Elmo León

Elmo León
Elmo León

© Elmo León
© Universidad San Martín de Porres
Fondo Editorial
Primera edición traducida, 2016

Av. Las Calandrias 151 -291 Santa Anita, Lima 43 - Perú

Correo electrónico: fondoeditorial@usmp.edu.pe
Página web: www.usmp.edu.pe

Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Turismo y Psicología

Av. Tomás Marsano 242-246, Lima 34, Perú
Teléfono: (511) 513-6300
F: (511) 242 5899

Diseño de carátula: Charo Suárez | Oficina de Diseño y Multimedia USMP

Diagramación: Carlos Yépez Espejo | Oficina de Diseño y Multimedia USMP

Año 2016

Reservados todos los derechos. Queda prohibida, sin la autorización escrita de los
titulares del Copyright, bajo las sanciones establecidas en la ley, la reproducción
total o parcial de esta obra por cualquier medio o procedimiento, incluidos
reprografía y el tratamiento informático.

Impreso en el Perú
aaaaa
aaa
E-mail: aaaaa

ISBN: -xxxxxxxx
Registro del Proyecto Editorial Nº xxxxxxxx FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS DE LA
COMUNICACIÓN, TURISMO Y PSICOLOGIA
Hecho el Depósito Legal en la Biblioteca Nacional del Perú Nº 2013 - 0x
To Duccio Bonavia, Donald Ugent and Luigi Piacenza
distinguished scholars on ethnobotany
which is basis of the Andean resources megadiversity

To my late beloved wife, Nancy Chavez,

who still young moved to heaven above…
miss you so much.
 CONTENT
FIGURES .......................................................................................................................................................................... 21
DIAGRAMS AND MAPS .......................................................................................................................................... 23
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................................................................... 25
FOREWORD .................................................................................................................................................................. 27

CHAPTER 1: AN INTRODUCTION TO PALAEODIET AND SOURCES ......... 29

THE ORIGINS OF THE HUMAN DIET .................................................................................................................. 31
The Role of the Cooking in Human Evolution .............................................................................................. 31
The Origins of Cooking ............................................................................................................................................ 32
Peruvian Food: A Taste of Childhood and Family ....................................................................................... 32
International NovoAndina Cuisine and Foreign Cuisine in Peru ......................................................... 35

COLLECTING SOURCES ON THE PERUVIAN PALAEODIET ............................................................... 39

Structure and Subject Matter of this Book ................................................................................................... 39
The Available Sources .............................................................................................................................................. 42
Pre-Hispanic vs. Modern Peru .............................................................................................................................. 42
Into the Sources ......................................................................................................................................................... 43
Ethnohistory and Ethnography: Their Contribution to the pre-Hispanic Cuisine ..................... 44
Direct Evidence: Organic and Inorganic Remains ...................................................................................... 44
Pre-Hispanic Foodstuffs—How Can We Know They Were Actually Prepared and Eaten? .... 45
The Scope and Limits of Technology in the Archaeological Recording of Foodstuffs ........... 47
‘Non-Peruvian’ Plants and Fruits Possibly Consumed in Pre-Hispanic Peru .................................. 49
Potatoes and Sweet Potatoes Grilled Five Thousand Years Ago... .................................................... 49
Kentucky Fried Chicken vs. Potatoes with Huacatay .............................................................................. 50
Remains of Fish, Molluscs, and Mammals Eaten in Pre-Hispanic Peru ............................................ 50

METHODS USED TO RECONSTRUCT PREHISTORIC FOODS .......................................................... 53

Can we know what a pre-Hispanic Menu Contained? ............................................................................. 53
Radiocarbon and the Remains of Ancient Food ......................................................................................... 54
Radiocarbon Calibration of Ancient Food Remains ................................................................................. 55
Radiocarbon and Some Problems Inherent to pre-Hispanic Foodstuffs ........................................ 55
Where can We Get Radiocarbon Dates for Pre-Hispanic Foodstuffs? ........................................... 56
Turning Radiocarbon Dates into Calendar Years ....................................................................................... 57
Specifying the Results of Radiocarbon Calibration .................................................................................. 59
Elmo Leon
Reconstructing the pre-Hispanic diet Through Modern Science ..................................................... 60
Direct Evidence: Bone Biochemistry ................................................................................................................ 61
Excrements and Pathologies Derived From the Food and From Bromatology ........................... 65
Proteins, Fat, Carbohydrates, and Vitamins in Native Peruvian Foodstuffs .................................. 66
Locating the Archaeological Sites Where Food Remains Have Been Found ............................... 66
Additional Considerations .................................................................................................................................... 68
CHAPTER 2: PRE-HISPANIC FOOD IN PERU ..................................................................... 71
THE MEANING OF FOOD IN PRE-HISPANIC POPULATIONS .......................................................... 73
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PRE-HISPANIC PERU ................................................................................................ 73
The Archaic or Preceramic Period ...................................................................................................................... 77
The Initial Period and the Chavín Phenomenon ......................................................................................... 79
Regional Cultures (Early Intermediate Period) ............................................................................................. 81
The Wari Empire ........................................................................................................................................................ 82
The Late Intermediate Chiefdoms ................................................................................................................... 83
The Inca .......................................................................................................................................................................... 83
FOOD IN PRE-HISPANIC PERU ......................................................................................................................... 85
Peruvian Pre-Hispanic Plants Used as Food ................................................................................................... 85
Tubers and Rhizomes ............................................................................................................................................... 85
Achira (Canna edulis Ker-Gawler or Indica)................................................................................................... 85
Arracacha, White Carrot (Arracacia xanthorrhiza Bancroft) ............................................................... 90
Sweet Potato (Ipomoea batatas) ....................................................................................................................... 93
Maca (Lepidium meyenii Walp) ......................................................................................................................... 102
Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) .............................................................................................................. 104
Arrowleaf (Xanthosoma sp., Xanthosoma sagittifolium) ...................................................................... 117
Oca (Oxalis tuberosa Molina) ............................................................................................................................. 118
Jíquima (Pachyrhizus tuberosus, Pachirhizus ahipa (Wedd.) Parodi) .................................................. 122
Yacon root (Smallanthus sonchifolius (Poepp. & Endl.) ......................................................................... 124
Olluco (Ullucus tuberosus Caldas) ................................................................................................................... 127
Totora (Typha angustifolia, Typha domingensis Schoenoplectus californicus
californicus y Schoenoplectus californicus totora) .................................................................................. 129
Wild Cane, Caña brava (Gynerium sagittatum) .......................................................................................... 131
Reed or Carrizo (Phragmites communis) ....................................................................................................... 132
Mashua (Tropaeolum tuberosum) .................................................................................................................... 132
Potato (Solanum tuberosum sp.) ...................................................................................................................... 133
Reeds (Cyperus, Scirpus sp.) ................................................................................................................................. 145
Coquito (Cyperus esculentus var. leptostachyus Boeck) ....................................................................... 145
10
14,000 years of food in Peru
Cereals and Pseudocereals ................................................................................................................................. 146
Kiwicha (Amaranthus caudatus) ....................................................................................................................... 146
Cañihua (Chenopodium pallidicaule, Chenopodiaceae) ....................................................................... 148
Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) ........................................................................................................................ 150
Corn (Zea mays) ....................................................................................................................................................... 160
Maize Chicha .............................................................................................................................................................. 177
Legumes ...................................................................................................................................................................... 180
Peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) ............................................................................................................................... 180
Oblique-Seeded Jack Beans, Jack Bean (Canavalia plagiosperma, Canavalia ensiformis) .... 188
Lima Beans (Phaseolus lunatus) ........................................................................................................................ 190
Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) ................................................................................................................ 195
Tarwi (Lupinus mutabilis Sweet) ...................................................................................................................... 205
Pacay (Inga feuilleei) ............................................................................................................................................... 207
Bean Chocho or “Fréjol Coral” (Erythrina sp.) ............................................................................................ 212
Carob Tree or Algarrobo (Prosopis sp.) .......................................................................................................... 213
Long-Spine Acacia [Huarango, Espino, Faique] (Acacia macracantha) .......................................... 219
Hierba de la Lancha [Acacia Blanca, Peladera] (Leucaena trichodes Benth) ................................ 219
Tahuari (Pithecelobium sp.) ................................................................................................................................. 220
Fruits ............................................................................................................................................................................. 220
Pineapple (Ananas comosus (L.) Merril, Ananas sativus) ..................................................................... 220
Custard Apple, Cherimoya (Annona cherimola Miller) ........................................................................ 223
Soursop [Guanábana] (Annona muricata) ............................................................................................................
Chili Pepper [Ají, Chojña, Huaica, Jima, Uchu] (Capsicum baccatum, Capsicum chinense,
Capsicum pubescens y Capsicum frutescens) ............................................................................................. 227
Gourds (Lagenaria) .................................................................................................................................................. 236
Squash [Calabazas or Zapallos] (Cucurbita) ................................................................................................ 237
Cucumber (Cucumis sp., Cucumis sativus) .................................................................................................. 247
Lucuma (Pouteria lucuma (R&P) Kuntze, Lucuma bifera Mol.) ........................................................... 248
Avocado, Palta (Persea americana Mill.) ....................................................................................................... 251
Huachulla (Solanum hispidum) ......................................................................................................................... 257
Guava [Guayaba, Bimpish, Guayabillo, Kima, Kumaski, Matus] (Psidium guajava) ................... 257
Peruvian Pepper [Molle, Aguaribay, Anacahuita, Gualeguay] (Schinus molle) ............................ 261
Sweet Granadilla [Granadilla, Apicoya, Hutu, Tintin] (Passiflora ligularis Juss) .......................... 263
Passion fruit [Tumbillo or Maracuyá Silvestre] (Passiflora foetida) ................................................ 263
Tumbo (Passiflora tripartita molissima) ....................................................................................................... 264
Kaywa [Caigua, Accoch] (Cyclanthera pedata) ........................................................................................ 264
Mito [Papayo, Mito, Mitu, Quemish] (Carica candicans - Vasconcellea candicans,
Carica pubescens - Vasconcellea cundinamarcensis) ............................................................................. 265
Palillo [Palillo Peruano] (Campomanesia linearifolia) ........................................................................... 266
Peanut Butter Fruit [Ciruela del Fraile, Cansaboca] (Bunchosia armeniaca) ............................... 267
Sweet Cucumber [Pepino dulce] (Solanum muricatum Aiton) ......................................................... 269
Inca Berry, Peruvian Cherry [Aguaymanto, Capuli] (Physalis Peruviana) ........................................ 271
Elmo Leon
Sapote (Capparis angulata, Capparis scabrida) ....................................................................................... 272
Clavillo (Jusseia peruviana, Ludwigia Perúviana (L.) H. Hara) ............................................................. 273
Wild Tomato, Cherry Tomato? [Tomate silvestre] (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.,
Lycopersicon peruvianum Dun., Solanaceae) ............................................................................................ 273
Tamarillo [Sachatomate, Tomate de Árbol] (Solanum betaceum) .................................................. 275
Peach Palm [Pijuayo, Chonta de Comer] (Gulielma gasipaes, B. gasipaes K.) ............................. 276
Caimito] (Pouteria caimito R. et P. Radlk, Star apple = Chrysophyllum caimito L.) ................. 279
Wild Tuna [Tuna silvestre] (Opuntia floccosa) ......................................................................................... 280
Cactus (Haageocereus sp. L.) .............................................................................................................................. 281
Grass Seeds or Fruits [Semillas o frutas de grass] (Caryopses) .......................................................... 281
Flowers and Bushes ................................................................................................................................................ 281
Amancae (Hymenocallis amancaes, Ismene amancaes) ......................................................................... 281
Begonias [Begonia] (Begonia geraniifolia) .................................................................................................... 281
Ccantu, Chinchircuma (Mutisia hirsuta) ....................................................................................................... 282
Chilca (Baccharis prostrata, Baccharis latifolia) ........................................................................................ 282
Stimulants .................................................................................................................................................................. 282
Coca, Cuca, Jibiro, Mumus, Pusashpan (Erythroxylum coca) ............................................................. 282
Thallophyte Plants ................................................................................................................................................. 288
Algae (Cryptogamae, Macrocystis humboldtii vg. Pyrifera sargazo,
Eisenia cokeri, algas pardas) .................................................................................................................................................. 288
Animals as Food ....................................................................................................................................................... 291
Megafauna ................................................................................................................................................................. 292
Megatherium tarijense ......................................................................................................................................... 292
Scelidoterium ........................................................................................................................................................... 292
Equus andium ............................................................................................................................................................ 292
Onohippidion saldiasi .......................................................................................................................................... 292
Non-Extinct Species ............................................................................................................................................. 292
Camelids ...................................................................................................................................................................... 292
Taruca, Deer (Hippocamelus antisensis) ....................................................................................................... 307
White Tailed Deer [Venado de Cola Blanca] (Odocoileus virginianus, Odocoileus
peruvianus) and Red Brocket [Ciervo Rojo] (Mazama americana, Mazama rufina) ................... 308
Peccary [Chancho de Monte, Jabalí Americano, Pecarí] (Tayassuidae) .......................................... 310
Rodents ........................................................................................................................................................................ 310
Guinea Pig [Cuy, Cobayo, Quwe, Wanchu] (Cavia porcellus) ............................................................. 310
Vizcacha (Lagidium peruanum) .......................................................................................................................... 316
12
14,000 years of food in Peru
Canids ............................................................................................................................................................................ 318
Sechuran Fox [Zorro de Sechura] (Dusicyon sechurae, Pseudolopex sechurae) and Andean Fox
[Zorro Andino or Colorado] (Pseudolopex culpaeus) .............................................................................. 318
Mustelids ..................................................................................................................................................................... 319
Andes Skunk [Zorrino de los Andes] (Conepatus rex, Conepatus chinga rex) ............................. 319
Peruvian Hairless Dog [Perros Peruanos] (Canis lupus familiaris) .................................................... 320
Lagomorphs (similar to rodents) ..................................................................................................................... 326
Brazilian Cottontail, Forest Cottontail, Tapet [Conejo Andino,
Conejo de Monte, Tapet ] (Sylvilagus brasiliensis) ................................................................................. 326
Batrachians and Amphibians ............................................................................................................................... 327
Salamander (Caudata) ........................................................................................................................................... 327
Northern Leopard Frog [Rana Leopardo] (Rana pipiens) ...................................................................... 327
Lake Junín (Giant) Frog or Andes Smooth Frog [Rana de Junín or Rana Gigante]
(Batrachophynus sp., Batrachophynus macrostomus) ........................................................................... 328
Reptiles ........................................................................................................................................................................ 328
Sea Turtle [Tortuga Marina] (Chelonioidea) ............................................................................................... 328
Reptiles (Lacertilia, Reptilia) .............................................................................................................................. 328
Cañán (Dricodon guttulatum) ........................................................................................................................... 329
False Monitor [Iguana] (Callopistes flavipunctatus) .............................................................................. 330
Lizards [Lagartijas] (Teiidae) ............................................................................................................................... 330
Yellow Rat Snake [Serpiente Voladora] (Spilotes pullatus) .................................................................. 331
Sea Lions [Lobos Marinos] (Pinnipedia, Otáridos) and Whales [Ballenas] (Cetacea) .............. 331
Birds .................................................................................................................................................................................332
Tinamou [Perdiz Andina, Tinamú] (Nothoprocta cf. taczanoskii) ..................................................... 333
Cormorant, Guanay Cormorant [Cormorán, Guanay, or Patillo] (Phalacrocorax sp.,
Phalacrocorax bougainvillii) ............................................................................................................................... 333
Peruvian Booby [Pájaro Bobo, Piquero Peruano or Alcatraz Piquero]
(Sulidae, Sula variegata) ...................................................................................................................................... 336
Calidris [Playero], Puna Plover (Calidris sp., Charadris alticola) ........................................................ 337
Seagull (Laridae, Larus sp.) .................................................................................................................................... 337
Albatross [Albatros] (Diomedeae sp.) ............................................................................................................ 338
Puna Ibis [Yanavico or Ibis de Puna] (Plegadis ridgwayi) ...................................................................... 338
Melodious Blackbird [Tordo Cantor] (Dives dives) ................................................................................. 339
American Coot [Gallinetón or Gallareta Americana] (Fulica americana peruviana) ............. 339
Garza Blanca (Egretta sp.) .................................................................................................................................... 339
Great Heron [Garza Grande] (Casmerodius sp.) ....................................................................................... 339
Aguilucho Grande (Geranoaetus fuscescens australis) ......................................................................... 339
Silver Teal [Pato] (Anas versicolor) .................................................................................................................. 339
Dabbling Ducks [Pato Silvestre] (Anas sp.) .................................................................................................. 339
13
Elmo Leon
Crested duck [Pato] (Anas speculorides) ...................................................................................................... 340
Muscovy Duck [Pato Joque or Moscovita] (Cairina moschata) ........................................................ 340
Pampero Peruano (Geossita paytensis) ......................................................................................................... 343
Rufous-Collared Sparrow [Gorrión Andino or Vinchi] (Zonotrichia capensis peruviensis) ...... 343
Peruvian Pelican [Pelícano Peruano or Alcatraz] (Pelecanus thagus, Pelecanidae) .................. 343
Pigeons [Palomas] (Columbidae) ..................................................................................................................... 344
Spot-Winged Pigeon [Paloma “manchada”] (Columba maculosa) .................................................. 345
White-Winged Dove [Cucula o tórtola aliblanca] (Zenaida asiatica meloda) .......................... 345
Eared Dove [Paloma de Campo o Tórtola “Torcaza”] (Zenaida auriculata) ....................................... 345
Sparrow [Gorrión Casero] (Passeridae) ......................................................................................................... 345
Shearwater [Pardela] (Pruffinus, Procellaridae, Laridae) ....................................................................... 345
Mimids [Calandria] (Mimidae) .......................................................................................................................... 346
Inca Tern [Zarcillo, Gaviotín, or Charrán Inca] (Larasterna inca) .......................................................... 346
Black Vulture [Gallinazo] (Coragyps atratus) ................................................................................................... 346
Andean Goose [Huashua or Ganso Andino] (Cloephaga melanoptera) ............................................. 346
Andean Coot [Gallareta] (Fulica ardesiaca) ...................................................................................................... 347
Giant Coot [Gallareta Gigante] (Fulica gigantea) ............................................................................................ 347
Andean Avocet [Avoceta Andina] (Recurvirostrus [Recurvirostra?] andina) .................................... 347
Andean Flicker [Pito] (Colaptes rupicolor [rupicola?]) .................................................................................. 347
African Penguin, Humboldt Penguin [Pingüino peruano] (Spheniscus demersus,
Spheniscus humboldti) ................................................................................................................................................... 347
Sea Fish .................................................................................................................................................................................. 348
Osteichthyes ...................................................................................................................................................................... 349
Peruvian Anchoveta [Anchoveta or Peladilla] (Engraulis ringens, Engraulidae) ............................... 349
Sardine or Herring [Sardina or Arenque] (Sardinops sagax sagax, Clupeidae) ................................ 353
Peruvian Silverside (Odonthestes regia regia, Atherinidae) ....................................................................... 355
Dark-Spot Mojarra, Periche (Eucinostomus entomelas) ............................................................................... 356
Croaker, drums, minor Stardrum (Stellifer minor) ........................................................................................... 356
Peruvian Banded Croaker, drums (Paralonchurus peruanus) ..................................................................... 357
Pacific Porgy [Marotilla, peje chino, sargo, taca] (Calamus brachysomus) ........................................ 359
Skipjack Tuna or Oceanic skipjack [Barrilete, listado] (Katsuwonus pelamis) .................................. 359
Bullseye Puffer, Network puffer [Tamborín, botete diana] (Sphoeroides annulatus) ................. 360
Peruvian sea catfish [Bagre con faja –bagre del norte] (Galeichthys peruvianus) ........................ 360
Pacific Jack mackerel, Jack mackerel, Inca Scad [Jurel, Furel] (Carangidae, Trachurus
symmetricus murphyi, Trachurus picturatus murphyi) .................................................................................. 361
Pompano, Paloma [Pámpano] (Trachinotus sp.) ............................................................................................... 363
Lorna Drum [Lorna, Cholo, Losna] (Sciaena deliciosa) ................................................................................. 363
Kingfish, Mis-Mis, Misho or Muchachita (Menthicirrus sp.) ....................................................................... 366
Croaker [Pintadilla, Peje Burro, Arnillo, Burro, Caracha] (Sciaena fasciata) ....................................... 367
Drums [Róbalo or Lubina] (Sciaena wieneri) ...................................................................................................... 367
Drums [Robalo or Lubina] (Sciaena starksi) ........................................................................................................ 367
Drums [Corvina, corvinilla] (Cilus gilberti, Sciaena gilberti A) .................................................................. 368
14
14,000 years of food in Peru
Pacific croaker [Corvina Dorada, Guavina] (Micropogon altipinnis) ............................................... 370
Whitefin Weakfish [Corvineta Reina, Corvina Real] (Cynoscion albus) ........................................ 370
Ground drummer [Ronco, bocón] (Bairdiella spp.) ................................................................................. 371
Grunt [Corcovado, callana] (Orthopristis spp.) ......................................................................................... 371
Flathead Grey Mullet, striped mullet [Lisa] (Mugil cephalus L.) ........................................................ 371
Palm Ruff, Blackruff [Cojinova, palmera, palmerita] (Seriolella violacea G.)] ............................. 373
Peruvian Weakfish, drum [Cachema, Cachema Sechurana or Ayanque] (Cynoscion analis) ..... 373
Mahi-Mahi, common dolphinfish [Perico, dorado] (Coryphaena hippurus) ................................ 375
Peruvian Hake, Pacific Hake [Merluza] (Merluccius gayi peruanus) .................................................. 375
Pacific Menhaden [Machete o machuelo] (Ethmidium maculatum, Brevoortia maculata) ..... 376
Spanish Mackerel [Pez Sierra] (Scomberomorus maculatus sierra J&S) .......................................... 376
Pacific Bonito [Bonito] (Sarda sarda, Sarda chiliensis chilensis) .........................................................376
Peruvian Rock Seabass [Cabrilla, cabrilla loca, cabrillón] (Paralabrax humeralis) .................... 378
Brick Seabass [Cherlo, chancharro o choromelo] (Acanthistius pictus) ....................................... 379
Bullet Tuna, bullet mackerel, wide corseleted [Barrilete negro, melva] (Auxis sp.) ................ 379
Cabinza Grunt [Cabinza] (Isacia conceptionis) .......................................................................................... 379
Peruvian Grunt, Pacific sargo [Chita o sargo] (Anisotremus scapularis) ........................................ 380
Blue-Bronze Sea Chub [Salema, Chopa] (Kyphosus analogus) ........................................................... 381
Sheephead, wrasses [Mulato, Peje Perro, or Vieja] (Pimelometopon sp.) ...................................... 381
Clingfishes, Pejesapo [Pejesapo or Shinguillo] (Sicyases sanguineus M&T) .................................. 381
Peruvian Morwong [Pintadilla, Páramo or Pintacha] (Cheilodactylus variegatus) ................... 382
Pacific Chub Mackerel [Caballa, estornino] (Scomber japonicus peruanus, Scombridae) .............. 382
Giant Blenny, scaleless blenny [Borracho, Borracho Gigante] (Scartichthys gigas) ................ 383
Blenny, scaled blenny, trambollo or Chalapo Clinid [Trambollo or Chalapo]
(Lepisoma philipii, Labrisomus philippii) ...................................................................................................... 383
Flounder, [Lenguado de ojos chicos] Paralitchthys microps (Paralitchthys microps) .............. 384
Sea bass, Pacific Mutton Hamlet [?] [Mero] (Epinephelus sp., Alphestes fasciatus) ................ 384
Fine Flounder, lefteye Flounder, halibut,[Lenguado común] (Paralichthys adspersus) .......... 385
Speckled-Tail Flounder [Lenguado de Cola Manchada] (Bothidae, Engyophrys sanctilaurentia) 385
Spotted Scorpion Fish [Pez Diablo] (Scorpaena plumieri mystes) .................................................. 385
Sandperch [?] [Bacalao, Rollizo] (Mugiloides chilensis) ......................................................................... 386
Pacific Golden-Eyed Tilefish or Ocean Whitefish [Peje blanco, blanquillo]
(Caulolatilus cabezon, Caulolatilus cabezon affinis Gil) ...................................................................... 386
Parrot Fish [Pococho perico] (Xenoscarus denticulatus, Scarus perico) ....................................... 386
Black Cusk-Eel [Congrio, congrio moreno] (Genypterus maculatus) ............................................. 386
Bonefish [(Pez) Zorro, Macabi] (Albula vulpes) ......................................................................................... 387
Catfish [Bagre negro] (Cathorops) ................................................................................................................. 387
Catfish [Bagre] (cf. Ariopsis) ................................................................................................................................ 387
Cartilaginous Fish ................................................................................................................................................... 387
Snake Eel [Ánguila] (Ophichthus sp.) ............................................................................................................. 387
Smooth-Hound and Spotted Houndshark [Tollo (Mustelus spp.)
and Tollo Manchado] (Triakis maculata) ...................................................................................................................... 388
Sharptooth Smoothhound [Tollo blanco] (Mustelus dorsalis) ......................................................... 389
15
Elmo Leon
Requiem shark, Galeorhinus sp. [Tiburón sopa de aleta, cazón o cazón de aleta]
(Galeorhinus sp.) .......................................................................................................................................................................... 389
Pacific Guitarfish [Guitarra] (Rhinobatos planiceps) ............................................................................................... 389
Chilean Angelshark, Angelshark [Angelote, Tiburón Ángel] (Squatina armata) ................................... 390
Rays [Raya] (Batoideo, Myliobatidae, Chondrichthyes, Dasyatis, Psammobatis caudispina sp.) ...... 390
Round Stingrays [Tapadera, Raya, Raya con Espinas] (Urotrygon sp.) ........................................................... 391
Blue Shark, Smooth Hammerhead Shark, Shortfin Mako Shark, Tiger Shark, Pacific Sharpnose
Shark, Great White Shark [Tintorera (Prionace glauca), tiburón martillo (Sphyrna zygaena L.),
tiburón bonito (Isurus oxyrinchus, Lamna nasus, Lamnidae), tiburón tigre (Galeocerdo cuvier),
tiburón hocicón (Rhizoprionodon longurio), tiburón blanco (Carcharadon carcharias)] ............... 392
Requiem Sharks [Tiburón o cazón] (Carcharhinus) ................................................................................................. 393
The Fish of Huaca Prieta ...................................................................................................................................... 393
Freshwater Fish ......................................................................................................................................................... 394
Bryconamericus peruanus [Blanquito or Lisita de Río] (Bryconamericus peruanus) ............... 394
Pencil Catfish [Life] (Trichomycterus sp., Pygidium dispar) ................................................................. 394
Lebiasina binaculata [Pejerrey de Río or “Charcoca”] (Lebiasina binaculata) ........................... 394
Molluscs and Crustacea ...................................................................................................................................... 395
Chitons
Chiton [Quitones / Barquillos] (Chitonidae and Polyplacophora) ................................................ 396
Chiton [Barquillo, chitón] (Chiton granosus) ............................................................................................. 397
Chiton [Barquillo, chitón] (Chiton cumingsii) ............................................................................................ 397
Chiton [Barquillo, chitón] (Enoplochiton niger) ....................................................................................... 397
Chiton [Barquillo] (Chaetopleura hennahi) ................................................................................................ 398
Limpets
Limpet (Fissurella crassa) ...................................................................................................................................... 398
Giant Keyhole Limpet [Blanco o lapa reina] (Fissurella maxima) .................................................... 400
Keyhole limpet [Lapa viuda] (Fissurella latimarginata) ....................................................................... 400
Peruvian Keyhole Limpet [Lapa] (Fissurella peruviana) ....................................................................... 400
Keyhole limpet [Lapa “gaviota”] (Scurria parasítica) y Fissurella limbata ................................... 401
Patela (Collisella ceciliana) ................................................................................................................................. 401
Green Chilean Limpet [Señorita o sombrerito chino] (Scurria viridula, Acmaeidae) ............ 401
Small Snails [Caracolitos] ................................................................................................................................... 395
Caracol Negro or Caracol Turbante (Tegula atra), Caracol Negro (Tegula euryomphalus) ..... 402
Snail [Caracol] (Tegula tridentata) .................................................................................................................. 403
Caracolito negro, lapa (Turbo niger, Prisogaster niger) ........................................................................ 404
Snail [Caracolillo] (Littorina peruviana) ....................................................................................................... 405
Snail [Caracolito] (Collumbella fuscata) ...................................................................................................... 405
Snails and Cone Snails [Caracoles y conos] .............................................................................................. 405
Caracol tornillo (Turritella sp.) ......................................................................................................................... 405
16
14,000 years of food in Peru
Snail [Caracolito] (Cerithium stercusmuscarum) ..................................................................................... 406
Snail [Caracolito] (Cerithidea valida) ........................................................................................................... 406
Caracol cresta de gallo (Epitonium sp.) ....................................................................................................... 406
Caracol blanco (Polinices cf. Cora, Polinices uber) ................................................................................. 406
Moonsnail [Caracol luna] (Polinices intermeratus) ..................................................................................407
Concave Ear Moon Snail [Orejón, Abalón, Caracol Babosa, Chanque] (Sinum cymba) ........ 407
Snail [Caracol] (Cymatium wiegmani) .......................................................................................................... 408
Caracol Rosado, Caracol Gringo (Bursa ventricosa) .............................................................................. 408
Caracol Sapo (Bursa nana) ................................................................................................................................. 408
Chilean Abalone or Rock shell [Pata de Burro, Chanque, or Loco] (Concholepas concholepas) ... 408
Snail [Caracol] (Thais callaoensis) ................................................................................................................... 410
Caracol negro, caracol plomo (Thais –Stramonitae– chocolata) ..................................................... 411
Snail [Caracol] (Thais –Stramonita- biserialis) ............................................................................................ 412
Snail [Caracol] (Thais –Stramonita– delessertiana) ........................................................................................412
Snail [Caracol] (Thais –Thaisella– kiosquiformis) .................................................................................... 413
Rock snail [Caracol de Roca] (Thais –Stramonita– haemastoma ....................................................... 413
Caracolito (Xanthochorus buxea) .................................................................................................................... 414
Caracol Buccino (Cantharus cf. Inca, Cantharus elegans, Cantharus fusiformes) .................... 415
Snail [Caracol] (Solenosteira fusiformis) ....................................................................................................... 415
Caracol Buccino (Columbrella paytensis) .................................................................................................... 415
Caracolito (Anachis sp.) ........................................................................................................................................ 415
Snail [Caracol] (Mitrella buccinoides) ............................................................................................................ 416
Snail [Caracol] (Nassarius dentifer, Nassarius gayi) ................................................................................. 416
Snail [Caracol] (Nassarius luteostoma) ........................................................................................................... 417
Snail [Caracol] (Oliva peruviana) ...................................................................................................................... 417
Olive shell [Olivela] (Olivella sp.) .................................................................................................................... 417
Olive shell [Olivita] (Olivela columellaris) .................................................................................................. 417
Caracolito (Prunum curtum) ............................................................................................................................... 418
Snail [Caracol] (Mitra orientalis) ....................................................................................................................... 418
Cancelaria (Cancellaria urceolata sp.) ........................................................................................................... 418
Cancellaria indentata .............................................................................................................................................419
Cancellaria decussata ............................................................................................................................................ 419
Alas de Ángel (Pholas chiloensis) ...................................................................................................................... 419
Crassilabrum crassilabrum .................................................................................................................................. 419
Snail [Caracol] (Homolocantha multicrispata) .......................................................................................... 419
Snail [Caracol] (Bostryx turritus) ...................................................................................................................... 420
Snail [Caracol] (Bostryx elongatus) ................................................................................................................. 420
Caracol chayote (Drymaeus sp., Drymaeus tigris) ................................................................................... 420
Sea Snail (Naticide sp.) ......................................................................................................................................... 420
Trochita] ([Caliptraea?] trochiformis) ............................................................................................................ 420
Ferguson’s Cone [Cono de Ferguson] (Conus fergussoni) .................................................................... 420
Freshwater Snail [Caracol de Agua Dulce] (Physa venustula) ............................................................. 421
Caracol de los Acuarios (Helisoma –Planorbis– sp., Helisoma peruvianum) ............................. 421
Landsnail [Caracol de Loma] (Scutalus mutabilis, Scutalus proteus, Scutalus versicolor) .......... 421
Caracol de Plantas (Systrophia sp.) ................................................................................................................ 424
17
Elmo Leon
Cups, saucer limpets [Piques] .......................................................................................................................... 425
Cup [Caracol “Pantufla,” Pique Señorita] (Creppatella dilatata) ....................................................... 425
Cup [Pique, Señorita] (Crepidulla incurva) .................................................................................................. 426
Cup [Pique, Señorita] (Crucibulum lignarium) ............................................................................................ 426
Cup [Pique, Señorita] (Crucibulum spinosum) ............................................................................................ 426
Cup [Pique] (Caliptrea trochiformis) ............................................................................................................... 426
Bivalves, Mussels, Oysters, Clams .................................................................................................................. 427
Black Ark [Concha Negra] (Anadara tuberculosa) ................................................................................... 427
Concha Prieta (Anadara nux) ............................................................................................................................. 427
Mussels [Concha Pata de Burro] (Anadara –Grandiarca– grandis) ................................................ 427
Mussels [Mejillón] (Glycymeris ovata) ......................................................................................................... 428
Common Musse [Choro Común, Choro o Mejillón Mussel] (Aulacomya ater) ....................... 428
Mejillín Púrpura (Brachidontes purpuratus) ................................................................................................ 430
Mussel [Choro or Choro Zapato] (Choromytilus chorus) .................................................................... 430
Chorito playero (Perumytilus purpuratus) .................................................................................................. 433
Chorito negro (Semimytilus algosus) ............................................................................................................. 435
Ostra Negra (Ostrea columbensis) .................................................................................................................. 436
Oyster [Ostra] (Ostrea angelica) ...................................................................................................................... 437
Peruvian Scallop [Conchuela, Concha de Abanico or Señorita] (Argopecten purpuratus) ......... 437
Scallop [Conchuela, Concha de Abanico] (Argopecten circularis) .................................................. 439
Scallop [Ostión] (Chama pellucida) ............................................................................................................... 439
Scallop [Ostión] (Pseudochama corrugata) ............................................................................................... 439
Concha Pata de Mula, Piconuda (Trachycardium procerum) ............................................................... 439
Almeja Fina, Berberecho (Mexicardia procera) ........................................................................................ 440
Piconudo (Trachicardium sp.) ........................................................................................................................... 440
Clam [Almeja] (Transenella pannosa) .......................................................................................................... 440
Piojosa (Dosinia dunkeri) .................................................................................................................................... 440
Concha Rayada] (Chione sp., Chione subrugosa) .................................................................................... 440
Venus shell... [Almeja or Almeja Rayada] (Protothaca thaca) ........................................................... 440
Concha Tabaco (Protothaca aspérrima) ..................................................................................................... 442
Clam [Almeja] (Petricola rugosa) ..................................................................................................................... 442
Clam [Almeja, Taquilla] (Mulinia edulis) ....................................................................................................... 442
Almejita (Spisula adamsi) .................................................................................................................................... 443
Clam [Almeja, Señorita, Conchita, Palabrita, Mariposa] (Donax peruvianus, Donax obesulus) ... 444
Razor clam [Navaja or Pico de Pato] (Tagelus peruvianus) ................................................................... 445
Razor clam [Chaveta] (Tagelus dombeii) ...................................................................................................... 446
Clam [Almeja] (Semele corrugata) .................................................................................................................. 446
Clam [Almeja] (Semele solida) .......................................................................................................................... 447
Wedge clams... [Machas] (Mesodesma donacium) ................................................................................. 447
Venus shell [Abanico, Piojosa, Concha Blanca] (Tivella sp.) ............................................................... 450
Cascabel Peruano] (Anomia peruviana) ....................................................................................................... 450
Clam [Almeja] (Eurhomalea rufa) .................................................................................................................... 450
Concha (Mactra velata) ........................................................................................................................................ 451
Concha Mariposa (Iphigenia altior) ................................................................................................................. 451
18
14,000 years of food in Peru
Sea Urchin ................................................................................................................................................................... 451
Sea Urchin [Erizos de Mar] (Loxechinus albus) .......................................................................................... 452
Piure, Ciruelo Colorado, Ciruelo de Mar] (Pyura, Pyura chilensis, Ascidiacea) .......................... 452
Percebe [Goose Bernacles?] and Crabs ....................................................................................................... 453
Barnacles [Percebe, Pico de Loro] (Balanus spp.) ..................................................................................... 453
Percebe (Chthamalus cirratus) .......................................................................................................................... 453
Taxonomically Unidentified Crabs (Pleocyemata cf. anomura and brachyura) ......................... 454
Crabs [Cangrejos] (Calappidae) ........................................................................................................................ 454
Crab [Cangrejo Tijereta] (Petrolisthes spp., Porcellanidae) ................................................................. 454
Cangrejo Violáceo, Jaiva Morada, or Cangrejo Colorado (Platyxanthus orbignyi) .................. 454
Rock crab [Cangrejo Peludo, Jaiva Peluda] (Cancer setosus) .............................................................. 455
Cangrejo de Agua (Arenaeus mexicanus ...................................................................................................... 456
Cangrejo Araña (Maidias) and Cangrejo Piedra (Xanthidae) ............................................................... 456
Rock crab [Jaiva] (Cancridae) ............................................................................................................................. 456
Sea Cucumber [Pepino de Mar] (Patabus mollis) .................................................................................... 456
Crab [Cangrejo de Arena] (Hepatus chiliensis) .......................................................................................... 456
Crab [Cangrejo Negro] (Callinectes toxotes) ............................................................................................. 456
Freshwater Crab [Cangrejo de Agua Dulce] (Hypollobocera) ............................................................ 457
Crab [Cangrejito] (Cycloxanthops sexdecimdentatus) ........................................................................... 457
Painted Ghost Crab [Cangrejo Carretero] ([Ocypode?] gaudicgaudii) .......................................... 457
River crab [Cangrejo de Rio] (Hypollobocera sp.) ................................................................................... 457
River crab [Cangrejo de Río] (Procambarus clarkii) ................................................................................ 458
Shrimp [Camarones] (Cryphiops caementarius) ....................................................................................... 458
Insects: entomophagy .......................................................................................................................................... 458
Humans: Anthropophagy or Cannibalism .................................................................................................. 460
Earth and Clays: Geophagy. Pre-Hispanic Chemical Cuisine .............................................................. 462
Salt ..................................................................................................................................................................................464
Breast Milk .................................................................................................................................................................. 465
FARMING, FOOD PRESERVATION, AND STORAGE TECHNIQUES ............................................... 467
Pre-Hispanic Agriculture ...................................................................................................................................... 467
Water Sourcing ........................................................................................................................................................ 468
Pre-Hispanic Irrigation Canals ........................................................................................................................... 469
Raised Field Systems (Waru-Waru and Ridges) ........................................................................................ 470
Reservoirs in the Central Highlands ................................................................................................................ 473
Tuber, Grain, and Meat Preservation Techniques ...................................................................................... 474
CHAPTER 3: THE PRE-HISPANIC DIET FROM
THE STANDPOINT OF MODERN SCIENCE .................................................................... 481
THE PRE-HISPANIC DIET OF PERU THROUGH CARBON AND NITROGEN
ISOTOPES AND COPROLITHS (EXCREMENT) ............................................................................................... 483
19
 14,000 years of food in Peru

FROM HEARTH TO OVEN: PRE-HISPANIC PERUVIAN CUISINE ..................................................... 495

Firewood and Mortars .......................................................................................................................................... 495

PRE-HISPANIC CUISINE AND CULINARY TRADITIONS:

THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND ETHNOGRAPHIC DATA ..................................................................... 499
The Food and Cuisine of the oldest inhabitants of Peru .................................................................... 499
Reconstructing the Menu: Case Studies in Pre-Hispanic Peru .......................................................... 504 FIGURES
Andean Food in Ethnography and Ethnohistory ...................................................................................... 513
Dinnerware and Culinary Modes ...................................................................................................................... 514
Pachamanca, Stew, and Toasted Food .......................................................................................................... 522 Figure 1. Common Dining Area in the Peruvian Andes. Current ethnographical 45
Chicha and Food: Feasts in pre-Hispanic Peru .......................................................................................... 526 records are crucial in reconstructing the Precolumbian diet traditions (courtesy
of Eric Chávez).
THE NUTRITIONAL BALANCE .......................................................................................................................... 535
Vitamins ........................................................................................................................................................................ 535 Figure 2. Achira remains dating to 2914-2287 B.C. (upper right) and from Pampa de 89
Minerals ........................................................................................................................................................................ 537 Llamas, Lower portion of the Casma Valley (courtesy of Donald Ugent).
Protein and Fatty Acids .......................................................................................................................................... 541
Figure 3. Sweet potato remains found in Pampa de Llamas-Moxeque (Casma 99
DIET-RELATED DISEASES .................................................................................................................................... 543 Valley) dating to 2088-1243 B.C. (both in the upper and one on bottom right).
Tuberculosis, parasites, infections, and malnutrition ............................................................................ 544 Sweet potato macroremains of Huaynuná (bottom left), Casma, dating to
Anaemia, Caries, and Pellagra ............................................................................................................................. 549 2914-2287 B.C. indeed the oldest sweet potato found ever in Peru (courtesy
Parasites, Agents of Malnutrition .................................................................................................................... 555 of Donald Ugent).
Pre-Hispanic Scurvy ................................................................................................................................................ 557
Figure 4. Manioc representation. Mochica ceramic, ca. A.D. 400, Northern Coast, 115
CONCLUDING REMARKS .................................................................................................................................. 559 Peru (Larco Museum. Lima-Peru).

BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................................................ 591 Figure 5. Jiquima found in scientific excavations in Cahuachi (Nasca) dating to 125
A.D. 200 (courtesy of Maria Grazia Piaecnza, Luigi Piacenza –late- and Carolina
Orsini).

Figure 6. Potato archaeobotanical remains from Chilca (upper), possibly dating 139
to 7000 B.C. and Pampa de Llamas-Moxeque, Casma, (lower) ca. 2000-1250
B.C. (courtesy of Donald Ugent).

Figure 7. Corn archaeological remains of Huaca Prieta and Paredones, La Libertad, 169
dating to ca. 5200 B.C. (courtesy of Proceedings of National Academy of
Sciences).

Figure 8. Corn remains in association with pepper (Capsicum sp) and potato 174
(Solanum tuberosum) found in the archaeological site of Casa Vieja, Nasca
Culture dating to A.D. 200-400 (courtesy of José Roque).

Figure 9. Purple corn remains found in Cahuachi, the Nasca capital dating to ca. 175
A.D. 100-400 (courtesy of Maria Grazia Piacenza, Luigi Piacenza and Carolina
Orsini)

21
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

Figure 10. Corn cob, virtually completed preserved in Pedregal, Jequetepeque 176
Valley, Chimu Culture dating to A.D.1000-1470 (courtesy of Robyn Cutright).

Figure 11. Copper “sonajera” composed by beads representing peanuts, Mochica 183
Culture A.D. 100-800 (Museo Larco. Lima-Perú).

Figure 12. Cerámica representando a pacay o guaba (Cultura Moche, ca. A.D. 400 209 DIAGRAMS
(Larco Museum. Lima-Perú).

Figure 13. Macrobotanical algarrobo remains found in the site of Samaca (ca. A.D. 218 Diagram 1.
500-900) (courtesy of David Beresford-Jones). Feeding patterns based on tubers, rizomes, cereals and legumes in Precolumbian Peru. 560

Figure 14. Mochica pottery representing soursoap -guanábana- dating to A.D. 227 Diagram 2.
400 (Larco Museum. Lima-Perú) Feeding patterns based on fruits in Prehispanic Peru. 575

Figure 15. Avocado representation (Chimu-Inca pottery) (Larco Museum. Lima- 256 Diagram 3.
Peru). Feeding patterns based on animals in Prehispanic Peru. 579

Figure 16. Llama astragalus bone with cutting traces recovered from scientific 303 Diagram 4.
excavations in Pedregal (Chimu Culture, Jequetepeque Valley), dating to A.D. Feeding patterns based on birds in Precolumbian Peru. 582
1000-1460 (courtesy of Robyn Cutright).
Diagram 5.
Figure 17. Dog bone remains with cutting scars interpreted as butchery activity 325 Feeding patterns based on fishes in Precolumbian Peru 584
posible for human food. Pedregal, Jequetepeque Valley, Chimu Culture, ca.
A.D. 1000-1460 (courtesy of Robyn Cutright). Diagram 6.
Feeding patterns based on mollusks and crustacean in Precolumbian Peru 587
Figure 18. Bone cormorán-bird remains found in scientific excavations in 334
Quebrada Tacahuay (Tacna) dating to ca. 10000 B.C. Pay attention to the upper
part showing cutting traces revealing removing flesh to obtain food (courtesy
of Susan DeFrance). MAPS
Figure 19. Shrimp representación in pottery. Chancay Culture, Central Coast of 459
Peru, dating to ca. A.D. 1000-1460 (courtesy of Guido del Castillo, Andrés del Map 1.
Castillo, Museum, picture of Lida Casas). Archaeological sites where food remains were found in Peru mentioned in the book 67

22 23
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The ambitious purpose of this book in compiling and assessing the main finds of research
in respect of ancient Peruvian food would not have been possible without the help and
cooperation on a number of colleagues who were kind to me during my work by means of
scientific comments, approaching to me papers that were not easy to find, but also pictures,
drawings and all graphic stuff to ilustrate my book.

First of all, I would like to acknowledge the permanent support and sponsorship to my research
of my dear colleague Dr. Johan Leuridan, Dean of the Faculty of Communication Sciences,
Tourism and Psicology of the University of San Martin de Porres. Without his support the
book that you have in your hands, dear reader, would not be a fact. Thank you dear Johan.

Two close colleagues of mine who enthousiast contributed with my Project were Duccio
Bonavia (Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia) and Donald Ugent (Plant Biology
Department, Southern Illinois University Carbondale), an archaeologist and a botanist, what a
perfect combitation to my book. Duccio, my tutor and friend, helped me in finding difficult
bibliography and providing me with his precious comments all the time. He was a splendid
human being, and researcher who teached my for over 20 years not only science but ethic.

Sursum et cordam Duccio! Don followed my manuscript in preparation and were in contact
with me to assess my data and assessments as well to provide me his illustrations of most
of his important findings on the Central Coast of Peru. Duccio and Don passed away. Both
colleagues told me more tan once, they wanted to read my book. They are not more on our
earth but surely in our heart. I dedicated my book to these dears colleagues and friends.

Many other colleagues helped with data, graphics, personal communications, radiocarbon
data, comments and further assisstance. I should mention here, Richard Burger (University
of Yale), Paula Reimer (University of Belfast, Ireland), Juan Yataco (Museum of Archaeology,
University San Marcos, Lima),), José Roque (Museum of Natural History, University San Marcos,
Lima), Vaughn Bryant (Texas A&M University), Rafael Vega (Pontifical Catholic University
of Peru, Lima), Karl Reinhard (Environmental Archaeology and Forensic Science, School of
Natural Resources, University of Nebraska), Greg Lockard (University of New Mexico), Claudia
Grimaldo (University of Manchester, UK), Alden Yepez (Pontifical Catholic University of
Ecuador), Robyn Cutright (Department of Anthropology, Centre College, Kentucky), Hugo
Ikehara (Department of Archaeology, University of Pittsburgh), Koichiro Shibata (Department

25
Elmo Leon
of Humanities, University of Yamagata, Japan), Douglas Price (Department of Archaeology,
University of Wisconsin-Madison), Anne Katzenberg (Department of Archaeology, University
of Calgary), Jocely Williams (Department of Anthropology, University of Trent, Canada),
Eve Emshwiller (Department Botany de University Wisconsin-Madison), Amy McPherson
(Botanical Society of America), Kat Rodenhizer and Diane Sullenberger (Proceedings of
National Academy of Sciences), Carolina Orsini in representation of the late Luigi Piacenza
(Conservatore delle Raccolte Extraeuropee Raccolte Artistiche Castello Sforzesco), Christian
Isendahl (Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, University Uppsala, Sweden), Joyce
Marcus and Katherine Clahassey (Museum of Anthropology if the University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor), Susan deFrance (Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville), Tom
D. Dillehay (Department of Anthropology, University of Vanderbilt), Heather McInnis (DePaul
University) and José Antonio Huldtwacker (Research Center, San Lorenzo Island, Lima).
I owe a special thank to my dear colleague, David Beresford-Jones (University of Cambridge,
UK) not only for his help in providing data and comments on ethnobotanic but also for his
kind help in correcting this english versión of the acknowledgments and foreword of this
book.
My last and deepest thank goes to my late and very dear wife, Nancy Chavez Cornejo and my
9 years old boy, Adriano Leon Chavez. While working Adriano asked me “dad, tell me, what
was the toothbrush of the Incas? ….and my wife, my dear wife who was alive and so happy
in the presentation of this book in its Spanish versión, by October 2013, now, unfortunately
passed away even at her 47 years old after a cáncer in bad hands of supposed “cáncer healers”.
Nancy was my permanent support and every single page of this book undergone her review…
even the title is an invention of Nancy…I miss you so much Darling and hope to join you after
this short life….you are my angel up in heaven.
26
FOREWORD
Six years ago, Robyn Cutright, in her dissertation (2009) about food and foodways within the
context of the Chimu Culture (ca. AD 1100-1460) in ancient Peru, she stated that to eat and cook
is the main human signature because they are cultural behaviors that isolate us from animals.
Indeed food implies to join or to isolate people, to celebrate or to mourn, or just as a link for
any family when dinning on a table where all sit around it to share experiences and dialogues
after the workday not only in modern times but also from the very begin of the human
prehistory. In this way we need to understand that each foodway and its implicances among
us as humans is a series of a microcosmos of interactions that are subject os scope os a numer
of anthropologists and other scientists focusing on food and its implications. A foodway can
be a personal but also a common experience. Once foodway is a companion of any culture
it becomes a memory for each of its components, we as human beings. John Holzman (2006)
calls it as “foodway legacy”.
This legacy is exactly what we as peruvians mean as peruvian gastronomy with roots in our
common ancestors some millenia ago. In my case, my family coming from the Northern Coast
of Peru. I remember the meals mixture when my grandma, Dorila was cooking a stew of potatos
and meat while my mother, Gloria, preparing a cebiche. The sweet potatoes simply putted
at side of the hearth after a few minutes became candy-like sweet…actually a “bocatto de
cardinale”…Those memories when one was a child are virtually “frappant”. And now in the case
of my wife Nancy, unfortunately passed away one moth ago, tasting the delicious cuisine of
Camana from the southern coast, where soup of shrimpfs and rocoto relleno (filled pepper)
are the kings of the table….unforgettable tastes… This is what I call megadiversity reflected on
the dayly meal on the table…this is the meaning of Peru.
I do believe that there are many things to be reoriented in our country, espcially when talking
about politicians, but there must be no doubt that who as we, bornt in Peru were blessed for
having enjoyed our childhood in Peru the land of the thounsand culinary flavors.
The book that you have in your hands, dear reader pursuits to provide you some passages
of the Peruvian ancient food and fooways history. Its chronology is restricted from the very
begin of the human arrival in the Andes until 1532 when Spaniards conquered our lands, that
mean our most ancestral and native food and cuisine. It contains a compilation of 326 foods
based on scientific archaeological (archaeobotanical and zooarchaeological peer reviewed
27
Elmo Leon

reports). The list is arranged after the taxa: botanical, zoological and mineral remains and
complemented by some efforts in reconstructing some foodways and cuisine in ancient
Andes. We tryied to include taxonomical, linguistic, ethnographical, bromatological, genetic
and archaeological data for each for each taxón or species. Time data are already converted
from radiocarbon into calendar years, for the first time to provide the reader a real time frame
of the origin of each food from the Andes. We believe these data are part of the fundament
or background for our modern culinary tradition.

The book addresses both Peruvian and international readers who like for instance corn or
potatoes (even known as pop-corn or french pommes, respectevly) to let them know that
these are ancestral Andean roots. It invites the reader to explore the native food world our
the Peruvian ancestors, who further after 14 millenia became the Incas…

Chapter 1

AN INTRODUCTION TO
PALAEODIET AND SOURCES

28
THE ORIGINS OF THE HUMAN DIET

The Role of Cooking in Human Evolution

It is a fact that cooking is in fashion, even in science. We need just mention two excellent
books, Richard Wrangham’s Catching Fire. How Cooking Made Us Human (2009), and Frances
Burton’s The Spark that Ignited Human Evolution (2009). Both books put the spotlight on
the significance “cooking food” has in our evolution, i.e. the role cooking has had in the very
phenomenon of our transformation into human beings.

Under the slogan of cooking made us human, Wrangham explores the history of cooking
and its role in the very process of human evolution. For Wrangham, the crucial point here
is not that fire provided light, but that its heat allowed the first groups of hominids (pre-
sapiens) to cook their food and in many cases make it digestible, thus ensuring subsistence
in such ancient times. From this standpoint it is clear that cooking has had a primordial
significance since the dawn of humanity.

Wrangham likewise believes that cooked food catalysed such basic cultural and biological
changes as the opposing thumb, bipedalism, and even language and exchange. Experiments
in primatology have shown that once a gorilla has learned to eat cooked food it prefers
it to raw food. So at first the culinary art was not just an essential part of the process of
humanisation; it probably also gave rise, in one way or another, to the process that has
taken us to the twenty first century.

In the second book, Burton points out the determinant role of fire in evolution by reducing
the level of melatonin (of an animal nature) in human beings. Burton likewise claims that
cooking food had the effect of increasing the energy that can be obtained from it.

It is thus clear that intentionally started fires (which according to recent scientific research
it is now clear took place about one million years ago) provided not just the spark that
allowed humanity to have light at night and shelter from the cold thanks to the heat it
generated; it also was the element that allowed food to be cooked, and this ultimately led
to the state of humanisation par excellence. We thus have an evident pairing that can be
expressed with the formula “cooking = humanisation.”

31
Elmo Leon
The Origins of Cooking
But how long has cooking existed in the world? Its origins are lost in time and even extend
to other pre-human species. Recent discoveries indicate that the Homo erectus from
Zhoukoudian, in China, was already eating toasted hackberry (a type of berry) seeds some
400 thousand years ago (Larsen 2000: 14) when Homo sapiens, our current species, had not
yet appeared. Going back to Burton, what enabled a better development of the brain and the
human species was precisely the energy raised by this primordial cuisine.
Even so, the evolutionary impact of the discovery of cooking was not unique in this context;
socialisation also had an impact, so cooking food also brings about socialisation. Wrangham
says that cooking allowed not only the development of human beings but also made them
more social because cooking can do by one person, groups or even families. It follows that
cooking food is not just a physical act; it also had a crucial role in the development of human
history and its basic principle: social being and family.
With this principle in mind, it is clear that cooked food does not just humanise; it also
socialises when cooking takes place in a group, the results are shared, and what happened
throughout the day is perhaps retold.
Both aspects of food preparation—evolution and socialisation—are instrumentalised
whenever human beings introduce food preparation techniques, and even food storage
procedures. In this way we have inventions such as dehydration, fermentation, parboiling, the
invention of seasoning and dressings, in short the development of food technologies that
have enriched prehistoric cuisine since its origins (Wollstonecroft 2011).
We are now concerned with one of the major consequences of food preparation, and even
more so in our environment—food as a cultural characteristic. Let us briefly explore this
concept and insert it in Peru.
Peruvian Food: A Taste of Childhood and Family
A key book, The Prehistory of Food, edited by Chris Gosden and Jon Hather, is a sort of synthesis
of food in the human past that appeared over a decade ago. Here Gosden (2005) claims that
food is not just essential for survival; besides, “it leads to culture” through it, and thus concludes
there are two main issues in prehistoric feeding. The first issue is of a methodological nature
and emphasises the importance plants have in cultural development. In order to approach the
plant/human being relation, one must be familiar with such fields as genetics, biochemistry, and
bromatology. This maxim proved enlightening for the present writer, so that this line of holistic
work inspired this book. The second issue raised by Gosden stresses the fact that a key point
that revolutionised history was the domestication of plants and animals, which led to a new
communication system, social reorganisation, and never-before-seen symbolic values in human
beings. This is precisely an area that has not been fully explored in the Andes.
32
14,000 years of food in Peru
Food is thus intrinsically a part of human beings, and all the more so in the case of Peruvians,
both because of the wide range of resources as well as because of the subjects just mentioned:
the family, society, our development since childhood, when tastes and memories are set in
our brain and accompany us until the moment we die.
This is so much so that it can certainly be said that no Peruvian can avoid feeling happy when
he/she is about to taste a traditional dish, be it olluquito con charqui, a nice arroz con pollo,
a pachamanca or even our fusion or flagship dish, Peruvian cebiche, and not the Mexican or
Ecuadorian varieties, even though there are now some similarities with the latter in the far
north of Peru.
It turns out that in the Andes—and quite possibly in other regions that correspond to large
civilisations like Persian, Hindi, Roman or Mexican civilisations—food is and has always
been special due to the ecological variety of the resources and the unique combinations of
condiments, which produced a wide range of flavours for our palate.
Three factors make an autochthonous food—in this case Andean cuisine—unique, a rich and
varied ecology; the use given to condiments in the Central Andes; and finally, the people
themselves of this region and their ‘animistic’ perception that makes food “live.”
We can illustrate the ecological wealth of Peru by simply drawing a line across the Central
Andes and checking the great variety of ecological tiers that extend from the littoral and
the riches of the Peruvian sea, across the Andes and down to the Amazon forest, which
abounds in tropical products. An environmental wealth is thus translated into a wealth
of resources.
To this diversity we must add seasoning and condiments. And although nowadays we clearly
prefer—at last in urban areas—western and not Andean seasoning, even so we have for
instance the chili pepper, the sine qua non condiment in Peru which is essential in almost all
dishes of an Andean style.
But without the third factor there would be no Andean food; we mean the animistic
perception, i.e. the fact that food comes alive. This vision is present since the time of the
pre-Hispanic feasts celebrated within the context of ritual or funerary ceremonies that even
today endure in the patronal festivals in Lima. And food is exalted when we ask: will you add
some chili pepper? Huacatay? Rice? Food is thus an extension of human beings—one more
relative on the table, so to speak...
The living food even has a connection with the world of the dead, precisely because these also
were not literally “dead for our Andean ancestors. This is why the cemeteries in contemporary
Lima become festive sites whenever a chanfainita is eaten accompanied by huainos and
trumpets in front of the tomb of a missing relative. Death does not mean sorrow but joy,
because the dearest beloved who has departed has not really done so.
33
Elmo Leon
This is the ‘living” pre-Hispanic Peru in which food was also alive... The notion of ‘living food’
has endured throughout millennia, and this is verified most intensely by Peruvians who have
lived outside our country. In fact, every time we travel abroad for a long time, my wife Nancy
tells me the following: “Peruvian food is the table, and hence the family, the feelings that have
appeared since our childhood and which we miss when we are adults, living somewhere that
is not our place of origin.”
Here it is worth recalling that the living nature of food has ancestral origins. Arturo Jiménez
Borja made some notes in this regard in a fascinating study published in 1953. For instance,
Jiménez Borja recounts some deeply-rooted Andean stories that tell of maize cobs that have
a life cycle as if they were “human maize,” and which even have “feelings.” Anyone who has
carefully observed Moche ceramics, where lima beans, maize and peanuts “turn into human
beings,” will evidently find that these stories must truly be the result of myths and legends
that lie at the very centre of Andean civilisation.
The animism of Peruvian food not only has connotations in the past; it also appears in our
intrinsic relation with our family, our loved ones with whom we have shared it since childhood.
In this regard we must recall its social nature as was argued above. It so happens that Peruvian
food must be included in what Locher et al. (2005) call comfort food—the sort of need we
have as adults of eating, in moments of stress, the dishes we had as children that evoke
pleasant memories. This type of food is often greasy, sweet or full of carbohydrates, and is a
“compensation” for the unpleasant moments in life.
The phenomenon of food-family is definitely universal. A good Neapolitan friend of mine
told me a while ago that one can eat thousands of good pizzas but none like in Naples, very
rarely in restaurants and there is nothing like “home,” at the hands of a mother who puts her
passion in her cooking. He concluded: “A good pizza is delicious, but without passion it is
nothing.”
Pizzas, curries, ajíes and chiles are all part of cultures that shone in the past and are now
major parts of universal legacies. This is why successive generations in these cultures
have experienced these tastes since childhood. It is as children then, so say the experts
in gastronomy, that our palates become sensitised and get used to the diversity of the
traditional table.
In Peru his tradition possibly goes back at least to the Inca Empire, as was shown by Turner
et al. (2010) in their study of stable nitrogen and carbon isotopes in the teeth of the humans
buried in Machu Picchu, our famed national park. Turner and is colleagues found that most
of the people buried here had almost not changed their food throughout their lifetime. It
follows that we always prefer the same foods and perhaps we always liked our seasoning
and our Andean resources. These have endured in one way or another up to the present day
albeit often combined with Western edible resources that include for instance olive oil, a
plant that was domesticated in the Eastern Mediterranean six thousand years ago, in Syria
and Palestine.
34
14,000 years of food in Peru
International NovoAndina Cuisine and Foreign Cuisine in Peru
There is one more point here. This living nature is not just connected with society; it is also
highly dynamic and exchanges characteristics with foods or cuisines both inside and outside
Peru. The so-called NovoAndina cuisine is an interesting phenomenon in this regard that has
materialised this type of mixture. In this concept, a traditional Peruvian dish is prepared that
combines various autochthonous Andean products and explores the inclusion of foreign
products or recipes.
I believe this can be exemplified with the nature of Christmas in Lima in the 1970s, when a
roasted turkey was served with applesauce, and people drank hot chocolate in the midst of
summer in this part of the world. Even today the Christmas table comprises not just food
from different places—turkey for instance, whose origin is claimed both by Mesoamerica and
Arizona, and which is eaten especially in Thanksgiving in North America; or chocolate, which
actually is a European invention adding vanilla and sugar to cacao, which the Aztecs mixed
with maize and chili pepper—it also includes modern and autochthonous variations like sweet
potato purée, which can be bought ... Ready-to-eat in the supermarkets in Lima. Culinary
traditions are thus highly dynamic, even in such commemorative occasions as Christmas...
It so happens that flavours can be explored to the utmost and some of them are widely
accepted. Whilst in Mexico I saw people enjoy having chocolate bars with chili. In fact,
whereas cacao (Theobroma cacao) originated in the Amazon and even the Upper Orinoco,
it was domesticated in Mesoamerica (at least since the Olmec, ca. 1000 B.C.); it was then
turned into chocolate and became a universal product because it is desired in tables all
around the world.
The same holds for coffee, which originated in Ethiopia and was taken by the Arabs to Yemen
across the Red Sea, and was used as a beverage since at least the sixteenth century; the award-
winning, Puneño Tunki coffee of Peru had its origins here. Or look at wine, which goes back
about 7500 years to a vessel in a site called Hajji Firuz in the Zagros Mountains, in northern
Iran; wine has come a long way from Iran to Peru through thousands of years. Had it not been
so there would be no Tacama, no Ocucaje nor a Santiago Queirolo, nor the grape processing
of another kind that gave rise to our Pisco, the purest and most aromatic version of which is
represented by a good Mosto Verde.
Likewise, when enjoying a good beer we should remember that the oldest evidence of this
beverage come from the remains found at Godin Tepe (Iran), dated to around 3500 B.C. (Miller
and Wetterstrom 1999). At that time beer was an ideal way in which to ingest carbohydrates
and vitamins.
When we have a refreshing glass of Coca Cola the name recalls our coca leaves, because this
beverage is simply the result of mixing Andean coca with kola (an African nut that also has
an energising effect), but coca was already celebrated before this. This is proven by the fact
that the pharmacologist John Pemberton patented a combination of coca with wine (Coca
35
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

Wine or Vin Mariani in the United States) since at least 1863 that would finally be known as
Vin Français Cola, Pope Leo XIII, who allowed his image to be used in publicity and awarded
this beverage a medal.
In the same way, when savouring “our” rice, the constant accompaniment of Peruvian dishes,
we should remember that it clearly comes from one of the two centres of domestication of
this cereal, i.e. China and India, some nine thousand years ago...
Tourism, and Psychology—we considered the possibility of embarking on a new project that
would expand the data included therein on the type of food eaten by Peru’s most ancient
populations. I began preparing the outline of this book whilst engaged in the last academic
position I held in the University of Bonn, Germany, in 2008. The following year I proposed this
plan to Father Leuridan and was given the go-ahead. With these brief lines I would now like to
invite the reader to explore the world of the most ancient pre-Hispanic food, and the culinary
adventure of fourteen thousand years of Peruvian history.

The Peruvian cuisine is thus the result of an impressive combination of migrations and cultural
contributions made by various parts of the world. It is perhaps not as well-known and tasted in
the realm of international cuisine, but for Peruvians its roots go back thousands of years. This fact
is precisely what gave rise to this book. It tries to delve into our roots through an examination of
food in the pre-Hispanic period, which is precisely when the main characteristics of our Andean
peoples appeared and were established some thousands of years ago. If we go back in such
an ancient history we will fully know at least some parts of it that will sketch these fourteen
thousand years of culinary in the Central Andes, that is to say, Peru.

In this context it is worth bearing in mind the legacy left by some of our ancestors, who were
precisely in charge of domesticating maize, the potato and quinoa, as well as many other high-
quality alimentary resources they bequeathed to the world. This is a good reason to feel pride.

It is a well-known fact that the potato not only saved some North European populations from
hunger in the nineteenth century, and that the European industrialisation would not have
been possible without its introduction (Kuester 1999: 1230). What it is regrettable is that we
do not know of similar cases in the context of pre-Hispanic Peru; speculating that this tuber
also saved Andean populations from hunger in that period is no absurd speculation. This is a
story that is yet to be written.

Another element that has yet to be assessed is whether it was ideal or not in the period that
interests us. Many myths have spread on whether the Andean population was healthy or
not. This book also explores this aspect in light of the new scientific information available.
No attempt will however be made to generalise, because more time and energy should be
invested in projects on food-derived palaeopathology.

Even so, some scientific studies apparently evince a decline in the quality of life at the time
of the Spanish conquest and even before, when the elites had access to better and bigger
food resources. For instance Klaus and Tam (2010) show that periodontal diseases and plaque
increased profusely amongst the native population of Lambayeque, on the North Coast of
Peru, after the Spanish invasion. A similar decline in the health of Ecuadorian and North
American aboriginal populations has also been shown.

It was in these circumstances that this book arose. Whilst working in Orígenes humanos en los
Andes del Perú (Human Origins in the Peruvian Andes), my first book—which also appeared
thanks to Father Johan Leuridan, the dean of the Faculty of Communications Sciences,

36 37
COLLECTING SOURCES ON
THE PERUVIAN PALAEODIET

Structure and Subject Matter of this Book

In the twenty first century, preparing a book on Peruvian pre-Hispanic food is no easy feat,
particularly if our starting premise is that nowadays there are several highly developed
sciences that make a permanent contribution to archaeology in the task of reconstructing
the past. And although today science develops along specialised lines, it tries to be holistic
when balancing the data in terms of a more objective assessment of the facts.

At first we based ourselves on the classic book by the great Hans Horkheimer (1960)
on the feeding modes in pre-Hispanic Peru, which is over half a century old, but we
soon realised two things. First, we realised that we would never be able to surpass
Horkheimer because he did not just review the archaeological evidence of food remains
found in various sites at the time of publication, he also made a balance of subjects
relating with food, from bromatology to farming. Second, on examining our databank
it was immediately clear that this would be impossible in just one volume, because the
sheer volume of the information amassed in more than fifty years is such that revising
Horkheimer’s masterpiece would require a much bigger book, and this despite the fact
that such a task is of the utmost importance nowadays. This is not the goal here and
we have focused instead on amassing the evidence in order to examine it. So from this
standpoint, this book should be considered incomplete.

Another handicap was the result of the readings made and the information available. In
many cases our colleagues only include lists of plant, animal or mineral remains but without
documenting as they should the contexts these remains were found in. In fact a crucial
characteristic required to know whether a given food was cooked or processed before its
consumption is that it exhibit traces of combustion such as charcoal or ashes, and yet in most
cases this is not noted. Many of these remains suggest instead that they were taken to these
sites but not necessarily eaten or at least prepared before their consumption; however, it can
evidently be inferred that in some cases the food was taken to these sites in order to be eaten
later. Even so, we cannot fully rule out the possibility that these actually are offerings. Here
only the taxa were included, whilst we await future research that clears up this issue.

39
Elmo Leon
The second chapter, which takes up most of the book, includes the main information on
Peruvian pre-Hispanic food. But once the taxa have been established, what information should
be included in each of them?
In order to answer this question we had to grapple with a much more difficult one—who
is this book meant for?—which actually is the starting point. We decided to approach this
subject from a strictly scientific perspective, and it was prepared in this way because we
wanted to give it solid foundations. This does not mean that it cannot be written intelligibly
with the laymen in mind, and a brief glossary is included at the end of the text. Readers who
do not find a given word in a conventional dictionary should use it because in a holistic essay
like the present one such technical terms cannot be avoided.
On the other hand, although the book is scientific in nature, it is meant for anyone who
is interested in this subject, even students finishing school and university undergraduates
because, trite though it may sound, they definitely are the very foundations of Peru. But it
is also meant for scientists in all areas who are interested in the subject of autochthonous
food, who I imagine includes bromatologists, nutritionists, physicians, parasitologists,
botanists, zoologists, anthropologists, sociologists, and archaeologists. Given the culinary
moment Peru is undeniably living, this book will prove especially useful for chefs, cooks, and
people dedicated to gastronomy, and even hotels, when informing tourists of the origin of
the items included in Peruvian dishes. They are the best spokespeople for our culinary past.
With the updated, albeit incomplete information due to the huge volume of data that had
to be reviewed, they can now disseminate the nature and history of Peru’s autochthonous
foods, as well as answering frequent questions made by foreign diners like: what is the
origin of potatoes? Since when are they eaten? If an English translation of this book were
eventually possible, the dissemination of the gastronomic potential of Peru would expand
in omnino globus.
Starting from the premise that this book is not exclusively meant for archaeologists but for
all the interested public, it was structured in terms of reproducing not “pre-Hispanic food in
archaeology,” but “the archaeology or history of each food.” This presentation will facilitate
the access to and the search for information, so the text is organised not by periods but by taxa
or by subjects related to feeding. An archaeological review that follows the chronology takes
place once a taxa or species has been established, i.e. the oldest evidence comes first and
then moves onward up to the Inca period, the endpoint of this study. The book is therefore
structured by foods and not by periods. In this way the information can be found in regard
to the subject sought, be it plant, animal or mineral, depending on the interest of the reader.
Having established this, and starting from the taxa-based information centre, the main goal
evidently was to review the archaeological discovery of plants, animals, and minerals that
were presumably eaten by pre-Hispanic populations. Even so, the information would remain
incomplete without a more holistic framework, which is the base idea of this book. As a
result every possible effort was made to add brief linguistic, biological, bromatological,
ethnographic and genetic information on each species whenever it was available.
40
14,000 years of food in Peru
The ethnohistorical notions of plants, animals and minerals consumed in pre-Hispanic Peru
have been mostly left aside because this type of literature abounds; in some cases it is of great
quality and let us delve into subjects such as the food of the Inca or of previous populations.
The reader should therefore excuse the absence of the colonial chronicles. It should however
be noted that whenever we had to resort to the chronicles, we did not always look up the
primary sources, which is a not too reliable procedure. In this context it is therefore worth
repeating that this is not a book on ethnohistory. Should the reader be interested in exploring
the reference data on pre-Hispanic nutrition he/she should consult the relevant primary
sources, be they Bernabé Cobo, José de Acosta, and others.
As for the sources, there is one fact that must not be ignored. We have had enough time
to explore specialised journals on bromatology, taxonomy, and genetics and came to the
sad realisation that Andean resources are minimally represented. As regards plants, there
are references to the potato, maize, maca, quinoa and occasionally to mashua, but the large
range of edible plants in pre-Hispanic Peru are almost completely ignored by the firms
specialised in food engineering. Luis Valcárcel (1948: 25) was right some sixty five years ago
when he pointed out that at the time there were no major studies on the bromatology of
Peru’s Andean farming products.
Scientific journals like Food Chemistry have included only scant international studies of
Andean plants. In fact, the last major biochemical review dates to 1989 (Gross et al.), when
the composition of seven traditional Andean plants for human consumption was assessed,
and it was concluded that oca, quinoa, tarwi, olluco, mashua, cañihua, and kiwicha contain
excellent proteins and carbohydrates that do not require replacement in the Andes. This is
an interesting starting point four our work. We hope that this essay will not just illustrate the
antiquity and the characteristics of Peru’s pre-Hispanic food, but will also arouse the interest
of local and international consortiums devoted to the alimentary industry. As we shall see in
the following pages, the potential is impressive.
On the other hand, a careful reading of the sources seems to document the plural access
to, and the consumption of, all types of resources by the various sectors in society since
the Terminal Pleistocene, some thirteen thousand years ago. We should however bear in
mind that this access probably became differentiated throughout time with the rise of
social hierarchies. These differences worsened at the beginning of our era. The lesson is
thus that if some eight thousand years ago anchovies were eaten at will, at present the
price of this resource—which is so important because of its nutritional value—has to be
regulated in terms of making it available on the family table, as was long the case in the
periods under study here. Passing this type of law, promoting consumption and developing
large-scale projects falls upon the Executive and particularly Congress, because it is absurd
that a country with such abundant maritime riches has at the same time such high levels of
malnutrition. Something has certainly gone wrong.
The second chapter is specifically designed for simplified consultation. All the reader
needs do is looking up the desired species in the index and go to the corresponding page,
41
Elmo Leon
where several references for the species as well as archaeological data, including coprolites
(ancient faecal remains) and others. The section on the taxonomic list is the most broad-
ranging one.
This core chapter is accompanied by two chapters. The first chapter is an introduction that
presents the methods of analysis and information research in regard to pre-Hispanic food. The
third chapter supplements the taxonomy with a series of ‘new’ information on pre-Hispanic
food derived from specialised analyses in physics, chemistry and other areas where data can
be obtained (stable isotopes, coproliths, and so on). Two subchapters, one on food-derived
palaeopathologies and another one on the bromatological balance of alimentary resources
come before the conclusions.
Now let us see the case of a student interested in, say, the potato. Once the corresponding
section has been found in chapter 2, the student will find the common name of this scientific,
its scientific label and a brief taxonomic review should it be required. If the information is
available, the section then includes biochemical information on its nutritional value, its pre-
Hispanic and contemporary distribution, genetic studies and, more importantly, the history
of this species in Peru from its origins to the Inca period. The radiocarbon dates of these
finds have been calibrated—i.e. turned into calendar years—especially the most ancient ones,
whilst those in our era have not always been calibrated as the differences are not so large in
comparison with the oldest ones.
The Available Sources
This book has tried to compile the available sources that include some type of documentation
on feeding in pre-Hispanic Peru, but keeping ethnohistorical sources strictly as a reference.
We will now review the sources used, with some preliminary considerations.
Pre-Hispanic vs. Modern Peru
A first issue is delimiting the information for Peru itself. Let us explore this briefly.
A book on pre-Hispanic food in Peru is constrained by an obvious fact—contemporary
borderlines do not correspond to past ones. We must therefore acknowledge right from the
beginning that this study is incomplete is we bear in mind modern borders. We know for a
fact that a large part of the Central Andes were occupied but not as Peru, and it initially was
instead a disjointed area divided into tribal groups. Several confederations later appeared,
which apparently became fused in at least three moments: a) the period archaeologists call
the Early Horizon, i.e. the spread of the Chavín belief system during the first millennium B.C.;
b) the Wari Empire, from ca. A.D. 650 to A.D.1000; c) the Late Horizon, from the fifteenth
to the sixteenth centuries (some recent studies are suggesting it probably began in the late
thirteenth century).
42
14,000 years of food in Peru
Of these expansion projects, the Inca was the most ambitious one, apparently moved by political
and economic interests posing under the label of religious paraphernalia. If this book had to cover
the Inca diet we would have to go far beyond its title, as we would have to include vast areas
once occupied by the Inca in north-western Argentina, northern Chile, a large part of Bolivia and
Ecuador, and even Colombia. Just listing these areas rules out a colossal task that would require
entire volumes devoted to these places. This book is thus limited to Peru, i.e. to what now lies
inside its frontiers. And since organic remains like pre-Hispanic food is only preserved in dry coastal
areas, remains of this kind are scant. We thus face a paradox, for the physical (nor ethnohistorical)
information on pre-Hispanic food in Peru is almost non-existent due to environmental conditions,
particularly the pH of highland soils, precipitations, and other factors.
Let us examine now the internal divisions of what is nowadays known as Peru. Although in pre-
Hispanic times Peru was not divided into departments, an administrative division the French
model later imposed on it—and more recently the (flawed) ‘regions’—archaeology clearly
shows the presence of territorial demarcations of cultural groups, some quite large like the
Mochica (100 B.C.-A.D. 800), others small, like the contemporary Lima or Maranga cultures;
some had quite a short span like the Inca, which may have lasted for just two centuries, others
a long one like the Cajamarca, which lasted for a thousand years. The case of the Amazon is
somewhat more complex. It seems that this expanse is culturally connected with the great
Atlantic Amazon fan; there evidently was a great inter-Andean contact, but its cultural origins
are different. So although this book considers cultural groups belonging to modern Peru, it
clearly has ‘blind spots’ as it leaves aside cultures that evidently established solid links with
these groups but lie outside the modern frontiers.
Let us see two examples. From an ecological standpoint, the North Coast starting in Sechura
is a transitional zone vis-à-vis the equatorial tropics, which means its resources differ from
those found in the rest of the Peruvian Coast. In the Amazon, to the east, foodstuffs like
the sweet potato are shared and extend beyond the frontiers; the same thing happens in
the Altiplano with quinoa—which Peru shares with Bolivia—or with molluscs and other
ingredients required for a good cebiche in Tacna, which can be the same in Antofagasta. “Our
cuisine” is a common Andean legacy that goes beyond the frontiers and should bear no flag
but be shared instead, thus announcing that we all come from one and the same people. So
the reader is forewarned that this book will remain incomplete until someone undertakes the
titanic task of writing on pre-Hispanic food in Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru and northern Chile—i.e.
a book on the pre-Hispanic food of our Central Andes that is much more consistent with the
lesson our forefathers gave us.
Into the Sources
Where can we find information for a book like the present one? We are entering a period when
writing had still not been invented, and this means that the whole written record is discarded.
There essentially are two major sources: the first sources are ethnohistorical ones, which abound
in information (but not direct information, it must be admitted) if we limit ourselves to the
43
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

accounts the Spanish chroniclers gave regarding food, agriculture, fishing, cooking methods and
the storage systems of pre-Hispanic Peru, amongst other subjects. It has already been pointed
out that this field will only be partially covered due to the range of information used, and
the methods applied, in this book. Indeed, it was initially envisioned as an attempt at revising
Horkheimer’s book, which was an impressive feat due to all the topics it covered: the food
remains reported in archaeological excavations, ethnohistorical documentation, and essays
in pre-Hispanic bromatology and agriculture—fields that would nowadays require separate
volumes each. It should in general be clear that this book does not intend to replace, and much
less imitate, the enduring interdisciplinary approach spearheaded by Horkheimer.

Ethnohistory and Ethnography:

Their Contribution to the pre-Hispanic Cuisine
We clearly do not intend to approach the ethnohistorical sources in extenso. Now, although these
sources provide indirect information, on reading the accounts of feeding customs left by Father
Cobo or by Acosta it becomes clear that neither archaeology nor any other method (at least
thus far) will be able to make such inroads in this subject with such a wealth of detail. This means
the present study is incomplete. Some data from the chronicles have therefore been included
because of their value as regards foodstuffs and cooking methods during the first centuries after
the Spanish Conquest. Passages from these chronicles, cited by colleagues like Tamara Bray, who Figura 1. Comedor popular en el Altiplano central andino. Las observaciones etnográficas son fundamentales para la reconstrucción de la
studies feeding customs with ethnohistorical data, were included as a supplement. dieta prehispánica. (CORTESÍA DE ERIC CHÁVEZ).

Ethnographic references definitely are another major source (Figure 1). Although scant, these are
of crucial importance because they include observations made by travellers, scientists and other
types of people several decades ago or more recently, in the context of Peru’s autochthonous
groups; these groups still preserve some alimentary traditions that open a window to the
past, albeit with all due reservations as the acculturation of these groups in the twenty-first
century is clear. There likewise is ethnographic information on hunting, fishing, farming and food
preservation; these are interesting sources that have been used in the present study.
Coast, which has an ideal pH to preserve the organic remains that here interest us. This
means that two points should be made. The first one is that since preservation is poor and
almost non-existent in both the highlands and the Amazon (except for carbonised organic
materials), we will never have a real picture of pre-Hispanic food in many of its parts.
The second point is that even now in 2012, few projects include special fields like ethno-
botanics or zoo-archaeology. This means that in order to have a range of information, we
had to resort both to pioneering studies and more recent research.

Direct Evidence: Organic and Inorganic Remains
The organic and inorganic materials left behind by the pre-Hispanic cultures are our second
major source. Here we have to include all remains including faunal remains, macro-and
microbotanical remains, phytoliths, starch grains, malacological remains (shells, gastropods,
and so on), human bone pathology, bone chemistry (stable isotope analysis), food residues in
pre-Hispanic ceramics or other types of vessels, depictions of plants and animals in pottery,
the remains left behind by cultivation systems such as irrigation canals, reservoirs, etc. As
regards this field, in general it must be acknowledged that the large mass of information
acquired last century was devoted to the development of large archaeological sequences
starting with the material culture. It was only in a few cases, which were perhaps more
frequent as of the 1960s, that chronologies were developed for local sites on the Peruvian
This being said, it should also be acknowledged that the number of projects studying past diets
has also risen, and this has taken place alongside an improvement in recording methods, as is
shown by the research currently under way of cultures like the Mochica under Gumerman’s
direction. This is encouraging.
Pre-Hispanic Foodstuffs-How Can We Know
They Were Actually Prepared and Eaten?
Despite this trend, there is one issue we must grapple with: the nature of the finds. When a
scientific study was found that included a list of the foodstuffs eaten, it turned out in many
cases that it had not been possible to establish whether these contained carbon remains that

44 45
Elmo Leon
proved their cooking. If the remains of food appear in an archaeological site this means they
were taken to the site, but not necessarily that they were eaten. This is why recording the
context is essential, precisely what many archaeological excavations and research lack. On
examination, about 90% of the finds do not mention combustion remains. Stating that the
presence of plant remains or of a mollusc at a given site means that they were eaten is mere
speculation. Unfortunately this is what most frequently happens. Some cases are even more
complicated, like those of various molluscs included here: there is, for instance, a considerable
list of molluscs from the site of Puémape (Elera et al. 1992), on the North Peruvian Coast,
south of Pacasmayo, but no direct reference to their consumption. These have been included
here with all due reservations because these are anyway molluscs that were taken to this site,
many of them in order to be eaten; there is however no in-depth data in this regard.
There are some exceptions. Such is the case of the French pre-historical school, whose
excavations often follow the décapage model (a very fine method that allows for the three-D
recording of a series of remains, thus reconstructing the activities that took place in that
site).An example of this method are the excavations headed by Danièle Lavallée, a French
archaeologist and probably the best representative this school has in Peru. Lavallée made
two major contributions that now allow us to explore the domestic milieu in two completely
different regions: the Central Puna of Peru, where the Telarmachay rock shelter lies, and the
seashore of Tacna, at a camp site called Quebrada de los Burros.
The study of the latter site, where the palaeoicthyologist Philipe Béarez made an interesting
and significant study of the type of fishing and the fish consumed in the Middle Holocene,
truly is a model for research. Whenever we found studies of this type we went over them
carefully because they include important data for this book. The work undertaken by Claude
Chauchat at the Preceramic camps of Paiján is another example of the work done by the
French school. In this case, however, the remains were more scattered, apparently due to
bioturbation and anthropogenic factors.
On the other hand, the work of taxonomic identification undertaken in the lab, like that
carried out by Víctor Vásquez and his team in Trujillo, shows that Peru is not only able to
form professional biologists of international standing, who undertake scientific ventures that
promote cooperation and stimulate that practice of science in Peru.
A study that was very hard to summarise is Margaret Towle’s (1961) handbook, probably the
most important study of Peruvian ethnobotanics, which is still valid despite the time gone
by. Of its content we prioritised the plants for which there are indications of its consumption
in the pre-Hispanic period. Two more studies of this same subject have been published; one
of them is Donald Ugent and Carlos Ochoa’s (2006) handbook on Peruvian ethnobotanics,
the other a publication Alejandro Fernández and Eric Rodríguez (2007) made in Trujillo. Even
so, we must not forget out limitations. Not all the foodstuffs that were eaten have been
found in the materials archaeologists excavate. Tubers that probably formed part of the pre-
Hispanic diet, like chago or mauka (Mirabilis expansa R. and P. Standley), have thus far not
been documented in the archaeological record. This shows how powerless this discipline can
be, and how much remains to be studied.
46
14,000 years of food in Peru
One of the greatest lessons Towle imparted was that in accordance with the subject-matter
of her book—ethnobotanics—she studied both edible and medicinal plants and not just the
first ones. We should bear in mind that in not a few cases we have ethnographic evidence
of the simultaneous consumption of edible and medicinal plants, so food is ingested along
with “integrated phytomedicine.” For example, in modern Lima the demand requires that
restaurants serve a sancochado (Andean stew) with some small muña (a kind a mint plant)
branches, which as we know have digestive properties. This however will not be easy to prove
with archaeological remains because at present technology cannot specifically establish what
foodstuffs were combined in one dish.
The Scope and Limits of Technology
in the Archaeological Recording of Foodstuffs
The current technology still does not have the ability to make such identification. It is also
known there is a wide range of plants that may have been eaten, but for which no evidence
has remained. An interesting example is a study by Van der Eynden et al. (2003), which
identified 354 species of wild plants in Ecuador, many of which have edible fruits that are
mostly eaten raw. Even so, Van der Eynden et al. claim these species comprise just a scant
part of the 6,186 vascular plants found in southern Ecuador. There still is a large gap that
has to be covered.
The same issue appears when we ask ourselves whether the pre-Hispanic Peruvians ate their
food raw or cooked, and whether this can be established through the technologies available
to the sciences that study the past. Here we must not forget what has already been noted
regarding the preservation of archaeological materials, which declines in a gradient from
west to east. On the coast organic remains evince an enviable preservation state that any
archaeologist would envy due to the type of soils, and to the unique combination of the
Cold Peruvian Current and the Andes, which provide protection from Amazon convection.
Because of its aridity, the Peruvian coast and a large expanse of the Chilean coast are unique
in the world and contain plant macroremains that are thousands of years old. It must however
be acknowledged that many of the cultivated plants may come from other zones, like
mesothermal valleys and probably even from the ceja de montaña, which means the Peruvian
desert must have been an arrival zone for previously domesticated plants. Conditions change
in the Andes. Here there are fewer remains than on the coast due to the types of soils and
to precipitations. Dry zones are exceptionally found, like the famed Guitarrero Cave. The
significance of Peru in this region is clear once we add to this legacy the more than fifty edible
plants domesticated in the South American subcontinent.
Finally, pre-Hispanic organic remains are rare both in the ceja de montaña and the Amazon
lowlands due to the climate and the high precipitation, yet paradoxically enough the first
domestication of several plants, like peanuts, must have taken place in this region. Our
picture is incomplete so no generalisations can be made. This was shown by molecular
studies like those carried out by Clement et al. (2010), which proved the significance of
47
Elmo Leon
pristine Amazonian crops based on this research technology. We must not forget that this
vast region has 138 plants that are cultivated, or which the natives have controlled and used
since pre-Hispanic times.
The incomplete distribution of sites with organic plant and animal remains, and their
subsequent concentration on the desert coast of Peru is compounded by other types of
missing evidence, such as the impossibility of recording the food [viandas y comidas] eaten
whilst moving from one place to another. For instance, Bonavia (1982: 311) correctly notes that
many plants give fruits that do not need to be cooked and are eaten whilst working; pre-
Hispanic people may have done so too.
Other factors, such as the lack of comparative collections and even the problems found when
establishing whether the plants are cultivated or wild species, make recording the data even
more difficult. On the other hand there also are fruits that leave no remains. or otro lado, hay
también frutos que no dejan restos. There is little that can be added to the critical picture
Bonavia presented thirty years ago.
Another crucial observation Bonavia made concerns the exaggerated and biased importance
some archaeologists ascribe to the mollusc shells found in archaeological sites. Each shell
represents a minimum amount of meat, so that many of them would have had to be gathered
in order to prepare a dish like cebiche (Bonavia 1982: 387).
Many of these issues in the archaeological record have been summarised by Jorge León in his
excellent handbook Botánica de los cultivos tropicales (2000):
· The extent in which archaeological materials (seeds, fruits, and other parts survive
better than roots or tubers) have been preserved.
· The climate conditions that determine the preservation of organic remains (preservation
is best in dry than in humid places).
· Whether the area under study receives more attention than others (like Mexico and
Peru in America).
· The ability to establish taxonomic determinations based on ideal comparative
collections.
It follows that the first three conditions—preservation of materials, climate, and the attention
given to the area—work for us whilst the latter one—the lack of comparative collections and
identifications—works against—but this is apparently changing thanks to major projects and
reliable laboratory analyses.
48
14,000 years of food in Peru
‘Non-Peruvian’ Plants and Fruits Possibly
Consumed in Pre-Hispanic Peru
One subject that should be included in this book is a list of the plants and fruits that are
not native to Peru but which may have been consumed here due to its geography, as well
as the permanent exchange that took place since ancient times. My frustration mounted
whilst reading published materials when researching this book because no information could
be included on, say, foreign fruits that are nowadays eaten in, and favoured by, the modern
markets of Lima and other cities, or which simply do not appear in the chronicles or in the
archaeological record as regards the subject that interests us here.
Víctor Patiño (2002) provides a good example. His magnificent book took shape during the
several decades this Colombian scholar devoted to the interdisciplinary study of fruits in
American tropical countries. His list includes any “Peruvian” fruits but many of these are
found in an area that extends from Peru to other countries, which means these are a common
heritage (e.g. heart of palm). Other lists in the book include fruits that Peruvians now eat, like
mamey (Mammea americana) or coconut, which are not native to Peru but are now part of
its cuisine. Readers interested in the history of these fruits should read Patiño’s handbook,
which includes scientific information as well as ethnohistorical data for several countries
in northern South America, including Peru due to the excellent preservation of botanical
remains on its coast.
The same holds for the South American crops included in the above-mentioned handbook
of cultivated American plants by Jorge León. Plants like peanuts, cassava or achira, which had
a major role and come from the Amazon were not domesticated in the Andes, yet they were
still essential to the pre-Hispanic diet and in the imaginaire of Andean cultural development.
Another problem arises when analysing most of the archaeological sources that precisely
have archaeobotanical data, i.e. the usually poor quality of the archaeological reports that
purportedly include reliable data on the identification of plant remains from excavations. Yet
it must be acknowledged that greater efforts have recently been made at interdisciplinary
work, in order to at least prepare taxonomic lists of botanical remains.
Potatoes and Sweet Potatoes Grilled Five Thousand Years Ago…
As has already been noted, the presence of these remains in archaeological sites does not
necessarily mean they were eaten. Hather (1991) in fact notes that only two of the plant
species included in Margaret Towle’s handbook on ethnobotany—cassava and achira—that
have been found in Peruvian archaeological sites actually showed traces of combustion or of
burning that could be interpreted as evidence the plants were cooked on a fire. This figure
can now grow thanks to the progress made in research, as was shown by Don Ugent and his
team with their archaeobotanical research at Casma. In this valley they recorded potatoes
and sweet potatoes that bore traces of having been roasted (see details below).
49
Elmo Leon
In the twenty first century there clearly are other methods that can be used to recover
this invaluable information, for instance the analysis of trace elements in bones or of the
coproliths themselves, but this is something that will be discussed later on. Several studies
are likewise showing that transmission electron microscopy (TEM) can be used to prove
whether the food remains found in archaeological vessels were raw or cooked (Koon et al.
2010). Biochemical methods are now being refined in order to recover proteins from various
archaeological materials in order to establish their role in prehistoric cuisine. When the
most recent technology is applied to pre-Hispanic Peruvian materials we will have at least
an elementary idea of what was really eaten in Peru at that time, and perhaps what food
preparation methods were used.
Kentucky Fried Chicken vs. Potatoes with Huacatay
The food problem in Peru concerns not just the government, the NGOs or the organisations
that combat malnutrition; it also concerns the alimentary habits that are somewhat
predetermined by city life in Lima. This is the struggle the potato with chili pepper wages
against Kentucky Fried Chicken.
Paul Mangelsdorf, perhaps the most renowned student of Andean maize and a visionary of food
sciences, had already foreseen the problem of world nutrition several decades ago when he noted
(1961: 288) that issues such as food, hunger and overpopulation were not future but present issues,
which had to be solved through several human attributes such as patience, tranquillity [calma],
courage, creativity, expertise and above all long-term planning. At that time, Mangelsdorf noted,
the world’s food was essentially based on three cereals, rice, wheat and maize; on two sugar
plants, the sugarcane and beets; on three rhizomes, the potato, the sweet potato and cassava;
on two legumes, beans and soy beans; and on two arboreal fruits, the banana and the coconut;
finally, peanuts have a supplementary role. Most of these staples are evidently familiar and native
to the Andes, and we are fortunate indeed to have these ancestral resources. But this essentially
concerns having varied resources and not just staples. This is precisely the wealth of Peru, e.g.
in roots and tubers, the most well-known of which is the “Irish potato.” Such is the wide range
of varieties in the Andes, which Hermann and Heller (1997: 5) meant; hence the importance that
looking back has in order to establish the origins of the Andean crops and wild plants, and the
role they had. Weberbauer (1945) identified 58 food plants in autochthonous Peru, and it would
be interesting to test how many of these were actually eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru.
Remains of Fish, Molluscs, and Mammals Eaten in Pre-Hispanic Peru
Zooarchaeology is another area of study of organic remains, i.e. the analysis of the bone remains
of animal used as food in the pre-Hispanic past (Reitz and Wing 1999). Elizabeth Wing summarised
the method and listed several problems that arise when analysing this type of remains in
archaeology, which mostly range from fragmented bones and vertebrate teeth, mollusc shells,
and echinoderm heads, to the exoskeletons of chitons, echinoderms, and crustacean.
50
14,000 years of food in Peru
One problem is that quite often the tools used in excavations are not adequate, for instance
nets that do not catch minute bone fragments. Another problem is that some animals that
were eaten leave no trace, either because they were too small, like insect larvae, or were too
big to be taken to the place they were eaten at, like whales.
To this we must add the taphonomic problems due to several events that take place
once bone remains are in the ground, e.g. disturbation, landslides, acid soils, and even the
alterations wrought about by insects or mice. (Taphonomy studies animal decomposition
from the moment of their death, particularly as regards their fossilisation.) Wing mentions an
interesting fact regarding the Peruvian site of El Paraíso (ca. third and second millennium B.C.),
where the first excavations yielded no bone remains until a two millimetre sieve was applied;
then large amounts of anchovy bones, the main food at this site, were found.
We must not forget the fact that the presence of a given food at an archaeological site
does not imply its direct consumption, even when found in association with hearth or similar
elements, and this also includes animal remains. For instance, finding molluscs or fish remains
at an archaeological site, such as a camp on the Peruvian coast, only indicates that these are
manuports (i.e. animals taken to a camp dead or alive to be eaten, raw or cooked), but does
not conclusively prove they were eaten.
In order to verify that foods of animal origin were eaten at a given site, we need research
that documents Ascertaining that food of animal origin was consumed in a given site requires
studies that document similar remains in other archaeological artefacts in said site and which
were in contact with one another, in terms of providing a more reliable and objective overview
of the resources actually eaten there.
Willis et al. (2008) have emphasised the neglect and the scant attention researchers and
archaeologists pay when recovering information on the field and when working in the lab,
in this case with fish bones. There clearly are very few scientific reports that were able to
show cut marks that indicate the fish were cleaned, scaled, and prepared for consumption.
Only Susan DeFrance has shown this can be done when analysing the bird fauna at the site of
Quebrada Tacahuay in Tacna. This means there is great uncertainty regarding whether these
animal remains found during the excavation of archaeological sites were meant to be cooked
for consumption or not.
51
METHODS USED TO RECONSTRUCT
PREHISTORIC FOODS

Can we know what a pre-Hispanic Menu Contained?

