societes: trois formes d’organisation dualiste, clans,
sous-clans, classes d age, associations, etc., ne represented pas, comme en AustraJie
autant de formations dotees d’une valeur fonctionnelle, mais plutot une serie de
traductions, chacune partielle et incomplete, d’une meme structure sous-jacente
qu’elles reproduisent a plusieurs exemplaires, sans jamais parvenir a exprimer ni
a epuiser sa realite.”
In his second conclusion Levi-Strauss says that we must always be wary ol

confusing the natives’ theories about their social organization and the actual
functioning of society. In the third conclusion Levi-Strauss writes:
“ Derriere le dualisme et la symetrie apparente de la structure sociale, on devine

une organisation tripartite et asymetrique plus fondamentale, au fonctionnement
harmonieux de laquelle l’exigence dune formulation dualiste impose des diffi
culty qui sont peut-etre insurmontables. Pourquoi des societes, qui sont ainsi
entachees d’un fort coefficient d’endogamie, ont-elles un besom si pressant de se
mystifier elles-memes, et de se concevoir comme regies par des institutions exo-
gamiques dune forme classique, mais dont elles n’ont aucune connaissance
directe?”
This same problem occurs with relation to the Inca. The . . institutions reelles,
. . . plus simples que leur formulation explicite” I called principles of organiza
tion in my theoretical outline of the organization of Cuzco 9). I should, never
theless, prefer to approach the problem posed by Levi-Strauss in a different way.
One of the reasons why the Australian organizations which Levi-Strauss
includes in his comparisons have been studied so many times and have therefore
become so well known, is their very clear and distinctive structure. Similar
studies have been made, mainly in Leiden, of Indonesian systems. All these
systems had in common that they consisted of unilineal clans, some combined
with double unilineal marriage categories, which were dominated by one par
ticular kinship system. In these cases one dealt with fairly clearcut situations
which enabled one to clarify the particular processes which took place in these
social systems and which were relevant in general anthropological theory. The
systems which involved social groups based on kinship but not on unilineality
were far less clearcut and therefore more difficult to expound.
The Inca system of social organization seems to me to be an almost ideal
medium for studying the systems which are based on non-unilineal kinship
groups, like, for instance, the Brazilian systems discussed by Levi-Strauss. The
Inca system is simple and clearcut. This feature may have given it its superficial
resemblance to the Australian systems. One can trace the uttermost consequences
of the premises on which it is based. It may well be that features inherent in
systems which consist of non-unilineal kinship groups are best examined with
reference to this system. By so doing the problem posed by Levi-Strauss might
even be formulated more simply and more cogently 10).
9) See III.
10) I can perhaps briefly indicate the direction in which I seek the solution of the pheno
menon indicated by Levi-Strauss in his three conclusions. The ayllu was the group of all people
who were descended from one particular ancestor. This formulation implies that in fact each
group to which an individual was linked by father or mother or both could be considered as an
b) The other point to which I wish to draw attention is the significance which
the Inca civilisation could have for cultural history in general. As a so-called
'higher’ culture it could be put on a level, for instance, with the cultures of
Egypt or of Mesopotamia in the third millenium B.C. In the study of these
so-called higher cultures the approach has usually been via the cultures which
succeeded them. The aspects of these cultures which linked them with cultures
which are traditionally studied by anthropological methods, remained in the
dark. With regard to the Inca, one is dealing with such a higher culture, which
was still in existence within the not so distant past, and fragments of which still
survive. These can be clearly observed and studied in anthropological terms
without the need for much recourse to hypothesis. The whole organization of
the state was extrapolated from the organization of Cuzco, which was in turn
based on kinship and on the application of kinship principles. Closely related
organizational forms are encountered among peoples who until recently were
ayllu; this holds also for the largest possible group in the Inca Empire, the empire itself. With
the exception of certain rules concerning incest, each group could be considered as exogamous
or as endogamous according to the specific situation involved. If a man from group A, for
instance, married a woman of group B, then A and B were placed in the exogamous relation
which existed for it in the scheme of the social organization. (Good examples of this are given
on the royal marriages. See V § 5-9 pp. 133-154). But if man A married a woman also belonging
to A then they were both considered as part of two different subgroups of A, which subgroups
in that case assumed an exogamous relation to each other, while A itself was an endogamous
group (for examples of this see IV § 2 f pp. 89*91; V § 4 c pp. 131-133; VI § 4 b pp. 179-182;
IX § 1 pp. 236-240).
In an exogamous relation a group bore the character of a marriage class in an asymmetric
connubium, whether or not included in an exogamous moiety; in an endogamous relation the
same group bore the character of an ayllu. An individual thus always belonged to two groups:
the first bore the character of an exogamous marriage class and the second was the endogamous
group which consisted of the marriage classes of which the former was one. I have described
this situation only in terms of the marital relationships. The relationships indicated were also
determined by other factors. Nonetheless, these relationships obtained their symbolic expression
in terms of marital relationships.
Although this situation can be completely elaborated for the Cuzco of the Inca, we possess
no examples of how a given historical event was placed in the system of the organization of
Cuzco. I am, however, able to give a modern example which is rather suggestive of how the
system functioned in actuality (see VII pp. 211-212). Shown schematically, the situation in this
example is as follows: Village A annually stages a ritual battle with the smaller villages B, C,
D, etc. of the neighbourhood. Marriages are made with unmarried women captured from the
opponents. Village A, however, has also — together with several other villages P, Q, R. etc. —
a ritual battle with the small city X with the same consequences as in the first fight. We see
here a hierarchy of groups with various representations of exogamy which carry various con
sequences for one particular group.
In Chapter V I (§ 6 pp. 183-192) the fact is discussed that a group among the Inca could bear
both an exogamous and an endogamous character. Now, the exogamous marriage classes were
matrilineal, while the endogamous ayllu was considered to be patrilineal. Therefore I will show
also how the concepts of matrilineality and patrilineality were attached by the Inca to the
functions of exogamy and endogamy.

counted amongst the most primitive in South America. Levi-Strauss (1958,

p. 113-132) typifies the cultures of these peoples not as archaic but pseudo-
archaic, because they are, in his opinion, not truly primitive but pauperised, by
which he implies that their cultures in former times attained a higher level1than
they do at present. It seems as if he already suspected the existence of a link
between the organizations of these peoples and that of the Inca. He mentions
as an argument for this pseudo-archaism the occurrence in these pauperised cul
tures of contradictory elements which could not have originated in the regions
where these people are found at present. I do not propose to discuss his theory
and all his arguments here, but I wish only to note that the examples of con
tradictory elements he records in the social organization of these people, also
occurred among the Inca. In Inca culture the contradictory elements emerge from
the system of organization. It is likely, therefore, that they can be similarly
explained in Brazil. The most important point to me (which by no means
detracts from Levi-Strauss’ argument) is that within the higher culture, like
that of the Inca, a form of organization was applied which was closely related
to forms of organization applied among primitive peoples, like those in Brazil.
In both instances, these related forms of organization were shown to be viable.§
§ 7. In this study I have approached a culture in the way that, for instance,
Granet (1939) approached that of ancient China and Held (1935) that of
ancient India. There is one important difference. Granet and Held devised their
own framework within which they examined and attempted to describe as clearly
and simply as possible the structure of the societies in question. The limitations
they encountered were largely self-imposed. The Inca, on the other hand, had
a framework for society, the ceque system, devised by themselves, which was
highly complicated, but of which they themselves recognised all the implications
and consequences. Their own theories about the values of their culture and their
views on this subject, were best expressed in the ceque system. I have attempted
merely to translate the Inca expression of the ceque system: in social organiza
tion, religion, mythology and so-called history, into anthropological terms. The
Inca methods of formulation were frequently as exact as those of science.
Levi-Strauss argued in his second conclusion, cited above, that a distinction
should be made between the theories a people may have itself about its social
organization, and the actual functioning of this society. In my own research I
was limited almost exclusively to the examination of the first element of this
distinction. The actual functioning — and what should 'actual’ be understood
to mean? — cannot, in my opinion, be understood until the indigenous theories
about the organization are clearly understood. But then we discover that, for
instance, the organization of Cuzco, or that of the ayllu, as the general designa-
tion of a group, was not and could not be concerned with particular, narrowly
defined groups of people who were organized in one particular way; they
referred rather to concepts, theories, or structural principles (if one wants to
use this term) dealing with social processes, which took place largely outside
the active will of the Inca 11). The question which should be asked, therefore,
is whether the form of organization primarily determined the social processes,
or whether, after a particular process had taken place, a particular representation
of the event was not rather devised within the known forms of organization.
Without an understanding of the Inca theories and concepts of their own
culture, this, as recorded in the chronicles, would be wholly unintelligible. Only
with this understanding can many historical facts and events of the Inca period
and later history, become intelligible 12) 13).
Beside the advantages the ceque system offered as a reliable means of describ
ing the culture, it also had the disadvantage that it involved the detailed examina
tion of its great complexity. This book inescapably reflects this complexity.
§ 8. One difficulty not usually encountered in research based on con

temporary anthropological material, was that my material consisted mainly of
myths, pseudo-historical events, etc., which had, moreover, been recorded in the
chronicles for completely different purposes than for which I have employed
them. Although the material itself is mostly clear enough if one is conscious of
the purpose it has served, the form in which it is presented nevertheless often
detracts from its clarity. So, too, does the method by which it has to be extracted
from the chronicles. Finally, it should be noted that the evidence, which is
widely scattered among the different chronicles, some of which are extremely
difficult to consult, is usually presented in an abominable style which renders its
examination and the tracing of important details virtually impossible.
Before surveying the chronicles I used, I wish to say something about them in
general. Several surveys have been made of the chronicles (e.g. Means, 1928;
Baudin, 1928; Rowe, 1946; Santisteban Ochoa, 1946; Horkheimer, 1950;Porras
11) It may even be asked whether it is not possible that the highly trained quality of Inca
thought and the conscious conversion of a many-coloured mosaic of human society to a scheme
which was simple in its design and which permitted the realisation of as many as possible of
the values of the culture in a flexible manner — whether these factors did not play a large part
in the accomplishment of a truly organized empire which consisted of more than a loose group
of vassal states, paying tribute to a small group of conquerors. The Inca applied the organization
of Cuzco to that of the entire empire.
12) I have given some examples of this. See VII pp. 211-212 and IX § 2 pp. 240-241.
13) For a more extensive and theoretical discussion of the distinction made here between
the population’s own theories about their social organization and its actual functioning I refer
to the study by P. E. de Josselin de Jong on D e v isie d e r p articip an ten op bun c u ltu u r (The
participants’ view of their culture) 1956.
Barrenechea, 1955). In these surveys, the authors and their chronicles were dis
cussed mainly in relation to the position they occupied in Spanish history. Their
reliability was evaluated primarily on the basis of what could be said about the
authors themselves. There was far less opportunity for evaluating their reliability
in relation to their data on the Inca culture. It seems to me that these two aspects
of reliability must be clearly distinguished. I shall offer no general opinion
as to the second aspect of the reliability of the chronicles; not enough is
known for such an evaluation. I could evaluate data, from whichever chro
nicler, only on the basis of the ceque system, the material from the archives,
comparison with the Brazilian cultures and the relations with other data.
Owing to this working method I was unable to derive support from the
work of other authors. I did not take into account the origin of data from
the chronicles in the use I made of it. Some impression, however, of my opinion
of the usefulness of any particular chronicle in relation to my subject can be
gained from the degree in which I made use of it. Thus, I have made much
use of Sarmiento’s chronicle of 1572; there was also very important material
in the chronicles by Cristobal de Molina, of about 1573, in Perez Bocanegra’s
book of 1631, in the chronicles of the Indian Joan de Santacruz Pachacuti
Yamqui Salcamaygua of about 1613, and that by Felipe Poma de Ayala, written
between 1584 and 1614.
One advantage of this method was that much of the material from the
chronicles which their authors had recorded for no other reason than that they
had got it from their informants, could be used. The significance of this material
was probably often not appreciated by the chroniclers themselves. N o desire to
prove anything can therefore have played a role in its recording; this fact cannot
but increase the reliability of the material. The division, by Means, of the
chronicles into a 'Garcilaso school’, which was pro-Inca, and a 'Toledo school’,
which was supposed to be anti-Inca because it saw the Inca as conquerors and
suppressors, seems to me to make no sense at all, quite apart from the question
whether an author like Sarmiento can be labelled as being anti-Inca. I do think,
however, that a distinction should be made between Murua and Poma de Ayala
on the one hand and all the other chroniclers on the other. For Murua and Poma
de Ayala show much resemblance in their material which varies from that of the
other authors. These two men knew each other. There can be no question only
of mutual copying because they both mention wholly original material as well.
I do not consider the fact that their opinions vary from those of the other
authors, detracts from the reliability of Murua or Poma. It is necessary, however,
to attempt to trace the reasons for this variation, for which, in one instance, an
explanation can be given 14).
14) See IX § 1 pp. 236-240.
In the following discussion on the chroniclers I shall mention only the most
important ones whose work has been quoted in this book, and I shall indicate
only their relevance to this study. The sequence in which I enumerate them is,
as far as possible, in the order of their importance. For further comment on the
authors I refer in the first place to Rowe (1946, p. 192-197).
The ceque system itself is described in the Historia del Nuevo Mundo written
in about 1653 by the Jesuit Bernabe Cobo ( 1956), in the chapter called Relacion
de los ceques. He had probably taken the material from a manuscript by
Cristobal de Molina, 'el Cuzqueno’, which has since been lost. A deal of other,
important material is also preserved in Cobo’s book. The gaps in the Relacion
de los ceques with regard to the social groups which had a role in the ceque
system, are filled completely by data from Molina’s chronicle and partly by that
from Sarmiento’s.
The most material by far could be taken from Sarmiento’s chronicle (1947),
written in 1572 at the command of the viceroy Toledo. Sarmiento, moreover,
records the informants he used. Of all the chronicle material, his is probably the
best co-ordinated. Doubtful elements in some of his most important data could
be explained from material from the other chronicles on the same subjects.
Cristobal de Molina (1943) was a priest in Cuzco. He was called el Cuzqueno
to distinguish him from a contemporary chronicler of the same name. In about
1573 he wrote a most interesting chronicle about Inca religious practices in
Cuzco which still merits a great deal of further research. I touched on Molina’s
importance above when discussing Cobo.
Juan de Betanzos (1880) wrote his chronicle in about 1551. This chronicle
deals almost exclusively with events connected with Pachacuti. The significance
of these events lay in the way in which they were the expression of one particular
element of the organization of Cuzco 15). In this respect, Betanzos provides the
best material. His material demonstrates an accuracy and co-ordination which is
unequalled by the other authors. His material, moreover, is corroborated by that
of other authors. One wonders whether Betanzos did not obtain his material
from informants who belonged to Pachacuti’s panaca. One might also wonder
whether in fact Sarmiento also had informants who were of the panaca of
Yahuar Huacac, the seventh ruler, which enabled him to be far more detailed
and accurate about this ruler than any of the other chroniclers.
Joan de Santacruz Pachacuti Yamqui Salcamaygua (1950) (henceforth called
Pachacuti Yamqui) belonged to an Indian chiefs’ family from Canas province
which was situated in the Aymara linguistic area, about 100 KM distance from
Cuzco. He composed his chronicle in about 1613. His description of the myth of
15) See III; IV § 2a pp. 77-80, § 5 pp. 103-113.

origin of the Inca is, nevertheless, not only more detailed and clearer, when
compared with Sarmiento’s version, but also better reflects its significance with
regard to the social organization of the Inca. The perusal of Pachacuti’s text,
however, was made particularly difficult by the nature of his style. It will
probably be a long time before full use has been made of his chronicle.
These observations about Pachacuti Yamqui apply to an even greater extent
to Poma de Ayala (1944). He wrote between the years 1584 and 1614. His
description of the age groups among the aclla, which was corroborated by data
from Pachacuti Yamqui, was of particular interest to me. Poma’s description of
the organization of Aymaraes province agrees completely with the data in the
archives. A great deal of his other material might similarly prove to be valuable.
It has not yet been proved, as Rowe asserts, that his observations on the so-called
history of the Inca are unreliable. They merely seem to indicate the existence of
a divergent tradition.
Gutierrez de Santa Clara, a Mexican mestizo, lived between about 1520 and
1603. He fought in the civil wars in Peru and wrote their histories. He devoted
a few chapters in these books to the Inca, which were of particular importance
to me. He is the only chronicler who asserts that it was not Manco Capac, the
first Inca ruler, who conquered Cuzco, but either Pachacuti, the ninth, or his
son Tupac Yupanqui. His description of the organization of Cuzco and his
picture of Inca history are consistent with this assumption. In his history he
ascribes to the rulers before Pachacuti (except in the version of a dynasty of
rulers which was also known to him) the position as contemporary chiefs of
groups in the organization of Cuzco. This internal consistency renders his
material valuable and reliable in my vision, especially because his description of
the organization of Cuzco agrees completely with those by Sarmiento and
Betanzos. Although the material of the latter two also bore closely on Pachacuti,
their historical interpretation was completely different16).
The value and reliability of the Comentarios Reales of 1609, by Garcilaso de
la Vega (1945), which used to be rated very highly, are at present often
doubted. It is difficult to separate reliable and unreliable material. The reliability
of much of the material can, indeed, be questioned on account of the purposes
for which Garcilaso used them. Some of it is not necessarily inaccurate. Other
parts I could make very good use of, as for instance the tradition, recorded only
by Garcilaso, regarding the four rulers, among them Manco Capac, who came
from Lake Titicaca and divided the earth between them. This material of Gar
cilaso’s can be shown, with that of other authors, to fit completely within the
larger framework of the organization of Cuzco.
16) See VI § 9 pp. 203-207.

I shall express no opinions about Bias Valera, a Peruvian Jesuit who had a
native mother, and who was often quoted by Garcilaso. On the evidence of other
material I would say that his material on the priests and their organizations, in
as far as I have made use of it, is reliable. In this opinion I differ from Rowe
(1946, p. 300), who, I think, did not have sufficient data for comparison.
In 1551 Cieza de Leon wrote his Cronica del Peru (1945) in the form of a
travel diary, composed during his journeys as a soldier. In that same year he also
wrote the Segunda parte . . . (1943), which consists of a complete description
of Inca civilisation. Some of his data, to which later authors did not refer, were
extremely useful to me.
The descriptions by Polo de Ondegardo, a lawyer, of several aspects of Inca
civilisation, written between 1561 and 1571, and the Historia Natural y Moral
de las Indias, by the Jesuit Jose de Acosta (1954), published by him in 1590,
agree in their versions of Inca history which otherwise diverge from the tra
ditional one. It is not possible that Acosta merely copied Polo, for he adds certain
data which, in the first place, link up logically with the rest of the material, and,
secondly, can be checked from Sarmiento’s chronicle. Moreover, the shift from
Gutierrez’s version of Inca history to that of all the other authors can be
explained only from Polo’s and Acosta’s versions. It was their work which
finally made it possible to assign to the Inca rulers their proper places in the
ceque system.
I would value the chronicle by Martin de Murua (1613) more highly than
does Rowe. In 1953 I consulted a photostat copy of the manuscript which a
pupil of Professor Manuel Ballesteros Gaibrois, of Madrid, had just discovered
in the library of the Duke of Wellington in London. This manuscript is far more
detailed and complete than that used for Constantino Bayle’s edition (Murua
1946), which already compared favourably with the one (Murua, 1922-25)
with which Rowe had to be satisfied. This manuscript from London contains
all the chapters which are missing in the other editions, as well as the drawings
which are mentioned in these other editions but not reproduced. The chapters
have also been much better edited, even if sometimes completely differently and
more comprehensively and the Indian names are usually spelt more accurately.
In this study I shall refer only to this manuscript. Unfortunately, this chronicle
has not yet been published. This, and several other chronicles, I was able to con
sult only in Spain or in Peru and I was, therefore, unable to refer back to them
when new possibilities presented themselves in particular problems.
Perez Bocanegra’s book (1631) was a manual for priests in Indian villages.
It has not, as far as I know, been used hitherto in research on the Inca. Perez
Bocanegra for a long time had a parish in Andahuaylillas, a village not very far
from Cuzco, and it can be assumed that his material relates to situations in his
village. The questions which he recommends for use in the confessional are in
fact provided with their own answers. In this way we are furnished with solid
facts about a particular group of Indians. Perez Bocanegra also wrote about
kinship nomenclature and the kinship system of the Indians.
One of the most important works about pre-conquest Peru is that by the Jesuit
Francisco de Avila (1939). At the beginning of the seventeenth century he col
lected Indian myths in Huarochiri, a village near Lima. Because these myths
relate only to Huarochiri, I have made little use of them in this book.
Arriaga (1920), who, like Avila, was an ‘Estirpador de la idolatria’, recorded
important material on the religion of the Indians, mainly those of Central Peru.
Important chronicles of the sixteenth century which covered the whole of the
Inca civilisation, were those by Miguel Cabello Valboa (1951) and Bartolome
de las Casas (1939). Those by Roman y Zamora (1897) and Anello Oliva
(1895) were of less importance and contained but little original material.
I used the lnfortnaciones, by the Viceroy Francisco de Toledo (1940), con
sisting of comments by old Indians who were questioned between 1570 and
1572, exclusively to supplement Sarmiento’s chronicle, which was also composed
at Toledo’s instructions, with regard to the ayllu that existed in Cuzco before
the Inca.
In chapter V ili I have shown the value of the list of more than a hundred
Inca rulers recorded by Fernando de Montesinos (1957). Montesinos lived from
1593 to 1655 (?).
In his ‘Compendium y description de las lndias Occidentals, Antonio Vaz
quez de Espinosa, who died in 1630, gives a geographical description of the then
Spanish Americas. The few chapters about the Inca derive their material mainly
from Garcilaso, but they also contain some very interesting data from unknown
sources.
I was able to make much use of the Relaciones Geogrdficas (1881-’97), which
are descriptions of the provinces composed at the instructions of the Spanish
king in the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth centuries.
Another description by Christobal de Castro and Diego Ortega Morej on (1936)
of 1558 is of the Chincha valley on the South coast of Peru at the time of
the Inca.
Fernando de Santillan (1950), a lawyer, wrote in 1563, mainly about ad
ministrative affairs in the Inca Empire. In his Historia General. . . Antonio de
Herrera, who lived from about 1545 to 1624, and who had never himself been
in America, made use of chronicles which have since been lost.
Finally, I was also able to make good use, not only for translating words but
also for obtaining information on the Inca civilisation, of the grammar (1951 a j
and the dictionary (1951 b) of 1560, by Domingo de Santo Tomas, and the
grammar (1607) and dictionary (1608) by Diego Gonzales Holguin (referred

to henceforth as Holguin), both of the Quechua language, and of the grammar
and the dictionary by Ludovico Bertonio (1612), of the Aymara language as it
was spoken in Juli, on Lake Titicaca.
§ 9. Of modern authors, five, Seler, Uhle, Latcham, Jijon y Caamano and Val-
carcel directed their attention especially to the organization of Cuzco. It is remark
able that, with the exception of the first, they were all obsessed by the question of
the origin of Cuzco and of the Inca, and did not examine the organization of
this town on its own merits. Eduard Seler (1915) gave the best approach to the
problem in his lecture, Vber die soziale Stellung des Khapax Inca, at the Con
gress of Americanists in 1894. He made a clear distinction between the different
categories of social units which are important for a description of the organiza
tion of Cuzco. He already posed the question whether the dynasty of rulers was
not a fictitious one. He concluded by asking whether all the members of the
actually ruling family in Cuzco did not belong to one ayllu, namely the Khapax
aylilu, a conclusion which seems to me to be wholly acceptable.
Uhle (1912), in his article Los ort genes de los Incas, tried first by linguistic
and subsequently by archaeological methods to reach some conclusions about the
origin of the Inca, in order to be able to use for this same purpose the material
on the panaca, i.e. the groups formed by the descendants of the different rulers,
and the other groups of which the organization of Cuzco consisted. Although
Uhle denied the reality of the existence of the dynasty of rulers and regarded the
rulers as having been no more than the chiefs of the different panaca, he never
theless used the material on the social groups of Cuzco for his historical recon
structions. He took his material about these groups from Sarmiento’s, Cobo’s and
Molina’s chronicles, i.e. he used the same data I used for my point of departure.
From among these sources, Seler used only Sarmiento’s and Molina’s chronicles.
Cobo’s material is found in the “ Relacion de los ceques” , which was based on
the ceque system. Uhle made no use himself of the ceque system. I was unable
to corroborate Uhle’s conclusions about the organization of Cuzco.
In 1928 Ricardo Latcham wrote his book Los Incas. Sus on genes y sus ayllus
(The Inca. Their origin and their ayllu). The concepts with which Latcham
explains the organization of Cuzco and the Inca civilisation, are those of
matriarchy and totemism. On the basis of the few existing facts, several of which
he gives without reference to their sources, he produces such a mass of gratuitous
assumptions, that his results can only be called a figment of the imagination.
Thus he speaks, for instance, of a ‘council of old women’ among the Inca. It
transpires afterwards that on the basis of the resemblance which he recognised
between the civilisations of the Iroquois and the Inca, he concluded that such a
council must have existed among the Inca as it did among the Iroquois, although
he had not a scrap of evidence to support this assumption.
Jijon y Caamaho (1959), in his Los origenes del Cuzco of 1934, like Uhie
uses archaeological and linguistic methods in his arguments, side by side with
the material from the chronicles about the different social groups in Cuzco.
Although Jijon y Caamaho uses far more material than Latcham and documents
it better, his conclusions do not seem to me to be much more felicitous. Jijon was
of the opinion, for instance, that four different periods could be distinguished
in the history of Cuzco, which were that of Aymara domination, followed by one
of Quechua influence, one of domination by the Atacameno from North Chile,
and finally a further period of domination by the Quechua. His evidence does
not, in my opinion, by any means justify such conclusions. It can in fact be
safely said that hardly anything is known yet about this history.
Finally, there is Valcarcel, who in his article Sobre el origen del Cuzco.
Resumen (On the origin of Cuzco. A resume) of 1939, restricts himself to
recording, point by point, the data on the first groups of people living in Cuzco,
on the origin myths and the opinions of Uhle, Jijon y Caamaho and Latcham.
He ends with a few conclusions.
I shall mention two other books which are not restricted to the subject of
Cuzco and its organization. In 1946 Imbelloni (1946) published his Pachakuti
IX. (El Inkario Critico). This book is centred around two main points. In the
first place he points to the significance of the number ten in the genealogy of
the Inca rulers and suggests that there was question of only five rulers in this
genealogy. His second point is the central position occupied by the ruler
Pachacuti and the significance of his name, which means ‘world change'.
Although Imbelloni supported his arguments with too few facts, I think that he
looked in the right direction for a solution of the problems of the history of
the Inca as it has been recorded.
Kirchhoff (1949) wrote a short article, ‘The social and political organization
of the Andean peoples’ in the Handbook of South-American Indians. In it he
restricts himself mainly to the Inca Empire and its capital. This article seems to
me to be the first level-headed, accurate approach to the problem. I doubt,
however, the validity of his distinction between the social organizations of the
Andean peoples and those of other peoples in South America on the grounds
that the former systems are based on kinship to a lesser degree than the latter.
Although we shall never know what the actual situation was among the Andean
peoples at the time of the Spanish conquest, their social organization was
probably described no less in kinship terms than those of other peoples, as will
appear in the present study of the organization of Cuzco 17).
17) Kirchhoff divides his articles into the following sections: Introduction; kinship and social
I shall discuss no other modern authors on the Inca civilisation. In the

present study I was faced by a special problem. I saw two possibilities of solving
this problem which were, however, mutually exclusive. One way was to extend
my studies into present-day literature on the subject in the hope that this would
produce a solution. Such a study would have resulted mainly in reconnaissance
work and, as I hope to have demonstrated, in an abortive attempt critically to
study the present-day literature on the subject. In view of past experiences with
this literature, I did not consider that the problem would come any nearer to its
solution by this method.
Secondly, I could attempt to solve the problem myself, and I was of the
opinion that I had all the material necessary for this method at my disposal.
This was the method I chose and which I hope has been productive.
This study has inevitably acquired a highly specialised and technical character.
Much more research will have to be done in order to achieve a general, critical
discussion of the traditional image of the Inca civilisation. It will perhaps then
be possible to acquaint the non-specialist with the real nature of the Inca
civilisation.
stratification; age groups; numerically patterned groupings; empire organization and conquest;
the church.
Although the entire article is extremely clearly written, the reader finds solid ground under
his feet only in the sections ‘age groups’ and ‘numerically patterned groupings' because only
there are concrete data discussed. He mentions for the age groups several ‘systems of age grades’
in the various provinces. Although he notes the regularity of the time intervals in the age
groups, his interpretation of the data is only partially correct and he has not fully grasped the
system on which the regularity is based.
For the ‘numerically patterned groups’ he confines himself to those of Cuzco. He distinguishes
1) a division into the moieties Hanan- and Hurin-Cuzco; 2) a division into ten clans — five
in each moiety — , each founded by one of the rulers; the four districts (suyu); a division of
the region around Cuzco by means of the ceque. He makes no suppositions concerning the sig
nificance of these groupings. Remarkably enough, under 2) he does not report the ten non-
aristocratic clans or ayllu. Since, however, he assumes in the first section that the ayllu in the
Inca Empire each comprised both aristocratic and non-aristocratic individuals, I surmise that
according to him in Cuzco the ten aristocratic panaca each formed one ayllu together with a
non-aristocratic ayllu. As may be seen from my whole argumentation in this study, this conclusion
cannot be correct. Kirchhoff sees the division into four districts as deriving from the Aymara,
from the region around and to the south of Lake Titicaca. He gives no evidence for this propo
sition — which in my opinion can be shown with many examples to be incorrect.
Although Kirchhoff recognises a typical structure in the organization of ten panaca, in his
penultimate section he accepts the Inca presentation of the origin of the panaca, two facts which
cannot be logically reconciled. This section and the one on ‘kinship and social stratification’
consist so largely of general assertions — after each of which the reader is constrained to put a
question mark, even though he can agree with some of them — that I shall not discuss these
sections. The difficulty is again that Kirchhoff here, in contrast to his description of the numer
ically patterned groups, cannot make use of a concrete situation, so that none of the assertions
supplies material for further investigation, the more so since hardly any reference is made to
material in the literature. This also holds, to a lesser extent, for the section on the church.
§ 1 0 . In the following chapters the organization of Cuzco will be compared

with those of villages and provinces in South Peru. In some of these the Aymara
language was spoken, in other Quechua, the language the Inca themselves also
used. Because there are no indications in the social organizations of the peoples
of the two linguistic areas of a distinction in types of social organization cor
responding to the linguistic one, I shall make no distinctions based on linguistic
material.
When native names are used, I adopt the spelling current in the chronicles
or in present-day Peru. N o attempt has been made to produce a scientific
orthography, especially since in most of the translations of passages from the
chronicles, the words had in any case to be reproduced in the spelling in which
they occurred in these passages; a more scientific orthography would involve
interpretations which might not be justified.
CHAPTER THREE
THEORETICAL SURVEY OF THE ORGANIZATION

OF CUZCO
§ 1. The descriptions which the Spanish chroniclers have left us of the
organization of Cuzco are based wholly on information from people who had
themselves, or whose parents of grandparents had, lived under the Inca Empire.
O f the city of Cuzco, as it had been organized under the Inca, the Spanish saw
little or nothing at all. Even documents which might have corroborated the
informants' accounts, were wholly non-existent. The chroniclers — and later
scholars with them — therefore accepted the image of Cuzco imparted to them
by their informants at its face value. They interpreted their data in the light of
their own culture and of what they saw as similar manifestations in their own
culture. Of the system of organization of Cuzco, as their informants presented
it, the real nature and the concepts behind it eluded them. A description and
examination of the system was for this reason the main purpose of this study.
The organization of the Inca Empire as a whole was an extension and extra
polation of the system of organization of Cuzco. A study of the organization
of the capital is therefore the best point of departure for that of the whole
Inca Empire.
§ 2. The sources on the organization of Cuzco appear to be mutually and

internally contradictory. I shall give two examples. About Manco Capac we read
(Sarmiento 1947, cap. 11, p. 117) that he founded the Inca dynasty called
Capac ayllu. We also learn from the same source (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 54,
p. 235) that Capac ayllu (I 1 b) was founded by Tupac Yupanqui, the tenth
ruler of the same dynasty, and that the panaca of Manco Capac was Chima
panaca (IV 2 b) (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 14, p. 134). Another example: in the
passages cited in chapter I from Cobo, Molina and Sarmiento, Chinchaysuyu
and Antisuyu together were called Hanan-Cuzco (because the panaca of the
rulers of Hanan-Cuzco belonged to these two suyu) and Collasuyu and Cuntisuyu
together were called Hurin-Cuzco (because the panaca of the rulers of Hurin-
Cuzco belonged to these two suyu). Other chroniclers, however, call only Chin
chaysuyu Hanan-Cuzco, and Collasuyu Hurin-Cuzco 1). As will appear later,
these contradictory accounts cannot all be fitted into a single description of the
social organization of Cuzco, since they relate to different representations of this
1) See IV § 2a pp. 77-80, § 4 p. 102.

40 III. THEORETICAL SURVEY OF THE ORGANIZATION OF CUZCO
system. Several of these representations can be treated as one because they vary
only in detail. Altogether there appear to have been three different representa
tions of the organization of Cuzco. The differences between them stemmed
from the different ways in which the relationships of the social groups men
tioned in connection with the ceque system were regarded. These groups could
thus be placed in wider associations in different ways. Certain individuals could
appear as the representatives of different groups; certain generic names could,
likewise, stand for different social groups in the ceque system.
The representations of the organization of Cuzco were, however, all three
based on combinations of three basic principles of organization which might be
described as the division into three, or tripartition, into four, or quadripartition,
and into five, or quinquepartition. In order to set out the line of argument in the
following chapters, I shall in this chapter outline these three principles of organi
zation and their combinations which resulted in the three different represen
tations.
This chapter may be considered as an, — entirely theoretical —, summary of
the description of the organization of Cuzco, and at the same time as a proposi
tion to be proved. The argumentation in the following chapters cannot, because
of the nature of the evidence, be presented in the same logical sequence as in
this theoretical review. I shall therefore now indicate in compressed type
where and in what way the evidence is provided in the present study. The
chapters covering the three representations of the organization of Cuzco require
not only a description of these representations, but also a development of the
theory on which the organization of Cuzco was based, which amounts to a
description of the principles of organization and their operation in this organiza
tion. In the sections concerning the three representations a resume will, therefore,
be given, of the relevant chapters, indicating the main lines of the argument.
At the end of this chapter a discussion of the nature of the principles of
organization and their interrelation is given.
§ 3. The first principle of organization was based on a division of the
society into three groups. I shall call these groups Collana, Payan and Cayao,
names which we have already come across in the ceque system. The relationships
between the three groups is described in various ways in the different chronicles.
The combination of this first principle of organization with a second one added
several other factors to these descriptions. The facts of the relationships of the
three groups relevant to our investigation, are as follows.
The point of departure in any account of the organization of society was
invariably the position of those most highly placed in it. Collana indicated the
endogamous group of ego and of the ancestors of all Collana people. All Collana
people were the primary kin (also called the legal kin) of ego. The rest of
humanity, not related to Collana, and from which Collana men could choose
their subsidiary wives, was called Cayao. (These wives are those referred to by
III. THEORETICAL SURVEY OF THE ORGANIZATION OF CUZCO 41
the Spanish as “ illegitimate” .) The offspring of the subsidiary unions of Collana

men with non-Collana women, were called Payan. That is to say that the
existence of Payan was explained from the two different functions Collana
could fulfill in society: that of an endogamous and that of an exogamous group.
But Payan and Cayao could also function as endogamous groups.
The mutual relationships between Collana, Payan and Cayao were regarded
as corresponding to those between the group of aristocratic rulers, that of their
assistants, servants and substitutes, and that of the non-aristocratic population.
We shall enter later into the meanings and translations of the terms Collana,
Payan and Cayao 2). Synonyms also occur, instead of these terms. The names
Allauca (right), Chaupi (centre) and Ychoc, Choque or Lloque (left) are also
used, mainly in central Peru. In the Aymara linguistic area in South Peru the
words Cupi (right), Chaupi or Taypi, and Checa (left) are substituted. The
word Chauin, also used in Cuzco itself, can be regarded as meaning the same
as Chaupi, Taypi or Payan 3).
In contrast to the following principle of organization and the combination of
the two, that of Collana-Payan-Cayao appears also in an essentially pure form
without contributory factors which confuse recognition of it.
a) The most distinct is the mutual relation between Collana, Payan and Cayao
as primary kin of ego, subsidiary kin and non-related individuals described in
terms of the first representation (Chapter IV, § 2 a, b pp. 77-84). According to
Betanzos, the ruler — and probably all his predecessors and successors — with
his primary kin belonged to I and his subsidiary kin to II. Betanzos also gives a
definition of the distinction primary/subsidiary. Non-related people belonged to
III + IV. Comparison of the suyu organization in Cuzco with the organization
of a few villages makes it clear that in their mutual relationship I = Collana,
II = Payan and III + IV = Cayao (Chapter IV, § 2 b pp. 81-84).
In the second representation the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco, presented as heads
of certain groups in Cuzco, belong to Collana and the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco as
their subsidiary brothers to Payan; the group from which they all choose their
wives is Cayao (Chapter V, § 3 pp. 128-129). Comparison of Cuzco with other or
ganizations enables us to see, in the second presentation, Collana in the group
I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV 1; Payan in I 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2 and Cayao
in I 3 + II 3 + HI 3 + IV 3 (Chapter V, § 1 pp. 114-122).
From page 129 to 154 I show why the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco, those of Hurin-
Cuzco and their wives can be connected in this presentation with these three
groups respectively.
We have already met the Collana-Payan-Cayao relationship of the third re-
2) See IV § lc pp. 71-75, V notes 157, 159.

3) Chauin is probably a form derived from Chaupi, and is composed of chau — according
to Lira’s dictionary an apocope of chaupi — with a suffix. The word chauin is used in an
unmistakable way in place of chaupi, for instance, in the organization of the village of Pasco
in Central Peru, where in 1722 (A.N .L. Leg. IX , cuaderno 220) occurred the three groups:
Collana, Chauin and Ychoca.
presentation in the description of the ceque system given in chapter I. There I

assumed that the panaca of the rulers, i.e. the groups formed by their descendants
(with the exception of the successor to the throne), were connected with the
ceque Payan and the non-related population with the ceque Cayao (Chapter I,
§ 4 pp. 8-10). It was assumed that the rulers themselves were associated with the
ceque Collana.
b) Where no indication of groups by the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao
was encountered, identification was often made possible by the fact that to
Collana were also assigned the rulers, to Payan “ the lords of the land” and to
Cayao the priests. These distinguishing features were described by Sarmiento
(Chapter IV, § 3 b p. 95 § 4 pp. 101-102). They are employed i.a. in the fol
lowing passages: Chapter IV § 3 b p. 97, § 5 b pp. 103-107, § 5 d pp. 110-113;
V §§ 4, 5 pp. 129-139, §§ 8, 9 pp. 149-154, § 13 pp. 166-170; VI § 3 a, b pp.
174-176, § 9 c, d pp. 205-207. An explanation of these distinguishing features
— which were connected with the role which Collana, Payan and Cayao played
in the second principle of organization, that of quadripartition — is given in
Chapter V, §§ 10-12 pp. 155-166, especially as concerns Collana and Cayao.
c) The distinguishing feature of Payan, i.e. being “the lords of the land”,
probably derives from another description given of the relationship Collana,
Payan, Cayao. In it, Payan was the established population of a village or city,
Collana were the Inca conquerors and rulers from Cuzco, and Cayao the pop
ulation living in the area around the village or city (see e.g. Chapter IV,
§ 4 pp. 101-103). While in the material under a) Collana and Payan can be taken
together as the Inca, in opposition to Cayao as the non-Inca, in the description
of Collana-Payan-Cayao under c) Collana is taken alone, as the conquerors, in
opposition to Payan and Cayao, as the conquered. On the latter contrast are based
two descriptions of the third representation of Cuzco (Chapter VI, § 8 pp. 199-
202, § 9 pp. 203-207). The same group, Payan, could thus be considered as
belonging to the conquerors, i.e. the Inca, and to the conquered.
d) Use is made of the hierarchical opposition described above (Collana =
aristocratic rulers, Payan = assistants, servants and substitutes and Cayao = non-
aristocratic population) in: Chapter IV, § 2 a pp. 78-79, § 4 pp. 102-103;
V § 4 b pp. 130-131, § 7 a pp. 140-141; VI § 6 pp. 183-192.
§ 4. The second principle of organization was the quadripartition, which
provided the framework for marriage relationships within the endogamous
group. This consisted of four matrilineal marriage classes, linked by asymmetric
cross-cousin marriage with MoBroDa and divided into two matrilineal, exoga-
mous moieties. The proper Inca names for the moieties were Hanan (upper) and
Hurin (lower), although these terms could not be used for the moieties in all
contexts.
It is easier to demonstrate that in the three representations of the organization
of Cuzco various forms of quadripartition occurred than that these four divisions
constituted the described matrilineal marriage classes related by the asymmetric
connubium by means of the marriage with MoBroDa.
The second principle of organization is expressed most clearly in the second
representation of the organization of Cuzco (see Chapter V, §§ 3-9 pp. 128-154).
In the first representation I have demonstrated first that a quadripartition was

found within suyu I (Chapter IV, § 2 c pp. 84-85) and suyu II (Chapter IV,
§ 2 d pp. 86-88). I argue next that the four divisions in each suyu were considered
by the Inca as marriage classes. Making use of the results obtained in this manner,
the second principle of organization became recognizable in other places as well
(see Chapter IV, § 5 a-c pp. 103-110; VI § 3 pp. 174-178; IX § 1 pp. 236-240).
Although the quadripartition could thus be demonstrated in many cases, the
existence of the second principle of organization could only be inferred in
directly, — except perhaps in the second representation of the organization of
Cuzco —, as discussed in Chapter IV, §§ 1-3 pp. 68-101. And we must still take
into account the fact that this may only be a representation of facts created by the
Inca. For a theory of the existence and origin of this representation, see Chap
ter III, § 13 pp. 62-67, where it is argued that the second principle of organiza
tion had its origin in and was a logical result of the first principle. The conse
quences of this connection are discussed in Chapter IV, § 3 pp. 91-101, and
indicated in the following section of this chapter.
§ 5 These first two principles of organization were combined in three ways.

These combinations could be encountered in every one of the three different
representations of the organization of Cuzco. To begin with, the Collana, Payan
and Cayao groups were each regarded as being divided into four marriage
classes. With the joining together of the corresponding marriage classes in these
three groups, every one of the four marriage classes could be said to consist
of one Collana, one Payan and one Cayao part.
Secondly, under influence of the system of marriage classes, Collana, Payan
and Cayao themselves were considered to be three matrilineal marriage classes,
linked together by the asymmetric cross-cousin marriage with MoBroDa. Collana
was the marriage class of ego, Payan that of the son: Cayao was therefore
regarded as the marriage class of the father. Owing to the asymmetric con-
nubium between the three groups as marriage classes, however, Collana was
also the class of FaFaFa, and Payan that of FaFa. Several characteristics of the
kinship system in fact agree with a system of three matrilineal marriage classes.
Thirdly, the names, or concepts, Collana, Payan and Cayao were also applied
to the marriage classes in the organization of four matrilineal marriage classes.
Again, Collana was the marriage class of ego, and Cayao that of the father.
Payan, however, could be the marriage class either of the son or of the grand
father, but not of both, and Collana was no longer the marriage class of FaFaFa,
but that of FaFaFaFa.
The Inca regarded the second and third combinations of the two principles
of organization not as two unrelated possibilities which could be applied se
parately and independently. Although it was impossible in reality, these two
combinations were regarded as two different aspects of one and the same form
of organization. The impossibilities they tried to circumvent in various ways.
One way was to classify the marriage classes of ego (1) and of FaFaFa (4)
both as Collana; that of Fa (3) as Cayao and that of FaFa (2) as Payan.
(The arrows indicate the marriage relationships between the classes; they point from the
husband to the w ife).
An alternative method was to classify 3 and 4 together as Cayao, the lower

moiety, or Hurin, and 1 and 2 as Collana and as Payan, and the latter two
together as the upper moiety, or Hanan. The upper and lower moieties were
regarded as two equivalent moieties. The relationship of 4 to 3 was the same
as that of 2 to 1. 2 and 4 could therefore both be marked as Payan, in relation
respectively to 1 as Collana and 3 as Cayao.
Cayao Collana
Finally, a third situation existed in which the people who did not belong
to ‘organized society’, were classified as 4. They could be the yanacona (a class
of serfs), the aboriginal population which had lived in the area before the
Inca, and the enemies of one’s own society. This group was nevertheless clas
sified as Collana. In those cases in which 4 was classified as Cayao, these
‘asocial’ elements were regarded as belonging to a separate sub-group of 1.
These people could therefore belong to 4 as well as to 1 4).
4) In the three situations mentioned here, in which an attempt is made to escape the impos
sibility of an adjustment of the tripartition to the quadripartition, the moiety division is considered
to be between 1 + 2 and 3 + 4. In all three situations the term Payan is linked to marriage
class 2. But the quadripartition must also adjust to the tripartition to the extent that to the
marriage classes could be linked not only the terms but also the concepts of Collana, Payan and
Cayao as indicated in the first principle of organization (III § 3 pp. 40-42). This implied that,
because 1 was the group Collana, the subsidiary sons Payan with their mothers who belonged
to Cayao, must actually be included in 4, i.e. the marriage class which was also linked to FaFaFa,
the yanacona, the original population and the enemies. To escape this consequence, Payan
was usually linked with 2, the marriage class of FaFa, and a distinction was thus obtained
between the groups of the subsidiary sons and their mothers. In all cases in which the concepts
Collana, Payan and Cayao, as described in the first principle of organization, were linked to
the classess of the quadripartition, the moiety opposition was seen as between Collana + Payan
and Cayao. In a few situations (e.g. V § 10c pp. 161-162) it can be seen that the Inca themselves
were also conscious of the fact that the group Payan actually belonged to 4. In those situations
the moiety opposition must thus be seen as between 1 + 4 and 2 + 3. It is unnecessary to
The content of this section is based largely on data from the first representa
tion of the organization of Cuzco (Chapter IV, §§ 1-4 pp. 68-103). The argu
ment is developed on the basis of the known facts on the three quadripartitions
contained in the first representation. These quadripartitions consist of two panaca
and two ayllu of suyu I (Chapter IV, § 2 c pp. 84-85), two panaca and two ayllu
of suyu II (Chapter IV, § 2 d pp. 86-88) and the four suyu I, II, III and IV them
selves (Chapter IV, § 2 a pp. 77-80). Although the existence of the three quadri
partitions within the first representation is indisputable, they are not — with the
exception of the last — mentioned as such by the Inca themselves. Two myths
concerning their origins refer to the three quadripartitions. The first is divided
into two parts. In the first part there is a mention of three groups which emerge
from three caves or windows of a mountain; this is a reference to the internal
organization of suyu II (Chapter IV, § 1 b pp. 69-71). In the second part of this
myth Manco Capac (i.e. the founder of the city of Cuzco and of the Inca ruling
dynasty) and his three brothers and four sisters, all separate themselves from
the group that came out of the middle cave. They travel to Cuzco, but one of
the brothers is eliminated early on. The group of Manco Capac and his two
brothers refers to the organization within suyu I (Chapter IV, § 1 d pp. 75-76).
The second myth may be said to have two versions. The first version mentions
three rulers who divide the country between them (Chapter IV, § 1 e pp. 76-77);
the second version mentions four rulers. In both versions Manco Capac is one of
the rulers. The second myth refers to the organization of the four suyu. The re
lationship between the two principles of organization and their combinations
may now be seen as follows:
a) The existence of the first combination is shown most clearly in the second
and third representations of the organization of Cuzco. (See the sections on
these representations.) Such distinct evidence is not available for the first re
presentation. Because both principles of organization maintain their independent
existence, this combination does not provide any difficulties.
b) The existence of the second combination is demonstrated as follows. The
first mentioned tripartition is represented in mythology as an organization of
three matrilineal marriage classes connected by the asymmetric connubium due
to marriage with MoBroDa (Chapter IV, § 1 b pp. 69-71).
Certain facts show a similar type of internal organization within the ayllu (i.e.
the ayllu in general). The three parts of the ayllu are indicated by the terms
Collana, Payan and Cayao (Chapter IV, § 1 c pp. 71-75).
The three groups mentioned in the second tripartition are indicated by the terms
Collana, Payan and Cayao. This fact makes it possible to compare the internal
organization of the two tripartitions and of the ayllu (Chapter IV, § 1 d pp. 75-
76). Its general similarity makes it possible to include the third tripartition in the
comparison of the two others (Chapter IV, § 1 epp. 76-77).
c) The existence of the third combination is shown as follows: In the second
version of the second myth the realms of the four rulers are the equivalent of
the four suyu. I show that the realm of Manco Capac in the first version com-
see a moiety opposition between 1 + 4 and 2 + 3 in the cases in which 1 and 4 together
bore a Collana character, because 1 and 4 could then be considered as one marriage class and
there was no longer a quadripartition but a tripartition.
prises two realms in the second version — those of Manco Capac and another
ruler — which refer respectively to suyu I and II. Another report portrays the
relationship between the two suyu as that of the primary and subsidiary relatives
of the ruler (Chapter IV, § 2 a pp. 77-80).
By comparing the suyu organization of Cuzco with other quadripartite organi
zations of a province and several villages of the region it can be demonstrated
that I = Collana, II = Payan and III + IV = Cayao (Chapter IV, § 2 b pp.
81-84). In connection with the two other tripartitions in the first myth of origin,
data are produced which show how in each tripartition one of the three parts cor
responds to two parts of the quadripartition within suyu II (Chapter IV, § 2 e pp.
88-89) and suyu I (Chapter IV, § 2 f pp. 89-91) respectively. The three examples
quoted differ slightly from one another. These differences are related to the
problem indicated in this paragraph under the third combination, of how the
terms Collana, Payan and Cayao are combined with the four marriage classes.
Primarily by means of the data thus obtained, this problem is worked out more
generally in Chapter IV, § 3 pp. 91-101. Later, in Chapter V, §§ 10-12 pp. 155-
166, the same problem is touched on again. By means of the data obtained for
the marriage classes in the second representation, I demonstrate why the people
in the marriage class of FaFaFa could also be a sub-class of that of ego. From the
relationship between the two marriage classes it resulted that Collana included the
rulers and Cayao the priests, as described in the paragraph concerning the first
principle of organization under b) (Chapter V, §§ 10, 11 pp. 155-163). The
relationship also provided the basis of the nature of the moiety opposition among
the Inca (Chapter V, §§ 11-13 pp. 162-170).§
The relationship between the first two principles of organization and their combinations.
§ 6. The analysis of the three representations of the organization of Cuzco

still to be described was particularly difficult because they were all influenced
by the third principle of organization, which was that of the quinquepartition.
This principle could, perhaps, even be broken down into two different principles
which in the organization of Cuzco were wholly parallel, the division into five
and that into ten. The influence on the three representations of this third prin-
ciple was most patent in the organization of the Inca dynasty. This is an im
portant fact, for much of the data on the organization of Cuzco has to be
derived from the history of the Inca rulers.
Although, according to Inca tradition, there had been some thirteen rulers,
only ten were mentioned in connection with the organization of Cuzco; of these,
five belonged to Hanan-Cuzco and five to Hurin-Cuzco 5). According to the
most widely spread tradition, the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco reigned after the five
of Hurin-Cuzco. Another tradition, however, has it that the dynasty began with
the ninth ruler, i.e. the fourth of Hanan-Cuzco. Those who in the first tradition
were his predecessors, were presented in the second as his contemporaries and
kin who all stood in special kinship relationships to him and were the heads of
particular social groups in the organization of Cuzco. The rulers of Hanan-
Cuzco were the primary kin and all the Hurin-Cuzco rulers the subsidiary
brothers of the Hanan-Cuzco rulers. It seems likely from this second tradition
that those before the ninth ruler never did rule over the whole of Cuzco and
the Inca Empire, but were representatives of the social groups with which they
were connected in the organization of Cuzco.
Although mention was made of the 'history’ of the Inca and their dynasty,
it should be remembered that no historical value whatsoever can be attached
to these traditions. They are valuable only with reference to the particular
system of which the social organization of the Inca was one expression 6).
The way in which, under the influence of the third principle of organization,
the representation of a dynasty with ten rulers was arrived at is discussed in
relation to the second representation of the organization of Cuzco (Chapter V,
§ 2 pp. 122-128), so that I may refer here to the relevant section.
In Chapter V ili the nature of the third principle of organization is described
as well as its further effects on the organization of Cuzco.
a) The point of departure is the organization of five age classes (each con
sisting of five years) in the group of adult men between the ages of twenty-
five and fifty (Chapter Vili, § 2 pp. 215-217). Further characteristics of these
age groups were obtained by means of the data concerning similar age classes of
the group of the aclla, or virgins of the sun (Chapter Vili, § 2 pp. 217-218).
Three attributes of the age classes are recognizable: 1) the simultaneous presen
tation: persons in the five age classes fulfilled, simultaneously and in parallel,
various roles in society; 2) the consecutive presentation: one person progressed
through the five age classes which gave them a successive relationship in time;
3) the five classes were placed in a hierarchy with the youngest class highest and
the oldest lowest.
b) Another application of the principle of quinquepartition, that of the five
worlds, bears these same characteristics (Chapter Vili, § 3 pp. 218-220).
5) See Chapter I.
6) See V § 2 pp. 122-128.
c) Besides quinquepartition, the decempartition also played a crucial part in

the realization of the Inca historical tradition of a dynasty with 10 rulers and of
the tradition of the organization of Cuzco composed of 10 panaca and 10 ayllu.
The decempartition expressed itself in the organization of the men with tribute
obligations and their families in groups of 10, 100, 1000 and 10.000. This form
of organization probably had its origin in Northern Peru; the Inca, possibly
under the influence of their own culture, also formed groups of 50, 500, 5000
and 40.000. On the basis of two examples it is demonstrated that the Inca meant
this system only to be taken as a symbolic indication of the hierarchical cate
gories of the various groups already known in their organization (Chapter Vili,
§ 4 pp. 220-224). In the groups of 50, 500 and 5000 (which they considered as
moieties of those of 100, 1000 and 10.000) the Inca recognized the quinque
partition. At the same time they saw an essential similarity between marriage
classes and age classes. The marriage classes also had the character of ayllu. In
the third representation of the organization of Cuzco there were eight marriage
classes, i.e. four each in Hanan- and in Hurin-Cuzco. From this there derived,
under the influence of the quinquepartition and decempartition, the 10 panaca and
10 ayllu (Chapter Vili, § 5 a p. 224). The relationship between the decemparti
tion, the quinquepartition and the marriage classes is further demonstrated by
two examples:
d) The yanacona, a class of serfs, was, in the quadripartition, one of the
groups which was included in both the marriage class of FaFaFa and in a sub
group of the class of ego. They also had many characteristics in common with the
aclla. In all probability the division of suyu IV into five groups of three ceque,
a deviation from the three groups in the other suyu, was a result of the inclusion
of the yanacona in suyu IV. In suyu I these five groups of yanacona — who
were then, like the aclla, taken as five age classes — were included in the
group of ceque I 3. In addition to the five rulers of Hanan-Cuzco and the five
of Hurin-Cuzco, who each belonged to marriage classes, there were these five
age classes of the yanacona (Chapter Vili, § 5 a pp. 224-227).
e) The moiety, the quinquepartition and the decempartition also expressed
themselves in the Inca calculation of time. They had time units of 10, 100, 500,
1000 and 5000 years. According to Vazquez de Espinosa, Inca history had
a duration of 500 years; according to Cabello Valboa it comprised 500 years
up to the battle launched by Pachacuti against the Chanca and, according to
Sarmiento, Inca history covered a period of 1000 years. From his data an original
version of Inca history can be pieced together indicating that 10 rulers had each
ruled for 100 years. The occasion of their accession to the throne was for the
rulers also the time of their primary marriage. The time from this moment until
their death might, therefore, be called the duration of their marriage class. The
fact that the rulers were linked to periods of a 100 years each and the yanacona
to age classes of 5 years each, indicates the hierarchical relation between rulers
and yanacona. It is expressed by a hierarchical scheme of periods of time. This
also emphasizes the essential identity of the marriage classes and the age classes
in the Inca conception (Chapter Vili, § 5 b pp. 227-235).
§ 7. The three representations of the organization of Cuzco were expressed
in the ceque system and in the various organizations of the panaca and ayllu
linked to the ceque. In the ceque system, the names Collana, Payan and Cayao
were applied to the three successive ceque of every group of three ceque. It
appears from a morphological comparison of the organization of the ceque
system of Cuzco with the social organization of neighbouring villages and
provinces that in Cuzco not only ceque but also three of the four suyu, and the
groups 1, 2 and 3 out of every suyu, could be called by the names Collana,
Payan and Cayao. These extended applications of the three terms need not
conflict with the application of the same terms to the ceque. A group which
was designated in one representation by one term, could, however, be designated
by another term in another representation. Thus there were other applications
of the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao in addition to the three mentioned above.
These additional applications in the organization of Cuzco of the terms Col

lana, Payan and Cayao were not in agreement with the ceque system. This is
seen most clearly in the first representation in the internal organization of suyu I.
The quadripartition there consisted of two panaca and two ayllu, related to the
ceque I 1 b, I 2 b, I 1 c and I 2 c. The ayllu related to ceque l i e , thus a ceque
Cayao, was called Chauin Cuzco ayllu. In this name Chauin is a synonym for
Payan (Chapter IV, § 2 c pp. 84-85).
Another useful example is seen in the indications of the suyu by the terms
Collana, Payan and Cayao in the first representation compared with the indica
tions in the second representation. In the first representation I = Collana,
II = Payan and III + IV = Cayao. The terms had the meaning given in § 3
on the first principle of organization. In the second representation I = Collana,
III = Payan and II + IV = Cayao. Here, however, the suyu faced each other
as marriage classes (Chapter IV, § 2 b pp. 81-84; V, § 1 d pp. >119-120).
§ 8. Before proceeding to an account of the representations of the organi

zation of Cuzco, some attention should be paid to the various methods by which
the relative positions of the Collana, Payan and Cayao groups were indicated in
the different representations. I shall mention three of these methods.
In the first method the indication of the geographical position of the three
groups was irrelevant and did not relate to a hierarchical order.
The second method was to present the groups as lying concentrically, with
Collana in the centre, encircled by Payan and, beyond Payan, Cayao.
In the third method the positions were presented in the form of a circle;
the ceque system is the expression of this method. By this method Collana,
Payan and Cayao were each divided and subdivided into smaller groups. The
sequence of these divisions and subdivisions was invariably Collana — Payan —
Cayao — Collana etc.
a) The first method probably occurred primarily in villages with which the
organization of Cuzco was compared.
b) The second method is most clearly described for the organization of the
village of San Jeronimo (Chapter IX, § 3 pp. 241-242).
c) The third method occurred, as has been said, in the ceque system. The
importance of the territorial relationships of groups is referred to in Chapter IX,
§ 3 pp. 241-246).
§ 9. The sequence in which in the following chapters the three represen

tations are discussed is determined solely by what seems to me to be the best
method of arranging the available material on the representations. A more
logical sequence would have been first to describe the second representation,
then the third and finally the first. In this chapter I shall follow this more
logical sequence.
In the second representation the four suyu, I to IV, were viewed as four
exogamous marriage classes. In the third representation the two moieties of
the preceding representation, I plus III, and II plus IV, were both endogamous
and in turn both subdivided into four marriage classes. In the first represen
tation the suyu I and II were each endogamous and divided into four marriage
classes.
In each of the three representations the term Collana, Payan and Cayao were
used in at least two ways: in the first place in their proper meaning7) and
secondly to designate the marriage classes into which each of the three groups
were divided.
This material is discussed further in Chapter VII which treats of the mutual
relationship of the three representations.
§ 10. In the second representation, discussed in Chapter V, the Colkna

group (in the proper sense of the term) was represented in four groups of
ceque: in I 1, II 1,. III 1 and IV 1; the Payan group in I 2, II 2, III 2 and IV 2,
and the Cayao group in I 3, II 3, III 3 and IV 3. But Collana, like Payan and
Cayao, could also be regarded as an endogamous group8), divided into four
marriage classes 9). In this case one marriage class from each of the endogamous
Collana, Payan and Cayao groups occurred in every one of the four suyu and
thus the suyu also functioned as marriage classes. The terms Collana, Payan
and Cayao were also applied to the marriage classes I, II and III, which each
consisted of the groups 1, 2 and 3. IV had characteristics of Collana — i.e.
in common with I — as well as of Cayao, and thus belonged, together with II,
to one moiety, while I en III belonged to the other moiety.
7) By the proper meaning of the concepts Collana, Payan and Cayao I understand the meaning
which emerged from the discussion of the first principle of organization (III § 3 pp. 40-42).
8) See III § 3 pp. 40-42.
9) See III § 4 pp. 42-43.
Some of the data on the second representation bore on the origin of the non-
Inca wives of the rulers. The rulers of Hanan-Cuzco, who belonged to Collana
(I 1, II 1, III 1, IV 1) were linked to the groups of three ceque in the following
manner: the ninth ruler, with all his successors, to I 1, the eighth ruler to II 1,
the seventh to III 1, and the sixth to IV 1. The rulers of Hurin-Cuzco, who, as
the subsidiary brothers of the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco belonged to Payan (1 2 ,
II 2, III 2, IV 2), were each linked to groups as follows: the fourth ruler and
his successors to I 2, the third to II 2, the second to III 2, and the first to IV 2.
i i
I 3
(Cayao)
III 1
(Collana)
The non-Inca wives of the rulers came not only from Cayao (I 3, II 3, III 3,
IV 3), but in the second representation their position was also determined by
the marriage relationships between the suyu. The wives of the ninth and fourth
rulers came from IV 3, those of the eighth and third rulers from I 3, of the
seventh and second rulers from II 3, and of the sixth and first rulers from III 3.
The tenth and fifth rulers made endogamous marriages within I.
After the treatment in Chapter IV, which concerns the first representation of
the organization of Cuzco, of the two first principles of organization and their
three combinations, in Chapter V the second representation is discussed. The

argument is as follows: a theoretical reconstruction of the second representation
(§ 1 pp. 114-122); the Inca rulers actually represented groups which also played
a role in the second representation (§ 2 pp. 122-128); the information concerning
each of these rulers which combined serve to illustrate the second representation
(§§ 3-9 pp. 128-154); a continuation of the discussion in Chapter IV concerning
the two first principles of organization and their combinations, by means of the
data obtained in Chapter V (§§ 10-13 pp. 155-170). In the sections of Chapter
V the argument runs as follows:
§ 1. The theoretical reconstruction of the second representation.
a) The village of Anta knows four ayllu comparable with the four suyu of
Cuzco. Each ayllu is divided into the two moieties, Hanansaya and Hurinsaya. In
addition, one ayllu — but probably the three others as well — is divided into the
sub-ayllu Collana ( = rich), Hatun ( = large) and Huchun ( = small). In
Cuzco there occurred Capac ayllu (ceque I 1 b) and Hatun ayllu (I 2 b). The
names suggest that they also refer to the two groups of three ceque to which
they belong and that the three terms are synonymous with Collana, Payan and
Cayao. Two examples of this will be given (pp. 114-115).
b) In the province of Collaguas — the first example — there are four sub
provinces, comparable to the suyu of Cuzco. The villages in each subprovince
have the following 9 sub-ayllu divided over three ayllu: Collana Collana, Collana
Payan, Collana Cayao; Payan Collana, Payan Payan, Payan Cayao; Cayao Collana,
Cayao Payan, Cayao Cayao. The ceque of one suyu in Cuzco are related in the
same way (pp. 115-118).
c) The same kind of organization as that of the villages in Collaguas occurs
in the village of Acos. There the ayllu Collana is also called Hanansaya and the
ayllu Payan, Hurinsaya. From the data in the three points a), b) and c) of this
paragraph it is demonstrated for Cuzco: that groups I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV 1,
I 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2 and I 3 + II 3 + HI 3 + IV 3 have the same
relationship as Collana, Payan and Cayao in the first principle of organization;
that these groups Collana and Payan in the second representation also indicate
the moieties Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco; that the hierarchical terms Capac,
Hatun and Huchun in Cuzco also have to do with these three groups and that
the terms are synonymous with Collana, Payan and Cayao (pp. 118-119).
d) In this representation the suyu are marriage classes. The terms Collana,
Payan and Cayao are also used to indicate these marriage classes. By comparison
of the ceque system with the organization of the province of Aymaraes and the
village of Puquio it is shown that suyu I = Collana, III = Payan and II =
Cayao. It follows from this that I is marriage class of ego, II of father, III of
FaFa and IV of FaFaFa (pp. 119-122).
§ 2. The reasons why Inca history, data from which illustrate the second
representation, cannot actually be history.
a) The improbability of the so-called history of the Inca has already been
demonstrated in Chapter II, § 3 a pp. 14-16 (pp. 122-123).
b) This opinion is supported by a datum from Gutierrez, from which the
following conclusion must be drawn: It was not Manco Capac, the first ruler,
who conquered Cuzco, but Pachacuti, the ninth. He divided the city into two
moieties and each moiety into five parts. The government of the ten parts, to
which he gave the names of the ten panaca, he assigned to ten relatives of five
lineages to which had also belonged FaFaFa, FaFa, Fa, Pachacuti himself and
his son. The lineages were thus matrilineal. Of the ten relatives one primary
relative and that man’s subsidiary brother belonged to each lineage. Thus, two
parts belonged to one lineage (pp. 123-126).
c) Polo and Acosta mention two simultaneous royal dynasties, of Hanan- and
of Hurin-Cuzco, the first rulers of which both descended from Manco Capac,
so that the latter belonged to neither dynasty. By means of these data it is pos
sible to identify the ten rulers of the one dynasty (their sequence is shown here
by numbers between parentheses) with the ten relatives of Pachacuti according
to Gutierrez. Polo and Acosta interpolated a ruler called Tarco Huaman, who
is not mentioned as such by other authors, but the source makes it possible to
identify him (pp. 126-128).
The 5 matrilineal The rulers of Hurin-Cuz- The rulers of Hanan-Cuz
lineages according to co (subsidiary kin of co (primary kin of
Gutierrez Pachacuti) Pachacuti)
lineage of FaFaFa Sinchi Roca (2) Inca Roca (6)
lineage of FaFa Tarco Huaman (...) Yahuar Huacac (7)
lineage of Fa Lloque Yupanqui (3) Viracocha Inca (8)
lineage of ego ( = Mayta Capac (4) Pachacuti (9)
Pachacuti)
lineage of son Capac Yupanqui (5) Tupac Yupanqui (10)
(The numbers in parenthesis indicate the succession of the kings in the tradition
of a single dynasty).
§ 3. Indication of how the data from § 2 illustrate the second representation.
The rulers after Tupac Yupanqui (and after Capac Yupanqui in the version of
Polo and Acosta) are not discussed. Tupac Yupanqui and Pachacuti belong to
I 1 and Capac Yupanqui and Mayta Capac to I 2 (pp. 128-129).§
§ 4. Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui.
a) Agreement between data concerning T.Y. and C.Y. and those concerning
the two heads of the Chanca, Uscovilca and Ancovilca. These two both belonged
to one of the four marriage classes into which the Chanca were divided. The
non-territorial moieties here extended over the four marriage classes, so that
Uscovilca was head of the upper moiety and Ancovilca of the lower moiety.
In the same way T.Y. and C.Y. belonged to suyu I as marriage class and T.Y.
was head of Hanan-Cuzco and C.Y. of Hurin-Cuzco (pp. 129-130).
b) C.Y. was general and substitute for T.Y. This indicates their Payan (12)
Collana (I 1) relationship (pp. 130-131).
c) T.Y. and C.Y. were both endogamously married within I. This indicates
the Collana character of I as marriage class, since all other rulers married exo-
gamously (pp. 131-133).
§ 5. Pachacuti and Mayta Capac
a) The character of P. supports his placement in I 1. The first representation
is explained not only from the position of Manco Capac, the first ruler, but
also from that of Pachacuti. Both were as rulers in the highest position; in the
second representation only P. and T.Y. could occupy this place. P. and T.Y.
are for this reason often insufficiently distinguished in the chronicles (pp.
133-134).
b) P. and M.C. both married women from IV 3. Their wives are the only
queens who have names of mountains. This indicates the character of their
marriage class as that of FaFaFa (pp. 134-136).
c) There are also other great similarities between P. and M.C. Both, as very
young men, defeated an enemy, with whom their old, senile father had wanted
to make peace. The names of both their enemies link these with the priests,
and the names in addition point to a Collana-Payan relationship of the two
enemies and thus also of P. and M.C. themselves. This also justifies their places
in I 1 and I 2 respectively (pp. 136-139).
§ 6. Indication of how the data concerning other rulers form an illustration
for the second presentation (pp. 139-140).
§ 7. Inca Roca and Sinehi Roca.
a) The occurrence of Roca in both names and the relationship Inca = ruler
and Sinchi = military commander points to the same Collana-Payan relationship
as that for T.Y. and C.Y. described under § 4 b (pp. 140-141).
b) I.R. and S.R., who in the version of Polo and Acosta are both the first
ruler in their dynasty, both have characteristics which refer to the very origin
of Inca society. This is seen from their description in the so-called Inca history,
a description which agrees closely with origin myths of the present day village
of Puquio. The origin character justifies their placement in IV (pp. 141-145).
c) The wife of S.R. comes from suyu II. In an asymmetric connubium this
points to S.R.’s having a place in marriage class IV. The marriage also indicates
a moiety opposition of I + III to II + IV (pp. 145-147).
d) Agreement between the marriage of I.R. and that of S.R. The marriage
of I.R. also points to a moiety-opposition (pp. 147-148).
§ 8. Yahuar Huacac and Tarco Huaman.
a) For the latter there are no data. Y.H. married a woman from II 3 (p.
149).
b) Other data concerning Y.H. indicate the Payan character of his marriage
class — for which reason he might also be placed in III — and the matrilineal
character of this tilass (pp. 149-150).§
§ 9. Viracocha Inca and Lloque Yupanqui.
a) V.I. and Ll.Y. are both placed in an priestly hierarchy — in positions in
II 1 and II 2 — whose organization agrees with that of suyu II in the second
presentation (pp. 150-152).
b) Agreement between V.I. and Ll.Y. already shown in § 5 c (p. 152).
c) Agreement in both their marriages. Their wives come from the plain of
Anta which, geographically speaking, lies in I, the suyu from which V.I. and
Ll.Y. would have had to choose their wives. In other ways their wives’ villages
also show the characteristics ascribed in the second representation to I 3 (pp.
152-154).
§ 10. The relationship of suyu I to suyu IV in the second representation.

The discussion in Chapter IV, § 3, pp. 91-101 concerning the adaptation of a
system of three marriage classes to one of four, is resumed. In a tripartition,
ego and FaFaFa belong to the same class. In a quadripartition, ego belongs to
the highest and FaFaFa to the lowest class. To the class of ego belong the rulers;
to that of FaFaFa the ancestors, the sanctuary of the group and the priests.
a) Reference to agreements between I and IV (pp. 155-158).
b) Theoretical discussion of why in the second representation certain groups
coilld belong to both IV and I 3 (pp. 158-159).
c) The opposition between I and IV, manifested in the war between rulers
and priests. One source is mentioned which says that the priests belonged to
IV and not to II as assumed in § 9. This is connected with a — hypothetical —
fourth representation of the organization of Cuzco (pp. 159-162).
§11. The resulting relationship of the upper moiety (I + III) to the lower
moiety (II + IV).
In the quadripartition the two antagonistic groups I and IV belong to the
two moieties I + III and II + IV. This resulted in the development of a
Collana-Payan relationship between the marriage classes II and IV within the
lower moiety like that between I and III. Within the lower moiety as Cayao,
this had the result that the priests belonged to II, and the sanctuary and the
yanacona as servants in the sanctuary to IV (pp. 162-163).
§ 12. The difficulties which the adjustment of a system of three marriage
classes to one of four marriage classes in the second representation brings with
it in relation to religion.
In a tripartition, without moieties, the sun as ancestor belonged to the group
of Collana. In a quadripartition, with moieties, he had a double form: as the
sun he was linked with the rulers belonging to I as marriage class of ego and
to the upper moiety; as Viracocha, the creator, he was linked with the priests,
, belonging to II and to the lower moiety (pp. 164-166).
§ 13. The opposition between the Sun and Viracocha in their relation to
the upper moiety (1 + III) and the lower moiety (II + IV) respectively.
a) The opposition demonstrated on the basis of the philosophical question,
put into the mouths of some rulers, as to who was more powerful, the Sun or
Viracocha (pp. 166-168).
b) The opposition demonstrated, based on the creation myth of Viracocha
(pp. 168-170).
§ 11. In the third representation, discussed in Chapter VI, the Collana,
Payan and Cayao groups (in the true meaning of the terms) were represented
in both the endogamous moieties, I + III, and II + IV, by the Collana ceque
(a), the Payan ceque (b) and the Cayao ceque (c). The four marriage classes
of Hanan-Cuzco (I + III) were I 1, III 1, III 2 and I 2; those of Hurin-Cuzco
(II + TV) were II 1, IV 1, IV 2 and II 2. This was the situation according
to the third representation uninfluenced by the quinquepartition (and it has
been represented accordingly in the diagram). It appears from several sources
on the organization of Cuzco that this situation was in fact current. Under the
influence of the quinquepartition, ten rulers had to be associated with marriage
classes; five in Hanan-Cuzco and five in Hurin-Cuzco. In Hanan-Cuzco the
ninth and sixth rulers moved therefore from I 1 and I 2, the marriage classes
with which they were originally linked, to I 2 and I 3, and the position I 1
was occupied by the tenth ruler and his successors. On account of the existence
of five rulers, use was made, in Hurin-Cuzco also, of the third group of ceque
in II, although in the third representation the groups of ceque I 3 and II 3
did not originally fulfil any function, nor did III 3 and IV 3. Under the influence
of the fact that the five rulers of Hurin-Cuzco were dynastically related to
those of Hanan-Cuzco, further shifts across the groups of ceque took place.
It is not as easy, therefore, to trace the original situation of the third represen
tation as it was in Hanan-Cuzco. In the third representation the rulers belonged
to the Collana group (i.e. the Collana ceque), the panaca to the Payan group
(i.e. the Payan ceque) and the ayllu to the Cayao group (i.e. the Cayao ceque).
§ 1. The formulation of the problem.

The assumptions which can be made concerning the third representation on
the basis of the results obtained concerning the first and second representations
(Chapter VI, pp. 171-172).
§ 2. The third representatio77 without the influence of the quinquepartition
in organizations outside Cuzco.
Two sources are discussed of which one mentions two moieties, each divided
into eight ayllu, while from the other it can be inferred that there are two
moieties, each divided into eight marriage classes. It is argued — on the basis
of a third example — that in both the two first examples there are eight marriage
classes, each divided into two moieties (pp. 172-174).
§ 3. The organization of Hanan-Cuzco (I -j- III) without influettce of the
quinquepartition.
a) For the reconstruction of the third representation without the influence of
the quinquepartition it must be proved, 1st) that the ruler, the panaca and the
ayllu of one group of ceque formed one marriage class, and 2nd) that the five
marriage classes, both in Hanan-Cuzco (I + III) and in Hurin-Cuzco (II + IV)
originated from four marriage classes. In sections 3, 4 and 5 the 2nd point is
proved and in section 6 the 1st (p. 174).
b) It is assumed that the quadripartition in Hanan-Cuzco can be reconstruc
ted by means of the data of the first four rulers of Hanan-Cuzco, in which
they represented the marriage classes I 1, III 1, III 2 and I 2. The fifth ruler
was thus eliminated from the system entirely (pp. 174-176).
c) Data concerning Pachacuti which support the assumption in b). The or
ganization of Cuzco is reconstructed, which results if a similar reasoning is
applied to Hurin-Cuzco (pp. 176-178).
§ 4. The influence of the quinquepartition on the organization of Hanan
Cuzco.
Hurin-Cuzco Hanan Cuzco
II 2a II la I 2a I la
The third representation of the organization of Cuzco without the influence of the quinquepartition
a) Tupac Yupanqui as fifth and last ruler of Hanan-Cuzco received the

highest place in the organization of Cuzco, i.e. I 1. Pachacuti shifted to I 2 and
Inca Roca to I 3. The effect which these shifts had on the data concerning these
three rulers discussed (pp. 178-179).
b) Data which demonstrate that the marriage classes of T.Y. and Pachacuti
stood together as one marriage class — with endogamous characteristics and
the two marriage classes therein considered as exogamous moieties — beside
the marriage classes of the three preceding rulers (pp. 179-182).
§ 5. The organization of Hurin-Cuzco (II + IV).
The problem of § 4 discussed for Hurin-Cuzco with reference to the diffi
culty that in the tradition of the single dynasty Manco Capac was considered
as the first ruler and that Tarco Huaman was dropped out (pp. 182-183).
§ 6. Evidence that the groups of ceque not only had an endogamous func
tion, but also, as marriage classes, had an exogamous function.
a) The reference to the patrilineality as well as the matrilineality of the
panaca (pp. 183-185).
b) The panaca, as ayllu (the term ayllu being used here in a general sense),
might operate both as an endogamous group — in which case it was considered
patrilineally by the Inca — and as an exogamous, and then matrilineal, group.
The above demonstrated on the basis of four examples under points c), d) and
e) (pp. 185-186).
c) The example of the Chanca in which Uscovilca, Ancovilca, the panaca or
ayllu of Uscovilca and the ‘huauque’ ('brother’) of Uscovilca (i.e. a statue of
Uscovilca which protects and represents him) belong together to one marriage
class, which facts point to both the endogamous and the exogamous character
of the marriage class (pp. 186-188).
d) Similar data to those under c), concerning Tupac Yupanqui, Capac Yupan
qui and Capac ayllu with reference to the second representation of the organization
of Cuzco (pp. 188-189).
e) Similar data with reference to the third representation, concerning the
rulers Capac Yupanqui and Inca Roca, their respective panaca and their respec
tive ‘huauque’. The role, among others, which C.Y. as subsidiary brother ful
filled as general and substitute for T.Y., was fulfilled — in the third represen
tation with respect to each ruler — by the subsidiary son who was head of the
panaca founded by his father (pp. 189-192).
§ 7. The place of the pre-Inca population of Cuzco in the group formed
by all ceque Cayao.
a) The organization of Cuzco in the third representation — and the relation
of the marriage classes in it — is seen in the relation between the panaca, and
from the dynasty of the rulers as founders of the panaca. The relation is not
found between the ten ayllu of Cuzco (pp. 192-193).
b) This relation in the group formed by all ceque Cayao did occur in the
organization of the ayllu of the pre-Inca population of Cuzco. Although they
bore other names, these pre-Inca ayllu were the same as the ayllu of Cuzco
mentioned by Sarmiento and Molina in connection with the ceque system
(pp. 193-196).
c) Among the pre-Inca ayllu none are mentioned which might agree with
the aylhi linked with I 3 c and II 3 c. This points to the fact that the fifth
ayllu — in Hanan-Cuzco and in Hurin-Cuzco — played no part in the third
representation without the influence of the quinquepartition (pp. 196-199).
§8. The groups Payan (all ceque Payan) and Cayao (all ceque Cayao) as
the population proper of Cuzco and Collana (all ceque Collana) as the Inca
conquerors.
In discussing the first principle of organization in this chapter various des
criptions are given of the Collana-Payan-Cayao relationship (see relevant para
graph in compressed type). The third representation has until now satisfied
the description under a). The organization of Cuzco, reported in relation to
the reorganization of Cuzco by Pachacuti, satisfied the description under c)
pp. 199-202).
§ 9. The relationship of Hanan-Cuzco (I + III) to Hurin-Cuzco (II + IV)
as that of conquerors to conquered and of worldly rulers to priests.
a) Reasons why a relationship such as is here described is to be expected
(pp. 203-204).
b) The data on the pre-Inca population, as used in § 7, also point to a similar re
lationship within the group Cayao (consisting of the ceque Cayao) (pp. 204-205).
c) Factors which justify placing the persons, linked in § 8 with the ceque
Cayao in Hanan-Cuzco, in the group of the ceque Payan in Hurin-Cuzco (pp.
2 05 - 2 0 6 ).
d) The original pre-Inca population of Cuzco lives in Hurin-Cuzco and is
linked to the god Viracocha, the religion and the priests; the Inca conquerors
live in Hanan-Cuzco and are linked with the Sun (pp. 205-207).
i
(Collana)
Hatun ayllu Capac ayllu
I 2b <— — (Collana)
^ I lb
IV \
(Cayao) I 2c
Arairaca
f — I lc
Chauin Cuzco
ayllu Cuzco ayllu (Payan)
cayao
Usca Mayta Apu Mayta

panaca . panaca
II 2b (Collana)
^nib-------- III
------ II 2c * 1 1 lc (Cayao)
Maras Sutic ayllu
ayllu (Payan)
(Cayao)
ii
(Payan)
The first representation of the organization of Cuzco
§ 12. In the first representation, discussed in Chapter IV, Collana — in

the proper sense of the term — was represented by I, Payan by II and Cayao
by III and IV. The four marriage classes in I were I 1 b, I 2 c, I 1 c and I 2 b;
in II they were II 1 b, II 2 c, II 1 c and II 2 b. In the first representation III and
IV, being Cayao, were regarded as being outside the organization of Cuzco
proper. That is why in the diagram of the first representation, no division of
Cayao into four marriage classes has been incorporated.
In this representation the marriage classes, too, were associated with the
concepts Collana, Payan and Cayao. Thus group l i e had the name Chauin
(i.e. Payan) which can be readily understood when one looks at the diagram,
although the ceque to which it was linked was called Cayao. The first repre
sentation, like the third, did not correspond to the ceque system as such. The
groups of ceque I 3 and II 3 had no function in this representation.
The first representation was employed principally in relation to the myth
of origin of the Inca.
§ 1. Myths of a tripartition.
a) Introduction.
In the first representation three quadripartitions occur: within suyu II; within
suyu I; consisting of the four suyu themselves. Relevant here are three myths
containing mention of a tripartion (pp. 68-69).
b) Myth of Tambo, Maras and Sutic.
In this myth which has bearing on the organization within II, Tambo, Maras
and Sutic are three matrilineal marriage classes linked by an asymmetric con-
nubium by way of marriage with MoBroDa (pp. 69-71).
c) Tripartition of the ayllu in Collana, Payan and Cayao.
For the groups Collana, Payan and Cayao within the ayllu (the word here
used as general indication of group) an organization is described similar to that
under b) (pp. 71-75).
d) Application of c) and b) to the tripartition in the myth of Manco Capac
and his brothers and sisters.
The three groups mentioned in this myth refer to the organization within
I and have as names synonymes of Collana, Payan and Cayao. From this, the
same character may be inferred for them as the tripartition mentioned under
c) and b) (pp. 75-76).
e) Myth of Manco Capac, Tocay Capac and Pinahua Capac, which refers
to the four suyu organization. Because of its character this myth may be
classified with those of b) and d) (pp. 76-77).
§ 2. The bipartition of Collana.
a) The bipartition of the group of Manco Capac.
In addition to the myth mentioned in § 1 e there is a second version which
speaks of four rulers. Their realms agree with the four suyu of Cuzco: that of
Tocay Capac with III and that of Pinahua Capac with IV. Manco Capac’s realm
in the first version agrees with the two realms in the second version (linked
with suyu I and II) belonging to Manco Capac and Colla respectively. In con
nection with the second version, another datum concerning the suyu organization
may be mentioned; in it primary kin of the ruler belong to I, subsidiary kin to
II and the non-related population to III and IV (pp. 77-80).
b) Connection of the four groups, thus derived, with the terms Collana,
Payan and Cayao.
Comparison of the suyu organization with the organization of a province
and several villages in the vicinity makes it possible to identify I with Collana,
II with Payan and III + IV with Cayao. From the combination of the data
of a) and b) there emerges a type of organization described as the first prin

ciple of organization in Chapter III (pp. 81-84).
c) The four groups in Chinchaysuyu.
A similar relation between a mythical tripartition — as described in § 1 e —
and a social quadripartition — as described in §§ 2 a and 2 b — also occurred
within suyu I and suyu II. For both organizations we will examine first the
question: with which two groups from the social quadripartition does the
marriage class Collana in the mythical tripartition agree? Secondly, we shall
analyse the description given in the chronicles of the relationship between these
two groups.
The first point is analysed in relation to suyu I (pp. 84-85).
d) The first point, mentioned under c), is analysed in relation to suyu II
(pp. 86-88).
e) The second point, mentioned under c), analysed in relation to suyu II
(pp. 88-89).
f) The second point, mentioned under c), analysed in religion to suyu I
(pp. 89-91).
§ 3. Adjustment of a system of three mainlined marriage classes to a system

of four matrilineal marriage classes divided over two moieties.
Although in all probability both the tripartition and the quadripartition were
not actually organizations composed of matrilineal marriage classes linked by an
asymmetric connubium, they were nevertheless in many cases so represented by
the Inca. For these cases I analyse how the Inca applied the terms Collana,
Payan and Cayao to the tripartition (see under a)) and to the quadripartition
(see under b) and c)). The first case also requires discussion. In the represen
tation of a quadripartition — as if it were a tripartition — the division of
Collana, as described in § 2, was glossed over in various ways. The analysis of
the way in which this adjustment was accomplished is useful for the under
standing of the adjustment of the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao to the qua
dripartition.
a) The glossing over of the actual division in Collana in a system of three
lineages (pp. 91-94).
b) The adjustment of the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao and the tripartition
to the quadripartition (pp. 94-97).
c) The situation in which the fourth group is not included in organized
society (pp. 98-101).
§ 4. Summary of the Collana, Payan dnd Cayao characteristics (pp. 101-103).
§ 5. Use made of three quadripartitions in the organization of Cuzco. The
first and second quadripartitions, however, concerned Collana and Payan (them
selves groups in the third quadripartition). There must thus have been another
quadripartition in Cayao.
a) In the first representation III + IV = Cayao. The panaca and ayllu men
tioned in these suyu could not be classified in a quadripartition. In the first
representation only I and II — as descendants of Manco Capac, the first Inca
ruler — formed the population of Cuzco. The role of the quadripartition in
Cayao was filled by the people of the Chanca (p. 103).
b) The quadripartition of the Chanca traversed by two non-territorial moie

ties (pp. 103-107).
c) An identical organization of the Inca.
This organization concerned the same panaca and ayllu as those mentioned
in § 2 c) and d ) ; they were, however, differently organized so that a quadripar
tition like that of the Chanca resulted (pp. 107-110).
d) The Chanca as Cayao and lower moiety to the Inca as Collana and Payan
and as upper moiety.
An organization has been developed which is identical to the third represen
tation of the organization of Cuzco (pp. 110-113).
§ 6. Conclusion.
The organization described in § 5 d) is no longer completely appropriate to
the first representation. It might be considered as related to the first represen
tation (p. 113).
§ 13. I placed the theoretical account of the organization of Cuzco at the

beginning of this study in order to introduce and facilitate the discussion of this
organization. This account can, however, also be regarded as containing the
conclusions and theoretical summary of the results achieved in this study. For
this reason the concept of ‘principle of organization' and the significance of
these principles in the organization of Cuzco are, in my opinion, best discussed
in this chapter.
The analysis of the organization of Cuzco was achieved by taking as points
of departure two principles of organization. One was that of the division of
society into an endogamous group, Collana, an unrelated group, Cayao, and a
group which consisted of descendants of Collana men and non-Collana wives
which was Payan. The other point was the division of society into four matri-
lineal, exogamous marriage classes linked by asymmetric cross-cousin marriage
with MoBroDa, and distributed over two matrilineal, exogamous moieties.
I also mentioned a third principle of organization, which was that of the
division into five, but this only indirectly influenced the system of the social
organization of Cuzco.
Three combinations were derived from the two first-mentioned principles
of organization. In the first combination, the three groups, Collana, Payan and
Cayao, were each subdivided into four marriage classes. In the second com
bination these three groups functioned themselves as marriage classes, and in
the third combination the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao were applied to the
marriage classes within the system of four marriage classes.
The second and third combinations could be regarded as derived principles
of organization. This cannot be said of the first combination, because in this
instance the characteristic features of the two original principles are preserved,
and there is question only of a joining together of the two.
By principle of organization, then, is understood a method by which the

whole of society is organized, which cannot be analysed into further constituent
methods. The two derived principles of organization have been treated as basic
principles because, although they in fact arose from the first two original prin
ciples, they had both, under the influence of the other principle, acquired an
altered, and therefore new and independent, character and could not be analysed
into further constituent methods.
This presentation of the organization of Cuzco, as being based on two original
and two derived principles of organization, must be regarded merely as a method
for describing the whole system of organization of Cuzco, for, it seems to me,
this whole organization can be explained from these four principles of organi
zation and the influence of the division into five. These four principles of
organization have been treated as the point of departure, the basis, of the whole
organization of Cuzco. That is not to say that the two derived principles of
organization did in reality develop in the manner set out above, from the two
original principles of organization. Nor does this mean that the organization
of Cuzco had in actual fact grown from these two original principles of organi
zation. To my knowledge, no data exist about the historical development of
the organization of Cuzco. It is nevertheless possible to ask what the historical
development was, and to attempt to find an answer to this question by way
of logic and, necessarily, hypothesis. Presently I shall attempt merely to explain
how the two original principles of organization found their place in the organi
zation of Cuzco and, if the two can be equated, the organization of the Inca
Empire.
To begin with, there seem to be no indications that these two principles

found their ways into the organization of Cuzco by different historical ways.
Nor does it seem to me imperative to explain their place in purely historical
terms. It seems most likely that the forces from which these two principles of
the organization of Inca society stemmed were still at work at the time of the
conquest of Cuzco by the Spaniards. These forces are expressed in certain
ways of thought of the Inca and can, I think, be described as follows.
Inca society was based on the relationship between the local endogamous
group, Collana, and the outside world, Cayao. The endogamous group was
conceived as including all those people who both patrilineally and matrilineally
descended from one forefather. This forefather was conceived of as a particular
holy site, a huaca, which was located within the territory of the group.
The fact that the group ascribed its existence to its own endogamy did not
exclude the possibility of exogamous marriages. A woman who entered into
an exogamous marriage, disappeared with her descendants from the group- The
descendants of a man who had entered into an exogamous marriage continued

to dwell in the territory of the group although not themselves belonging to the
endogamous group. They were regarded as a separate group: Payan. Given
the character of the group Collana, the recognition of this separate group Payan
is an absolute necessity. One result of the possibility of belonging patrilineally
as well as matrilineally to Collana is that there were people who were related
to it neither patrilineally nor matrilineally — i.e. the group Cayao — , and other
people, i.e. the Payan group — who were related patrilineally to Collana and
matrilineally to Cayao.
The relationship of a Payan man to the Collana and Cayao groups was
determined at the personal level by his relationship to his father, who was
Collana, and his MoBro, who was Cayao. Since Payan was regarded as a separate
group, it could also have an endogamous existence of its own, but with the
additional possibility of exogamous marriages. The consequent position of the
descendants of a Payan man and a Collana woman — if indeed such marriages
were possible — would be no different than if a Payan man had married endo-
gamously. This form of exogamous marriage can therefore be disregarded.
A Payan man could also marry a Cayao woman. The possibility would then
arise of a group originating between Payan and Cayao with the same Payan
relationship vis-a-vis the first Payan group as the latter had vis-a-vis Collana.
Theoretically, many Payan groups could be inserted between Collana and Cayao.
To a Payan man born of an exogamous marriage, however, the group to which
his father belonged as weil as all the groups to which all his patrilineal ancestors
belonged, were Collana, and the group of his MoBro was Cayao. If a man, like
his father before him, married exogamously, he married a woman who was,
in relation to himself, equivalent to MoBroDa. Although we need not assume
that this explains the existence or origin of MoBroDa marriage in Inca society,
it is nevertheless possible now to see how this form of marriage can agree with
the principle of organization into the groups Collana, Payan and Cayao. We
also see that the exogamous marriages resulting from this principle always
went in one direction: Collana Payan 1 -» Payan 2 -> Payan n -» Cayao.
Only one form of marriage, then, occurred which corresponded to the prin
ciple of organization of Collana, Payan, Cayao, and this was asymmetric cross
cousin marriage with MoBroDa. The exogamous marriages with non-related
women could also be symbolised by this marriage form. (Within the framework
of the principle of organization of Collana, Payan, Cayao, there seems to be no
necessity or reason for opposing the MoBroDa marriage to a symmetric cross
cousin marriage in which there is question of a sister or daughter exchange, or
to a FaSiDa marriage).
Based on the Collana, Payan, Cayao relationships, the structure of Inca society
was wholly hierarchic10). The place of every person in this hierarchy was
determined by three dualistic relationships. To begin with, a man could divide
society into the endogamous group to which he considered himself to belong,
i.e. the group Collana, and outside it the group Payan plus Cayao. Secondly,
he had to divide society into the endogamous group to which he did not belong
any more, i.e. Collana, and into the group outside it which was his own, i.e.
Payan and Cayao. Thirdly, he could divide society into, on the one hand,
the people related to him (i.e. Collana and Payan) and on the other the rest
of humanity which was not related to him (i.e. Cayao).
We have not yet discussed the organization within the endogamous group.
Although in practice the criteria of the endogamous group could be applied to
various groups — e.g. the population of a whole village or valley — theore
tically Collana, Payan, Cayao relationships permitted the existence of the smal
lest conceivable endogamous group. The fact that the Inca inquired theoretically
into the smallest possible endogamous group is proved by the fact that brother-
sister marriage was permitted to the ruler, i.e. the supreme person in the Inca
Empire. This form of marriage, however, was also seen in terms of the rela
tionship valid for other, normal, marriages. For this reason I propose to examine
what was the smallest possible endogamous group for normal marriages.
The prohibition of incest implied that even within the endogamous group,
exogamous sub-groups must have existed. One characteristic of Inca thought,
exhibited in their attitude to questions of social organization, was to transfer,
or regard as transferred, the characteristics of one form of social organization
to another. One clear example of this trait is the adaptation of the number
of marriage classes of the third representation — which contained eight — to
the division into ten. In Inca organization the Collana, Payan, Cayao principle
was obviously primary, and the organization within the endogamous group was
regarded in terms of this principle of organization. The exogamous sub-groups
of the endogamous group were seen as Collana, Payan and Cayao groups with
regard to their exogamous, mutual relationships. Within the smallest concei
vable endogamous group one must therefore of necessity marry the closest
possible relative whom one is permitted to marry within the framework of the
marriage relationships between Collana, Payan and Cayao. This was one’s
MoBroDa. This conclusion is, in my opinion, corroborated by the explanation
which, according to Cobo (1956, Tome II, libro 14, cap. VII, p. 250), the Inca
10) I shall not deal with the question of the extent to which this relationship, indicated
as hierarchical, between the groups Collana, Payan and Cayao depended upon an actual social
difference in rank or to what extent each endogamous group could consider itself as Collana
with respect to the outer world and in this manner could see that world in a hierarchical way.
66 HI. THEORETICAL SURVEY OF THE ORGANIZATION OF CUZCO
themselves gave for the MoBroDa marriage. With the exception of the ruler —
who was permitted to marry his full sister — and of his closest relatives —
who were permitted to marry their half-sister by the same father, but not by
the same mother — everyone was permitted to marry MoBroDa. She was
probably also the most obvious person to be the primary wife of a man. The
position of the primary wife could not at her death be taken over by any of the
other wives; the man had to marry another primary wife. According to Cobo
a man married MoBroDa because then the husband and the wife both descended
from the same grandfather. This motivation fits wholly in with the definition
of the endogamous group which consisted of a group of people who all des
cended patrilineally and matrilineally from the same forefather.
The similarity of the relationships between exogamous sub-groups and those
between the Collana, Payan and Cayao groups also implied, however, that mar
riages between the sub-groups could take place in one direction only. Marriage
with FaSiDa was thus impossible. For this reason the number of sub-groups
within the smallest conceivable endogamous group had to be three. Then the
nearest forefather of the three sub-groups was FaFaFa. In actual fact the term
villca appears to mean FaFaFa, forefather, as well as holy place of the local
endogamous group. Finally, the Inca saw themselves forced to regard the exo
gamous sub-groups as matrilineal marriage classes because, as in the relation
ship between Collana and Payan, father and son could not belong to the same
sub-group. The image the Inca formed of the endogamous group was based on
that of the smallest conceivable endogamous group. They regarded the endo
gamous group as one consisting of a group of people who all descended patri
lineally from one fore-father and which was divided into three exogamous
matrilineal marriage classes, linked by asymmetric cross-cousin marriage with
MoBroDa.
The names Collana, Payan and Cayao were also attached to the three matri
lineal marriage classes. If Collana was the class of ego, Payan was the class of
the son and Cayao that of the father of ego.
In Inca theoretical thought, i.e. their mythology, the endogamous group was
always presented as numbering three marriage classes. There was one contin
gency in the organization of society which this tripartition could not meet.
This arose from the fact that beside the division of society into the groups
Collana, Payan and Cayao, a dualistic opposition was also operative which
was that of the endogamous group to the outside world, i.e. of Collana to
Payan plus Cayao, or, of the group of relatives to the non-related world, i.e.
of Collana plus Payan to Cayao. Society being organized into Collana, Payan
and Cayao, this form of dualistic opposition sufficed because the opposition
did not consist of an organization of two exogamous — and therefore iden-
tical — moieties 11). When the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao were applied
to the three subgroups of the endogamous group as matrilineal lineages, such
oppositions of Collana to Payan plus Cayao, or of Collana plus Payan to Cayao,
were indeed not possible. In contrast to the Collana, Payan and Cayao groups,
the three marriage classes were identical, which they had to be in order to main
tain marriage relationships within the endogamous group. In order to obtain a
dualistic relationship, one marriage class would have to be opposed to the other
two. In that case the single group of the dualistic relationship would be func
tioning as an exogamous moiety, but not so the double group, because it gave
scope to endogamous marriages in addition to exogamous ones. Such a dualistic
relationship would not at all fit in with the character of the three identical
marriage classes. In my opinion these patterns must be regarded as the cause
of the extension of the system of four marriage classes as described here 12).
The two moieties, each consisting of two marriage classes, were identical in
nature and therefore corresponded to the nature of the marriage classes which
must also be identical.
My point of departure in the explanation of the social organization of Cuzco
were the two principles of organization: that into the groups Collana, Payan
and Cayao and that of the whole of the four marriage classes. From these
principles of organization I deduced the whole of the three marriage classes
and of the application of the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao to the classes of
the division into four. It would, however, be possible to speak of one principle
of organization, that into the Collana, Payan and Cayao groups, from which
all other forms of organization were derived.
11) Nonetheless, there was a possibility of seeing Cayao as a group essentially identical to
their own local group, composed of Collana Payan, if the opposition of Collana + Payan
to Cayao applied to one other non-kin group and not to the outer world as a whole.
12) See IV § 3 pp. 91-101.
CHAPTER FOUR
THE FIRST REPRESENTATION OF THE ORGANIZATION

OF CUZCO
Here I propose to discuss the representation of the organization of Cuzco
which occupied the third place in the previous chapter. My reasons for doing
so here are that this representation is the best documented one. The data also
serve best for discussing the principle of tripartition, of quadripartition or of
the combinations of these. The results of this discussion will serve not only
to explain this particular representation of the organization of Cuzco, but also
to explain the two other representations.
About this representation, three myths regarding tripartitions are known to
us; these can be used to explain the three quadripartitions, each spread over
two moieties, which occur in this representation. These partitions concern that
in Chinchaysuyu, that in Collasuyu and that of the four suyu of Cuzco 1).
These three myths are mutually so similar, as also the three quadripartitions,
that data relating to one tripartition or quadripartition can be used to explain
phenomena in the other iripartition or quadripartition.
In the discussion of the tripartition and of the quadripartition, and of their
mutual influences, the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao will be used repeatedly.
After this discussion there follows a short resume of the relevant characteristics
of the groups designated by these terms.
(Cayao) (Collana)
Collasuyu Antisuyu
(Payan) (Cayao)§
§ 1. a) The group in Chinchaysuyu within which a quadripartition occur

red, was designated in the quadripartition of the whole of the four suyu of
Cuzco by the term Collana; the corresponding group in Collasuyu was desig
nated by the term Payan. Within the four suyu as a whole, the suyu Antisuyu
and Cuntisuyu together represented Cayao. No myth is known to me which, in
connection with the three myths mentioned above, relates to the quadripartition
in Cayao alone. There was, however, a representation of the organization of
Cuzco which was closely related to the first (and is for that reason included in
this chapter), in which there did exist a quadripartition of Cayao. Chinchay-
!) See III, § 12 diagram p. 59.

IV. THE FIRST REPRESENTATION 69
suyu and Collasuyu together formed one moiety as the population proper of
Cuzco and as opposed to ihe hostile, non-Inca Chanca people who formed the
other moiety. Although the Chanca were connected with Antisuyu and Cunti-
suyu, they were not represented in these suyu by panaca or ayllu. Within the
organization of the Chanca people, there existed a quadripartition which cor
responded to a similar quadripartition in the organization of Cuzco which itself
consisted of Chinchaysuyu and Collasuyu. Cuzco consisted of the same panaca
and ayllu as those of the first representation, although organized in a different
way. Every one of the four parts of Cuzco consisted of the panaca and ayllu
which together belonged to one group of three ceque.
panaca panaca
ayllu ayllu
panaca panaca
ayllu ayllu
Chanca Cuzco
(consisting of the panaca and ayllu
of Chinchaysuyu and Collasuyu)
This joining together as moieties of the organization of Cuzco and that of

the Chanca in this representation — which is related to the first one — exhibits
a type of organization which is identical to that in the third representation of
the organization of Cuzco.
b) As my point of departure in the reconstruction of this representation, I
propose to discuss the three myths which throw light on the form of organization
of three matrilineal lineages linked to each other by the asymmetric marriage
with MoBroDa. These myths relate to Chinchaysuyu, to Collasuyu and to Cuzco
as consisting of the four suyu.
This form of organization is most clearly illustrated by the myth about the
groups Tambo, Maras and Sutic, which I shall therefore discuss first. These
three groups were connected with the internal organization of Collasuyu, as is
clear from diagram B. The version of the myth which I have used is that of
Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 217-18). Because of the difficulties of interpre
tation of the text I shall give it translated in toto.
“This ynga Mancocapac was hostile to the uacas (huaca, holy site) and for
this reason destroyed that belonging to the curaca (chief) Pinaocapac (Pinahua
Capac) with all its idols. In the same way he destroyed that belonging to
Tocaycapac, who was a great servant of the idols, and then ordered it to be
built (the holy site? the house?) on the spot where he had been born. The
Indians in the end built it at the orders of Mancocapac, destroying the house
and rebuilding it in stone, in the shape of a framework which consisted of three
windows, which referred to the house of his parents (or ancestors?) from whom
70 IV. THE FIRST REPRESENTATION
they descended and who were called as follows: the first Tampottoco, the
second Marasttoco, the third Suticttoco who were of his uncles, grandparents
on his mother’s side and on his father’s side which are the following:
Yncaptampottocon, or Pacarinancacpaunanchan. In the Indian language they are

called Paccaritampotoco. These two trees symbolise his father and mother, Apo-
tampo and Pachamamaachi.
Marasttoco Suticttoco
And he had also ordered that they should get roots of gold and silver and
had golden fruits hung up in the trees, so that they (the trees) were called
corichaochoc collquechaochoc tampo y uacan; this means that the trees sym
bolised his parents, and that the ynga produced by them were like their fruits,
and that the two trees must be the trunk and the root of the ynga, for they made
all these things for their glory” .
The first point of interest in this myth from Pachacuti Yamqui is the per
sonification of Tambo, Maras and Sutic. From Sarmiento2) and M olina3)
we know that these three names were used to designate groups, or ayllu. Ac
cording to Pachacuti Yamqui, his uncles, his grandparents on his mother’s side,
and his grandparents on his father’s side, belonged to these groups. Manco
Capac himself was associated with Tambottoco. In the caption under the dia
gram, this window was called Yncaptampottoco, i.e. the Tampo window of the
Inca. Manco Capac and his brothers and sisters in particular were called Inca
by Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 214, 216, 217). The nature of the three groups
is not known. For this reason I shall first examine how far the data on these
groups indicate a patrilineal or matrilineal character.
2) See I § 3 pp. 7-8.

3) See I § 2 pp. 5-7; diagram B p. 6.
I translated the Spanish personification of the groups, “tios” and “ abuelos” ,

by “ uncles” and “ grandparents” . The plural of the Spanish word “ tio” can mean
both “ uncles and aunts” and “uncles” alone. Similarly, “ abuelos” can be trans
lated both by “ grandparents” and by “grandfathers” . In either case it appears
to me that in all probability only the men are referred to and not both the men
and the women. One argument in favour of this assumption is the fact that,
as will appear from the data, lineages are meant by the three groups, in which
husband and wife do not belong to one and the same lineage. A second argument
is that in Quechua terminological distinctions are made between uncles and
aunts and between grandfathers and grandmothers4). Holguin (1607, Cap.
LII) in his grammar calls FaFa, MoFa and the male ancestors, macho in Que
chua, “ abuelos” , and opposes them to FaMo, MoMo and the female ancestors,
paya, whom he calls “ abuelas” . As Pachacuti Yamqui was an Indian, it seems
likely that he, like Holguin, distinguished between the words abuelos and
abuelas.
With reference to Indian conditions in Peru, the Spanish word tio is often
used only to indicate MoBro, for in Quechua, FaBro, like the father, is called
yaya. Nonetheless, I shall investigate whethei there is a possibility that the word
tio refers to FaBro or MoBro, and also whether the lineages can be patrilineal
or matrilineal. The four possibilities are as follows:
1 ) Uncle equals FaBro and the lineages are patrilineal. Ego, FaBro and FaFa
would belong to the same lineage. This is an anomaly.
2) Uncle equals FaBro and the lineages are matrilineal. In this case ego and
FaBro could not belong to the same lineage. This is not possible either.
3) Uncle equals MoBro and the lineages are patrilineal. MoBro and MoFa
would then belong to the same lineage. This is equally impossible.
4) Uncle equals MoBro and the lineages are matrilineal. Only in this situation
do MoBro, MoFa and FaFa not belong to the same lineage. Ego belongs
to the lineage of MoBro.
This proves then that the terms uncle, MoFa and FaFa cannot be indications
of patrilineal lineages and that by the term uncle, MoBro, and not FaBro, is
meant. Although it has not been proved that the three kinship terms indicate
lineages, they must, if this is the case, perforce refer to matrilineal lineages.
c) It could be deduced from Manco Capac s hostility to the chiefs Tocay
Capac and Pinahua Capac that his people consisted of the groups Tambo, Maras
and Sutic. This would indicate endogamous marriage movement within the three
groups as a whole. If MoFa and FaFa belonged to different matrilineal lineages
4) MoBro = caca and FaBro is called like the father yaya. FaSi = ipa and MoSi is also
called like the mother mama.
than ego (Manco Capac), marriage ties must have existed between the lineages.
The indication of exclusive MoBroDa marriage in the Quechua kinship system
is wholly in agreement with the existence of such marriage ties (Holguin 1607,
cap. L II). The term caca means both MoBro and father-in-law of the husband.
The term ipa, on the other hand, carries only the meaning of FaSi, and not
that of mother-in-law. If indeed there existed the exclusive MoBroDa marriage
among the members of the Tambo, Maras and Sutic groups as lineages, then
Maras was the matrilineal lineage of MoFa as well as of Fa; Sutic the matrilineal
lineage of FaFa as well as of the son; and not only ego and his MoBro, but
also his patrilineal great-grandfather and his patrilineal great-grandchildren
belonged to Tambo. Below I shall cite further evidence to corroborate the
assumed form of organization in three matrilineal lineages linked by the asym
metric connubium of MoBroDa marriage.
There is evidence to suggest that the word ayMu was used for a social group
of which the internal organization was the same as that outlined above. I wish
to draw special attention to this similarity because of the significant function
which the ayllu had at the time of the Inca rulers — and even at the present
day — in problems of social organization in Peru and Bolivia. This further
evidence also suggests that the myth connected with Chinchaysuyu explains an
organization similar to that of Tambo, Maras and Sutic.
It might be appropriate at this point to enter into the problem of the ayllu
and the evidence pointing to a tripartition wthin it. According to Holguin
(1607, cap. LII) the ayllu is a kinship group. In Aymara, ayllu means penis,
which might be an indication of the patrilineal character of the ayllu. In Que
chua there is the related word ullu for penis. In Quechua, however, the word
ayllu is the name of a particular kind of weapon, called bolas, or boladora, in
Spanish. In Peru this weapon consisted of three metal or stone balls joined
together by leather thongs. The connection between the three different meanings
of the word ayllu: a social group, the male genitals, and the bolas, can be
illustrated by a number of examples, as for instance a number of Aymara words
from the stem urco. Bertonio (1612) gives the following meanings:
1) “Urcona: the stone grinder for grinding corn;
2) Urcona cchanca: a very strong, triple thread;
3) Urcona: a rope from which pieces of string hang down, used for hunting
vicunas and deer (i.e. a bolas);
4) Urcona, or chacha urco: a strong man, the captain on whose courage others
depend;
5) Urcorara: a large herd, a body of men or male animals” .
The fourth and fifth headings point to the concept of a social group, and the
second and third to a tripartition. The fourth and fifth headings also mention
the male character. In Quechua, urco is a general' word indicating the male
species.
The second meaning, “very strong, triple thread” , reminds us again of a
Quechua word with the same meaning which also points to a connection with
the Quechua kinship system.
According to Holguin (1608) the Quechua word mullaypa means a rope of
esparto, twined of three strands. This word may be derived from mulla, which
means brother’s children (of a woman speaker). Translated literally mullaypa
would them mean: “ of my brother’s children” . One could perhaps read in these
meanings: a rope twined of three strands, and of bolas, a symbol'isation of the
ayllu as an endogamous group consisting of three matrilineal lineages, linked
by MoBroDa marriage. From the word villca, a synonym of ayllu, it further
appears that the ayllu is a group of which all members descend patrilineally
from one ancestor. According to the dictionary by Santo Tomas (1951) the
words ayllu and villca are synonymous and both mean lineage, descent, extended
family. Santo Tomas gives pump, or purging syringe as an additional meaning
of villca. Purging by means of a clyster pipe was known to the South American
Indians before the arrival of the Spanish 5). The sap of a particular tree was
used for this purpose and both the tree and the sap itself were called villca
(Holguin 1608). According to Poma de Ayala (1944, foja 71, 119), who
called a purging syringe vilcachina, men had purges with the aid of syringes
in order to be stronger in battle and in order to increase their health. I would
think that the purging syringe and penis were conceived as associated with each
other.
Apart from its meaning of lineage, villca was also applied, as a synonym
of huaca, a holy site, to the holy site from which a group considered itself
to be descended (Avila 1939, see Index s.v. huaka and huillca, and p. 138;
Molina 1943, p. 83; Poma 1944, foja 237, 239, 263, 265; Anello Oliva 1895,
Lib. 1, cap. 4, p. 132-134;.
Villca meaning great-grandson is related to this last sense of the word (Hol
guin 1607, cap. LII). From a remark in Santo Tomas it appears that the great
grandfather and great-grandson occupy a comparable position in the Inca kin
ship system. Both in his dictionary (1 951b ) and in his grammar (1951a,
p. 155), he records that the great-grandfather jokingly says brother to his great-
grandson. It seems likely therefore that villca meant not only ancestor but
also great-grandfather, in addition to its meaning of great-grandson. If there
5) L. Velez Lopez (1930, pp. 296-297) gives a description and application of a clyster pump
and the depiction of it on a Chimu earthenware pot.
is question here of a patrilineal great-grandfather, which is to be expected con

sidering the other meanings of villca, this terminological identification of ego
and great-grandfather also suggests an organization of three matril'ineal lineages
linked by an asymmetric connubium. Because the three matrilineal lineages as
a whole were endogamous, all members of the endogamous group could be
the descendants of one ancestor.
I propose to adduce a last piece of evidence for the connection between the
organization of the ayllu and that of Tambo, Maras and Sutic, as well as its
applicability to the internal organization of Chinchaysuyu. This evidence is the
way in which Perez Bocanegra (1631, p. 612, 613) uses the terms Collana,
Payan and Cayao. According to him:
“ Carurunamacij (is) a distant kin in the fourth degree;
Collana, a not so distant kin;
Payan, someone who is more closely related, and
Cayaurunamacij, the closest kin” .
Apparently, in the Inca kinship system, relatives of the third degree were still
regarded as kin. Thus Holguin (1608) records: “parallel cousins: cichpa; in
the case of first cousins once removed, that is to say, kin to the third degree,
the word caylla (also extremities, or shores) is added; in the case of first cousins
twice removed, this word is replaced by ccaru ( “ far away” ) ” . Likewise, Gar-
cilaso (1945, Tomo I, Libro IV, cap. IX, X ) records that the Inca ruler married
his sister, his relatives who were within the fourth degree, and women even
further removed. When we add to this his remark (Garcikso 1945, Tomo I,
Libro IV, cap. V ili) that one must marry within one’s ayllu (parentela, or
linaje), it may be concluded that only relatives to and including the third degree
were regarded as kin and as belonging to one’s own ayllu. In the data of
Perez Bocanegra, -runa indicates the plural with regard to human beings, and
macij means kin. If it may be assumed that Collana, Payan and Cayao were
terms indicating degrees of kinship, the implications are that Collana indicated
the third degree, Payan the second degree and Cayao the first degree, for Caru
indicated the fourth degree. We also know Collana as meaning first, most
important. In the descriptions of the different systems of social organization
in Cuzco, the point of departure was always the position of the most highly
placed person in it, that is to say, the ruler (Collana). It seems likely therefore
that in this instance too, the term Collana was applied to ego. If the three
terms are applied only to kin in the ascending or descending line, the sequence
can be applied either to kin in the ascending line, or to those in the descending
line, which produces different results. The first application seems to me to be
the correct one, for it agrees with all the other evidence which we shall come
across later. It is also more likely that collateral kinship is indicated by means of
an ascending lin e 6). The relatives in the ascending and descending lines can
then be linked to the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao in the following manner:
Collana great-grandfather (FaFaFa)
Payan grandfather (FaFa)
Cayao father (Fa)
Collana ego;
Payan son;
Cayao grandson (S 0 S 0 )
Collana great-grandson (S 0 S0 S 0 )
d) It appears from the internal organization of Chinchaysuyu that by the
terms Collana, Payan and Cayao not only kin were indicated, but also the three
matrilineal lineages to which they belonged. This type of organization is illu
strated in the following myth of which Sarmiento (1947, cap. 11-13, p. 117-
131) has the most detailed version.
In Sarmiento’s version the myth begins with the story of the cave with three
windows; this cave he calls Tambotoco. The centre window, however, unlike
the one in Pachacuti Yamqui, is called Capactoco, and the Tambo come from
Sutictoco. Although a Sutic-ayllu is not mentioned in this myth, Sarmiento
(1947, cap. 11, p. 119) does mention one further on in the text.
Manco Capac and his three brothers, Ayar Uchu (uchu means chili), Ayar
Cachi (cachi means salt) and Ayar Auca (auca means warrior, enemy) and his
four sisters, Mama Occlo, Mama Huaco, Mama Cura or Mama Ipacura, and
Mama Rahua, are all descended from Capactoco 7). One of the four brothers,
however, was soon eliminated, for he was so wild and strong that the other
brothers grew afraid of him. By a ruse they made him enter the cave Tambotoco
and then this brother’s servant moved a rock in front of the entrance so that
the brother could not come out again (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 12, p. 122, 123) 8).
The three remaining brothers 9*) and their sisters then went to Cuzco, defeated
6) The meaning of Paya = grandmother may also point in the direction that by Payan is
meant the group of the grandfather.
7) Most chroniclers share Sarmiento’s opinion that Manco Capac had three brothers and four
sisters; according to a few others (Cieza de Le6n 1943, VI, pp. 51, 52; Acosta 1954, cap. X X V ,
p. 38; Las Casas 1939, cap. X V I pp. 88, 89; Santillan, numero 2, pp. 43, 44), — who were,
however, among the earliest in Peru — there were two brothers of Manco Capac and three
sisters.
8) The chroniclers do not agree on which of the four brothers is meant. Some (e.g. Cabello
Valboa 1951, cap. 9, p. 261) call him Ayar Auca; according to others it was Ayar Cachi. Sar
miento, among others, defends the last proposition vigorously; he nevertheless contradicts him
self twice (1947, cap. 11, p. 119; cap. 13, p. 128) and seems to know that it was actually Ayar
Auca. It seems probable to me that it was Ayar Auca who returned. His name, Auca, does
after all mean: enemy, warrior (see IV note 46).
9) Or the three o rig in a l brothers, according to the variant versions.

the pre-Inca population and took the town. Every one of the three brothers
became the fore-father of an ayllu. According to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 11,
p. 119) 10) Ayar Cachi’s ayllu was called Chauin Cuzco ayllu, and Ayar Uchu’s
ayllu Arairaca ayllu Cuzco callan. The royal dynasty, the rulers of which Sar
miento (1947, cap. 11, p. 117) calls the Capac Inca, descended from Manco
Capac. Betanzos (1880) describes them on the title page of his chronicle as the
Capaccuna, that is to say, the Capac men; according to Garcilaso (1945, Tomo
II, Libro VII, cap. IX ) they all belonged to one lineage, the Capac ayllu. It
seems then that there are two usages of the word, the most important being to
indicate the royal dynasty. The other indicates the whole of the three lineages
descending from Manco Capac and his two brothers. For these three brothers,
according to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 11, p. 118) came from the window Capac-
toco. The second usage is not relevant here.
The three lineages were mutually distinguished not only by their proper
names but also by the use of the terms Collana, Payan, and Cayao or the syno
nyms of these. Thus Capac was used instead of Collana. In the ceque system,
too, the first ceque of Chinchaysuyu is not called Collana, but Capac 11), and,
as I mentioned before 12), Chauin is a synonym of Payan. In the word Callan
may be read a wrong transcription of the word Calliau, which is equivalent
to Cayao.
In the course of the discussion I shall introduce various reasons why the terms
Collana, Payan and Cayao can be applied to indicate the position of the three
lineages in Chinchaysuyu and those in Collasuyu in the following manner:
Collana Payan Cayao
Chinchaysuyu: Capac ayllu Chauin Cuzco ayllu Arairaca ayllu Cuzco Cayao
Collasuyu: Tambo Sutic Maras
If Chauin Cuzco ayllu, like Sutic, is regarded as a matrilineal lineage, then
the term Chauin, i.e. Payan, indicates not only FaFa, or the son, but also the
matrilineal lineage to which they belong, provided that ego belongs to Capac
ayllu. Likewise, Arairaca ayllu Cuzco Cayao, and therefore also the term Cayao,
indicate the matrilineal lineage of the father and of the MoFa of ego.
e) The third reference to a tripartition of which we have already encountered
several examples is that about the chiefs, or rulers, Manco Capac, Tocay Capac
and Pinahua Capac. In Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 217) these kings were
also mentioned as we saw above 13). Poma de Ayala also mentions these three
kings in a similar way. Relating how the five worlds succeeded each other, he
1°) N .B.: here Sarmiento does speak of Ayar Cachi (see IV note 46).
11) See diagram A p. 4 and the diagram in I § 4 p. 9.
12) See III, § 3 p. 41.
13) See IV, § lb p. 69.
records (1944, foja 80) that from the people of the fourth world, the Aucaruna,
“ there came forth Capac Ynga Tocaycapac, Pinaucapac first ynga” . About Sin-
chi Roca, Manco Capac’s son, he says (1944, foja 89) that he had killed
“ Tocaycapac Pinaucapac ynga from Xacxauana ( = Jaquijahuana, which lays
in the Anta plain, the valley to the North of the valley in which Cuzco lies)
to Quiquixana the Indians Chelques Acos” (Quiquijana lies in a valley to the
South of Cuzco. Here the Chilques used to live. Acos, in Cuntisuyu, lies nearby).
§ 2. a) In this last instance it is also possible to compare the three groups

(that is, the three peoples of the three kings) to the three lineages mentioned
in the former examples. One problem arises from this evidence, however, which
also occurs in that on the organization of Chinchaysuyu and Coliasuyu. If one"**
looks for the three lineages in each of the three instances of quadripartition in
the organization of Cuzco as discussed in chapter III, it will become clear that
in these three instances the lineage of ego, which had the characteristics of
Collana, was partitioned into two groups which were each represented in the
organization of Cuzco, and that thus quadripartition arose. How this bipartition
of Collana was applied, will be made clear from the identification of the people
of Manco Capac, Tocay Capac and Pinahua Capac with the four suyu of Cuzco.
I shall therefore take this organization as my point of departure in solving
this problem. In this way it will be possible to uncover the lineages mentioned
in the three instances in the organization of Cuzco. It will also become clear
that the groups indicated here as lineages, are represented not only as such,
but that in addition, these groups are also represented in a different manner
and endowed with wholly different characteristics. There are nevertheless lo
gical connections between these different representations. It also becomes evident
that one can speak only of hypothetical representations of the organization of
Cuzco, which do not necessarily represent the real situations.
The question of the relationship of the tripartition to the quadripartition
arises at once in the version of the myth about Manco Capac, Tocay Capac and
Pinahua Capac recorded by Garcilaso (1945, Tomo I, libro I, cap. X V III).
According to this version a man had appeared in Tiahuanaco, after the Flood,
who was so powerful that he had divided the world into four quarters and
given these quarters to four men whom he had called kings. He had sent them
out, each to conquer his own part. To Manco Capac he gave the northern
quarter, to Colla the southern, to Tocay the eastern and to Pinahua the western
quarter. The Inca Empire was said to have grown out of these four quarters
and was therefore called Tahuantinsuyu, i.e. the realm of the four quarters.
Manco Capac settled in the valley of Cuzco and the Inca dynasty descended
from him.
The identification of the four kingdoms with the four suyu of Cuzco presents
no immediate problems. Colla’s kingdom was Collasuyu. As regards Tocay’s
kingdom, various chroniclers throughout Inca history (e.g. Sarmiento 1947,
cap. 20, p. 146; cap. 34, p. 182) call Tocay Capac the ruler of the Ayarmaca.
Considering that in Antisuyu ceque III 3 b is called not Payan but Ayarmaca,
Antisuyu can for this additional reason be identified with the Ayarmaca and
their king Tocay Capac. The ceque Anahuarque 14) occupies the same position
in Cuntisuyu as the ceque Ayarmaca in Antisuyu. Several further instances 15)
support the identification in this context, of Anahuarque with Cuntisuyu and
the people of Pinahua Capac, who are called the Pinahua. These Pinahua used
to live in the valley of Lucre (or of Muyna), near the present town Oropesa,
which lies at about 30 KM to the S.E. of Cuzco (Las Casas 1939, cap. XVI,
p. 92; Sarmiento 1947, cap. 19, p. 144; A.H.L. R 181) 16). Manco Capac, the
ruler of the Inca, who went to live in the region of Cuzco, can be identified
with Chinchaysuyu. In this context no other author mentions the ruler Colla.
The myth is nevertheless valuable as an illustration of the division into four.
From data in Molina and Betanzos it appears that the kingdoms of Manco Capac
and Colla were equivalent to the two groups into which Cuzco was divided.
According to Molina (1943, p. 31) only the panaca and ayllu of Collasuyu
belonged to Hurin Cuzco, or Lower Cuzco, the one group of Cuzco. But then,
one may also conclude from the evidence below (from Betanzos) that the king
dom of Manco Capac was identified not only with Chinchaysuyu, but also
with Hanan Cuzco, or Upper Cuzco, the other group of Cuzco.
Betanzos (1880, cap. XVI, p. 107-112) explains the organization of Cuzco
in connection with the war which the Inca ruler Pachacuti, who was the ninth
ruler, conducted against the Chanca people 17). The Chanca, — who originated
from the region of present-day Andahuaylas, ± 160 KM West of Cuzco — , had
attempted to conquer Cuzco. Although Pachacuti’s father, who was still ruling
at the time, and many others, had fled from Cuzco, Pachacuti had been able with
the aid of three friends to defeat the Chanca. Subsequently Pachacuti assumed
power and began to rebuild and reorganize Cuzco. He was assisted in this labour
14) See IV note 23.

15) See e.g. IV, § 3 a p. 93 and note 42.
16) In his book “ El Cuzco Imperial o Ccoscco” , Santiago Astete Chocano refers (pp. 31-35)
among other things to the people of the ayllu of the Pinahua living in the region of the Spanish
city of Oropesa. Although he gives no clearly mentioned source, his data seem to me to be
reliable, the more so because the author himself comes from Oropesa. A mountain in the vicinity
of Oropesa is also called Pinahua.
17) The reason why this description of the organization of Cuzco is linked to the person of
Pachacuti is not of importance here, but will be mentioned in the discussion of the second
representation of the organization of Cuzco (see V § 5 pp. 133-139, § 10 a, b pp. 155-158).
by ten chiefs of the local population. After the reconstruction he assigned land
outside the town to them. He and his kin established themselves inside the city
itself.
The part of the town between the rivers running from the temple of the sun
to the confluence of the rivers, he called Hurin-Cuzco. Here the three friends
and their kin went to live. From them the three lineages of Hurin Cuzco
descended. The section between the rivers from the temple of the sun to the
hill on which the fort (Sacsahuaman) is situated he assigned — and here I
quote literally — to “the chiefs (senores) who were his closest kin, and descen
dants of his lineage in a direct line, who were the sons of noble men and
women (senores y senoras) of his own kin and lineage; for the three chiefs
whom he permitted to dwell in the section stretching from the temple of the
sun downwards, as you have already heard, were the subsidiary sons of chiefs
who, although they belonged to his lineage, had been born from alien women
and were of low descent. Sons begotten in this manner they call Guaccha
Cconcha, which means ‘deriving from poor people and of low origin’, although
sons of the Inca, they are ( ailed thus and no honour is paid to them by any one
from among the more noble people, with the exception of the orej ones
(nobles) who also belonged to the commoners” (Betanzos 1880, cap. XVI,
p - 112)-
Betanzos discusses the three lineages of the subsidiary kin of Pachacuti in
Hurin-Cuzco, i.e. Collasuyu mentioned by Molina and Garcilaso. These three
lineages can probably be identified with the three lineages Tambo, Maras and
Sutic of the myth recorded by Pachacuti Y am qui1S). Thence would also follow
that Manco Capac’s descendants and those of his two brothers, form the same
group as the primary kin of the ruler Pachacuti.
The difference between the primary and subsidiary relatives of Pachacuti, it
appears from Betanzos, was that the former belonged to his kin both patrilineally
as matrilineally and the latter only patrilineally. With reference to the passage*
cited above Betanzos explains the difference between the two groups again in
greater detail. Because this distinction between the two groups is one of the
most important, if not the most important, foundations of Inca organization,
I wish to enter further into it.
In brief, the ruler, according to Betanzos (1880, cap. XVI, p. 113), had one
principal wife who was his sister or cousin (primahermana). This woman was
called a Pihuihuarmi, or Mamahuarmi (mama, mother; huarmi, woman, wife),
and had to be related to the Inca both on father’s and mother’s side, without being
related in any way to a Guaccha Cconcha. The Inca took her as his principal18
18) See IV § 1 b pp. 69-70.

wife on the day when he was installed as emperor. Her sons were called
Pihuichuri, which, according to Betanzos, “ means as much as primary children” .
Their eldest son was the first heir.
The primary children of the ruler, then, distinguished themselves from the
subsidiary ones in being born from the one primary wife of the ruler, who must
also be his sister or cousin. The primary children belonged to Hanan-Cuzco, the
subsidiary ones to Hurin-Cuzco 19).
19) Because of the importance of the distinction between the single primary wife and the
other subsidiary wives, I will here too give some data taken from other chroniclers.
It was not only the ruler who had only one principal wife, but also the other men in the
population. This was the wife given by the Inca or his representative; she was called mama-
huarmi (Betanzos 1880, cap. X V I, p. 113; Cabello Valboa 1951, cap. 19, p. 348), pihuihuarmi
(Betanzos 1880, cap. X V I, pp. 113, 115; Holguin 1608, under the word “pihuichuri"), or
mamanchic (Polo 1916b, p. 93; Garcilaso 1945, Tomo I, libro I, cap. X X V I ). She could, by
special favour, be a relative of the ruler or an aclla of the acllahuasi ( = house of the virgins
of the sun) (Murua 1613, libro II, cap. 22), but it was usually a woman from the man's
immediate environment or one of his kin. Molina says, for example (1943, p. 68), that “ when
the Inca gave them the women, whom they also received although it were on command of the
Inca, then the man went to the house of the father of the girl to tell him that the Inca had
given her to h im ..." after which the normal marriage took place. In the same chapter in which
Garcilaso reports (1945, Tomo I, libro IV, cap. V ili) that men must marry within the village
and within their kin-group, he says that every year or every two years the Inca collected the
mariageable boys and girls of his lineage and joined them in marriage. Several days later the
wedding ceremony was performed once more in the presence of the close relatives of the bride
and groom. After this the Inca sent his ambassadors to conclude the marriages of the others
from Cuzco and its vicinity. This report is reminiscent of one by Betanzos (1880, cap. X IV ,
pp. 86, 87) in which he says that Pachacuti sent out his three friends to marry the youths of
one province to the girls of another and vice versa. From this must be inferred that marriage
was in agreement with a given system of marriage classes. The endogamy of the marriage with
the principal wife is still further specified by Garcilaso (1945, Tomo I, libro IV, cap. X ) in a
report on the Inca aristocracy. He says: “All those of royal blood married their kin to the 4th
degree, so as to insure many primary children by descent. Only the king, however, might marry
his sister” . From some other quotations (Garcilaso 1945, Tomo I, libro IV, cap. IX ) it is even
more clear what idea Garcilaso — who was himself a grandson of the 11th ruler, Huayna
Capac — had of the marriage of the rulers. “ If there was no primary sister, they married the
nearest relative". “ They also said that the rulers married their sisters so that the empire would
belong to the successor to the throne through both the lineage of the mother and the father,
because if this was not the case they said that the ruler was illegitimate through the mother” .
“ The king thus had three kinds of children: those of his wife who were legitimate for the
succession of the empire, those by related wives who were legitimate by reason of blood, and
the subsidiary children of foreign women".
The principal wife was not only legitimate because she was legitimately married to her
husband, but also because she was his kin within the fourth degree. This condition led Garcilaso
himself to make a distinction between children of the legitimate wife and children of other
legitimate relatives who were not of the legitimate wife. All these children are apparently
considered by Garcilaso to be legitimate in certain aspects.
Only the king married his sister. His closest kin could marry a sister of the same father
(Cobo 1956, Tomo II, libro 14, cap. 7, p. 250) and Cobo adds to this “ all other people who
were not yet married (i.e. legitimately married) might always marry their nieces if they requested
b) As was demonstrated above, there was, within the framework of the

tripartition relating to Manco Capac, Tocay Capac and Pinahua Capac, a biparti
tion in Manco Capac’s group which resulted in an overall quadripartition. No
material is known to me about the mutual relationships of the groups in this
tripartition, but this can be extrapolated from a comparison of the organization
of the four suyu with that of villages and of provinces in southern Peru. In this
manner the feasibility of applying the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao to the
four suyu in Cuzco will also be demonstrated.
This feasibility is illustrated by the organization of the Inca province of
Aymaraes20) and by that of the present-day village Puquio which are both
situated in the Ayacucho Department. The Aymaraes province was sub-divided
into four sub-provinces which Poma de Ayala mentions in two sets of two:
Collana Aymaraes and Taypi Aymaraes, and Yanaca Aymaraes and Cayao
Aymaraes (Poma 1944, foja 154). This grouping in his listing of these four
sub-provinces obviously corresponds to the actual grouping21).
permission of the Inca or his representatives, for there was a law that might not be ignored
that both (husband and wife) were descended from the same stem and grandfather” . By this,
both could worship the same dead bodies of their ancestors, each in direct line. It was forbidden
to take nieces as subsidiary wives. It seems probable to me that by this niece Cobo meant
M oBroDa, since the term caca meant both MoBro and father-in-law.
How important the matrilineal descent was, may be judged from the following reports:
According to Cieza (1943, cap. X , p. 72) the ruler at his coronation married his primary full
sister on his father’s and mother’s side so that their children would be legitimate through the
mother. Should she bestow herself on other men and have children by them, these were
nevertheles her children and not those of foreign women, because the Inca too could take other
women, as a result of which there could in his case never be certainty that the children were
legitimate and his.
Because the principal wife of a man was distinguished from the other wives in the first place
by her descent, this must be the reason that one of the other women could not take the place
of the principal wife in the event of her death and that the man had to marry a new principal
wife (Cobo 1956, Tomo II, libro 14, cap. 7, p. 249). If a chief died and left no legitimate
successor, then, according to Murua (1613, libro II, p. 14), a successor would not be sought
in the first place among the sons of his brothers but among those of his sisters. Only then
would the legal succession be secured.
20) This province must not be confused with the people of the Colla, living on Lake Titicaca,
which was later given the name Aymara by the Spaniards. Nevertheless, the Aymaraes probably
spoke the Aymara language, a fact which is indicated by the use of the Aymara word Taypi
( = middle) in the following passage.
21) The data on this organization come from three sources. According to Poma de Ayala
(Poma 1944, foja 154), the fifth captain, i.e. the general of the fifth Inca ruler, conquered
the provinces of the “ Quechuas aymara uaquirca collana taypi aymara yanaca cayauaymara
pampamarca” . The people of the Quechua lived in a province bordering on that of the Aymara.
Besides the generic names Collana, Taypi, Yanaca and Cayao, we also find the place or proper
names mentioned of Uaquirca, Challuanca and Pampamarca. So Poma de Ayala here describes
a provincial division as — according to him — it existed in Inca times, although he m u st also
have used his knowledge of the situation at the time in which he wrote. In the chronicle of
Vazquez de Espinosa (1948, § 1874, p. 663) the province of Aymaraes is divided into the
The division into ayllu of the present-day village Puquio (Arguedas 1956,
p. 184, 185) in Rucanas province corresponds to that of Aymaraes province. In
Puquio there are to be found the four ayllu Collana, Chaupi, Piscachuri and
Cayao. In a document dating from 1830 (A.H.L. R 100) these ayllu are men
tioned in this same sequence22).
The very name of Piscachuri ayllu in Puquio very much facilitates the com
parison of the four ayllu in Puquio and in Aymaraes to the four suyu of Cuzco.
In Quechua, Piscachuri means the five sons. Within the ceque system there
were five groups of three ceque in Cuntisuyu in Cuzco, in contrast to the other
suyu which all had three groups of three ceque. This indication of a division into
five in Piscachuri ayllu as well as in Cuntisuyu suggests that Piscachuri ayllu in
Puquio, Cuntisuyu in Cuzco as well as Yanaca ayllu in Aymaraes, occupied
similar positions23).
It is more difficult, however, to compare the Collana, Taypi or Chaupi (both
repartimientos (sub-provinces): Collana Aymara, Taype ayllu, Cayao Aymara, Challuanca and
a few other repartimientos which are not relevant here.
The third source is several loose sheets from the undated “ Documentos varios sobre los
Indios” (Various documents concerning the Indians), belonging to the Archivo Histhrico of
the University of Cuzco (A.H.C. Legajo X L II). In it mention is made of the repartimiento
Collana Aymara (sheet no. 28); the cacique (the chief) of the ayllu Yanaca with his “ segunda
persona” (second-ranking chief) of the ayllu Rimacvillca (sheet no. 38); the repartimiento
Cayao Aymara and the village of Guaquirca, where the alcalde mayor (chief mayor) of the
repartimiento Collana lived, which alcalde mayor had under him caciques guarangas, piscapa-
chacas and pachacas (i.e. chiefs over 1000, 500 and 100 tribute payers) in the village of
Guaquirca, with his secunda persona in Challuanca (sheets nos. 38, 43, 44).
The fact that Taypi is called ayllu by Vazquez de Espinosa and Yanaca is called ayllu in the
loose sheets, justifies our also considering Collana and Cayao to be such. These ayllu were,
however, subdivided into other ayllu or groups, e.g. Rimacvilla which belonged to Yanaca
and Guaquirca to Collana. Thus in all probability in the datum of Poma de Ayala, the groups
Uaquirca, Challuanca and Pampamarca were subdivisions of the four ayllu Collana, Taypi,
Yanaca and Cayao.
22) Arguedas writes the name of the ayllu as pichqachuri; the document as piscachuri. As with
the other Quechua words, I shall retain the more traditional spelling.
23) In actual fact the fifth group of three ceque in Cuntisuyu was divided into two parts. The
first part was a ceque which was first called Collana and later Cayao and which was placed after
the second group of three ceque. The second part was a ceque called Anahuarque, placed after the
fourth group of three ceque. As will be seen from comparison of the four suyu in Cuzco with
village organizations outside Cuzco (IV § 2 b pp. 81-84, § 3 a pp. 92-93), the position of the
ceque Anahuarque in Cuntisuyu was identical with that of the ceque Payan in the third group
of ceque of a suyu divided into three groups of ceque. If we also ascribe the character of Payan
to the ceque Anahuarque, we may conceive that in the following manner the three groups of
ceque in Cuntisuyu had multiplied so as finally to constitute five groups of ceque:
fir st h a lf seco n d h a lf
first group: IV 1 a Collana (14) Collana (7)
IV 1 b Payan (13) Payan (6)
IV 1 c Cayao ( 12) Cayao ( 5) Chimapanaca
these words are used as synonyms of Payan24) and Cayao ayllu in Aymaraes
and Puquio to the suyu in Cuzco. But here the organization of the village
Puquiura, which lies on the road from Cuzco to the Anta valley, might throw
some light on the situation.
According to a document of 1787 (A.N.L. Legajo 17, Cuaderno 423) the
following ayllu were to be found in this village:
Collana Anansaya
Tiqui Collana Hurinsaya
Chaupisuyu Anansaya
Chaupisuyu Urinsaya
Ayamarca and Tamboconga
Ayamarca Urinsaya
Tamboconga.
Another document (A.N.L. Legajo 17, Cuaderno 424), which follows upon
the latter, records that Chaupisuyu ayllu was joined together as one with Collana
ayllu.
I do not at this point wish to enter into the question of the distribution of
the ayllu over Hanansaya and Hurinsaya (i.e. the Upper Half and the Lower
H alf) 25), as given by the first document. It mentions four ayllu: Collana,
Chaupi, Ayamarca and Tamboconga. The second document records that Collana
and Chaupisuyu are joined together as one. From the first document one might
conclude that the same applied to Ayamarca and Tamboconga. The very name
Chaupisuyu seems to indicate that the other four ayllu were also called suyu.
Ayamarca ayllu can be said to correspond to Antisuyu 26). Tamboconga, which
in Puquiura occupies the same position as does Piscachuri ayllu in Puquio and
second group: IV 2 a Collana (11) . . Collana (4)
IV 2 b Payan (10) . . Payan (3)
IV 2 c Cayao ( 9) . . Cayao (2) Quisco ayllu
thirdgroup: IV 3 a Collana
IV 3 b ( 8) . . Anahuarque ( 1)
IV 3 c Cayao
(the figures between parentheses give the sequence of the ceque as given by Cobo in his Relation.
See I § 1 p. 2).
As a result of the duplication Chimapanaca and Quisco ayllu — which according to Molina
(diagram B p. 6) belonged together — were placed in the second half and were there distributed
over two groups of three ceque. Thus in all probability Rauraupanaca — the only panaca not
mentioned in the ceque system — with Masca ayllu similarly belonged to the first half. By a
reduction of the five groups of three ceque to three groups we must therefore place Raurapanaca
with Masca ayllu in the first of the three groups of ceque; Chimapanaca with Quisco ayllu in the
second group and the ceque Anahuarque in the third group.
24) See III § 3 p. 41.
25) See IV § 5 b pp. 106-107.
26) See IV § 2 a p. 78.
Yanaca ayllu in Aymaraes, can therefore be said to correspond to Cuntisuyu in

Cuzco.
Although the comparison of Collana ayllu with Chinchaysuyu and of Chaupi-
suyu with Collasuyu seems obvious, there is also proof of its applicability in the
mutual relationship of Collana and Chaupi ayllu in Puquio.
According to Arguedas (1956, p. 184, 185) there is a great difference in
present-day Puquio between the social relationships and the economies of Collana
and Chaupi ayllu, whose members regard themselves as each other’s brothers,
on the one hand, and of Piscachuri and Cayao ayllu, whose members also regard
themselves as each other’s brothers, on the other. In the latter two ayllu are
found the highest percentage of fullblood Indians. In Collana and Chaupi there
are many half-castes and people who are of supposedly pure European descent.
The percentage of the latter is highest in Collana ayllu. This has been a cause
of much discontent among the Indians in Collana because they were deprived
of their land by land-owners of European origin and were reduced to great
poverty in this ayllu. Because the percentage of the latter is lower in Chaupi,
there exists greater harmony between these two groups.
The situation in Puquio is obviously the result of present-day adaptation to
the relationship which used to exist in Cuzco, of the Inca and their descendants
to the local inhabitants. This situation must also have existed in Puquio when
the Inca were occupying the present-day position of the people of European
descent.
As in Puquio, the most pure-blood Inca in Cuzco probably belonged to Collana
(Chinchaysuyu) while those of more mixed descent, that is to say the subsidiary
children of the Inca, probably belonged to Payan (Collasuyu). The situation in
Cuzco, then, was as follows:
(Collana)
Collasuyu Antisuyu
(Payan) (Cayao)
c) As was demonstrated above, the three mythical groups relating to Manco

Capac, Tocay Capac and Pinahua Capac were associated with the four suyu
of Cuzco. The next question is with which four groups27) in Chinchaysuyu
27) We may suppose for two reasons that the myth of Manco and his brothers and sisters and
the three lineages mentioned in this myth were linked with four groups in Chinchaysuyu and the
myth of Tambo, Maras and Sutic with four groups in Collasuyu. The first reason is the analogy
between both myths and that of Manco Capac, Tocay Capac and Pinahua Capac, which last myth
is also connected with four groups, the four suyu. The second reason, as will be still clearer from
the discussion of the third representation (see VI § 3 pp. 174-178), is that the third panaca
and the third ayllu of Chinchaysuyu and the third panaca and the third ayllu of Collasuyu played
no role in the first representation nor in the third.
the three lineages Capac ayllu, Chauin Cuzco ayllu and Arairaca Cuzco Cayao
were associated, and with which four groups28) the three lineages Tambo,
Maras and Sutic were associated. A second question is how the bipartition of
Capac ayllu and of Tambo was presented. A wholly similar situation as in that
of the four suyu is not to be expected here. In this case the terms Collana and
Payan were applied to the two suyu which, in the tripartition, together formed
one group. In the other two cases the terms Collana and Payan must be applied
to two of the three lineages of the original tripartition.
From the point of view of answering the first question, the situation is
clearer in Chinchaysuyu. In Chapter I 29) I argued that Chauin-Cuzco ayllu
must be linked to ceque l i e , and Arairaca ayllu Cuzco Cayao to ceque I 2 c.
Capac ayllu was linked to ceque I 1 b. This Capac ayllu, however, in the ceque
system corresponded to the panaca of the tenth ruler, Tupac Yupanqui. In the
chapter on the second presentation of the organization of Cuzco, I shall there
fore have to produce the proof of the identification of this panaca with the
Capac ayllu which in this presentation of the organization of Cuzco represents
the complete dynasty of the rulers30).
The panaca which occurs in one group of three ceque together with Arairaca
ayllu Cuzco Cayao, is Hatun ayllu. In the quadripartition this panaca, together
with Capac ayllu must be regarded as a Collana group as opposed to Chauin
Cuzco ayllu (Payan) and Arairaca ayllu Cuzco cayao (Cayao). Only on the
basis of this assumption can a number of elements in this representation of the
social organization be explained.
This assumption is corroborated by evidence found in the marriage records
of the church in San Jeronimo, a village at 10 KM from Cuzco. According to
these records, in 1712 all but one of the ten panaca were still to be found in
the organization of the village. Instead of Capac ayllu panaca and Hatun ayllu
panaca these records mention only a Collana ayllu which, moreover, had all the
characteristic features of these two panaca. I shall enter further into the organi
zation of San Jeronimo below 31).
The quadripartition in Chinchaysuyu then looked as follows:
H atun ayllu Capac ayllu

I 2b I ib
Arairaca ayllu Chauin Cuzco

Cuzco cayao ayllu
I 2C I IC
28) As IV note 27.

29) See I § 4 pp. 8-9-
30) See V | 4 a pp. 129-130.
31) See V ili § 4 pp. 222-223; IX § 3 pp. 241-242.
d) The identification of the Tambo lineage in Collasuyu proved to be more

difficult, for no group with this name is mentioned in the organization of
Cuzco, although it does contain a Sutic ayllu and a Maras ayllu. These must
be linked to the II 1 c and II 2 c ceque.
The following themes in my opinion justify the identification of Tambo
with Apu Mayta panaca and Usca Mayta panaca. The analogy between the
organizations within Chinchaysuyu and Collasuyu could be said to be the first
theme. This analogy is apparent from the identical use of the words Capac
or Cuzco as well as Tambo in two meanings of the words. To begin with, in
Chinchaysuyu the word Capac was encountered first to designate the lineage
of Manco Capac alone as opposed to his brothers’ lineages. Sarmiento, however,
also used Capactoco (1947, cap. 11, p. 118) for the window from which Manco
Capac and his three brothers and four sisters all emerged. Pachacuti Yamqui
(1950, p. 216) uses the word Cuzco in a similar way in the same context. The
“ Cuzco Inca” were the descendants of Manco Capac and his three brothers.
The word Cuzco also occurs in the names of the lineages descending from
these brothers.
Similarly, the word Tambo is used in two ways in Collasuyu. Sarmiento
(1947, cap. 11, p. 117) used Tambotoco for the three windows as a whole.
This same broad meaning of Tambo is apparent from the following prayer,
recorded by Molina (1943, p. 43) with a translation:
“ Prayer for all the Inca
A punchao Inca inti yayay Cuzco tambo ...
(i.e.) O Sun, my father, who said that there must
be cuzco and tambo .. . ”
By Cuzco and Tambo Molina meant the whole of the Inca population. The
only possible explanation for this data is that Chinchaysuyu (i.e. Hanan-Cuzco)
was meant by Cuzco, and Collasuyu (i.e. Hurin-Cuzco) by T am bo32).
32) That the ayllu Tambo played an important part in the organization of Cuzco, even though
it is not mentioned in the scheme given in Chapter I, is indicated by the following reports:
According to Poma de Ayala (1944, foja 347), for the profession of Tocricoc, i.e. an Inca
governor, were chosen the Auquicuna, who were the sons, grandsons or greatgrandsons of the
various rulers who had some kind of physical disability and the members of the ayllu Tambo.
Seen in the light of the foregoing, it seems acceptable that the members of the ayllu Tambo must
actually be identified with the sons, etc., of the various rulers, i.e. their subsidiary descendants.
This can also be deduced from the reports of Garcilaso (1945, Tomo I, libro I, cap. X X I I I ) .
With respect to the piercing of the ears of the Inca aristocracy, this author says that those who
bore as last names Urcos, Yucay and Tampu — who all lived downstream on the river Yucay
(i.e. Urubamba) — were permitted, after the Inca (i.e. Manco Capac and his successors), to have
the largest hole in their ears. Here Garcilaso equates the ayllu Tambo with the inhabitants of the
valley of Yucay in which the city of Ollantaytambo — called Tampu by Garcilaso — is situated.
In this connection I would like to refer to a remarkable piece of information given by Cobo
(1956, Tomo II, libro 12, cap. Ill, pp. 63, 64), to which attention was first called by Warren
In addition to this broad meaning, Tambo is also used to designate one of

the three lineages: Tambo, Maras and Sutic. It seems most likely therefore
that by analogy with the situation in Chinchaysuyu, Tambo was used specifically
to designate Apu Mayta panaca and Usca Mayta panaca. The link between
these two panaca is apparent not only from the common element of their
names Mayta, but also from the words Apu and Usca. According to Holguin
(1608) Apu means “great lord, or high judge, or first chief. C^apay apu means
king” . Usca is the root of words meaning to beg. There is a contrast, then,
of high and low in these words. The word Tambo is also encountered in the
name of one of Sarmiento’s informants, Don Juan Tambo Usca Mayta (1947
Tee de la probanza . . / p. 285). He was the chief of the panaca of Mayta
Capac, i.e. Usca Mayta panaca. None of the other informants had Tambo as
part of his name.
A last indication of the relation between Tambo and Apu Mayta- or Usca
Mayta panaca can perhaps be found in the words Tambo and Mayta. Tambo
Cook (thesis, University of Lima 1955). According to most of the chroniclers, Pacaritambo was
situated in Cuntisuyu. This place is still known by the same name today and is situated to the
west of the city of Paruro. One of the myths of origin which Cobo reports is, however, entirely
in conflict with this opinion. He says that Manco Capac and his sister departed from Lake
Titicaca to seek a place where they could settle. They came to the valley of Tampu and went
downstream until they came to Pacaritampu. From there they went to Cuzco, on their way passing
Pacaritampu. According to Cobo, Manco Capac came from the valley of Tampu ( = Ollantay-
tambo) where Pacaritampu was supposed to lie. For this opinion he cites the argument that
according to his informant Don Alonso Topa Atau, grandson of Huayna Capac, the Inca rulers
spoke a language of their own which was the same as that of the inhabitants of the valley of
Tampu. That in speaking of “the valley of Tampu” Cobo unmistakably means the valley of
Yucay (of the Urubamba river) is shown by the report (Cobo 1956, Tomo II, libro 13,
cap. X X V I, p. 214) that the valley of Tampu lies downstream from Cuzco. Support for this
opinion of Cobo’s is found in the fact that after Cuzco, the most important Inca ruins are located
in the valley of Yucay, including Pisac, Chincheros (in the vicinity of the valley), Ollantaytambo
and Machu Picchu.
is a place name referring to a house or a town (as a group of houses); the woid
Mayta, which both panacas mentioned above have in common, probably consists
of the stem May- plus the suffix -ta. Although the translations which the
dictionaries give for this word cannot be used in an interpretation of the names
Apu Mayta and Usca Mayta still we can say that the stem may- in all the
words constructed with this stem refers to place. I conclude that all three of
the words Tambo and Apu Mayta or Usca Mayta probably indicate place or
location; if so, it strengthens the case for Tambo being a group made up of
both panacas.
I must draw attention to one irregularity in the organization within Colksuyu.
Apu Mayta panaca, the panaca of Capac Yupanqui, the fifth and last ruler
of Hurin-Cuzco, is linked in the ceque system to the second group of three
ceque of Collasuyu, and Usca Mayta panaca to the first group. One would
have expected the most important panaca to be linked to the first group of
ceque, as in Chinchaysuyu. There seems to me to be a mistake here. If this
irregularity is treated as a mistake, the organization of Collasuyu looks as
follows:
Usca Mayta Apu Mayta
panaca panaca
II 2b II ib
Maras Sutic
ayllu ayllu
II 2C II ic
So far the third panaca and ayllu of Chinchaysuyu nor those of Collasuyu
have been mentioned. Apart from the fact that they did not occur in the
material relating to this representation of the organization of Cuzco, it also
follows from this very representation that these groups had no place in it.
e) The second question33) that remains to be answered is that of the way
in which the bipartition of the Capac ayllu and Tambo lineages was presented
in this representation of the organization of Cuzco. I propose first to consider
the situation in Tambo.
In Pachacuti’s version (1950, p. 217, 218) 34) of the myth of Tambo,
Maras and Sutic, Manco Capac and his brothers and sisters formed an endo-
gamous group as the ‘Cuzco Capac’ or ‘Cuzco Inca’ (Pachacuti Yamqui 1950,
p. 216) within Tambo. There were other people beside them in Tambo who
participated in the marriage exchanges with Sutic and Maras. These people
were designated by Pachacuti Yamqui by the kinship term for MoBro. The
difference between the two groups was, it seems to me, expressed by the two
trees which Pachacuti Yamqui drew beside the window Tambotoco. These trees
33) See IV § 2 c pp. 84-85.

34) See IV § 1 b pp. 69-70.
were called ‘corichaochoc collquechaochoc tampo and uacan’, and were connected
with the father, Apu Tampo, and the mother, Pachamamaachi, of Manco Capac.
Holguin (1608) gives the following meanings of the elements of these words:
Chhauchu: a green layer with roots, family tree;
corichhauchumanta pacha: from the first forefathers;
ccori: gold;
ccolque: silver.
Pachacuti Yamqui obviously referred to lineages by the words corichaochoc
and collquechaochoc. The name Tampu indicates that the father of Manco
Capac also belonged to Tambo. O f these two words, tampo and uacan, tampo
belongs to corichaochoc, the tree which, in accordance with its name, had golden
roots according to Pachacuti Yamqui. Corichaochoc tampo can then be inter
preted as the patrilineal lineage of Manco Capac and his brothers and sisters
who belonged to Tampo. This lineage was able to preserve its patrilineal
character by means of marriages of its male members with their sisters. Coll
quechaochoc uacan, the tree with the silver roots, was the matrilineal lineage
through which Manco Capac and his brothers and sisters also belonged to
Tambo. To this matrilineal lineage belonged also all the other members of
Tambo, designated by Pachacuti Yamqui by the word for MoBro. The term
uacan appears to indicate that the great-grandfather (FaFaFa) of Manco Capac,
and his ancestors in general, must also be counted among the 'other members’
of Tambo. As was pointed out before 35), one of the uses of the word huaca —
i.e. the root of huacan — was that of a synonym of villca, a holy site, ancestor,
great-grandfather.
Thus, two groups must be distinguished within Tambo: the group which
belonged both matrilineally and patrilineally to Tambo and the group which
belonged only matrilineally.
f) The bipartition of Capac ayllu I can demonstrate only with the aid of an
example of which it is difficult to determine whether it belongs only to this
representation of the organization of Cuzco or to one of the other two as well.
It may even belong to all three representations.
A different name for Hatun ayllu is Inaca panaca (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 47,
p. 220). According to Bertonio (1612), Inaca was a synonym of Palla in
Aymara. Both words were obviously borrowed from Quechua, for in this
language they are also used as synonyms in composite words. Bertonio translates
Inaca as: ‘woman who belongs to the aristocratic class of the Inca’. Garcilaso
(1945, Tomo I, libro I, cap. X X V I) gives the following definition of the
title Palla: ‘a woman of royal blood’, and ‘all the subsidiary wives of the Inca
35) See IV § 1 c p. 73.

who belonged to his family and all the other women of royal blood’. Garcilaso
adds that they descended in the male line from the kings but not in the female
line. Before they married, Palla were called frusta. They were the daughters
of the Inca. Only the primary daughters were called nusta. The nusta whose
mother came from elsewhere had the name of the province the mother came
from added in front. The name nusta corresponds to auqui for men.
If we assume that the rulers themselves belonged to Capac ayllu and their
wives, in as far as they were related to them, even if only patrilineally, belonged
to Inaca panaca, then the relationship within Chinchaysuyu of Capac ayllu
to Hatun ayllu or Inaca panaca could be compared to the relationship within
the whole of the four suyu of Cuzco of Chinchaysuyu (i.e. Hanan-Cuzco and
primary descendants) to Collasuyu (i.e. Hurin-Cuzco and subsidiary descem
dants). The relationship of these two suyu was like that of Collana (i.e. the
group of ego) to Payan (i.e. the son’s group) 36).
If Capac ayllu and Hatun ayllu are together regarded as one group — beside
Chauin Cuzco ayllu and Arairaca ayllu Cuzco cayao — , this group is implicitly
represented as a matrilineal lineage — like both the other ayllu — , although
within that group Capac ayllu formed a lineage which was both matrilineal
and patrilineal and members of Hatun ayllu were only patrilineally related to
those of Capac ayllu.
Within the matrilineal Tambo lineage, two groups, the first one also patri
lineal, could be distinguished. By analogy with the relationship between Capac
ayllu and Hatun ayllu, and between Chinchaysuyu and Collasuyu, it is to be
expected that the subsidiary descendants of men of the first group belonged
to the second group within Tambo and that this second group was thus related
to the first only patrilineally. The first group of Tambo therefore probably
consisted of Apo Mayta panaca and the second of Usca Mayta panaca 37).
The folowing conclusions can be reached with regard to the quadripartitions
discussed above.
In three instances the basis of the quadripartition was a tripartition: i.e.
three groups were involved with the names or characteristics of Collana, Payan
and Cayao.
36) See IV § 2 a p. 79, § 2 b p. 84.