Can we reconstruct what items were simultaneously combined in the food? In other words,
can we establish what was in a pre-Hispanic menu based on the physical information
available in palaeoalimentary sciences, in the Andean pre-Hispanic context? The answer is
that this task is practically impossible, even with modern technology, if all we have to work
are just archaeological remains and no contemporary written sources that provide a partial
approach to this subject.

The key here is developing technologies that bring us closer to the specificities of pre-
Hispanic cuisine, because we are still at a rudimentary level as regards exploring this type
of information. This is crucial in Peru, because the debate hinges in part on whether the
foodstuffs that are to be presented in this book were intensely spiced or not before the
European colonisation.

Carmen Ulloa (2006: 314) pointed out that one of the most significant aspects of a given cuisine
is the combination of various spices, which give the food a unique taste (like contemporary
Peruvian cuisine). This is a complex task if we approach it only from an archaeological
standpoint because all we have is part of the documentation or the ingredients used
to prepare pre-Hispanic dishes. In many cases the original native spices have not been
recovered in the excavations or in the analysis of coproliths or excrement, or it simply was
the case that the teams in charge of making taxonomic identifications were not sufficiently
prepared to list these species during analysis and then publish them scientifically. Hence
our great handicap in providing the reader a full picture of “pre-Hispanic gastronomy.” We
will therefore strictly limit ourselves to presenting the information recovered scientifically
through archaeological means. We will save for a second edition of this book a more
extensive work compiling colonial and eventually republican sources, but always with this
book as a starting point. This would be a much bigger book but it would hold the deepest
root of Peruvian cuisine, which begins with the present publication.

53
Elmo Leon
It is for this reason that we cannot talk of Peruvian gastronomy sensu stricto—we will
never have the ingredients, the flavouring substances, or the ‘recipe’ itself. In any case an
effort has been made to recover some of the most basic recipes from the archaeological
information, which fortunately grows every day with techniques that can recover much finer
data. Ethnographic observations made by some authors have been included regarding the
use of fruits as well as of condiments and flavouring substances—subjects that are almost
completely ignored by archaeology.
The following pages represent a prehistorian’s effort to combine several sciences in order to
reconstruct the type, as far as the evidence permitted, of pre-Hispanic Peruvian food. It must
be confessed that this was no easy task; there were certain areas in which I felt like a complete
ignoramus—an impression that endured once the book was ready because now there are
more questions and fewer answers than before.
During my years in the university, ceramic classifications were based on decorations in an attempt
to establish what culture-style the materials belonged to. Nowadays many studies have changed
methods because what they want to find out is what was done with the pottery, particularly
with dinnerware. Besides there is a boom in pre-Hispanic forms of bowls, pots and jars, which
curiously enough seem to be contemporary with the intensification of agriculture that took
place just before the beginning of our era (Pearsall 1998: 318-319). The times are in fact a-changing.
Radiocarbon and the Remains of Ancient Food
It is well known that radiocarbon (C14) is first of all, a physical method that allows us to
approximately establish when organisms died, which is tantamount to saying when the
stopped exchanging oxygen and carbon dioxide with the atmosphere. One of the components
of carbon dioxide is the C14 isotope, the only radioactive component. When an organism dies
it retains its last intake of C14, which decreases in time but can still be measured. It has been
shown that this radioactive isotope lasts for about forty thousand years, the date up to which
past and present organisms be dated (e.g. Taylor 1987).
On the other hand, although the radiocarbon method is not precise, it does provide the
absolute time—in terms of probabilities—when an event took place because it dates one or
more organisms associated with that event. And when there is no writing, as seems to have
been the case in pre-Hispanic Peru, there is as yet no better method with which to discuss
a period in temporal terms. So in this book on pre-Hispanic food, C14 is the only way with
which we can establish its age and the time it appeared.
But a review of the scientific literature shows the dates supposedly associated with plants,
animals and minerals from the pre-Hispanic period were established simply by directly using
and publishing the radiocarbon calculation, but without first converting it into calendar years.
This book therefore tries to solve this problem presenting not just a large majority of simply
non-radiocarbon dates, but also converted or calibrated into real calendar years before our era.
54
14,000 years of food in Peru
The reader may here very well ask what does calibration a radiocarbon date mean, and what
significance calibrated dates have for pre-Hispanic foods. We turn to this now.
As has been noted, radiocarbon dates are frequently cited in archaeological or historical
studies, Andean or Peruvian in our case, but without bearing in mind that these are not
calendar or historical years. One thus usually finds in scientific publications thirty years old,
and even in more recent ones, that archaeologists directly list the radiocarbon data without
any discussion, or instead subtracted 1,950 years from the radiocarbon result. This clearly is no
longer valid, as we will now see.
Radiocarbon Calibration of Ancient Food Remains
Vries (1958) noted over fifty years ago that although the rate of radiocarbon in an organism is
constantly decaying, the production of atmospheric radiocarbon has constantly varied. This
in turn means that organisms consumed different rates throughout time, and that radiocarbon
dates must therefore be ‘calibrated.’ All dates in this book therefore had to be corrected.
In other words, all the remains that have been found of plants or animals, be it in pre-Hispanic
sites or even detected as trace elements in human bones, which indicate the last diet the
ancient Peruvian inhabitant had, must be not just dated but calibrated too. This will be
done throughout this book: a large majority of dates related with pre-Hispanic food will
be presented for the first time in calendar years. The radiocarbon calibration method will
allows us to know, in statistically real physical dates, not just when a given food—e.g. maize,
quinoa, anchovies or meat from a guinea pig or llama— was used or consumed, but also to
let us draw closer in real terms to when these were domesticated. This last point is crucial
because that is how we can value the real international weight, in temporal terms, of the pre-
Hispanic domestication of plants. It should however be noted that due to the abundance of
radiocarbon dates associated with Peruvian pre-Hispanic food, only the most ancient ones
had to be calibrated in order to explore their real antiquity. This is important because it has
been shown that the difference between radiocarbon and calendar years is greatest in the
period that extends between the Terminal Pleistocene and the Middle Holocene (ca. 12,000-
4,000 B.C.). Dates after Christ have in general not been calibrated because test results indicate
the difference is much smaller. Even so, this will have to be done in future in order to make all
required chronological corrections.
Radiocarbon and Some Problems Inherent to pre-Hispanic Foodstuffs
Even so, although the chronological information can be updated, there are some issues that
must be briefly explained to the reader. There are in fact some caveats that must be borne in
mind before beginning calibration. Ziólkowski (1994) mentioned some of the main difficulties
which are here endorsed, such as the irregularities in the value used for the half-life of
radiocarbon, the Suess effect and the radioactivity standard, the lack of isotopic fractionation,
55
Elmo Leon
the errors in radiocarbon dating reports, the standard deviation of laboratory results, and the
lack of accuracy in radioactivity.
This type of problematic affects all of the chronology related with pre-Hispanic food. Let
us take an example related with plant consumption. Huaca Prieta is one archaeological site
where a significant amount of Peruvian pre-Hispanic plants have been found on the North
Coast of Peru. The earliest dates are almost useless because they were measured using
‘carbon-black’—the oldest radiocarbon method which was noted for its lack of precision
(Olsson 2009: 1)—except for the recent and accurate chronology of this major site prepared
by Dillehay et al. (2012).
As we shall see later, at Huaca Prieta several plants were found in domestic contexts, i.e. they
were edible, but since they were dated using this method the dates can only be taken as a
reference, at least until we have the report of Dillehay and Bonavia’s recent archaeological
research at this site.
To the problem posed by old radiocarbon methods we must add another issue, which concerns
the type of organisms that are to be dated as well as the abnormal results that cannot yet
be explained—for instance, the radiocarbon results yielded by seeds of seasonal plants like
pumpkin and Chenopodium (possibly quinoa), and some peanuts from the preceramic site of
Nanchoc (cf. Rossen et al. 1996). This shows the low precision radiocarbon has in these cases.
Besides these problems that have been correctly pointed out by the above-mentioned
scholars, in this book we face the challenge of having to present results for the animals and
plants eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru in calendar years. The truth is this is no easy task.
Where can We Get Radiocarbon Dates for Pre-Hispanic Foodstuffs?
First we have the dates directly obtained from the remains. This is relatively simple because
both plants and animals consumed C14, in the first case through photosynthesis, in the second
from eating plants.
Even so, many of the contexts with organic materials were established through the charcoal
left in the fire and which lets us date the remains indirectly; this is by far the element that
makes the radiocarbon results more reliable and accurate. Now, when the samples dated
come from the same plant and animal remains, we must bear in mind the variation between
them that is known as isotopic fractionation; this is a simple calculation that standardises
the difference between the amount of carbon contained by a given organism, and the real
amount in the organism itself, which can often vary due to internal biochemical fluctuations.
Such is for instance the case of plants that undergo photosynthesis, which apparently lose the
C13 isotope in comparison with other land organisms. Marine organisms on the contrary have
their mean C12/C14 values enriched due to the environment they live in. We therefore should
bear in mind isotopic fractionation when calibrating the date of Andean plants like maize or
56
14,000 years of food in Peru
even (when no other possibility remains) a marine mollusc, which can exhibit distortions due
to the increased amount of calcium carbonate that must have altered the real concentration
of C14 in its organism. So isotopic fractionation is essential in order to attain come precision
in the dates that are to be corrected.
The bones of the individuals who fed on these resources obviously are our second source of
information. And although there are very few dated human remains in pre-Hispanic Peru in
comparison with other organic remains, they are available. Interestingly enough, recent research
is of an isotopic nature and is thus obtaining dates from the same organic ‘microremains’ and
even from trace elements in bones, which not only support and supplements the research
undertaken with ‘macroremains,’ but are also often results obtained in AMS labs (Accelerator
of Mass Spectrometry); this means they are processed with recent technology that is often
more accurate in chronological terms.
As has already been pointed out, one major issue that must be borne in mind before carrying
out calibration and its assessment is precisely the quality of the radiocarbon information
available. First, the dates were processed using different technologies; the earliest ones
from the 1950s-1960s are the least accurate, and those from the 1960s-1970s are partially so
because the dates obtained with the AMS are evidently more accurate, and also had more
sophisticated methods of Bayesian statistics. The revolution brought about by this procedure
led to the development of software for conventional computers in 1990-2000; at present,
information systems ensure convenience and much precision in this type of procedure.
Second, any attempt at correcting the radiocarbon dates for plant, animal, and mineral remains
consumed in pre-Hispanic Peru from the information published in the works of our colleagues
means that we have to depend on these studies and rely on them. This implies a risk per se
because one must assume that the dates obtained were directly associated with the remains
of food. It is for this reason that whenever possible we always tried to go to the direct source,
but this was not always possible.
Turning Radiocarbon Dates into Calendar Years
Assuming the types of handicap that have been presented and the problems that may derive
from them, we now need to briefly explain the procedure used to calibrate the radiocarbon
dates for this book. First, we used the calibration programme OxCal 4.1 (2010) from Oxford
University because it has several digital tools, Bayesian statistical tools, and new proxies (in
this case, radiocarbon values for tree rings derived from recent research) that allow use to
upgrade calibrations and get more accurate results (Bronk Ramsey 2009).
A major question arises when choosing the dendrocurve (the proxy radiocarbon curve
obtained from tree rings) that must be used when calibrating the remains of the food eaten
by ancient Peruvians. There are two available curves with which to calibrate terrestrial
radiocarbon dates, one for archaeological sites in the Northern Hemisphere (the most recent
57
Elmo Leon
one called IntCal09), the other for the Southern Hemisphere (ShCal04) (Reimer et al. 2009,
McCormac et al. 2004). The reader may conclude that given that the present territory of Peru
is in the Southern Hemisphere, logic dictates the corresponding curve should be used. But a
more in-depth examination of this matter shows this deduction is neither simple nor correct.
There are two reasons that make this a questionable choice. First, the radiocarbon information
derived from tree rings in the Southern Hemisphere mostly comes from outside South America.
Second, although in the modern epoch Peru has been located in the southern Southern
Hemisphere, we should consider that little is as yet known of the history of variation in the
Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) that may have affected the Central Andean area with
rainfall and a warm climate. Now we know for certain that this line varies seasonally and that
it can range between Paraguay (in the austral summer) and Mexico (in the austral winter).
Using the ShCal04 radiocarbon calibration dendrocurve may in fact be more advisable when
applied to zones in the Southern Hemisphere between latitudes 35º and 50° (Paula Reimer,
personal communication, 21.6.2010).
The other option is using the IntCal09 calibration curve. In these case researchers often apply
a value known as the reservoir value, which is like an adjustment of this curve in order to
adapt it to the Southern Hemisphere. These values have varied depending on the progress
made in research; the two most recent ones are 41±14 (McCormac et al. 2002) and even more
recently 40±20 (Hogg et al. 2009). Some studies in which this reservoir value was jointly
applied with the curve for the Northern Hemisphere in fact yielded interesting and significant
results in regard to Peru’s archaeological sequences; this even suggests using these values for
subsequent calibrations (cf. Unkel and Kromer 2009). Another possibility would be applying
the value resulting from the map of global preindustrial radiocarbon production which
includes the equatorial countries, and which corresponds to the 0-1 ppm gradient multiplied
by 8, i.e. 0-8 radiocarbon years (Braziunas et al. 1995).
After reviewing all of these possible calibrations we opted to follow some suggestions in
using the ShCal04 dendrocurve for the Peruvian zone, but noting the inaccuracies that may
arise not just from the proximity to, and the uncertainties in, the history of the ITCZ in regard
to the latitude of Peru, but also because of the lack of tree rings that can provide South
American radiocarbon values (Paula Reimer, personal communication, 21.6.2010). When the
dating exceeded 9,250 radiocarbon years—i.e. the late Terminal Pleistocene and the Beginnings
of the Early Holocene—we had to resort to the second of the two options presented, i.e.
using the IntCal04 curve plus the Southern Hemisphere’s 40±20 offset (Hogg et al. 2009).
When calibrating we did not always have terrestrial radiocarbon samples, particularly in
molluscs that have been excavated and sent to the laboratory to be radiocarbonically dated. It
is well-known that because of the reasons presented above, this type of material is not ideally
suited for dating. This can be the case of the remains of marine molluscs, and eventually fish
that come from pre-Hispanic middens. Marine09, the last corresponding marine curve, was
used when working with this type of material including the case’s reservoir value, in accordance
to the reservoir values interface available online (http://intcal.qub.ac.uk/marine/).
58
14,000 years of food in Peru
Specifying the Results of Radiocarbon Calibration
Several specifications that the calibration program considers complicate the picture even
more, but it is worth including them here. This may be somewhat tedious but it is important,
especially for my colleagues who are acquainted with this subject.
Having explained the curve chosen and the reservoir values used for Peru, we need now
explain how the programme’s setup was modelled to calibrate the dates that interest us.
The results were obtained using the programme’s conventional way. Once the calibrations
had been made they were assessed using the two conventional possibilities, to wit, one
(68.2%) and two (95.4%) sigma; however, in most cases the mean available in the new OxCal
4 programme was used in order to make the process more readable. The means usually are
exact and are not rounded off, so that readers will find conventional dates measured in highly
precise years, and this should really come as no surprise. Even so, it should be noted that the
results obtained with the means have a lower probability of being accurate because this is
a statistically valid, mean value of the real result, but at the same time it appears with just
one value, thus avoiding the confusion of temporal distribution for readers who are not?
Interested in the subject of radiocarbon calibration.
We applied just 1 probabilities sigma (68%) in exceptional cases in order to shorter time
periods depending on their age.
Thanks to this procedure the dates are presented already corrected, and they appear in this
book as B.C. (Before Christ / before our era), or A.D. (Anno Domini or years after Christ), simply
leaving out “cal,” as would be required in a specialised journal because we want to lighten the
burden of academic symbols in a book that is scientific but is meant for the general public.
However, as regards radiocarbon calibration, we would like to repeat that a time span of
centuries and even millennia will be given when mentioning a culture, but on mentioning the
find of food or plant remains a more accurate span will be given, almost always within the
aforementioned span. We may thus say, for instance, that “the Chancay culture developed
between ca. A.D. 1000 and 1460, and that cassava (Manihot esculenta) remains have been
found in the site of Lumbra which belongs to this culture, and which date to A.D. 1380-1450,
evidently within the temporal span of this same culture.” Readers who want to carry out a
‘recalibration’ can look up in the bibliography the sources where we found the dates.
A procedure that should be accepted and applied in a study like the present one are the MCMC
models (Markov Chain Montecarlo Models) in order to calibrate the radiocarbon sequences,
as recommended by the programme. However, a study like this one would require a different
study and another book. This means that we resorted to simple radiocarbon calibrations
respecting the above-mentioned parameters. It must however be acknowledged that much
work has still to be done to calibrate the sequences that have been examined.
Most of the radiocarbon calibrations were done on materials discovered in the same
context and layer where the food remains were found. It was only occasionally that we
59
Elmo Leon
could directly calibrate a radiocarbon date that came directly from the organic remain that
concerns us, and which in the best cases was done using charcoal. Organic plant and animal
remains that are believed to have been eaten as part of Peru’s pre-Hispanic diet should
therefore be dated.
To sum up, radiocarbon calibrations are probable results in calendar years and are not exact,
yet they will help us explore the real age of the major plant, animal and mineral resources that
comprised our ancestors’ diet.
We now leave the long but essential section on radiocarbon applied to pre-Hispanic food,
and turn to a brief introduction on the methods and techniques used in this book, that will
show the reader how the science can recover information in an interdisciplinary way, and in
abundant detail, on the foodstuffs used in the pre-Hispanic period, and if possible in what
ways these were prepared.
Reconstructing the pre-Hispanic diet Through Modern Science
We mentioned Hans Horkheimer and his handbook on pre-Hispanic food at the beginning
of this book, and pointed out that it will not be replaced ever by this or any other book,
given its wide coverage that only he could carry out, and because science has advanced so
much in half a century that it is simply impossible to collect all of the new data in one book
alone. Even so, were Horkheimer alive he clearly would have used these modern methods like
no one else, as is shown by the dedication he showed to pre-Hispanic Peru throughout his
academic career.
At present several fields in science contribute to the world of palaeofood including
criminology, biology, bromatology, medicine, chemistry and so on. This research is applicable
not just to various past cultures, as it can even reach such times as when the very process of
hominization was taking place. For example, Ungar and Scott (2009) presented an overview
of the diet the first humans had starting from the molar occlusions studied in the bone
remains of Homo rudolfensis, Homo erectus, and Homo habilis. They concluded that two
million years ago they chose to eat animals like Cebus apella or Alouatta palliata rather
than follow a hard-chewing diet.
Now then, we owe much of what we currently know of food in the pre-Hispanic period to
the Spanish chroniclers, and particularly to the accounts written by Juan de Betanzos in 1551
(1880) and by the Jesuit priest Bernabé Cobo in 1653 (1893). Cobo listed a series of plants and
animals that were eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru, which makes it the sine qua non of any book
that deals with this subject. But here, as has already been noted, we will only tangentially
touch this subject and will instead concentrate on the physical-chemical sciences in order
to reconstruct the pre-Hispanic diet. These methods should complement the two that have
already been examined the direct analysis of foodstuffs and those found in archaeological
contexts.
60
14,000 years of food in Peru
Direct Evidence: Bone Biochemistry
As has already been noted, the type of food eaten in the past can be reconstructed essentially in
two ways, one of them indirect and the other one direct (Williams 2005). The indirect approach
works through the archaeological context (botanical and zoological remains, pollen, ceramic
residues) and ethnohistorical data, amongst others. The direct approach instead applies a
bioarchaeological analysis, i.e. trace elements or human bone chemistry, faecal remains, etc. The
information is evidently affected by the quality of the preservation of the remains (the mean
type), the way in which the evidence was recovered (the size of the sieve, the use of flotation,
the site’s location), and even the potential contamination of the remains.
Bone biochemistry provides a first approach, i.e. the application of carbon 13 and nitrogen 15
isotope analysis to the collagen of excavated pre-Hispanic human bones. This type of analysis
opens a good window with which to directly identify the real food eaten by ancient Peruvians
(Hastorf 1985) and this kind of study is being published since the late sixties, so this is a good
opportunity to disseminate them here.
In the chapter on prehistoric food in Archaeological Chemistry (Goffer 2007: 307-309),
Goffer states that animals, human beings included, generate their own tissue by eating
food. It has been shown that food has determined—and still does—our way of life. The
study of feeding habits and diets is thus crucial for an understanding of past societies.
Besides, very many studies have confirmed that various types of food are directly related
with the variable amounts of the isotopes of some chemical elements in our organism, be
they dead or alive. In this way the study of the carbon and nitrogen consumed by human
beings in the past through food allow us to reconstruct their diet. Both elements are
natural components of the atmosphere, as well as of plants and animals. In both cases the
stable heavy isotopes C113 and N15 remain in very small amounts due to a process known
as isotopic fractionation that takes place in every type of living being, and concentrate in
various ratios. The result is that both animals and plants are distinguished by their content
of these heavy and light isotopes.
Plants are a good example. These follow three photosynthetic processes known as C3, C4,
and CAM. 95% of plants, like potatoes, follow C3 whilst others follow C4, including maize,
which was eaten almost continually in the pre-Hispanic Andes. When humans ingest these
plants, their record is automatically passed on to them, and this gives us a way to access
past feeding habits. We should however add that the characteristics of this photosynthetic
mechanism apparently are not the same in the Peruvian Andes. Cadwallader et al. (2012) made
a broad study of plant photosynthesis in Ica and found that it was not just maize that had
C4 photosynthesis, but also other cereals like the kiwicha and quinoa. This has questioned
previous studies that supported the presence of C4 in the human bone record.
In an effort to find wider-ranging sources, Schwarcz (1991) noted that we should examine not
just the stable isotopes in the food eaten but also in human bone as was posited by Goffer
(2007), as long as the information is complementary.
61
Elmo Leon
The stable isotope line of research has had a spectacular development in the last ten years.
This has been a boon for us, insofar as studies of this type are including the determination
of stable isotopes recovered in remains of kernels and food, both in archaeological contexts
and in ceramic sherds, where maize starch sometimes remains and shows what was cooked in
these vessels (Hart et al. 2007).
Larsen (2000: 16) mentioned the information derived from stable isotopes in a broader
overview of this subject, and emphasised the fact that this is the direct method par excellence
used to evince food consumption practices in the human past. This type of analysis has been
carried out ever-more intensively for the last twenty years in order to study trace elements
and reconstruct the prehistoric diet, including manganese, strontium and barium—which
concentrate in remains that come from food plants, and partially so in molluscs—as well as
zinc and copper, which are mostly present in foodstuffs of animal origin.
It is worth including here a very good summary of Jocelyn Williams’ doctoral dissertation
(2005). Williams made a fascinating study of several corpses from the Inca site of Puruchuco,
in the modern Lima district of Ate-Vitarte. Williams compared criminological studies and
forensic anthropology, because these studies are frequently used in this type of research in
order to establish what the deceased ate before death.
For instance, the analysis of soft tissue (e.g. hair, skin, nails, muscles) allows the food the
individual had just a few months before his/her demise to be traced, whilst the study of bone
isotopes reveals what food was eaten 10-25 days before death.
Williams (2005) gave a general account of the applications these studies have in studying
the past. Williams mentions that by identifying the type of food its differential ingestion
can be detected in the elites and in the common people, in men and women, and in the
social organisation; one can even document cultural changes and modifications in subsistence
strategies. Besides, one can assess the type of nutrition and health conditions in the past. So
for Williams, isotopic studies can go far beyond, a position with which I concur.
Williams adds that a poor diet turns into a poor health condition that is reflected in
the low height of the individuals, in a higher mortality rate and an impaired cognitive
development, low immunity, and a decrease in the work capacity of adults. This type of
food study is evidently essential not just for a study of the past, but also for the present
and the future.
A good example of the results that can be attained jointly with other areas in archaeology
overall is one that supports the proposal that as societies developed and became more
complex, the dominant groups had access to more resources at the same time that these
decreased for the common people. Such was the case in Egypt and the Near East. A good
example here is how food was sweetened—the only choices were fruits or honey. It has
been established that honey was controlled by the Pharaoh. Besides, in Dynastic Egypt a large
amount of honey has been found as elite offerings.
62
14,000 years of food in Peru
Olive oil is another good example. It was imported from Palestine and its property was limited
to the elite. The same thing seems to have been the case with fish, as the privileged classes
reserved their consumption to themselves (Miller and Wetterstrom 1999: 1135).
Robert Tykot has made one of the best overviews, which we will cite here, of that part of the
method that has still to be explained (Tykot 2006). The results reached by the experiments
showed that different bone tissues can indicate differences in the diet, in this case the human
diet. In general, bone collagen is produced from the proteic part of the diet whilst bone
carbonates and dental enamel (both formed by a calcium hydrophosphate called apatite) are
formed by a mixture of food protein, carbohydrates, and fat. In this way the stable isotope
analysis of bone collagen and apatite allow us to quantify several component parts of the
diet. And just as Williams anticipated, an individual’s diet can also be reconstructed through
the study of the stable isotopes in his/her hair; in fact this is the most accurate way because
it is the most precise combination of isotopes (Robbins 2002).
The stable isotopes in teeth also contribute. Sealy et al. (1995: 290) Sealy et al. (1995: 290)
noted that the analysis of stable isotopes in dentine reveals the type of food eaten during
childhood; besides, strontium can be used to track change in feeding behaviour, and therefore
possible past displacements or migrations. Besides, bone collagen and apatite are permanently
reabsorbed and recomposed by the organism, so that their isotopic compositions give an
account of the feeding customs at least during the final years of an individual, whereas the
composition of the dental enamel can at least provide information regarding the type of food
eaten during the year in which the dental crown was formed.
In America, the analysis of stable isotopes is being used somewhat frequently, particularly
in regard to reconstructing the consumption of maize, because this plant is a C4 that made
a significant contribution to the pre-Hispanic diet, as was previously noted. Van der Merwe
and Tschauner (1999) had already shown that once domesticated, plants with a C4 origin, like
maize or sugarcane, became the largest suppliers of resources for the highest civilisations the
world over. The proportion of carbon isotopes in organisms that come from lakes or seas
is however more variable, and in general they have a higher content of nitrogen isotopes.
Organisms of this type often contribute much more carbon to bone collagen than maize
itself or other plants. It is in this regard that Tykot emphasises that studies of this kind are
particularly important in coastal and river areas, where C4 plants and a crassulaceae acid
metabolism for human consumption are available.
Multivariate nitrogen and carbon methods were more recently presented for a more complete
reconstruction of the prehistoric diet (Froehle et al. 2012). This actually is a good opportunity
for the development of this type of studies in Peru, given its environmental conditions.
To what extent is this type of study being applied in America? What progress does the method
hold? It has, in fact, been successful in several places where human bone remains can be
analysed in good preservation conditions (Ambrose 1993). For instance, in a pioneering study
using C13 isotopes almost thirty years ago, Chrisholm et al. (1982), were able to show that the
63
Elmo Leon
ancient inhabitants of British Columbia in Canada consumed marine animals and C3 plants. I
still ignore whether there is a compilation of the many and various recent studies on the use
of biochemistry (i.e. the stable isotopes found in human bones for the reconstruction of the
food eaten in the past), because most of the scientific literature focuses on methods and their
fine tuning, as happens with all new sciences.
There are many handbooks of this kind, but I would briefly like to mention a specific one:
Biogeochemical Approaches to Palaeodietary Analysis by Ambrose and Katzenberg 2002, and
a pair of important supplementary articles (Burton and Wright 1995, Pate 1994, Katzenberg
and Harrison 1997). The work by Ambrose and Katzenberg presents several contributions,
particularly in regard to the potential animal bone isotopes have, but also human bones.
In their study of bone isotopes in some Maya burials, Van der Merwe et al. (2000: 23-38)
concluded there was a greater dependence inland on maize throughout time, yet in Belize
there was not such a strong dependence on this plant.
The research done by Burton and Price (2002: 159-171) provides a caveat in this regard.
They noted that bone porosity and mineralisation can alter this kind of study. Besides, the
overall amount of calcium and the ratios of Sr/Ca and Ba/Ca in animal and plant resources
potentially consumed by humans must be fully established. A well-known and main critique
of the method in this regard is bone alteration through diagenesis.
Burton and Wright (1995) in turn showed that the level of strontium in archaeological human
bones is not just a way of measuring the relative meat-plant proportion of the prehistoric
diet, because it can also provide important data alongside with barium, on a mineral-rich diet.
Even more recently, Evershed et al. (2008) were able to reconstruct the diet of the early
peoples of the Near East, especially in Anatolia (modern-day Turkey), based on the study of
lipids that remained on the surface of the ceramic vessels. Reynard et al. (2011) were analysing
calcium in human bones in order to determine the consumption of prehistoric dairy products.
The methods used to determine the chemical components held by the vessels through gas
chromatography and mass spectrometry, had already been put forward and applied with
excellent results for at least three decades (Heron et al. 1991).
Finally, there are two already classic studies that deserve a brief mention here. Schoeninger
and Moore (1992) recounted how trace elements in human bones have been used to investigate
marine- and maize-based prehistoric diets in North America. Of their observations it is worth
emphasising that the manipulation of the feeding of South American camelids, who were
fed with marine products by humans, has been detected (Schoeninger and Moore 1992: 283-
284). Katzenberg and Harrison (1997) in turn made a succinct but most useful summary of the
possible human-bone-based biochemical interpretations.
Pate (1994) likewise made an extensive account of this mode of analysis but from an
archaeological perspective, in terms of reconstructing not just the type of food in a given
population but also in terms of its variability, and even more of establishing the environments
64
14,000 years of food in Peru
where these resources were obtained, as a complement to interdisciplinary work in the
reconstruction of the resources found in a given site.
Excrements and Pathologies Derived From
the Food and From Bromatology
In order to finish this introduction to the alimentary evidence of the past, we must point out
other resources or sources used. One major study is the palaeo-odontological analysis and
the study of the human skeleton. Physical anthropologists recover invaluable information
for the determination of past food through the study of teeth (caries, plaque, hypoplasia,
attrition) and skeletons (height, pathology, growth lines). This type of study however faces
problems such as preservation conditions, the natural loss of teeth, and bone lesions due to
pathologies such as anaemia and scurvy.
Following Williams (2005: 32), our direct evidence comprises the content of the intestines,
coproliths, trace elements and the analysis of stable isotopes. Coproliths report the diet in
the 24 hours before death, and there is as yet no way of establishing whether the diet shown
by the excrements was typical or not.
As for the bones, these provide different types of information. For instance, a dental crown
records the type of food an infant has between one and five years of age, whereas bones do
so between 10 and 25 years of age for adults.
Palaeo-scatology (Bryant and Dean 2006, Sobolik 2000) and palaeopathology (Verano 1997)
are two complementary and necessary studies in order to directly trace the type of food eaten
by the pre-Hispanic populations. The former manages to reactivate and hydrate human faecal
remains in terms of examining the diet of its last twenty-four hours, albeit without knowing
whether the food eaten was typical of this individual’s diet. The most remarkable food residues
from an archaeological standpoint are those that definitely come from ancient human faecal
remains. Coproliths are mineralised or desiccated faeces that hold micro- and macroscopic
residues from which the diet of the individual who ingested them can be reconstructed, thus
providing crucial data such as caloric balance and nutritional consumption.
The items this type of study recognises evidently are not the ones that were digested, and
therefore have to be supplemented with those that were digested and which are revealed by
steroids, DNA and proteic residues.
Nowadays faecal remains can determine the gender of the individual who defecated
through hormone studies (Reinhard and Bryant 1992). Sobolik (2000) adds new techniques
like gonad steroids, which can be detected in coproliths and which can indicate the gender
of the producers, i.e. they can specify whether the faeces are male or female. Sobolik also
mentions new coprolith-based research paths such as detecting the types of proteins present
in the faeces, nutritional analyses, studies of pollen concentration (for instance, the pollen
65
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

of Prosopis lasts longer than that of maize), parasites and nutrition, and so on. A study was
more recently published showing that coproliths also hold important information related to YACIMIENTOS ARQUEOLÓGICOS PERUANOS
mitochondrial DNA and diseases such as Haemophylus parainfluenza (Luciani et al. 2006). PREHISPÁNICOS CON RESTOS DE ALIMENTOS

Palaeopathology in turn is a mandatory companion because several human diseases arise

whenever there are alimentary diseases, such as anaemia due to iron insufficiency. Both
sciences have been introduced in the text in order to present their evidence and to explore
the significance both disciplines have, when applied to the diet of pre-Hispanic Peru.

Proteins, Fat, Carbohydrates, and Vitamins in Native Peruvian Foodstuffs

A complementary, brief and marginal but essential study in this book is an approach to the
biochemistry of the food eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru. Readers will find this contribution split
into two sections, one that appears throughout the account of each species that was part of
this food trove—for instance, when discussing the nutritional value of each resource whenever
it could be found—and the other section in a special chapter meant to briefly examine the
characteristics of each biochemical component of pre-Hispanic foodstuffs, including proteins,
carbohydrates, and lipids, along with vitamins and mineral elements, in terms of assessing
whether these sufficed or not for a good nutrition. I am fully aware that the biochemistry
of food is not my field and cautiously made direct reference to renowned scientific journals
such as Food Chemistry or National Research Council (NRC), and particularly to the quite
complete handbook The Cambridge World History of Food (1999, 2000, two volumes). This
is just a brief approach; readers interested in the biochemistry of native Peruvian foods can
consult other specialised sources.

Finally, a question that has to be answered: what fuel was used to cook the food? This can
be answered using ethnohistorical sources, yet for several decades now archaeology has
had a science that can help us in this regard: anthracology. It studies the charcoal left in
archaeological sites not just to identify the wood used, but also to determine the durability
and temperature of the fire. It is often used in the Northern Hemisphere, but now we have
the first dissertation on Peruvian anthracology (Moutarde 2006a and 2006b), which will be
briefly mentioned later on.

We now leave the methods used in this book and turn to some important clarifications in
order to avoid confusion.

Locating the Archaeological Sites Where Food Remains Have Been Found
One point that may prove annoying for my colleagues or for the scientific community (but
perhaps not for non-specialist readers interested in, for instance, the history of each species)
is that the radiocarbon-based age and the localisation of the food remains in each of them are
repeated throughout the book. This reiteration of site localisation (Map 1) and chronology has Mapa 1. Yacimientos arqueológicos peruanos prehispánicos con restos de alimentos

66 67
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

in mind readers who just want to review one or more taxa, such as students or the interested applied it when eating everyday food. The inclusion of information on traditional medicine
public who would not like to read the whole book, which is meant to be a sort of sourcebook. alongside food is essential, but it is the subject of another book.

Let us see this with one example. At least a dozen or so plant species were found at the famed Having reached this point, and before presenting the results of our research, we must briefly
Huaca Prieta site. Each one them was discussed in the corresponding section so that when raise once again the questions with which this book began: ¿is food a social, familiar or gender
discussing each species the name of the site, its location and chronology are included. This subject? What is the real scope of food—in our case, pre-Hispanic food—and how far can
may give the idea that it was my intention to expand the size of the text, but my argument is interpretations go? The following are some preliminary deliberations by way of questions.
that since the book is organised for interested readers who are not specialised in the history
of pre-Hispanic food, this iteration makes it easier for whoever wants to find out about a given
species, who can then go directly to the relevant section and check the available information
without having to go to the beginning of a chapter in order to find the chronology and location
of each site, which interrupts reading and is more complicated. This may seem redundant, but
it is meant for an advanced high school student or a university freshman.

Another example: readers interested in the potato can go directly to the corresponding
section and find all the information required on this plant without having to go over other
sections, as would be the case if all we were dealing with was chronology or the location
of the archaeological sites. AS noted above, university students (and school students, for
that matter) can go directly and search each plant, animal or mineral per item in the second
chapter. Here they will find all the information they want without having to read the rest of
the book if it is not required.

Additional Considerations
There also are several details that must be borne in mind before reading this account of pre-
Hispanic food. In the taxonomy list the reader will find that in some cases there is abundant
information whilst in others this is not so because we do not have it or it is extremely scant. This
essentially is because some plants like the potato, quinoa or maca have caught the attention of
researchers, whilst others like tarwi, in which half its weight is pure protein, are not taken into
consideration by our government but are paradoxically enough appreciated in Denmark.

It should likewise be noted that not all archaeological sites where food remains have been
discovered could be included, because there is a long list of studies that are being made in
Peru, but the book does include a sufficiently representative sample of them. The same holds
for the sources; some are unavoidable and their occasional absence is my responsibility. In
some cases, which certainly were not few, indirect sources had to be used because I was
unable to find the main study in order to find the citation or direct information. This procedure
was however carried out based on publications found in peer-reviewed journals, conventional
scientific journals or books that are managed and accepted following scientific conventions.

Another relevant issue here is the assessment of certain edible resources that in some cases
also had medicinal applications. This is the book’s weak spot, because after having finished
it is clear that our pre-Hispanic forefathers were familiar with ethnomedicine and must have

68 69
 Chapter 2

PRE-HISPANIC FOOD IN PERU

THE MEANING OF FOOD IN
PRE-HISPANIC POPULATIONS

At present, to the best of my knowledge, there still is no full anthropological study of Peruvian
archaeological food remains. This is a paradox. Due to the significance it has in modern Peru,
food has had a special role—both unifying and familial at the same time—and it can be
assumed it had the same significance in the Andean world.

We are aware in this regard that this book requires a major accompaniment, to wit—
anthropological assessments of the meaning food had in pre-Hispanic Peru. This field has as yet
been little explored and it involved the simultaneous use of the sources and methodologies
of two sciences, archaeology and anthropology. We are aware of this limitation and only
mean to point out that this gap is now being filled. Some major studies are available. Though
scattered, these have to be reviewed by way of an introduction because of the connotation
they have in this context. These scholars have made a general contribution towards the
interpretation of food in the pre-Hispanic periods, and also have an Andean experience. We
now turn to some of the points of view from which pre-Hispanic food can be studied.

George Gumerman (1997) prepared a doctoral dissertation on the foods found at the Chimú-
period site of Pacatnamú. This interesting study gives some suggestions that are useful for
our subject matter, i.e. pre-Hispanic food. Gumerman even managed to establish the types of
food and how often they were consumed, both by the common people and by their leaders.

Gumerman claims that food is intrinsically social, and that social relations are defined and
maintained through it, as has already been pointed out in the first part of this book. He
believes that the types of food can vary throughout time due to several factors. Food likewise
divides human groups between those who have access to power and those who belong to the
common people, as is all-too regrettably clear in groups with great social cleavages like Peru.
There is thus clear evidence of a differential access to food resources in pre-Hispanic Peru.

To this we must add the fact that food was also different by gender, age, and the occupation
of those who ate it. For instance, in complex societies specialised cooks are in charge of
preparing the food of those sectors involved in different activities. Let us see some examples.

73
Elmo Leon
The study of stable isotopes is yielding some relevant data as regards gender. A significant
study in this regard is the paper by Ericson et al. (1989) on the human bones found in the
burials at the Huaca Negra site in the lower Virú Valley, on the Northern Peruvian Coast, which
show the diet of males was more varied than that of females.
For Peru we also have a paper by Hastorf (1991) that emphasises the role of women involved
in preparing chicha in the Mantaro Valley. Their role in preparing this important brew made
them the centre of attention in festivities and political alliances, but at the same time it
separated them from power (Gumerman 1997: 114).
Now, can we bring anthropological concepts to bear on this field? A pioneering concept,
albeit of a structural type and which has been duly criticised, was developed by the famed
anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss. Lévi-Strauss revolutionised the concept of cooking in his
Triangle Culinaire (1969), where he defined three major types of food preparation: stewed,
roasted, and smoked. These however are mostly related with meat, which was certainly not
the case in the Andes or in Peru.
Lévi-Strauss believed that stewing meat was a cultural way of cooking, given that water was
added and that it maximised use as “nothing was lost” of the food. On the other hand roasting
was for him a natural way of cooking because the food was directly exposed to fire, and part
of it could be lost. Smoking was a third cooking method that was likewise a natural, albeit
slower, one. For Lévi-Strauss, other types of cooking fell within the angles of the triangle
formed by each of these three basic cooking types.
This type of classification and reasoning have both been criticised, particularly by Shankman
(1969), who had challenged the model on the grounds that it lacks an argument, is missing
cooking-methods, and so on. Lehrer (1972, cited by Gumerman 1997) also raised objections
against Lévi-Strauss’ classification because he believes it debases what had originally been
conceived as a linguistic range and turns it into a culinary system. Even so Gumerman believes
the type of cooking provides an anthropological basis as the methods are indeed shared, thus
uniting human groups (Gumerman 1997: 108). He ends by raising several questions that can be
answered using interdisciplinary approaches on the subject of pre-Hispanic food, which is
what concerns us here.
The approach developed by DeFrance (2009) is a supplementary yet important study that has
to be included due to the vastness of its scope. This approach provides tools with which to
understand how it was that food was distributed during Peru’s pre-Hispanic period, particularly
within the elite.
The premise drawn by DeFrance is that all animals which provide food and other products
had a key role in the development of past societies. She believes archaeologists can use
zoo-archaeological remains to explore both the ways and extent in which they developed
status amongst the elites and its dimensions, as well as their condition as elements of
power.
74
14,000 years of food in Peru
For DeFrance, zoo-archaeology can also be used to show skill in regard to animal domestication.
Her analysis touches the Andes and includes camelids as the basis of a pastoral economy
that included their domestication and the transportation of wool, fibre, fertilisers and meat
throughout a large part of the Andean area (DeFrance 2009: 111).
DeFrance also believes that three domesticated animals had a key role in the Central Andes:
guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus), dogs, and the Muscovy duck (Cairina moschata). Besides their use
as food, guinea pigs had medicinal and ritual roles. Using data derived from the archaeological
and isotopic record—e.g. Chavín de Huántar, based on the studies made by Miller and Burger
(1995)—DeFrance posits that agricultural produce were exchanged in the vicinity of Chavín
against other items such as dried llama meat (charqui), which was produced at higher altitudes
in the Andes.
DeFrance then presents the case of the Mochica economy, where the exchange of llamas
and fish, presumably made in markets, had a key role—but as she herself notes, there is no
conclusive evidence of markets at that time, i.e. the sixth century A.D.
DeFrance likewise includes the Altiplano cultures of Tiahuanaco and Wari. From a zoo-
archaeological perspective, these were sustained by camelids even though other animals such
as fish have been recorded at Wari sites. Finally, during the brief Late Horizon charqui seems
to have been mostly consumed during festive ceremonies and by the Inca militia. DeFrance
(2009: 114) ends her review recalling that fish was essential for the early development of
complex societies on the Central Coast of Peru, a point that was reflected on the cultures
that arose in these areas a few centuries prior to the arrival of the Inca.
DeFrance uses several lines of evidence at a global level to convincingly draw the premise that
elite consumption goods existed. According to previous studies that will be reviewed below
(e.g. Miller and Burger 1995, Sandefur 2001), DeFrance believes that the Inca elite (i.e. in the last
and most recent period of pre-Hispanic Peru) promoted the consumption of meat over other
types of food, as was the case with the Maya.
For DeFrance (2009: 124) the decision to eat mostly meat, particularly that of young animals
(specifically domesticated for this purpose), is visible in the cut patterns left in bones when
removing the flesh, as was found by the studies made at the site of Chavín de Huántar in the
Central Peruvian highlands. Things were different during the Wari Empire, when the elites
seem to have favoured the consumption of a wider range of animals. In DeFrance’s scheme,
the coastal elites in the Inca period also favoured the bigger fish (with more flesh) and huge
amounts of types of shellfish (DeFrance 2009: 129).
On the other hand subject populations ate smaller fish, whose remains were more intensively
used. Another indicator of power that is reflected in the animals is that bigger fish for the
consumption of the elite were imported and moved along vast distances, from the coast
to sites in the upper Andean highlands, as was seen at Chavín de Huántar and in Wari times,
specifically at Cerro Baúl.
75
Elmo Leon

DeFrance concludes that animal foods used by complex societies were meant not just for
consumption but also to establish social distinctions; to legitimise the ruling elites; and to
ensure social unity through the symbolic manipulation of animals in ritual.

A practical application to Chimu cuisine was recently undertaken by Cutright (2009). Basing
herself on the work done by Bray, Dietler and Gumerman, Cutright posits that one can explore
the world of sociocultural processes through cuisine. Culinary decisions such as what and
how to eat, or how to cook, are potential openings that enable an understanding of the A BRIEF HISTORY OF PRE-HISPANIC PERU
multiple cultural changes that have taken place not just in modern times, but also in the pre-
Hispanic period.

Before moving on to our subject at hand, it is worth presenting a very brief outline of the
pre-Hispanic period, simply to familiarise the reader with the main dates and events. This
will allow the reader to position him/herself spatially and temporally in the Central Andes,
and will also provide some data on the environment in certain periods, which is important
because the climate has been connected in one way or another with the obtention of food
since the beginnings of human occupation.

The Archaic or Preceramic Period

Human groups in Peru, i.e. in the Central Andes, go back to fourteen thousand years B.C. Their
presence is recorded both in the highlands and on the coast, where they go back to twelve
thousand years B.C. So in principle these immigrant populations were quite similar in temporal
terms. At this time the Andes experienced several glaciations and the retreat of the glaciers;
this came to an end in the Terminal Pleistocene after the Younger Dryas glaciation around
11,000 B.C. It is believed that the scant human groups fed on the food resources derived from
the contemporary megafauna along with deer and small mammals, obviously supplemented
with several plants that were at initially wild.

Little is known of how these early peoples lived, but it seems they settled in seasonal camps
for very brief periods. We regrettably have no data on hunting modes or culinary preparation,
but it can be speculated that they may have stalked their prey and used wood- or stone-
tipped spears or javelins. In the highlands they must have used a series of rock shelters and
caves to protect themselves from the elements, whereas on the coast they would have built
camps, probably to exploit marine resources, and those from the lomas and the tributaries
of river deltas and river banks in the middle of the desert. The sea held several key resources
derived from the upswelling of zooplankton and phytoplankton; this however probably did
not take place as it happens nowadays, for the cold Peruvian Current only stabilised around
3,800 B.C. Little is known of local climate changes in the Central Andean area, but it is clear
that the Younger Dryas brought down the temperature in just a few decades. This must have
had an impact on the behaviour of these early settlers as regards their food needs. There
unfortunately are no human bone remains dating to such distant times, so that a reconstruction
from a bio-archaeological standpoint cannot be presented.

76 77
Elmo Leon
A subsequent period extended from the last glaciation (11,000 B.C.) to around 4,000 B.C. The
number of sites increased, and demographic density also rose slightly. Temperatures gradually
rose in the Andes throughout this period as happened in the rest of the world during the
Holocene. A marked and sustained temperature rise in the Central Andes is clear by 7200 B.C.,
and it reached its peak in 6,200-4,800 B.C.
A first achievement was attained in this period: the development of early horticulture
[horticultura]. Studies undertaken in the highlands and the coast have shown that experiments
were made with resources such as gourds, legumes, chili peppers and even peanuts. This
happened both in the Andes and in the tropical or semitropical areas before 9000 B.C. Some
biologists believe that plants dating to this period were already in a state of experimental
domestication, and so it can be speculated that the origins of this process go back to the
Younger Dryas. Recent research is on the other hand painting a different picture of the
hunting and gathering period. The so-called Paiján complex from Pampa de los Fósiles, in the
Cupisnique area, corresponds to an early culture that developed ca. 11,000-6,200 B.C. This
culture was characterised by populations that lived in camps and were highly mobile, but
it likewise included groups from the Jequetepeque Valley on the Northern Peruvian coast
that lived in semi-permanent camps and were therefore already experimenting with plant
management. Some of these populations were also building irrigation canals by 5600 B.C.,
which is quite an early date in the context of international agriculture.
Experiments were being made at the same time—ca. 6000 B.C.—with camelid management,
so that this type of mammal was literally under domestication by 4,200 B.C. By then most of
the plants in the Andes had been domesticated.
After Paiján, coastal populations comprised multiple human groups settled essentially on the
littoral, where they used marine resources such as fish, shellfish, algae and fowl. They lived in
camps like those found at Paloma, close to San Bartolo, south of Lima, where they fed mainly
on gourds and anchovy, and buried their dead inside the huts. In the highlands the people
found refuge in caves or shelters.
Little is known of their physical appearance, but it is known for instance that the Paiján people
had gracile bones, narrow faces, and hyperdolicocephalic skulls—a somewhat rare trait
amongst these early South American groups. They suffered from caries and arthritis. In the
highlands, the children buried inside Lauricocha Cave were oddly enough interred with semi-
precious stones and several other offerings, thus suggesting that infants received a special
treatment. Contemporary highland burials exhibit different physical characteristics—these
were small people with more robust bones and a wider face. The analysis of human bones and
genetic seem to indicate the presence of several populations in South America at that time,
and specifically in the Andes.
Archaeologists have devoted much study to the stone tools dating to this period but this is
simply due to their better state of preservation, for organic materials long ago vanished after
so many thousands of years. These tools reveal that except in the case of obsidian, people
78
14,000 years of food in Peru
did not travel much in search of raw materials or stones. The stone blocks were carved in
the quarries and were then taken to their dwellings, which included areas meant for tool
manufacture. Arrow points used to hunt have been found, as well as stone chips and cutting
knives, scrapers to prepare the skins used as clothes, and so on.
A particularly significant event took place in the fourth millennia B.C. It was then that the
Cold Peruvian Current stabilised, and with it the stock of marine resources available for food
became more permanent and stable. When we add agricultural development, it becomes
clear that a relative economic boom took place in this period. This probably gave rise to
more differentiation within the population, which in turn showed in the time these groups
devoted to activities other than subsistence, including ritual activities undertaken in public
buildings that are usually called ‘temples.’ A step had been taken that led from the simple
encampment meant for a more ‘elementary’ life to a more complex society that probably
comprised shamans, the elite and a stratum of common people.
It was at this time, ca. 3800 B.C., that several public buildings were erected, particularly in the
small coastal of what is known as the Norte Chico (Small South); these monumental works
entailed the mass mobilisation of labour, and in their midst there arose the iconography that
would be developed in Chavín and would endure until the Inca Empire. In the Central Andes
this period is currently known as the Late Archaic Period. Several plants and marine resources
were managed during this period that seem to have formed the base for what we will later
see. This alimentary base provided for a kind of economic boom and sedentism that enabled
the construction of several large buildings such as Áspero, Chupacigarro-Caral, Las Haldas,
Sechín Alto, Cotos, La Galgada, and the so-called ‘U-shaped temples” of the Central Coast
like El Paraíso, Cardal, Mina Perdida, and so on.
As for the environment, we should bear in mind that in this period the El Niño phenomenon
became a recurring event on the coast at the same time that the southern Altiplano came
out of a protracted drought and desertification process that lasted almost all of the Middle
Holocene, ca. 7,000-3,500 B.C. This gave rise to several active populations, and this finally led
to the domestication of, for instance, quinoa in an immediately subsequent period.
The Initial Period and the Chavín Phenomenon
The Initial Period, which extends from ca. 2500 B.C. to 1000 B.C., is so called because it
indicates the development of pottery in pre-Hispanic Peru. Although pottery is significant
from a ritual standpoint—it bears the iconography with the beliefs the early peoples of the
Central Andes had—it probably was not so from a functional point of view insofar as several
vessels had been used since ancient times.
By convention the Early Horizon comes next. This period extends from 1000 B.C. to 200 B.C.
and is characterised by the presence of the Chavín cult in the Central Andes, which spread out
from the ceremonial centre of Chavín in the Callejón de Huaylas. The architectural conception
79
Elmo Leon
of the edifice indicates however that it was not an original idea and was instead the result
of several traditions that must have corresponded to different types of cults found on both
the Northern and Central coasts—platforms, truncated pyramids, U-shaped temples—as well
as in highland sites (Kotosh in Huánuco, La Galgada in Áncash). Chavín is thus the outcome
of several traditions, and probably the offspring of previous cults. The human background
of the Chavín phenomenon must have comprised several shaman castes ‘institutionalised’
by the groups [which ones?]; these shamans acted as ‘priests’ and used a paraphernalia that
comprised ‘sacred’ and exchanged elements that included offerings and the consumption of
hallucinogens.
Research undertaken in U-shaped temples showed they were built by several, probably
diversified [diversificadas: differentiated?], populations, which bear witness to their multiple
components. Even more interesting is the presence of buildings showing they were abandoned,
intentionally burned and then rebuilt, a pattern typical of ritual conducts followed in this kind
of ceremonial centre. A similar history is observable at Chavín de Huántar itself (Lumbreras
1993), which comprised at its centre several structures and galleries, courtyards or plazas,
stairways and so on. Its strategic location clearly indicates a connection between the coast,
the highlands and the tropical forest, so that several traditions merged. Chavín iconography
includes birds, felines and serpents, in what has been interpreted as a combination of the
various environments found in the Central Andes. The galleries on the other hand held several
offerings, and it is now being posited that some openings served as smoke ducts and for the
sound of music, which must have penetrated other platforms.
Excavations have shown there was a town in the vicinity dedicated to textile (dyed wool,
tapestries), ceramic, and lithic (beads, polished tools) manufacture. Thus far the absence of
elite tombs is odd and it seems they did not exist. What is clear is the progress made in
technology and art. Metal objects stand out in this regard, alongside the development of
several techniques. The pottery left behind by Chavín likewise comprises veritable art pieces.
We thus see a clear social stratification and several lines of evidence that clearly show long-
distance contacts, i.e. exchanges. The evidence likewise indicates meat was prepared as
charqui, and particularly high rates of maize consumption.
The structures were abandoned towards the end of this period in 200 B.C., and the Chavín cult
paraphernalia gradually disappeared. Sites were located in the higher areas, and archaeologists
have interpreted this as an evidence of conflicts. Research is however needed to elucidate the
connection between the Early Horizon and what is known as the Early Intermediate Period,
when the white on red pottery appeared.
Other parts of the Andes present different cultural varieties. Such is the case of Vicús in Piura,
a little-studied culture which developed a remarkable pottery that is more related with the
Northern Andes, highly-skilled metalwork and deep tombs. Pucará is another culture with its
own characteristics, this time in the southern Altiplano, which grew high-altitude cereals like
quinoa, built temples and initiated the use of camelid caravans for transportation.
80
14,000 years of food in Peru
Regional Cultures (Early Intermediate Period)
Developing a chronology for this period is not easy as it comprises several major cultures that
have been studied for over a century. If we have to do so we have a period that on average
extend from 100 B.C. to A.D. 700, but this lapse of time varies from one site to another.
At this time the Central Andes had at least four main characteristics: the establishment of a
State sensu stricto (with a sector of people working for it, i.e. bureaucrats); manufactures at
the scale of, and specific to, the various cultures of the time (which entails specialists such
as farmers, fishermen, etc.); a unique art style [arte diferenciado]; and (according to some
scholars) the rise of the city, but it must here be noted that some believe in this regard that in
the Andes cities, unlike in the Western world, had sui generis characteristics that made them
look more like ritual centres with agglomerations of people. Unlike previous periods, this
period saw an increase in the number of fortifications and in sites of a defensive nature, which
perhaps delimited regionalism.
These characteristics were shared to a greater or lesser extent by cultures like the Lima,
Moche, Nasca, Recuay or Cajamarca, amongst others. Here we will discuss just three of them
because this book does not have to dwell on this period.
The Mochica culture is the classic culture par excellence (Castillo and Uceda 2008). It
apparently developed out of a style known as Salinar, to which types of dwellings and
ceremonial centres have been ascribed, as well as fortresses and irrigation canals, which mean
water control is key to an understanding of this phenomenon. Yet there also was another
culture known as Gallinazo that was spread over a larger area. It is believed the Mochica later
on incorporated Gallinazo and then established simple and complex settlements, both of
residential and a cult nature. All this brought about a significant demographic increase. Elite
burials are also clearly present, indicating the vertical segmentation of Moche society. Part of
the paraphernalia becomes evident when we analyse the massive human sacrifices.
Nasca is a similar culture that developed in the modern-day department of Ica, on the
South-Central coast of Peru. It literally developed in the middle of an extremely arid
environment. Its people established themselves in this environment and extracted water
from the water table by building cisterns and ducts, which were used to irrigate and cultivate
several vegetable resources they consumed alongside those of a marine nature (Silverman
and Proulx 2002).
It is impressive that the Nasca managed to raise monumental shrines in this desert like
Cahuachi, which comprises some 150 hectares full of courtyards, tombs and offerings, and
where large-scale pilgrimages took place. They lived in houses associated with public, probably
ritual, centres. The Nasca made impressive and elaborate ceramic and textile objects, many
of them of a votive nature. Their rituals were festive and were held with a series of musical
instruments and paraphernalia. They also built the famed lines or geoglyphs, which are now
taken to be totemic representations of a water cult.
81
Elmo Leon
The Recuay culture developed in this period in the highlands of Ancash. It was characterised
by the rise of several high-altitude sites in the midst of ceremonial places and areas where
activities such as grazing took place, for llamas and other camelids were key resources (Lau
2002). The Recuay also produced a fancy pottery which reflected the hierarchy of the elite
and sacred as well as economic activities. They also distinguished themselves due to the
versatility of their stone stelae, which are associated with elite burials.
The Wari Empire
After these first cultural groups that date to the beginning of the Christian era, there appeared
a culture in Ayacucho that expanded around A.D. 600 and became the first Andean empire.
The Middle Horizon Wari Empire in the Central Andes is one of best-known culture thanks to
the current interdisciplinary research. We will here present it following Cook and Glowacki
(2003).
The Wari State first began as a small confederation in the Early Intermediate that is known as
Huarpa. Starting in A.D. 600 it began to transform into an empire that collapsed in A.D. 1000.
The eponymous site of Wari lies close to modern-day Huamanga. This was its capital, where
some of the biggest and most complex architecture in the empire is found. The urban core,
which extends over three square kilometres, housed several architectural compounds with
many enclosures. Isbell and McEwan (1991) estimate the city had at least seventy thousand
inhabitants during its heyday.
What was the climate like in this period? Although there are no specific palaeoclimatic studies
of this issue, we can speculate that a severe drought afflicted several parts of the Andes in the
sixth century of the Christian era, as was recorded in the ice layers of the Quelccaya glacier
and as is shown by the data from the O18 isotope they hold (Thompson et al. 1985). Cook and
Glowacki (2003: 176) believe this spurred the search for new arable and fertile land outside
Ayacucho in the late sixth century A.D. Following Glowacki and Malpass (1998), they suggest the
drought may have led to an increase in the number of ceremonial offerings made to the huacas
and ancestors, as well as in the number of festivals meant to gain control of water sources.
Pottery is one of the essential and recognisable products manufactured by the Wari.
Archaeologists have identified two stages in their development, a first, non-secular stage with
two styles—Chakipampa and Ocros—and a second one that is in general known as Viñaque.
The ceremonial ceramics in the first phase comprise the Conchopata and Robles Moqo styles,
whilst the latter one comprises the Atarco and Pachacamac styles. Thanks to the sequence
developed by Dorothy Menzel it is assumed that during the Middle Horizon epoch 1 (ca.
A.D. 540-700), the first stage in Wari expansion was represented by the Ocros (disseminated
over the northern, central, and southern highlands) and Chakipampa (found on the coast)
ceramic styles. The Wari presence in the highlands during the second phase (ca. A.D. 700-800)
is evinced by the Viñaque style, and in the southern and central coasts by the Atarco and
Pachacamac styles respectively.
82
14,000 years of food in Peru
The Late Intermediate Chiefdoms
Several kingdoms appeared once the Wari Empire had split, probably due to several political
and environmental factors. These kingdoms had a high ceramic, metal and textile output as
well as commercial exchange systems and agricultural and fishing technologies that involved
a complex social development that even involved the establishment of confederations. This
period extended from ca. A.D. 1000 to A.D. 1470.
Archaeologists likewise believe that this was period of conflict, for many sites lie on the upper
parts of hills and mountains. The Chincha culture has some good examples of this. This culture
included a whole range of sea-based merchants with exchange networks that encompassed
all of the Andean area, and who travelled on small crafts alongside the littoral (Sandweiss
1992). Another case in point is the Chancay culture, north of Lima, which had several domestic
settlements and a particularly high number of cemeteries, and which cultivated all plants
known at present (Parsons and Hastings 1988). On the North Coast the Chimú built, the citadel
of Chan Chan amongst other sites, whilst the Lambayeque stood out due to their marvellous
metalwork (Moore and Mackey 2008). But a new empire would prevail shortly afterwards.
The Inca
According to historical sources the Inca Empire developed from around A.D. 1470, but the
evidence suggests that this happened long before. What is clear is that it gave rise to a society
that imposed its rule over almost all of Andean South America in a relatively brief span.
It is not easy showing that such an empire grew out of a ceramic style known as Killke, and it
certainly must have had an impressive plan of expansion in administrative terms that had the
support of accounting systems like the quipu, which by the way were a Wari invention.
The Inca used logos or symbols such as the trapezoidal architectural form. Llamas were used
as sacrifices, in caravans, and eventually as food, particularly that of the ruling elite. As for
maize, its massive consumption was standardised. The Inca also built an impressive road
system that connected almost all of the Andean area (Bauer 1992). The influence the panaca
or royal families had is known. These groups were organised by ayllus and in order to serve the
State they had servants who carried out the duties they were assigned. The Inca apparently
had a rigid legal system, so that transgressors rarely escaped their punishment, which could
include the death penalty.
83
FOOD IN PRE-HISPANIC PERU

We move on now to the analysis of the palaeodiet and finally enter the subject matter of this
book. It has been divided into plants, animals, and minerals. The information available for each
taxon appears as follows: definition, taxonomy, some characteristics of the species, genetic
information, origins, domestication, and finally a review of the archaeological finds and the
associated physical data that ensure its presence in the pre-Hispanic world. The reader will
find some entries that are not recognised as belonging to the Andean area, but which had to
be included because they appear in the scientific literature. A glossary has been prepared to
help readers who want to look up terms from various specialties, which is an unavoidable
issue in this book due to its interdisciplinary nature.

Peruvian Pre-Hispanic Plants Used as Food

Tubers and Rhizomes

Achira, Adeira, Imocona, Luano, Munay, sio (Canna edulis Ker-Gawler or Indica)
The plant known as achira is an American rhizome that can be domesticated and eaten, and
which has shown up in various Peruvian archaeological sites. It can be segmented in tube-
like shapes, and is then boiled or roasted for its domestic consumption. Donald Ugent (1984)
posits it has high nutritional value due to the amount of starch it has; besides it is easily
digested and holds great promise for future alimentary food purposes (National Research
Council 1989b: 11, Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 112).

Let us turn now to its bromatology. Its fruits are so bulky they can be the size of a human
forearm. Fresh tubers have up to 75% water and 6-14% sugars, like glucose and saccharose. It
has a high potassium content, but a low calcium and phosphorus content.

Corpoica (2003) made a bromatological study of fresh achira, and for each 100 grams recorded up
to 70% water, 130 calories, 0.9-2.7 g of proteins, 25.7-31 g of carbohydrates, 0.5-0.8 g of fibre, 0.1 g
of fat, 15-35 mg of calcium, 33-63 mg of phosphorus, 1.4-9.3 mg of iron, 0.01 mg of riboflavin, 0.03
mg of thiamine, 8 retinol equivalents of vitamin A, 0.4-0.66 mg of niacin, and 7 mg of vitamin C.

85
Elmo Leon
Pérez and Lares (2005) made the most agreed-upon analysis of the biochemistry of starch
in this plant. They list, in descending order, phosphorus, sodium, potassium, magnesium,
and—in lesser amounts—iron, calcium, and zinc. They believe this plant was domesticated
in a macroregion that extends from southern Central America to northern South America
(Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 163).
As for the distribution of achira, Margaret Towle (1961: 33-34) notes that in Peru it extends from
sea level up to two thousand metres. She likewise points out that wherever they are found,
the direct or indirect evidence for the presence of this plant indicates that pre-Hispanic
populations saw in it an excellent source of starch.
Before reviewing the scant samples found of achira in pre-Hispanic Peru, we should go over
a brief presentation Daniel Gade made in a pioneering article (Gade 1966), particularly in
regard to the origins of this important rhizome, and whether there is at least an ethnographic
knowledge of its preparation.
Gade points out that the distribution of achira extends from Venezuela to northern Chile,
and includes the Amazon forest, Paraguay, the Antilles and Central America, ranging in
altitude from 0 to 2900 masl. He speculates that it originated in the tropical forest in a
South American precipitation environment, perhaps in what is now Colombia. Gade posits
it may have disseminated from the green oriental Andean region to the coast of Peru and
Northern Chile.
The interesting point four decades later is that Gade apparently was not wrong. The wild
ancestor of achira may have developed in the Amazonian lowlands, given that this environment
had a low carbon dioxide level and a reduced seasonality, at least since the Late Pleistocene
(Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 111).
The National Research Council (1989a: 27) in turn believes that this is a plant that originated
in Peru and Ecuador. Although its presence has been recorder on the coast sin the Preceramic
Period (prior to 2200 B.C.), the Council believes that the Inca clearly established its massive
consumption and enhanced its “genetic engineering”, thus attaining rhizomes that were up to
20 cm thick.
Gade on the other hand believed that achira was extremely important for early agriculture on
the Peruvian coast, before the coming of maize and yucca. This assumption cannot be easily
verified because as seen below, the number of this type of rhizomes that have been found is
lower in comparison to others.
It is clear that any effort to reconstruct the techniques used to prepare achira will be
complicated but it is worth going over Gade’s account (1966: 412), which is actually based on
Ernst Middendorf, a German nineteenth-century traveller in Peru. Middendorf described how
achira was cooked in a small oven known as “huatia,” where it was roasted over hot ashes and
yielded a nutritious and agreeable food.
86
14,000 years of food in Peru
Gade gave an account of the technique used to stew [cocción] achira in the upper Apurímac
valley. Here they used ovens—literally a hole in the ground—lit with agave in which they
placed stones that were then heated. Achira leaves were placed on top, and the rhizomes
were placed on top of them and were then covered with dry achira. Finally the whole lot was
covered and allowed to cook underground for some twelve hours. The end result was sweet
rhizomes with a high starch content, a quality noted at the beginning of this taxon.
Achira has many advantages as food [tema comestible]: it is quickly cooked, it can be eaten
raw or cooked and is easily digested, particularly by children, old-age people, or individuals
with digestive problems (National Research Council 1989a: 28).
The domestication of achira is still debated. Herrera (1942b) suggested that it originally took
place in the southern Peruvian mountains, while Cohen (1978) thought the North Coast had
better conditions for domestication. The National Research Council (1989a: 29-35) has a
similar position when it claims that this plant was one of the earliest plants domesticated
in the Andean area. Its wild species are scattered all over the mid-elevation Andes, usually
in wet niches. Even so, it is believed in more general terms that its domestication may have
begun on northern South America or southern Mesoamerica.
On the other hand, the size of the specimens recovered in the excavations made in Peru
indicates that if there was a change, it must have taken place in quite distant times because
both archaeological and modern specimens are quite similar. Don Ugent used this argument
to posit that achira domestication began at an earlier date (Ugent 1984: 428). I believe that this
took place during the Early Holocene.
Jeffrey Quilter (1991: 398) is very cautious in this regard. He believes achira domestication is
still uncertain even by 2,500 B.C., and that it may have taken place even later.
Margaret Towle (1961: 139) pointed out that achira was probably domesticated since the
beginning of the occupation of Huaca Prieta, around 3000 B.C. The radiocarbon dates from
this site are however currently under reassessment, and we still await the new publication of
the plants and the other finds related with the food of its preceramic inhabitants (cf. Dillehay
et al. 2012), which were still unavailable as we went to press.
Scholars in general believe the achira found since the Preceramic Period is a cultivated
plant (Bonavia 1982: 313), which means a consensus has been reached regarding its date of
domestication.
Let us turn now to the evidence of achira in pre-Hispanic Peru, and first of all to
ethnohistorical and ceramic sources. Ugent (1984: 418) and Vargas (1962: 111-112) correctly
point out the first observations can be made on sculpted Mochica and Chimu ceramics.
Here achira appears both modelled and painted, thus evincing that populations in both
cultures were familiar with this plant. This also allows for a relative dating at both ends
ca. A.D. 500 and A.D. 1100-1480.
87
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

Seminario (2004: 22) correctly points out in the above-mentioned compilation by Ugent (1984)
that the chroniclers, strangely enough, do not mention achira in any other part of America
except for the Central Andes. This strengthens the idea that it originally was a Peruvian plant.
Ugent likewise points out that “achira” is a Quechua mode used to label the “edible achira,”
which seems to be another argument for the Andes.

Soukup (1980: 102) had already discussed this plant which he believed had been much cultivated
in the Inca empire, but it had been found when excavating some tombs in the Peruvian coast,
both raw and cooked. Let us turn now to the available evidence from archaeological excavations.

Ugent (1984) reported the earliest achira remains in the archaeological record. It was found
in the same context as sweet potato, and so can be dated to 2914-2287 B.C. in the site called
Huaynuná, in the Casma Valley (Figure 2).

The second earliest evidence thus far dates to the third millennium B.C. Only the remains of one
piece of achira (Canna edulis) have been found at La Galgada, a monumental archaeological
site in Pallasca—a province of the modern region of Ancash close to the Tablachaca Canyon,
some 1100 masl. The dates from this site range between 2600 B.C. and 1316 B.C., but the
specimen can be dated to 2147 B.C. (Grieder et al. 1988: 69, Smith 1988: 128).

The remains of two charred seeds were found at Caral, in a phase that on average dates to
2000 B.C. This means achira was eaten on the Central Coast at least on this date, if not before
(Flores Blanco 2006: 224).

Frédéric Engel (1966: 62) and Jeffrey Quilter et al. (1991: 280) have reported achira at El Paraíso
north of Lima, in a period close to ca. 2150 B.C., so it may have also been eaten at this site.

Cohen (1978: 32) reports that achira was already present in the lower levels of the Pampa
phase on the Central Coast of Peru, probably in the Middle Holocene (ca. 5000 B.C.), but
accuracy is difficult without a radiocarbon date. Cohen emphasises that this seems to have
been the most important rhizome throughout all of the occupation sequence, in comparison
with its present absence. Figura 2. Restos de achira de Huayuná -2914-2287 a.C.- (superior a la derecha) y de Pampa de Llamas, valle bajo de Casma. (CORTESÍA DE
DONALD UGENT).
Don Ugent (1984: 420) posits that the presence of achira at Pampa de Llamas, in the lower Casma
Valley, was extended through time, as it has also been found at other sites like Pampa Rosario and
San Diego, which date to ca. 800 and 300 B.C. His observations (Ugent 1984: 425) regarding the The characteristics of the traces of charcoal found on the remains suggest these were baked,
conditions the achira remains were found in are interesting, and give the impression that the inside either in the open air like a grill or in charcoal pits. The latter cooking method prevailed with
of the rhizomes was removed in order to extract the edible part of the plant. Besides, most of the achira rhizomes until the appearance of pottery, and is similar to that which was used with
specimens still had fragments of charcoal on their peels, and are thus interpreted as roasted achiras. potatoes and sweet potatoes in the lower Casma Valley. It is somewhat similar to the so-
called “huatia” Daniel Gade mentioned.
The fascinating point here is that Ugent found that some specimens had spiral-shaped traces,
which usually appear when the rhizome is peeled with a cutting element like a stone chip, as Huaca Prieta, on the North Coast of Peru, is a classic archaeological site where achira has also been
may well have been the case. This is the first evidence, about 4000 years old, of the removal discovered. Junius Bird et al. (1985: 233) reported its presence in layer “Q,” which is equal to at least
of achira peels before their consumption and cooking. 2819 B.C. The remains of chewed achira tubers, leaves, and branches evince that it was eaten.

88 89
Elmo Leon
Margaret Towle (1961: 113) says the Mochica also cultivated achira, so it may have been eaten
during the first centuries of the Christian era. Towle likewise mentions the presence of achira
in the tombs of the pre-Hispanic cemetery of Ancón in late periods (probably ca. A.D. 1000-
1535). She points out the presence of achira in the Early Intermediate Period is recorded in the
Playa Grande ceramic style in the shrine of Pachacamac (Towle 1961: 127).
Achira is also depicted on Nasca and Chimú vessels that even include the characteristics of the
plant’s epidermis (Towle 1961: 34). I have also seen depictions of achira in three ceramic pieces in
the Museo Nacional de Arqueología, Antropología e Historia del Perú, one Middle Nasca piece
(ca. A.D. 300), one late Chimú (ca. A.D. 1400), and a White-On-Red piece (A.D. 300 a.C.-100), that
probably came from the North Coast.
A significant amount of achira—in some cases with traces of roasting—was found in the Nasca
shrine at Cahuachi, which dates to the first centuries of the Christian era (Piacenza and Pieri
2012: 3, 6). The high consumption of achira by the people of this culture has already been
pointed out (Silverman and Proulx 2002: 52).
Patterson and Moseley (1968: 116-117) reported achira first appears in the so-called Preceramic
VI at the La Pampa site (dating to ca. 2500-2300 B.C.), which we calibrated to 3090 B.C. It is
worth pointing out that this was a charcoal sample but it was associated with cotton seeds,
thus dating this type of plant at Ancón.
At Los Gavilanes, a site close to the mouth of the Huarmey River, Bonavia (1982: 149)
documented the presence of some remains of Canna sp. (probably achira) starting in layer 1,
i.e. ca. 4000-3,000 B.C..
On the other hand, iconographic evidence indicates that achira was already known and
depicted by the Chavín culture during the first millennium B.C., as is evinced by the Tello
Obelisk (Lathrap 1971, Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 110).
For later periods, e.g. the Chancay culture, Nelson and Bellido Cerda (2010: 50) have reported
the finding of achira in the archaeological middens of sites such as Chambara, Quipico and
Rontoy (90-1,000 masl), which were radiocarbon dated to 1265-1625 B.C.
Finally, Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) observed the presence of achira in the Los Pinos site,
also of the Chancay culture in the Huaura valley, just four kilometres away from the sea.
Arracacha, Creole Celery, Birraca, Waisampila, White Carrot (Arracacia xanthorrhiza Bancroft)
This tuber was frequently eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru, but in time its consumption fell or
worse, it stopped. We now turn to this food resource.
90
14,000 years of food in Peru
This is an umbellifer (like the carrot and celery) that was cultivated in Peru in the 600-3,200
masl altitude range. It is the only domesticated umbellifer in South America and is still limited
to its original environment, but has lately been successfully exported to Brazil. It is in fact now
being grown in Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Peru and y Bolivia (Hermann 1997: 78-80).
Hermann believes there are several reasons why arracacha holds the most promise for
the future, in within the context of the minor Andean tubers. One of these reasons is that
arracacha is free of all undesirable substances in cooking which are present in other tubers,
e.g. oxalates in oca, mucilages in ulluku, or isothiocyanates in mashua.
What is the natural environment of arracacha? Where does it come from? Unlike other Andean
tubers which come from higher altitudes, the arracacha is highly versatile and adaptable to a
wide range of altitudes, from tropical to mesothermal altitudes. It is a paradox that it is almost
unknown in Peru, and yet it is posited that this is its place of origin. Hermann (1997: 85) pointed
out in surprise that no Peruvian dish or standard cookbook includes the arracacha. Almost no
one in Lima knows its existence, and it even has some negative connotations amongst our
Andean peoples.
As for the origins of arracacha, Father Soukup (1980: 68) believes it probably comes from
Colombia, at altitudes ranging between 1700 and 2500 masl, and that Peruvian aborigines
cultivated it particularly because its roots were highly valued for preparing picantes and
chupes.1* Soukup also says that Herrera recorded four classes of arracacha: “rumuracacha,”
“arroz racacha,” “huaysampilla,” and “morada”. These notes support Hermann’s claim that this
tuber used to be eaten more frequently.
Let us turn now to the bromatology of this major tuber. The arracacha is essentially formed
by starch, and from this standpoint it closely resembles the achira. The root is the edible
part of the plant and it has a high content of carbohydrates (26 g), starch (23.5 g), ascorbic
acid, B-carotene, and especially vitamin A (1,760 mg) and niacin. The presence of ascorbic
acid and the way it facilitates the absorption of iron have to be emphasised (Larsen 2000). It
also has minerals such as calcium (65 mg), magnesium (65 mg), phosphorus (55 mg), iron and
potassium. Its large edible range and unique qualities in comparison to other tubers are why
it is preferable (Hermann 1997: 119).
Are the ways in which it was prepared known? The National Research Council (1989b: 60) also
discussed this tuber’s importance and provided ethnographic data in this regard, particularly
from Colombia, where it is used in soups and purée, especially in locros and in the sancocho
colombiano.2* It can also be drunk as “guarapo” or arracacha chicha, prepared using the same
way as masato, particularly in the region of Cundinamarca (Colombia).
1 Denses soups made of boiled vegetables and animal meat, typical from southern Peru.
2 Stews of native vegetables flavoured with spices.
91
Elmo Leon
Hodge (1954) lists the benefits this plant has as regards the ease with which it is cooked or
stewed (in this way it is ideal for newborn babies and children), and its typical consumption in
the Andes in the form of locro, as has already been noted.
Martins (1976) noted an interesting fact in regard to the way arracacha was prepared in pre-
Hispanic Peru by broiling it on embers, i.e. it was roasted. This should not come as a surprise,
as that was the cooking method par excellence at the time.
Like other Andean tubers, the arracacha was also efficiently preserved. When desiccated it
lasts for an impressively long time as it can be stored for almost seven years, yet it preserves
10-12% of its protein content.
But let us turn once again to the question: where does it come from? Wild species have been
found in Peru and particularly in Ecuador; Hermann therefore argues that this is where it was
domesticated. Linguistic data support this hypothesis.
Turning to Hodge (1954: 210), he notes that arracacha is disseminated from Venezuela to
Bolivia. In fact, since the Spanish conquest accounts show it was found all over the Inca
Empire. Hodge suggests that arracacha may have been taken to Colombia by the Incas but
this is mere speculation because as we have just seen, this goes in the opposite direction of
its origins.
It follows that although the origins of this plant are hard to trace, it can be concluded that
modern Colombia is the first possible candidate and Ecuador the second one; from there
it would have spread to the rest of the Andes. Even so, more interdisciplinary studies are
required in order to be more conclusive.
We turn now to the archaeological record of arracacha in pre-Hispanic Peru. It must have
been widely eaten because Hermann (1997: 85) claims that the Spanish chroniclers noted it so.
The main problem here is the actual evidence, because it really is scant.
The earliest evidence of arracacha consumption may come from Los Gavilanes, a site in the
zone of Huarmey. Weir and Bonavia (1985: 105) reported the finding of arracacha pollen in
coprolites from this site, in a period averaging 3200-2200 B.C. Not only is its presence in this
major site excavated by Bonavia clear, it is also established that it was directly eaten as it was
found in human excrement.
Both Yacovleff and Herrera (1934) as well as Towle (1961: 74-75) noted that part of the Nasca
iconography that is similar to yucca, can also be interpreted as a depiction of the arracacha.
This claim must, however, be taken with due prudence.
Arracacha remains were found in the excrement of three individuals in the Mochica site of Dos
Cabezas, at the mouth of the Jequetepeque Valley (Geyer et al. 2003). Radiocarbon datings
range between A.D. 536 and A.D. 580 (Moseley et al. 2008: 83) and prove it was eaten by the
92
14,000 years of food in Peru
Mochica. Reinhard et al. (2007: 534) however believe it may be a case of misidentification due
to the altitude at which the arracacha is cultivated, as well as to the questionable nature of
the pollen analysed.
Sweet Potato, Apichu, Batata, Huascai, Inch (Ipomoea batatas)
Unlike the previous two tubers, references to the sweet potato abound as regards the subjects
we touch upon before their archaeological record. Let us see its fascinating history.
The sweet potato had such significance that it literally laid down the alimentary foundations
both for the Inca Empire and the Maya culture (Cooley 1951). Its importance reached beyond
the American continent, for once exported it was accepted by many populations all over
the world. Cooley thus reports the case of the distant Mori (New Zealand), who store sweet
potatoes in an especially-built bin in an underground part of their villages, which is considered
one of the most important parts of their surroundings.
The incidence of sweet potato consumption is also clear from its export outside America. The first
who did so were the Peninsular European settlers. The cultivation of the sweet potato had been
successful by the time the Spaniards arrived to America that it was widespread in Mesoamerica and
South America, and it was the Spaniards themselves who took it to Europe China, and Malaysia.
The Portuguese then took it to India, Indonesia, and Africa (Seminario 2004: 16).
One issue that has yet to be solved is the pre-Hispanic presence of the sweet potato outside
America, specifically in Melanesia (Asia). In this context it has been claimed that it was introduced
into Oceania by Polynesian travellers from the western coasts of South America—either Ecuador
or Peru—in A.D. 1000-1100, and that it reached New Zealand in A.D. 1250-1300 (Bourke 2009: 491).
After a massive review of the evidence, O’Brien (2000: 209, 215) concluded there was enough
data to support the presence of the sweet potato in the central part of Polynesia by A.D. 1000,
and even in Micronesia as from A.D. 50. On combining the evidence from this part of Oceania,
O’Brien posited that the sweet potato had reached the Fiji Islands ca. B.C. 500. She believes
the Lapita spread this plant in 1500-500 B.C., and reached New Guinea through Melanesia
before the Europeans. The movement of the sweet potato from Melanesia to America may
have been due to human or natural causes, through birds or floating seed pods. Even so it must
be noted that both hypotheses must be examined in order to reach an objective conclusion.
Of the many studies that have been made of this remarkable tuber, we have chosen a
comprehensive one that recently appeared (Loebenstein and Thottappilly 2009), and will
base ourselves on it in order to make a brief introduction to the sweet potato.
This tuber is a member of the Convolvulaceae family and belongs to the Ipomoea genus. This
genus encompasses at least some 600-700 species, about 500 of which appear in America in wild
or domesticated condition. Readers interested in taxonomy should see Austin and Huamán (1996).
93
Elmo Leon
The sweet potato is easily grown, and tolerates droughts, high temperatures, and high humidity.
Yet as a plant with tropical origins it grows best in warm regions, but can be adapted to other,
more temperate ones. The sweet potato stands out amongst other tubers and root crops in
the world because of the large amount of vitamins and minerals it has (as shall be seen below).
In terms of output, the sweet potato is according to Loebenstein and Thottappilly the seventh
most important crop. It yields more biomass and nutrients per hectare than any other crop,
and has a unique role in assuaging hunger.
At present China has the largest amount of hectares dedicated to sweet potato cultivation—about
80% of the total—and is followed by Vietnam (Thottappilly 2009: 4). The sad and paradoxical point
here is that Latin America, the place of origin of the sweet potato, only grows 1.5% of the world
total output, a figure that shows how little Latin American countries do for tubers that should have
such a key role for their populations. In South America the largest producers are Brazil, Paraguay,
and Argentina. In Peru the sweet potato is mostly grown on the North and Central Coasts, but it is
also cultivated in the intermontane valleys up to 2,800 masl, and even in the Amazon forest. It is
generally assumed that its best quality is obtained below 800 masl.
The sweet potato is highly versatile in terms of its planting. It has few problems with weeds,
requires little care, and once sown it rapidly reproduces and even prevents soil erosion. It
grows at high altitudes above sea level and under varied climate conditions, yet it cannot
withstand frosts (Loebenstein and Thottappilly 2009: 5).
Can the sweet potato counteract world hunger? The answer is yes, and this example will illustrate
this. East of Africa the sweet potato is heralded as the “saviour of children and lactating babies”
because it essentially is the only food that saves them from famine. In these regions three million
children are blind due to xerophthalmia, which in turn is due to the lack of vitamin A, hence the
importance of the sweet potato in fighting this disease. The use the sweet potato has in Africa
and its output in Asia provide lessons that should be learned in Peru.
The biochemistry of the sweet potato will be briefly discussed before we move on to our
review of archaeological finds and domestication. We have seen that this is a first-rate pre-
Hispanic alimentary source (in the past and for the future). This type of data has been extensively
discussed, and so it is worth pointing out some researchers’ main data, since these results should
be reviewed within the context of the relevant role this tuber had in pre-Hispanic alimentation.
First of all, the sweet potato is very rich in carbohydrates, glucose, alcohol and beta-carotenes
(the latter are phytonutrients capable of producing vitamin A, antioxidants, and even improve
the human body’s immunological system).
At the protein level, the different varieties of sweet potato range between 1.3 and 10%. It also provides
other vitamins like C, B2 (riboflavin), B6, and E, and even minerals like calcium, potassium, magnesium,
copper, and iron; acids like ascorbic acid —it improves the capacity to absorb iron, as in the case
previously discussed of the arracacha— (Larsen 2000) and it is low in cholesterol and fat.
94
14,000 years of food in Peru
Cooley (1948) claims the sweet potato surpasses the potato in many of its properties because
it has more fat, carbohydrates, fibres, sugar, starch, calories, and vitamins like carotene,
rivoflavin, and pantothenic acid (vitamin B5), a part of which has already been mentioned.
It is also worth including here Hans Horkheimer (1960: 110) classic study. Horkheimer pointed
out that every 119 grams of sweet potato held 1.2 g of proteins, 0.2 g of fat, 27 g of carbohydrates,
and 110 calorie units.
Purselove (1968, cited in the handbook by Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 120) also listed values
of 70% humidity, 27% carbohydrates, and 1.5-2 % proteins. From the above-mentioned
bromatological studies it follows that the sweet potato is a great alimentary source, and that
it in fact was so in pre-Columbian Peru.
We will now examine the data on the domestication of this important tuber. The origins of
the sweet potato have long ago been broadly located in the tropical Americas, but without
pinpointing its precise location (Candolle 1886).
The famed botanist Vavilov (cited in Smith 1968) thought several decades later [later than what]
that it originated in Mexico and Central America, including Guatemala, Honduras, and Costa Rica.
A few decades ago O’Brien (1972) made a full analysis of this tuber and concluded that it had
originated somewhere in North Eastern South America, and that it was the result of a process that
had begun around 2,00 B.C. at the hands of agricultural villages in tropical forest areas. In a later
work O’Brien (2000: 215) moved the date back to 8000 B.C. (and incorporated new evidence) but
still in the same region, within the context of what she calls the early agriculture of tropical tubers.
On the other hand Austin (1987) suggested, from the standpoint of botanical morphology,
that the origins of sweet potato go at least seven or eight thousand years ago, thus agreeing
with O’Brien.
On the other hand the outlook changes if we broach this subject from a genetic perspective,
which makes the search for the ancestors of sweet potato focus on Mesoamerica and México.
Firon et al. (2009: 13) mention previous studies which hold that Ipomoea batatas var. apiculata
has the most direct connections with the domesticated sweet potato, and that Zhang showed
that its greatest genetic diversity is found in Mesoamerica (Guatemala, México, Panama, and
El Salvador), thus marking this area as potentially its original area of domestication.
Fuentes and Chujoy (2009) hold a similar position regarding the sweet potato in South America.
Based on Austin’s studies on botanical morphology, Fuentes and Chujoy concluded this tuber
was domesticated in the tropical Americas, but included the Orinoco as a possible centre in
this process. Yet the archaeological, linguistic and historical evidence seem to suggest the
primary domestication centre may have been either in Colombia, Ecuador, or North Eastern
Peru. It is therefore interesting that the genetic markers for sweet potato come from Peru,
despite the fact that its greatest genetic diversity is found in Mesoamerica.
95
Elmo Leon
Piperno and Pearsall (1998: 163) pointed out that the sweet potato must have been domesticated
inside a macrozone that comprises southern Central America and northern South America.
Horkheimer (1960: 71) claims that in pre-Hispanic Peru, the sweet potato was profusely
cultivated not just in the tropical forest but also on the coast and in the highlands, and added
that “camote” (its Spanish name) comes from “camotli,” an ancient Náhuatl word, thus leading
to the above-mentioned position of Piperno and Pearsall.
For Bonavia (1984: 17) the sweet potato originally came from tropical regions and then dispersed
throughout various zones in South America. Nowadays it has adapted to all warm regions, both
on the Peruvian coast as well as in the intermontane valleys. Reading between the lines, this can
be taken to mean a possible northern origin, albeit without specifying a region.
Broadly speaking, we can conclude from the current state of research, as summarised by
Pearsall and Piperno, that the sweet potato was already domesticated in the Early Holocene,
and that it originally came from modern-day Colombia, the Orinoco or even Mexico or
Central America. We cannot however fully discard its possible domestication in Central
Andean zones.
We now have to answer the question of the ancestors of the sweet potato. Jarret et al.
(1992) used a botanical cladistic analysis to establish that the closest ancestors of cultivated
Ipomoea batatas were Ipomoea trifida and wild Mexican tetraploids. Kobayashi (1984) in turn
had already confirmed that an Ipomoea trifida that includes all plants in the sweet potato
section can cross with Ipomoea batatas. Patricia O’Brien (2000: 215) herself concluded the
sweet potato is the result of several “n” (the small pollen from Ipomoea trifida) and “2n” (the
large pollen of Ipomoea trifida) crosses within the Ipomoea trifida complex (small pollen
from Ipomoea trifida).
We now review the archaeological documentation in terms of establishing the antiquity of
sweet potato and its consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru.
The sweet potato finds from Peru are so important that this one of the few species examined
in depth in “The Cambridge World History of Food” (Kiple y Ornelas 2000) in order to
establish its origins tuber and its domestication (O’Brien 2000: 207-208). It is thus worthwhile
reviewing the available evidence in depth.
It must first be noted that according to Martins (1976), sweet potatoes that had been burned
as a result of the cooking process have been identified in pre-Hispanic Peru, thus proving they
were roasted on an open fireplace. It is regrettable that we cannot specify when this took place
as we were unable to find Martins’ dissertation. But as we shall now see, we have evidence that
supports this type of cooking, and it shall be presented from most ancient to most recent.
A possible find of sweet potato (it is unclear whether it was domesticated or not) was made in
the caves of Tres Ventanas and Quiqché, in the Chilca highlands of the Lima region (Engel 1970),
96
14,000 years of food in Peru
which would be the most ancient remains found thus far. Duccio Bonavia (1984: 8-13) however
seriously questioned this find due to the inappropriate descriptions and errors included in
this scientific publication by Frédéric Engel. It is worth going over some of the relevant points
in this publication, as these may be the most ancient remains of sweet potato in Peru.
Engel documented the presence of Ipomoea batatas remains in a preceramic layer (prior to
the third millennium B.C.) in the above-mentioned sites, but he unfortunately did not report
the finds as in-depth as the case deserved. However, the relevant point here is his claim that
the potato (Solanum tuberosum) was also present in the same layer where the sweet potato
was found. Were we to believe these claims, we could speculate that both tubers (potato
and sweet potato) were consumed by the early Middle Holocene at about 3600 masl in the
highlands of Lima. The radiocarbon dates, which we calibrated (Engel 1970: 56) for the layer
with sweet potato, gave a date ranging between 7031 B.C. and 6903 B.C., but we still have to
consider the questions Bonavia raised regarding these data (Bonavia 1984, 1988).
On the other hand, Bonavia (1984: 9) correctly pointed out that whereas the remains have
been identified as sweet potato, it was not possible to ascertain whether they were indeed
domesticated plants. We did not have access to the work by Douglas Yen, the specialist who
identified the sweet potato in Chilca, but Bonavia points out only two 39 and 76 mm tubers
were recorded. These measurements seem to make sense when compared with other sweet
potato specimens. Those from Pachacamac were 60 mm long while those from Casma were
on average only 31 mm long, probably due to their preceramic nature (Ugent et al. 1983). There
seems to have been an increase in the size of sweet potatoes throughout time due to their
manipulation, for they actually grew. This however is mere speculation if it is not discussed
by botanists.
If we were now to remove the Chilca sweet potatoes from the scientific record, we would
find that most of the early evidence points towards the third millennium B.C. as the time
when this tuber actually appeared in pre-Hispanic Peru. Let us review the evidence.
First we will review the case of the Central Coast. Ugent et al. (1981: 401) note that sweet
potatoes were found in sites belonging to the Preceramic VI or Final Preceramic in the Ancon
Sequence, i.e. the Tank Site and Punta Grande. On correcting the radiocarbon dates for both
sites we have that in the first site, the earliest occupation that should have sweet potato
dates 2323 B.C, and the second one to 2112 B.C., i.e. dates internally consistent in one same
region. The single Punta Grande date was taken from a sample of a burned plant, which points
to a domestic context. Cohen (1978) showed that sweet potato was eaten later at Ancón in
ceramic periods, so if we accept his position, this tuber was permanently eaten in this zone in
coastal Lima since the third millennium B.C.
These finds on the Central Coast are now being confirmed by recent archaeological research.
Sweet potatoes have been found to the north of Lima at Buena Vista, in the Chillón Valley, in the
form of starch as well as very small remains. These have been interpreted as the remains of food
eaten in a “feast” in the context of a ritual activity held in a temple and dated to 2193 and 2164 BC.
97
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

To conclude with the Central Coast, Lanning and Patterson, who dedicated several years of research
to this zone, believed the most ancient remains of sweet potato in Peru should be at least 4000
years old (Bonavia 1982: 323). This means that this plant was already claimed to be quite ancient
fifty years ago. Their position should therefore be taken as correct until new data appear.