37) Another datum also gives the same relationship of the rulers ( = Capac ayllu) to their
wives ( = Hatun ayllu) or as of the matrilineal and patrilineal lineage within Tambo ( = Apo
Mayta panaca) to the matrilineal lineage ( = Usca Mayta panaca) therein. According to Garci
laso (1945, Tomo I, libro III, cap. X X , X X I ) the mummies of the rulers were kept in the
temple of the sun, in the room specially devoted to the golden statue of this deity, while the
mummies of the queens who were at the same time their sisters were kept in the same temple
in the room of the moon with the silver statue of the deity were. Here too is seen the opposition
between gold and silver.
In this tripartition Collana was divided into two groups of which one be
longed both matrilineally and patrilineally to Collana and the other only matri
lineally.
The second group in Collana was related to the first only patrilineally.
For this reason the relationship of the first group to the second within
Collana was again presented like that of Collana to Payan, while the two groups
together were related to a third group also as Collana to Payan.
If the four groups are regarded as marriage classes, the tripartition presented
as follows:
A.
would be the basis of the following quadripartition.
Below I propose to consider the various difficulties resulting from the adap
tation of the tripartition to the quadripartition.
§ 3. a) This adaptation of the organization of three matrilineal lineages,

interconnected by an asymmetric connubium, to a system of four similar lineages
is in reality impossible. We should also taJce into account that, apart from
these actual systems of marriage classes, there are many cases of groups being
presented as marriage classes when they were nothing of the sort. The Inca
circumvented or glossed over the problem in various ways.
But it is clear from all these cases that the Inca used the terms Collana,
Payan and Cayao to describe not only the three groups in the tripartition, but
also the four groups in the quadripartition. I shall maintain this usage and in
future in the diagrams designate Collana by the arabic numeral 1, Payan by 2
and Cayao by 3. Although my point of departure is the different cases of
tripartition, in order to clarify quadripartitions, this does not imply any historical
sequence but serves only to demonstrate logical connections.
I shall begin by enumerating the instances of tripartitions containing ele
ments which help to solve the problem that Collana in fact consisted of two
groups, namely la, that of the people who belonged both matrilineally and
patrilineally to Collana, and lb, that of the people who were only matrilineally
Collana but who, as the subsidiary children of men from la were related to the
latter only patrilineally. In fact, all the subsidiary sons of men of 1a ought to
belong to 2 because this was the group from which the men of 1 had to choose
their wives. Probably because the people of lb were half-siblings of those of
la, they were treated as belonging to 1 in the case of the myths about Manco
Capac and his brothers, about Tambo, Maras and Sutic, and about Manco Capac,
Tocay Capac and Pinahua Capac. This difficulty, that lb men, being sons of
la men, could not in fact belong to 1, was realised by the Inca. That is why,
according to Betanzos, they called the lb men ‘guacchacconcha’ 38). Betanzos
(1880, cap. XVI, p. 112) translates this word as “ deriving from the poor and
of low origin” . The literal translation, however, is ‘the poor sister’s children
(male speaker)’ (guaccha, poor, cconcha, a sister’s child (male speaker))
(Holguin, 1608). The sister’s children did belong to 1 as their matrilineal
lineage, even if these sisters married outside men. There were three other solu
tions in addition to this one, for fitting the relationship of la to lb in the
system of the tripartition.
As was shown above, the relationship of la to lb was in fact the same as
that of Collana to Payan and that of 1 to 2.
The second possible solution was that lb and 2, both Payan, were regarded
as one group as opposed to la as a Collana group. Sarmiento (1947, cap. 11,
p. 118) records a clear application of this solution in his version of the myth
about Tambo, Sutic and Maras 39). Capac ayllu (i.e. la) came from the centre
cave; Tambo (i.e. lb) came from Sutictoco and therefore together with the
Sutic ayllu (i.e. 2).
Further evidence of the reality of this solution can be seen in the doubt of
the chroniclers as to whether it was Ayar Cachi or Ayar Auca who should be
connected with Chauin Cuzco ayllu in Chinchaysuyu. Sarmiento already betrays
this doubt 40), even though he asserts that it was Ayar Cachi who was locked
in the cave. According to Cabello Valboa (1951, cap. 9, p. 261) it was Ayar
Auca. Cieza de Leon, however, who mentions only three brothers (1943, cap.
VI, p. 51) calls them Ayar Manco, Ayar Cachi Asauca and Ayar Uchu. Asauca
looks like a corrupt form of Ayar Auca. Thus there was one person who in
this instance received both the names Cachi and Auca. A similar case of con
traction and corruption can also be found in Las Casas’ material (1939, cap.
XVI, p. 88, 89). He also mentions three brothers the second of whom he calls
Ayarancha.
The third possible solution was that la was regarded as Collana, lb as Payan,
and 2 and 3 together as Cayao. A clear instance of the application of this
solution is to be found in the organization of Acos, a village about 50 KM to
the South East of Cuzco. Acos consisted of three ayllu, each divided into three
groups. In three documents the names of the three ayllu and of the nine groups
38) See IV § 2 a pp. 79-80.

39) See IV § 1 d pp. 75-76.
4° ) See IV § 1 d pp. 75-76.
are recorded. The oldest of these documents dates from 1708 (the baptismal
register of the parish church of Acos); the second dates from 1835 (A.H.L.
R 181. Matricula de Indigenas de Quispicanchis de 1835), and the third from
1873 (the marriage register of the Acos parish church). Another document,
dating between 1756 and 1780 (A.H.C. Legajo XLVII, 7 ‘Informaciones y
certificados de los hijos de Nobles Indios que estudiaron en el Colegio de
Caciques’ ) already mentioned the nine mandones (chiefs) of the nine ayllu of
Acos, although it did not record the names of the ayllu. The following are
the names of the three ayllu and the nine groups, derived from different
sources and correlated as I think they should be:
1708 1835 1873

( Hananccoscco Hanan Cuzco
Hanansaya / Fayan Urinccoscco Horen Cuzco
( Ccollana 41) Urinccoscco Ccayao Horen Cuzco
( Ccollana Acos Collana Acos
Hurinsaya / Fayan Acos Fayan Acos
r Ccayahua Acos Ccayao Acos
( Ccollana Anahuarcca Collana Anahuarque
Anahuarque ) Sahuaraura Anahuarque
/ Ccayahua Anahuarcca Ccayao Anahuarque
In the comparison of the organizations of Acos and of Cuzco, Hanansaya
corresponds to Chinchaysuyu, i.e. Hanan Cuzco, Hurinsaya to Collasuyu, i.e.
Hurin Cuzco, and Anahuarque to Antisuyu and Cuntisuyu. This correspondence
of Anahuarque is based on the names Anahuarque and Sahuaraura. Anahuarque
was a Payan ceque in the last group of three ceque in Cuntisuyu. Sahuaraura,
which in Acos occupies the place of Fayan Anahuarque, was also found in the
ceque system of Cuzco. The first huaca of the Anahuarque ceque was a stone
with the name Subaraura, and on the Ayarmaca ceque, i.e. the Payan ceque of
the third group of ceque of Antisuyu, a huaca named Sahuaraura, which
consisted of three stones, was situated. It therefore appears likely that Anahuar
que ayllu in Acos can be said to correspond to Antisuyu and Cuntisuyu together
in Cuzco42). Since, on the analogy of the situation in Cuzco43), Hanansaya
in Acos as a whole can justifiably be called Collana, and Hurinsaya in Acos
as a whole Payan, Anahuarque as a whole must be Cayao.
41) There must be an error here; in place of Collana it should be Ccayahua.

42) With the report of this fact I also refer back to the places where I have already made
use in my argumentation of these identical positions, in Antisuyu and Cuntisuyu, of Ayarmaca
and Anahuarque (see IV § 2 a p. 78 and notes 14, 15).
43) See IV § 2 b pp. 83-84.
Finally, the fourth possible solution was, that of the four groups, la, lb, 2
and 3, one was dropped so that the situation reverted again to one of three
groups. Since the remaining three groups were again called Collana, Payan and
Cayao, it is difficult to say which of the four groups had been dropped. This
solution may be only of theoretical interest, although it was testified in one
instance of the version of the myth in which Ayar Auca was sent back by the
other three brothers and shut up in the cave 44).
b) In this system, discussed above, of three matrilineal marriage classes,
Collana was ego’s group, Payan that of the son and of the grandfather, and
Cayao the group of the grandson and of the father. In a system of four matri
lineal marriage classes linked by asymmetric connubium, however, the great-
great-grandfather and the great-great-grandson belong to one and the same
lineage as ego. The lineage of the grandfather together with that of ego, forms
one moiety. The lineage of the son, which is no longer the same as that of the
grandfather, forms another moiety together with the father’s lineage and that
of the mother’s father.
The solutions cited above can, in my opinion, be applied to the quadripar-
tition in the following manner.
In the first solution la can be assumed to be Collana, lb Payan as opposed
to Collana, 2 Payan as opposed to 1b and 3 Cayao. The system would then
look as follows in diagram:
la
44) Another example of this fourth possibility is the following: in an origin myth concerning
all the peoples of Peru, Sarmiento says (1947, cap. 7, pp. 105-110) that the highest god Vira-
cocha Pachayachachi, after he had destroyed the earth by means of the Flood, the huno pachacuti,
retained only three men to help him repopulate the earth. But because one of them, Taguapaca,
did not obey his orders, he commanded the others to take Taguapaca captive and to set him
afloat, bound to a balsa (reed boat), on Lake Titicaca. Nothing more was ever heard of Tagua
paca. Viracocha and his two servants passed from Tiahuanaco through the whole country to the
north in order to summon the people out of the caves that they might multiply themselves.
One servant was sent by Viracocha along the coast, he himself took the central road through the
mountains and the other servant went along the border of the jungle. In the vicinity of present-
day Puerto Viejo in Ecuador they met each other again and entered the sea. Later, Taguapaca
reappeared, but the inhabitants soon saw that he was evil. Las Casas (1939, cap. V II pp. 36-37)
also mentions Taguapaca Viracocha in his version of this myth. According to him, Taguapaca
was evil, and always contradicted or opposed his father. When his father Viracocha made the good
people, Taguapaca made the bad ones; when his father made mountains, he made the plains
or changed his father’s plains into mountains, and he even dried up his father’s springs. In the
end his father became angry and threw him into the sea so that he should perish, but without
avail.
Now, Tahua = four and paca = secret, hidden. In a simpler form Molina gives the myth
There are several obvious objections to the application of this solution* lb,
for instance, is located in the same moiety as 3, and la in the other one with 2.
That is to say that Collana is divided between two moieties.
A greater objection, however, is that in this presentation of the quadripar-
tition, there would be no place for the mothers of men of lb, the subsidiary
sons of men of la. These mothers could not, with their subsidiary sons, be
counted among Payan because they were women from outside. The fundamental
difficulty is that Collana as an endogamous group, Payan as the group of people
born from the exogamous marriages of Collana people, and Cayao as the group
of people not related to Collana, were, in fact, not marriage classes.
We must assume, however, that for the purposes of adapting the terms
Collana, Payan and Cayao to the four class system, use was made of the fact
that Payan was not only the group of ego’s son, but also of his grandfather,
and that the two Payan groups, 2 and lb, were mutually interchangeable. In
the case of such interchanges taking place, the system would look as follows
in diagram:
In this presentation, three out of four of the solutions mentioned in con

nection with the tripartition, could be adapted to the quadripartition. There
appear to be no real differences in the adaptations of these three solutions.
In the first solution the unity of Collana ( l a plus lb) as an upper moiety
(hanansaya) could be preserved as opposed to 2 plus 3 as a lower moiety
(hurinsaya). This is apparent in the opposition of panaca to ayllu in the internal
organization of Chinchaysuyu and Collasuyu. The organization of Acos is ano
ther example of the application of this solution45). In Acos the opposition
of Collana, i.e. Hanansaya, to Payan plus Cayao, i.e. Hurinsaya, was applied to
the internal tripartition within the ayllu called Cuzco or Hanansaya. A merger
of the second and third solutions results in the contrasting of la, i.e. Collana,
and lb, i.e. Payan, together as the upper moiety to 2 and 3 together as the
lower moiety, lb then functions as Payan with relation to la, and 2 with relation
to 3. This Payan character of 1b and 2 within their moieties is apparent from
one of the characteristics of Payan, which is the fact that Payan had as its
proper name the place name of the whole to which it belonged. For an expla
nation of this characteristic we must refer to the myth about Manco Capac and
(1943, pp. 12, 13) which speaks only of Viracocha and two sons. One of them went through
Cuntisuyu, the other through Antisuyu and he himself went to Cuzco.
45) See IV § 3 a pp. 92-93.
his brothers and sisters. After Ayar Auca had disappeared, Manco Capac and
his other two brothers, on their way to Cuzco, agreed that they would divide
the following functions among themselves (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 12, p. 124).
Manco Capac and his successors took the government upon themselves. For
this purpose Manco Capac married his sister. Ayar Uchu became the huaca,
the holy site, for their religion. Ayar Cachi would take possession of the land
they were going to live on when this was pointed out to him. When the three
brothers ascended a mountain, they saw a rainbow, called Huanacauri in Que-
chua. Ayar Uchu turned into stone because he sat down on top of the mountain.
The mountain was called Huanacauri and it became the most important holy
place of the Inca (Sarmiento, 1947, cap. 12, p. 124, 125). Before Manco
Capac and Ayar Cachi had conquered Cuzco, Ayar Cachi took possession of
the town by seating himself on a pillar on the location of the future temple
of the sun, the centre of Cuzco. There he turned into stone. Such pillars are
called Cozco in the old language of the valley (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 13, p. 128),
from which the name of the town derives. The lineage descending from Ayar
Cachi was in fact called Chauin Cuzco ayllu for this reason, and Ayar Cachi
belonged to lb, i.e. Payan46).
In the tripartition it must be assumed that this characteristic of Payan re-
46) See IV § 1 d, pp. 75-76 and notes 8, 10.

The reason why I assume that Ayar Cachi is meant here was explained in note 8. Sarmiento,
however, in this passage calls the same person both Ayar Cachi and Ayar Auca. From still
another fact, i.e. the mistaken explanation which he gives of the word Cuzco, it can be seen
that he did not understand his own, reliable piece of information: he says namely that a pillar,
such as Ayar Cachi sat on, was called “ Cozco” in the old language of the valley. In Sarmiento
the entire passage now runs as follows: “Ayar Auca, after he had heard the words of his brother,
rose on his wings and went to the place which Manco Capac showed him and when he sat
down there he became stone and so was a pillar which indicated that possession was taken, which
in the old language of the valley is called cozco, and as a result this name of Cuzco has been
kept for this place to the present day. From this the Inca derived a proverb which runs:
“ Ayar Auca cuzco guanca” meaning “Ayar Auca pillar of marble” . According to others, Manco
Capac bestowed the name of Cuzco because he wept at the place where he buried his brother
Ayar Cachi; for which reason and because of the fertility of the place he gave it this name
which in the old language of chat time means sad and fertile (sic !). But the former is most
probable since Ayar Cachi was not buried in Cuzco but died in Capac toco as has been said
above; and this is generally known among the Inca and the natives” . The possible reason for
Sarmiento’s hesitation in making a choice here between Ayar Cachi and Ayar Auca has already
been explained (see IV, § 3 a pp. 92, 94). The surname “ cuzco guanca” was also known to Poma
(1944, f. 184) i.a. as the name of one of the brothers Ayar. Arriaga (1944, cap. II, p. 28) gives
the following description of huanca: “ Huanca is the name they (the Inca) give to a very big
stone which they commonly set up in their chacaras ( = fields) and they also call it Chacrayoc,
which means “ Lord of the Chacara” for they think that that chacara is of that huanca ( =
sanctuary) and that it (the huanca) will provide for its yield (of the chacara)” . Cuzco Huanca
thus means the huanca which as its proper name bears the name of Cuzco. The word huanca
here expresses the character that Sarmiento ascribed to Ayar Cachi as Lord of the land.
ferred to the three groups Collana, Payan and Cayao as a whole. In the quadri
partition, in which the four groups were distributed over two moieties, the old
Payan group (2) went to the lower moiety and the new Payan group (1 b)
to the upper moiety. Group 2, being Payan, carried the name for the four
groups as a whole (and specifically of the lower moiety, because, in the upper
moiety, group lb assumed this function). Examples of this Payan character of
groups lb and 2 were encountered in Acos and in Puquiura.
In A cos47) Hanansaya ayllu (Collana) was called Cuzco, and Hurinsaya
ayllu (Payan) was called Acos, i.e. the name of the village as a whole. Together
they were opposed to Anahuarque ayllu (Cayao). In Puquiura I encountered
Collana and Chaupisuyu ayllu as forming one group, and Ayarmaca and Tam-
boconga ayllu which were also mentioned together. As proof of the assertion
that the latter ayllu had a Payan character with relation to Ayamarca, I quote
Sarmiento about these ayllu (1947, cap. 16, p. 137). He records that Lloque
Yupanqui, the third ruler, had relations with, among others, the Ayarmaca
from Tambocunca and with the Quilliscachi. Since the Quilliscachi ayllu, which
is mentioned in the chronicles as well as in more recent documents, still occurs
in Guaroconde, a village in the Anta plain, I think that the Ayarmaca of Tam
bocunca can be identified with the Ayarmaca and Tamboconga ayllu in Pu
quiura, the village situated halfway on the road between Cuzco and the Anta
plain. Tamboconga, then, is the name of the place where (in this context)
the Ayarmaca lived. Tamboconga occupied the same position in Puquiura as
Cuntisuyu did in Cuzco. This could be said to indicate that Pinahua Capac
(who was represented in Cuzco by Anahuarque, which is in Cuntisuyu) had
a Payan position in the myth about Manco Capac, Tocay Capac and Pinahua
Capac.
So far, then, I have discussed three of the possible solutions for the adap
tation of the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao to the quadripartition. It was
shown to be impossible to make any real distinction between them, but the
superficial and external differences to which they gave rise, nevertheless neces
sitated this discussion48).
47) See IV § 3 a p. 93.

48) A symbolic application of this quadripartition consisting of one group Collana, two
groups Payan and one group Cayao can be seen in the following example. Huascar, the son of
Huayna Capac, received his name (huasca = cord, rope) from the fact that his father had a
large golden chain made at his birth, with which the people who held it danced (Cobo 1956,
Tomo II, libro 12, cap. X V III, p. 94). According to Molina (1943, p. 62), however, the name
of this huasca was muruurcu and it was used on the occasion of a particular celebration in
December. The cord was also not of gold but was made of four colours: black, white, red-
brown and yellow-brown. This cord was carried in a long row by all the people who had not
undergone their initiation rites in that month. First they danced around the square until the
c) The fourth solution for the adaptation of the terms Collana, Payan and
Cayao to the division into four could, however, be said to be distinctive49).
In this the use of these three terms is reserved for three of the four groups.
To the fourth group belonged all the people who could collectively be called
outcasts, for they were regarded by the Inca as not belonging to organized
society. This quadripartition would look as follows in diagram form:
------ 1
(outcasts) (Collana)
S * 2
(Cayao) (Payan)
The original population, serfs (yanacona), and possibly enemies and beggars
as well, were probably included among the outcasts. An example of the classi
fication of the beggars in group 4 can be found in the internal organization of
Collasuyu. Here the place of Usca Mayta panaca was occupied not only by
group lb in the former diagram (while group la was Apu Mayta panaca),
but also in this diagram by group 4. The element usca in the name of the
panaca associates it with beggars. A similar situation can be assumed to have
existed in Chinchaysuyu. There it may be Ayar Auca (auca, enemy), who
should be associated with Hatun panaca.
A peculiar feature was that in those cases in which the group of outcasts
were not classified as 4, they were classified as a sub-group of 1. Side by side
with the original population, the ancestors — personified in the great-grand
father — of the people belonging to Collana, Payan and Cayao, were probably
also classified as 4, and could as such also be called Collana 50). Thus, if the
end of the line was joined to the beginning. Then they danced until the cord was laid in a
spiral on the ground.
From examples to be discussed lated (see IV § 5 b pp. 104-105; V § 9 a p. 152) it can be
seen that to indicate the groups of a tripartition use was made, among other things, of the
colours white, black and an in-between colour which could be black-and-white or red. In the
case of the muruurcu we first encounter the word urcu, which in Aymara was the root of words
which indicated the ayllu as a social group, the ayllu as bolas and the cord of three strands
(see IV § 1 c p. 72). Holguin gives the following derivations of the word muru: Muru muru —
something of different colours; Muruchhuruna — strong man with a healthy appearance. It
seems to me that we may compare the meaning of the word muruurcu with that of the words
Urcona and Mullaypa. In the case of muruurcu, however, there was question of a rope of four
strands which represented one group Collana, two groups Payan (for the in-between colours)
and one group Cayao in contrast to Urcona and Mullaypa as a rope of three strands. The fact
that the ends of the muruurcu came together again should indicate the circle of marriage rela
tions of the four groups. Possibly the muruurcu symbolized the whole and the unity of the four
suyu of Cuzco.
49) See IV § 3 a p. 94.
50) This can explain the duplication of the name of Manco which according to Cobo (1956,
Tom II, libro 12, cap. 3, p. 62) occurred in the names of the four brothers. These names are
4th group belonged to Cayao, the outcasts, the ancestors and the original popu
lation were classified as Collana. There are examples from Cuzco and its
surroundings of cases of the serfs and the original population belonging to 4
as well as to a subgroup of 1.
The serfs, or servants, of the Inca nobles were called yanacona by them.
The fact that they are not regarded as belonging to organized society appears
from the fact that, according to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 51, p. 229), they were
not classed in the decimal division into groups of ten, a hundred, a thousand
and ten thousand taxpayers with their families. I shall not discuss the nature
of the groups at present 51) because it is not relevant here. The word yanacona
consists of the element yana, meaning black, servant, serf, and -cona, a plural
form referring to people: yanacona thus means the yana people, the black
people, or the serfs.
In the organization of the Aymaraes province yanaca was the name of the
fourth ayllu. The best translation of this word seems to me to be ‘the group
of the yana people’ 52). The Yanaca ayllu in Aymaraes province might be re
garded as the ayllu of the yanacona53).
In other organizations, however, the yanacona are classed as part of the
Collana ayllu. The village of Maras provides a clear example of this. In this
village which lies on the road from the Anta plain to the valley of the Uru-
bamba river, there still exist four ayllu. A similar type of organization was also
found in Puquiura, and in other villages in and about this plain. According
to the oldest document at my disposal (A.N.L. Legajo XVIII Cuaderno 456
ano 1791), of 1791, the Collana ayllu, the Yanacona together with Collana,
Oyola, Maras and Mullaca were to be found at that time in Maras. Here, we
see, the Yanacona were classed in the Collana ayllu 54) 55).
Manco Capac, Ayar Cachi, Ayar Uchu and Ayar Manco. Aya or Ayar means “ dead one” , so
Ayar here indicates the dead ancestor. Manco Capac stands out here as the only one who, in
place of Ayar, has the royal designation of Capac after his name.
51) See V ili § 5 a pp. 224-227.
52) Parallels of a similar word construction are formed by the words pachaca and panaca.
Pachaca, derived from pachac = 100, means “group of 100 tax payers” and panaca, derived
from pana = sister of the man, means “group of the sisters” and was used to indicate a
matrilineal lineage (see VI § 6 a pp. 183-185). The sufix-ca was thus used in these three cases to
indicate a certain group of the people.
53) As I hope to establish as probable in the relevant chapter (see V ili § 5 a pp. 224-227)
there existed a quinquepartition in the group of the yanacona. We may then assume that the
ayllu Piscachuri ( = five sons) in Puquiura and Cuntisuyu in Cuzco (consisting of five groups
of 3 ceque) were also an indication of the group of the yanacona.
54) From the fact that the name of the whole village was not carried by the ayllu Collana
but by another ayllu; it may be inferred that with the ayllu Maras the group Payan was meant.
55) It may be that in modern Puquio too the situation exists that the “outcasts” as well belong
to Collana; for here, in addition to the European landowners, the poor Indians who had been
robbed of their land were included in Collana (See IV § 2 b p. 84).
We have already come across one example of the removal of group 4, the
group of the outcasts, to group 1, in the organization of Cuzco. This was ap
parent from the fact that Sarmiento mentioned Oro ayllu in the position which
should have corresponded to that of the second group of three ceque in Cun-
tisuyu but which was mentioned by Molina, — as ‘the others of Uro’ — , as
being the third ayllu of Chinchaysuyu 56). This was a removal not only from
Cuntisuyu to Chinchaysuyu, but also from a second to a third group of three
ceque 57). From the way in which the word Uru was used by the Inca, it can
be assumed that they used it in general for designating the original population
in a particular region. The clearest illustration of this usage is the fact that
there are still Indians, living in the marshes around Lake Titicaca, who are
called Uru. The Inca called them Uru, which means worm, maggot (Holguin
1608). They also considered that the Uru were fit only for paying their taxes
in lice (La Barre 1946, p. 576; Baudin 1928, p. 180-181). The Uru themselves
believe that they were a people who existed before the sun and the moon had
been created 58).
An indication of the primordial nature of the Oro ayllu in Cuzco is found
in the fuller version of this ayllu’s name found in San Jeronimo, a village about
10 KM from Cuzco. Almost all the panaca and ayllu of Cuzco were to be found
in this village. The Oro ayllu was called Oro Acamana in San Jeronimo (Mar
riage register of the parish church of San Jeronimo 1712). According to Poma
56) See I, § 4 p. 8.
57) I will return to the question of the meaning of this moving of Oro ayllu from a second
group of three ceque — in Cuntisuyu — to a third group — in Chinchaysuyu — when I am
dealing with the second presentation (V § 10 b pp. 158-159).
58) From the data from 1729 which are known to us concerning the organization of the city
of Copacabana (situated on Lake Titicaca and in whose neighbourhood Uru were encountered)
we may infer that there too the Uru were associated with the group Collana. The baptismal
register of Copacabana for 1729 (A .N .S.) refers to three p a r c ia lid a d e s (groups): Hanansaya,
Hurinsaya and Uru. Nevertheless, later the baptismal register gives the following division:
Hanansaya: ay llu Hurinsaya: ay llu

Cozco Cana
Chinchaysuyu Capa Anco
Chachapoyas Lupaca
Yanacona
Uro ( = Sullca)
The ayllu Cana, Capa Anco and Lupaca belonged to the established Aymara population of
Copacabana. In the upper moiety, however, we recognise the ayllu Cozco — consisting of the
Inca conquerors and administrators of this region — whom we may assign to Collana, as was
also the case for the ayllu Hanan-Cuzco in Acos (see IV § 3 a p. 93). Linked to the ayllu
Cozco in Copacabana were the Yanacona and the Uru. The name Sullca which is also given in
this baptismal register to the Uru, means “youngest, least” and has therefore a direct connection
with the term Collana which means “ principal” .
de Ayala (1944, foja 84) the name of Cuzco, before Manco Capac’s arrival,
was Acamama, i.e. the same name.
Although several names are known of the oldest population of Cuzco before
the arrival of the Inca, none of the chroniclers mention an Oro ayllu as belonging
to it. This gives me the impression that the name Oro was used as a sort of
generic name for the oldest population of Cuzco 59).
§ 4. In the descriptions of the three representations of the organization
of Cuzco, it will be necessary to mention the names of the Collana, Payan and
Cayao groups repeatedly. These groups can often only be recognised by their
individual features, which I shall therefore briefly discuss once more.
To begin with, to Collana belonged the endogamous group of people who
descended patrilineally as well as matrilineally from one particular ancestor,
and were thus regarded as the primary descendants. Payan was the group of
people who were related to the Collana group only patrilineally and were
therefore regarded as subsidiary descendants. Cayao was the group of people
who were not related to Collana.
When the groups Collana, Payan and Cayao were considered not as kin-
groups but as marriage classes, they did not always comprise the same individual
kinsfolk, because in the latter case they occurred in a four-class system as well
as in a three-class system. Given that ego was Collana, Cayao could be associated
with ego’s father as well as with ego’s grandson. Either the son or the
grandfather of ego were classed as Payan.
There was a third characteristic of the three groups which was reflected
in the myth of Manco Capac and his brothers 60). Manco Capac and his suc
cessors, who were all Collana, were the rulers of the whole organization, which
consisted of three groups. Ayar Cachi, who represented Payan, was the lord of
the land, i.e. he was specially linked with the land on which the three groups
lived. Ayar Uchu was linked with religion. Cayao, Ayar Uchu’s group, will be
shown in many instances to be predominantly that of the priests 61).
59) It may be that on this fourth possibility of adjustment of the terms Collana, Payan and
Cayao to the quadripartition there was also based a fourth representation of the organization of
Cuzco, in addition to the other three representations which are discussed here. When Santillan
(1950, § 9, p. 47) describes the four parts into which the entire Inca empire is divided, he
says that Chinchaysuyu begins near Vilcaconga and extends to Quito (in Ecuador), that Collasuyu
extends from Urcos to Charcas (the present Sucre in Bolivia), that Antisuyu extends from
Abisca to the East and that Cuntisuyu extends from Cuzco to Arequipa. Vilcaconga, Urcos and
Abisca are all situated at some distance from Cuzco. Cuzco itself was situated in Cuntisuyu.
If it can also be said that the original population and the ancestors were associated with Cunti
suyu, this would be the reason why the Inca placed Pacaritambo (i.e. the place of origin in which
is situated the cave from which the Inca originated) in Cuntisuyu (see IV note 32, VI note 69).
60) See IV § 3 b p. 96.
61) See IV § 5 b pp. 104-105.
As was noted above, the special link of Payan with the land on which the
three groups lived was reflected in a number of instances by the fact that the
proper name of the Payan group was the same as that applied to the three
groups as a whole62). The organization of Acos village63) clearly demon
strates the implications of the opposition of Collana, rulers, to Payan, lords
of the land. As the names of the subdivisions of Hanansaya indicate, the people
deriving from Cuzco belonged to Hanansaya, i.e. Collana. They were the rulers
and probably the conquerors. It can be assumed that the local population, which
had been conquered by the Inca, was classed as Hurinsaya, all the sub-divisions
of which, incidentally, were called Acos. The people who lived around the
village of Acos probably belonged to Anahuarque ayllu. The fact that the Inca,
i.e. Collana, lived in the same locality in Acos as the original population of
the region, i.e. Payan, may have been a cause of marriages taking place between
the two groups and the local population becoming patrilineal, i.e. subsidiary,
kin to the Inca.
From Gutierrez it is clear that, at any rate in his view, the situation in Cuzco
was similar to that in Acos. It should also be mentioned that as Gutierrez
represented the situation 64), the terms Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco were
applicable only to Chinchaysuyu and Collasuyu. He (1905, cap. LXIV, p. 559)
divided the population into four parcialidades (groups), which according to
him were called Hanan-Cuzco, Hurin-Cuzco, Tambo Appo and Masca Payta.
According to Gutierrez (1905, cap. L, p. 432) Cuzco itself was not conquered
by the Inca until Tupac Yupanqui — or possibly his father, Pachacuti — con
quered it, although the Inca had apparently already made considerable conquest
in the surrounding countryside. In order to conquer Cuzco, the Inca built their
own city above Cuzco which they called Hanan-Cuzco. Cuzco itself, then, was
called Hurin-Cuzco; the original population of the town belonged to Hurin-Cuzco
and the conquerors to Hanan-Cuzco. Corresponding with this presentation of
the situation it was, according to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 14, p. 131), Molina
(1943, p. 31) and Betanzos (1880, cap. XVI, p. 112) the groups of Collasuyu,
i.e. Payan, who went to live in the real centre of the town. For although Sar
miento (1947, cap. 14, p. 131) records that Manco Capac and his followers
settled on the later site of the temple of the sun and in the region which ran
from this point to the confluence of the rivers, it was in fact the Collasuyu,
i.e. Payan, groups who lived here, while the Chinchaysuyu, i.e. Collana, groups
lived in the area between the temple of the sun and the Sacsahuaman fort,
which was the higher part of the town.
62) See IV § 3 a pp. 92-93, § 3 b p. 96, § 3 c p. 99 and note 54.

¢3) See IV § 3 a pp. 92-93.
64 ) As for Molina (IV § 2 a p. 78) and Betanzos (IV § 2 a p. 79).
The subjection of Hurin-Cuzco, i.e. Collasuyu, to Hanan-Cuzco, i.e. Chin

chaysuyu, is apparent from the relationship of Pachacuti to his three friends,
during and after the fight against the Chanca people65). This relationship
is corroborated by Santo Tomas (1951a, p. 128). According to him Capac ayllu
was the principal lineage of the Inca. The other prominent lineages were the
panaca, of which he mentions a few. In addition to these prominent lineages
there were two others, which were not quite as prominent, which were Maras
ayllu and Sutic ayllu. The members of these two ayllu were the servants of
the other lineages.
As regards their character and their position in the moiety relationship,
Collana, the rulers, and Payan, the local population, the vanquished, must be
seen together as forming one moiety as opposed to Cayao which, as the other
moiety, contained the enemy, the equal opponents. This is illustrated by what
follows below.
§ 5. a) So far I have made use of three myths relating to tripartitions
which, in the organization of Cuzco, formed the basis of quadripartitions. I
assumed that the three myths and the three instances of quadripartition cor
responded to three similar types of organization, and this was indeed shown
to be the case. There is nevertheless one difference between the quadripartitions
of Chinchaysuyu and Collasuyu on the one hand and that of the four suyu of
Cuzco on the other. Among the four suyu as a whole, Chinchaysuyu represented
Collana and Collasuyu represented Payan. The four suyu organized as one group
could not, however, represent the quadripartition inside the Cayao group because
only Antisuyu and Cuntisuyu were Cayao as opposed to Chinchaysuyu and
Collasuyu. If Chinchaysuyu and Collasuyu are treated as representing Cuzco
proper, then it appears that they, by including the functions of Collana and
Payan, belong to one moiety while the Chanca people belong to the other, as
Cayao. Now I propose to show first that the organization of the people of the
Chanca was identical to that of the Inca; then I hope to demonstrate that they,
as Cayao and the lower moiety, were opposed to Cuzco and the Inca as the
upper moiety. In the discussion of the second representation of the organization
of Cuzco the question to be answered is why the Chanca, who were linked with
Pachacuti, the ninth Inca ruler, in the struggle which was to be a turning point
in Inca history, should have fulfilled this function.
b) The most comprehensive description of the organization of the Chanca
is that by Betanzos, for although Betanzos in fact deals only with the organi
zation of the army which marched against Cuzco, Garcilaso (1945, Tomo I
libro IV, cap. X X II) refers to the same organization for the Chanca people
65) See IV § 2 a pp. 79-80.

as a whole. I therefore assume that Betanzos’s account of the army organization

also applies to that of the people as a whole.
According to Betanzos (1880, cap. VI, p. 20) Uscovilca, the chief of the
Chanca, had six captains who were called Malma, Rapa, Yanavilca, Teclovilca,
Guamanguaraca and Tomayguaraca. Uscovilca divided the army into three parts:
Malma and Rapa, at the head of one part, had to spy on and conquer Cuntisuyu,
while Yanavilca and Teclovilca, at the head of another part, had to spy on and
conquer Antisuyu. Neither army was permitted to approach closer to Cuzco
than 50 KM and they had to bypass the town.
Uscovilca reserved the attack on Cuzco for himself at the head of the central
army. The captains of this army were Guamanguaraca and Tomayguaraca. While
they marched, Tomayguaraca asked Uscovilca if he might lead the attack on
Cuzco, but Uscovilca reserved this undertaking for himself. It may be deduced
from this event that Tomayguaraca was more important than Guamanguaraca.
For the attack on Cuzco, the three armies joined forces again after Uscovilca,
“with the consent of the three chiefs with him” had sent an envoy to Viracocha
Inca, who was in power at the time. This quotation probably refers to three
captains, one from each of the three armies.
Betanzos mentions only one chief, Uscovilca, at the head of the whole Chanca
army. Sarmiento (1947, cap. 26, p. 163) adds a second chief, Ancovilca.
In these accounts the problem of the contrast between the tripartition and
quadripartition occurs again. Betanzos speaks of three armies. The central army,
however, is distinct from the two others because the commander in chief, Usco
vilca, and probably Ancovilca too, was linked with this army. Uscovilca and
Ancovilca could be regarded as a fourth group beside the other three.
The names of the different persons are most indicative of their positions in
the quadripartition. As regards the names Malma and Rapa, Holguin (1608)
notes: Mallmani: to level ploughed land by crumbling the clods of earth. Rapani:
to pull out weeds when ploughing, done by women following the plough. Both
words refer to typically feminine tasks, performed after the soil has been worked
with digging-sticks by the men.
The names Guamanguaraca and Tomayguaraca both contain the element
huaraca, which means sling. This may refer to warriorlike activities. Huaman,
falcon, is a man’s name. Lira (1944) translated Tumay by “to surround” , to
guard something that requires care, like estates, by going around them.
The other names all have the element villca in common. This word was en
countered above with the meaning of holy site, forefather, and great-
grandson66). It also means priest (Bias Valera 1950, p. 155). Yana means
66) See IV § 1 c pp. 73-74.

black. Teclo, I would say, is a corrupt form of Ticlla, which according to Holguin
(1608) means “ something made in two colours, black on one side and white
on the other like, for instance, a shirt” . Ushku, according to Lira (1944) means
whitish. Hanco, according to Bertonio (1612), in Aymara, means white. These
four names must therefore be regarded as being interconnected.
If the organization of the Chanca is collated with that of Cuzco, the middle
army of the Chanca can be compared to Cuzco, consisting of Hanan-Cuzco, i.e.
Chinchaysuyu, and Hurin-Cuzco, i.e. Collasuyu. Uscovilca and Ancovilca, in their
capacities as the absolute chiefs, together form the Collana group (1), and
Tomayguarca and Guamanguaraca, in their capacities as protectors of the ter
ritory, form the Payan group (2 ). As Teclovilca and Yanavilva had to conquer
Antisuyu, and Malma and Rapa had to conquer Cuntisuyu, they could likewise
be compared to these two suyu.
In diagram form, the relationships of the four groups appear as follows 67):
R apa Uscovilca
4 1 (Collana)
Malma Ancovilca
N*
Teclovilca Tom ayguaraca
(Cayao) 3 < 2 (Payan)
Y anavilca Guam anguaraca
The question arises, hov/ever, whether we are justified in assigning position 3

to Teclovilca and Yanavilca, or whether position 4 should be assigned to them.
If they are regarded as the chiefs of the group to which the priests belonged,
position 3 would be the correct one. The ayllu of Ayar Uchu, in its function as
a marriage class in Chinchaysuyu, i.e. Hanan-Cuzco occupied the corresponding
position in Cayao 68). Later on other examples will confirm this conclusion 69).
Nevertheless, the fact that villca can mean forefather and great-grandson, might
be an indication that one should look for Teclovilca and Yanavilca in 4. In a
quadripartition in which the opposition of the moieties was the main factor,
3 and 4 were regarded as Cayao. Thus certain elements of that complex concept
villca were linked with 4 and others, in this case the priestly element, with 3.
This will be explained in greater detail elsewhere 70); then it will also become
clear why the Cayao group was linked with the religion.
If, on the other hand, the organization of the Chanca is regarded as tripartite,
one is certainly justified in placing Uscovilca, together with Teclovilca and
Yanavilca, into one of the three groups. In the context of a tripartition the fact
67) By analogy with previous diagrams, the relationships between the four groups in this and
in the following diagram are indicated by arrows. I am not aware of any data on possible mar
riage relationships between these four groups, however.
68) See IV § 1 d pp. 75-76, § 2 c p. 85, § 4 p. 101.
6») See V § 9 a pp. 150-152; VI § 3 b p. 175.
70) See V § 11 pp. 162-163.
that Betanzos mentioned only Uscovilca also makes sense. Ancovilca would in
this situation have been superfluous.
In the context of a quadripartition, on the other hand, in which Uscovilca
represented a separate group, mention of Ancovilca does make sense. According
to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 26, p. 163) the Chanca people were led by two
brothers. The eldest and most important one was Uscovilca; he led the Hanan-
Chanca. His brother, Ancovilca, led the Hurin-Chanca. It is noteworthy that not
only the meanings of the names Uscovilca and Ancovilca, but also those of the
two captains of each of the three armies, were related to each other. One may
in my opinion, conclude from this fact that all three armies were divided into a
Hanansaya (saya = part) and a Hurinsaya.
I assumed that Tomayguaraca was more important than Guamanguaraca 71).
From the meanings of their names it also appears that Teclovilca was more
important than Yanavilca. From these facts it can be concluded that Betanzos,
in his enumeration of the six captains began with the lower placed and ended
with the higher placed one. If the more highly placed captain of each army is
assumed to have belonged to the Hanan-Chanca, and the more lowly placed one
to the Hurin-Chanca, then the organization of the Chanca would look as follows
in diagram form:
R apa (Hanan) Uscovilca (Hanan)
Malma (Hurin) Ancovilca (Hurin)

^ _______
Teclovilca (Hanan) Tom ayguaraca (Hanan)
(
Y anavilca (Hurin) G uam anguaraca (Hurin)
It is clear from this diagram that the relationship of the Hanan-Chanca to the
Hurin-Chanca had no bearing on territory, for it cut across the quadripartition,
while the relationship of Hanan-Cuzco, i.e. Chinchaysuyu, to Hurin-Cuzco, i.e.
Collasuyu, did bear on territory. Yet the organization of the Chanca did not
stand alone. We have already come across another example of moieties which
did not bear on territory in the organization of the village of Puquiura72).
Puquiura had this feature in common with other villages in the Anta plain. I
shall first examine the clearest instance from the village of Anta itself. As early
as 1576, Acosta (1954, p. 275) mentioned Anta, Sanco, Quero and Conchacalla
as the four ayllu of Anta. In the above mentioned document of 1787, which also
referred to the organization of Puquiura (A.N.L. Legajo 17 Cuaderno 423), the
same ayllu in Anta are each divided into Hanansaya and Hurinsaya.
In Puquiura the moiety division within the Collana and Chaupisuyu ayllu is
clear. The two other ayllu are referred to as follows:
71) See IV § 5 b p. 104.

72) See IV § 2 b p. 83.
Ayamarca and Tamboconga
Ayamarca Urinsaya
Tamboconga
As Ayamarca and Tamboconga are each mentioned twice, it can be assumed

that in these ayllu there also existed a division into Hanansaya and Hurin-
saya 73).
c) Superficially the organization of the Chanca army does not appear to cor
respond to that of Cuzco (i.e. Chinchaysuyu plus Collasuyu) as it has thus far
been encountered. There existed, however, another representation of the organi
zation of Cuzco which consisted of these two suyu. This representation was
based on the organization of Pachacuti’s army which fought against the Chanca;
this organization was the same as that of the Chanca army.
Some of the evidence on Pachacuti’s army points to a quadripartition, and
some points to a tripartition. When he attacked, Pachacuti, according to Betanzos
(1880, cap. X , p. 55), had an army of ten thousand men, divided into four
groups. Cobo (1956, Tomo II, libro 12, cap. X, p. 75) 74) estimated the
strength of this army at thirty thousand, which seems to point to a division into
three groups. Moreover, Betanzos remarks elsewhere: "and when they had thus
been divided, he (appointed) as generals of the three army groups his three
good friends, while he took one (army group) himself” . The existence of three
armies could be deduced from this text. But it can also be interpreted as meaning
that Pachacuti took the fourth group.
Betanzos (1880, cap. VI, p. 24-26) gives the names of the three friends as
well as those of their, and Pachacuti’s, personal servants:
the friends the servants
Pachacuti Inca Yupanqui Pata Yupanqui
Vica quirao Muru Uanca
Apo Mayta Apo Yupanqui
Quilliscachi Urco Guaranga Uxuta Urco Guaranga
7 3 ) it is remarkable that the word Tiqui is placed before the name of Collana Hurinsaya.
Tiqui is the same word as Ticci which, according to Holguin (1608), means ‘foundation, origin,
etc.'. As will be shown, the meaning of ‘origin’ was linked to Cayao within the totality of
Collana, Payan and Cayao (see V note 159)- From the argumentation concerning the second
representation (see V § 1 a-c pp. 114-119) it follows that Tiqui Collana Hurinsaya filled the
part of Cayao within the ayllu Collana. This role explains the name Tiqui.
7 4 ) Following Garcilaso, Cobo makes the mistake of assigning deeds of Pachacuti, such as
the war against the Chanca, to his father Viracocha (Rowe 1946, p. 194).

As in the Chanca army, eight men are mentioned in this connection. Only in
the case of Vicaquirao and Muru Uanca are the names of the master and the
servant not recognisably connected. From the names of Pachacuti’s friends and
their servants, an organization similar to that of the Chanca can be deduced for
Cuzco. This organization does not correspond to the one which Betanzos records
elsewhere. In this last one Pachacuti and his primary kin were classed as Hanan-
Cuzco (Chinchaysuyu), and the friends, probably together with their servants,
as Hurin-Cuzco (Collasuyu).
Sarmiento clarifies Betanzos’s material. Once he mentions the friends and
helpers in the same context. Elsewhere he represents them as the sons of former
rulers, and one of these rulers in person. This last account makes it possible to
arrange the eight men into two non-territorial moieties. According to Sarmiento
1947, cap. 26, p. 165) those who helped Pachacuti were Inca Roca, his primary
and eldest brother, Apo Mayta, Vicaquirao, Quillisca Urco Guaranga, Chima
Chaui Pata Yupanqui, Viracocha Inga Paucar and Mircoimana, the governor of
(Pachacuti) Inca Yupanqui. Quilliscachi 75) was in the first instance a spy and
messenger to Pachacuti (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 27, p. 166, 169).
Sarmiento here mentions seven assistants, who correspond to the three friends
and four servants recorded by Betanzos. A few of the variations between the
two writers are the following:
Pata Yupanqui (Betanzos) = Chima Chaui Pata Yupanqui (Sarmiento)
Muru Uanca (Betanzos) = Mircoimana (Sarmiento) 76)
For Apo Yupanqui and Uxuta Urco Guaranga, Sarmiento records the wholly
different names Inca Roca and Viracocha Inca Paucar.
Sarmiento mentions six of the seven assistants once more, as the sons of
previous rulers and as one of these previous rulers himself. Apo Chimachaui
(i.e. Chimachaui Pata Yupanqui) and Apo Urco Guaranga (i.e. Quilliscachi
Urco Guaranga) were the sons of Capac Yupanqui, the fifth Inca (Sarmiento
1947, cap. 18, p. 143). Apo Mayta, the grandson of Capac Yupanqui, was the
man after whom the panaca of Capac Yupanqui was named. According to Sar
miento Apo Mayta was a great 'captain’ (in the meaning of general), and
together with Vicaquirao he made many conquests. Vicaquirao was a son of
the ruler Inca Roca. One brother of Vicaquirao was called Inca Paucar Inca
(which is probably the same name as Viracocha Inca Paucar).
75) Here Sarmiento refers again to Quilliscachi; both versions of the name also occur in the
village of Guaroconde in the plain of Anta where the ayllu Quilliscachi is located.
76) The name Mircoimana seems to me to be an erroneous transcription of the name Muru
Uanca. The first stroke of the first u in Muru could then be the i in Mircoimana, the second
stroke the r, the r the c, the u the o, the u of uanca the i and the first stroke of the m, the a
the two other strokes, the n the a and the c the n. The name Muru Uanca makes sense in
Quechua; the name Mircoimana none to my knowledge.
In chapter III I suggested that the organization of Cuzco, as it consisted of

panaca and ayllu, corresponded to a particular system of organization which had
always existed and in which the so-called rulers did not in fact belong to one
dynasty, but were contemporary chiefs of the various panaca. This thesis is cor
roborated in two respects by Sarmiento’s material. To begin with, the similarity
between the names, which Sarmiento lists for Pachacuti’s assistants as well as
for the sons of Capac Yupanqui and Inca Roca, is too great to be due to co
incidence, especially because in the second passage these people occur as brothers,
or as generals, who together held the command of the army and were thus con
nected with each other. The second corroboration of this thesis of the con
temporaneity of the panaca is that the six names which were mentioned twice,
are applied only to people who, in the third representation, are classed as Chin-
chaysuyu and Collasuyu, i.e., in the first representation of the organization of
Cuzco, only to persons from Cuzco. The choice of the names of the seven
assistants, then, was not arbitrary 77). It can be assumed therefore that the names
of Pachacuti and his seven assistants in Sarmiento, or, in Betanzos, those of his
three friends and their four servants, reflect an organization of Cuzco identical
to that of the Chanca.
From comparison of the names, as Sarmiento and Betanzos have them, it is
clear that some shifting of names must have occurred. Betanzos mentions Muru
Uanca as Vicaquirao’s servant, but according to Sarmiento Mircoimana (i.e.
Muru Uanca) was Pachacuti’s governor, that is to say probably Pachacuti’s ser
vant. Sarmiento mentions Inca Roca in addition to Vicaquirao as his primary
and eldest brother. As a ruler, Inca Roca was the founder of Vicaquirao panaca.
It seems more likely therefore that, in Betanzos’s terminology, Inca Roca must
be regarded as a friend and kinsman of Pachacuti, and Viracocha as Inca Roca’s
servant. In any case, both — the friends and the servants — occur in Chinchay-
suyu and in Collasuyu. It can therefore in my opinion justifiably be asserted
that Pachacuti and his three friends can be correlated with Uscovilca and his
captains Tomayguaraca, Teclovilca and Rapa in the organization of the Chanca,
in which they belonged to the Hanan-Chanca. It follows then that Hurin-Cuzco
was represented by the four servants, just as Hurin-Chanca was represented by
Ancovilca, Guamanguaraca, Yanavilca and M alm a78).
77) The name of the general and half-brother of Pachacuti who would later accomplish the
great conquests for him, Capac Yupanqui, also fits into this framework entirely if we see in
him the same person as Capac Yupanqui the fifth ruler, founder of Apo Mayta panaca and
father of Inca Roca, Apo Chimachaui and Apo Urco Guaranga (see also V, § 4 b pp. 130-131).
78) Perhaps the possibility is not excluded that the words huaraca and huaranca were variants
of each other and that in this way the names Tomayguaraca and Guamanguaraca and the
names Quilliscachi Urco Guaranga and Uxuta Urco Guaranga indicate corresponding positions
of the bearers in the organizations of the Chanca and Cuzco respectively (see also VI note 10).
In his account of the relationship between Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco,

Betanzos in fact recorded two different representations; one was the territorial,
of Chinchaysuyu as opposed to Collasuyu, and the other, the non-territorial
representation, of Pachacuti and the three assistants as opposed to the four
servants79). From Santo T om as80) it appears that the relationship between
the territorial moieties was regarded as being the same as that between the non
territorial ones as described above.
Santo Tomas (1951a, p. 118) writes that Capac ayllu was the most prominent
lineage of the Inca. The panaca, of which he mentions some of the Hanan-Cuzco
ones, were the other prominent lineages. Maras ayllu and Sutic ayllu were the
lineages of the people who were the servants of the former. The best inter
pretation of Santo Tomas’s account seems to me to be that the panaca belonged
to Chinchaysuyu and that Collasuyu was represented by Maras ayllu and Sutic
ayllu. The relationship of these two suyu was one of master to servant.
d) I introduced the organizations of Pachacuti’s army and that of the Chanca
because I consider that in these organizations the complementary moieties of one
larger whole could be distinguished. This view, of these organizations as
moieties, was supported by the fact that one of the two organizations was linked
with two of the four suyu. It could be assumed therefore that the other organiza
tion, which was mentioned exclusively in relation to the first, was linked with
the other two suyu. From the material discussed so far, there emerged a presenta
tion of the relationship of the two moieties as two hostile, equivalent, but un
related groups. From other data on the prelude to the war against the Chanca
it appears that the relationship between the moieties was also expressed as a
kinship relationship which in addition symbolised the opposition of wordly
authority (the upper moiecy) to spiritual authority (the lower moiety).
The kinship relationship was expressed in the form of that between Pachacuti
and his father, Viracocha Inca. The latter’s link with religion is already expressed
by his name and by the myth which explains why he bore this name. Viracocha
Inca adopted the name after the god Viracocha had appeared to him one night
when he was in the large temple dedicated to this god; the god then foretold
him the future greatness of the Inca (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 24, p. 156).
Although Sarmiento (1947, cap. 25, p. 159, 160) mentions several of Vira
cocha’s conquests, the attitude which he and Betanzos later ascribe to this ruler
is in absolute contradiction to his former deeds. When the Chanca march against
Cuzco Viracocha flees from the city and tries to make peace with them. When,*SO )
79) At this point I have not attempted to answer the question of how Pachacuti and the
friends with their servants can be linked with groups — panaca and ayllu — of the organization
of Cuzco. Later I can go into this question in more detail (see VI § 3 c pp. 176-177 and note 10).
SO) See IV § 4 p. 103.
later, Pachacuti has defeated the Chanca, Viracocha does not want to recognise
the victory and tries to name his son Inca Urco, who had fled with him, as
his successor instead of Pachacuti. He even wants to have Pachacuti murdered.
This attitude induces Pachacuti to take possession of the royal insignia and to
crown himself as ruler, without his father’s consent.
Bias Valera (1950, p. 150, 162, 163) gives an explanation for this contro
versy between father and son. In the first place, he writes that the priests in
former days had very great powers and that the high priest was more powerful
than the king. The fact that they were so wealthy and powerful and all inter
related, was the main reason at Viracocha Inca’s time that the people, above
all Hanta huaylla and the Chincha, rebelled. Pachacuti, however, was victorious;
he brought many of the priests to Cuzco and relieved them of their functions.
When he had become ruler, he instituted a new class of priests and commanded
that they should always be chosen from among poor people of low descent.
From that time onwards it became possible also for women to assist at the
sacrifices.
In this context Bias Valera mentions a person called Hanta huaylla. This
name is known at the present-day, in the form Andahuaylas, as that of the
capital of the province in which the Chanca used to live. The Chincha people
were neighbours of the Chanca and lived along the coast. It may be assumed
that by the Hanta huaylla and the Chincha, mentioned by Bias Valera as rebel
ling, the same people were meant as those who were called Chanca by other
authors. Although the people had risen against the priests, both they and the
priests were defeated by Pachacuti. These two groups can therefore be identified
as Pachacuti’s opponents81). Viracocha Inca, who was identified with the
priestly class by Bias Valera, was also involved in this defeat.
There is good reason for accepting that the highest priest belonged to Vira-
cocha’s panaca 82). The other priests were recruited from Tarpuntay ayllu, the
81) This connection of the Chanca with the priests was corroborated by Montesinos (1957,
cap. X X I, p. 82). This author, however, speaks of the war against the Chanca at the time of
Sinchi Roca, which king he places between Capac Yupanqui and Yahuar Huacac, thus in place
of Inca Roca. For an explanation of this shift of the war against the Chanca, see V § 10 pp. 155-
162. A second, indirect, confirmation of the connection of the Chanca with the priests is seen in
the following myth supplied by Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 239). After Pachacuti had defeated
the Chanca, he pursued them as they fled. Arriving at the Apurimac river, he fatally wounded
a captain of the Chanca. The latter, called Villcaquire, complained to Pachacuti that he should
have to die without having served any purpose. However, Pachacuti had him buried at the foot
of a tree out of whose seed a medicine later could be made, called villca. We have already seen
(IV § 1 c pp. 73, 74) that — besides meaning sanctuary, ancestor, phallus symbol and priest —
villca also had the meaning of medicine. Thus in this myth too the Chanca were again asso
ciated with the same concept of villca.
82) I base this reason on the names of many high priests reported in the literature. Sarmiento
(1947, “ F e e d e p r o b a n z a ...’\ p. 286) mentions Don Francisco Challco Yupanqui as one of his
ayllu of the non-aristocratic Inca, which was linked to one group of ceque
together with Sucsu panaca, Viracocha’s panaca (see e.g. Molina 1943, p. 26,
28, 50). These panaca and ayllu were in Antisuyu. Viracocha Inca can therefore
be regarded as the representative of the lower moiety, which consisted of
Antisuyu and Cuntisuyu, as opposed to the upper moiety, which consisted of
Chinchaysuyu and Collasuyu. In this manner the opposition of the Chanca to
the Inca under Pachacuti was introduced in this representation of the organi
zation of Cuzco.
Bias Valera asserts that, before they were defeated, the priests had very great
power, but that afterwards they were recruited from the lowest classes and
that women also could fulfil priestly tasks. This remark cannot be taken literally.
Even after Pachacuti’s time, there was a high priest who always belonged to the
ruler’s family, with a complete hierarchy of priests below him. As a result of
the application of the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao to the system of four
marriage classes, distributed over two moieties, the upper moiety was identified
with the highest group in the hierarchy, i.e. Collana and Payan, and the lower
moiety with the lowest groups, i.e. Cayao. There are also several instances in
Peru of myths relating to the moiety system in which the lowest moiety had
formerly been the highest but had, for some reason, been forced to cede this
position to the other moiety S3). Since this 'mythical reversal’ is an inherent
characteristic of the moiety system, there is no justification for attaching any
historical value to the story that the priests at former times really had possessed83
informants belonging to the panaca of Viracocha Inca. The name Challco is not reported for any
other informant. The high priest who performed the marriage between the Inca Huayna Capac and
his sister was called Apo Challco Yupanqui, according to Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 258). When
according to the same author (1950, p. 249) a victorious expedition of Tupac Yupanqui, when
still a crown prince, was celebrated, one of the three priests of the temple of the sun was named
Auqui Challco Yupanqui. Sarmiento (1947, cap. 49, p. 223) also gave Chaleo Yupanqui as the
name of the captain in the army of Tupac Yupanqui who carried the statue of the sun. Lastly,
Murua (1613, cap. 39) states that the high priest of the sun at the time of the coronation
of Huascar Inca, Apo Challco Yupanqui, was the grandson of Viracocha Inca. Cabello Valbao
(1951, cap. 24, p. 395) mentions the same person in the same function.
83) One example was that the first five Inca belonged to Hurin-Cuzco and the later ones to
Hanan-Cuzco. Another example is given by Sarmiento (1947, cap. 7, pp. 105-106): “When the
god Viracocha created the sun and the the moon, he made the latter brighter than the former.
The sun was envious and threw ashes at the moon’s face. This made the moon darker and of
the colour that it now has” . We have seen (IV note 37) that, among others, Garcilaso (1945,
Tomo I, libro III, cap. X X , X X I ) connected the sun with the rulers and the moon with the
queens, their sisters. Garcilaso also states (1945, Tomo I, libro I, cap. X V I) in one of his
versions of the origin of the Inca that Manco Capac placed himself at the head of Hanan-Cuzco
and his sister and wife at the head of Hurin-Cuzco. We can therefore also connect the sun with
Hanan-Cuzco, the upper moiety, and the moon with Hurin-Cuzco, the lower moiety, of both
of whom — the sun and the moon — according to another myth (Poma 1944, foja 81) Manco
Capac was the son. In this manner the myth of the sun and the moon is seen to be applicable
to the relationship of the moieties.
power. In my opinion, the opposition mentioned in Bias Valera’s account

between the priestly class, who belonged to the lower moiety, and the ruling
element, which belonged to the upper moiety, and the lowliness of the position
of the priests, must not be interpreted literally, but only as the expression of a
moiety-division.
§ 6. I suggested above84) that the opposition of Pachacuti to Viracocha

Inca could be correlated with that of Chinchaysuyu with Collasuyu to Antisuyu
with Cuntisuyu and of Cuzco to the Chanca. This does not imply that Viracocha
Inca and the organization he represented can be identified with Uscovilca and
his organization. I adduced in this representation of the organization of Cuzco
the personal opposition of Pachacuti to Viracocha Inca to illustrate the nature
of the relationship of the Inca to the Chanca as that of moieties.
In certain respects I went beyond the original scope of this chapter by dis
cussing this opposition, since I touched on the representation of the organization
of Cuzco consisting of Chinchaysuyu as Collana, Collasuyu as Payan and Anti
suyu and Cuntisuyu together as Cayao. Because there was a quadripartition in Col
lana and in Payan, I expected the same situation in Cayao. This last quadri
partition did occur. On account of the nature of Cayao, as a group which was
not related to Collana, and as a moiety equivalent to another moiety, the
organization of Cayao as an endogamous group could be described as one of
four territorial groups which were cut across by two non-territorial moieties;
a similar organization prevailed in the other moiety, the one opposed to the
moiety Cayao. In this last organization, however, the territorial nature of
Collana (i.e. Chinchaysuyu) and Payan (i.e. Collasuyu) was lost. By combina
tion of these two forms of organization, an organization was achieved which
consisted of two territorial moieties, which were each divided into four terri
torial groups, which were each subdivided into two non-territorial moieties.
This type of organization was the same as that found in the third representation
of the organization of Cuzco 85).
Nonetheless, the characteristic nature of the representation of the organiza
tion of Cuzco discussed in this chapter lay in the fact that it consisted of four
suyu one of which, as Collana, and the other, as Payan (which were each sub
divided into four groups) comprised Cuzco proper, and that the two other suyu
did not really belong to Cuzco.
84) See IV § 5 d pp. 110-112.

85) See diagram IV § 5 b p. 106.
CHAPTER FIVE
THE SECOND REPRESENTATION
§ 1. a) In the representation of the organization of Cuzco, outlined in the

previous chapter, we considered three groups of people, i.e. the primary kin of
the Inca ruler, his subsidiary kin, and the population of Cuzco and the surround
ing countryside, which was in no way akin to the ruler. These groups were desig
nated by the terms Collana, Payan and Cayao. The first two were linked with
Chinchaysuyu and Collasuyu; Cayao was linked with Antisuyu and Cuntisuyu.
All three groups were divided into four marriage classes; these marriage classes
were again linked with the concepts Collana, Payan and Cayao.
In the second representation of the organization of Cuzco, discussed in the
present chapter, the four suyu in their function of marriage classes form the
basis of the discussion. The suyu were in turn each divided into the three
groups: Collana, the primary kin of the ruler, Payan, the subsidiary kin, and
Cayao, the population not related to him. It could be said that there existed
territorial distinctions between the marriage classes, but not between the Collana,
Payan and Cayao groups. These three groups were each distributed over the
four suyu. In this second representation, too, the concepts of Collana, Payan
and Cayao were applied in a second way, which related to the four suyu them
selves.
I propose to demonstrate the existence of the second representation in Cuzco
from an organizational form found in the village of Anta, where it occurs side
by side with the representation outlined in the previous chapter 1).
The population of Anta consisted of the four ayllu, Anta, Sanco, Quero and
Conchacalla. None of the ayllu is in the documents called Collana, Payan or
Cayao. However, from the organization of the village of Puquiura2) we may
argue, by extrapolation, that these names were also applicable to the ayllu in
Anta. The ayllu called Anta, which bore the same name as the village as a
whole, was probably Payan 3).
At the present day there still exists a tripartition within one of the four
ayllu to which synonyms of the names Collana, Payan and Cayao are applied.
I learned this information from Mr. Jose Pacheco, palaeographer in the His
torical Archives of the University of Cuzco, who was born in Anta. According
1) See IV § 5 b p. 106.
2) See IV § 2 b p. 83.
3) See IV § 3 b pp. 95-97.
V. THE SECOND REPRESENTATION 115
to him, the Collana ayllu — the present-day name of one of the same four
ayllu — is divided into the following sub-ayllu:
Capac Collana,
Hatun Collana,
Huchun Collana
It is not possible to determine which of the three ayllu, Sanco ayllu, Equeco
ayllu or Conchacalla ayllu, should be identified with the Collana ayllu referred
to by Mr. Pacheco. This does not, however, detract from the value of this in
formation; its reliability is corroborated by the references in the document of
1787 (A.N.L. Leg. 17, Cuaderno 423) cited above, to the organizations of the
villages in the neighbourhood of Anta 4). In the village of Curahuasi, on the
road from Anta to Abancay, there were found Atun Collana ayllu and Uchui
Collana ayllu; in the nearby village of Antilla, were found Atun Collana ayllu,
Uchui Collana ayllu and Chona ayllu.
The following meanings can be attached to the names of the three sub-ayllu
of Collana ayllu of Anta. Capac means rich, powerful, and referred to the
dynasty of the rulers. Hatun means large: the hatunruna were the ordinary,
free people (Holguin, 1608). Huchun derives from Huchuy, and means small.
Capac and Hatun were a]so mentioned in the organization of Cuzco. Capac
ayllu was found in the first group of three ceque in Chinchaysuyu and Hatun
ayllu in the second group of three ceque in Chinchaysuyu.
From two pieces of evidence I propose to demonstrate that in the second
representation of the organization of Cuzco, the terms Capac, Hatun and Hu
chuy referred not only to the first, second and third groups of three ceque in
Chinchaysuyu, but also to the corresponding groups in the other suyu, and that
the meanings of the names Capac, Hatun and Huchuy can in fact be equated
with those of Collana, Payan and Cayao.
The first source is the organization of the province of Collaguas5); the
second that of the village of A cos6). I propose to discuss first the division
into four of the territory of the Collaguas people, and subsequently that into
nine in every fourth part.
b) Collaguas province was divided into three sub-provinces: Yamqui-Col-
lagua, Lare-Collagua and Cavana Conde. The people of Cavana Conde were
of a different origin than the Collaguas and spoke a different language; they^
spoke Quechua, while the Collaguas spoke Aymara. The Cavana Conde have
no relevance to this argument.
4) See IV § 2 b p. 83.
5) This organization is described in the R elacid n d e la p ro v in c ia d e lo s C o lla g u a s from the
year 1583 which appears in the Relaciones Geograficas (1881-97, Tomo II, pp. 38-44).
6) See V § 1 c p. 118.
116 V. THE SECOND REPRESENTATION
The sub-provinces Yamqui-Collagua and Lare-Collagua were called after

the two provincial capitals Yamqui and Lare which, although these provinces
were relatively large, lay about 7 KM apart on the same river. The first town,
which lay further upstream, was called Yamqui according to the Relacion
because Yamqui was a highly honoured name which was given to the principal
cacique. Yamqui was also the principal town of the whole province. Lare, in
Aymara, means uncle (M oBro), or kin, and was used as a polite form of
address to a cacique, a chief. Because the Yamqui and the Lare, that is to
say the two people, regarded one another as brothers who had come forth
from the Collaguata, the mountain of origin which was worshipped as a huaca
by the Collaguas, they founded the two main towns, Yamqui, the town of
the most powerful lords, and Lare, where the lords lived who followed after
them in importance and who were their uncles and nephews.
This, in brief, is what the Relacion records. The group of the Lare was
referred to by the term MoBro as well as by that for nephew, as opposed to
the group of the Yamqui, being ego’s group. It seems likely that by nephew,
SiSo was meant.
As appears from the introduction to the Relacion, both the Yamqui Collagua
and the Lare Collagua were divided into Hanansaya and Hurinsaya; these were
in turn ruled by a 'cacique principal’, — i.e. the first, the principal chief — ,
and by a ‘segunda persona’ — i.e. the second man.
In Collaguas province there were thus two Hanansaya and two Hurinsaya
groups; these may have been not only sub-divisions of Yamqui-Collagua and
Lare-Collagua, but probably also manifested themselves as one Hanansaya and
one Hurinsaya which were mutually opposed. It is not known in detail how the
two sub-provinces were divided into Hanan and Hurin. The four sub-divisions
can be represented as follows in diagram form:
Yamqui
Lare
From this presentation one could say that in both Hanansaya and Hurinsaya
there is a question of subdivision into Yamqui and Lare. We have no further
data about the relationships between the different parts in this quadripartition.
There may have existed a similar relationship between Yamqui and Lare as was
observed between the two groups in Tambo in the myth about Tambo, Maras
and Sutic (Pachacuti Yamqui’s account7)) . The group represented by Manco
Capac and his brothers and sisters could be correlated in Collaguas with Yam-
7) See IV § 2 e pp. 88-89.

qui, in Hanansaya, and the MoBro group in Tambo with Lare, in Hanansaya.
Or, if the four suyu as described in the previous chapter are drawn into the
comparison, Yamqui Hanansaya could be compared to Chinchaysuyu, Lare
Hanansaya to Collasuyu, Yamqui Hurinsaya to Antisuyu and Lare Hurinsaya
to Cuntisuyu 8).
A division into nine, as reflected by the ceque within every suyu in Cuzco,
occurs also in Collaguas. The Relation mentioned above (Relaciones Geogra-
ficas 1881-1897, Tomo II, p. 45) records the following: “the province was
ruled as the Inca had arranged, i.e. through the ayllu. Every ayllu contained
three hundred Indians and a chief whom they obeyed, and these three chiefs
obeyed a chief cacique” . I.e. there were nine hundred Indians. The three groups
of three hundred Indians each were called Collana, Payan and Cayao.
The groups of three hundred were probably divided into groups of a hundred,
and these groups were probably called again Collana, Payan and Cayao. This
can be concluded from a document of 1617 9). This document contains a
reference to the following ayllu in the village of Tuti, Hurinsaya, Collaguas:
Taypi pataca
Collana pataca
Collana Pahana pataca
Pahana Taypi pataca
Pahana Cayao pataca
Collana Paque
Paque and Tuti
Pataca in Aymara is the same word as pachaca, a group of a hundred. Pahana
is the same as payan. Taypi in Aymara is the same as Chaupi or Payan in
Quechua. In Tuti there was obviously question of three ayllu: Collana, Payan
and Cayao, each in turn subdivided into Collana, Payan and Cayao. To avoid
repetition of the same names, one of these words, when it would otherwise
have occurred twice in one name, was replaced by a synonym. If we assume
that Collana Paque ayllu and Paque and Tuti ayllu each consisted of two ayllu
joined together, then there must have been nine ayllu in Tuti.
In the whole territory of the Collaguas and in all four subdivisions, there
occurred nine different kinds of ayllu, numbering a hundred men each. All
the ayllu of the same kind had two of the names Collana, Payan and Cayao,
or synonyms of them, in common, in the same combinations and sequence.
Ayllu of the same name in any of the four parts of Collaguas could be com-
8) See IV § 2 a, b pp. 77-84.

9) This document in the National Archives in Lima consists of three loose sheets numbered
395, 396 and 397 of the year 1617 and had not yet been catalogued when I examined it.
pared to one of the nine ceque in any of the four suyu of Cuzco, and to the
groups linked to these ceque 10).
c) A situation similar to that indicated for the villages of the Collaguas
province was encountered in a more elaborate form in the organization of the
village of Acos 11). Here the following ayllu occurred:
Hananccoscco ( = Collana Collana) )
Fayan Urinccoscco (Collana Payan) \ Hanansaya
Ccayahua Urinccoscco ( = Collana Cayao) \
Ccollana Acos ( = Payan Collana) \
Fayan Acos ( = Payan Payan) > Hurinsaya
Ccayahua Acos ( = Payan Cayao) \
Ccollana Anahuarcca ( = Cayao Collana) \
Sahuaraura ( = Cayao Payan) l Anahuarque
Ccayahua Anahuarcca ( = Cayao Cayao) \
With reference to the second representation of the organization of Cuzco,
the organization of Acos could be compared to that of the nine ceque in every
suyu of Cuzco. The terms Collana, Payan and Cayao refer not only to the
first, second and third ceque of every group of three ceque in every suyu, but
also to the first, second and third groups themselves.
In the first representation 12) I related Hanansaya ( = Cuzco ayllu, = Col
lana) in Acos to Pachacuti’s primary kin ( = Chinchaysuyu, = Hanan-Cuzco),
Hurinsaya ( = ayllu Acos, = Payan) to the subsidiary kin ( = Collasuyu,
= Hurin-Cuzco) and Anahuarque ( = Cayao) to the non-related population
( = Antisuyu plus Cuntisuyu). In the second representation of the organization
of Cuzco the primary kin of the ruler and the ruler himself can therefore be
said to belong to the four first groups of three ceque (I 1, II 1,. III 1 and
IV 1) the subsidiary kin to the four second groups of three ceque (I 2, II 2
III 2 and IV 2), and the non-related population to the four third groups of
three ceque (I 3, II 3, III 3, and IV 3). In the second representation Hanan-
Cuzco consisted of I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV 1 and Hurin-Cuzco of I 2 +
II 2 + III 2 + IV 2.
Since the first and the second of the three names Capac, Hatun and Huchuy,
mentioned in Anta, were also found in the first and second groups of three
10) I speak of groups because — as I hope subsequently to make acceptable — in the three
representations of the organization of Cuzco the link between a group and a given ceque concerned
not so much this group alone but all groups which were in the same situation in the entire
system as this group (V § 7 c pp. 146-147, § 9 c pp. 152-154).
11) See IV § 3 a p. 93.
12) See IV § 3 a p. 93.
ceque in Chinchaysuyu, it can be assumed that they were also applicable to

these groups of three ceque as a whole, and that Huchuy referred to the third
group of three ceque. Capac, Hatun and Huchuy, then, are synonyms of Col-
lana, Payan and Cayao, and indicate even more clearly than the latter names,
the internal, hierarchic differences between the three groups. The terms Usco
or Anco ( = white), Ticlla ( = black-white) and Yana ( = black), as en
countered in the organization of the Chanca 13), referred to the same hierar
chic differences 14) 15).
The question arises whether, just as there existed hierarchic differences
between the three groups of three ceque within every suyu, the three ceque
within every triad demonstrated these same differences. I have no material with
reference to this representation of Cuzco which indicates that the ceque show
these hierarchic differences, but some suppositions about the existence of such
differences will be found below 16).
d) No mention has been made yet in this context of the mutual relationships
of the four suyu. In Anta and Puquiura, if it is assumed 17) that the two villages
had similar organizations, we saw in addition to the fact that certainly one,
and probably all four, of the ayllu in Anta were divided into Collana, Payan
and Cayao, that these terms also referred to the four ayllu themselves. In this
chapter I propose to demonstrate that in the second representation of the or
ganization of Cuzco also, the four suyu had the characteristic features of Col
lana, Payan and Cayao.
In the first representation the four ayllu in Puquiura, Puquio and Aymaraes
were compared to the four suyu in Cuzco. Collana corresponded to Chinchay-
1S) See IV § 5 b pp. 104-105.

14) Poma (1944, foja 244) has a similar hierarchic distinction among the Inca of the Capac
Inca, the Hahua Inca and the Huaccha Inca. Hahua is “grandson, end and bank of a river” .
In a moiety system with four marriage classes it could thus represent the group of Payan, by
the side of Collana, in one of the moieties. Huaccha is “poor” and indicates the group Cayao.
15) In addition to the subdivision into Capac, Hatun and Huchun, the ayllu Collana in
Anta — which was thus one of the ayllu Sanco, Equeco or Conchacalla — was also divided
into Hanansaya and Hurinsaya. We may assume that both divisions were combined in a particular
way. It is, however, impossible to say how this was done. We could equate Collana Hanansaya
with Capac Collana and Collana Hurinsaya with Hatun Collana. As in Acos, Hanansaya was
equated with ayllu Cuzco and Hurinsaya with ayllu Acos, or as in Cuzco in the first represen
tation Hanan-Cuzco = Chinchaysuyu = Collana and Hurin-Cuzco = Collasuyu = Payan.
In Cuzco the first representation nevertheless still contained the opposition between Chinchaysuyu
+ Collasuyu and Antisuyu + Cuntisuyu, and in Acos that between ayllu Cuzco + ayllu Acos
to ayllu Anahuarque. It is therefore also possible that within the ayllu Collana of the village
of Anta, we must equate Hanansaya with Capac Collana + Hatun Collana and Hurinsaya with
Huchun Collana.
16) See VI note 34.
17) See IV § 2 b p. 83, V § 1 a p. 114.
suyu, Pay an to Collasuyu, Cayao (in Puquio and Aymaraes) or Ayamarca (in
Puquiura) to Antisuyu, and Piscachuri (in Puquio) or Yanaca (in Aymaraes)
or Tamboconga (in Puquiura) to Cuntisuyu. Chinchaysuyu and Colllasuyu com
prised the Inca population of Cuzco, and Antisuyu and Cuntisuyu the non-
Inca population from outside. These comparisons are not, however, applicable
in the second representation.
The second representation is distinguished by the fact that it gives nine
ceque for every suyu and is in this respect unique. In this ceque system Chin
chaysuyu and Antisuyu constitute one moiety and Cuntisuyu and Collasuyu the
other. This distinction is implied in the sequence of the ceque in the four suyu.
In both, Cuntisuyu and Chinchaysuyu, there was a Collana ceque on the common
boundary. The sequence of the ceque: Collana, Payan, Cayao, Collana etc., in
Chinchaysuyu was continued in the same way in Antisuyu and, likewise, that
of Cuntisuyu was continued in Collasuyu. Cuntisuyu and Collasuyu were thus
the mirror image of Chinchaysuyu and Antisuyu.
If we compare this element of the organization of Cuzco with correlating
elements in other villages or provinces, it will be possible to relate the terms
Collana, Payan and Cayao to the four suyu. In Aymaraes and in Puquio the
Collana ayllu and Payan ayllu were opposed to Yanaca, or Piscachuri, and
Cayao. It is remarkable, however, that with reference both to Aymaraes and
Puquio, Poma de Ayala and the document of 1830 18) name first the Yanaca
ayllu and the Piscachuri ayllu and subsequently the Cayao ayllu, just as in
the ceque system of Cuzco Collasuyu followed after Cuntisuyu. There might
be question of a coincidence, but in the other moiety, too, in Aymaraes as well
as in Puquio, this sequence of the Collana ayllu before the Payan one, was
preserved.
If this peculiarity is accepted as a justification for comparing Cuzco to Ay
maraes, Puquio and Puquira, the following conclusions, presented in diagram
form, can be reached with regard to the application of the terms Collana,
Payan and Cayao to the four suyu in Cuzco.
>> Cuntisuyu Chinchaysuyu

'5 (Collana)
E
Q Collasuyu Antisuyu
(Cayao) (Payan)
In the present representation of the organization of Cuzco, there existed a

tripartition within each suyu. Thus the following diagram can be established:
IS) See IV § 2 b p. 82.

Collana ( = Capac) or Hanan-Cuzco
(The two moieties (I + III) and (II + IV) are called Upper moiety and
Lower moiety to distinguish them from Hanan-Cuzco (I 1 + II 1 + III 1 +
IV 1) and Hurin-Cuzco (I 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2) 1 9 ) ) .
The remainder of this chapter will be devoted to the illustration of the
second representation with the help of material from Inca history. From this
material it appears that the same meaning is attached to the terms Collana,
Payan and Cayao and to the marriage classes as in the first representation. The
functions of these groups were the following:
As marriage classes, the suyu fulfilled the same function which in the first
representation was fulfilled by, among others, the four marriage classes within
Chinchaysuyu and the four marriage classes within Collasuyu. The marriage
relationships between the suyu can be presented as follows: I—>IV—>111—>11^*1
(i.e., a man from I married a woman from IV, a man from IV married a
woman from III, etc. Compare with the arrows in the previous diagram).
In the first representation the primary kin of the rulers belonged to Chin
chaysuyu, the subsidiary descendants of the rulers to Collasuyu, and the mothers
of members of this last group belonged to Antisuyu and Cuntisuyu. In the
19) See V § 1 c p. 118.

second representation the primary kin of the rulers belonged to the Collana
group (I 1 4- II 1 + III 1 + IV 1), the subsidiary kin to the Payan group
(I 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2) and the mothers of the members of this last
group to Cayao (I 3 + II 3 + III 3 + IV 3).
The equation of Chinchaysuyu with Collana, Antisuyu with Payan, Collasuyu
plus Cuntisuyu with Cayao, and therefore of Chinchaysuyu plus Antisuyu with
the Upper moiety, and of Collasuyu plus Cuntisuyu with the Lower moiety,
was also expressed in Inca history.
Those who governed, that is to say the rulers of Cuzco, belonged to Chin
chaysuyu (Collana). The inhabitants of the land belonging to Cuzco and its
surroundings, who had subjected themselves to Inca rule, were classed as Anti
suyu (Payan). The whole priestly hierarchy belonged to Collasuyu (Cayao).
Collasuyu and Cuntisuyu also represented the non-Inca population outside Cuzco
which had not been subjected by the Inca when these still formed only a city
state, even later they probably did not belong to the nominal Inca 20).
A similar distinction to that in the Upper moiety between Collana (Chin
chaysuyu) and Payan (Antisuyu) i.e. between the rulers of a particular area
and its resident population, can be recognised in the Lower moiety between
Collasuyu and Cuntisuyu. Finally, there was also a link between Chinchaysuyu
(Collana), in its function as the group of rulers, and Cuntisuyu, in its function
as the group of their ancestors, which last group in the system of three marriage
classes was Collana too.
§ 2. a) As I mentioned above, the second representation of the organi

zation of Cuzco can be illustrated by material from Inca history. This is possible
because the Inca rulers were not in fact rulers who together constituted one
dynasty; they were representatives and leaders of social groups who had a place
in the second representation as well. It is possible in a few instances that the
names of the rulers were not in fact mere proper names but were derived
from the groups to which the rulers belonged.
Before quoting the material illustrating the second representation, I propose
to show the unhistorical nature of what was recorded by most of the chroniclers
as Inca history.
In chapter I 21) we saw that Molina and Cobo mentioned ten panaca which
had been founded by Manco Capac and his first nine successors. In their
accounts these ten panaca were distributed over the four suyu and the groups
of three ceques in such a manner that one panaca occurred in every group of
20) Nominal Inca or Inca by privilege were the people or ayllu around Cuzco who did not
belong to the Inca originally but were later addressed as such (Poma 1944, foja 85, 337; Gar-
cilaso 1945, Tomo I, libro I, cap. X X , X X III; Rowe 1946, p. 189).
21) See I Diagrams A and B, pp. 4, 6.
three ceque. Beside the panaca, there was also in every group of three ceque
one of the ten ayllu of the non-aristocratic population of Cuzco22).
As will be demonstrated in the next chapter, in the discussion of the third
representation, this type of organization corresponded not only to this third
representation of the organization of Cuzco, but was also connected with the
principle of the division into five 23).
It can not readily be supposed that the successive rulers really did found
their own panaca and that thus the organization of Cuzco was incomplete and
inoperative until after the reign of the tenth ruler. In addition, the panaca of
the later rulers would not have had a place in the system. As regards this
contingency, Molina and Cobo accordingly record that there were no panaca
of the later rulers in the organization of Cuzco, although there is evidence of
the existence of a panaca, the Tumibamba panaca, of the eleventh ruler, Huayna
Capac (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 62, p. 251). But in the context of the organi
zation of Cuzco as expressed in the ceque system, only the panaca of the first
ten rulers have to be taken into account.
b) One of the chroniclers, Gutierrez de Santa Clara, wholly corroborates
the suggestion that the ten panaca represented a particular form of organization
which must contain all ten and in which the chiefs of the panaca were certain
of the ruler’s kinsmen and not his predecessors. Gutierrez correlates the division
of the government of the population of Cuzco with the conquest of the town
by the Inca; according to him, however, (1905, cap. L, p. 432) it was not
Manco Capac who conquered Cuzco, but Tapac Yupanqui 24).
Next, Gutierrez (1905, cap. L., p. 435) describes how Tupac Yupanqui
divided the government of the panaca among his kinsmen: “ He (Tupac Yupan
qui) was the first Inca to start building the fortress of Cuzco (i.e. Sacsahua-
man), although others, elders, say that Pachacuti began its construction when
he was engaged in the struggle with the chief of Cuzco, and that, because the
latter was unable to finish it, Tupac Yupanqui added a large part; from here
he conducted his war against the chief (of Cuzco). He (Tupac Yupanqui)
also divided Cuzco into two large districts; the first and most important he
called Hanan Cuzco, which means the upper district of Cuzco, and the other
Hurin Cuzco, which means the lower district. Subsequently he divided the
upper district into five parts: the first and most important part he called Ayllo
Cappa (Capac ayllu), i.e. the lineage of the Inca rulers; the second was called
22) Cobo does not mention the panaca of the second ruler and the ayllu belonging to it.
This omission is, however, certainly due to the incompleteness of his data (see I § 4 pp. 9-10
and note 14).
23) See VI §§ 4, 5 pp. 178-183.
24) I shall be able further on to explain satisfactorily why Tupac Yupanqui was mentioned
in this connection as the conqueror of Cuzco (see V § 5 a pp. 133-134).

Yna Cappanaca (Inaca panaca), the third Cuccopanaca (Sucsu panaca) 25); the
fourth Illipanaca (Aucailli panaca), and the fifth Cumapanaca (Suma pana
ca) 26); to every one of these parts he assigned a number of people who would
live there for ever. As chief of the first part he appointed the son who was to
succeed him in his realm; the second and third parts he assigned to his collateral
descendants; the fourth to his grandfather and his descendants, the fifth to his
great-grandfather. The other district, the second, which covered the lower district
of the town, he also divided into five parts; the first part he called Uzcamayta
(Usca Mayta) and appointed as its chiefs the descendants of the second son
of the first Inca ruler to reign after himself; the second part he called Appo-
mayta (Apo Mayta) and appointed as its chief the second son of the second
Inca ruler. And in the same order of succession he laid down that in the third,
fourth and fifth parts the second sons of the third, fourth and fifth Inca rulers
should succeed to the government; although his kingdom did not survive
because of the arrival of the Spaniards” .
Gutierrez probably did not understand this important datum, for there are
several mistakes and impossible details concealed in his account. Thus he asserts
that Tupac Yupanqui assigned the first part, Capac ayllu, to the son who later
was to succeed him. According to all the other chroniclers Capac ayllu was
Tupac Yupanqui’s own panaca. It should be assumed therefore, that, in the
context of Gutierrez’s account, it was Pachacuti who divided the government,
and that the government of Capac ayllu was assigned to Tupac Yupanqui. This
division of the government could be compared to the re-organization of the
town by Pachacuti as recorded by the other chroniclers (Sarmiento, 1947, cap.
30-32, p. 174-180; Betanzos 1880, cap. XVI, p. 107-111) 27). In my opinion
Pachacuti can be substituted for the Tupac Yupanqui of Gutierrez’s account.
Three sorts of kin of Pachacuti are mentioned as the chiefs of the five parts
of Hanan-Cuzco: 1) his successor, 2) his collateral kin, 3) his grandfather and
his descendants and his great-grandfather. It is difficult to conceive that Pacha
cuti did in fact assign the government of two of the parts to his great-grand
father and grandfather. It seems more likely that this government was assigned
to the kin belonging to the lineages to which his great-grandfather and that to
which his grandfather had belonged.
In three instances Gutierrez refers to the kin of Pachacuti, — the great
grandfather the grandfather and the son — , who probably belonged to his
patrilineal ascendants and descendants. The obvious conclusion of this is that
in the other two instances the 'collateral kin’ refer to Pachacuti’s father’s kin
25) See VI § 3 b p. 175 and note 6.

26) See VI note 73.
27) See V § 5 pp. 133-139, VI § 8 pp. 199-202.
V. THE SECOND REPRESENTATION 1 25
and the kin of Pachacuti’s own lineage, for Pachacuti and his father are the
only ones who did not occur in this lineage of partilineal ascendants and descen
dants. If these patrilineal relatives belonged to different lineages, then these
five lineages were probably matrilineal.
Gutierrez deals even more strangely with the division of the government
of the five parts of Hurin-Cuzco. He mentions Usca Mayta panaca before
Apu Mayta panaca. This error can probably be explained from the sequence
in which Molina and Cobo, mistakenly, placed these panaca in Collasuyu 28).
Gutierrez ignores the names of the remaining three parts. We can only con
clude from Gutierrez’s material that the chiefs of the five parts of Hurin-Cuzco
were to be the second sons of rulers who were to succeed Pachacuti. As the
rulers themselves never existed, owing to the arrival of the Spaniards, as Gutier
rez remarked, their second sons could not possibly become the chiefs of parts
of Hurin-Cuzco. Nor could these rulers themselves or their descendants belong
to any particular parts, the panaca, because the ten existing parts of Cuzco had
already been assigned to other kinsmen of Pachacuti.
It seems to me that Gutierrez’s account must be interpreted as follows. By
‘second sons’ of a ruler, the chroniclers understood either the subsidiary sons,
or all the sons except the successor to the throne29). In the case of Tupac
Yupanqui, Gutierrez records that he, in his capacity as successor to the throne,
became the chief of Capac ayllu, that is to say the ayllu of the Inca, the lineage
to which the ruler belonged. Capac ayllu was the principal, the first lineage.
The second, the subsidiary son of Pachacuti was the chief of Usca Mayta; Apu
Mayta should be read for this name in Gutierrez. The latter chief was there
fore the subsidiary brother of Tupac Yupanqui. Gutierrez calls Tupac Yupanqui
the first Inca after Pachacuti. This term ‘the first Inca’ may, however, have
referred to the chief of the first, the principal lineage, which was Capac ayllu.
The second Inca would then be not the Inca who followed after Tupac, but
the chief of the second panaca in Hanan-Cuzco, i.e. the chief of Inaca panaca,
and therefore the Inca before Tupac Yupanqui. The subsidiary sons of the
first, second, third, fourth and fifth rulers after Pachacuti in Gutierrez’s ac
count, would therefore in fact have belonged to the lineages of Pachacuti’s
successor, his own, his father’s, his grandfather’s and his great-grandfather’s.
28) See I § 1 pp. 1-5, IV § 2 d p. 88, VI § 5 p. 182.

29) This use of the term “second son” is most explicit in a passage from Garcilaso (1945,
Tomo I, libro I, cap. X V I). When he states that the population of Cuzco was divided into
Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco — I pass over the representation in which this division was
considered — he is comparing the relationship between both groups as the first-born, older
sons in Hanan-Cuzco to the “ second sons” in Hurin-Cuzco. According to Betanzos, in the first
representation the primary sons belong to Hanan-Cuzco and the subsidiary sons to Hurin-Cuzco
(see IV § 2 a p. 79).
This conclusion is supported and further explained by the material in this

chapter 30).
Gutierrez, then, has side by side with the five chiefs, one for each part of
Hanan-Cuzco, a subsidiary brother as chief of each of the five parts of Hurin-
Cuzco. Because they all belonged to lineages which were personified in Pacha-
cuti’s patrilineal ancestors and descendants, these chiefs, who were contemporary
with Pachacuti, were later identified with his ascendants and descendants.
c) Another version of the history of the Inca is known beside that by Gutie
rrez; this is by Polo de Ondegardo and Acosta, and it also varies from the more
customary one. Both these chroniclers mention two contemporary dynasties:
one from Hanan-Cuzco and one from Hurin-Cuzco. Besides a Hanan-Cuzco
ruler, one from Hurin-Cuzco was always in function; these two contem
porary rulers could, in keeping with Gutierrez's account, be regarded as two
brothers, a primary and a subsidiary, who were also the chiefs of one of the
five parts of Hanan-Cuzco and of Hurin-Cuzco.
The version of the history of the Inca given by Polo de Ondegardo and by
Acosta also varies, as regards the names and the succession of the rulers of
Hurin-Cuzco, from the customary accounts of the history of the Inca. If all
the rulers are regarded as contemporary chiefs, the version by Polo de Onde
gardo and Acosta is in accordance with the second representation. It is therefore
important to take cognisance of their version of the history of the Inca 31).
Acosta (1954, Libro VI, cap. X X -X X III, p. 200-203) relates in brief how
Manco Capac was the founder of two dynasties, one for Hanan-Cuzco and one
for Hurin-Cuzco. The kings of the first dynasty, Hanan-Cuzco, were the Inca
who had conquered the country and ruled over it. Acosta does not mention the
achievements of the second dynasty.
The first of the Hanan-Cuzco kings was Inca Roca. Then followed Yahuar
Huacac, Viracocha Inca, Pachacuti, Tupac Yupanqui and Huayna Capac. The
30) I wish to call attention to one fact in Gutierrez’s material. He states not that Tupac
Yupanqui divided the administration among his kin of the lineages from himself up to and
including that of his great-great-grandfather bu t that Pachacuti made this division among his
contemporary kin of the lineages of those up to and including his great-grandfather. Only one
of the five parts of Hanan-Cuzco did he give to his son, who is of course not a contemporary
kinsman. I am of the opinion that this distinction in this second representation of the organiza
tion of Cuzco and the next one is of great importance, as wil be shown (see V § 3 pp. 128-129,
VI § 4 pp. 178-182).
31) The data of the jurist Polo de Ondegardo and of the Jesuit Jose de Acosta agree so well
that we must accept that Acosta obtained his data from Polo, although he adds other information
independently. Polo must have written his chronicle before 1575, the year in which he died
(Ochoa 1946, p. 103), while Acosta arrived in Peru in 1572 and published his chronicle in
1590 (Acosta 1954, pp. X I, X X II)
last one was the father of the two brothers Huascar and Atahuallpa who were
involved in a civil war at the time of the Spanish conquest.
In Hurin-Cuzco Manco Capac was succeeded by Sinchi Roca, Capac Yupan
qui, Lloque Yupanqui, Mayta Capac and Tarco Huaman. The last one was
succeeded by a son whose name is not recorded. The eighth and last was Don
Juan Tambo Maytapanaca.
Acosta refers to two contemporary dynasties which both descended from
Manco Capac. The same presentation can be read from Polo de Ondegardo’s
account. Polo de Ondegardo (1916a, cap. Ill, p. 10, 11) calls Manco Capac
the 'origin and father of the people’. He also mentions two ‘parcialidades’,
groups: Hanan-Cuzco, the principal group, and Hurin-Cuzco, the other. Inca
Roca was the chief of the first and he was succeeded by Yahuar Huacac, Vira-
cocha Inca, Pachacuti, Tupac Yupanqui, Huayna Capac and Huascar. Sinchi
Roca was the chief of the second group; and he was succeeded by Capac
Yupanqui, Lloque Yupanqui, Mayta Capac and Tarco Huaman.
Both these authors are the only ones who mention first the rulers of Hanan-
Cuzco and then those of Hurin-Cuzco. If they had regarded the rulers of the
two moieties as one and the same dynasty, they would probably not have men
tioned first those of Hanan-Cuzco. Moreover, both authors insert the name of
one ruler, Tarco Huaman, who was not mentioned in this capacity by any of
the other chroniclers, although Sarmiento (1947, cap. 17, p. 141) does mention
him as a subsidiary son of Mayta Capac.
Polo’s remark, cited above, makes it clear why both authors insert one more
ruler among those from Hurin-Cuzco: since Manco Capac was the forefather
of both dynasties, he could not himself belong to either. Sinchi Roca was there
fore the first ruler of Hurin-Cuzco and there resulted a gap at the end of the
series of five rulers of Hurin-Cuzco which was filled by Tarco Huaman.
Polo and Acosta were the only authors who placed Capac Yupanqui between
Sinchi Roca and Lloque Yupanqui. According to all the other authors Capac
Yupanqui reigned after Mayta Capac. From other details in this chapter it
appears that Polo and Acosta made the same error of interchanging Capac
Yupanqui and Tarco Huaman in the Hurin-Cuzco dynasty. If this mistake
is corrected, the list of the contemporary rulers of Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-
Cuzco looks as follows:
Hurin-Cuzco Hanan-Cuzco
Sinchi Roca . Inca Roca
Tarco Huaman Yahuar Huacac
Lloque Yupanqui Viracocha Inca
Mayta Capac . Pachacuti
1 28 V. THE SECOND REPRESENTATION
Capac Y u pan qui............................... Tupac Yupanqui32)

To resume: the five rulers of Hanan-Cuzco and the five of Hurin-Cuzco were
in fact the ten chiefs of the parts into which, according to Gutierrez, Cuzco
was divided.
§ 3. If it is assumed, then, that the rulers of Cuzco were in actual fact

not rulers of one dynasty but the personified chiefs of social groups, the
material about these rulers can then be used outside its historical context in
order to throw light on the position which these social groups occupied in the
organization of Cuzco, which groups played also a role in this second repre
sentation.
Just before discussing the position of the rulers in the so-called history of
the Inca, I indicated in what light the functions of the moieties, of the four
suyu and of the three groups of three ceque in every suyu should be regarded
in relation to the second representation of the organization of Cuzco 33). From
what follows it will appear that the rulers can be linked with the social groups
in this representation in the following manner: Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca are
linked to IV 1 and IV 2; Yahuar Huacac and Tarco Huaman to III 1 and III 2;
and Viracocha Inca and Lloque Yupanqui to II 1 and II 2. Two rulers, one
from Hanan-Cuzco and one from Hurin-Cuzco, who were regarded as being
brothers by Gutierrez, are thus consistently linked with each suyu. There are,
however, five rulers in Hanan-Cuzco and five in Hurin-Cuzco, but only four
suyu. It appears now that both Pachacuti and Tupac Yupanqui are linked to I 1
and that both Mayta Capac and Capac Yupanqui are linked to I 2. The two
32) A confirmation of the version of two simultaneous dynasties is found in the name which
Acosta gives for the last, the eighth ruler of Hurin-Cuzco, Don Juan Tambo Maytapanaca. The
Spanish title Don and the name Juan indicate that this individual lived after the conquest of
Cuzco by the Spaniards. If the fifth ruler of Hurin-Cuzco, Capac Yupanqui, was actually suc
ceeded by the first of Hanan-Cuzco, Inca Roca, there could have been no later rulers of Hurin-
Cuzco. But even if we suppose that in the last case the royal dynasty was continued in Hurin-
Cuzco too, parallel with that of Hanan-Cuzco, then the eighth ruler could still not have lived
in the Spanish period but must have been a contemporary of the third king of Hanan-Cuzco,
Viracocha Inca. In 1572 Sarmiento (1947, cap. 17, p. 142, Fee de la probanza, p. 285) knew
this same Don Juan, under the name of Don Juan Tambo Usca Mayta, as head of the panaca of
Mayta Capac which was called Usca Mayta panaca. For Acosta too, the name Tambo Mayta'
panaca suggested a relation with either Usca Mayta panaca or with Apu Mayta panaca. In
1572 Sarmiento estimated the age of Don Juan, who was one of his informants, at 60 years.
This was the age which a son of Huascar, the seventh ruler of Hanan-Cuzco, would approxi
mately have had if he had been able to succeed his father. Remarkably enough, and important
for my subsequent argumentation (see VI § 5 pp. 182-183), is the fact that it is not stated that
Don Juan founded his own panaca, like the other rulers, but that he was chief of the panaca
of Mayta Capac, a panaca which had long been in existence.
33) See V § 1 d pp. 119-122.
rulers in every group each personify different functions of the group. Pachacuti
and Mayta Capac personify in Chinchaysuyu the function of this suyu as a
marriage class, the male members of which married the women from IV;
Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui personify the function of Chinchaysuyu
(Collana) as the endogamous group to which the rulers belonged both matri-
lineally and patrilineally. Accordingly, all rulers from Pachacuti onwards can
be said to have been linked to I 1 34).
There was thus no need in this representation for separate fifth rulers in
Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco. The sixth ruler of Hanan-Cuzco, Huayna Capac,
could also be ignored. But, because one of the expressions of the principle
of the quinque-partition, to be discussed later, was the system of five rulers
in Hanan-Cuzco and five in Hurin-Cuzco35), these two fifth rulers could
not be omitted from this representation 36).
§ 4. a) It will now be possible to use the material about the Inca rulers
to elucidate the second representation. The most intelligible material on the
question of two rulers linked to two groups of three ceque in each suyu, is
that relating to Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui. In order to explain
the significance of this material, however, I shall have to compare the position
of these two rulers in the organization of Cuzco to that of the rulers Uscovilca
and Ancovilca in the organization of the Chanca 37).
In the organization of the Chanca, I assumed the existence of a quadripar-
tition in which I used the term Collana to refer to the group represented by
Uscovilca. Every one of these four groups was divided into Hanansaya and
Hurinsaya. Uscovilca stood at the head of Hanansaya and of all the Chanca.
people; Ancovilca stood at the head of Hurinsaya. The names of the two
chiefs were synonymous, both meaning white vilca.
The data on Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui are wholly in accordance
with those on Uscovilca and Ancovilca. The names Tupac Yupanqui and Capac
Yupanqui are, similarly, synonymous38).
Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui are the most important rulers of
Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco. Capac ayllu which, according to Gutierrez 39)
was the panaca of the Inca, the ruler, descended from Tupac Yupanqui. The
34) See VI § 4 pp. 178-182.

35) See V I § 4 pp. 178-182.
36) See V § 2 b pp. 125-126.
37) See IV § 5 b pp. 103-107.
38) According to Holguin, Tupa refers to something which stands in connection with the
king. At the same time, it is a title of honour. Both, Tupac nan and Capac nan, for example,
mean “royal road".
39) See V § 2 b p. 123.
element Apu in the name Apu Mayta panaca, the name of Capac Yupanqui’s
panaca, according to Holguin (1608) means “great lord, high judge, principal
chief. £apay apu means king” .
These similarities between the names of Uscovilca and Ancovilca and those
of Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui indicate that the same position must
be accorded to the latter two in the organization of Cuzco as were occupied
by the chiefs of the Chanca in their organization. Tupac Yupanqui and Capac
Yupanqui therefore were linked to the groups of ceque I 1 and I 2.
b) Uscovilca and Ancovilca were contemporary chiefs. There are also indi
cations that Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui were each other’s contem
poraries. Like Pachacuti’s assistants in his war against the Chanca40), Capac
Yupanqui is also mentioned twice in the history of the Inca. On the first
occasion he acted as the ruler, five generations before Tupac Yupanqui in the
history of the Inca. His second appearance is when he, as Pachacuti’s subsidiary
brother — first by himself and then together with Tupac Yupanqui, the crown
prince — , makes the most important conquests in the expansion of the Inca
Empire 41).
Since it is important, not only in this context but also generally, to know what
were the relationships in this representation between the two chiefs, of Hanan-
Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco, within one suyu, I shall enter further into the second
of Capac Yupanqui’s functions.
According to Garcilaso (1945, Tomo II, libro VI, cap. X X X II) Pachacuti
called Capac Yupanqui his captain, his right arm and deputy, and his ‘segunda
persona’ in peace and war, to whom he granted absolute power in his whole
kingdom 42). Garcilaso explains elsewhere (1945, Tomo I, libro III, cap. X II)
with reference to Capac Yupanqui the ruler what he means by ‘substitute’.
This ruler sent a brother, Auqui Titu, out as general of the army, with four
major-domos. Later, when the ruler himself went to battle, he appointed Auqui
Titu as governor and deputy to the government of the whole realm. He had his
four major-domos as councillors, while the ruler took his four councillors with
him as major-domos.
It is odd that the chroniclers in this context call Capac Yupanqui, the general,
Pachacuti’s, and not Tupac Yupanqui’s, subsidiary brother and deputy, for it
is Capac Yupanqui who personified Hurin-Cuzco (1 2 + II 2 + III 2 + I V 2)
in his capacity as its chief and thus clarifies his own position, as opposed to
that of the chief of Hanan-Cuzco (I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV 1), Tupac Yupan-
40) See IV § 5 c pp. 107-110.

41) See V note 44.
42) Sarmiento (1947, cap. 38, p. 139) confirms this position for Capac Yupanqui by the state
ment that Pachacuti gave him, as a general, his own golden weapons.
qui. But especially in the framework of the second representation, not too much
value should be attached to the question as to whether any particular events had
taken place during Pachacuti’s or Tupac Yupanqui’s reign 43) 44).
In the light of this second representation it can therefore be asserted that the"'
man who bore the name Capac Yupanqui united in his person the functions
of the chief of Hurin-Cuzco as a whole (1 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2) and of
the general and deputy of the head of Hanan-Cuzco as a whole ( I 1 + II 1 +
III 1 + IV 1). The latter was also the ruler of Cuzco as a whole. The charac
teristics of the ruler of Cuzco as a whole in the second representation were
shared by Pachacuti and Tupac Yupanqui45).
c) Now that the positions of Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui in the
second representation have been determined, as being linked to I, it appears
that the data on their marriages also agree on this point. As it is necessary
in this representation, for the purposes of determining their position in the
organization of these two as of the other Inca rulers, to refer to the marriages
they entered, I shall first briefly outline what is known about the dynastic
marriages.
All authors on the subject agree that Manco Capac married his sister and
43) See V § 3 pp. 128-129.

44) There is just as little agreement among the chroniclers concerning the question of whether
Capac Yupanqui acted only as Pachacuti’s general, whether he made conquests together with
Tupac Yupanqui as crown prince, or whether he was also Tupac Yupanqui’s principal general
and substitute. The different opinions concerning the general Capac Yupanqui are the following:
Sarmiento (1947, cap. 38, pp. 192-197) states that Capac Yupanqui conquered the country north
of Cuzco as far as Cajamarca and that, on the orders of his brother, Pachacuti, he was killed
because he carried his conquests too far. After this, Tupac Yupanqui, still a crown prince,
resumed these conquests in the north (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 44, pp. 208-210). He had two
brothers accompanying him as a general, whom Pachacuti had killed on their return for the same
reason as Capac Yupanqui (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 46, pp. 217-218). We are thus constrained to
ask ourselves whether the campaign of Capac Yupanqui and that of Tupac Yupanqui were not
one and the same.
According to Cieza (1943, cap. X L IX , p. 233), the general who made the northern conquests
for Pachacuti was Lloque Yupanqui, who had with him as advisor a “ Copa Yupanqui” . Jimenez
de la Espada reads into this last name “ Tupac Yupanqui” . It would be more justifiable to read
“ Capac Yupanqui” . Later, as ruler, Tupac Yupanqui took with him on a campaign as general
of all his troops and as principal advisor “ Capac Yupanqui, his uncle, but not the one who
made war against the people of Jauja (this is the first northern campaign of Pachacuti’s reign)
because this man, it is said, hanged himself out of pure pique” . This quotation from Cieza
conveys the impression that the name Capac Yupanqui was linked to a certain place in the
social system. The name Capac Yupanqui could have been borne by several individuals. Ac
cording to Garcilaso (1945, Tomo II, libro VI, cap. X X I X ) Capac Yupanqui also made great
conquests in the northern part of the empire together with the successor to the throne and was
not killed for being overly energetic.
45) I shall be able to show later that in the organization of the Chanca, too, the relationship
of Uscovilca to Ancovilca was that of the ruler to his general and substitute (see VI § 6 c
pp. 186-188.
that he prescribed this form of marriage to all his successors. There are two
schools of opinion about the actual practice of this marriage form. According
to most chroniclers, Manco Capac’s successors, for political reasons (Cieza de
Leon, 1943, cap. X, p. 72, 73; cap. X X X I, p. 173), did not follow his edict
and married women from outside Cuzco. According to Poma de Ayala and
Murua, on the other hand, all the rulers married their sisters. Poma and Murua
also record wholly different names46) for the Coya, the queens, in addition
to those given to them by the first group of authors. In one case, that of Sinchi
Roca, Murua (1613, cap. 3) records that the ruler had not just one wife with
two different names, but that he had first married a non-Inca woman, Mama
Coca, and subsequently, at his accession to the throne, had married his sister,
Chimpu Coya, whose primary son, Lloque Yupanqui, became his successor.
According to the other chroniclers, on the other hand, Mama Coca was Sinchi
Roca’s primary wife and Lloque Yupanqui her son. It seems more likely to me
therefore that the two names recorded by Poma and Murua for every Coya, in
fact refer to the ruler's two wives, the first his sister, the primary wife, and
the second his subsidiary wife.
The marriages entered by the rulers with non-Inca women fit in completely
in the second representation of the organization of Cuzco. The reason why the
other writers mention these marriages in particular might be that by doing so
they could give an integrated picture of the second representation of the organi
zation of Cuzco and its surroundings. The divergent names recorded by Poma
and Murua, on the other hand, point to yet another representation of the
organization of Cuzco47).
According to all the chroniclers, with the exception of Poma, Murua and
Garcilaso, Tupac Yupanqui was the first ruler after Manco Capac to marry
his own sister. She had been given to him by his father at his accession to the
throne (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 43, p. 208). Tupac Yupanqui’s successors hence
forth followed his example (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 60, p. 241; Cabello Valboa
1951, cap. 20, p. 360, cap. 23, p. 399). In this manner they could always,
within the organization of Cuzco, continue to belong to Capac ayllu. Thus they
also distinguished themselves as the only real rulers from the previous rulers
who had married not only women from outside Cuzco, but whose marriages
also fitted in the framework of the suyu as marriage classes. Due to these cir
cumstances, the real position of the previous rulers as the chiefs of particular
social groups within the organization of Cuzco also came to light.
Only the ruler Capac Yupanqui’s marriage hints of endogamy. Of the mar-
46) Garcilaso agrees with Poma and Murua on the sister marriage of all rulers, but gives the
queens the names which were reported by the other authors.
47) See IX § 1 pp. 236-240.
riages of all the other rulers, with the exception of Tupac Yupanqui, the
origins of their wives from outside Cuzco is recorded in detail. Sarmiento (1947,
cap. 18, p. 143) and Cobo (1956, tomo II, libro 12, cap. V ili, p. 72), on the
other hand, assert that Capac Yupanqui’s father-in-law was a noble who came
from Cuzco and had been a very important man among the earlier Inca. This
marriage between Capac Yupanqui and a woman from within Cuzco was of an
endogamous nature, in contrast to the other dynastic marriages which were
entered with women from outside Cuzco 48).
These endogamous marriages of Tupac Yupanqui and, probably, of Capac
Yupanqui are completely in accordance with the nature of I in the second re
presentation, for this marriage class, to which the two rulers belonged, must
be expected to have had an endogamous nature. To illustrate the second repre-~)
sentation my point of departure was the conclusion that the functions of Collana
(Hanan-Cuzco, i.e. I 1, II 1, III 1, IV 1) and of Payan (Hurin-Cuzco, i.e. I 2,
II 2, III 2, IV 2) in the second representation were the same as those of Col
lana (Hanan-Cuzco, i.e. Chinchaysuyu) and of Payan (Hurin-Cuzco, i.e. Col-
lasuyu) in the first representation, and that the suyu in the second represen
tation fulfilled the same function as the four marriage classes in Chinchaysuyu
and in Collasuyu in the first representation49). In the first representation, the
marriage class I 1 b in Chinchaysuyu, and the marriage class II 1 b in Collasuyu,
were referred to as Collana. Both Collana marriage classes were the only endo-.
gamous ones in I and I I 50). The endogamous function of these marriage
classes was taken over in the second representation by I, as the Collana marriage
class. Tupac Yupanqui’s and probably Capac Yupanqui’s marriage corroborate
this characterisation of I as endogamous. ^
§ 5. a) The next rulers I propose to discuss are Pachacuti and Mayta

Capac. I linked them, like Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui, to I 1 and
I 2. As regards Mayta Capac, this link was based on the great similarity of the
material on him to that on Pachacuti. If this similarity can be demonstrated to
be true, this would imply that material on either of the two rulers can be used
to explain material on the other.
The first reason for linking Pachacuti to I 1, is his character. I assumed that
the three representations of the organization of Cuzco were viewed by the Inca
from the point of view of the most highly placed individual in it, i.e. the ruler.
48) I would like to point out that Sarmiento (1947, cap. 18, p. 143) also reports another
tradition according to which the wife of Capac Yupanqui is supposed to have been a daughter
of the chief of the Ayarmaca.
49) See V § 1 d pp. 120-121.
50) See IV § 2 e, f pp. 88-90.
Thus, the first representation was described from the point of view of Manco
Capac, the founder of the ruler’s dynasty. A repetition of this description was
encountered in connection with the re-organization of Cuzco by Pachacuti at
the conclusion of the war against the Chanca. The description of the organiza
tion of Cuzco by Gutierrez must also be connected with Pachacuti 51). In the
last two descriptions Pachacuti was the most highly placed individual. There
was nevertheless no reason why, in connection with the first representation, the
organization of Cuzco should be explained from Pachacuti’s point of view and
not that of any other ruler of the dynasty of Inca rulers. The explanation from
this point of view is justified, however, in the case of the second representation
if it can be shown that the first, second, third and fourth rulers of Hanan-
Cuzco as well as of Hurin-Cuzco, belonged to the suyu IV, III, II and I in
their functions as marriage classes; this would imply that Pachacuti and Mayta
Capac belonged to I (Chinchaysuyu).
As has been shown above, the fifth ruler of Hanan-Cuzco as well as of Hurin-
Cuzco was classed as I 52). It is understandable, therefore, that there was some
hesitation among the chroniclers, as for instance Gutierrez 53), as to the question
whether the re-organization of Cuzco should be ascribed to Tupac Yupanqui,
the fifth ruler of Hanan-Cuzco, or to Pachacuti, the fourth ruler. In the context
of the second representation, it also becomes intelligible why according to Ca-
bello Valboa (1951, cap. 18, p. 339) Pachacuti was only an epithet for Tupac
Yupanqui.
b) One piece of evidence confirming Pachacuti’s place in I in the second
representation is his marriage. I deduced logically that the following asymmetric
form of connubium existed between the four suyu as matrilineal marriage
classes. I marries a woman from IV; IV one from III; III one from II; and
II one from I 54). It can also be deduced logically that the non-Inca wives of
the Hanan-Cuzco rulers (I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV 1, i.e. Collana) and of the
Hurin-Cuzco rulers (I 2 + II 2 -b III 2 + IV 2, i.e. Payan) must have come
from Cayao (I 3 + II 3 + III 3 + IV 3) 55). As will be shown later, Pacha
cuti married a woman from IV 3. Since all the available data on the rulers’
marriages are in agreement with this representation, it follows from the fact
that Pachacuti’s wife belonged to IV 3, that he himself, as the ruler of Hanan-
Cuzco, was classed as I 1.
Pachacuti’s wife was called Mama Anahuarque (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 34,
51) See V § 2 b p. 124.

52) See V § 4 a pp. 129, 130.
53) See V § 2 b p. 124.
51) See V § 1 d p. 121.
55) See V § 1 d pp. 121-122.
IV I (Collana)
I 1
IV 1 ir ii \
(Collana) (Colkna)
I 3
(Cayao)
III 1
(Collana)
II (Cayao) III (Payan)
Diagram of the marriage relationships of the rulers in the second representation of the
p. 183). The name Anahuarque indicates that she belonged to the group which
was also referred to in the organization of Cuzco with the name Anahuarque.
Before demonstrating this, I shall first attempt to prove that in the second re
representation the Anahuarque group was linked to the IV 3 group of ceque.
In the first representation Anahuarque was the name for IV 56). The suyu
were connected with the hierarchic groups in the following manner: Chinchay-
suyu, as Collana, with the ruler and his primary kin, Collasuyu, as Payan, with
the subsidiary kin of the ruler, and Antisuyu and Cuntisuyu as Cayao, with the
56) See IV § 2 a p. 78.

non-related population. Within every hierarchic group there was a quadripar-

tition into four marriage classes linked by the asymmetric connubium. I was
also able to compare these quadripartitions with the quadripartition consisting
of the four suyu. Therefore, still in this first presentation, the suyu can be
regarded as marriage classes as well as hierarchic groups.
In the second representation the suyu took over the function of the marriage
classes within the hierarchic groups of the first presentation. The hierarchic
groups in the second representation were Collana, I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV 1;
Payan, I 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2, and Cayao, I 3 + II 3 + III 3 + IV 3.
It is therefore to be expected that in the second representation the names
Ayarmaca and Anahuarque, which in the first representation were applied to
Antisuyu and Cuntisuyu, that is to say, both to Cayao, were aplied to Cayao as a
whole: I 3 + II 3 + III 3 + IV 3. This is not the case, however.
In the second representation, too, the suyu had a double function. In addition
to their function as marriage classes, Chinchaysuyu (I) and Antisuyu (III), as
Collana and Payan, and together as the upper moiety, constituted the population
of Cuzco, while Collasuyu (II) and Cuntisuyu (IV ) as Cayao, and together as
the lower moiety, constituted the non-Inca population. This had the following
effect on the group of I 3 + II 3 + III 3 + IV 3. The villages around Cuzco
which, either as the result of their subjection to the Inca or of an alliance with
Cuzco were recognised as ’nominal Inca’, were classed as I 3 and III 3. The
names Ayarmaca and Anahuarque were reserved for the groups II 3 and IV 3.
In the ceque system the Payan ceque of the group IV 3 was called Anahuarque.
It seems most likely therefore that in the second representation the name Ana
huarque was used to refer to IV 3 and Ayarmaca to II 3.
I hope to demonstrate now that Mama Anahuarque, Pachacuti’s wife, be
longed to the Anahuarque group, i.e. IV 3. In this argument I shall have to
make use of data on Mayta Capac’s wife. In doing this I anticipate the proof
that this ruler belonged to I 2 and, like Pachacuti, chose his wife from IV 3.
Pachacuti’s and Mayta Capac’s wives derived their names from those of
mountains near Cuzco. They differ in this respect from all the other queens.
Mama Anahuarque came from the village of Choco (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 34,
p. 183) 57), at the foot of the mountain Anahuarque. This mountain is called
the seventh huaca of the Anahuarque ceque, and Molina mentions it specially
as being the huaca, the holy place, of the village of Choco. Mayta Capac’s wife
was called Mama Taucaray and came from the village of Taucaray58). Even
now a mountain Taucaray is still known; it lies beside the Anahuarque. In the
57) In the Relation de los ceques the village of Choco occurs in the 5th and 6th ceque of
Cuntisuyu (see diagram Chapter I § 1 p. 2 for the numbering of the ceque in the Relation).
58) The name Taucaray is corrupted in various ways by the chroniclers. Sarmiento (1947,
ceque system a huaca Tancaray (n copied instead of u) occurred on the ceque

II 2 c and a mountain Tocacaray ( = Tacucaray = Taucaray?) as the fifth huaca
of the ceque II 2 b.
The resemblance of the names of these two queens, — whose husbands, as
will appear, were both classed as I — , with those of two adjoining mountains
is, in my opinion, an indication not only of the great similarity of their husbands'
marriages, but also of the fact that these names were not primarily the proper
names of these queens, but generic names of the groups to which they be
lon ged59). Mama Anahuarque clearly belonged to the Anahuarque group
(IV 3), which probably derived its name from the mountain Anahuarque.
Mama Taucaray also belonged to the Anahuarque group (IV 3). In the
first representation Anahuarque was used to refer to Pinahua Capac’s people,
the Pinahua 60). According to Astete Chocano (p. 31-35) 61) one of the ayllu
of the Pinahua was Taucaray ayllu. Here again Taucaray was connected with the
Pinahua, and thus with Anahuarque.
c) Other data, in addition to those on their marriages, point to the great simi
larity between Pachacuti and Mayta Capac. Even Mayta Capac’s deeds hint at an
imitation of those of Pachacuti. This further material not only confirms Pacha-
cuti’s and Mayta Capac’s positions in I 1 and I 2, but also points to their mutual
relationship as Collana (I 1) to Payan ( 12) .
The following story is recorded about Mayta Capac in the chronicles (Sar-
miento 1947, cap. 17, p. 139-141). He was born when his father Lloque
Yupanqui was very old, but he grew up very fast and after two years fought
with big boys. At that time there lived other people in Cuzco as well, who had
not yet been subjected by the Inca. Once, when Mayta Capac was playing with
a boy from among these people, he killed the son of the chief of the Allca-
biza. Thus there arose a fight between the Inca, under Mayta Capac,
and the other people, much against the will of Lloque Yupanqui, the king of
the Inca. He wished to make peace because he was afraid that the Inca would be
defeated. In connection with this war the soothsayers, according to Betanzos
cap. 17, p. 141) speaks of Mama Tacucaray from the village of Tacucaray; Cabello Valboa
(1951, cap. 12, p. 286) of Mama Coca Taucaraz from the village of Taucaraz. In another name
too — that of Mama Micay, the wife of Inca Roca — Cabello Valboa (1951, cap. 13, p. 293)
makes the final letter a z instead of a y. Since all the other chroniclers have a final y for both
words, we may assume that Cabello Valboa was in error and that we should speak of Taucaray
and Micay where he puts Taucaraz and Micaz. Lastly, Cobo (1956, Tomo II, libro 12, cap.
VII, p. 70) mentions Mama Tancaray Yacchi and calls her the daughter of the cacique of the
province of Collaguas.
59) i wiH return later in this chapter to the reason why names of mountains were used for
these queens (see § 10 c p. 160, § 11 p. 163, § 13 b p. 168).
CO) See IV § 2 a p. 78.
c i) See IV note 16.
(1880, cap. V, p. 17) foretold that the Allcabiza would be driven from Cuzco
and that the Inca would come to power, 'as history will show’. Betanzos devoted
the remainder of his chronicle to this acquisition of power. Although it was
Mayta Capac’s feats by which this power was achieved, Betanzos connects it with
events centred around Pachacuti.
Like Pachacuti, Mayta Capac is represented in this context as the youthful,
reckless crown-prince whose conquest forms the foundation of the later Inca
conquests. Just like Viracocha Inca, Lloque Yupanqui is the old, senile ruler who
prefers making peace with the enemy to attempting to defeat him. Just as I was
able to demonstrate a connection between Viracocha’s family and the priestly
class62), Acosta (1954, libro V, cap. X X II, p. 166) mentions with relation
to Lloque Yupanqui that the priests belonged to his lineage.
Perhaps we can find another correspondence between Mayta Capac and Pa
chacuti by considering the etymology of their names. On page 88 I referred to
the word Mayta as an indication of place. The same can be said of the word
Pacha in the name Pachacuti. Like Mayta, Pacha is a locative. It is translated as
"world” , "earth” . The usual translations of Pachacuti’s name stress the "trans
former of the world” aspect of his name. Perhaps this translation overlooks the
locative meaning of Pacha, which would parallel Pachacuti’s name to that of
Mayta Capac.
The most striking resemblance can be detected, however, between the name
of Uscovilca, the commander of the Chanca who fought against Pachacuti, and
that of Allcabiza.
The Allcabiza are mentioned not only as Mayta Capac’s enemies, but also as
Manco Capac’s. At that time Allcabiza was not only the name of a people (Sar-
miento 1947, cap. 14, p. 131, 132) but also that of the commander of the
pre-Inca people who defended Cuzco against the conquering Inca under Manco
Capac (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 9, p. 113). Cabello Valboa (1951, cap. 12, p. 284)
gives Allcavillca 63) for Allcabiza; this version of the name is probably more
accurate and to us more intelligible. For Allcavillca means the black and white
villca, and is therefore a synonym of Teclovilca (Ticllavillca) 64), the name of
one of Uscovilca’s captains65). Just as Pachacuti fought against Uscovilca,
the white villca, Mayta Capac fought against te Allcavillca, the black and
white villca.
62) See IV note 83.

63) According to Poma (1944, foja 183) and Pachacuti Yamqui (1959, p. 225 note) the form
biza of the word villca, like the last word (Bias Valera 1950, p. 155), means ‘priest’.
64) Under the heading Allca Holguin (1608) also considered the words Allca and Ticlla
as synonyms.
65) See IV § 5 b pp. 104, 105.
As has been remarked above66) Usco, or Anco, Ticlla, or Allca, and Yana
on the one hand, and Capac, Hatun, Huchuy on the other, were series of names
synonymous with Collana, Payan, Cayao. By connecting them with their enemies’
grades, it is possible to see the relationship of Pachacuti to Mayta Capac as that
between Collana and Payan. The implication of this relationship is that Pacha-
cuti’s position was I 1, and Mayta Capac’s I 2.
§ 6. The material on Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui cited above 67)
enabled me to compare these rulers to the chiefs of the Chanca. On the basis of
this comparison, I argued the similarity between the organization of Cuzco and
that of the Chanca. But only the second representation of the organization of
Cuzco shows this similarity. I therefore drew the conclusion that Tupac Yupan
qui and Capac Yupanqui in this representation were linked to the groups I 1
and I 2. By his marriage with his sister Tupac Yupanqui emphasized the
endogamous nature of Chinchaysuyu, because all the other Inca rulers, with the
exception of Capac Yupanqui 68), married women from outside Cuzco. There
was a hint of endogamy in the marriage of the latter in that he married a
woman from Cuzco and not from outside.
Pachacuti and Mayta Capac, I also considered, should be placed in I 1 and
I 2. The function of Chinchaysuyu as a marriage class followed from the two
rulers’ marriages. Their wives belonged to group IV 3. Like Tupac Yupanqui
and Capac Yupanqui, Pachacuti and Mayta Capac showed characteristics of
chiefs, or rulers, of the whole of Cuzco.
If it is assumed that Pachacuti and Mayta Capac belonged to I in its function
as ego’s marriage class, I should now demonstrate that Viracocha Inca and
Lloque Yupanqui, in their capacities of chiefs, belonged to II (Colilasuyu) in
the father’s marriage class, Yahuar Huacac and Tarco Huaman to III (Antisuyu)
in the grandfather’s marriage class, and Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca to IV
(Cuntisuyu) in the great-grandfather’s marriage class. If we have argued cor
rectly thus far, it should be possible to place these former rulers of Hanan-
Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco in this representation by similar methods, on account
of their respective kinship relationships to Pachacuti and Mayta Capac. There
is some further material which enables us to do so.
Viracocha Inca and Lloque Yupanqui were included in one priests’ organi
zation. These rulers and their organization can therefore in this representation
be classed as II (Collasuyu), as the suyu with a Cayao nature. Yahuar Huacac
had a Payan character in relation to his son and grandson, on account of his
66) See V § 1 c p. 119.
67) See V § 4 a pp. 129-130.
68) Manco Capac is omitted in this representation because Sinchi Roca was the first ruler of
Hurin-Cuzco (See V § 2 c pp. 126-128).

link with the land of Cuzco. This made it possible to class him in III (Anti-
suyu). Finally, Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca were presented not only as the great-
grandparents of Pachacuti and Mayta Capac, with whom, in a system of three
marriage classes 69), they belonged to Collana, but also as the ancestors of the
Inca. As was shown above, the characteristics of the great-grandfather of ego
and those of the fore-father of the Inca fused together70). Below, I propose
to cite material which proves the placing of the rulers in the suyu in accordance
with the second representation as mentioned above.
In order to give a logical sequence to the material, I shall begin with the
rulers Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca.
§ 7. a) Acosta and Polo de Ondegardo regarded Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca
as the first rulers of the contemporaneous dynasties Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-
Cuzco. The similarity in their names also gives cause for mentioning them
together. The words Inca and Sinchi, which constitute the only difference
between their names, must also be seen in relation to each other. Sinchi, accord
ing to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 11, p. I l l ) , means brave, and is used in the
meaning of army commander in time of war. The word Inca points to Inca
Roca’s royal nature.
In anticipation of the proof that Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca belonged to IV 1
and IV 2, a similar relationship can be assumed to have existed between these
two rulers as that between Tupac Yupanqui, the ruler in I 1, and Capac Yupan-
qui, his general and deputy and chief of Hurin-Cuzco in I 2.
I regarded the rulers as the chiefs and representatives of the groups to which
they belonged. If the relationship of Inca Roca to Sinchi Roca, and that of
Tupac Yupanqui to Capac Yupanqui can be called characteristic not only of the
relationship of all the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco to all the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco,
but also of the relationship of the whole Collana group (I 1 + II 1 + III 1 +
IV 1) to the Payan group (1 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2), then the relationship
of Collana to Payan in the second representation is most strikingly similar to
that of Collana to Payan in the first representation. In the first representation,
the ruler and his primary kin belonged to Collana (Chinchaysuyu), and his
subsidiary kin to Payan (Collasuyu). In the defence and re-organization of
Cuzco by Pachacuti these subsidiary kin were his assistants who in times of
war were his captains and afterwards his envoys and deputies to the government
of the provinces subject to Cuzco 71).
69) The system which I had to take as point of departure in my description of the organization
of Cuzco (See IV § 1 pp. 68-77).
70) See IV § 1 c pp. 71-75, § 3 c pp. 98-101.
71) See IV § 2 a pp. 78-79.
The above gives prominence not only to the conclusions reached by other
methods 72) that the relationship of Collana (I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV 1)
to Payan (I 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2) in the second representation corresponds
to that of Collana (I) to Payan (II) in the first representation, but also to
Gutierrez’s remark 73) that the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco were in fact Pachacuti’s
primary kin and the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco his subsidiary kin.
b) I shall now examine the material which points to the ancestral character of
Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca, which justifies their position in IV. Origin myths
have been recorded relating to both these rulers. In the history of the Inca
the nature of these particular myths as origin myths was not very clear because
they were distorted as pseudo-historical stories. Arguedas (1956, p. 202-204)
recorded an origin myth (in which the myths about Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca
were the two most important elements) in Puquio, the village the organization
of which we touched on before 74). I shall first elucidate some religious con
cepts which occur in Puquio, side by side with Roman Catholicism, and then
tell the myth from this village.
The principal god in Puquio is Inkarri 75). He is not the object of any cult.
Daily worship is given to the Wamani. They are the mountains: the Lords
Wamani (Arguedas 1956, p. 197). Water is a present from the Wamani.
This water which comes from the mountains is not referred to by the ordinary
word for water, yaku, but by a word which has religious significance, aguay
unu. Aguay unu is the blood which flows from the veins of the Wamani.
The people receive the water from the Wamani, for rain comes from God
(Arguedas 1956, p. 200-201).
The myth in question is the myth about the heroes, the Wachoq, and it
relates directly to the Wamani and the Aguay Unu.
This myth relates that the Wachoq divided the land among the four ayllu
of Puquio. These Wachoq belonged to a yet older generation than the wild
people. Through the water veins they penetrated to the hearts of the Wamani
and discovered the source of the water. In order to penetrate to that depth they
had put on golden helmets. Their clothes were also made of gold and silver,
like the altars. They therefore glittered in the light of the moon and sun.
Only with the aid of these clothes could they penetrate to the core of the
mountains.
They assigned the moya (the land between the cold plateaux and the lower
72) See V § 1 d pp. 121-122.

73) See V § 2 b pp. 123-124.
74) See IV § 2 b pp. 83-84.
75) Inka-rri. Rri is the Spanish word “rey” for “ king” .
situated cultivable land) to Collana and Chaupi ayllu, and the good, warm
land to Piscachuri ayllu and Cayao ayllu.
So far, in brief, this myth. The name Wachoq in the Quechua of Cuzco
means “ sinful” . In the word as used in Puquio there may be concealed an
agreement in meaning with villca76). The word Unu (agua is the Spanish
word for water) also occurs in the word for the Flood: huno pachacuti (Sar-
miento 1947, cap. 6, p. 103). A variant of the first part of the myth about
the finding of the water connects it with Inca Roca.
Once, according to Cieza (1943, cap. X X X V , p. 183-188) this Inca ruler
suffered a great pain because his ears had just been pierced in order to put ear
discs into them 77). To find relief from his pain he went to the mountain
Chaca outside Cuzco. When he had arrived he prayed to the gods for water
for irrigation, of which there was a great lack. Suddenly he heard a loud rum
bling. The Inca in his fear bowed forward and his left ear touched the ground.
Much blood flowed from it. He also heard water flow. He called the Indians
to come and open a way for the water. This was the origin of the river Huatanay
which flows through Cuzco. In a variant of this myth, in Cobo (1956, Tomo
II, libro 13, cap. X X V III, p. 216), Inca Roca stuck his arm into a hollow
and thus produced the water.
The resemblance of this myth about Inca Roca with that about the Wachoq
in Puquio is most striking. In both myths there is question of a mountain from
which water flows. In Puquio the Aguay Unu was called the blood flowing
from the veins of the Wamani, the mountains. Although in the myth about
Inca Roca the connection between his blood and the water vein is not clear,
it is nevertheless there. Another myth relates 78) that the water discovered
might be used for the irrigation of Hanan-Cuzco only. I shall return to this
aspect of the myth later. Even in this variant the similarity with the myth from
Puquio is clear, for the Wachoq gave the higher land to Collana and Payan
ayllu and the lower land to Piscachuri and Cayao ayllu. The irrigation water
was intended in the first place for the higher lands on the mountain sides.
The second part of the myth from Puquio, in which there is question of
golden clothes, is recorded for the Inca by Montesinos (1957, cap. XVI-XVII,
p. 64-70). He connects this myth with Inca Roca but interchanges him with
Sinchi Roca. According to Montesinos Sinchi Roca came after Capac Yupanqui,
and Inca Roca and not Manco Capac was the first ruler of the Inca dynasty.
However, he once gives Inca Roca the title of Manco, so he probably united
the two rulers in one person.
76) See IV § 1 c p. 73.

77) This was an initiation rite for the Inca aristocracy.
7«) See V § 7 d p. 147.
According to Montesinos, many previous dynasties had held power before

the Inca rulers. Under the reigns of the last of these, things had gone so badly
in Peru that a woman, Mama Ciuaco, Inca Roca’s mother, tried to make some
changes. For this purpose she hid her son in a cave above the town. To the
people of Cuzco she said that Inca Roca was the son of the sun. To convince
the people of this she had him emerge from the cave, hung with golden plates
which reflected the rays of the sun. Convinced of the truth of what Mama
Ciuaco had told them, Inca Roca was accepted as the king 79).
Montesinos gives a different aspect to this myth than it had in Puquio. He
turned it into a seemingly historical explanation of the arrival of the Inca.
He nevertheless preserves the three salient elements of the myth: the donning
of the golden garments, the sun’s reflection on them and the change in society
brought about by the wearer of the golden garments.
Markham (1911, chap. V, p. 58-67) in his interpretation of the myth as
recorded by Montesinos, maintains the name Inca Roca but places him in the
history of the Inca after Capac Yupanqui. This procedure enables him to give
an explanation of the change-over in the history of the Inca from the Hurin-
Cuzco royal dynasty to that of Hanan-Cuzco. Montesinos neither gave, nor
implied this interpretation.
There are other reasons, however, why it makes sense to connect the myth
of the golden garment with Inca Roca’s person if, at any rate, he and Sinchi
Roca are regarded as being contemporary and as the men with both of whom,
as the ancestors of the Inca, the origin myth is connected. This can perhaps
be clarified by another version of the myth of the golden garment, recorded by
Ramos Gavilan (cited from Means 1931, p. 215; Ramos Gavilan 1621, p. 5-9).
A chief from the neighbourhood of Cuzco had two sons. The elder looked
physically like the other Indians, but the younger one was fair and had a light
79) In rendering this myth, Markham (1911, Chap. V, p. 58) attempts to read into the name
Ciuaco a word Sivi yacu, which according to him means “the ever widening circle” . This is a
romantic interpretation. It seems to me more likely that with Mama Ciuaco, Mama Huaco is
meant. She was one of the four sisters of Manco Capac and in the myth concerning him and his
brothers and sisters she played the largest part in the capture of Cuzco from the pre-Inca inha
bitants (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 13, p. 129-131). According to Poma (1944, foja 80), Manco
Capac was married to his mother Mama Huaco. The fact that Montesinos puts Inca Roca, as
the first Inca ruler, in relation with Mama Ciuaco, or Mama Huaco, is once again evidence that
Inca Roca — or Sinchi Roca according to other authors — also bore the traits of character of
Manco Capac. Acosta and Polo put Sinchi Roca in the place of Manco Capac (see V § 2 c pp. 126-
128). Poma de Ayala calls Mama Huaco a sorceress who slept with every man and who was in
addition married to her own son. Possibly he had the word Wachoq ( = adulterous one) — the
name of the ancestors in Puquio who discovered water — in mind. Her identification with
Manco Capac in his role of founder and ancestor of the Inca dynasty — in the myth recorded
by Montesinos it was the role of Inca Roca — may have led him to adopt this characteristic
of the Wachoq.
skin. Amazed at his younger son’s appearance, the father consulted a great
magician and accepted his advice. When the father died, the elder son succeeded
him while the younger one was brought up in great secrecy. The magician
taught him to believe that he was the son of the sun and married him to his
own daughter. When the boy was twenty years of age, the magician hung
him with golden plates and showed him to the people from a hill above Tambo.
The people then made him their king, as being the son of the sun.
Ramos Gavilan connects the motif of the golden garment with the myth
of the two brothers. In other versions of this myth of the two brothers, who
appeared on earth after the Flood, these two brothers are the chiefs of two
moieties, the youngest of the upper moiety and the eldest of the lower moiety.
If we are justified in identifying Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca with the two
brothers of Ramos Gavilan’s myth, then Inca Roca would be the younger and
most powerful brother, who was hung with the golden plates and was the
chief of the upper moiety, and Sinchi Roca the chief of the lower moiety.
From the version of the myth as recorded by Ramos Gavilan, it could be
concluded that the motif of the golden garment explained the origin of the
existing order and of the moiety partition, in which the fore-father of the
upper moiety wore the garment80). The myth of the finding of the water
had the same significance to the moiety partition. These two myths can ob
viously be treated as part of one myth as it was told in Puquio, where it was
also an origin myth and explained a moiety partition.
The fact that this origin myth occurred in Cuzco in connection with Inca
Roca and Sinchi Roca enables us to place them in the second representation of
the organization of Cuzco in marriage class IV (Cuntisuyu). The moiety par
tition referred to in the myth is reflected in the placing of Inca Roca in IV 1
and of Sinchi Roca in IV 2 81).
This placing of the two rulers in IV is supported by the motif of the moun
80) The myth as told to Montesinos probably had this structural significance, but he failed
to understand it and explained the myth historically as an explanation of the origin of the
Inca dynasty. This would make understandable his shifting of Inca Roca to the beginning of the
Inca dynasty.
81) Now that we have distinguished the character of Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca as primordial
figures and have seen, by means of the myth of the Wachoq in Puquio, what the traits of this
character were, I wish to return once again to the name Wachoq and its meaning of “lascivious
ness” . As we have noted, Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca filled the same position in Cuzco as the
Wachoq in Puquio. Now, Pachacuti Yamqui (1959, p. 223) says of Sinchi Roca that this ruler
became very lascivious. In the very obscure passage in which this trait of the ruler is stated,
Pachacuti Yamqui (1959, p. 222-223) links this datum to a report about the huaca — i.e. the
dead ancestors and the sanctuaries in which they were worshipped — which in that time still
occurred on earth. I shall not here enter into the meaning of the entire passage, but point only
to the fact that the trait of being ‘lascivious’ is also shared by Sinchi Roca and the Wachoq.
tain in both myths, that of the finding of the water and that of the golden
garment. This motif was also mentioned with reference to Mama Anahuarque
and Mama Taucaray, Pachacuti’s and Mayta Capac’s wives, in relation to the
group of ceque IV 3. It can therefore be asserted that the motif of the mountain
had a particular significance to Cuntisuyu. I shall return later to the significance
of this 82).
c) The material on Inca Roca’s and Sinchi Roca’s marriages still remains to
be discussed. This material, with regard to both rulers, points to a moiety
contrast, which has so far not been mentioned, of I + III, the upper moiety,
to II + IV, the lower moiety. The material on Sinchi Roca’s marriage can be
most readily explained. I shall therefore start by discussing him.
Virtually all the authors (e.g. Sarmiento 1947, cap. 13, p. 129; cap. 15,
p. 136) agree that Sinchi Roca married Mama Coca, the daughter of Sutic-
guaman, the chief of the village of Sanu 83), when Manco Capac, Sinchi Roca’s
father, was on his way to Cuzco. Cieza de Leon (1943, cap. X X X II, p. 175-
176) gives us the principal data on this marriage, although he is the only author
to ascribe the marriage to Lloque Yupanqui, Sinchi Roca’s son, and not to the
latter, whom he records, was married to his own sister. I have assumed that
Mama Coca married Sinchi Roca, but otherwise accept Cieza’s data.
When Sinchi Roca married Mama Coca, he asked his father-in-law to come
and live in Cuzco with all his followers. The higher part of the town, Hanan-
Cuzco, was assigned to them while Sinchi Roca remained in the lower part,
Hurin-Cuzco. And, Cieza adds, “some Indians even asserted that one Inca ruler
had to belong to the one lineage (i.e. moiety) and the other (the next one)
to the other; but I do not believe this and the aristocracy does not usually
give this account” .
When we examine this remark by Cieza, we are first struck by the moiety
relationship of the ruler — who belonged to Hurin-Cuzco — to Sanu — which
belonged to Hanan-Cuzco — . Cieza equates this moiety relationship with
another one, the existence of which is indicated by the remark that the rulers
belonged to either moiety in turns 84). In the case of patrilineal succession of
the rulers, these moieties would have to be matrilineal. But in the second re
presentation we observed a moiety contrast of I + III, as the upper moiety,
to II + IV as the lower moiety. Cieza’s remark acquires meaning only in
connection with this moiety partition.
Sanu, whose inhabitants did not belong to the Inca by descent, but who had
82) See V § 10 c p. 160, § 11 p. 163, § 13 b p. 168.

83) This is the present village of San Sebastian, situated 5 km from Cuzco.
84) This datum of Cieza’s thus does not fit into a representation of Inca history in which a
dynasty of five rulers of Hurin-Cuzco was succeeded by a dynasty of rulers of Hanan-Cuzco.
been invited by Sinchi Roca to come and live in Cuzco, must in this presentation
be classed as Cayao (I 3 + II 3 + III 3 + IV 3). Sinchi Roca, as the sub
sidiary kin of the ruler in I 1, belonged to Cuzco proper, which consisted of
Collana (I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV 1) and Payan (I 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2).
Sanu, however, also belonged to the upper moiety (I + III) if Cieza’s remark
may be read in this light, and Sinchi Roca to the lower moiety (II + IV)
and to IV in particular. As regards the village of Sanu, the position III 3 and
I 3 in this representation remain unfilled. By a different method I concluded 85)
that there existed a marriage relationship in this representation between the
men of the marriage class IV and the women of the marriage class I I I 86).
Therefore we may accept that Sanu belonged to III 3.
In connection with the remark about the village of Sanu, I would like to
draw attention to one peculiarity in Inca thought about their own social organi
zation. Sanu was a village with an autonomous organization in which it was cer
tainly possible for the inhabitants to marry endogamously. In the relationship of
this village to the Inca — in this case represented by the marriage of the Inca
ruler with a daughter of the Sanu chief — this village was presented as a matri-
lineal lineage within the organization of Cuzco. Because the village was linked to
the III 3 group of ceque, it acquired a special status in this organization. The
position III 3 showed three aspects of this status. Because III 3 belonged to
the upper moiety (I = Collana 4- III = Payan) it had become an Inca village
because the non-Inca population was classed in the lower moiety (II + IV =
Cayao). On account of its position in III (Payan) the village had an element
of connectedness with the land of Cuzco 87). The very position in the group
of ceque, namely Cayao ( 3), indicated that the inhabitants were neither primary
nor subsidiary descendants of any Inca ruler. It can be assumed, therefore, that
this village acquired its particular position in the social organization of Cuzco
not on account of its marriage relationship to Sinchi Roca, but, vice versa, that
a particular position and status was assigned to Sanu by the Inca in their social
organization and that marriage relationship was merely the symbolic and my
thical expression of this position. Sanu could also be regarded, as I argued
85) See V, § 1 d p. 121.

86) In the third representation Sanu is also mentioned (see VI § 3 b p. 175). There the place
in the organization of Cuzco was III 2 c; that is a place on a ceque Cayao. In the third representa
tion the role of the ceque Cayao was the same as that of the groups of three ceque Cayao in the
second representation (see VI § 1 pp. 171-172). This explains why the place of Sanu in the
ceque system according to Cobo and Molina (see I §§ 1, 2 pp. 1-7), where the place satisfied the
third representation, was a somewhat different one from that which I had to assign to Sanu
in the second representation (see also VII p. 208).
87) In the similar marriage relationship of Inca Roca, this Payan-character can be clearly
shown (see V § 7 d pp. 147-148).
more generally above, as the symbol and representative of all the villages around
Cuzco which were marked by the Inca as being nominal Inca 88).
d) Inca Roca’s relationship shows the same characteristics as that of Sinchi
Roca.
Inca Roca married Mama Micay, the daughter of the chief of the village
of Patahuayllacan (or Huayllacan) Soma Inca (Sarmiento, 1947, cap. 19, p.
144). Cobo adds a piece of information which is important for the determi
nation of Inca Roca’s and Mama Micay’s positions in this presentation. Mama
Micay herself, according to him (Cobo, 1956, Tomo II, libro 12, cap IX,
p. 72, 73), was a cacica (i.e. a female chief) of this village. When she saw
how dry the Cuzco valley was, she very meritoriously provided for its irrigation.
The care for the irrigation remained the responsibility of the ayllu descending
from her.
This piece of information reflects a completely different tradition about the
origin of the irrigation water from that in which Inca Roca discovered it, which
is the tradition which Cobo (1956, Tomo II, libro 13, cap. XX V III, p. 216)
also records elsewhere. The implication of both traditions is probably that the
people of the upper moiety, not taking into consideration which upper moiety,
had absolute rights to the irrigation water. This can be extrapolated from the
similar situation in the village of Copacabana, on Lake Titicaca. According to
Lizarraga (1946, cap. LXVIII, p. 121) only the Indians of Hanansaya used to
pray for water in the procession in honour of the image of Mary of Copacabana,
and not those of Hurinsaya because Hanansaya was more powerful. For this
reason only the Hanansaya fields received water 89) 90).
The explanation for the existence of two traditions relating to the origin
of the irrigation water in Cuzco is, in my opinion, that in both traditions there
is question of different moiety contrasts.
I first discussed the myth about the finding of the water by Inca Roca in order
to throw light on the fact that Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca symbolised origin.
In addition, there appeared to be question in this myth of a contrast of Hanan-
Cuzco to Hurin-Cuzco. In this presentation these two moieties consist of Collana
(I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV 1) and Payan (I 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2). In the
given situation in which endogamous marriage relationships could exist within
Hanan-Cuzco (Collana) and in Hurin-Cuzco (Payan), Inca Roca and Sinchi
88) See V § 1 d p. 122.

89) i n the preceding chapter (IV note 89) we saw how in Copacabana the Inca, who were
the conquerors and rulers of the region, belonged to Hanansaya, and the original Aymara popu
lation to Hurinsaya.
90) In Puquio the ayllu Collana and Payan on one hand, and the ayllu Piscachuri and Cayao
on the other hand, were distinguished likewise. See V § 7 b pp. 141-142.
Roca could be called rhe ancestors of Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco, because

their descendants could in fact belong to Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco.
In this representation there was also question of the exogamous and matri-
lineal moieties of I + III and of II + IV. The remark that Mama Micay’s
descendants had absolute rights to the irrigation water can be regarded as an
indication that in the moiety contrast of I + III to II + IV, only the upper
moiety had this right. Only in this contrast did Mama Micay and her descendants
belong to the upper moiety and Inca Roca to the lower moiety, and thus only
those who had rights to the irrigation water could have descended from her.
These must have been her matrilineal descendants, in this representation, while
the population of Huayllacan, the village of which she was said to be the
cacica, was with certainty also classed as her group.
The Payan character evident from the material on Mama Micay, that is to
say her strong links with the land of Cuzco, and the primordial nature of the
task of provision of the irrigation water for Cuzco, indicates that Huayllacan
should be placed in III (Payan) and that the village, the inhabitants of which
did not descend from the Inca ruler, should be classed as a group 3 (Cayao).
Huayllacan can in this manner be linked, like Sanu, to the III 3 group of
ceque 91).
91) It does not seem likely that in this representation according to the myth of the finding
of the irrigation water by Inca Roca only the primary kin of the ruler in I would actually have
had the right to this water, or that, according to both myths, of Inca Roca and of Mama Micay,
both the groups I 1 -)- II 1 -f- III 1 + IV 1 and I + III had this right, as a result of which
only II 2, IV 2, II 3 and IV 3 would have been excluded. I reported the myth of the finding
of the irrigation water by Inca Roca in the first place in order to indicate the primordial character
of this myth and of this ruler, and also to be able to set him, as first ruler of Hanan-Cuzco
( = Collana = I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV l ) in opposition to Sinchi Roca, the first ruler
of Hurin-Cuzco ( = Payan = I 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2). In the third representation of the
organization of Cuzco (Chapter V I) it can be seen even more clearly, however, that with the
relationship of Inca Roca to Sinchi Roca and of the primary to the subsidiary kin of the ruler
in I there was linked a division of Cuzco into Hanan-Cuzco ( = I + III) and Hurin-Cuzco
( = II -f- IV ) which applied to the entire population of the city and not only to the kin of the
ruler. In the third representation it was likewise possible for Inca Roca and Sinchi Roca to
function as ancestors of Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco because there too these moieties were
endogamous and the descendants of both rulers could continue to belong to their moieties. In
the myth of Inca Roca we must therefore see the element of moiety-partition rather in the light
of the relationship of Hanan-Cuzco ( = I + III) to Hurin-Cuzco ( = II — f- IV ) in the third
representation, while the element of moiety partition in connection with Mama Micay belongs
in this second representation.
The moieties in this last context were also I + III and II + IV but in their exogamous
function. An advantage of the assumption that the myth of Inca Roca belongs in the third
representation and that of Mama Micay in the second is that the moieties which are mentioned
in each of the two myths — in both cases I + III and II + IV — remain the same. They
differ only as to function, i.e. in the second representation they are exogamous and in the third
endogamous.
§ 8 . a) The rulers whose turn it is now to be discussed, are Yahuar Huacac,

Inca Roca’s son and successor, and Tarco Huaman, who in this representation
is Sinchi Roca’s successor 92). Since Tarco Huaman is mentioned only by Polo
and Acosta, and these two authors mention no more than the names of the
rulers of Hurin-Cuzco, I am not able to throw light on the position of this
ruler in this representation.
Logically, Yahuar Huacac’s and Tarco Huaman’s position in the second repre
sentation would be III 1 and III 2 93). Yahuar Huacac’s marriage relationship
clearly supports this assumption of his position in III 1. For he married Mama
Chiquia, the daughter of Tocay Capac, the chief of the Ayarmaca (Sarmiento
1947, cap. 22, p. 153, 154) 94). In this representation the position of the
Ayarmaca, as was demonstrated earlier, is II 3 95). Thus Yahuar Huacac’s
marriage emphasises the asymmetric connubium between the marriage classes
III and II, in which the men of III married women of II.
b) The circumstances leading to the marriage throw light not only on Yahuar
Huacac’s position and on that of the Ayarmaca in this representation, and on the
nature of their mutual relationship, but also on the marriage of Viracocha Inca,
who was Yahuar Huacac’s son. It is therefore necessary briefly to examine these
foregoing events (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 20-23, p. 146-156).
Inca Roca married Mama Micay who came from the village of Huayllacan.
This woman had, however, been promised to Tocay Capac, the king of the
Ayarmaca. The latter threatened to make war on Huayllacan (which village had
become politically subject to the Inca as a result of Mama Micay’s marriage),
unless Huayllacan would let him have Inca Roca’s son by Mama Micay, for her
son should have been Tocay Capac’s. Under the pretext of making Yahuar
Huacac the owner and heir of the lands of Huayllacan, this village was able to
capture him and hand him over to Tocay Capac. Yahuar Capac wept blood on
account of his imprisonment, hence his name: Yahuar means blood. Subse
quently, Inca Roca, through the assistance and wiles of a woman from the
village of Anta who was one of Tocay Capac’s subsidiary wives, got his son
back again. Inca Roca wished to reward the village of Anta. The inhabitants
asked to be called kinsfolk by the orejones, the aristocracy, of Cuzco. When Inca
92) See V § 2 c pp. 126-128.