A similar case holds for the sites with preceramic sweet potato in the lower Supe and Casma
Valleys. The Supe Valle is now being intensively studied by archaeologists. The site of Caral—
also known as Chupacigarro—has a chronology of 2585-1938 B.C. (Shady et al. 2001) that is
supported by radiocarbon dates. Remains of sweet potato were found in this occupation, but
as yet there are no in-depth analyses. Even so, the remarkable thing here is that the remains
were partially charred, thus indicating they were exposed to the embers of an open air fire.

As for the sites in the lower Casma Valley, Don Ugent et al. (1981: 402 and 405) and Ugent y Peterson
(1988: 5) made one of the best reviews of the documentation on sweet potato since the third
millennium B.C. They reported a total of 18 specimens discovered in three sites by the Pozorskis’
expeditions in Casma, to wit (from most ancient to most recent): Huaynuná, Pampa de Llamas-
Moxeque, and Tortugas. Of these, only one specimen was discovered at the Late Preceramic site
of Huaynuná. It was in the same stratum as the potato (Solanum tuberosum) and the achira (Canna
edulis), so it can be speculated that these tubers were all eaten in the same period.

Let us turn now to the scientific report on the specimen of sweet potato that is—literally,
and by consensus—the oldest and scientifically documented in Peru. The specimen is only
18 mm long, but it must have been twice the size when it was cooked (Ugent et al. 1981: 407).
It is fusiform (like some modern specimens), has a peel on just part of the tuber, is cocoa-
coloured, and had sand grains. Parts of its surface showed charcoal, and is thus interpreted as
having been heat roasted in a fireplace. If we assume that this type of cooking was in general
frequent in pre-Hispanic Peru, it seems clear that sweet potatoes lost fewer nutrients during
cooking before they were eaten. For instance, amino acids like lysine are not modified when
cooked in this way (Padmaja 2009: 190), so the consumption of this tuber at this time may
have had this advantage.
The calibrated radiocarbon dates gave the dates 2914 and 2287 B.C. Bonavia (1984: 17) reported
the same open-oven cooking in the archaeological site PV35-4, which was essentially a seasonal
camp in the lower Huarmey Valley, and may have been a frequently used pre-Hispanic cooking
technique.
Following the sequence of the lower Casma Valley, sweet potato has been excavated at Pampa
de Llamas-Moxeque, another archaeological site some 20 km from the littoral and on the
southern bank of the valley of the same name. The tubers of sweet potato were in the same
layers than those from potato, so they existed at the same time. Their size is similar to those
found at Huaynuná; one however measured 40 mm, which can be taken to be an indication of
slight growth, i.e. manipulation.
Ugent et al. (1981) believe that the fragments of charcoal on the skins indicate the same open-
fire cooking technique. These finds must be dated to ca. 2088-1243 B.C. (Figure 3).
Figura 3. Camotes procedentes del sitio de Pampa de Llamas Moxeque (Casma) con un fechado promedio de 2088-1243 a.C. (los dos
superiores y el de abajo a la derecha). Camote procedente de Huaynuná (abajo a la izquierda), Casma, fechado en 2914-2287 a.C. Se trata
pues del camote, científicamente hablando, más remoto del Perú. (CORTESÍA DE DONALD UGENT).
To finish with the sweet potatoes from Casma, Ugent et al. (1981) reported the presence of this
tuber at Tortugas. Direct datings cannot be established just like in the previous sites excavated
by the Pozorskis (Ugent et al. 1981: 403), but one gave a date of 1463 B.C., which would be a
reference of the time it was consumed. It is thus clear that sweet potatoes were cooked on an
open fire and consumed on a regular basis in the Casma Valley almost 5,000 years ago.
It is clear in both regions—coastal Lima and coastal Supe—that the earliest remains of sweet
potato date to the early third millennium B.C. It was perhaps for this reason that Deborah
Pearsall (1998: 274) noted that the earliest evidence of sweet potato on the Peruvian coast
date to about 2600 B.C. It is thus clear she does not accept Engel’s find in the Chilca Canyon.
What does seem clear is the finding of sweet potato starch grains on the surface of possible
stone grinding tools at the site of Caballete (lower Fortaleza Valley, on the Central Coast of
Peru), that have been dated to ca. ,540 B.C. (Haas et al. 2013). There is also evidence of these
grains in the human and dog faecal remains analysed. This may be a direct evidence of the

98 99
Elmo Leon
processing and consumption of sweet potato on the coast in the mid-third millennium B.C.
We will now review the remains of this important tuber in later times.
The first indications of sweet potato consumption in the pre-Hispanic period may have come
from ceramic depictions like those of the Mochica, where several scholars have documented
this tuber’s figure (e.g. Vargas 1962: 109), and thus concluded that the people in this culture
consumed it. We have also seen some Middle Mochica (ca. 400 A.D.) pieces that are clearly
sweet potatoes, thus verifying the previous assertions.
The Paracas and Nasca also consumed sweet potato. Margaret Towle (1961: 78) says sweet
potato remains have been found in archaeological contexts at Paracas, Ocucaje, and
Cahuachi, all evidently on the South-Central coast (in the modern-day Ica region), and
dated to 400 B.C. to A.D. 600. Towle therefore believed sweet potatoes had only been
cultivated in the Andes since the first millennium A.D. (Towle 1961: 141), and we have seen
she was not that far off.
As for the Paracas, the extensive documentation on the mummies from the peninsula of the same
name in Ica provided several preserved sweet potatoes, which were discovered in the funerary
context of Paracas Necropolis, and were dated to about 400 B.C. (Tello and Mejía Xesspe 1979: 473).
Ipomoea batatas was also found at Cerrillos, in the upper Ica valley, and so may have been part of
the food the Paracas had at this site around 800-600 B.C. (Splitsloser 2009: 94).
As regards the Nasca, the archaeological documentation Towle presented for Cahuachi was
recently corroborated. Significant numbers of sweet potatoes were found by the excavations
made at this site, some even bearing traces of having been subjected to fire, which means they
were roasted sometime in the first centuries of the Christian era (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 3, 5).
Continuing within the context of the Nasca culture, more specimens of sweet potatoes were
excavated at the Casa Vieja site, on the lower Callango Valley in Ica, some 260 masl. Roque et
al. (2003) note that these finds date to the Late Nasca stage and the rise of the Wari empire in
this zone, and can be indirectly dated to A.D. 530-820 with the Palpa sequence (cf. Unkel 2006:
111). The significance the consumption of sweet potato had both for the Nasca (Silverman y
Proulx 2002: 52) and the Paracas people in 500 B.C. and A.D. 500 is clear.
As regards the North Coast, Margaret Towle (1961: 79) says that Yacovleff and Herrera identified
the sweet potato in Mochica ceramics in this same period. Despite the scant evidence
available at present for the northern region, it is clear that significant amounts of this tuber
were consumed; we simply require more research.
Even so, there are at least two studies that must be mentioned in regard to the Mochica and
the sweet potato. Ericson et al. (1989: 74) analysed human excrements from the Puerto Moorin
site (in the lower Virú Valley) belonging to the North Coast Salinar culture—probably from
200 B.C. to the first centuries of the Christian era—and found remains of sweet potato. This
shows its direct consumption by the Mochica people. There also are indications (also through
100
14,000 years of food in Peru
human excrement) that it was still eaten in the Wari epoch. This means its consumption was
frequent in this part of the Virú Valley (and by extension in others too), just like in Lima, Ica,
and Casma.
Sweet potatoes were eaten in the Wari Empire (A. D. 650-1,000), as has already been noted.
Bonavia et al. (2009: 242) reported finding a large number of roast sweet potato remains in
a camp called PV35-4 (ca. A.D. 800) that is on the north part of the mouth of the Huarmey
River. This line of evidence indicates the prolonged use and consumption of sweet potato
in this empire. This is also borne out by the significant amounts of sweet potato remains
found in the layers dating to the Wari period (A.D. 650-1000) in the excavation of the Beringa
(Arequipa) site.
As for the period archaeologists call the Late Intermediate, Perry (2002: 337) recorded the
presence of sweet potato in a well recorded archaeological context dating to the late Chimú
culture (A.D. 1470-1523) at a site called Manchán in the Casma Valley. It is worth noting that
Perry showed the sweet potato was smaller in more ancient times. Bigger specimens were
later obtained at least in the Chimú period, in what is another indication of its manipulation
in order to obtain bigger specimens for consumption.
Cutright (2009: 145) likewise discovered sweet potatoes at Pedregal, a site on the North Coast
of Peru, within a Chimú domestic consumption context. It is thus clear the Chimú frequently
consumed it.
We now return now to the Central Coast in this same period prior to the Inca. Harshberger
made one of the earliest references to sweet potatoes in 1898, when he mentioned the remains
in excellent state of preservation found by Max Uhle during his excavations at Pachacamac.
Regrettably no chronology is available in this regard, but we can presume the remains are Inca.
Other information is also available for Pachacamac, albeit with more control and a possible
chronology of A.D. 1000 and 1460. Ugent et al. (1981: 407) reported the presence here of a
tuber at least six centimetres long; following the author’s botanical reasoning, this means that
when fresh it may have been twice as long. This specimen is clearly bigger than those found
in the preceramic epoch and so denotes the process of domestication.
In this same publication Ugent et al. (1981: 407) mention the first discoveries of sweet potato
made in the Ancón burials on Peru’s Central Coast. These were published by Wittmack in
1880-1887 and were dated to the Late Intermediate (A.D. 1000-1460). This type of discovery
simply confirms the long-lasting presence of this tuber in pre-Inca Lima.
The consumption of camote in this period has also been documented both to the north
and south of Lima. In the first case we have the Los Pinos site in the Huayra Valley, where
Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) noticed the presence of sweet potatoes in contexts belonging
to the Chancay culture. Its rate of use was relatively high, so Lanfranco and Eggers believe it
consumption was relatively frequent.
101
Elmo Leon
As for the second case, Ugent and Peterson (1988: 8) noticed the remains of two sweet potato
specimens at a site known as La Centinela in the Chincha Valley, some 200 km south of Lima,
thus showing the Chincha also consumed it.
It is somewhat ironic that the documentation of food remains from the Inca culture is scant, as
will be seen below. Only a few specimens were found at the archaeological site of Panquilma.
This site was occupied by the Inca since at least A.D. 1460. Cohen (1975: 53) believes this may
be due to some problems with the analyses.
Finally, Margaret Towle (1961: 79) also reported the presence of sweet potato remains in an
Inca context at the site of Pachacamac.
Maca (Lepidium meyenii Walp)
We now turn to maca, one of the tubers that have won renown for Peru at the international
and the local level due to the properties it has been credited with. How significant is—and
has been—its consumption in biochemical terms? Is there any evidence that it was eaten in
pre-Hispanic Peru?
Let us turn first of all to the taxonomy. Mostacero et al. (2009: 277) classified maca as a
biannual crop typical of the Andes, which is considered a sexually reinvigorating food. Maca
is widely cultivated in the Peruvian highlands, particularly in the Altiplano. Its roots are
consumed both fresh and in processed state due to its alimentary properties (Soukup 1980:
243). We should add that it has been shown (Quiroz et al. 1996) to be is highly adaptable to
various environments. Maca is a part of pre-Hispanic Peru that has still to be explored in terms
of establishing where it was cultivated and consumed.
The National Research Council (1989a: 11) claims maca (the Peruvian ginseng) is a valuable
tuber not just because of the food content of its rhizomes, which are rich in sugars and starch,
but also for its leaves, which are usually given to guinea pigs as food..
Another advantage this plant has is that it can be stored for years if it is desiccated. As for its
presence, this is a crop that grows from at least 4000 masl upwards. Its consumption must
have been highly prized, since two centuries ago in Junín one of the major items given in
tribute to the governors was precisely maca (National Research Council 1989b: 58).
Leon (1964) is another important study that points out the Spanish chroniclers who reached
Peru made references on maca that are identifiable with areas like Junín.
As for the customs regarding its consumption, León notes that maca was used both fresh
and desiccated. It was also often eaten using the pachamanca cooking method (in which the
tubers are placed in the deepest part of a hole) and eventually parboiled. The smallest tubers
were the ones most eaten because they had the least fibres. Maca was also renowned because
102
14,000 years of food in Peru
it was believed to make women fertile—a point that still had not been verified by the time
León’s article appeared.
Seminario (2004: 28-29) also broached this subject and pointed out that maca was the tribute
given to the Spaniards during an inspection they made to Junín. It was used at the time to
improve the fertility of foreign livestock. Seminario mentions Rea, who claimed in 1992 that
the domestication of maca began in Junín two thousand years ago. We were unfortunately
unable to consult this paper and find out the reason for such a claim.
We now turn to this tuber’s biochemistry. Quiroz y Aliaga (1997: 173-198) is a summary of
this plant’s bromatology. They point out that proteins comprise 10.2% of maca (in 100 grams:
156.7 mg of glutamic acid, 99.4 mg of arginine, and 91.7 mg of aspartic acid, amongst others),
carbohydrates comprise 59%, and lipids and minerals like potassium (2,050 mg per 100 grams)
and calcium (150 mg per 100 grams) comprise 2.2%.
Dini et al. (1994) likewise measured the biochemical composition of maca and confirmed
that its potassium content is largest, followed by calcium, sodium, iron, copper, zinc, and
manganese, all these minerals all with low values.
Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 23) said that maca contained steroids, alkaloids, and a significant
zinc component. These actually are characteristic of a stimulant. This is another aspect that
should be explored in regard to pre-Hispanic Peru.
Since when has maca been consumed? At present we have relatively recent dates in the
archaeological record, but it has been suggested that its cultivation may have taken place
simultaneously with the domestication of camelids in the Peruvian puna in 6000-5000 B.C.
(Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 5). However, no arguments have been given in support of this claim.
Let us turn now to the available evidence. Lepidium was in fact documented in the cave of
Panaulauca, which lies at 4150 masl in the Junín puna, in layers dated to 3800 B.C. It is however
possible that it was found in older layers in this same cave (Rick and Moore 1999: 292). This
means that the oldest evidence corresponds to the transition between the Middle and the
Late Holocene.
Interestingly enough, one of the earliest evidences of maca consumption on the Peruvian coast
comes from the Dos Cabezas site (on the mouth of the Jequetepeque River Valley). Geyer et al.
(2003) reported the presence of maca remains in the excrement of at least one individual, who
ate it before passing away. The radiocarbon dates given were A.D. 536-580 (Moseley et al. 2008:
83). We have seen that Reinhard et al. (2007: 534) challenged some pollen species derived from
the faeces found at Dos Cabezas, precisely because it is a high-altitude product.
Just like in the case of other high-altitude crops, Hastorf (2002: 157) recorded maca remains in
sites belonging to the Wanka culture, which is dated between A.D. 193 and the Late Horizon,
i.e. the Inca Empire in this area. The sites extend between 3,200 and 3,900 masl.
103
Elmo Leon
The National Research Council (1989b: 64) includes a reference to Deborah Pearsall. There she
notes there are Peruvian archaeological sites where maca has been reliably found, and which
date to ca. 1600 B.C.
Quiroz and Aliaga (1997: 175) claim there is evidence that maca was cultivated in Puno in Inca
times, but not much evidence is presented in this regard.
Cassava, Adtza, Caniri, Canri, Cuabe, Jimeca, Mandioca (Manihot esculenta Crantz)
This plant is typical of tropical America and was much cultivated due to its tuberous roots
rich in starch. Some taxonomic classifications like Gade’s (2003) include synonyms such as
Manihot utilissima, Manihot palmata, Manihot aipi, and Manihot dulcis.
Cassava is an essential food in the tropical forest. It can be eaten parboiled, stewed or fried.
It is also used to prepare alcoholic beverages like masato and tapiaco. Let us see now its
main characteristics, ethnographic preparation methods, bromatological values, origins,
domestication and archaeological occurrence.
One characteristic worth emphasising is the effect the acids found in these tubers have.
The presence of cyanhydric acid (manihotoxine) means mostly “sweet” cassava is consumed
(Mostacero et al. 2009: 413). Even so, the presence of this acid is reduced by exposing cassava
to the sun, precisely through a process of solar drying.
Carl Sauer believed there are two varieties of cassava, to wit, “bitter” (Manihot utilissima) and
“sweet” (all other varieties of Manihot). The latter deteriorates rapidly whilst the former lasts
longer; the main problem here is the bitter variety may have a high content of cyanogenic
glycosides, which may cause poisoning by prussic acid if the roots are not properly processed.
The varieties of cassava are thus an issue in cultivation and feeding.
An essential property mentioned by Mostacero and his colleagues is that the consumption of
cassava has anti-diarrhoeic effects. This is important because we will see that diarrhoea was
a frequent pathology in pre-Hispanic Peru, particularly due to a series of infections that can
lead to death if they are not cured.
Several details regarding the cultivation and properties of cassava are significant in this
context. This tuber has a long maturation process under specific conditions, such as relatively
low temperatures in the American tropics (25-29 °C, but it can tolerate 16-28 °C) and no frosts.
It therefore does not grow over 2300 masl, or in soils with more than 1000 mm of annual
precipitation (Isendahl 2011: 455).
Its output rises when cassava cultivation is successful, to the point that the frequency of its
cultivation in the South American Amazon has given rise to some five thousand varieties;
suffice it to say that our Aguaruna have over a hundred of them. Some factors musts be
104
14,000 years of food in Peru
borne in mind to have such an output, and which were surely considered in the past: a high
productivity, a high quality of starch, tolerance to pests, and ease in storing it as flour or bread.
What type of cassava was the first to be domesticated? There is no consensus on this point, but
it does seem clear that the bitter variety enabled the preparation of flour. The experts believe
that its storage was the basis for cultural complexity in the Amazon (Isendahl 2011: 455-457).
It has been posited in this regard that the stability brought about by the cultivation of
bitter cassava gave rise to the high productivity of these tubers, which were also subject to
interregional exchange. This process then gave rise, in A.D. 500-900, to the establishment of
sedentary villages and a regional settlement in the upper Xingú valley in Brazil. In this case
(and probably also in others) the starch in cassava may have been supplemented with the
proteins derived from fish (Heckenberger 1998).
This is a good example of the significance cassava has in regards to its massive consumption
and as food stock. The investment of time and effort in its cultivation is (and probably has
always been) highly “profitable” in terms of the intensity of its output. This is, in fact, the first
source of calories in the tropics, and the sixth most important tuber in the Amazon. It is also
the most important domesticated crop in the Amazon, and the main carbohydrate for close
to 800 million people. It cannot have been less in the past.
According to the evidence, cassava was undeniably a major food source not just for Amazonian
cultures, but also for Andean ones. A single plant can give between 5 and 10 tubers, which
nowadays can yield up to 2 kilos. Under ideal conditions the output can reach up to 30 tonnes
per hectare of fresh tubers, but its mean output ranges between five and fifteen tonnes.
What does linguistics tell us regarding cassava? “Manioc” comes from the Tupi word “maniot,”
whilst “cassava” comes from the Arawak word “cassabi,” which means “bread” (Clement et al.
2010: 76). “Yucca” is a term from the Caribbean (Karasch 2000: 181). Horkheimer (1960: 67) in
turn noted that “yucca” came from the Antilles and that “ruma” was the Quechua and Aymara
term for this plant. From this research standpoint, the origins of cassava thus point towards
the Caribbean and northern South America. We shall see that this partially agrees with the
archaeological evidence but not the biological data.
Carl Sauer (1952: 46), the renowned geographer, provided some relevant data not just on
cassava domestication but also regarding its preparation, and so it is worth briefly including
them here. It was claimed from the very beginning that once domesticated in Brazil, cassava
spread all over the Amazon basin eastwards.
Sauer also provided some details regarding its preparation as flour for “bread,” a regular
procedure that begins by grating, which was followed by compressing, and ended with its
washing in order to remove the hydrocyanuric acid, and was finally baked in the form known
as cassava. It can be preserved for a long time once it has been made flour or as bread. We
have already seen the importance this tuber had in the case of the Xingú in Brazil. Sauer listed
105
Elmo Leon
other ways in which cassava was prepared (stewed or roasted), as a pudding (tapioca), and
even as an alcoholic beverage.
In this line of food preparation we have to mention masato. This is an Amazonian beverage
based on stewed and crushed cassava, which is then fermented through mastication and
salivation on parts of the dough. It is diluted in water every time it is taken, and can long
sustain an Indian without other food (Soukup 1980: 260).
It is worth mentioning that one of the main goals behind cassava domestication was the
desire to concentrate a large amount of carbohydrates in the rhizomes. For Sauer, this plant
has many uses because the leaves as well as the tubers are edible, and may be cooked like
spinach. Sauer also discussed the high output we have already pointed out, noting that several
roots can grow radially, and that each plant may have up to eight kilos in the roots.
Sauer also believed cassava was a resource highly used by the people of the Amazon forest
due to its multiple adaptation potential to various climates and low-fertility soils, including
their capacity to survive disasters.
We now turn briefly to the bromatology of cassava. When fresh it is primarily starch, a veritable
source of carbohydrates. The leaves however have vitamin A and proteins, and the roots when
fresh may have calcium, vitamin C, thiamine, riboflavin, and niacin, properties that are lost
when the plant is boiled or desiccated (Karasch 2000: 181-182). Hence the importance the raw
ingestion of some resources has, obviously once the toxic substances have been removed.
Purseglove (1968, cited in Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 120) points out that cassava comprises 62%
water, 35% carbohydrates, and 1% proteins. Schery (1947) also noted the benefits of cassava not
just in South America but throughout the world. After 18 months under cultivation, rhizomes
have large amounts of saccharose and starch.
León (2000: 248) also noted that cassava provides more calories per area than any other plant,
including tubers and cereals. Although its roots are protein-deficient, they do have significant
amounts of vitamin B, phosphorus and iron, but are low on calcium.
We now turn to the data on cassava domestication and geographic origin.
Candolle (1886) made one of the first studies on the origins of cassava, and posited it came
from some geographical point in tropical South America like eastern Brazil. Following Candolle,
Schery (1947) agreed that cassava probably was first cultivated in Brazil.
Carl Sauer initially believed cassava had its origin in north-western South America, in Colombia
(Sauer 1952: 45), but later changed his position referring to an entomological study. Sauer
concluded that cassava came from the Venezuelan savannah (the lake of Maracaibo) and had
been spread by insects that transported the pollen across the Orinoco to the Río Negro and
from there to the Amazon, later entering what are now Paraguay, Bolivia, and Perú.
106
14,000 years of food in Peru
In her handbook on Peruvian prehistoric ethnobotanics, Margaret Towle (1961: 141) claimed
cassava was domesticated only after the first millennium A.D. This assertion can now be
assessed because Linda Perry (2002) managed to prove that the cassava specimens found at
Pampa de Llamas (Casma), and which were dated to 1800 B.C., have starch grains that are much
bigger than those from Manihot flabellifolia. It is therefore clear that cassava was manipulated
on the Peruvian coast in order to achieve a higher yield. It is worth noting in this regard that
this type of starch study is ever more developed, to the point that it is now possible to
establish the differences between Amazonian and Andean cassava from the types of starch
grains—the broader forms appeared in the Amazon, whilst in the Andes the type of grains are
almost the same as what they were three thousand years ago (Perry 2002).
Rogers (1965) made an assessment of what was then known regarding cassava and its origins.
The major points included the idea that it may have originally come essentially from Brazil,
as well as Venezuela and Mexico. The evidence clearly had grown since the time of Candolle.
In Rogers’ argument, the Mexican evidence indicates that cassava was domesticated by the
Yucatán Maya alongside maize, and so alternated both crops. Rogers believes that part of the
domestication process took place in Mesoamerica, particularly in Guatemala and Honduras.
He also believed that cassava became a significant part of the diet the first populations in
the tropical lowlands of Mesoamerica had, and that it had been taken from there to South
America. Be it as it may, cassava was widely cultivated in South America, Mesoamerica and the
Caribbean by the time of the European arrival (Hawkes 1989).
The famed botanist Vavilov (in Smith 1968) thought cassava had its origins in Brazil and
Paraguay. Following the principle of species concentration, Vavilov recognised in this case at
least two potential centres of domestication, Brazil with 80 species and Mexico with 17.
Hershey (1994) on the other hand simply concluded, within the context of a broader study,
that cassava had neotropical American origins.
That same year Allem (1994) presented a required taxonomic clarification, and which is here
briefly summarised. There are three cassava subspecies—Manihot esculenta ssp. esculenta (the
cultivated form), Manihot esculenta ssp. flabellifolia (its closest wild relative), and Manihot
esculenta peruviana (probably not involved in the domestication process). Allem however
did not manage to pinpoint this plant’s geographical origins, and assumed it perhaps lies in
eastern Peru or western Brazil. We will see below that other scholars have suggested the
northern Mato Grosso and Rondônia.
An expert like Melina Zeder notes that the single-event domestication of cassava from Manihot
flabellifolia has already been confirmed by microsatellite studies in botanics (Zeder et al. 2006:
149). A consensus thus seems to have been reached as regards the taxonomic origins of cassava.
Dolores Piperno and Deborah Pearsall published a major handbook of tropical plants in
the late twentieth century, which included cassava and other species (Piperno and Pearsall
107
Elmo Leon
1998: 163). They believe this plant must have been domesticated in areas south of Guyana, in
southern Venezuela or in northern and central Brazil. Piperno and Pearsall also believe that
the high quality of starch, the large production volume and the high adaptability of cassava
to different soils were decisive factors in the demand for this crop.
Christine Hastorf (1999: 40) noted, one year after Piperno and Pearsall published their
handbook, that the domestication of cassava was not easy as it reproduces—unlike other
tubers—by replanting cuttings. It however has the advantage of producing all year long, but it
musts be supplemented with a protein product.
In his summary of cassava, Karasch (2000: 182) concluded that although experts in general
agree on its Brazilian provenance, they do not pinpoint its place of origin which may be in
Central America, the Amazon, and even North Eastern Brazil.
Milton de Albuquerque, a researcher, went even further and believes that the origins of cassava,
in its most primitive form, may lie in the zone of Goias and Bahía (cited by Karasch 2000).
Nassar (2000) clarified this proposal and claimed that El Cerrado (a region that combines
arboreal forest with permanent grass, as well as spaced-out grass and bushes is the area
where cassava was originally domesticated. This means all other sites simply are a result of
it migrating in an already domesticated state. Nassar established four centres of diversity for
Manihot esculenta: southern Goias and eastern Minas Gerais, in the Brazilian savannah, south-
western Mexico, north-western Brazil, and south-western Mato Grosso and Brazil, including
the Bolivian lowlands.
Seminario (2004: 14) recalled that Donald Lathrap based himself on the evidence provided by
clay sherds found in the Colombian and Venezuelan Amazon that were used to make cassava
flour cakes, and which were dated three thousand years ago. For Seminario, this means its
cultivation would have begun seven or nine thousand years ago.
This method for grinding cassava was also documented at the Real Alto site in Ecuador some
three thousand years ago. This is a direct proof of the type of processing this plant was
already undergoing by the late Holocene (Chandler-Ezell et al. 2006).
Clement et al. (2010: 76-78) recently presented a relevant approach as regards the domestication
of cassava. This is the Amazonian tuber that has been most studied from a molecular point
of view. Clement et al. concluded that the bitter cassava variety was most important for
Amazonian populations as it is more resistant to the climate and the environment. Even so,
the cultivation of sweet cassava was apparently more intensive in the Amazonian west and in
the headwaters of rivers like the Ucayali and the Marañón in Peru.
Bolder approaches combining several sciences, including the molecular ones, are providing
invaluable data on the origins of cassava. After combining experimental studies and the
archaeological data available for the mid-Madeira River Valley in Brazil, Fraser (2010) claims that
108
14,000 years of food in Peru
the native populations in this zone were able to control the cultivation of sweet and black
cassava on patches of solid ground, and so the latter may have also been planted on fertile.
If we however compare the current results in cassava research from two standpoints—
botanical-cladistic and pure archaeology—there no agreement is possible. On the one
hand, from an archaeological standpoint it can now be claimed that cassava came first from
Colombia and then from Panama. Aceituno and Castillo Espitia (2005) reliably recorded the
presence of cassava starch grains in some sites in the Cauca and Porce Valleys, from central to
northern Colombia, and which have a calibrated radiocarbon dating of 6400 B.C.
Botanists on the other hand have reached two conclusions. First, Manihot carhaginesis is
potentially the closest wild ancestor to Manihot esculenta. Second, there are two separate
phylogenies, on one hand the Mesoamerican one and on the other a South American one.
More recently, a review study (Isendahl 2011: 457) posited that the origins of cassava can
be approached from three evidentiary standpoints: botanical (where does domesticated
cassava descend from), geographical (the biomass within which the progenitor evolved), and
agricultural (the initial area of cultivation of the ancestor.
Isendahl made the most recent review of cassava domestication and consumption. He
concluded, by means of a series of interdisciplinary studies, that the most probable ancestral
candidate is the Manihot esculenta flabellifolia (Pohl) ciferri subspecies, and that El Cerrado
in Brazil, towards the south of the tropical Amazon forest, probably was where this plant had
its geographic origins (thus taking up Nassar’s position, which we saw above), and that it was
in this same region where it was first cultivated. From here it spread to other parts of South
America, probably in the early Holocene (ca. 10,000 years ago), and it was only by 4500 B.C.
that it was widely used and diversified in South America.
From the archaeological and genetic data, Melinda Zeder et al. (2006: 149) concluded that
cassava originated in the southern Amazon basin and then rapidly spread through the Orinoco
to Central America. Zeder and her colleagues thus seem to be again pointing to El Cerrado as
the centre of cassava domestication.
On the other hand the dating of Manihot esculenta pollen in other sites in the Mexican
Gulf and Belize, which range around 4600 B.C., clearly show this domesticated tuber rapidly
spread in Central America during the Middle Holocene. Pollen evidence is also available that
indicates the Maya cultivated cassava for consumption by 2600 B.C. (Isendahl 2011: 464). These
Central American finds must therefore be considered when discussing domestication.
Science however moves on and is changing this picture. It now seems that cassava was
also domesticated in South America, for it has been found with even earlier radiocarbon
dates. Phytogeographical analyses (Olsen and Schaal 1999, 2001) indicate that cassava was
domesticated from a variety of wild Manihot esculenta (Manihot esculenta subsp. Flabellifolia)
on the southern banks of the Amazon River basin, between Rondônia and the Mato Grosso,
109
Elmo Leon
i.e. again within the land El Cerrado. Besides, this study has as its starting point the fact that
the biggest concentrations of wild cassava are found both on the western Amazon zone of
Brazil and on the eastern lands of Peru. This means Peru may have been part of this incipient
process of domestication, regarding which the consensus seems to be that it had its origins
in the Brazilian El Cerrado.
But the most interesting thing as regards the conclusions these researchers reached, is that
their proposal on cassava domestication matches other areas where plants like peanuts,
various types of chili pepper (Capsicum baccatum, Capsicum pubescens, Capsicum frutescens),
tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum), coca (Erythroxylum coca), uncuncha (Xanthosoma sagittifolium),
and the pallar de los gentiles (Canavalia plagiosperma) were domesticated, thus forming an
apparently homogeneous set in this zone (Isendahl 2011: 459). If human groups were behind
this process, it is not difficult to conceive them as progressive horticultors who were carrying
this out since at least the Early Holocene and probably before. The dissemination of this
important knowledge mast have been rapid due to the advantages the alimentary stock of
cassava and other plants had, but the specific details of this process are as yet unknown, and
are the subject of interdisciplinary research.
We turn now to the archaeological evidence. We have to start with a paradox because as
Isendahl (2011: 461) correctly notes, although we can logically expect to find the most ancient
traces of cassava in the zone documented south of the Amazon delta, as was noted above,
soil conditions did not allow preservation.
Thus far, the earliest evidence of cassava in the South American context comes from the northern
part of the continent, i.e. from Colombia. A site known as San Isidro, on the upper part of the
Cauca Valley, at 1700-1800 masl, has been reported. Here possible grains of starch in cassava were
found in the parts used as milling mortars. The radiocarbon calibration of the layer from which this
find comes dated it between 9589 B.C. and 9029 B.C. (cf. Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 200).
Even so, the most ancient concrete evidence of cassava comes from Colombia itself, at site
Y-021, some 875 masl in the Porce Valley, in the Central Cordillera. Here remains of starch
grains have been recorded in mortars’ pestles in phase III, which corresponds to ca. 4500 B.C.
Pottery with cassava starch remains has been recorded in later periods, thus indicating the
continuity of the processing and consumption of this tuber (Castillo Espitia and Aceituno
Bocanegra 2006). Cassava pollen was also found in the excavations at the Abeja site, in the
vicinity of the Caquetá River in the Colombian Amazon, in the middle of a tropical forest of
low altitude (Mora et al. 1991). In this case the upper layer was dated to 3460 B.C., and so it
must be slightly earlier than this date. From all of these data we can conclude that at present,
cassava consumption has its deepest roots in Colombia.
Still in the northern sphere but somewhat more to the north, Piperno (2006) and Piperno et al.
(2000) found grains of cassava starch on pestles in Panama, in a rock shelter called Aguadulce.
According to the phytoliths studied, the cassava in this case was already domesticated. The
mean oldest date here is 5935 B.C. so this is quite an early specimen from the Middle Holocene.
110
14,000 years of food in Peru
But it is even more important that the grains were found on pestles and choppers (a type of
stone small hand axes), thus suggesting that cassava was pulverised or mashed, thus evincing
a technique used to prepare the food for consumption.
Monagrillo and La Mula are other sites in this same zone that have similar evidence. On
reading these data the words of Lathrap come to mind, when he forecast several decades ago
that cassava must have been already domesticated by 7000 B.C. (Isendahl 2011: 459).
Pope et al. (2001) reported the discovery of pollen grains from possibly domesticate cassava
somewhat further to the north, in the sediments at the site of San Andrés (Grijalva River) in
the Gulf of Tabasco, Mexico, with dates of about 4600 B.C. Here we end our brief summary
of cassava in the northern context.
We turn now to Brazil. Curiously enough, here we have relatively recent evidence like that
from the Peruaçu basin in Minas Gerais, which dates to A.D. 1216 (Freitas and Martins 2000).
But although southern Brazil is believed to be the area where cassava originated—as was
noted above—the archaeological evidence only has dates in the A.D. 1050-1300 range for the
site of Januaira, where the remains of the tubers themselves have been found. Similar dates
were obtained from cassava starch in French Guiana. It is thus clear that archaeology has been
unable to document what botany suggests.
For Ecuador we only have the site of Loma Alta, where cassava starch grains have been found
both in pottery as well as on the site’s floor. The dates obtained average around 3350-3010 B.C.
On the other hand the radiocarbon dates for cassava phytoliths from the Real Alto site are
2800-2400 B.C. (Isendahl 2011: 462).
From the South American picture it follows that archaeologically speaking, cassava is more
ancient in Colombia and Panama, less so in Mexico, and finally even less ancient in Ecuador
and Brazil. Preservation factors have a key role in how clear a picture we have.
We now turn to the presence of cassava in Peruvian archaeological sites. We must however go
first into a thorny preliminary issue, that is to say the state in which this plant is found in the
sites (this pertains to all other food remains, as was pointed at the beginning of this book). If
there is any evidence of cassava, then it is clear that it was taken to the site for several reasons,
including food.
But if the remains are not charred or appear as processed starch, there little that can be said
of its preparation or cooking prior to consumption. Analyses of the state cassava remains
were found in archaeological sites are very scarce—if any exist.
In this regard Hather (1991: 662) cites Martins’ (1976) dissertation. Martins claims he has recorded
the presence of cassava with evidence that it was cooked on fire, i.e. that it was broiled in
pre-Hispanic Peru, but regrettably enough we cannot specify what context the remains were
111
Elmo Leon
found in. Cassava would thus have been subjected to the same procedures we have seen in
the case of other tubers, at least for achira and the sweet potato.
The most ancient evidence for cassava should average to the third millennium B.C. Pearsall
(1998: 274) says it is a plant that appeared on the Central Coast of Peru since at least 2600
B.C., which is somewhat late in regard to the remains from northern South America, and
particularly those of Colombia.
However, the recent research undertaken by Tom Dillehay in the Zaña Valley on the Northern
Coast is literally revolutionising the data on pre-Hispanic Peru’s pristine crops, as we shall see
throughout the rest of this book. The oldest evidence for cassava thus comes from Nanchoc,
in the modern region of Lambayeque.
Small amounts of Manihot esculenta have been documented in the excavations undertaken
in the preceramic villages of Quebrada de las Pircas, on the North Coast of Peru, at about 450
masl (Rossen et al. 1996: 396). The oldest calibrated date in this layer is 6830 B.C.
The presence of cassava has also been documented through the starch that remained in the
plaque on the teeth of the human skeletons from Nanchoc, thus proving its direct consumption
at the time (Dillehay and Piperno 2008: 19624). These fragments of starch were analysed by
Donald Ugent, who believes they correspond to domesticated cassava (Rossen et al. 1996). It
is thus clear that cassava was eaten in Peru since at least 6800 B.C. The location of this site
in the lower Andes opens the door to possible connections with the Amazon plains, in what
may be a way to explain the presence of plants from semitropical or tropical environments.
Cassava was also found, this time as phytoliths, at the site of Quebrada de los Burros on the
littoral of Tacna, with mean dates of 7900-4800 B.C. Other remains from this same period
were found to be charred due to their cooking (Chevalier 2012a, 2012b: 465).
These dates coincide with those Duccio Bonavia (1982: 149) obtained for the presence of
cassava at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey Valley in 3200-2480 B.C. Bonavia is
categorical as regards the identification of this species, which he believes was of the utmost
importance in the Preceramic diet. Part of the evidence indicates that it was roasted, due to
the signs of combustion found in some of the remains. This cooking procedure corroborates
this form of food preparation that was quite frequent throughout these millennia.
Moving forward in time, there is evidence of cassava in the Chillón Valley, North of Lima, in
the third millennium B.C. The excavations at the site of Buena Vista (dated to 2193-2164 B.C.)
unearthed microremains in the form of cassava starch in gourd vessels, which were obviously
interpreted as food. In this case Duncan et al. (2009) assumed the cassava present at the site
was brought from the Amazon lowlands, which would have been perfectly feasible given the
information here presented. One interesting point is that the cassava was eaten in gourds,
i.e. in modern terms a dish and food at the same time, but we do not know whether this
happened in a ritual or domestic context.
112
14,000 years of food in Peru
Cassava has been recorded slightly to the north of the Chillón Valley, in the lower Nepeña
Valley, at sites like Cerro Blanco (Ikehara and Shibata 2005: 144, Ikehara 2010: 54). Both scholars
noted that starch remains from cassava were found in some of the largest vessels found at
this site. They interpreted this as cassava chicha (i.e. masato) being prepared in the context of
feasts in 1110-250 B.C.
This datum is fascinating as it apparently is the oldest evidence of masato being prepared,
not just on the coast but in all of pre-Hispanic Peru, and on the North-Central coast. This is
obviously due to the excellent preservation of the remains, and not because this is where this
type of beverage had its origin.
We should now dwell on the preparation of masato. Ikehara and Shibata based themselves for their
reconstruction on Antúnez de Mayolo (1984, in Ikehara 2010: 54). Ikehara and Shibata point out that
first they would choose specimens of sweet cassava, which were then cooked in water, A part of
it was set aside for mastication—and thus fermentation—whilst the other part was ground with a
mortar until a paste formed. The chewed mass was mixed with the rest of the cooking water in large
vessels and allowed to stand covered for one or two days, after which it is ready for drinking.
In comparison, Chocolate was originally taken fermented in the first millennium B.C., as was
discovered in Zapotec contexts in Mexico (Clement et al. 2010: 80).
According to Ikehara—based this time on Daggett (1983, in Ikehara 2010: 54)—another variant
in masato preparation mixes part of the milled cassava with the chewed one in a vessel. It is
only then that they are mixed with the cooking water inside the bowls and served.
Even more fascinating is the reconstruction Ikehara has made of the vessels used to prepare
and drink masato. His research showed that the large neckless pots were used to store the
liquid whilst the buckets were meant to ferment the mass.
These studies however yielded few maize remains in comparison with those of cassava.
Ikehara used this to posit that in this period masato and cassava cultivation may have been
more important than maize itself, which would have disseminated in somewhat later periods.
This is not a far-fetched idea in light of the evidence.
In this context it is worth recalling that Carole Daggett (1983), in her work on masato
consumption in groups like the Chayahuita (a population in the Peruvian selva baja, between
the Marañón and Huallaga Rivers), showed the nutritional properties this brew has, which
accompanies everyday work and has a key role in social reunions and rituals.
We now turn to the archaeological record. The Casma Valley abounds in pre-Hispanic
cassava. The earliest finds made in this valley (Perry 2002) come from Pampa del Rosario in
the archaeological site of Pampa de Llamas, and date to 2088-1243 B.C. Cassava has also been
found at the Las Haldas site (1040-895 B.C.). The dates are similar to those from the Chillón
Valley but later than those from Huarmey, and begin around the second millennium B.C.
113
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

Cassava peels have also been reported in this area in the Tortugas site, in the vicinity of Casma
Bay, which on average date to 1800-900 B.C. (Isendahl 2011: 462). The sequence continues in
the Pampa Rosario and San Diego sites, also in the Casma Valley, which date to 800-300 B.C.
Ugent (1984: 422) studied the remains of Manihot esculenta and concluded in general that it
was commonly consumed in this period on the Central Coast of Peru.

Perry (2002) presented a report on cassava domestication that was partly based on the remains
analysed by Ugent. Perry concluded that an important characteristic was the increase in size of
the tubers throughout time. This means the tubers were slightly bigger by the end of the pre-
Hispanic period than they had been in more ancient times. We have already seen the same trend
in the achira and the sweet potato. This means the horticultors who cultivated coastal tubers
experimented with this type of pre-Hispanic ‘genetics’ since the first time these plants appeared.

We thus come to the time of the Chavín culture in the first millennium B.C. In this context
the iconography shows cassava as part of the plants that were then known. Such is the case
of the Tello Obelisk, where it was depicted in association with the cayman (cf. Lathrap 1971,
Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 110). Both elements were clearly associated with a fully neotropical
environment.

Other evidence of cassava consumption corresponds to the Cupisnique ceramics, in the first
millennium B.C.

The remains of cassava from the Paracas culture must also date to around this time (Towle
1961: 61). Cassava remains were in fact found in archaeological work undertaken at the Cerrillos
site in the upper part of the Ica Valley, in an early Paracas context dated ca. 800-600 B.C.
(Splitsloser 2009: 94).
Cassava was also found when the Paracas burial bundles were excavated, and dated to ca. 400
B.C.-A.D. 100 (Tello and Mejía Xesspe 1979: 473).
There is more evidence from the first millennium B.C. For instance, Ikehara (2007: 128) reports
having found cassava in starch-form on the ceramic remains of a feast that was held at Cerro
Blanco, in the Nepeña Valley, on the Central Coast of Peru, that date to ca. 1000-700 B.C.
Similar dates (ca. 900-600 B.C.) were obtained in layers where cassava was found in the Tank
site at Ancón.
The remains of this tuber have also been found, albeit in small amounts, in late phases of the
Central Coast sequence prepared by Lanning and Patterson (Cohen 1978: 37).
Moving on to the Christian era, Vargas (1962: 109) detected cassava depictions on the pottery
of the Nasca and Chimú cultures, thus implying their cultivation and consumption on the
Peruvian coast during the last two millenniums through this evidence alone. Hans Horkheimer
(1961) also noted at the time that cassava appeared on Mochica pottery (Figure 4). We likewise
Figura 4. Yuca. Cerámica mochica, aproximadamente 400 d.C. Costa Norte peruana. (MUSEO LARCO. LIMA-PERÚ).
verified this in the collections of the Museo Nacional de Arqueología, Antropología e Historia
del Perú, which has a Moche piece from ca. A.D. 200.
We can now ask: was there cassava in the ceja de selva or in the tropical forest itself in pre-
Hispanic times? Despite the lack of organic remains in these zones to the east of the Peruvian
Andes, Pickersgill (1969: 60) speculates that populations like those of Yarinacocha (Pucallpa)
and Kotosh (Huánuco) based their economy on cassava cultivation (alongside Capsicum
chinense or ají limo) since at least the first millennium of the Christian era.
Ugent and Peterson (1988: 7) cite Wittmack, who analysed the botanical remains from the
Ancón excavations and established the presence of cassava around A.D. 1000-1460.
The people of the Nasca culture also favoured the consumption of cassava (Silverman and
Proulx 2002: 52). Cassava tubers have for instance been found in domestic contexts at Casa
Vieja site in Callango, in the lower Ica Valley (260 masl), that dated towards the end of the
Nasca culture and the early Middle Horizon (Roque et al. 2003). Although no radiocarbon
dates are available for this site, is estimated to have been occupied in A.D. 530-820 (cf.
Unkel 2006: 111).

114 115
Elmo Leon
It is worth recalling that Margaret Towle (1961: 62) had already noted the presence of cassava
in classic Nasca sites like Cahuachi, Huaca del Loro and Estaquería in the first centuries A.D.,
and which are all in Ica. Modern research is proving her right.
Cassava has also been recorded in significant amounts at the monumental site of Cahuachi
(Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 3). Even more impressive is that in some cases these specimens
showed traces of combustion, which Piacenza and Pieri believe was due to their having
been roasted. This type of evidence simply corroborates the presence of this plant in
Nasca ceramics.
Around this time, people from the Mochica culture on the North Coast began to consume
cassava. Geyer et al. (2003) reported finding cassava remains in the excrement found in three
human burials at the Dos Cabezas site, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley. The radiocarbon
dates gave the span A.D. 536-A.D. 580 (Moseley et al. 2008: 83). Reinhard et al. (2007: 535)
however questioned the validity of the identification made of cassava in these faeces.
The results of the analysis of human coproliths found at Puerto Moorin, in the lower Virú
Valley, showed that cassava was eaten at this North Coast site from about the first to the
fourth centuries A.D. (Ericson et al. 1989: 74). The sample was relatively large, so it can be said
that according to the coprolith study this was the fourth most-eaten vegetable resource.
Still in the Moche area, Chapdeleine and Pimentel (2003) drew attention to a scene showing
cassava harvesting in a textile from the Castillo de Santa (Santa Valley) in ca. A.D. 300-400. It
is interesting that this textile was used to wrap a child. This kind of depictions gives us an idea
of how significant cassava cultivation and consumption was, even though the remains in many
cases were not preserved due to soil conditions.
We now move on in time to the Wari culture, i.e. to the Middle Horizon. Duccio Bonavia
discovered a camp labelled PV35-4 to the north of the mouth of the Huarmey River, on
the shores of the La Honda beach. The researchers (Bonavia et al. 2009: 242) concluded
that cassava and maize were the items most consumed here. Tubers were documented in
this case, along with some stems and a seed, and it was found to have been eaten roasted.
This settlement belongs to the Middle Horizon epoch 3, and so can be dated to around
A.D. 800.
Beringa (A.D. 650-100), another Wari-period site where cassava has been found, is in the
modern region of Arequipa and this tuber was clearly consumed at this site (Tung 2012: 49).
The people of the Chancay culture also ate cassava. Nelson and Bellido Cerda (2010: 50)
reported having found cassava in archaeological garbage dumps at the site of Chambara in the
Huaura Valley, some 1000 masl. The radiocarbon dates averaged A.D. 1375-1625.
Cassava was also found in this same valley at the El Pino site, just four kilometres from the
littoral, and was apparently frequently consumed (Lanfranco and Eggers 2010: 79).
116
14,000 years of food in Peru
Perry (2002: 337) reported the presence of cassava in a Chancay cemetery in the Chancay
Valley, but without giving the specific site. Even so it is one more piece of evidence that the
people here ate this tuber.
The remains of cassava roots have been excavated at Manchán in the Casma Valley, a Chimu
site from their final southern phase (A.D. 1470-1523). Perry (2002: 337) points out the cassava
found are of similar size, with a diameter of 1-2 cm from the first millennium B.C. to the
fourteenth century A.D. but they can exceptionally be of larger size, particularly in Chancay
sites. We should however bear in mind that these plants are neither carbonised nor desiccated.
Scant cassava remains were found at the Panquilma site in the upper Lurín Valley within an
Inca context (Cohen 1975: 53). Towle (1961: 61) reported the presence of cassava remains at the
site of Pachacamac. It is thus clear that this tuber was eaten by the Inca on a regular basis.
Arrowleaf elephant´s ear, Uncuncha, Huirina, Mairino, Yantia, Yauía
(Xanthosoma sp., Xanthosoma sagittifolium)
This genus has close to forty species, ten of which are found in Peru. Apparently the most
significant species in this country is Xanthosoma sagittifolium (L.) Schott, an herbaceous
species of the rhizome type that is spread over the regions of San Martín and Madre de Dios,
on the eastern Peruvian Andes, essentially at 25200-30000 masl.
The plant gives out a tuber with a highly productive white pulp. Its leaves and corms are edible
(Mostacero et al. 2009: 1057), and it has a high biochemical value as regards nutrition because
it contains raw fibre, nitrogen, calcium, phosphorus, iron, carotene, thiamine, riboflavin and
ascorbic acid, amongst other substances (Morton 1972). We should bear in mind the importance
ascorbic acid has for the catalysis of iron in order to avoid anaemia (Larsen 2000). This tuber may
thus have been particularly important, despite the fact that it has yet to be archaeologically
recorded in Peru. According to Onweme (1978, cited by Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 120),
Xanthosoma comprises 70-77% water, 12-26% carbohydrates, and 1.3-3.7 proteins.
As regards domestication, Quero-García et al. (2010) state that Xanthosoma sagittifolium
(L.) Schott is often associated to the sole cultivated species of this genus. Its cultivation
may have first taken place in eastern South America and from thence spread to the Antilles.
In fact, it is most intensely cultivated here. The tubers are quite adaptable to various
environments and are often stewed or toasted; the starches can be removed by boiling. This
procedure is essential in order to remove the content of calcium oxalate crystals (Piperno
and Pearsall 1998: 163).
Piperno and Pearsall (1998: 116) note that Xanthosoma sagittifolium was extensively cultivated
by the time of the Spanish arrival in a macroregion that extends from southern Central America
to northern South America, yet they do not discard the southern tropical South American
region as another centre of domestication of this plant (Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 163).
117
Elmo Leon
In the South American context there is evidence of uncuncha starch traces on the surface
of pestles from the San Isidro site, Colombia, with dates that average 9589 and 9029 B.C.
(Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 200). Towle reported the uncuncha had edible leaves and roots;
the latter, when desiccated, are used like chuño (Towle 1961: 30). Towle also noted that in his
1917 work on Peruvian pre-Hispanic plants, Safford (in Towle, ibidem), seems to have identified
the depiction of one of these rhizomes on a pre-Hispanic vessel. We were unfortunately
unable to find this. There supposedly are more depictions, but the sites where these were
found are not given. Piperno and Pearsall believe the remains of uncuncha processing and
consumption can be found in Peru’s Andean zones, but this is still being researched.
Oca, Apilla, Uncha (Oxalis tuberosa Molina)
We now turn to the pre-Hispanic evidence of another major Andean tuber: oca. From a
botanic standpoint, Oxalis is a vast genus that comprises over 800 species that are highly
variable in their ecology and habitat. It has large concentrations in South America and South
Africa (Emshwiller and Doyle 1998: 975).
In the handbook on Peruvian phanerogams prepared by Mostacero and his colleagues, the oca
is defined as a species native to the Andes that is cultivated in the Andean countries from
Venezuela to Chile and Argentina. This is an herbaceous plant with a subterranean stem or
rhizomes that give out elongated tubers that are of white, pale yellow, orange and other colours.
These can be eaten raw, parboiled, or dehydrated in chuño form (Mostacero et al. 2009: 393).
Oca is one of the most important tubers in the Andes and is grown at altitudes ranging
between 2800 and 4100 masl, e.g. Solanum sp. and Ullucus tuberosus. According to the
National Research Council (1989a: 12) it is currently under cultivation from Venezuela to the
north, to the island of Chiloé (Chile) to the south. It has also been introduced into Mexico and
even New Zealand (León 2000: 310).
This is the second most-eaten crop in the Peruvian Andes, second to the potato. Its white and
fresh pulp is agreeable but slightly acid. Hodge (1951) states that ancient Peruvians dehydrated
it just like they did with the potato in order to get a sweet taste.
Stegemann et al. (1988) state that oca chuño was called caya, that it was brought about with
frosts—just like potato chuño—and was then threshed to extract as much water as possible.
Cahui is a type of dehydrated oca, one of the few by-products that are sweet. Stegemann and
his colleagues used a biochemical study to establish the high amino acid concentration of
oca, and so it can be concluded that its consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru was a major source
of food and proteins.
The Salesian missionary priest Soukup provides very illustrative data on the preparation of
chuño. Soukup says that oca chuño (cjaya) was prepared through a process that desiccated
the tubers (which have a large amount of starch by exposing them to the sun in order to
118
14,000 years of food in Peru
extract saccharin. The long procedure begins by dipping the oca tubers in water immediately
after pulling them out of the ground for four days; they are then subjected to ice and solar
rays in between having them trod on. The end result is a chuño with a high protein value and
a significant amount of starch (Soukup 1980: 302).
Margaret Towle (1961: 56-57) was one of the first who gave an account of the significance this
plant had in pre-Hispanic Peru. She claimed it was a typical crop in Colombia and Bolivia, and
that there are at least two types of oca: the bitter oca (cjaya-oca) with white tubers, and the
sweet oca which comes in many colours. The first type has a high amount of calcium oxalates
and must be placed under the sun before eating. Oca chuño is specifically prepared with the
bitter type.
Sauer (1952: 50) states that oca was cultivated alternately alongside potatoes. This is
interesting because this may have been the case in the pre-Hispanic Andes. This association
is support botanically because the high-altitude strip that extends from 2500 to 4300 masl
was used to domesticate not just potatoes and oca but also mashua and olluco, so they are
all interconnected (León 2000: 35).
Oca is at present exported and consumed as exotic produce in Mexico and New Zealand,
albeit in small amounts (Hermann and Heller 1997: 9). In the Andean environment, Pastor et al.
(2008) point out, oca has had, and still has, a key role in rural communities’ reserves.
Let us turn now to the bromatology of oca. This tuber has given rise to a series of investigations
that will be briefly reviewed here.
King and Gershoff (1987: 508) made a biochemical study of the contents of oca and found it
held 3-8% proteins, 83-88% carbohydrates, 0.5-0.6% fat, 4-5% fibre, and 368-374 gr of calories.
As regards the amino acids, King and Gershoff emphasised their great variety and mention
lysine, threonine, valine, isoleucine, and phenylalanine-tyrosine (with the highest values,
similar to olluco).
Gross et al. (1989: 28-29) analysed the biochemistry of these seeds and reported 87.9%
carbohydrates, 86.2% water, 5.6% proteins, 4.1% ashes, 1.4% fibre, and 1% oil. As for
polysaccharides, oca has no less than 20.92% sacharose and is thus the tuber with the highest
rate in this index. Glucose, with 3.63%, is far above quinoa but far below the glucose found in
olluco. It follows that two values are important: amino acids and saccharose. Both must be
assessed when discussing the pre-Hispanic nutritional balance.
In a comprehensive study of oca, Bradbury and Emshwiller (2011) repeat that it can be stored
dehydrated (khaya) but can also be consumed fresh. In the latter form it is known as way’ku
(stewed) or misk’i (tasty). In their biochemical analysis of the contents in oca, Bradbury and
Emshwiller point out that its name is actually due to the presence of oxalic acid, which is
evidently venomous and toxic. Besides, it also holds ascorbic, malic, tartaric, succinic, and
glutaric acids.
119
Elmo Leon
Bradbury and Emshwiller emphasise on the harm the consumption of oxalates does, which
they say are anti-nutritional and have toxic effects as well as lowering calcium absorption,
kidney failure, and causing complications in the absorption of salts, magnesium and iron.
Even so we should not forget how ideal ascorbic acid is to the avoidance of anaemia
(Larsen 2000). This property should be emphasised when assessing how balanced the
pre-Hispanic diet was.
As regards plant management, for Bradbury and Emshwiller it is clear that during domestication
the chemistry of oca was manipulated secondarily.
The National Research Council (1989b: 83-91) established that the nutritional value of oca is
as good as or better than that of potatoes. It holds 70-80% water, 11-22% carbohydrates, and a
mean 9% of proteins. The carbohydrates are particularly rich in sugars and are easy to digest.
What is the origin of oca and where was it domesticated? Eve Emshwiller (1999) made what is
possibly the most extensive recent study of oca. She points out that both Vavilov and Sauer
believed oca had originally been domesticated in the Andes.
Hodge and Bruechner then claimed it originated in southern Peru. They posited with
more geographical precision that oca had been domesticated in the Titicaca Altiplano, but
Emshwiller believes that the species of Oxalis found in this zone have no connection with
cultivated oca.
Phylogenetics is also making a contribution to this issue. Emshwiller and Doyle (1998) made
a study of coca based on samples of wild Oxalis that had originated mostly in Bolivia. In this
study both scholars were only able to establish some of the ancestors of oca whilst others
still had to be identified; in fact they urged more research in this area.
The relationship between hybridisation and the origin of this plant was recently established.
Octoploid oca may have been the result of the hybridisation of Oxalis picchensis Kunth (a
native to southern Peru) and the taxa of an as yet unnamed tuber. Even so, in a subsequent
study Emshwiller et al. (2009) concluded that oca had its origin in a group called Oxalis
tuberosa Alliance. Only two species of this group have been identified, the above-mentioned
Oxalis picchensis and Oxalis chicligastensis R. Kunth, which is a native of North-Western
Argentina. The other two species, which have still not been catalogued, come from North
Western Bolivia and the highlands of Lima.
We leave now the question of the origins of this major tuber and turn to the archaeological
evidence.
It is possible that the oldest evidence of what is perhaps oca—still in undomesticated
condition—comes from Ancash. Tubers that were classified in the Oxalis genus, albeit without
specifying the species, come from one of the deepest strata in Guitarrero Cave, some 2850
masl in Callejón de Huaylas.
120
14,000 years of food in Peru
The important point here is that type of tuber was found in many of the strata in this cave, so
we can infer that it was persistently consumed since at least 9000 B.C. Emshwiller (1999: 29),
perhaps the foremost expert on this tuber, insists these are wild plants that date to around
9000 B.C. (Smith 1980a: 100).
The highlands of Lima are a second location where oca has been reported. Emshwiller (1999:
27-28) cites Pearsall (1992) and believes that the identification of this tuber made in Tres
Ventanas Cave, in the highlands of Lima, could well be correct. However, the conditions the
find was made in and the lack of documented contexts mean one cannot be conclusive nor
can the presence of these remains be assessed despite the fact that they date to around
10,000 B.C. and would virtually be the most ancient remains of oca in Peru.
We can conclude for both the Callejón de Huaylas and the highlands of Lima, that there is
no clear evidence that oca had been domesticated by 9000 B.C., and no variety was present
except for the wild version of this tuber.
The following site in the archaeological record where oca was more convincingly discovered
and published is Paloma, in the Chilca Valley (Quilter 1989: 23). Its date averages to at least
3500 B.C. and seems to be more reliable than the previous examples, but we should bear in
mind that no analysis report has been presented.
Oxalis (probably tuberous) has been found in the excavations at Pachamachay Cave in Junín, at
4300 masl (Pearsall 1978-1980: 65-66). The oldest level corresponds to a radiocarbon date of
2155 B.C. This time period, which is very similar to that of the other tubers thus far presented,
is intriguing.
Lanning claimed he had found oca at the site of Punta Grande on the Central Coast, in the
Ancón-Chillón region, which dates to ca. 2100 B.C. For Emshwiller (1999: 29), the presence of
oca in this zone indicates that coastlands and highlands interacted, because this crop cannot
be cultivated on the coast.
Oca has also been found in contexts pertaining to the Pucará culture on the South Andean
Altiplano that dated to ca. 1300 B.C. and A.D. 50 (Whitehead and Bruno 2003).
The following pieces of evidence come from the Mochica culture, so it can be posited that
oca was also consumed in the second and first millennium B.C., at least on the Central and
North-Central Coast.
The Mochica site of Dos Cabezas is on the North Coast in the Jequetepeque Valley. Three
tombs were found here (Geyer et al. 2003). The analysis of human faeces established that three
individuals ate oca regularly before their death (just below maize and guava). The site dates to
A.D. 536-580 (Moseley et al. 2008: 83). It is intriguing that a highland crop has been found right
in the centre of the land of the Mochica, and this is frequent on the coast since the Preceramic
Period. Reinhard et al. (2007: 534) criticised the identification of this pollen type because oca
121
Elmo Leon
grows at a different altitude than that at which the Mochica culture developed. Exchange could
however be a working hypothesis that answers this problem (cf. Emschwiller supra).
Hastorf (2002: 157) reports that ocas remains have been found in Wanka archaeological sites
in the upper Mantaro Valley, from at least A.D. 200 onwards. DeNiro and Hastorf (1985: 113)
reported the presence of oca at the site known as Ushnu dating to ca. A.D. 1100. The evidence
clearly indicates that Junín probably was a major producing area.
In his summary of oca, Emshwiller (1999: 29-30) points out that it was found at Pachacamac
and was depicted in the Pacheco-style pottery of the Wari Empire. DeNiro and Hastorf (1985:
113) proved the finding of oca remains in the Pachacamac shrine dating to the Inca occupation.
Towle reported having found a scant presence of oca in the Inca occupation of Pachacamac.
She also notes that Yacovleff and Herrera had found oca plants in some Pacheco-style
ceramics from Wari, as well as a possible depiction of this plant on a Chimú vessel.
Jíquima, Ahipa, Jaspo, Namou, Wuiso (Pachyrhizus tuberosus, Pachirhizus ahipa (Wedd.) Parodi)
This tuber also had an essential role in the food of ancient Peru, but its consumption has at
present fallen on such hard times that it is dying out.
The National Research Council (1989b: 39) describes the jíquima as a legume that stands out
due to the edible fruit it has in its roots, which can weigh up to a kilo. Its internal part is
succulent, is of good taste and can even be eaten raw. According to this report the jíquima has
never been found in wild state, but it is pointed out that there is evidence of its cultivation in
Peru some two thousand years ago.
Father Soukup (1980: 303) stated that although the seeds are poisonous, the roots are edible
and very nutritive. The ancient Mexicans knew the jíquima as xicamatl, hence its name, and so
for Soukup the plant originated in this zone.
The jíquima is often cultivated in tropical and relatively temperate subtropical valleys. It adapts
well between 1800 and 2600 masl, but it can reach some 3000 masl in Bolivia. This means that
it is cultivated at similar altitudes to those in which other tubers—except maca—are grown.
Jïquima in general belongs to the group of tubers that were domesticated in the lower Andes
like the potato, the yacón, the arracacha and the achira (1500-3000 masl). At present it is planted
in the intermontane valleys and in coastal Ecuador, between 0 and 1500 masl (León 2000: 210).
Sorensen et al. (1997: 13-74) devoted a comprehensive study to this tuber. They concluded that
ñame or yam is its botanical relative, and that although it is exported to other countries, at
present only a few Andean communities cultivate it, particularly in Bolivia and in North-Western
Argentina (in Peru only some communities in Tarapoto grow it). In another study, Sorensen (1988)
discussed previous taxonomic denominations that interested readers should read.
122
14,000 years of food in Peru
Jíquima had multiple roles. Its cultivation is ideal because it is invaluable for the environment
due to the nitrogen exchange. It has even been shown that it causes no droughts as some
suggestions propose. Its uses currently recorded in Bolivia include those of body disinfectant
and antitussive; it is also beneficial for the lungs and helps breathe.
Turning now to the jíquima’s bromatology, amongst the Andean tubers it has one of the highest
protein contents (8-18%), particularly in its leaves, 45-55% carbohydrates, and 8-24% sugar.
Purseglove (1968, in Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 110) reported 87.1% water, 20.6% carbohydrates,
and 1.2% proteins.
Margaret Towle (1961: 52) located its origins in the headwaters of the Amazonian rivers, i.e. in
Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia. Subsequent investigations like those of Barbara Pickersgill
(2007: 927) concluded that the earliest finds in archaeological sites come from Mesoamerica,
where it was frequently consumed by later cultures (León 2000).
According to Jorge León (2000: 210), it is clear that two species from one genus (Pachyrhizus)
were domesticated, one in Mesoamerica (Pachyrhizus erosus) and another one in the western
part of the Andean Amazon rainforest (Pachyrhyzus tuberosus).
We now turn to the archaeological evidence of jíquima consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru.
Yacovleff (1933) believed the jíquima was known by the native peoples, as is proved by its
ceramic depictions. Yacovleff cited Father Acosta (1590) and mentioned that the fruits of this
plant are fresh and wet, and in summer they quench the thirst. He then followed Bernabé
Cobo in pointing out that it can be eaten raw as a fruit, and that it can even be used against
swellings and as an antibiotic.
Probably the earliest find of jíquima, albeit in a non-cultivated state, was made in the previously
mentioned and somewhat problematic caves of Tres Ventanas and Quiqché in the upper
Chilca Valley, some 3700 masl in the highlands of Lima. Engel (1970: 56) claims that remains of
this plant were found in strata that we have calibrated to 7031 and 6903 B.C. He also stated
that Douglas Yen was the specialist who identified them and established they were wild. It is
worth recalling in this context that Bonavia has questioned the validity of Engel’s reports, so
this information must be taken a reference only (Bonavia 1982: 316).
Deborah Pearsall (1998: 274) gave jíquima a date of ca. 5700 B.C. on the Central Coast of Peru,
but no details were given of the archaeological sites in question.
Cohen (1978: 38) and Quilter et al. (1991: 280) also reported the discovery of jíquima at El
Paraíso, Chuquitanta, in the Chillón Valley (Lima), starting at the Gaviota phase ca. 2000 B.C.
In this case the excavation documentation required for a better assessment is also missing.
At the site of Los Gavilanes in the lower Huarmey Valley, Bonavia (1982: 149, 315) documented
possible jíquima remains that he dated to 2300 and 1480 B.C.; however, Bonavia emphasised
that this was just Pachyrhizus sp., i.e. the genus and not the species.
123
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

Although there is evidence of jíquima consumption in Peru before the Christian era, the
documentation required for a more conclusive assessment is lacking.

Moving on in time, Margaret Towle (1961: 51) cited Paul Mangelsdorf to note the presence
of jíquima in the context of the Paracas Necropolis culture just a few centuries before the
Christian era, particularly in ceramic depictions of this tuber. She was not mistaken, for jíquima
remains have been found in the excavations undertaken at the Cerrillos site (which belongs to
the Paracas culture) in its early period, ca. 800-600 B.C. (Splitsloser [sic] 2009: 94).

Some researchers believe it is in the context of the Nasca culture that we are more certain of
jíquima consumption. Vargas (1962: 111) for instance found it painted in Nasca ceramics and thus
deduced that it was consumed on the coast a few centuries before the Christian era. Several
finds have also been made in the Cahuachi shrine (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 3) (Figure 5). On the
other hand the Museo Nacional de Arqueología, Antropología e Historia del Perú has a vessel
in the Nasca 3 style that depicts jíquima and is dated to ca. A.D. 200-300. It is therefore clear
that the Nasca consumed jíquima during the first centuries of the Christian era (Silverman and
Proulx 2002: 52).

It is possible that the Moche also consumed jíquima. Bruecher (1989) drew attention to a
depiction of this plant on Moche pottery. What is missing here is archaeobotanical data.

To finish with this important tuber, it has also been found in the middens of Manchán Figura 5. Jíquimas descubiertas en las excavaciones del santuario de Cahuachi (Nasca), primeros siglos de nuestra era. (CORTESÍA DE
(A.D. 1470-1523), a site in the Casma Valley that corresponds to the final phase in the Chimú MARIA GRAZIA PIACENZA, LUIGI PIACENZA Y CAROLINA ORSINI).
southwards expansion (Perry 2002: 337).

In general there is still little information on this plant in pre-Hispanic Peru. What does seem to
be clear is that it was consumed by several cultures some centuries before the Christian era.
Yacon root, Arboloco, Aricoma (Smallanthus sonchifolius (Poepp. & Endl.)
H. Robinson, Aolymnia edulis Wedd., Polymnia sonchifolia)
As regards bromatology, the impressive thing is that the leaves of the plant have 11-17% proteins.
However their tubers or roots stand out because of their carbohydrates 0.4-2.2% proteins and
high potassium levels (National Research Council 1989b: 115-122). Herrera (1942a: 28) also said
this plant has starch-rich tuberous roots that can be eaten raw and have a high nutritional
value. Yacón grows wild preferably between 900 and 2750 masl in Colombia, Ecuador, and
probably in mid-altitude ranges in Peru.

For the National Research Council (1989b), yacón (or Peruvian ground apple) is nowadays
consumed from Colombia to North-Western Argentina. It has white, sweet and juicy
tubers that are almost free of calories, and which can weigh up to half a kilo each. It is a
good food for diabetics, and contains water, starch, sugar and albuminoids (Mostacero et
al. 2009: 889).
Yacón is a primary source of natural sugar. Because of its succulence it can be eaten raw,
but it is sometimes cooked. This plant would be a good candidate if one were to seek a
substitute for some sugar sources as is proven by the presence of yacón chancaca,*3 which
is similar to sugarcane.
3 * Naturally extracted honey-like syrup from this tuber.
For León (2000: 36), yacón is a tuber that was domesticated in the Andes. If so, it took place
between 1500 and 3000 masl. Grau and Rea (1997) instead claim that it can be cultivated
between 900 and 3500 masl; this would mean it has a wide altitudinal range, and that it
can adapt both to a warm environment as well to a subtropical one. Grau and Rea state
that Peruvian researchers are the ones who most devote their time to the study of yacón,
particularly as regards germplasm.
Douglas et al. (2003) reported the significance of yacón consumption and its benefits. It has
fructooligosaccharides of the insulin type with prebiotic qualities, i.e. it requires minimum
processing and makes food pass to the small intestine where it is fermented by bacteria,
which is beneficial for whoever consumes yacón. Hence the interest currently shown for this
plant in New Zealand, Japan, and other markets.