93) See V § 5 b diagram p. 135.
94) Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 235) mentions the wife of Yahuar Huacac as the great-
great-granddaughter of Tocay Capac. He is thus aware that Tocay Capac could not have spanned
many generations, a fact to which Sarmiento gives no attention. Nevertheless, if the great-great-
granddaughter of Tocay Capac lived at the time of Yahuar Huacac, then Tocay Capac himself
must have lived at the time of Mayta Capac, while Pachacuti Yamqui too reports him before
Manco Capac and his company departed for Cuzco.
95) See V § 5 b p. 136.
Roca had his son back, he made peace with Tocay Capac. To seal this peace
Yahuar Huacac married one of Tocay Capac’s daughters, and one of Inca
Roca’s daughters, Curi Ocllo, married a son of Tocay Capac. The people of
Huayllacan, in spite of their treacherous deeds, wanted a son of Yahuar Huacac
as their chief. But because a different chief was assigned to them than the one
they had requested, they killed this new chief. Yahuar Huacac punished them
as he had done after their first treachery. Yahuar Huacac’s mummy was never
theless kept hidden from the Spaniards in Paulo, the village of the Huayllacan
people 96).
The first thing that strikes one in this account is the strong link between
Yahuar Huacac and the village of Huayllacan, despite the fact firstly, that he
was himself betrayed by this village and, secondly, that the chief appointed
by him to this village was murdered. His mother came from Huayllacan and
Yahuar Huacac’s mummy was kept in Huayllacan. This link between Yahuar
Huacac and Huayllacan was based on matrilineal kinship and was expressed
by the fact, if my foregoing conclusions were correct, that both belonged to
the marriage class III: Yahuar Huacac to III 1 and Huayllacan to III 3.
The second revelant feature of this account is the role played by the Ayar-
maca. They were the enemies of the Inca and had not been subjected by them.
This fact clearly illustrated the distinction I made between the groups I 3 and
III 3 belonging to the upper moiety (I and III) and the groups II 3 and IV 3
which belonged to the lower moiety (II and IV). It was already evident from
the references to the villages of Sanu and Huayllacan that, although they were
properly speaking not Inca, they were notwithstanding classed as Inca because
they belonged to the upper moiety. The Ayarmaca appear to have retained their
independence from the Inca because they belonged to the lower moiety. This
independence is perhaps even accentuated by the basis of equality of the mar
riages arranged by Inca Roca and Tocay Capac, for they both yielded a daughter
to the others son 97).
The third important aspect in this account of Yahuar Huacac was the role
played by the village of Anta and the position it acquired by this method in
Inca society; this will be discussed with reference to Viracocha Inca’s marriage.
§ 9. a) The last rulers I propose to discuss with relation to the second

representation, are Viracocha Inca and Lloque Yupanqui. Their positions in
the second representation were II 1 and II 2. This is corroborated by the links
of these rulers with religion and the priestly class 98).
96) What meaning Paulo has in this datum from Sarmiento is not known to me precisely.
97) For the discussion of this example of sister or daughter exchange, see IX § 4 pp. 246-250.
98) This relationship of marriage class II ( = Cayao) with religion could also be expected in
Viracocha Inca derived his name from the god Viracocha, the creator, because
the latter had once appeared to him (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 24, p. 156). The
high priests of the temple in Cuzco probably all belonged to the panaca of
Viracocha Inca’s descen dan ts"). According to Acosta (1954, Libro V, cap.
X X II, p. 166) the priests belonged to Lloque Yupanqui’s lineage. Another
indication of the link between Lloque Yupanqui and religion can be detected
in the variant of his name, Lluquis Uaynacauri, recorded by Anello Oliva (1895,
libro 1, cap. 2, p. 30-37). With reference to the first representation100) we
saw that Huanacauri, situated on the mountain of the same name in the valley
of Cuzco, was the most important holy place of the Inca after the temple of the
Sun in Cuzco. Manco Capac’s brother Ayar Uchu, also had this name and he
was linked with religion (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 12, p. 125; Poma 1944,
foja 84).
One form of organization of the priestly class in the Inca Empire is known
which wholly corresponds to the internal organization of the suyu in this re
presentation. It can therefore be concluded that in this representation the whole
priestly hierarchy of the Inca Empire fitted into suyu II.
According to Bias Valera (1950, p. 154-163) this organization of priests
functioned in the following manner. The high priest in Cuzco was the head
of the whole hierarchy. His name was distorted in many ways. The correct
form seems to be Villca U m a 101). In this context villca means priest (Bias
Valera 1950, p. 155). Uma means a person’s head, a mountain top (Holguin
1608). The literal translation of Villca Uma is then: the highest priest102*).
Under the Villca Uma stood the Hatun Villca (Bias Valera 1950, p. 155, 156,
157). They, according to the Spanish, were the 'bishops’. There were ten of
these in the country which they had divided into ten dioceses. Under the Hatun
the second representation. The ayllu of Ayar Uchu, the brother of Manco Capac and lord of
religion fulfilled a corresponding place in the first representation within the four marriage
classes of Hanan-Cuzco ( = Chinchaysuyu) (see IV § 2 c p. 85, § 3 b p. 96, § 4 p. 101).
°9) See IV note 82.
10° ) See IV § 3 b p. 96.
101) The high priest is mentioned in the chronicles as i.a.: Vilaoma (Cieza 1945, cap. XC II,
p. 234), Villaoma (Garcilaso 1945, Tomo I, libro III, cap. X X II) and Villacumu (Cobo 1956,
Tomo II, libro 13, cap. X X X III, p. 224). The second of these forms seems to me to approach
most closely the correct form, Villca Uma. Analogously, for the people of the Allcavillca, we
find besides the forms Allcabiza (see V § 5 c p. 138) and Allcavillca (Cabello Valboa 1951, cap.
12, pp. 284-287), those of Allcayvilla (Cabello Valboa 1951, cap. 12, p. 284) and of Allavilla
(Cobo 1956, Tomo II, libro 13, cap. X V ). Support for the meaning ‘priest' for the word villca
is the form ‘biza’ in Poma (1944, foja 183) and Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 225 note), also
with this meaning.
102) Rowe (1946, p. 299) translates the form Villac-oma by ‘announcing head’. The translation
which I have suggested, however, seems to me entirely in agreement with the place and the
significance of the person.
Villca stood the Yana Villca (Bias Valera 1950, p. 155, 161, 163); they were
the ordinary, low priests of the third variety, as Bias Valera puts it. We came
across the word Hatun before, in the series Capac, Hatun, Huchuy, and the
name Yana in the series Usco or Anco, Ticlla, Yana, which were the two series
which were synonymous with the series Collana, Payan and Cayao103). The
Villca Uma, the Hatun Villca and the Yana Villca could thus be placed in II 1,
II 2, and II 3. I mentioned the relationship between the Villca Uma and Vira-
cocha Inca before 104). In the name Hatun Villca, a synonym of the name of
the people of the lineage of the Allcabiza (Allcavillca) can be detected. This
name, like Ticllavillca, means the black and white villca. We also saw that the
Allcabiza were linked with Lloque Yupanqui in the same way as the Chanca
under Uscovilca with Viracocha Inca 105). Montesinos, accordingly, (1957, cap.
XIV, p. 56) calls the priests Tarpuntaes and Allcabizas. The Hatun Villca
were probably the priests who belonged to Lloque Yupanqui’s lineage and were
identical with the Allcabiza.
b) I also indicated before the similar elements in Viracocha Inca’s and Lloque
Yupanqui’s attitudes to their sons Pachacuti and Mayta Capac in the war against
the Chanca and that against the Allcabiza 106).
c) Similarities can also be detected between Viracocha Inca’s and Lloque Y u
panqui’s marriages which may throw light on the second representation of the
Viracocha married Mama Rondocaya from the village of Anta (Sarmiento
1947, cap. 24, p. 156). Lloque Yupanqui married Mama Cahua from the village
of Oma, which lay at 10 KM from Cuzco (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 16, p. 137).
Cobo (1956, tomo II, libro 12, cap. VI, p. 68, 69) remarks with reference to
this last marriage that Lloque Yupanqui had charged Pachachulla Viracocha, one
of the caciques from the Guaro valley, with finding him a wife. The Guaro
valley was the first region which had subjected itself to Lloque Yupanqui.
Here lived, according to Cobo as well as Sarmiento (1947, cap. 16, p. 137)
Guaman Samo (or Sano), Pachachulla Viracocha, the Ayarmaca of Tambo-
cunca 107) and the Quilliscachi. With the aid of this piece of information it is
possible to identify the Guaro valley as the Anta valley, for Quilliscachi is
still the name of one of the ayllu in the village of Guaroconde in this valley 108).
I was unable to identify the village of Oma, from which Lloque Yupanqui’s
103) See V § 1 c p. 119.

104) See IV note 82.
105) See IV § 5 d pp. 110-113, V § 5 c pp. 137-139.
106) See V § 5 c p. 137.
107) Therefore, this was the village Puquiura (see IV § 3 b p. 97).
1.08) Possibly we may recognise the name Guaro in the name Guaroconde.
wife had come. Lloque Yupanqui’s special relationship with the Anta valley
could, however, be good grounds for connecting this village with the Anta
valley. If this assumption is correct, then Viracocha Inca’s and Lloque Yupan
qui’s wives could be connected with the same valley which, geographically,
belongs to Chinchaysuyu. In the framework of the second representation Vira
cocha Inca’s and Lloque Yupanqui’s wives should belong to I 3, which is
Chinchaysuyu. I asserted above that the geographical situation of a village did
not necessarily have anything to do with its position in the ceque system 109).
There are indications, however, that the Anta valley did have a special position
in I 3 in this representation of the organization of Cuzco, which corresponded
to the geographical location of Chinchaysuyu.
I now have to show the connection between the position of the Anta valley
in the organization of Cuzco and that of the Yanacona. In the last chapter I
gave a few examples of organizations consisting of four ayllu in which the
Yanacona were either the fourth ayllu, corresponding to Cuntisuyu in Cuzco,
or a sub-group of the first ayllu, the Collana ayllu, corresponding to Chinchay
suyu in Cuzco110). If the name Yana in the series Usco, Ticcla, Yana is
treated as being synonymous with Cayao, the implication of the last mentioned
organizations is that the Yanacona should be placed in I 3 in this representation
of the organization of Cuzco. If, moreover, Viracocha Inca’s marriage were
in accordance with the asymmetric connubium which in this representation exists
between II and I, then the village of Anta should be placed in I 3. The village
of Anta and the Yanacona would then both belong in this same group I 3 in
this representation and we can assume the existence of a special link between
the village of Anta or the valley of the same name and the group of the
Yanacona. Some of the material from the chronicles corroborates this as
sumption.
Here I refer to Cabello Valboa and Murua. Discussing the war between
Huayna Capac, Tupac Yupanqui’s successor, and the Cayambi people in Ecua
dor, Cabello Valboa (1951, cap. 21, 22 p. 370-376) records that the ruler
would have been killed had he not been saved by the Yanayaco and the Xac-
xaguana, or, according to Murua (1613, libro I, cap. 34), by the Yanayaco
from Sajsahuana. By the Yanayaco the Yanacona are meant (Sarmiento 1947,
cap. 51, p. 229). Xacxaguana, or Sajsahuana, was the Jaquijahuana valley, a
name used by the Spanish in the first years after the conquest for the Anta
valley. According to Cabello Valboa and Murua, the Yanacona, or at any rate
109) See I § 1 p. 1. An example of this proposition is given by the village Sanu. In the ceque
system the place of this village, as ayllu, was III 2 c. See I § 4 diagram p. 9. The actual
location of this village, now called San Sebastian, is in Collasuyu.
110) See IV § 3 c pp. 99.
those in Huayna Capac’s army, then came from the Anta valley.
The inhabitants of the Anta valley play another role in the history and social
organization of the Inca and of Cuzco which they were to be expected to have
in connection with the Yanacona’s function as the servants to the Inca aristo
cracy. The members of Quilliscachi ayllu, from the village of Guaroconde, and
Equeco ayllu, from the village of Anta, were in the rulers’ service especially
as policemen (Poma 1944, foja 184, 306-312, 345), that is to say that they were
empowered to imprison members of the aristocracy and to act as spies and
messengers 111*13). Tocay Capac’s subsidiary wife, the one who warned Inca Roca
that Yahuar Huacac was in Tocay Capac’s power, also played a double
role n s u s ) .
This material may corroborate the supposition that, at least in the story about
the capture of Yahuar Huacac, the village of Anta can be identified with the
group of the Yanacona. The fact that the inhabitants of Anta called themselves
the kinsmen of the orejones, the aristocracy of Cuzco, can be explained in the
same way as the relationship of Yahuar Huacac to the village of Huayllacan.
Because Yahuar Huacac’s mother came from Huayllacan, the inhabitants of
this village called themselves his kin and were all linked to III, Antisuyu.
Likewise, Pachacuti’s mother, Viracocha’s wife, came from the village of Anta,
and the inhabitants were permitted to call themselves Pachacuti’s kin. In this
representation, Pachacuti symbolised group I, Chinchaysuyu, which comprises
the rulers and their children born from endogamous marriages, that is the
higher aristocracy. The implication for the village of Anta, of the privilege
of calling themselves the kin of the Inca aristocracy, might be that they belonged
to I 3.
The data on Yahuar Huacac’s capture can therefore, with regard to the village
of Anta, be used to elucidate the fact that Viracocha Inca and Lloque Yupanqui,
— the latter on account of the similarity of his marriage relationship to that
of Viracocha Inca — , chose their wives from I 3.
111) The occupation of spy or messenger being fulfilled by people of the ayllu Quilliscachi
is illustrated by the following examples: When the Chanca, in their war with Pachacuti, went
to Cuzco — according to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 27, pp. 165-167) they captured in the village
of Conchacalla (i.e. the ayllu Conchacalla of the village of Anta (see V § 1 a p. 114)) a man
who was to lead them to Cuzco. This man, called ‘Quilliscachi of Cuzco’ however had a change
of heart and slipped into Cuzco to warn the city of the arrival of the Chanca. Another man
with the name of Quilliscachi, in full Quilliscachi Urco Guaranga, one of the friends and
assistants of Pachacuti, brought the message of the victory of the Inca over the Chanca to
Viracocha Inca, who had fled the city (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 27, p. 169).
112) See V § 8 b p. 149.
113) For other data which link the Yanacona to the plain of Anta, see VI § 7 c p. 198;
V I notes 10 and 11.
§ 10. a) Above, I connected the so-called rulers of Hanan-Cuzco, those

of Hurin-Cuzco, the villages from which their wives had come and the most
important facts from the history of the Inca, with the suyu of Cuzco and the
three groups into which every suyu was divided. In this discussion the suyu
occurred only as separate marriage classes. For this reason no explanation was
given for the material which clarifies why the characteristics which we encount
ered in the preceding paragraphs were ascribed to the moieties I + III and to
II + IV, to the suyu as marriage classes, and to the groups which formed part
of the suyu. This problem will be discussed in the following pages. My views
on the question are in brief as follows.
The similarity and relationship of the classes I and IV seems to me to be
basic to the explanation of these characteristics. The relationship of I to IV
can be explained from the tripartition in which ego and ego’s great-grandfather
belong to the same class. In a system of four classes these two were divided
between different classes: ego was placed in I and the great-grandfather in IV.
Ego’s and his great-grandfather’s classes also showed great contrast side by
side with their great similarity. In the quadripartition the nature of this contrast
determined the relationship of the two moieties (I + III and II + IV ). Al
though nothing is known about the history of the social organization of Cuzco,
the fact that the moiety relationship has to be explained from the contrast
between ego and his great-grandfather, might be an indication that the moiety
relationship and the quadripartition had their origins in contrasts between two
groups within one of the classes of the three-class system 114).
In the framework of the second representation I must first draw attention
to the similarity of I to IV 115) and the contrast between them 116*). Then we
114) An illustration of what has here been said about the origin of the moiety division has
already been encountered several times in the first representation. I would therefore like to
call attention once again to one example from the first representation. In the origin myth of
the Inca there is mention of three matrilineal classes, linked by an asymmetric connubium, named
Tambo, Maras and Sutic. Tambo was divided into two groups: one group which participated
in the regulation of marriage with Maras and Sutic and one group, that of Manco Capac with
his brothers and sisters, which was endogamous. The latter group considered the first as that
of the subsidiary brothers or kin and also that of their great-grandfather or ancestors. In the
first representation, the relationship between both groups within Tambo crystallized into a moiety-
opposition too, be it in another way than we shall encounter in the second representation. The
group within Tambo of the subsidiary kin of Manco Capac and of his great-grandfather and
of his ancestors, together with the groups Maras and Sutic, formed Hurin-Cuzco. The group
of Manco Capac and his brothers and sisters, within which a tripartition developed in the same
sense as between Tambo, Maras and Sutic, formed Hanan-Cuzco. The name Tambo — in its
meaning of group of subsidiary kin of Manco Capac and of group of his great-grandfather or
ancestors — in the moiety opposition to Manco Capac and his primary kin was extended to
the totality of Tambo, Maras and Sutic.
115) See V § 10 a, b pp. 156-159.
116) See V § 10 c pp. 159-162.

can trace how the relationship between the two marriage classes led to the con
trast between the moieties of I + III and II + IV 117) and how it determined
the nature of this contrast118).
The existence of the second representation has so far been argued mainly
from material on the different Inca rulers. For the purposes of elucidating
the relationship between I and IV, we shall have to make use mostly of the
same material.
To begin with, the nature of the relationship between I and IV is apparent
from the corresponding feats of Pachacuti (I 1), and Inca Roca (IV 1), and
of Mayta Capac ( 1 2 ) and Manco Capac (IV 2). Manco Capac is mentioned
here instead of Sinchi Roca. The reason is that events, which really related to
Sinchi Roca, were linked with Manco Capac, in his capacity of Mayta Capac’s
great-grandfather in the so-called Inca history of the single dynasty of kings.
Not only Pachacuti, but also Inca Roca (Cobo 1956, tomo II, libro 12, cap.
IX, p. 73; Garcilaso 1945, tomo I, libro IV, cap. XV ; Montesinos 1957, cap.
X X I, p. 82-83), is recorded as having fought against the Chanca. Monte
sinos 119) mentions as the cause of this war the great power the priests had
acquired in the country; Bias Valera gives the same cause of war 120).
I regarded Mayta Capac’s war against the Allcabiza as an imitation of Pacha-
cuti’s war against the Chanca 121). The Allcabiza, however, were also the main
opponents of Manco Capac at the conquest of Cuzco (Toledo 1940, p. 186,
187; Sarmiento 1947, cap. 9, p. 113; cap. 13, p. 130). According to Toledo,
Ayar Uchu, Manco Capac’s brother and the religious chief 122), was also the
chief of the Allcabiza123). The link of the Allcabiza with religion124) was
also apparent from the position in the second representation which I ascribed
to them, namely II 2 125).
Pachacuti’s war, as well as that of Mayta Capac’s and those of their great
grandfathers against the same opponents, were presented as the contest between
the wordly ruler and the priests. Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 223, 224) also
records that there was much idolatry in Inca Roca’s time; according to Pacha-
H7) See V § 11, pp. 162-163.

11S) See V §§ 12, 13 pp. 164-170.
119) So Montesinos here mentions Sinchi Roca in the place of Inca Roca (see V § 7 b p. 142).
12°) See IV § 5 d, p. 111.
121) See V § 5 c pp. 137-138.
122) See IV § 3 b p. 96, § 4, p. 101.
123) An explanation of how Ayar Uchu could be considered head of the Allcabiza will be
given below (see VI § 9 c, d pp. 205-206).
124) I will return to the war between Manco Capac and the Allcabiza below (see VI § 7
pp. 192-199).
125) See V § 9 a p. 152.
cuti Yamqui (1950, p. 217) and Montesinos (1957, cap. XVI, p. 64) the
history of the Inca had its beginning in the victory of the first rulers over
the idolaters. N o wars against Chanca or Allcabiza are mentioned with reference
to the kings of the period between Pachacuti, Mayta Capac and their great
grandfathers.
One conclusion that can be drawn from this evidence is that characteristics
of mythical origin can be ascribed not only to Inca Roca and Manco Capac
(or Sinchi Roca) but also to Pachacuti and Mayta Capac. Pachacuti’s very name
points in this direction. Its meaning is world reformer, and also occurred in
the expression huno pachacuti, meaning the Flood (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 6,
p. 103) 126). But this expression of mythical origin can also be detected in
other material, in connection with Pachacuti’s name. Thus, according to Gar-
cilaso (1945, tomo II, libro VI, cap. X X X V ) before his accession to the throne
Pachacuti had the epithet of Manco Capac. According to Poma de Ayala (1944,
foja 146) Manco Capac’s general and deputy was called Ynga Yupanqui
Pachacutichic Ynga; one of the ruler Pachacuti’s generals, on the other hand,
was called Manco Capac 127). That is to say that Poma interchanges Pachacuti
and Manco Capac, who in this representation not only belonged to different
suyu, but also to different groups of ceque (1 and 2); it can be concluded
from this that they were both personifications of the concept of primordiality.
There is another similarity between I and IV which is relevant to the argu
ment. Every ruler had his own huauque, which was his personal amulet and
oracle (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 14, p. 134). The word huauque means brother
(of a man). The huauque of three of the rulers was connected with the Sun.
Manco Capac’s huauque was the inti bird (inti = sun) which he had brought
with him from Tambotoco. At his death the bird was shut in a cage. None of
his successors before Mayta Capac dared take the bird from its cage (Sarmiento
1947, cap. 17, p. 141). Mayta Capac talked with the bird which then served
him too as his huauque. Finally, Pachacuti had Inti illapa, Thunder, as his
huauque (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 48, p. 221). Thunder was regarded as being
the servant or messenger of the Sun (Cobo 1956, Tomo II, libro 12, cap. XIII,
p. 82; libro 13, cap. XIV, p. 178, Garcilaso 1945, Tomo I, libro II, cap. I;
libro III, cap. X X I); the element “ inti” in this name also points to the con
nection between Thunder and the Sun. Because none of the other rulers had a
126) por a full discussion of the word Pachacuti, I refer to the book by Imbelloni “ P ac h a
ltu ti IX ” .
127) Just as in the first representation Pachacuti had his friends as generals and substitutes
and in the second representation the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco had their subsidiary brothers to
play these parts, in the third representation all rulers of the Inca dynasty had their generals and
substitutes. Poma calls these “ capitanes” or “ sinchis” and considers each of them to be the son
of the ruler whose substitute he was. See also VI § 6 e p. 192.
huauque which was connected with the sun, it can be argued that in this re
presentation, the sun was linked with I as well as with IV. The material on
the yanacona throws even more light on the nature of the mutual relationship
of I to IV, and that of I and IV together to the sun. The Spanish chroniclers
also call the yanacona specifically the servants of the Sun 128). In the preceding
chapter I cited some instances from South Peru of the yanacona belonging to
the ayllu which corresponds to IV in Cuzco, but also of the fact that in other
organizations they formed a sub-group of the ayllu which is comparable to
I 129). In Cuzco, too, there were indications that the yanacona were classed
either as IV as a whole 130) or as I 3 131). I also gave an example for the
original population of Cuzco, similar to that relating to the yanacona 132).
b) In this last example IV 2 was identified with I 3. This identification
can serve to explain the fact that both I and IV were linked with the concept
of origin. The theoretical argument could run as follows. In the first represen t
tation the construction of organization of Cuzco was presented as having been
brought about by a historical and recurrent process of fission. From among the
three matrilineal, exogamous marriage classes which together constituted an endo-
gamous whole, an endogamous group split off from ego’s class, which was in
turn divided into three marriage classes. Ego’s class, which was also the class
of FaFaFa, as a result of this fission became exclusively the class of FaFaFa,
while the splinter group became ego’s. In addition to the endogamous marriage
movement in the splinter group, it also maintained marriage relations with the
other three classes. The primary sons of its founder belonged to the splinter
group, and his subsidiary sons went to the class of FaFaFa 133). Thus marriage
movement was occasioned among the four matrilineal classes, which in their
mutual relations, were exogamous. The group which, before the fission, had
been ego’s group, became that of FaFaFa, as was remarked before. But the
marriage classes had another function in addition to this one. Ego’s class was
the group of the leaders, the highest groups. The class of FaFaFa was the group
of the ancestors and the lowest group. But because the same process of fission
128) Poma de Ayala (1944, foja 266) speaks of the Yanayaco ( = Yanacona) which he
includes among the property — such as estates, cattle, gold and silver objects — of the sun.
Sarmiento (1947, cap. 51, p. 229), Garcilaso (1945, Tomo I, libro IV, cap. IV ) and Castro and
Ortega Morejon (1936, p. 240) mention two sorts of yanacona: those of the Inca and those of
the sun. The meaning of this distinction and the role of the yanacona will be discussed below;
see V ili § 5 a pp. 224-227.
129) See IV § 3 c, p. 99.
130) See IV § 3 c, p. 99.
131) See V § 9 c, pp. 153-154.
132) See IV § 3 c, p. 100.
1 3 3 ) See IV § 2 e, f, p. 89.
occurred again within the splinter group, the founder of the newly brought
about quadripartition was in turn placed in the great-grandfather’s class.
Every founder of an endogamous group in one quadripartition, then, be
longed to the highest group, which was the endogamous group of the leaders;
but in the other quadripartition, he belonged to the lowest, that of the great
grandfather and the ancestors.
In the history and mythology of the Inca, this splitting-off process is men-
ioned three times. At first, there were the three kingdoms, Manco Capac’s,
Tocay Capac’s and Pinahua Capac’s. In Manco Capac’s kingdom a tripartition
took place into Tambo, Maras and Sutic, and finally, those who were to form
the Capac ayllu, Chauin Cuzco ayllu and Arayraca ayllu Cuzco cayao, — i.e.
Manco Capac and his brothers and sisters — , split off from Tambo.
In the first presentation Collana (Chinchaysuyu) consisted of the last three
ayllu, and Payan (Collasuyu) of the Tambo, Maras and Sutic ayllu. Seen from
this point of view, Cayao consisted of the four suyu as marriage classes as a
whole, and was based on the kingdoms of Manco Capac, Tocay Capac and
Pinahua Capac.
In the second representation the first group, Collana, was represented by
I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV 1; the second group, Payan, by I 2 + II 2 + III 2 +
IV 2, and the third group, Cayao, by I 3 + II 3 + III 3 + IV 3. That is to
say that what was the highest group in Cayao, (I 3), was the lowest one in
Payan (IV 2), and the highest group in Payan (I 2) was the lowest one in
Collana (IV 1). I 3 was thus identical with IV 2, and I 2 to IV 1.
It thus becomes clear how I and IV could both become associated with
mythical origin, and how they were both connected with the sun and with the
war against the priests. This theoretical explanation also clarified how in the
second representation, I was the marriage class of ego and of the rulers, and
IV that of FaFaFa and the ancestors and the original population.
c) One of the points of agreement between I and IV appeared to be the war
of the rulers against the priests; this war was connected with the rulers of both
suyu. The explanation for this war, in my opinion, is as follows. The founder
of an endogamous group in the one quadripartition, as I remarked before, be
longed to the highest marriage class, but in the other quadripartition to the
lowest. There was a second aspect to this situation. Because an endogamous
group had split of from the group of FaFaFa, the latter group had been relegated
from the highest position, which was that of ego, to the lowest, which was that
of FaFaFa. This relegation was presented as a war between I and IV, or a war
between the rulers against the priests. I, ego’s class, was the rulers’ group, as was
demonstrated above. IV, the class of FaFaFa, was the group of the ancestors
(villca), who, in the form of the holy site consecrated to mythical origin 134),
symbolised the unity of the four marriage classes 135). Group IV was also the
group from which the men of I chose their wives with whom they entered
exogamous marriages and the group to which their subsidiary sons belong. The
priests, who were also called villca, should also be classed in this group IV 136).
This conclusion does not appear to agree with the organization of Cuzco as
I reconstructed it in the second representation on the basis of the so-called
history of the Inca. From this m aterial137) it appeared that the priests’ class
belonged to II and not to IV. Before showing that this situation was a logical
development from that in which the priests were classed as IV, I propose first
to cite some data from which it appears that this last situation, or representation,
also existed in the organization of Cuzco.
In connection with the material on the special relationship between the motif
of the mountain and IV 138), it was shown how in the second representation
the ancestors and the holy place of the whole organization of the four suyu of
Cuzco came to belong to IV. The mountain probably symbolised the ancestors
and derived this significance from its function as a phallic symbol. This aspect
is evident from the word Urco which, according to Holguin (1608) means
mountain as well as male animal. I quoted some examples before of the identity
of meaning of Urcu and ayllu (penis, clan) 139) 140). Thus we see that the
mountain was the symbol of the villca, meaning ancestor, phallus, ayllu. This
conclusion is corroborated in one of the first articles of faith of the Roman
Catholic dogma, written in Quechua, in the sixteenth century. Here the word
mountain is translated by villca (Holguin, 1952, p. X I).
134 ) The sanctuary of origin was called huaca, a synonym of villca. See IV § 1 c, p. 73.
135) The totality of the marriage classes was the ayllu, a word which is also a synonym of
villca. See IV § 1 c, p. 73.
136) Having arrived at this point in my argument, I would like to point to a datum given by
Pachacuti Yamqui which may contain an explanation of the word “Manco” in the name of Manco
Capac. Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 232) refers to “piedras mancos” , i.e. stones called “manco” ,
entirely with the meaning of villca and huaca. The word “manco” in the name of Manco Capac
would thus indicate his primordial character. I report the explanation of his name here because
we can now, after the exposition in the preceding section, understand how Manco Capac could
be considered the first Inca ruler — who fought the pre-Inca population, identified with the
priests — as well as himself possessing, as his name indicates, characteristics of these villca or
huaca.
137) See V § 9 a, pp. 150-152.
138) See V § 7 b, p. 142.
139) See IV § 1 c, pp. 72-73.
14° ) Another example of the mountain as a phallus symbol is given by Avila (1939, cap. 10,
p. 98). He tells of a woman who had sinned with all the huaca, one of whom, Rucanakoto
( = finger mountain) was enthroned on top of a mountain. Men with a small penis prayed to
this mountain.
Poma de Ayala explicitly connects Cuntisuyu with the religion and the priests.
He writes (1944, foja 183): ‘He (Tupac Yupanqui) laid down that in this
great city, chief of these realms (Cuzco), there should be a principal priest-
magician, called Uallaviza condeviza, and other from Chinchaysuyo and from
Andesuyo and from Collasuyo’. Uiza was a variant for villca 141). Thus, accord
ing to Poma the high priest was connected with Cuntisuyu. In his first name,
Uallaviza, can also be detected the relationship with the Huaylla people, the
oldest and poorest section of the inhabitants of the Cuzco region, who had been
living there before the arrival of the Inca and even of the other pre-Inca people
(Toledo, 1940, p. 185, 186). This corroborates the nature of the relationship
between the priests and the original population and with Cuntisuyu as the fourth
marriage class (beside the Collana, Payan and Cayao classes) 142) 143).
It ought to follow from the marriage relationships between I and IV in the
second representation, that the subsidiary kin and sons of the rulers belonged y
to IV. If Poma connects the priests especially with IV, it is to be expected that
he also sees a special link between the subsidiary sons of the rulers and the
priests and the holy places. He records this link in the following form.
In Cuzco, according to him (Poma 1944, foja 262, 263), there were three
temples. In the first temple, the temple of the Sun, the ruler prayed to the
golden image of the sun; in the second temple the queen prayed to the image
of the moon. In the third temple, dedicated to Venus, the auquicuna and the
nustacuna, — the subsidiary children of the ruler — , prayed and sacrified. Poma
calls Venus ‘Chasca cuyllor chuquiylla uaca billcacona’ (1944, foja 185, 263).
O f this series of words Chasca cuyllor was the real name of Venus. Chuqui ilia
is one of the three names and manifestations of Thunder (Polo 1916a, cap. I,
p. 3-7; Molina 1943, p. 29, 34) 144). Venus was obviously also connected with
141) See V § 5 c, p. 138, § 9 a, p. 151.

142) Like Poma, Pachacuti Yamqui also mentions (1950, p. 234) the two words Uallaviza
and Cuntiviza together.
143) In the priestly organization, according to Poma, Cuntisuyu was the most important of the
four suyu. I am of the opinion that here the same representation is conceived of as that which
I mentioned in the preceding chapter as possibly the fourth representation of the organization of
Cuzco (see IV note 59). In that representation, all of Cuzco, taken geographically, belonged to
Cuntisuyu, and the other suyu started outside it. If this is in fact a case of a fourth representation,
it would apply only to the priestly organization, which we would have to see as the direct
antipode not only of the second representation but likewise of the first representation and of the
third representation. In all these three representations the true rulers and their primary kin
belonged to Chinchaysuyu and this suyu was the most important in Cuzco. I shall return to the
question of the direct consequences — not only within the second representation but also within
the first and third representations — of the opposition of the priestly organization to the other
three representations of the organization of Cuzco in chapter IX , § 3 pp. 241-246.
144) Poma hereby equates Venus with Thunder. This identification is also probably indicated
by other chroniclers: according to Garcilaso (1945, Tomo I, Iibro II, cap I; libro III, cap. X X I ) ,
the huaca and the villca. There was thus a clear relationship between the sub
sidiary sons of the ruler and the ruler’s huaca and villca, which were regarded
as his ancestors or great-grandparents145).
§ 11. As was demonstrated above, in the second representation too, the

organization of four marriage classes must be regarded as having originated
from three classes. Because the concepts Collana (the ruler’s primary kin), Payan
(his subsidiary kin) and Cayao (the non-related population) were applied to
these classes, the same difficulties arose in the second representation as observed
in the first representation 146).
The Collana group of the tripartition was distributed over I and IV in the
quadripartition. Together with I, the Payan group of the quadripartition be
longed, as III, to the upper moiety, and the Cayao group as II, together with IV,
to the lower moiety. Because I comprised the ruler’s primary kin and was there
fore in fact Collana, the ruler’s primary and subsidiary kin were associated with
the upper moiety, and the non-related population with the lower moiety. Ill thus
became the group of the subsidiary kin and took over this function from IV
which remained associated only with the class of the great-grandfather, the
ancestors, the original population, the outcasts, including the yanacona, and the
priests.
^ Because the upper moiety and the lower moiety were two equivalent, even
if opposed, moieties, there arose in the lower moiety, between the marriage
classes II and IV a relationship like that in the upper moiety of I (Collana) to
III (Payan). One feature of this relationship of Collana to Payan was that the
latter was connected with the land and its population, and the former with the
rulers. Now, in the lower moiety, the relationship of the priests to the holy
places became regarded in the same way as that in the upper moiety of Collana
to Payan. As IV was the lowest of the four suyu, and therefore also remained
the lowest in the lower moiety, the huaca came to be associated with IV and the
priests came to belong to II.
^ We came across the results of this shift of the group of priests from the
both, Venus and Thunder, were servants and messengers of the Sun; Bias Valera (1950, p. 166)
calls Venus the son of the Sun. It is thus quite explicable that the subsidiary sons of the ruler
worshipped Venus or Thunder and felt themselves related to them, in a way similar to the ruler
who worshipped the Sun.
145) We see here a situation similar to that of the adjustment of the tripartition of Tambo, Maras
and Sutic to the quadripartition. Within Tambo, in addition to the endogamous group of Manco
Capac and his brothers and sisters, there was the group to which belonged the subsidiary' descen
dants of Manco Capac and his great-grandfather. The latter group received the further indication
of huacan, i.e. “ of the huaca” . See IV § 2 e p. 89.
146) See IV § 3, pp. 91-101.
marriage class of the great-grandfather to that of the father before, in this

second147) and in the first representation 148), and I gave a few examples
with relation to the first representation of the way in which in the lower moiety,
in a quadripartition, the marriage classes of the father and of the great-grand
father were related to each other like Collana to Payan 149); this relationship
in the second representation is also suggested by two words.
The first of these words is the name of the high priest, which I considered
should be read as Villca U m a 150). Villca means priest. Uma, according to
Holguin (1608) means the top of a mountain, in addition to its meaning of a
person’s head. The motif of the mountain in the second representation was
associated with IV. The priests could then be regarded as representing the top,
as the guardians of the holy place, which was the mountain. In connection with
the first representation, Ayar Uchu was said to have climbed the mountain
Huanacauri, the first holy place of the Inca mentioned in their history. There
he turned into stone and thus crowned the holy place 151). Thus the relationship
in the second representation of IV to II was seen as that of the mountain and
the holy place to the priests, as representing the top of the mountain and as the
guardians of the holy place 152).
The second word, Quishuarcancha, the name of Viracocha Inca’s palace which
was also the temple to the god Viracocha 153), contains a symbolic indication of
the priests’s position similar to that in the word Uma. In Quishuarcancha lived
Viracocha Inca’s descendants, among whom, as was shown before, the high
priest was also classed154). The word Cancha is used for a fenced-in space
within which there are buildings. The Quishuar is a tree which, according to
Cobo (Cobo, Tomo I, libro VI, cap. X LIX , p. 225), is distinct from other trees
in that it can grow in the highest and coldest regions. This fact may induce us
to suppose that the priests — who together with Viracocha Inca in the second
representation belonged to II — were compared to the Quishuar tree as the
crowning of the mountain 155).
147) See V § 9 a, pp. 150-152.

148) In the first representation, Arairaca ayllu Cuzco cayao, the ayllu of Ayar Uchu, was in
I 2 c and thus filled the place of the class of the father in relation to Capac ayllu in I 1 b. See
IV § 2 c, p. 85. § 4, p. 101.
149) See IV § 3 b, pp. 96-97.
150) See V § 9 a, p. 151.
151) See IV § 3 b, p. 96.
152) For further support for this conclusion see V note 155.
1 5 3 ) i wiH discuss both functions of Quishuarcancha below (see IX § 3 pp. 243-246).
154) See IV note 82.
155) This association of the god Viracocha, the priests and Viracocha Inca with the quishuar
tree is supported by the following data. Pachacuti Yamqui says of Viracocha Inca that this ruler
was very meek and occupied himself with such things as “ the chacaras (the arable fields) and
§ 12. As was shown before, out of a tripartition a quadripartition into the

classes I, II, III and IV was brought about and with it, a moiety opposition of
I + III to II + IV. This change caused unsurmountable difficulties not only in
relation to the social organization but also in the field of religion. I propose now
to examine the difficulties encountered in religion as well as their solutions,
which were sought in their connection with the moiety contrast. This procedure
will give a better insight into the nature of the moiety contrast.
The highest god of the Inca was the Sun. The rulers were supposed to have
descended from him. They regarded the mountain as the earthly symbol of their
heavenly descent and they obviously saw no contradiction in the two different
traditions in one of which Manco Capac was regarded as the son of the Sun, and
in the other as having come from a mountain cave. The Aymara word villca for
the sun, which, according to Bertonio (1612), existed side by side with the word
inti, supports the opinion that the sun was seen as the origin of the people. For
villca meant great-grandfather, fore-father, holy site dedicated to mythical origin,
phallic symbol, etc. 156).
In the tripartition the Sun, as the highest god, was connected with the Collana
group, the group of the leaders. The priests and the holy place, the huaca or
villca 157) therefore also belonged to Collana.
alders and other plants such as the quishuar and chachacoma and molli” . A possible reason for
the relation of Viracocha Inca with the quishuar tree has already been noted above. According
to Tschudi (1853), the chachacoma is a bush which grows in the colder parts of the mountains
and of which the crushed leaf-buds, mixed with the rosin of the tree, are used to strengthen
weakened parts of the body. The molle was very much in use as a purge (Cobo 1956, Tomo I,
libro 6, cap. L X X V III, p. 268). Being found in the high, cold mountains was thus a feature
shared by the chachacoma and the quishuar tree. Further, the chachacoma and the molle each had,
on the one hand, one property in common with the fruit of the villca tree, i.e. the fortifying and
purgative effects respectively, and thus show a relation with the whole concept of villca (see
IV § 1 c p. 73) and on the other hand they were associated with the quishuar tree and with
Viracocha Inca.
According to Cieza (1945, cap. L X X X IV , p. 229) near the temple of Guarivilca, in the
valley of Jauja, there were three or four sacred molli trees. Since Guarivilca is a name of the
god Viracocha (Pachacuti Yamqui 1950, pp. 211, 231, 232) we see here too the relation between
the god and the molle tree.
166) Another example of the fact that the mountain could also represent a celestial deity is
the mountain Huanacauri, the first sanctuary of the Inca and the place where Ayar Uchu turned
into stone. According to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 12, p. 124) Huanacauri means “ rainbow” .
157) In this connection I would refer to the meaning of the word Collana in Quechua and in
Aymara. In both languages Collana means “ the first, the highest, prominent” , etc. According to
Lira, in Quechua this word is derived from an adjective Kkolla, with the meaning of “ prominent
very valuable or very high” . A word Colla is also known in Aymara, but there, according to
Bertonio, it means purgative or medicine. Thus this word agrees in meaning with villca which
also has this meaning in Quechua (see IV § 1 c p. 73). Now, according to Tschopik (1951, p. 206),
some of the modern Aymara call God “ qolani aukixa” or “ my father with the medicines” .
Although this refers to the Christian God, the Aymara often make an identification with the sun
Although in the quadripartition the Collana group was distributed over I

and IV, and both suyu were connected with the sun, the nature of this relation
ship varied between the suyu. For the rulers in I the Sun was the symbol of
their high position. It can be asserted therefore that in the quadripartition and
in the moiety contrast, the Sun was linked with I and with the upper moiety.
The relationship of IV to the Sun is most evident from the position of the
yanacona as the servants or serfs of the Sun, or of the Inca, the ruler. As a
result in the quadripartition the relationship of the whole lower moiety to the
sun was represented as similar to that of the yanacona to the Sun. Owing to
the moiety contrast, the Sun no longer remained the symbol of the entire
society, but only of the upper moiety.
I argued before158) that the priests belonged to II and the lower moiety.
Only the changeover from the division into three to that into four, can in my
opinion clarify the contradiction between the fact that the priests, who after
all, were the priests, or servants, of the Sun, (compare for instance the position
of the high priest in the temple of the Sun in Cuzco) are connected with another
god, Viracocha, the Creator 159).
The concept of Viracocha, the Creator, should possibly be explained as
(Tschopik 1951, p. 190). It is therefore probable that the Aymara once addressed their highest
god, the Sun, with this term. The sun would be for them their villca. Although the origin of
the word Collana is not relevant here, it is of value to know that Collana or Colla were also
given the meaning of villca.
158) See V § 9 a, pp. 150-152.
159) Now that we have established that a primordial character was attached to the entire lower
moiety, it becomes possible to interpret the word Cayao, as indication of the lower moiety. For
the word Cayao we encounter the written forms Callao, Cayau or Callahua. Kkalla means —
according to Lira — “ beginning, origin” and is the stem of various derivations. He mentions
Kkallar, i.e. “ beginning, origin” and therefore Cayao, Cayau or Callahua may also be regarded
as composed of the stem kkalla and the suffixes -u or -hua. These suffixes do not seem to have
any semantic function (for a treatment of these suffixes see Galante 1959, p. 23). Cayao thus
means “ beginning, origin” (see IV note 73). At the same time we can now explain the meaning
of the word “ Lloque” in the name of the ruler Lloque Yupanqui. In the second representation
he belonged to II 2 and from him were also descended the priests, the villca. In the series
Allauca ( = right), Chaupi or Chauin ( = middle), Ychoc or Lloque ( = left) (see III § 3
p. 41) we encountered the word Lloque as synonym of the word Cayao in the series Collana,
Payan, Cayao. Lloque thus also means “ beginning, origin” and is as such a reference to villca as
ancestor. So the name Lloque Yupanqui also points to the priestly character of this ruler. A
final confirmation of the connection of the concepts of “beginning, origin, ancestor” and “priest”
with the word lloque and the person of Lloque Yupanqui is a translation which Pachacuti Yamqui
gives (1950, p. 231) of the word lloque. He states that “the idols (which are) the representations
of the demons happtnunos were on the snow-covered mountain tops, where people never
come, which were called the lloques or the quenamaris” . Lloque here has the meaning which
we also found for the word Villca Uma (see V § 11 p. 163). In this word I saw the expression
of the place of the marriage class of the father and of the priests ( = Cayao) — a place which
in the second representation corresponds to ayllu II — with respect to the marriage class of
FaFaFa, i.e. suyu IV.
being, — to the Inca at least — , a relatively theoretical construct which was

to serve in the adaptation of the tripartition to the quadripartition and the con
comitant moiety opposition. The origin and creation features which the Sun
had, in relation to the tripartition, were personified in a separate deity in the
quadripartition and in that context associated with the lower moiety. Although
he personified one aspect of the Sun, Viracocha, the Creator, was nevertheless
regarded as a god antagonistic to the Sun.
§ 13. a) There are several instances of the opposition of the Sun to Vira
cocha connected with the moiety opposition in Inca culture; I shall cite a few
instances at the end of this chapter.
The first instance concerns the opposition of the Sun to Viracocha, as a
religious or philosophical problem, but this in fact also throws light on the
opposition of the chiefs of the Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco moieties in their
capacity of Inca rulers.
The Inca Capac Yupanqui, according to Murua ( 1613 libro I, cap. 11),
once asked his councillors who was more important: the Sun or Viracocha.
After a discussion Capac Yupanqui decided that it must be Viracocha, for the
Sun could be obscured by the smallest cloud.
In this instance, then, Viracocha was placed higher than the Sun. As the
rulers before Pachacuti were not in fact rulers but the chiefs of particular
social groups in the organization of Cuzco, the significance of this discussion
lies in the person and in the position in the organization of Cuzco of the ruler
who considered Viracocha as being more important than the sun. According to
Murua this ruler was Capac Yupanqui. Cobo on the other hand, ascribes the
story to Pachacuti. The manner in which Cobo relates it, however, makes one
suspect that it was the ruler Viracocha Inca who put the god Viracocha higher
than the Sun, especially because Cobo (1956, tomo II, libro 12, cap. XI, p. 76),
elsewhere, when discussing Viracocha Inca, writes that this ruler ‘tried to change
the religious state of affairs by ordering that preference should be given to the
god Viracocha above the Sun and other gods’.
According to Cobo, Pachacuti before he was king went to Jaquijahuana,
outside Cuzco, where his father, Viracocha Inca, was dwelling. On his way a
man appeared to him near a well who said that he was the sun, his father.
He foretold Pachacuti great victories for the Inca if they were to worship him.
When Pachacuti subsequently returned to Cuzco, he built a temple to the Sun.
But after he had shown his devotion to the Sun, he wondered how an object
which was subject to regular daily movement could be God, especially since
a small cloud could place itself in front of it and obscure it. Thus Pachacuti
reached the conclusion that the creator, Viracocha Pachayachachic (Pachayacha-
chic = creator of the world), must be the highest god and built the Quishuar-
cancha temple for him. And, according to Cobo, 'although the Inca from the
beginning were acquainted with the creator of all things and paid honour and
brought sacrifices to him, he was not worshipped to the same extent as in the
time of Viracocha Inca and his son'.
Cobo’s story sounds illogical. The idea that Pachacuti, — as the ruler of the
upper moiety (I + III) in the second representation, whose huauque Inti illapa
was clearly connected with the Sun — , should prefer Viracocha, — the god
linked with the lower moiety — , to the sun, is not acceptable; nor is the idea
that he built a temple, Quishuarcancha, for Viracocha, which was also his own
fathers palace (e.g. Vazquez Espinosa 1948 § 1508, p. 519). The story about
Pachacuti’s meeting with the Sun is also reminiscent of Viracocha Inca’s meeting
with the god Viracocha. It seems more likely, therefore, that the last meeting
reflects Inca tradition, and that the story of Pachacuti’s meeting was a story
made up by Cobo, who could, moreover, give no significance to this story.
I assume therefore that Viracocha Inca placed the god Viracocha higher than
the Sun, but that it was Pachacuti who built the temple to the Sun, as is also
recorded by several chroniclers (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 31, p. 177). It would
then have to be Viracocha Inca as the chief of the lower moiety (II + IV) who
placed the god Viracocha higher than the Sun and thereby emphasised the
contrast between the two moieties, I + III to that of II + IV.
There remain two more questions. The first is why, as Murua asserts, Capac
Yupanqui appreciated Viracocha more highly than he did the Sun. The answer,
which I can not elucidate until later160) must, in my opinion, be that the
position which Viracocha Inca as chief of the lower moiety (II + IV) had in
the ceque system according to the second representation (viz. II 1 a), was occu
pied by Capac Yupanqui as chief of Hurin-Cuzco (II + IV) according to the
third representation.
The second question is why Cobo transferred the higher appreciation of the
god Viracocha by the ruler Viracocha Inca, to Pachacuti. In this question I can
but express a suspicion. The worship of the Sun was, to the Christian Spaniards,
and all the more to the Jesuit Cobo, a heathen concept. Now Viracocha, — the
white, bearded god and creator, who at one time had travelled through the
country to civilise the people and teach them the concept of neighbourly love,
but who had not been understood by the people — , was to the Spanish reminis
cent of Christianity. Among the Spanish there even originated the thought
that Saint Thomas had tried to convert the country and that his memory had
survived in the person of Viracocha. Cobo did not know that the placing of
16° ) See VI § 9 d pp. 205-207.

Viracocha above the Sun was the expression of a moiety contrast and not a
generally applicable view. It can therefore be readily understood that he tried
to place a piece of information, which sounded so familiar to his Christian
ears as centrally as possible and therefore connected it with Pachacuti.
b) Now that this contrast of the Sun to Viracocha has been recognised as
an expression of the moiety partition, it will also be possible to interpret the
second instance of this contrast. This occurs in the creation myth relating to
Viracocha himself. This instance also serves further to clarify the significance
lent by the Inca to the concepts of Hanan, upper, and Hurin, lower.
The creation myth of the Inca revolves around the following element (Sar-
miento 1947, cap. 7, p. 105-109). After the Flood, Viracocha161) went to
the island of Titicaca in the lake of the same name, and there created the sun,
the moon and the other heavenly bodies, the provinces and the valleys and the
people who were to inhabit them. The people for the time being remained
in the mountains, springs, etc., until Viracocha and his servants brought them
forth from there. For that purpose they travelled from Titicaca through the
whole country to the North. When they arrived at the coast, at Manta, in
Ecuador, they walked on the water and disappeared and were never seen again.
Because the Creator walked on the water in this way, says Sarmiento (1947,
cap. 7, p. 109), he was called Viracocha, the foam of the sea.
Although from this myth the contrast of Viracocha to the Sun is not yet
clearly apparent, elements of this contrast are nevertheless present in the myth.
The Sun was connected with the sky, fire and the mountain country, as opposed
to the association of Viracocha with the earth, water and the coast. This contrast
is very clearly discernable in two myths from the village of Huarochiri; because
both myths can be used to explain the first myth, it is useful to quote them.
Huarochiri lies at a short distance from that part of the coast where the holy
place of Pachacamac was situated. The highest god in Huarochiri was Coniraya
Viracocha (Avila 1939, cap. 1, p. 77; cap. 14, p. 103), the Creator, and al
though Pachacamac is also mentioned as such, it is not clear whether in Huaro
chiri, as among the Inca (Acosta 1954, libro V, cap. Ill, p. 141), the two gods
were identified with each other (Avila 1939, cap. 22, p. 116) 162).
The first myth from Huarochiri (Avila 1939, cap. 8, p. 91-93) deals with
161) The fullest form of the name Viracocha is Ticci Viracocha Pachayachachic (Cobo 1956,
Tomo II, libro 12, cap. Ill, p. 62; Sarmiento 1947, cap. 7, p. 105; Acosta 1954, libro V, cap. Ill,
p. 141; cap. IV, p. 144). Ticci means “ beginning, origin, foundation” , Pachayachachic “ creator
of the world” .
162) Avila does say here in so many words that in the mountain country the sun was wor
shipped as the highest god and on the coast Pachacamac. This myth about Pachacamac agrees
with both myths about Viracocha.
the struggle between Pariacaca (now the name of a mountain), Viracocha’s

son (Avila 1939, cap. 16, p. 105-106), against Huallallo Carhuinchu, another
primordial god. Pariacaca fights with rain and Huallallo with fire. The latter
loses the battle and has to flee to the highlands. There, according to Avila
(1939, cap. 9, p. 93) he is still worshipped by the Huanca people. Pariacaca’s
descendants, on the other hand, populated the coastal regions.
The second myth (Avila 1939, cap. 14, p. 103, 104) deals with Coniraya
Viracocha himself, but in his function as the king of the coastal regions, shortly
before the arrival of the Spaniards. He once went to the Inca Huayna Capac,
Tupac Yupanqui’s son, and together they went to Lake Titicaca. Here Viracocha
suggested to the Inca that they should divide the country, and he offered his
own sister to the Inca as a wife. Then they parted again and each returned to
his own territory.
From this last myth it may be concluded that the division of the country
concerned the coastal and the mountain regions. The comparison of the two
regions with two exogamous moieties is apparent from the marriage of Huayna
Capac with Viracocha’s sister. The myths speak of a link of the coast, rain and
water (Lake Titicaca), with Viracocha and his son; and of the mountain country
and fire, with the Sun, or with Huayna Capac, the Inca, as the son of the Sun.
Instances of the link between Viracocha and water, in the form of Lake
Titicaca and the sea into which he disappears, we found among the Inca. This
link explains the translation of Viracocha’s name by “ foam of the sea” 163).
The contrast between the Sun and Viracocha, between Hanan and Hurin, was
connected by the Inca with the contrast of heaven to earth and of the mountain
country to the coastal regions. Above 164) I concluded that Viracocha was one
aspect of the Sun which must necessarily be separated and distinguished on
account of the adaptation of the tripartition to the quadripartition and the re
sulting moiety partition. Viracocha’s journey from Lake Titicaca across the
country to the sea at Manta, Ecuador could perhaps be regarded as an earthly
projection of the course of the sun along the sky.
Finally I wish to note that in the myths from the coast, from Huarochiri,
Viracocha and his son Pariacaca were presented as being more powerful than
the Inca and Huallallo Carhuinchu. The coastal people, at least in religious
questions, recognised no superiority of the mountain people. A similar instance
can be given from the Inca among whom the lower moiety, from its point of
1 6 3 ) A metaphor similar to that used here by the Inca is found among a Ge people, the
Canella of eastern Brazil. In one of the ceremonies of these Indians the six ceremonial “ plaza
groups” who perform in it are called by the names of fishes. The leader of the six groups is
called Koyampro, which is “water foam” (Nimuendaju 1946, p. 225).
164) See V § 12 pp. 165-166.
view, regarded itself as superior to the upper moiety. The person who asked
who was more powerful, the Sun or Viracocha himself finally chose the latter.
From this fact I deduced that in the second representation the questioner must
be Viracocha Inca 165).
165) For a detailed discussion of the relationship between the Sun and Viracocha and between
the mountains and the coast, see Zuidema (1962).
CHAPTER SIX
THE THIRD REPRESENTATION
§ 1. The Relacion de los ceques in Cobo’s chronicle not only gives a des
cription of the holy sites and of the imaginary lines, the ceque, on which the
sites were situated, but also mentions which social group maintained every
ceque. Cobo’s incomplete material was supplemented by Molina’s and Sarmien-
to’s accounts1). As appeared from the reconstruction of this organization, to
which the third representation was applicable, this organization of Cuzco con
tained ten panaca and ten ayllu. The ayllu were the groups which were not
descended from the rulers. In every group of three ceque, — Collana, Payan
and Cayao — , there always occurred one panaca and one ayllu of which, as
I argued before, the panaca was linked to a Payan ceque and the ayllu to a
Cayao ceque. The panaca of the first five rulers of Hanan-Cuzco were linked
to I + III, and the panaca of the five rulers of Hurin-Cuzco to II + IV. In
the third representation I + III can therefore be called Hanan-Cuzco and
II + IV Hurin-Cuzco.
By comparing it with the first and the second representation, it is possible
to make several assumptions about the system of the third representation.
In the second representation each of the moieties Hanan-Cuzco (I 1 + I I 1 +
III 1 + IV 1) and Hurin-Cuzco (I 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2) was distributed
over the four suyu and, like Cuzco as a whole, could function as an endogamous
unit. In the third representation Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco occupied the
territories of the suyu I + III and II + IV respectively. The two moieties can
therefore be expected to function as endogamous units, just as Cuzco as a whole,
as well as the moieties Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco, did in the second re
presentation.
In the third representation every group of ceque invariably contained the
panaca of a ruler and one ayllu: the panaca linked to a Payan ceque and the
ayllu to a Cayao ceque. The ruler-founder of the panaca was probably also
linked to the same group of ceque. In the second representation, a marriage
class was divided into three groups: Collana, i.e. the group of ceque 1, Payan,
i.e. the group of ceque 2, and Cayao, i.e. the group of ceque 3. In the third
representation the groups of ceque probably each functioned as marriage classes.
In this context the founder-ruler probably belonged to a Collana ceque, and the
! ) See I §§ 2, 3 pp. 5-8.

172 VI. THE THIRD REPRESENTATION
function of the panaca in relation to the ruler probably corresponded to that of

the ruler of Hurin-Cuzco in the second representation in relation to the ruler
of Hanan-Cuzco in the same marriage class; the ayllu in the third representation
then probably corresponded to, or were identical with, the non-Inca villages,
which in the second representation comprised the wives of the rulers of Hanan-
Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco.
If the groups of ceque in the third representation were indeed marriage
classes, the implication is that there occurred five marriage classes in Hanan-
Cuzco as well as in Hurin-Cuzco. In the second representation the fourth and
fifth rulers of Hanan-Cuzco and those of Hurin-Cuzco belonged to the marriage
class I (Chinchaysuyu). It is to be expected that the structure in the third re
presentation of five groups of ceque constituting marriage classes in both moie
ties was brought about by the quinquepartition, mentioned in Chapter V ili.
As will appear later2), in the third representation the fourth and fifth rulers
of Hanan-Cuzco as well as of Hurin-Cuzco were linked to different groups
of ceque but these groups nevertheless functioned together as one marriage
class in relation to the other three marriage classes in each moiety. It is to be
expected therefore that according to the third representation, when uninfluenced
by the quinquepartition, there were altogether eight marriage classes in Cuzco.
§ 2. Cobo’s material on the ceque system, and the corresponding accounts

by Molina and Sarmiento which supplement it, reflect the organization of eight
marriage classes, but not wholly in accordance with the organization as I extra
polated it. Apparently it was outside Cuzco that this type of organization was
preserved in a pure form. Before, therefore, reconstructing it with relation to
Cuzco, I shall cite the material from outside the town.
There are two sources which speak of organizations of eight ayllu each, in
which the ayllu are subdivided into two moieties. Both sources refer to the
Andes region, south of Lake Titicaca 3). According to Matienzo (1910, p. 16),
every repartimiento (a Spanish word for a kind of province in the sixteenth
century) was divided into Hanansaya and Hurinsaya. Each moiety had its own
cacique, or chief. Both moieties were divided into eight ayllu. In councils, the
chiefs of the eight ayllu of Hanansaya occupied the best places. They sat on
the right hand side, behind their cacique, and the eight chiefs of Hurinsaya
2) See VI § 4 b, p. 180, § 5, p. 182.

3) The first source to which I shall refer is the book “ G o b iern o d e l P eru ” dating from the
sixteenth century, by Juan de Matienzo. Although Matienzo does not say where the form of
organization he mentions occurred, we may assume that this was in present-day Bolivia. When
he wrote his book he was “oidor de la Audiencia” (an administrative function) at Charcas
(present-day Sucre in southern Bolivia).
VI. THE THIRD REPRESENTATION 173
sat on lower seats behind their cacique, on the left hand side. The cacique of
Hanansaya also had authority over the whole repartimiento and the Hurin-
Cuzco cacique had to obey him.
It is difficult to decide from Matienzo’s account whether the moieties were
associated with territory or not. The second source, Bertonio’s Aymara dictionary,
possibly gives the answer to this question. Bertonio’s dictionary deals with the
Aymara dialect of Juli, a place on the south bank of Lake Titicaca. His entry
probably refers to this area. With reference to the word lari, Bertonio entered:
Lari: uncle, mother’s brother, and virtually all the wife’s kin are called lari.
Quimsacallco lari, all kinsmen of the wife are called by this word by her
husband and her sons.
Lari lari: the people from the puna (the plateau) who recognise no cacique;
cimarrones (runaway slaves, or people who have left their village and there
fore no longer live under their chief).
The translation of the term lari by MoBro and wife’s kin suggests MoBro
marriage. In the expression Quimsacallco lari, the element Quimsacallco means
eight. Apparently the woman had eight kinds of kin in her own group. If a
link is assumed between Bertonio’s entry and Matienzo’s account, the existence
of two exogamous moieties which each consisted of eight ayllu can be derived
from them. Since, according to Bertonio, the eight ayllu in either moiety were
interrelated, the moieties probably consisted of eight marriage classes4). As
the moieties were exogamous, they were probably not associated with territory,
for a territorial division would have made the practice of exogamy of the
moieties very difficult.
The non-territorial nature of the moieties is also evident from a document
of 1568 from Chucuito, (A. I. Justicia 479) a village north of Juli on Lake
Titicaca. The same organization probably obtained in Chucuito as in Juli. Ac
cording to the document all the villages in Chucuito province, including the
town of Chucuito, were divided into Hanansaya and Hurinsaya. Every village
moiety had a chief. A cacique principal stood above all the chiefs of the Hanan
saya village moieties, as another above the Hurinsaya ones. Both caciques prin
cip als lived in the town of Chucuito. The Hanansaya cacique principal was
4) The symmetrical connubium of the moieties is supported by the following datum from
Bertonio. With respect to the word Sucullu, he describes the ceremony associated with the first
dressing of a baby in certain clothes. In it the FaSi fulfilled an important function, but in her
absence the function came to the wife of MoBro. Although with eight marriage classes in one
exogamous moiety a symmetric cross-cousin marriage is improbable, the fact that FaSi and the
wife of MoBro were similarly treated may indicate the symmetrical connubium of the moieties
in which FaSi and MoBro’s wife belonged to the same moiety.
also the chief of the whole province. The Hanansaya village chiefs were also
the chiefs of their villages as a whole.
Although at a village level the moieties in Chucuito province could bear on
territory, the Chucuito document confirms that the moieties, as sketched by
Bertonio and Matienzo, each consisting of eight ayllu, were certainly not linked
to territory. It can therefore be concluded that both sources refer to an organi
zation of eight ayllu in which each ayllu was subdivided into two moieties.
It was evident from the Chucuito document and from Matienzo’s account
that there existed a hierarchical distinction between the Hanansaya and Hurin-
saya chiefs. Bertonio’s entiy lari lari also suggests a certain relationship of the
village population, which belonged to Hanansaya, to that of the surrounding
countryside, which belonged to Hurinsaya.
It seems to me that this form of organization, found south of Lake Titicaca
corresponded to the organization of Cuzco uninfluenced by the quinqueparti-
tion. Further evidence suggests 5) that the Hanansaya moieties can be compared
to the panaca in Cuzco, and the Hurinsaya moieties to the non-aristocratic ayllu
there. If this comparison is correct, it confirms once again that the rulers of the
so-called history of the Inca did not in fact form a dynasty, and that the social
organization was not the result of an historical process which involved the
foundation of panaca, but that it represented a type of organization in which no
single group could for certain be said to be older than an other.
§ 3. a) For the purposes of reconstructing the third representation of the or
ganization of Cuzco, uninfluenced by the quinquepartition, two assumptions
have to be shown to be correct. The first is that the ruler, the panaca and the
ayllu who were linked to one group of ceque constituted one marriage class;
secondly that the system of ten marriage classes had developed from a system
of eight. For the sake of convenience I shall first demonstrate that both in
Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco the organizations of four marriage classes were
the basis of the organizations of five marriage classes. For the time being I
assume that the five marriage classes did in fact exist.
b) It was possible to demonstrate the second representation by using the ma
terial on the rulers Inca Roca, Yahuar Huacac, Viracocha Inca and Pachacuti. The
extension of this dynasty by a fifth ruler, Tupac Yupanqui, had no effect on
the system of the organization. It appears that the organization of Hanan-Cuzco
(I + III) in the third representation can also be reconstructed from the material
on the first four rulers of Hanan-Cuzco.
Since Tupac Yupanqui was classed in a Chinchaysuyu group of ceque and
there were thus three rulers in this suyu as opposed to only two in Antisuyu,
5) See VI § 8, pp. 199-202.

VI. THE THIRD REPRESENTATION 1 75
it is to be expected that the quinquepartition influenced Chinchaysuyu in par

ticular. Both in the first and in the second representations Pachacuti occupied
the highest position in the organization of Cuzco. If Tupac Yupanqui’s function
in the third representation is disregarded, his position in I 1 a would be occupied
by Pachacuti. Viracocha’s position was III 1 a. Tarpuntay ayllu (III 1 c), the
ayllu of the common lower grade priests, belonged to the same marriage class
as Viracocha. The whole of the marriage class III 1 was thus linked with reli
gion and was Cayao in nature as opposed to Pachacuti’s marriage class I 1,
which was Collana in nature 6). Yahuar Huacac’s position was III 2 a. In the
second representation Sami ayllu belonged to the same marriage class as did
this ruler. The same applied to the third representation. Yahuar Huacac’s mar
riage class, III 2, therefore probably had a Payan nature as opposed to Pacha-
cuti’s marriage class, I 1. In Antisuyu use was made only of the III 1 and III 2
groups of ceque. In the framework of the four marriage classes in Hanan-Cuzco,
similar use of only I 1 and I 2 was probably made in Chinchaysuyu. Inca Roca
would in this situation have belonged to the marriage class I 2.
The reconstructed organization of four marriage classes in Hanan-Cuzco
would look as follows in diagram form:
6) From the following datum we may infer that the word “ sucsu” , i.e. the name of the panaca
of Viracocha Inca, also points to the Cayao character of the marriage class III 1. For Acosta
(1954, libro V, Cap. X V III, p. 160) says: “ The people of Peru sacrified birds of the puna —
as the desert was called there — when they went into battle in order to reduce the powers of the
huaca of the opponent. This sacrifice was called cuzcovicza or contevicza or huallavicza or
sopavicza . ..” . The names contevicza or condeviza and huallavicza or uallaviza have already
been met with in connection with the second representation of the organization of Cuzco (see
V § 10 c p. 161 and note 142). There they indicated suyu IV as marriage class of FaFaFa
with attached to it the meanings of mountain, ancestor, huaca or villca, etc.
From the context of all the rest of Acosta’s data, too, it can be seen that the word cuzco in
cuzcovicza could not have been meant to refer to the city of Cuzco but is rather a degenerate
form of the word sucsu. Cases of such degeneration or erroneous copying of this word are found
throughout the chronicles (Kirchhoff 1946, p. 304; Gutierrez 1905, p. 435). The name cuzco
vicza ( = sucsuvicza) is thus employed by Acosta as a synonym for the various meanings of
villca, including these of sanctuary and priest. In the use of the word sucsuvicza we also see
characteristics of the concept cayao. The birds in the sacrifice were killed in substitution for
the enemy and they were linked with the puna, the plains or desert outside the inhabited world.
The relation between the concepts cayao and puna were expressed in the Aymara word larilari
(see VI § 2, p. 173). The cayao character of the word sucsuvicza also emerges from Acosta’s
report of the fact that after the birds had been sacrificed, for the same purpose sacrifices were
made of black llamas, called urco, which were weakened by fasting, and black dogs called
apuruco, in which latter word we may certainly read apu-urco. The hearts of the enemy were
as weak as the llamas, says Acosta. The colour black points to the Cayao character. The word
urco had the same meaning as villca (see IV § 1 c pp. 72-73).
Lastly, in this connection I would also like to refer to the word sopavicza, used by Acosta
as a synonym of cuzcovicza ( = sucsuvicza), contevicza and huallavicza. The Spaniards translated
supay by “ devil” . From the quotation of Acosta we can see in which connection the word was
used by the Inca.
c) There are indications then that the organization into eight marriage classes,
— consisting of four Hanan-Cuzco ones, as reconstructed here, and four Hurin-
Cuzco ones — , persisted side by side with the organization into ten groups of
ceque linked with ten rulers; also that Pachacuti and Inca Roca, as I assumed
above, occupied the position I 1 and I 2 in the organization into eight marriage
classes. In order to demonstrate the correctness of these assumptions, I shall
have to return to material on the first representation.
In the first representation I also reconstructed an organization into eight
marriage classes, each divided into two moieties, based on the armies of Pacha
cuti and of the Chanca and their opposition. Pachacuti’s army comprised an
organization into four classes which represented the organization of Cuzco as
consisting of the Collana (I) and Payan (II) groups. The Chanca army also
comprised an organization into four classes which, on the other hand, repre
sented the organization of the Cayao (III + IV) group. In the organization
of Pachacuti’s army, he himself and his three assistants belonged to the upper
moiety and their four servants to the lower moiety. Although Betanzos, from
whose account this material is derived, himself said that Pachacuti belonged
to I and his assistants to II, the names of two of his assistants, Vicaquirao and
Apu Mayta pointed to a different organization of the four panaca and four
ayllu of I and II, which occurred in the first representation. Both assistants
had the same names as those of panaca in I and II of which they must have
been the chiefs (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 19, p. 145) 7). It can be concluded
therefore that Pachacuti and his three assistants personified the four panaca as
the upper moiety, and the four servants the four ayllu as the lower moiety. This
conclusion implies the assumption that the groups and the positions of the
groups to which Vicaquirao and Apu Mayta belonged, were identical in the first
and third representation, even if organized in different ways. This assumption
is supported and corroborated by the fact that no mention is made of names
in the organization of Pachacuti’s army which in the third representation
occurred outside I and II; moreover, Viracocha Inca, the only Inca connected
with III in the Chanca episode, also belonged to III in the third representation.
If the position of the groups can be said to be the same in the first and third
representation, it follows that Pachacuti the ruler was linked to I 1 b, Vicaquirao
to I 2 b, Apu Mayta to II 1 b and Quilliscachi Urco Guaranga, the third helper,
7) See IV § 5 c pp. 107-110.

to II 2 b. But then it also has to be assumed that in the third representation

the situation in Chinchaysuyu is represented in accordance with that in Hanan-
Cuzco as I reconstructed its organization without the influence of the quinque-
partition. We can go one step further and assume that the positional arrange
ment (although not the organization), and the number of panaca and ayllu,
as they were found in the first representation8), corresponded with the posi
tional arrangement and the number of panaca and ayllu in the third represen
tation uninfluenced by the quinquepartition. The third representation would then
look as follows in diagram fo rm 9) 10) n ) :
8) See IV § 5 c, d, § 6 pp. 107-113.

9) In this scheme I do not give the groups linked with the ceque Collana, although there
would be no objection to this in the third representation and in the presentation of the organi
zation of Pachacuti's army. The reason for the omission of the groups linked with the ceque
Collana is that I wished this scheme to be applicable to the first representation as well. Within
the first representation we actually encountered two variations of the organization of Cuzco
( = I + II): the representation that Chinchaysuyu was divided as Collana into four marriage
classes and Collasuyu as Payan likewise and in addition the representation that the groups of ceque
I 1, I 2, II 1 and II 2 functioned as marriage classes (see IV § 5 c pp. 107 - 110 ) . In the first case
the ceque Collana I 1 a, I 2 a, II 1 a and II 2 a played no part; in the second case they did. In the
second case, Vicaquirao and Apu Mayta belonged to the ceque Payan I 1 b and II 1 b. Sarmiento,
in his presentation of the organization of the army of Pachacuti, puts Inca Roca in the place of
Vicaquirao, however. In the third representation of the organization of Cuzco, without the influen
ce of the quinquepartition Inca Roca filled a place on a ceque Collana: I 2 a, as did Pachacuti I 1 a.
In the first case of the first representation Pachacuti — like Manco Capac in the explanation
of the first representation based on the origin myth of the Inca — belonged to Capac ayllu,
or I 1 b, however. It seems to me most probable therefore that in the first representation the
ceque Collana and the ceque Payan of one group of ceque formed one single unit: in the first
case as a marriage class; in the second case as the upper moiety of a marriage class.
10) In the foregoing I have not indicated how we should render in a diagram the four mar
riage classes of the army of Pachacuti according to Betanzos’ data. There are two possibilities
available here. T h e fir s t o f th ese i s :
T h e seco n d p o ssib ility is:

Quilliscachi Urco Pachacuti (upper moiety)
Guaranga (uppermoiety) l ib
II ab I 2b Vicaquirao Pachacuti I ib
P ata Yupanqui (lower moiety) Muru Uanca Pata Yupanqui I ic
U xu ta Urco Guaranga I 2C
I 1C
(lower moiety) ¢.
II 2C II ib Apu Mayta Quilliscachi Urco Guaranga II 2b
II IC Apu Yupanqui U xnta Urco Guaranga II 2C
Apu M ayta (upper moiety) Vicaquirao (upper moiety)

II ib . I 2b
Apu Y upanqui (lower moiety) Muru Uanca (lower moiety)

II ic I 2C
Both possibilities can be defended, although the first seems to me the most probable. In the
third representation Vicaquirao and Inca Roca — which ruler Sarmiento mentions instead of
Vicaquirao in his representation of the organization of Pachacuti’s army (see note 9) — belonged
to the marriage class of Pachacuti’s great-grandfather. This would thus be a reason to choose the
second possibility.
Vicaquirao and Pachacuti would then, however, no longer be included in one moiety, as they
Chima panaca Raurau panaca Hatun ayllu Capac ayllu
IV 2b IV lb I 2b I lb
Upper moiety Upper moiety Upper moiety Upper moiety
Quisco ayllu Masca ayllu Arairaca ayllu Chauin Cuzco ayllu
IV 2c IV lc Cuzco cayao I 2c I lc
Lower moiety Lower moiety Lower moiety Lower moiety
Apu Mayta panaca Usca Mayta panaca Sucsu panaca Aucaylli panaca
II lb II 2b III lb III 2b
Upper moiety Upper moiety Upper moiety Upper moiety
Sutic ayllu Maras ayllu Tarpuntay ayllu Sanu ayllu
II lc II 2c ‘i ll lc III 2c
Lower moiety Lower moiety Lower moiety Lower moiety
Collasuyu Antisuyu
The third representation of Cuzco uninfluenced by the quinquepartition.
§ 4. a) I propose now to examine the influence of the quinquepartition

on the organization into four marriage classes in Hanan-Cuzco. Tupac Yupan-
qui, as the last ruler in the dynasty of five rulers of Hanan-Cuzco was entitled
to the position I 1 a. Pachacuti’s position as a result shifted to I 2 a, and Inca
Roca’s to I 3 a. The material on Inca Roca does not reflect any clear effects of1
were in the first possibility, in agreement with the first representation. The name Quilliscachi
Urco Guaranga is also in agreement with placement of its bearer in the marriage class of the
great-grandfather, as I have already indicated (see V § 9 c pp. 152-154). The first possibility
therefore seems to me more likely. We must then, however, assume that the position of the
marriage class of Vicaquirao and Inca Roca with respect to Pachacuti in his army was a different
one than in the second and third representation.
11) The place held by Quilliscachi Urco Guaranga and Uxuta Urco Guaranga in Pachacuti’s
army, and thus also in the first and third representations, was II 2b and II 2 c respectively.
They would thus belong to Usca Mayta panaca (II 2 b) and Maras ayllu (II 2 c) respectively.
This also seems probable for the following reasons. The name Quilliscachi Urco Guaranga and
Uxuta Urco Guaranga show a distinct connection, not only in the words Urco and Guaranga,
but probably also in the words Quilliscachi and Uxuta. The Quilliscachi Indians had the function
of policeman, messenger and spy (see V p. 154). Now, it may be that the word Uxuta —
sandal — points not only to Uxuta Urco Guaranga’s character of servant to Quilliscachi Urco
Guaranga, but also that in the word Uxuta the functions of the Quilliscachi Indians as police
men, messengers and spies were expressed. In any case we may assume that Quilliscachi Urco
Guaranga and Uxuta Urco Guaranga were both Quilliscachi Indians. Uxuta Urco Guaranga would
have to belong to Maras ayllu. Maras ayllu is the same as the village of Maras. (In the myth
of Tambo, Maras and Sutic (IV § 1 b pp. 69-70) the group Tambo was similarly a population
group in the valley of the Urubamba river (see IV note 32) and the ayllu Sutic still survives to
the South-West of Cuzco. The ayllu Sanu was also both an ayllu of Cuzco and a village outside
Cuzco (see V § 7 c p. 145)). Maras now lies on the northern edge of the plain of Anta and
thus borders on the village of Guaroconde, in which the ayllu Quilliscachi can still be found.
Although in the chronicles the Quilliscachi Indians appear most often as policemen, messengers
and spies, the inhabitants of other villages and ayllu — e.g. the village of Anta and the ayllu
Equeco of that village — located on the plain of Anta were also mentioned in these capacities.
It therefore seems to me probable that in the organization of Cuzco the names Quilliscachi and
Maras were indications of the same group of people and that the same capacities were assigned
to the Indians of Maras as the Quilliscachi Indians and the other inhabitants of the plain of
Anta. Quilliscachi Urco Guaranga and Uxuta Urco Guaranga would thus belong to the same
group or marriage class as Usca Mayta panaca and Maras ayllu.
this shift, in contrast to the material on Pachacuti in the third representation.

This can be argued as follows.
The first representation was reconstructed from events which had taken place
at the time of Pachacuti and of Manco Capac. In this material which reflected
the first representation, these two rulers were distinct from others in that they
were the only ones to marry their sisters, which placed them in Capac ayllu 12).
In the so-called history of the Inca, on the other hand, Pachacuti married Mama
Anahuarque, a non-Inca woman. In the second representation this marriage
threw light on the marriage relationship between I and IV. In the second re
presentation every ruler belonged to the marriage class in which his mother’s
village was also classed. It is to be expected therefore that Tupac Yupanqui,
Pachacuti’s son, belonged to IV. He was, however, classed as I together with his
father, and it was Tupac Yupanqui, as the first ruler, who married his sister
despite the fact that his father had instituted this form of marriage. An illogical
element is concealed in these facts which I ascribed, in the first representation,
to the fact that Pachacuti personified the function of I as an exogamous marriage
class, and Tupac Yupanqui the function of I as an endogamous group. In the
first representation these two functions gave rise to the distinction within the
group Tambo, for instance, between two parts: the part of Manco Capac and
his brothers and sisters, who constituted an endogamous group, and the remain
der of Tambo, which maintained exogamous marriage relations with Sutic and
Maras 13). One of the distinctions between these two parts, Apu Mayta panaca
and Usca Mayta panaca, in Tambo was that between the primary and subsidiary
brothers and kin of Manco Capac, who had Collana and Payan characteristics.
Capac ayllu and Hatun ayllu were distinguished from each other in the same
way 14). This relationship in the first representation between Capac ayllu and
Hatun ayllu may have had an influence in the third representation, where Tupac
Yupanqui was associated with Capac ayllu in I 1, and Pachacuti with Hatun
ayllu in I 2. On account of its endogamous marriage form Tupac Yupanqui’s
marriage relations with other marriage classes, lent a Payan character to Pacha
cuti’s exogamous marriage, by which his marriage class participated in the
marriage- relations with other marriage classes, lent a Payan character to Pacha
cuti’s marriage class, I 2, in relation to Tupac Yupanqui’s marriage class.
b) As was demonstrated above there existed in all probability in Hanan-Cuzco,
uninfluenced by the quinquepartition an organization into four marriage classes.
In this organization the marriage class I 1, with its possibility of endogamy,
functioned as Collana in relation to the other marriage classes. As a result of
12) See IV § 2 a, p. 79.

13) See IV § 2 e, pp. 88-89.
14) See IV § 2 f, pp. 89-90.
1 80 VI. THE THIRD REPRESENTATION
the extension of the dynasty of rulers of Hanan-Cuzco from four to five rulers,
Pachacuti and his panaca were shifted from I 1 to I 2, and Inca Roca and his
panaca from I 2 to I 3; thus a fifth marriage class was, as it were, created in
which Tupac Yupanqui and his panaca were lodged. A real extension of a four
class system to one of five classes would in fact result in a complete change of
the nature of the system. Thus it would not be possible to harmonise a system
of five matrilineal and exogamous marriage classes, linked by an asymmetric
connubium with a moiety system in the same manner as was done with regard
to the system of four classes. There are no indications which point to such a
change to a five class system. There are hints, on the other hand, that after
the adaptation of the four class system to the quinquepartition, the classes linked
to I 1 and I 2, that is to say Pachacuti’s and Tupac Yupanqui’s classes, were
then together regarded as the endogamous Collana marriage class, and that Inca
Roca’s class remained that of the great-grandfather, even though linked to
I 3 15).
This material concerns the accounts of the ceremonies at the wedding of
Huayna Capac, Tupac Yupanqui’s successor, and of Huascar Inca, Huayna
Capac’s successor. For although all Tupac Yupanqui’s successors married their
sister and therefore all belonged to the Capac ayllu, the marriages of Huayna
Capac and Huascar Inca nevertheless give the impression that Hatun ayllu
and Capac ayllu were two exogamous moieties of one endogamous group in
which the rulers belonged in turn to one or the other moiety.
The marriage between Huayna Capac and his sister is described briefly by
Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 257, 258). For the consecration of the marriage,
Huayna Capac departed from Pachacuti’s house, his grandfather’s, accompanied
by his council and the high state officials and apocuraca of Collasuyu, while his
sister, Mamacusirimay, departed from Tupac Yupanqui’s house, accompanied by
the state officials and apocuraca from Chinchaysuyu, Cuntisuyu and Antisuyu,
and all the auquicona and oerjones. She was carried on her father’s litter; Huayna
Capac on his grandfather’s. They entered the temple of the Sun through separate
15) One support for this supposition has already been seen in the report by Gutierrez con
cerning the division by the ruler of the administration over the five parts of Hanan-Cuzco (see V
§ 2 b, pp. 123-126). I concluded that this ruler must have been Pachacuti. He distributed parts
of Cuzco to kin who belonged to his own lineage, to that of his father, grandfather, and great
grandfather, a n d he gave a part to his son. This manner of presentation showed that the lineages
were matrilineal marriage classes. Had there really been five marriage classes and had not Pacha
cuti but Tupac Yupanqui made this division, as Gutierrez himself says, then he would also have
had to report a lineage or marriage class of the great-great-grandfather and none for the son.
The information as put by Gutierrez may thus indicate that the ruler, Pachacuti, by my assump
tion, and his son Tupac Yupanqui, actually belonged to one marriage class.
doors and there were joined in wedlock by the Villca Uma, the high priest,
whose name was Apochallcoyupanqui.
Murua (1613, cap. 43) gave an account of Huascar’s marriage. Huascar
wished to marry his sister Chuquihuipa. His mother, Rahua Ocllo, refused to
give her consent. Thereupon Huascar went to the mummy of Tupac Yupanqui
and asked him and those who looked after and represented the mummy for
permission for this marriage. Tupac Yupanqui gave his consent after which
Rahua Ocllo also agreed. On the day of the marriage Huascar departed from
his house accompanied by the image of the sun and by Tupac Yupanqui’s mum
my, and went to the house of Rahua Ocllo to collect his bride. Murua does not
mention who performed the marriage ceremony. About Huascar’s coronation
however, — for the ruler’s coronation always took place at the same time as his
marriage — , he writes (1613, cap. 39) that Apo Challco Yupanqui, the high
priest and grandson of Viracocha Inca, officiated at this ceremony.
Because the two accounts are so similar, either can be used to support and
elucidate the other. In the first account Pachacuti and Tupac Yupanqui each
had their own house. Their panaca, Hatun ayllu and Capac ayllu, also lived
there. Huayna Capac was associated with the house of Pachacuti, his grand
father, and therefore also with his panaca. In the second account the panaca
of Huascar’s grandfather was mentioned in connection with Huascar16). If it
is accepted that Huayna Capac and Huascar also belonged to the panaca and
the houses of their grandfathers, it follows that the four rulers constituted a
patrilineal lineage, and that the two panaca were mutually opposed as matri-
lineal and matrilocal moieties; this applies, at any rate, if it is accepted that
there was a constant, mutual marriage relationship between the two panaca.
The two marriages complied with this condition. In a system of two matrilineal
and matrilocal moieties, ego’s father, wife and wife’s mother belong to the same
moiety. In the first account Huayna Capac’s bride departed from the house of
his father, Tupac Yupanqui. That is to say, she belonged to Tupac Yupanqui’s
panaca or moiety. In the second account Huascar’s bride lived in her mother’s
house, which was possibly also that of his father, Huayna Capac, and his great-
16) Pachacuti Yamqui also connects Huascar with the house of Tupac Yupanqui. According
to him (1950, p. 277) Huascar lived in Pucamarca, the palace which had belonged to his grand
father. Another association of Huascar with his grandfather is seen at his death: when during
the civil war between Huascar and his half-brother Atahuallpa, the generals of the latter had
taken Huascar prisoner and killed him, they directed their vengeance according to Sarmiento
(1947, cap. 66, pp. 266-270), especially at the house, i.e. the panaca, of Tupac Yupanqui which
had supported Huascar. They killed the head of the house with the wives and servants and
burned the mummy of Tupac Yupanqui. Murua (1613, cap. 57) also says that they killed all
those who had been in the service of the dead man and the wives and descendants of Tupac
Yupanqui. He gives as reason that Tupac Yupanqui was the father of Rahua Ocllo, the mother
of Huascar, and the grandfather of Huascar on both his father’s and mother’s sides.
grandfather’s, Pachacuti. Although the ruler and his sister, i.e. his wife, and
their common parents all belonged to Capac ayllu, there was nevertheless a
suggestion that the marriages of the rulers after Pachacuti gave expression to a
moiety relationship between Capac ayllu and Hatun-ayllu; as a result these
panaca constituted one endogamous group. In the organization of Hanan-Cuzco
they together constituted the endogamous Collana marriage class 17).
§ 5. Although we have to accept that in Hurin-Cuzco in the third presem

tation, without the influence of the quinquepartition, there existed a situation
identical to that in Hanan-Cuzco, it is extremely difficult if not impossible to
deduce this original situation from the material relating to the panaca of
Hurin-Cuzco. It is to be expected that in Hurin-Cuzco uninfluenced by the
quinquepartition the rulers, — from whose number the fifth, Capac Yupanqui,
was missing — , were associated with the marriage classes as follows: Mayta
Capac with II 1, Lloque Yupanqui with IV 1, Tarco Huaman with IV 2, and
Sinchi Roca with II 2. In this list I made use of the same sequence of the rulers
of Hurin-Cuzco as was found in the second representation. Yet there is no
evidence of a similar situation in the associations of the five rulers with the
marriage classes of Hurin-Cuzco. Capac Yupanqui in the system of five rulers
was linked to II 2, Mayta Capac to II 1, Lloque Yupanqui to II 3, Sinchi Roca
to IV 1, and Manco Capac to IV 2 18).
The confusion arose, because in the best known tradition of one royal dynasty
the dynasty of Hurin-Cuzco was given a place anterior to the dynasty of Hanan-
Cuzco. The representation of the dynasty of Hurin-Cuzco was based on the fact
that the chiefs of the classes of ego, his father, his grandfather and his great
grandfather were identified with the latter. Thus, Lloque Yupanqui became
the father of Mayta Capac, Tarco Huaman the grandfather, and Sinchi Roca the
great-grandfather. Under the influence of the quinquepartition, Capac Yupanqui
was added to this dynasty as the son of Mayta Capac. Because, in addition, the
whole dynasty of Hurin-Cuzco was placed anterior to that of Hanan-Cuzco,
Manco Capac, who had been outside the organization of Cuzco in his capacity
as the father or forefather of Inca Rcca and of Sinchi Roca, at any rate in the
second representation, now belonged to Hurin-Cuzco and thus removed Sinchi
Roca from his position as the first ruler of Hurin-Cuzco. As a result of Sinchi
Roca’s change to the position of second ruler, there came to be six
rulers in Hurin-Cuzco, which is one too many. In order to reduce their number
to five again, Tarco Huaman was eliminated from the dynasty. In Acosta’s and
17) See also IX § 2 p. 240.

18) To one part of the confusion, — i.e. the association of Capac Yupanqui with II 2 and
Mayta Capac with II 1 — , I referred already before. See IV § 2 d p. 88, V § 2 b p. 125.
of Polo’s versions of the history of the Inca, the process by which Tarco
Huaman disappeared from the dynasty can be seen. Tarco Huaman and Capac
Yupanqui changed places; Tarco Huaman thus became the sixth ruler of Hurin-
Cuzco and could as such not maintain his position in the dynasty of five rulers
of Hurin-Cuzco who were followed by the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco.
It is not possible to determine now how the shifts and movements in the
rulers’ dynasty of Hurin-Cuzco caused the confusion in the allocation of posi
tions to the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco. It does not seem likely that this confusion
also influenced the positions of the panaca. I shall discuss this reservation
further below 19).
I demonstrated with regard to Hanan-Cuzco that in the system of five panaca
Capac ayllu and' Hatun ayllu together (as an endogamous group divided into
two matrilineal, matrilocal moieties), probably constituted the Collana marriage
class. In relation to Hurin-Cuzco, there is one indication which possibly shows
that Apu Mayta panaca and Usca Mayta panaca, too, constituted a similar endo
gamous group. Acosta, in his version of the history of the Inca, mentions Don
Juan Tambo Maytapanaca as the eighth ruler of Hurin-Cuzco. He was, in my
view, the same person as Don Juan Tambo Usca Mayta, the chief, in 1572,
of Usca Mayta panaca 20). If, in the context of the marriages of the rulers of
Hurin-Cuzco after Mayta Capac, Usca Mayta panaca and Apu Mayta panaca
were regarded as the matrilineal exogamous moieties of an endogamous group,
this might explain why Don Juan Tambo Usca Mayta, as the eighth ruler,
together with the sixth ruler, was associated with Usca Mayta panaca, i.e. the
panaca of Mayta Capac, the fourth ruler. One would, otherwise, have expected
Don Juan to be associated with the Apu Mayta panaca 21). If this explanation
is correct, it also follows that Capac Yupanqui and his successors married their
sisters, although possibly not those born from the same mother as themselves.
This last suggestion can also be deduced from a remark by Cobo (1956, tomo
II, libro 14, cap. VII, p. 250) that the men of the highest aristocracy were
also permitted to marry their sisters although not, like the ruler, any born from
the same mother.
§ 6. a) I based my argument that in the third representation there existed a

system of four marriage classes, both in Hanan-Cuzco and in Hurin-Cuzco,
19) See VI § 9 c p. 205.

20) See V note 32.
21) The explanation of why Don Juan Tambo Usca Mayta belonged to Usca Mayta panaca
could not follow from the succession of the rulers in Hurin-Cuzco as Acosta gives it, however.
Mayta Capac was the fifth ruler there and not the fourth. The explanation can therefore be
only a supposition.
on the positions of the rulers in this organization. I extrapolated their positions

from those of the panaca of which they were said to be the founders. I assumed
implicitly that the three social groups which were linked to one ceque each from
every group of three ceque (i.e. the ruler to ceque a, the panaca founded by
him to ceque b and the ayllu which did not descend from any ruler, to ceque
c) in this representation together constituted one matrilineal marriage class.
In the framework of the third representation the panaca would then have
to be a matrilineal exogamous group. It appears, however, that the accounts in
the chronicles by no means support this view of the panaca.
According to Sarmiento (cap. 14, p. 134) the panaca was a group consisting
of the children of a ruler and their descendants, with the exception of the suc
cessor to the throne who founded his own panaca. A subsidiary son of the
founder was the chief of the panaca and it derived its name from him. This
description seems to indicate that the panaca was a group, an ayllu, which
descended patrilineally from the founder, a so-called ruler, and as such did not
fit into any matrilineal marriage class.
Side by side with these indications in the chronicles of the patrilineal nature
of the panaca, there are however others which definitely indicate their matri
lineal nature. The first piece of evidence is the very term panaca. Panaca derives
from the word pana, the sister of a man, and its meaning is: the group of the
man’s sister or sisters 22). The panaca was a descent group. In an endogamous
or a patrilineal exogamous group the term sisters’ group would not be applicable.
Neither in a patrilineal nor a matrilineal exogamous group can the descendants
22) Likewise pachaca means “group of 100” (pachac = 100) and yanaca “group of Yanacona”
(yanacona is the plural of yana = black, servant or serf. See IV note 50). A confirmation of
this translation of panaca is found in the word apupanaca. Apu is “ Lord” ; an apupanaca was
the ambassador of the ruler who supervised the houses of the aclla, the maidens of the sun
(Polo 1916a, pp. 91-94; Acosta 1954, libro V, cap. X V , p. 156; Cobo 1956, Tomo II, libro 13,
cap. X X V II, p. 232). Originally the maidens of the sun were probably equated with the group
of the sisters of a chief or ruler. According to the R e latio n d e lo s ceques, the first huaca, named
Inticancha ( = house of the sun), of the seventh ceque, Collana, of Cuntisuyu was a small
house in which the sisters of Manco Capac had lived who had come with him from Pacaric-
tampu. As a result of the manner in which the fourteen ceque of Cuntisuyu could be reduced
to a system of nine ceque, the seventh ceque in the R e la tio n belonged in the reduced system
to ceque IV 1 a. Inticancha was another name for Coricancha, the temple of the sun. According
to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 13, p. 131), Inticancha, divided into four cancha (walled living spaces),
was the place where Manco Capac and his sisters went to live; according to Cieza (1943, cap.
X X V II, p. 152, 1 53) Coricancha contained four houses of aclla. Thus, equated with each other
were the place where Manco Capac and his sisters went to live, the house of the sisters of
Manco Capac alone and the temple where the maidens of the sun lived. A confirmation of this
equation is seen lastly in the report by Cieza (1947, cap. X X X I, p. 173) (see V § 7 c p. 145) that
the sister of Lloque Yupanqui, or as I assumed of Sinchi Roca, withdrew to the house of the
maidens of the sun because her brother had married a non-Inca woman and not her as he should
have done.
of a man be classed in his sister’s group. It seems most likely therefore that
the word panaca points to a matrilineal exogamous group in which the man
belongs to his sister’s group. His children can then not be classed in his group.
The second indication of the matrilineal nature of the panaca was found
in Gutierrez23). According to him, Pachacuti, when he organized Cuzco, as
signed the government of the ten parts of the town to kinsmen from different
lineages, viz. the lineages to which the patrilineal ascendants or descendants
of Pachacuti belonged or had belonged. This division of the government sug
gests that the lineages themselves were matrilineal in nature. I used Gutierrez’s
evidence to explain the origin of the presentation of the so-called history of
the Inca. The fact that in this history every ruler of the patrilineal dynasty
founded his own panaca, could, like Gutierrez’s remark about the lineages, be
interpreted, as being an indication of the matrilineal nature of the panaca.
b) Although one might be inclined to say that patrilineality and matri-
lineality are mutually exclusive, this exclusion does not operate in the applica
tion of the concepts related to Inca social organization. Thus words indicating
matrilineality were encountered in relation to exogamous marriage classes. In
connection with the term ayllu24) I pointed out before that words pointing
to patrilineality were used to indicate the endogamous nature of the group.
I presented the ayllu as consisting of matrilineal marriage classes linked by an
asymmetric connubium. The unity and endogamy of the classes as a whole was
symbolised by a patrilineal lineage. The words ayllu and villca reflected the
endogamous and patrilineal nature of this whole, for both words also signified
phallus symbol, while villca also meant great-grandfather and forefather.
Exogamy and endogamy in a group need not be mutually exclusive, although
the group’s behaviour in relation to other groups is different in the two situa
tions. It may well be that a social group which, in the third representation,
was linked to one group of three ceque and consisted of a ruler, a panaca and
a non-aristocratic ayllu, functioned as a matrilineal and exogamous marriage
class in relation to other groups; the patrilineal characteristics, however, which
I thought could be recognised in Sarmiento’s 25) account of the panaca, were
based on the endogamy of the group.
For the purposes of demonstrating that the marriage class in the third repre
sentation could function as an exogamous as well as endogamous group, it
might be profitable first to examine some of the characteristics which the mar
riage class can be expected to show as an exogamous and as an endogamous
group.
23) See V § 2 b, pp. 123-125.

24) See IV § 1 c, pp. 72-74.
25) See VI § 6 a, p. 184.
In this chapter, I assumed that the marriage classes in the third representa
tion functioned in the same way as those in the second. In the second represen
tation the following links were to be found in each suyu as a marriage class:
a) a ruler of Hanan-Cuzco was linked to a Collana group of ceque; b) his
subsidiary brother, as a ruler of Hurin-Cuzco, was linked to a Payan group
of ceque; c) the wives of the father of a ruler and of the father’s subsidiary
brother were linked to a Cayao group of ceque. It is to be expected therefore
that in the third representation in every group of three ceque, as an exogamous
marriage class, the ruler was linked to a Collana ceque, his subsidiary brother,
as his general and deputy, to a Payan ceque, and their father’s wife to a Cayao
ceque.
In each group of three ceque as an endogamous group the ruler also belonged
to a Collana ceque, but to the ceque Payan belonged his subsidiary sons, —
that is to say, his panaca — , instead of his subsidiary brothers. The non-Inca
population was linked to the Cayao ceque. There are indications in several
sources that one and the same name could be applied to the subsidiary brother
of the ruler (with whom this brother belonged to the same marriage class
and at whose side the brother held the same functions which, in the exogamous
marriage class, were associated with the Payan group) and to the subsidiary
son who, in the same marriage class but now in its function as an endogamous
group, was associated with the same Payan group and, in the endogamous group,
had Payan characteristics. This double meaning of the name of a Payan group
can be accepted as evidence of the fact that the functions of Collana, Payan and
Cayao as a whole, to which this group belonged in its Payan quality, were
both endogamous and exogamous.
I shall cite four instances of this double nature of the marriage class. Only
two of these instances relate to the third representation. In order to explain
these last two instances, I shall, to begin with, examine one from the Chanca
social organization, and then one relating to the second representation of Cuzco.
It appears from the second instance that in this respect, too, the third repre
sentation and the moieties of the second representation show agreement.
c) The first instance is based on the following sources. In the description
of the organization of the army of the Chanca it appeared26) that this army
had two leaders: Uscovilca, the leader of the Hanan-Chanca, and his brother,
Ancovilca, the leader of the Hurin-Chanca. Uscovilca was in addition the com-
mander-in-chief or ruler of all the Chanca. I argued that both leaders could be
placed in one and the same marriage class in the organization of the Chanca.
Sarmiento (1947, cap. 26, p. 163) adds that after these two chiefs had died.
26) See IV § 5 b, p. 104.

their companions made an image of Uscovilca which they always carried with
them when they went to war. This image was called Ancoallo. Although the
Chanca had other leaders, sinchi, their feats were always credited to the image
of Uscovilca.
After the Chanca had been defeated, they were included in the army of
Capac Yupanqui the general, brother and deputy of Pachacuti 27). The leader
of the Chanca was now Ancoaillo (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 38, p. 192-195); he,
according to Sarmiento, was captured by the Inca at the Chanca attack on
Cuzco 28).
In Sarmiento’s account three names were mentioned containing the element
Anco: Ancovilca, Ancoallo and Ancoaillo. All three probably referred to the
same concept which, in the organization of the Chanca, was expressed in dif
ferent ways and functions. The identity of the words Ancoallo and Ancoaillo
goes without saying. Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 258) names Ancoaillo instead
of Ancovilca. He writes of the Hancoallo as of a people which, together with
the Chanca, made an attack on Cuzco. According to Garcilaso (1945, Tomo I,
libro IV, cap. X X II), the leader of the Chanca in the war against Cuzco was
called Ancohuallu. The element vilca in Ancovilca’s name is synonymous with
ayllu, which can be recognised in the name Ancoaillo. Huallu can be seen as a
variant form of ayllu; Lira's dictionary gives wayllu as being related to ayllu.
Ancoaillo and Ancohuallu then represent two different ways of writing the
same name and refer to the same person as Ancovilca.
Several functions were associated with the bearer of the name Ancovilca
which also occur in the other three instances. In the first place, it was the
brother of Uscovilca, — the ruler of all the Chanca and more specifically the
chief of the Hanan-Chanca — , who was called Ancovilca, or Ancoaillo. He
was the chief of the Hurin-Chanca and probably Uscovilca’s general and
deputy 29).
27) See V § 4 b, p. 130.

28) Sarmiento mentions Ancoaillo with respect to the following event. In the conquests made
by Capac Yupanqui in the northern part of Peru the Chanca distinguished themselves so greatly
that Pachacuti was afraid that they would become aware of their strength and rise against the
Inca. He therefore sent Capac Yupanqui word that he should kil all the Chanca in his army.
The talk between the messenger who brought this news and Capac Yupanqui was overheard by
Capac Yupanqui’s wife who was a sister of Ancoaillo and she told the message to her brother.
One night all the Chanca fled to the jungles of northeastern Peru and the Inca were unable to
catch up with them. In connection with the first representation I stated that there was a moiety-
opposition between the Inca and the Chanca (see IV § 5 d pp. 110-113). We may possibly see
an expression of this moiety relationship in the marriage of Capac Yupanqui with the sister
of Ancoaillo.
29) From the title “ Capitan general” which Garcilaso gave to Ancoaillo — or as he writes it
Ancohuallu — as headman of the Chanca, it can also be inferred that he had in mind the
function of “general and substitute” , since he also called Capac Yupanqui the “ Capitan general”

The function of the image of Uscovilca called Ancoaillo was probably in

accordance with the first-mentioned function of Ancoaillo. If this image is
regarded as the huauque, or amulet and oracle of Uscovilca, then the other
meaning of the word huauque, namely brother, points to this brother relation
ship 30).
Both these functions, associated with the bearer of the name Ancoaillo, or
Ancovilca, fit in with the organization of the army of the Chanca, consisting
as it did in my reconstruction, of four exogamous, matrilineal marriage classes
and corresponding to similar organizations among the Inca31). The meaning
of the name Ancoaillo, however, is contradictory to such an organization, for
it clearly points to association with an ayllu, which would have to be Uscovilca’s
ayllu or panaca. It appears then from the name Ancoaillo that Uscovilca’s and
Ancovilca’s marriage class also functioned as an endogamous group. This may
explain why Garcilaso and Sarmiento, in their descriptions of the campaign of
Capac Yupanqui mentioned only Ancoaillo as the leader of the Chanca. An
coaillo was the chief of the Chanca and the chief of the panaca of Uscovilca,
which was also called Ancoaillo. Uscovilca himself, in the endogamous presen
tation of his marriage class, was the mythical founder of his panaca. In Pacha-
cuti Yamqui’s account, the name Ancoaillo had probably passed completely to
the panaca. It appears, then, that the concept Ancovilca, or Ancoaillo, applied
to the exogamous marriage class as well as to an endogamous group.
d) The second instance of the double function of the marriage class, as an
exogamous as well as endogamous group, concerns the marriage class of Tupac
Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui in the second representation of the organization
of Cuzco32). The fact that Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui were the
rulers of Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco, is in agreement with the function
of this marriage class as an exogamous as well as matrilineal group. Their
names, like those of Uscovilca and Ancovilca, are synonymous. Capac Yupanqui
is also referred to as the subsidiary brother and general and deputy of Pacha-
cuti, but not of Tupac Yupanqui. In the second representation, however, Pacha-
cuti belonged to the same marriage class as Tupac Yupanqui, and these two
had certain characteristics in common33).
of Pachacuti. See V § 4 b, p. 130.

30) It is clear that with the statue of Uscovilca his huauque is meant if we recall the meaning
which the huauque of Manco Capac had for Mayta Capac (see V § 10 a p. 157). This huauque,
a bird, was shut up in a cage at Manco Capac’s death and Mayta Capac was the first who dared
to release it. Mayta Capac talked with the bird and as a result became a “wise and alert man
who knew what he had to do and what awaited him” (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 17, p. l 4 l ) .
31) See IV § 5 b, c pp. 103-110, V § 4 a, b pp. 129-131.
32) See V § 4 pp. 129-133.
33) See V § 5 a, p. 133-134.
Capac ayllu, Tupac Yupanqui’s panaca, however also had the name Capac in
common with Capac Yupanqui. It has to be assumed that the agreement in
name, just as in the organization of the Chanca, points to the endogamous
function of the marriage class of Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui in the
second representation34).
e) We have now reached the position in which it has become possible to exa
mine the two instances from the third representation of the organization of
Cuzco. These two instances concern the different meanings of the names Vica-
quirao and Apu Mayta.
In the discussion of the panaca, I used Sarmiento’s description of i t 35).
34) In this example from the second representation there occurs, however, a difficulty which
cannot be omitted here. I referred to the agreement between the names Capac Yupanqui and
Capac ayllu and connected this example with the second representation. The name Capac ayllu
or the concept panaca had not yet been linked with the second representation, however. I did
point out the meaning of the words Capac, Hatun and Huchuy in the second representation
(see V § 1 a p . 115) as indications of the first, second and third groups of ceque in a suyu
respectively. On the other hand, it was not possible for me to explain the meaning within the
second representation of the three ceque in one group. Without going too deeply into the
problem, I would like to make it understandable that Capac ayllu in the second representation
played the same part at place I 1 b, and therefore bore the same name, as Capac Yupanqui at
place I 2 a, a place to which Capac Yupanqui had a right as ruler of Hurin-Cuzco. The argument
is that, within a suyu as a marriage class of the second representation, the ceque 1 b ( =
Collana-Payan) — and the group represented by that ceque — had an identical relationship
to the ceque 1 a ( = Collana-Collana) as the ceque 2 a ( = Payan-Collana) to the ceque 1 a
( = Collana-Collana). This proposition can be illustrated by the organization of the village
of Acos which I took as an example for that of a suyu in the second representation (V
§ 1 c, p. 118).
Acos was divided into three ayllu: Cuzco ( = Hanansaya), Acos ( = Hurinsaya) and Ana-
huarque. Fixing the attention on these names, I reasoned that the Inca would belong to ayllu
Cuzco, the native population of the village to ayllu Acos and the surrounding population to the
ayllu Anahuarque. This assumption may be correct. If we notice, however, the names Hanansaya
and Hurinsaya and compare the organization of Acos with that of a suyu in the second represen
tation, we must come to the conclusion that the Inca of Hanan-Cuzco belonged to Hanansaya
and those of Hurin-Cuzco to Hurinsaya. That this conclusion is correct will be demonstrated
below (see VI § 9 a pp. 203-204). Besides the relationship in the village of Acos between the ayllu
Hanansaya ( = Hanan-Cuzco) and Hurinsaya ( = Hurin-Cuzco), there was within the ayllu
Hanansaya ( = Cuzco) a relationship between the sub-ayllu which was identical with the fore
going. The sub-ayllu Collana was called Hanan-Cuzco; the sub-ayllu Payan was called Payan
Hurin-Cuzco. The relationship of the ayllu Acos to the ayllu Cuzco was thus the same as that
of the sub-ayllu Payan Hurin-Cuzco to the sub-ayllu Collana Hanan-Cuzco. If we also apply
this comparison to the organization of a suyu in the second representation of Cuzco, we obtain
2 : 1 = lb: la. We may probably, in the first part of the comparison, substitute 2a and la
for 2 and 1. The comparison would then become 2a: la = lb: la. I will not here go into the
realization of this comparison in the organization of Cuzco. It may be that Capac Yupanqui
also belonged to Capac ayllu. In any case, it seems to me to have been established as probable
that Capac ayllu also played a role in the second representation and that the comparison found
here indicates the reason why Capac Yupanqui had the same name as Capac ayllu.
35) See VI § 6 a p. 184.
According to him the panaca was called after a subsidiary son of the ruler who
had founded the panaca. Sarmiento, in his account of the so-called history of
the Inca, supports this assertion only in relation to the panaca of the rulers
Inca Roca and Capac Yupanqui, and even in those instances his evidence is
incomplete. Vicaquirao was the name of a subsidiary son of Inca Roca as well
as of his panaca (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 19, p. 144), but Apu Mayta was not
the name of a son of Capac Yupanqui, but of a grandson of his (Sarmiento
1947, cap. 18, p. 143) 36).
I now propose to trace how far the meanings which in the last two instances
were associated with the names Ancovilca, or Ancoaillo, and of Capac Yupan
qui, or Capac ayllu, are also expressed in the names Vicaquirao and Apu Mayta.
If the same meanings can be detected in these names, this would indicate that
the names Vicaquirao and Apu Mayta designated exogamous, matrilineal groups
as well as endogamous groups; the former groups could function as marriage
classes. If proof can be found for the existence of these two marriage classes,
it would follow that the other rulers and their panaca also belonged to marriage
classes. This proof can be argued as follows.
The same synonymity found in the names Uscovilca and Ancovilca, and in
Tupac Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui, can also be recognised in the words
Capac — of the name Capac Yupanqui — and Apu — of the name Apu Mayta
panaca, i.e. the panaca of Capac Yupanqui, the ruler — . They were both titles
of rulers, or very highly placed officials. The huauque of Uscovilca, as was
shown before37), had the same name as his brother, Ancoaillo (or, according
to Sarmiento, Ancovilca), the chief of the Hurin-Chanca. The huauque of
Inca Roca and Capac Yupanqui also had the same names as the panaca of
these rulers (Cobo 1956, Tomo II, libro 12, cap. VIII-IX, p. 72, 73) 38)
This last piece of evidence gives the strong impression that the two other
functions, which in the second representation were associated with the ruler’s
brother (huauque), with his general and deputy and with the ruler of Hurin-
Cuzco, are in the same way connected in the third representation with Vicaquirao
and Apu Mayta. It is noteworthy, however, that these two other functions are
mentioned only in an association with Vicaquirao and Apu Mayta, — who in
fact represent the only instances I can cite from the third representation for the
36) Sarmiento (1947, cap. 14, p. 134) does say that the panaca of Manco Capac was called
Chima panaca after Chima — a person to whom Manco Capac had entrusted the administration
of the panaca — but the only subsidiary son of whom he speaks is Manco Sapaca (Sarmiento
1947, cap. 13, pp. 129, 131).
37) See VI § 6 c, p. 186-188.
38) The only authors who supply us with names of the huauque of the Inca rulers are Sar
miento and Cobo. The data are either entirely in agreement with each other or supplement each
other. The huauque of Inca Roca and Capac Yupanqui are not mentioned by Sarmiento.
purpose of comparison with the instances mentioned above from the organiza
tion of the Chanca and from the second representation — , and that both these
other functions were mentioned not in the third, but in the first representation.
There Vicaquirao and Apu Mayta were two of Pachacuti’s three generals and
deputies. Pachacuti and his primary kin belonged to Hanan-Cuzco ( = Chin-
chaysuyu), and Vicaquirao and Apu Mayta, as his subsidiary kin, to Hurin-
Cuzco ( = Collasuyu) 39). If it is assumed that by Pachacuti’s primary kin are
meant his predecessors, the rulers, then Vicaquirao and Apu Mayta can be
regarded as the representatives, in the first representation, of the generals and
deputies of all the rulers. In the third representation, these generals and deputies
would have to be represented, in accordance with the endogamous function
of the marriage class of every ruler, as the subsidiary son of every ruler, and
as the chief of his panaca. It could be asserted that one of the aims of the third
representation was to present the marriage class of each of the rulers in its
function of endogamous group as the replica of the organization of Cuzco in
the first representation, in which there was question of only one ruler, Pacha
cuti. In the marriage classes of the rulers, in their exogamous function, it is to
be expected that the chiefs of the panaca were at the same time the generals
and deputies of the rulers who had founded their panaca, and that between
the group linked to a Collana ceque and that linked to a Payan ceque in one
group of ceque, there existed a relationship similar to that between Hanan-
Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco, in the first and in the second representations.
In Sarmiento’s material on Vicaquirao and Apu Mayta in their capacities
of subsidiary sons of Inca Roca and of Capac Yupanqui, the function of general
and deputy cannot be clearly discerned. Sarmiento does mention them as being
the most important, but not as their fathers’ generals.
In his chapter on Inca Roca he (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 19, p. 144, 145)
writes ‘He (Vicaquirao) was a great soldier and he was the comrade in arms
of Apu Mayta, and these two captains were the ones who obtained great vic
tories on behalf of Viracocha Inca and Inca Yupanqui (i.e. Pachacuti), and
who conquered many provinces for them; (these conquests) were the beginning
of the great power which the Inca had later’. Even though it may have appeared
odd to Sarmiento that a son made all his father’s conquests, it is even more
incredible in his historical image that Vicaquirao and Apu Mayta should have
made these conquests when still young men for a ruler who lived three genera
tions later.
Another chronicler, Poma de Ayala, however, does mention that it was al
ways the subsidiary son who was the ruler’s most important general, and that
he made all the conquests for his father. After his survey of all tne Inca rulers
39) See IV § 2 a, p. 79.
and of the Coya, the queens, Poma (1944, foja 146-172) also gives a survey
of the capitanes, or sinchi, of the rulers, who were also their subsidiary sons.
Although Poma writes that every ruler had one capitan, or sinchi, he never
theless frequently mentions in his account the names of other subsidiary sons
who made conquests for their fathers. Poma does not mention the panaca of the
rulers; the capitanes, or sinchi, also carry different names in his account than
the rulers' sons in Sarmiento’s or any other chronicle. There seems to be no
doubt, however, that the function of general and deputy in Poma’s account
is filled by the capitan, or sinchi, who was the same figure as the chief of the
panaca in Sarmiento. In the second representation, too, the word sinchi in my
opinion pointed to the function of the general and deputy, as in the name
Sinchi Roca as opposed to Inca R oca40). On the basis of Poma’s account it
can therefore be assumed that the chief of the panaca in the third representa
tion was also the general and deputy of the ruler who had founded the panaca;
it can also be assumed that, within the exogamous function of the marriage
class, the chief of the panaca’s position in relation to that of the ruler was that
of a subsidiary brother in relation to his primary brother, similar to that in the
second represeritation of a ruler of Hurin-Cuzco to the ruler of Hanan-Cuzco
in the same marriage class.
It can be concluded from this material that in the third representation there
existed a relationship between the group consisting of all the Collana ceque and
the group consisting of all Payan ceque, like that between Hanan-Cuzco and
Hurin-Cuzco, in the first and in the second representations.
Above, I examined the question how far the positions of the rulers in the
third representation indicated that the groups of ceque to which they belonged,
comprised marriage classes41). All the characteristics of the marriage class
which I cited, as an endogamous as well as exogamous group, in the organiza
tion of the Chanca and in the second representation of the organization of Cuzco,
were also encountered among the instances I cited from the third representation.
To conclude this discussion, I think that the question posed in the beginning
can be answered in the affirmative. The position of the rulers in the third
representation also proved, in that context, that both in Hanan-Cuzco (I + III)
and in Hurin-Cuzco (II + IV) there existed a system of four marriage classes
of which each class was subdivided into Collana, Payan and Cayao groups.
§ 7. a) Hitherto I have not mentioned in the third representation the

non-aristocratic ayllu which in Hanan-Cuzco (I + III) and in Hurin-Cuzco
(II + IV) comprised the Cayao group, consisting of all the Cayao ceque. To
i0 ) See V § 7 a, pp. 140-141.

« ) See VI § 3 pp. 174-178.
expound the problem to be dealt with I shall first repeat some of the con
clusions relating to the first and the second representations.
In the first representation of the organization of Cuzco, I described an
internal organization of four marriage classes in Collana ( = I = Hanan-
Cuzco), and Payan ( = II = Hurin-Cuzco), but I had no material at my
disposal for assuming a similar organization in Cayao ( = II + IV ). I was
of the opinion, however, that in Cayao the organization of the Chanca army
took the place of that of four marriage classes.
In the framework of the second representation of the organization of Cuzco
I was unable to cite an organization into four marriage classes which occupied
the position of the Cayao group (I 3 + II 3 + HI 3 + IV 3) in the same
way as in the first representation. The groups which in the second represen
tation were associated with the four marriage classes within Cayao (i.e. the
classes I 3, II 3, III 3, IV 3), manifested no mutual connection or co-ordination.
It is not possible, either, to assert that the non-aristocratic ayllu in the third
representation constituted an organization of four marriage classes within the
Cayao group in Hanan-Cuzco (I + III) or in Hurin-Cuzco (II + IV ). When,
however, the Inca conquered Cuzco, they came across a population which was
organized into two groups of three ayllu. These pre-Inca ayllu were put on
a par with the non-aristocratic ayllu, which in the third representation consti
tuted the Cayao group. Like the organization of the Chanca in the first repre
sentation, the organization of the pre-Inca population in the third representation
presents the image of the internal organization of Cayao, in Hanan-Cuzco and
in Hurin-Cuzco. It also throws a different light on the relationships of the
Cayao group (i.e. the group of Cayao ceque) to the Collana one (i.e. the group
of Collana ceque) and the Payan one (i.e. the group of Payan ceque). It is
necessary, therefore, first to examine the organization of the pre-Inca population.
b) According to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 9, p. 112, 113) three nations (nacio-
nes), or groups (parcialidades) had lived in the Cuzco valley from time imme
morial. Although they lived close together, their lands were nevertheless separate.
These groups were called Sahuasiray 42), Antasayac43) and Huaylla44). Then
there came three sinchi (war leaders), from outside the valley, who were called
the Allcabiza 45), Copalimayta and Culumchima 46), with the troops they had
42) Sarmiento refers to Sauaseras (1947, cap. 9, p. 112) and to Sauaseray (1947, cap. 13,
p. 130). Toledo (1940, p. 185) and Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 215) write Sauasiray.
43) According to Toledo (1940, p. 185); Sarmiento gives Antasaya.
44) Sarmiento gives: Guallas; Toledo: Huallas (1940, p. 192); Murua: Guayllas ( 1613, cap.
3) and Poma de Ayala: Ualla (1944, foja 183). In the present-day village of Guaroconde the
name is written Huailla (See VI note 56).
45) Sarmiento here gives Alcabiza; Cabello Valboa (1951, cap. 12, p. 284) Allcay villca.
46) Sarmiento gives Culumchima; Cabello Valboa gives Culluinchima or Culluimchima (1951,
cap. 12, p. 284).
collected. With the consent of the original inhabitants they came to live in the
Cuzco valley. Thus there lived six groups in the valley, three original ones
and three from outside. Later, when Manco Capac and his followers went from
Huanacauri to Cuzco (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 13, p. 129-131) they first gave
battle, long before reaching Cuzco, with the Huaylla, of whom they killed
as many as they could. When they were about three miles from Cuzco, the
sinchi Copalimayta went to meet them. Although he came from outside, he had
joined the Sahuasiray panaca47), which lived on the present-day site of the
Santo Domingo monastery, i.e. the former site of the temple of the sun.
Thus we see that in pre-Inca Cuzco there was question of tripartition; Sar
miento speaks of three original groups and three from outside. This is supported
by Betanzos (1880, cap. Ill, p. 9). According to him there was situated on the
future site of Cuzco, before the arrival of the Inca, a village named Allcabi-
z a 48), which consisted of thirty houses in which there lived thirty Indians.
The way in which the three original groups and the three which had come
from outside lived together, was probably such that one group from outside
joined an original group. This can be deduced from the fact that Copalimayta
joined Sahuasiray. Allcabiza, Copalimayta and Culumchima were called sinchi,
and Sahuasiray, Antasayac and Huaylla, ayllu or panaca. Between the groups
from outside and the original population there was possible a relationship of
an upper to a lower moiety.
The pre-Inca population found a place in the Inca organization of Cuzco.
According to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 9, p. 113) the three sinchi and their
groups came from the same region as the Inca and called themselves kin of
the Inca. The viceroy Toledo, who, for the composition of his Informaciones,
in several instances used the same informants as Sarmiento, further specifies
this remark. According to him (Toledo 1940, p. 186, 187) Allcabiza was the
name of the ayllu of Ayar Uchu, who lived in a place called Pucamarca. Puca-
marca was also the name of the palace of Tupac Yupanqui (Garcilaso 1945,
Tomo II, libro VII, cap. IX ), which was situated in Hanan-Cuzco 49). Thus,
the group Allcabiza can be identified with Arayraca ayllu, which in the first
presentation occupied the position I 2 c, as the ayllu founded by Ayar Uchu 50).
Sahuasiray, according to Toledo (1940, p. 185), was a sinchi who came
from Sutictoco. Sahuasiray ayllu could therefore be identified with Sutic ayllu
47) This is what Sarmiento says about this group.

48) Betanzos writes Alcaviza.
49) In this use of the term Hanan-Cuzco I have in mind the geographical division of the city
into Hanan and Hurin, as applied by Betanzos among others. See IV § 2 a, p. 79.
50) See IV § 1 d, p. 76.
which, both in the third and in the first presentations, occupied the position
II 1 c. Toledo also records that they lived in Cuzco on the future side of the
temple of the Sun, that is to say in Hurin-Cuzco 51).
Antasayac ayllu was identical with Quisco ayllu, for informants from Anta-
sayac told Toledo (1940, p. 186) that they were descended from Quisco Sinche.
According to Cobo and Molina, in their descriptions of the organization of
Cuzco 52), the position of Quisco ayllu in the third representation, was IV 2 c.
That of the pre-Inca ayllu Antasayac was probably the same 53).
Neither Cobo, Molina nor Sarmiento mention Huayllu ayllu in their enu
merations of the ten non-aristocratic ayllu54). It is nevertheless most likely
that Huaylla ayllu, as a pre-Inca ayllu, belonged to IV. Toledo (1940, p. 185,
186) calls Huaylla ayllu the oldest ayllu of Cuzco, which settled there before
Antasayac and Sahuasiray ayllu; Poma de Ayala (1944, foja 183) associates
Huaylla ayllu, probably in its capacity as belonging to the original population,
with Cuntisuyu 55). Huaylla may in fact have been a general: name for the
pre-Inca population in IV 56); it is also possible that Huaylla ayllu in the third
representation, as reflected by the descriptions of Cobo, Molina and Sarmien
to 57), was replaced by Masca ayllu (IV 1 c). Cabello Valboa (1951, cap. 13,
p. 291) writes that Masca ayllu consisted of several shameless families of bar
barians who in Inca Roca’s time were wandering around Cuzco. They were
defeated by Apu Mayta, the brother of the king, and their chief, Guariguaca,
was captured and taken to Cuzco.
The fact that the Masca were reported still to be wandering round as wild
barbarians in the time of Inca Roca points to the primordial character of this
ruler and of the Masca themselves, and may enable us to regard them as a
pre-Inca ayllu. Masca ayllu also replaced the Huaylla ayllu in a second way.
According to Gutierrez de Santa Clara (1905, cap. LXIV, p. 559), the popu
51) This term again in the geographical sense. See note 49.
52) See I §§ 1, 2 pp. 1-7.
53) Kirchhoff (1949, p. 304) links Antasayac ayllu with ceque I 2 c and thus does not
equate it with Quisco ayllu. His reason for this placement is that Cobo mentions ayllu Andasaya
in connection with a huaca of ceque I 2 c, although he does not say that the ceque was main
tained by this ayllu. A fact concerning a given huaca, however, need not necessarily be associated
with the ceque and the ayllu which maintains this ceque. There are various illustrations of this
in the R e la tio n d e lo s ceques. Therefore I do not think there is any reason not to equate the
ayllu Antasayac with Quisco ayllu and not to link it to ceque IV 2 c.
54) See I §§ 1, 2, 3, p. 1-8.
55) See V § 10 c, p. 161.
56) This assumption is supported by the organization of the present village of Guaroconde
in the plain of Anta near Cuzco. In Guaroconde there are, as my own information showed, four
ayllu of which two belong to Hanansaya and two to Hurinsaya. One of the ayllu of Hurinsaya
is called Huaylla.
57) See I.
lation of Cuzco consisted of four groups: Hanan-Cuzco, Hurin-Cuzco, Tambo

Appo and Masca Payta58). The Mascapaycha 59) was also one of the ruler’s
insignia. Paycha means insignia, and mascapaycha the insignia of the Masca. As
Gutierrez used the word Masca paycha to designate one of the suyu of Cuzco,
it can be accepted that by Mascapaycha Cuntisuyu is meant. By occupying the
position IV 1 c, Masca ayllu replaced the ayllu Huayllu as being a pre-Inca
ayllu belonging to the three ayllu of the original population.
The three ayllu of the original population belonged to Hurin-Cuzco (II +
IV ), and of the three ayllu which came from outside, one at least was in
Hanan-Cuzco (I + III). It can, in my opinion, be concluded therefore that the
organization of the pre-Inca population as described by Sarmiento as such fitted
into the third representation of the organization of Cuzco, and secondly that
the three original ayllu constituted the Cayao group (linked to the Cayao ceque)
in Hurin-Cuzco, and the three ayllu from outside, constituted the Cayao group
in Hanan-Cuzco. This analysis of the internal organization of the Cayao group
in the third representation makes it possible to draw certain conclusions, one
of which is the following.
c) In the first and second representations there were several indications of
the way in which an organization into three marriage classes could develop into
one of four marriage classes. In the third representation this organization into
four marriage classes was extended to include five, of which two represented
one of the original four marriage classes. This extension from three to five
groups in the third representation, which applied to the number of rulers (the
Collana group) and that of the panaca (the Payan group) in Hanan-Cuzco
(I + III) and Hurin-Cuzco (II + IV ), did not apply in the case of the Cayao
group in as far as it represented the pre-Inca population 60). It is nevertheless
possible that the three original ayllu and the three which had come from out
58) See IV § 4 p. 102.

59) Many words which have a “ ch” in Quechua, e.g. pachaca, are written in Aymara with
a “t” , e.g. this word pataca; the word Mascapayta is probably an Aymara version of the word
mascapaycha.
60) It might be said that the organizations of Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco were seen in
the third representation as built up of both a tripartition and a quinquepartition. Another similar
example of an organization which was probably the same as that of Cuzco in the third represen
tation would support the assumption. The example concerns the organization of the people of
the Canari living in southern Ecuador, as described in their origin myth in a version given
by Sarmiento and one given by Molina. It is not known how it happened that both authors
knew the origin myth of this people and why they reported it. The Canari did play an important
role as auxiliary and police troops of the Inca during and after the reign of Huayna Capac,
in the city of Cuzco. I think, however, that in this case a myth has been ascribed to the people
of the Canari, by the Inca or by the Spaniards, which had not belonged to them but to the
Inca themselves.
Sarmiento says (1947, cap. 6, pp. 103-104) that after the Flood only two men and two
side, were linked in the third representation to the four Cayao marriage classes
in Hurin-Cuzco (i.e. to II 1 c, IV 1 c, IV 2 c and II 2 c) as well as to the four
Cayao classes in Hanan-Cuzco (i.e. to I 1 c, III 1 c, III 2 c and I 2 c). In the
first representation the Tambo, Sutic and Maras groups of the origin myth of
the Inca were also associated with four marriage classes (with II 1 b, II 2 c,
II 1 c and II 2 b) as were the descendants of Manco Capac, Ayar Cachi and
Ayar Uchu (with I 1 b, I 2 c, I 1 c and I 2 b) 61). It can therefore justifiably
be assumed that Sahuasiray, as a pre-Inca ayllu, represented not only Sutic ayllu
(II 1 c) but also Maras ayllu (II 2 c), and that the Allcabiza represented
Chauin Cuzco ayllu (I 1 c) as well as Arairaca ayllu (I 2 c). There is no reason
to suppose, however, that the fifth non-aristocratic ayllu in Hurin-Cuzco, of
which the position in the ceque system was II 3 c, and the fifth non-aristocratic
ayllu in Hanan-Cuzco, of which the position was I 3 c, were associated in the
organization of the pre-Inca population with Sahuasiray ayllu and the Allcabiza,
or had a function in this organization.
On the other hand, one might well wonder whether these non-aristocratic
ayllu linked to II 3 c and I 3 c really did exist, or whether these two ayllu
were not created in order to make the number of the non-aristocratic ayllu agree
with the number of ten rulers and ten panaca. This doubt arises particularly
with regard to Cuicusa ayllu, which was linked to the II 3 c ceque. Molina
and Sarmiento 62) do mention this ayllu in their lists of the ten non-aristocratic
ayllu, but there is otherwise no mention of a Cuicusa ayllu in the whole of the
women survived on a mountain in the country of the Canari. Later, when the older man was
drowned, the younger married one of the women and took the other as subsidiary wife. He
had ten sons by them, whom he divided into two groups of five. He called one group Hanansaya
and the other Hurinsaya. The Canari descended from these ten sons. We may assume that in
this myth the ten sons stand for 10 ayllu and that five ayllu were descended from the primary
wife and belonged to Hanansaya and five ayllu were descended from the subsidiary wife and
belonged to Hurinsaya.
Molina (1943, pp. 15-16) in his version speaks of the myth of two brothers, an older and
a younger, and of two women, also one older and one younger. Only the younger brother had
children by the younger woman; they had three sons and three daughters. If we compare
Molina’s version with Sarmiento’s, it seems probable that the three sons represent groups in
Hanansaya and the three daughters groups in Hurinsaya. For the same people we therefore
again have one myth in which the society was composed, taken as a whole, of ten groups and
another myth in which it was composed of six groups.
Molina’s version of the myth evidently had a wider distribution in the Andes. He himself
heard (1943, pp. 16-17) from the Indians of Andasmarca, in Antisuyu 25 km from Cuzco, the
myth of a shepherd with his three sons and three daughters who were the only survivors of
the Flood and thereafter re-populated the province of Cuyos. Herrera also records this myth
(1944-47, decada 5, libro 3, cap. VI, p. 250), but more generally for the “ people from the
mountains” as he puts it.
61) See IV § 2 c, d, pp. 84-88.
62) See I §§ 2, 3, pp. 5-8.
history of the Inca, or in other sources consulted by me in which groups from

the social organization of Cuzco are mentioned. Only Cobo mentions a huaca
called Cuicosa on the ceque II 1 b, of which the place is not in accordance with
that of the ayllu Cuicusa ( = II 3 c). Instead of Cuicusa ayllu Cobo mentions
a family Aquiniaylla on which I have no further information.
The case of the ayllu linked to I 3 c is somewhat different from that of
Cuicusa ayllu. According to Cobo and Sarmiento 63) this ayllu was Huacaytaqui
ayllu. Molina has Uru ayllu in this place, which ayllu Sarmiento mentions in
stead of Quisco ayllu. Molina and Cobo agree, however, as regards the position
IV 2 c they ascribed to Quisco ayllu. Now Uru ayllu was one of the examples
of a group which belonged to the original population, or the Yanacona, and
which could be the marriage class of the great-grandfather as well as a sub
group of the marriage class of ego 64). As such this phenomenon fitted into the
second representation in which IV was the marriage class of the great-grand
father and I 3 the sub-group of I 65). Cobo and Sarmiento placed Huacaytaqui
ayllu in the position of Uru ayllu, in I 3, and Molina and Cobo placed Quisco
ayllu in the position of Uru ayllu, in IV 2. Huacaytaqui ayllu and Quisco ayllu
may therefore have been the same in nature as the original population, or the
Yanacona.
The very name Huacaytaqui suggests such a nature. Huaca is the word for
the holy place which is regarded as being the forefather of an ayllu. Taqui
means dance, or dancer. Huacaytaqui ayllu could therefore be the ayllu of the
dancers for the huaca of the ancestor, a religious function which is reminiscent
of that of the Yanacona 66).
As regards Quisco ayllu, this ayllu was the same as Antasayac ayllu 67). In
the preceding chapter I remarked that in several situations in the history of
the Inca the Yanacona group was identified with the population of the Anta
plain 68). As the element -saya is a term indicating territory, the name Anta
sayac ayllu could be translated as the population of Anta. Antasayac ayllu and
Quisco ayllu may therefore have belonged to the Yanacona group.
If the assumption that Uru ayllu, Huacaytaqui ayllu and Antasayac, or Quis
co, ayllu are only so many terms to designate the original population and the
Yanacona, then this group cannot in the third representation be linked to I 3,
although it could be in the second representation. In the third representation,
63) See I.
64) See IV § 3 c, pp. 98*101.
65) See V § 10 a, b, p. 155-159.
66) See IV § 1 c pp. 73, 74, V ili § 5 a, pp. 224-227.
67) See VI § 7 b, p. 195.
68) See V § 9 c, pp. 153-154.
the oldest of the pre-Inca ayllu were linked to IV 1 c and IV 2 c, and there was
no pre-Inca ayllu linked to I 3 c. Cobo and Molina record nothing, except their
names, about the non-aristocratic ayllu Huacaytaqui ayllu and Uru ayllu, nor
of the Cuicusa ayllu 69).
If the doubt expressed above, whether there really were non-aristocratic ayllu
in II 3 and I 3 is justified, then the fact that these ayllu are missing in II 3 and
I 3 supports the thesis that the organization into five panaca founded by five
rulers, in Hurin-Cuzco as well as in Hanan-Cuzco, was an extension of the
system of four marriage classes, which also occurred in Hurin-Cuzco and Hanan-
Cuzco.
§ 8. The fact that the pre-Inca population in the third representation

was classed in the Cayao group, consisting of the Cayao ceque, enables us to
bring to the fore data which describe the mutual relations between the Collana
groups (consisting of the ceque-Collana), the Payan groups and the Cayao
groups otherwise than as relations between the rulers, their panaca and non-
aristocratic ayllu. These sources are mutually consistent in that they record that
the Inca ruler divided the city of Cuzco into ten groups and assigned the govern
ment over these ten groups to his various kin. The ruler and his kin, as the
Inca conquerors, belonged to the Collana group, and the conquered, pre-Inca
population of Cuzco belonged to the Payan and Cayao groups. In the organi
zation of the Cuzco of the pre-Inca population, there already existed a division
into moieties, consisting of the Payan and Cayao groups, which did not bear
on territory. A third group, Collana, that of the conquerors and rulers, was
added to this organization. The organization of Cuzco is not therefore shown
from these facts to have been built up in the slow historical process described
in the so-called history of the Inca, but as having originated at one given time.
We made use of one description of this organization of Cuzco before, viz.
that by Gutierrez 70). This description linked up with that of the conquest of
69) Here I have collected the factors which enabled us to see the ayllu linked with I 3 c
and IV 2 c as representatives of the primordial population of Cuzco. There is one other datum
which supports this assumption and enables us to see the whole group of ayllu in IV as re
presentatives of the earliest inhabitants. Murua mentions in one place (1613, libro II, cap. 10)
that all the Indians who lived in Cuzco before the Inca were called Acamama, and in another
place (1613, cap. 3) he says that in those times Cuzco had that name and that is was inhabited
by the Lares, the Poques and the Huallas. The name Acamama is found in that of Uru Acamama,
as the ayllu Uru was called in the village of San Jeronimo (see IV § 3 c p. 100). Murua links
Acamama with the Huaylla, an ayllu which we elsewhere (V I § 7 b p. 195) also recognised
as representative of the entire primordial population in IV. In this way we thus see the Huaylla
and the ayllu Uru linked together. We might consider Acamama as an indication of the pre-
Inca population which in the second representation belonged to the ayllu of IV and of I 3 c.
79) See V § 2 b, p. 123-126.
the town by the Inca not under Manco Capac but under Tupac Yupanqui or,
more probably, Pachacuti. The point of departure of the description of the
organization of Cuzco has to be the account of the actual conquest, for the
description of this clearly indicates the relationships between the conquerors
and the conquered. The conquerors belonged to Hanan-Cuzco, the conquered
to Hurin-Cuzco. According to Gutierrez, Hanan-Cuzco was identical with Chin-
chaysuyu, and Hurin-Cuzco with Collasuyu 71). This identification relates to
the first representation of the organization of Cuzco. The conquerors, then,
belonged to Collana (Hanan-Cuzco) and the conquered to Payan (Hurin-
Cuzco), while the conquered probably also included Cayao (Antisuyu and Cun-
tisuyu). Gutierrez records that Pachacuti divided the government of the ten
parts of Cuzco among his kin, who also belonged to the ten marriage classes.
This description of the division of the government is in complete accordance
with the third representation. Gutierrez calls the ten parts by the names of the
panaca. Because the panaca in the third representation were represented by the
Payan group (consisting of Payan ceque), it can be assumed that they, together
with the Cayao group, constituted the original population of Cuzco which
was conquered by the Inca.
The other chronicler to give an account of the third representation as charac
terised above, is Betanzos. It is remarkable that he, too, connects a description
of the first representation with one of the third. Betanzos gives the first re
presentation in connection with the defence of Cuzco by Pachacuti and his
assistants against the Chanca, which is his version of the event of which another
version records that Pachacuti conquered the town. Betanzos described the third
representation as follows (1880, cap. XVI, p. 107-111). Pachacuti needed many
people from the surrounding countryside for the reconstruction of the town after
the Chanca attack. Ten chiefs (senores) and twenty orejones of the population
of the town helped him in this task and went out to the provinces to collect
people 72). Pachacuti divided the work among the ten caciques and the groups
of which they were the chiefs; separate tasks were assigned to the different
groups. When the town had been rebuilt, Pachacuti assigned different plots
of land in the surrounding countryside to the ten caciques, where they were
allowed to settle. In the town itself remained, “ the orejones, the descendants
of his lineage and of the other Lords (senores) who had succeeded one another
from Manco Capac on” .
Betanzos opposed the original population of Cuzco to the Inca. From the
71) See IV § 4, p. 102.

72) Pachacuti Yamqui agrees completely with this datum of Betanzos. He too refers (1950,
pp. 237-238) to the ten parts of the city of Cuzco and says that Pachacuti was assisted by twenty
orejones in the defense of the city against the Chanca.
fact that he speaks of ten chiefs and twenty orejones, nobles, it could be deduced
that every chief had two orejones under him, and that the latter were the
sub-chiefs in the moiety division of every group. The moieties of the groups
can probably be identified with the panaca and the non-aristocratic ayllu of
the groups of ceque. This follows from the fact that the ten chiefs and their
groups had lands assigned to them outside Cuzco while the primary kin of the
ruler remained living in the town. These kin were, according to Gutierrez’s
account, identified with Pachacuti’s own predecessors, belonging to Hanan-
Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco. The kin constituted the Collana group (consisting of
the Collana ceque); from this fact it follows that the ten groups, which were
each divided into two moieties, consisted of the Payan and Cayao groups. Finally
it could be assumed that the chiefs of the ten groups of the original population
were in reality the chiefs of the panaca 73).
73) The following datum supplies strong support for this assumption. In listing the names
of the ten parts of Cuzco, i.e. the names of the ten panaca, Gutierrez calls the fifth part of
Hanan-Cuzco, Cuma panaca (see V § 2 b p. 124). This name deviates from that given by all
other chroniclers to this panaca, which was Vicaquirao panaca. In all probability we may read
the name Cuma panaca as £uma panaca = Suma panaca, since Gutierrez also writes Cucco-
panaca instead of Cucgo panaca = Sucsupanaca. In the name Suma we recognise the name of
Soma Inca, chief of the village of Huayllacan and father of Mama Micay, the wife of Inca Roca.
Since Inca Roca, as kin of Pachacuti, was chief of the part of Cuzco called Suma panaca, Inca
Roca was thus the Inca chief of this group of the true, original population to which his father-
in-law, as one of the ten chiefs — to use Betanzos’s terminology — belonged. Up to here this
datum completely supports the assumption. But one severe difficulty is present. In both the
second and third representations data emerged which indicated that the village of Huayllacan
must be placed in one marriage class together with Yahuar Huacac the son of Inca Roca. One
of the data was that Mama Micay, the wife of Inca Roca, came from this village. Soma Inca
would thus, according to this datum, also belong to the marriage class of Yahuar Huacac and
not to that of Inca Roca. W e must perhaps seek the solution of the difficulty in the fact that
the marriage classes were considered both as exogamous and matrilineal groups and as endo-
gamous groups. In the one case the subsidiary son belonged to the marriage class of his primary
brother. In the other case the subsidiary son belonged to the endogamous group of his father.
In the latter case the chief of a panaca could, as subsidiary son of the ruler who had founded
the panaca, be equated with the head of the group of the original population who was the
non-Inca chief under this ruler. Since we must come to the conclusion that a ruler was not so
closely linked to a panaca as suggested by the so-called Inca history, it is possible that Soma
Inca did not need to be chief of Huayllacan but was, for some reason, considered as such. The
reason might be that in the endogamous presentation of the marriage class the subsidiary son
united in his person both the functions of chief of the panaca and chief of the local population.
In the representation of the marriage class as an exogamous and matrilineal group, the subsidiary
son belonged to a different marriage class than th.e father, and the chief of the local population
was then considered as chief of the non-Inca village from which the mother of the subsidiary
son came, a village which then belonged to the same marriage class as the subsidiary son and
the primary son.
In any case, this datum of Gutierrez, besides serving as support for the assumption which
was the point of departure for this note, is also once again evidence that we may not automatically
accept Sarmiento’s proposition that “a panaca was called after a subsidiary son who was made
Gutierrez and Betanzos then give different accounts of the relationships

between Collana, Payan and Cayao in the third presentation than those found
in the so-called history of the Inca, in which the panaca (Payan) were regarded
as being ayllu founded by the rulers, and were therefore regarded as being
Inca, while the non-Inca population comprised only the Cayao group. At the
same time we saw 74) that the chiefs of the panaca, and the panaca themselves,
were said to live in Hurin-Cuzco, side by side with the rulers in Hanan-
Cuzco75), but also that only the rulers of Cuzco as a whole lived in Cuzco
and that the panaca lived around them 76). I want to return to this problem
later 77) 78).
chief of the panaca by the founder of the panaca” but that we must evaluate this proposition
according to its significance in the system of the organization of Cuzco.
74) See VI this § 8.
75) Both moieties seen as geographically separate units. See IV § 2 a, p. 79.
76) See VI this § 8.
77) See IX § 3, p. 241-246.
7S) Up to this point I have established the tenfold division in Cuzco with examples which
were connected with Pachacuti. In the first representation the organization of Cuzco was ex
plained both from the point of view of Pachacuti and of Manco Capac (see IV § 2a pp. 77-80).
In the chapter concerning the second representation I gave an explanation of this phenomenon
(see V § 10 a, b pp. 155-159). In the third representation, too, it is said not only of Pachacuti but
also of Manco Capac that he divided the administration of the 10 groups of Cuzco among his
relatives. According to Murua (1613, libro III, cap. 10) Manco Capac divided the city of Cuzco
into Hanan and Hurin, and each of these moieties into five “ streets” . “ Street” is a Spanish
genealogical expression of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which we may interpret as
family or lineage. Murua gives the names of the streets only for Hanan, calling the first Capac
ayllu and the fifth Vicaquirao panaca. Elsewhere Murua says (1613, cap. 2, 3) that when Manco
Capac built the city of Cuzco he divided it into two ayllu or districts. His son Sinchi Roca, who
was to succeed him, he made chief (capitan) of one of these ayllu (i.e. Hanan or Hurin). The other
ayllu (here Murua uses the plural and thus means the “ streets” ) he divided among his kin in the
collateral line, because according to law the subsidiary sons ( h ijo s s e g u n d o s ) of the Inca rulers
were to govern the ayllu and p a rc ia lid ad e s (groups) as chiefs and as military officers during their
father’s lifetime. Murua probably misunderstood this information and as a result he speaks, in
error, of the second and the third representation as well. In any case, in Manco Capac’s time
there were already 10 panaca in existence. Because Murua saw Sinchi Roca within the frame
work of the so-called Inca history as legitimate successor of Manco Capac, he considered Sinchi
Roca, instead of all the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco, as chief of Hanan-Cuzco. Murua does mention,
in the case of Hurin-Cuzco, several subsidiary kin of Manco Capac in the collateral lines as
chiefs, probably of the five “ streets” in Hurin-Cuzco. Seen in this way, his report is in agree
ment with the third representation and he gives the same arrangement of the division of the
administration of the five parts of Hurin-Cuzco as Gutierrez. In the time of Manco Capac these
subsidiary kin in the collateral lines were, however, also the subsidiary sons of “the Inca” , as
Murua puts it. By this he must have meant the successors to Manco Capac who, however, were
also his contemporary primary kin and heads of the five “ streets” , which were the five panaca,
in Hanan-Cuzco.
The rulers of Hurin-Cuzco were, lastly, also “ chiefs and military officers” of the rulers of
Hanan-Cuzco. Here we must see a reference to the second representation in which the position
of a ruler of Hurin-Cuzco with respect to the ruler of Hanan-Cuzco in the same marriage class
§ 9. a) In this chapter on the third representation there was no need as

yet to refer to the relationship between Hanan-Cuzco (I + III) and Hurin-
Cuzco (II + IV ). The rulers of Hurin-Cuzco, however, are also represented
as the subsidiary brothers of the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco; the marriage relations
between the classes to which the rulers belonged, however, were regulated
inside the moieties. A relationship of conquerors to conquered was also asso
ciated with Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco, which is one reason for discussing
this relationship here.
This moiety relationship is to be expected to exist on the grounds of the
conclusions reached before. I shall therefore briefly repeat these conclusions.
In the relationships between the Collana (all the Collana ceque), Payan (all
the Payan ceque) and Cayao (all the Cayao ceque) groups, not only Collana
and Payan together were represented as the group of the Inca, and Cayao as
the non-Inca population, but also Collana alone as the Inca and Payan and
Cayao together as the non-Inca *79).
In the first representation, too, the relationships between Collana, Payan and
Cayao were represented in two ways. According to Betanzos 80), Collana ( =
Hanan-Cuzco = Chinchaysuyu) and Payan ( = Hurin-Cuzco = Collasuyu)
was equal to that, in the third representation, of the chief of a panaca with respect to a ruler in
the same marriage class.
Montesinos describes the division of the government of Cuzco in the same way as does Murua.
He ascribes the division, however, to Inti Capac Yupanqui, one of the first rulers in his dynasty
of more than a hundred kings. Nonetheless, he says (1957, cap. V, p. 20-25) of Inti Capac
Yupanqui that he defeated the Chanca and that he married a woman from the village of Choco
who was called Anahuarque. Thus in Inti Capac Yupanqui we recognise Pachacuti. Inti Yupanqui
then divided the city into two districts (Montesinos 1957, cap. VI pp. 26-29), the principal one
being Hanan-Cuzco and the other Hurin-Cuzco. The first district he divided into five or six
“ streets” ; gave the supervision of it to the son who was to succeed him and called this district
Capac ayllu, which means the most important group. He populated the district with all kinds
of people ( “ de todos estados y gentes” ) and gave the streets their names. The second district
he called Hurin-Cuzco; he divided it too into five or six streets; gave the supervision of them
to his subsidiary son (hijo segundo) and populated it with various peoples (diversas gentes).
The fact that Montesinos speaks of five or six streets is remarkable. This report may have
been influenced by the idea that in the third representation there were also two groups of
ceque in Antisuyu and in Cuntisuyu which were not linked to a ruler, a panaca and a non-
aristocratic ayllu. The importance of Montesinos’s data is that he does not ascribe a version of
the division of the government of Cuzco, which agrees with that given by Murua, to Manco Capac
but to a ruler who shows agreement at all points with Pachacuti.
The last piece of information which contains evidence for the division of Cuzco into ten
groups by Manco Capac comes from Sarmiento (1947, cap. 11, pp. 119-120). When Manco Capac
and his brothers and sisters went from Tambotoco to Cuzco they were accompanied by the ten
non-aristocratic ayllu which were divided into five ayllu of Hanan-Cuzco and five of Hurin-
Cuzco. This is said by Sarmiento, according to whom, at another place in his chronicle (1947,
cap. 34, p. 182), the division into Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco was effected by Pachacuti.
79) See V I §§ 7, 8, p. 192-202.
80) See IV § 2 a, p. 79.

both belonged to the Inca, and Cayao ( = Antisuyu + Cuntisuyu) belonged to

the non-Inca. But according to Gutierrez 81), the Inca conquerors of Cuzco
lived in Collana ( = Hanan-Cuzco = Chinchaysuyu) and the pre-Inca popula
tion in Payan ( = Hurin-Cuzco = Collasuyu) as well, probably, as in Cayao
( = Antisuyu + Cuntisuyu).
Finally, a similar picture of the second representation can be detected if we
once more pay attention to the organization of the village of Acos. I used this
organization before as an example of the organization of a suyu as a marriage
class in the second representation82). In the second representation the rulers
of Hanan-Cuzco belonged to Collana (I 1 + II 1 + III 1 + IV 1), the rulers
of Hurin-Cuzco to Payan ( 1 2 + II 2 + III 2 + IV 2), and the non-Inca
population to Cayao (I 3 + II 3 + III 3 + IV 3). The three ayllu in Acos,
Hanansaya, Hurinsaya and Anahuarque, correspond to Collana, Payan and
Cayao. The Inca conquerors of Acos probably belonged to Hanansaya and Hurin
saya, and, possibly on the analogy of the third representation, the people who
had lived in the village before the Inca conquest, belonged to Anahuarque.
If, however, we take the names Cuzco (also called Hanansaya in the document
of 1708 relating to the organization of Acos), Acos (also called Hurinsaya),
and Anahuarque into consideration, a different relationship again is suggested
than that of the three ayllu. The Inca conquerors would have to belong to Cuzco,
and the pre-Inca population of the village to Acos and Anahuarque. But then
it would have to be assumed, in accordance with this relationship of the three
ayllu in Acos, that in the Cuzco of the second representation, too, the rulers of
Hanan-Cuzco were the real Inca and the conquerors of the town, and that the
rulers of Hurin-Cuzco were classed as the pre-Inca population.
b) In the third representation the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco belonged to I + III,
and the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco to II + IV. On the analogy of the second and
first representations one would expect that between Hanan-Cuzco (I + III)
and Hurin-Cuzco (II + IV) there existed a relationship of conquerors to con
quered. In the organization of the pre-Inca population, as associated in the
third representation with the Cayao group 83), there are hints of a relationship
of Hanan-Cuzco to Hurin-Cuzco as that of conquerors to conquered. For, ac
cording to Sarmiento, the pre-Inca population was divided into two groups.
The original population, which had always lived in Cuzco, belonged to the
first, and the three sinchi, army commanders, who had come from outside, to
the second group. The three sinchi set themselves up as the leaders of the three
original ayllu. The sinchi belonged to Hanan-Cuzco and the three original ayllu
81) See IV § 4, p. 102.

82) See IV § 3 a, pp. 92-93, V § 1 c, VI note 34.
83) See VI, § 7 b, pp. 193-196.
to Hurin-Cuzco. The relationship between these two groups thus wholly cor
responded to that of the two moieties of the town, just as was surmised.
c) There are other sources about the pre-Inca population which also point
to a relationship of Hanan-Cuzco to Hurin-Cuzco as one between conquerors
to conquered. These other sources suggest also that in the third representation
the relationship of the three groups which had come from outside to the three
original ones was presented not only as that of the Cayao group (the Cayao
ceque) in Hanan-Cuzco to the Cayao group in Hurin-Cuzco, but also as that of
the Payan group to the Cayao group in Hurin-Cuzco. This is suggested by
Toledo’s evidence. According to him (1940, p. 187), the Allcabiza constituted
the ayllu of Ayar Uchu and lived in Hanan-Cuzco. This was the reason why the
Allcabiza were identified with Arairaca ayllu (I 2 c). But, Toledo continues,
after Ayar Uchu and Cuzcoychima had turned into stone, the Allcabiza took
Apu Mayta as their sinchi.
Toledo, then, mentions Ayar Uchu instead of Allcabiza, as being the sinchi,
Apu Mayta instead of Copalimayta, and Cuzcoychima instead of Culumchima.
The names Copalimayta and Culumchima are untranslatable and in the form in
which they are recorded by Sarmiento 84) suggest that they were corrupt forms
of Apu Mayta and Cuzcoychima; of these names, Apu Mayta can be partly
interpreted 85) 86). It seems to me that Apu Mayta ( = Copalimayta, according
to Sarmiento) was the sinchi, the leader of Sahuasiray ayllu ( = Sutic ayllu).
This piece of information is wholly in agreement with the third representation,
in which Apu Mayta panaca and Sutic ayllu also belong to one marriage class
(II 1). If this conclusion is correct, then it also seems likely that the group
of Cuzcoychima ( = Culumchima) was identical with Chima panaca (IV 2 b),
for the two names have the element chima in common. Ayar Uchu, finally,
would then have to belong to Rauraupanaca (IV 1 b).
Toledo did not, in his account, write of three contemporary sinchi, but of one
group, the Allcabiza, with three successive chiefs. A few important conclusions
can be drawn from this piece of information. Because there is mention of one
group and of three successive chiefs, it seems likely that the chiefs personified
marriage classes within the group, just as in the so-called history of the Inca
the succession of the rulers indicated the mutual relations of the marriage classes
to which they belonged. On account of the link of Ayar Uchu with religion 87),
he probably belonged to the Cayao marriage class. The name Apu Mayta fur
thermore indicates that he belonged to Collana. Cuzcoychima would then have
84) See V I § 7 b, p. 193.

85) See IV § 2 d pp. 87-88, V I § 6 e p. 190.
86) For the name Cuzcoychima see V I note 88.
87) See IV § 4 p. 101.
to belong to the Payan marriage class. The so-called history of the Inca does
mention a subsidiary son of the ruler Capac Yupanqui, who is called Apu
Chimachauin (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 18, p. 143). The word Chauin is a synonym
of Payan. As Apu Mayta appears in the so-called history of the Inca in the
same capacity (he was the grandson of Capac Yupanqui), there is the possibility
that Chimachauin was identical with Cuzcoychima and belonged to Chima-
panaca 88).
Apu Mayta was the chief of Apu Mayta panaca, which, according to the
so-called history of the Inca, had been founded by Capac Yupanqui. In the
light of the argument above, it does not seem to me to be too far-fetched to
argue that this ruler from Hurin-Cuzco, and with him the other rulers of
Hurin-Cuzco, was also counted among the pre-Inca population.
d) Finally, the name Allcabiza can be said to contain an indication of the
fact that in the third representation the whole of Hurin-Cuzco was associated
with religion and with the god Viracocha, and Hanan-Cuzco with the worldly
rulers and the Sun. I argued above 89) that the name Allcabiza, in the frame
work of the third representation, was also used to designate the Payan group
(all Payan ceque) in Hurin-Cuzco90). The name Allcabiza occurred earlier
as well to designate a Payan group. In connection with the second representa
tion 91) I drew attention to the fact that besides Manco Capac, Mayta Capac
also fought against the Allcabiza, and that this war looked like an imitation
of that of Pachacuti against Uscovilca, the chief of the Chanca. I therefore
associated Uscovilca (white vilca) in the second representation with II 1, and
Allcabiza, or Allcavilca (the black and white villca), with II 2. In the second
representation they both personified the marriage class II, which was associated
with religion, with the god Viracocha, and with the opponents of the Inca.
The fact that in the third representation the Allcabiza were associated with
the Payan group (all Payan ceque) of Hurin-Cuzco (II + IV) indicates that
the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco (the Collana group), too, belonged among the op
ponents of the Inca who, in this context, were all classed in Hanan-Cuzco, and
that the whole of Hurin-Cuzco was associated with the religion and with the
god Viracocha. To illustrate this opposition of the wordly rulers and the Sun
to the priests and Viracocha, I return to the story in which the Sun and Vira-
S8) Together with Chimapanaca, Quisco ayllu belonged to a single group of ceque. The pos
sibility is not excluded that the word “ Cuzco” in the name Cuzcoychima indicates Quisco ayllu.
89) See VI § 9 c pp. 205-206.
90) An indication of this Payan character is also the fact that Apu Mayta ( = Copalimayta),
Cuzcoychima ( = Culumchima) and Ayar Uchu or Allcabiza were called jin c h i of three original
groups of Cuzco.
91) See V § 5 c pp. 137-138.
cocha were placed opposite each other92). According to one version of the
story, the ruler Viracocha Inca esteemed the god Viracocha more highly than
the Sun; according to another version, the ruler Capac Yupanqui did the same
thing. I regarded the first version as an expression of the opposition, in the
second representation, between the lower moiety ( = II + IV ), in which Vira
cocha Inca was the most important person, and the upper moiety ( = I + III).
The second version can be regarded as an expression, in the third representation,
of the opposition between Hurin-Cuzco ( = II + IV ), in which moiety Capac
Yupanqui was the most important person, and Hanan-Cuzco ( = I + III). hT
both versions the moiety division of Cuzco was the same. The groups belonging
to the lower moiety (second representation) and to Hurin-Cuzco (third repre
sentation), or to the upper moiety (second representation) and to Hanan-Cuzco
(third representation), were probably identical in both cases. Only the people
who personified these groups in the so-called history of the Inca, varied. The
groups did not vary in the two representations, nor did their positions in the
organization of Cuzco; only the representation of their mutual relationships^
varied.
92) See V § 13 a pp. 166-168.

CHAPTER SEVEN
THE CO-ORDINATION OF THE THREE REPRESENTATIONS
In chapters IV, V and VI the three different representations of the organi

zation of Cuzco were examined and discussed. Chapter III also gave a theoretical
outline of the three representations. For the conclusions drawn from the three
chapters following it, we refer to chapter III. It was not previously possible to
pay full attention to the relationship between the three representations: this
will be the subject of the present chapter.
In the examination of the three representations of the social organization

of Cuzco, there was question of three different kinds of groups.
There were, to begin with, those groups whose position as far as can be
decided from the available data, did not vary in the three representations. This
fact is clearly demonstrated by Capac ayllu and Hatun ayllu, which were men
tioned in all three representations, by Sutic ayllu and Maras ayllu, which oc
curred in the first and third representations, and to a certain extent by Uru
aylu; for although this ayllu was linked to IV 2 c as well as to I 3 c, the reason
for these links was that the people who belonged to the original population,
the yanacona or enemies of the own society, were linked to IV as well as to
I 3. The case of Sanu ayllu is a little more complicated. In the third represen
tation its position was III 2 c; in the second I assumed its position to be III 3.
The question as to the position of Sanu ayllu seems to me to be connected
with the fact that it is not known what significance the ceque may have had
within the groups of the second representation. If, on the analogy of my con
clusion drawn in Chapter VI, note 34, it should be asserted that III 3 relates
to III 1 in the same way as III 2 c to III 2 a, this would explain why the position
of Sanu ayllu in the third representation was III 2 c, and III 3 in the second.
The fact that Sanu ayllu in the third representation belonged to III, would be a
confirmation of the conclusion that the marriage between Sinchi Roca and a
woman from Sanu indicated the existence of the asymmetric connubium between
IV and III in the second representation.
The second type of group of which there was question in the discussion
of the different representations was that of the groups which did change
position in the different representations. Thus, the name Ayarmaca in the first
representation was used to designate III, but in the second representation it
VII. CO-ORDINATION OF THE THREE REPRESENTATIONS 209
probably designated I I 1). The name Allcavillca in the second representation

probably referred to II 2 2), but in the third representation both to I 2 c 3)
and to the group II 1 b + II 2 b + IV 1 b 4- IV 2 b 4). The names Ayarmaca
and Allcavillca do not occur as the proper names of existing groups as recorded
by Cobo, Molina and Sarmiento5) in the organization of Cuzco. The names
Ayarmaca and Allcavillca were probably generic names; this was shown clearly
to be the case as regards Allcavillca. As generic names they probably referred
to the position of a particular group in relation to other groups in any of the
three representations. This particular group could be a panaca, an ayllu, or a
group belonging to a particular combination of ceque, like III, or II 2, or
II 1 b + II 2 b + IV 1 b + IV 2 b.
The third category concerns the individual persons in the history of the
Inca, as for instance rulers, their wives and subsidiary sons, who in the organi
zation of Cuzco personified particular groups. A particular person could in the
different representations personify different groups, which led to a situation
in which one person sometimes played different roles in the so-called history
of the Inca. The significance of the occurrence of these individuals in the so-
called history of the Inca seems to me to lie in the determination of the relation
ships between the groups in the three representations and the way in which
these groups were personified; these individuals were not necessarily historical.
It can also be asserted that the panaca and ayllu6) of the organization of
Cuzco, mentioned by Cobo, Molina and Sarmiento, had fixed positions in all
three representations of this organization, although these positions did not ne
cessarily indicate their actual habitats. It was only the mutual relationships of
the panaca, ayllu and their subdivisions which varied in the three different
representations. In referring to these different relationships, the generic names,
like Ayarmaca or Allcavillca, or indications of family or marriage relationships
of persons, were used.
As for an explanation for the existence of the three different representations,
the third representation can be said to have developed logically from the second,
and the first from the third. In the second representation the four exogamous
marriage classes of the suyu were distributed over two exogamous moieties.
In the third representation the moieties became endogamous, with the result
that there arose four marriage classes again within the moieties. The possibility
1) See IV § 2 a p. 78; V § 1 d, p. 120, § 5 b, p. 136.