124 125
Elmo Leon
In his summary of Andean tubers, Seminario (2004: 27-28) points out that Father Bernabé
Cobo apparently made the first ethnohistorical reference to yacón when stating that it was
eaten as a raw fruit, that it had a very good taste, and that heat made it sweeter, adding that
it could be preserved for up to twenty days.
Yacón, still according to Seminario was depicted both on Paracas textiles (400 B.C. and A.D.
100) and Nasca ceramics (100 B.C.-A.D.650), as follows from the notes made by Yacovleff,
Safford, and Lila O’Neale. Apparently it was likewise recorded in North-Western Argentina in
the Christian era.
It is worth pointing out that for Seminario, yacón may have originated in a region that extends
from Venezuela to North-Western Argentina. It may thus have been domesticated in any of
the Andean zones included in such a vast area. Zardini (1991) however notes that Peru, and
Colombia and Venezuela in second place, are places where seven yacón-related species have
been identified, so its domestication may have taken place in this vast expanse.
We now turn to the archaeological evidence. As has already been pointed out, Yacón finds
are not limited to Peru. Zardini (1991) points out that its oldest use in Argentina was in
several sites in this country’s northwest within the context of the Candelaria culture, ca.
A.D. 1-1,000.
Margaret Towle (1961: 96) believed that both ancient Peruvians and Bolivians had cultivated
yacón since pre-Hispanic times. She concluded (Towle 1961: 142) that it was domesticated
in Peru at the beginning of the Christian era, i.e. some two thousand years ago. Towle also
pointed out that Safford studied yacón in Peruvian pre-Hispanic collections in the Smithsonian
Museum, and that is also depicted on pottery.
What is the most ancient find of yacón in pre-Hispanic Peru? It apparently dates to the second
millennium B.C. Cohen (1978: 37) reports that Margaret Towle found a specimen in the Tank
site at Ancón that could be dated to ca. 1800 B.C., but its identification was not easy because
these are starch remains. The evidence is thus inconclusive.
Other finds date to the Christian era. We know the Nasca were familiar with yacón and
consumed it because Whitaker and O’Neale documented this plant in an Initial Nasca
weaving from the first centuries of the Chastain era. Besides its presence as a major
foodstuff in the Nasca culture has been underscored by recent research (Silverman and
Proulx 2002: 52).
Yacón was also consumed on the North Coast both by pre-Mochica and Mochica populations.
It has been found in the human excrement excavated at Puerto Moorin, a site from the Salinar
culture in the lower Virú Valley that dates to A.D. 17-300 (Ericson et al. 1989: 74).
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 134) also documented yacón in the excavations at Huaca de la Luna,
which means the Mochica were already consuming this plant at least by A.D. 400-750.
126
14,000 years of food in Peru
Olluco, Melloco, Papaliza, Ruba, Ullucu, Ulluma (Ullucus tuberosus Caldas)
The National Research Council (1989a: 12) holds that olluco was one of the most important
tubers for the Inca, and that in some parts of the Andes it challenges (and surely did so in past
times) the position of potatoes as a source of carbohydrates.
Hodge (1951) believes the olluco was (and is) a very important plant in the Peruvian Andes
whose popularity was just below that of the potato and maize. This was due to its high
nutrient content and pleasant taste; to its characteristics—it is frost-resistant and has a high
tuber productivity per plant—and to the many ways in which it can be prepared, chuño
included, which is quite similar to that of potato. So in general the food this tuber provides is
of high quality and durability.
The olluco has many uses, particularly due to its high water content. It can be stewed, served
au gratin, ground, and cut but is rarely baked. It is also eaten in stews and soups (National
Research Council 1989b: 108).
In the mid-twentieth century Hodge found through ethnography that olluco was cultivated
interspersed with oca, and hence was part of the Altiplano triad along with mashua (Oxalis
tuberosum). Intriguingly here we have a triad like the one Vavilov found—in this case mashua-
oca-olluco—in which their cultivation is mutually beneficial. Therefore if any evidence is ever
found any of these tubers was consumed, we can speculate that one or two of them were
cultivated in the same place.
We have four sources of bromatological analysis that are worth comparing given this tuber’s
nutritional richness, which holds 3% starch, 10% sugar, 12% proteins, and 3% fat (Mostacero
et al. 2009: 154). The National Research Council (1989b: 108) gives 85% water, 14% starch and
sugars, and 12% proteins. It also has a high content of vitamin C (23 mg per every 100 grams).
King and Gershoff (1987: 508) similarly give biochemical values of 10-15% proteins, 73-81%
carbohydrates, 3-5% fibres, and 370-381 grams of calories. Its amino acids are lysine, threonine,
valine, isoleucine, leucine, triptophane, phenylalanine, tyrosine (which has the highest value
of the components), and methionine.
To finish this comparison of olluco’s bromatological values, Gross et al. (1989: 28) found it has 87.6%
water, 84.2% carbohydrates, 8.5% proteins, 5.4% ashes, 1.4% oil, and 0.5% fibre. This is the Andean
plant with the highest rate of glucose (13.18%), fructose (11.13%), and even saccharose (6.08%).
Despite the variations in these bromatological date, the high protein value of olluco is clear—it
can reach 15% (with important amino acids), and has a large amount of carbohydrates and sugars.
Despite this tuber’s biochemical richness the figures show that while at present some thirty
million people are eating olluco in the Andes, practically no one elsewhere is eating it
(Hermann and Heller 1997: 8). For Herrera (1942a: 27) the olluco is the crop par excellence of
the Peruvian puna, which as we have seen is where its domestication may have taken place.
127
Elmo Leon
Little is known of its domestication. First we must distinguish Ullucus tuberosus Caldas
aborigeneus Bruecher—the taxonomic denomination of the wild olluco native to Peru’s
Andean region (which was originally believed to belong to North Western Argentina, Peru
and Bolivia)—from Ullucus tuberosus Caldas tuberosus, the species native to South America
and which is cultivated in the Andes.
It has been posited that this tuber had its origin in the highlands between the Colombian and
the Argentinian Andes (León 2000: 87), but there are as yet few studies in this regard. There
apparently is evidence of a wild olluco in Cuzco, which is why some believe this is its zone
of origin.
It is known from ethnographical sources that in Peru they prepare chullqe—a prolonged dry-
storage method that prevents its spoilage. In order to prepare this the ollucos are boiled,
washed, and then left on the roof of a house for several days and nights in the dry season.
There also are other ways of dehydrating it (Escobar 2003).
We turn now to the evidence of olluco consumption in Peru. An initial examination of the
scientific literature regarding olluco in pre-Hispanic Peru gives the impression that research is
still in its infancy.
A first point regards the type of cooking. Hather (1991: 662) points out that Martins’ dissertation
(1976) mentions the presence of burned olluco in pre-Hispanic Peru. This can be interpreted to
mean that the olluco may have been subjected to embers of fire, a type of cooking that as we
have seen was quite frequent at the time.
Also scant are the actual remains of this plant that is now eaten by Peruvians. Perhaps the
oldest specimen is the one found at Guitarrero Cave, in the Callejón de Huaylas. Here the
excavations undertaken by Thomas Lynch and his team yielded a significant number of plants;
these were well-preserved despite the millennia in-between thanks to environmental factors
that favoured this process. The botanist C. Earle Smith identified the remains of desiccated
olluco in level 2a (Smith 1980a: 97), which despite having some stratigraphic problems can be
dated to ca. 9000-8500 B.C. It is interesting that after having been consumed in this epoch, it
is then found almost always in the upper strata, which means it was consumed at least in the
Early Holocene.
A scientific reports claims to have documented “possible” olluco remains in the caves of
Quiqché and Tres Ventanas, in the upper Chilca Valley (Engel 1970: 56), which could date to
7031 and 6903 B.C. We have, however, seen the critique Bonavia (1988) made regarding the
scientific quality of these excavations.
After such early dates there is a larger gap of several millennia until we reach the cultures
in the Christian era. Although almost unknown in coastal archaeological documentation,
MacLelland (2008: 54) noticed the presence of olluco trees in Moche pottery. Strangely
enough these tubers are associated with monkeys. We thus are only able to assume the
Moche consumed olluco because if they were acquainted with it, it follows that it was eaten.
128
14,000 years of food in Peru
Moving onwards in time it is clear that the Wari consumed olluco. Margaret Towle (1961: 38)
says Yacovleff and Herrera identified reliable depictions of olluco from traits such as stems,
leaves and tubers that are found in round and oblong forms in Pacheco-style Wari ceramics.
Towle however also points out that Hodge has criticised this identification made through the
shape of leaves, which could be potato leaves.
The olluco was also not unknown for the Chimú. Hodge reports that Lavallée published a
Chimú textile where this plant’s fruits are visible.
Finally, Hastorf (2002: 157) noticed the presence of olluco remains in Wanka sites in the
upper Mantaro Valley, at an altitude of 3200-3900 masl. This means they were then not just
cultivated but also consumed.
Totora, Enea, Huaricolla (Typha angustifolia, Typha domingensis Schoenoplectus californicus
californicus y Schoenoplectus californicus totora)
Usually two species are known as totora, Typha angustifolia and Schoenoplectus
californicus. This is a genus of rhizome plants that comprises at least ten species, two
of which are found in Peru, Typha angustifolia and Typha domingensis (Mostacero et al.
2009: 1059). The first species is found in muddy, flooded places and riverside ditches. Its
leaves are typically used to manufacture rush mats and bed mats, which were so common
in pre-Hispanic Peru.
Typha angustifolia differs from Typha domingensis in that it is an aquatic, herbaceous plant
found in the regions of Cajamarca, Ancash, Amazonas, and Lima. The rhizomes are eaten
(Towle 1961: 16).
Schoenoplectus californicus is another type of totora. Heiser (1978: 231-233) says it was
previously part of the Scirpus (Scirpus californicus) genus. Nowadays this species is defined as
Schoenoplectus californicus spp. totora (C. A. Meyer) Steudel.
Two subspecies are accepted within this species that it is worth distinguishing, because
they connote two different ecological environments inhabited by ancient Peruvians in
which they obtained food resources. Schoenoplectus californicus spp. californicus on the
other hand appears mostly on the coast, whilst on the other Schoenoplectus californicus
spp. totora characterises the upper Andean zones (Banack et al. 2004: 12). The altitudinal
distribution of Schoenoplectus californicus spp. californicus is impressive as it extends from
0 to 3750 masl.
Totora is unfortunately declining as regards its species occurrence. Some fifteen years ago
it was considered one of the major species in the Cyperaceae genus in America (Macía and
Balslev 2000: 82), which is no longer the case.
129
Elmo Leon
Several documents show totora was consumed in ancient Peru. Heiser (1978: 222) mentioned
Acosta, who noted in 1590 that alongside its multiple roles, totora was also eaten by the ancient
inhabitants of Lake Titicaca. Heiser believed it was consumed due to its high carbohydrate
content.
Heiser also cites Father Bernabé Cobo, who claimed in 1590 that the black and white totora
roots in the vicinity of Lake Titicaca were used as “bread” by the Indians, and were sold in
their towns in the plaza. Cobo also claims they were eaten raw once they had been peeled.
We can therefore wonder whether the Indians had realised the nutritional value the raw plant
has, which we will see when discussing its bromatology. Heiser cites La Barre (1948, in Heiser
1978: 228), who claimed the taste of totora largely surpassed that of celery as regards its
softness and delicacy. It follows that it is an edible rhizome that is probably easily consumed
or swallowed.
Totora served several purposes in pre-Hispanic Peru. Banack et al. (2004) summarised its uses
at that time, which included building rafts, bridges boxes, straw mats, houses, and ropes, as
well as a fertiliser. It was also used as food, as is still done by the Uro in Lake Titicaca, as was
already noted.
Is the potential consumption of totora significant from a bromatological perspective? Although
we were unable to find direct data on this species we do have some for Typha domingensis,
and it can serve as proxy when discussing the alimentary balance. The most surprising point
is that it holds 16.1% proteins, 1.57% calcium, 0.53% magnesium, 0.79% phosphorus, and 7.3%
potassium (Kinupp and Inchausti 2008: 851). It clearly shows that totora in general amount of
proteins and potassium.
Was totora domesticated? A review of the botanical literature unfortunately only yielded old
references so that we cannot be conclusive. What does seem to be clear is that there are two
positions in this regard, a sceptical and an affirmative one. Let us see the first position. In a
study that is over thirty years old, Heiser claims that totora was not cultivated in pre-Hispanic
Peru and yet admits its cultivation from the nineteenth century onwards, and conclusively
states that cultivation cannot be ascertained for earlier periods.
An interesting fact in this regard concerns the presence of wells used to cultivate totora in
the vicinity of the citadel of Chan Chan. Heiser also mentions documents found by María
Rostworowski which show totora cultivation in the vicinity of Trujillo and in Lurín, on the Central
Coast (Heiser 1978: 230-231). These data can be taken as an indication of totora domestication,
maybe even in the pre-Hispanic period. It is a research path that should be followed.
The other, affirmative, position is held by Kautz and Keatinge (1977), who believe there is
enough evidence to support the idea that totora was domesticated in pre-Hispanic Peru. They
excavated what were supposedly low-level fields (pools) and found totora that may have
been intentionally cultivated at the sites of Médanos, La Joyada, and Cerro la Virgen, in the
environs of Huanchaco. The results seem conclusive.
130
14,000 years of food in Peru
Kautz and Keatinge believe this type of crop can be dated to the time of the occupation of
Chan Chan (ca. A.D. 1450), the Inca period, and even the early colonial period.
We now turn to the evidence of totora consumption as food in the pre-Hispanic period.
The archaeological evidence seems to be quite clear. Margaret Towle’s ethnobotanical
handbook (1961: 16) had already shown that the rhizomes are edible, and that the ancient
Peruvians knew this.
The oldest evidence of totora consumption seems to come from the lower Huarmey Valley.
Thypha angustifolia has been found in a human coprolith that dated to ca. 3000 B.C. at site
PV-35-6 in this zone.
On the North Coast, Bennett and Bird (1949) documented totora at Huaca Prieta and thought
they were food waste. Callen y Cameron (1960), who pioneered coprolith analysis, confirmed
that human faeces from Huaca Prieta held totora residues. This was interpreted to mean that
their fibrous roots had formed part of this people’s diet. Although there are no radiocarbon
datings to establish since when was totora eaten we can assume that it was in the Preceramic
period, i.e. ca. 2000 B.C.
Cohen (1978: 30) likewise documented the presence of totora stalks, leaves and rhizomes at
the La Pampa site on the Central Coast, which was dated around 3090 B.C.
Another important study of human coproliths was carried out at Puerto Moorin site in
the Virú Valley, on the North Coast, where the remains of Typha angustifolia were found
(Ericson et al. 1989: 74). This shows totora was still being eaten at the beginning of the
Christian era.
Our final piece of evidence is of Schoenoplectus californicus found at the Huaca de la Luna,
which was dated to A.D. 400-650. This means the Mochica probably consumed it (Cárdenas
et al. 1997: 134).
Wild Cane, Caña brava (Gynerium sagittatum)
Mostacero et al. (2009: 993) believe this plant had its origin in tropical, riverine, rhizomatous
America where it formed the well-known reedbeds alongside the rivers, which can grow up
to 1500 masl. They claim this grass had several uses, from construction to curative, ones, but
there was no evidence it had ever been eaten. Margaret Towle (1961: 18) drew attention to its
presence both in the burials of Paracas mummies as well as in pre-Hispanic basketry.
Ericson et al. (1989: 74) however showed that wild cane was eaten because it was found in the
coproliths of people from the Puerto Moorin site in the lower Virú Valley on the North Coast,
within the context of the Salinar culture and in the first centuries of the Christian era.
131
Elmo Leon
Reed, Carrizo or Caña Hueca (Phragmites communis)
This is a plant of the Arundienae tribe (a relative of the wild reed above) that vegetates near
rivers, wet sandy terrains with saltpetre and alongside irrigation canals. It is used in rustic
buildings and in handcrafts (Mostacero et al. 2009: 993).
This is a type of grass that was apparently eaten at Puerto Moorin during its Salinar occupation,
around the first centuries of the Christian era. Ericson et al. (1989: 74) found remains of this
plant in the human faeces left behind by the people of this archaeological site. Bonavia et al.
(2009: 242) also found abundant burned remains of this plant, which was presumably used as
domestic fuel site PV35-4 at La Honda beach, immediately to the north of the mouth of the
Huarmey River on the Central Coast.
Mashua, Año, Añu, Isaña (Tropaeolum tuberosum)
The National Research Council (1989a: 11) catalogued mashua as an ornamental crop for the
Incas, but one whose consumption as food was also important. This apparently was a favourite
tuber crop because it does not require much attention and can be stored in the ground for
a long time. Mashua is also considered the fourth most important Andean tuber, after the
potato, oca, and the olluco (National Research Council 1989b: 67-69). Hodge (1951) likewise
believed that mashua, alongside the oca and the olluco, formed the essential alimentary triad
in the Altiplano.
Mostacero et al. (2009: 398) state that this is an annual, climbing plant with tubers of various
colours that can reach up to eight centimetres. Mashua is often found close to brooks, near
cultivated fields and so on. It usually has a bitter taste, but the bitterness decreases if it is
dried under the sun. Mashua is cultivated alongside the olluco and the oca, so it is possible
that whenever a group ate mashua it also ate the other two tubers.
Turning to the bromatology of mashua we find that it had a significant amount of ascorbic
acid, which entails high levels of vitamin C (National Research Council 1989b: 67-69). Gross et
al. (1989: 28) studied its biochemical components and found 85.8% carbohydrate, 85.4% water,
7.7% proteins, 4.8% ashes, and 0.7% fibre. The protein content thus is not negligible, nor that
of minerals like calcium, iron and phosphorus.
It is worth including here the comprehensive report on mashua by Grau et al. (2003). The
properties this tuber has include not just its biochemical content but also its beneficial impact
in its environment where it seems to provide protection against pests; it protects the soil, has
a high productivity and is disease-resistant. These qualities may have benefitted associated
crops like the potato, the olluco, and the la oca.
The data this report has on types of consumption and preparation are also invaluable. As
regards edibility, its bitter taste is essentially due to the presence of isothiocyanates, which
132
14,000 years of food in Peru
means it must be boiled in order to reduce their presence. Once boiled, mashua often
accompanies other tubers and meat as a stew. It is often exposed to the sun before cooking
in order to sweeten it. Mashua can also be baked in a huatia, where it takes an aromatic smell
and the texture of the sweet potato. Towle (1961: 58) said of its taste that it was not pleasant
and that chuño is one of the ways it is most frequently eaten.
Is there data on mashua domestication? Not much. It may have taken place in the southern
Peru-Bolivia Altiplano, given the high variety of species found in this zone in terms of their
taxonomic filiation and the ecological adaptation of this plant (Ortega et al. 2007).This seems
possible. For the National Research Council (1989b: 67-69), mashua may have been originally
cultivated in the zones where potatoes were first cultivated. Grau et al. (2003) on the other
hand believe that its domestication must have taken place in the area between Ecuador and
Bolivia, given the maximum diversification found in this zone. They believe that its relative late
apparition in the archaeological scene means that its domestication probably took place later,
in comparison with other Andean tubers. Tropaeolum tuberosus pp. silvestre apparently is the
original form of this plant. We should add that it preferably grows between 2400 and 4300 masl.
We turn now to the archaeological information. The documentation regarding the presence
of mashua in pre-Hispanic archaeological contexts is still very scant and dates only to the
beginning of the Christian era. Christine Hastorf (2002: 157) reported its presence in Wanka
sites in the upper Mantaro Valley at 3200-3900 masl since at least A.D. 193, with the site
of Pancán as her reference. Huachumachay Cave, in the Jauja Valley, lies in this same zone.
Mashua remains have been documented in this cave’s sediments that date to A.D. 650-1350
(Pearsall 1992).
Whitehead and Bruno (2003) also reported mashua remains found in the southern Altiplano in
contexts pertaining to the Pucará culture, which dated to ca. 1300 B.C.-A.D. 50.
Outside Junín, mashua has only been reported in Ayacucho. Margaret Towle (1961: 58) noted
that Yacovleff and Herrera had found mashua depicted in Pacheco-style pottery from Wari.
This means it may at least have been consumed here approximately between A.D. 800 and 900.
Potato, Acsu, Apalo, Catzari, Cchoque (Solanum tuberosum sp.)
If ever a crop characterised the Andes—even abroad—it certainly is the potato. It was and still
is so relevant in the history of world food, that it currently holds the fourth place amongst the
essential staples for the human diet, surpassed only by wheat, rice, and maize. It was a staple
part of the diet of Peru’s pre-Hispanic cultures and beyond the Andes. Even now it is hard to
envision a Peruvian dish that dispenses with potatoes. This tuber is now eaten even as fried,
many-coloured chips that are sold in supermarkets since the beginning of this millennium
thanks to the assessment and recommendations made by the Centro Internacional de la Papa
(CIP), which is disseminating the consumption of various cultivars. Its applications (leaving
aside medicinal uses, like in anti-inflammatories), for instance as potato starch, which go from
133
Elmo Leon
paper to plastics, ensure the local and international impact of the potato will apparently
remained unsurpassed by that of any other tuber.
Once the Andes had been conquered, the potato must have arrived in Spain by 1570, and
from there it spread to Italy. The story of the role it had in the mid-nineteenth-century
epidemic and famine in Scotland is well known. In Ireland it also became the main vegetable
food. The history of the potato in Europe goes as far as, for instance, the manufacture of
potato whisky.
The potato also had major permanent impact in the history of Central Europe. A greater
variety of this tuber was attained for culinary purposes once Parmentier introduced it in
France—after being imprisoned in a cell in Germany during the Seven Years War (Safford 1925:
217-223). The attempts made to diversify potato varieties, says the National Research Council
(1989b: 93), were already observable in the Andes themselves, where the Indians had managed
to cultivate some two hundred varieties in just one field. This process had begun some ten
thousand years ago at an altitude of 4000 masl. Basing himself on previous studies (Hawkes
1989, in Bonavia 1993: 176), Messer (2000: 188) claims that the greatest potato diversity is
found in the Titicaca region (Peru and Bolivia), where domestication probably came to an end
between eight and five thousand years ago. These data agree with those previously presented
regarding the place where the associated tubers had been domesticated, i.e. mashua, añu
(Tropaeolum tuberosum), oca (Oxalis tuberosa), olluco (Ullucus tuberosus)—in the end these
tubers all belong to one same group of plants that are adapted to a specific phytogeographic
environment (Hawkes, en Bonavia 1993: 174). There seems to be a general consensus regarding
the time and place where the potato was domesticated, the area that surrounds Lake Titicaca
around 6000 B.C.
Mostacero et al. (2009: 799) state there are some 1700 potato varieties, 273 of which are
Peruvian. Solanum tuberosum had its origin in the Andes of southern Peru and northern
Bolivia. It is cultivated because of its starchy fruits which are culinary and edible. Herrera
(1942a: 28) in turn pointed out the potato is the noblest species in the Andes, and that Peru’s
native population was able to use nature to dehydrate and preserve it despite its high water
content and its brief useful life.
Before discussing the origins of the potato, an issue on which much has been written (we
certainly will not do so), we must inform readers of the present state of the taxonomy of the
potato and its ancestors. Stevenson (1951: 159) pointed out that Hawkes believed the origin
zone of the domesticated potato comprises Peru and Bolivia due to the high concentration
of Solanum species in this region. Besides, Solanum tuberosum was part of a complex that
comprised Solanum andigenum—in the northern Andes, and in Peru and Bolivia—and Solanum
chileanum in the southern Andes, particularly on the coastal plains of Chile.
Let us see now the position the botanists have. In general they believe these are varieties of
one same species. Experts like Vavilov, Bukasov, and Juzepczuk believed it originated in Chile
and coined the label of Solanum tuberosum.
134
14,000 years of food in Peru
Scientists nowadays believe the wild potato has two centres of diversity: the central Mexican
region and the Andean Altiplano, from Peru to North Western Argentina (Luján 1996). Carlos
Ochoa (1998: 3), the foremost potato scholar, said there are over two hundred wild species
that give Solanum sp. Of these, over a hundred are concentrated in Peru and occupy several
ecological zones. Ochoa says there are two subspecies, Solanum tuberosum ssp. andigena,
which is cultivated all over the Andes, and Solanum tuberosum sp. tuberosum, which was
domesticated in Chile. The first subspecies grows from the highlands of Mexico to Guatemala,
Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia and the Argentinian Northwest, which is virtually
the major centre of potato diversity between 2000 and 4000 masl. The second subspecies
includes hundreds of crops of the Solanum tuberosum ssp. Tuberosum variety and has its
centre in the Chiloé archipelago (Chile); although adapted to cold conditions, it can germinate
at sea level (Ortiz and Huamán 2001).
Ochoa believed that Solanum stenotonum may have had its origin in various places (it is a
polymorph), and so it may have been domesticated in more than one place, and even more
than once (Bonavia 1993: 176).
Heiser (1979: 316-317) noted that the progenitors of Solanum andigena include Solanum
stenotonum and Solanum vernei. Messer (2000: 188) discussed the first species in order to
explain the origins of the potato, and posited it hybridised with Solanum sparsipilum or some
other species to give Solanum tuberosum, which would have evolved from the subspecies
Solanum andigena form the northern Andes.
There apparently is a consensus regarding Solanum stenotonum as the origin of the potato. It
was at least four decades that Donald Ugent (1970) emphasised the domestication of modern
potatoes from this species because of its diploid nature. As for its origin centre, Ugent, like
others, mentioned southern Peru and northern Bolivia.
Here it is also worth briefly summarising the work done by Bonavia (1993: 174), who is perhaps
the archaeologist who most time devoted to the study of Andean ethnobotanics. Bonavia
believed the native potato species came from the western Andes, between 500 and 4500
masl. Wild potatoes are easily crossed with others, and so a process of hybridisation must
have begun thousands of years ago. Following biologists specialised in this subject, Bonavia
likewise pointed out that the Altiplano was the area where the potato most likely originated,
not just because it has the highest concentration of varieties, but also because there are
species—like ruki—that cannot reproduce themselves, i.e. they require human intervention.
For Bonavia, the Bolivian Solanum leptophyes is the native species most similar to the potato,
but the most primitive species is in fact Solanum stenotomum, which is essentially distributed
in northern Bolivia—an area that overlaps the distribution of Solanum leptophyes. Bonavia
therefore concluded that the potato was domesticated as Solanum stenotomum from the
wild species Solanum leptophyes. It would then have spread northwards to Peru, and after the
formation of Solanum tuberosum spp. andigenum it became hybrid and introgressed.
135
Elmo Leon
Bonavia also mentioned Grun’s hypothesis (Grun 1990, in Bonavia 1993: 176), which posits the
potato originated in the Solanum brevicaule complex; after selection it gave rise to Solanum
stenotonum, and when mixed with unknown species it ended up as Solanum tuberosum ssp.
andigenum. The latter then had several introgressions and gave rise to the spp. Andigenum
complex, which on mixing with species as yet unknown led to Solanum tuberosum ssp.
tuberosum.
Despite the hypothesis presented—still according to Bonavia—most specialists favour the
theory of a double independent domestication: one in the Andean tropical belt between 10°
N and 25° S, at 2500-4800 masl, and another one between 35° and 45°, the temperate zone
south of Chile, in 0-250 masl.
We mentioned above some contributions applied genetics made to the study of potato origins.
The work done by Spooner et al. (2005) stands out in this regard. They analysed several potato
varieties through cytogenetics, thus concluding the general validity of the hypothesis of a
cladistic division into a northern potato (Peru) and a southern one (Bolivia and Argentina), for
members of the Solanum brevicaule complex. Unlike previous hypothesis, this research suggests
instead the monophyletec provenance of potato originally from Peru (the northern variety).
We turn now to the bromatology of the potato. Ugent says it has 75-80% water, 12-20% starch,
2% proteins, 3.3% fibre and ashes, as well as a large number of sugars, acids, and pectin. Daniel
Gade points out that in some potato varieties proteins come to 5% (Gade 1999: 1255), so that
we can speculate that certain types have more proteins than what potatoes usually offer.
Among the minerals we have to mention its iron, calcium, magnesium, sulphides, chlorine,
and potassium content, as well as trace elements like copper, boron, manganese and iodine.
Vitamins include C or ascorbic acid (antianaemic), B1 or thiamine, B2 or riboflavin, y and B3 or
nicotic acid (antipellagra) (Stevenson 1951: 168-169).
In his handbook of pre-Hispanic food, Hans Horkheimer (1960: 110) noted that every 100
grams of white potato provide 22 g of carbohydrates and 100 units of calories. The potato is
important particularly because of the starch it has. Horkheimer for instance records that the
absence of vitamin C in the United Kingdom during the two world wars was alleviated by the
potato (Stevenson 1951: 170).
Woolfe (1987: 10), who devoted a whole book to the study of the potato, probably gave the
values that come closest to the average bromatological traits: 70% starch, 2% citric acid, 0.5-
1% proteins, 0.3-0.5% fat, 6-8% fibre, and 4-6% ash.
To finish with the bromatology of the potato it is worth including the study by Bonierbale
et al. (2008). They noted that potassium (379 mg) is the most important mineral present in
potatoes, and that ascorbic acid, nisin, thiamine and rivoflavin are likewise crucial for human
consumption. Bonierbale et al. also indicate that the ascorbic acid found in the potato
decreases by 50 y 90% when it is cooked before consumption. The consumption of this acid
is extremely important as it promotes iron absorption in the human organism. Suggesting
136
14,000 years of food in Peru
the presence of combinations such as guinea pig or camelid meat with potatoes in the pre-
Columbian past is thus interesting and seems probable, but such suggestions must be subject
to the archaeological documentation. Even so potatoes, according to recent studies, may
have antinutritional factors, particularly glicoalkaloids, and this must be borne in mind when
assessing potato consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru (cf. León and Rosell 2007).
Now, two questions that have to be raised in the context of pre-Hispanic food, come to mind
if we think retrodictively: if the Incas based their diet on maize, was it ideal for the organism
to combine it with potatoes? Was eating potatoes or dehydrated potatoes (chuño) more or
less healthy?
We can answer the first question by considering that the proteins in potatoes (like in legumes) have
a high amount of lysine whilst the amount of amino acids with low sulphide content is low. This
makes it a good nutritional element, particularly when consumed with cereals as supplementary
proteins. It was precisely for this reason—i.e. the higher protein/fat/carbohydrate density—that
the Inca favoured maize as the Empire’s main staple (Messer 2000: 196).
As regards the second question, it should be noted that dehydrated potatoes (chuño) lose
bromatological properties. An experiment was made to compare chuño with fresh tubers. It
was concluded that the properties of the former diminish, particularly in minerals like zinc,
calcium, iron, sodium, potassium, phosphorus, and magnesium (Haan et al. 2010).
Interestingly enough, during the process of domestication horticultors set out to reduce the
size of the stolons in order to have a higher concentration of tubers below the stem (Rodríguez
2010a). We can thus speculate that Preceramic Andean groups experimented in this regard.
As science advances, the potato is studied using other methods—e.g. genetics—in order to
reconstruct part of its development process, especially human manipulation, as happened
with maize. Ortiz and Huamán (2001) suggest that wild potatoes suffered irreversible changes
due to human manipulation which introduced large amounts of isozymes, and so these
potatoes had to adjust to change. The potato’s genome sequence has even been determined
(The Potato Genome Sequencing Consortium 2011).
After examining the origins and development of the potato, we have to present some of the
native ways in which it was prepared and eaten. The texture of boiled potatoes is well known.
Reeve (1967: 294) cited Pedro Cieza de León in this regard. In 1550 Cieza said that the pulp of
cooked potatoes was as soft as that of cooked chestnuts. Reeve also cited Cieza as regards
the transformation of potatoes into chuño. The tubers were scattered over the ground at
night in order for them to freeze. The following day unshod women and children trod on
them to remove as much water as was possible, a process repeated for several days and nights
until dehydration was over. The end product had a white colour and was used as flour. The
antiquity of this technique is at present a matter of speculation. Suggesting that is probably is
an ancestral procedure is no flight of fancy. Daniel Gade (1999: 1255) in fact believes this is one
of the most ancient forms of tuber dehydration in the world.
137
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

For Bonavia (1993: 175), potato cultivation is highly profitable as the tubers can be eaten
even before they are fully mature, sixty days after planting; potatoes provide more
calories and proteins in terms of time and space than any other plant; and their yield
is impressive because it be up to five times higher per land unit than that of plants like
maize, wheat or soya.

The National Research Council (1989b: 94-100) lists some significant species: “piquiña”
(Solanum stenotomum), which is widely accepted as the most primitive of domesticated
potatoes; “yellow” or “Limeño potatoes” (Solanum goniocalix); “phureja” (Solanum phureja);
“andigena” (a descendant of Solanum stenotomum), the progenitor of the most widely traded
potato (wider, rounder tubers with on average 12% protein and a high vitamin C content);
“chaucha” or “huayro” (the result of crossing “pitiquina” and “andigena”); “ajanhuiri” (which can
withstand frost at 3800-4100 masl); and “ruki” (probably the most resistant of all potatoes, it
is usually bitter and is processed as chuño).

Margaret Towle (1961: 84-87) gave two ways in which potatoes can be prepared: chuño and
moray (tunta or white chuño), both prepared using bitter potatoes. Chuño is the key ingredient
in “chupa,” a typical Andean stew. Potato flour is made out of moray, which unlike chuño is
washed for two months before it is dried and stored.
Figura 6. Restos de papa de dos sitios arqueológicos precerámicos peruanos. Arriba, de Chilca, posiblemente del 7000 a.C. y abajo, del
When were potatoes first eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru? One first issue here is that the presence sitio Pampa de Llamas-Moxeque, Casma, aproximadamente 2000-1250 a.C. (CORTESÍA DE DONALD UGENT).
of this tuber is limited to the remains that have been found, either as starch or as desiccated
specimens. On the Peruvian coast it is usually destroyed, and things are worse in the highlands
unless they are inside dry caves (Bonavia 1993: 177). The reader should bear in mind that in Frédéric Engel seems to have claimed the most ancient discovery of Solanum (still not
principle the remains found by archaeologists do not necessarily represent the oldest ones, all recognised as domesticated) in Peru from cave 1 at Quiqché and 2 at Tres Ventanas, in the
the more so considering that the botanical evidence clearly points to the southern Altiplano upper Chilca Valley, some 3700 masl in the highlands of the Lima region (Engel 1970, Ugent y
as this tuber’s centre of domestication. It can therefore be suggested that human groups were Peterson 1988: 8); The validity of these finds was severely questioned by Bonavia (1988: 13-17),
experimenting some eight or six thousand years ago in this region, but archaeology cannot who finds it hard to give credibility to these studies due to their clear methodological and
document it as yet due to the poor preservation of organic materials. theoretical deficiencies.

The oldest wild potato found in an archaeological site is of the Solanum maglia species. It The preceramic layers from which Solanum sp. presumably comes can be dated between
was represented by a small, dehydrated tuber and nine fragments of potato skin found at the 7031 and 6903 B.C. (at Quiqché and Tres Ventanas respectively). The truth is that Douglas Yen,
Monte Verde site in Llanquihue department ( in the Central Chile region), just 25 km away the specialist in tuber remains, did not say that it was possible to establish whether they are
from the Pacific Ocean and at 55 masl, Its age was 11,000 B.C. (Bonavia 1993: 183). domesticated or not (Engel 1970: 56).

Experts in ethnobotany like Deborah Pearsall (1998: 274) claim the oldest potatoes found in
Peru come from the coast around 2600 B.C. We now turn to the available evidence.
Before assessing the earliest potato samples in pre-Hispanic Peru it is worth going over the
major assessment Bonavia made. He carefully examined the scientific publications from
a critical standpoint and concluded that the most acceptable evidence available comes
from Huaynuná site, as shall be seen below. So whenever a site is mentioned, a critical
assessment will be provided.
Ugent examined five potato tubers from Chilca on the coast south of Lima (Figure 6, upper row).
He described these as yellow and with elliptical starch grains, which made him believe they
were domesticated potatoes (Ugent and Peterson 1988). Yet it is hard to give credibility to
these finds (Bonavia 1984: 16) without a context and given the possibility that the materials
were mixed up.
In his analysis of the vegetable remains eaten at the site of Quebrada de los Burros, on the Tacna
littoral, Chevalier (2012a) reported the discovery not of domesticated potatoes but of Solanum
multifolium. The remains even had traces of carbon (which means they were subjected to fire).
The dates for the strata where the remains were found are 7900 and 4800 B.C.

138 139
Elmo Leon
Moving onwards in time we have the possible discovery of potatoes MacNeish et al. (1975: 31)
made at Ayacucho that dates to 3800 B.C. This time period corresponds to the Chihua and
Cachi phases (ca. 4200-2500 B.C.). If we accept this provenance, then Margaret Towle (1961: 87)
was clearly right in claiming the potato was first cultivated in the Andean highlands and was
then taken to and/or exchanged with the coastal lowlands.
Besides the evidence—unfortunately poorly documented and published—for Chilca and
Ayacucho, there is also other evidence that comes from Lima. These are some sites where
potatoes were probably found but their publication does not satisfy scientific standards, like
Pampa (Ventanilla), Punta Grande (Lima), and El Paraíso (in the lower Chillón River Valley).
Here coproliths or human faecal remains have been found with potato remains from 2500
B.C. Either way, despite the shortcomings in these publications we can accept these finds as a
reference (Bonavia 1993: 178).
Bonavia’s correct critical assessment aside, the concentration of potato finds on the Central
Coast is striking. Clearly no inference can be made without having in-depth publications. It
is however intriguing that all of them point to the third and second millennium B.C. as the
period to which the potato remains belong. For instance, let us turn to the case of The Tank
(Ancón, Lima), where Frédéric Engel (1968) made an important find of charred potatoes that
were presumably sent to the radiocarbon lab (Cohen 1978: 37, Ziólkowski 1994: 354). The finds
were made in what may have been a domestic context, and the remains of tubers were found
in a midden formed by their culinary preparation. The remains probably were associated with
other tubers and plants, in the middle of the debris from stone dwellings. The radiocarbon
calibration gave 1759 B.C. If, as is assumed, the date of the carbonized plant is direct, it proves
the presence and the presumed consumption of this tuber in Lima, at least since the early
second millennium B.C.
We have already seen that Solanum sp. was documented at El Paraíso, a site dated to 2150
B.C. on the lower Chillón Valley north of Lima (Quilter et al. 1991: 280). But we do not know
whether the potato was cultivated, and we unfortunately do not have a lengthy report of the
finds. This makes it difficult to take the finds at face value, as Bonavia (1984) noted.
As was noted above, perhaps the most reliable archaeological documentation of potatoes
discovered in Peru come from the site of Huaynuná, in the lower Casma Valley (Pozorski and
Pozorski 1987, 1990; Ugent et al. 1982). Given the significance this plant has and its global
legacy, it is worth making an in-depth review of the data from this site. Huaynuná is some 13
km north of Casma Bay in Peru. The evidence from the site shows it was occupied since the
Late Preceramic; it had a structure that can be taken to be a temple (with a central hearth, as
was typical at the time), as well as domestic areas (Pozorski y Pozorski 1990: 17).
It is clear the earliest inhabitants of the site lived on marine food, yet some of the most ancient
tubers in Peru were also found here. Ugent et al. (1982) described the potatoes found at the
site in depth. According to Ugent et al., the impressive preservation of these remains is due
to the hyper-arid coastal desert of Peru. A total of 21 potato tubers from four archaeological
140
14,000 years of food in Peru
sites in the lower Casma Valley were analysed. They were positively identified as Solanum
tuberosum based on residual starch. Besides, the characteristics of the tubers examined were
different from those found in wild state.
Five samples of Solanum tuberosum e Ipomoea batatas were found at a site known as Pampa
de Llamas Moxeque (Ugent et al. 1982: 183-184) that were dated to about 2088-1243 B.C. (Figure
6, bottom row); at the site of Huaynuná at least six potato specimens were excavated, all of them
less than two centimetres in diameter and with colour skins that went from pink to cocoa
brown. These potatoes must have been at least twice as big at harvest time. A comparison with
the archaeological potatoes from the Pachacamac collections shows they were of similar size.
Rudimentary dwelling structures were apparently also found in these contexts; the potatoes
were taken from these dwellings. At Huaynuná the oldest date was calibrated to 2914-2287
B.C. (mean, 2629 B.C.), whilst a similar date gave a mean of 2718 B.C. So from an archaeological
standpoint, potatoes can be dated on the Central Coast to the early third millennium B.C. At
least one of these dates came from carbon, which somewhat guarantees the result.
In this same valley, literally on the beach and some 20 km south of the mouth of the
Casma River, is another major site where potato remains were presumably found. This is
the ceremonial centre of Las Haldas. Ugent (1984: 422) reported these finds associated with
radiocarbon samples that were calibrated to 1328-390 B.C.
According to Pozorski and Pozorski (1979), this type of find means potatoes were already
under cultivation at this time in the lower Casma Valley, possibly even using artificial irrigation
since at least the Initial Period, i.e. since the second millennium B.C. Ugent et al. (1982: 191)
suggest that irrigation for tuber cultivation may already have begun in the Preceramic Period.
Ugent et al. (1982: 191) also point out that based on a comparison with the Solanum tuberosum
series found at Chilca—virtually the ever oldest and smallest in Peru (over 30 mm in diameter
in size)—as well as by the analysis of starch grains (elliptical forms in Chilca and Casma, not in
apices, as in their wild variety), it can be concluded that experiments with Solanum tuberosum
may have been taking place some ten thousand years ago.
Even more fascinating is the fact that these researchers have found carbon remains on some
potato skins whilst other had no skin at all, which suggests they were peeled before eating—
perhaps to extract the burned part, or simply because they did not want to eat them with its
skin on. They are believed to have been cooked in a fire—a sort of open oven. A similar datum,
albeit without a specific chronology, appears in Martins’ dissertation (Martins 1976, in Hather
1991: 662), where the discovery of a burned potato is noted. It is thus clear that one of the
ways in which this tuber was prepared was by roasting or by exposing it to the embers. We
should bear in mind that according to Bonavia (1993: 178) we must be careful with this source.
The research on the potatoes found in archaeological contexts in the lower Casma Valley
has promised to follow up the production and consumption of potato in this part of Peru. In
a slightly later work, Ugent et al. (1983) provided additional details of the potatoes found in
141
Elmo Leon
the Casma Valley based on four sites (Huaynuna, Pampa de Llamas, Tortugas, and Las Haldas).
In this study we find that based on the forms and some other criteria, the authors believe
these probably are local crops grown in this same valley, initially by taking advantage of the
seasonal swelling of the river and later on using artificial irrigation (Ugent et al. 1983: 42).
Ugent et al. measured the few samples of potatoes grown in pre-Hispanic Peru and reached
the conclusion that their size increased throughout time due to human manipulation. The
specimens from Casma are thus generally smaller, comparatively speaking, than those from
Pachacamac and Chilca. Ugent et al. remind us that Max Uhle excavated potatoes that were
an inch in diameter, whereas the Casma specimens have on average a diameter of 1.4 cm. It
should however be noted, as Ugent et al. do, that the size of the tubers must be markedly
reduced—between 50% and even 90%—in relation to their original size. Before leaving behind
the evidence from Casma, it is worth noting that Ugent et al. are right in emphasising the need
of interdisciplinary studies in order to explore the origins, development and consumption of
potatoes in pre-Hispanic Peru.
Although the species eaten in the past cannot be specifically determined through a stable
isotope analysis, we can instead infer that it may have been one of the tubers eaten at the
site of Bandurria—to the north of Lima and in the environs of the city of Huacho (Coutts et
al. 2011: 207)—because the presence of C3 plants as part of the food eaten in 3000-1700 B.C.
has been established.
There is more certainty as regards the microremains of starch that were discovered in some
fragments of gourds—which according to the reconstructions were once vessels—at the
archaeological site of Buena Vista, in the Chillón Valley north of Lima, dated to 2193 and 2164
B.C. (Duncan et al. 2009).
Potato starch likewise seems to have been present in some vessels that were found in the
excavations undertaken at Cerro Blanco in the Lower Nepeña Valley, in the context of feasts
that were dated to 1100-250 B.C. (Ikehara and Shibata 2005: 144, Ikehara 2007: 128).
The information on potato consumption in the pre-Hispanic period can likewise be verified
through coproliths, i.e. the remains of human faeces from the past. Ericson et al. (1989: 72)
reported the finding of potato in human faeces at the well-known archaeological site of
Puerto Moorin (Salinar culture), in the Virú Valley on the North Coast of Peru, which can be
dated to A.D. A.D. 17-300. More documentation is however needed. This would be irrefutable
evidence of the potato consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru.
We now move to the southern Altiplano in eastern Peru, where there also seems to be evidence
of potato consumption that is slightly over two thousand years old. Margaret Towle (1961: 86)
claimed she had analysed potato remains excavated in a house of the Chiripa culture (in the part
of Lake Titicaca that belongs to Bolivia, which is included here for information purposes) which
could be dated to 900-100 B.C. Towle says of this find that it included twelve carbonised potato
tubers, which shows they were cooked over the fire, i.e. roasted, and that there already were
142
14,000 years of food in Peru
varieties of one single species. Towle claimed that several of these tubers had the form and size
of chuño. She believed it had been domesticated only since the first millennium before our era
(Towle 1961: 141); now we know the potato was under cultivation in the third millennium, and it
can be presumed that it was domesticated some ten thousand years ago.
After Towle it was Whitehead (2006: 270) who most recently assessed the potential presence
of domesticated potatoes in the Formative context of Chiripa (ca. 1000-200 B.C.). Whitehead
believes there is evidence of parenchyma with dermis, which could be an indication of the
presence of potatoes. Although she does not believe the potato was this culture’s staple food,
its cultivation and consumption became ever more intensive. Whitehead and Bruno (2003)
likewise reported the discovery of potatoes in contexts belonging to the Pucara culture at the
site with the same name in the southern Altiplano.
It should also be noted that Vargas (1962: 108-109) observed forms in Altiplano pieces—within
the context of the Tiahuanaco culture—that resembled the potato and which are similar to
conopas.
Shortly afterwards, on the Peruvian coast, the Nasca also consumed various types of potatoes
(Silverman and Proulx 2002: 52). Roque et al. (2003) for instance documented the presence of
potatoes within the domestic context of the Casa Vieja site (Callango, Ica). Although we do not
have a radiocarbon chronology of the site, the finds do belong to the Nasca culture and the
early stages of the Wari Empire, i.e. A.D. 530-820 (cf. Unkel 2006: 111). Despite the lack of Nasca
ceramic depictions of the potato (cf. Bonavia 1993: 177) its presence and consumption is clear.
Potatoes were also cultivated and eaten by the Mochica. This is borne out by ceramic
depictions like those in the Museo Nacional de Arqueología, Antropología e Historia del
Perú and in the Museo Larco in Lima. But we also have direct evidence of this. Geyer et al.
(2003) have reported potato remains in the faeces of at least one individual buried at the Dos
Cabezas site, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley. Radiocarbon dates range between A.D. 536
and A.D. 580 (Moseley et al. 2008: 83). However, Reinhard et al. (2007: 534) have questioned
the identification of potatoes in these remains.
Margaret Towle (1961: 86) thoroughly documented the presence of potatoes depicted
in various ways in Moche ceramics—as we saw in the above-mentioned collections—and
emphasised the significance this tuber had in the everyday life of the Moche. This plant was
so ingrained amongst the Moche that it appears intermingled in several images and scenes
that go beyond everyday life and deal with ritual subjects where the tuber is transformed,
hence Towle’s comment.
Margaret Towle (1961: 86) also documented the presence of this tuber in the Wari Empire (A.D.
600-1100) with the Pacheco-style iconography in Ayacucho.
Potatoes probably were also consumed some two thousand years ago in the Junín puna.
Hastorf (2002) made an ethnobotanical study of edible tubers in the Upper Mantaro
143
Elmo Leon
Valley, Junín, in well-known sites like Hatunmarca and Tunanmarca amongst others. She
concluded that medium to small potatoes were cultivated at least in A.D. 200-1000,
and more intensively towards the latter date. The sites lie between 3200 and 3900 masl.
Potato cultivation and consumption decreased considerably after A.D. 1000, and was
much lower during the Inca Period. Interestingly enough, the analysis of the ceramic
vessels’ walls in some of these archaeological sites that date to the early Christian era,
showed that potatoes were boiled and kneaded, and then cooked in these vessels (Hastorf
and DeNiro 1985: 190).
Perry (2002: 337) also found potatoes at the site of Manchán in a Chimu-Inca context, which
evinces its inhabitants ate it during this culture’s final phase on the Central Coast of Peru in
A.D. 1470-1523. Part of the occupation of the Pedregal site, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley,
belongs to this same culture. Here Robyn Cutright (2009: 145) found potato remains albeit in
small amounts, which were part of this peoples’ diet. Vargas (1962: 108-109) also identified
potatoes in Chimú ceramics.
The people of the Chancay culture also ate potatoes as was shown by Lanfranco y Eggers
(2010: 79), who found remains of this plant at the Los Pinos site in the lower Huaura Valley, on
the Central Coast of Peru.
The site of La Centinela lies on another part of the coast some 200 km to the south of Lima,
in the Chincha Valley, close to the seashore. This site of Inca occupation dates to about A.D.
1000 and A.D. 1470. Ugent and Peterson (1988: 8) excavated a mound here in the middle of the
site and found potato remains. One of these potatoes proved striking because it weighs about
3.48 grams without its skin. The potato had a diameter of about 25 mm and was of irregular
circular shape.
Potatoes were also eaten in the Inca Empire, as was shown by Jocelyn Williams (2005:
166) through an analysis of stable isotopes in the bones of people from this period in the
Puruchuco-Huaquerones site, in the Rímac Valley. As regards iconography, Vargas (1962: 108-
109) has also observed potato forms in some Inca conopas.
Towle (1961: 87) points out that Uhle excavated potato tubers in the shrine of Pachacamac,
possible in an Inca context. In a pioneering study, Harshberger (1898) made one of the first
references to archaeological potatoes. Uhle formed the potato collection at the archaeological
site of Pachacamac. He noted that the potatoes on average had an inch in diameter, which
in his opinion evinced not domestication but eating wild specimens. It is however known
from subsequent research that potatoes with that size had already been domesticated on the
Central Coast of Peru in the Late Preceramic Period.
Ugent and Peterson (1988: 7) also examined this collection. They corroborated the identification
made by Harshberger, but explained they must have been twice the size, allowing for humidity
decompression. The specimens came from the Temple of the Sun and from Pachacamac,
which may indicate they correspond to the Inca occupation of the famed shrine, as was
144
14,000 years of food in Peru
already noted. Another important piece of information is that starch grains are elliptical
and oval in form both in the Casma sites, as well as in those from Chilca and Pachacamac.
Ugent and Peterson believe these forms correspond to thousands of years of cultivation, so
horticultural management must have taken place quite early in time.
Reeds (Cyperus, Scirpus sp.)
Cyperus is a very large family with some 120 genera and around five thousand species that
grow in wet and swampy areas. Mostacero et al. (2009: 1060) claim that 26 genera and 224
species are known in Peru. Bonavia (1982: 339) believes that although they were frequently
used to make mats, baskets and so on, the rhizomes and roots may have been eaten in the
pre-Hispanic period, so much so that in twentieth-century Puno the pith at the base of the
stem was eaten.
Margaret Towle (1961: 25-26) notes that Whitaker and Bird (1949) found small reed tubers in the
preceramic levels at Huaca Prieta, and assumed they were eaten. Reeds may thus have been
eaten at this North Coast site some four thousand years ago.
Other remains of reeds were found in the analysis of human coprolith remains from Puerto
Moorin, Salinar culture, in the lower Virú Valley, which were dated between the first and the
fourth centuries A.D. (Ericson et al. 1989: 74).
Coquito, chauchilla, chufa (Cyperus esculentus var. leptostachyus Boeck)
This is a kind of rhizome with 55 species in Peru that range from tropical to temperate climates
(Mostacero et al. 2009: 1064). Although we were unable to find the bromatological values that
correspond to this species, it clearly has a high protein content in fibres and natural sugars.
Bonavia (1982: 339) noted the relevant presence of this plant’s remains on the Central Coast
in Late Preceramic sites (ca. 4000-2000 B.C.), which indicates it was much eaten. Weir and
Bonavia (1985: 98) in fact found remains of Cyperus esculentus– in a coprolith from site PV35-6
in the environs of Huarmey, that were dated to 2450 B.C. It is thus assumed to have been eaten
since the Preceramic Period.
The excavations the Italian team is carrying out at Cahuachi disclosed the find of a significant
amount (350 grams) of these tubers, small, toasted, and mixed with peanut seeds and maize
in a cotton bag. This suggested to the researchers that the Nasca ate it during the first
centuries A.D. In Ica (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 6). The tubers of this species are sweet and
rich in starch.
145
Elmo Leon
Cereals and Pseudocereals
Kiwicha, Achita, Millima (Amaranthus caudatus)
These are robust, annual herbs with seeds the size of mustard, and with some 50-60 species
in the Amaranthaceae family. Kiwicha is cultivated especially due to its high alimentary value
(Mostacero et al. 2009: 157).
Herrera (1942a: 26) believed that it may have been cultivated by the people in the Wanka
region, in the Central Sierra of Peru, in a zone that nowadays comprises the modern regions of
Junín, Huancavelica, Ayacucho, and Apurímac.
In his account, Karash (2000: 76-78) points out that Amaranthus was originally gathered wild
by the American natives. At that time it must have been a major source of proteins and
vitamins. For Karash, the Amaranthus cruentus species had already been domesticated in
Puebla (Mexico) around 4000 B.C.
Karash also points out that Carl Sauer established that the original core of Amaranthus extended
from Mexico to North Western Argentina, including the Central Andes of Peru. Amaranthus was
widely disseminated in the Aztec Empire by the time the Spanish conquered Mexico—it was
cultivated in chinampas—and was even a form of tribute. It is worth noting that Amaranthus
caudatus, the Andean species, has been documented in a vessel from the Argentinian Northwest
at the site of Pampa Grande, in Salta, which dated to the beginning of the Christian era.
Kiwicha was rapidly exported outside the Andes once the Europeans were familiar with it.
Karash also notes that it was exported from Peru to Europe in the late sixteenth century. In
fact, in 1601 it appeared in a publication Carl Clusius made at Antwerp. We should also note
that once exported, kiwicha was cultivated even by the Mongol nomads at over 3500 masl in
a frontier area with the Himalayas, in Nepal.
Soukup (1980: 54) noted that the Indians in southern Peru believed it had a high alimentary
value and took it with chicha (half and half), toasted, as mazamorra4* or in puches. This is
what we will now examine.
We found some referential assessments that differ in certain regards, but in general support
the premise that this Andean cereal has a high alimentary quality. According to the National
Council Research its seeds have on average 12.8% grams of proteins, i.e. a high protein and
amino acid content essential for human beings. The latter include lysine (which helps absorb
calcium) and methionine (which regulates the consumption of fats), which are rare in plant
protein. The protein in kiwicha (which can come to 13-18%) is almost comparable with that of
milk (casein) and far higher than that of any other cereal (National Council Research 1989b: 12).
4 * Porridge.
146
14,000 years of food in Peru
It also has minerals, e.g. 236 mg of calcium, 453 mg of phosphorus, and 7.32 mg of iron, thus
surpassing quinoa with these values.
On the other hand kiwicha provides thiamine, riboflavin, and vitamin C (Centro Nacional de
Alimentación y Nutrición 2009: 14-15). It also has tryptophan, one of the eight amino acids
that are essential for the human being. Kiwicha is thus one of the most important nutrients
of pre-Hispanic Peru.
To finish with the bromatology of kiwicha, it is worth including the biochemical results
reached by Gross et al. (1989: 28-29), as they supplement this picture. Gross et al. obtained
69% carbohydrates, 15.5% proteins, 9% water, 8% oil, 7% fibre, y 3.5% ash. They also found 2.11%
saccharose, 0.99% galactose, 0.79% raffinose, and 0.20% stachyose. From these data it follows
that kiwicha has more proteins than cañihua or than quinoa itself but clearly much less than
tarwi, which is the Andean grain crop with the highest protein content, probably the only one
in the world of this type.
Recent bromatological studies of this major Andean cereal showed that its fibre is much
richer in proteins and high-quality fats in comparison to other cereals like wheat, barley or
maize itself (Repo-Carrasco-Valencia et al. 2009a). It should be pointed out that this study
evinced that cooking this grain improved the digestibility of the proteins and starch it has. All
of these properties must be taken into account when assessing the pre-Hispanic diet.
In the ethnohistorical field, Bernabé Cobo identified kiwicha as bledo and distinguished it
from quinoa.
The National Research Council (1989: 139-148) holds that kiwicha is cultivated between 1500 and
3600 masl, but it cannot withstand frosts. It is even said that it has been found already domesticated
in Andean tombs more than four thousand years old, so its domestication may have taken place
since around the Middle Holocene. It is also stated that it contributed to the expansion of the Inca
Empire, particularly in the areas that bordered with the Aymara in southern Peru.
We now turn to the archaeological evidence. Although its consumption is ethnohistorically
recorded in pre-Hispanic Peru—as seen in Bernabé Cobo, who pointed out that in the sixteenth
century the “bledos” were white- and red-coloured seeds the Peruvian Indians ate (Towle 1961:
37)—the archaeological evidence is extremely scant.
One of the presumed finds of kiwicha, and perhaps the most ancient in all of pre-Hispanic
Peru, was made by Richard MacNeish in the Ayacucho archaeological sites he excavated with
his team. Here MacNeish isolated a phase called Piki that was dated to 5600-3800 B.C., and
where he claimed to have found kiwicha. The relevant studies are however missing, as has
already been pointed out (Bonavia 1982: 341; León 2007: 225).
Amaranthaceae (it is not clear whether wild or cultivated) were found amongst the food
remains at the ceremonial site of El Paraíso to the north of Lima, near the mouth of the
147
Elmo Leon
Chillón River, which were dated to at least 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 280). Regrettably we
also do not have an in-depth study of these finds.
Bonavia (1982: 341) reported the presence of Amaranthaceae in epoch 2 (ca. 3200-2200 B.C.)
of the Los Gavilanes site, in the lower Huarmey Valley. In this case it is a wild plant that was
quite probably brought from the lomas or coastal valleys. Based on data provided by Javier
Pulgar Vidal, Bonavia drew attention to the presence of these two species—Amaranthus
edulis (achis) and Amaranthus caudatus (kiwicha)—in the Callejón de Huaylas, and so believes
that its presence in the Peruvian Preceramic Period should come as no surprise.
Geyer (2003) reported the presence of human excrement in a Mochica burial at the
archaeological site of Dos Cabezas, close to the mouth of the Jequetepeque River. The faeces
had a possible kiwicha content that was radiocarbon dated to about A.D. 536-580 (Moseley et
al. 2008: 83), but Reinhard et al. (2007: 536) have questioned this identification.
Lockard (2005: 213) also documented the remains of Amaranthus sp., but it is not clear whether
these are the remains of a domesticated plant or not. Lockard simply mentions that it was
frequently eaten not just during the Mochica occupation of this site (A.D. 600-800) but also
in Chimú times (A.D. 1000-1460), and was by far the plant most eaten in this period.
Kiwicha was also reported in the excavations and flotation work undertaken at the Nasca
Casa Vieja site, in the Ica Valley, which dates to the first centuries A.D. It may thus have been
part of the food of this early people, as it held fifth place amongst the plants most eaten
(Cook y Parrish 2005: 139).
On the other side of the Andes, Kolata (1993) argues that kiwicha, and then quinoa, were an
essential part of the Tiahuanaco diet in A.D. 500-1150.
Finally, in an Inca context, thanks to the stable isotope analysis of the bones in the human
burials found at Machu Picchu, Turner et al. (2010: 524) report that many of these individuals
who came from various parts of the Andes had eaten kiwicha whilst alive. Turner et al. state
it was eaten in three ways: toasted, raw, and stewed.
Ca ihua (Chenopodium pallidicaule, Chenopodiaceae)
In the Andes, this type of plant gives one of the seeds with the highest protein content (16-
19%), and it is one of the rarest plants in that it has a balance of essential amino acids like
lysine, methionine, cysteine, threonine, and alanine (National Research Council 1989a: 12).
Cañihua impressively grows in places where no other grain can grow, which have frost nine
months a year at 4200 masl and are three degrees below zero. It also grows in the middle
of rocks and is drought resistant. Mostacero et al. (2009: 144) say it is often cultivated in
central and southern Peru and at present in the regions of Cuzco, Puno, Apurímac, and
Huancavelica.
148
14,000 years of food in Peru
Daniel Gade (1970) devoted a study solely to this grain. Although it is somewhat old, it posits
that this is a native plant that helped support many generations of Indian populations at
extremely high altitudes. Like Mostacero and his colleagues, Gade states that no other grain
is as resistant to such a combination of factors as frost, drought, salty soils and diseases, and
even requires little care; this is an important condition because it may thus have supported
populations at really high altitudes since very early times.
Turning now to the biochemistry of cañihua, Gade (1970: 55) believes no other Andean
crop surpasses it in terms of protein percentage (13.8%), which is higher than that of quinoa
(12.3%). Some reports even give it 15-19% of protein content and it does not have saponine
like quinoa, which makes it more processable. Cañihua also has two amino acids that make
it essential in an Andean context—lysine and tryptophan—hence its extreme importance.
Its value in this regard lies in that it milk and its by-products are not much missed; the same
holds true for quinoa.
Gross et al. (1989: 28) established that cañihua has 66% carbohydrates, 9% water, 15% proteins,
7% oil, 7% fibre, and 3% ash. As for saccharides, it has saccharose (3.03%), galactoside (0.22%),
and raffinose (0.16%), and other with minor values. The extremely high significance this cereal
has as regards proteins follows from this bromatological overview. It is besides rich in iron
and calcium, as well as an excellent source of antioxidants (Repo-Carrasco-Valencia 2009b).
Although we have no archaeological evidence that this grain was consumed, Gade assumed
(over forty years ago) that its cultivation may have been significant for populations like those
of the Tiahuanaco culture, which could have taken benefitted with its high amino acid content.
Although the Inca later occupied this zone, it is little likely that they would have spread the
consumption of cañihua throughout the empire—we will see later on that this is supported
by modern studies—as opposed to the emphasis given to plants like maize.
Besides having been a major food staple in the Altiplano, cañihua ashes, which have a high
calcium content, seem to have been highly appreciated as llipta, i.e. as a companion to coca
consumption, as happened also with quinoa ashes (Gade 1970: 60).
As regards its preparation, Gade notes that according to the observations he made, in the
Altiplano the separation of the seeds is facilitated by washing them; this detaches the pericarp
and eliminates the bitter taste. The cover is then removed simply by applying pressure with
the foot. The cañihua is then usually left to dry in the sun. It is most frequently prepared as
flour (cañihuaco) from toasted and ground seeds. Nowadays cañihua is taken with milk. It used
to be ground in order to prepare an alcoholic beverage: pituscca (Herrera 1942a: 26). The grains
are so beneficial that they are even used in medicine to prevent the effects of high altitude
and against dysentery. Its ashes are also used as a repellent against insect bites.
In its report, the National Research Council (1989b: 129-138) notes that cañihua has provided
for countless generations of Indians in the Andes, one of the harshest agricultural areas in
the world where such important staples as maize, and even quinoa, cannot grow due to
149
Elmo Leon
low temperatures and to nine months with frequent frosts. Cañihua apparently also resists
droughts, pests, and soil salts, which make it the strongest grain. Its leaves are particularly
invaluable because they have calcium. The Andes have been proposed as its place of origin,
quite probably at very high altitudes, especially the Altiplano area.
There are only two recorded archaeological excavations that evince the discovery of cañihua
in pre-Hispanic Peru. Whitehead and Bruno (2003) found cañihua remains in contexts belonging
to the Pucara culture in the southern Altiplano, with dates ranging between ca. 1300 B.C. and
A.D. 50. Lockard (2005: 206) in turn documented the presence of at least one cañihua seed at
the site of Galindo, in the middle Moche Valley, so it may have been eaten at this site at least
during its Chimú occupation (A.D. 1000-1460). Given the distance and the late date in regard
to its origins, there clearly still is much evidence that has yet to be discovered.
Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa)
Quinoa belongs to the family of the Chenopodiaceae, which has about one hundred genera
and one thousand five hundred species including beetroot (Beta vulgaris) and spinach (Spinacia
oleracea), even though no eye will find them similar to each other. A Chenopodiaceae that is
more closely related to quinoa is cañihua, which is used as human and animal food, has the
highest protein value, and grows at higher elevations even than quinoa. The plants in this family
frequently have salt in their leaves under the form of sodium or potassium chloride (Glimn-
Lacy y Kaufman 2006: 88), an interesting datum in regard to the obtention and consumption
of salt in pre-Hispanic Peru.
Despite this Andean cereal’s significance it has as yet been the subject of few studies, and in
fact more research is required on this topic. It is known historically that Garcilaso de la Vega
was the first to take quinoa to Spain, and Feuillée then took it to France in 1725. In 1846 Johann
Presl recommended its use in Czechoslovakia (Soukup 1980: 122). It is therefore clear that
international studies of this grain have long recognised its alimentary value.
Whilst researching this book we found above all data on Germany and its interest in this
grain for at least a century, as it appears in journals specialised in alimentary bromatology.
For instance, Hanausek (1918) claimed that not only was its cultivation feasible in Germany, it
would also be enormously beneficial due to its alimentary advantages, which he compared
with those of a cereal. Hanausek made some early observations regarding the way quinoa
was prepared, as well as a detailed report on its anatomy and physiology that emphasised its
role storing water. He explained that the seeds can be cooked in water or in milk, they can be
made into quinoa flour, or toasted in order to use them as a daily consumption food.
Regarding its bitter taste, Kickton and Krueger (1918) noted that it faded away after cooking for
twenty minutes, as well as if the grains were left in cold water the night before cooking. They
pointed out that it was included in soups and stews, and that chicha was also made out of quinoa.
The leaves could also be eaten as vegetables, and were even given as fodder to ruminants and pigs.
150
14,000 years of food in Peru
Quinoa seems to have been successful shortly afterwards in Russia. The interest for quinoa
and the progress in its cultivation in Germany seems to have come together in a datum
provided by Simmons (1965: 228), who suggests that it was used as food in Germany during
the First World War, thus showing it could be grown in temperate zones. Simmons even claims
that quinoa cultivation has had promising results in countries like Kenya. We now turn to this
aspect of this major Andean plant.
At present most cultivated quinoa is found around Lake Titicaca, between Cuzco and Lake
Poopó (Bolivia). This is why experts believe it was domesticated in this zone (cf. Gandarillas
1979, Pearsall 1992).
Mostacero et al. (2009: 144) report that this plant, which grows up to three metres high, is cultivated
in Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia, and is highly valued due to its high protein and vitamin values.
Quinoa is often catalogued as a pseudocereal because its grains are actually fruits, and
even as an oil from a pseudocereal because it stores energy in the form of fat and starch.
Cusak himself says this is due to its exceptional balance between oil, protein, and fat. Yet
its cultivation outside the Andes is rare despite its high protein content (National Research
Council 1989a: 12).
Quinoa is in fact one of the three most important South American cultigens, alongside maize
and the potato (Hunziker 1952). This cereal will be presented somewhat in-depth due to its
relevance in the history of pre-Hispanic—and modern—food in Peru. Cusak (1984: 21) says its
significance is such that it has been acknowledged the world over as a potential major resource,
particularly for Third World countries. Its benefits may even give rise to an improvement in the
environment surrounding it due to its particular physiology, for instance its soil desalination
property and optimising its productivity, as well as its resistance to difficult conditions such
as droughts (Jacobsen et al. 1999-2000: 403).
Latz (1995) says that Chenopodiaceae are in general adapted not just to alkaline soils, but also
high calcium carbonate levels, and still yield a high rate of edible seeds. This then is a highly
profitable plant with a high yield, characteristics that may have been perceived within the
context of pre-Hispanic Peru.
Herrera (1942a: 27) in turn points out that quinoa is the most important Andean cereal. It is
used to prepare a refreshing and nutritive beverage called aloja, which is usually taken in the
Altiplano during festivals. Herrera mentions a white quinoa variety (paraccai-quinua); we now
turn to this and other varieties.
Are there several types of quinoa? The answer is yes. Studies have shown the presence of at
least 17 races and over 200 quinoa varieties just in Peru, Bolivia and Ecuador, and this without
including areas outside the Andes. This would be due to the fact that this grain has been
manipulated for thousands of years. By the time of the Spanish conquest quinoa was in fact
being cultivated from Northern Chile to Central Colombia.
151
Elmo Leon
According to Gandarillas (in Cusak 1984: 24) there are five quinoa categories depending on
the altitude it is in: valley quinoa, Altiplano quinoa, saltpetrous quinoa, sea-level quinoa, and
possibly subtropical quinoa, the latter a Bolivian variety. Two of these are of interest here,
Altiplano and valley quinoa. We now turn briefly to them.
Altiplano quinoa developed under extremely cold conditions, especially the ever-present
threat of frosts and dryness in this area. This has made it a small plant (1-1.8 metres) that
grows relatively fast and gives small but resistant seeds. Few plants can in fact adapt to these
altitudes. Its adaptation range currently extends from 0 to 4,000 masl.
Valley quinoa, which was probably domesticated in the upper valleys of Peru, Ecuador, eastern
Bolivia and southern Colombia, grows between 2000 and 3900 masl and is defined by the
seasonal cycle of Andean rainfall, which is clearly more frequent than that of the Altiplano
(up to 2.5 metres a year), which is why it grows at a slower rate. Valley quinoa is associated
with other types of crops like maize, and to those from higher altitudes (e.g. the potato). This
datum lets us speculate regarding the possibility that quinoa was cultivated along with maize
and potatoes in the pre-Hispanic period.
It has been pointed out that quinoa belongs to the Chenopodiaceae genus, which is worth
reviewing here in order to understand its diversity in the Andean context. No source surpasses
Father (1980: 121-122), who classified it in eight species strictly related with our Andes: C.
Ambrosioides L. (paico, cashua), which is useful for stomach cramps; C. Insisum Poir (alcca,
paico); C. Multifidium L. (paico), also used as a digestive aid; C. Murale L. (which is known as
hierba del gallinazo, culantrillo); C. Pallidicaule Aellen (cañihua, which we have just reviewed),
whose cultivated forms are puccoya, pacos, and sali, and which is generally eaten as a flour
with a high nutritional value; C. Petiolare HBK, (lipcha); C. Quinoa Willd. (quinua, hupa, dahua,
candonga, lipsa), which Soukup claims has been cultivated since the pre-Hispanic period and
was the main staple food of ancient Peruvians alongside the potato and maize, as well as a
ritual plant that the Incas offered in golden cups.
For Soukup, the cultivated forms are “paraccai-quinua” (highly valued), “choclo-quinua”, “puca-
quinua” (lower quality, more bitter), “mesaquinua” (a hybrid of the previous two), “ckello-
quinua” (quinua real or white quinoa, less bitter), “candonga” (another highly valued variety),
“acacquinua,” and “yana-quinua”, bitter quinoa (wild and blackish, whose seeds are not used
due to their being bitter), and “coytojupa” (a greyish seed).
Before discussing quinoa bromatology there are several interesting facts here. The National
Research Council listed some of a botanical nature that we have to include here. Its height
usually ranges between half a metre and slightly over two metres, and its colour goes from
white, yellow and pink to hues such as dark red, purple and black. Its root system and its
consistency make it wind-resistant and it can grow at extremely high altitudes, with poor
soils, low precipitation and extreme cold, which make it even more important than maize in
this regard (Cusak 1984: 21-22, National Research Council 1989a: 12).
152
14,000 years of food in Peru
As is well-known, quinoa is a plant that is in general bitter. Simmons (1965: 231) believes this
characteristic may be connected with the fact that it is resistant to plagues and diseases, and
that the pericarp in its seeds is covered by a resin called saponin from which the bitter taste
derives (Dennler 1936), and which is often removed prior to human consumption López et al.
(2011) recently drew attention to the potential identification in archaeological materials of
the process whereby these toxic substances in quinoa were removed. This was achieved in the
Inca site of Churupata (some three kilometres from the Villa La Candelaria, Bolivia).
When is quinoa planted and harvested? This is a summer grain that is planted between
September and November and is harvested in March, after a growth period of four-six months,
which gives a maximum of twenty kilos of seed per hectare (Simmons 1965: 231).
Do we have any references regarding its preparation? Soukup (1980: 122) provides extensive data
in this regard, which will have to be summarised here. Using quinoa flour the Indians prepared a
type of bread called “kispiña,” which apparently can be stored for up to two years and still retain
a high nutritional quality. It is also often prepared as a soup with milk (“ppeske”), toasting, salty
or sugary form, or as toasted... with chili pepper or cheese. Quinoa is also used to prepare a
refreshing beverage, especially in Cuzco. Its tender leaves are consumed as if they were spinach.
Quinoa stalks can be used to prepare “lluktaj” (ashes) and the “luqque” potatoes, cooked and
kneaded like dough, and which are chewed along with coca. Other uses fall into the field of
natural medicine. Soukup (et passim) for instance says that ground quinoa is used in poultices
for bruises and dislocations, and there even was a quinoa broth with which a paste was made
that was apparently used when embalming the corpses of the ancient Peruvians.
It is time to examine the biochemical value of quinoa because it is a cereal that must have
been often consumed in pre-Hispanic Peru. We were able to amass information in this regard
because this grain has been much studied from this perspective. Let us see the major sources.
Quinoa has a high nutritional value. Eiselen (1954) had already realised this and he tried to
present not just the alimentary benefits of quinoa, but also to introduce it into the international
market. Oelke et al. (1992) state that the quality and amount of proteins are higher than those
of standard cereals. The amino acids in quinoa are well-balanced and are recommended for
human beings and animals, just like those of casein. According to these researchers, quinoa
grains have a high calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, potassium, iron, copper, manganese, and
zinc content that is significantly higher than other cereals, like maize or wheat.
Cusak (1984) states there are ten amino acids in quinoa grains, with leucine, lysine, and valine
being the predominant ones that make a contribution to the development and repair of
muscular tissue. It is worth drawing attention to the presence of lysine in significant amounts
because no other plant in the world has such a high rate of this key amino acid, one of the
eight that most matter for human beings. It also has tryptophan a crucial amino acid.
In percentages, Simmons (1965: 231) posits that quinoa comprises 14%-15% of proteins
(sometimes even 23%), 4% fat, and 51-58% carbohydrates. Horkheimer (1960: 110) recorded
153
Elmo Leon
353 calorie units per 100 grams of quinoa, which is by far one of the highest values in a
plant product.
For Gross et al. (1989: 28-29) quinoa has an exceptionally high content of phosphorus, calcium
and iron in comparison with wheat, and it also has high values for vitamin E and B-complex.
Quinoa likewise comprises 66% carbohydrates, 15% proteins, 9% water, 8% oils, 6% fibre, and
3% ash, values that are similar to those previously recorded. Other saccharides with lower
values are saccharose (which comes first with 2.79%, non-digestible galactose (0.23%), and
glucose (0.19%). According to Gross and his colleagues, the proteins in quinoa are of the
highest quality in comparison with cereals and other Andean tubers.
We thus find after the analysis that quinoa is rich in proteins, as well as in supplementary
minerals and vitamins that make its consumption significant.
The National Research Council (1989b: 124) states that quinoa is “chisiya mama” in Quechua, i.e.
“mother grain.” Its significance as regards maize is evident, at least in certain parts of the Andes,
probably those at extremely high altitudes. Although archaeology still does not have methods
that allow for in-depth reconstructions of culinary combinations or techniques, ethnographic data
show that it is often toasted or ground as flour, but it can also be boiled and added to soups.
We now have to briefly discuss the origins and domestication of quinoa. Let us see some of
the main positions held in this regard.
Hunziker (1943) believed that Argentina’s Chenopodium hircinum Schrad was the ancestor of
quinoa. Heiser took up his argument, but drew attention to the lack of supporting evidence
(Heiser 1979: 318). This means Argentina was considered right from the beginning as this cereal’s
area of origin.
Simmons (1965: 234) subsequently considered that it was reasonable to speculate on the
possibility that quinoa was locally selected amongst wild ancestors by people who needed
nutritive grains in order to supplement what was provided by the starch in tubers, and who had
no adaptable grasses in wild state in which they could have found the grains of some cereal.
Simmons believes that a characteristic of human intervention in the process of domestication
of this cereal is precisely the high altitude at which it is cultivated, in comparison with
other plants. It follows that it would be unable to survive at such altitudes without human
intervention. Simmons likewise notes that the Aymara call wild quinoa “isualla.”
It is clear that altitude and dispersal have varied throughout time since its domestication,
even though Carl Sauer (1965) studied its net concentration in the Central-Southern Andes.
Cusak (1984) in turns points out that it never spread successfully outside this area. Going back
to Simmons, he claimed that this plant frequently occurs at altitudes higher than 4000 masl
in countries like Bolivia and Peru. Heiser and Nelson (1974: 503) however noted that quinoa is
usually cultivated from 2400 masl upwards. Yet its presence is race and falls in Argentina (Jujuy
and Salta), Chile, and Ecuador, and it recently disappeared in Colombia.
154
14,000 years of food in Peru
The original distribution of quinoa extender from 5°N to 30°S, but at present it only extends
from 5°S to 20°S. Simmons cited Sauer in this regard, who had noted quinoa was also present
in the island of Chiloé (Simmons 1965: 228).
From this all it follows that quinoa cultivation has fallen in regard to the past, and that
reconstructing its phytogeographical dispersal will not be easy because we do not have the
required studies. Besides these theories there is only one proposal concerning the process of
quinoa domestication, which claims that it took place in the central Peruvian puna ca. 6000-
5000 B.C., at the same time that camelids were being domesticated (Pearsall 1978-1980).
What data do we have on the ancestor of quinoa? Heiser and Nelson (1974) claimed that
Chenopodium quinoa var. Melanospermum probably was a form of wild quinoa that was
similar to the ancestor of quinoa. The observations they had made led these scholars to posit
three possible origin scenarios for domesticated quinoa. The first possibility is that quinoa
developed from a domesticated “black seed” that may have spread from South America to
Mexico; the second possible scenario includes two domesticated species both in Mexico and
the Andes, which may have developed separately from two other species; the third scenario
focuses on wild species that were similar but different, and which may have given rise to
cultivated forms. Based on taxonomies, and on linguistic usages and studies, the researchers
concluded that both forms of Chenopodiaceae may have been independently domesticated.
In a more recent study Wilson (1988a, 1990) states that Chenopodium hircinum Schrad is an
ancestor of quinoa, even though the characteristics an Andean specimens separate them
from the related southern varieties. Yet for Wilson the greater diversity of monophyletic
quinoa is found in the Southern Andes, and its centre of domestication would have been
in the highlands of Peru and Bolivia (Wilson 1988b). Even genetic consistency suggests the
northwards and southwards dispersal of quinoa. Gandarillas (1984), Tapia (1979), and Risi and
Galwey (1984) have the same position, which means that for these scholars the idea that
Andean quinoa is the original one seems to be well supported.
In this section we begin to review the archaeological evidence of quinoa consumption in pre-
Hispanic Peru. In general, the human use of Chenopodiaceae literally goes back to the first
human beings. McConnel (1998) discovered remains of this type of plant in a rocky Carpenter´s
Gap in Australia that was dated between 23,000 to 16,000 years ago. During this epoch the
world was living the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), and the humans exploited Chenopodiaceae
in response to the decrease in and fruits in the vicinity of the rock shelter. McConnel believes
that Chenopodiaceae were eaten when droughts struck and provided important proteins
and carbohydrates to the far-removed inhabitants of Australia. Zohari (2001: 220) in turn
claims Chenopodiaceae were domesticated at least five thousand years ago in the southern
Altiplano, but he admits the radiocarbon dates are problematic.
The South American context includes several pieces of evidence that we have to briefly
summarise before turning to Peru. Such is the case of the quinoa found in Mendoza (Argentina),
where this plant has been found in domesticated condition at sites such as Agua de las Tinajas,
155
Elmo Leon
Gruta del Indio, Agua de los Caballos, and Reparo de las Pinturas Rojas, with dates that range
between 300 and 200 B.C. (Castro and Tarragó 1992, Lagiglia 2001). The sites found between
Salta and Catamarca, in modern-day Argentina, yielded evidence of quinoa that was dated
from about 400 B.C. to Inca times (Lennstrom 1992).
The significance of quinoa was widely acknowledged in the colonial chronicles. Cusak
(1984: 21) has called it the alimentary reserve grain of the Inca Empire. In this regard he cites
Garcilaso de la Vega and his Comentarios reales, where Garcilaso notes that quinoa came
second for the Inca after maize. Simmons (1965: 223) claims other names for it are “hupa”
or “jupa” in Aymara, “dahue” (in Chile), and “secksaholor” (in Atacama). We will now review
some of the most important evidence recorded on the archaeological discovery of quinoa
in pre-Hispanic Peru.
In his handbook on pre-Hispanic food Hans Horkheimer (1961) stated right from the beginning
that quinoa was an important foodstuff for the Peruvian aborigines, and that its grains were
used to prepare chicha. Horkheimer also the pre-Hispanic ceramic vessels depict this plant,
which means it was well known (Horkheimer 1960: 64).
Since when has quinoa been eaten in Peru? Rossen et al. (1996) reported the discovery of a
single Chenopodium sp. seed (which they claim is much more similar to quinoa and could
be the oldest evidence of this cereal) at the site of Quebrada de las Pircas 1 in Nanchoc, in
the mid-Zaña Valley on the North coast of Peru. This type of find comes from controlled
excavations. These are a series of domestic contexts where the remains of edible refuse were
found—in some cases these were carbonised—in which (possibly) quinoa was found, amongst
other foodstuffs. The dating of this layer gave 6830 B.C., so it can be inferred that quinoa was
consumed on the North Coast around this time at about 450 masl. Dillehay et al. (2007: 1890)
later reported the discovery of a carbonised Chenopodium seed similar to that of quinoa
that was dated between 6000 and 5500 B.C., which corroborates the previous date. Besides,
Piperno and Pearsall (1998: 207) believe these Chenopodium remains correspond to both wild
and domesticated quinoa, in what can be considered as quinoa undergoing the process of
domestication.
Deborah Pearsall (1978-80: 65-67) has presented evidence of Chenopodium (a wild, non-
domesticated member of quinoa) in the cave of Pachamachay close to Lake Junín at about
4,300 masl since the beginning of the human occupation, i.e. since ca. 8106 B.C.
It is believed within the context of the Junín puna, that the beginning of quinoa cultivation
took place simultaneously with the domestication of camelids, i.e. in the sixth millennium
before our era (Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 5).
Paloma is a site on the Central Coast that comprises several Preceramic villages. Here Benfer
(1990, 1999) fund a large amount of organic remains. These included archaeological human
faecal remains with residues of the food eaten. Chenopodium (Benfer 2008: 378) was found
here but it was not specified whether this was domesticated quinoa or not. These finds come
156
14,000 years of food in Peru
from layers dated between 5316 and 3630 B.C. The remains of small stones and charcoal found
in these same coproliths indicate that Chenopodium was cooked on fire before being eaten.
MacNeish et al. (1981: 160) claim to have found seeds of what may be quinoa at the cave of
Pikimachay (Ayacucho) in the midst of some controversial archaeological contexts that may
date to between 6350-5460 B.C. (Piki Phase). The excavations have, however, been roundly
criticised and their validity questioned; there also is no archaeobotanical study of the
remains exposed, so the data here included only appears as reference. Bonavia (1982: 341) also
questioned these preliminary determinations because what is clearly pending is a study of
these remains aimed at determining whether these are crops or wild plants.
Chenopodium-Amaranthus was detected in pollen form in the Telarmachay rock shelter at
about 4420 masl, in the Junín puna, around 5600 B.C. (Van der Hammen and Noldus 1985: 381).
Although Van der Hammen and Noldus believe humans took this plant to the rock shelter it is
unknown whether it was cultivated or wild, but we tend to favour the second option.
The research undertaken at Panaulauca Cave in the Junín puna (in the modern-day district
of Tarma), at about 4150 masl, yielded a similar dating. Here Nordstrom (1990) recorded the
presence of quinoa as from 4150 masl and it was long used until A.D. 1350. The morphological
analyses made by María Bruno show that is possible that quinoa was being domesticated in
this preceramic epoch.
Bonavia (1982: 149) in turn reported the discovery of Chenopodium sp.—it is unclear whether
this is domesticated quinoa but Virginia Popper, the ethnobotanist who analysed these
remains, believes these were wild plants—at the site of Los Gavilanes in the lower Huarmey
Valley at least between 3100 and 2300 B.C.
Cusak (1984: 24) claims that quinoa was used as food in pre-Hispanic Peru at least since 3000
B. C. or even earlier.
We now turn to the published evidence of quinoa in the Altiplano, a subject for which there
fortunately is abundant documentation. The site of Jiskairumoko (in the modern region of
Puno) is in the southern Altiplano and on the eastern side of the Andes, from whence come
many of the hypotheses regarding the origins of quinoa. Here Nathan Craig (2005) reliably
documented cultivated quinoa dated to about 2000 B.C. at 4115 masl. It is interesting that
the beginning of quinoa cultivation was connected with a better climate during the Final
Holocene. In fact, considering the lack of rainfall and the dryness of the period known as
the Middle Holocene, climate conditions mean that quinoa domestication was probably not
attempted here at least between 6000 and 3000 B.C. (this is perhaps the reason why most
remains come from the puna and the Central Coast of Peru).
With this datum alone we move beyond the limit set by Margaret Towle (1961: 141), who
claimed the first millennium of our era was the period which saw the initial domestication of
quinoa. Science moves on.
157
Elmo Leon
Bruno (2006), an archaeobotanist who has specialised in Andean quinoa, made one of the most
important studies in this regard. Bruno uses the methodology whereby she observes changes
in botanical morphology, particularly the width of the seed’s testa, in order to determine the
domesticated condition of the grains. Based on her analysis she concluded that it is possible
that quinoa domestication may have begun at least a couple thousand years before our era.
In this way she lines concurs with Pearsall.
The history of quinoa in the Titicaca Altiplano takes us now to the Pucara culture. Christine
Hastorf (2008: 545) notes that being tubers, quinoa and potato cultivation had excellent
conditions in which to develop within the context of this culture. Hastorf points out the
importance both crops had throughout the development of Pucara at least between 1235 B.C.
and A.D. 519 (Mujica 1981), but more likely from 400 B.C. to A.D... (Klarich 2003, 2005, 2009;
Steadman 1995).
Still in Pucara, Bruno and Whitehead (2003) go somewhat beyond the taxonomic documentation
and show the existence of two varieties if cultivated quinoa, i.e. Chenopodium quinoa and
Chenopodium quinoa negra. The plants are associated with Pucara sites.
Chávez (1992) made a significant analysis in this regard based on use marks in Pucara ceramics,
in which he found vessels that had been used for storage and to serve food. Some closed
vessels had been exposed to fire, thus indicating they had been used to cook, whilst the small
vessels and others with a red-painted lip showed traces of lime, which Chávez claims is taken
in conjunction with coca consumption. Chávez assumes that some of the biggest jar-type
vessels may have been used for storage, transportation, preparation, and even to ferment
some alcoholic beverage, which may well have been based on native quinoa (in Klarich 2005:
204-205).
Bruno and Whitehead (2003) analysed the quinoa remains documented for the site of Chiripa
(Bolivia), in the same geographical setting, which is approximately contemporary with Pucara.
This type of crop was found in a context with domesticated plants in the Lake Titicaca
basin like quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa), cañihua (Chenopodium pallidicaule), and tubers
like the potato (e.g. Solanum tuberosum), oca (Oxalis tuberosum), and mashua (Tropaeolum
tuberosum) that had a major role in the development of complex pre-Hispanic societies in
the Andes during the Formative Period (ca. 1800 B.C.-A.D. 500).
It is worth recalling that Browman (1986) had already documented the presence of quinoa in a
Chiripa culture context around 1350 B.C.-A.D. 50. It is relevant that the entire southern Altiplano
plant complex, which includes quinoa, is associated with certain farming technologies like
terraces and raised fields, which centuries later would characterise Tiahuanaco agriculture
(Erickson 1988). It is likewise evident that the climate—which at that time was wetter and
probably warmer, thus giving rise to more grass and a higher water level in the lake after
the long drought in the Middle Holocene (7000-3000 B.C.)—brought about better farming
conditions (Hastorf 2008).
158
14,000 years of food in Peru
Karen Mohr Chávez (1988, 1998: 18), another student of the Chiripa culture, posits that one of
the main characteristics this site has is the organisation of residential houses into a village in
which the excavations found quinoa (approximately between 1400 and 100 B.C.). The site of
Kala Uyuni, which has been dated ca. 700 B.C.-A.D. 400 (also a Chiripa site) likewise had quinoa
remains (Bruno 2008).
Other finds of domesticated quinoa were made in the cave of Quelcatani (in the current
department of Puno), where Einsentraut (1998) found remains dated to 850 B.C.
We now turn to the role quinoa had in the context of the Tiahuanaco culture, still in the
Southern Altiplano. In fact, quinoa, along with potatoes, consolidated its position as a
foremost grain in this region (Kolata 1993). Each domestic dwelling studied in the Altiplano and
which belonged to this culture’s rural context, had access to, and consumed, abundant quinoa
(literally 92-99% of organic remains recovered in archaeological garbage dumps). It is thus
clear that Chenopodium quinoa was the most abundant and permanent grain in Tiahuanaco
domestic contexts.
The excrement of three individuals who were buried in tomb 3 was excavated at the Mochica
site of Dos Cabezas, in the mouth of the Jequetepeque. Geyer et al. (2003) managed to identify
quinoa in these remains. The layer where these remains came from was dated to A.D. 536-580
(Moseley et al. 2008: 83), which means the Moche also consumed quinoa. Assuming that it
was domesticated in the Altiplano, it is evident that it reached this part of the Peruvian coast
through exchange—the identification of quinoa pollen in these remains has, however, been
challenged by the new analysis made by Reinhard et al. (2007: 534).
Quinoa consumption has also been documented in Wari contexts in Nasca, to the point
that Orefici and Drusini (2003: 293) have inferred that these grains were introduced from the
highlands to the coast in this place. This type of find was already evident in the Pacheco-style
ceramics found at Nasca, and which date to about A.D. 800-900, in the height of the Wari
epoch (Valcárcel 1948: 30).
Hastorf (2002) and DeNiro and Hastorf (1985: 113) have shown that quinoa was cultivated in
known Wanka sites like Hatunmarca, Tunanmarca, and Umpamalca, amongst others found in
the upper Mantaro Valley between 330 and 3900 masl, so that quinoa farming must have taken
place at least by A.D. 200. The output fell as of A.D. 1460, apparently due to the pressure the
Inca administration exerted in order to expand maize cultivation. In pre-Hispanic times quinoa
was much consumed in this part of the central Peruvian puna, as was shown by Lennstrom and
Hastorf (1992) with their isotopic research at the site of Pancán, a complex of archaeological
sites in the Mantaro Valley. It is thus clear that quinoa was the most widely cultivated and
consumed cereal in A.D. 650-1300.
Quinoa was also eaten by the people who inhabited our coasts in A.D. 1000-1460. Remains
of Chenopodium quinoa have been found at the site of Galindo in the middle Moche Valley,
but they belonged to Chimu times (Lockard 2005: 213). On the other hand Ugent and Peterson
159
Elmo Leon
(1988: 7) give an account of Wittmack’s botanical identifications based on the pioneering
excavations of Reiss and Stübel at Ancón, where quinoa remains were found that can be dated
to A.D. 1000-1460.
Again on the North Coast, the analyses of human coproliths from Puerto Moorin that come
from the Salinar culture (in the first centuries of the Christian era)show that the people in this
site in the lower Virú Valley ate quinoa, albeit in small amounts (Ericsson et al. 1989: 72).
It is documented that quinoa was eaten in considerable amounts in the Inca Empire—toasted,
boiled and even raw, as food eaten by the individuals who were buried in Machu Picchu, who
evidently came from other high parts of the Andes (Turner et al. 2010: 524).
Williams (2005: 166) noted the occurrence, within the context of the Inca culture, of trace
elements in bones that show quinoa was eaten, albeit in small amounts, by the people of the
Puruchuco-Huaquerones site in Lima.
Maize, Corn, Chawu, Chinqui, Sara, Sinki, Xequi (Zea mays)
We now turn to what is probably the most characteristic plant of native America—maize. We
run however the risk of leaving aside important sources because this subject has been the
subject of much research (as Bonavia 2008 shows). Maize, a member of the Poaceae family,
is currently the most important gramineae in Latin America and Africa, and the second most
widely cultivated cereal in the world—from this standpoint its significance is obvious (Messer
2000: 97-111).
Originally cultivated in America, maize was introduced into Europe almost from the very
moment itself of the Spanish conquest in the fifteenth century. It spread so successfully
throughout the world that at a given time it was not just the main grain eaten in Central
Europe, but also the most frequent food distributed in the African slave trade, and even the
main food of journeymen in the British African mines in the late nineteenth century, and is
now the major cereal in Africa (Van der Merwe and Tschauner 1999: 535-536).
Yen (1959), for instance, reported it has been eaten since 1772 by the Maori people of New
Zealand, who rapidly leaned how to transport it after it had been dried. It is a fact that maize
is the most widely cultivated and widely-used C4 cereal in the world, even in Africa.
The adaptability this plant has, in which human groups have most interfered, is simply
impressive. At present, of all crops in the world, maize is the one that has most adapted
to various altitudinal and climate conditions. Maize also has been used, is used, and will be
used in an impressive array of culinary preparations. Yet its edible uses do not have a great
human demand for only 20% of the world output is grown for this purpose, 65% is for animal
consumption, and 10% is exclusively used to manufacture products, some of which are not
edible (Messer 2000).
160
14,000 years of food in Peru
Maize is practically cultivated all over the world between 50º north latitude and 50º south
latitude, and ranges from altitudes below sea level to those above 3600 masl (as in the
Andes), and from rainy regions with less than 25 cm of rainfall a year, like Russia, to others
with more than 1,000 cm a year as in the Pacific coasts of Colombia, or in America between
Canada and Chile.
In her handbook The Ethnobotany of Pre-Columbian Peru (1961: 20-25)—which is still essential
despite the half-century that has gone by since its publication— Margaret Towle summarised
what was then known about maize in Peru from an ethnobotanical standpoint. Towle notes
that by the time of the Spanish invasion, maize cultivation had spread from the Missouri River
to Chiloé Island in Chile, and it had turned into a crop that could not survive in nature without
human intervention.
The adaptive capacity of maize seems to go hand in hand with the various ways it can be
prepared for human consumption. Nowadays it is eaten in tortilla form mostly in Mexico,
Guatemala, and Honduras; in Peru as choclo, in Italy as polenta, in Kenya or Malawi as purée,
and has even become an important cereal in Indonesia and in parts of China. Probably no
other plant surpasses this type o distribution and vast consumption. Human manipulation has
turned maize into the grain with the most modifications made to it, which include mutations,
genetic diversity, and multiple adaptability. In fact, the number of its varieties largely surpasses
that of any other plant species, so that it is a plant that is completely dependent on human
beings (Messer 2000).
Because of our archaeological purposes and due to the sometimes incomplete nature of the finds,
it must be pointed that a deseeded maize ear is a cob (Mostacero et al. 2009: 1011-1012). This notion
will be useful below when reviewing the discoveries that have been made of this plant.
From a linguistic standpoint a consensus seems to have been reached that the term maize
is of Taíno (the language of the Arawak people) or Caribbean origin, where it was known as
mahiz or marise, whereas in Quechua it is zara (Bonavia 2008: 7).
Research needs let to the establishment of subdivisions at each species level, as is the case
with the race criterion, which evidently can be used to trace development lines. Bonavia (2008:
9) for instance pointed out that in the late nineteenth century pod corn was distinguished
from pop corn (also known as confite), dent corn, flour corn, and sweet corn. Grobman in turn
divided maize into some fifty races, five of which are primarily pre-Hispanic and nineteen pre-
Hispanic hybrids.
Having seen the significance of this American cereal, we now briefly turn to its origins. Heiser
(1979: 310) correctly noted three decades ago that no American plant has received more
attention from scientists than maize, and this includes the study of its origins. How did such
a simple spike turn into ears with several rows of kernels? How did it turn into the main
staple of the Inca Empire? We will now see a brief history of research that has no pretence of
completion, and will t hen try to give answers.
161
Elmo Leon
From a historical standpoint, the research on maize origins can be divided into two major
periods. The first period is the 1930s, when George Beadle and Paul Mangelsdorf (both
essentially based on phytogeography and on the work done by Vavilov, e.g. 1931) presented
two conflicting hypotheses on the origins of maize. We now turn to them.
Beadle posited that maize is a domesticated form of teosinte (Zea spp.) that developed into a
grass that grows mostly both in Mexico as well as in Guatemala. For him this plant’s principle
of domestication lay in that pre-Hispanic populations produced several mutations through
natural selection that eventually turned teosinte into maize (Beadle 1939, 1977, 1980).
Mangelsdorf (1947, 1974, 1986) in turn believed that maize was instead the product of the
hybridisation of a yet-as undiscovered wild maize and Tripsacum (a rhizome-type relative
of maize), in what later became known as the “tripartite” hypothesis. Mangelsdorf used the
botanical race criterion and went slightly beyond by suggesting that the six races of maize had
had separate origins, i.e. two in Mexico, one in Colombia, and three in Peru.
It was clear from the beginning that both hypotheses essentially concluded not only that maize
had different ‘progenitors,’ but also different places of origin, with Beadle suggesting Mexico-
Mesoamerica and Mangelsdorf the Andes. Although the latter hypothesis was considered
valid and was widely accepted until the 1960s, Beadle’s hypothesis gained favour in recent
decades, particularly due to the studies on chromosomes and morphological systematics (e.g.
McClintock 1929, Iltis 1983) that highlighted the differences in information available for both
the proposed origin areas, and did nothing but complicate things.
A third, important position appeared during this first research period on the origins of maize that
was actually based on a study made in the late nineteenth century (Harshberger 1896), which argued
that maize was derived from the hybridisation of teosinte and a plain wild grass. This position
was later retaken by the palaeobotanist Mary Eubanks (1995), who reviewed the available genetic
evidence and concluded that teosinte actually is the ancestor of maize, but that its mutation was
gradual and slow. This is another theory on the “non-Andean” origins of maize.
Before leaving this first phase in research we should briefly review it, particularly because
in recent decades there has been an explosion in genetic studies. We will just mention two
studies. In a review of the origins of maize, Melinda Zeder et al. (2006: 146) concluded that
from a phylogenetic perspective the matter had already been settled with the support
previously given to teosinte. Finally, Matsuoka et al. (2002), have a more nuanced position that
was also reached through molecular genetics, and which raises the possibility that although it
is possible that multiple domestications took place and that there are multiple races of maize,
they all appeared out of teosinte. For Matsuoka et al. this process must have taken place at
least nine thousand years ago, so that once it had been domesticated in the highlands, maize
spread to lower tropical zones.
A second period began in the 1960s that was characterised by the genetic studies that were
making progress at the time. The researchers focused on observations regarding the diversity in
162
14,000 years of food in Peru
evolutive relations within the Zea genus, and on the study of the genes involved in the evolution
of the genome. Wilkes was the first to publish a full monograph on teosinte (1972) in which—
based on Vavilov’s similar position—he supported it as the closest ancestor to maize. Wilkes
likewise considered that all hypotheses regarding the origins of maize led to three alternatives:
the direct evolution of a wild ancestor from a hybrid species; evolution from a hybrid species;
or evolution from a wild ancestor, but with repeated hybridisation with teosinte.
In general, the studies made in the second period conclude that teosinte is the ancestor
of maize. For example, Itis (1983) posited that it was the result of a transmutation, i.e. the
transgenic evolution of teosinte. Similarly, within the context of modern DNA analysis, John
Doebley and his research team studied and redefined the phylogenetic filiations between the
grasses and the Zea genus, and contributed to our understanding of how the maize genome
has evolved. Doebley et al. (1997) concluded the genetic evolutive changes showed (once
again9 that maize is derived from teosinte.
Even so, recent studies depict a somewhat more varied picture that once again opens the
door to the possibility that maize may have followed a different and independent process
of domestication in the Andes. Such is the case of Vigoreux et al. (2008), who used Bayesian
statistics on a large number of maize samples representative of America and concluded that
both Mexico and the Andes are potential sources of maize’s genetic diversity.
Finally, in this context we must add two crucial but once again contradictory positions that are
derived from two different research areas: on the one hand palaeobotany, which is essentially
based on phytoliths (a position represented by Dolores Piperno and Deborah Pearsall), and
on the other the botanical-archaeological perspective (represented by Alexander Grobman
and Duccio Bonavia). Piperno and Pearsall (1998: 158-163) claim that maize and teosinte have a
common ancestor and that both species have the greatest affinity. For them this means that
the place where maize was domesticated would have to be in southern and western Mexico.
Besides, according to several indicators maize would have had to have been domesticated
approximately between the Terminal Pleistocene and the Early Holocene. They also emphasise
that the molecular information does not suffice for a multiple domestication hypothesis
(thus going indirectly against the work done by Vigoreux and his colleagues). For Piperno and
Pearsall the original maize, which came from the Balsas River, spread and then adapted to
new conditions such as the altitude and the dry environment of the Central Andes, where it
apparently is more recent than in Mexico.
Grobman though that wild maize hybridised with wild perennial teosinte, thus giving rise
to teosinte. In this process there was human intervention. There also are several pieces of
evidence showing that Andean—i.e. Peruvian—maize had already separated from its wild
Mesoamerican counterpart. Against Beadle and based on the evidence that clearly shows
there is no proof of the evolution of teosinte into maize, Grobman holds there is no
similitude between them both. On the other hand Grobman and Bonavia believe maize was
independently domesticated both in Mexico and in the Andes, and probably also in Colombia.
Migratory birds may have taken wild maize to the Andes. This is substantiated with five types
163
Elmo Leon
of evidence: the presence of three races of Preceramic maize— Proto-Confite Morocho,
Proto-Kculli, and Confite Chavinense—and their respective hybrids; a greater radiocarbon
antiquity; the difference between chromosomal nodes; the absence of teosinte hybridisation
with Casma maize; and the high variability of Andean maize (Bonavia 2008).
Leaving aside these hypotheses, we must examine some preliminary considerations of Bonavia’s
on the domestication of maize. First, Bonavia posits that this is a plant that corresponds to groups
of hunter-gatherers and not precisely to sedentary societies, and this is how its occurrence must
be understood. Maize would therefore not be a synonym of sedentism. What is evident is that
throughout time human groups intervened to make this plant a more productive food, as can be
seen in the increase in the number of rows, the hardening of the cob, the development of naked
kernels that are more easily removed, an increase in its flavour, and so on. It is also worth noting
that the changes that led to modern maize came to an end just about five thousand years ago,
so that the technology and its adaptive process are quite ancient.
In his vast synthesis on maize Bonavia (2008) gives an account of the origins of this plant, which
he summarises into four hypotheses. The first one by Beadle and Galinat, holds that annual
teosinte gave rise to maize; the second one, led by Mangelsdorf, argues that both annual
teosinte and maize gave rise to maize; the third one, which Mangelsdorf and Grobman defend,
was based on the idea that there can be three evolutionary lines: from maize to variable maize;
from maize to maize and annual teosinte; and from Zea diploperennis to annual teosinte and
maize. Finally, the fourth hypothesis, which is defended by Wilkes and Mangelsdorf, suggests
that annual teosinte was arrived at from perennial teosinte (Zea diploperennis), but wild maize
also led to annual teosinte and modern maize.
Bonavia deals extensively with the domestication of maize, so interested readers in a
complete account should see his study (Bonavia 2008: 67-121), as only a brief summary will be
given here. Bonavia points out there are in general two hypotheses on maize domestication:
one that claims this took place in Mesoamerica, and another one which posits independent
domestication in Mesoamerica and the Andean area. We turn to them now
The first hypothesis is based on two areas—the Balsas River and Tehuacán—that provided key
information supporting the domestication of maize in Mesoamerica and Mexico. Mutations
in annual teosinte would finally have led to maize in the lowlands of the Balsas River Basin (in
the state of Guerrero, between 400 and 1200 masl); this position is based on genetic studies.
In the other area—still within the Mexican context—maize domestication would have taken
place in the highlands of the Tehuacán Basin (in the state of Puebla, between 1000 and 1500
masl). Here maize in its modern version would have been the result of the hybridisation
of two of its wild relatives, diploid perennial teosinte and maize in an initial stage of its
domestication. Bonavia (2008: 68-69) choose this hypothesis due to its greater support, both
biological and archaeological.
The second position regarding the domestication of maize is based on the proposal put forward
by Paul Mangelsdorf among others, who argued for the possibility that the domestication of
164
14,000 years of food in Peru
Andean maize independently from Mexico and Mesoamerica, given the existence of maize
races that are exclusive to the Andes. Alexander Grobman and his colleagues (1961, in Bonavia
2008: 74-75) later made more studies supporting the variability of Andean maize races, their
adaptive capabilities, interracial hybridisation, and so forth. A great variability in races was
documented in the Peruvian Andes that turned this region into an active evolutionary centre
for maize. It is worth recalling here the definitions of isolated races for Peru. First there is
Confite Morocho, which may be native to Ayacucho, and whose antecedent is called Proto-
Confite Morocho; Kculli, which is the origin of maizes with have high concentrations of
anthocyanin (and consequently a purple colour) and which come from the central highlands of
Peru; Chullpi, from the Apurímac-Ayacucho region and whose ancestor is Confite Chavinense,
from which all varieties of sweet maize are believed to come, and some of which may have
been derived for toasting purposes (Bonavia 2008: 76). Interested readers should see the
extensive discussion and explanation in Bonavia (2008: 77-121).
What has been said regarding its preparation and properties? The benefits of maize cultivation
in combination with that of squash and beans have been pointed out, and it has proven
beneficial besides providing all food requirements: maize carbohydrates, squash oils, and bean
proteins. It should however be noted that maize consumption can cause diseases such as
pellagra, niacin deficiency and child malnutrition.
Even so, Bonavia (2008) suggests that this is a distorted image and that pellagra was not present
in pre-Hispanic Peru, nor is it connected with maize as assumed, precisely because following the
principle of associated feeding, they cultivated and ate the three plants just mentioned.
While assessing this subject Messer (2000: 103) specifically mentions this triad when mentioning
Mexicans, who eat maize tortillas with beans and squash seeds. If for instance maize is eaten
alongside beans, its deficiencies in lysine, isolysine, and tryptophan are overcome, so much so
that the amino acids consumed are similar to proteins of animal origin. Besides, when maize
is prepared with a lime solution (CaO) it frees niacin, thus providing calcium to the human
organism (Super and Vargas 1999: 1248).
Going back to Messer, when he lists the ways maize was prepared he points out the simplest
method probably was barbecuing the ears over hot sand or stones, or over ashes, so that
these burst. Even so maize was more frequently boiled and then ground. After soaking the
cobs in an alkaline environment and washing them to remove the husks the kernels could
be eaten directly as mote, or it was made into a paste by adding water in order to prepare
tortillas (thin dough), arepas (thick dough), or tamales (wrapped-around paste with filling).
Margaret Towle (1961: 25) mentioned the ways in which maize was cooked, as well as its pre-
Hispanic presence and domestication. In the first case Towle mentions two types of maize
on the coast: pod corn or primitive pop corn, which were found in the earliest levels, were of
small size, and have been found at Ancón, the El Brujo site, and in the Virú Valley. The second
type, which characterises more recent maizes and is even found in modern Peru, tends to have
straighter-sided forms and bigger kernels.
165
Elmo Leon
Towle finished her study of maize in her handbook citing other authors listing its various uses,
highlighting for instance the preparation of a kind of tortilla in special occasions, as well as its
occurrence in archaeological burial contexts, which is especially mentioned by Stafford and
Wittmack (Towle 1961: 25). Towle likewise noted that kernels were boiled (mote) or toasted
(cancha); that the latter was the prime ingredient used to prepare some type of beverage; that
some kind sweet juice could be obtained from the stalk, and oil from the ears; that chicha
was prepared with maize kernels chewed by women to in order to ferment them; and that
the livestock could eat some parts of the plant as fodder. Towle thus glimpsed the multiple
functions maize had in the pre-Hispanic Andes.
We now have to turn to the bromatology of this major Andean cereal. Let us see first its
consumption in fresh form. Cárdenas et al. (1997: 140-141) specifically noted that whereas
purple maize holds 38.3% calories and 7.6% protein, the ears have 64.5% calories and 16.5%
protein. Besides, toasted maize or cancha provides 38% calories and 22.8% protein (almost the
same protein as fresh llama meat). According to this analysis it is clear that more proteins are
ingested when eating cancha than when eating an ear.
In pre-Hispanic Peru maize was also eaten in dehydrated form, in which each kernel has 74.5%
starch, 6.8-12% proteins, 12% water, 3.4% fat, and 1% fibre (Ericsson et al. 1989: 97).
Besides, Horkheimer (1960: 110) claims that every 100 grams of maize hold 73 g of carbohydrates
and 343 calorie units (a very high value, below only that of quinoa and toasted maize). From all of
these analyses it follows that in the Andean world maize was an extremely important food source.
We will now review the archaeological evidence, which is certainly very rich. Let us briefly
see some records outside Peru that are important for this book, and then we shall examine
the Peruvian evidence.
It is clear from what has just been presented, that the Mexican archaeological record has
prevailed. Here we will use Bonavia’s extensive critical study as our main reference. Out of
about a dozen major archaeological sites we will review here the cases of Tehuacán (Puebla)
and Guilá Naquitz. At Tehuacán, Richard MacNeish and his team isolated a series of phases
where the impressive evidence of over 24 thousand maize remains was found. Here also
chewed stalks and dry maize leaves were found (Bonavia 2008: 129), so it is believed that other
parts of the plant were eaten. This study was able to document the sequence of increase in
the size of the cobs throughout time due to human manipulation in order to attain better
results and more food, since about 5000 B.C.
Guilá Naquitz (close to Oaxaca) is another prominent site where maize has been found, either
primitive or hybridised with teosinte, that dated to about 6700 B.C.—recent radiocarbon
dates however showed some dated to 4200 B.C..
Only one example will be given for Central America. Although her evidence does not come
from the Central Andean area, Dolores Piperno (2009: 157) claims to have found maize
166
14,000 years of food in Peru
phytoliths in the Aguadulce rock shelter in Panamá for which the oldest date is 5935 B.C.
What is even more impressive is that these finds come from maize starch recovered from
the surface of some sort of mortar, from which it can be concluded that this plant’s kernels
were already being ground at this time. Piperno also published the presence of phytoliths
in the preceramic site of Las Vegas in Ecuador that date to about 4600 B.C. It is worth
emphasising the potential that the study of phytoliths holds, even to detect whether
processed maize is a residual outcome of cooking (cf. Ravielle 2011).
Ecuador is closer to our Central Andean area. According to recent studies, here there
apparently is phytoliths-based evidence of maize as it was being domesticated around 5000
B.C. Bonavia has a critical position in this regard in view of the difficulties there are in inferring
taxa from this type of microevidence.
We now turn briefly to the Peruvian pre-Hispanic maize record, in which the remains have
been found in various forms. Perhaps the most striking form are the depictions on pottery,
textiles, metalwork, and many other crafts left by the ancient Peruvian cultures.
I would like to insist in that readers interested in a more in-depth review of Peruvian pre-
Hispanic maize should read the vast study by Bonavia (2008). Now then, there are several
ways in which the presence of maize in pre-Hispanic contexts can be documented both
as macroremains as well as microremains, and even through indirect evidence such as
dental lesions. Bonavia proposed in this regard that maize consumption can be recorded
through the caries, because the carbohydrates and sugars found in maize favour this type
of pathology.
Interest in the study of pre-Hispanic maize goes back over a hundred years. One of the earliest
finds was made in the late nineteenth century in the ruins of Pachacamac (Harshberger 1898).
This study only emphasises that maize is of Mexican origin and that it was much used by the
Inca, particularly in ritual events.
Wittmack (1888) had studied the archaeological maize from Pachacamac some years earlier and
had classified it into three groups, according to his observations of the external shape of the plants.
In the history of maize research, Margaret Towle discussed the macroremains discovered
in various archaeological contexts of Peruvian coastal cultures, where few indeed had no
maize. Towle even made a major synthesis of the archaeological sites that have maize (1961:
21-25). We have to bear in mind that she had at the time the materials derived from classic
investigations like those carried out at Paracas, Pachacamac, Supe, Chuquitanta or by the Virú
Project so although this is an important review, there is no radiocarbon documentation that
allows us to accurately know the age of these finds.
Let us carry out our review chronologically. To continue we need more modern references
and the best way to do so is to base ourselves on Bonavia’s study, which makes an extensive
analysis of preceramic maize in Peru (Bonavia 2008: 156-203). To this we obviously will add the
167
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

references derived from our own research, because Bonavia left out all sites later than 1800
B.C. Even so, we are also unable to assess all sites where maize has been found, so that only a
summary will be presented here.