2) See V § 9 a p. 152.
3) See VI § 7 b, p. 194.
*) See VI § 9 c, p. 205.
5) See I.
6) S e e l.
210 VII. CO-ORDINATION OF THE THREE REPRESENTATIONS
of endogamous marriage in the Collana (I 1 and II 1) marriage classes, led to

the presentation of I and II as endogamous groups. Although in the third
representation the moieties of I + III, and that of II + IV were endogamous,
their relationship was nevertheless presented as one between Collana and Payan.
This Collana-Payan relationship was transferred in the first representation to
that between I and II, so that as a result III and IV together became Cayao.
The reason for the existence of the three representations seems to me to be
connected with the fact that the concepts Collana, Payan and Cayao were applied
to the marriage classes. Collana was a group which could function in an endo
gamous as well as an exogamous capacity. As an endogamous group it was
opposed to the whole of the outside world, which was not related to it. One
result of the exogamous marriages of Collana was the existence of Payan. For
this reason Collana and Payan together could be opposed to the non-related
outside world. Finally, the relationship of Collana and Payan together to Cayao
can be seen as one between two exogamous moieties, for Collana and Payan,
as exogamous groups, took their wives from Cayao. The second representation
gave expression to this last possibility. Collana (I) and Payan (III) constituted
the one exogamous moiety, and Cayao (II + IV) the other. In the third re
presentation these two moieties were regarded in the first place as groups which
were not mutually related, and which as a result were endogamous and similar
to each other in their internal structures. I, as Collana, also had an endogamous
function in the second representation, which corresponded to that of I 1 in the
third representation. As II + IV, as an endogamous moiety, was identical in
the third representation with I + III, the function of II 1, as the Collana group,
was the same as that of I 1. This gave rise to the first representation in which
I as well as II acted as endogamous groups.
Finally, the question arises how the organization system of Cuzco, with its
three different representations, in fact functioned. It should be taken into
account when considering this question that the panaca, ayllu and sub-groups
of these two types of group within Cuzco could potentially function in the
framework of the Collana-Payan-Cayao relationship, or within that of
the marriage classes, or could themselves function as marriage classes, but that
outside Cuzco they often existed as independent, endogamous units. Possibly
too the suggested Collana-Payan-Cayao relationship and the marriage
relationships within Cuzco were merely symbolical expressions of the relation
ships between the groups, although organizations with Collana-Payan-
Cayao relationships, divided into matrilineal lineages linked by an asymmetric
connubium, must have existed in Inca civilisation. If that is so, the organization
of Cuzco could be regarded as symbolising and characterising the system by
which the Inca had organized their whole empire.
VII. CO-ORDINATION OF THE THREE REPRESENTATIONS 211
The following illustration — from an account of present-day customs of

indians in Canas province, Cuzco department — of the combination in one group
of the different characteristics, both as an endogamous group and as a marriage
class, or 'as a group in the Collana-Payan-Cayao relationship — , might
explain how representations, such as described for Cuzco, could be realised in
actual social relationships.
Alencastre and Dumezil in their article “ Fetes et usages des indiens de
Langui” [Journal de la Soc. des Am., nouvelle serie Tome XLII, 1953, p. 21-
29) describe the annually recurring ceremonial fights which take place in a
similar form in different places in Peru. The fights described by them take
place between the village of Checca, which consists of five ayllu, and the vil
lages of Langui, Quehue and Hampatura, which also contain several ayllu. This
battle is waged by the men, while the women, who stand around, provide them
with food and drink during the intervals. Although these fights result in men
being wounded, and even killed, there is no rancour afterwards on account of
casualties.
Also when someone from either party calls out ‘rest’ both parties comply
immediately. The party which is able to press the other back to its territory,
wins. Victory results in a good harvest for the winning party for that year,
and a bad harvest for the losers. Captives are also made in this fight. The
captured women are undressed and sent back in this state, but they are not
subjected to sexual violence. The women who are kept, are taken in 'experimen
tal marriage’ (sirbinakuy); the business side of these marriages is arranged later
by the two families involved and a seal put on the marriage.
The relationship between the two parties has several of the characteristics
of that between moieties, and even one of exogamous moieties. For the
result of the rivalry is that the men of one party marry women from the other.
But the significance of these actually existing exogamous relations is that they
are in fact symbolic. No man is forced to marry a woman from the other party,
even if the fight might be used as a means to bring about a marriage; but these
marriages are important in that they symbolise the representation of the two
parties as exogamous moieties. Although the effects of the fight cover a longer
period than the duration of the fight itself, as, for instance the harvest and the
marriages, the moiety relationship between the parties applies only during the
fight. One village may also have similar moiety relationships with other villages.
Thus the vilage of Checca also has an annual fight, elsewhere, against the village
of Livitaca, which lies further away and in another province. While in the first
mentioned fight the village of Checca fought by itself against other villages
in the Canas province, it fights together with other villages from Canas province
against one, much larger, village from Chumbivilcas province. If this last fight
212 VII. CO-ORDINATION OF THE THREE REPRESENTATIONS
also involves a moiety relationship, then the moieties must be of a higher order
and larger in size than those of the first fight. This is also evident from the
way in which the fight against Livitaca is conducted. While the first fight was
conducted on foot, and with slings, the men from Canas in the second fight
are also on foot and armed with slings, while the men from Livitaca are
mounted and armed with lassoes and bolas.
There could even be said to be a hierarchy of moiety relationships. In the
colonial period, the privilege of riding was reserved for the Spanish and the
Inca nobility. The men from Livitaca have therefore taken over the role of the
Inca nobility.
On the battle fields the two parties formed two diametrically opposed moieties.
But Checca fought alone against its surrounding villages and Livitaca did the
same. These positions are more in accordance with the relationship of the central
Collana group to the surrounding Payan and Cayao groups.
It is not known how the system of the three representations of the organi
zation of Cuzco was put into actual practice. One can get some idea of this,
however, from the present-day custom described above. Perhaps the examples
like those concerning Huayna Capac and Atahuallpa, discussed in Chapter
IX 7), may give a further answer to this question.
7) See IX § 2 pp. 240-241.

CHAPTER EIGHT
THE QUINQUEPARTITION AND THE DECEMPARTITION
§ 1. So far, expressions of a quinquepartition and of a decempartition

have been encountered twice in the organization of Cuzco. Hanan-Cuzco and
Hurin-Cuzco, in the third representation, were both divided into five parts,
which each contained one group of ceque. These parts were governed by a total
of twice five, that is ten chiefs, who for certain reasons *) were presented as
belonging to a dynasty of ten rulers, although they were in fact contempora
neous chiefs. A quinquepartition was also encountered in the organization of
Cuntisuyu in the ceque system. In this suyu there were five groups of three
ceque, as opposed to three groups of three ceque in the other three suyu 12).
I assumed that the quinquepartition in Cuntisuyu was connected with a parti
cular organization of the group of Yanacona 3).
The quinquepartition and decempartition were, as I see it, based on two
forms of organization which also had important functions in the organization
of Cuzco. The development of the influence of the quinquepartition and de
cempartition on the organization of Cuzco, as presented in the preceding
chapters, seems to have followed the course I propose to set out in the present
chapter.
In their own culture the Inca had a classification of the adult, marriageable
population into five age classes. The mutual relations of the age classes were
regarded as being similar to those of the marriage classes. In North Peru, in
the Chimu kingdom, there existed an organization in which the whole popu
lation of a town, or some other social unit, was divided into ten groups. The
Inca adopted this form of organization, but also extended it. They divided
the ten groups into two halves of five groups each. On the one hand they com
pared the five groups to five age classes, and on the other hand they recognised
features which these five groups had in common with the marriage classes.
This resulted in the third representation of the organization of Cuzco, in which
the influences of the quinquepartition and decempartition were most noticeable,
so that both in Hanan-Cuzco and in Hurin-Cuzco there were thought to be five,
instead of four marriage classes. In order that the system of marriage classes
might still function, the marriage classes of the last ruler and the last but one
1) See V § 2 b, p. 126.
2) See I § 1 p. 3.
3) See IV § 2 b pp. 81, 82, § 3 c p. 99; V § 10 a, b pp. 158-159.
214 Vili. QUINQUEPARTITION AND DECEMPARTITION
were together regarded as one marriage class in relation to the other three
marriage classes.
The age classes and marriage classes had two features in common. In addition
to the fact that the adult, marriageable population was divided into five age
classes, every individual also passed through these age classes. This can be re
garded as the simultaneous and consecutive aspects of the age classes respectively.
Also, the marriage classes not only existed side by side and simultaneously,
but in addition they were placed in a sequence of time which was symbolised
by the members of one patrilineal lineage, the members of the rulers’ dynasty.
The time span of a ruler’s reign, and particularly the time span of a com
plete dynasty, was thought to have a fixed number of years; moreover a ruler’s
accession to the throne co-incided with his wedding. In their consecutive aspects,
the age classes and marriage classes were parts of a particular system of dividing
time which was based on quinquepartition and decempartition. According to
the Inca the most important criteria for distinguishing the age classes, the time
span of the marriage classes 4), and other periods of time, were their position
in a hierarchy of different periods. The higher or lower position in the hier
archic order was indicated by the longer or shorter duration of the period.
Quinquepartition has been encountered twice before in the organization of
Cuzco, relating to the five rulers of Hanan-Cuzco and of Hurin-Cuzco, and to
the five groups of yanacona. The hierarchic difference between the two quin-
quepartitions was expressed in that the first quinquepartition was applied to
the marriage classes while the yanacona were divided into five age classes.
As regards the examples of tripartition and quadripartition it was possible
to describe in detail the function of the organizational forms in which the
numbers three and four played a role. These descriptions threw light on the
reasons why these numbers were essential in the relevant forms of organization.
In the several presentations of quinquepartition it is not possible, however, to
discern the necessity for the use of the number five. It can only be assumed
that the decimal system of counting in the Peruvian languages, and the number
of fingers on a hand, influenced this use of the number five 5).
4) Under “ timespan of a marriage class” is understood the duration of the period from the
wedding of a king till the wedding of his son and successor.
5) I shall give a few examples of the possible relationship between the number of fingers of
the hand and the number five in the forms of organization which make use of this number. Ac
cording to the dictionary of Santo Tomas, the fingers of the hand had the following names:
thumb — ISfaupa rucana ( = first, main finger)
index finger — Catec rucana ( = the accompanying finger)
middle finger — Chaupi rucana ( = middle finger)
ring finger — Catec rucana ( = the accompanying finger)
little finger — Sullca rucana ( = the last finger).
Vili. QUINQUEPARTITION AND DECEMPARTITION 215
§ 2. The most important sphere of Inca culture in which quinquepartition

was applied was probably that of the age classes. As this system of the age
classes has been described in detail by Rowe (1958, p. 499-522), and I want
to discuss only part of this system, I shall touch on the system as a whole
only briefly.
Rowe regards the system in the first place as a means by which the Inca
collected taxes. For this purpose the adult, marriageable men were grouped in
one class which covered the ages between twenty-five and fifty. Before entering
this class one belonged to that of the adolescent men, from eighteen to twenty-
five: after it came that of the middle-aged men, from fifty to sixty, and then
that of the old men, of sixty and older. The chroniclers give several names
and arrangements into ages of the classes before that of the eighteen or twenty
year old ones. Poma and Murua classify the men of the age classes into ten
'streets’, but they include in this classification also a couple of streets of, for
instance, the sick so that the system was no longer based exclusively on age
classes. According to Castro and Ortega Morejon, Santillan and the chronicle
called ‘Senores que sirvieron . . . ’ there were twelve real age classes.
As Rowe demonstrated, the material indicates that to the Inca the absolute
age of a person was irrelevant to the question of the age classes. Kirchhoff
(1949, p. 300) remarked, on the other hand, that there was a certain periodicity
in the classes; this he based on the following data. In the province of the
Pacajes (Rel. Geogr. 1881-1897, T. II, p. 71), an Aymara people near the
city of La Paz, in Bolivia, the following age classes were distinguished: five to
ten years, ten to twenty, twenty to twenty-five, twenty-five to thirty, thirty to
fifty, fifty to sixty and sixty years and older. In the Chincha valley, on the coast
of South Peru, there were, according to Castro and Ortega Morejon, Santillan
and the ‘Senores que sirvieron . . . ’ the age classes of nought to two years, two
The system in the naming of the fingers was that the 1st, the 3rd and the 5th fingers were
distinguished with respect to each other as the first, middle and last, and that the 2nd and 4th
fingers were seen only in relation to the 1st and 3rd. The 2nd finger formed one group with the
1st, the 4th finger a group with the 3rd, while the 5th remained alone. The 2nd and the
4th fingers were not distinguished from each other because they had the same name. A similar
system can be recognised in the quinquepartition of the ceque system in Cuntisuyu. The quinque-
partition in Cuntisuyu concerned other social groups than the division into three groups of three
ceque to which this quinquepartition had to be adjusted (see V ili § 5 a pp. 224-227). The five
groups of ceque in Cuntisuyu had to represent both the characteristics of the three groups in
the other suyu and those of the quinquepartition of which they were an expression. The adjust
ment of the quinquepartition in Cuntisuyu to the three groups of ceque took place in the same
manner as the naming of the fingers of the hand. The first group of ceque (IV 1) was doubled
so as to form two groups; the middle group (IV 2) likewise. The last group of ceque (IV 3),
however, remained in its original form, although the ceque Collana and Cayao were added to the
doubled group IV 1 and the ceque Payan to the doubled group IV 2.
to four, four to six, six to eight, eight to sixteen, sixteen to twenty, twenty to
twenty-five, twenty-five to fifty, fifty to sixty, and of sixty years and older.
From this arrangement Kirchhoff derived a periodicity of five years for Pacajes,
and one of four years for Chincha. A periodicity of four years certainly does
not apply to the age classes of those from twenty to twenty-five, twenty-five
to fifty, and fifty to sixty in the Chincha valley. It seems rather that three
different groups of classes must be distinguished in the systems of age classes
as described by the chroniclers. In the first place there is question of classes
which were not in fact age classes, like that of the sick. Secondly, there were
the names for the age classes mainly of young persons; these probably only
referred to their estimated ages. There was a definite system of classes with
a periodicity of five years only in the third group, that of the adults. I shall
occupy myself only with this group.
The class of the twenty-five to fifty years old, hatunruna (called aucapuri
by Santillan), was described by all authors as that of the adult men. Certain
divisions can, however, be detected in this group. The Pacajes had a sub-division
into a group of the twenty-five to thirty and one of the thirty to fifty years
old; Santillan mentions the existence of groups of the twenty-five to forty
and forty to fifty years old. The group of the adolescent men was that of the
twenty to twenty-five years old. This group could be regarded as one intro
ductory to that of the grown men. In the introductory group, the initiation of
the young probably took place, and it seems likely to me that the groups of
initiates also stayed together later. But then one would have to suppose that the
group of the twenty-five to fifty years old was divided into groups of five
years each 6). There are two sources which mention such an organization into
five age classes of five years each.
Damian de la Bandera (Rel. Geogr. 1881-1897, T.I. p. 100) mentions this
form of organization in connection with the mass-marriages; on these occasions
the men were placed in one row and the women in another opposite them. The
men were divided into five age classes which were those between fifteen and
twenty, twenty and twenty-five, twenty-five and thirty, thirty and thirty-five,
and thirty-five and forty years. The same division was applied to the women.
The women were first given to the cacique and then to other men down the
G) From the foregoing we must infer that people of one age class belonged to that class for
five years and then went to the following class. The transfer would thus have to take place once
every five years. According to Cieza, Polo de Ondegardo, Garcilaso and Cobo, the age classes
were re-arranged every year. According to Poma (1944, foja 24) this took place every half year.
Damian de la Bandera (1881-97, Rel. Geogr., Tomo I, p. 100) says, however, that it occurred
every three years, and Murua ( 1613, Tomo II, cap. 20) every five years. The opinion of the
last of these authors seems to me the only correct and possible one for the age classes of the
adult population.
hierarchical scale. The position of the men in the hierarchy may therefore well
have been linked with the age classes 7). Damian de la Bandera mentions as
the first class that of the fifteen to twenty years old, and as the fifth that of
the thirty-five to forty years old. The first and last classes of the group of the
adult, marriageable men in his account begin ten years sooner than according
to the other authors, if at any rate this is the group Damian de la Bandera
refers to. I have no further data at my disposal about the nature of the five age
classes of five years each. It is possible, however, to examine the nature of the
system by extrapolation from its application to the group of the aclla, the virgins
of the Sun. The same probably applied for them as for the group of grown men.
According to Poma (1944, foja 299-300) there were six categories of virgins
for the 'idols’, and six categories of 'ordinary’ virgins, who were to be found
all over the empire. Here, Poma was probably distinguishing between the two
groups of accla which in other chronicles, (e.g. Santillan, 1950, p. 62-64) are
referred to as the accla of the Sun and the aclla of the Inca. Poma mentions the
system of five marriage classes lasting five years each only as a subdivision of
the category of the aclla of the Sun. The virgins of the Sun were not permitted
ever to marry or to leave their house. The other chronicles vary in their accounts
on the other kind of virgins.
Poma described the six kinds of virgins of the Sun as follows:
"The virgins of twenty years old, who were the most important ones and
were called Guayrur aclla, served the Sun, the Moon and the Stars. They never
spoke to men until they died. They entered the house at the age of twenty.
"The virgins of the huaca of Guanacauri, who were called Sumac aclla (sumac,
beautiful). They did not mix with men and were thirty years of age.
"The virgins of the principal huaca, who belonged to the uayror aclla sumac.
They were twenty-five years of age and remained in the house for life.
"The virgins of the second (grade) huaca, who were called sumac aclla
catiquin (Holguin: catini, or caticuni, to follow after the one who precedes)
and were thirty-five years of age. They wove the clothes for the huaca.
"The virgins of the smaller and less important huaca were called aclla chaupi
catiquin sumac aclla (the aclla who followed after the aclla in the middle) and
were forty years of age. They tended the land and wove.
"The pampa-acllacona (pampa, a plain. This indicates a very low order),
served the Moon and the Stars and the other huacabilca and the ordinary gods.
7) Mishkin (1946, pp. 465-468) describes for the modern Quechua Indians of southern
Peru a hierarchic system linked to age classes in which certain functions in the community,
connected with fixed financial responsibilities has to be filled by boys and men of given ages.
Only by successively filling al these functions, which demands continually heavier sacrifices,
can a person reach the highest function, that of mayor.
They were the weavers of chumbes (chumpi, tape), and uinchas (huincha, a
hair fillet), chuspa-uatus (chuspa, coca bag, huatu, cord) and of chuspas ystalla
(ystalla, a woman’s bag), etc. They were fifty years of age and never sinned.
They were the daughters of the auquicona (the aristocracy, the subsidiary sons
of the rulers)” .
Such were the houses (as Poma calls the age classes) of the virgins of the
Sun. Poma inverted the sequence of the second and third houses, but it is clear
that he recorded the following age classes: twenty to twenty-five, twenty-five
to thirty, thirty to thirty-five, thirty-five to forty, forty to fifty and fifty and
older. Compared to the age classes of the men, the last class of the aclla, that
of fifty and older, could be said to correspond to that of the middle aged men,
fom fifty to sixty years of age. Poma has an irregularity in the fifth age class,
which he gives as lasting not five but ten years. He may have tried here to
correlate the system applied to the aclla with that applied to the grown men.
In the groups of the aclla of the Sun there was then a system of five age classes
of five years each 8).
This system of five age classes had three characteristics. To begin with,
Poma speaks of five groups of aclla which existed side by side and simul
taneously and had different tasks. Secondly, a sequence of time can be recognised
in the five groups. It seems reasonable to suppose that the aclla of the age
class twenty to twenty-five, after they had belonged to this class for five years,
were replaced by another group and that they then belonged to the class of the
twenty-five to thirty year olds and thus went through alii five classes. In the
third place there existed a hierarchy of the five classes. The first class was the
highest, the fifth the lowest.
§ 3. I called the simultaneous aspect of the system of five age classes the
first characteristic 9), and its consecutive aspect the second. The quinquepartition
was applied not only to the age classes of grown people but also to other time
spans or units. I shall cite another instance of the simultaneous as well as con-
8) It is remarkable that in the group of aclla of the sun the system of naming the five age
groups also corresponded to that of the fingers of the hand (see V ili note 5). The three first
age classes were called guayror, guayror sumac and sumac. There may have been in this nomen
clature the same sequence as, in the organization of the Chanca, that of the names Uscovillca
( = white villca), Ticllavillca ( = black and white villca) and Yanavillca ( = black villca)
(see IV § 5 b pp. 104-105). The two other age classes of the aclla were called sumac aclla cati-
quin and aclla chaupi catiquin sumac aclla. These names have the word catiquin in common. We
recognise this word in the form catic in the names of the 2nd and 4th fingers. The three first
age groups could thus be compared to the 1st, 3rd and 5th fingers and the two others with the
2nd and 4th fingers. Evidence that the 5th age group was conceived to follow the 3rd is also
found in the word chaupi, middle, with which the 3rd age class is indicated.
9) See V ili § 1 p. 214.
secutive representation of a quinquepartition below, for this instance is also rele

vant in relation to the so-called history of the Inca.
Poma de Ayala (1944, foja 49, 54, 58, 64) records that there were four
worlds, or periods, previous to that in which Manco Capac and his successors
acceded to power; these worlds or periods were those of the Uariviracocharuna,
of the Uariruna, of the Purunruna and of the Aucaruna, which lasted eight
hundred, thirteen hundred, eleven hundred and two thousand one hundred
years. There was a total, then, of five successive worlds. The first world was
associated with the god Viracocha.
The other writers who also mentioned five worlds were Murua and Monte-
sinos. Murua ( 1613 cap. 27) writes that before this world or sun there existed
another four suns which perished each in a different way. Montesinos (1957,
p. 31, 48) calls a world which lasts a thousand years, Capac huatan, or Intip
huatan, i.e. the great year, or the year of the sun. Every thousand years a sun
perished and a new one came into being and all dating was started anew. Every
sun was a world.
Side by side with this consecutive presentation of the five suns there was
also a simultaneous one, recorded by Cieza (1945, p. 229, 230) from the
mountain people of the Huanca in Central Peru. Formerly there were many
demons in the country of the Huanca, who terrified the people. Once, however,
after five suns had appeared in the sky, the demons all disappeared. The
dwelling of the demon Huarivillca was burnt down completely.
Montesinos connected the five worlds with the Sun, while Poma associated
them with Viracocha. To the Huanca the five simultaneous suns were the
opponents of Huarivillca, who was identical with Viracocha (Pachacuti Yamqui
1950, p. 211, 231, 232). Huarivillca is also described as having five manifes
tations; this is recorded not from the Huanca, but their enemies, the population
of Huarochiri, the people with whom the Huanca associated Huarivillca. With
relation to Huarochiri I described before 10) the myth about the fight between
Pariacaca, the god of the coastal region, and Hualkllo Carhuinchu, the god of
the mountains, who fled to the country of the Huanca. Pariacaca was the son
of Coniraya Viracocha, and was therefore associated with him. Pariacaca was
said to have been born from five eggs (Avila 1939, p. 82, 87) in the form of
five falcons which later turned into five men, brothers. Pariacaca in this myth
had five manifestations.
In the examples above, then, we again encountered a consecutive as well as
a simultaneous presentation of the quinquepartition. In the consecutive one
there was mention of five successive worlds each connected with one of the
10) See V § 13 b, p. 169.

five suns or one of the five Viracocha. In the simultaneous presentation there
was mention of five suns, or five sons of Viracocha, who were in fact one.
§ 4. The quinquepartition among the Inca, which was expressed above all
in the system of age classes, was an important factor, as I see it, in the forma
tion of the historical image of the five rulers of Hurin-Cuzco and five of
Hanan-Cuzco, as well as in the extension of the eight-class organization into a
ten-class system. This extension, however, was also influenced by another form
of organization which was based on decempartition. The Inca had, in my
opinion, taken over this decempartition from other peoples; there is no reason,
however, for assuming that the organization into five age classes was not indi
genous among the Inca. The decempartition and quinquepartition may indeed
have been related to one another. Before entering into the question of the
quinquepartition I shall first touch on the decempartition.
Several of the chroniclers describe a form of organization the Inca applied
in the administration of their empire. In this form of organization ten grown
men with their households were treated as one group, called a chunca; ten of
these chunca constituted a group of a hundred, the pachaca; ten pachaca a
group of a thousand, the huaranca; and ten groups of a thousand a group of
ten-thousand, the huno. One of my main reasons for arguing that this decimal
organization was not native to Inca civilisation is its distribution in the areas
which once belonged to the Inca empire, as is clear from the documents of the
Spanish church and of the civil administration which I was able to examine in
the archives of the capitals and in many other towns and villages in Ecuador,
Peru and Bolivia.
The terms pachaca and huaranca hardly occurred at all in such documents
from South Peru (I shall cite two instances later 11), while they were in frequent
use from Central Peru — the Ancash valley — to North Peru 12). In the Otuzco
repartimiento, Moche valley, (A.N.L. Leg. 6, Cuad. 116, ano 1647) the terms
pachaca and huaranca were used only to refer to groups. From Central Peru
to the south of Bolivia, on the other hand, the terms Hanan and Hurin fre
quently occurred. North of that region they were not mentioned at all, but for
a few exceptions, for example in the towns of Cajamarca and Quito, where there
is evidence of strong Inca influence. The terms Collana, Payan and Cayao and
11) See this paragraph pp. 221-224.

12) The only document which I have seen in which all the ten pachaca of one huaranca were
listed, concerned a huaranca of Cajamarca. According to a document dating from 1594 (B.N .L.
no. A 14, p. 19 ff) the huaranca of Chonta in Cajamarca comprised the following 10 pachaca:
Pincomarco, Nepos, Polloque, Xampoden, Catache, Lesachi, Ayoque, Senan, Quepan and
Payaques.
synonyms occurred mainly, and probably exclusively, in Central and South Peru.
For these reasons, among others, it seems most likely to me that the decimal
organization was adopted by the Inca from the kingdom of Chimu which was
centred around the Moche valley and had been conquered by the Inca.
It was probably the Inca, however, who extended the decimal organization
in a manner derived from their own culture; this extension was not inherent
per se in the prototype of the decimal organization which the Inca had adopted,
for no instances of this extension are to be found in North Peru. The Inca
divided the group of a hundred into two groups of fifty, the group of a thou
sand into two groups of five hundred, and the group of ten thousand into
two of five thousand each. They also created a group of forty thousand, called
a huaman; this number, according to Santillan (1950, p. 47, 48) and to the
‘Senores que sirvieron . ..’ (Senores 1904, p. 201), agreed with that of the
population of a valley or a province.
From the two instances at my disposal of the application of the decimal
organization it appeared, that the Inca made the pachaca co-incide with the
groups of the existing forms of organization and, whenever possible, did the
same with the pichcapachaca (the groups of five hundred) and the huaranca.
These instances, in my opinion, convincingly demonstrate that with such terms
as pachaca, pichcapachaca and huaranca the Inca attempted in the first place
to class existing groups into these categories and then, as far as possible, to
apply the sub-division of these groups, like the pachaca, inside the huaranca
or the pichcapachaca. It was definitely not their intention to designate by the
terms pachaca, pichcapachaca and huaranca, groups which really did contain a
hundred, five hundred and a thousand heads of families and their families. If
this conclusion is correct, it follows that the division of Cuzco into ten groups
can be connected with this decimal organization.
The first instance I shall cite of the application in South Peru of the decimal
system, probably under the influence of the Inca administration, is the organi
zation of the villages in Collaguas province, which was mentioned once
before 13). Every village consisted of three ayllu of three hundred Indians each.
The author of the chronicle on Collaguas province probably arrived at this
number under the influence of the fact that in every ayllu there were three
pachaca. Thus, a village organization consisted of nine pachaca. There is not a
single indication of any addition of an odd sub-ayllu by the Inca to this organi
zation of three ayllu and nine sub-ayllu, in order merely to complete the
huaranca. It has to be assumed that the Inca referred to a whole village organi
zation of nine pachaca by the term huaranca. The pichcapachaca could not
13) See V § 1 b, p. 117.

have any part in such kinds of village organizations. Finally, it seems most
unlikely that there should in fact have been a hundred families in each pachaca.
The village organizations in Collaguas province were wholly similar to that
of the village of Acos 14). In this village it does not seem to me to be possible
that Cuzco ayllu (Hanansaya), the ayllu of the government, was as large as
Acos ayllu or Anahuarque ayllu, to which the population proper of the village
belonged. These last two ayllu were probably both much larger than Cuzco
ayllu. It could be said that the Cuzco, Acos and Anahuarque ayllu were com
parable units as were their sub-divisions into Collana, Payan and Cayao.
The second instance is taken from the organization of the village of San
Jeronimo as it appears from the register of marriages in the parish church from
the years 1712 to 1745 (San Jeronimo, Libro de Casamientos 1712-1745),
San Jeronimo and San Sebastian (Sanu) are two villages in the Cuzco valley
in which there still survive panaca and ayllu which must date from pre-conquest
days. In this register from San Jeronimo these panaca and ayllu were distributed
in the following manner over the five pachaca.
First pachaca: Collana, Chahuen-Cuzco, Callampata, Churucata
Second pachaca: Succssu, Aucailli, Oro Acamana
Third pachaca: Huecachirau, Apumaita, Andamachay (Uscamaita), Huahuani
Fourth pachaca: Raurauhua, Cori, Chima, Anahuarque
Fifth pachaca: Yanacona, Colloncas, Qqemaquiro, Piron, Surama.
But for two exceptions the distribution of the panaca over the first four pa
chaca appears to be the same as that of the panaca in Cuzco over the suyu I, III,
II and IV. Collana ayllu in San Jeronimo was, as I surmised before 15) identified
with Capac ayllu and Hatun ayllu together. Vicaquirao panaca, written Hueca
chirau in San Jeronimo, was classed in this village in the third pachaca, which
corresponded with suyu II in Cuzco; Uru ayllu, which together with Vicaquirao
panaca in Cuzco was linked to one group of ceque, occurs in San Jeronimo
under the name of Oro Acamana in the second pachaca, where it corresponds
in position to suyu III in Cuzco. Usca Mayta panaca is not mentioned in San
Jeronimo. One of the people whose marriage was registered in the column of
the third pachaca however, was said to belong to the ‘Uscamaita from Anda
machay’ ayllu. It can be assumed therefore that Andamachay is just another
name for Usca Mayta panaca. In San Jeronimo the Inca attempted to class
the people who had come from Cuzco into a pichcapachaca, and to make the
five pachaca take over the function of the four suyu in Cuzco. The Yanacona
belonged to the fifth pachaca. The fourth and fifth pachaca together occupied
1 4) See V § 1 c, p. 118.
15) See IV § 2 c, p. 85.
the position of suyu IV in Cuzco, for in Cuzco the Yanacona belonged to IV.
In San Jeronimo, then, can be seen an attempt at adapting a quinquepartition
to the original quadripartition; but we might also make the tentative supposition
that the redoubling of the original 9 ceques of Cuntisuyu to 15, as we find
them in the cequesystem, was meant as an adaptation of the fourfold suyu
division of Cuzco to a quinquepartition.
From a comparison of the organization of San Jeronimo with that of present-
day San Sebastian and of Acos, it becomes clear how the Inca envisaged a
division into two moieties by means of the division of the huaranca into two
pichcapachaca and similarly, of the huno into two pichcahuaranca, or of the
pachaca into two pichcachunca. This conclusion can be drawn for the following
reasons. In San Sebastian (L. Aguilar 1925, p. 21-23) there are two ayllu:
Sanu and Ayarmaca. The original population of the village and the panaca
of Cuzco belonged to Sanu. Their economic functions indicate that they were
identified with the centre of the village, and Ayarmaca ayllu with the sur
rounding region. Sanu ayllu can therefore be compared with Cuzco ayllu (Ha-
nansaya) and Acos ayllu (Hurinsaya) in Acos, and Ayarmaca ayllu with Ana-
huarque ayllu in Acos. Sanu ayllu could also be compared to the population
proper of Cuzco in the first representation of the organization of Cuzco (I +
II), and Ayarmaca to the surrounding population (III + IV ). The pichcapa
chaca to which San Jeronimo belonged would have to be compared to Sanu
ayllu in San Sebastian, or the suyu I and II in Cuzco. But then a second pichca
pachaca which corresponded to the Ayarmaca in San Sebastian (or to Ana-
huarque ayllu in Acos, or to II + IV in Cuzco) can be assumed to have existed
beside the first one. In this way the whole organization of San Jeronimo pro
bably constituted a huaranca. It was fitted into the decimal system in a com
pletely different way to the organization of Acos. But if the Inca really did
try to fit existing organizations into a decimal system, then this seems to demon
strate that the terms huaranca, pichcapachca and pachaca were no more than
symbolical ones for the different categories of different groups. The decimal
system as applied by the Inca might perhaps best be compared with the present-
day Western decimal system of cataloguing books in libraries (the U.D.C.) 16).
16) Concerning the further application of the decimal organization by the Inca in the admini
stration of their empire, as here assumed, we have the following data. According to Santillan
(1950, pp. 47-48) and the “ Senores que sirvieron ...” (Sehores 1904, p. 201) the group
of 40,000 bore the name of huaman, and this group was the population of a province. The
huaman was, according to them, divided into Hanan and Hurin. If we were to apply this or
ganization to the province of Collaguas (see V § 1 b, pp. 115-117) this would mean that this
province was a huaman, and the four subprovinces Yamqui Hanansaya, Yamqui Hurinsaya, Lari
Hanansaya and Lari Hurinsaya each a huno ( — 10,000). In these four huno, each of the villages
formed a huaranca and the subdivisions of these villages the pachaca.
22 4 Vili. QUINQUEPARTITION AND DECEMPARTITION
Having reached this conclusion about the nature of the group called pachaca
we might also offer a tentative interpretation of the word pachaca itself. It
might be that it did not originally refer to the number 100, but that it derived
the first meaning from its stem pacha, which is an indication of place. So the
first meaning of the word pachaca would have been “ local group” and only
after that, to mark it off from other kinds of, smaller and bigger, local groups,
it took the meaning of 100.
§ 5. a) Now that we have recognised the true nature of the decimal organi
zation in the Inca Empire, it can also be shown how the Inca tried to adapt
the organization of Cuzco to the decimal system. In the third representation
they extended the four marriage classes of Hanan-Cuzco and of Hurin-Cuzco
to five, and the number of the chiefs of the marriage classes was accordingly
increased to ten 17).
The adaptation of the decimal organization in Cuzco was probably influenced
or made possible by the fact that this form of organization was regarded as
being related to the indigenous Inca organization into five age classes. The
fact that the ten chiefs were presented as belonging to one dynasty of ten rulers
was therefore due not only to the identification of the ten parts with marriage
classes 18), but also to the fact that a similarity was seen to exist between the
decimal organization and that into five age classes which last organization
was shown to have simultaneous as well as consecutive aspects19). Charac
teristics similar to those of the marriage classes were ascribed to the age classes.
_ I shall illustrate this by two instances. The first instance demonstrates the
identity or similarity between the parts of the decempartition and the marriage
classes and age classes, for groups of ceque in the organization of Cuzco could
relate to the ten parts while at the same time also relating to marriage classes
and age classes. The second instance demonstrates that the ten parts as marriage
classes in the consecutive presentation and the age classes both were fitted into
a time scale which was based on the quinquepartition and the decempartition.
Both instances demonstrate that above all a hierarchic distinction was made
between the marriage classes and the age classes.
The first instance relates to the manner in which the group of the yanacona
in the second representation were integrated into the organization of Cuzco.
17) As I have already noted, it seems probable to me that the Inca took over the decimal
organization of the Chimu. An example of a decempartition as in Cuzco can also be found in
Chimu culture. The capital of the Chimu, Chanchan, was composed of various districts which
were entirely independent of each other, indicated in Spanish by “ ciudadelas” or “ little towns” .
Even today ten such districts can be distinguished in the ruins of Chanchan, and when the city
was built in the Chimu period it probably contained the same number.
1S) See V § 2, pp. 122-128.
19) See V ili § 2, p. 218.
In Cuntisuyu (IV ) there was a quinquepartition into five groups of ceque

which corresponded to the quinquepartition in the Piscachuri ( = “ five sons” )
ayllu of the village of Puquio. Since Yanaca ayllu in Ayamaraes province
corresponded to Piscachuri ayllu in Puquio and to Cuntisuyu in Cuzco, I con
sidered that it could be assumed that the quinquepartition should be associated
with the group of the yanacona20). The position of the yanacona was pro
bably similar to that of the aclla. If this can indeed be proved by the following
argument, it will follow that a quinquepartition, similar to that described by
Poma for the aclla of the Sun can be expected among the yanacona and that
this quinquepartition was expressed in the quinquepartition of Cuntisuyu.
Like the aclla21), the yanacona were also divided into the yanacona of the
Sun and the yanacona of the Inca (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 51, p. 229; Poma
1944, foja 266; Castro and Ortega Morejon 1936, p. 245). Although the
position of the yanacona became one of serfdom during the Spanish period,
it had been much higher and entirely different in nature under the Inca. Poma
de Ayala (1944, foja 266) classifies the yanacona with the chattels, — like
golden and silver objects, estates and cattle — , of the Sun, i.e. the temple of
the Sun. In the same way in which the aclla of the Sun and of the Inca were
the most beautiful girls and were moreover chosen from the highest classes,
the yanacona, according to Santillan (1950, p. 62-64), were the men with the
best physical build and mostly the sons of curaca chiefs. They were the servants
specifically of the Inca and of the deceased Inca. They were exempt from
taxation and as they were withdrawn from the authority of their curaca, placed
directly under the governor of the Inca, who used them in his service. Some of
them were sent to Cuzco and later made into curaca of the provinces. The Inca
also kept the sons of the curaca with him as tokens of subjection and servility,
these youths being brought to him when they had reached a suitable age. San
tillan finally records that the Inca gave such aclla as were not intended for
service in the temples or for the huaca in marriage to people whom he wished
to favour, which he did regularly to his servants and yanacona. Castro and
Ortega Morejon (1936, p. 245) confirm specifically that the aclla were also
given in marriage to yanacona of the Su n 22).
Particularly this last piece of information on these marriages between aclla
and yanacona shows that these two groups were considered as equivalent. Like
20) See IV § 2 b, p. 82, § 3 c, p. 99.

21) See V ili § 2, p. 217.
22) A confirmation of the equation of aclla with yanacona is also seen in the following pas
sage from Pachacuti Yamqui (1950, p. 224; see also p. 247). In connection with his description
of the various kinds of aclla he says: “ Likewise they had brought up many boys who were not
allowed to come into contact with women; these later served as soldiers...” .
the aclla of the Sun, the yanacona of the Sun may be expected to have been
divided into five age classes which, in a hierarchic order, were in the service
of particular classes of holy places. If this supposition is correct, it might demon
strate in two ways how the Inca saw a resemblance between the age classes
and marriage classes.
The first way relates to the quinquepartition in Cuntisuyu. It seems likely
that these five groups of ceque were used to designate the five age classes
of the yanacona of the Sun especially since the site or sites, considered holy
because of their connection with the mythical origin of the whole community
of the city of Cuzco, were associated in the second representation with Cuntisuyu
in particular23). The extension in Cuntisuyu from three to five groups of
ceque must be seen in the light of the second representation since in this ex
tension use was made of the group of ceque IV 3, which played a role only
in the second representation. As the whole class of the yanacona was classed
in Cuntisuyu, this marriage class was regarded as an endogamous group, and
also as an ayllu which was in turn divided into three marriage classes 24). Under
the influence of the quinquepartition these three marriage classes were extended
to five 25).
The second instance of the way in which the Inca saw a resemblance between
the age classes and marriage classes concerns the data on the five age classes
of the yanacona. The yanacona of the Sun were classed in IV and also as a
sub-group of I in I 3 26) in the second representation of the organization of
Cuzco. As was shown above, the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco in the second repre
sentation, were placed as the chiefs of marriage classes in I 1, II 1, III 1 and
IV 1, and the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco in I 2, II 2, III 2 and IV 2. The rulers
were thus presented as being contemporary chiefs (i.e. the simultaneous aspect).
If they are treated as the rulers of the whole of Cuzco, who belonged to two
dynasties (i.e. the consecutive aspect), then it would follow that the five rulers
23) See V § 10 c, pp. 160-161.

24) See VI § 6, pp. 183-192.
25) That the age classes of the yanacona were compared with five marriage classes and seen
as an extension of three marriage classes is once again demonstrated by a comparison of the data
of the yanacona with the names of the age classes of the aclla of the sun. The system in the
adjustment of the five age classes of the yanacona to the three groups of ceque in Cuntisuyu
was the same as the system of the naming of the fingers of the hand (see V ili note 5). A similar
system is also recognisable in the naming of the five age classes of the aclla of the sun (see
V ili note 8). The 1st, 3rd and 5th fingers as well as the 1st, 3rd and 5th age classes of the
aclla were distinguished from each other in the same way as the three groups of an ayllu were
distinguished as white, black-and-white, black or Collana, Payan, Cayao. We may then speak
here of a correspondence in the nomenclature of the age classes and of the groups Collana, Payan
and Cayao in their function of marriage classes.
26) See V § 10 a, p. 158.
of Hanan-Cuzco were all linked to I 1, in the first as well as in the second

presentation 27), and similarly the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco were all linked to I 2.
It seems to me that this recurrence of quinquepartitions: the five rulers of
Hanan-Cuzco in I 1, the five rulers of Hurin-Cuzco in I 2 and the five age
classes of yanacona in I 3, can be taken as an indication of the fact that the
relationships between the rulers of one moiety were regarded in the same way
as those between the age classes.
The information on the Yanacona in my opinion showed that the Inca saw
a similarity and an identity in nature between the age classes and marriage
classes. This similarity was an operative factor in the extension of the system
in the third representation to five groups in Hanan-Cuzco and five in Hurin-
Cuzco, which resulted in a decimal organization which corresponded to that of
the Chimu, in their capital Chanchan, and to the decimal form of division into
pachaca, huaranca, etc. Partly owing to this factor — because the age classes
always had a simultaneous as well as a consecutive aspect28) — a situation
was created in which the image of the so-called history of the Inca, namely
that of a dynasty of ten rulers, could originate.
b) In the preceding chapters data from the so-called history of the Inca
were used to explain the social organization of Cuzco. The chiefs of the ten
parts, distributed over two moieties of five each, on which the organization of
Cuzco was based, were presented as so many kings in a dynasty. The time scale
of the world as it had existed was, according to the Inca, based on a combination
of the quinquepartition and the decempartition as it was expressed in the
decimal form of organization29). The history of the Inca was also fitted into
this system. This adaptation makes it all the more clear that the extension of
the organization of Cuzco from eight classes in the third representation to an
organization into ten marriage classes, was brought about under the influence
of the quinquepartition and decempartition as they are known from the orga
nization into five age classes and from the decimal organization which com
prised the pachaca, the pichcapachaca and the huaranca. To begin with I shall
give an outline of the Inca system of dividing time.
According to Montesinos (1957, p. 31, 48) and Poma (1944, foja 49, 54,
58, 64) the Inca believed that they were living in the fifth world. The previous
worlds, as Montesinos informs us, had each lasted a thousand years. Each
period, called Capac huatan, or Intip huatan, was divided by the Inca into
periods of a hundred years each, and these periods in turn into periods of ten
27) See IV § 2 f, p. 90, V § 4 c, pp. 132-133.

28) See V ili § 2, p. 218.
29) See V ili § 4, pp. 220-224.
years each. One half of a Capac huatan was called Pachacuti and lasted five
hundred years.
In this system there was not only question of dating. For, according to Mon-
tesinos, every thousand years one sun perished, a new one came into being and
the counting of the years began again. On these occasions, and also when a
pachacuti had run its full course, i.e. twice every thousand years, great changes
were brought about.
This material, then, conveys a strong impression that the quinquepartite or
ganization was combined with a decimal one and that originally a pachacuti
merely stood for a change from one world to the next. This is the impression
one gets from Poma, for he speaks only of five kinds of people who each
lived in one of the five worlds. He uses the word pachacuti (1944, foja 49)
in connection with the origin of man in the first world; this was supposed to
have taken place after the Flood, that is to say after the ‘uno uaco pachacuti’.
Just as periods of five years each were part of the organization into five age
classes, so they probably also fitted into the time scale as recorded by Monte-
sinos. These periods can be regarded as being identical to the halves of the
periods of ten years mentioned by Montesinos. The Inca thus combined a
consecutive representation of the moiety organization with the consecutive re
presentation of the decimal organization 30).
In accordance with his picture of the five suns, or worlds, Montesinos de
votes his whole chronicle to the description of a dynasty of more than a hundred
rulers, who covered the whole period from the beginning of the first sun to
the conquest of the Inca Empire by the Spaniards. Every ruler whose reign
co-incided with the transition from one Intip huatan to the next, or from one
Pachacuti to the next, received the epithet Pachacuti. As the ruler Pachacuti,
known to us through the other authors as well — according to Montesinos —
was the ninth ruler with this name, we have to assume that during his reign
the fifth world began. Another chronicler, Bias Valera (1950, p. 162, 164)
confirms that the well known ruler Pachacuti was the ninth and last to bear this
name. He also writes of the deeds of the seventh Pachacuti (1950, p. 166).
Montesinos’ chronicle is considered to be of little value by present-day authors
on the culture of the Inca, for they all held that the existence of a dynasty of
more than a hundred rulers was impossible. It appears, however, that other
chroniclers of proved reliability tried to harmonize the history of the Inca —
which they all presented as beginning with Manco Capac — with the duration
30) Support for the conclusion that the periods of the age classes were fitted into the system
of divisions of time can be found in Garcilaso (1945, Tomo II, libro VI, cap. V ili) . He is the
only chronicler to say that the periods of age classes were not five years but ten. He divided
the entire life of a man into periods of ten years.
Vili. QUINQUEPARTITION AND DECEMPARTITION 22 9
of one Pachacuti, or of one sun. We, on the one hand, conclude from this that
in all the chronicles Inca history had the same character as in Montesinos’ work.
On the other hand Montesinos’ version of the history of the Inca can be re
garded as being no more than a reasoned elaboration of the tradition of the
five worlds which he was not the only one to be acquainted with.
Three of the chroniclers, Sarmiento, Cabello Valboa and Vazquez de Espinosa
give detailed chronologies of the history of the Inca rulers. As appears from
their data, the history of the Inca lasted a thousand years according to Sarmiento,
and five hundred according to Vazquez de Espinosa31). Cabello Valboa dis
tinguishes between two periods in the history: the first, which could be called
the mythical period, which lasted five hundred years, and the second, the
historical period, of which the dates given by him are acceptable. According to
all three authors the history of the Inca began with Manco Capac. The difficulty,
however, was where to end the period of a thousand, or five hundred, years,
whether with the ruler Pachacuti, after Tupac Yupanqui’s reign, or whether
with the arrival of the Spaniards or even later. These three authors, or their
Inca informants, each tried in their own way to solve the difficulty.
For Sarmiento the history of the Inca had lasted a thousand years, and,
originally, the ten rulers from Manco Capac to Tupac Yupanqui each reigned
a hundred years. But since the history of the Inca continued after the reign of
Tupac Yupanqui, Sarmiento also included these later rulers within the time
span of the same sun, or world. It is possible, however, to reconstruct how he
achieved this presentation.
Cabello Valboa was faced with a different difficulty. His chronicle makes
one more clearly aware of the fact that each period of five hundred years was
marked by a Pachacuti, or change of worlds at each end. These two Pachacuti
in the history of the Inca were the conquest of Cuzco by Manco Capac and the
defence of the town by the ruler Pachacuti against the Chanca 32). The period
between these two events lasted five hundred years. Everything that happened
after the last event lay outside this period. Thus Cabello Valboa adhered most
closely to the concept of the successive Pachacuti as climactic changes. He did
not, however, in this picture of history take into account the extension of the
organization of eight marriage classes to that into ten panaca with which the
ten rulers from one dynasty were associated.
In the version of the history of the Inca by Vazquez de Espinosa the Pacha-
31) Vazquez de Espinosa, who probably wrote his chronicle in 1629, faithfully follows Gar-
cilaso de la Vega in his data on the deeds of the rulers. Both add a ruler between Pachacuti
and Tupac Yupanqui, namely Inca Yupanqui. But Vazquez de Espinosa must have taken his
chronology from another source, unknown to us.
32) See V § 10 a, pp. 156-157.
cuti which put an end to a period of five hundred years was the conquest of
the Inca Empire by the Spaniards. In his version the concept of the period of
five hundred years is clearest.
Sarmiento’s version of the history of the Inca, which was probably the
original one, demonstrates most clearly of all the similarity between the history
of the Inca, the Inca system of time scale, and the decimal organization of
Cuzco. In order to show why this is probably the original version, I shall first
touch on the versions by Vazquez de Espinosa and Cabello Valboa.
According to Vazquez de Espinosa (1948, § 1536, p. 529) Manco Capac
and his sister Mama Occlo, left Lake Titicaca in 1025. In 1031, after much
wandering, they founded Cuzco which was to be the capital of the Inca Empire
for five hundred years. The length of the rulers’ reign was as follows: (Vaz
quez de Espinosa, 1948, § 1587, p. 549): Manco Capac — forty years, Sinchi
Roca — thirty-four years, Lloque Yupanqui — thirty-six years, Mayta Capac —
thirty years, Capac Yupanqui — forty years, Inca Roca — fifty years, Yahuar
Huacac — thirty years, Viracocha — sixty years, Pachacuti — sixty years, Inca
Yupanqui — thirty years, Tupac Yupanqui — forty years, Huayna Capac —
forty-two years, and Huascar — eight years. The final ruler succeeded in 1523
and was murdered in 1531 at the command of Atahuallpa, who was then already
in Spanish hands.
The remarkable feature of Vazquez de Espinosa’s account is that the reigns
of all the Inca rulers together lasted exactly five hundred years, and that this
period was calculated not from the beginning but from the end, that is to say
from the moment when the history of the Inca made way for that of the Spanish,
which was a change of worlds (Vazquez de Espinosa, 1948, § 1586, p. 549).
The lengths of the rulers’ reigns are too well rounded and to improbably long
to inspire much trust from the purely historical point of view. The significance
of this account, in my opinion, lies in the fact that he presents the history of the
Inca as having lasted exactly five hundred years, one pachacuti, and that he
calculated this period from the end. This final event was of such magnitude
to the Inca that it counted to them as a change of worlds; this change of worlds
was also called Pachacuti.
This conclusion is corroborated by Cabello Valboa’s version of the history

of the Inca. To him the change of worlds, the pachacuti, was the defeat of the
Chanca by the ruler who was, on account of this event, called Pachacuti. Rowe
(1945, p. 265-284; 1946, p. 203) has remarked on the great difference between
Cabello Valboa’s dates for the period since Pachacuti began his reign (i.e. after
he had defeated the Chanca) and those for the rulers before Pachacuti. The
dates from Pachacuti onwards are as follows:
Viracocha Inca deposed 1438

Pachacuti reigns 1438— 1471
Tupac Yupanqui assumes the high command of the army 1463
Tupac Yupanqui reigns 1471— 1493
The conquest of Chile 1473
Huayna Capac reigns 1493— 1525
Huascar reigns 1525— 1532
These dates look completely reliable from a historical point of view, in contrast
to the dates before that of Pachacuti’s accession to the throne.
According to Cabello Valboa (1951, cap. 10, p. 270, 271) Manco Capac
died at the age of ninety-one, in the year 1006, after a reign of more than
sixty years. The years of the other rulers’ deaths are:
Sinchi Roca 1083
Lloque Yupanqui 1161
Mayta Capac 1226
Capac Yupanqui 1306
Inca Roca 1356
Yahuar Huacac 1386
Viracocha Inca 1438
( Cabello Valboa, 1951, cap. 11-14, pp. 280, 286, 289, 291, 294, 296, 301).
Manco Capac’s reign must then have started one or more years before 946
A.D. or after 936, as in 1006 he had ruled for more than sixty years. If the
year 1438 was equally critical to Cabello Valboa in his calculation of the reigns
of the rulers before this year as 1531 was to Vazquez de Espinosa, then it is
very well possible that Manco Capac conquered Cuzco in 938 and began his
reign in that year and that in this manner the time span between this date and
Pachacuti’s battle against the Chanca did indeed cover exactly five hundred
years.
If this interpretation of Cabello Valboa’s dates is correct, it corroborates the
following facts, or conclusions. The conquest of Cuzco by Manco Capac and the
defence of Cuzco against the Chanca by Pachacuti were events of the same
magnitude as changes of worlds, or pachacuti 33). The time span between these
two pachacuti was five hundred years, and Montesinos called this period also
a Pachacuti. While Vazquez de Espinosa took the point at which the history
of the Inca ended and the history of the Spaniards took its beginning as the
last change of worlds, Cabello Valboa, on the other hand took an event which
belonged completely to the history and culture of the Inca and was in no way
33) See V § 10 a, pp. 156-157.

subjected to Spanish influence. It is noteworthy, however, that Cabello Valboa

took no account in his choice of the critical date of the extension of the organi
zation of Cuzco under the influence of the quinquepartition or decempartition.
This extension obscured the central position occupied by Pachacuti, and his
defense of Cuzco against the Chanca, for the explanation of the organization
of Cuzco, which had come to consist of ten ayllu and ten panaca associated
with ten rulers. Sarmiento, on the other hand, in his original version of the
history of the Inca, did take this extension into account. That is why he was
not only able to make the duration of the whole of the history of the Inca,
but also the duration of the dynasties of Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco and
the reigns of the rulers themselves fit in with the time scale. As Vazquez de
Espinosa and Cabello Valboa dealt with dynasties of more or less than ten
rulers, this last possibility was not open to them.
Sarmiento’s account is as follows. Of every ruler he tells the age at death,
the age at which he succeeded his predecessor, the year of his death and the
duration of his reign.
Manco Capac (Sarmiento 1947, cap. 14, p. 133) was thirty-six years when
he left Pacarictambo and after eight years of wandering assumed the govern
ment of Cuzco.
age age at date of length

accession death of reign
cap. 14, pp. 133, 135 Manco Capac 144 44 665 A.D. 100
cap. 15, P- 136 Sinchi Roca 127 108 675 10
cap. 16, P- 138 Lloque Yupanqui 132 22 786 111
cap. 17, P- 142 Mayta Capac 112 12 896 100
cap. 18, P- 143 Capac Yupanqui 104 15 985 89
cap. 19, P- 146 • Inca Roca 123 20 1088 103
cap. 22, P- 155 Yahuar Huacac 115 19 — 96
cap. 24, P- 161 Viracocha Inca 119 18 — 101
cap. 47, pp. 219, 220 ° Pachacuti 125 22 1191 103
cap. 54, pp. 234, 235 * Tupac Yupanqui 85 18 1258 67
cap. 62, P- 251 Huayna Capac 80 20 1524 60
cap. 69, P- 274 Huascar 40 31 1533 9
We see then, that Manco Capac began his reign in Cuzco in the year 565.
At Huascar’s death, in 1533 according to Sarmiento, the total of reigns of the
Inca dynasty was still thirty-two years short of a thousand. In view of the data
from Vazquez de Espinosa and Cabello Valboa it seems likely that Sarmiento,
or his informant, really did intend to make the Inca dynasty last a thousand
years. The question now arises what significance the year 1565 had to Sar
miento, or his informant, in whose version the Inca Empire lasted a thousand
years. Before attempting to find an answer to this question, I first wish to
draw attention to a few peculiarities in Sarmiento’s dates. From these peculiarities
we may deduce that his version of the history of the Inca was based on another,
an original version which had been the product of the Inca concepts of their
own history. In this original version there could have been place only for a
dynasty of ten rulers, each of whom ruled for a hundred years.
There is an odd confusion in Sarmiento’s records of the deaths of the rulers.
N o dates are given for the deaths of Yahuar Huacac and Viracocha Inca. Inca
Roca died in 1088, Pachacuti in 1191, and the latter’s reign lasted a hundred
and three years. According to Sarmiento’s dates, Inca Roca was succeeded by
Pachacuti and he by Tupac Yupanqui. Tupac Yupanqui died in 1258, but
Huayna Capac in 1524, although he had reigned as the former’s successor for
no more than sixty years. We get the impression that by mentioning the year
1524 Sarmiento rectifies his mistake and again includes the reigns of Yahuar
Huacac and Viracocha in his calculations. But if one follows this calculation
through, the year 1515, and not 1524 is arrived at. Nine years are missing.
Sarmiento also made a mistake with relation to Sinchi Roca’s reign. This ruler
began his reign at the age of a hundred-and-eight and died at the age of a
hundred-and-twenty-seven. He nevertheless is reported to have ruled for only
ten years. It is very possible that there were nine years too many here which
were missing elsewhere in the chronology.
The year of Huayna Capac’s death (1524) is almost wholly in accordance
with Vazquez de Espinosa and Cabello Valboa. On account of the dates of
their deaths Sarmiento groups Inca Roca, Pachacuti and Tupac Yupanqui toge
ther and ascribes an order of succession in this group. Comparably, Cobo and
Molina classed the panaca of these rulers into one group. The panaca were
linked to the ceque I 3, I 2 and I 1, in the same order as that of the succession
of the rulers. Because the years of their deaths were not mentioned, Yahuar
Huacac and Viracocha Inca were also classed as a group. The reason and cause
for the confusion in Sarmiento’s dates was obviously the nature of the organi
zation of Cuzco. On account of his historically reliable date of death, Huayna
Capac was dealt with completely separately from Tupac Yupanqui and his
predecessors, whose dates of death are not reliable. From this it can also be
concluded that for Sarmiento history in the Inca sense of the word ended with
the death of Tupac Yupanqui.
Now that it is clear what significance these dates from Inca history had in
Sarmiento’s eyes, and how he used them, other features can be noted which
throw light on the relationship between the history and the social organization
of Cuzco.
All the rulers up to and including Pachacuti reigned for about a hundred
years each. Manco Capac reigned for exactly one hundred years. According to
Sarmiento, Mayta Capac too reigned for one hundred years. Nevertheless this
ruler died in 896 A.D. and his father, Lloque Yupanqui in 786. This is a dif
ference of 110 years. We must therefore accept that Sarmiento also at this
point made a mistake. Lloque Yupanqui and Capac Yupanqui reigned for
exactly two hundred years between them, and Inca Roca, Yahuar Huacac and
Viracocha Inca together for exactly three hundred years. It even seems as if
Sarmiento substracted a few years from the reigns of Capac Yupanqui and
Yahuar Huacac and added them to the reigns of Lloque Yupanqui, Inca Roca
and Viracocha Inca with the sole purpose of making these periods of exactly
a hundred years each seem slightly less improbable. Only his datum on Sinchi
Roca does not agree with that on the other rulers. Although he reaches about
the same age as the other rulers, approximately a hundred-and-twenty years, he
is already a hundred-and-eight when he succeeds his father and then reigns
only for a short time. The other rulers, on the other hand, began their rule as
youths, at about twenty. This conveys the impression that Sarmiento for some
special reason altered Sinchi Roca’s age at his accession, for this difference
between his age at accession and that of the other rulers is too obvious. The
reason for this seems to me to be that Sarmiento had to add a few rulers to a
dynasty of ten rulers who together ruled for a thousand years and nevertheless
had to adhere to the period of a thousand years. It therefore became necessary
to substract a number of years from the reigns of the first ten rulers. Only the
reigns of Sinchi Roca and of Tupac Yupanqui among the first ten rulers are
considerably shorter than a hundred years each, and that of Mayta Capac is a
few years longer. Sarmiento probably used the years he saved by this manoeuvre
for the reigns of Huayna Capac and Huascar, and for the thirty-two years after
the death of Huascar.
It can be concluded from this that in the original version of the history of
the Inca, as presented by Sarmiento, there was question of a thousand year old
Inca Empire in which the ten rulers of both dynasties ruled a hundred years
each. This history of the Inca was probably purely mythical. The aims of this
history in the Inca view was to give a picture not of the past of the Inca, but to
- express the system of the social organization of Cuzco. Partly because the mutual
relationships between the age classes and those of the marriage classes were
conceived of as being really equivalent, the organization into two moieties,
each divided into four marriage classes, was extended to a system of ten mar
riage classes. The fact that the five rulers of Hanan-Cuzco and the five rulers
of Hurin-Cuzco were connected with marriage classes and with periods of a
hundred years and the five groups of Yanacona with the age classes lasting
five years each, merely pointed to the hierarchic difference between the rulers
and the Yanacona.
There remains only the question why Sarmiento in his altered, later, version
of the history of the Inca had the thousand year Inca Empire end in the year
1565. It can be asserted that although, according to Sarmiento, Huascar, the
last pre-conquest Inca ruler, died in 1533 and the Spaniards shortly afterwards
conquered Cuzco, in the eyes of many the definite end of the Inca Empire had
not yet come. Outside Cuzco an independent Inca Empire continued to exist,
until in the year 1570 the last resistance was broken. Sarmiento dated his
chronicle in 1572. It is possible, therefore, that a few years previously an event
had taken place which had been the cause for Sarmiento or his informant to
date the end of the Inca Empire as 1565.
I can make one suggestion concerning such an event. In the year 1565 a
messianic and revivalistic movement broke out in the southern part of Peru
and Bolivia which, according to Molina (1943, p. 78-84), had its origin in
Vilcabamba where the independent Inca Empire continued to exist. The move
ment existed till 1572, the end of the independent Inca. Molina’s description
gives the impression that the movement had a great influence on the minds of
the indians. It was said that the huacas, destroyed by the Christians, revived
again and entered into the bodies of the adherents of the movement. These
abstained from all things related to the Christians and renounced the Catholic
faith. In the same way as before the Christian God had slain the huacas, the
reenforced huacas would now expel the Christian God and the Spaniards from
the country.
The movement thus could have all the characteristics of a Pachacuti: a change
back from the Christian to the Inca world. This idea is even reenforced if we
compare this movement with the episode in Inca history in which the future
king Pachacuti defeats the Chanca army. This incident meant for Cabello
Valboa the end of a Pachacuti, a period of 500 years. The king Pachacuti
was helped in his struggle by an army of supernatural men, the Pururauca, sent
by the creator Viracocha, which men later turned into stones (Cobo T. II,
libro XII, cap X, p. 75). So it seems that Pachacuti too was helped by huacas,
made into men for the occasion. The revivalistic, messianic movement in 1565
could very well be the reason why in the opinion of indians a new world
began, that had as its starting point the end of the 1000 years old Inca Empire.

CHAPTER N IN E
DATA WHICH DO NOT REFER DIRECTLY TO ANY

SINGLE REPRESENTATION
§ 1. In each of the preceding chapters those elements from the culture

of the Inca were cited, which could serve to throw light on one of the three
representations of the organization of Cuzco. In these chapters, the data always
referred to one representation in particular. On account of this arrangement
it was not possible to deal with phenomena which could not be associated with
or did not refer to any single one of these representations. I shall cite some
of these phenomena in this chapter.
In Chapter V the marriages of the rulers were mentioned. Two views of these
marriages can in fact be detected in the Spanish chronicles !) . Although they
all agreed that Manco Capac, the founder of the Inca dynasty, had prescribed
sister marriage to his successors, the majority of the chroniclers relate that this
form of marriage was not observed by the subsequent rulers. They all married
non-Inca women from outside Cuzco, except for Capac Yupanqui, Tupac Yu-
panqui and the latter’s succesors. These marriages all fitted in completely with
the second representation of the organization of Cuzco.
According to the other group of chroniclers, that is to say Murua and Poma
de Ayala, all rulers married their sisters. The names of the queens recorded by
these two authors are completely different from those recorded by the others.
It could be deduced from these names that the moieties to which the rulers
of Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco belonged, were exogamous. The names of
these queens, then, point to a different mutual relationship between the rulers
of Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco than that recorded by the majority of the
authors; this is the reason why I mention Murua’s and Poma’s version here.
The names of the queens, according to Murua and Poma are as follows:
ru ler’ s nam e qu een ’s nam e, acco rd in g to q u een ’s n am e, ac co rd in g to
M u ru a ( 1 6 1 3 ) Pom a (1 9 4 4 )
Manco Capac (1) Mama Huaco or: Mama Huaco
Mama Ocllo (cap. 2) (foja 84, 121)
Sinchi Roca (2) Chimpu coya (cap. 35) Chimbo Urma coya
(foja 89, 123)
Lloque Yupanqui (3) Mama Cora or: Mama Cora Ocllo
Anahuarque (cap. 7) (foja 97, 125)
x) See V § 4 c, pp. 131-133.

IX. DATA N O T REFERRING TO ANY SINGLE REPRESENTATION 237
Mayta Capac (4) Chimpo Urma or: Chinbo Urma Yacincoya

Mama Yache (cap. 9) Chinbo mamayachi
(foja 99, 127)
Capac Yupanqui (5) Chimpo Ocllo or: Chimbo Ucllo Mamacaua
Mama Cahua (cap. 14) (1st wife)
Cuci chimbo mama micay
coya curi ocllo
(2nd wife)
(foja 101, 129)
Inca Roca (6) Cuci Chimbo or: Cucichimbo mamamicay

Mama Micay (cap. 13) (foja 103, 131)
Yahuar Huacac (7) Ipa Huaco coya or: Ipa Huaco Mama machi
Mama Chiquia (cap. 15) (foja 105, 133)
Viracocha Inca (8) Mama Yunto coya (cap. 17) Mama Yuntocoyam
(foja 107, 135)
Pachacuti (9) Ipa Huaco or: Mama Mama Anahuarque
Anahuarque (cap. 22) (foja 109, 137)
Tupac Yupanqui (10) Mama Ocllo (cap. 24) Mama Ocllo
(foja 111, 139)
Huayna Capac (11) Rahua Occlo (cap. 29) Rahua Occlo
(foja 114, 141)
Murua and Poma both give each queen two names. One of the two names
agrees with that recorded by the other authors; this name is irrelevant here.
A regular pattern can be detected in the names of the successive queens. The
first, third, fifth, seventh and ninth queens all have a name which corresponds
to one borne by one of Manco Capac’s four sisters. These four sisters of Manco
Capac were called (Murua 1613, cap. 2; Sarmiento 1947, cap. 11, p. 118)
Mama Huaco, or Ipa Huaco, Mama Cora, Mama Ocllo and Mama Rahua. Of
the queens mentioned above, those from Hanan-Cuzco are all called Ipa Huaco
and those from Hurin-Cuzco, Mama Occlo. With reference to Manco Capac’s
queen, Murua speaks of a Mama Huaco, or Mama Occlo and Poma mentions
only Mama Huaco, but most of the other authors (e.g. Sarmiento 1947, cap.
12, 13, p. 121, 124, 126) record only the name Mama Ocllo for Manco Capac’s
queen.
The other queens, the second, fourth and sixth, have the element Chimpu
in their names, either combined with Urma or with Cusi. As for the eighth
queen, for whom one would expect a similar name, only a name is known
which corresponds to the name the other authors also record: Mama Rondo-
caya 2).
It seems to me that the three names Chimpu, Mama Ocllo and Mama —
or Ipa — Huaco are basically generic names. Holguin (1608) gives the fol
lowing translation for Chimpu: 'a distinguishing mark of (llama) wool, a thread,
or tassel, in different colours’, and for Intipchimpum, or cuychin quillapchimpun
2) See V § 9 c, p. 152.
238 IX. DATA NOT REFERRING TO ANY SINGLE REPRESENTATION
he enters: 'aurora of sun or moon’. Mama Huaco and Ipa Huaco are also
kinship terms. Mama means mother, and Ipa, FaSi; but mama huaco, according
to the chronicler Perez Bocanegra (1631, p. 609-613) also means great
grandmother. The names Mama Ocllo and Mama — or Ipa — Huaco also
refer to a division into moieties. By clarifying this reference, it becomes pos
sible, with the aid of the terms Chimpu, Mama Ocllo and Mama — or Ipa —
Huaco, to explain the kinship system in which the royal marriages, in the
versions by Munia and Poma, had their place.
In the Relacion de los ceques (Cobo 1956, Tomo II, libro 13, cap. XIII,
p. 170) the names Mama Ocllo and Mama Huaco refer to the groups of ceque
I 3 and II 3. The nature of the reference to Mama Ocllo was as follows: the
third huaca of the ceque I 3 a was called Ticicocha (the lake of origin). 'This
was a well in the house of Diego Maldonado. This well was sacred to the Coya,
or queen, Mama Ocllo; large sacrifices were often brought to her, especially
when people wanted to ask Mama Ocllo for something, for she was the most
revered woman among the Indians'. The nature of the relationship of Mama
Huaco to the group of ceque II 3 is indicated by the following two passages.
'The third huaca of the eighth ceque in Collasuyu (ceque II 3 b) was called
Sausero (Cobo 1956, Tomo II, libro 13, cap. XV, p. 179). It consisted of a
field belonging to the descendants of Paullu-Inca, where the Inca himself went
at the time of sowing in order to plough there for an instant. The harvest from
this field was for sacrifices to the Sun. The day the Inca went to plough this
field was a solemn day of celebration for the chiefs of Cuzco. Many sacrifices,
mainly silver, gold and children, were brought in this plain’. The Sausero field,
according to Molina, was consecrated to Mama Huaco. He records (1943,
p. 66): 'The month of April they called Ayriguay; in this month the fields
were harvested and the harvest stored; this was called aymoray. Those who
were due to be ennobled, went out to the Sausiro field in order to fetch the
corn which had been harvested. This field lay beyond the G ate3) near which
it was said that Mama Huaco, Manco Capac’s sister, had sown the first corn.
Every year the harvest from this field was put aside in the form of chicha
(corn beer) for the body (mummy) of Mama Huaco; this was necessary for
worshipping the body; in this form the corn was brought and transferred to
the people who looked after the mummified body. Then, the corn was har
vested, in order of importance, from the fields of the Creator, the Sun, the
Moon, Thunder, the Inca, Guanacauri and all the deceased Lords'.
The passage on Mama Ocllo does not mention who this Mama Ocllo was.
The analogy between this passage and that on Mama Huaco makes it likely
3) Arco Punco, i.e. outside Cuzco on the road to San Sebastian.

IX. DATA NOT REFERRING TO ANY SINGLE REPRESENTATION 239
that they both referred to Manco Capac’s sister and wife. The positions of
Mama Ocllo and of Mama Huaco in the ceque system: I 3 and II 3, link them
with the second representation of Cuzco; these positions could even lead to the
conclusion that they were non-Inca women, came from outside Cuzco and were
not even Manco Capac’s sisters. I cannot, however, enter into this question here.
What seems to me to be relevant here is that the positions of Mama Ocllo
and Mama Huaco, I 3 and II 3, express a moiety contrast which in the second
representation corresponds with that of I + III to II + IV. Although it is not
possible to fit the rulers’ marriages as recorded by Murua and Poma in with the
second representation, for their accounts fit into a different system than those
given by the other authors on the royal marriages, it is my opinion that the
important thing is the moiety contrast expressed by the names Mama Ocllo
and Mama Huaco, irrespective of the system in which the royal marriages are
placed in the versions by Murua and Poma. The essence of this system seems
to me to have been that the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco, and Mama Ocllo, belonged
to one exogamous moiety, and the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco, with Mama Huaco,
to the other. Murua and Poma do record that the rulers married their sisters,
but as their accounts relate to the moiety system, it is questionable how much
value the word sister has in this context. The moieties were exogamous. This
is corroborated by the fact that Tupac Yupanqui, the ruler, about whom all
the authors agree that he married his sister, had a Mama Ocllo as a wife, that
is to say a women with whom a ruler of Hurin-Cuzco should marry. Tupac
Yupanqui was the first ruler of Hanan-Cuzco to infringe the exogamy of the
moieties.
So far we have encountered in the organization of Cuzco a system of exo
gamous moieties with four constant marriage classes. If the existence of these
four marriage classes is assumed to have existed in the moieties referred to
above, then the four names by which the Inca queens were called in turn, Mama
Ocllo or Mama Huaco, and Chimpu Urma or Cusi Chimpu, could be regarded
as indicating these marriage classes. The rulers, and the queens, could then be
placed in the following four class system:
1s
5
Mama Huaco 3 . 9 Chimpu
Chimpu 4 ^ 8
IO
(the numbers refer to the rulers in the list on pp. 236, 237)
If this interpretation of Murua and Poma’s accounts of the royal marriages

is correct, several questions arise. One of these questions is why the rulers are
classed in the four classes in a way different from that of the second represen-
tation or of the third. Perhaps the four classes suggested above — for it seems
certain that Murua’s and Poma’s accounts belong to a definite system— cor
respond to the four marriage classes of Chinchaysuyu in the first represen
tation. This is supported by the reasonable assumption that Mama Ocllo, Mama
Huaco and the other two sisters of Manco Capac each belonged to one marriage
class in which in the first representation Manco Capac and his three brothers
were also classed. I cannot here enter further into this question.
The purpose of this reference was to mention a phenomenon which was
already touched on before, and which fits completely in the framework of the
problems discussed in this study but could nevertheless not be associated cate
gorically with any one of the three representations of the organization of Cuzco.
§ 2. One particular fact or event from the history of the Inca may relate
to more than one representation of the organization of Cuzco. One instance of
this is the description of the marriage of Huayna Capac 4). The account that he
departed from Pachacuti’s palace and his sister from that of Tupac Yupanqui,
can be connected with one representation, while the account of her being ac
companied by the aristocracy of Chinchaysuyu, to which, incidentally, Pachacuti
also belonged, and of Huayna Capac being accompanied by the aristocracy of
Collasuyu can be connected with another representation.
There have also been instances, as for example that relating to Capac Yupan
qui 5), of one individual being mentioned in different capacities and classed in
different groups of the organization of Cuzco in the different representations.
These features may explain why the accounts on the person of Atahuallpa,
the last Inca ruler, are apparently so contradictory.
All the chroniclers agree that Atahuallpa was a subsidiary son of Huayna
Capac, that he was charged by his father with the government of the northern
parts of the Inca Empire, and that he rebelled against his brother Huascar
when the latter had succeeded as the primary heir to the throne. Atahuallpa
triumphed in this civil war between the brothers, captured Huascar and had him
killed while he himself was in captivity of the Spaniards.
According to some chroniclers (e.g. Cieza 1943, cap. LX IX , p. 314; 1945
cap. X X X V II, p. 123) Atahuallpa was the son of Huayna Capac and a princess
from Quito 6).
According to Sarmiento (1947, cap. 63, p. 252) Atahuallpa’s mother be-
* ) See VI § 4 b, pp. 180-181.

5) See V § 4 b, pp. 130-131, VI § 5, pp. 182-183.
6) Cieza (1943, cap. LX II, p. 289) states that according to the Indians from Cuzco the mother
of Atahuallpa came from Quilaco. The inhabitants of Quito were called Quilaco (Cabello Valboa
1951, cap. 26, p. 408).
longed to Pachacuti’s panaca, which was Hatun ayllu. Finally, there is a reference
in Cieza (1943, cap. LXII, p. 289) to the theory that Atahuallpa belonged to
Hurin-Cuzco and another reference that the struggle between Huascar and
Atahuallpa was one between Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco (Sarmiento 1947,
cap. 63, p. 254).
It is not altogether clear how these three contradictory statements can be
connected with the three representations of the organization of Cuzco. It does,
however, seem most likely to me that a solution for these contradictions must
be sought in the framework of these representations.
The indications
after the street
names refer to the
ceque to which
the panaca and
ayllu in Cuzco
( 11) were linked.
Square
W ////A
Collana. I i b, I 2 b
Callejon del Sol
Andamachay (= U sc a m a y ta II i b)
Ccaqsamnnati
Anahuarque IV 3 b
Ground-plan of San Jeronimo
§ 3. I propose now to discuss a problem which was briefly touched upon

above 7). This concerns the mutual territorial relationships of the suyu and the
moieties I + III and II + IV in the different representations.
I twice mentioned facts which I ascribed to a potential fourth representation
of the organization of Cuzco 8). In this fourth representation the Villca Uma,
the high priest, belonged to Cuntisuyu. The whole of Cuzco was in Cuntisuyu
and the three other suyu were situated outside the town. The fourth represen
tation completely inverted the relationships between the suyu as they are known
from the other three representations. In these three representations Chinchay-
7) See e.g. IV § 4, p. 102, VI § 8, p. 200.