Possibly the earliest evidence of maize in a pre-Hispanic context comes from the lower Casma
Valley. Here Santiago Uceda excavated two sites that are important because maize appeared
early: Cerro El Calvario and Cerro Julia (Uceda 1986: 229-261). Bonavia (2008) found a clear
sequence when assessing the former. A corn cob was found in level 5 in association with a
sample that gave the date of 4192 B.C. Bonavia noted that although the sample deteriorated,
Alex Grobman believed it was a type of maize related with those found at the site of Los
Gavilanes—excavated by Bonavia himself—and at Guitarrero cave, excavated by Thomas
Lynch and his team, as we shall see below. The race is a mixture of Confite-Chavinense and
Proto-Confite Morocho. Purple-coloured glumes suggest a connection between this Huarmey
maize and the highland races (Bonavia 2008: 158).

Leaf remains and stalk fragments were found in stratum 3 at Cerro Julia, which was dated to
4888 B.C. Both the dates of Cerro El Calvario and Cerro Julia are consistent, and are perhaps
the most reliable and solid evidence of Preceramic maize from the Peruvian coast that dates
to the fifth millennium B.C.
More recently, a significant report was published on the maize found in the excavations undertaken
at Huaca Prieta and Paredones, two sites that are practically on the seashore close to the mouth
of the Chicama River, on the North Coast (Grobman et al. 2012). In these archaeological sites
the authors discovered a total of 293 fossil pop corns and the remains of maize flour. Fifteen
AMS radiocarbon dates gave a range of 5245-300 B.C. The two races documented at the sites
during the Preceramic Period are Proto-Confite Morocho and Confite Chavinense (which was
also documented at the site of Los Gavilanes in the Huarmey Valley) (Figure 7). The significance
of this study is that the maize found has no connection with teosinte, the primitive Mexican
maize. This means that this plant was domesticated independently of Mexico. Besides, a new
race was found that has been called Proto-Alazán. The interesting thing here is that this is a flour
maize, which opens the door to speculation. It is likewise that some of the ears were burned,
thus showing they were subjected to fire in order to be eaten—a culinary technique that is quite
frequent with tubers, as we have just seen.
We now turn to the highlands in the Callejón de Huaylas. One of the oldest pieces of evidence
of the consumption of maize in Peru comes from Guitarrero Cave, at about 2850 masl. Here
Smith (1980b: 121-143) documented 26 maize cobs in Complex III—which in radiocarbon terms
is equal to about 6700 and 6000 B.C.—which he claims have some similarities with the Pira
maize from Colombia.
In the chronological sequence we are following, it is now the turn of the maize Richard MacNeish
and his research team found in the large-scale excavations they undertook in Ayacucho. At
Rosamachay Cave, maize was found associated with two remains that were dated to about 4244
B.C. (cf. MacNeish et al. 1981: 123-124). Duccio Bonavia made an intensive examination of this
Figure 7. Maiz de Huaca Prieta y Paredones, La Libertad. Aproximadamente 5200 a.C. (CORTESÍA DE PROCEEDINGS OF NATIONAL
ACADEMY OF SCIENCES).
find, as well as of the other maizes found by the Ayacucho Project (Bonavia 2008: 190-198). He
concluded that of all these questionable maize finds, this one is not only the most reliable one
but also, according to the analysis made by Alexander Grobman, a maize race that proves the
independent domestication of this plant in the Andes without Mexico or Mesoamerica.
The research undertaken on the Central Coast by several scholars, and above all by Bonavia,
has made great contribution to our knowledge of pre-Hispanic maize. There are sites like
Culebras in the Casma Valley, Tuquillo north of the Huarmey Valley, and Áspero in the Supe
Valley, where maize has been found in Late Preceramic contexts that presumably date to the
third millennium B.C., but regrettably no radiocarbon dates are available. The publications on
maize for other sites that are now well-known, like Caral—which have been conscientiously
examined by Bonavia (2008: 179-185)—unfortunately show having had little control in the
excavations. There are maize specimens in contexts that date to around 2500 B.C., but most
come from construction fills that are of scant validity for scientists.
The site of Los Gavilanes (PV35-1), on the left bank of the Huarmey Valley, is worthy of special
mention. Bonavia prepared an extensive monograph on this site (1982), where preceramic
maize has been unquestionably found and was studied by interdisciplinary teams that ranged
from the ethnoarchaeological to the ethnobotanical approaches. The condition in which this
group of plants was found is simply impressive because there were stalks, roots, leaves, cobs,
and even whole plants. Besides, a series of radiometric dates were obtained that let us know
since when maize was handled at this site. It is therefore worthwhile making a brief summary
(Bonavia 2008: 162-163).

168 169
Elmo Leon
Los Gavilanes is a site on the right bank of the Huarmey Valley that comprises a system of 47
storage bins (which Bonavia calls “hoyos”) where maize was stored. Bonavia was able to show
that maize was placed with sand in order to preserve the kernels and the ears, and the bins
themselves had a total area of 1590 square metres. It has been estimated that a minimum
461 tons of maize were stored in all of the bins, which entails a large demand by the early
population of this site. This is in fact an exceptional site because nothing similar has been
found in the context of the pre-Hispanic Andes. Maize appeared in epoch 2 and continued
in use during epoch 3, which in radiocarbon dates means the bins would have in in use at
least during the interval 2884-1271 B.C. Besides, Bonavia documented ethnographically that
some people in Huarmey still stored maize in the sand until the second half of the twentieth
century, using river sand, saltpetre, and having previously dried the maize under the sun.
A major contribution made by Bonavia´s research is that he and Alexander Grobman were
able to establish the presence of three races of maize, i.e. Proto-Confite Morocho, Confite
Chavinense, and Proto-Kculli. The first race mentioned clearly is the most abundant one.
For Bonavia, its high anthocyanin content indicates that this plant came from the Callejón
de Huaylas. In fact, the maize found at Los Gavilanes also resembles that of Casma and
Ayacucho—all from the Middle Holocene—in this characteristic.
The conclusive evidence that maize was found at Los Gavilanes comes precisely from the
tusks that Bonavia (1982: 227) found in some of the faecal remains discovered in the site, and
which date to at least 3200-1860 B.C.
Slightly earlier dates for domesticated maize was published from the research done by Weir
and Dering (1986: 28) at the site of Paloma, in the vicinity of Lima, which ranged between 5316
and 3630 B.C. Robert MacBird however claims this is an intrusive maize and that it does not
belong to that epoch (Weir and Dering 1986: 25).
It has been claimed that maize has been found at Caballete (a site in the Fortaleza Valley 8 km
inland from the mouth of this river) and at Huaricanga ((in this same valley, but 23 km inland) with
dates that go back to 3000 B.C. (Haas et al. 2013). Even more important is that maize phytoliths and
starch have been found in certain parts of stone tools, so it is possible they were used to prepare
food with this plant. Its consumption is also proven because most of the human faecal remains
found at the site have maize starch. Interestingly enough, maize was also eaten by dogs (it was
found in the coproliths), so it can be speculated that they accompanied these groups of humans.
Vega Centeno (2007) found a single ear of maize in the archaeological site of Cerro Lampay—
also in the Fortaleza Valley—north of Lima. This ear can be dated by association to 2410-2064
B.C. It was found in the context of a midden with food refuse, so it is believed to come from
an event of this kind.
Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) on the other hand reported maize at the site of Puémape south
of the Jequetepeque Valley, at least since 3008 B.C. to 339 B.C., when maize was apparently
eaten more intensively.
170
14,000 years of food in Peru
Perry et al. (2006) also reported having found maize at Waynuná, on the northern section
of the modern Arequipa region. This site is close to the Cotahuasi Canyon over 3625 masl,
practically at the upper cultivation limit of this kind of plant. Here maize was found in the
form of starch and silicificated phytoliths that dated to 2000-1600 B.C. According to the
researchers, the endosperms analysed suggest the presence of at least two races in this epoch.
Besides, the size of the kernels analysed leaves open the possibility that they were ground on
stone mortars in order to prepare some type of flour or some similar product, and that this
was a flour maize, which has already been mentioned in the case of Huaca Prieta.
For a more recent epoch, in the Initial and Formative periods, Ugent (1984: 422) reported
finding maize at Las Haldas, a site some 20 km south of the Casma Valley on the Central Coast
of Peru. We calibrated the radiocarbon dates—particularly those from charcoal contexts
related with the samples—and obtained 1328-390 B.C. Maize has also been found in contexts
that are almost parallel to the Chavín culture in Casma sites like Pampa Rosario and San Diego,
some kilometres away from the mouth of the river that dated to 800-300 B.C. (Ugent 1984:
423), but these are dates that we were unable to calibrate.
Almost parallel to these finds is the maize starch that Ikehara and Shibata (2005: 144) claim
to have found in some vessels from Cerro Blanco, a site in the lower Nepeña Valley, in feast
contexts. Ikehara and Shibata believe that the presence of this starch indicates the preparation
of maize chicha, but the scientific biochemical reports supporting this interpretation are still
pending. The dates of these contexts average 1100-250 B.C., which means that maize chicha
may have been prepared and taken since at least three thousand years ago.
Following the context of the first millennium before Christ we come to Chavín the Huántar. Richard
Burger excavated just two maize cobs in this famed archaeological site. They belong to the two
broadest Chavín phases, i.e. 850-460 B.C. and 460-390 B.C. (Burger 1984: 254). The presence of maize
in contexts belonging to this site let us state that it was eaten in situ in the above-mentioned epoch.
The consumption of maize was also confirmed here at the biochemical level. Burger and
Van der Merwe (1990) showed through the isotopic analysis of human bones from Chavín de
Huántar and Huaricoto, that maize had a secondary role whilst plants such as the potato and
quinoa formed the daily dietetical basis throughout the development of this civilisation.
Maize has also been found in the context of the Paracas mummies, which have been dated
from around 400 B.C. (Tello and Mejia Xesspe 1979: 473). Ugent and Peterson (1988: 8) supplied
a direct date for a corncob recovered in Paracas Necropolis contexts of around 440 B.C.
Maize was also found in a Paracas context at the site of Cerrillos, in the upper Ica Valley, and
was dated to about 800-600 B.C. (Splitsloser 2009: 93).
Peter Kaulicke (1991: 414) observed the presence of maize imprints in the Loma Valverde site,
in the Upper Piura River Valley, and with dates that ranged to around 160 B.C.-A.D. 450. This
means they correspond to the Salinar-Mochica occupation of this part of northern Peru.
171
Elmo Leon
Somewhat more to the south but still on the North Coast we have Ericson’s report (1989:
72) on human faeces found in the Virú Valley, in the well-known Salinar archaeological site
of Puerto Moorin in the modern region of La Libertad. The remains included maize, which
means it was eaten by the population in this site. The dates that we were able to calibrate
average between A.D. 17 and A.D. 500, but they may perhaps date to around the first three
centuries of the Christian era.
Even more important is the fact that maize was the plant most eaten by most of the
populations in the lower Virú Valley throughout the period examined, from the Early
Horizon (1200 B.C.) to the Wari epoch (A.D. 1000). This is one of the few cases in which it
can be said of a region that maize was the most important plant in its diet, at least since the
first millennium B.C. up to the Inca occupation. These coprolith-based studies were verified
by the analysis of stable C13 isotopes in human bones, which showed that maize was the
essential component in the diet of the sites in the lower Virú Valley. In fact, researchers
claim that maize comprised 40%-50% of the diet since Gallinazo times, i.e. 100 B.C.-A.D. 100
(Ericson et al. 1989: 86).
Because of the quality of the materials that have been preserved, we will now review the
record of pre-Hispanic maize in some sites belonging to the so-called pristine States, which
developed during the first centuries of our era, particularly on the coast.
It should be noted that the evidence showing maize was known and was eaten go back to
several vessels and other types of raw materials that show maize was massively consumed. For
instance, Margaret Towle (1961: 25) mentions several depictions of this kind in the pottery and
textiles of cultures like the Nasca, Paracas, Mochica, Wari, Chimú, and Inca. A year later Vargas
(1962: 109) identified maize in coastal vessels belonging to cultures like the Mochica and the
Nasca, as well as in Inca conopas.
Besides this type of depiction, on the North Coast there is the Mochica site of Dos
Cabezas, which lies almost on the mouth of the Jequetepeque Valley. Here the excrement
of three individuals was found, so what they had before dying. Geyer et al. (2003) reported
the presence of abundant maize consumed by the individuals in the tombs dated to A.D.
536-580 (Moseley et al. 2008: 83). In comparison with other plants, maize was by far the
plant food most eaten by this people. Males and females did not ear maize in the same
proportion, and the upper social groups ate it more (Geyer et al. 2003: 278). We should
however bear in mind that Reinhard et al. (2007: 536-537) claimed that the maize originally
came from the area where the Dos Cabezas site is, but no macrobotanical remains area
available that can confirm these finds.
In the Ayacucho region maize was the main food resource during the Wari Empire. Finucane
(2009) has made an extensive review of the evidence and he claims that this was the main
food resources from A.D. 800 and even up to the early Colonial period. Based on the evidence
presented for the Preceramic Period, Finucane believes maize had an increasingly relevant
role starting around the fifth millennium B.C. He based himself on a study of collagen in 107
172
14,000 years of food in Peru
individuals in order to obtain information on stable C13 isotopes values for bones that date
to 800 B.C.-A.D. 1100. The samples for these individuals came from Pikimachay, Rosamachay,
the cist burials at the site of Trigopampa, the Mongachayoc zone in Huari, the funerary
contexts of Marayniyoc, and the village of Qasapampa. The evidence also clearly indicates
that maize was consumed by the Wari who lived in the empire’s periphery, for instance
at Beringa, a site in Arequipa that dates to A.D. 650-1000, where it was one of the main
foodstuffs (Tung 2012: 49).
Lockard (2005: 208) identified a large number of maize cupules..., cobs, and kernels at the site of
Galindo, in the middle Moche Valley, which correspond both to a Mochica (A.D. 600-800) and
a Chimú (A.D. 1000-1470) occupation, but more was evidently eaten during in Mochica times.
Shelia Pozorski (1979: 170) reported the presence of maize slightly more to the south but still
on the North Coast, in sites that range from the Moche Valley to modern-day Huanchaco,
and which extend from the Moche to the Chimú-Inca occupation. Pozorski points out that it
was eaten at sites like the Huaca de la Luna (see also Cárdenas et al. 1997: 134). Galindo, a site
in this same valley, is striking because it has a 71% plant diet that means maize was of crucial
importance to its people.
For the Huaca de la Luna itself, Cárdenas et al. (1997: 138-139) analysed the coproliths of some
Mochica people (ca. A.D. 400-750) and found that maize was frequently eaten, not just as
kernels, but also in cobs and even in stalks. This information is even more relevant because it
has been found that practically all of the maize was burned in zones like the urban centre of
Huaca de la Luna, which means it was cooked (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 192).
Gumerman (1994) found similar consumption patterns at Pacatnamú, in the mouth of the
Jequetepeque River. Its presence in other sites is relatively important, with Choroval (Chimú-
Inca) standing out with 48%. In a subsequent study the Pozorskis (2003: 125) reported the
occurrence of 87 maize cobs at the Huaca del Sol, which means this plant was clearly eaten
by the Mochica at this site.
Gumerman and Briceño (2003) reported the abundant presence of maize ca. A.D. 400 at
Ciudad de Dios, a Mochica site in the middle Moche Valley. Several mortars have even been
documented at the site, and may have been used to process maize. Several stone hoes were
also found that may have been used to mow down the plants themselves.
As for the Central highlands of Peru, Christine Hastorf (2002) has documented that the
presence of maize in Wanka sites like Tunanmarca and Hatunmarca in the upper Mantaro
Valley in Junín, at 3,200 and 3,900 masl, had a boom during the Inca epoch. Her study of food
remains clearly showed that whereas maize was intensively cultivated by Wanka farmers since
A.D. 200, it later fell in A.D. 1000-1460 and rose again during the Inca occupation. Hastorf
believes that this phenomenon was due to the tribute-like obligation the Inca set, and because
of the imposition of large-scale chicha brewing.
173
Elmo Leon
Figura 8. Tusas de maíz (e incluso fragmentos de tallo) que fueron descubiertas asociadas a ají (Capsicum sp) y papa (Solanum tuberosum,
enteros, y fragmentados) del sitio de Casa Vieja correspondiente a la Cultura Nasca durante los primeros siglo de nuestra era. (CORTESÍA
DE JOSÉ ROQUE).
Various remains that include maize stalks, flowers, seeds and cobs were discovered at Casa
Vieja (Figure 8), a site that dates to Final Nasca and to the early Wari Empire in the Cayango
Valley (Roque et al. 2003) and which we can infer dates to A.D. 530-820 (cf. Unkel 2006: 111).
Piacenza and Pieri (2012: 4) reported finding a series of human faeces or coproliths in burials
at Cahuachi in which maize, even purple corn, was found, and is direct evidence of its
consumption (Figure 9).
Margaret Towle (1961: 21-25) made a pioneering study of this point based on the maize found at
Cahuachi (alongside others that had been found and analysed, which belonged to the Paracas and
Nasca cultures at sites such as Wayurí, Estaquería, Huaca del Oro, and Ocucaje), and concluded that it
was massively cultivated. This was confirmed by modern science through stable isotopes but mostly
for the Wari Empire, which means it was due to an imposition (Kellner and Schoeninger 2008).
Duccio Bonavia et al. (2009: 242, 254) found a significant number of cobs, kernels, cornsilks
and other fragments, and even a maize stalk. Maize (along with cassava) was by far the species
most eaten at the site. Most of the cobs are of the Protoconfite Morocho race, and a few are
Proto Kculli and Confite Chavinense. In general the cobs were no more than seven centimetres
long. For Bonavia the purple colour of the glumes indicates these are plants cultivated in the
174
14,000 years of food in Peru
Figura 9. Tusas de maíz morado procedentes de las excavaciones del Santuario Nasca de Cahuachi, aproximadamente 100-400 d.C.
(CORTESÍA DE MARIA GRAZIA PIACENZA, LUIGI PIACENZA Y CAROLINA ORSINI)
highlands. Some of the cobs had traces of carbonisation, which means they were subjected
to fire for cooking. The result evidently was roasted and even popped maize, like cancha. The
site dates to the Wari Empire, i.e. ca. A.D. 800.
Maize was documented for this period at Cerro La Cruz (Chao Valley). In this case Vogel
realised there were three different cob shapes with eight, ten and twelve rows, which she
believes correspond to attempts at cultivation in the vicinity of this site (Vogel 2012: 126).
Maize was long consumed in the lower Lambayeque Valley on the North Coast of Peru, at
least in 1300 B.C.-A.D. 1400, that is to say from the Cupisnique to the Sicán culture (Klaus and
Tam 2010: 596). At the same time Nelson and Bellido Cerda (2010: 50) reported the presence
of maize in the middens of three Chancay sites on the Central Coast of Peru, in the Huaura
Valley. The dates obtained at these sites average A.D. 1265-1625. Lanfranco and Eggers (2010:
79) likewise reported the presence of maize at Los Pinos, A Chancay site in the Huaura Valley.
According to their statistics, maize consumption increased in this period.
A large amount of evidence on maize consumption has also been documented for the Chimu
culture. Perry (2002: 337) found evidence for this period in the Casma Valley at the site of
Manchán (final Chimu phase, A.D. 1470-1523).
175
Elmo Leon
Figura 10. Mazorca de maíz, conservada en su panca. Pedregal, valle de Jequetepeque. Cultura Chimú, aproximadamente 1000-1470 d.C.
(CORTESÍA DE ROBYN CUTRIGHT).
Cutright (2009: 145) documented maize cobs and kernels on the North coast at Pedregal,
a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, which evidently are the remains of the people
who lived at this site (Figure 10). This study was also able to detect that during the Late
Intermediate Period, the cobs with just a few rows eventually had 12 of them and thus more
kernels; this implies the development of farming technology in this period, and an attempt
to develop more varieties. Interestingly enough, maize was stored not just as cobs, but also
as shelled kernels.
Keatinge (1975: 226) had already reported the presence of maize at Cerro La Virgen, a rural site
in Chan Chan, as one of the main Chimu staples. Gumerman (1991: table 3.4) showed—in this
same cultural context—that both the elites and the common people ate maize albeit in very
low proportions at Pacatnamú, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley that dates to ca. A.D.
1300-1400. In the case of Pacatnamú, maize was stored in cobs and was rarely shelled.
The vast dissemination of maize on the coast during Inca times ca. A.D. 1650 [sic]-1520
was representatively evinced by the huge amounts excavated at Panquilma, a site in the
middle Lurín Valley south of Lima, some 25 km away from the coast. Cohen (1975: 50)
in turn reported the discovery of some 6,500 maize cobs in an excavation of just a few
square metres.
176
14,000 years of food in Peru
The analysis of stable isotopes in the human bones from Machu Picchu (Turner et al. 2010: 524)
determined that the people buried in this site ate little maize. Here they even managed to establish
its culinary preparation, for it has been posited that maize was eaten boiled, i.e. as a “choclo.”
Hastorf and DeNiro (1985) made a major study in which they managed to identify the maize
embedded in ceramic vessel fragments of the early Wanka population in the Mantaro Valley.
The evidence indicates maize was boiled alongside quinoa, obviously for eating, that it was
most eaten in A.D. 100-300, and in Inca times it was prepared toasted, roasted and boiled
(mote). Large vessels and mortars where the kernels were ground were part of the tools used
to process maize.
Ugent and Peterson (1988: 8) reported maize remains at La Centinela, a site almost on the
seashore in the lower Chincha Valley, in a mound of food refuse alongside potatoes, sweet
potatoes, and guinea pigs. The context was dated to ca. A.D. 1190.
Williams (2005: 186) noted the possibility that the people of Puruchuco-Huaquerones, an
archaeological zone in the modern district of Ate-Vitarte, may have eaten toasted maize as
followed from the dental attrition found. In the excavations at Malanche 22, in a village that
virtually occupied a loma that is also on the Central Coast south of Lima, not far away from
the Lurín Valley or Chilca Ravine, Mujica et al. (1992: 88) found several remains of maize eaten
by the people in this site at about A.D. 1200-1450.
The research carried out by DeNiro and Hastorf (1985: 114) also showed the presence of maize
at Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley, that dates to Inca times.
Maize Chicha
There being a significant number of studies of this maize-based beverage, all that we intend
here is simply to supplement the information given on pre-Hispanic maize. This means only
some overviews of chicha preparation and consumption, as well as the archaeological data,
will be included here.
If there is anything that symbolises Andean reciprocity par excellence, that clearly is maize
chicha. Nicholson (1960), basing himself on Otero (1951, in Nicholson 1960: 290), claims that chicha
connected humanity with the gods through the fecundation of earth. Nicholson described the
ways in which chicha was prepared in Peru using different types of maize in different regions,
particularly in Catacaos, Cuzco, and Puno. For instance, in coastal chicha maize undergoes a
process that includes it being soaked, germinating, smoked and dried in order to prepare jora.
Horkheimer had already observed the significance chicha had but he took a broad perspective,
pointing out the presence of old of chicha made out of quinoa ,cañihua, peanuts, carob seeds,
maguey, molle and masato (1960: 98). Horkheimer believed the name chicha was introduced by
177
Elmo Leon
the Spaniards from the Antilles, where a very similar beverage was prepared. Its name in Quechua
is aque or akha. Basing himself on Louis Baudin, Horkheimer claimed that Peruvian Indians ate little
but drank a lot, something he believed many Spanish chroniclers claimed about. Bonavia (2008:
255-269) on the other hand specified that this term comes perhaps from Panama or from the Aztec
zone. In Aymara this beverage is called cusa. In the Caribbean the term is derived from chichal, with
chal being saliva, which probably means the fermentation required to turn the starches into sugar.
Bonavia (2008) made some observations that should be briefly included here. He believed the
evidence clearly indicates that maize chicha was intrinsically connected with power, especially in
the Inca Empire, and in particular with two activities that were of the utmost importance in the
Andean context—hospitality and exchange. For the Inca, the consumption of maize chicha had
three main goals: facilitating social integration (in the context of religious, social, and State contexts),
institutionalising status (gender, age, class, provenance, etc.), and mobilising labour organised as mita
or corvée labour (in order to institutionalise political feasts) (Bonavia 2008: 216-218).
Bonavia (2008: 223) likewise believes there may have been a series of vessels used for their
consumption, for instance simple gourds for the common people, metal and wooden cups for
the elite and, in certain cultures, Tiahuanaco keros and Moche stirrup spout vessels.
As regards the degree of fermentation, Bonavia (2008: 225-226) followed the references given
in some chronicles when noting that sora must was far stronger than any wine made out of
grape, and also pointed out that maize chicha can be toxic (because it holds phosphorus,
carbon oxide or arsenic).
In their research on pre-Hispanic chicha, Hastorf and Johannesen (1993) explain that nowadays
chicha has an extremely significant role in the Andean culture as a key component in ceremonial,
religious, political, and social transactions. In the Andes, preparing chicha is mandatory when
celebrating the harvest, in feasts or in festivals. It is also the symbolic stamp in in agreements,
pacts and understandings between Andean peoples, which go from a desire to improve
the harvest to wedding celebrations. Since it is shared in activities like these, chicha can be
considered as an element par excellence of reciprocity in the Andean area. Based on their
research in Jauja, both Hastorf and Johannesen posit that chicha consumption rose amongst
the elite, particularly as of the Wanka II phase, and was t hen extremely intensive during the
Inca occupation of this zone. This trend was likewise evinced by the presence of more maize
grinding tools and even bigger vessels meant to hold the chicha prepared for libation feasts.
The significance chicha had in this type of activities in the Inca Empire, was recorded by the
Spanish chroniclers in the early Colonial Period. Although it is not easy going into specifics,
the data on chicha preparation and libation probably dates to the first millennium B.C. (if not
before); here we have a Mochica vessel showing chicha being prepared.
Maltose plus maltodextrins—in this case in maize—are highly acidogenic and cariogenic,
particularly after cooking and the subsequent gelatinisation that takes place when it reaches
a temperature of one hundred degrees. Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 88) specified this problem
178
14,000 years of food in Peru
and concluded that chicha consumption definitely raised the level of carbohydrates in the
pre-Hispanic diet. Whereas raw and germinated maize provides fewer carbohydrates when it
is used to prepare chicha, it has a higher carbohydrate content when ground or toasted. When
placed in fermentation vessels, chicha likewise increases its saccharose content, which may
have increased the rate of smooth surface caries in people who consume chicha.
It should also be noted that because of the fermentation process, chicha consumption causes
several dental pathologies like superficial caries, which have been detected for instance in
cultures like Salinar at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley some centuries
before our era (Lanfranco and Eggers 2010: 88). So apparently, maize chicha may have been
taken for over two thousand years.
The general method followed when preparing chicha in the Andes is to dissolve the sugars
in the fermented kernels or berries in boiling or hot water; these sugars turn into alcohol
through bacterial fermentation in semihermetic vessels at room temperature (Goldstein and
Coleman 2004: 526). Jerry Moore made an illustrative summary of chicha preparation in the
context of his research at Manchán (1989), a Chimu administrative site in the Casma Valley.
The first phase obviously is preparation. One of the methods used to prepare chicha begins
by converting starch into sugar by mixing maize flour with human saliva, which provides the
enzyme diastase that sets off the chemical process. The other method ferments the maize
kernels, and this also converts the starches into sugars (Moore 1989: 686). The whole process
can last from twelve hours to one or two days. Citing John Rowe (1946), Bonavia (2008: 259)
noted that this researcher had already claimed that chicha was prepared not just with maize,
but also with oca and molle. Besides, its traditional preparation had women chewing the pulp
and then spitting it into pitchers with hot water, where it is allowed to settle until it matures.
This process left behind remains of it in patios, textiles, wicker, leaves or other types of
materials used to cover the liquid undergoing fermentation, mortars and grinding stones used
to get the jora, as well as hearths, charcoal and reddened vessels, wicker strainers or textiles
used as such, and bran—that is to say, the materials that had been separated from chicha and
which comprised fermented kernels, the remains of hulls, etc. Cobo claims that chicha was
drunk in gourds on the North Coast.
Goldstein and Coleman claim maize or jora chicha is the best known variety. Moore (1989:
686) accurately summarised its manufacturing process, from its preparation to fermentation,
including the selection of the maize, its shelling, washing, germination, drying, and the milling
of the dry germinated maize.
The ethnobotanical studies in the Mantaro Valley likewise seem to support the intensification
of chicha production at least since the Wanka II epoch, which corresponds approximately to
A.D. 1350-1450 (Hastorf and Johannesen 1993). In previous periods maize was consumed more
as cancha and mote, whereas later it was ground and was most frequently prepared as chicha.
Hastorf and Johannesen claim that more chicha was prepared for libations and alliances with
other groups, to avoid conflicts, reach agreements and so on.
179
Elmo Leon
We should also bear in mind the well-known Inca site of Huánuco Pampa, where chicha was
produced massively and in standardised fashion by the State. This left as evidence grinding
stones, mortars and other tools that suggest a series of banquets and feasts, which means the
chicha was not stored and was instead taken immediately (Bonavia 2008: 226).
Let us continue our review of pre-Hispanic plant food.
Legumes
Peanuts, Groundnuts [Maní, cacahuate, choccopa, inchis] (Arachis hypogaea)
Johanna Dwyer and Ritu Sandhu (2000: 364-374) summarised the main points regarding peanuts,
so here we have to repeat their main conclusions. This is a major member of the legume
family. In Greek arachis means legume, and hypogaea means below the ground. Arachis is a
genus of plants native to South America, and it was in this subcontinent that peanuts were
domesticated and disseminated. Dwyer and Sandhu point out that peanuts were widespread
in the wet South American lowlands and even in the Caribbean at the time the Spanish arrived
to America, but not on the coasts of Colombia or in Central America. Although there are
some doubts in this regard, it is possible that the peanut may have been introduced into
Mexico from Peru (Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 132).
We turn now to the origins of peanuts because a debate surrounds this legume. Candolle (1886) first
posited that it had its origin in Brazil. Vavilov then had a similar position on Paraguay (Smith 1968: 255).
Carl Sauer (in Towle 1961: 43) in turn believed that peanut cultivation must have been originally
been associated with that of cassava, both in its sweet and its bitter varieties, which means
he partially meant Brazil. This proposal is relevant because it allows us to speculate that pre-
Hispanic peoples who were cultivating maize were also growing cassava; this means they may
have been complementary staples, but this is all clearly in the realm of conjecture.
Hans Horkheimer (1960: 66) also wrote on the origins of the peanut in his book on pre-Hispanic
food. Based on Oviedo, Horkheimer noted that the term “maní” comes from Haiti, whereas
in Quechua it was known as inchis. He believed the peanut was important, for instance in
Mochica society, where it was depicted in anthropomorphic shape, and it has been abundantly
found in archaeological sites on the Peruvian coast. For Horkheimer, the peanut was a first-
rate alimentary resource in pre-Hispanic Peru.
According to Krapovickas (Simpson et al. 2001), who is perhaps the greatest authority on
this subject, the domestication of the peanut Arachis hypogaea var. hypogaea took place
in Bolivia, probably as an adaptive response to a dry environment. Even so here Krapovickas
points out that the peanut had its origins in the South Western Matto Grosso do Sul or
in North Western Paraguay. Krapovickas emphasises human intervention throughout this
process, particularly in the case of Arachis stenosperma and Arachis hypogaea.
180
14,000 years of food in Peru
Simpson and his team (2001) made a very brief summary of current data on peanut domestication.
For them the process may have begun somewhere in the Andean ceja de selva, where the
temperature and humidity conditions are suitable. This is a significant suggestion because it
follows that the area of peanut domestication must have been some sort of “corridor” between
eastern Bolivia and Peru’s ceja de selva, and this would explain up to a point the archaeobotanical
record, which is so early for northern Peru, and to which we now turn.
Deborah Pearsall and Dolores Piperno held (over a decade ago) that the earliest evidence
of peanut cultivation came from Peru around 2000 B.C. (they also based themselves on the
data presented by Sauer). The dates have however moved backwards dramatically, as shall be
shown in the following pages.
Piperno y Pearsall (1998: 164) concluded that the peanut was perhaps domesticated in a
very large area that extends from the eastern Andes to the Bolivian lowlands and western
Brazil, and that Arachis montícola is the best candidate for the ancestor of the domesticated
peanut. Besides, the places where domestication took place can also be established through
the subspecies that have been found. Such is the case of Arachis hypogaea spp. fastigata
in Argentina and Bolivia, and of Arachis hypogaea hypogaea in the area to the north and
northwest of the above-mentioned region.
The peanuts of the Peruvian variant found in Ecuador and Peru are known as runners (Arachis
hypogaea Hypogaea, var. Hirsuta), and are precisely the type frequently found in pre-Hispanic
sites (Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 131).
Barbara Pickersgill, who is also an expert on Andean archaeobotany (1969: 54), believed that
the peanut was native to Bolivia, in which he followed Krapovickas.
This legume was extensively discussed in Patiño’s handbook on Peruvian tropical fruits
(2002: 411-416), which not only compiles data regarding their origin as well as their forms
of consumption and preparation from an ethnographic standpoint. Patiño states that maní
is an Arawak term. Arachis hypogaea corresponds only to the cultivated species whose
domestication process may have taken place on the Eastern slopes of the Bolivian Andes and
north-western Argentina, as was posited by Krapovickas.
Patiño points out that peanut consumption apparently spread all over the tropical Americas
because in 1493 Doctor Chanca, whom Patiño cites, and who was with Christopher Columbus
at Hispaniola, noted that the Indians ate some kind of good-tasting “hazelnuts.”
Patiño also points out that peanuts were intensively cultivated in subsequent centuries in the
warm inter-Andean valleys of Ecuador, and even in the Marañón River basin. Archaeological
peanut remains, Patiño notes, come mostly from Peru and north-western Argentina, with
the latter region giving dates that begin at A.D. 200, which means they are relatively late
in comparison with those from Peru. Besides, the aborigines of Bahia (Brazil) used to smoke
peanuts in order to preserve them for one year, and thus have it available as food for a long
181
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

period of time. We can wonder whether this condition raised its protein value, as was the
case of some of the tubers we have seen. And the answer is yes, as is shown below by the
results attained by Cárdenas et al. (1997).

Patiño also mentions that peanuts were eaten toasted, boiled or scrambled in holidays in
Lima during the eighteenth century. Patiño believed that the most varied forms of peanut
consumption are found on the eastern slopes of the Bolivian Andes, thus strengthening the
idea that this was its zone of origin, as has already been noted above. Peanut chicha, a tradition
that is likewise typical on the Peruvian coast, was prepared here. Peanuts are however also
eaten raw when the pods are thick and juicy (Bonavia 1982: 314).

Soukup (1980) in turn believed the peanut had its origin in Brazil because it is now grown both
in warm and warm-temperate regions.

Having presented the issue of the origins and domestication of this major plant, we must now
present the bromatological properties of its fruits, which really were a major source of fat and
proteins for the pre-Hispanic population and must therefore be considered when drawing a
nutritional balance.

Many are aware of the potential peanuts have, particularly as regards oils and proteins.
Peanut butter was developed in 1890, and was initially meant for sick people, due to the high
proportion of proteins and low carbohydrate content of this plant. Peanuts are nowadays
widely used as food and as culinary ingredient in Asia and Africa, amongst other continents.
By weight alone, peanuts have a higher proportion of proteins than beans. The peanut is the
vegetable with the highest proportion of vegetable protein in the world.
Unlike leguminous plants, peanuts store oil instead of starch. During their development,
cotyledon plants gradually increase the amount of fat and proteins that are characteristic of
peanuts. The amino acids it comprises, in decreasing order of importance, are phenylalanine
(99 mg), valine (58 mg), isoleucine (48 mg), lysine (41 mg), threonine (31 mg), methionine, and
cystine (27 mg), histidine (27 mg), and tryptophan (13 mg).
As for fats, they comprise 44%-56% of their total weight. But amazing as it may seem, peanuts
have no saturated fats, which favours the control of cholesterol. The biochemical values listed by
Dwyer and Ritu (2000) are 25% protein, 46% fat, and 12% carbohydrates. Peanuts are also rich in
nitrogen (564 k/cal), and besides unsaturated fat acids they also have also saturated fatty acids.
We have already asked whether the consumption of smoked peanuts alters their bromatology.
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 140-141) seem to have provided an answer. They have established the
bromatological values of the peanut in various states. When raw the peanut has 559% calories,
24% proteins, and 48% fat, whereas parboiled it has 374% calories, 27% fat, and 16% proteins.
Finally, toasted maize has 590% calories, 51% fat, and 27% protein. This means the best way to
eat it is toasted, as it increases the amount of proteins and retains the fat level, as shown by
this study.
Figura 11. Cuenta de collar representando maní, sonajera de aleación de cobre. Cultura Mochica (100-800 d.C.). (MUSEO LARCO. LIMA-PERÚ).
In his handbook on pre-Hispanic food, Hans Horkheimer (1960: 110) endorsed the proteic
quality of toasted maize. Horkheimer believed that of all vegetable staples, the peanut had
the lowest amount of protein—26.9 g in every 100 grams (somewhat more than in Cárdenas’
study)—but it was held more fat by far (44 g) in comparison with its carbohydrate content
(just 27 g). In caloric terms the peanut has 559 calorie units, which means it is the legume with
the highest amount of calories in the Andean world.
As regards minerals and vitamins, the peanut has a large amount of potassium (670 mg),
followed by phosphorus (430 mg), magnesium (210 mg), and much lower percentages of iron,
copper, zinc, manganese, selenium, and iodine. As for vitamins, E, K, thiamine, rivoflavin, and
vitamin B6 stand out (Dweyer and Sandhu 2000: 369).
Ceramic depictions have thus far been here considered as a reference regarding the consumption
of plants and fruits in pre-Hispanic Peru, and the peanut is clearly present in vessels like those of
Paracas, in the final centuries before the Christian era, or in Moche and Nasca vessels that date
to the beginning of the Christian era (cf. Vargas 1962: 109-110) (Figure 11).
We now turn to the archaeological data on peanuts. Just like with maize, Harshberger (1898)
also published one of the pioneering studies of Peruvian ethnobotanics. He believed the
peanut was an American plant because all those that had been found in this continent
were domesticated, thus clearly proving its provenance. Harshberger also mentioned
the peanut remains Max Uhle found at Pachacamac in his pioneering excavations, which

182 183
Elmo Leon
characteristically had a more elongated form. Harshberger realised the significance
the peanut had in pre-Hispanic Peru because he noticed the specimens found were as
big as those traded in modern markets. For him this supported its prolonged use and
domestication in Peru.
In the history of the study of the pre-Hispanic peanut, Margaret Towle (1961: 42-43) was
already able to perceive its significance not just thanks to its ceramic depictions various
coastal cultures left behind, but also because there was already evidence of its presence in
the still few excavations undertaken up to 1961, the year she published her handbook on pre-
Columbian ethnobotany. Towle believed the peanut was widely represented in the cultures
of the Peruvian coast. She also noted that peanuts had been discovered in a Late Preceramic
site in Supe, and mentioned the specimens found at Ancon by the pioneering research carried
out by Rochebrune, Safford, and Wittmack.
We now turn to more modern information. The finds made in one of the best-controlled
excavations as regards archaeobotanical materials is Nanchoc, on the North Coast of Peru’s
middle Zaña Valley. This is a series of preceramic villages where a large amount of food
refuse has been found. Peanuts have been recorded at this site albeit in wild state, not just as
macroremains but also as residues in the dental plaque of some human burials.
Rossen et al. (1996: 398) found peanuts from level 2, which has a mean date of 6971 B.C. The
question on whether this is a domesticated specimen or not cannot be easily answered. In a
previous publication, the authors argued that the fruits’ morphology indicates the plant was still
not under cultivation, and was instead gathered in the vicinity of Quebrada de Las Pircas, an area
adjoining the research area. And yet in a more recent scientific contribution, Rossen et al. (2008)
opened the possibility that the specimens found can perhaps be categorised as domesticated
peanut as both their morphology and the size of the starch grains (which are quite similar to
those of Arachis hypogaea) suggest it was already under cultivation at that time.
It can thus be safely concluded that peanuts were eaten on the North Coast of Peru during this
phase, either in wild or domesticated state (Dillehay and Pi perno 2008: 19624). This type of
maize is found in small and hirsute form and a series of capillarities that correspond to its wild
state, as has just been noted (Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 205), but there must be other, more
evolved ones that can be conceived of as domesticated ones. A subsequent determination
made directly on the peanut shells preserved at the site gave a date of 6611 B.C. (Dillehay et
al. 2007: 1890), which is compatible with the date previously given.
A more modern line of research is detecting food remains preserved on human dental plaque.
The consumption of peanuts at Nanchoc was in fact shown through the analysis of dental
plaque from this site. Although the count of peanut starch is lower than in the case of the
lima beans eaten (thus showing the significance lima bean consumption has had since that
time), the dates found in the molars range between 7142 and 5802 B.C. This is perhaps a direct
and conclusive piece of evidence of the consumption of wild or domesticated peanuts on
the Peruvian North Coast since the eighth millennium B.C.
184
14,000 years of food in Peru
Whitaker and Bird (1949: 6) also recorded peanuts during their excavation of Huaca Prieta,
finds that should on average date to 3000 B.C.
Bonavia (1982: 149) found a series of maize seeds and shells at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower
Huarmey Valley, which had been clearly consumed in epoch 1 of this site, which comes to
around 4000 B.C.
Cohen (1978: 35) in turn reported finding peanuts at the Tank site of Ancón during the Gaviota
phase (ca. 2,000 B.C.), but the documentation in this regard is scant.
A peanut shell found at La Galgada, a site in Tablachaca Canyon in the province of Pallasca, at
about 1100 masl, has been documented and studied. It was found in the upper layers of this
site, so it possibly dates to 1316 B.C. (Smith 1988: 128).
The presence of peanuts at the archaeological site of Pampa de Llamas-Moxeque, in the
lower Casma Valley, which dated to 2088-1243 B.C., was reported by Ugent et al. (1984: 420).
Ugent reported having once again found peanuts slightly to the south at the ancient ceremonial
temple of Las Haldas, in layers dating to 1328-390 B.C. (Ugent 1984: 422). Peanut consumption
in sites on the Casma River mouth was documented with the finding of this plant at Pampa
Rosario and San Diego, which date to 800-300 B.C. The iconographic depiction of the peanuts
found on the Tello Obelisk, which belongs to the final phase of the Chavín culture, must also
date to around this time (Lathrap (1971, Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 110).
Margaret Towle (1961: 43, 141) pointed out that Yacovleff and Muelle had observed the presence
of peanuts both in the burials found both at Paracas as well as those from the Chillón Valley;
the former date to at least 300 B.C. Towle believed the domestication of this plant had only
begun at this time, but we have seen that recent scientific research has disproved this.
In a comprehensive study of pre-Hispanic food in the Moche Valley, Pozorski showed that
peanuts were also eaten, albeit in very small amounts, at Gramalote (1800 B.C.), as well as in
Early Moche (0-A.D. 300) and Early Chimu (A.D. 800-1000) sites in the Moche Valley (Pozorski
1979: 170). This showed the long span of peanut consumption in this part of Peru.
The scientific literature reviewed for this book clearly shows that the Mochica were major
and frequent consumers of this legume, who favouring including it in their food. According
to Gregory Lockard, the inhabitants of Galindo (A.D. 600-800) in the middle Moche Valley
consumed peanuts in significant amounts (Lockard 2005: 208, 211). Lockard believes it was by
far the legume most eaten by this site’s Moche population.
Peanuts were also eaten, albeit in lower amounts, by the Mochica of Huaca del Sol during
the first centuries of the Christian era. It has in fact been shown that the Moche, as regards
vegetable, preferred eating peanuts, pumpkins and beans, in this order according to the
Pozorskis (Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 125).
185
Elmo Leon
The excrement of the Moche people also provides evidence that they ate peanuts. Here we
present three examples. Cárdenas et al. (1997: 134), who also identified peanuts at the Moche
site of Huaca de La Luna around A.D. 400-750, have been able to record cotyledon shells in
some Mochica human faecal remains, which clearly evinces peanut consumption.
Geyer (2003) likewise reported peanut remains in the excrement found in three burials at Dos
Cabezas, an archaeological site in the Jequetepeque River mouth, thus proving it was eaten
before death. The dates range between A.D. 536 and A.D. 580. Moseley et al. (2008: 83) have
however questioned that the peanut pollen found really comes from this plant, just as they
have done with the other remains found in the Dos Cabezas excrement.
To conclude with the faecal remains from the North Coast, this time in the lower Virú Valley,
Ericson et al. made this study in some human remains from the site of Puerto Moorín (Salinar
culture), whose dates range between the beginning of the Christian era and around A.D. 300
(Ericson et al. 1989: 72). Peanut remains were found in the excrement, thus clearly indicating it
was eaten at this time in this part of the valley.
The Moche from Lambayeque also consumed peanuts. The Shimadas have recorded peanut
remains in Moche contexts in the modern-day department of Lambayeque, with dates that
range between A.D. 711 and A.D. 800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 33).
But it was not just the North Coast’s Moche people who ate peanuts; the people of the
Paracas and Nasca cultures, in the modern-day department of Ica, also did so.
Peanuts were found in large amounts in the funerary contexts of the mummies of Paracas
Cavernas and the Wari Kayan Necropolis in the Paracas Peninsula, which have been dated to
ca. 400 B.C. (Tello and Mejia Xesspe 1979: 473).
One very interesting piece of evidence comes from Cerrillos, a Paracas archaeological site that
dates to ca. 800-400 B.C. It was reported that the peanuts found at this site were exceptionally
big and had apparently been preserved under thick layers of straw. Other sites in the vicinity
of Cerrillos indicate how important peanuts were for the Paracas (Splitstoser 2009: 94).
The Nasca also consumed peanuts intensively (Silverman and Proulx 2002: 52). Roque et al.
(2003) have reported the presence of peanut fruits and pods in the archaeological site of Casa
Vieja in the lower Calango Valley (Ica), at about 260 masl, which had an indirect date of A.D.
530-820, i.e. in the final phase of the Nasca culture (cf. Unkel 2006: 111). Unkel emphasised the
fact that peanuts grog between 500 and 1000 masl, and that it is found both on the coast and
in the tropical forest.
Margaret Towle (1961: 43) documented peanuts in Nasca at Cahuachi, Huaca del Oro and
Ocucaje, so we have evidence of it in this part of the Peruvian coast at around A.D. 400-800.
It was also present in the first phase of this culture, as is borne out by the depictions found in
the iconography of the initial styles of Nasca textiles.
186
14,000 years of food in Peru
The Italian archaeological research team has likewise documented the presence of peanuts at
Cahuachi in very large amounts. It is even more surprising that it has been found cooked, toasted,
so it is clear that the Nasca ate toasted peanuts during the first centuries of the Christian era
(Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 3). This same study shows that the dental study of the Nasca evinced a
type of wear that corresponds not just to the consumption of toasted peanut seeds, but also of
molluscs that seem to have been eaten along with sand remains, as was noted in the study made
by Andrea Drusini, the project’s physical anthropologist (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 12).
The Wari also ate peanuts, as was shown by the research Tiffiny Tung undertook at Beringa
(Arequipa), a site in the southern marches of the empire that has been dated to ca. A.D.
650-1000.
Moving forwards in time we find that peanuts were also eaten in significant amounts in the
period of time just before the Inca. Ugent and Peterson (1988: 7) note that Wittmack presumably
found it among the remains of the Ancón burials, which date to ca. A.D. 1000- 1460.
The Chancay people also ate peanuts. Nelson and Bellido excavated several archaeological
rubbish dumps in the Huaura River at a Chancay site called Chambara where they found
maize, thus showing it was part of this people’s diet (Nelson and Bellido Cerda 2010: 50). The
radiocarbon dates come to A.D. 1375-1625.
Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) likewise documented peanuts at Los Pinos, a site also in the
Huaura River Valley and again in a Chancay context. Their figures show the people of this site
heavily consumed this legume.
Peanuts have also been found in some archaeological garbage dumps in the lower Lambayeque
Valley that date to A.D. 1300-1400, a period of time that includes several cultures that
consumed peanuts throughout time (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596).
Cutright found peanut remains somewhat more to the south, in the Jequetepeque Valley,
which was part of the food eaten by this people albeit as a complimentary item (Cutright
2009: 144).
Malanche 22 is a site on the Central Coast of Peru some kilometres to the south between the
Lurín Valley and the Chilca Ravine. Here a village was found on a loma that had a series of
storehouses and dwellings. Remains of peanuts were found in its garbage dumps, in a context
that has been dated to ca. A.D. 1200-1450 (Mujica et al. 1992).
Still in this period of time, Ugent and Peterson (1988: 8) published remains of peanut shells
excavated at the site of La Centinela in the Chincha Valley, some 200 kilometres south of
Lima, that date at least to A.D. 1000-1470 in Inca times.
Cohen reported finding considerable amounts of peanut seeds in the Inca occupation of
Panquilma, a site in the middle Lurín Valley south of Lima, which were grown and at this site.
187
Elmo Leon
Finally, DeNiro and Hastorf showed the presence of peanuts in Inca times in this same valley,
almost in the Lurín River mouth (DeNiro and Hastorf 1985: 113).
Peanuts clearly were intensively consumed throughout time by the people in various cultures,
particularly since the beginning of the Christian era.
Oblique-Seeded Jack Beans, Jack Bean, Baybean [Pallar de gentiles]
(Canavalia plagiosperma, Canavalia ensiformis, Canavalia maritima)
Although little known nowadays, Canavalia was consumed by Peru’s pre-Hispanic population.
The data available is however scant.
Canavalia is a genus that comprises close to forty species, twelve of which correspond to
Peru including Canavalia plagiosperma, a shrub that gives this type of legume (Mostacero et
al. 2009: 340).
What do we know regarding the origins and domestication of Canavalia? Clearly less that we
know of lima beans. Deborah Pearsall and Dolores Piperno (1998) believe its domestication
may have taken place in the dry Circum-Caribbean area as well as to the east of the Andes,
i.e. in the Amazonian Andes, the Bolivian low- and wetlands, and western Amazonia. Because
of the toxic condition of Canavalia in its natural state, Pearsall and Piperno believe that a
social network must have developed in order to disseminate the method used to remove this
substance and thus contributed to its diffusion. Since the lima bean has similar characteristics,
it is possible that both processes took place hand in hand.
Jonathan Sauer and Lawrence Kaplan (1969) made a brief study that is worth summarising
here. They believe that Canavalia apparently had five wild ancestors, Canavalia maritima,
Canavalia brasiliensis, Canavalia dictyota, Canavalia piperi, and Canavalia boliviana. As
regards the presence of Canavalia in Peru, they mention that it frequently appears in Mochica
ceramics as well as in Paracas textiles. Sauer and Kaplan also specify that Canavalia ensiformis
is believed to have originated in Central America and the Caribbean.
For Sauer and Kaplan there two characteristics that must be borne in mind in regard to
Canavalia: it is on the one hand a highly resistant plant that can survive in dry soils and
withstand insect activity, and on the other hand it has a great capability to develop as it grows
well wherever its beans fall. Unlike other legumes, Canavalia thus has a high adaptive and
survival capacity.
Canavalia ensiformis and Canavalia piperi (mature) from Matto Grosso, Brazil, the Bolivian
lowlands and North Western Argentina comprise 23% proteins, 55% carbohydrates, and 1% fat
(Purselove 1968, in Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 132). So according to the study, from a proteic
standpoint Canavalia surpasses beans.
188
14,000 years of food in Peru
A more specific, albeit older, biochemical study points out that every 100 grams of Canavalia
in dry condition hold an average of 331 calories, 25.4 g of proteins, 1.3 g of fat, 57.1 g of
carbohydrates, 96 mg of calcium, 343 mg of phosphorus, 4.9 mg of iron, 10 mg of vitamin
A, 0.46 g of thiamine, 0.15 mg de riboflavin, and 2.1 mg of niacin, but no ascorbic acid (Wu
Leung and Flores 1961). It can thus be concluded that Canavalia in dry condition has a higher
protein, carbohydrate, and fat content. The relative significance of calcium and phosphorus is
striking, and it must be considered when assessing its presence in pre-Hispanic Peru, given the
complete lack, or scant presence of, mammalian meat.
We now turn to the archaeological evidence of this legume’s consumption in pre-Hispanic
Peru.
Despite the scant presence of Canavalia in the archaeological evidence, attention has been
drawn to Canavalia plagiosperma and its domestication in the Andes around 4000 B.C.
(Pickersgill 2007: 927).
The presence of Canavalia in relatively small but constantly present amounts at La Galgada,
an archaeological site in Tablachaca Canyon (in the modern-day province of Pallasca in the
department of Ancash), makes Smith consider it as a significant edible resource at this site
(Smith 1988: 128). Several parts of the plant (grains, seeds, shell, epidermis, etc.) have been
found since the beginning of the occupation ca. 2600 B.C.
Towle (1961: 45) reminds us that Canavalia was found in Huaca Prieta since ca. 3000 B.C.
Lawrence Kaplan concurs and studied Canavalia in this same site but during its Cupisnique
occupation, so we can assume it was eaten at this time in this part of the North Coast
Patterson and Moseley (1968: 116) reported the presence of Canavalia in the Pampa de Ancón
phase, albeit with insufficiently documented contexts, for which radiocarbon have a mean
date of 3075 B.C.
On the other hand, the analysis of the coproliths found at Los Gavilanes, in a stratum that
dates to 3200-2200 B.C., showed Canavalia was eaten albeit in limited fashion (Weir and
Bonavia 1985: 99).
Abundant remains of Canavalia were found at the site of Huaca Prieta in layers Q to E, which
go from 2899 B.C. to ca. the first millennium B.C. Callen studied the residues of the food eaten
at this site found in the faecal remains, and claims Canavalia is the residue most frequently
present, with a date of 2899-2753 (Callen 1965: 335). This shows the importance this plant’s
consumption had.
Residues of Canavalia have been found in the archaeological human faeces from Puerto
Moorin (a Salinar site from the early Christian era) on the North Coast in the lower Virú Valley
(Ericson et al. 1989: 74). Canavalia was also eaten during the Mochica occupation (ca. A.D.
0-600) of Huaca de la Cruz, a site in the Virú Valley.
189
Elmo Leon
Canavalia was also consumed on the South Coast. The Paracas for instance were acquainted with
it and ate it. Paracas mummy contexts also held remains of Canavalia gladiata, which means it was
being eaten in this peninsula since around 400 B.C. (Tello and Mejía Xesspe 1979: 473).
It has been clear that the Nasca consumed Canavalia even since Margaret Towle made her
pioneering observations in her major study of pre-Columbian ethnobotany. Towle identified
Canavalia at Cahuachi, Huaca del Oro, Ocucaje, and Estaquería (Towle 1961: 45), and believed
that it had been domesticated in Peru only since the beginning of the Christian era (Towle
1961: 143). The recent finding of Canavalia at Cahuachi by the Italian archaeological mission
has confirmed what Towle posited over fifty years ago (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 3).
The Wari also consumed Canavalia, apparently roasted. The remains of this plant have been
found in large amounts in association with lima beans, in the hearth of a contemporary camp
on the north side of the Huarmey River mouth. Bonavia et al. (2009: 242) recorded the remains
of lima beans and Canavalia in significant amounts in a hearth were they were roasted, and
this was in a Wari 3 camp (ca. A.D. 800).
The Chancay also ate Canavalia. Nelson and Bellido Cerda (2010: 50) found its remains in the
Chancay garbage dumps at the sites of Rontoy and Chambara, which are in the Huaura Valley.
The radiocarbon dates range between .A.D 1265 and A.D. 1625.
Lima Beans [Pallar, Huarhui, Poroto] (Phaseolus lunatus)
We now turn to the lima bean, of which there is no question had a major role in the pre-
Hispanic diet. Debouck (1991) notes the Phaseolus genus comprises some 55 species in America.
The lima bean is a South American annual climbing legume that gives white seeds that have
a pleasant taste, and which have up to 19% protein. It was thus highly important in the pre-
Hispanic diet even though it has glycoside and hydrogen cyanide, which are somewhat toxic
(Mostacero et al. 2009: 360).
There are essentially to positions regarding the American origin of the lima bean. The first
positions is that of Marechal (1978), who claimed that the species P. maculatus, P. marechalii,
P. ritensis, P. jaliscanus, P. salicifolius, and P. polystachyus have a great affinity with Phaseolus
lunatus.
The second position is held by Maquet et al. (1999). They argue their phylogenetic study
(using protein and isoenzyme electrophoresis, which was compared with wild Mesoamerican
and Andean lima beans) showed the Mesoamerican species are more distant from Phaseolus
lunatus than the Andean ones. Mesoamerican species would thus be part of the third
generation of the genetic pool, whereas the Andean ones (P. pachyrrhizoides, P. augusti P. aft.
bolivianus) would be a second genetic generation. Maquet et al. therefore suggest that from
a phylogenetic standpoint, lima beans would have had originated in the Andes.
190
14,000 years of food in Peru
Dolores Piperno and Deborah Pearsall (1998: 163-164) have a broader position. They claim the
lima bean may have been domesticated in an area that would extend from southern Central
America to northern South America, as well as to south-eastern Ecuador and north-eastern
Peru (as was the case of the pallar ancho).
As with Canavalia, it is interesting that Piperno and Pearsall argue that the culinary techniques
(cooking for a minimum of six hours in order to remove its toxic content) used both with the
lima bean and with Canavalia had a major role in spreading the domestication of both plants.
The reader will probably wonder why. This procedure, and particularly lima bean desiccation,
had to be known and disseminated in order to reduce or remove the toxic cyanine content,
which had to be done before consumption (Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 139).
Margaret Towle (1961: 52) points out the lima bean is a plant that naturally grows in temperate
environments but which can adopt to several, and that wild forms of it have been found in
Guatemala, so this may have been its place of origin.
The lima bean evident food source, and it must be conceived thus within the context of pre-
Hispanic Peru. Its bromatological properties on average comprise 22 g of protein, 5 g of fibre,
385 mg of phosphorus, 176 mg of magnesium, 1,874 mg of potassium, 23 mg of sodium, 74 mg
of calcium, 1.95 mg of manganese, 1.29 mg of copper, 4.24 mg of zinc, y 6.12 mg of iron. Besides
this, the main amino acids it contains are glutamic acid, aspartic acid, lysine, isoleucine, and
phenylamine (Olobhobo and Fetuga 1983).
It should however be pointed out that Larsen (2000: 26) claims consuming leguminous plants
like lima beans lowers iron absorption in human beings. If this is indeed so, it may not have been
an ideal dietary and nutritional companion of certain items that have a large amount of iron, like
beans, chuño or some shellfish, as it would have reduced the content of this important mineral.
We turn now to the archaeological record of the lima bean in pre-Hispanic Peru. Margaret Towle
based herself on the illustrations published by Larco Hoyle and noted the significant presence
this plant had in the ceramic depictions made by various cultures, particularly coastal ones like
Paracas, Nasca, Wari, and even Lambayeque. Towle believed it was highly consumed on the coast,
at least from 400 B.C. to A.D. 1450, i.e. throughout a large part of Peru’s cultural development.
The most ancient evidence of the lima bean in Peru thus far comes from Guitarrero Cave
in the Callejón de Huaylas, at around 2850 masl. Its age is still however debated due to the
possible perturbation of the layer where it was found in. Here we shall dwell on this subject
because it involves not just the lima bean but also another group of extremely ancient plants
that were found in a good state of preservation in Guitarrero Cave.
The final report on the excavations undertaken at Guitarrero lists and presents evidence of
preceramic lima beans from level IIC (in the earliest part of the cave), which averages an age of
around 8200-7800 B.C. (Kaplan 1980: 145-148) after our calibration of this stratum (León 2007:
175-179), the critiques made notwithstanding.
191
Elmo Leon
There are two main positions in regard to the ethnobotanical findings of lima beans made
at Guitarrero Cave. The first position is based on the stratigraphy and on the conventional
radiocarbon method, while the second one is supported by a more recent research based
solely on lab dates obtained through AMS (Accelerator of Mass Spectrometry). In the former
position, Gary Vescelius concluded there were two occupations, one that started in 8000
B.C. and the second one in 5900 B.C. Leon subsequently proposed, based on radiocarbon
calibration, that complex II, where lima beans (among other relevant plants) were found dates
to 9600-6100 B.C. and has slightly older age after a radiometric assessment. It can thus be said
that the chronological inconsistencies do not invalidate the chronology in general terms, at
least in terms of an error of a millennium at most (Lynch et al. 1985: 864).
Turning to the second position, which is supported by radiocarbon dates based on materials
deposited in the cave, Kaplan and Lynch (1999: 269) presented lima bean dates that had been
directly measured with AMD and gave 1786 B.C. as the oldest date. The latter date is striking because
it is extremely recent in comparison with the dates obtained for the other materials found in this
cave. The question here is whether the sequence presented and corrected by Lynch and other
scholars is valid, or whether instead full credit must be given to the AMS dates. I believe AMS may
not have sufficient capacity to remove contamination or some other noise effect that has still to
be studied, and unreservedly prefer the earlier dates. On the other hand, archaeology is based on
the principle of association, which has to be its main tenet, whereas radiocarbon is the means used
to establish an absolute chronology. Readers can draw their own conclusions.
Turning now to the lima beans themselves, Lynch et al. (1985) reported that the seeds were
found in units 122, 123, and 150, and Kaplan (1980) claims that the Guitarrero lima bean variety,
which is known as “Big Lima,” is different from other, smaller ones from parts of Central America,
and was independently domesticated since the beginning of the Holocene, just like happened
with the bean. Here we must emphasise an observation Yacovleff and Herrera made regarding
the great variety in size and colour of the Peruvian lima beans found in archaeological sites
(Towle 1961: 53); this perhaps bespeak of the great temporal depth of lima bean cultivation in
the Central Andes in Peru.
A direct and better-controlled evidence of lima bean consumption comes from the Nanchoc
Valley, just like other cultigens under review here. Piperno and Dillehay studied 39 dental
pieces from skeletons found in this complex of archaeological sites and cemetery, mostly
from the Middle Preceramic Period. The dental plaque in an incisor had Phaseolus lunatus
starch which was recovered. This tooth was dated to a mean date of 6930 B.C., so it can be
said for sure that lima beans were eaten at this time on the north coast of Peru. It should also
be pointed out that some believe the grain of starch in the lima bean had traits that hint at its
domestication, but this is a preliminary interpretation. Other teeth—mostly molars—also had
this type of starch almost continuously throughout the occupation of Nanchoc. These teeth
that ate lima beans date to 7142-5802 B.C.
Next in the chronology is the Chilca Canyon, another major site where lima beans (Phaseolus
lunatus) have been excavated. Lima bean pods were found before 1963 by Frédérick Engel in a
192
14,000 years of food in Peru
camp (12BVII, House XIII). These specimens were examined by Hugh Cutler, one of the pioneers
of American ethnobotany, who classified them as such, and then by Kaplan. This apparently
gave a date of 4717 B.C. (Kaplan and Lynch 1999: 270), but the truth is there still is no specific
report of the context in which the sample was found (here it is worth bearing in mind the
critical Bonavia’s critical stance in regard to the lima beans found at Chilca; Bonavia 1982: 318).
Later AMS radiocarbon determinations obtained directly from the pod gave 4406 B.C., a date
that is consistent with previously published ones—unlike those for Guitarrero Cave.
Fragments, cotyledons and the skin of several lima beans (Phaseolus lunatus) have been reported
in the excavations of La Galgada (a site in the Tablachaca Canyon in the modern-day province
of Pallasca, in the department of Áncash), at about 1100 masl, and whose dates range between
2600 and 1800 B.C. (Smith 1988: 130). Finding out why lima beans vanished once pottery was
introduced would be interesting, but this has apparently not yet been solved. Even more
relevant is that Earle Smith, who was guided by Kaplan—the expert on Phaseolus—claims that
the measures of the preceramic lima beans are similar to those of more recent ones when
fully domesticated (Smith 1988: 130); this indicates heir development and temporal depth
since they were cultivated, probably in the early Holocene. The observation regarding the
“Big Lima” beans also concurs with that of Guitarrero itself, as well as with those observations
made by Towle and Yacovleff and Herrera in the first half of the twentieth century. There is
thus almost a consensus regarding the “Big Lima”: it apparently is native to the Andes.
Capps (1987: 54) noticed the presence of Canavalia and lima beans in the excavations of Asia,
a site on the Central Coast in the lower Mala Valley, ca. 1490 B.C.
Huaca Prieta, a site that was made known by the pioneering research undertaken by Junius
Bird and his team in the 1940s-1950s, also held lima beans in its initial occupation layers (level
Q), which dated to ca. 2899-2753 B.C. Bird et al. (1985: 234) noted that during the preceramic
period lima beans were most frequently found in association with beans, and concluded that
both legumes were intensively eaten since ca. 2000 B.C. The study of Huaca Prieta was also a
pioneer in site analysis, with the then-innovative palaeoscatology or coprolith study. Callen
and Cameron (1960) thus found remains of legumes in “possibly” human faecal remains from
Huaca Prieta, which included what can be considered to have been lima beans.
Lima beans have been recorded for the Conchas phase at Ancón (ca. 2700 B.C.). They began to
be eaten at Caral, in the Supe Valley, around 1600 B.C. It is worth noting that the seeds of this
plant were excavated in partially carbonised condition, thus indicating they were exposed to
fire in order to cook them (Flores Blanco 2006).
Lima beans have been reported with slightly more recent dates for the site of Pampa de
Llamas-Moxeque, in the lower Casma Valley (Ugent et al. 1984), with a date of 2088-1243 B.C.
The Nasca also consumed lima beans and Canivalia (Silverman and Proulx 2002: 52). The
archaeological data is scant, but Roque et al. (2003) have documented the presence of the
fruits and seeds of the pallar de los gentiles and of Phaseolus lunatus at Casa Vieja, a site
193
Elmo Leon
in the lower Calango (Ica) Valley. No radiocarbon dates are available, but we can indirectly
infer that this site dates to A.D. 530-820 (cf. Unkel 2006: 111), i.e. Late Nasca during the Middle
Horizon or Wari Empire.
Kaplan and Lynch (1999: 266) reported an indirect date of 429 B.C. for lima beans from
Huacaloma, a site in Cajamarca. This date is consistent with another from this same stratum,
i.e. 228 B.C., so it is plausible that lima beans were eaten in this part of Cajamarca at that time.
Quilter et al. (1991: 280) reported the presence of lima beans at El Paraíso, a site that is quite
close to the Chillón River mouth north of Lima. This should date to ca. 2150 B.C.
Bonavia (1982: 149) documented lima bean remains at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower
Huarmey Valley, with dates that ranged between 2300 and 1480 B.C. The analysis of the lima
bean specimens from this site was undertaken by Lawrence Kaplan, and it indicated that this
plant was evidently cultivated first in the warm and humid inter-Andean valleys, and was then
disseminated onto the coast (Bonavia 1982: 321).
Pozorski (1979: 170) in turn reported a minimum presence of lima beans at the site of Alto
Salaverry (1600 B.C.). She drew attention to the absence of this legume in Mochica and Chimu
sites in the Moche Valley, and even in the city of Chan Chan.
This observation aside, the Mochica clearly consumed lima beans in abundance. Geyer (2003)
noticed the presence of lima beans remains in the excrement of three individuals buried at
Dos Cabezas (a site in the Jequetepeque Valley) that dated to A.D. 536-580 (Moseley et al.
2008: 83). Reinhard et al. (2007: 536) have however questioned this find.
Lima bean remains have also been found on the North Coast in archaeological human faecal
remains or coproliths from Puerto Moorin, in the lower Virú Valley (Ericson et al. 1989: 74).
These remains belong to the Salinar culture, which approximately dates to the first centuries
of the Christian era. Cárdenas et al. (1997: 134) reported finding lima beans in Huaca de la Luna,
in a Mochica context that dates to A.D. 400-750. We should bear in mind that in this same
study Cárdenas et al. report having found lima beans and skins in Mochica faecal remains, thus
directly showing its frequent consumption (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 138-139). It is even relevant
that legume seeds (probably lima beans) in carbonised state have been found, thus implying
they were roasted, i.e. cooked.
Lockard (2005: 211) in turn reported finding at least one lima bean seed at Galindo, a North
Coast site in the middle Moche Valley, so it is possible that it was eaten at this site at least in
low intensity.
Both the Moche and the Nasca were equally frequent consumers of lima beans, as can be
seen in museum ceramic pieces. Margaret Towle noted the presence of this plant at sites like
Cahuachi, Huaca del Oro, the Ocucaje tombs and Estaquería (Towle 1961: 45).
194
14,000 years of food in Peru
This leguminous plant is likewise well documented in other Paracas sites. Towle (1961: 53) for instance
mentions that Paul Mangelsdorf reported lima beans in Paracas Cavernas funerary contexts.
Lima beans were also found in the excavations of Cerrillos, an Early Paracas site in the upper
Ica Valley that dates to around 800-600 B.C. (Splitstoser 2009: 94).
Duccio Bonavia et al. (2009: 242) documented the remains of a significant amount of lima
bean and Canavalia seeds in the hearth in which they were roasted in a Wari epoch 3 camp
(ca. A.D. 800). The colour range of the lima beans found at this site is interesting: black, dark
red, and cinnamon in order of preference (Bonavia et al. 2009: 261). The site is known as PV35-4
and lies on the littoral immediately north of the Huarmey River mouth.
Lima bean consumption seems to have increased in the Late Intermediate Period, albeit in association
with Canavalia. They have been found at Chambara, which dates to A.D. 1375-1625, while both were
found at Los Pinos, a Chancay site in the lower Huaura Valley (Lanfranco y Eggers 2010: 79).
A Chimu context provides another piece of evidence of the association of lima beans with
Canavalia. Robyn Cutright (2009: 144) for instance reports finding the remains of lima beans and
Canavalia at Pedregal, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, as remains of the food eaten.
Perry (2002: 337) showed the discovery, still in the Late Intermediate Period, of lima beans at the
Chimu site of Manchan (final southern phase, A.D. 1470-1523), which is in the lower Casma Valley.
Lima beans and Canavalia were also part of the diet of the people of Panquilma—a site in the
middle Lurín Valley—during its Inca occupation since around A.D. 1460, but they were not as
important as maize of beans (Cohen 1975: 53).
Lima beans have been documented at around the same time—A.D. 1000-1470, including the
Inca Empire—at La Centinela, a site in the Chincha Valley that lies almost on the shoreline
itself some 200 km south of Lima (Ugent and Peterson 1988: 8).
A recent analysis of stable isotopes in human bones from the tombs at Machu Picchu (Turner
et al. 2010: 524) established that many of these individuals ate raw lima beans throughout
their life, and eventually only one time cooked or boiled.
Margaret Towle (1961: 45 and 53) was able to document Canvalia and lima beans in her study
of Pachacamac under Inca occupation: this was confirmed by DeNiro and Hastorf (1985: 113).
Common Bean [Fréjol, Ahuihua, Alorma, Biik, Chaucha, Porotillo] (Phaseolus vulgaris)
On Sunday 4th November 1492, barely three weeks after having first stepped on American soil,
Christopher Columbus saw areas sown with “fabas” to the north of the island of Cuba whose
shape was quite different from those grown in Spain (Kaplan 2000: 271).
195
Elmo Leon
For American aboriginal populations beans were and still are a very rich source of protein,
and are also low in fat (except for seed oil), sodium and bad cholesterol (Sathe and
Despande 2003). Its delicate cultivation conditions notwithstanding, beans are by far the
most cultivated legume in the world, and for many populations they are the source of
meat-replacing protein.
According to both authors Asia is nowadays the first world producer of beans with 48.8%
of the total output, followed by Latin America and the Caribbean with 26.98%, and Mexico
with 7.48%. Although Peru is below these levels, it has varieties that indicate the significance
Phaseolus vulgaris had in the Andes. For instance the muña variety can be catalogued as
a popcorn bean because it bursts when cooked, albeit not as spectacularly as its maize
counterpart (National Research Council 1989a: 12).
Although not as widely disseminated as maize, beans are instead grown in a wider range of
ecological tiers. Graham and Ranalli (1997) prepared a significant compilation regarding the
origin, morphology, and domestication of beans. The major conclusions they reached is that
beans originated in America and are now globally distributed from 52°N (e.g. Quebec) to 32°S
(Santiago de Chile), and from 0 to 3,000 masl. Human intervention in this process is beyond
question.
It should also be pointed out that the American Phaseolus genus includes 160 species, five of
which were domesticated in pre-Hispanic times; this includes both common beans (P. vulgaris
L.) and lima beans (P. lunatus L.). Cultivated bean varieties are known archaeologically from
North America up to Chile (Kaplan and Lynch 1999).
We will now go over part of the history of this major plant, both as part of the diet in the
past as well as in the present. Much has been said regarding its origins. For instance, Burkart
and Bruecher (1953) believed the wild bean found in Bolivia, Peru and Central America was the
ancestor of the domesticated bean. So at that time it was already believed that beans had
originated both in Mexico as well as in the Andes.
Vavilov in turn favoured the idea that it had originated in Mexico and Central America, but he
did not discuss this (Smith 1968: 255).
Lawrence Kaplan has probably made the greatest contribution to our knowledge of the
history of beans. Kaplan long ago presented a summary in this regard (Kaplan 1965) that he
later updated (Kaplan 1981). Kaplan discussed the closest filiation of Phaseolus vulgaris vis-à-
vis the species Phaseolus vulgaris L. Phaseolus aborigineus Buró, and Phaseolus aborigineus
var. hondurensis Burk. For Kaplan several candidates, from various places, vied for the position
of ancestor of the bean.
Kaplan likewise concluded that no scientific group had ruled out the possibility of independent
domestications in Mesoamerica and South America. He therefore believed there were three
possible scenarios. The first one posited the initial domestication of the bean in Mexico and
196
14,000 years of food in Peru
its dissemination to South America; the second one envisioned primary domestication in the
Andes followed by transportation to Mexico (i.e. the opposite of the first scenario); finally, the
third case considered independent domestication in both regions.
In a more mature account of the origins and domestication of beans, Kaplan (2000: 273-274)
explained that some traits characterised this plant whilst evolving, to wit its “gigantism” (an
increase in the size of the seed and other parts of the plant); the suppression of dispersal
mechanisms in the seed (a lower tendency of the pod to form spirals); and changing maturation
among other biochemical and physiological characteristics. There elements however have
not been properly studied genetically.
Kaplan argued that cultivated Phaseolus can be distinguished from wild ones in archaeological
sites by the size of the seeds and the structure of “indehiscent” grains (for the dispersal of
pollen and seeds). From his research, which is based not just on botanical tests but also on
recent molecular evidence, it follows that the origins of the bean definitely lie in the Andes. A
key argument of his is the posited hypothetical presence of phaseolin, the bean’s main protein
component. It turns out that all of the world’s Phaseolus —Europe, Africa and the United
Stated included—have T-type phaseolin; since it is of Andean origin, it must have first set out
from the Peruvian Andes.
Paul Gepts, from the University of California, Davis, is another scholar who has made a major
contribution to the study of beans. In the work on the genetic pool he prepared with another
colleague (Koenig and Gepts 1989), Koenig and Gepts established that whereas Mesoamerican
beans had a range that extends from Mesoamerica to Colombia, the range of Andean beans
extends instead from southern Peru to Argentina. They thus posited the presence of two
independent domestication centres.
In a subsequent study (Gepts 1990), as well as another one done in association with other
scholars (Singh et al. 1991), Gepts claims that the racial difference between Mesoamerican
and Andean beans had developed since the diversification of the wild ancestors in both areas
took place. This position reinforced his previous conclusion regarding the presence of two
independent and exclusive centres of domestication.
In a slightly more recent study than the above-mentioned one, Gepts and Debouck (1991)
claim that beans developed evolving—both in Mesoamerica and the Andes since at least
seven or eight thousand years ago—into a big leguminous plant, and a very rich source of
protein for the pre-Hispanic populations of both American regions. It is worth mentioning
that Zohary (2001) reached the same conclusion in regard to independent domestications,
both in Mesoamerica as well as in South America.
The noted ethnobotanists Dolores Piperno and Deborah Pearsall (1998: 163) in turn concluded
that the bean was domesticated in Guatemala as well as in the area of the Balsas River. They
did not, however, rule out other areas like northern Colombia, the area east of the Andes, the
wet Bolivian lowlands, and eastern Brazil.
197
Elmo Leon
Basing themselves on the information other scholars provide, Piperno and Pearsall used several
independent lines of evidence ranging from phytolith and macroremains analysis to genetic
studies to posit there were two centres of bean domestication, one for small seeds and one
for bigger seeds, which would have developed in the Peruvian Andes. Following Piperno and
Pearsall, a third centre of domestication may hypothetically have been in northern Colombia
(Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 135).
Debouck et al. (1993, including Gepts) pointed out that wild beans have been found in
concentrations in Ecuador and northern Peru, and that throughout its history Andean beans
adapted to higher altitudes than Mesoamerican ones, as well as to the typical cold climate of
these areas. In this way they added data to the characterisation of Andean beans.
Papa and (once again) Gepts (2003) used genetic analysis to insist on the presence, alongside
wild and domesticated beans, of ‘intermediate’ (under domestication) beans and the ‘frejol
de rama,’ which would have to be traced in order to complete the picture of this plant’s
domestication, at least in Mesoamerica.
Zeder et al. (2006: 146) more recently accepted that from a genetic point of view there
were two centres of bean domestication, one in Mesoamerica and one in South America, as
most positions posit. Yet unlike other students they claim no major morphological changes
separate both beans.
We should recall that beans, as Carl Sauer pointed out, was part of the triad beans-maize-
squash (as was already noted for maize), in what is an unparalleled symbiotic complex—while
maize grows tall and required sunlight and humidity, beans climb around its stalk in order to
share light and their roots hold nitrogen-fixing bacteria. Finally, the squash tends to encircle
the base of these two plants, as if it were the complex’s line of defence (Sauer 1952: 64), so
finding them together should come as no surprise.
Duccio Bonavia et al. (2009: 277) has also pointed out that combining these three plants
in meals provides most of the carbohydrates, proteins and vitamins required for nutrition,
particularly when one also consumes fruits like the cherimoya and ají, which have a large
amount of vitamins. Potatoes, sweet potatoes and cassava, tubers which abound in Peru,
provided in turn large amounts of carbohydrates and calories. This is a key observation by
Bonavia and his team, because it addresses the issue of nutritional balance in the pre-Hispanic
period.
Besides, the common bean, just like the lima bean, is a legume that has the excellent property
of fixing nitrogen in its roots. Although this is not directly consumed by human beings, it is
highly beneficial for other plants like maize, which have their growth ensured when sown
close to beans, and this may even extend to other plants (Cabieses 1996: 203-205).
Fernando Cabieses constantly mentioned that boiled pieces are perhaps more frequent on
the coast because the boiling point takes longer in the highlands, and thus requires more fuel
198
14,000 years of food in Peru
and energy. This detail is worth bearing in mind when assessing the occurrence of beans (and
the possible ways in which these were cooked) throughout the pre-Hispanic period.
Here we conclude this summary of the origins and domestication of beans, and we now
briefly turn to the bromatology of this major legume.
Beans frequently provide 300-350 kilocalories for every 100 grams. They are also rich in
complex carbohydrates, vitamins B (especially thiamine, rivoflavin, and niacin), B6 and E,
fibres, and some minerals in the form of significant amounts of calcium and iron, as well as
copper, zinc, sodium, potassium, magnesium and phosphorus. However, it is possible that
one of its most significant contents is the proteins that comprise 15-25% per seed, followed
by carbohydrates (50-75% per seed). According to Rodrigo (2000) it is worth recalling that
part of the starch found in beans resists digestion in humans and therefore acts like fibre,
thus favouring the digestive system and combatting obesity. It is also known that beans help
prevent colon cancer and reduce the amount of bad cholesterol in the blood (this is especially
true of the black bean due to its anthocyanin content). It is however known they inhibit the
fixation of several minerals in the body.
In a broader bromatological assessment, Mostacero et al. (2009: 361) claim beans are an annual
herb that has up to one thousand varieties and contains 19% protein, vitamins (A, B, B1, B2,
B5, C) and the above-cited minerals, as well as trigonelline, silicic acid, hemicellulose, and
toxoalbumin. This last substance is toxic, but it can be destroyed with prolonged cooking.
It is important that these scholars point out that dry bean seeds are an excellent diuretic, and
are also used against anaemia and malnutrition. We can wonder, just like in the case of other
resource of vegetable origin, whether the protein content of dehydrated beans rises or not.
What evidence is there of bean consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru? Beans have a long history
of research in Peruvian archaeological contexts. The first beans to be studied were part of the
pioneering research carried out at Ancón in the late nineteenth century. Graham and Ranalli
(1997) cite the analysis made by Wittmack, who published a report of his study of the Ancón
beans around 1880. As we shall now see, a series of studies documenting the discovery of
pre-Hispanic beans ensued.
But before we turn to this point what international evidence do we have, especially for
Mesoamerica? The first datum available in the scientific literature is that the earliest (wild) bean
comes from Huachichocana Cave (Jujuy), in strata dated to 7600-4700. The Mexican data are
also obviously mentioned, particularly those for Ocampo (Tamaulipas), which date to 4000-
2300 B.C. The authors however point out that new AMS dates for wild—undomesticated—
bean (Phaseolinae) samples from the well-known archaeological site of Guilá Naquitz have
been available for over ten years; once calibrated, the oldest date came to 6442 B.C. (Kaplan
y Lynch 1999: 264). In general terms we see that Mesoamerican beans date to the Middle to
Late Holocene, which is when the process of domestication must have begun.
199
Elmo Leon
As regards variability, the authors show that whereas there are two varieties of Phaseolus
vulgaris (1 and 11) in Mexico, in Peru there is just one variety (Pv4) at Guitarrero Cave; however,
the discussion of the materials found in this cave will show the latter variety is older. It has
also been stressed that both the Mexican and the Peruvian findings share two characteristics—
they are both domesticated, and they come from dry areas. It is known that Phaseolus vulgaris
grows and develops in more humid places, so Kaplan and Lynch suggest they may have even
been domesticated a long time before the dates shown.
If we list the remains of pre-Hispanic beans, we clearly have to carry out an in-depth
examination of the finds made by the excavations undertaken at Guitarrero Cave (2850 masl)
in the Callejón de Huaylas. These remains date no less than to the Early Holocene, quite
literally to just after the ice layers of the Younger Dryas glaciation retreated.
Kaplan et al. (1973: 77) presented the first radiocarbon dates for bean seeds from this cave.
They analysed at least thirty seeds from the lowest strata. In their observations the beans
had at least two colour compositions, dark red (red-purple) and red-dark brown (similar to
the Ayacucho variety). They also had a varied shape: rounded ones, more flattened ones, and
kidney-shaped beans. Five round-shaped beans and two pods in this series gave a radiocarbon
date of 6531 B.C. We should bear in mind that Kaplan and his team had already anticipated in
1973 that the beans would date to at least 6000 B.C. Once calibrated, this statement confirms
their first claim.
Even assuming the critiques regarding the radiocarbon chronology are “lateral” critiques (León
2007), this still leaves open the possibility that the presence of domesticated beans in these
strata does in fact date to ca. 8500 B.C. because in Kaplan’s original report (1980: 145-148) they
were recorded in level IIa (i.e. ca. 9000 B.C.), and then in the following levels (especially in the
reliable level IId, i.e. 7800-7300 B.C. The persistence and continuity of beans in the various
preceramic strata is an argument for their continuous consumption since they were first
eaten. For Smith this continuity (as was noted by Bonavia 1982: 321) amounts to domestication
because he conclusively established that the beans from Guitarrero Cave’s Complex II were
already domesticated, hence the presence of domesticated beans around 9200 B.C.
It was in these circumstances that new radiocarbon measurements were made using AMS,
which yielded different dates. For instance, Kaplan and Lynch (1999: 265, table 1) reported
the date for a domesticated bean seed in Complex IId that I calibrated to 2903 B.C. It should
be noted that in a subsequent study Kaplan himself questioned the accuracy of the AMS
method in regard to this type of plant. The dates clearly are not fully consistent, but given the
contexts and the massive amount of other remains we can be certain (even after discarding
the oldest dates) that at least in Guitarrero Cave, beans were quite probably under cultivation
during the seventh millennium B.C. on the Santa River Valley floor (Lynch 1973: 77).
From the standpoint of size, we should bear in mind that when studying the beans from all of
the excavation levels at Guitarrero Cave, Kaplan (1980) concluded that the size of the seeds
had not changed, and that they were even smaller in other contemporary archaeological sites.
200
14,000 years of food in Peru
For Kaplan this can only be explained if the process of domestication began much earlier than
the most ancient finds made at Guitarrero Cave, i.e. probably during the Early Holocene as was
suggested above, immediately after or (perhaps) simultaneously with the glacial thawing of
Younger Dryas, as of 10800 B.C. This suggests, as Kaplan noted, that the beans of the varieties
found were domesticated in Peru independently of Mexico.
Following the chronology we come next to the Ayacucho Project (MacNeish 1981: 162), which
also documented beans in Pikimachay Cave, in strata they dated to around 4100 B.C. to 6000
B.C. There is however no specific published ethnobotanic report that supports this type of
scientific information. Despite the contradictions present in the final reports of the Ayacucho
study as regards this plant (cf. Bonavia 1982: 321) and in light of new evidence, we can at least
raise the possibility that in Ayacucho the beans actually do date to the Middle Holocene, but
here we are fully within the realm of speculation.
As part of the AMS preceramic-bean dating project, Kaplan and Lynch (1999: 265, table 1)
published one date for a bean seed from Chilca (12BVII, House XIII), which is south of Lima,
and which gave a calibrated result of 4406 B.C. Although in this case we also do not have
specific analyses, we can raise the possibility that this bean had already been domesticated
and that it was eaten by the ancient Lima population at least during the fifth millennium B.C.
Conventional analyses are still however required in order to corroborate this hypothesis.
Paloma, a Middle-Late Preceramic (ca. 6000-2500 B.C.) site that comprises huts and burials lies
in the same area. Here Robert Benfer (2008: 378) reported having found beans that go back to
at least 3630 B.C. (level 200). This bean was already domesticated, as was shown by Weir and
Dering (1986: 28).
Leguminous plants that perhaps include beans have been found relatively frequently in
Pachamachay Cave (Junín), at around 4300 masl (Pearsall 1978-1980: 66-67), since at least 2155 B.C.
Remains of Phaseolus sp. (which can be either beans or lima beans) have more recently been
reported at Quebrada de los Burros a site in a dry environment on the Tacna Littoral. The
dates average to 5400-4800 B.C. (Chévalier 2012a, 2012b: 465).
Some bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) skins were also found at La Galgada, a site in Tablachaca
Canyon (Ancash), and have dates that range from ca. 2600 to 1800 B.C. (Smith 1988: 130).
Rafael Vega-Centeno (2007) found the remains of bean seeds on the Central Coast at Cerro
Lampay, in the Fortaleza Valley to the north of the department of Lima. These seeds were in
a context that has been assumed to be food refuse and have been dated between 2410 B.C.
and 2064 B.C.
The chronology of the well-known site of Caral is almost contemporary with that of Cerro
Lampay and extends from 2585 to 1938 B.C. Shady et al. (2001) reported having found beans,
but the full evidence has yet to be presented. It is equally important in this regard pointing
201
Elmo Leon
out that some of the beans found at this site had traces of having been scorched, so this is a
good piece of evidence (and one of the few) that beans were exposed to fire, perhaps roasted
or grilled (cf. Flores Blanco 2006).
The site of Caballete in the Fortaleza Valley has more recently been excavated (Haas et al. 2013)
and starch grains of the Phaseolus genus were found. This does not rule the possibility that these
are actually beans. The interesting thing here is that these residues were over the surface of stone
tools that were perhaps used to grind or prepare this legume. Given that the context dates to 2540
B.C., this would be one of the first pieces of evidence of bean ‘milling’ on the coasts of Peru.
Feldman (1980: 317) has also reported finding beans at Áspero, which is almost on the Supe
River mouth and has a similar chronology.
Thomas Patterson and Edward Moseley (1968: 117) noted the presence, during the excavation
of the Ancón sites, of beans from this same period that come from the Playa Hermosa phase,
which averages to 2634 B.C. The available archaeological documentation is insufficient.
What is clear is that beans were eaten at El Paraíso, a site in the lower Chillón Valley north of
Lima, since ca. 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 280).
Another piece of evidence from the Peruvian coast comes from the site of Alto Salaverry in
the Moche Valley, where domesticated beans were definitely present around 1600 B.C., as was
confirmed by Bonavia (1982: 322).
Pampa de Llamas, an archaeological site in the lower Casma Valley, held bean remains (Ugent
et al 1984: 420-422) that date to 2088-1243 B.C., whilst Las Haldas, which is south of the Casma
Valley, had beans that dated to 1328-390 B.C. Beans were consumed in this same zone, as was
corroborated by the excavations the Pozorskis (Ugent et al. 1984: 422) carried out at sites such
as Pampa Rosario and San Diego, which date to 800-300 B.C.
Kaplan and Lynch (1999: 266) have presented four bean seed dates from Huacaloma, a site in
Cajamarca, which date to 763 B.C.-A.D. 19.
It can be said, still within the first millennium B.C., that beans were also documented during
the study of the Paracas Necropolis burial bundles found in the Paracas Peninsula, in the
modern department of Ica (Tello and Mejía Xesspe 1979: 473).
The beans found during the Cupisnique occupation of Huaca Prieta, in the Chicama Valley,
must have a similar chronology. The same thing has been show through the study of the
faecal remains or coproliths from this site (Callen 1965: 335).
Beans have been found at Ancón—but these finds have no absolute chronology (Towle 1961:
54)—as well as in the excavation of Cerrillos, a site in the upper Ica Valley, in an Early Paracas
context that dates to ca. 800-600 B.C. (Splitstoser 2009: 94).
202
14,000 years of food in Peru
It is well-known that the Mochica, Nasca and Chimu profusely depicted beans on their
ceramic pieces (e.g. Vargas 1962: 109). Vargas believes beans may have been cultivated by these
cultures in the inter-Andean mesothermal valleys.
The evidence for bean consumption abounds on the North Coast, particularly since the
beginning of the Christian era with the coming of the Moche. Shelia Pozorski (1979: 170)
reported finding beans, albeit in very small amounts, in archaeological sites in the vicinity
of the Moche Valley like Gramalote (1800 B.C.), huacas with Early Moche and Early Chimu
occupations in this same valley, and even in the city of Chan Chan.
Even so, the low presence of beans thus far is low in comparison with what is found in all of
the typical North Coast iconography, where this legume so frequently appears.
The site of Puerto Moorin, in the Virú Valley, was occupied from about the first to the fourth
centuries A.D. Here Ericson et al. (1989: 73) studied faecal remains that show beans were
frequently eaten at this time, which is contemporary with the beginning of the Mochica
culture, down even to the time of the Wari. This verifies bean consumption in this part of the
North Coast.
176 bean skins have also been found at Huaca del Sol, in the lower Moche Valley, so the
Mochica evidently consumed this legume at this site (Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 125).
Beans were likewise found at Huaca de la Luna in A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 134). In this
same study Cárdenas et al. show beans always went with maize in Mochica food (Cárdenas
et al. 1997: 138-139). It is thus possible that the Mochica also used the beneficial trio of maize-
beans-squash as was already posited.
Ryser (2008) documented the presence of beans in three sites in the Moche Valley, to wit,
Santa Rosa-Quirihuac, Ciudad de Dios, and Galindo, and one site in the Chicama Valley—El
Brujo. The analysis of all of these sites was based on 340 bean seeds. The authors [which
ones?] showed that whereas beans were more important during the Moche epoch, lima beans
were so during both the Initial Period and the Late Intermediate Period. From what we have
seen in regard to lima beans, they seem to be right in this last point.
The discovery of bean seeds in food consumption contexts in the upper Piura Valley (Loma
Valverde) certifies the Mochica from this site ate them in A.D. 350-450.
A series of hearths with burned, i.e. roasted beans —an interesting datum on Mochica
cuisine— was found at Santa Rosa-Quirihuac (which was partially mentioned above), a site
in the middle Moche Valley that corresponds to the Gallinazo and Early Moche cultures,
probably around A.D. 200. What is even more impressive is that at least ten types of beans
have been identified, thus showing its intensive cultivation and handling. They were found in
association with maize and some as yet unidentified cactus species (Gumerman and Briceño
2003: 230-231).
203
Elmo Leon
Beans were found during the excavation of the site of Pampa Grande (Northern Mochica, in
Lambayeque), which dates to A.D. 711-800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 33).
Like lima beans, the bean was frequently part of the food eaten by the people of the Nasca
culture (Silverman and Proulx 2002: 52). It has been found for instance at Casa Vieja, a site in
the lower Calango Valley (Ica) in a Final Nasca and Early Wari Empire context, and was dated
indirectly to A.D. 530-820 (cf. Unkel 2006: 111).
Still in the context of the Nasca culture, Towle (1961: 54) reported beans both at Cahuachi as
well as at Estaquería. A large amount of beans was more recently found at the ceremonial
centre of Cahuachi, not just in excavation contexts but also in faecal remains as well as in
some human burials in this site (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 3-4). Piacenza and Pieri were able to
reconstruct different modes of preparation such as toasting. It can thus be posited that the
Nasca ate toasted beans. Even more fascinating is the fact that some evidence was found that
pods were directly removed using parts of the petiole, much like it is done nowadays using
the thumbnail. These are just a few of the scant data available that opens a window on the
possible Nasca culinary process.
Bonavia (2009: 242) reports the presence of bean seeds at a site called PV35-4 that is
immediately north of the Huarmey River mouth, on the littoral at La Honda beach. These
beans were roasted [asados] in a hearth alongside cassava, maize and other items probably
around A.D. 800, i.e. in the Wari epoch. The authors pointed out that in this hearth besides
beans there were more skins from the other seeds. The beans were of reddish brown colour,
just like the ones we recall from Guitarrero Cave.
Ugent and Peterson (1988: 7) cite Wittmack, one of the pioneers of Peruvian ethnobotanics,
who analysed the Ancón remains that presumably date from the Late Intermediate Period
(A.D. 1000-1460), and in which beans were found. Cohen found beans that date to ca. A.D.
1000 at the Tank Site in Ancón itself (Cohen 1978: 35).
Beans were still being consumed on the North coast in A.D. 1000-1460, albeit not in the same
intensity as in Moche times. They were eaten in several archaeological sites in the lower
Lambayeque Valley at least from the time of the Cupisnique (1300 B.C.) to that of the late
phase Sicán culture (ca. A.D. 1400) (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596).
Lockard (2005: 208, 211) also found significant amounts of bean remains during the Mochica
(A.D. 600-800) and Chimu occupations of Galindo, a site in the Middle Moche Valley.
Cutright (2009: 144) found remains of beans somewhat more to the north in a Chimu site called
Pedregal, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, but the percentages show it was not intensively
eaten. Remains of beans were likewise found at Cerro La Virgen, a Chimu site within the
context of the citadel of Chan Chan, where they comprised a major part of this people’s diet
(Keatinge 1975: 226).
204
14,000 years of food in Peru
It is also clear that the Chimu people from the Central Coast ate beans during their final phase
(A.D. 1470-1523), as was shown by Perry (2002: 337) when he found the remains of this plant at
Manchán, a site in the lower Casma Valley.
Nelson and Bellido Cerda (2010: 50) reported the presence of beans at this same time on
the Central Coast in the Huaura Valley in at least three Chancay sites—Rontoy, Quipico, and
Chambara—that have a radiocarbon-dated chronology of A.D. 1265-1625-
Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) also documented bean seeds at Los Pinos, a Chancay site.
Turning now to the presence of beans in the Andean highlands we find this plant was apparently
also cultivated in Wanka sites (taking Pancán as reference) between 3200 and 3900 masl in the
Mantaro Valley (Junín), since at least A.D. 193 up to the Inca occupation (Hastorf 2002: 157). Hastorf
and DeNiro (1985) recorded bean remains embedded in some vessels at these sites that were used
to cook them. Their study showed they were boiled and kneaded and then cooked, but the reason
that explains this evidence is not clear. It is also intriguing that based on starch identification, the
analysis showed beans were prepared in vessels or pots where no other type of grain was cooked.
In Inca times there was an intensive consumption and cultivation of beans, as is evinced by Cohen
(1975: 50), who identified some 5,500 bean seeds at Panquilma, in the middle Lurín Valley south of
Lima, in an excavation that was just a few metres deep. These finds should date to ca. A.D. 1460-
1520. Margaret Towle (1961: 55) also found beans in Inca contexts at the site of Pachacamac.
Tarwi, Chocho, Lupin [Tarwi, Chocho, Lupino] (Lupinus mutabilis Sweet)
Tarwi is a fabaceae that belongs to the family of Andean legumes. Soukup (1980: 251) claims the
term “lype” is derived from the bitterness of its grains. It is often cultivated in small amounts
on the edges of the chakras (fields). The water it is boiled in to remove its toxicity (which is
inherent to the plant’s defence against insects) and its bitterness is sometimes used precisely
as an insecticide, a laxative, or even against gastro-parasitic diseases (due to its alkaloid content,
particularly sparteine and lupinine), diabetes, kidney diseases, and as a tonic.
Tarwi is a privileged plant as it has a great nitrogen-fixing capacity—up to 100 kilos per
hectare. It also easily adapts to different environments, be they either temperate valleys or
the high altitudes of the Andes, and is strongly resistant to climatic impacts, droughts, rainfall,
temperature, altitude and so forth (Jacobsen and Mujica 2006: 459).
As for bromatology, this seems to be the plant with the highest protein content in the Peruvian
Andes. According to the National Research Council (1989a: 13) its roots are extremely rich in protein
(40%), which is more than all beans (and more than soybeans or peanuts). It includes important
amino acids for humans like lysine and cystine, a large amount of polysaccharides, and abundant
vegetable oil that surpass soybeans. Tarwi has in fact been called the Andean soybean.
205
Elmo Leon
Gross et al. and his team have also analysed the biochemical components of tarwi, i.e. 43.1%
protein (the mean being 41-51%), 20.9% oil (14-24%), 26.4% carbohydrates, 9.8% water, 6.8%
fibre, and 2.8% ash (Gross et al. 1989: 28).
The galactose contained by tarwi (9.87%) also stands out—it is by far the largest in the Andean
assemblage followed by stachyose with 4.67%. The low consumption of tarwi is probably due
to its bitter taste, which is why the aborigines soak it in water for one or two days in order to
lower it. Tarwi grows at 800 metres of altitude, but it is more frequently found at 3,000 masl.
In the Andes it is usually served in stews, in soups, and so on.
Mostacero et al. (2009: 366) note that Lupinus mutabilis is an annual herb that grows up to
one and a half metres high and holds 42% raw protein. It has to be washed for some five or six
days as has been already noted in order to eliminate its major toxic and narcotic substances
that include saponin (Herrera 1942a: 26).
Jacobsen and Mujica (2006) made a more recent and complete assessment that emphasises
the large number of proteins in tarwi and their alimentary quality. According to this study
this is a resource that can ensure nutritional security for the Andean people. Both scholars
however regret the lack of concern Andean authorities have for the increasing interest this
plant is raising.
As for fatty acids, Jacobsen and Mujica (2006: 461) mainly include 40% of oleic acid (Omega
9), 37% of linoleic acid (Omega 6), and 2.9% of linolenic acid (Omega 3). To this we must add
13% of palmitic acid [aceite palmítico].
This same study claims that quinoa-tarwi-potato is a mutually beneficent crop combination.
Jacobsen and Mujica also note that It is frequently consumed by humans as mote, or in
salads, cream soups, mazamorra, and the well-known cebiche serrano. “Tarwi milk” is also
recommended in case of lactose intolerance.
Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 46) says that tarwi was frozen in order to concentrate its
proteins and lower its content of alkaloids and bitter ingredients. This datum is of the utmost
importance because it tells us of the technique used to alter the original conditions of our
resources in order to benefit more from them, as is the case with the greater availability of
proteins.
What do we know of the origin and domestication of tarwi? Actually very little. According to
the National Research Council (1989b: 188), tarwi was domesticated at least some 1,500 years
ago, but do not provide any details. In any case this plant has been cultivated in the cold
climate areas of tropical zones and in high altitudes between 800 and 3,000 masl. Its mature
state makes it resistant even to frosts.
Heiser (1979: 319) mentioned the presence of several native species of tarwi both in Bolivia as
well as in Peru, and this indirectly suggests that it had its origin in the Andes. In this publication
206
14,000 years of food in Peru
that is over thirty years old, Heiser then drew attention to the fact that more research was
still needed in order to clear this plant’s taxonomic issue. To date not much progress has been
made in this regard.
Margaret Towle (1961: 48) tried to synthesise the information regarding tarwi. She pointed
out that it grows naturally in the Andes from Colombia to the north, to Bolivia in the
south, which is what Heiser in general claimed. In pointing out that tarwi’s centre of
occurrence lies in Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia, Jacobsen and Mujica (2006) suggest that this
would be its initial origin area and add that 83 varieties of Lupinus have been documented
in this region.
Is there any pre-Hispanic evidence of this legume? There is, but it actually is scant. Margaret
Towle and Hans Horkheimer mentioned a South Coast Wari iconographic design in the
Pacheco style (ca. A.D. 800-900), so it can be assumed that it was known and consumed in
Ayacucho at that time.
Pearsall (1978-1980: 66-67) found remains of Lupinus in Pachamachay Cave at about 4300 masl,
albeit in wild and undomesticated state; no radiocarbon date is available, but we can assume
it dates to the Late Preceramic, ca. 3,000 B.C.
Remains of tarwi were found in three Mochica human burials excavated at Dos Cabezas, a site
in the lower Jequetepeque Valley (Geyer 2003). Moseley et al. (2008: 83) determined three
radiocarbon dates between A.D. 536 and A.D. 580. The validity of this type of pollen from this
site has been questioned as was already seen in the case of other plants, particularly due to
the altitude at which this legume appears (in a non-Mochica area), and because the type of
pollen is hard to identify (Reinhard et al. 2007: 535).
Tarwi has also been documented at the site of Pampa Grande (Moche V) in Lambayeque, and
it dated to ca. A.D. 800 (Pozorski and Pozorski 1981: 33).
Christine Hastorf (2002: 157) showed tarwi was consumed by the Wanka people specifically at
Umpamalca in the upper Mantaro Valley (in the modern department of Junín), between 3,200
and 3,900 masl. The dates associated with this plant’s consumption go back at least to the phase
Wanka I, i.e. A.D. 193, but its ingestion increased around A.D. 1000. We should add in this regard
that this is one of the few studies that have tried to find food adhered to the inside walls of the
vessels in which it was prepared. It was thus found that tarwi was boiled and kneaded in order to
be cooked in this area during the first centuries of the Christian era (Hastorf and DeNiro 1985: 190).
Pacay [Pacay, Huaba, Ina, Inchipa, Pacae, Senan] (Inga feuilleei)
The pacay, which is commonly known nowadays as pacay, pacae or guaba in Peru, is a member
of the leguminous family It depends on the humid environment in which it is found and can
resist temperatures over 25 °C.
207
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

Mostacero et al. (2009: 308) mention that this is a tree that grows up to 15-25 metres high and
is distributed over various areas in the Andes, from the North and Central Coast to the jungle,
has appetising fruits, and strong wood.

Pacay perhaps had its origin in the lower section of the Eastern Andean cordillera but it can
grow at higher altitudes, a trait that made it important for the Inca (Dillehay and Piperno
2008). From there it spread to the Peruvian coast. Nowadays it is widely disseminated not
just throughout the Andean area, but also in the tropical lowlands of America. The shadow
it casts is highly appreciated on the North Coast, its wood is a good fuel, and the pods are
picked even by children. The present writer even learned how to make them fall off using
simple slings.

The significance of pacay’s fruit was recorded by the chronicles. At the time Europeans arrived
to Peru the pacay was cultivated both on the coast as well as in the highlands, i.e. in the
intermontane valleys. Pedro Pizarro for instance tells that Atahualpa sent a basketful of pacay
to Francisco Pizarro as a present (National Research Council 1989b: 277).

Patiño (2002: 182) claims pacay is Quechua whereas guaba is Taíno, from the northern South
American zone. Patiño says that the conquistadors led by Pizarro had already discovered
pacay at Puerto Viejo when they arrived to Ecuador, and Cieza says it was grown on the North Figura 12. Cerámica representando a pacay o guaba (Cultura Moche, ca. 400 d.C.). (MUSEO LARCO. LIMA-PERÚ).
Coast of Peru.

Pacay was later on grown in Lima as fuel and not for the fruit. Patiño says it was evidently the department of Lambayeque. Here Dillehay and Piperno (2008) reported pacay starch in
grown in the pre-Hispanic period. Here it is worth noting Patiño thoroughly documented the dental plaque found in the molars of skeletons found in archaeological excavations. The
pacay consumption in Central America, the Orinoco River basin, Brazil, Ecuador, and Colombia dates for these molars range from 7142 B.C. to 5802 B.C. Pacay was thus clearly eaten at that
since at least the mid-seventeenth century. time on the North Coast.

The bromatology of this plant indicates above all that it holds abundant sugars, water, and
vitamin C. According to the National Research Council (1989a: 14) its pulp is so sweet that it
could be called “ice cream beans”. Pacay in fact contains 1% protein and 15% carbohydrates,
mostly sugars. This fruit’s plant has great potential due to its property of incorporating nitrogen
to the soil. It also has 53% calories, 85% water, and 1.4% vitamin C (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 140-141).
We now turn to the archaeological evidence of pacay consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru. As
usual, our ancestors depicted it long with other edible resources, especially on pottery. Vargas
(1962: 110) reports its occurrence on Moche and especially Chimu ceramics (Figure 12). Margaret
Towle in turn mentioned the depictions of this plant on Moche, Chimu, and Inca vessels,
as well as on some from Chimbote. In his ethnobotanical study, Soukup (1980: 220) noted
there is significant evidence of the presence of pacay fruits and leaves in Peru’s pre-Hispanic
tombs. Herrera (1942: 28) believed this was the favourite fruit of the Inca, who cultivated it
abundantly. Let us now go over the evidence in chronological order.
The most reliable information regarding the most ancient consumption of pacay in pre-
Hispanic Peru comes from Nanchoc, a tributary of the Middle Zaña Valley some 500 masl in
A find of similar age comes from the highlands of Ancash. This is a pacay seed found in stratum
IId of Guitarrero Cave in the Callejón de Huaylas, at an altitude 2850 masl (Smith 1980a: 98).
This stratum has been approximately dated to 7800-7300 B.C., but this must be taken just as a
reference because the stratigraphy was somewhat altered, as was see when discussing beans
and maize. Even so we must not forget that Duccio Bonavia had already drawn attention to
the taxonomic determination done by T. C. Earl Smith himself, who believed that all that had
been found in all levels of Guitarrero Cave was instead Inga adenophylla.
Deborah Pearsall (1999: 275) makes a far more modest claim in regard to the apparition and
consumption of pacay in pre-Hispanic Peru, and states that the first evidence date to ca.
2600 B.C. Here it must be pointed out that in general, a series of pieces of evidence on pacay
cluster from the fourth millennium B.C., particularly on the coast due to the well-known
conditions for preservation in this zone.
Pacay (Inga feuilleei) remains have been found in very small amounts at Bandurria, a monumental
preceramic centre close to the modern city of Huacho. It may thus have been part of the food
eaten by the people who lived there in 3170-1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 135).

208 209
Elmo Leon
Pacay remains were excavated in the archaeological garbage at Cerro Lampay (Fortaleza Valley,
north of Lima) associated with a preceramic temple (Vega-Centeno 2007). The radiocarbon
results gave a period of time of 2410-2064 B. C.
Mercedes Cárdenas (1999) reported the occurrence of pacay remains at Las Salinas de Chao, a
site in the lower Chao Valley, with dates around 2000 B.C.
The presence of pacay has also been documented at Caral (Shady et al. 2001) in the Supe
Valley north of Lima, with an indirect date of 2585-1938 B.C. For Shady and Leyva (2003: 115)
pacay was the second most abundant plant at this archaeological site with 32%, and so may
have been part of the food eaten by the early population of this site in 2595-1951 B.C.
The pacay remains found at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey Valley, date to about
the same time, i.e. 4000-1480 B.C. (Bonavia 1982: 149).
A series of botanical remains were found at the monumental site of La Galgada in Tablachaca
Canyon (in the modern department of Ancash), at about 1100 masl Smith (1988: 130). These
remains were part of the food, and inside them several pacay skins and six seeds were
discovered, which must have been eaten in 2600-1316 B.C.
Mark Nathan Cohen (1978: 29) observed the occurrence of pacay seeds in the survey of La
Pampa—a site that dates to ca. 3090 B.C.—in the context of the research undertaken by Lanning
and Patterson. It is interesting that pacay leaves were found above all in camelid faecal remains,
which means they were feed in this way (just like with carob leaves, as will be seen below).
Quilter et al. (1991: 280) also reported the presence of pacay seeds at the site of El Paraíso,
which goes back to 2190 B.C. and is very close to the Chillón River mouth north of Lima.
Thus far we notice the frequent consumption of pacay fruits (and eventually leaves) on the
Peruvian coast since ca. 3000 B.C. We now turn to the evidence of this legume as of the first
millennium B.C.
The Pozorskis have undertaken prolific excavations in the Casma Valley that have paid special
attention to the valley’s ethnobotanics, which were then analysed by Donald Ugent. They also
documented pacay at the sites of Pampa Rosario and San Diego, and dated to ca. 800-300
B.C. (Ugent 1984: 422).
Ugent and Peterson (1988: 8) noticed the presence of pacay in the Paracas Necropolis funerary
bundles from the Paracas Peninsula, dated from around 400 B.C. onwards. Pacay remains have
also been excavated at Cerrillos, a site in the upper Ica Valley that has dates that go back to
the Early Paracas epoch, ca. 800-600 B.C. (Splitstoser 2009: 94).
Pacay was also eaten by the Cupisnique. Towle (1961: 48) reported it was found alongside
Cupisnique pottery at Huaca Prieta, evidently within the first millennium B. C.
210
14,000 years of food in Peru
The Mochica culture also included pacay in its food. Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 125) showed
it was eaten in the lower Moche Valley at Huaca del Sol, during the first centuries of the
Christian era. Cárdenas et al. (1997: 134) found the same thing at Huaca de la Luna, where it had
dates that ranged to A.D. 400-750.
The northern Moche also ate pacay. Geyer et al. (2003) examined the faeces from the burials
at the site of Dos Cabezas (in the Jequetepeque River mouth). It was established that at least
two of these individuals had eaten pacay before death. The indirect dating of this context
gave A.D.536-580 (Moseley et al. 2008: 83).
Ericson et al. (1989: 74) documented pacay remains in human faecal remains from Puerto
Moorin, a site on the North Coast’s Virú Valley, which dates to ca. the first and the fourth
centuries A.D. There is also other evidence in this same region of the Virú Valley that indicates
it was eaten during the Wari epoch. This means pacay consumption was continuous in this
area, where it has actually been found in human excrement.
Lockard (2005: 208) furthermore documented pacay remains at Galindo, a site in the mid-
Moche Valley, both in its Mochica (A.D. 600-800) and its Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations.
The research undertaken by Shelia Pozorski (1979: 170) in the archaeological sites in the
Moche Valley prior to that of Lockard’s showed pacay was eaten only in sites with a Chimu-
Inca occupation as of A.D. 1000. Cutright (2009: 144) found pacay remains at Pedregal, an
archaeological site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley. From all this information it thus follows
that at this site there was a clear continuity in its consumption.
Moving on to the Central coast, Mark Cohen noticed the occurrence of a large amount of
pacay leaves at Cerro Campana, a site belonging to the Lima culture (ca. A.D. 100-600). The
leaves were found in association with llama excrement, which made Cohen believe it was
used as fodder for this animal.
The Nasca, somewhat more to the south, did not avoid consuming pacay. It has in fact been
claimed that it was one of their major food sources (Silverman and Proulx 2002: 52). In the
pioneer book on Peruvian ethnobotany, Margaret Towle (1961: 47) had already noted that
pacay was frequently identified at the shrine of Cahuachi in a clearly Nasca cultural context,
i.e. one that dated to the first centuries of the Christian era. The Italian archaeological mission
at Cahuachi subsequently reported finding pacay in significant amounts, so it is assumed to
have been evidently eaten and not just used as an offering in rituals (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 3).
Towle herself reported pacay nor far away at Estaquería, Huaca del Oro, and in the burials
in the zone of Ocucaje. She also pointed out that Paul Mangelsdorf had documented it in
Paracas funerary bundles, as was also done by Ugent and Peterson (see above).
Pacay consumption in this zone persisted once the Nasca had been annexed to the Wari
Empire. David Beresford-Jones (2004: 42) thus found pacay remains that date to the Middle
Horizon (ca. A.D. 600-900) in his excavations at Samanca, in the lower Ica Valley. In this same
211
Elmo Leon
Final Nasca and early Wari Empire context, Roque et al. (2003) have published the finding of
pacay leaves, seeds, fruits and even flowers in domestic contexts at the site of Casa Vieja,
in the lower Ica (Calango) Valley. Although no radiocarbon dates are available for this site,
indirect dating using the Palpa master sequence suggests they perhaps average to A.D. 530-
820 (cf. Unkel 2006: 111).
The Wari occupation at the site of Bering, in the modern-day department of Arequipa,
corresponds to a similar period of time. Here the remains of pacay eaten by its inhabitants
have been found (Tung 2012: 49).
Just like on the North Coast and the Central-South Coast, pacay was evidently also known
and consumed on the Central Coast. For example, Towle noted the use of pacay leaves to
cover burials both at Ancón and in the Chillón zone. Although she did not provide date
regarding the chronology of this type of find, it seems to have been intensively used on the
Central Coast. We should recall in this regard that Ugent and Peterson (1988: 7) mentioned
that Wittmack was able to identify pacay fruits among the remains found by the excavations
Reiss and Stübel carried out at Ancón, which dated to ca. A.D. 1000-1460.
Pacay was apparently also eaten by the people of the Chancay culture because it has been
found at Los Pinos, a site in the Huaura Valley (Lanfranco and Eggers 2010: 79).
Mark Nathan Cohen reports the occurrence of significant amounts of pacay seeds at Panquilma,
a site in the middle Lurín Valley, precisely in A.D. 1460-1532, i.e. during its Inca occupation
(Cohen 1975: 58). The same thing happened in Inca times as is shown by the analysis made
at Pachacamac first by Margaret Towle (1961: 47) and then by DeNiro and Hastorf (1985: 113).
It is thus clear that pacay was eaten on the Central Coast shortly before and during the Inca
occupation of this zone.
Bean [Pea?] [Chocho or “Fréjol Coral”] (Erythrina sp.)
Erythrina sp. is a leguminous plant of tropical and subtropical origin. It is usually used due
because of the medicinal or ritual properties it has due to its chemical content, but some
varieties have edible fruits. Although here we cannot define the species it probably was
Erythrina edulis, which is cultivated and whose seeds are edible. This is a first-rate food
because it has 24% protein, 50% carbohydrates, and a high phosphorus and iron content, so
it is more important from the standpoint of protein than other Andean cereals like maize, or
tubers like the potato (Mostacero et al. 2008: 347-348).
At present only two examples of its consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru have been recorded.
Smith (1988: 130) noticed the presence of this type of legume at La Galgada in Tablachaca
Canyon in the modern-day province of Pallasca, in the department of Ancash and at about
1100 masl, where it was probably eaten since 2600 B.C. It has also been found at Pachacamac,
where it was dated to the Inca occupation (DeNiro and Hastorf 1985: 113).
212
14,000 years of food in Peru
Carob Tree [Algarrobo, Garroba, Guarango, Tacco] (Prosopis sp.)
Although it is not a domesticated plant, the carob tree has been manipulated by Peruvian pre-
Hispanic groups in such a way that Duccio Bonavia et al. (2009: 276) correctly called it a “stimulated”
plant due to its high yield and consumption in pre-Columbian Peru, where it gave two harvests
per year. In order to summarise the main data available on this important genus, before beginning
our review we shall use data taken almost exclusively from Beresford-Jones’ doctoral dissertation
(2004) and Pasiecznik et al.’s monograph (2001) due to their up-to-date data.
Prosopis is a nitrogen-fixing tree that can withstand extreme conditions of drought heat,
alkalinity, and salinity. It is even reborn several times after being cut. The carob tree is in fact
the most dominant tree in the vicinity of water sources, and the most characteristic tree in
the American desert ecosystems. Both Prosopis and Acacia provide high-quality nutrients for
animals and humans and one type of fermented beverage that was still grown some decades
ago on the North Coast of Peru, and even in Ica (Bonavia 1982: 331). Carob trees provide the input
for timber, fuel, charcoal, fibre, cordage and even glue, as was just noted. Nord et al. (2004) for
instance observed that soil quality improved at Pampa de Chaparrí, an archaeological site on
the North Peruvian Coast, wherever carob leaves fell on the agricultural due to the hydrogen
they provided. The knowledge of the properties of the carob tree persisted even in colonial
times. There are many references that date to the beginning of the Spanish occupation of Peru
that describe how its fruits were turned into flour in order to make bread. When the present
writer spent summer during his childhood in this zone in the 1960s, he consumed bread and
algarrobina,5 a custom that still endures.
The benefit brought about by this plant extends even to climatology. It has been shown that
the rings of trees like Prosopis pallida can record events such as Enso phenomena, and are
even used in dendrochronological studies (López et al. 2005).
The high quality of the charcoal derived from carob was noted above. Pasiecknik et al. (2001:
81-82) pointed out that Prosopis is an excellent firewood for producing caloric energy due to
its high tannin and lignin content and low humidity as it does not fracture when combusting,
nor does it give off sparks or give out much smoke. And yet it gives a strong fire and much
heat, to the point that it has been called de “wooden anthracite.” We can imagine Peru’s pre-
Hispanic populations—not just the coastal ones but also those living in the intermontane
valleys—warming themselves with the heat of burning carob, particularly on the coast.
The taxonomy of Prosopis has undergone a series of changes that we must cover before
turning to our archaeological review. It is part of the leguminous family (Fabaceae) that gives
out seeds in pods. According to Pasiecznik et al. (2001) it can be concluded that Prosopis
juliflora is found both in Mesoamerica as well as in northern South America, Prosopis pallida
is mainly found on the Peruvian-Chilean coast, and Prosopis tamarugo is found in the desert
in far-south Peru and northern Chile.
5 Syrum obtained from the Algarrobo tree.
213
Elmo Leon
The largest number of species is however concentrated from Bolivia to Argentina; in northern
Chile and Bolivia we find Prosopis chilensis while further to the south is Prosopis nigra, which has
been found in Argentinian archaeological sites from the Holocene (Beresford-Jones 2004: 45-46).
Some modifications were made after Bukart (1976) prepared his taxonomic classification but
these are essentially for Argentina, which is not of our concern here. Interested readers should
turn to the extensive monograph by Pasiecznik et al. (2001: 19-29) in this regard.
For the purposes of this book and due to the wide range of plants that have to be examined,
here we just present the conclusions that were reached by Beresford-Jones in an up-to-date
overview of the classification of Prosopis in Peru (Beresford-Jones 2004: 51-52). There are two
species in Peru, two on the coast and two in the highlands. Prosopis pallida predominates on
the coast, while Prosopis juliflora (and its hybrid, which is known as P. juliflora-P. pallida) is
found mostly on the north coast.
There are two different species in the highlands. Prosopis chilensis (Molina) Stunz, the first
species, is found mostly in dry, high altitude intermontane valleys mostly in southern Peru
but not on the coast, as was clarified after some taxonomic confusion. The fourth separate
population is Prosopis laevigata, which is found close to Calca (Cuzco) at about 3,000 masl in
southern Peru.
More recently a fifth group was defined. This is Prosopis limensis, which has been reassessed
for the North Coast of Peru. Beresford-Jones believes it is applicable for the entire Peruvian
coast (Beresford-Jones 2004: 52).
Just like other scholars, Patiño (2002: 409) believed that Prosopis chilensis was found in Peru
as well as in Bolivia, Central Chile, and north-eastern Bolivia. This is a mistake, as will be
shown in the following paragraph. When discussing Prosopis juliflora, Patiño noted that it
was called tacco in Quechua, and that this term is often used in various parts of Peru for
the “guarango.”
To conclude with the taxonomic section, Beresford-Jones concluded that Prosopis chilensis
does not exist on the Peruvian coast; what does exist are mostly Prosopis pallida, which
can be renamed Prosopis limensis (as was seen in the above-mentioned fifth group), and
the P. juliflora-P. pallida complex. This is an important observation due to the amount and
the quality of the organic materials of this kind found in excavations undertaken on the
Peruvian coast.
We now list some of the characteristics this tree has. Prosopis pallida is the biggest and can
reach from 8 to 20 metres, while Prosopis juliflora only reaches up to 12 metres high. The
roots of Prosopis pallida can reach depths of 20-25 metres, where they extract water from
the groundwater. David Beresford-Jones (2004: 102) reported finding the well-known “Huayuri
huarango” (close to the town of Palpa in Nasca), which according to studies made by the
Universidad de Huamanga and the Universidad Agraria de La Molina is 1,064 years old.
214
14,000 years of food in Peru
We now turn to the bromatology of carob seeds because these actually were part of the pre-
Hispanic diet. These have a high sugar, carbohydrate (30-75%) and protein (7-22%) content.
Both the seeds and the pods are sweet and obviously edible. Every year each tree can yield
on average 20-50 kilos of fruits in whatever environment it is in. For instance, Beresford-Jones
(2004: 88) points out that a set of studies made by the Universidad de Piura found that the
specimens of Prosopis pallida in that zone had 46% saccharose, 8-13% protein (including lysine
in particular, one of the eight essential amino acids for humans, and with one of the highest
proportions in the world at 26,000 ppm), and vitamins E, C, and potassium.
Prosopis has several applications besides its properties as food. For instance, extracts taken
from its leaves and bark are used against mouth and throat infections, ulcers, bronchitis,
general pains, and parasites. In our countries it is particularly used to treat conjunctivitis, liver
stones, and venereal diseases. Nor should we forget the benefit it provides as a cover against
sunstroke and protection against the wind, as may well have been the case on the Peruvian
coast. Yet it can also cause some harm such as the dental lesions (caries) brought about by the
consumption of the natural sugar found in this fruit (cf. Lanfranco and Eggers 2010: 88). We
also must not forget that the preparation of fermented algarrobo in Ica as a nutritious tonic
has been documented (Soukup 1980: 337).
Propopis seeds were in fact part of the pre-Hispanic alimentary stock not just because of its
properties, but also due to the sweet nature of its pericarp (Giovanetti et al. 2008). In South
America its consumption and management go back to the early Holocene. Fernández-Distel
(1986) has apparently found mortars and residues left behind by this activity, for instance at
Huachichocana Cave in the vicinity of Jujuy, in the puna of the Argentinian North-West, with
a date of over 10 ka. and in Mexico, Smith detected several decades ago the abundance of
Prosopis remains in the excavation of Tehuacán, where it dates to ca. 6500 B.C. (Smith 1967).
Pasiecznik et al. (2001: 8) divides South America into two periods as regards the use of Prosopis.
During the first period, from 6500 B.C. to A.D. 800, it was used mostly as food, fuel, and a basic
raw material. This product was developed on a more sustainable basis as of A.D. 1000. By 300
B.C. carob was in fact being used as lintel at sites like Chanquillo, in the Casma Valley (Guezzi
2007), and in buildings at Huaca Prieta around 2500 B.C. (Strong and Evans 1952).
Although the carob is always present in archaeological literature of Peru, It is not easy
documenting when it was used for human consumption because its wood was often reused
to make tools. The only references are its association with, for instance, seeds in garbage
dumps that were left behind as evidence of their consumption, and eventually the (less likely)
discovery of micro-level remains like starch or similar substances. It has been assumed that its
fruits may have been directly eaten but also cooked or toasted, as was for example the case
of Inca sites in the zone of Catamarca in Argentina (Caparelli 2011).
For Peru, Claude Chauchat (1992: 355) suggests—correctly in my opinion—that the early North
Coast people were already eating carob in the context of the Paiján culture, i.e. as of 11,000
B.C., because this tree abounds in this region; its remains have not, however, been recovered
215
Elmo Leon
in excavations due to the lack of plant preservation. And yet some type of grinding stones,
which abound at this time, may have been used to grind carob kernels for alimentary purposes.
Chauchat sees no other way in which to explain the massive presence of this type of stone tool.
Carob fragments that include remains of starch have been found at the site of Buena Vista,
where a preceramic temple was erected north of Lima, in the Chillón Valley (Duncan et al.
2009). It is worth pointing out these remains were found as an edible remain over the surface
of a squash vessel, thus showing their consumption. This site was dated to 2193-2164 B.C.
Prosopis chilensis was found at the site of Los Gavilanes, not just as macroremains but also as
a significant amount of seeds and pods and in most of the coproliths from this site, which is
in the lower Huarmey Valley and dates to 3100-1480B.C. (Bonavia 1982: 149).
The preceramic temple of Cerro Lampay developed almost at the same time in the Fortaleza
Valley north of Lima. Here Vega-Centeno (2007) documented Prosopis pallida seeds in a
context with garbage and food residues that was dated to 2410-2064 B.C.
Mercedes Cárdenas (1999) excavated carob seeds at the site of Las Salinas de Chao, among the
food refuse left behind by its population around 2000 B.C.
Reviewing the evidence in chronological order, Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) reported
finding carob in archaeological contexts which dated to 3008-339 B.C. at Puémape, a site south
of the Jequetepeque valley. This means it was eaten at Pacasmayo during the two thousand
years before the Christian era.
The same thing seems to hold true for the ceremonial site of El Paraíso in the lower Chillón
Valley north of Lima. This was shown by Quilter et al. (1991: 280), who documented the
presence of Prosopis sp. seeds in the sites rubbish, which was dated to 2150B.C. Carob wood
also seems to have been used at this time at Huaca Prieta (Towle 1961: 56).
Depictions of carobs are also present on Mochica ceramics and show their potential
consumption throughout the time this major culture developed on the North Coast. Yacovleff
and Herrera (1934, 1935) found them associated with deer hunting scenes and identified them
as Prosopis juliflora. The presence of this species in northern Peru during the first centuries of
the Christian era is thus clear. Beresford-Jones (2004: 218-219) notes that Yacovleff and Herrera
claimed carob resin could be used to repair pre-Ceramic pottery.
Carob consumption by the Mochica people in Piura is also evident. This was evinced by the
discovery of seeds in the garbage due to their consumption at Loma Valverde in the upper
Piura River (Kaulicke 1991: 414), with dates that average to A.D. 350-450. Horkheimer (1960: 78)
drew attention to the abundance of carob woods in Moche ceramic depictions.
Also on the North Coast but more to the south, in the lower Virú Valley, is the site of Puerto
Moorin; here a series of faecal remains from its ancient inhabitants in a context from the Salinar
216
14,000 years of food in Peru
culture (during the first centuries of the Christian era) have been analysed. The results obtained
by Ericson et al. (1989: 74) showed there were carob seeds in these coproliths and had therefore
been eaten. We even have evidence they were eaten in this part of Peru during the Wari epoch.
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 134) reported finding Prosopis chilensis at Huaca de la Luna at around A.D.
400-750, so the Mochica in this zone may have eaten carob pods. In this same valley, Lockard
(2005: 208, 211) found remains of Prosopis chilensis at Galindo during its Moche occupation
(A.D. 600-800).
Prosopis was also eaten by the Paracas in Ica; Prosopis limensis has been recorded at Cerrillos,
a site in the upper Ica Valley, within an Early Paracas context (ca. 800-600 B.C.) (Splitstoser
2009: 93).
The monumental site of Cahuachi, which is believed to have been a Nasca shrine, pilgrimage
centre, and cemetery, provided significant information regarding not just the use of carob
wood to raise the buildings, but also as food (Silverman 1993, Silverman and Proulx 2002:
52, Piacenza 2005). Silverman, for instance, managed to excavate over 21 kilograms of plant
remains from garbage dumps left behind after consumption, which included what she
classified as Prosopis chilensis. Cahuachi has a radiocarbon chronology that comprises more
than 100 dates, which when taken under low resolution dates gives ca. A.D. 166-956 (Nasca
8). This last date is relevant because it comes precisely from a garbage dump that held carob
seeds (but it is too old to make associations).
Silverman concluded that approximately 34% of total plant weight exclusively comprised
carob fruit. The only percentage higher than this was that for maize. Carob trees were also
found in coproliths from the Cahuachi cemetery, which evidently indicate their consumption
as food. Towle (1961: 56) observed the presence of carob wood both at Cahuachi as well as at
Huaca del Loro in the Nasca Valley. Towle also mentioned its abundant presence at Ancón, for
which there are no absolute dates.
Beresford-Jones excavated the site of Samaca and found abundant carob (Prosopis pallida)
macroremains at a Middle Horizon site on the right bank of the Ica River (lower section), in
the district of Ocucaje and at 220 masl, close to the Tablazo de Ica (Figure 13). The remains
were in the midst of other botanical remains in garbage dumps and were partially associated
with charcoal, which means they can be interpreted as possible food remains (Beresford-
Jones 2004: 397-448). The site does not have radiocarbon dates that allow for an accurate
chronology, but since the pottery found goes from Nasca 5 to Nasca 8 it can essentially be
assumed to have been occupied throughout the Middle Horizon, between A.D. 50 and A.D.
900. Piacenza and Pieri on the other hand documented carob skins and seeds in the human
faecal remains found in some burials from the monumental site of Cahuachi in Nasca, which
is a direct indicator that carob was consumed by its inhabitants (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 4).
PV35-4 is a North Coast site in the Huarmey River mouth that also belongs to the Middle
Horizon, but which has been dated to its early stage (in this case ca. A.D. 800). Here Bonavia
217
Elmo Leon
Figura 13. Fragmentos de vainas y semillas de algarrobo documentadas del sitio de Samaca (ca. 500-900 d.C.) (CORTESÍA DAVID
BERESFORD-JONES).
found twenty carob seeds, in this case Prosopis pallida—its endocarp and a whole pod—as
well as fragments of de Prosopis sp. (Bonavia et al. 2009: 262).
Piacenza has also reported carob seeds from other Nasca archaeological sites (Piacenza
2005). This biologist selected several sites where he has gathered plants. What is clear is the
discovery of carob seeds and pods in domestic contexts at the Late Nasca and Early Wari
Empire (from A.D. 530 to A.D. 820) site of Casa Vieja, in Ica (Roque et al. 2003).
The remains of Prosopis pallida have also been documented at Cerro la Cruz (in the Chao
Valley) within the context once again of the Wari Empire and of the Casma culture (ca. A.D.
900-1350). Its fruits may thus have also been eaten here.
There likewise is evidence of carob consumption on the Peruvian coast during the Late
Intermediate Period, ca. A.D. 1000-1460. It is interesting that carob seeds that may have been
218
14,000 years of food in Peru
part of food refuse have been found at Los Pinos, a site belonging to the Chancay culture (A.D.
1000-1460) that is in the Huaura Valley north of Lima (Lanfranco and Eggers 2010: 79).
Carob consumption also took place in the Chimu culture, as in the case of the Pedregal
archaeological site (lower Jequetepeque Valley), where its remains have been found. It is
possible these are food refuse.
Carob seeds were also eaten by the Chimu people, as was shown by Gumerman (1991: table
3.4), this time at the site of Pacatnamú. Here it was found that both the elite as well as the
common people ate these seeds. The algarrobo was, in fact, the second most important food
source of vegetable origin at this site, second only to guava.
Finally, Mark Nathan Cohen (1978: 29-30) reported finding an algarrobo seed in a Late
Intermediate context at the Ancón necropolis. Its presence in general seems however to have
been scant on the Central Coast, in comparison with the North and South Coasts.
Long-Spine Acacia [Huarango, Espino, Faique] (Acacia macracantha)
The long-spine acacia or huarango is a species native to subtropical and tropical zones found
from North to South America. It has somewhat rough legumes that are seven centimetres
long. It is found all over the coast of Peru and grows from sea level up to 2200 masl, and it
vegetates in desert zones, sand dunes, dry ravines and in the brush alongside rivers. Its wood
is highly appreciated as fuel (Soukup 1980: 39, Mostacero et al. 2009: 304).
Weir and Bonavia (1985: 101) reported finding the pollen of Acacia huarango in some
coproliths from Los Gavilanes, in a stratum that was dated to 3200-2200 B.C. These scholars
consider that this plant was eaten by the people of this site on the Central Coast, in the
Huarmey area. The relative significance of its pollen made Weir and Bonavia conclude that
the flowers were eaten. This is perhaps one of the few pieces of evidence of the ingestion
of flowers.
Acacia macracantha has been documented by the excavations at Huaca de la Luna, in the
lower Moche Valley, so it may have been part of the food eaten by the Mochica people at
this site (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 134).
Hierba de la Lancha [Acacia Blanca, Peladera] (Leucaena trichodes Benth)
This shrub has seeds that can be eaten. It is found on stony soils at the edge of irrigation
canals, and it grows between 200 and 2300 masl (Mostacero et al. 2009: 309)
The remains of this species have been found at Huaca de la Luna in the lower Moche Valley, so
it is possible the Mochica who lived at this site around A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 134).
219
Elmo Leon
Tahuari (Pithecelobium sp.)
This is a relative of the carob tree, but according to Mostacero et al.’s handbook of
phanerogamous plants (2008: 313-314) not one of the nine Peruvian species seems edible.
Pithecelobium sp. has a merely tropical connotation, yet it has been documented among
the remains found at the site of La Galgada in Tablachaca Canyon (Ancash). However we do
not really know whether its round-shaped fruits were eaten (Smith left this possibility open),
particularly in the upper strata of the site in 1200-1800 B.C. (Smith 1988: 130).
Fruit
Pineapple [Piña, Achupalla, Ananá, Cancá, Chihuy, Piña Negra] (Ananas comosus (L.) Merril, Ananas
sativus)
We now face a serious quandary. This is a fruit which thus far there is not a single instance
in Peru’s archaeological record. And yet the ethnohistorical references and data suggest the
possibility that it was eaten, perhaps not frequently but on occasions, particularly in the
eastern region of Peru.
The pineapple belongs to the family of the Bromeliaceae and probably had its origin over a
vast expanse of land (Central and South America) in which it was cultivated and had several
orchard forms (Mostacero et al. 2009: 948). The term ananá comes from Guaraní, which is
why some believe it had its origins both in Brazil as well as in the Guianas. Father Soukup
(1980: 57) says it was discovered in Brazil in 1555, and Father Acosta claimed it was a fruit that
was completely eaten without its skin and had good taste.
For some time now the best scientists engaged in studying the pineapple are at Hawaii
University in Honolulu. Once the pineapple reached the Old World it met with a resounding
success.
The smooth cayenne pineapple, which nowadays is so treasured in Peru’s markets, had its origin
in French Guiana, from whence it was exported to France by Perrottet in 1819, and from thence
to all the markets in the world (Rohrbach 2003: 2). At present Thailand and the Philippines
are the biggest producers and exporters in the world, and Brazil in America. We must bear in
mind the Spanish introduced the pineapple into the Philippines in the early sixteenth century,
shortly after the discovery of America, so it has a long tradition there.
What origin did the pineapple have? Barbara Pickersgill (2007: 927) believes it comes from the
tropical Amazonian lowlands of South America because the most ancient fids of this plant
come from this area.
Piperno and Pearsall (1998: 156) on the other hand believe the pineapple had its zone of origin
south of Brazil and in Paraguay. This would validate the above-mentioned positions.
220
14,000 years of food in Peru
Collins (1949, 1960) made one of the first studies of the pineapple; though dated, many of his
conclusions are still valid. Collins believed this fruit had been part of the diet eaten by the
pre-Hispanic populations of South America and the Caribbean. For Collins, Ananas comosus
(L.) Merril appears in its cultivated form but the ancestral one is not known. It is worth noting
here that Ananas comosus has been derived into many varieties, three of which are the most
relevant ones, i.e. cayenne, red Spanish, and queen pineapple.
When the Europeans reached America they found a large number of races that the American
aborigines had developed while cultivating the pineapple, from which we can infer the
antiquity of this process. The natives ate it not just fresh, but also prepared beverages like
chicha and guarapo, and also used it in a series of medicinal applications, including as
treatment for stomach diseases and even carcinogenic ones.
When summarising the origins of the pineapple, Rohrbach et al. (2003) pointed out the first
European colonists found it widely distributed throughout tropical South America and the
Caribbean, and mentions the Orinoco, the Amazon and the area around Rio de Janeiro. The
Europeans themselves helped disseminate this plant, just like they did with others they took
outside the Americas like the lemon, the orange and the banana, which had spread all over
America in less than two decades in the sixteenth century (Columbus 1506, in Rohrbach 2003:
1). Wilson (2007: 87) notes that the ancient inhabitants of the Caribbean were already eating
pineapples at the time of the European arrival. The Europeans first had contact with this
fruit shortly after Columbus arrived at Guadeloupe Island in 1493; about a century later the
pineapple was a first class crop in America that had spread over the entire continent.
Do we have information regarding its domestication? Yes, but not as extensive as for other
species. We should however emphasise that its process of domestication played an important
role not just in reducing the size of the inner seeds, but in also increasing the size of the
fruit so that it became juicier and more delicious as the experiments done by the Ancient
American aborigines who cultivated it increased.
There are two hypotheses regarding the groups who domesticated the pineapple. The first
hypothesis claims that Ananas comosus ananassoides was domesticated by the Tupi-Guarani, and
after a migration it reached the Antilles, the northern Andes and Central America. The second
hypothesis was developed by Leal and Antoni, and claims this genus may have had its origin in an
area that lies between 10°N-10°S and 55°-75°W (which by the way includes the Peruvian Amazonian
Andes). It has also been claimed that south-western Brazil may have been its secondary centre
of origin and dissemination. Finally, it is possible that modern pineapples originated in the Paraná
River region (Paraguay) because here there is a concentration of wild varieties.
Clement et al. (2010: 85) recently confirmed that the pineapple was widely disseminated at
the time of the European arrival, which indicates it was widely consumed in tropical America,
from Mesoamerica and the Antilles to the Central Andean Valley—where some special crops
developed, in which Peru, Colombia, and Venezuela stand out—and as far south as Paraguay.
This position differs from the previous one.
221
Elmo Leon
Clement and his colleagues claim the wild pineapple was found practically throughout the
entire region east of the Andes, from the northern shores of South America to the south of
Brazil and Paraguay. The greatest variety and morphologies were however found in South
America north of the Amazon River. Clement et al. (2010: 86) therefore believe that this region
is the place where the pineapple originated. Other studies based on genetic, biochemical, and
morphological data posit the Guianas was the origin zone where the pineapple was. Based
on biological calculations, Clement concluded the pineapple was already being used in wild
state around 8000 B.C., and that it was domesticated around 4000 B.C.
Coppens d’Eeckenbrugge et al. in turn posit, based on Persall’s data, that the pineapple was
domesticated some 3,500 years ago (Coppens d’Eeckenbrugge et al. 2011: 30-31). Genetic data
support two domestication processes. On the one hand there is the Guyana shield, which
holds the largest cytoplasm variety (the hybridisation of A. cosmosus var. cosmosus and A.
cosmosus var. ananassoides [A. cosmosus erectifolius derives from the latter]), and on the
other we have the Upper Amazon, i.e. the headwaters of the Amazon River, which may also
have been a centre of pineapple diversification.
It follows that scholars have yet to agree on the domestication of the pineapple and
whether it took place north of the Amazon River or in Tupi-Guaraní territory. The only
point agreed upon is that it must have been domesticated in a South American tropical
Amazonian environment.
What do we know of the pineapple’s bromatology? The Office of the Gene Technology Regulator
published a consensual report (2008) on this species which calls it one of the most significant
fruits in terms of its global output, just behind the banana and the lemon. The pineapple is an
excellent source of manganese and it has vitamins such as C1 and B1 (thiamine), as well as fibres,
calcium, nitrogen, phosphorus, iron, ascorbic acid, carotene, thiamine, riboflavin, and niacin
(OGTR 2008: 21). In the context of pre-Hispanic Peru we must bear in mind the antianaemic
properties of ascorbic acid, as it facilitates iron absorption (Larsen 2000).
Patiño (2002: 292-307) made an extensive presentation of the pineapple in his handbook on
American tropical fruits. From his presentation if follows that most of the historical references
on this fruit come from the Eastern Andean Cordillera.
Patiño makes a large reference list of the presence of the pineapple in the Antilles, Panama,
Colombia, the Orinoco, the Amazon, Ecuador, and other areas where it is widely disseminated.
One concentration zone found by Spanish travellers lies in the frontier area between Brazil,
Colombia and Peru, which is a relevant datum as regards the latter country. Cieza de León
claimed in this regard having seen pineapples on the North Coast as far as Trujillo, while
Acosta claims that it did not grow in that area but was brought instead from the Andes, and
it was not of good quality.
It is now worth making the effort of archaeologically documenting the pineapple. Vargas
(1962: 110) claims having seen the depiction of this plant in a wooden vessel in the Museo
222
14,000 years of food in Peru
Arqueológico of the la Universidad Nacional del Cuzco. Margaret Towle (1961: 30) supported
this claim based on the characteristics of the leaves.
Hans Horkheimer (1960: 74-75) held the position that the pineapple had been cultivated in
ancient Peru based on chroniclers like Pedro Cieza de León, Miguel de Estete, and Garcilaso
de la Vega, but he did not mention any pre-Hispanic finds.
Margaret Towle (1961: 30) included this plant in his book on the ethnobotany of pre-Hispanic
Peru. She believed it was grown in tropical South America. Towle noted that the first reference
was made by Miguel de Estete, who mentioned “small pineapples that can be found on the
coast.” Clement (et al 2010: 86) pointed out that in Peru the earliest archaeological pineapple
found comes from the coast and can be dated to 1200-800 B.C., yet their bibliography (Pearsall
1992: 178) includes not one specific reference to this finding in any of the three sources Pearsall
lists. It is thus clear that although no archaeological documentation of pineapple consumption
in pre-Hispanic Peru is available, it may appear in future once the recording and la methods have
been honed—yet unlike other pre-Hispanic fruit, it is not expected to have abounded.
Custard Apple, Cherimoya [Chirimoya, Amuesha] (Annona cherimola Miller)
For Mostacero et al. (2009: 202) the custard apple is a plant native to Peru’s intermontane
valleys, whilst others claim it originated in Mesoamerica. Its tree can grow up to 10 metres
high, and it is well known for its aromatic flowers and its fruit, which can have a diameter of
up to 25 cm. The custard apple grows between 1500 and 2200 masl. Another major study
points out it is found from Venezuela to Bolivia, and that it can grow under temperatures that
range between 16 and 20 °C (Moutarde 2006b: 26).
Do we have any information regarding its origin? After carrying out an interdisciplinary study
of the custard apple, Duccio Bonavia and some of his colleagues concluded that there was a
consensus on it being native to Ecuador and Peru, and that its cultivation had practically not
undergone any major change for a very long time (in Morales 2003 and Popenoe 1921, in Bonavia
et al. 2004: 510). They also claimed the custard apple was not introduced in Peru in A.D. 1630 as
was claimed by Pozorski and Pozorski (1997) and instead went much further back, as will be seen
below. They likewise claimed the custard apple grew and was eaten both on the North Coast as
well as on the Central Coast since at least the Final Preceramic Period and up to the Inca epoch.
Southern Ecuador seems to actually have had a decisive role in the origin and domestication
of custard apple, just like previous scholars believed. Wolters (1999, in Schedelman 2001-2002:
25) thus described ceramic vessels from the Valdivia culture that dated to 3600-1500 B.C. with
depictions of custard apples. It seems the antecedent of this fruit lies in the Loja zone in Ecuador.
Guzmán (1951, also in Schedelman 2001-2002: 25) on the other hand believed the custard apple
came from the Marañón’s intermontane valleys, including southern Ecuador. More recent
research of a molecular type suggests there was a second domestication centre in Mesoamerica.
223
Elmo Leon
Despite the time gone by, we should also bear in mind that Margaret Towle also claimed
the domestication of the custard apple began in the early Christian era and in Peru (Towle
1961: 143).
The National Research Council (1989b: 229-240) in turn posits the custard apple comes from
the Ecuadorian Andes (there is a large density of wild custard apple trees in the Loja area as
was noted above), while in Chile it is considered its national fruit .
What do we know of the custard apple’s nutritional value? Like several other Andean fruits it
was a high percentage of sugar and carbohydrates, but is low in acids. It has moderate amounts
of calcium and phosphorus (35 mg per every 100 grams). Although it is low in vitamin A, it is a
good source of niacin, thiamine, and rivoflavin. Scheldeman (2001-2002: 36) summarised the
bromatological values several researchers gave for the custard apple and gave the following
components: water (73-77%), proteins (1-1.9%), fat (0.1-0.2%), carbohydrates (18-24%), fibres (1.3-
2%), calcium (25-34 mg), phosphorus (30-47 mg), and ascorbic acid (4.3-29 mg), amongst others
present in low amounts.
We now turn to the archaeological data. Bonavia (1982) reported the discovery of custard
apple in epoch 3 (the most recent one) of Los Gavilanes, i.e. ca. 2400-1000 B.C.
Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) report the presence of custard apple in various sites in the
Puémape complex south of the Jequetepeque Valley, at least in 3008-339 B.C. Thus it may well
have been consumed on the North Coast throughout the last two thousand years B.C.
The evidence from Huarmey and the Jequetepeque thus indicate the custard apple was eaten
on the Peruvian coast since around 3,000 B.C.
Custard apple seeds have also been found for instance at Puerto Moorin in the Virú Valley,
with a slightly earlier date of around 200 B.C. This confirms its consumption on the North
Coast of Peru throughout the first millennium B.C. (Ericson et al. 1989: 76).
Lockard (2005: 206) in turn documented possible custard apple remains—pericarps and
seeds—during the Mochica occupation (A.D. 600-800) of Galindo, a site in the middle Moche
Valley. These remains comprised 68% of the fruits eaten at this site, which means it was
frequently consumed.
Another type of evidence is provided by ceramic pre-Hispanic depictions, particularly those
from the Chimu culture (Vargas 1962: 111). It should also be noted that depictions of this plant
also appear in the Mochica occupation of the Santa Valley, as well as in Nasca pottery, during
the Wari period in Huarmey, and in the North Coast’s Chimu and Chimu-Inca ceramics. It is
thus clear the custard apple was not just known and was consumed on the Peruvian coast
since the beginning of the Christian era up to the Inca period that marks the chronological
period studied in this book.
224
14,000 years of food in Peru
Gumerman (1991: table 3.4) provides more evidence that the Chimu ate custard apples on
showing that it was consumed somewhat frequently at Pacatnamú, a site in the Jequetepeque
River mouth during its Chimu occupation around A.D. 1300-1400.
Margaret Towle (1961: 38-39) pointed out that Safford had seen ceramic depictions of this
plant in Peruvian funerary contexts, and that several of its seeds had been preserved in the
burial contexts of Ancón.
There is also evidence that the Nasca consumed custard apples. Roque et al. reported the
presence of its seeds in domestic contexts at the site of Casa Vieja in the lower Calango
Valley, in the modern Ica department, at around 260 masl (Roque et al. 2003). Although no
radiocarbon dates are available, it has been suggested that this site was occupied between
A.D. 530 and A.D. 820 (cf. Unkel 2006: 111).
The coastal Wari people also consumed this fruit. A seed was excavated in site PV35-4,
immediately north of the Huarmey River mouth. This is a camp that has been dated to around
A.D. 800 (Bonavia et al. 2009: 253).
Finally, Lanfranco and Eggers documented the presence of custard apples in Chancay contexts
at Los Pinos, a site in the Huaura Valley (Lanfranco and Eggers 2010: 79).
Soursop [Guanábana] (Annona muricata)
This is a plant of the Annonaceae family found in the tropical lowlands between 1000
and 1150 masl. Warm and humid environments favour its development, and the fleshy
fruits usually weigh up to four kilos. The plant itself is benign as regards its capacity to
rehabilitate soils.
Guanábana is a Taíno word from the Greater Antilles. Patiño (2002: 68) says it was known
in the early sixteenth century in Puerto Rico and the Antilles. In his monumental study of
American tropical fruit trees, Patiño claims the soursop is partially native to Peru due to
the documentation presented by Eugenio Yacovleff, who published Chimu ceramics that
depicted this fruit. This observation had previously been made already by Margaret Towle
(1961: 39). Intriguingly enough the pre-Hispanic and colonial history of the soursop is tied
to the North coast, yet in the late eighteenth century it was frequently mentioned as being
under cultivation in the fields around Lima.
The bromatology of the soursop gives for every 100 grams, 38 mg of calcium, 43 mg of
phosphorus, and 19 mg of vitamin C (Centro Nacional de Alimentación y Nutrición 2009: 25).
Mostacero et al. (2009: 202) claim it can come from various zones in tropical America and
that it has 12% sugar—most of it glucose—, some fructose and pectin, as well as vitamins B1,
B2, B5, and C.
225
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

As regards its origin, from a linguistic standpoint everything seems to suggest words from
Haiti, Taíno or the Antilles, which would mean it is a species from northern South America or
the Caribbean.

Botanical research suggests the soursop had its origin in the Caribbean area, in northern South
America or in Brazil (Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 156).

Bonavia et al. (2004) made a fascinating interdisciplinary study of the soursop and concluded
that it was evidently eaten since at least the Early Horizon, both on the North Coast as well as
on the Central Coast of Peru, but it was apparently eaten before this in Ecuador. The evidence
available for all subsequent archaeological periods in Peru indicate it was eaten right up to
Inca times. Here we should point out that the soursop did not appear in Peru in A.D. 1000, as
was claimed by Pozorski and Pozorski (1997), and is in fact much more ancient.

Let us now see the scant archaeological evidence we found. Lanfranco and Eggers reported
soursop at Puémape, a site south of the Jequetepeque Valley, in contexts that date to 3008-
ca. 1200 B.C. (Lanfranco and Eggers 2010: 79). It is thus possible that soursop was first eaten
since around 3000 B.C.

Bonavia et al. (2004) made a detailed list of the archaeological sites where soursop has been
found from around 200 B.C. up to the Chimu epoch; the list focuses particularly on the North
Coast, including the Moche and Wari Empire site in the Virú and Jequetepeque Valleys. The
evidence clearly indicates it was consumed in abundance on the North Coast of Peru.
Bennett and Bird in 1960, and Mason in 1964 (Bonavia et al. 2004: 512), reported soursop in the
Early Intermediate Period, but did not present the evidence. Larco Hoyle in 1938 and Towle in
1961 (ibid) both included Mochica ceramic depictions of soursop (Figure 14).
These depictions are now being corroborated by the excavations undertaken in the land of the
Mochica. For instance, Vásquez and Rosales identified soursop remains in the urban areas of
the Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, which means the Mochica ate it throughout
the first centuries of the Christian era (Vásquez y Rosales 2004: 362).
According to the research undertaken by Pozorski, a site has been identified in the Moche
Valley where the soursop was the most-consumed fruit (Pozorski 1979: 170). It was also widely
consumed throughout the Chimu epoch at the archaeological site of Chan Chan itself, where
it was by far the most eaten fruit, second only to the lucuma (Pozorski 1979: 170).
More recently, the investigations at Cerro La Cruz (in the Chao Valley) found soursop remains,
which mean this fruit must have been consumed there ca. A.D. 900-1350 (Vogel 2012: 126-128).
A high soursop consumption is observable both on the northern and southern Chimu
peripheries. Perry (2002: 337) documented its presence at Manchán, an archaeological site in
the Casma Valley belonging to the southern phase of the Chimu culture (A.D. 1470-1523). In
Figura 14. Representación de guanábana en cerámica. Cultura mochica (ca.400 d.C.). (MUSEO LARCO. LIMA-PERÚ).
his interesting work on Pedregal, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, Cutright (2009: 144)
likewise found that this group based its botanical diet on soursop consumption (34% of all
plant foods found at this site).
Bonavia et al. (2004) also mention the discovery of soursop remains at Los Pinos, a Chancay
site in the Huaura Valley that dates to ca. A.D. 1000-1460. This fruit was thus also clearly eaten
on the Central Coast.
Chili Pepper [Ají, Chojña, Huaica, Jima, Uchu] (Capsicum baccatum, Capsicum chinense, Capsicum
pubescens y Capsicum frutescens)
Chili pepper or ají is without question the permanent companion to Peruvian food, but it also
has alimentary and medicinal properties, and is even a means of human interaction. Heiser
and Smith support this citing Alexander von Humboldt, who claimed chili pepper was as
essential for Native Americans as salt was for Europeans (Heiser and Smith 1953: 214). Besides,
in his overview of chili pepper Andrews points out that about 20% of the people on earth eat
it, and that its consumption is rising (Andrews 2000: 281-287).
Father Soukup (1980: 104-105) claims Capsicum comes from the Greek kaptein, which evokes
the spicy flavour some species have. Ají is essentially used in the Andes not just to spice food