8) See IV note 59, V note 143.
suyu, to which the ruler and his close family belonged, was directly opposed
to the other three suyu. This does not appear clearly from the territorial rela
tionships of the suyu in Cuzco, although it does in the neighbouring village of
San Jeronimo, where, according to the register of marriages in the church of
San Jeronimo, the ten panaca and some of the ten ayllu of Cuzco were distri
buted over four groups which corresponded to the four suyu in Cuzco, in almost
exactly the same manner. As the organization of San Jeronimo has been dis
cussed before in Chapter V ili 9), I shall mention only what is relevant here.
Instead of the panaca Capac ayllu and Hatun ayllu, which in Cuzco belonged
to Chinchaysuyu, there was only one panaca to be found in San Jeronimo, called
ayllu Collana 10). Even in present-day San Jeronimo, several of the streets are
called after panaca and ayllu from Cuzco. The ground-plan of San Jeronimo
is found on p. 241.
If it can be assumed that a panaca or ayllu lived in its eponymous street, then
it would follow that ayllu Collana lived in the centre and the other panaca and
ayllu at greater or lesser distances away in conformity with their social standing
in Cuzco.
The same kind of contrast as we have shown to exist between the fourth
representation and all others also occurred within each of the three representa
tions in some of their moiety oppositions. The regions involved in the moiety
opposition were always the same in the three representations. As the problem
only concerns the territorial oppositions within the organization of Cuzco, it is
possible to use instances of it indifferently from the three representations 11).
From the point of view of the first representation the problem presents itself
as follows. Manco Capac and his brothers and sisters founded the city of Cuzco
on the site of the future temple of the Sun and the area which ran from that
point down to the confluence of the two small streams which ran on either side
of the temple of the Sun. In the first representation however, this was Hurin-
Cuzco (II) territory and Manco Capac and his brothers and their descendants
belonged to Hanan-Cuzco (I), which was therefore situated outside the original
centre of Cuzco, although it still lay between the two streams. In this centre, —
Hurin-Cuzco — , the three ayllu Tambo, Maras and Sutic, who had come with
Manco Capac and his brothers and sisters from Pacarictambo, were supposed to
have lived.
This account in the first representation, however, is in complete contradiction
to the real habitat of Tambo, Maras and Sutic, which was situated outside
Cuzco. Tambo ayllu lived in the valley of the Urubamba river, where the village
9) See V ili § 4, pp. 222.

10) See IV § 2 c, p. 85.
11) See I § 4, p. 9.
of Ollantaytambo is now situated, which Garcilaso called Tampu 12). The name
Maras can be recognised in the name of the present-day village of Maras and
the ayllu Maras in this village 13). Sutic ayllu can still be found just outside
Cuzco, in the direction of Cuntisuyu, as I was informed when I enquired. The
fact that the descendants of Manco Capac, the rulers, lived in Cuzco, is in
accordance with the real habitat of Tambo, Maras and Sutic.
In the third representation the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco and therefore also their
panaca, lived in the region which ran from the temple of the Sun to the con
fluence of the two streams and the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco had their palaces
between the two streams beyond the temple of the Sun. Sinchi Roca, or Lloque
Yupanqui — it is not relevant here who it was 14) — invited the non-Inca
Sanu ayllu to come and live in Hanan-Cuzco, while the ruler himself lived
in Hurin-Cuzco.
In connection both with the second representation 15) and the third 16) it was
possible to demonstrate that the opposition of the Sun to Viracocha was an
expression of the opposition of I + III as the upper moiety or Hanan-Cuzco,
to II + IV as the lower moiety or Hurin-Cuzco. It is therefore most strange
that the temple of the Sun is situated in Hurin-Cuzco and Quishuarcancha, the
temple of Viracocha, in Hanan-Cuzco (Molina 1943, p. 29). A second pecu
liarity is that the palaces of the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco were situated beyond
the true centre of the town, and that the palaces of the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco,
who in the second representation were their subsidiary brothers, were situated
in the centre proper. The location of the most important holy sites of Cuzco
proves that the relationship between the territory of Hurin-Cuzco and that of
Hanan-Cuzco was regarded as similar to that between the centre and the sur
roundings. Only the one temple of the Sun, situated in Hurin-Cuzco, played
an important role in the religious life of the Inca in Cuzco. Several holy sites
outside Cuzco were sacred to Viracocha. One of these holy sites was Huanacauri
(Cobo, 1956, Tomo II, libro 13, cap. II, p. 150), the spot where Ayar Uchu,
the brother of Manco Capac, turned into stone and, after the temple of the
Sun, the most important holy place in Cuzco in the eyes of the Inca. One of
the most important of Viracocha’s temples was that near present-day San Pedro
de Cacha (Betanzos 1880, cap. II, p. 5-7; Cieza 1945, cap. X C V II), while in
the temple of Pachacamac, near Lima, on the coast, the god Pachacamac was
identified with Viracocha (Cobo 1956, Tomo II, libro 13, cap. II, p. 150;
12) See IV note 32.

13) See IV § 3 c, p. 99.
1 4 ) See V § 7 c, p. 145.
1 5 ) See V §§ 12, 13 , pp. 164-170.
1 6 ) See VI § 9 d , pp. 205-207.
Acosta 1954, libro V, cap. Ill, p. 141; Cabello Valboa 1951, cap. 15, p. 310).
It has to be assumed, therefore, that — in relation to the temple of the Sun
in Hurin-Cuzco — Quishuarcancha in Hanan-Cuzco was regarded as lying
outside the real centre of the town. Although, therefore, the site of the temple
of the Sun in the centre of the town and that of Quishuarcancha, the temple
of Viracocha, beyond it, accurately reflected the fact that the rulers, or the Inca
proper, lived in Cuzco itself, and their subsidiary descendants, or the non-
Inca, outside Cuzco, the names of the two parts have, on the contrary, been
reversed. Hurin-Cuzco was the centre of the town and Hanan-Cuzco lay beyond
it. I can explain this phenomenon only by a comparison of the organization of
Cuzco with that of the Bororo tribe in the Matto Grosso, Brazil (Levi-Strauss,
1955, pp. 228-231).
The houses of Bororo villages stand in a circle. The population is divided
into two exogamous, matrilocal and matrilineal moieties, called Cera and Tu
gare. The houses of Cera form one semi-circle, those of Tugare the other. In
the centre of the village stands the men’s house; this is divided into two halves,
one for the men of Cera and one for the men of Tugare. The Cera half is
situated in the Tugare half of the village, and the Tugare half in the Cera
half of the village. There is a way out of the men’s house to either moiety.
From the men’s house paths lead to the family houses.
The fact that the half of the men’s house of one moiety is situated in the
half of the village belonging to the other moiety is probably connected with
the matrilocal and matrilineal nature of the moieties. The married men of Cera
lived in the Tugare half and vice versa. To Cera men their half of the men’s
house is central and the Tugare moiety lives around it, and to the Tugare men
their half of the men’s house is central and the Cera moiety lives around it.
As was deduced in the preceding chapters there existed in Cuzco, too, exo-
gamous matrilocal and matrilineal moieties and it is therefore likely that a

similar explanation can be given for the fact that the temple of the Sun lay in
Hurin-Cuzco and Quishuarcancha in Hanan-Cuzco. The ceque in Cuzco can
well be compared with the paths from the men’s house to the family houses
of the Bororo. As the temple of the Sun was the focus of the ceque system, this
temple can be equated with the men’s house of the Bororo. One should rather
extend the comparison of Cuzco with a Bororo village, however, by regarding
the temple of the Sun as the religious centre of Hanan-Cuzco, and Quishuar
cancha as the religious centre of Hurin-Cuzco. The function of the temple of
the Sun and of Quishuarcancha together would correspond to that of the men’s
house. The rulers of Hanan-Cuzco each had a palace in the part of the town
which was called Hanan-Cuzco. These palaces also housed their panaca, which
functioned in relation to one another like exogamous, matrilineal, matrilocal
clans. There are two traditions about the place where the rulers of Hurin-Cuzco
lived. According to the first one they lived in the temple of the Sun. According
to the second tradition (Vazquez de Espinosa 1948, § 1507, p. 519) they each
had a palace outside the temple of the Sun, but situated in Hurin-Cuzco. These
palaces of the rulers should, perhaps, be compared to the family houses of the
Bororo; patrilineal succession was probably symbolised by the temple of the
Sun as the men’s house of Hanan-Cuzco, and Quishuarcancha as the men’s
house of Hurin-Cuzco. The matrilineal family houses of the rulers of Hurin-
Cuzco would then be standing in the eponymous part of the town, and their
patrilineal men’s house in Hanan-Cuzco, and the matrilineal family houses of
the rulers of Hanan-Cuzco in Hanan-Cuzco and their patrilineal men’s house in
Hurin-Cuzco 17).
The opposition of the Sun to Viracocha was linked with that between Hanan-
Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco and that of the worldly chiefs to the priests. The
temple of the Sun was the centre for the chiefs, and Quishuarcancha the centre
17) The origin of the tradition (which in that case must be erroneous), that the rulers of
Hurin-Cuzco lived in the temple of the sun, might be explained as follows. Manco Capac and
his brothers, as the mythical ancestors of the Inca, built the temple of the sun. In the first
representation they belonged to Hanan-Cuzco. As the result of the mistaken explanation of
facts about the social organization of the Inca which produced the tradition of a dynasty of 10
rulers, Manco Capac was placed in the position of the first ruler of Hurin-Cuzco and the idea
developed that his successors, also of Hurin-Cuzco, lived in the temple of the sun.
for the priests. As in a Bororo village both the chiefs and the priests could
regard themselves as being central in relation to the moiety of the other side.
Other oppositions, however, were also associated with that between Hanan and
Hurin, like that of primary and subsidiary kinship, of belonging to the own
group or the outside world. These circumstances were conducive to the real
position of power of Hanan.
This relationship of Hanan-Cuzco to Hurin-Cuzco and of the temple of the
Sun to Quishuarcancha, resulted in the fact that the Inca descriptions of their
own social organization, which were expressed in mythological and historical
terms, sometimes conveyed the impression of a diametrical opposition of the
moieties and sometimes of a concentric social structure. If one saw society in the
light of the last representation, from the point of view of the worldly rulers,
then they, the rulers, as the hierarchically most elevated group, were placed in
the centre; the other groups lay around the rulers concentrically and in confor
mity with the hierarchic order of importance. If, on the other hand, one saw
society from the point of view of the holiness of the group and of the attached
priests, then these were placed centrally.
I do not know whether this relative positioning was also applied to the Inca
habitational patterns, and, if this was indeed the case, why and when one or
the other positioning was used. It is conceivable, too, that this positioning was
expressed mainly in ceremonial, as for instance in dances, in which sometimes
one and at other times another system of positioning was applied. Such methods
of expression are known from the moiety organization of the Ge tribes in
Eastern Brazil.
§ 4. The last subject I propose to discuss is that of sister or daughter

exchange; there has so far been no opportunity for discussing this when dealing
with the Inca system of social organization. I shall refer back to a few points of
this discussion before enlarging on the question of sister or daughter exchange.
The Inca system of social organization was in brief that the endogamous
group consisted of two exogamous matrilineal moieties which covered four
matrilineal marriage classes linked by asymmetric cross-cousin marriage with
MoBro.
The whole of human society was seen by the Inca as an extension, a projec
tion of the own endogamous group. Even the marriage classes were, from the
Inca point of view, distributed over the whole of human society, while these
comprehensive marriage classes did not necessarily exist in fact, not even for
the non-Inca.
Two kinds of marriage were open to the members of the endogamous group
(that of the Inca), an endogamous and an exogamous one. In the first instance
the descendants also belonged to the endogamous group, but not in the second
one. The woman from outside the group whom the man from inside the group
had married, was classed by him in the same (but more extensive) marriage
class as the one which she should have belonged to if he had entered an endo
gamous marriage.
The system of quadripartition and the existence of the marriage classes
within it can only permit asymmetric cross-cousin marriage. There is no room
for sister or daughter exchanges. This form of marriage did, notwithstanding,
exist. There are real examples of this form of exchange established by Inca
rulers with independent rulers of other people with whom the Inca made
treaties. I cited one instance, that of the marriage of the Inca ruler Yahuar
Huacac with the daughter of Tocay Capac, the ruler of the Ayarmaca, and of
the son of the latter with the sister of Yahuar Huacac18). There even are
clearer instances in a document of 1562, which contains a description and a
census of the Indians of Huanuco province in Central Peru. One of the chiefs
of the Indians answers to the question about marriage forms among the Indians
that two fathers often exchanged their daughters and married one to the other
man’s son (Ortiz de Zuniga. Rev. Arch. Nac. Pern, Tomo I, Entrega I, 1920,
p. 33). There is one instance in which a chief said that he had a wife who had
been given to him in exchange for his sister. (Ortiz de Zuniga. Rev. Arch. Nac.
Peru, Tomo II, Entrega III, 1921, p. 495). In both these cases it was a chief
who mentioned this form of marriage.
The Inca were able to give a place in their organization to both forms of
marriage, the marriage with MoBroDa and sister or daughter exchange, by
representing the moieties both as being exogamous and endogamous. This can be
argued as follows.
Assuming that the Inca ruler belonged to the marriage class 1, and he married
a non-Inca woman, then not only his wife was classed in 4, but also the people
to which she belonged. If, however, the Inca arranged a sister or daughter
exchange marriage with an independent non-Inca ruler, the latter with his
sister or daughter and his people could be classed in 4 on account of that sister
or daughter’s marriage to the Inca, but could not be so classed on account of his
18) See V § 8 b, p. 150.

own marriage to the Inca’s sister or daughter. On the grounds of the latter
marriage, the non-Inca ruler would then have to be classed in 2.
This difficulty can be solved by the circumstance that in one representation
the Inca did class their rulers in 1, and the non-Inca ruler and his people in 4,
and that they saw the relationship of the Inca to the non-Inca people in the
same way as that between two marriage classes, but that this did not necessarily
make the marriage classes sub-divisions of an endogamous group. Both for the
Inca and the non-Inca people endogamous marriages were possible, irrespective
of the sister or daughter exchange the rulers had established.
As a result of this exchange, the relationship between the two rulers in the
Inca organization came to be considered from two different points of view and
to be represented in two different fashions. In the first place, the non-Inca
woman and the non-Inca ruler and his people were classed in 4, the marriage
class from which the Inca ruler, being himself 1, chose his wife. The marriage
classes 1 and 4, and the moieties 1 + 3, to which the Inca and 2 + 4, to which
the non-Inca people belonged, were exogamous. Moreover, and in the second
place, the Inca and the non-Inca were two independent and therefore endo
gamous peoples. As the ruler of an independent and therefore equal people, the
non-Inca ruler could also marry a sister or daughter of an Inca ruler. As a
result of this relationship the two peoples were regarded as two endogamous
moieties of one organization. Both moieties were sub-divided into four marriage
classes each and both rulers belonged in their endogamous moiety to the mar
riage class 1. It seems to me that the sister, or daughter, exchange should be
regarded as linked with the relationship between two endogamous moieties. If
this conclusion is correct, then the ways in which the relationship between two
rulers was presented can be detected in the second and third representations
of the organization of Cuzco.
In chapters IV to VI inclusive it was demonstrated that the panaca, ayllu,
suyu and the moieties Hanan-Cuzco and Hurin-Cuzco in the organization of
Cuzco could have several functions, depending upon the different represen
tations of this organization; as a result they often got different and even con
tradictory functions assigned to them in Inca mythology or history. The second
representation accentuated the endogamous organization of Cuzco and of the
Inca people and considered I + III as one exogamous moiety and II + IV
as the other. Only the asymmetric cross-cousin marriage had a function in this
representation and the marriages which were represented as such, because the
husband and wife were classed in two of the four marriage classes 19). In the
third representation these same moieties were endogamous and their relation-
19) E.g. the marriages discussed in V §§ 5-9, pp. 133-154 of the rulers with women of villages
in the vicinity of Cuzco.
ship was represented in the same way as that of two independent peoples, the
rulers of which entertained a relationship by the exchange of sisters or daugh
ters. With the aid of these two representations, it was possible to give both the
asymmetric cross-cousin marriage and the sister or daughter exchange a place
in the organization of Cuzco.
If sister or daughter exchange was repeated in the second generation, there
would be question of a symmetric cross-cousin marriage which could as such
be opposed to the asymmetric marriage. Whether symmetric cross-cousin mar
riage did occur in Peru I do not know but it does not seem to me to be in
accordance with Inca social organization.
As the second and third representations of the organization of Cuzco have
been discussed again in connection with sister or daughter exchange, I shall
also deal with the first representation in this connection.
Although the first representation could be said to have developed from
the third in the same way as the third had developed from the second, the justi
fication of this representation lies in this as in other features of the organization
of Cuzco. The result of exogamous marriages of an otherwise endogamous
group was, in addition to this group (Collana) and the group (Cayao) from
which women were chosen for the exogamous marriage, a third group Payan,
of which the members were regarded as the subsidiary offspring of members
of the first group. The relationship between the marriage classes 1 in each of
the two endogamous moieties of the third representation, was regarded in the
first representation in the same way as that between Collana to Payan because
the subsidiary sons of the Inca ruler could be classed in the marriage class 1
of the non-Inca people. This Collana-Payan relationship of the two marriage
classes 1, extended in the first representation to the whole suyu to which the
two marriage classes belonged, i.e. to Chinchaysuyu (I) and Collasuyu (II).
For this reason, II and IV were together regarded as Cayao. As in the integration
of the concepts of Collana, Payan and Cayao in the organization into four
marriage classes, Collana and Payan were classed in one moiety, and Cayao in
the other, there arose in the first representation a moiety relationship of I + II
to III + IV. In the first representation the relationship of the Inca to the
hostile, independent Chanca people was transferred to this moiety system as
though it were a relationship between two endogamous moieties. As a result
a representation came into being, related to the first one, which presented I + II
together as a whole, divided into four marriage classes (and therefore no longer
consisting of I = Collana and II = Payan) side by side with an identical division
into III + I V 20); this representation is therefore the same in its internal
2°) See IV §§ 5, 6, pp. 103-113.

structure as the third. The marriage relationship between these otherwise endo-
gamous moieties was expressed in the form of the relationship between Pacha-
cuti and his father Viracocha Inca, who was himself connected in the first
representation with III + IV and the Chanca people; this relationship was
possibly also expressed in that of the account of the marriage which Capac
Yupanqui, the general and deputy to Pachacuti, contracted, according to Sar-
miento (1947, cap. 38, p. 194), with the sister of Ancoaillo, the chief of the
Chanca, after they had become the allies of the Inca.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A b b rev ia tio n s
A.H.C. Archivo Historico de la Universidad del Cuzco.

A.H .L. Archivo Historico del Ministerio de Hacienda y Comercio, Lima.
A.I. Archivo de Indias.
A.N .L. Archivo Nacional del Peru, Lima.
A.N .S. Archivo Nacional de Bolivia, Sucre.
B.N .L. Biblioteca Nacional, Lima.
A costa, J ose de,

1954. H is to r ia n atu ra l y m o ral d e la s In d ia s. (1590). Biblioteca de Autores Espanoles. Tomo
L X X III. Obras del Padre Jose de Acosta. Madrid.
A guilar, L e 6nidas,
1925. L o s a y llu s d e San S eb a stian . Revista universitaria. Organo de la universidad del Cuzco,
no. 48. pp. 21-31.
A lencastre G., A ndres et D umezil , G eorges,
1953. F e te s et u sa g e s d e s ln d ie n s d e L a n g u i. (province de Canas, departement du Cuzco).
Journal de la Societe des Americanistes, nouvelle serie, Tome X L II, pp. 1-118. Paris.
Arguedas, J ose M aria,
1956. P u q u io u n a cu ltu ra en p ro ceso d e cam b io. Revista del Museo Nacional. Tomo X X V ,
pp. 184-232. Lima.
Arriaga, Pablo J oseph de,
1920. L a extirp ac io n d e la id o la tria en el P eru . (1621) Ed. H. H. Urteaga y C. A. Romero.
Col. Libr. Doc. Ref. Hist. Peru, 2a serie, Tomo I. Lima.
Astete Chocano , Santiago,
E l C uzco im p e ria l 0 C coscco. Cuzco.
Avila, Francisco de,
1939. D d m o n en u n d Z a u b e r im In k areich , a u s d em K h e tsc h u a iib ersetzt u n d ein geleitet von
H e rm an n T rim b o rn . Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte der Geographic und
Volkerkunde, Band IV. Leipzig.
Baudin , L ouis ,
1928. L ’E m p ire so c ia liste d e s In k a. Inst. Ethnol. Trav. Mem. vol. 5. Paris.
B ertonio , L udovico,
1612. V o c ab u lario d e la le n g u a A y m ar a. Juli, Pern.
B etanzos, J uan de,
1880. S u m a y n arracion d e lo s In c a s ........ (1551) Ed. Marcos Jimenez de la Espada. Biblio
teca Hispano-Ultramarina, vol. 5. Madrid.
Cabello V alboa , M iguel ,
1951. M isc e la n e a A n tdrtica. (1586) Ed. Instituto de Etnologia, Facultad de Letras, Univer
sidad nacional mayor de San Marcos. Lima.
Castro, Christobal de, y Ortega M o rej 6n , D iego de,
1936. R e la tio n y d ec la rag io n d e l ........ v a lle d e C h in ch a ....... (1558) Ed. Wilhelm Petersen.
Quellen zur Kulturgeschichte des prakolumbischen Amerika. Herausgegeben von H.
Trimborn. Stuttgart.
Cieza de L eon, Pedro de,
1943. D e l sen o rio d e lo s In cas. (Segunda parte de la Cronica del Peru, que trata del senorio
de los Incas Yupanquis y de sus grandes hechos y gobernaci6n) (1551). Reproducci6n

252 BIBLIOGRAPHY
de la edicion de Marcos Jimenez de la Espada. Prdlogo y notas Alberto Mario Salas.

Buenos Aires.
1945. L a cron ica d e l P eru . (Parte primera de la chronica del Peru, que tracta la demarcacion
de sus provincias; la descripcion dellas; las fundaciones de las nuevas ciudades; los
ritos y costumbres de los indios y otras cosas extranas dignas de ser sabidas) (1551)
Coleccidn Austral. Segunda edicion. Buenos Aires.
Cobo, B ernabe ,
1956. H isto r ia d e l nuevo m u n do. (1653) Ed. P. Francisco Mateos. Biblioteca de autores
espanoles. Tomos L X X X X I , L X X X X I I. Obras del P. Bernabe Cobo. 2 vols. Madrid.
D umezil , G eorges,
S e e : A lencastre G., A ndres et D umezil , G eorges.
G alante , H ipolito,
1959. G ram a tic a Q u ech u a (Del Ollantay). Traducida del latin por Fernando Tola y Santiago
Erik Antunez de Mayolo. Segunda edicion aumentada y corregida por Teodoro L.
Meneses. Publ. Inst. Fil. Fac. Letr. Univ. San Marcos. Gramaticas no. I. Lima.
G arcilaso de la V ega, (El Inca),
1945. Comentarios reales de los Incas. (1609) Ed. Angel Rosenblatt. Segunda edicidn. 2
Tomos. Buenos Aires.
G onzalez H olguin , D iego,
1607. G ram atica y arte n u ev a d e la le n g u a g e n e ral d e to d o el P eru , lla m a d a le n g u a Q q u ich u a,
0 len g u a d e l In ca. Lima.
1608. V o c ab u lario d e la le n g u a g e n e ral d e to d o el P eru lla m a d a le n g u a Q q u ic h u a , 0 d e l In ca.
Corregido y renovado conforme ala propiedad cortesana del Cuzco. Lima.
1952. V o c ab u lario d e la le n g u a g e n e ral d e to d o el P eru lla m a d a le n g u a Q q u ic h u a 0 d e l In ca.
(1608). Nueva edicidn Raul Porras Barrenechea. Lima.
G ranet , Marcel,
1939. C ateg o ries m atrim o n iales et relatio n s d e p ro x im ite d an s la C h in e ancien n e. Annales
Sociologiques, Serie B. Sociologie Religieuse, Fasc. 1-3. Collections de l’Annee Socio-
logique. Paris.
G utierrez de Santa Clara, Pedro,
1905. H isto r ia d e la s g u e rra s civ iles d e l P eru . (1544-1548). Tomo Tercero. Col. Libr. Doc.
Ref. Hist. America. Madrid.
H eld , G. J.
1935. T h e M a h ab h arata. An ethnological study. London, Amsterdam.
H errera y T ordesillas, A ntonio de,
1944-47. H isto r ia ge n e ral d e lo s hechos d e lo s C astellanos en la s is la s i tie rra fir m e d e l m ar
ocean o. (1601-15). Reproduccion de la edicion de 1726-27. 10 Tomos. Asunci6n del
Paraguay.
H olguin ,
S ee: G onzalez H olguin , D iego.
H orkheimer, H.,
1950. El Peru prehispanico. Tomo I. Lima.
I mbelloni, J ose,
1946. P ach ak u ti I X ( E l In k ario C r it ic o ) . Buenos Aires.
J ijo n y Caamano, J acinto,
1959. O rtgen es d e l C uzco. (1934). Sobretiro de la Revista del Museo e Instituto Arqueold-
gico de la Universidad Nacional del Cuzco, no. 18. Cuzco.
J osselin de J ong, P. E. de,
1956. D e v isie d er p articip an ten op hun cu ltu u r. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volken-
kunde. deel 112, 2de afl. pp. 149-168.
K irchhoff , Paul ,
1949. T h e so c ial a n d p o litic a l o rgan izatio n o f the A n d ean p e o p le s. Handbook of South-
American Indians, vol. 5. pp. 293-311. Washington.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 253
La B arre, W eston
1946. T h e U ru -C h ip ay a. Handbook of South American Indians, vol. 2, pp. 575-585. W as
hington.
L as Casas, Bartolome de,
1939. L a s a n tig u a s gen tes d e l P eru . (1564). Ed. H. H. Urteaga y C. A. Romero. Col. Libr.
Doc. Ref. Hist. Peru. 2a serie, Tomo X I. Lima.
L atch am, Ricardo E.,
1928. L o s In cas. S u s o n g e n e s y su s a y llu s. Establecimientos Graficos „Balcells y Co” . San
tiago. (Chile).
L evi-Strauss, Claude,
1952. L e s stru ctu res so c ia le s d an s le B r e sil cen tral et o rien tal. Proceedings of the 29th Con
gress of Americanists. Univ. of Chicago Press, in: Sol Tax, ed. Indian tribes of aboriginal
America, pp. 302-310.
1952. L a notion d ’arc h a ism e en eth n ologie. Cahiers internationaux de Sociologie. vol. 12.
pp. 32-35.
1955. T riste s tro p iq u e s. Paris.
1956. L e s o rg an isatio n s d u a liste s e x isten t-e lle s? Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volken-
kunde. deel 112, 2de afl. pp. 99-128.
1958. A n th ro p o lo g ie stru ctu rale. Paris.
L ira, J orge A.,
1944. D ic c io n ario K k ec h u w a -E sp a n o l. Instituto de Historia, Linguistica y Folklore X II.
Tucuman.
Lizarraga, R eginaldo de,
1946. D e sc rip c io n d e la s In d ia s. (1602-12). Ed. Francisco A. Loayza. Los pequenos grandes
libros de historia americana, serie I. Tomo X II. Lima.
Markham , Clements ,
1911. T h e In cas o f P eru . London.
Matienzo , J uan ,
1910. G o b ie rn o d e l P eru . (1576). Buenos Aires.
M eans, Philip A insworth ,
1928. B ib lio te c a A n d in a, p art one, the chron iclers, or, the w riters o f the sixteen th a n d sev en
teenth cen tu ries w ho treated o f th e p re -H isp a n ic h isto ry a n d cultu re o f the A n d ean
cou n tries.
Connecticut Acad. Arts. Sci. Trans, vol. 29. pp. 271-525.
1931. A n cien t civ iliz atio n o f the A n d e s. New York-London.
Mishkin , B ernard,
1946. T h e con tem p orary Q u ech u a. Handbook of South American Indians, vol. 2. pp. 411-470
Washington.
M olina , (El Cuzqueno), Cristobal de,
1943. F a b u la s y rito s d e lo s In cas (1573). Ed. Los pequenos grandes libros de historia
americana. serie I. Tomo IV.
M ontesinos, F ernando de,
1957. M e m o rias A n tig u a s H isto r ia le s y P o litic as d e l P eru . (1644). Ed. Luis A. Pardo. So-
bretiro de la Revista del Museo e Instituto Arqueoldgico de la Universidad Nacional
del Cuzco, no. 16-17. Cuzco.
M orua, Martin de,
1922-25. H isto r ia d e l o rigen y g e n e alo g ia rea l d e lo s reyes In cas d e l P eru , d e su s hechos,
costu m bres, tra je s y m an era d e go b iern o . Ed. H. H. Urteaga and C. A. Romero. Col.
Libr. Doc. Ref. Hist. Peru, 2a serie. vol. 4. pp. 1-253, vol. 5. pp. 1-72. Lima.
M urra, J ohn V.,
1961. S o c ia l stru ctu re a n d econ om ic th em es in A n d ean ethnoh istory. Anthr. Quarterly, vol. 34,
number 2, April.
254 BIBLIOGRAPHY
M urua , M artin de ,
1613. H isto r ia g e n e ral d e l P eru y o rigen i d egen d en cia d e lo s yn cas d o n d e se tr a ta a ss t d e
la s g u e rra s g iv iles S u yas, com o d e la E n tr a d a d e lo s e sp an o les, d esc rip g io n d e la s
g iu d ad e s y lu g a re s d el, con o tras co sas n o tab les, co m p u esto p o r el P e. F r. M a rtin d e
M u ru a, elector gen l. d e l orden d e n ra sa d e la s m rd s P ro r. d e c a p tiv o s co m o r y cura
d e H u a ta . E n la P la ta p o r N a n o 1 6 1 3 . (Inedited manuscript of the library of the Duke
of W ellington).
1946. H isto r ia d e l origen y g e n e a lo g ia real d e lo s R eyes In c a s d e l P eru . Introduction, notas
y arreglo por Constantino Bayle. S.J. Biblioteca ,,Missionalia Hispanica” . vol. II. Madrid.
N im uendaju , Curt ,
1946. T h e E astern T im b ira . Univ. Cal. Publ. Amer. Arch. Ethn. vol. 41.
Oliva, A nello ,
1895. L ib ro p rim e ro d e l m an u scrito o r ig in a l d e l R . P . A n e llo O liv a, S .J . H is to r ia d e l rein o
y p ro v in c ia s d e l P eru ... (1598). Ed. Juan Pazos Varela y Luis Varela y Orbegoso.
Lima.
Ortega M orejon , D iego,
S e e : Castro, Christobal de .
Ortiz de Z u n ig a , I nigo ,
In fo rm a c io n e s so b re E n co m en d ero s y E n co m ie n d as. (1562). Revista del Archivo Na-
cional del Peru. Tomo. I-II. 1920-1925; Tomo X IX , 1955-1961.
Pachacuti Y amqui Salcamaygua, J oan de Santacruz,
1950. R elacion d e a n tig iie d a d es d este reyno d e l P iru . ( ± 1613). Reproduction de la edicidn
Marcos Jimenez de la Espada, Tres relaciones de antigiiedades peruanas. pp. 207-281.
Asuncion del Paraguay.
Perez B ocanegra, J uan ,
1631. R itu a l jo rm u la r io ; e in stitu cio n d e C ura, p a r a a d m in istr a r a lo s n atu ra le s d e este R eyno,
etc. Lima.
Pizarro, Pedro,
1944. R elacio n d e l d escu b rim ien to y co n q u ista d e lo s rein o s d e l P eru . (1571). Editorial
Futuro. Segunda edition. Buenos Aires.
Polo de Ondegardo, J uan ,
1916a. L o s err o res y su p e rsticio n es d e lo s in d io s, sac a d a s d e l trata d o y a v erig u a c io n q u e hizo
el L icen ciad o P o lo . Ed. H. H. Urteaga y C. A. Romero. Col. Libr. Doc. Ref. Hist. Peru,
la serie. Tomo 3. pp. 1-43.
1916b. R elacio n d e lo s fu n d am e n to s acerca d e l n o tab le d aiio q u e resu lta d e no g u a r d a r a lo s
in d io s su s fu ero s. Junio 26 de 1571. Ed. H. H. Urteaga y C. A. Romero. Col. Libr. Doc.
Ref. Hist. Peru, la serie. Tomo 3. pp. 45-188.
1917a. D e l lin ag e d e lo s In g a s y com o co n q u istaro n . Ed. H. H. Urteaga. Col. Libr. Doc. Ref.
Hist. Peru, la serie. Tomo 4. pp. 45-95.
1917b. T ra sla d o d e un cartap acio a m an era d e b o rrad o r q ue q u ed o en lo s p a p e le s d e l L ic e n
ciado P o lo d e O n d egard o cerca d e l lin ag e d e lo s In g a s y com o co n q u istaro n . Ed. H. H.
Urteaga. Col. Libr. Doc. Ref. Hist. Peru, la serie. Tomo 4. pp. 95-138.
1940. In jo rm e d e l L icen c ia d o Ju a n P o lo d e O n d egard o a l L icen c ia d o B r iv ie sc a d e M u n a to n e s
sob re la p e rp e tu id a d d e las en co m ien d as en el Pern . (1561). Ed. C. A. Romero. Revista
Historica. vol. 13. pp. 125-96. Lima.
Poma de A yala, Felipe G uaman,
1944. E l p rim e r n u eva coro n ica y buen go b iern o . (escrita entre 1584 y 1614). Publicada y
anotada por Arthur Posnansky. La Paz.
PORRAS BARRENECHEA, RAUL,
1955. P u en tes H isto ric a s P eru an as. Lima.
Prescott, W illiam H ickling ,
1950. H isto ry o f the con qu est o f P eru . Everyman's Library. London, New York.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 255
Ramos G avilan , A lonso ,

1621. H is to r ia d e l celeb re san tu a rio d e N u e str a Sefio ra d e C o p acab an a, y su s m ilagro s, e
in ven cidn d e la cruz d e C arabu co. Lima.
R elaciones geograficas de Indias. Peru .
1881-97. 4 vols. Publicadas por Marcos Jimenez de la Espada, Madrid.
Roman y Z amora, J er 6nimo ,
1897. R e p u b lic a s d e In d ia s; id o la tria s y go b iern o en M e x ico y P eru an tes d e la co n q u ista.
(1575). Ed. D. L. d’Orvenipe. Colecci6n de Libros Raros 6 Curiosos que Tratan de
America, Tomos 14-15. Madrid.
Rostworowski de D iez Canseco , M aria,
1953. P ach acu tec In c a Y u p a n q u i, Lima.
Rowe, J ohn H owland.
1944. A n in tro d u ctio n to the arch aeo lo gy o f C uzco. Pap. Peabody Mus. Amer. Arch. Ethnol.
Harvard Univ. vol. 27. no. 2.
1945. A b so lu te ch ron ology in the A n d ean A re a. Amer. Antiq. vol. 10. no. 3. pp. 265-284.
1946. In c a cu ltu re a t the tim e o f the S p a n ish con quest. Handbook of South American Indians,
vol. 2. pp. 183-330. Washington.
1958. T h e a ge -g ra d e s o f th e In ca census. Miscellanea Paul Rivet octogenario dicata. vol. II.
pp. 499-522. X X X I Congreso Internacional de Americanistas. Univ. Nac. Aut. de
Mexico.
Santillan , F ernando de,
1950. R elacio n d e l origen , d escen d en cia, p o litic a y go b iern o d e lo s In cas. 1563). Reproduction
de la edicihn Marcos Jimenez de la Espada, Tres relaciones de antigiiedades peruanas.
pp. 35-131. Asunci6n del Paraguay.
Santisteban Ochoa, J uliAn ,
1946. L o s cro n istas d e l P eru . Cuzco.
Santo T omas, D omingo de,
1951a. G ratn m atica 0 arte d e la le n g u a ge n e ral d e lo s in d io s d e lo s R eyn os d e l P eru . (1560).
Edici6n facsimilar Raul Porras Barrenechea. Lima.
1951b. L ex ico n , 0 v o cab u lario d e la le n g u a ge n e ral d e l P eru (1560), Edicihn facsimilar Raul
Porras Barrenechea. Lima.
Sarmiento de G amboa, Pedro,
1947. H isto r ia d e lo s In cas (1572). Biblioteca Emece. Tercera edicihn. Buenos Aires.
Seler , Eduard,
1915. XLber d ie so z ia le S te llu n g d es K h a p a x In ca. (Compte rendu de la dixieme session du
Congres International des Americanistes, Stockholm 1894. pp. 9-10) Gesammelte Ab-
handlungen zur Amerikanischen Sprach- und Altertumskunde. Fiinfter Band. pp. 77-86.
S en o r es
1904. R elacio n d e l origen e g o b iern o q u e lo s In g a s tu v iero n y d e l q u e h ab ia an tes q ue e llo s
sen o reasen a lo s in d io s d este reino, y d e q ue tiem p o , y d e o tras co sas q ue a l g o b iern o
con ven ia, d e c la ra d a s p o r sen o res q u e sirv iero n a l in g a Y u p a n q u i y a T o p a in g a Y u p a n
q u i y a G u a in ac a p ac y a H u a sc a r In g a . Ed. Jose Toribio Medina, La Imprenta en Lima,
vol. I. pp. 200-206. Santiago de Chile.
T oledo, Francisco de,
1940. In fo rm a c io n e s q u e m an do le v an tar el V irrey T o led o so b re lo s In cas. (1570-1572). Ed.
Roberto Levillier, Don Francisco de Toledo, Supremo organizador del Peru, Tomo II.
pp. 1-204. Buenos Aires.
T schopik Jr., Harry,
1951. T h e A y m ara o f C h u cu ito, P eru . I. M a g ic . Anthropological Papers of the American
Museum of Natural History, vol. 44. part 2. pp. 137-308. New York.
T schudi, J. J. von ,
1853. D ie K ech u a-S p rach e. Dritte Abteilung. Worterbuch. Wien.
256 BIBLIOGRAPHY
U h le , Max ,
1912. L o s or'igenes d e lo s In cas. Congr. Int. Amer. Sess. 17. Buenos Aires. 1910. vol. I.
pp. 230-253.
V aca de Castro,
1921. (D e c la r a tio n d e lo s q u ip o cam ay o s a V aca d e C a str o ). D isc u r so so b re la d esce n d en cia
y g o b ie rn o d e In c a s (cronicas de 1533 a 1575) Ed. H. H. Urteaga. Col. Libr. Doc.
Ref. Hist. Peru. 2a serie. Tomo III. Lima.
V alcarcel, L uis E.,
1939. S o b re el origen d e l C uzco. R esu m en . Lima.
V alera, B las,
1950. R e la tio n d e la s costu m b res a n tig u a s d e lo s n atu rale s d e l P iru . (=t 1590). Reproduccion
de la edition Marcos Jimenez de la Espada. Tres relaciones de antigiiedades peruanas.
pp. 135-203. Asuncion del Paraguay.
V azquez de Espinosa , A ntonio ,
1948. C o m p en d io y d e sc rip tio n d e la s in d ia s o rien tales. (-1630). Smithsonian Miscellaneous
Collections, vol. 108. (Publication 3898) Washington.
V elez L opez, Lizardo R.
1930. E l clister en el a n tig u o P eru . Proceedings of the X X III session of the International
Congress of Americanists. 1928. New York. pp. 296-297.
Z uidema, R. T.,
1953. L a o rg an iz a tio n so c ia l y p o litic a in caica segu n la s fu en tes e sp a n o las. Tesis doctoral,
Universidad de Madrid. Madrid.
1962. T h e relatio n sh ip betw een m o u n tain s a n d coast in an cien t P eru , in: “ The wonder of
man’s ingenuity, being a series of studies in archaeology, material culture and social
anthropolgy by members of the Academic Staff of the National Museum of Eth
nology, published on the occasion of the Museum’s 125th anniversary” . Mededelingen
van het Rijksmuseum voor Volkenkunde, Leiden, no. 15, Leiden.
INDEX
Abisca, place name 101 A.N.L., Archivo Nacional del Peru, Lima 16,
“Abuelos” 71 18-19, 41, 83, 99, 106, 115, 117, 220
Acamama, old name of Cuzco 100-101, 199, A.N.S., Archivo Nacional de Bolivia, Sucre
222, 241 20, 100
Acamana (see: Acamama) 222, 241 Anta, village 106, 114-115, 149-150, 152-154,
Aclla, virgin of the Sun 47-48, 184, 217-218, 178, 198
225 Antahuailla, village 6
Aclla huasi, house of the virgins of the Sun Antasayac, ayllu in Cuzco 193-195, 198
184, 217-218 Antilla, village 115
Acos, village 20, 23, 24, 77, 92-93, 118, 189, Antisuyu, quarter of Cuzco and of Inca Empire
222-223 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 39, 78, 83-84, 101, 120
A costa, J'ose de 33, 75, 106, 126, 138, 151, Apinaye, people in Brazil 25
168, 175, 184 Apo Chimachaui, proper name (see: Chima-
Acoyapongo (Angostura de — ), place name chaui) 109, 206
6 Apocuraca, title 180
Adultery 142-144 Apo Mayta, proper name 107-108
Adult men 216 Apotampo, proper name 70, 89
Age classes 21, 215-218, 224-227 Apo Urco Guaranga, proper name (see: Qui-
Aguay unu, holy water (see: Puquio) 141 lliscachi Urco Guaranga) 108-109
A guilar, L. 223 Apo Yupanqui, proper name 107-108, 177
A.H.C., Archivo Hist6rico de la Universidad Apu, title 87
del Cuzco 20, 93 Apu Mayta (panaca), proper name and ayllu
A.H.L., Archivo Historico del Ministerio de 3, 4, 6, 9, 86-88, 124-125, 178, 182-183,
Hacienda y Comercio, Lima 17, 18, 78, 82, 189-191, 195, 222
93 Apupanaca, title 184
Ahuaymin panaca (see: Hahuaini panaca) 6 Apurimac, river 6
Ahucani panaca (see: Hahuaini panaca) 3 Apu urco, ritual name of black dog 175
A.I., Archivo de Indias, Sevilla 20, 173 Aquiniaylla, ayllu in Cuzco 4, 9, 198
A lencastre , G. A. 211 Arairaca ayllu Cuzco cayao, ayllu in Cuzco 6,
Allauca, generic name of ayllu 41 7, 9, 76, 85, 178, 194, 205
Allavillca (see: Allcavillca) 151 Archaism 22, 28
Allca, white-black 138-139 Arco Punco, place name 238
Allcabiza, generic name of social group (see: Arequipa, town 101
Allcavillca) 137-138, 152, 156, 193-194, A rguedas, J ose Maria 21, 82, 84, 141
205-206 A rriaga, Pablo J oseph de 34, 96
Allcavillca (see: Allcabiza) 138, 209 Assistant 42
Allcayvilla (see: Allcavillca) 151 A stete Chocano, Santiago 78, 137
Anahuarque, mountain, ayllu in different vil Asymmetric connubium 27, 42-43, 64
lages 4, 93, 135-137, 222, 241 Atacameno, people in Chile 36
Ancash, department 220 Atahuallpa, proper name 5, 12, 240-241
Ancoaillo, proper name 187-188, 250 Atun (see: Hatun)
Ancohuallu (see: Ancoaillo) 187 Auca, enemy 75, 98
Ancovilca (see: Ancoaillo) 104-105, 186-188 Aucailli panaca, ayllu in Cuzco 4, 5, 6, 9, 31,
Andahuaylas ( = Antahuaylla), town 78 124, 178, 222, 24l
Andahuaylillas, village 33 Aucapuri, adult men 216
Andamachay, ayllu 222, 241 Aucaruna, men of the fourth world 219
Andasmarca, village 197 Auquicuna, noble men 161, 180
258 INDEX
Auqui Titu, proper name 130 Capac Yupanqui, proper name 3, 109, 129-
Australian systems 26 133, 166-167, 182, 187, 188-189, 206-207,
Avila, Francisco de 34, 73, 160, 168, 169, 240, 250
219 Capitan 108, 130-131, 157, 187, 192
Ay a (see: Ayar) Cari, ayllu in Cuzco 4, 10
Ayacucho, department 81 Castro, Christobal de, y Ortega M ore-
Ayar, title of ancestors 99 jo n , D iego de 34, 158, 225
Ayar Auca, proper name 75, 92, 96 Catec, or: catiquin (see: Fingers, Aclla) 214,
Ayar Cachi, proper name 75-76, 92, 96, 101 217
Ayarmaca, people, ayllu in different villages Cavana Conde, people 115
4, 78, 83, 136, 149-150, 152, 223 Cayambi, people in Ecuador 153
Ayar Uchu, proper name 75-76, 96, 101, 156, Cayao, generic name of ayllu 1, 40-41, 101-
194, 205-206 103, 165
Ayllu, social and local group 5-6, 16-17, 20, Caylla, extremity, shore (see: Kinship) 74
26-27, 28-29, 72-75, 185, 209 Ccaqsamunati, street in San Jerdnimo 241
Aymara, people, language 31, 35, 36, 37, 38 Ccaru, far away (see: Kinship) 74
Aymaraes, province 32, 81, 120 Ceque, line 1,
Aymoray, religious feast 238 Ceque system 2, 9, 17-18, 21-25, 120
Ayriguay, name of month 238 Ceremonial fights 27, 211-212
Chaca, mountain 142
Chachacoma, tree 164
Baudin, L ouis 29, 100 Chachapoyas, people, town 100
B ertonio , L udovico 35, 72, 89, 105, 173 Chacrayoc, title 96
B etanzos, J uan de 31, 76, 78, 79, 80, 92, Chahuen-Cuzco (see: Chauin Cuzco ayllu)
102, 104, 107, 124, 137, 193, 200, 243 222
Bird-sacrifice 175 Challco, proper names of high priests with —
“ Bishop” 151, 152 111-112, 181
Biza (see: Villca) 138, 151 Challuanca, village 81-82
B.N.L., Biblioteca Nacional, Lima 220 Chanca, people 69, 78, 103-106, 110-111, 129-
Bolas (or: boleadora) 72 130, 156, 186, 188-200, 250
Bororo, people in Brazil 21-22, 25, 244-245 Chanchan, town 224, 227
Brazil 21-22, 25 Charcas, town 101
Chasca cuyllor, venus 161
Cabello Valboa, M iguel 34, 75, 80, 92, Chau (see: Chaupi) 41
112, 132, 134, 137, 138, 151, 153, 195, Chauin, generic name of ayllu (see: Chaupi)
41, 76, 206
231.
Caca, mother’s brother 71 Chauin Cuzco ayllu, ayllu in Cuzco 6, 7, 9,
Cacique principal 116 76, 84, 178, 222
Cajamarca, town 220 Chaupi, generic name of ayllu 4 l, 214, 217-
Callampata, ayllu 222 218
Callejon de Huaylas, valley 16 Checa, generic name of ayllu 41
Cana, people 100 Checca, village 211
Canas, people 31, 211-212 Chile, country 36
Canella, people in Brazil 21-22, 25, 169 Chilques, people 77
Canari, people in Ecuador 196-197 Chima Chaui Pata Yupanqui, proper name 108,
Capa Anco, ayllu in Copacabana 100 109
Capac, title 4, 76, 115, 118-119, 129 Chima panaca, ayllu in Cuzco 3, 4, 6, 9, 39,
Capac ayllu, panaca in Cuzco 4, 5, 6, 9, 39, 178, 205, 222
76, 85, 92, 123-125, 129, 178, 181-182 Chimbo (see: Chimpu)
Capaccuna, royal lineage 76 Chimpu, names of queens with — 236-239
Capac huatan, period of 1000 years 219, 227- Chimu, people 213, 221, 224
228 Chincha, people, valley 34, 111, 215
Capac Inca, class name 119 Chinchaysuyu, quarter of Cuzco and of the
INDEX 25 9
Inca Empire 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 24, 39, 78, 84, Coya, queen 6, 131-154, 236-240
101, 120, 241-246 Creation myth 168
Chita, plain 6 Creator (see: Viracocha) 112, 164, 165-170
Choco, village 136 Cubgu panaca, ayllu (see: Sucsu panaca) 4, 5
Chonta, village 220 Cuicusa ayllu 6, 7, 9, 197-199
Choque, generic name of ayllu (see: Lloque) Culluimchima (see: Culumchima) 193
4l Culumchima, proper name and ayllu 193-194,
Chucuito, town 173-174 205
Chumbivilcas, province 211-212 Cuntisuyu quarter of Cuzco and of the Inca
Chuquihuipa, proper name 181 Empire 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 39, 78, 82, 83-84, 101,
Churicalla, place name 6 120, 225-226, 241
Churucata, ayllu 222 Cupi, generic name of ayllu 4 l
Cichpa (see: Kinship) 74 Curahuasi, village 115
Cieza de L e 6n , Pedro de 33, 75, 80, 92, 132, Cusibamba, place name 6
142, 145, 151, 164, 184, 219, 240, 24l, 243 Cusi Chimpu, names of queens with — 237-
Citua, religious feast 5 239
Clyster pump 73 Cuyos, province 197
Cobo, B ernabe 1-5, 31, 35, 65, 80, 81, 86, Cuzco 1, 86, 96, 200, 202-203
87, 97, 98, 107, 133, 137, 142, 147, 151, Cuzco, ayllu 93, 96, 100, 206
156, 157, 163, 164, 166, 168, 183, 184, Cuzco Capac, royal lineage 88
190, 235, 238, 243 Cuzco huanca, proper name 96
Colla (see: Collana) 164 Cuzco Inca, royal lineage 88
Collaguas, province, people 23, 24, 115-118, Cuzco panaca, ayllu (see: Sucsu panaca) 6
221-223 Cuzcoychima, proper name 206
Collana, generic name of ayllu 1, 3, 40-41,
Dancer 198
100, 101-103, 164
Daughter exchange 246-250
Collana-Payan-Cayao (Relation between — )
Decempartition 48, 220-235
1, 24, 40-41, 43-46, 63-67, 74-75, 101-103
Decimal organization 17, 48, 200, 202-203,
Collasuyu, quarter of Cuzco and of the Inca
220-224, 227-235
Empire 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 24, 39, 78, 84, 101,
Deformations 86
120, 242-246
Demons 165
Collateral kin 124-125 Deputy (see: Substitute)
Colloncas, ayllu 222 Derived principle of organization 62-63, 67
Collquechaochoc, lineage (see: Kinship, Cori- Devil 175
chaochoc) 89 Dog-sacrifice 175
Combination of principles of organization 43- D u m e z il , G. 211
46, 62-63 Dynasty of rulers 3-4, 12-13, 15-16, 35, 122-
Conchacalla, ayllu in Anta 106, 154 128, 227-235, 236-240, 245-246
Condesuyos, province 17
Condeviza, sacrifice 175 Endogamous-exogamous 7, 16, 27, 41, 63-67,
Coniraya Viracocha, creator (see: Viracocha) 132-133, 146-147, 180-182, 183, 184-192,
168-170, 219 237-240, 242-246, 246-250
Conqueror-conquered 42, 192-196, 199-202, Equeco, ayllu in Anta 154
203-207 Established population 42
Consecutive aspect (see: Simultaneous aspect) Exogamous (see: Endogamous)
Contradictory informations 39-40, 240-241 Experimental marriage 211
Copacabana, town 100, 147
Copalimayta, proper name 193-194, 205 Fingers 214
Coricancha, temple of the Sun 184 Fire 169
Corichaochoc, lineage (see: Kinship, Collque Flood (see: Huno Pachacuti)
chaochoc) 89 “ Foam of the sea” 168-169
Coronation 181 Forefather (ancestor) 40, 63, 65-66
Councillor 130 “ Friend” 78-80, 107-109
260 INDEX
G arcilaso de la V ega, (E l I nca ) 30, 32, Huacaytaqui ayllu 4, 7, 8, 9, 198

34, 74, 76, 77, 80, 89, 90, 103, 112, 122, Huaccha, poor 119
125, 130, 151, 156, 157, 158, 161, 187, 228 Huaccha Inca, class name 199
Ge, group of peoples in Brazil 21-22, 25 Huahuani, ayllu 222
General (see: Capitan) Huallallo Carhuinchu, god 169
Generic names 1, 24 Huallu (see: ayllu) 187
Golden cloths 141-144 Huaman, falcon, province, group of 40.000
Gold-silver, opposition of gold to silver 89, 90 adult men 104, 221, 223
G ranet , M. 28 Huanacauri, mountain 96, 164, 243
Guaccha Cconcha, generic name of social group Huanca, sanctuary 96
(see: Huaccha) 79, 92 Huanca, people 169, 219
Guamanguaraca, proper name 104 Huanuco, town, department 19, 247
Guaman Samo (or Sano), proper name 152 Huaraca, sling 104
Guaquirca, village 81 Huaranca, group of 1000 adult men 109, 220-
Guariguaca, proper name (see: Huari-) 195 224
Guarivilca, creator (see: Viracocha) 164 Huaraz, town 16
Guaro, valley 152 Huarivillca, creator (see: Uari-, Guari-) 164
Guaroconde, village 152-154, 178, 195 Huarochiri, village 34, 168-170, 219
G utierrez de Santa Clara, Pedro 32, 102, Huascar Inca, proper name 5, 12, 97, 180-181,
123, 175 240-241
Huauque, brother, amulet 157, 187-188, 190-
Haguayin panaca (see: Haguaini panaca) 3 191
Hahua, grandson, bank of a river 119 Huaylla, ayllu, generic name of social group
Hahua Inca, class name 119 (see Ualla-) 161, 193-196, 199
Hahuaini panaca, ayllu 3, 4, 6, 9 Huayllacan, village 147-150
Hampatura, village 211 Huayna Capac, proper name 5, 12, 153, 169,
Hanan-Cuzco, Hurin-Cuzco, moieties 4, 6, 7-8, 180-182, 240
15, 39, 78, 102, 112, 145, 147-148, 242-246 Huayparga, place name 6
Hanan-Hurin, moieties 83, 106, 116-117, 141- Huayrapacha, place name 6
148, 172-173, 242-246 Huchun, generic name of ayllu (or: Huchuy)
Hanta huaylla, people (see: Anta Huaylla) 111 115, 118-119
Happinunos, demons 165 Huecachirau, ayllu (see: Vicaquirao) 222
Hatun, generic name of ayllu 115, 118-119 Huno, group of 10.000 adult men 220-224
Hatun ayllu, ayllu 4, 6, 9, 31, 85, 89, 178, Huno pachacuti, flood 94
181-182, 240-241 Hurin-Cuzco (see: Hanan-Cuzco)
Hatunruna, adult men, class name 115, 216
Hatun Villca, clas of priests 151-152 Illegitimate (see: Subsidiary) 4 l, 80
H eld, G. J. 28 Illipanaca, ayllu (see: Aucailli panaca) 124
H errera y T ordesillas, A ntonio de 34, I mbelloni, J. 36
197 Inca, title 140
High priest (see: Villca Uma) “ Inca by privilege” 122, 146-147
History (Inca concept of — ) 12-13, 15-16, 48, Inca empire 11, 101
109, 122-128, 176, 227-235, 236-240, 245- Inca Paucar Inca, proper name 108
246 Inca Roca, proper name 3, 108, 140-148, 156,
H olguin , D iego G onzalez 35, 71, 73, 74, 174, 180, 195
80, 92, 100, 107, 115, 129, 138, 160, 163, Inca Urco, proper name 111
237 Incest, prohibition of — 65
Holy water (see: Aguay unu) Indonesian systems 26
H orkheimer, H. 29 Inkarri, god 141
House of the virgins of the Sun (see: Aclla- Inti, sun 157
huasi) Inticancha, temple of the sun 184
Huaca, shrine, ancestor 63, 69, 73, 161-162, Inti Illapa, thunder 157-158
175, 217, 235 Intip huatan, period of 1000 years 219, 227
INDEX 261
Inaca, princess 89 Mamahuarmi, principal wife 79-80

Inaca panaca, ayllu 4, 5, 9, 89-90, 124 Mama Micay, queen 147-148, 201, 237
Ipa, father’s sisters 71 Mamanchic, principal wife 80
Ipa Huaco, proper name (see; Mama Huaco) Mama Ocllo, queen 75, 236-240
237-238 Mama Rondocaya, queen 152-154
Iroquois, people in North-America 35-36 Mama Taucaray, queen 136-137
Mama Yunto coya, queen (see: Mama Rondo
Jaquijahuana, plain 6, 77, 166 caya) 237
J ijo n y Caamano, J. 36 Manco, title, kind of sacred stones 142, 160
J osselin de J ong, P. E. de 29 Manco Capac, proper name 3, 39, 69, 75-76,
Juli, town 35 156, 157, 182, 242-243
Maras, ayllu in Cuzco 6, 7, 9, 70, 75-76, 86-
Kinship 69-75, 88-89 88, 242-243
K irchhoff , P. 17, 23, 36-37, 175, 215 Maras, village 99, 178
Marcahuasi, village 6
La B arre, W. 100 Markham, C. 15, 143
Langui, village 211 Marriage class 27, 42-43, 71-72, 182-192, 237-
Lare, mother’s brother, place name 115-117 240, 246-250
Lare-Collagua, sub-province 115-116 Masca, ayllu in Cuzco 6, 7, 9, 178, 195-196
Lares, place name, ayllu 199 Masca paycha, insignia 196
Lari, mother’s brother (Aymara) 173 Masca Payta, name of a quarter of Cuzco 102,
Las Casas, Bartolome de 34, 75, 78, 92, 94 196
Lasciviousness 142-144 Matienzo , J uan 172
L atch am , Ricardo 35-36 Mato Grosso, region in Brazil 21
Legal kin (see: Primary kin) 40, 80 Matrilineal — patrilineal 16-17, 27, 71, 79-80,
L evi-Strauss, C. 22-28, 244 89-90, 124-125, 181, 183, 184-185, 237-240,
L ira, J. A. 104, 105, 165 244-246
Livitaca, village 211-212 Matrilocality 16-17, 27
L izarraga, Reginaldo de 147 Mayta, word occurring in proper names, indi
Llama-sacrifice 175 cation of place 88, 138
Lloque, generic name of ayllu and of men, Mayta Capac, proper name 3, 131-139, 156,
demon. 41, 165 157, 182-183
Lloque Yupanqui, proper name 3, 131, 137- M eans, P. A. 29, 143
138, 150-154, 165, 182 Men’s house 245-246
Lluquis Uaynacauri (see: Lloque yupanqui) Messenger 154, 178
151 Messianic movement 235
“ Lord of the Land” 42, 96, 148, 162-163 Mircoimana (see: Muru Uanca) 108-109
Lower-moiety (see: Upper-, Lower-moiety) 120 M ishkin , B. 217
Lucre, village 78 Moieties 8, 15, 16, 24, 27, 42, 66-67, 78, 106,
Lupaca, ayllu in Copacabana 100 145, 180-182, 183, 211-212, 237-240, 242-
246
Macho, grandfather 71 M olina (El Cuzqueno) Cristobal de 4-6,
Major-domo 130 31, 35, 78, 86, 95, 97, 112, 161, 197, 235,
Malma, proper name 104 238, 243
Mama Anahuarque, queen 134-137, 236-237 Molli, tree 164
Mama Cahua, queen 152-154, 237 M ontesinos, Fernando de 34, 142-143, 152,
Mama Chiquia, queen 149-150, 237 156, 157, 203, 227
Mama Ciuaco (see: Mama Huaco) 143 Mother’s Brother’s Daughter (M oBroDa) 42,
Mama Coca, queen 154 64-66
Mama Cura, queen (or: Mama Ipacura) 75, Mountain 137, 141-145, 151, 160, 163, 168
236-237 Moya, kind of land 141-142
Mama Cusirimay, queen 180 Mulla, brother’s child (see: Kinship) 73
Mama Huaco, queen 75, 143-144, 236-240 Mullaca, ayllu in Maras 99
262 INDEX
Mullaypa, rope of esparto (see: Kinship) 73 128, 131-139, 156, 157, 175-177, 179-180,
Mummy 181, 238 200-201
Murra, J'. V. 19 Pachacuti Inca, army of — 107-110, 176-177,
M urua , Martin de 30, 33, 80, 132, 153, 166, 228
181, 193, 199, 202, 216, 219, 236, 237 Pachacuti Y amqui Salcamaygua, J oan de
Mum Muru, something of different colours 98
Santacruz 31-32, 69, 70, 76, 86, 88, 112,
Mumchhuruna, strong man 98
138, 144, 149, 151, 156, 160, 164, 165, 180,
Muru Uanca, proper name 107-108, 177
181, 186, 193, 200, 219, 225, 228
Mum urco, kind of cord 98
Pachamamaachi, proper name 70, 89
Muyna, village, plain 78
Pachayachachic, creator (see: Viracocha) 166-
“Mythical reversal” 112
168
Palace 180-181, 245-246
Natives’ theories 26, 28-29
Palla, princess 89-90
N imuendaju - C. 22, 169
Pampa, plain (see: puna) 217
“Nominal Inca” 122, 146-147
Pampamarca, village 81-82
Non-aristocratic population ( = non-Inca, non-
Pana, sister of a man 99, 184
related population) 42, 136, 193
Panaca, ayllu, descendants of a king 3-4, 7,
Non-unilineality 26
12-13, 15-16, 35, 123-126, 181, 183-192,
Naupa, first (see: Fingers) 214 201, 209
Nusta, princess 90, 161 Pariacaca, mountain, god 169, 219
Pasco, town 41
Oliva, A nello 34, 73, 151 Patahuayllacan, village (see: Huayllacan) 147
Ollantaytambo, village 86 Pata Yupanqui, proper name 107-108, 177
Oma, village 152 Patrilineality (see: Matrilineal-patrilineal)
Orcon, street in San Jeronimo (see: Urco) 241 Paullo, proper name, village ( ? ) 6
“ Origin” 107, 165 Paullu-Inca, proper name (see: Paullo) 238
Origin myth of Manco Capac and Mama Ocllo Paulo (see: Paullo) 150
112, 125 Paya, grandmother 71
Origin myth of Manco Capac, Tocay Capac Payan, generic name of ayllu 1, 40-41, 148
and Pinahua Capac 69-70, 76-77 Penis 72-73
Origin myth of Puquio 141 Perez B ocanegra, J uan 33-34, 74, 238
Origin myth of sun and moon 112 “ Physical build” 86, 225
Origin myth of Tamputoco, Marastoco and Pichcapachaca, group of 500 adult men 221,
Sutictoco 69-70, 75-76 223
Oro, ayllu, generic name of social group (see:
Pihuichuri, primary son 80
Uru)
Pihuihuarmi ,principal wife 79-80
Oropesa, town 78
Pinahua, people, ayllu in Oropesa 78, 137
Ortiz de Zuniga, Inigo 19, 247
Pinahua Capac, proper name 69, 76-78, 137
Otuzco, village 16, 18, 220
Piron, ayllu in San Jeronimo 222
“ Outcasts” 98-100
Pisac, town 6, 87
Oyola, ayllu in Maras 99
Piscachuri, ayllu in Puquio 82, 99
Pacajes, people 215 Place names 24
Pacaritampo, place of origin 70, 87 Police 154, 178
Pacha, place 138 Polo de Ondegardo, J uan 33, 80, 127, 161,
Pachac, hundred 99 184
Pachaca, group of a 100 adult men 99, 220- Poma de Ayala , F elipe G uaman 30, 32, 73,
224 77, 80, 86, 96, 101, 119, 122, 138, 143,
Pachacamac, sanctuary 168, 243-244 154, 157, 158, 161, 192, 193, 195, 216, 217,
Pachachulla Viracocha, proper name 152 219, 225, 227, 228, 236, 237
Pachacuti, period of 500 years (see: Huno pa- Poques, ayllu in Cuzco, place name 199
chacuti) 228-231, 235 Porras Barrenechea , Rai5l 29-30
Pachacuti Inca, proper name 5, 31, 78-79, 123- Pre-Inca 138, 193-199, 199-203, 203-207
INDEX 263
Priest (see: V illca) 42, 101, 111-113, 138, Representation, fourth — 101, 161, 241-246
151, 156-166, 245-246 Representation (mutual relationship of the
Priestly organization 150-152 three representations) 50, 208-212
Primary kin (see: Subsidiary kin) 24, 40, 140 Representation, second — 50-55, 114-170
Principal wife 79-80 Representation, third — 55-59, 171-207
Principle of organization 40, 40-42, 42-43, 46- Revivalistic movement 235
48, 62-67 Roman y Zamora, J er 6 nimo 34
Pseudo-archaism 22, 28 Rostworowski de D iez Canseco , Maria 15
Pucamarca, palace 181, 194 Rowe, J. M. 15, 16, 29, 31, 107, 122, 151,
Puna, plain (see: pampa) 173, 175 215, 230
Purging 73, 164 Royal marriages 27, 131-133, 236-240
Purunruna, men of the third world 219 Rucana, finger 214
Puquiura, village 83, 106-107 Rucanakoto, mountain 160
Puquio, town 82, 84, 99, 120, 141-142 Rulers 42, 156-166, 245-246
Qqemaquiro, ayllu in San Jeronimo 222 Sacrifice 175

Quadripartition 40, 42-43, 90-101, 155-166 Sacsahuaman, fortress 79
Quechua, language 35, 36, 38 Sahuaraura, proper name, ayllu, shrine 93
Queen 131-154, 236-240 Sahuasiray, ayllu 193-197
Quehue, village 211 Saint Thomas 167
Quenamaris, demons 165 Sajsahuana (see: Jaquijahuana) 153
Quero, people, ayllu in Anta 114 Salpina, place name 6
Quilaco, people in Ecuador 240 Sanco, ayllu in Anta 114
Quillisca, ayllu (see: Quilliscachi) 108 San Jerdnimo, village 85, 100, 199, 222-223,
Quilliscachi, ayllu in Guaroconde, proper 241-242
name 108, 152-154, 178 San Pedro de Cacha, village 243
Quilliscachi Urco Guaranga, proper name 107- San Sebastian, village (see: Sanu) 145, 223
109, 154, 176-178 Santillan , Fernando de 34, 75, 101, 217,
Quinquepartition 40, 46-48, 213-235 221, 223, 225
Quiquijana, village 77 Santisteban Ochoa, J. 29
Quisco, ayllu in Cuzco 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 178, 195, Santo T omas, D omingo de 34, 73, 103, 110,
198, 205-206 214
Quisco sinche, proper name 195 Sanu, ayllu and village 6, 7, 9, 145-147, 175,
Quishuar, tree 163 178, 208, 243
Quishuarcancha, palace, temple 163, 243-246 Sarmiento de Gamboa, Pedro 7-8, 30, 31,
Quito, capital of Ecuador 101, 220, 240 34, 35, 39, 75-76, 78, 86, 87, 89, 92, 94,
96, 97, 99, 102, 104, 106, 108, 110, 111,
Rahua Ocllo, queen 181, 237 123, 124, 127, 130, 132, 133, 134, 136,
Rain 141 138, 140, 143, 149, 151, 152, 154, 156,
Rainbow 164 157, 158, 164, 167, 168, 176, 181, 184,
Ramos G avilan, A lonso 143 185, 186, 188, 190, 191, 193, 194, 196,
Rapa, proper name 104 203, 206, 225, 232, 237, 240, 24l
Raurahua panaca (see: Raurau panaca) 3, 222 Sausero, place name in Cuzco 238
Raurau panaca, ayllu 3, 6, 9-10, 178, 205, 222, School (Garcilaso-, Toledo-) 30
241 Segunda persona 116, 130
Relaciones G eograficas 34, 115, 117, 215, Seler , E. 35
216 S e n ORES 221, 223
Relative positions of Collana, Payan and Cayao Serfdom 225
groups 49-50 Servant 103, 107, 109, 110, 158, 225
Religion 42, 85, 96, 101, 151-152, 156, 162- Sherente, people in Brazil 22, 25
168, 205-207 Silver, opposition of gold to silver 89, 90
Representation (definition) 39-40 Simultaneous aspect — consecutive aspect 214,
Representation, first — 59-62, 68-113 218-219, 224, 226, 228
26 4 INDEX
Sinchi, title 140, 157, 192, 193-194 Ticlla, white-black 105, 138-139
Sinchi Roca, proper name 3, 9-10, 140-148, Tilca, place name 6
156, 182 Time (Inca calculation of — ) 48
“T ios” 71
Sirbinakuy, experimental marriage 211 Tiqui (see: Ticci) 107
Sister-marriage 65-66, 131-133, 180-182 Titicaca, lake, island 35, 37, 168
Sister exchange 246-250 Tocay Capac, proper name 69, 76-78, 149-150
Socialism 14 Tocricoc, title 86
Soma Inca, proper name (see: Suma) 147, 201 T oledo, Francisco de 30, 34, 156, 161, 193,
Sopavicza, sacrifice (see: Supay) 175 194, 205
Spy 154, 178 Tomayguaraca, proper name 104
“ Street” 202, 215 Topa Atau, Don Alonso 87
Subaraura (see: Sahuaraura) 93 Tripartition 40, 90-101, 155-166
Subsidiary kin (see: Primary kin) 24, 80, 124- T schopik J r ., H. 164, 165
125, 130, 140, 186-192 T schudi, J. J. von 164
Subsidiary wives 40, 80 Tumay, to guard 104
Substitute 42, 130-131, 187-192 Tumibamba panaca, ayllu 5
Sucsu panaca, ayllu (or Zocso, Cubgu, Cuzco Tupac, title 129
etc.) 4, 5, 6, 9, 111-112, 124, 175, 222, 24l Tupac Yupanqui, proper name 4, 39, 123-125,
Sucsuviza, sacrifice 175 129-133, 180-181
Sullca, generic name of ayllu 100, 214 Tuti, village 117
Suma panaca, ayllu (see: Soma) 124, 201
Uallaviza condeviza, name of high priest (see:
Sun 157, 158, 161, 164-170, 206-207, 219,
Huaylla) 161, 175
225, 227-228
Uaquirca, village (see: Guaquirca) 81-82
Supay, devil 175
Uariruna, men of second world (see: H u ari— )
Surama, ayllu 222
Sutic, ayllu in Cuzco 6, 7, 9, 70, 75-76, 86-88, 219
Uariviracocharuna, men of first world (see:
194-195, 205, 242-243
Sutic guaman, proper name 145 Huari — ) 219
Uchu, chili, Spanish pepper 75
Symmetric marriages 150, 246-250
U h le , M. 35
Uiza (see: Biza) 161
Tahuantinsuyu, Inca name of their country 77 Ullu, penis 72
Tahuapaca, proper name 94 Uma, head, mountain top 151, 163
Tambo, ayllu in Cuzco 70, 75-76, 86-88, 89, Unilineality 26
92, 242-243 Unu, sacred name of water (see: Huno pacha-
Tamboconga, ayllu in Puquiura 83, 152 cuti) 142
Tambo Usca Mayta, Don Juan 87, 128, 183 Upper-, Lower-moiety 120
Tampu (see: Tambo) Urco, mountain (and derivatives) 72-73, 175
Tantar, place name 6 Urcos, village 86, 101
Tarco Huaman, proper name 126-127, 149, Uru ayllu 6, 7, 8, 9, 100-101, 198-199, 222
182 Usca, beggar 87, 98, 178
Taqui, dance 198 Usca Mayta panaca, ayllu 3, 4, 6, 9, 86-88,
Tarpuntay, ayllu in Cuzco 6, 7, 9, 111-112, 124-125, 128, 178, 183, 222, 24l
175, 178 Uscovilca, proper name 104-105, 129-130, 138,
Taucaray, mountain, ayllu in Oropesa 136-137 186-188
Taypi, generic name of ayllu (see: Chaupi) Ushku, white 105
4, 81 Uxuta, sandal 178
Teclovilca, proper name 104, 138 Uxuta Urco Guaranga, proper name 107-109,
Temple of the Sun (See: Inticancha, Corican- 177-178
cha) 243-246
Thunder 157, 161-162 V alcarcel, L. E. 36
Ticci, origin 107, 168 V alera, Blas 33, 104, 111, 138, 151, 152,
Ticcicocha, place name in Cuzco 238 228
INDEX 265
V a z q u e z de E sp in o s a , A n t o n io 34, 81, 167, Wamani, lords of the mountains (see: Puquio)

230, 245 141
V e l e z L o p e z , L. R. 73 World or Sun, period of 1000 years 219, 227
Venus 161-162
Vicaquirao, proper name 107-108, 176-177, Xacxaguana (see: Jaquijahuana) 77, 153
188-191, 222
Vicaquirao panaca, ayllu 3, 4, 6, 9 Yahuar, blood 149
Vicza (see: V illca) 175 Yahuar Huacac, proper name 5, 31, 126-127,
Vilaoma (see: Villca Uma) 151 149-150, 154, 175
Vilcabamba, region near Cuzco 235 Yaku, water 141
Vilcaconga, mountains 101 Yamqui-Collagua, sub-province 115-116
Villacumu (see: Villca Uma) 151 Yamqui, title 115-117
Villaoma (see: Villca Uma) 151 Yana, black 99
Villca, priest, ancestor, great-grandchild, sun, Yanaca, village, sub-province 81, 99
medicin, phallic symbol 73-74, 104, 111, Yanacona, class of people 48, 98-99, 100, 149-
138, 161-162, 164, 175, 217 150, 153-154, 158, 198, 222, 224-227
Villcachina, clyster 73 Yanacora, ayllu 4
Villcaquire, proper name 111 Yanavilca, proper name 104-105
Villca Uma, high priest 111-112, 151-152, Yana Villca, class of priests 152
163, 181, 241 Yanayaco (see: Yanacona) 153, 158
Viracocha, creator 94, 110, 111, 151, 163, 165- Yaura panaca, ayllu (see: Raurau panaca) 3, 6
170, 206-207, 219-220, 243-246 Yaurisqui, place name 6
Viracocha Inca, proper name 5, 110-113, 150- Ychoc (see: Lloque) 4 l
154, 163, 166-167, 175, 206-207 Yucay, village 86
Viracocha Inca Paucar, proper name 108
Virgin of the Sun (see: Aclla) Zocso panaca, ayllu (see: Sucsu panaca) 5
Z uidem a , R. T. 14, 22, 170
Wachoq, “ Hero" (see: Puquio) 141-144

The Ceque System of Cuzco The Social Organization of The Capital of The Inca - Zuidema, R. Tom

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Ceque System of Cuzco The Social Organization of The Capital of The Inca - Zuidema, R. Tom

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE CEQUE SYSTEM OF CUZCO

THE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE

Copyright ig64 by E . / . Brill, Leiden, Netherlands

§ 8. A method for making use of the chronicles, with a survey of

III. T heoretical Survey of the O rganization of C uzco 39

IV. T he first R epresentation of the O rganization of C uzco . . 68

f) the representation of the bipartition within Chinchaysuyu 89

§ 11. The resulting relationship of the upper moiety (I + III) to

VI. T he third R e p r e s e n t a t i o n ................................................................... 171

VII. T he C o -ordination of the three R epresentations . . . 208

V ili. T he Q uinquepartition and the D ecempartition . . . 213

b) the adaptation of the decimal organization to the form of

IX. D ata which do not refer directly to any single Represen­

B ibliography .................................................................................................... 251

There can be no doubt that Dr Zuidema’s The Ceque System of Cuzco is a

so much stimulated me and who made me feel so much at home in their

THE POINT OF DEPARTURE OF THIS STUDY

2) See IV § 2b p. 82 and note 23.

With the aid of Professor Manuel Chavez Ballon, professor of archaeology

3) See IV note 23.

Ceque Ayllu Ceque Ayllu

Relaci6n de los Ceques

7) Yahuar Huacac Aucailli panaca

§ 2. Molina (1943, p. 29-32) mentions the panaca and other groups in

Cuntisuyu Collasuyu Antisuyu Chinchaysuyu

THE POINT OF DEPARTURE OF THIS STUDY

Yaurisqui (5 km from Huayparga Pisa (that are those of Jaquijahuana, Tilca

The organization of Cuzco according to Molina.

§ 3. According to Sarmiento’s chronicle of 1572 (cap. 11 p. 119-120),

H ) See III §§ 3-5 pp. 40-46.

As no other panaca is mentioned in IV 1 b 14) (the position where one might

of evidence supporting their suspicions, however, these authors saw themselves

§ 3. a) In 1953 I laid down in a study (Zuidema 1953) the first results

The history of the Inca, as portrayed by the Spanish chroniclers as well as

de Leon Pinelo, mentions in a letter attached to the census of 1665 of Conde-

§ 4. With the discussion of these three points I hope to have given an

of their own conceptions of the organization of society. I collected the material

through patrilineal inheritance as a result of Spanish influence. Then there

(Nimuendaju 1946, p. 90-91), drew my attention to relevant facts which

This conclusion and the great superficial resemblance of the organization of a

§ 5. With these three types of material at my disposal I was finally able to

could be touched on by referring to the organizations of other villages and

§ 6. a) I want to draw attention to two reasons why this type of examination

In his second conclusion Levi-Strauss says that we must always be wary ol

“ Derriere le dualisme et la symetrie apparente de la structure sociale, on devine

Int. Arch. f. Ethn., Suppl. to Vol. L 4

counted amongst the most primitive in South America. Levi-Strauss (1958,

§ 8. One difficulty not usually encountered in research based on con­

15) See III; IV § 2a pp. 77-80, § 5 pp. 103-113.

16) See VI § 9 pp. 203-207.

grammar (1607) and dictionary (1608) by Diego Gonzales Holguin (referred

I shall discuss no other modern authors on the Inca civilisation. In the

§ 1 0 . In the following chapters the organization of Cuzco will be compared

THEORETICAL SURVEY OF THE ORGANIZATION

§ 2. The sources on the organization of Cuzco appear to be mutually and

1) See IV § 2a pp. 77-80, § 4 p. 102.

the Spanish as “ illegitimate” .) The offspring of the subsidiary unions of Collana

2) See IV § lc pp. 71-75, V notes 157, 159.

presentation in the description of the ceque system given in chapter I. There I

In the first representation I have demonstrated first that a quadripartition was

§ 5 These first two principles of organization were combined in three ways.

An alternative method was to classify 3 and 4 together as Cayao, the lower

§ 6. The analysis of the three representations of the organization of Cuzco

IX. D ata which do not refer directly to any single Represen

§ 8. One difficulty not usually encountered in research based on con

These additional applications in the organization of Cuzco of the terms Col

§ 8. Before proceeding to an account of the representations of the organi

§ 9. The sequence in which in the following chapters the three represen

of a) and b) there emerges a type of organization described as the first prin

b) The quadripartition of the Chanca traversed by two non-territorial moie

§ 1. a) The group in Chinchaysuyu within which a quadripartition occur

is question here of a patrilineal great-grandfather, which is to be expected con

In this presentation, three out of four of the solutions mentioned in con

The subjection of Hurin-Cuzco, i.e. Collasuyu, to Hanan-Cuzco, i.e. Chin