226 227
Elmo Leon
but also as a medicine, for instance as an analgesic against dental caries, to cure ailments
caused by “el aire” (toasted), as an anti-inflammatory medication, and eventually against
influenza. Andrews (2000) reminds us that once the capsaicin (which is responsible for the
spicy taste) found in chili pepper enters our organism it does not have an acid effect but an
alkaline one that stimulates the appetite and strengthens our defences.
As regards the consumption and cultivation of chili pepper, it has always gone hand in hand
with maize. Perry et al. (2007: 988) pointed out that every time maize is found in some pre-
Hispanic site in the Americas it is usually associated with chili pepper remains, and that once
the pre-Hispanic populations included ají in their diet they never stopped consuming it.
Gnerre’s linguistic studies of the plants in the New World made him say that among the
Andean peoples the “pepperoncino” substituted for salt (Gnerre 2002: 1251). Margaret Towle
(1961: 98) called ají a “condimento en la cocina andina prehispánica.”
Mostacero et al. (2009: 784-785), who authored a handbook that is nowadays essential in
its field, point out that at present there are 25 species of wild chili pepper and just five
domesticated ones. We therefore now turn briefly to the taxonomy of the ají, before
discussing its origins and domestication and reviewing the archaeological finds.
The above-cited handbook considers that Capsicum annuum, one of the first species
domesticated, is native to Mexico (chile jalapeño) but later spread to Central, North, and South
America. Another study based on molecular analyses concluded that Capsicum annuum was
domesticated in Mexico as well as in northern Central America (cf. Clement et al. 2010: 84).
The dates for Capsicum annuum (ají largo, ají verde, or ají pimiento) obtained in the excavations
at Coxcatlán (Mexico) range on average to 6600-4750 B.C., but in this case it was not possible
to determine whether it was domesticated or wild chili (Buckler et al.1998: 160).
Previous studies of another kind made by Pickersgill (1971) indicated this species originated
in Mexico. The significant influence this type of ají or chili had can be traced nowadays for
instance in its yellow colour, and the presence of this colour in other types of chili pepper
would be the result of their hybridisation with Capsicum annuum (Pickersgill 2007).
Capsicum annuum contains capsaicin that gives it its strong and spicy flavour, which stimulates
the appetite and gastric secretions. In Peru there are two varieties of this species that are
essential in every diner’s table (and we can imagine the same held true in pre-Hispanic times).
One of these varieties is Capsicum annuum var. longum, which is also known as “paprika chili
pepper.” Capsicum annuum var. Perroleti, the other variety, commonly known as “ají limo,”
is quite characteristic of the Peruvian North Coast. Piperno and Pearsall (1998: 153) believe
Capsicum annuum is related with Capsicum frutescens and Capsicum baccatum.
Capsicum pubescens R & P, the second domesticated species, which is also known as “rocoto,”
originated in the western South American Andes, from whence it expanded up to Mexico. It
228
14,000 years of food in Peru
was cultivated on clayish soils and very humid and montane secondary forests, between 60
and 3600 masl. Margaret Towle (1961: 81) claimed most of the diversity of Capsicum pubescens
had its origin in the Andes. Piperno and Pearsall believe Capsicum pubescens is somehow
separate from other Capsicum (1998: 153). Andrews (2000) drew attention to the fleshy nature
of this chili pepper, which deteriorates rapidly and thus prevents its transportation, except in
quite restricted fashion.
Moving on to the Peruvian context, Capsicum pubescens (National Research Council 1989b:
196) is cold-resistant and is grown between 1500 and 2900 masl. This report says the Incas
valued it mostly due to its intense flavour. The wild ancestor of rocoto is not known but it
must be related with the ulupica (Capsicum cardenasii). We must bear in mind that it was
highly valued not just in food, but also as an excellent repellent (Orozco and Lentz 2005: 171).
Capsicum baccatum L. var. pendulum is a third species that is also known as “ají escabeche,”
“ají verde,” “ají Amarillo,” and—when dehydrated—“ají mirasol;” this is a particularly spicy
species. It is believed to have originated in northern Bolivia, but it was cultivated from the
ceja de selva to the Gran Chaco and southern Brazil, including western South America as far as
Ecuador. The National Research Council (1989: 197) posits that it may have originated in a vast
expanse that extends between southern Peru and the southern Amazon region that includes
Paraguay and Bolivia, with the latter being the place where its cultivation began. This species
grows in relatively low-altitude ecological tiers, up to 1100 masl.
Barbara Pickersgill is perhaps the scientist that has devoted more time and effort to the study
of this plant, and she authored one of the earliest studies (1969) on the origins of the Peruvian
chili pepper. Basing herself on the excavations at Huaca Prieta and Punta Grande, Pickersgill
claimed that Capsicum baccatum (the ají mirasol) is the species that was found at both sites.
Besides, this plant would have reached the North Coast along with four others that were
probably domesticated in Bolivia or in southern Peru.
Capsicum chinense (which is known in Mexico as “chile habanero,” and in el Peru as “ají panca”)
is the fourth species of chili pepper; its origins seem to lie in the northern Amazon zone.
It later reached Mexico through Cuba after the Spanish conquest (hence its name; it had
previously been taken there by the Arawak of northern South America). It should be noted
that many handbooks include the ají limo (mochero) or Colorado in this species, but we found
it included in the Capsicum annuum. Var. perroletti species.
Barbara Pickersgill (1969) claims for Capsicum chinense that it was domesticated in the
lower Amazon basin and then spread to the coast at the same time that pottery developed.
Pickersgill believed that it was quite likely that the people of Yarinacocha and Kotosh may
already have been growing Capsicum chinense around 2000 B.C., so ají panca may have been
eaten around this time in this part of the eastern Andes.
Capsicum frutescens, the fifth species of chili pepper, which is commonly known as tabasco in
Mexico, and as “pipí de mono” (lit. monkey peepee) in Peru, probably originated in Mexico or in
229
Elmo Leon
the Caribbean. Candolle (1886) posited that its native area extended from the Peruvian coast up
to Brazil. Vavilov instead claimed that it came from Mexico and Central America (Smith 1968: 255).
Piperno y Pearsall (1998: 163) however established that it was domesticated in a macrorregional
area that extended from southern Central America to northern South America.
What was the origin of chili pepper? Is there any data regarding its domestication? The experts
on Capsicum believe the origins of this genus lie in Bolivia (McLeod et al. 1982, Perry et al.
2007: 986); Brazil however has a large variety of species, and this means it cannot be ruled out
as the pristine zone of this genus.
Piperno and Pearsall (1998: 153) in turn believe chili pepper comes from central Brazil and
Bolivia, and that it then reached the Andes due to birds and humans.
Andrews (2000) cites Pickersgill—probably the major student of chili pepper—and points out
that the early humans who first peopled South America at the end of the last Ice Age found
wild chili pepper, which was then spread by birds and other agents from its areas of origin
to other areas, i.e. from the zone south of the wet Amazon forest and the semidry area of El
Cerrado in Brazil to the rest of the subcontinent. Its dispersal was such that the Spanish word
ají is apparently Arawak, a group in the Caribbean zone that took chili pepper to other parts of
America. “Chili,” on the other hand, is a Náhuatl term. Patiño (2002: 437) believes ají is a Taíno
word from Colombia, whereas uchu is Quechua. The dispersal of chili pepper was quite rapid
and it was accepted by many Native American cultures. Patiño also pointed out that Cobo
noted that ají was preserved as an escabeche (i.e. marinated), especially when travelling, or
dried once it had been ground.
On reaching Africa and Asia thanks to the Spanish conquistadors, chili pepper was rapidly
accepted because food was already strongly spiced in these areas, e.g. with the African
melegueta pepper or the black pepper from India; this means that it was not just the potato
that made an international contribution for ají, our goo condiment, also made one.
Andrews (2000) believes the origins of chili pepper are still not clear because the genus
Capsicum is defined by the production of capsaicin; even so, its centre of diversity evidently
lies in an area that extends from Bolivia to south-western Brazil. Andrews concluded that the
South American tropics were the nucleus of domestication of chili pepper. She thus supports
previous research.
Clement et al. (2010: 84) summarises this stating there are at least three major independent
centres of chili pepper domestication, i.e. Mesoamerica, the Andes, and the low-altitude South
American tropical region. In general one or more chili pepper species was domesticated in each
of these areas. Margaret Towle (1961: 139) held chili pepper had been possibly domesticated
since at least the late Preceramic Period ca. 3000 B.C.
Bromatology is a subject that we must broach briefly. Heiser and Smith (1953) pointed out that
the special nutritive value of chili pepper was due to its high vitamin C content (150-180 mg
230
14,000 years of food in Peru
per 100 grams), and this besides its 6 gr. of protein, 23 gr. of fibre, 116 mg, of calcium, 200 mg
of phosphorus, 15 mg of iron, and 25 mg of carotene.
Andrews (2000: 285) emphasises the fact that chili pepper has a high nutritional value. The
impressive thing is that it has more vitamin A per weight than any other plant on earth, and
when eaten raw it has more vitamin C than lemons themselves, and it preserves more of this
vitamin even when ripe or dry. In the case of Capsicum pubescens, just its high vitamin C and
antioxidant values make it a major alimentary source (Viñals et al. 1996). Andrews also believes
that its significant amounts of magnesium and iron, along with its vitamins and minerals, made
chili pepper an essential accompaniment for pre-Hispanic food.
We now turn to the archaeological evidence. Perry et al. (2007) correctly noted that the
documenting of chili pepper in America has been hindered above all by the environment,
which means that we only have finds made in dry coastal environments, as well as a few
reports that mention chili pepper pollen.
What is clear is that chili pepper was extensively cultivated probably before 2500 B.C., as was
suggested by Jeffrey Quilter (1991: 398). This at least was evinced by the review Perry et al.
(2007) made of domesticated chili peppers consumed from the Bahamas to the Andean area.
The point made therein that is worth citing here is that the most ancient chili pepper remains
were found as phytoliths at the Aguadulce rock shelter (Panama) that date to around 3600
B.C., as well as in the Loma Alta complex at Ecuador ca. 4250 B.C. It should be noted that the
Aguadulce chili pepper was recovered in the form of kernels that had been ground in some
kind of mortar, so it follows it was already being ground at this time in this part of America.
Because of the significance chili pepper had in Mexico it is worth pointing out here the most
ancient Mexican remains come from the Tehuacán valley. They date to the eighth millennium
B.C. Other archaeological sites where chili pepper has been found, from the Bahamas to the
Andes, date to around the fifth millennium B.C. (Clement et al. 2010: 84).
We now turn to the chili pepper record in pre-Hispanic Peru. Vargas (1962: 110) already noted
several decades ago the presence of chili pepper depictions in Moche, Nasca, and Chimu
pottery, which meant its consumption on the Peruvian coast since at least the beginning of
the Christian era is not in question.
Margaret Towle (1961: 80-81) evidently was one of the first scholars in the history of
ethnobotanical research who studied chili pepper, and she also made special reference to
Nasca and Chimu pottery with depictions of this plant.
Perhaps the ají found in Guitarrero Cave is most ancient in Peru (Smith 1980a: 101-102).
This site is on the Cordillera Negra in the Callejón de Huaylas at about 2850 masl. The
problems this cave’s stratigraphy raises notwithstanding, chili pepper (Capsicum chinense,
which probably entails the presence of ají limo) has been found in a little-altered layer
and was dated to around 9000-8500 B.C. (the dates from Guitarrero cave were previously
231
Elmo Leon
discussed in León 2007: 175-176). The identification of this species was also verified
by Barbara Pickersgill, an expert in this subject. The most impressive thing here is that
Pickersgill claims these are cultivated chili peppers, which means they are amongst the
earliest cultivated plants in the world.
And regarding the domestication of chili pepper, perhaps the most striking point here is
that from the morphology observed by Smith, it follows that this specimen shows traces of
having been domesticated. This shows the antiquity of the domestication process as regards
chili pepper in the Andes, which perhaps goes back to the Younger Dryas itself, i.e. the last
glaciation ca. 11,000 B.C. (cf. Richerson et al. 2001).
The Ayacucho Project also holds documentation on Capsicum but it is unfortunately lacking
in details, which are so important in science (MacNeish et al. 1981: 162). Ají may have been
discovered there within a context belonging to the Chihua phase, which was dated to around
5600-4140 B.C. Bonavia (1982: 325) reports that García Cook claimed the species identified
in Ayacucho’s Jaiwa phase, which dates to around 8000-6000 B.C. is Capsicum annuum, but
Bonavia has also questioned this taxonomic determination because it lacks support.
Alejandro Chu (2008: 138) reported that his excavations at Bandurria, a site close to the modern
city of Huacho, yielded just one ají seed, so that its consumption at this site may have taken
place in 3170-1610 B.C.
Capsicum sp. was found not just in large amounts but also in all occupation levels at the
ceremonial site of La Galgada, in Ancash, at about 1100 masl. Earle Smith noticed the specimens
had an ivory colour, which is strange in the case of the Andean chili pepper (ají limo?), and its
dates start at 2190 B.C. (Smith 1988: 140-141).
The Capsicum baccatum species of chili pepper has been found in layers ‘D’ to ‘Q’ at Huaca
Prieta, on the North Coast of Peru, which means it dates at least to between 2899 and 1586-
771 B.C. (mean, 1183 B.C.). Bird et al. (1985: 236) state that Pickersgill, who examined the remains,
believes that Capsicum baccatum var. Pendulum (ají amarillo or escabeche) was already
domesticated. The other species were found in the upper layers, always up to 771 B.C. Her
observations show red- and orange-coloured chili peppers appeared in the lower levels.
For Pickersgill, the colour selection indicates domestication because orange chili pepper is
not found in the wild. Callen (1965: 335) and Callen and Cameron (1960) found Capsicum sp.
seeds in human faeces or coproliths from Huaca Prieta, so there can be no question that it
was consumed by the people of this site in the above-mentioned epoch. Ají escabeche was
therefore being eaten 5000 years ago on the North Coast of Peru. Capsicum chinense was also
eaten at Huaca Prieta in the same epoch (Perry et al. 2007: 986), so it is possible that ají limo
was also being consumed on the North Coast since around the third millennium B.C.
Capsicum sp. (no further taxonomic specification is available) was found in strata that dated
to 2200-1480 B.C. at Los Gavilanes (Bonavia 1982: 149), in the lower Huarmey Valley.
232
14,000 years of food in Peru
Next in the chronology come the excavations made at Huaynuná, a Final Preceramic site in
the lower Casma Valley that found a series of botanical remains studied by Ugent et al. (2004:
420), and which include Capsicum sp. It can be concluded by association that these remains
date to 2914-2287 B.C. For Perry et al. (2007: 987), the chili pepper from Huaynuná is important
because a diagnostic morphotype of the Capsicum pubescens species has been identified; this
means rocoto was being eaten in the lower Casma Valley some 4,500 years ago.
For Perry and his team, should this information be confirmed by macrobotanics it would mean
that at least three species of chili pepper were being eaten on the Peruvian coast and highlands
around 2000 B.C., i.e. Capsicum pubescens, Capsicum chinense, and Capsicum baccatum, that
is to say rocoto, ají limo, and ají escabeche.
Perry and his team reported the discovery of Capsicum sp. at Pampa de Llamas-Moxeque,
in this same region, which dated to 2088-1243 B.C. The remains of Capsicum sp. were found
within this zone at the sites of San Diego and Pampa Rosario that date to ca. 800-300 B.C. This
means ají was intensively eaten in the lower Casma Valley.
Capsicum sp. has also been documented as starch residues in gourd containers found at Buena
Vista, a site north of Lima that dates to 2193-2164 B.C. Since these are food residues, it is clear
Capsicum sp. was eaten (Duncan et al. 2009). This is one of the few clear indicators that ají
was directly eaten.
Capsicum remains that date at least to 3008 B.C. were found at Puémape, a site quite close to
the littoral south of the Jequetepeque Valley (Lanfranco and Eggers 2010: 79).
Some remains of Capsicum sp. that date to 2410-2064 B.C. were recorded in the rubbish left
behind as food refuse at Cerro Lampay, a site in the Fortaleza Valley north of Lima. It also
appears slightly later at Caral, almost around 2000 B.C. Caral (Flores Blanco 2006: 281).
Mercedes Cárdenas (1999) reported the discovery of Capsicum remains among the edible
remains from Las Salinas de Chao on the North Coast of Peru, with dates that go back to
2000 B.C.
Patterson and Moseley (1968: 117) reported some decades ago having found ají in the vicinity of
Ancón, starting in the Playa Hermosa phase up to 2634 B.C., but no contextual archaeological
documentation was presented. The presence of chili pepper in the Conchas phase in this
same complex of sites at Ancón, which dates to 2722 B.C., has also been observed. Cohen
(1978: 36) also reported the presence of Capsicum chinense around 2000 B.C. at the Tank site
at Ancón, so ají limo was also eaten at that time in Lima. Cohen later noted the variety he
most found—albeit sporadically—in the sites he studied in Lima was the ají escabeche variety.
Bonavia (1982: 325) mentions that Fréderick Engel documented the presence of Capsicum
frutescens (we can assume this was “pipi de mono”) at Asia, south of the Mala Valley, with an
approximate date of 1490 B.C.
233
Elmo Leon
Another type of reference to chili pepper is found, for instance, in Chavín iconography, i.e.
throughout the first millennium B.C., at altitudes like that of this site in the Callejón de Huaylas,
at 3150 masl (Lathrap 1971, Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 110).
Chili pepper (simply identified as Capsicum sp.) was also recovered in the excavations of
El Paraíso, a Preceramic U-shaped temple in the Chillón Valley north of Lima that dates to
around 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 280).
In a regional study of the North Coast, Shelia Pozorski (1979: 170) reported the occurrence
of Capsicum sp. in various archaeological sites in the vicinity of the Moche Valley, i.e. Alto
Salaverry (1,600 B.C.), Gramalote (1800 B.C.), several sites with Early Moche and Early Chimu
occupations, and even Chan Chan and various Chimu sites in the vicinity of modern-day
Huanchaco. Its presence is clearly more significant in Early Chimu and Chimu-Inca sites. In
a subsequent article Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 125) mention the discovery of 27 Capsicum
sp. and Capsicum annuum (ají limo?) peduncles in a Chimu context. Capsicum has also been
documented at the site of Pampa Grande (Lambayeque), which dates to ca. A.D. 711-800
(Shimada and Shimada 1981: 33).
There are some cases in which several species of chili pepper have been identified at one
site. Cárdenas et al. (1997: 134) reported the discovery of species such as Capsicum annuum
(including the perroletti variety, i.e. ají limo), Capsicum frutescens (“pipí de mono”), and
Capsicum pubescens (rocoto) in Mochica contexts at Huaca de la Luna, a site in the lower
Moche Valley, which date to ca. A.D. 400-750. It is also worth mentioning that in this same
study Cárdenas et al. (1997: 138-139) identified the occurrence of Capsicum sp. in all Mochica
human faecal remains; this means it was a staple par excellence, and at least in once case
Capsicum pubescens (rocoto) was eaten.
Chili pepper has also been found in other human faecal remains in the North Coast of Peru.
The Capsicum baccatum species (ají amarillo or mirasol) has been identified in the excrement
of the three individuals buried at Dos Cabezas, a site that is almost on the Jequetepeque River
mouth (Geyer et al. 2003), which has been indirectly dated to A.D. 536-580 (Moseley et al.
2008: 83), which means the Mochica evidently consumed ají. It seems to have been consumed
mostly by the upper tiers of society, as follows from the comparative analysis of these tombs.
Interestingly enough, the reassessment Reinhard (et al. 2007: 536) ´made of the pollen found
in the excrement corroborated the presence of chili pepper.
On the other hand the coprolith analysis Ericson et al. (1989: 74) made of the faecal remains
from Puerto Moorin, a site in the lower Virú Valley, clearly showed chili pepper was eaten at
least during the first centuries of the Christian era.
There is also evidence that the Moche consumed chili pepper at Galindo, a site in the middle
Moche Valley because Lockard (2005: 211) found some remains of this seed in domestic refuse
contexts; these have only been classified as Capsicum sp.
234
14,000 years of food in Peru
Perry (2002: 337) in turn found Capsicum at Manchán, a Chimu (final phase, A.D. 1470-1523) site
in the Casma Valley, and Keating (1975: 226) found it at Cerro La Virgen, a part of the Chan Chan
citadel on the North Coast.
At Pacatnamú Gumerman (1991: table 3.4) noticed during the Chimu occupation too, that chili
pepper (non-specified species) was eaten around A.D. 1300-1400 both by the common people
and by the elite; it would seem however that the latter ate it more, thus giving the impression
that it was more of an elite food item. Part of the occupation of Pedregal, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, also belongs to the Chimu; here Cutright (2009: 145) reported finding
remains of Capsicum frutescens.
All of this information simply emphasises the fact that chili pepper (part of it limo was
consumed in significant proportions by the Mochica and (particularly by) the Chimu culture.
Chili pepper was also known and consumed by the pre-Hispanic population of Ica, i.e. the
Paracas and the Nasca. Margaret Towle (1961: 81) had already noted the presence of chili pepper
in Paracas Cavernas and Paracas Necropolis—i.e. since 400 B.C.—as well as its depiction in
pottery. Towle observed that these specimens were big and of similar proportion to modern
ones, so she believed ají had undergone an extensive period of manipulation. Significant
amounts of Capsicum frutescens have in fact been found in the recent excavations of the
monumental Nasca site of Cahuachi (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 3).
Helaine Silverman and Donald Proulx (2002: 52), two authorities on the Nasca culture, believe
the consumption of Capsicum frutescens was favoured.
As for the Late Nasca context, Roque et al. (2003) found the remains of ají (Capsicum sp.)
fruits and seeds in Casa Vieja, a site in the lower Ica Valley at an altitude of around 260 masl;
it belongs to the end of this culture and the early Middle Horizon, and can be indirectly dated
to A.D. 530-820 (cf. Unkel 2006: 111). We now turn to materials belonging to the Wari Empire.
Roasted Capsicum (probably frutescens, i.e. “pipí de mono”) was found in a hearth at PV35-4,
a site north of the Huarmey River mouth, at the zone of La Honda beach, that dates to ca.
A.D. 800 (Bonavia 2009: 242, 260), so it was evidently eaten in this way since at least this time.
It is worth pointing out that Capsicum frutescens has also been found at Caral in the Supe
Valley, so it was quite probably consumed at this site approximately between 2595 and 1951
B.C. (Shady and Leyva 2003: 115).
Chili pepper was also eaten during the Late Intermediate Period. Klaus and Tam (2010: 596)
summarised the plants consumed in the lower Lambayeque Valley between A.D. 1300 and A.D.
1400, and listed it as part of the produce found in several sites.
Nelson and Bellido Cerda (2010: 50) on the other hand documented Capsicum in rubbish
dumps at Quipico, a Chancay site that lies at about 940 masl in the Huaura Valley. Ají remains
235
Elmo Leon
were also found in this same valley but closer to the shore at El Pino, another Chancay site
(Lanfranco and Eggers 2010: 79).
Although this species is not widely found in other archaeological sites in Peru, Towle (1961:
81)—following previous studies by Safford—had already documented it in tombs close to
Lima (presumably belonging to the Late Intermediate Period-Inca, i.e. A.D. 1000-1532),
As for Inca contexts, Williams (2005: 166) managed to document through stable isotope
analysis, that chili pepper was eaten in small amounts at the Puruchuco-Huaquerones site.
Capsicum baccatum or ají amarillo also seems to have been eaten and grown at Panquilma, a
site in the middle Lurín Valley during its Inca occupation (Cohen 1975: 60).
Gourds (Lagenaria)
Gourds (Lagenaria, “mati” in Quechua) have been particularly known since the Preceramic
Period, when they were already used as containers, vessels of bottles, and even as floaters
or turned into musical instruments (maracas). Gourds were even used for their medicinal
properties and occasionally as food (Cutler and Whitaker 1961).
Some genetic studies are available that allow us to explore the origins of this plant. Zeder
et al. (2006) claim that Lagenaria is native to Africa and that it was probably exported to
America across the ocean. Lagenaria has apparently been found wild in Zimbabwe; five wild
congeners have even been found in the northern half of Africa (Decker-Walters 2004), but
curiously enough the most ancient finds of Lagenaria siceraria come from Egypt and Zambia
around 2000 B.C. Indeed, one issue in this regard is the lack of a wild species that allows us to
study its development from that condition to domesticate. This premise is supported by the
fact that this same species is found in Africa and America.
Even so Erickson et al. (2005) claimed, in a study that combined archaeological evidence
and genetics, that Lagenaria reached America in domesticated condition; that the first
palaeo-Americans brought it in the early Holocene from Asia and not from Africa. Erickson
and his team showed the genetic markers of the most ancient Lagenaria, both Andean and
Mexican ones, had the Asiatic sequence and not the African one. Decker-Walters (2004)
hold a different position; they claim Lagenaria was exported from Africa to America, but it
underwent an independent domestication process in America. The debate in this regard is
still not over.
When discussing the domestication of Lagenaria, Piperno and Pearsall (1998: 140) insist that
gourds are native to the semidry tropical African lowlands south of the equator, and that the
seeds were disseminated by flotation. As regards the antiquity of Lagenaria siceraria, Smith
(2005: 9444) points out that in the Oaxaca Valley (Mexico) it dates to 7970 B.C.
236
14,000 years of food in Peru
The archaeological record per se of Lagenaria evidently does not imply its consumption, so
here we will only focus on the finds where it can be verified gourds were actually eaten.
One of the earliest pieces of evidence of the occurrence of gourds comes from the Tres
Ventanas and Quiqché Caves, in the upper Lurín Valley south of Lima, at an altitude of over
3700 masl (Engel 1970: 56). Despite the problems raised by this excavation, we can speculate
these finds date to 7031-6903 B.C.
Lagenaria siceraria also appears in the Arenal complex in Lima that has been connected with
the Middle Holocene, during the sixth millennium B.C. (Cohen 1978: 32). Even more interesting
is the fact that this plant had already been domesticated by then (Cohen 1978: 39). So bearing
this in mind it is possible that it was domesticated over 7,000 years ago.
Although we cannot delve into this subject, we do want to emphasise the fact that Lagenaria
siceraria was found among the excrement of two burials at Dos Cabezas, a site in the mouth of
the Jequetepeque Valley (Geyer 2003). The burials have been dated to A.D. 536-580 (Moseley
et al. 2008: 2003). This is clear evidence that gourds were eaten by the Mochica.
Squash [Calabazas or Zapallos] (Cucurbita)
In the pre-Hispanic period American squash are second only to maize, so in this case we must
examine the evidence somewhat more extensively then in previous cases.
It is worth beginning our review of Cucurbita with the study by Decker-Walters and Walters
that was published in the Cambridge World History of Food (2000: 335-351). Squash has been,
and still is, a subject of fascination for explorers, botanists, gold seekers, European settlers,
horticulturalists, and—evidently, as evinced by out subject of interest—the American aborigines.
The botanical study of this plant began at least in the nineteenth century. The pioneering
studies in archaeology are however the finds Junius Bird made and the studies made by
Whitaker, both of which in fact took place in the late 1940s when the radiocarbon method
had just been discovered.
The genus Cucurbita has long been studied. Taxonomy is a major issue, and interested readers
are directed to Cutler and Whitaker 1956 and Cutler and Whitaker 1961: 470. Here we will review
this plant’s taxonomy, which in turn entails its origins and domestication; then we will turn to
the uses given to squash before reviewing the archaeological finds. For interested readers, two
good overviews of the Cucurbitaceae genus are Bisognin (2002) and Teppner (2004).
Before broaching the subject of taxonomy it is worth pointing out that throughout its history
Thomas Whitaker (from the Department of Agriculture of the United States of America) is the
scientist that has devoted most time and effort to the study of cucurbitaceae. For instance,
237
Elmo Leon
Whitaker studied the relationship between wild and domesticated squash using all the then-
available lines of evidence, be they archaeological data, experiments at hybridisation or
morphological comparisons. The pioneering word undertaken by Whitaker and Cutler (the
latter a researcher who joined the former) has been supplemented with a series of studies of
a phylogenetic and isoenzymatic nature, particularly those headed, amongst others, by Deena
Decker-Walters, Hugh Wilson and Laura Merrick.
Taxonomically speaking there are five domesticated and twenty wild species of squash that
live in various environments that range from tropical to temperate ones. At present both the
archaeological and the genetic evidence suggests that domesticated species were selected
independently from their wild progenitors. The morphological and botanical characteristics
of each species can be found in Whitaker and Bohn (1950: 65).
Now, the five domesticated species have dates that range between 15,000 and 5,000 years
ago. The native Americans domesticated the small and white wild species that gave rise to a
whole range of varieties. Although the mature fruit was not eaten due to its bitter and little-
oxygenated taste (and which is, by the way, toxic) prior to its domestication, it is possible
that the fruits were gathered whilst still young in order to eat them after having boiled them
several times, as can be shown with the peduncles found in archaeological sites. The major
success attained by the process of domestication was in fact eliminating the bitter taste
of the American squash, besides having made it less fibrous and thicker as well as having
generated pulps with softer textures and more colourful rinds.
The domestication of the five squash species— C. argyosperma, C. ficifolia, C. maxima, C.
moschata, and C. pepo— took place successively on five occasions. C. argyosperma, which is
probably derived from C. sororia, was domesticated south of Mexico around 5,000 B.C. This
type of squash was cultivated not just as food but also for use as a container, and it is even
possible that its pulp may have been used as detergent due to its saponin content (Huber
1990: 56). Cutler and Whitaker (1956) and Whitaker and Bohn (1950) in turn considered C.
argyosperma as a variant of C. ficifolia.
C. moschata (lacayote) is a species that should be of our utmost interest due to its frequent
occurrence in Peru’s archaeological record. Decker-Walters and Walters (2000: 345) explained
that the oldest evidence of its domestication was probably found in southern Mexico around
5,000 B.C., and around 3,000 B.C. in Peru (this is presumably based on Huaca Prieta; even so we
must consider the more recent finds made by the excavations undertaken in sites in the upper
Zaña Valley) (see Piperno 2011: 276).
It is worth pointing out the way scholars assess Peru’s archaeological specimens. These differ
from the Mexican specimens by their wrinkled rinds and the sharp edges of the seeds. This
has made them suggest Peru as a second domestication centre of C. moschata, and perhaps
even as an independent centre of domestication of this species, all the more so if we consider
its diversity in the Colombian zone, which is exceptional in comparison with its Mexican
counterpart.
238
14,000 years of food in Peru
In Mexico, Cucurbita moschata appears in the sixth millennium B.C. Here it must be pointed out
that the latest finds of Cucurbita moschata have been made in the upper Zaña (Lambayeque)
Valley, where this species has been recorded with dates that range around 8200 B.C. (Piperno
2011: 276). Out view of this plant has therefore now changed.
Piperno and Pearsall (1998: 142-143) pointed out the relative taxonomic isolation of the
Cucurbitaceae and their lack of introgresion. Each is derived from a particular common
ancestor and prefers specific environmental conditions; for instance, C. moschata tolerates
high temperatures and a strong humidity. Its potential ancestor is found, as has already been
noted, north of Colombia and in the central Pacific area in Panama. This seems to be have
been borne out by genetic analyses (Nee 1990, Sanjur et al. 2002).
Barbara Pickersgill (2007: 927) on the other hand believes that Cucurbita moschata and
Cucurbita ficifolia are plants that were domesticated independently of each other in the
Andes, the former some 5000 years ago, and the latter 4000 years ago. C. maxima and C.
andreana apparently evolved in Mexico from C. moschata and subsequently reached South
America.
As for C. pepo, it is believed to have been domesticated in two zones, the first being Florida
around 10,000 B.C. and the second one Mexico ca. 8000 B.C. The dates for this plant’s
domestication draw close to 10,000 both at Tamaulipas (cf. Whitaker et al. 1957) as well as
at Guilá Naquitz (Oaxaca) (cf. Whitaker y Cutler 1971: 124). Zucchini is nowadays savoured in
Italy precisely due to this species. The new obtained directly from the seeds using the AMS
method seem to confirm this time period that begins in 8208 B.C. It thus seems this plant
was already being domesticated around 8000 years ago (Smith 1997: 933-934, Smith 2005,
Teppner 2004).
Although C. maxima and C. maxima Dutch (i.e. zapallo loche and macre) are found scattered
throughout South America, the most ancient evidence of its domestication appears in Peru
around 2500 B.C., and its closest ancestor would be C. maxima andreana. Once domesticated
it dispersed in the south—probably from Bolivia—and not northwards as some have suggested.
Pickersgill (1977) raises the possibility that C. maxima was derived from C. andreana, which has
more branches. Based on genetic analyses Nee (1990) concurs that this is feasible.
Cucurbita ficifolia has been recorded in Peru as a domesticated species between 6000
and 3000 B.C. Pickersgill (1969: 55) believed it had been domesticated in Peru and that it
reached Mexico at a relatively late date (“lacayote” is a term that derives from Náhuatl).
But we must not forget that Cucurbita ficifolia is found in the wild in Bolivia, and that it
is a high altitude plant.
As a resource, squash had a series of functions and uses, particularly as food. Nee (1990) says
the quality of the pulp varies and ranges between what can be found in a specimen that is 4-15
cm in diameter and what can be held by Cucurbita maxima, which has a diameter of up to one
metre and weighs 300 kilos. Squash must therefore have had a high yield.
239
Elmo Leon
For instance, when Decker-Walters and Walters (2000: 34) discuss the preparation and
consumption of squash, they noted that seeds, flowers, sprouts, and leaves (i.e. almost all of
the plant) of both mature and immature plants are edible and were actually eaten. The best
seeds are found in mature plants but immature squash can be eaten raw, even if it has to be
first boiled and then seasoned.
Whitaker (1981: 461) holds in this regard that both the seeds and the pulp, be they immature
or mature, can be prepared in various ways—coated with sugar, pickled, boiled, dried, fried,
baked or grilled. Whitaker claims that in the pre-Hispanic period the seeds were mostly eaten
raw, toasted or fried, and that the pulp was used as a detergent. It has likewise been recorded
that seeds were boiled or dried (under the sun or over ashes) and stored for a long time,
and we can speculate that this also was the case in pre-Hispanic Peru. We can once again
wonder here whether the nutritional value of squash rose when in dehydrated or dried state.
Whitaker and Cutler (1965) discussed the significance of its ingestion in regard to the amount
of sugar and starch, and the highly nutritional quality of its seeds.
Bonavia (1982: 330), who was quite knowledgeable as regards Andean ethnobotanics, believed
the cucurbitaceae probably were the main staple during the pre-Ceramic period because
even their flowers can be eaten once boiled, and the same holds for their peduncles and
young, immature fruits. Bonavia likewise claimed the seeds must have been eaten when in
wild state because in this condition the pulp is unpleasant and scant. Bonavia also mentioned
the triad formed by squash along with maize and beans, which we mentioned when discussing
the latter two crops, which along with squash sufficed to cover the basic alimentary needs of
the American aborigines.
When discussing the cucurbitaceae, Patiño (2002: 398-403) points that some Native American
peoples added the leaves, hearts and even the flowers of some species to the soup. Patiño
also points out that Cobo noted that squash was sometimes cooked and served to Indians,
African Americans and Spaniards roasted or stewed.
As for the biochemistry of squash, students have developed a general approach for its
contents that presents them part by part; this will prove convenient when reviewing the
archaeological record.
The seeds for instance have potassium (1.111 mg on average, i.e. a high amount), phosphorus (852
mg, also a respectable amount), magnesium, copper, and zinc. They are likewise particularly
fatty as they have 30-35% of oil per weight (Decker-Walters and Walters 2000: 349). The
highest proportion of iron is found in the leaves and particularly in the seeds, which according
to this analysis are quite nutritive. Calcium on the other hand is found in almost all parts of
this plant. In general this is thus a first-rate food.
Few studies show the sprouts do have a nutritional value. Although squash sprouts do have
a large amount of vitamin A (1,000 mg), mature fruits have more (1,000-7,810 mg). Other
elements found in squash are carotene, niacin, riboflavin, thiamine, and ascorbic acid.
240
14,000 years of food in Peru
To this we can add some references as examples as part of our goal of assessing the pre-
Hispanic nutritional balance. The Cucurbita moschata (lacayote) species can give us an idea of
the alimentary value this type of plants had in Peru’s past. The Squash Production Guide gives
the following figures: for every 100 edible grams of this fruit we have 85-91 g of water, 0.8-2
g of proteins, 0.1-0.5 g of fat, and 3.3-11 g of carbohydrates plus vitamins A, B1, B2, C, niacin,
calcium, magnesium, phosphorus and above all iron (SQG 2000, Whitaker and Bohn 1950). We
thus find there is an essentially large amount of water, carbohydrates, minerals, and vitamins,
which concurs with the above-mentioned values.
What archaeological evidence does the archaeological record have of squash consumption?
Before discussing the Peruvian case we must briefly review its antiquity in Ecuador. The study
of phytoliths Dolores Piperno has undertaken for at least three decades also resulted in the
discovery of the most ancient South American Cucurbita, this time in Ecuador. Piperno and
Stothert (2003) identified Cucurbita phytoliths in sites OGSE-80 and M5 A4-67 of the Las
Vegas culture in the Santa Elena Peninsula (Ecuador), which have dates that average to 9836
B.C.; this is equal almost to Younger Dryas, the last Ice Age. The most surprising thing is that
Piperno and Stothert believe this type of squash was already domesticated. For them this
means they can suggest that squash domestication processes took place at the same time as
in Mesoamerica, or even earlier, at least in this part of South America.
Piperno (2009: 155) reports the discovery of Cucurbita moschata phytoliths in the Aguadulce
shelter in Panama that date to this time ca. 6000 B.C., Piperno (2009: 155).
We turn now to the history of squash in Peru. The first scientific and reliable information
to be assessed comes from the upper Zaña Valley. The oldest squash remains found in
Peru, in a scientifically-proven consumption context, come from the upper Zaña Valley in
the department of Lambayeque. Cucurbita was found and dated around 6830 B.C. in the
excavation of Pre-Ceramic sites in the Nanchoc area (on the northern coast of Peru) at around
450 masl (Rossen et al. 1996: 396).
This determination was then verified by directly dating the dried and burned seeds from a
habitation floor in site CA-09-27, which gave 6455 B.C. The remains of the fruits from this
plant were found partially charred and desiccated, and this evinces their consumption. Yet
the seeds of this type of squash apparently were wild and not cultivated (Rossen et al. 1996:
398). These dates, which correspond not just to squash but also to the other plants listed for
Nanchoc that were found domesticated and not in their pristine areas, entail the reformulation
of statements such as those that posit that Andean agriculture began around 4500 B.C. (cf.
Richerson n.d.). It must however be noted that at the time this publication came out there was
some uncertainty regarding whether this was domesticated or wild squash.
All doubts were dispelled with subsequent studies. Remains of Cucurbita moschata seeds
were recovered in this North Coast Valley in a domestic context found in a camp belonging
to the Late Paiján culture that was dated to 8423 B.C. (Dillehay et al. 2007: 1890, Piperno
and Dillehay 2008: table S2, supporting information). This date is fully consistent with that
241
Elmo Leon
obtained from the dental plaque of a human buried at Nanchoc, in which Cucurbita moschata
starch was found that dated to no less than 8401 B.C. The most impressive point here is that
Piperno and Dillehay were able to establish that this was Cucurbita moschata, and that it was
already domesticated. Besides its frequent presence in the dental plaque analysed indicates
it was regularly consumed (2008: 19624). This breaks the date barrier Margaret Towle had long
ago set for the beginning of the domestication of C. moschata in the Late Preceramic.
Next in the chronology comes the Cucurbita found in Guitarrero Cave, at about 2850 masl in
the Cordillera Negra in the Callejón de Huaylas, in Peru’s central highlands. Smith (1980: 104)
reported finding this plant, but establishing whether it was C. moschata or C. maxima was not
possible. It comes from complex II, so it dates in general to around 9000-6700 B.C.
A less reliable context is that of the find made in the excavations at Pikimachay in Ayacucho,
where MacNeish et al. (1981: 160) reported the presence of Cucurbita in the Piki phase (which
has been dated approximately to 6350-5460 B.C.); the archaeobotanical report is still missing
and is required in order to be certain.
More recently, Beárez (2012a, 2012b: 465) documented Cucurbita remains and phytoliths
at Quebrada de Los Burros, a site on the Tacna littoral. This was a seasonal camp that was
occupied ca. 7900-4800 B.C.
The discovery of C. moschata in the excavations undertaken at Huaca Prieta (Whitaker and
Bird 1949), which dates to ca. 3000 B.C., is well known, and similar remains have been found
at Tehuacán (Whitaker and MacNeish 1964). We shall pause here to review the data regarding
the finding of squash at Huaca Prieta due to de interest this famed archaeological site stirs.
w site (Patterson and Moseley 1968: 117), which was calibrated to 3075 B.C.
Whitaker and Bird (1949) reported their finds and we also have the final report made by Bird et
al. (1985: 236-237). For instance, they point out that some 11,000 rind fragments, and over 1,300
seeds from squash and gourds were found in just two excavation pits. The remains of these
plants, which come exclusively from layer M and excavation pit HP3, have been analysed.
The remains of de Lagenaria, Cucurbita ficifolia, and even Cucurbita moschata were recovered
in Preceramic level R (Bird et al. 1985: 237). The evidence points out in this regard that Lagenaria
siceraria and Cucurbita ficifolia were grown simultaneously. However, the chapter on radiocarbon
at Huaca Prieta (Bird et al. 1985: 53) shows that layer R is not dated, so we do not have a direct
reference to an absolute date for these samples. Cutler and Whitaker (1961: 472) reported then
that the Huaca Prieta remains were the earliest found in America of C. moschata. Towle (1961:
94-95) concludes that Lagenaria or gourds were not eaten in the pre-Hispanic period.
The only thing that can be said here is that these plants were used before layer “Q” formed,
i.e. before 2899-2753 B.C.; in other words, squash were being eaten and used to make gourd
utensils at least around the beginning of the third millennium B.C. On the other hand two
dates are available for layer “M,” which gave up most of the squash and gourd remains, one
from a seashell and the other from a jumble of plants.
242
14,000 years of food in Peru
Leaving aside the imprecisions regarding a marine organism-based dating, the gourds and
squash found in layer “M” date to 3354-2631 B.C., which is clearly far too accurate for a standard
deviation. Strangely enough, Whitaker and Bird (1949: 2) had correctly foreseen that these plants
were used at Huaca Prieta in 3000-1000 B.C. They claim that gourds (Lagenaria) were mainly
used as vessels, fishing net floats and so on, whilst the cucurbitaceae were on the other hand
a major source of food. The latter have also been found in the possibly human faeces of the
ancient inhabitants of Huaca Prieta, which means they were eaten (Callen and Cameron 1960).
It should also be noted in this regard that Pickersgill (2007: 927) pointed out the presence, in
the Andean area, of Cucurbita moschata dated to ca. 5000 B.C.
Squash (Cucurbita maxima and Cucurbita moschata) was found in large numbers in the excavations
of La Galgada, a site in Ancash that lies at around 1100 masl, with dates that begin at 2600 B.C.
There is also significant evidence of squash and its consumption in Lima for at least five
thousand years. Both Patterson and Moseley (1968: 115) as well as Cohen (1978: 38) claim
they found squash and Lagenarias (and especially C. ficifolia—lacayote—the earliest in the
sequence) in the Encanto phase at Ancón north of Lima, but they have not presented the
contexts that bear witness to their finds.
Despite the critiques raised against the Ancón sequence (cf. Rick 1983), the resultant calibrated
radiocarbon date for the important occurrence of C. ficifolia was 3452 B.C. Cohen believes
this plant was already domesticated. Margaret Towle suggested as much in her ethnobotanics
handbook (Towle 1961: 139). The persistence of these remains during the Late Holocene on this
part of the coast seems to be confirmed by the discovery of squash at the Pampa de Ancón
Although several species of squash occur throughout the sequence of the site of La Pampa
(Cohen 1978: 39), they gradually diminish. Cohen therefore believes the squash was not a
significant food on this part of the Central Coast, at least in periods subsequent to the above-
mentioned ones.
The burned and unburned remains of Cucurbita ficifolia have been found in the excavations
of Paloma, a site south of Lima in the Chilca Valley, that date to at least 5316-3630 B.C. (Weir
and Dering 1986: 28, Benfer 2008: 377), which means it was clearly eaten at this time on this
part of the Central Coast.
The remains of Cucurbita ficifolia Bouché and Cucurbita maxima Duch (zapallo loche?) were
found quite close to the Casma River mouth at Huaynuná. A series of botanical remains were
found here, e.g. gourds that were studied by botanical experts like Ugent, who dated them to
2914-2287 B.C. (Ugent et al. 1982, Pozorski and Pozorski 1990).
Caral is another site that has been researched, particularly due to its monumental size. It lies
some 23 km inland up the Supe Valley north of Lima. Radiocarbon calibration dated the site
243
Elmo Leon
to 2585-1938 B.C. Shady et al. (2001) reported a series of architectural remains associated with
the macroremains of plant and alimentary resources. Cucurbitaceae were listed among them
but no species was specified.
Two squash seeds, for which no major details have been given, were found in the excavations
of the site of Bandurria, close to Huacho and north of Lima. This means it may have been
consumed here between 3170 and 1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 138).
Following the chronology of Huaynuná, the presence of Cucurbita maxima was recorded at Pampa
de Llamas-Moxeque, a site also in the Casma Valley (Ugent et al. 1984: 420) that dates to 2088-
1243 B.C. It can thus be concluded that both plants were cultivated and used, at least in the lower
Casma Valley, throughout the last millennia B.C. The sequence of the use and consumption of
Cucurbita maxima in Casma extends throughout time, because these same scholars excavated it
at the sites of Pampa Rosario and San Diego, which they date to 800-300 B.C.
Duccio Bonavia also found Cucurbita moschata at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey
Valley in strata that dated to 3200-1480 B.C.
Buena Vista is another recently-excavated site where squash (Cucurbitaceae) have been
reported, not just for food consumption but also to make gourds. Here Duncan et al. (2009)
found this type of plant’s starch and microremains belonging to? three of the species
documented above at Huaca Prieta (C. maxima, C. moschata, and C. ficifolia). Buena Vista has
been dated to 2193-2164 B.C.
Rafael Vega-Centeno (2007) reported many fragments of gourd and squash (Lagenaria siceraria
and Cucurbita pepo) rinds and seeds in the lower Fortaleza Valley north of Lima. They were
found in what can be surmised was edible refuse that dates to 2410-2064 B.C.
Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) reported the discovery of Cucurbita sp. on the North Coast
at Puémape, a site south of the lower Jequetepeque Valley, dated to at least 3008-1000 B.C.
The famed Virú archaeological project also left a major report for the North Coast which
analysed 525 specimens of Cucurbitaceae found in archaeological deposits that dated to ca.
2,000 B.C.-A.D. 1100 (West and Whitaker 1979). It was found that whereas Cucurbita maxima was
frequently found in the earliest phases, Cucurbita moschata was more common in later ones.
The presence of seeds from Cucurbita moschata has been reported at sites, like Castillo de
Tomabal or Huaca de la Cruz, from the Gallinazo epoch (Towle 1961: 91). This species appears
since the Middle Holocene at Nanchoc, some 100 km north of Virú (Dillehay and Piperno
2008), so this hypothesis seems to be finding support.
These authors have suggested that in this part of Peru there was an independent process
of domestication of Cucurbita maxima. The latter is more typical of colder highland zones,
whereas Cucurbita moschata is found in lowland zones; the switch took place almost at the
244
14,000 years of food in Peru
beginning of the Christian era (does loche therefore have highland origins?). This species has
also been recorded in the Cupisnique levels at Huaca Prieta, during the first millennium of our
era (Towle 1961: 91).
In this context it is worth mentioning the research undertaken by Ericson et al. (1989: 77). Through
the study of coproliths they showed the inhabitants of Puerto Moorin, a site actually in the lower
Virú Valley, ate squash at least since the beginning of the Christian era, albeit in small amounts.
Shelia Pozorski (1979: 170) claims the sole fruit eaten at the site of Padre Abán (2300 B.C.) was
Cucurbita sp. (no species was given). It was important as plant food in other sites like Alto
Salaverry, which dates to 1600 B.C. (94%), but its significance gradually declined in Moche and
Chimu Shelia Pozorski (1979: 170).
Jeffrey Quilter et al. (1991: 280) report having found a significant amount of seeds of C.
ficifolia, C. maxima and C. moschata at the site of El Paraíso north of Lima, in the lower
Chillón Valley, thus evincing these three types of squash were being eaten since at least 2150
B.C. Cucurbitaceae have also been found in the coproliths or faeces of the people who lived
at this site. Seeds of Lagenaria siceraria belonging to this same epoch have also been found.
This type of information provides an actual view of the combination of squash that was being
eaten in Lima some 4,000 years ago.
Moving on to the record for the first millennium before our era, Cucurbita sp. has been found
in a fully early Paracas context at Cerrillos, a site in the upper Ica Valley, around 800-600 B.C.
(Splitstoser 2009: 94), which means the Paracas also consumed squash. We should however
not forget Vargas (1962: 110) had already documented the presence of squash in Paracas and
Chimu pottery.
It is likewise clear the Nasca people ate squash (Silverman and Proulx 2002: 52), as is shown
below. Squash (Cucurbita maxima) and gourd (Lagenaria siceraria) seeds were found when
excavating domestic contexts at Casa Vieja, a site in the lower Calango Valley, in the modern
department of Ica (Roque et al. 2003). These finds possibly date to ca. A.D. 530 and A.D. 820,
i.e. Late Nasca and the early Wari Empire (cf. Unkel 2006: 111).
Cucurbita maxima had already been reported in Late Nasca contexts in the Ica Valley even
before radiocarbon had been discovered, ca. A.D. 600 (Carter 1945).
It is possible that when Cutler and Whitaker (1961: 473) said C. maxima having been found
at Ocucaje (ca. A.D. 650) they actually had the same reference in mind, but this cannot be
conclusively established. In this same report, Cutler and Whitaker say they identified the
same species at San Nicolás, a site that dated to ca. A.D. 1200. They also reported finding the
same species at Chulpaca (Ica), which dated here to A.D. 1300-1400.
A good amount of Cucurbita maxima has been recorded at the site of Cahuachi in Nasca
(Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 3).
245
Elmo Leon
The following information shows the Moche frequently ate squash. Few remains of Cucurbita
maxima and Lagenaria siceraria were discovered in the excrement found in the two burials from
Dos Cabezas, a site in the Jequetepeque Valley (Geyer 2003). The burials were dated to A.D. 536-
580 (Moseley et al. 2008: 2003), i.e. the final part of the Mochica occupation. Reinhard et al.
(2007: 536) have, however, questioned the find of the pollen. What this study does in fact leave
clear is that squash was eaten within the context of the Moche culture. Even so the presence
of C. maxima had already been posited several decades ago by Margaret Towle (1961: 90), who
observed depictions of this fruit on Moche pottery. Yet Pozorski and Pozorski (1981: 33) reported
the presence of these remains in a Mochica context that dated to A.D. 711-800.
Lockard (2005: 206) also reported the finding, albeit in small amounts, of Cucurbita maxima,
Cucurbita moschata and Lagenaria siceraria at the site of Galindo, in the middle-Moche
Valley, both during the Mochica (A.D. 600-800) and the Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations.
On the other hand, the research undertaken by Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 125) shows this
type of Cucurbita sp. was frequently consumed (897 peduncles have been found) at the site
of Huaca del Sol during its Mochica occupation, during the first centuries of the Christian era.
Here we must pay special attention to Lagenaria siceraria. Impressively enough, at the Huaca
del Sol an almost 25% increase in Cucurbitaceae seeds took place in regard to the origins of
this plaint in the earliest sites of the Archaic Period; this clearly means squash was one of the
vegetables that most transformations had whilst under cultivation by the Moche, and that its
consumption gradually rose.
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 134) identified the remains of C. maxima in a Moche context (ca. A.D. 400
and 750) at Huaca de la Luna, a site in the lower Moche Valley. It is on the other hand clear
the Moche were acquainted with, and consumed, squash because it was depicted in Moche
pottery, as can be seen in pieces from the Larco and Trujillo museums.
The Wari clearly also consumed squash. Its remains have been found in the excavation
of Beringa (Arequipa), a site that dates to ca. A.D. 650-1000, but the species has not been
identified (Tung 2012: 49).
We likewise have ample evidence that squash was consumed by several Peruvian cultures
in the Late Intermediate Period. Wittmack for instance found squash in the tombs at Ancón
(Ugent and Peterson 1988: 7). These remains may date to the Late Intermediate Period, ca. A.D.
1000-1460.
Cucurbita moschata was found when excavating the archaeological garbage at Chambara and
Quipico, two Chancay sites that have been radiocarbon dated to A.D. 1365-1625 (Nelson and
Bellido Cerda 2010: 50). Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) documented Lagenaria siceraria and
Cucurbita sp. within the same cultural context at Los Pinos, a site in the Huaura Valley.
The Lambayeque Valley is a region with a long proven record of Cucurbita consumption, at
least in A.D. 1300-400 (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596). Perry (2002: 337) found Cucurbita remains in
246
14,000 years of food in Peru
this same epoch but in a different valley—Casma—at Manchán, a site that dates to the Chimu
epoch. The same thing holds for Cerro la Virgen (Keatinge 1975: 226), a site within the context
of the Chan Chan citadel where Cucurbita remains were found as food residues. It is thus
clear that both the Chimu as well as the Lambayeque frequently consumed squash shortly
before the Inca presence in the zone.
Gourds or Lagenaria have also been widely recorded in sites belonging to the Chancay and
Chincha cultures (Towle 1961: 94). This implies that gourds were intensively used on the coast,
at least from the first millennium B.C. up to Inca times.
Cohen (1975: 58) showed Lagenaria and Cucurbita moschata remains have been found in the
Late Horizon—i.e. the Inca epoch (A.D. 1460-1532)—at Panquilma, a site in the middle Lurín Valley.
Towle (1961: 92) did the same for this same species at two Chincha sites. Puruchuco-
Huaquerones is part of this network of sites. Using stable isotope analysis, Williams (2005:
166) was able to establish that squash was eaten in small amounts. It should be noted here
that Margaret Towle (1961: 91, 94) had recorded the presence of squash as well as gourds
(Lagenaria) in Inca contexts at Pachacamac. DeNiro and Hastorf (1985: 113) in turn verified the
discovery of Cucurbita moschata at the shrine of Pachacamac during Inca times.
Cucumber (Cucumis sp., Cucumis sativus)
This is the type of find in which one must be careful with its taxonomic identification, as it
may be a plant that is not native to the Andes. It can therefore be assumed this is a pumpkin
or squash variety, yet in one case it has been identified as C. sativus, i.e. cucumber. Cucumis
belongs to the Cucurbitaceae family and is therefore related to the pumpkin. Bisognin (2002:
718) claims that C. sativus originated in India some 3,000 years ago and that its ancestor was
Cucumis sativus var. hardwickii. It grows between 1,500 and 2,000 masl, especially in warm
zones. The cucumber was rapidly cultivated east of the Himalayas, from where it spread to
China and Europe.
Mostacero et al. (2009: 550) confirmed this is a species native to the Intertropical Asia. Its
fruits are rich in vitamins A, B1, B2, B5 and C, as well as minerals like potassium, calcium,
phosphorus, iron, sodium, silicon, sulphur, chlorine, and magnesium.
Cucumis has been found during the excavation of a series of Preceramic camps south of Lima
at Chilca, which date on average to 3794-1530 B.C. This may thus far be the oldest evidence of
this plant’s potential consumption in Peru.
The Mochica also consumed Cucumis sp., as was documented by the analyses undertaken at
Huaca de la Luna, where Cárdenas et al. (1997: 136) managed to identify it. We can therefore
assume it was part of the food eaten by the Moche in this valley ca. A.D. 400-750.
247
Elmo Leon
Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) found remains of Cucumis sativus at El Pino, a site on the
Central Coast in the lower Huaura Valley which they believe belongs to the Chancay culture.
Lucuma [Lúcuma, Cumala, Locma, Lucma, Pucuna Caspi, Rucma] (Pouteria lucuma (R&P) Kuntze,
Lucuma bifera Mol., Lucuma obovata H.B.K.)
This is one of the fruits that were consumed with relative frequency in the pre-Hispanic Andean
context. Mostacero et al. (2009: 647) believe it was a species native to the intermontane
valleys of Ecuador, Chile, and Peru, and that it was grown by the ancient Peruvians. Although it
originally grew between 2000 and 2800 masl, it can grow in different soils, particularly those
that have rich organic nutrients. This plant can withstand dry environments and occasional
but not excessive rainfall, as well as permanent water sources.
Unlike many fruits, lucuma has a large amount of solid matter and is a good source of
carbohydrates (rich in starch, it provides the daily dose) and calories. Lucuma can be directly
consumed and it has vitamin A (including provitamin A), carotene (particularly relevant),
vitamins B1, B2 B3 (niacin), B5 and C, as well as phosphorus, calcium and iron (the latter in
significant amounts).
Besides being edible, this plant’s wood has good calorific properties. Moutarde (2006: 170)
claims its wood is good as firewood, and it apparently was the main fuel used to feed the
fires during the most recent occupation of Pachacamac, i.e. in the Inca epoch. The presence
of lucuma in an archaeological site can therefore entails not just its use as food, but also as
a source of heat.
Lucuma can be stored for several years in dry condition, and one single tree can give some
500 fruits a year. Some can weigh up to a kilo, but the vast majority are much lighter.
Patiño made ample reference to lucuma in his handbook on tropical fruit Patiño (2002: 162-
163). Patiño claims the first appearance of lucuma in the historical record is in Diego Trujillo’s
1531 account for a place inland from the port of Manta (Ecuador). Lucuma was grown in Lima
and its environs in the sixteenth century and in Trujillo in the eighteenth century, as well as in
the northern Andean valleys and in Cuzco.
Lucuma is a fruit that was identified several decades ago on Peruvian pre-Hispanic pottery,
e.g. some Nasca and Chimu pieces. It can thus be assumed it was eaten on the Peruvian coast
and eventually in other regions too. Yet very little is known of its process of domestication.
Margaret Towle (1961: 76-77) believed the lucuma had its origins in Peru, and that it had
essentially been cultivated for its edible fruits. Towle also noted that its seeds or cotyledons
are frequently found in archaeological sites like Paracas, Ancón, Castillo de Tomabal or Huaca
de la Cruz (in its Gallinazo occupation) in the Virú Valley, as well as in Cahuachi and in Huaca
de Oro in Nasca. Towle likewise pointed out that ceramic depictions of lucuma abound in the
248
14,000 years of food in Peru
pottery of the Moche, Lambayeque, Nasca and Paracas cultures. This means it was present
and was widely scattered throughout the Central Coast since the first millennium B.C.
The most ancient lucuma remains found probably are the seeds from stratum IIb at Guitarrero
Cave (Smith 1980a: 101) that date to ca. 8500 B.C. It apparently was permanently consumed
since then, because its remains have been found in the upper layers of this archaeological site.
At Pikimachay Cave in Ayacucho, MacNeish et al. (1981: 162) reported the presence of lucuma
in the Chihua phase, i.e. ca. 5600-4140 B.C. The ethnobotanic report regrettably remains
unpublished, as has already been noted, which means this datum must be exclusively taken
as a mere reference.
Lucuma was also recorded at Paloma, a site south of Lima that comprises some sort of
domestic settlements in contexts that have been dated to 5316-3630 B.C. (Capps 1987: 33).
Hundreds of lucuma seeds date before 2899-2753 B.C., were found at Huaca Prieta (on the
Chicama River mouth) in section HP3 (Bird et al. 1985: 235). It is therefore assumed the fruit
was directly eaten.
Deborah Pearsall (1999: 274) claims the oldest dates for lucuma on the Peruvian Coast go
back to 2600 B.C. It was only for this period that Margaret Towle (1961: 139) considered its
cultivation may have begun.
Caral, in the Supe Valley and some 25 km from the river mouth, is slightly more recent in
chronological terms. Here the excavations found remains of Lucuma obovata. The indirect
date for these remains is 2585-1938 B.C. (Shady et al. 2001).
Bonavia (1982: 149) also reported having found lucuma at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower
Huarmey Valley, which dated to 3100-1480 B.C.
Similar dates that fall around 2700-2000 B.C.at the Tank site in Ancón, north of Lima, correspond
to the discovery of some lucuma seeds. It can thus be inferred that at this time it was eaten in
this Central Coast site (Cohen 1978: 36). Lucuma seeds would subsequently abound in other
Central Coast sites, and this indicates the significance its consumption had in these societies.
Pouteria lucuma was found at the Final Preceramic archaeological site of Huaynuná (Pozorski
and Pozorski 1987, 1990). Several of the botanical remains found here have been studied. Ugent
et al. (1984: 420) identified this plant at this site between 2914 and 2287 B.C. The excavations at
Pampa de Llamas, a site in the lower part of this same valley, likewise recorded the presence
of lucuma in a later epoch, i.e. 2088-1243 B.
With her archaeological excavation at Salinas de Chao (on Peru’s North Coast), Mercedes
Cárdenas (1999) recorded the presence of lucuma seeds were left behind by its inhabitants
when feeding. Their dates go back to 2000 B.C.
249
Elmo Leon
Las Haldas lies south of the Casma River mouth. This site is an early ceremonial centre
where Ugent et al. (1984: 422) recorded the presence of Lucuma bífera; it was dated, through
association, to 1328-390 B.C.
Buena Vista is an archaeological site some kilometres north of Lima in the Chillón Valley. Here
Duncan et al. (2009) found lucuma (Lucuma bífera) starch on squash fragments, which are
assumed to have been the vessels used to eat this fruit. The date for this site averaged 2050-
1650 B.C. This supports the direct consumption of lucuma by the ancient people of Peru.
Cerro Lampay, in the Fortaleza Valley north of Lima, is an archaeological site that dates to
2410-2064 B.C. where lucuma (Pouteria lucuma) was found (Vega-Centeno 2007). Quilter et al.
(1991: 280) likewise noticed its considerable presence in the rubbish left behind as food refuse
at the archaeological site of El Paraíso in the lower Chillón Valley, not far from Ventanilla,
immediately north of Lima. In this case the approximate date goes back to 2150 B.C.
Pozorski and Pozorski (1986: 390) in turn reported the presence of Lucuma bifera as having
been consumed at Pampa de Llamas, a site in the lower Casma Valley in 2088-1243 B.C.
The Paracas also ate lucuma. Its remains were recorded in the study of Cerrillos, a site in the
upper Ica Valley that dates to ca. 800-60 B.C., where this fruit may have been eaten at this
time in this zone (Splitstoser 2009: 93).
It is likewise clear that lucuma was eaten on the north coast, not just during the Mochica
occupation but also by the Chimu. It was eaten by the people of Puerto Moorin, a Salinar site
in the lower Virú Valley, as was shown by the study of the human faecal remains this people
left (Ericson et al. 1989: 74), and which were dated to around the first and the fourth centuries
of our era. This is a direct evidence of its consumption.
Lucuma bifera has been found in the excrement of at least two burials at the site of Dos
Cabezas, in the Jequetepeque River mouth (Geyer 2003). It is thus clear it was eaten during
the Mochica epoch. The dates gave a time period of A.D. 536-580 (Moseley et al. 2008: 83).
It should also be noted that lucuma was eaten by the Mochica of Huaca del Sol, but it is
present in small amounts (Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 125). The Pozorskis explain that it came
from a cultivated tree, and that this fruit was the favourite one. Huaca de la Luna, where
lucuma remains have been found in Mochica contexts, rises in front of Huaca del Sol (ca. A.D.
450-700) (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 136).
The remains of this fruit have been found in no small amount at Galindo, a site in the middle
Moche Valley, where they date to A.D. 600-800, i.e. the Mochica occupation as well as that
of the Chimu (Lockard 2005: 208).
Lucuma was frequently eaten during the Chimu occupation of the Moche Valley and of
Chan Chan, even during the Inca epoch (Pozorski 1979: 171). At Alto Salaverry (B.C. 1600) it
250
14,000 years of food in Peru
comprised up to 80% of all vegetable products eaten at Caracoles, Chan Chan, during the
Chimu-Inca epoch.
Cutright (2009: 145) in turn found lucuma as part of the Chimu diet at Pedregal, in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley. Keatinge (1975: 226) found it in the garbage of rural sites around the Chan
Chan citadel, as has already been noted.
Lucuma was also eaten in the archaeological sites of the lower Lambayeque Valley throughout
a period of time that extended from 1300 B.C. to A.D. 1400 (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596).
The Nasca likewise ate lucuma. For instance, Piacenza and Pieri (2012: 3) recorded much of its
remains at Cahuachi. This was corroborated by Silverman and Proulx (2002: 52), who claim
lucuma was consumed by the Nasca people.
At Beringa, which dates to the Wari epoch (A.D. 650-1000), Tiffiny Tung (2012: 49) reported
finding lucuma, which makes its consumption at this site in Arequipa highly likely.
Lucuma has also been identified amongst the botanical remains found at Ancón by Wittmack
(Ugent and Peterson 1988: 7), which may date to ca. A.D. 1000-1460.
We have already seen that lucuma was eaten on the Central Coast in the Preceramic. This trend
persisted in subsequent periods. Nelson and Bellido Cerda (2010: 50) report having found lucuma
remains in the excavation of the archaeological garbage of the Chancay culture at sites such as
Rontoy, Quipico, and Chambara, which means it was likely eaten by its inhabitants in A.D. 1265-1625.
Lucuma was also found at Los Pinos, a Chancay site in the Huaura Valley (Lanfranco and Eggers
2010: 79). The research done by Perry (2002: 337) somewhat more to the north, in the Casma
Valley, recorded its presence at Manchán, a site belonging to the Chimu in its southern variant
(A.D. 1470-1523).
The evidence that coastal populations continued intensively consuming lucuma was found
in the excavation of Panquilma, a site in the middle Lurín Valley south of Lima, where large
amounts of its seeds have been found that date to its Inca occupation (Cohen 1975: 53). A
good example confirming this type of consumption is Malanche 22, a village on a loma south
of Lima not far away from the Lurín Valley. Here Mujica et al. (1992: 86-88) found the remains
of lucuma in a context that can be dated to around A.D. 1200-1450. Margaret Towle (1961: 77)
also found the remains of lucuma cotyledons in her archaeobotanical analysis of the Inca
occupation levels at Pachacamac.
Avocado [Palta, Aguacate, Apache, Avocado, Palltai, Parité] (Persea americana Mill)
We now turn to avocado, another plant that also has a significant presence in pre-Hispanic
Peru’s archaeological record. Its significance was such that Hastorf (1999: 52) believes avocado,
251
Elmo Leon
alongside maize and guava (the fruit most eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru) were turned in part into
a memory of places and things, of ancestors and lineages; in other words, avocado helped the
Andean people craft a social world and define the environment.
Hastorf (1999: 41) points out that Bergh claimed the Peruvian avocado tree had its origin in
northern South America. This is a perennial tree that lives all year long, so it is suited for use
as a permanent resource.
Avocado is disseminated over the tropical and subtropical America. In Peru it is grown in the
coastal valleys, the high valleys in the highlands and in the Amazon forest. It grows on well-
drained soils with rainfall (Moutarde 2006b: 136).
Almost all experts agree that avocado was domesticated at Coxatlan, in Puebla (Mexico),
between 8000 and 7000 B.C., where it appears as our first evidence. Here researchers found
not just domesticated but also wild avocado, which means the process of domestication
could be observed from the growth in size of the seeds throughout time (Smith 1966: 169).
Students like Candolle at first posited the avocado was native to Mexico (1896), and so did
Anderson (1952). Hodgson (1950) also claimed from the beginning that Persea americana Mill.
Originated in the Mexican highlands and was taken from there to Peru.
Jaroslav Soukup (1980: 317-318) likewise claimed avocado had its origin in southern Mexico,
from where it spread all over Southern and Central America. More recently, Piperno and
Pearsall (1998: 156) claimed its original habitat lies somewhere between Central America and
the northern Andes including Colombia.
Mostacero et al. (2009: 222) are of the same opinion—they believe avocado originally came
from southern Mexico, Guatemala and the Antilles, and that it later disseminated to South
America.
The study by Heiser (1979: 314-315) is a major work on avocado despite its age. Among his most
important conclusions are that there are three varieties; that modern avocado is the result
of hybridisation; and that although it was likely introduced from Mesoamerica into South
America, a South American origin still cannot be ruled out.
Galindo-Tovar et al. (2007) summarised the history of avocado in America. They mention
previous studies that indicate it was taken from Mexico to Peru through Ecuador at the time
of the Valdivia culture, around 2200 B.C. It is striking that they cite Father Acosta when he
distinguished Mexican and Peruvian avocados, with the latter being bigger and having a
harder rind.
Since all of the available evidence points towards a Mexican origin for avocado, and specifically
the remains found in the cave of Guilá Naquitz, it is worth presenting more detail in this
regard. In a review of the oldest plants in Mexico using AMS, Smith (2005) concluded that the
avocado from level XXIV at Guilá Naquitz should be dated to ca. 6033 B.C., but it should be
252
14,000 years of food in Peru
noted that it was wild and not domesticated. Even so, the incongruent dating suggests it may
be earlier still. This was evinced by the samples of avocado seeds that show cultivation, and
which presumably date to 7641 B.C.
Buckler IV et al. (1998) in turn showed that the avocado from Guilá Naquitz may date to
6670 B.C. (but they acknowledge this may be an intrusion), whilst at Coxcatlán it date to
ca. 6660 B.C. It must be pointed out that the sample is bigger as it comprises 71 specimens.
These evidently are similar dates, so it can be assumed that avocado was consumed in
Mexico since this time.
Still, C. Earle Smith wondered what differences existed between Mexican and Peruvian races
(1968: 258), a point that regrettably has not been fully explored (like the above-cited reference
from Father Acosta). This probably is a line of research that can isolate them and examine
their age in depth, both in South Americas as well as in Central America.
Here we must unavoidably cite some observations made in Patiño’s handbook on American
tropical fruits (2002: 77-88), where it is noted that “palta” comes from a dialect of the Jivaro
language (in intermontane Ecuador), which was incorporated to Quechua as paltay as the
tree’s name. When discussing the avocado in Peru, Patiño mentions the data provided by Cieza
de León, who stated that at the time of the Spanish Conquest it was grown on the North
Coast, from Tumbes to Trujillo.
In the seventeenth century the best known avocados were found in the Ica Valley on the
coast, and in Azángaro in the highlands. Acosta pointed out that whereas Mexican avocado
was smaller and had a thinner skin to peel off, the Peruvian ones were bigger and had a thicker
rind that was completely removed. As for the type of food consumption, Patiño (2002: 87)
points out it was one of the main fruits in tropical America. He believes it was a staple at
harvest time. On the other hand, eating it with salt or sugar may be a custom due to the
Spanish colonists.
The consumption and culinary preparation of avocado happened quite early. Dolores Piperno
and Deborah Pearsall (1998: 200) found charred remains at the site of San Isidro (Colombia)
that had the surprising date of 9589-9029 B.C. However, Piperno and Pearsall have questioned
their being domestic.
Is avocado a good food? It certainly is first-rate, particularly due to its highly-digestible fat,
which was a significant condition in an environment like that of pre-Hispanic Peru, which had
no large mammals, so it may have partially supplemented its inhabitants’ physiological needs.
One avocado can hold 175-400 calories. Its fat (30% of the fruit’s pulp) is highly digestible
as has already been noted, and it abounds in B complex as well as vitamins A, thiamine,
riboflavin, vitamin D in lower amounts, and a little vitamin C (Mostacero et al. 2009: 222). It
also has starch, saccharine, crystallised resins, water, sugar, tannin [tanino], malic acid, and
acetic acid. The dry seeds are used against parasites, like the so-called solitaria or Taenia
solium. We should bear this in mind when discussing palaeoparasites in pre-Hispanic Peru.
253
Elmo Leon
Besides its abundant vitamin and mineral content, Hodgson (1950: 287) emphasised its laxative
properties and its ability to lubricate the intestines.
We now turn to the archaeological record of avocado in pre-Hispanic Peru. Thus far, the
oldest evidence of its cultivation in Peru comes from coastal Ancash. Bonavia (1982: 149)
discovered at least 13 avocado cotyledons at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey Valley,
which dated to 3200-1400 B.C. Bonavia (1982: 314) likewise pointed out that a comparison of
cotyledon size suggests the Los Gavilanes avocado must have been already cultivated, or at
least domesticated. The avocado found at Huarmey includes site PV35-6, which is quite close
to Los Gavilanes; here an avocado cotyledon was found in a context that was dated to 2450
B.C. (Weir y Bonavia 1985: 90). For the moment it is thus clear that avocado was eaten in Peru
at least four thousand years ago.
The archaeological site of La Galgada, also in Ancash, lies at 1100 masl in the Tablachaca
Canyon (in the modern province of Pallasca). Here Grieder et al. (1988: 69) and Smith (1988:
128) noticed the presence of avocado cotyledons. The oldest ones date to 2600 B.C. Their
characteristics made Smith, the ethnobotanist in charge of the study, believe these fruits
come from a tree sown and intentionally cultivated around the archaeological site.
Deborah Pearsall (1999: 274) claims the oldest avocado on the Peruvian coast dates to ca. 2600
B.C., so she may have meant the finds made at La Galgada.
Margaret Towle (1961: 41) in turn says Junius Bird found avocado seeds from the Cupisnique
occupation of Huaca Prieta, i.e. ca. 1000 B.C. onwards.
Vega-Centeno (2007) excavated a rubbish dump at Cerro Lampay, in the Fortaleza Valley some
220 km north of Lima, close to a Preceramic temples-and-patios complex. He found two
earrings made out of avocado seeds, thus implying it may have been eaten. They were dated
to 2410-2064 B.C.
Mercedes Cárdenas (1999) found avocado remains at Salinas de Chao, a site on the North
Coast of Peru, left over from the food eaten by the people at this site since at least 2000 B.C.
Flores Blanco (2006: 234) found clear evidence, albeit in small numbers, that avocado was
eaten at Caral. Actually just one piece of avocado (Persea americana) has been found in this
site in the Supe valley, which dates to 2595-1951 B.C (Shady and Leyva 2003: 115).
The avocado (Persea americana) found at Pampa de Llamas-Moxeque, an archaeological site
in the lower Casma Valley, which was studied by Ugent et al. (1984: 420), is somewhat later. The
dates for the site comprise the period of time that extends from 2088 to 1243 B.C. The site of
Las Haldas is also in the Casma Valley but to the south. Here Ugent et al. (1984: 422) reported
the presence of Persea americana with an associated date of 1328-390 B.C. The continuity of
avocado consumption on the Central Coast is documented by the discovery of this plant’s
remains at sites like Pampa Rosario and San Diego, which have been dated to 800 and 300 B.C.
254
14,000 years of food in Peru
The North Coast’s pre-Hispanic population apparently were great avocado eaters, as we
shall now see. We find it first in the Gallinazo occupation of Castillo de Tomabal, in the Virú
Valley, around the beginning of the Christian era (Towle 1961: 40-41). Its remains have also been
found in the excrement of two Mochica individuals from Dos Cabezas, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley (Geyer 2003). Radiocarbon dated the faces to A.D. 536-580 (Moseley
et al. 2008: 83). Reinhard et al. have however questioned the finding of avocado due to the
quality of the pollen present in the excrement analysed (Reinhard et al. 2007: 536). In any case
this would be a direct evidence of the consumption of avocado.
Shelia Pozorski (1979: 170) showed that avocado was already being eaten in the environs of the
Moche Valley during the occupation of Alto Salaverry (ca. 1600 B.C.), as well as at sites like
Gramalote (1800 B.C.) and the Early Moche huacas (the Huaca del Sol included); during the
Chimu and Inca epochs it was however eaten more consistently and in lower intensity on this
part of the North Coast. It therefore seems clear that avocado was long eaten in the Moche
Valley. Lockard (2005: 208) likewise found remains of Persea americana in relatively significant
amounts at Galindo, a site in the middle Moche Valley, both in Moche (A.D. 600-800) as well
as Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) contexts. On the other hand, the Mochica of Pampa Grande, a site
in Lambayeque that has been dated to A.D. 711-800, usually ate avocado.
There also seems to have been a long tradition of avocado eating in the lower Virú Valley,
which is also on the North Coast. Ericson et al. (1989: 77) showed through coprolith analysis,
that the people from Puerto Moorin, a Salinar site that dates to ca. the first centuries of the
Christian era, ate avocado, as its remains were found in the faeces they studied. The evidence
extends up to the Wari occupation. This is one of the few instances in which we can assume
the data on avocado consumption by human groups on the North Coast is truly reliable.
Avocado has been found slightly more to the north in the middens in the lower Lambayeque
Valley, evidently due to their consumption ca. A.D. 1300-1400 (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596).
Avocado was also a part of the food eaten by the Chimu, as was shown by Cutright (2009:
144) for Pedregal, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, albeit in small amounts. Something
similar has been seen in the Moche Valley. For instance, vessels from Chimu-Inca contexts
depicting avocado can be seen in the Larco Museum (Figure 15).
The Paracas also ate avocado. The remains of this plant were excavated at Cerrillos, a site in
the upper Ica Valley, and were dated in an Early Paracas context; this means it was eaten by
its inhabitants around 800 and 600 B.C. (Splitstoser 2009: 94). Some centuries later, the Nasca
also found the avocado to be a major food (Silverman and Proulx 2002: 52). Towle (1961: 40-41)
had already pointed this for the Nasca occupation of Cahuachi (ca. A.D. 100-500).
Avocado was also frequently eaten on the Central Coast since at least the first millennium
B.C. up to the Inca epoch. Cohen (1978: 36) reported the presence of its seeds at the Tank Site
(Ancón) north of Lima, with dates that ranged between 900 and 600 B.C. Avocado has not,
however, been found in any other Lima site right up to the Late Intermediate Period, starting
255
Elmo Leon
Figura 15. Representación de palta o avocado en cerámica Chimú-Inca procedente del la costa norte. (MUSEO LARCO. LIMA-PERÚ).
at around A.D. 1000 in the well-known Ancón necropolis. Margaret Towle (1961: 40-41) likewise
reported its discovery in the Inca occupation of Pachacamac. DeNiro and Hastorf (1985: 113) in
turn showed avocado remains excavated at the Inca occupation of Pachacamac.
Middens with avocado remains have been excavated by Nelson y Bellido Cerda (2010: 50) in
the archaeological sites of Chambara and Quipico, in the lower Huaura Valley, on the Central
Coast, which date to A.D. 1365-1625 and belong to the Chancay culture. For this same valley
Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) reported avocado remains in the Chancay site of Los Pinos.
One curious datum is that the only depiction of avocado on an archaeological object is in
Vargas (1962: 111), who saw what he believes is an avocado sculpted in an Inca conopa. It was
apparently found in the Apurímac Valley, i.e. at least under 3000 masl, in the ceja de selva.
Cohen (1975: 53) analysed the botanical remains found at Panquilma, a site in the middle Lurín
Valley south of Lima, which correspond to the Inca or Late Horizon occupation. He found
a few avocado seeds in a midden, which means it was also eaten here shortly before the
Spanish arrived.
256
14,000 years of food in Peru
Huachulla (Solanum hispidum)
Little is as yet known of this plant, which in taxonomical terms is a relative of the potato (even
though it has here been considered a fruit). Its fruits look like small, yellow-veined tomatoes,
and its leaves apparently have antianaemic, anticough, and antitumoral properties.
Only one fruit has thus far been recorded in an archaeological context. It was found in level IIa
of Guitarrero Cave, in the Callejón de Huaylas, at around 2850 masl, which means it dates at
least to 9000 B.C. It has an acid taste and is a relative of the species known as cocona (Smith
1980a: 103).
Guava [Guayaba, Bimpish, Guayabillo, Kima, Kumaski, Matus] (Psidium guajava)
Ruehle (1948) claims Psidium guajava belongs to the Myrtaeae genus, which includes for
instance the cinnamon tree and the eucalyptus.
Ruehle believes this plant originated in tropical America, as was claimed by Candolle in 1886.
It is found in tropical America at altitudes that range from 0 to 1500 masl. Pickersgill (1969: 57)
instead claims the guava originally did not grow in Peru, and that it comes instead from the area
east of the Andes, i.e. the montaña. When Duccio Bonavia (1982: 323) examined the evidence for
guava in Peru since the preceramic period he concluded that it was a fruit that must have been
taken to the coast from somewhere along the astern Andes, as is claimed by Pickersgill.
Mostacero et al. (2009: 567-568) likewise hold that although guava is now grown in both
American hemispheres, particularly due to its rich and aromatic fruits, and its high vitamin
C content, it must have had its origin in tropical America, Mesoamerica, in Brazil and in Peru.
The bromatology of guava is of major importance as it was the most-eaten fruit in pre-
Hispanic Peru. During the Second World War, its low cost and high vitamin C output made
it a remarkable source of this vitamin for US troops (Mostacero et al. 2009: 309). It also has
abundant fibre, iron, phosphorus and calcium, as well vitamins like A and C (particularly the
green guava); the latter has on average 218 mg for every 100 grams of edible portion (oranges
in comparison only have 90 mg). Nowadays, more use should be given to this little-known
potential. B1, B2, B5, and G4 are other vitamins found in guava. It also holds mineral salts.
Interestingly enough, one of the properties of this tree’s bark is that it combats tuberculosis.
All of this should be borne in mind when discussing public health in the pre-Hispanic Andes
and the alimentary balance.
Guava has about the same vitamin content as other fruits, like the apple and the banana, but
fewer calories. It should also be noted that white guava has more vitamin C than pink guava.
Hastorf (1999: 41-52) points out guava is a highly productive tree because it gives out fruits all
year long, which probably is one of the reasons it was the most eaten fruit in pre-Hispanic
257
Elmo Leon
Peru. As has already been noted, Hastorf believes guava may have had a major role, alongside
avocado and maize, in the remembrance of things and places, ancestors and lineages, thus
giving rise to a veritable social network.
Patiño (2002: 3) notes that Father Acosta distinguished the Antillean guava, which did not have
a good taste, from the white ones found in Peru, which he believed were best. So this was a
particularly good fruit. Besides, the antidiarrhetic properties of guava, which were known since
the Spanish conquest, are probably due to its tannin content (Patiño 2002: 8). Patiño also believes
that guava is a Taíno term from the Antilles, and that Francisco Pizarro’s men had already noticed
the presence of guava in San Mateo Bay, Atacames, and Puerto Viejo, where it was found in large
numbers and was of high quality. Guava was also grown on the North Coast of Peru, in Tumbes and
Trujillo. It follows from a remark made by Father Cobo that it was intensively consumed in Peru, as
he found some 10 or 12 classes of guava, of different sizes and shape. At the time of the Spanish
contact the guava was widespread almost all over the tropical Americas (Patiño 2002: 195-196).
The advantages guava has go beyond its fruit. Moutarde (2006: 146) pointed out that the
wood from its tree can be used as fuel, and more precisely to cook. Soukup (1980: 338-339) on
the other hand argues that guava was frequently grown in pre-Hispanic Peru, and that both its
leaves as well as its fruit are regularly found in tombs dating to that period.
The oldest guava thus far found possibly comes from Paloma, a site some 65 km south of
Lima in the Chilca Valley that lies close to a loma, where it dated to ca. 5316-3630 B.C. (Weir
and Dering 1986: 28, Capps 1979: 33). Weir and Dering classified these remains as domesticated
specimens. This would mean that guava was being eaten in Peru over seven thousand years
ago and that it had already been domesticated, thus suggesting this process had begun earlier.
Guava fruits and seeds have also been reported for the Pampa phase (Ancón, north of Lima)
around 3075 B.C. (Cohen 1978: 32), and even for the Playa Hermosa phase—which dates on
average to 2634 B.C.— and the Concha phase at 2722 B.C. (Patterson and Moseley 1968: 116-
117). However, the chronology and the finds lack association and contexts. All of these dates
were accepted by Deborah Pearsall (1999: 274). In her review of pre-Hispanic plants from the
neotropics [neotrópico], Pearsall accepted all of these dates and pointed out that guava
appeared on the Peruvian coast since 5700 B.C.
Guava was the most eaten plant at Bandurria, a site close to Huacho (Chu 20008: 138), where
it comprises about 90% of all excavated vegetables. Mostly seeds have been found in almost
all of the archaeological contexts excavated at this site, with the dates falling within a time
period of 3170-1610 B.C.
It is thus clear that the oldest evidence of guava consumption goes back to the Middle
Holocene, and that strangely enough it is concentrated in the sites around Lima.
A few remains of guava fruits and seeds were recorded at the excavation of La Galgada (in
the Tablachaca Canyon, Áncash), a ceremonial sites with dates that begin at 2600 B.C. The
258
14,000 years of food in Peru
seeds come from immature fruits, which made Smith believe they were thrown away. Given
the dryness of this area, the seeds evidently came from other zones (Smith 1988: 140) where
they were originally grown using artificial irrigation (Smith 1988: 141). They date to ca. 2190 B.C.
Remains of guava have also been found at Huaca Prieta on the North Coast, in layers R to C
of excavation pit HP3 (Bird et al. 1985: 235), just like most of the plants found at this site, and
at least in a layer older than 2899-27 53 B.C.
Bonavia (1982: 149) recorded guava remains at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey
Valley, which dated to 3100-1480 B.C. Bonavia included Áspero, Alto Salaverry, and El Paraíso
when reviewing this fruit’s occurrence in preceramic sites, i.e. sites found on the Central Coast
that date to between four and two thousand years B.C. (Bonavia 1982: 323).
Guavas microremains have been excavated at Buena Vista—a site in the Chillón Valley north
of Lima—that date to 2050 [sic?] -2650 B.C. This is guava starch found in gourd [calabaza]
vessels, from which it can be inferred that guava was eaten by the ancient inhabitants of this
site (Duncan et al 2009). This is a clear piece of evidence that guava was in fact eaten using
this type of vessel.
Some remains of guava seeds were found at Cerro Lampay (a site in the Fortaleza Valley north
of Lima), in a midden context with organic remains that had been eaten, and which dated to
2410-2064 B.C. (Vega-Centeno 2007).
The sequence for Caral, a monumental site in the Supe Valley north of Lima, begins almost at
the very end of the Cerro Lampay sequence. Shady et al. (2001) have reported the presence of
guava, which can be dated to 2585-1938 B.C. Flores Blanco (2006: 277) notes that guava was the
fruit most eaten at Caral throughout its occupation. Flores Blanco also pointed out that guava
was found in a hearth, thus clearly showing it was cooked in the fire (Flores Blanco 2006:148).
This type of culinary preparation is striking—it has been shown that guava was sometimes
subjected to heat, and this is a point that should be more explored.
Guava remains have also been recorded around this same epoch in the oldest part of the
occupation—ca. 3008 B.C.—of Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley (Lanfranco
and Eggers 2010: 79).
Quilter et al. (1991: 280) reported also having found an abundant amount of guava in the
excavation of the ceremonial site of El Paraíso, which is immediately north of Lima, close to
the Chillón River mouth. It apparently was the fruit most eaten at the site.
In his report of the plants excavated and eaten at the site of Asia, Capps (1987: 54) reported the
presence of guava Capps (1987: 54) in the lower Mala Valley, which had a mean date of 1490 B.C.
Guava remains have also been found at Cerrillos, a site in the upper Ica Valley, where they
dated to 800-600 B.C. (Splitstoser 2009: 94). It can thus be said the Paracas ate this fruit.
259
Elmo Leon
Ugent et al. (1984: 422) recorded the presence of Psidium guajava at Pampa Rosario, a site
close to the Casma River mouth, which gave the (non-calibrated) date of 810-450 B.C.
Margaret Towle (1961: 141) believed guava probably had been domesticated in Peru only in
the first millennium B.C.
The pre-Hispanic inhabitants of the North Coast also ate guava since early times. Shelia
Pozorski (1979: 170) has shown it was eaten in at least two sites, i.e. Alto Salaverry, where it
dates to 1600 B.C., and another site in the Moche Valley from the Moche epoch.
Guava was also eaten by the Mochica people. Towle (1961: 73) long ago reported it in the
Mochica occupations of Castillo de Tomabal and Huaca de la Cruz, in the Virú Valley.
The excrement of three individuals excavated at the archaeological site of Dos Cabezas, on the
Jequetepeque River mouth, were analysed and found to hold abundant guava remains. These tombs
were dated to A.D. 536-580 (Moseley et al. 2008: 83). It should be noted that guava was consumed
in larger amounts by the upper-class individual, whilst the woman found in the tomb ate a smaller
amount. It is worth pointing out that Reinhard et al. (2007: 536) have accepted the presence of guava
in the excrement here found. This is another piece of evidence that guava was eaten directly.
On the North Coast Lockard (2005: 211) found evidence of guava consumption in a Mochica
(A.D. 600-800) context at Galindo, albeit in small amount. Guava was also found at the Moche
Huaca del Sol site, in the lower Moche valley, but this was a cultivated tree (Pozorski and
Pozorski 2003: 125).
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 138-139) in turn found guava seeds in Mochica faecal remains, so that its
direct consumption by this population is proven.
The presence of guava in Nasca contexts at Cahuachi and Estaquería, on the Central-South Coast,
is evident (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 3). Citing O’Neale and Whitaker, Towle noted these scholars had
already recorded depictions of this plant on Initial Nasca weavings. Guava was also found in the
tombs at Ocucaje, all of which date to around the beginning of the Christian era. In brief, Silverman
and Proulx (2002: 52) have shown the significant presence guava in the diet of the Nasca people.
Guava was also eaten in the department of Ica in the Middle Horizon. Beresford-Jones (2004:
422) found its remains when excavating middens at Samanca, in the lower Ica Valley, that
date to the Middle Horizon around A.D. 600-900. Interestingly enough, Erythroxylum coca
var. Coca is an Andean tree that flourishes under the shadow of guava and pacay trees. These
crops appear to be associated, and may have been so in past times. And although it does
not belong in this book, it is not strange finding evidence of guava associated with coca
consumption from the first millennium B.C. right up to the Inca epoch.
Abundant evidence of guava consumption is available for the Late Intermediate Period (ca. A.D.
1000-1460). For instance, Ugent and Peterson (1988: 7) point out that that Wittmack identified
guava in the Ancón burial contexts, which may belong to the above-mentioned period.
260
14,000 years of food in Peru
Guava was found among the fruits eaten by the inhabitants of the Lambayeque Valley in A.D.
1300 B.C. and A.D. 1400, i.e. from the Cupisnique to the Sicán (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596). This
means there is a long tradition of guava consumption in this zone.
Cutright (2009: 145) found guava remains on the North Coast in domestic contexts at the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, which clearly are the remains of food eaten by the Chimu. Gumerman
(1991, Table 3.4) found guava was the major fruit (by far the most important vegetable source
in the site) at Pacatnamú, on the Jequetepeque River mouth, where it was eaten both by the
elite as well as by the common people (and more frequently by the latter) around A.D. 1350.
Guava remains that date to this same epoch have been found in middens at the sites of
Quipico and Rontoy, on the Central Coast, thus showing they were part of the food eaten
by the Chancay people ca. A.D. 1265-1405 (Nelson and Bellido Cerda 2010: 50). Lanfranco and
Eggers (2010: 79) found guava remains at Los Pinos, a site in the Huaura Valley that has been
ascribed to the Chancay culture.
Large numbers of guava remains have been found for the Inca occupation of Panquilma, a site
in the middle Lurín Valley, thus showing the persistence of its consumption on the Peruvian
coast throughout time (Cohen 1975: 53). And Margaret Towle (1961: 73) mentioned guava seeds
having been found in the Pachacamac shrine, as was later reported by DeNiro and Hastorf
(1985: 113), which were dated to Inca times.
Peruvian Pepper [Molle, Aguaribay, Anacahuita, Gualeguay] (Schinus molle)
Peruvian pepper or molle is a small tree that can grow up to 12 metres long. It grows along
rivers on the Western Cordillera from sea level up to 2300 masl (Kramer 1957: 322), but it can
reach up to 3500 masl (Moutarde 2006b: 24). This is a highly beneficial plant that could be
used in various ways, which is why it is included here. Let us see the history of this major plant
in Peru.
Schinus molle is probably one of the most representative species of the Schinus genus,
especially due to its coral-red fruit that has a very thick skin that looks like pepper, hence its
common name. As regards its distribution, it is found in countries like Peru, Chile, Ecuador, and
Colombia. In Peru it grows both on the Western and the Eastern Cordilleras, from the littoral
coastlands to the Amazon forest.
Mostacero et al. (2009: 464, 466) note that the Schinus genus has some 30 species that are
native to South America, four of which are Peruvian. For Mostacero and his team, Schinus
molle is a species native to the intermontane valleys of south, central and northern Peru that
thrives in hollows, ravines and riverine bushland. It is found on the coast in desert areas, in dry
ravines, in sand dunes, and is relatively able to withstand very dry environments. The process
followed when processing the seeds by making them mature and drying them in order to
prepare the famed “pimienta andina” is well known.
261
Elmo Leon
Three parts of the plant are usually used in Peru—the fruits, the leaves’ juice, and the sap in
the tree trunks. The fruit has peperine and is usually washed in warm water; its slightly sweet
skin is gently rubbed in order to release the liquid that will be used to prepare molle chicha
(Kramer 1957: 322-323). This substance can also be used as syrup, or fermented as vinegar.
Some parts of the plant have beneficial properties that include alleviating rheumatism and
ophthalmia. Molle is even known to repel cockroaches.
Peruvian pepper leaves are an excellent fertiliser when planting maize. Its seeds were exported
as a substitute for pepper when the Spaniards began its commercialisation, albeit without
realising its long-term collateral effects (Goldstein and Coleman 2004: 525). Moutarde, who
authored the only overview thus far made of anthracology in Peru, claims that its wood was
used as fuel, and so the kitchen hearths may have been fed with molle.
When Soukup (1980: 368) discusses molle he says ancient Peruvians grew it essentially to
prepare chicha by rubbing the mature fruits in warm water until it took over a sweetly taste.
This was then filtered through a cloth and left to ferment for 3-4 days. This chicha was taken
alone or combined with maize chicha.
Besides its antispastic properties, Peruvian pepper was also used to prepare honey out of its
resin (Cerrate de Ferreira 1979), a point also made by Horkheimer (1960: 83-84).
In his study of tropical American fruits, Patiño (2002: 207) points out that the molle tree was
planted by the ancient Peruvians near to places of religious worship. As a result, Catholic
priests had them cut down because of the idolatry they entailed.
What evidence do we have for molle in Peru’s pre-Hispanic archaeological record? Weir and
Dering (1986: 28) excavated molle remains at Paloma—a site close to San Bartolo south of
Lima—that probably date to 5316-3630 B.C. Its earliest apparition is associated with guava,
which we have just seen, and took place some six thousand years B.C. on the Central Coast
of Peru.
Schinus molle seeds have also been found at the site of La Pampa with a date of ca. 3090 B.C.,
as well as in other, later sites on the Central Coast (Cohen 1978: 30).
Bonavia (1982: 149) had already noticed the presence of Schinus molle remains at Los Gavilanes, a
site in the lower Huarmey Valley; they held the earliest dates for this site since at least ca. 4000
B.C. Bonavia believes it may have been more extensively used since the Preceramic Period than is
assumed. For instance, Lynch (1980: 9) identified molle pollen in all strata of Guitarrero Cave (in
the Callejón de Huaylas), i.e. since at least 9200 B.C. In his review, Bonavia states that the remains
of this plant have been identified in sites like Asia (south of Lima), where it dates to ca. 1460 B.C.,
and on the Central Coast starting with the Pampa Phase, i.e. 3075 B.C.
From this moment on the use of molle was not recorded until A.D. 650. Goldstein and Coleman
(2004) and Goldstein et al. (2008: 133-166) thus recorded molle chicha as a pre-Hispanic beverage.
262
14,000 years of food in Peru
The role this and other types of chicha had will be discussed later. These scholars believe molle
chicha was the beverage par excellence of the Wari Empire, and that the Incas later replaced
it with maize chicha. Such is the case of Beringa (Arequipa), a Wari site (A.D. 650-1000) where
maize, along with molle, was the main staple. For Tiffiny Tung, the presence of large amounts
of molle peduncles and of ceramic vessels with molle remains suggest that whole bunches of it
were being brought in order to process them, quite likely into chicha (Tung 2012: 49).
More recently, Valdez (2012) published an article where he presents the operational chain
followed when preparing molle chicha, and describes a series of vessels similar to those
used when preparing maize chicha. Valdez has drawn attention to the possibility that the
consumption of this type of chicha was more extensive than was previously assumed; much
less research has, in fact, been devoted to its identification than to its maize counterpart.
Finally, Cohen (1975: 60) reported finding some molle seeds from the Inca occupation of
Panquilma, an archaeological site in the middle Lurín Valley.
Sweet Granadilla [Granadilla, Apicoya, Hutu, Tintin] (Passiflora ligularis Juss)
This climbing plant had its origin in tropical America and grows in the intermontane valleys
between 800 and 2500 masl (Mostacero et al. 2009: 529).
The sweet granadilla was grown in pre-Hispanic Peru not just for its pleasant and edible pulp,
but also as an offering for the huacas (Soukup 1980: 311), but there evidently is very scant
documentation in this regard. Although it was used as food in ancient Peru, it is possible that
the granadilla is native to a vast area that extends across the Andes from Venezuela to Bolivia.
Margaret Towle (1961: 68) had already pointed out that Yacovleff and Herrera had described it.
The evidence at present available is only indicative of the presence of the sweet granadilla
in pre-Hispanic Peru. Some Pasiflora seeds (which for C. Earle Smith, one of the greatest
ethnobotanists, are from sweet granadilla) were recovered in the excavations of the ceremonial
site of La Galgada, in the Tablachaca Canyon (Ancash), which date on average to 1870 B.C.
(Smith 1988: 138). It is therefore possible that future excavations will provide more evidence.
Passion fruit [Tumbillo or Maracuyá Silvestre] (Passiflora foetida)
This is a species native to South America that is often found amongst the brush and in
salpetre and clayish soils, near irrigation canals, on hill slopes and in the tropical forest. It
grows between 25 and 1250 masl (Mostacero et al. 2009: 532).
Only one piece of evidence for this fruit has been found in a pre-Hispanic Peruvian. Cárdenas
et al. (1997: 136) reported (wild) passion flower remains at the site of Huaca de la Luna. It can
thus be assumed the Mochica consumed it in this archaeological site ca. A.D. 400-750.
263
Elmo Leon
Tumbo (Passiflora tripartita molissima)
This plant is often found in Peru’s highlands on slopes, wooded ravines, on the edge of roads,
and so on. It grows from 2000 to 3500 masl.
Tumbo has slightly acid and fragrant yellow-coloured fruits that are rich in nutrients such as
proteins, vitamins A, B1, B2, B5, and C, minerals like calcium, iron, and phosphorus, including
niacin and carotene (Mostacero et al. 2009: 532).
Margaret Towle (1961: 68) listed it as a fruit that was also eaten in ancient Peru, but without
providing specific data. Towle mentions its presence in the Mochica culture since the beginning
of the Christian area but perhaps in wild state or eventually in horticulture.
Hans Horkheimer (1960: 74) recorded a depiction of tumbo on a Paracas Necropolis-style
ceramic vessel.
Kaywa [Caigua, Accoch] (Cyclanthera pedata)
This an annual herbaceous vine cultivated for its fruit, and which grows up to 10 or 20 cm long,
originated in the tropical Americas and is widespread from Mesoamerica to north-western
Argentina (Mostacero et al. 2009: 551, 553). Kaywa is a cucurbitaceae that was probably
domesticated in pre-Hispanic Peru, but little is known of its history. It is known not just for
being edible but also for its medicinal properties as it reduces negative cholesterol, is diuretic,
and has anti-inflammatory properties.
Kaywa can be sown in all regions of Peru up to around 2100 masl. It is an important staple
because it contains pectin, carbohydrates, proteins, vitamin C, salts and minerals (like iron,
calcium, phosphorus, selenium, magnesium, and zinc). Its high fibre content is highly valued
(Tommasi et al. 1999).
Soukup (1980: 149) says kaywa was domesticated in pre-Hispanic Peru, and that some (like
Juan de Arona) noted that it can be eaten filled with meat. Its roots used to be employed for
dental cleaning.
Probably the oldest evidence of kaywa consumption comes from Chilca, a series of preceramic
camps south of Lima, where it was found as part of the alimentary refuse (Capps 1987: 48). The
dates obtained for this site and which were associated with kaywa average between 3794 and
1530 B.C. This same study (Capps 1987: 54) reported the presence of kaywa in contexts in Asia,
a site in the lower Mala Valley, that date on average to 1490 B.C.
The ceramic depictions of kaywa both in Cupisnique as well as in Moche times (Towle 1961:
108) let us suggest that it was known and eaten on the North Coast since 1000 B.C. Towle also
believed kaywa was domesticated in the Andes since the first millennium B.C. (Towle 1961: 141).
264
14,000 years of food in Peru
Geyer et al. (2003: 276) reported finding the remains of kaywa fruits in the excrement of
three individual males from tomb number 3 at Dos Cabezas, an archaeological site in the
Jequetepeque River mouth. The radiocarbon date of this find is A.D. 536-580 (Moseley et
al. 2008: 83). Reinhard et al.’s assessment (2007: 536) verified the identification of kaywa
at this site is correct, which means the determinations are reliable. Pottery, on the other
hand, also shows its presence in Mochica contexts (ca. A.D. 300-400). The evidence for its
consumption is therefore clear.
The scant kaywa remains discovered by Lockard (2005) in the excavations at Galindo, in the
middle Moche Valley, come from a later period, i.e. a Chimu context that dates to A.D. 1000-
1460.
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 134) recorded kaywa remains in a Mochica context at Huaca de la Luna,
a site in the lower Moche Valley, ca. A.D. 400-750.
Kaywa was likewise found in the excavation of the middens at Chambara, a Chancay site in
the Huaura Valley at around 1000 masl, which has been radiocarbon dated to A.D. 1375-1625
(Nelson and Bellido Cerda 2010: 50).
Mito [Papayo, Mito, Mitu, Quemish] (Carica candicans - Vasconcellea candicans, Carica pubescens
- Vasconcellea cundinamarcensis)
Readers will probably be surprised to find this fruit in pre-Hispanic Peru, particularly because
they are acquainted with the tropical papaya (which is frequently sold in the markets).
However, in the pre-Hispanic Andes we are before two different species, the Andean papaya
(Carica pubescens) and mito (Carica candicans -Vasconcellea candicans). We must therefore
distinguish the papaya (Carica papaya L)—which seems to be native to Mexico, as posited
by Soukup (1980: 107), or Central America and the Caribbean (Piperno and Pearsall 1998:156)—
from the papayo or mito strictly speaking. C. pubescens flourishes in the Peruvian Amazon
forest. It is the most widespread species of Andean papaya, from Panama to Argentina and
Chile (National Research Council 1989b: 253-254).
Mostacero et al. (2009: 538) claim C. pubescens (the Andean papaya) is mainly found on the
lomas of the Western Andes, where it grows up to 2800 masl. Nowadays it is found practically
all over Peru.
Patiño (2002: 132), basing himself on Horkheimer (1973), believes Carica candicans (mito) is a
species native to the Andes south of Ecuador, not just in the highlands but also on the coast.
Margaret Towle (1961: 69) in turn noted it grows wild on the Eastern Andes and on the coastal
lomas. Hans Horkheimer (1960: 81) claimed this was the wild papaya, and also pointed out that
its leaves were used to soften meat when cooking—a typical characteristic modern papaya
has in this same task.
265
Elmo Leon
By the early seventeenth century colonists report the presence of papaya, particularly in various
countries in Central America. Francisco Pizarro and his men saw papaya (obviously without
noticing its species) in Puerto Viejo, on the Ecuadorean coast, when they passed that way in
1531. For Patiño, this shows it had been domesticated in this region and probably to the south
too, on the North Coast of Peru. So it is possible that the papaya was already under cultivation
by the time of the Spanish Conquest. The first immigrants reported one type of papaya (Carica
septenlobata) close to Pozuzo (an affluent of the Huallaga River) (Patiño 2002: 136-137).
Even so, it is possible that the papaya was also eaten in the pre-Hispanic Andes. Daniel Gade
(1999: 1255), a prolific ethnobotanical researcher, notes in this regard that Carica papaya
originally came from the eastern Andean valleys—i.e. the ceja de selva—but that its most
ancient use (including that of food) is recorded for Mesoamerica. In future it would therefore
be worth having interdisciplinary studies in terms of taxonomically documenting the species
that are excavated and studied in the Peruvian Andes.
Is there any evidence of the pre-Hispanic consumption of the two or three species of Carica
described above in the Andean region? There is, in fact, but not much, and the evidence goes
back to the beginning of Andean archaeobotanics. For instance, Ugent and Peterson (1988:
7) mention the presence of “papaya” in the botanical collections from the excavations Reiss
and Stubel made at Ancón. The collections are held by the Berlin Museum, and a modern
identification and analysis would be interesting. These finds suggest the possibility that this
type of papaya was consumed in Peru around Lima since the beginning of the Christian era.
Yet there apparently is a more ancient evidence of papaya consumption. Carica candicans
(mito) seeds have been found at Paloma, an archaeological site south of Lima close to San
Bartolo, which date to 5316-3630 B.C. (Weir and Dering 1986: 28, Capps 1987: 33).
Vargas (1962: 111, fig. 18) on the other hand recorded the presence of a “papaya” (mito?) fruit
in Nasca pottery. It appears from what can be seen that he is correct. It should also be noted
there is a type of Carica (papaya) in Mochica pottery, as is being shown in this book thanks to
the courtesy of the Museo Larco.
In brief, although very little information is as yet available, it is clear that mito (and possibly other
Carica species) was being eaten on the Peruvian coast since around seven thousand years ago.
Palillo [Palillo Peruano] (Campomanesia linearifolia)
According to Mostacero et al. (2009: 563), palillo is a native species to the Amazon forest of
Eastern Brazil, Peru, Colombia and Bolivia. Readers should not confuse it with the modern
turmeric, the flavouring used in Peru that is of Persian origin. Palillo is found in transitional
forests, and eventually in cultivated form. Its fruit is fragrant like that of guava, and it is
edible in its natural state. It has vitamins such as B1, B2, and B5, and minerals like calcium,
iron, and phosphorus.
266
14,000 years of food in Peru
Margaret Towle (1960: 141) believed this plant was domesticated in Peru only since the first
millennium before our era.
Although there is scant evidence of the presence of palillo in Peruvian archaeological contexts,
it did appear at quite an early epoch and was relatively well disseminated. The earliest
evidence of its potential consumption in Peru comes from Caral, where it came third among
the resources of vegetable origin found in the excavations of this well-known archaeological
site in the Supe Valley, which was dated to 2595-1951 B.C. (Shady and Leyva 2003: 115).
Margaret Towle (1961: 72) reported the remains of this fruit at El Paraíso, a site in the lower
Chillón River Valley, where they probably date to ca. 2150 B.C.
Mark Nathan Cohen (1978: 36) also reported the presence of this type of fruit’s remains in the
early part of the Early Horizon Tank site at Ancón, around 800 B.C.
But Nasca is where we have more evidence available on the potential consumption of palillo.
Towle (1961: 141) had already reported its presence at Cahuachi, which many consider the
major Nasca ceremonial centre including Huaca del Oro. More recently, during its excavation
of the ceremonial centre itself the Italian archaeological mission recorded no less than 16
kilos of palillo, found as offerings made in the site. According to Piacenza and Pieri (2012: 9),
this volume makes this fruit the most significant one found at this major archaeological site.
They report the fruits are between 1 and 3 cm in diameter, but noted there are no depictions
on the pottery.
Again, Margaret Towle (1961: 141) reported palillo among the remains from the Inca epoch
excavated in the Pachacamac shrine.
Peanut Butter Fruit [Ciruela del Fraile, Cansaboca, Ushum, Usuma] (Bunchosia armeniaca)
This is a tree or bush that grows in Peru and is cultivated for its fruits, the edible peanut butter fruit
which has a fleshy and reddish pulp and an olive-green skin (Mostacero et al. 2009: 442-443).
According to the Centro Nacional de Alimentación y Nutrición (2009: 24-25), this fruit has
21.5 g of carbohydrates, 20 mg of calcium, 53 mg of phosphorus and 36.8 mg of vitamin C,
which means it was important in the pre-Hispanic diet, particularly on the coast, where it is
often found due to the above-noted circumstances. It grows between 1500 and 2400 masl
(National Research Council 1989a). It probably originated in the Amazon forest (Piperno and
Pearsall 1998: 157).
Patiño (2002: 202-204) points out that in eastern Peru the peanut butter fruit is known as
“cansaboca” and “indano”. He also draws a distinction as regards the “ciruela” because the
Spanish gave this name to two species, i.e. the one we are now discussing and another one
called Spondias purpurea, which means we must be careful when reading the chronicles.
267
Elmo Leon
What he does find correct is that the description of a “(red) flesh-coloured fruit” that was
“soft and sweet to excess,” shows Francisco Pizarro found Bunchosia at Puerto Viejo. Soukup
(1980: 95) also points it is red and sweet.
The peanut butter fruit is relatively abundant in Peru’s archaeological record, for instance in
the excavation of the preceramic villages at Nanchoc, on the North Coast. Here it was found
as a food residue, as some remains were found charred and dried (Rossen et al. 1996: 398). The
remains come from level 4, which has been calibrated to 7214 B.C.
It was also found in layers “R” to “D” of the excavations at Huaca Prieta (Bird et al. 1985: 234),
which means it comes from the oldest layers in the site, before 2899-2753 B.C.
Deborah Pearsall (1999: 275) agrees with this chronology, and dates the earliest Andean
finds of this fruit to ca. 2600 B.C. Margaret Towle believed its cultivation began around
3000 B.C.
Some specimens of Bunchosia armeniaca were recorded in the excavations of La Galgada, a
site in the Tablachaca Canyon (Ancash), with dates that can go back to 2600 B.C. The analysis
seems to indicate that the trees which gave these fruits were artificially irrigated. The size of
these fruits also shows these are cultivated specimens (Smith 1988: 132-133). It thus seems that
Margaret Towle was right.
Bunchosia armeniaca was apparently still being consumed, but this time on the North Coast.
Lanfranco and Eggers (2010: 79) found its seeds at the site of Puémape, where they dated to
3008-339 B.C.
Ugent et al. (1984: 420) reported the presence of Bunchosia armeniaca at Pampa de Llamas,
on the Central Coast in the lower Casma Valley, which was dated to 2088-1243 B.C. Its
consumption in the lower Casma Valley was documented through excavations, in which these
plants were found at Pampa Rosario and San Diego, sites that were dated to 800-300 B.C.
(Ugent et al. 1984: 422).
Cohen (1978: 35) recorded the presence of peanut butter fruit in the Tank site at Ancón, in Lim,
where it dates to ca. 1000 B.C.
Pozorski (1979: 170) recorded the consumption of this fruit in the Moche Valley and somewhat
more to the north in this zone—but still on the coast—at sites that date to 1600 B.C., like Alto
Salaverry, Moche occupation sites in the Moche Valley, and even right up to the Chimu epoch
in the city of Chan Chan.
Bunchosia armeniaca was evidently eaten by the three individuals buried at Dos Cabezas, a
Mochica archaeological site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley (Geyer 2003). The remains of
this fruit have been found in the excrement from these individuals and radiocarbon dated
to A.D. 536-580 (Moseley et al. 2003). Reinhard et al. (2007: 535) criticised this taxonomic
268
14,000 years of food in Peru
determination because this plant does not grow in the environs of the lower zone occupied by
the Moche, and because its pollen leaves few traces in excrement. Pozorski and Pozorski (2003:
125) however recorded “cansaboca” in a Mochica context at Huaca del Sol, and emphasised
that its fruits may come from a cultivated tree.
Research at Huaca de la Luna also recorded remains of Bunchosia armeniaca. Margaret Towle
(1961: 61) reported that Julio C. Tello found three jars bearing depictions of this fruit.
Margaret Towle mentioned the finding of this type of fruit on the Central Coast at Vista
Alegre and Playa Grande (Lima), which it can be speculated date to just a few centuries before
the Christian era.
The people of the Nasca culture also ate Bunchiosa. Roque et al. (2003) published their finding
of this fruit at Casa Vieja in Samanco, a Late Nasca and Wari site in the lower Ica Valley (A.D.
530-820). According to the author [sic], this type of plant grows between sea level and 3000
masl. It should also be noted that several remains of this fruit were found in the Nasca shrine
of Cahuachi (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 3).
Bunchiosa was eaten on the Central Coast some centuries before the Inca occupation, just
like it had been before. Such was the case of the Chancay people. Nelson and Bellido Cerda
(2010: 50) found remains of this fruit in the middens of Chambara and Quipico, two sites in
the lower Huaura Valley that date to A.D. 1365-1625. It was also eaten in a Chancay context in
this same valley at Los Pinos, a site some 4 km from the sea (Lanfranco and Eggers 2010: 79).
It is likewise clear the Chimu ate this fruit. Perry (2002: 337) verified this at Manchán, a site
in the Casma that belongs to this culture’s southern variant (A.D. 1470-1523). Pedregal, in the
lower Jequetepeque Valley, is another Chimu site where Cutright (2009: 144) found remains
of Bunchiosa associated with the remains of other foods eaten by the ancient inhabitants of
this valley.
As for Inca culture contexts, Cohen (1975: 59) noticed a marked occurrence of Bunchiosa
remains at the site of Panquilma (in the middle Lurín River Valley), starting at A.D. 1460. The
specimen Margaret Towle (1961: 61) found in the botanical materials excavated at Pachacamac
belongs to this same epoch.
Sweet Cucumber [Pepino dulce] (Solanum muricatum Aiton, Solanaceae)
The sweet cucumber belongs to the Solanaceae family, so it is a relative of the potato. Despite
being a tuber, it is included in this section due to its condition as a “fruit.”
For the National Research Council (1989a: 14), the sweet cucumber is another species that is
entering international trade and holds great potential for the Andes, particularly in areas like
Europe, North America, and the Canary Islands, amongst others.
269
Elmo Leon
Prohens et al. (1996) point out that the cucumber spreads rapidly and is cultivated on various
soils, even under conditions of moderate salinity or flooding for several days. So it is in some
way resilient. In the Andean area it can grow from sea level up to 3500 masl, albeit without
frosts.
How is the sweet cucumber’s bromatology defined? First of all by its content of vitamin C
(45-70 mg for every 100 grams), vitamin A, just 7% carbohydrates, and above all 92% water
(National Research Council 1989b: 300). It also has antiscorbutic properties and regularise renal
functions. In Peru it is eaten directly as a fruit, and its consumption is a tradition thousands
of years old (Fernández and Rodríguez 2007: 209). So like all solanaceae, it is a good source of
vitamin C (León 2000: 322).
Where did the sweet cucumber originate? This issue has been debated for decades. While
some scholars (e.g. Correl 1962; Heiser 1964, 1979) claimed Solanum capirense may have been
the wild ancestor of Solanum muricatum, others (Bruecher 1966) hold the opposite position.
According to the genetic studies of wild cucumbers, Blanca et al. (2007) showed the greatest
centre of Solanum muricatum diversity was in northern Ecuador and southern Colombia,
and therefore suggest this zone as its origin centre. They also recorded a series of other wild
plants involved in this process that are still unknown. It should be noted that this analysis
included Peruvian cucumber plants from sites like Chimbote, Ayacucho, Lima, and the Virú
Valley.
The National Research Council (1989b: 303) notes that cucumbers must be native to some
temperate area in the Andean highlands—a more general statement. Its depictions however
show it was evidently known and consumed in pre-Hispanic Peru.
Jorge León (2000: 323) has a more sceptical position, for he claims there are no wild species
from which it could be derived. For León, the closest species is Solanum tabaoense.
Margaret Towle (1961: 84, 141) in fact claimed it was of Peruvian origin, and that it was
domesticated since the first millennium before our era. Towle believed the cucumber was
one of the fifteen species domesticated around that time in Peru.
Patiño (2002: 222-223) claims in regard to the sweet cucumber that its Quechua name was
“cachon,” and that it was called “pepino” due to its similarity to a Spanish cucurbitaceae
(Cucumis sativus) the Conquistadores tried to establish in America.
Patiño also points out that Cieza de León evoked the sweet cucumber when listing the “unique
American fruits from the irrigated plains of the Peruvian coast.” It is also informative that Inca
Huayna Capac ate this fruit when he passed through the Chimu kingdom, and was impressed
by its sweet taste. Cieza de León would later point out how delicious this fruit was whilst he
was in Chincha. He claimed one had to eat several of them in order to feel satisfied.
270
14,000 years of food in Peru
It should also be added that according to Patiño, Acosta claimed having found the pepino
only on the “coastlands of Peru” but not elsewhere. He also points out that Bernabé Cobo
described the colour of the sweet cucumber: purple, yellow and white, with the first being
more typical and with variations present longitudinally. Also, the best were those from Trujillo,
Ica, and Chincha (Patiño 2002: 222).
What of the archaeological record of the sweet cucumber? At present little evidence is
available in Peruvian sites; however, Margaret Towle showed in her handbook on Peruvian
ethnobotanics (1961: 84) that we have a series of ceramic depictions of this fruit, especially
for the Salinar, Mochica, and Nasca cultures. The present writer has also seen them in
Middle Moche pieces that date to ca. A.D. 400 in the collections of the Museo Nacional de
Arqueología, Antropología e Historia del Perú and the Museo Larco. It can thus be inferred
that it was consumed by the people from this famed culture. Its consumption by the Nasca
was likewise corroborated by Silverman and Proulx (2002: 52).
Vargas (1962: 111) includes the Paracas modelled pottery in this list. And since it also appears in
a Cuzco Inca conopa, this confirms the sweet cucumber was present in both the coastal and
highland pre-Hispanic diet.
Virtually the only palaeobotanical evidence of the consumption of sweet cucumber comes
from the North Coast of Peru. Its seeds were found in the faecal remains from Puerto Moorin, a
Salinar site in the lower Virú Valley that dates to the first centuries B.C. (Ericson et al. 1989: 74).
Inca Berry, Peruvian Cherry [Aguaymanto, Capulí, Tomatillo] (Physalis Peruviana)
Physalis Peruviana belongs to the family of the Solanaceae and has similar characteristics to
the tomato and the potato. It is an herb that usually grows on the coastal valleys, on the edge
of canals and in farm fields. Mostacero et al. (2009: 797) claim it is native to the Andes even
though it is now grown in warm countries between 600 and 3240 masl. Its fruits are of round
shape, yellow, and sweet.
As for its bromatology, Physalis Peruviana has carotene (as vitamin A), thiamine, riboflavin, nicotinic
acid, and above all vitamin C and ascorbic acid (which means it has antiscorbutic properties) which are
essential for all human organisms (Gutiérrez et al. 2007), and it also improves iron absorption (Larsen
2000). The minerals it has include sodium, iron, sodium [sic], copper, sulphide, with phosphorus and
potassium being particularly abundant. It also has a considerable amount of pectin. Its main acid is
citric acid, but it also has tartaric and malic acid (Khare 2007: 1186). Soukup (1980: 322) says it was eaten
in pre-Hispanic Peru, and that it was introduced into Europe only in 1779.
Although there is scant documentation regarding its ancestral consumption, it may well have
been one of the most eaten fruits. The analysis of the remains of human faeces from sites
along the Peruvian coast is clearly required because of the advantages it presents for the
preservation of organic remains.
271
Elmo Leon
One good example is the analysis of human coproliths from the sites of Chilca, Asia, and El Paraíso,
where John Jones (1988: 84) found Physalis Peruviana seeds, from which it can be concluded that
this fruit was being eaten since around 3000 B.C., and continuously up to the first millennium B.C.
Of these three sites, the clearest evidence comes from El Paraíso, which is immediately north of
Lima in the lower Chillón Valley, and which was occupied since 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 280)
Physalis Peruviana pollen was found in human faecal remains from the archaeological site of
Los Gavilanes (lower Huarmey Valley, Central Peruvian Cost) in a context that was dated to
3200-2200 B.C., so it is may have been part of the food eaten by this early people (Weir and
Bonavia 1985: 99).
It is thus clear that Physalis Peruviana was being eaten on the Central coast at least five
thousand years ago, but more research is still required in this regard.
It is known that Physalis Peruviana was eaten in the Andean region in subsequent pre-Hispanic
periods (Pickersgill 2007: 927). More evidence comes from the site of Galindo, in the middle-
Moche Valley, where Lockard (2005: 211) was able to record a large amount of this fruit’s seed
in the midst of food contexts from the Mochica (ca. A.D. 600-800) and mostly from the
Chimu occupation (A.D. 1000-1460) occupation of this site. Both North Coast populations
therefore ate Physalis Peruviana.
It is known that in colonial times Physalis Peruviana was grown around Lima in the eighteenth
century, and that it was grown around Cali, in Colombia, shortly after the Spanish Conquest
(Patiño 2002: 220).
Sapote (Capparis angulata, Capparis scabrida)
This is a xerophytic plant that is distributed across the South American Amazon area. In Peru it
is found in Tumbes, Piura, Lambayeque, and La Libertad from 0 to 1600 masl. Its wood and ...
[derivados en gomas] are highly appreciated. The same holds for Sapote as food, particularly due
to the pulp of its fruit which comprises 15% carbon hydrates [hidratos de carbono], 19% proteins, 6%
fat, vitamins A and C, mucilages, resins, organic acids, tannins, saponins, calcium, iron, magnesium,
sodium, and potassium, which give it a high nutritional value (Rodríguez et al. 2007).
Sapote seeds have been found at Huaca Prieta (Bird et al. 1985: 237). Like many of the plant
remains found at this site they come from the deepest layer, i.e. “R,” which means they must
be earlier than 2899-2753 B.C.
Capparis angulate was found in the excavation of Huaca de la Luna in the lower Moche Valley.
This means the Mochica may have eaten it ca. A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 134).
It has likewise been recorded—albeit for a much longer period of use, from A.D. 1300 to A.D. 1400—in
the middens with food remains in the lower Lambayeque Valley (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596).
272
14,000 years of food in Peru
Clavillo (Jusseia peruviana, Ludwigia Perúviana (L.) H. Hara)
This is plant from the Onagraceae family whose fruits grow in the valleys of the Central
Peruvian Coast. Probably the only report of Jusseia peruviana consumption comes from the
study Cohen (1978: 29) made of this plant’s remains at site PV45-26, in the lomas de Encanto,
close to Ancón and north of Lima, date to ca. 3500 B.C.
Wild Tomato, Cherry Tomato? [Tomate silvestre] (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., Lycopersicon
peruvianum Dun., Solanaceae)
Janet Long (2000: 351-358), when summarising the history of the tomato in The Cambridge
World History of Food, included important information that must be briefly included here.
This plant can adapt to several climates and environments and has a high vitamins A and C
content, more than is usually believed.
Although the wild tomato is known as Lycopersicum esculentum, there actually are seven wild
species all from the South American northwest. The wild relatives of tomato are confined
to a coastal swath that extends from Ecuador to northern Chile, including the Galapagos
Islands. In fact the Lycopersicum esculentum var. cesariforme (cherry tomato) is possibly the
oldest direct ancestor of the modern tomato, and the only wild tomato found outside South
America, for instance in Mesoamerica and Mexico.
In this regard, Rick and Holle (1990) reached the conclusion, through phylogenetics and hybridisation
botanical studies, that the Central Andes, i.e. Peru and Bolivia, were instead a secondary centre of
wild tomato variability, which means it is not the primary domestication area.
Daniel Gade (1999: 1255) has drawn attention to the edible fruit of an egg-shaped, acid-tasting
tomato tree (Cyphomandra betacea) of South American origin. Fernández and Rodríguez (2007:
208) hold that although the tomato in wild condition is native to the western Central Andes,
when the Spaniards reached America only the Mexicans grew it in the maize fields; however,
they claim it was of no importance. Fernández and Rodríguez even claim that in Mexico the
term “tomato” meant Physalis ixocarpa. This means there is some debate regarding this plant,
and it is not really clear that tomato itself was being cultivated by the Mexicans.
Nevertheless, since there are no archaeological remains or linguistic references, Long (2000)
concluded the Andean people did not cultivate the tomato even though they were acquainted
with in wild state, while the Mesoamericans and Mexicans did grow it. One piece of evidence
of its introduction into the Andes in the Hispanic period is that it retained the natural or
Aztec name tomatl.
It is also interesting, as Long notes, that the tomato has a history quite similar to that of ají—
both species are native to South America and were domesticated in Mesoamerica.
273
Elmo Leon
In fact, the zone where tomato domestication took place was perhaps the Puebla-Veracruz
(Mexico) area, which James Jenkins claims has the greatest variety of tomatoes. Its form was
originally similar to that of the cherry tomato. The experiments made to domesticate it made
it larger and it ended up as L. sculentum. Establishing how the cherry tomato’s seeds migrated
to Mesoamerica is extremely difficult. It may have taken place both by water or by the wind,
and even through birds. The seeds may even have been taken by humans with contacts that
probably began around 1600 B.C.
The oldest evidence of L. sculentum being consumed comes from Tehuacán in the Valley
of Mexico ca. 9000-5090 B.C. At Tehuacán, the molcajetes (grinding vessels) have been
interpreted as actual tomato processors, in which it may have been ground jointly with chili
in order to prepare pastes or sauces (molli: sauce).
The tomato was taken to Spain once the Spaniards had conquered America. From there it
moved to Italy, where the Mediterranean climate and type of food (of roman roots) ensured
its rapid dissemination. In fact, the first reference to the tomato in Italy was made in 1544 by
Petrus Andreas Mathiolus, who gave it its name of pomi d’oro. Shortly afterwards, in 1575,
Piero Antonio Michel called the tomato poma peruviana (Long however believes Michel
had no idea Peru was the real origin centre of the tomato). It was only in 1692 that Antonio
Latini published the recipe for tomato sauce in Naples, which it had reached from Spain
precisely in the same way it was prepared by the Aztecs—ground with chili as a sauce (Long
2000: 356).
The presence of the tomato in pre-Hispanic Peru is as yet scant and not widespread. At first
it was initially suggested that it had its origins in Peru (Candolle 1886). Anderson (1952) and
Vavilov (Smith 1968: 255) concurred, but the latter also included Ecuador, Chile, and Bolivia as
origin areas.
Smith (1968: 263) however noted that the only archaeological evidence available at the time
he published dated to 800 B.C. (uncalibrated) and came from Coxcatlán (Mexico). Smith
also points out tomato comes from the Náhuatl tomatl. Even so, its biggest distribution is
on the Pacific coast of South America, so the logical conclusion would be that it was first
domesticated in this area.
The National Research Council (1989b: 191) believes the tomato is of Peruvian origin but
apparently it was not used as food, as did happen in the Mesoamerican zone. It apparently
had its origin on the Peruvian coast, and when it reached Europe it was described as a yellow
fruit that was believed to be poisonous. Even so it entered the United States in 1710, and by
1779 it was already being used as ketchup.
Patiño (2002: 442-445) points out that the tomato takes its name from the Náhuatl xitomatl,
and that the Indians probably consumed it as a fruit and not as a vegetable, as is the case
nowadays. He also claims those who have studied the Lycopersicum genus believe the tomato
is native to the Andes.
274
14,000 years of food in Peru
In this regard, the tomato first appears in the chronicles in 1578. After an El Niño phenomenon,
the people in the corregimientos of Trujillo and Zaña, on the North Coast of Peru, were
starving and alleviated it by consuming carob pods and cooked guava seeds. A witness from
Túcume claimed the tomato was used as emergency food.
In Peru, the wild species L. hirsutum H. et B. and L. Perúvianum Mill are known. Some students
claim friar Tomás de Berlanga, de bishop of Panama, took the tomato from Peru to Central
America. José de Acosta noted already in 1587 that a “delicious” sauce was made from the
tomato.
Some observations have to be made here. Vargas (1962: 112) for instance claims phytomorphic
depictions of tomatoes are extremely rare, and one may be of Inca origin. Jenkins (1948) in turn
had already suggested that although the tomato conquered Europe from Mexico, it had really
been brought there from some part of Peru or Ecuador, either in wild or cultivated condition,
because its centre was the South American coast from 0° to 30°S. Here Jenkins posits that
the wild form Lycopersicon esculentum var. cerasiforme was found in this region. Others
claim that L. esculentum derives from L. pimpinellifolium, which is native to Peru and Ecuador.
However, the Veracruz-Puebla region has a wide range of tomatoes, so we can assume this
may have been another origin centre.
The archaeological record holds little data on the Andean tomato. For example, Weir and
Dering (1986: 28) found remains of Lycopersicon esculantum at Paloma, a site close to San
Bartolo, some 65 km south of Lima, which date to ca. 5316-3630 B.C.
Lycopersicum was also found in the excavations of Casa Vieja, a Nasca site in the Ica Valley, so
it must have been consumed there throughout the first centuries of the Christian era (Cook
and Parrish 2005: 139).
Horkheimer (1960: 75) believed that although tomato cultivation was not too widespread in
Peru, it did take place in the pre-Hispanic period.
Tamarillo [Sachatomate, Tomate Andino, Tomate de Árbol] (Solanum betaceum)
A native of the eastern Andes, tamarillo grows from 500 masl upwards. These are small trees
that give slightly elongated and pedunculated fruits 4 to 10 cm long that have a bitter taste.
When parboiled they become bittersweet and hold significant amounts of vitamins A, B. C,
E, and iron.
Tamarillo is often grown alongside the ají. It is included in our food list because Fernández
and Rodríguez (2007: 205) claim that although it does not appear among the archaeological
remains found on the coast, some ceramic vessels have been found close to Trujillo with
tomato depictions. Evidently this all is just pure speculation as long as no scientific proof is
presented in this regard.
275
Elmo Leon
Peach Palm [Pijuayo, Chonta de Comer, Chontadura, Pijibay, Pupuña] (Gulielma gasipaes, Bactris
gasipaes Kunth)
This plant is included in our record even though thus far no Peruvian archaeological context
proves its consumption. The peach palm however had its origin in the Amazon and is partially
Peruvian in origin, so it may have been consumed before (it was domesticated in the pre-
Hispanic period). It should therefore be borne in mind when reviewing the pre-Hispanic
diet—at least at a speculative level—due to its significant oil (cholesterol-less) content and
its content of 11% protein.
Two taxonomic precisions regarding this species are in order. Up to two decades ago it was
known as Gulielma gasipaes, but this has been corrected to Bactris gasipaes Kunth (Uhl and
Dransfield 1987). Second, based on botanical arguments Bernal (1989) posited that Bactris
gasipaes should be used as a synonym of what was previously called Bactris ciliata, and that
the latter taxon should be eliminated (this means it is just one single species).
Thus a revision of the genus Bactris in Mostacero et al. (2009: 1034-1036) shows no reference is
made to B. cilata. Both precisions have been made because the major handbook on Peruvian
ethnobotanics—which this writer believes is still valid (Towle 1960: 28-29)—separates both
taxa; this means some taxa have changed in the forty plus years that have gone by since its
publication. Augusto Weberbauer (1945: 147) in turn mentioned Gulielma ciliata as pijuayo,
which the Indians of Tarapoto often grow for its edible fruits.
The peach palm is a type of palm from the Arecaceae family that is spread throughout the
world [se halla difundida globalmente] as well as in various regions in tropical South America,
from Honduras to Bolivia. Towle (1961: 28) says this plant has many uses, and this is precisely
why the Amazon peoples undertook its domestication.
In Peru the peach palm is grown in almost every village by the people of the department of
Loreto. Its soft, red- or orange-skinned fruit is eaten and called the palmito. Although hard,
even the white pit is edible. It is believed that the potential of palm consumption suffices as a
daily food, as in the case of the Aché group. In fact the pejibaye was the most important fruit
in all of the neotropical contexts in the Americas (Piperno and Pearsall 1998: 58). Piperno and
Pearsall believe it was definitely domesticated in the pre-Hispanic period.
Pijuayo grows in humid and warm environments with mean temperatures of 25° or more. It
prefers acid soils (ph5) in environments with rainfall and between 1700 and 4000 masl. This is
the most important palm since the pre-Columbian period (Mora Urpi 1993). Its seeds have 30%
oil, similar to that of the coconut (Soukup 1980: 78).
Now, in order to dwell upon this plant we need to summarise two major studies, one by Patiño
(1963), still essential despite its age, and the more recent one by Urpi-Mora and his team (1997
[above and in the bibliography it says: Mora-Urpi]). The first attempt at systematising the
studies on pijuayo were made by the Colombian Víctor Patiño (1963, 2002: 464-537). Probably
276
14,000 years of food in Peru
no other scholar has studied this plant using so many approaches. Let us see some aspects
that are of interest in this book. The name pijuayo is of unknown origin (probably Chibcha),
but in Quechua Patiño recorded the terms “chonta de comer” and “chontadura.” For Patiño,
this is the fruit of the most important palm in America since the pre-Hispanic period. This is
borne out by the long list of names in other Native American languages he lists.
Patiño claims this plant was known by the Inca, perhaps only as tribute in wood for arms or
for ceremonial uses. He also says, citing the chronicle by Cieza de León, that when Francisco
Pizarro was exploring the Colombian littoral, the Indians gave provided him with maize and
fruits of the pijibae palm, which “was a very good thing.” Patiño likewise reports we owe
Humboldt and Bonpland the first taxonomic definition of this plant, which was based on the
collections they assembled in Colombia in 1801. Gasipaes is in fact the Latinised form of the
Indian name for the Magdalena Valley (Patiño 1963).
It should also be noted that the map showing this palm’s possible dispersal since the discovery
of America includes the first part of the Amazon basin, which comprises the lower section
of the Ucayali and Marañón basins, as well as the departments of Amazonas and Loreto, and
with a lower density in modern-day Madre de Dios. Other countries in the map are Panama,
Colombia, Ecuador, and Brazil in the affluents of the Amazonian rivers.
In the second study Mora-Urpi et al. (1997) present what probably is the biggest summary
available for this species. It is therefore worth including some of the main conclusions
they reached. Mora-Urpi et al. (1997) believe this is the most significant food resource in
the Amazonian lowlands of South America, and that once it was domesticated the Indians
disseminated it rapidly all throughout the entire Amazon basin. For these scholars the main
value this plant has is the ease with which it is grown in traditional agroforestry systems,
its good yield even in low-fertility soils, the ways in which it is prepared and its alimentary
quality as well as its multiple uses, including construction. This plant has regrettably been
neglected and is little appreciated since the Spanish conquest, when it was substituted with
other crops like maize. Still, there is a growing interest for the chonta de comer that began
some decades ago.
The uses given to its fruits are many, of which its use as food is the most important one. As
regards its consumption, Mora-Urpi et al. (1997: 20) point out the easiest way of preparing
the fruit was to simply boil it and to eat the mesocarp. Another popular way in which it is
consumed is as pijuaína, a chonta-de-comer-based beverage. Mostacero et al. (2009: 1036)
note in this regard that pijuaína is prepared by removing the mesocarp, which is then chewed
and fermented for one or two days. It is eventually left to ferment for eight days; water is then
added in order to consume this alcoholic beverage in celebrations.
A type of ensilado6 (fermented and preserved for a long time) is also often prepared. In this
case the pulp is cooked and pressed and then it is compressed into a hole in the ground, where
6 Ensilado literally means something that is stored underground in a silo. Trans.
277
Elmo Leon
it is covered with leaves. This preparation is ready to be consumed in a month and can last for
up to a year. It can even be diluted with water or carried across long distances wrapped in the
above-mentioned leaves. The fruits were also dried or smoked in order to preserve them and
make them last. Eating the heart of the plant was of secondary importance.
The biochemical characteristics of the chonta de comer speak for themselves. The results
exhibit a great variability but in order to highlight the potential this fruit has, here we will give
the highest values (interested readers can consult the original piece in the bibliography listed
below). It can have up to 11.3% proteins, 29% oil (without cholesterol), 79% carbohydrates, and
18% fibre. As regards minerals, every 100 grams have 162 mg of potassium, 10.9 mg of calcium,
6.1 mg of iron, 2.7 mg of sodium, and 2.1 mg of zinc. Its high vitamin C (lost when cooked) and
carotene content is known. As for essential amino acids, we have arginine (6%), glycine (4.3%),
lysine (4.3%), leucine (3.6%), valine (3.1%), threonine (3%), isoleucine (2.3%), histidine (2.2%), and
tyrosine (2%), amongst others (Mora-Urpi et al. 1997: 21-23).
We now turn to the origin and domestication of this palm. Some scholars like the renowned
Vavilov, defend one single origin in the south-western Amazon, i.e. in its headwaters (including
Peru). Others posit multiple origins, both in the aforementioned area as well as in the eastern
Andes and the lowlands of Central America—a far bigger surface. This hypothesis is also defended
by Piperno and Pearsall (1998: 156), who posit a large zone for this plant’s origin that extends from
the flat and lowlands of Central America up to South America. In any case what seems to be clear
is that the multiple variety of races shows the importance the Amazon had in this process.
As regards Peru, Seibert (1950) posited that it was native to the Huallaga Valley because it
had been found there in wild state, thus proving what Vavilov claimed. This proposal was
apparently supported more recently by Clement et al. (1997), who likewise posited that
Bactris gasipaes originally came from B. chichagi, and that it is definitely from the South West
Amazon (which includes practically all of the Peruvian montaña) or the Colombian North
East. These scholars pointed out that some races are of Peruvian origin, e.g. the Putumayo,
Tigre, Pampa Hermosa and—in part—Tembé races. The presence of the Peruvian montaña in
this process is thus clear. Oliver (2008) is of the same opinion.
Barbara Pickersgill (1977) in turn believes several of the South American plants underwent
an independent domestication process, including Bactris gasipaes. More recently, based on
genetic relations studied from the Mora-Urpi classification and allele analysis, Hernández-
Ugalde et al. (2010) concluded there were two ancient areas of domestication of Bactris
gasipaes Kunth in the eastern Andes. It may thus have been domesticated in order to have
its branches (possibly to make weapons), and only then did they notice the significance of
its edible fruit (because of its oleaginous nature, the starch it contains, and its fermentation
potential [capacidad de fermentación]).
When reviewing the domestication of Bactris, Clement et al. (2010: 81-83) mention genetic
analyses that were made in various parts of South America. Mora-Urpi et al. (1997: 27) pointed
out the Chibcha of Colombia were already growing this plant 2300 years ago.
278
14,000 years of food in Peru
Is there any evidence of its consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru? It is not easy ascribing an
alimentary use to the remains of pijuayo found in pre-Hispanic contexts. The same is true
for its absence as the conditions of the Amazon soils have not allowed its preservation.
Morcote-Ríos and Bernal (2001) made an interesting summary in this regard of palms found in
archaeological contexts from pre-Hispanic America. The record comprises some 50 species
in various sites. The most ancient one is a charred palm endocarp type from the zone of
Rondonia (Brazil), which dates to 14,000 B.C.
We must also recall that Anita Roosevelt recorded a large amount of palm fruit remains at the
site of Piedra Pintada since at least the ice age (ca. 11,000 B.C.) (Oliver 2008). Both finds thus
clearly show its consumption began at quite an early date, and that it musts have turned into
an Amazonian tradition (which also involves Peru).
Even so, the record of palm consumption begins to grow as of 7200 B.C., particularly that
of Acronomia, Attalea s.l., Astrocaryum, Syagrus, Elaeis, Onenocaropus and Bactris, precisely
the family under discussion here. All of these are edible fruits, which in many cases are still
consumed nowadays by the natives.
In an ethnographic-type study, Van der Eynden et al. (2003: 584) recorded the consumption
of chonta mesocarps. This made them, assume it was eaten in this region probably since the
pre-Hispanic period. Can this also have been the case of Peru?
For Peru Towle (1961: 28) points out the discovery, citing a study by Rochebrune (1879), of a
comb made out of this type of plant in the tombs at Ancón, but without giving the age of
this material.
[Caimito] (Abiu = Pouteria caimito R. et P. Radlk, Star apple = Chrysophyllum caimito L.)
This is also a palm fruit and it appears as Pouteria when the taxonomic reference is given at
the genus level, whilst Chrysophyllum concerns the subfamily. Parker et al. (2010) devoted an
exhaustive study to this palm fruit, which has been so much used and consumed by various
peoples of Central and South America. Of their finds it is worth mentioning that whereas the
seeds in natural state have less pulp, the domesticated ones have little skin and much pulp,
are less acid and more sugary.
For Mostacero et al. (2009: 646-647) this plant is native to the western part of the South
American Amazon, approximately on the frontier between Brazil and Peru, yet its distribution
extends up to Central America. Its fruit contains vitamins A, B, B1, B2, and C, minerals such as
iron, calcium, and phosphorus, and it even has tonic properties—something that will be worth
bearing in mind in our overall balance of the pre-Hispanic diet.
The members of Francisco Pizarro’s expedition who landed on the modern-day coast of
Esmeraldas, in Ecuador, found caimitos in San Mateo and Manta. Besides, Cieza de León
279
Elmo Leon
mentioned its presence at Puerto Viejo and claimed the North Coast of Peru was the
southernmost area where caimito was found. In the early twentieth century it was frequently
found in the Putumayo, Marañón, and Caquetá regions (Patiño 2002: 159-160). The reader can
well see that although in Peru there is no archaeological record of the caimito, it may well
have been eaten during the pre-Hispanic period.
Wild Tuna [Tuna silvestre] (Opuntia floccosa)
This is a kind of small, brownish-yellowish and edible globular berry. It grows between 300
and 4835 masl (Mostacero et al. 2009: 197).
Patiño (2002: 99) claims tuna is a term derived from the Taíno group, which is widespread
in South America. The consumption of its fruit was widespread at the time of the Spanish
Conquest in Cuba, the Antilles, Mexico (where it is known as nopal), Ecuador, and evidently
in Peru. Patiño also pointed out that in Chuquimayo it is known as tuna de comer. He believes
that no tuna was domesticated in pre-Hispanic America except in Mexico, where there was a
domesticated tuna cactus [tunal domesticado].
Novoa (2006) devoted a study to the tuna. He claims the results of the research carried out
suggest it was domesticated in Mesoamerica over 9000 years ago. Novoa concludes that
other species, like Tephrocactus and tunilla, may also have been eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru.
Novoa (2006: 175) also points out the evidence of a potentially more ancient consumption of
tuna in Peru comes from the rock shelter of Pachamachay, in the Junín puna, at more than 4100
masl. This find was made in a stratum that dates to ca. 8100 B.C. Novoa believes this may have
been Austrocylindropuntia floccosa, which is commonly known as huaraco.
Rick and Moore (1999: 292) also note the presence of Opuntia in the Junín puna, in strata from
the caves of Panalauca, with dates that fall between 3800 and 330 B.C. It may thus have been
part of the menu eaten by the inhabitants of the cave.
It is interesting that Weir and Bonavia (1985: 104) found the pollen of Opuntia floccosa in the
faecal remains left by the people of Los Gavilanes, a site close to Huarmey (on the central
Coast), with dates that fall at least to 3200-2200 B.C. They were thus probably eaten by the
early populations of this site. Its presence as pollen does not rule out the possibility that the
flowers from this cactaceae were eaten.
Later cultures were acquainted with Opuntia floccosa and consumed it, as is shown by Paracas,
Nasca, Moche and even Inca pottery, but it should be noted that it really appears only in the
latter two. For Novoa, the species found in Moche iconography may be Opuntia MacBride
Britton & Rose, which means it may have been eaten not just by the Moche, but also by Peru’s
desert foxes. Hans Horkheimer (1960: 79) had already drawn attention to how frequent tuna
appeared in Mochica and Nasca pottery.
280
14,000 years of food in Peru
Cactus (Haageocereus sp. L.)
This is a genus that comprises several species found from Piura to northern Chile (Mostacero
et al. 2009: 192).
Capps (1987: 33) recorded the remains of this type of fruit, which may have been eaten by the
people of Paloma, a site on Peru’s Central Coast ca. 5316-3630 B.C.
Grass Seeds or Fruits [Semillas o frutas de grass] (Caryopses)
The research undertaken by Weir and Dering (1986: 38) shows caryopses were the main seeds
or fruits eaten at Paloma, a coastal archaeological site some 65 km south of Lima, between
5316 and 3630 B.C., as was shown by the study of the coproliths found at the site. Apparently
the grinding stones used to grind this dry fruit were also found.
Flowers and Bushes
Amancae (Hymenocallis amancaes, Ismene amancaes)
This is an Aymara (amancaya) and then Quechua (amancay) term for a herb with white bushes
whose flowers were eaten by the Late Holocene people of Paloma, a site some 65 km from
Lima in the Chilca Valley (Benfer 2008: 377). The excavations undertaken before this by Edward
Lanning and Thomas Patterson at site PV45-26, an Encanto-complex loma encampment
north of Ancón (Lima) found tuber remains (similar to small onions) belonging to this plant
in a midden (Cohen 1978: 29). Although the dates given for this complex have been heavily
criticised, it can be estimated that this occupation took place around 3500 B.C., and thus
coincides with the finds made at, and the dates for, Paloma.
It is thus clear this loma plant’s flowers and rhizomes were apparently being eaten during the
Final Preceramic Period in sites close to the coastal lomas.
Begonias [Begonia] (Begonia geraniifolia)
This species is believed to be edible, yet it contains oxalates and cucurbitacin (Laferriere 1991).
It is essentially spread across the lomas of the Peruvian coast.
Although it may seem unusual, Benfer (2008: 377) and Quilter (1989: 23) reported partially
charred—i.e. probably prepared for food—begonia tuber remains similar to the potato as
of level 300 at the site of Paloma (south of Lima), which have been radiocarbon dated to ca.
4881 B.C. The students in fact believe these were the plants most eaten throughout this time.
Besides, Glendon Weir found clear evidence of its consumption at this site in chewed tubers.
281
Elmo Leon
These scholars even believe it is even possible their process of domestication had already
begun.
Ccantu, Chinchircuma (Mutisia hirsuta)
Yacovleff and Herrera (1935: fig. 62) illustrated the presence of flowers from this species, which
were apparently eaten, in some Inca keros. This was shown by the study of human coproliths
from the Salinar occupation of Puerto Moorin, a site in the lower Virú valley. The remains of
this flower were found in the above-mentioned excrement (Ericson et al. 1989: 74).
Chilca (Baccharis prostrata, Baccharis latifolia)
This is a shrub from the Asteraceae family, which frequently grows in the Peruvian highlands. It
seems to have been used not just as dye (green and yellow) but also as food, and it may have
had some type of function once eaten. The study made by Ericson et al. (1989: 74) showed
this as they found the remains of this shrub in the faecal remains of the people of Puerto
Moorin, a North Coast site in the lower Virú Valley, which they dated to the first centuries of
the Christian era.
Stimulants
Coca, Cuca, Jibiro, Mumus, Pusashpan (Erythroxylum coca)
Coca belongs to the Erythroxylum P. Br. genus, which is distributed across the American tropics
and comprises some 250 species. It is a bush 2-3 m high whose leaves hold an alkaloid called
cocaine, which in turn has an active principle. It is a narcotic and is used as a local and surface
anaesthetic; it lowers the glandular secretion and stimulates the central nervous system,
which favours physical activity (Mostacero et al. 2009: 395). In countries like Peru or Bolivia
the veins are removed from the dry leaves; an alkaline paste (llipta or ashes) is then added and
this all is chewed for a long time, thus restoring the nervous system and strengthening it. This
tradition is thousands of years old.
It is possible that the consumption of coca leaves was frowned upon in ancient times, and
what is worse it still is for some. For instance, Gutiérrez Noriega and Von Hagen (1951) assessed
its consumption and concluded it was addictive, toxic, and had secondary effects such as
tachycardia, hypovitaminosis, malnutrition, ocular pathologies, hepatomegaly, and even
changes in the thyroid gland.
Two decades passed before the benefits of coca were re-discovered by Martin (1970), who
made a more holistic study that included not just taxonomic discussions, but also the Andean
tradition of coca consumption. Martin thus showed consumption was two thousand years old
282
14,000 years of food in Peru
and its physiological use as a narcotic. He points out that this plant was first used for medicinal
purposes because cocaine had already been isolated by 1860 in Göttingen (Germany) in order
to use it as an anaesthetic. Martin believes that in South America, coca leaves were first used
as a narcotic in a shamanic context, and also had other medicinal uses. He gives, amongst
other examples, Moche, Nasca, and Inca ceramic pieces with depictions of this plant, which
makes it clear it was an ancestral resource.
The account left by Tschudi is one of those included by Martin. Tschudi had an Indian servant
who tried the effects coca has, and who did not have to eat for five days and slept for just
two hours a day.
Shortly afterwards Timothy Plowman (1979), who probably is the scholar who best knows
this plant, marked a shift with a study that assembled different pieces of information on
coca available up to that moment. One of his major contributions was establishing that the
traditional coca comes from the Amazon, and that it has more leaves. Plowman claims this
species is native to the montaña region east of the Andes, between Ecuador and Bolivia; it is
grown between 500 and 1500 masl, where it is favoured by the high precipitation, moderate
temperatures (15-18°C), and well-drained soils rich in minerals.
As regards the required taxonomic precision, Plowman (1979: 51-58) also established that
the coca variety found on the Peruvian coast and in the western Andean valleys, including
the upper Marañón River, is the Trujillo coca, which is known since the pre-Hispanic period.
In a more recent study, Plowman and Henshold (2004) made a broader synthesis of coca
taxonomy. This paper is an essential study on this plant’s biology.
In this regard we should emphasise that Mostacero et al. (2009: 397) described E.
novogranatense (Rusby) var. truxillense (“coca de Trujillo”), and point out that it is distinguished
by the somewhat sweetish taste its leaves have, and that it is usually grown on the edges of
the agricultural fields in the modern-day departments of Amazonas, San Martín, La Libertad,
Huánuco, and Lima.
It is true that coca nowadays has a negative connotation. But is it possible that it was once
consumed not just due to its narcotic effects, but also as food? The truth be said, although
its bad reputation (due to modern Western society) is known, little has been said regarding
its nutritional value. This concerns not just the leaves but also the other parts of the plant;
for instance, the remains of pre-Hispanic human faecal remains often show some parts that
nowadays are not considered edible—at least by our creole society—were being eaten. In
order to explore what concerns us here, i.e. the alimentary properties of various Andean
resources, we must consider what has been scientifically written in order to fully assess this
subject, without any bias and following a strictly biochemical criterion.
A first look at the bromatology of coca leaves is simply impressive. It has vitamins B1 and C
as well as riboflavin, so much so that two ounces of chewed coca (chacchada) a day fulfil the
body’s daily vitamin intake. It also benefits the intestinal tract and promotes food absorption.
283
Elmo Leon
Penny et al. (2009) beg to differ. They found, using plasma spectrometers and chemical
agricultural methods, that every 100 grams of cocaine leaves held 20.28 g of proteins (with
lysine as the main amino acid), 3.51 mg of betacarotene, 16.7 mg of vitamin E but above all
calcium (990-1,033 mg), 29 mg of iron, 2.7 mg of zinc, and 225 mg of de magnesium; the main
alkaloid is cocaine, with 0.56 mg per every 100 grams. The conclusion Penny et al, reach is that
coca does not even provide 10% of the required food for a child, and that its leaves are not to
be recommended as food. And yet, even so we should note the high calcium value that not
even Penny et al. can deny.
Against Penny and her team, a previous study in which Timothy Plowman took part found that
every 100 grams of coca leaves held 18.9% proteins, 46.2 g carbohydrates, and 5 g fat, as well as
vitamins A, C, B6, B12, thiamine, riboflavin, niacin, ฀-Tocopherol, folic acid, biotin, biotin [sic] and
pantothenic acid. Calcium, iron, iodine, magnesium, zinc, sodium, aluminium, barium, potassium,
manganese, and chrome were also recorded (Duke et al. 1975). Mostacero et al. (2009: 397) in
turn pointed out that coca leaves have calories, carbohydrates, fibre, calcium, phosphate, iron,
magnesium, vitamin a and riboflavin. We thus have two positions; it is however cleat that the
nutritional value of this plant, from a biochemical standpoint, has been underestimated.
In regard to the bromatology of the uses given to coca leaves, it is worth including here the
interesting paper by Barrios Healey (2010), as it is a study exclusively devoted to this subject.
Barrios Heally gives the following values for coca leaves: 20.06 mg of nitrogen, 3.68 mg of
fat, 47.50 mg of carbohydrates, 9.40 mg of betacarotene, 2.76 mg of alpha carotene, 6.47 mg
of vitamin C, 40.17 mg of vitamin E, 0.73 mg of thiamine (vitamin B1), riboflavin, 0.88 mg of
vitamin B2, 8.37 mg of niacin, 2,097 mg of calcium, 412.67 mg de of phosphorus, 1,739.33 mg
of potassium, 299.30 mg of magnesium, 39.41 mg of sodium, 17.39 mg of aluminium, 6.18 mg
of barium, 136.64 mg of iron, 12 mg of strontium, 6.75 mg of boron, 1.22 mg of copper, 2.21 mg
of zinc, 9.15 mg of manganese, and 0.12 mg of chrome (Ministerio de Salud, 1996, in Barrios
Healey 2010). This is a more comprehensive analysis that presents not just the wide range
of mineral and vitaminic values for coca leaves, but also its calcium contribution which was
noted previously, in regard to the lack of dairy products.
This is, in fact, the most relevant biochemical content of coca leaves, to the point that it has
been said to be the vegetable with the highest worldwide calcium content, even though its
absorption is not ideal (209 mg, even more than kiwicha, which has 179 mg). Several factors
depend on this absorption, including for instance the consumption of vitamins D and K, the
adequate protein and physical activity levels, and potassium, magnesium, zinc, and boron
consumption. We cannot specify whether pre-Hispanic individuals were predisposed for this,
as it would require a specific study that has not as yet been made.
Using a comparative table Barrios established, basing himself on a report by Harvard University,
a study by Guyton (Tratado de fisiología médica), as well as other references, that every 100
grams of coca have 19.90 g of protein (surpassing for example the 14 g found in quinoa), 9.8 mm
of iron, and above all a high content of vitamin E, and additionally vitamin C and B complex,
which have been mentioned above. The reader can draw his or her own conclusions.
284
14,000 years of food in Peru
It should be pointed out here that an expert like Ramiro Castro de la Mata (2003) claimed the
alkaloids in coca inhibit calcium absorption in human beings.
There is no need to dwell on this subject because there is an extensive literature on this point;
suffice it to point two studies that are illustrative. The first one is an interdisciplinary review
of coca that draws a positive conclusion regarding its alimentary properties. Stolberg (2011),
its author, cited the previous study by Plowman and concluded that coca leaf consumption
covers the daily requirements of calcium, phosphorus, riboflavin, and vitamin A. We should on
the other hand remember that in 1976, Ralph Bolton claimed that coca consumption regulates
the metabolism of human glucose [regula el metabolismo de la glucosa humana].
Bray and Dollery (1983) made a more extensive study, particularly regarding the pre-Hispanic
coca consumption tradition and the evidence of its use. Bray and Dollery claim its consumption
in various parts of the Andes was massive; they also study its pharmacological effects and
provide interesting archaeological data in order to evince the antiquity of its consumption.
They review the ceramic, lithic, and organic remains from both the Peruvian and Chilean
coast. Tools such as lime containers, small spoons and so on clearly show how massive its
consumption was in the pre-Hispanic period. On the other hand, palaeodental studies show
coca leaf consumption gave rise to a series of caries, as has been shown for some pre-Hispanic
populations from northern Chile (Langsjoen 1996).
The Quechua name given to coca was mumus or Mother Coca, as claimed by Diego González
Holguín and Friar Martín de Murúa (Bray and Dollerly 1983: 269). In Aymara instead it is kkoka,
which means the quintessential plant (Soukup 190: 174).
In an interesting overview of coca, Plutarco Naranjo (1981) laid bare the vile human interest in this
leaf that has been used for thousands of years in the Andes: whereas in the pre-Columbian period
coca was used as an energiser and as a medicine, the Spaniards used it since the sixteenth century
to exploit the Andean Indians as it endowed them with more energy that they would use working
for the colonists—and as a drug it nowadays has become the scourge of humanity. Naranjo drew
attention to the fact that it was only centuries later that the anaesthetic properties of coca were
identified. For example, Naranjo recounts an anecdote told by Father Bernabé Cobo, who had
to undergo a dental extraction. An Indian suggested he should chew coca, and Cobo claims this
had a sedative effect, which enabled the extraction to be painless. As far as the present writer is
concerned, even today it is not unusual to find that in the most remote parts of the Andes, people
use coca leaves or flour whenever a physician recommends calcium consumption.
We now turn to the archaeological evidence. At the time of the Spanish conquest coca was
being consumed from Nicaragua to Chile, and from sea level up to the Andean cordilleras.
What has been found will therefore only reflect a small part of what the consumption of coca
leaves may have represented.
Perhaps the most reliable and ancient discovery of coca consumption was made by Tom
Dillehay and his team at Nanchoc (Dillehay et al. 2010). This is borne out by the presence of
285
Elmo Leon
potassium and calcium among the remains of the leaves consumed. Besides, these studies
showed that around 6000 B.C., coca leaves were being chewed not just in ceremonies but by
common people in domestic contexts. This entailed the intentional preparation of lime for
its consumption in order produce an alkaline ... [medio] with which to activate the functions
of the coca leaves.
Continuing with our review of the finds in chronological order we have the work done by
Richard MacNeish et al. (1975), who claim having found coca in their excavations at Ayacucho
that dated on average to 4200-3500 B.C. However no more evidence for this presumed find
has been provided, to the point that Plowman (1984) has questioned it, essentially due to the
lack of documentation.
Plowman himself pointed out that coca was already under cultivation around 2500 B.C. in the
coastal valleys of Peru, which was adapted to a dry climate and that it was therefore already
being frequently chewed.
Although zones outside Peru are not the main subject of this book, cultural areas did extend
beyond the modern frontiers. Applying this to southern Peru means we must review what
was happening in the far Chilean north. Through a radioimmunological study of human hair
from 76 mummies from various cultures in northern Chile, Cartmell et al. (1991) showed that
cocaine (which can be absorbed through the capillary fibres of the individual who is chewing
coca) was being consumed at least around 2000 B.C. Cartnell and his team also noted the
antiquity of the evidence available both for Ecuador (ca. 2500 B.C.) as well as at Tiahuanaco
(ca. A.D. 400).
Continuing with the review of the Peruvian record we have Culebras, a Late Preceramic site
on the Central coast that dates to around the third millennium B.C. Here shell and Lagenaria
containers with pulverised lime, which was consumed along with coca, have been found in
funerary contexts.
Preserved coca leaves have even been found on the Central Coast at the site of Asia, as well
as in some sites in the Chillón Valley that date to the early second millennium B.C. (Bray and
Dollery 1983: 271).
As regards Moche and Nasca pottery, it is clear a series of ceramic vessels from both cultures
depict coca, even people chewing it, which means it was consumed on the Peruvian coast
between A.D. 100 and 650. The details shown include spatulas used to remove the lime from
the lime gourds used when consuming coca. Cook and Parrish (2005: 139) documented the
remains of this plant in the excavations of the Nasca site of Casa Vieja in the Ica Valley.
Lockard (2005: 211, 213) found coca remains at Galindo, a site in the middle Moche Valley, that
must have been consumed during the Mochica occupation. The remains were found only in
elite contexts, which may mean it was exclusively consumed by this social group.
286
14,000 years of food in Peru
In the Moche Valley itself, Cárdenas et al. (1997: 136) recorded coca remains in the lower valley at
the site of Huaca de la Luna, so it is believed to have been consumed by the Mochica of this zone
around A.D. 400-750. They also recorded at least one piece of Mochica human faecal remains
which had coca seeds. Its direct consumption, including not just leaves but seeds too, is thus clear
(Cárdenas et al. 1997: 138). This is a good piece of evidence, precisely because of what was pointed
out at the beginning of this section, coca does not mean just cocaine, it also was food.
Again, Tom Dillehay (1979) reports having found some coca leaves, this time in deposits at the
Huancayo Alto site on the Central coast, in the middle Chillón Valley, with dates that date on
average to 800-200 B.C.
Coca remains, interestingly enough, have been found at the site of Beringa (Arequipa), which
dates to A.D. 650-1000. It is thus seems clear the Wari consumed coca (Tung 2102: 49).
Coca was also consumed on the South Coast. Thanks to a dental analysis of the prehistoric Chiribaya
populations (A.D. 900-1400) of coastal Peru close to Ilo, Indriati and Buikstra (2001) showed they
consumed coca. This is an undeniable proof that this plant was eaten during the pre-Hispanic
period. A group of 86 mummies of individuals aged between 20 and 55, from the sites of Chiribaya
Alta, Algodonal, Yaral, and Chen Chen, was studied in this regard. The results showed this type of
chewing gave rise to a type of cervical caries, which in some cases expose the roots themselves.
The caries are on the back of the mouth [parte posterior del aparato dental] and match practices
that are still known today. This type of consumption has been verified in up to 855 of the cases, as
well as through the study of the hairs from these same individuals.
Aufderheide et al. (1991) in turn showed the presence, in the Chiribaya culture from southern
Peru, of coca quids placed inside the mouth and associated with coca leaves inside textile bags.
Christine Hastorf (1987) found one coca leaf and two endocarps at some archaeological sites
in Junín (in the Central Andean Altiplano) that date between A.D. 1000 and the Inca epoch,
and at 3200-3900 masl. These sites include Tunanmarca, one of the biggest in pre-Hispanic
Peru. Other remains have been recovered at Umpamalca. The coca remains were found in
contexts with large amounts of maize, tubers, and possibly quinoa.
Coca leaves were found at Hatunmarca, another large site, this time in a funerary context
that probably took place at the beginning of the colonial period. Timothy Plowman believes
these leaves are of the Huánuco coca variety. In general it seems to have been consumed
particularly by the elites. Hastorf points out that since coca does not grow in this region, it
must have been imported from the nearby ceja de montaña zone. Besides, these coca leaves
are smaller and thicker than those of the truxillense variety.
Plowman (1984) has also recorded coca in contexts pertaining to coastal cultures that
developed during the Late Intermediate Period and the Late Horizon (A.D. 1000.-Inca Empire).
Finally, Sandweiss and Wing have reported finding coca leaves within the Inca period at Lo
Demás, a site in the Chincha River mouth whose main economic activity was fishing.
287
Elmo Leon
Thallophyte Plants
Algae (Cryptogamae, Macrocystis humboldtii vg. Pyrifera sargazo, Eisenia cokeri, algas pardas)
Algae were also part of the food eaten by our pre-Hispanic ancestors. From a taxonomic
standpoint algae are ... [un todo a la vez]: marine unicellular organisms and plants. This is
why it has been included in this botanical appendix of thallophyte plants. Algae are in fact
eukaryotic, photosynthetic macro- and microorganisms that live both in salty and fresh
waters as well as on soils.
As regards size, algae can be very variable and range from microorganisms like plankton to
others that are 54 m long, like some found in Peru’s Pacific Ocean. Algae consumption by
human beings is known as phycophagy. Its history goes back thousands of years, particularly
in populations that lived of coastal marine resources like those in South-Eastern Asia who
still favour them, e.g. Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Philippines, and Hawaiians (Aaronson
2000: 231).
In a list of the algae eaten both nowadays and in the past, Aaronson (2000: 233-238)
lists the fourteen following edible species for Peru: Nostoc commune (cushuro), Nostoc
parmeloides, Nostoc sphaericum, Nostoc verrucosum (nostoc: yuyucha), Chara spp.,
Cladophora sp., Monostroma sp., Monostroma guaternaria (monostroma: lechuga de río),
Ulva fasciata (cochayuyo), Ulva lactuca (cochayuyo), (ulvas: lechuga de mar), Durvillea
antarctica (cochayuyo), Gigartina chamissoi (cochayuyo), Gigartina glomerata (cochayuyo),
Grateloupia doryphora (cochayuyo), Porphyra columbina (cochayuyo), Porphyra leucosticta
(cochayuyo), and Rhodoglossum denticulatum.
From a nutritional standpoint, algae are in general low in carbohydrates, but slightly rich in
lipids. Microalgae on the other hand are particularly rich in proteins, and this makes them a
major food both for humans as well as for animals (Aaronson 2000).
Seaweed in particular contains a significant amount of unusual amino acids present in
proteins and acids-iodine [?: aminoácidos no usuales en proteínas y ácidos-yodo]. Macro-
algae on the contrary are rich in carbohydrates but low in protein. Besides they are major
sources of vitamins B and E, and to a lesser extent of vitamin C and betacarotene, which
are well-known antioxidants. They also have minerals like potassium, calcium, sodium,
phosphorus, magnesium, strontium, iron, zinc, boron, aluminium, copper, titanium, nickel,
vanadium, chrome, cobalt, molybdenum, and gallium. They also contain ... [yodina]. In other
words, these foods are extremely rich in nutrients for human beings. Readers interested
in the morphology, taxonomy, and some properties of Peruvian algae should see the
introduction prepared by Sánchez Romero (1973: 239-242). In general, Sánchez Romero lists
39 algae families for the Peruvian coast and almost 150 species.
In an extensive study published by the Universidad de San Martín de Porres, the same
press behind this book, Cristóbal Noriega (2010) included interesting data regarding the
288
14,000 years of food in Peru
ancestral consumption of algae in Peru. Here Noriega extensively documented coastal
and highland traditions regarding the consumption of algae and yuyos in festivities and in
everyday dishes, particularly those based on cushuro (Nosctoc commune) and cochayuyo
(Porphyra columbina); on the North Coast instead, red algae of the Gigartina family (e.g.
Chondracanthus chamissoi, Gigartina paitensis and Gigartina glomerata) were favoured.
Besides being used as food, Noriega drew attention to the medicinal consumption of algae
in the highlands especially that of Macrocystis pyrifera due to its iodine content, which
prevents ailments like goitre.
Noriega reminds us that the algae eaten in the pre-period came not just from the seashore
but also from the rivers, lagoons and lakes in Peru, so we must imagine our ancestors finding
these remains [restos] in several different environments.
According to Cruz-Suárez et al. (2000), from a nutritional standpoint Macrocystis pyrifera
is low in calories and has a high concentration of minerals like magnesium (1.90%), calcium
(1.2%), phosphorus (0.2%), potassium (5.5%), and iodine (0.1%), as well as vitamins (especially
carotene and ascorbic acid), proteins (5-12%), carbohydrates (which are not too digestible),
fibres (4-8%), and a low lipid content. This means there was a high nutritional potential for
the ancient peoples of the Peruvian coast, as well as for catalysing iron adsorption in order
to combat anaemia (Larsen 2000).
Aaronson (2000: 245) however has drawn attention to some algae that still adsorb proteins
[que retienen la absorción de proteínas]. In any case their amino acids, ascorbic acid,
carotenes, cinnamic acid, flavonoids, melanoidines [melanoidinas], peptides [fostatidos],
polyphenols, reductones, tannins, and tocopherols are a great contribution for the
organism and have antioxidant effects. In pre-Hispanic Peru people used to eat cochayuyo
(dehydrated seaweed), which contributes iodine and oligoelements [oligoelementos] to the
human diet. It should be pointed that cochayuyo was eaten even in the Peruvian highlands,
which involved its transportation (Antúnez de Mayolo 1996: 33).
The importance algae consumption had since the Peruvian Preceramic is still not well
known, but Duccio Bonavia (1982: 345) pointed out that students find algae almost in every
settlement that dates to this time. Such is their abundance that seaweed is found in almost
all archaeological sites on the Central Coast that date to the fourth and third millennium
B.C., but regrettably no clear taxonomic determination is given. Bonavia pointed out that
for Moseley, the volume of big seaweed comes second after that of molluscs. Seaweed
is found in remains such as air bladders [vejigas de aire] or as stalks (in large amounts),
but the leaves, which are the edible parts, are not found. Bonavia however noted that
although seaweed can be dried and eaten due to its high carbohydrate content, it is not
easily digested by human beings.
Let us turn now to the archaeological record for seaweed in pre-Hispanic Peru. Yacovleff
and Muelle (1934: 134) reported finding seaweed in a Paracas funerary bundle in association
with cotton. This must date to ca. 400-50 B.C., which means seaweed may have been eaten
289
Elmo Leon
at this time. Ugent and Peterson (1988: 8) also note that seaweed was found in the Paracas
funerary bundles.
Margaret Towle (1961) also pointed out its presence in the iconography of a Nasca ceramic
vessel, which she interpreted as a possible aracanto (Macrocystis humboldtii vg. pyrifera),
a type of seaweed (alga parda or marrón) this culture apparently was acquainted with. It
should be noted that Macrocystis pyrifera is a big seaweed that can reach up to 50 m. Its
habitat is the tide zone and it has a vast world distribution, but it seems to be more present
in the Southern Hemisphere. In South America it is found in Peru, Patagonia, and Tierra del
Fuego.
Horkheimer (1960: 82) pointed out that in Quechua this plant was called cochayuyo
(seaweed), and that once dried it was used as an ingredient in soup. He believed this seaweed
was perhaps exchanged with the Peruvian highlands.
The oldest algae found come from Los Gavilanes. The remains of Macrocystis humboldtii
vg. Pyrifera were found in this site in the lower Huarmey Valley (Bonavia 1982: 156), which
has been dated to the Preceramic Period, i.e. since at least the third millennium B.C. At this
site Bonavia also recorded Eisenia cokeri or algas pardas around the same time. Part of the
remains were found burned, from which it follows they were cooked and used for human
consumption. Bonavia was able to associate the collection of algae with that of chiton [?:
quitones], because both live close to the rocks.
Macrocystis pyrifera consumption has been strongly recorded throughout time in this same
zone. For instance, Bonavia and his team reported the presence of significant amounts of
this type of algae (sargassum) in a Middle Horizon 3 (ca. A.D. 800) camp on the littoral zone
immediately north of the Huarmey River mouth (Bonavia et al. 2009: 263). To this we can
add that remains of this type of algae were found in the Paracas contexts stored in the
Museo Nacional.
Callen (1965: 336) in turn pointed out the finding of algae remains in the coproliths of human
faeces discovered during the excavation of Huaca Prieta, so it is clear algae were being
eaten on this part of the North Coast since at least the fourth millennium B.C.
In addition to these finds, Moseley (1975) had already identified algae in the Pampa phase
(ca. 3000 B.C.) and in the subsequent phases from Playa Hermosa to Gaviota, i.e. up to ca.
2000 B.C. in Lima. Patterson and Moseley (1968) believed algae were already being eaten
as a dietary supplement by the early people of the Peruvian coast. Their list mentions that
Engel identified algae from the Gigartina and Rhodophycea families—which he classified as
cochayuyo—at the site of Asia (Lima), presumably with an indirect date of 1490 B.C.
Macrocystis—according to Bonavia (1982: 345), and based on Moseley and Willey’s work—
was found among the remains from Áspero, in the Supe Valley (Lima). Aaronson (2000:
230) also recorded the presence of algae—which was probably for human consumption—
290
14,000 years of food in Peru
in some sites in the Moche Valley: Padre Abán (2300 B.C.) and Alto Salaverry (1600 B.C.),
Gramalote and Caballo Muerto in the second and third millennium B.C., and also in the
huacas of Moche (200 B.C-A.D. 600.) including Chan Chan (A.D. 1000-1532).
Ericson et al. (1989: 77) on the other hand reported finding algae remains in human excrement
from the famed North Coast archaeological site of Puerto Moorin, in the lower Virú Valley,
which dated to the first centuries of our era. It is thus clear that algae were consumed in
this region at least since this epoch, and presumably at an earlier date too.
Yuyo (Gigartina cf. chamissoi) for instance has been recorded at Caral, and it therefore was
quite likely part of the food eaten by the early peoples of the Central coast in 2600-1800
B.C. (Flores Blanco 2006). It is well-known that it grows wild on the seashore. This same
species has been recorded in the residues of the food eaten in the middens of Galindo, a
site in the middle-Moche Valley, during its Mochica occupation (A.D. 600-800) (Lockard
2005: 206).
The properties of algae like Macrocystis integrifolia were also applied to the preservation
of fish, as is the case with a series of fish (Peruvian silverside [pejerrey]) heads wrapped
in the leaves of this species at the Nasca archaeological shrine of Cahuachi during the
first centuries of our era (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 5-6). According to Piacenza and Pieri,
these leaves may have prevented the putrefaction of the silverside given their alginic acid
content. These fish would have been carried 40 km from the seashore to the site itself, so
it seems this technique was effective.
Animals as Food
The animals eaten throughout the pre-Hispanic period obviously are a second type of
resource. Although they apparently were complementary with plant foods, animal resources
must have been crucial for survival in societies that depend on the sea.
Let us review first of all the extinct species consumed, and then the conventional species
eaten in the Andes.
There is a group of animals who lived in the Ice Age that is no longer alive, some of which
may eventually have survived well into the Holocene Period. The oldest human groups in
Peru may thus have used their flesh and bones as food.
When the first inhabitants entered the Andes they found a group of animals who were
already there since the Ice Age, and which may eventually have survived until well into the
Holocene. They were part of the so-called megafauna and probably part of the food eaten
by our most remote ancestors. But except for three sites, there is as yet no evidence in Peru
that human groups fed off of this megafauna. The following animals may have been used as
food, at least from 14,000 to ca. 10,000 B.C.
291
Elmo Leon
Megafauna
Megatherium tarijense
This is a species of the well-known megatherium that has been reported by MacNeish (1970)
and Hoffstetter (1986) within the context of the finds made in Pikimachay Cave, in Ayacucho,
and which are part of the Ayacucho complex ca. 15,400-14,600 B.C.
Scelidoterium
This has also been reported in contexts of apparent consumption at Huargo Cave (Huánuco)
that have a radiocarbon date of 14,190 B.C. (Hoffstetter 1986).
Equus andium
This is a type of horse that has been excavated in the Ayacucho complex in Pikimachay Cave,
which apparently dates to 15,400-14,600 B.C. (Hoffstetter 1986). It may have been eaten by the
ancient inhabitants of this cave.
Onohippidion saldiasi
This species has been identified in the remains, probably eaten by humans, found at Huargo
Cave (Huánuco) that date to 14,190 B.C. (Hoffstetter 1986).
Non-Extinct Species
Camelids
Andean camelids are the biggest domesticated mammals in the Andes. We could try to
prepare our review using various references, but instead we will follow the superb handbook
on camelids published by Duccio Bonavia (2008), supplemented with other studies.
Camelids always had a significant role due to the various uses they had: their meat was
eaten, their fibre gave wool, their excrement was used as fuel and as fertiliser, their bones
were used to mare utensils, and their skin to make wool and leather (Lavallée 1990: 30,
Stahler 2008: 129).
A taxonomic revision is in order before reviewing the presence and probable consumption of
camelids as food in Peru’s archaeological resources. Studies like that by Christian de Muizon
(2008: 1-10) are essential for this task. Let us make a brief summary of this study.
292
14,000 years of food in Peru
Although there are four models of camelid lineages, here we will only go over the one
that has archaeological support (interested readers should see Bonavia 2008). This model
includes two wild camelids, the vicuña and the guanaco. Their domesticated forms would
be the alpaca (a domesticated vicuña) and the llama (a domesticated guanaco).
Camelids are of the artiodactyl order and the Camelidae family. Lama glama Linné (llama)
has been found in the Pleistocene both in Argentina as well as in Bolivia, and it was
domesticated during the Holocene in Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Peru. Lama
guanicoe Miller 1976 (guanaco) has been documented in southern and western South
America since the Holocene. On the other hand, Lama pacos Linné (alpaca) is found in
Argentina as a domesticated animal since the Holocene in Bolivia and Peru [sic: se halla en
Argentina como animal domesticado desde el Holoceno en Bolivia y Perú.]
Muizon points out that the extinct Paleolama was widely dispersed across Bolivia, Ecuador,
Peru, and even northern Florida throughout the Middle and Final Pleistocene. Hemiauchenia,
another relative, is a genus found both in North America as well as in Argentina from the
Middle to the Late Pleistocene.
The guanaco is the smallest of the camelids, so it may well be the most ancient species
in this genus. It has a much bigger habitat than the vicuña; it extends from 8°S to 53°S, and
extends across deserts, grasslands, savannahs, shrub areas, puna, and even extremely dry
deserts and tropical areas. The guanaco has a high water and energy metabolism, which
means it can live for a long time without drinking water. These animals are between 1.20 and
1.75 m long and can weigh 120--130 kilos (Bonavia 2008: 23-29).
The vicuña is, on the other hand, the smallest of the camelids. An adult can weigh on
average up to 38 kilos and can reach a height of up to 86-90 cm high. In some cases they
have been known to reach up to 45 kilos. There are two vicuña subspecies, i.e. Lama vicugna
vicugna (distributed from 18 to 29°S) and Lama vicugna mensalis (which is found from 9°30’S
to 18°S). The vicuña is a perfectly adapted animal as regards its blood pressure, and its
hooves have developed callosities suited for soils like that of the puna and other stony
floors. It usually lives between 3000 and 5200 masl (Bonavia 2008: 34-45).
Wheeler says the llama (Lama glama), on the other hand, descends from Lama guanicoe (as
shown above in Muizon’s taxonomic synthesis). It is the biggest species of all the camelids
here discussed, and weighs 100 kilos on average (it can reach up to 155 kilos). It is highly
adaptable to literally every environment, particularly because it can hold much water in its
stomach, and this can last from weeks up to months. The llama is distributed from southern
Colombia to Chile, and Argentina, and its favourite areas extend from 3000 masl upward;
nowadays it is concentrated in the Altiplano (Bonavia 2008: 45-51).
Finally, the alpaca may descend from the vicuña even though no wild populations of it have
ever been found. Jane Wheeler believes the subspecies Lama vicugna mensalis is its ancestor.
It is much smaller than the llama, is often less than 1 m high and weighs 62-64 kilos; this is
293
Elmo Leon
perhaps one of the reasons it is not a beast of burden. Unlike sheep, this camelid species
grazes without harming the grass. It can also adapt rapidly to various environments, and does
not even require a dry environment. Even so it finds adapting to low altitudes difficult, so its
distribution tends to concentrate between 4000 and 5200 masl, and it is more commonly
found between 4300 and 4800 masl. It is in fact more adapted to the bofedales. The alpaca
can withstand temperatures like those found in the highlands of Piura (15 degrees on average),
as well as the freezing temperatures of the Titicaca Altiplano (Bonavia 2008: 52-56). As far as
food goes, the alpaca gives little meat but more fat, even more than the llama, which averages
to 1500 kilo-calories. The alpaca was used essentially to obtain wool. At lower altitudes it can
experience a series of pathologies.
Having made a general review of the taxonomy and of Andean camelids and gone over their
description, we now have to examine the nutritional value of their meat as they were in fact
consumed. As a food source, an average adult llama, which can weigh almost up to 90 kilos,
can yield 957 kcal/kg of live weight. For every 100 grams of llama meat Horkheimer (1960: 110)
gave 15.7 grams of proteins, 2.7 of fat and 110 calorie units.
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 141) presented the bromatological values both of llama meat, both
fresh and as charqui. The former has 140% calories, 69% water, 24.8% proteins, and 30% fat
(the biggest amount of fat and protein in the mammals eaten by the ancient Peruvians). Its
bromatological values increase significantly as charqui up to 317% calories, and particularly
up to 57% proteins (fat falls to 7.5%). Clearly in the pre-Hispanic period, the consumption of
camelid meat (whenever there is evidence of it) in any of its two forms, was the protein basis
obtained from land animals.
Few studies are available regarding the processing of llamas prior to their being eaten, but
one can well imagine they were used to the utmost (as can be observed ethnographically).
Contemporary herders use almost all parts of this animal, including the flesh, the internal
organs, blood, tissues, sinews, and skin. The llama’s main role supposedly was transportation.
Adult males can carry up to 30 kilos a day over 20 km. They are even able to carry up to 45
kilos over shorter distances (Sandefur 2001: 182). Gade (2000) tried to explain the enigma
of why this type of animal does not provide milk, and suggests that the low maternal milk
productivity has somehow extended to our time in the form of lactose intolerance.
Howe do camelids feed? Duccio Bonavia prepared a hefty volume on these animals and
presents an up-to-date picture of this subject. The research undertaken on the coast shows
these animals feed on carob seeds and pods, reeds, fruits, and grass.
As regards camelid adaptation to the puna, Rodríguez and Quispe (2007) claim these animals
have acclimated themselves to altitude sickness, which can affect other species but has no
major effect on camelids. Their adaptability to the Andean environment is such that their
hooves do not even harm the puna grass (as was noted above), and they are also able to digest
grasses that have a high lignin content.
294
14,000 years of food in Peru
The domestication of camelids is an issue that was fully covered in the most extensive study
available on this subject (Bonavia 2008). Here we must distinguish the llama and the alpaca
from the other species because these are the only two camelids which were domesticated
(Horkheimer 1960: 42). Horkheimer believed there was a special, short-necked llama which
appears in Moche pottery. Horkheimer had in fact observed many camelid depictions in
various pre-Hispanic cultures such as Moche, Wari, Tiahuanaco, and even in Recuay and Chimu
pottery, as well as in the classis Inca stone conopas, particularly those of alpacas.
Going back to domestication, Megnoni (2008) points out in a review of pre-Hispanic camelids
in the Andes that there may have been two domestication centres, one in the Central Andes
and another one in the South Central Andes. Both regions would have undergone similar
processes, starting with the intensification of camelid use (which began ca. 6500 B.C.) and up
to the use of corrals that limited the movement of these animals and brought about changes
in their leg bones. There is in fact evidence of the use of corrals in both zones, both in the
open-air site of Asana in southern Peru as well as in Inca Cave in north western Argentina. This
made Megnoni believe there were several independent domestication centres over some
2,300 km; however, without supporting evidence this position remains speculative.
Bonavia in turn presented a review of camelid domestication that will be briefly summarised
here (Bonavia 2008: 193-206). For Bonavia, the best documentation available in this regard
comes from the excavations made at Telarmachay, in the Junín puna, by Danièlle Lavallée and
her team. These studies evinced a process that took place between ca. 7000 and 5200 B.C.,
starting with the generalised hunting of guanaco and vicuña in 5200-400 B.C. and ended with
the rise of domestic animals between 4000 and 3500 B.C. (Bonavia 2008: 195).
The changes that arose throughout and after this process can be tracked through zoo-
archaeological analyses. Jane Wheeler reports modifications in the animal’s dental patterns
and certain diseases such as diarrhoeas, which were caused by bacterial epidemics that only
strike when camelids live huddled in corrals with large amounts of excrement. Like Megnoni
suggested (see above), there are several places where domestication may have taken place
including the central Peruvian puna, the salt flats in the southern highlands and so on. For an
extensive discussion readers should turn to the detailed references in Bonavia (2008: 193-206).
How were camelids hunted? What techniques were used to trap them? No study has as
yet been made reconstructing the trapping techniques used when hunting animals in Peru,
but it is worth including here accounts like that left by Father Bernabé Cobo (1893: 225-
226). When explaining the types of hunting, Cobo claims Peruvian Indians hunted out of
necessity and that it cost them much effort because they had no animals that could help
them. The game (like camelids) was hunted using arrows and other launchable weapons, but
lassos and traps were also employed. The chaco was the most common hunting method.
It was always used by the community with the permission of the governors or of the Inca.
When the Inca king decided to hunt he amassed twenty thousand Indians who spread in a
semicircle over a vast expanse in order to corner the animals, which were mostly vicuñas,
guanacos, and deer. As they moved forward they drew closer and then the surplus people
295
Elmo Leon
formed rows in order to stop the animals from fleeing. Some of the hunters were armed
with clubs for the killing; at the end they kept ten or twenty thousand animals and let the
rest go because the Inca the Inca had what he needed. It should be noted that vicuñas were
always let go once they had been shorn.
Caycu is another hunting technique that corners the animals and makes them enter inside
some sort of corral built between mountains and narrow areas.
Moving on from camelid domestication and hunting, we will now review the evidence for
camelids in pre-Hispanic Peru. This account will be based first of all on the excellent review
prepared by Bonavia,, which is based on Peru’s pre-Hispanic depictions of these animals in
various media, and then on a review of Bonavia’s account, including some results of our own.
The Central Andean iconography clearly has depictions of Camelids since quite early times
left by the Cupisnique, Vicus, Gallinazo, Moche, Nasca, Recuay, Wari, Lambayeque, Chancay,
Chimu, and Inca cultures. The most famed ones are those of llamas, particularly a short-
necked variety as Horkheimer noted (Bonavia 2008: 170-172).
We now turn to the documentation of llama bones found in Peru’s archaeological sites that
can be considered pre-Hispanic food. The reader should be forewarned that frequently only
the family is given, and in the best of cases the species too. This section will therefore be
devoted to data on llama and camelid finds in general. A subsequent section will discuss the
species as far as the data allows. We beg the readers’ forgiveness for using indirect citations
(Bonavia 2008), but we believe Bonavia’s handbook is as reliable as the original datum.
Camelid remains, but not precisely those of llamas, have been discovered at Jaywamachay
Cave in Ayacucho, in what is known as the Puente phase (MacNeish et al. 1981: 155), i.e. ca.
10,085-6960 B.C. The variety of the bones found suggests that several body parts from these
animals were processed in this cave. The occurrence of more camelid bones increases in
subsequent phases, so that a focus on catching and selecting this type of animal is visible in
this part of Ayacucho throughout the Early Holocene.
The most ancient finds perhaps are those from the well-known Pikimachay Cave in Ayacucho
itself (Huanta). MacNeish noticed the occurrence of llama bones in layers “j”, “h,” and “i1,”
which have been dated to ca. 14,000 B.C. Caution is required in the face of such an impressive
antiquity because the reports do not provide the data required in order to be conclusive as
regards the apparition of this type of camelids before Younger Dryas, yet the data cannot be
ruled out either.
Next, according to the research undertaken in Ayacucho, is the presence of alpacas and
modern llamas around 8000 B.C. Camelids are present throughout all of the preceramic
occupation of this zone, from 6500 to 2000 B.C. (Bonavia 2008: 95-98). MacNeish mentions
corrals with camelid bones in subsequent phases between 2213 and 1670 B.C., and even in the
Huarpa culture when caravans were already in use (Bonavia 2008: 106, 121).
296
14,000 years of food in Peru
Guitarrero Cave, which lies at about 2500 masl, and which has already been mentioned on
more than one occasion in regard to plants, is another site with very early dates for camelids.
Thomas Lynch reports the presence of camelid remains since at least 9200 B.C. Even one date
of 9690 B.C. for site Pan-12-58, which lies at a higher altitude than Guitarrero, seems to be
associated with a presence of up to 75% camelid bones. There are camelid bones at Pampa de
Lampas, a site also in the Callejón de Huaylas that has early Holocene dates, so camelids are
well represented in this part of Peru since quite an early date (Bonavia 2008: 83).
Lauricocha Cave (in the Raura Cordillera, Ancash) is another Early Holocene site (ca. 8,500
B.C.) where camelids remains have been excavated. Augusto Cardich, who was in charge of the
excavations, claims he found camelid bones as food refuse (Bonavia 2008: 85).
Next in this inventory of camelids in early sites is the evidence for the punas of the modern-
day department of Junín, where many experts believe domestication took place.
Several archaeologists, including Ramiro Matos and John Rick, have excavated the Pachamachay
rock shelter, which is some 7 km west of Lake Junín at about 4250 masl. Here it was found that
the biggest part of the fauna (95%) comes from Early Holocene (ca. 8000-6000 B.C.) camelid
bones. In the subsequent phase the accumulation of camelid bones has been interpreted
as a result of “specialised hunting;” finally, the process of camelid domestication may have
taken place around 2500 B.C. and thus gave rise to herding. Panaulauca (4150 masl) is a site
close to the Pachamachay rock shelter where a significant amount of camelid bones from the
Holocene has been found (Bonavia 2008: 87-90).
But it evidently was in the Telarmachay rock shelter, at about 4420 masl in the Junín puna, close
to modern San Pedro de Cajas, that this process was best examined. Using fine archaeological
recording techniques, Danièlle Lavallée and her team literally recorded hundreds of thousands
of camelid bones here; in many cases these bones bore combustion marks due to their culinary
processing before being consumed. According to the excavations, in time camelids became
the most consumed resource. It was here that evidence has been recovered of some sort
of trench in the ground where thermofractured stones and camelid fragments (presumably
llamas) were found; the latter were cooked using hot stones, in what can be considered to be
some kind of pachamanca that dates to 6200 B.C. We will return later on to Telarmachay and
its remains of camelids.
In the central puna itself we have evidence from the Uchkumachay (Tilarnioc) rock shelter at around
4050 masl, which was excavated by Peter Kaulicke. Here we apparently also have a domestication
process that began in 7000 B.C. and extended up to 5500 B.C. (Bonavia 2008: 93-94).
In the south, in the highlands of Moquegua, we have evidence not just of camelids but also of
their being processed for consumption. Mark Aldenderfer (1990: 489-490) excavated the surface
site [yacimiento superficial] of Asana, which lies at 3435 masl in the sierra of the Osmore Valley. A
domestic level was recorded in a layer that dates to 3370-3106 B.C., where camelids were processed
for human consumption. Some interesting structures were found here, such as small trenches that
297
Elmo Leon
Aldenderfer believes worked as heaters and/or illuminators, and even rocks that may have been
used as tables where camelids were processed or butchered. Bones used as scrapers, hearths and
even grinding stones evince this process. Bone analysis showed whole animals were carried in
order to attain the highest yield. The high presence of long bones indicates the consumption of
these camelids’ meat. Other river stones—i.e. grinding stones—show traces of having been used to
grind grains or seeds of unknown taxonomy (perhaps Chenopodiaceae?), yet for Aldenderfer they
point out that the diet was being supplemented with vegetables.
A camelid cranium that may be a llama was found in the excavation of Los Gavilanes, a site
that dates to 2300-1460 B.C. (Bonavia 1982: 200). Bonavia (2008: 100) points out that camelid
excrement is present probably since 3000 B.C. at this same site, which means camelids go
a long way back here. This is one of the first pieces of evidence (if not the earliest one) of
camelids on the Peruvian coast alongside those from Lima, which appear below.
Lanning and Patterson claim there were camelids in the Central coast’s Chillón Valley around
4200-2500 B.C. Camelid remains have been documented at El Paraíso, a site in the Chillón
Valley, Lima, also around 2500 B.C. (Bonavia 2008: 100).
Moving forwards in time we have Huaricoto in the department of Ancash. Located at about
2750 masl and dated to 2200-1800 B.C., the site held 25% camelid bones, so it is possible they
were part of what humans were eating; this is more frequent around 900 B.C. and even 400
B.C., with an increase in average to 69% (Bonavia 2008: 95, 101). Llama bones were excavated in
the Temple of the Crossed Hands at Kotosh, a Late Preceramic (second millennium B.C.) site in
the Huánuco department close to the Higueras River. Their consumption endured throughout
the first millennium of the Christian era (Bonavia 2008: 95, 124).
The analyses Melody Shimada carried out at Huacaloma, a site at about 2700 masl in the
suburbs of the modern-day city of Cajamarca, showed that at least half of the camelids found
here had been killed for food, so it is clear they were being consumed at this site from 2000
to 200 B.C. Likewise at Kuntur Wasi (in the province of San Pablo, Cajamarca), camelids were
the animals most eaten throughout the first millennium B.C. (Uzawa 2007).
Camelid consumption persisted throughout the first millennium B.C. (Bonavia 2008: 103, 109,
121). Bonavia mentions their presence at Huayhuaca (Apurímac), a site that dates to the first
centuries of the Christian era. In Huancavelica there were both alpacas as well as llamas. This
is one of the few studies that were able to identify the species.
Huaca Lucía-Chólope is a site in the department of Lambayeque, Ferreñafe province, where
a series of camelid bones have been identified amongst remains such as those of guinea
pig, lizards and molluscs, so this animal may have been part of the food eaten by its early
inhabitants in 1400-700 B.C. (Bonavia 2008: 118).
On the coast, Ikehara and Shibata (2005: 144) managed to identify long bones and parts
of camelid vertebrae in food consumption contexts at Cerro Blanco, a site in the lower
298
14,000 years of food in Peru
Nepeña Valley, that have been interpreted as feasts and which have dates that fall between
1100 and 250 B.C.
Bonavia (2008: 106) likewise pointed out the presence of camelid bones at Puémape, a
Cupisnique site (ca. 1500-400 B.C.). In the Lurín Valley on another part of the coast, Burger
claims having found camelid remains at Cardal (ca. 1170-740 B.C.) that were for human
consumption (Bonavia 2008: 106).
Camelid remains have been found at the site of Acha in Caravelí (Arequipa) that date to ca. 925
B.C., and which may have been part of the food eaten by the people who lived here (Bonavia
2008: 108). More camelid remains have been excavated at Michinal, a site in the ceja de selva
of Cajamarca that dates to the second and third millenniums B.C.
Llama (Lama glama) has been found in an early Paracas context in the excavation of Cerrillos,
a site in the upper Ica Valley (ca. 800-600 B.C.) (Splitstoser 2009: 93).
Jean Guffroy (1989: 193) excavated camelid remains at Ñañañique—a site in Chulucanas
(Piura)—that fall ca. in 1500-400 B.C. These remains abound since the beginning of the site’s
occupation. Also in Piura, but towards Pariñas (Talara), there is a site called PV7-18 where
camelids were apparently being eaten from 450 B.C. to A.D. 600 (Bonavia 2008: 118).
Bonavia (2008: 109) reported the occurrence of camelid bones at about 3930 masl in southern
Peru at Kaluyo, a site (province of Azángaro, Puno), as well as at Pucará (province of Lampa,
Puno), so it may have been part of the food eaten by the people of this cultures throughout
the first millennium of the Christian era.
Bonavia (2008: 112) likewise points out that during the occupation of Chavín de Huántar,
camelid long bones comprised 20-30%. Luis Lumbreras believes that pieces of camelids
(llamas and alpacas) were boiled or roasted [hervidos o rostizados] and were then served
in vessels. There were also many rib and leg bones cut into proportional sections. It should
likewise be noted that studies have shown that at Chavín birds, dogs, vizcachas and guinea
pigs were eaten, as shall be seen in subsequent animal taxa.
The site of Pikicallepata in Quispiscanchis, Sicuani (Cuzco), excavated by Karen Mohr Chávez
(Bonavia 2008: 117), has yielded abundant camelid remains that were part of the site’s diet,
probably in the first millennium B.C. Marcavalle is also in Cuzco at about 3314 masl; here
a significant amount of camelid remains have been excavated, so apparently mostly young
llamas were being slaughtered (Bonavia 2008: 117).
In his overview, Bonavia (2008: 119) mentions several Early Horizon coastal sites—i.e. prior
to the first millennium B.C.—where camelid remains have been found, e.g. Huaca Cortada,
Huaca de los Reyes, Huaca de la Cruz, and Huaca Guavalito (La Libertad), or in sites in Casma
like Pampa Rosario, Pampa de Llamas, and the Moxeque complex. Camelids were found
at Huarmey at the site known as Bermejo, and in Lima at Faro de Supe (Chancay). Camelid
299
Elmo Leon
remains from the first millennium B.C. reach the ceja de selva, for instance at El Cerezal, a
site in eastern Cajamarca that lies at about 510 masl on the Tabaconas River; in this case the
remains are from llamas (Bonavia 2008: 120).
The zooarchaeological research undertaken by Shelia Pozorski (1979: 169) shows the llama
evidently was the main source of meat and the main food of animal origins in sites that lie
on the lower Moche Valley, including Chan Chan to the north. A subsequent study claimed
llamas were the main source of meat at Huaca del Sol in the Mochica period. The same thing
holds true for the Huaca de la Luna, where camelid remains abound (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 134)
and include llama, guanaco, and alpaca (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 189).
The evidence of camelid processing for consumption includes not just charred llama bones
with cut marks, but also large amounts of dung. Most of these animals were very young
adults, thus suggesting their control and the presence of herds raised especially for meat.
Besides, these were ... [ganado de casta] in a context where a greater efficiency in the
slaughter of these animals as soon they reached adulthood was attained; in other words
they did not gain weight and consumed invaluable fodder (Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 122).
From this we can infer the high quality of the meat eaten by the Moche, which was also
verified by Vásquez et al. (2003: 58).
Keatinge (1975: 226) reports that llama was eaten at the Cerro La Virgen site (the rural zone
of Chan Chan in the Chimu epoch. The llama appears in domestic consumption contexts at
Caballo Muerto (ca. 1200 B.C.) and even at the city of Chan Chan, including the Inca occupation
of this zone. Shelia Pozorski recorded four llama bones with cut marks at Huaca Herederos
Chica, a part of the Caballo Muerto complex, and she interprets this as the dismembering
of bodies for their preparation and consumption. This actually is one of the scant pieces of
evidence showing camelids were cooked for eating (Bonavia 2008: 106).
Van Gijsehem (2001: 261) recorded camelid remains in a “kitchen zone” at the site of Huaca de
la Luna, which were probably eaten along with the coco or zuco fish, as well as other molluscs
and loma snails.
We now turn to the evidence of camelids in the first centuries of the Christian era (100 B.C.-
A.D. 600), and we still continue with Duccio Bonavia’s camelid handbook.
First there is evidence of camelids in the Callejón de Huaylas at 4500 masl at a site called
Huachanmachay, in the headwaters of the Casma River. Camelids are known in this zone since
the early Holocene, as has already been noted.
There is a strong presence of camelid bones, particularly llama bones, in the sites of the
ancestors of the Mochica, and of the Mochica themselves. It is striking that llamas comprise
up to 92% of the food [producto] consumed in the Moche Valley, at the sites of Cerro Arena
(60 B.C.) and Galindo (A.D. 679-828). Such rates were not equalled by any other product eaten
at these sites, so its high consumption even before the Mochica themselves can be inferred.
300
14,000 years of food in Peru
Kaulicke reported llama being eaten slightly more to the north at Loma Valverde, a site in the
upper Piura River that he dates to ca. A.D. 160-450, i.e. throughout the Mochica occupation.
The study of coproliths in some Salinar sites at Puerto Moorin showed llama was being eaten
in this part of the Virú Valley, at least since the beginning of the Christian era (Ericson et al.
1989: 74). This is a direct evidence of llama consumption shortly before the beginning of our
era on the North Coast of Peru.
Likewise in the Santa and Virú Valleys, sites like Suchimancillo and Castillo de Tomaval show
the presence of corrals. These sites thus suggest places where llama caravans were provisioned
(Bonavia 2008: 129).
Bonavia presents a tight summary of camelid remains associated with the Moche culture
that clearly shows llamas were above all raised, consumed and used as transportation by the
Moche people. In this context, Sheila Pozorski shows the treatment they were given when
preparing them in the Moche Valley itself (Bonavia 2008: 131). She reconstructed the process
like this: the animal was skinned and the carcass was dismembered by cutting at the joints.
The long bones were split, quite likely to extract the marrow in order to eat it. The analysis
recorded that at least a third of the bones were burned, particularly in the vertebrae and
ribs. After studying the evidence, Pozorski concluded that llama meat was frequently roasted
(especially the ribs and the backbone). Camelids on the other hand usually ate fodder and
carob fruits, which gave them a special flavour.
Lockard (2005: 201) showed, also in the context of the Moche culture, the high consumption
of llamas that took place during the Mochica occupation of Galindo, particularly by the elite,
in ca. A.D. 600-800. Quite the contrary, this fell during the Chimu epoch and lost favour to
agricultural produce (which may have been due to some climate change). There apparently
was a differentiated access to llama meat, with the elite being favoured.
We now turn to the Nasca on the Central-South Coast. It is known that the people of Cahuachi
found their main source of animal protein in camelids, quite possibly llamas, at least from A.D.
200 to A.D. 600 (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 4). Large amounts of guano have likewise been found
at Cahuachi, and a llama corral was even found at Paredones, a Nasca site not far away from
Cahuachi (Bonavia 2008: 134-135).
Llamas are also found in the Callejón de Huaylas at Pan 12-59, a Recuay site (i.e. A.D. 100-800)
that had 88% camelid bones (Bonavia 2008: 109). This suggests this culture either greatly
consumed this animal, or instead used it for transportation.
Llamas were also part of the food eaten by the ancient Wanka people in the upper Mantaro
Valley (3200-3900 masl), at least from A.D. 200 up to the Inca occupation (Hastorf 2002).
Sandefur (2001) claims the Wanka populations in this zone depended more on the llama than on
grains during the first centuries of the Christian era because these animals were not vulnerable
to seasonal changes like grains and tubers, and were even able to withstand drought.
301
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

The Wari also ate llamas. At least four of them have been identified in the excavation of Cerro
Baúl (Moquegua) that bore marks of having been processed for consumption, along with
other, smaller ones. Llamas clearly comprised the largest part of this people’s diet. One llama
had bone cut marks that have been interpreted as its ritual dismemberment, i.e. the animal
was sacrificed. As has already been noted, the chronology of this site ranges between A.D. 631
and A.D. 1000. It is worth noting that at least three llamas seem to have eaten coastal plants,
so they are believed to have been transported from that zone (Moseley et al. 2005: 17269).
More recently, Tiffiny Tung (2012: 52) has pointed out the presence of the remains of llamas
consumed by the people of Beringa (a site in Arequipa), in a full-fledged Wari Empire context.

When examining the camelid remains recorded for the Middle Horizon, Bonavia concluded
that during the Wari Empire herding was less intensive because the Wari apparently favoured
agriculture more. For instance, at the well-known site of Conchopata there is 28% less camelids
(Bonavia 2008: 138).

There similarly is a series of evidence from the Wari occupation of the coast, for instance at
Batán Grande, where a high number of llamas was found in Huaca del Pueblo 14. Shimada, who
studied the site, believes the llama excrement contained carob leaves and fruits, a custom
already evinced by the Moche. The llama was also the main food at Huaca Chotuna in the
Middle Horizon. At Pampa Grande there also was a large amount of llamas that were meant
not just for transportation, but also as food (Bonavia 2008: 139).

About 20% camelids have been found around this time in the shrine of Pacatnamú as well as
in the site of Cañoncillo (Jequetepeque), where 50% of the fauna comprised llamas. Sheila
Pozorski identified cut marks in the bones due to skinning. On the other hand a series of sites
in La Libertad like El Brujo, Galindo, and San José de Moro had llama remains in significant
percentages [en cierto porcentaje], so they may have been part of the food eaten in this
region in A.D. 600-1000.

Camelids were also found in site Virú 631. Max Uhle pointed out their presence Ancón (Lima).
There were also camelids in Pacheco and Huaca del Oro, Wari sites in Ica (Bonavia 2008: 142-146).

We now turn to the Late Intermediate Period, where the continuity of llama consumption is
clear. We find one of these major continuities in Lambayeque, where llama remains have been
reported in several archaeological sites in the lower valley as residues left behind by the food
eaten by the people of various cultures, at least from Cupisnique (1300 B.C.) to Sicán (A.D.
1400). Its consumption was more frequent in the latter stage of the Mochica culture ca. A.D.
600 (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596).
Robyn Cutright (2009: 158) carried out research slightly more to the south with her excavation
of Pedregal, a Chimu site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley. Cutright showed the llama was the
main animal eaten by the people of Pedregal. She claims part of the llamas consumed here
was raised in corrals in this same site, and that they probably were fed carob seeds, as has
been seen at some Moche sites. A series of cut marks have also been detected that indicate
Figura 16. Astrágalo de camélido (llama) del sitio Pedregal (cultura Chimú, valle de Jequetepeque), aproximadamente 1000-1460 d.C.
(CORTESÍA DE ROBYN CUTRIGHT).
the llamas were carved before being cooked (Figure 16). Cutright cites studies like that done by
Víctor Vásquez from the University of Trujillo—which recorded the remains of corrals and of
camelid raising at Santa Rita, a site in the Chao Valley—or by Rosales, who has shown camelid
raising at Túcume, a site in the Lambayeque Valley that raises the possibility that llamas were
bred on the coast. This changes the idea that these animals were exclusively bred in the
highlands (Cutright 2009: 160).

302 303
Elmo Leon
The shrine of Pacatnamú is almost on the mouth of the Jequetepeque River. Here Gumerman
(1991) found the people buried at this site had eaten llama, particularly the elites, a trend we
have already seen in a Moche context.
Bonavia mentions the presence of camelid bones in a series of highland sites that extend from
north to south and which belong to this period (A.D. 1000-1460). They include Huamachuco
and southern Tarma (where Jeffrey Parsons claims there was a high concentration of llamas)
amongst others, as well as Rakasmarka, Palcamayo (Junín), and even the site of Kuélap
(Amazonas). Throughout this period camelids were also found at Ayacucho, particularly at
the sites of Rosamachay and Ayamachay, as well as in Pikimachay Cave, which is known for
holding the oldest evidence for Peru (Bonavia 2008: 146-147).
Llamas also existed in the south as is shown by the site of El Yaral (Moquegua), where a
significant number of naturally dried up llamas and alpacas were found in contexts pertaining
to the Chiribaya culture (A.D. 950-1350). According to Hermann Trimborn, the discovery of
llama remains has been reported for the site of Tocucho (Caplina Valley, Tacna) (Bonavia 2008:
149-150).
Bonavia examined the llama remains found from the north to the south coast in this same
period and mentions a site [un yacimiento] in Tumbes where many llama bones were found in
Chimu sites [sitios], for instance at Cabeza de Vaca, Pirámide del Sol, and San Pedro. Moving
towards the south Bonavia lists Bayóvar (Illescas Peninsula). Alfredo Altamirano made the
analysis and concluded camelid meat was eaten toasted, boiled [tostada, hervida] and as
charqui. The accumulation of camelid dung indicates the llamas were raised in the vicinity of
these sites (Bonavia 2008: 152), a characteristic we have already found.
Still moving southwards we find the Huaca del Pueblo (Túcume) in the Lambayeque Valley,
where Shimada recorded up to five metres of camelid dung. A layer 50 cm thick of llama
excrement was found at a site called Cerro Sapame in La Leche Valley; the dung contained
carob seeds, earth [?: tierra], leaves, maize cobs and even shrubs.
Bonavia examined the evidence for the Moche Valley, still more to the south. In general the
sites belonging to the period immediately before the Inca, like Chan Chan, had just 36% of
camelids (Bonavia 2008: 152-153). It was precisely in these marginal areas in Chan Chan where
llama was eaten. In some sectors the butchery practices were even evinced, for instance the
presence of the animal’s forepart and hind legs; in others the cranium and the backbone prevail
(as was already known in the first millennium B.C.); and still in other sectors the emphasis is
on the hind section and in other parts of the animals. Since there are no burned bones, the
authors assume the meat was boiled (Bonavia 2008: 154).
The Casma and Nepeña Valleys have a series of sites that contain llama remains. The same is
true of Cerro Azul and Lomas de Chilca, immediately south of Lima. Camelid remains are also
present at Huaca del Oro (Nasca), and especially in Chiribaya sites like Estuquina.
304
14,000 years of food in Peru
Elizabeth Wing pointed out for the Late Horizon or Inca epoch that camelids reach up to 86%
at the site of Huánuco Pampa, whilst at La Pampa, Corongo (Áncash) we have a concentration
of camelid bones. On the other hand the site of Minaspata (3,100 masl) has over 90% camelids
masl) (Bonavia 166-167).
Likewise in Lima, the excavation of the Temple of the Sun at Pachacamac found a significant
amount of camelids. Bonavia ends his review of the camelid record at the site of El Gran
Pajatén in the montaña (department of San Martín), where corrals have been found, and in
the ceja de selva along the Pampaconas River, La Convención (Cuzco), where the presence of
camelid bones has been noted (Bonavia 2008: 168-169).
The is a significant amount of evidence for the llama during the Inca Empire in various sites
in the modern department of La Libertad, which include not just bones but also coproliths.
Further south on the Central Coast, at Cajamarquilla, Bonavia found a large amount of
coproliths, possibly llama, in the same Inca context.
Yocelin Williams (2005: 186) claims the dental study of the mummies from Puruchuco-Huaquerones,
in the modern district of Ate-Vitarte, show the area’s inhabitants were eating charqui during the Inca
occupation, albeit in small amounts. This is thus a direct evidence of its consumption.
Not far away from this site but also in Lima, is Pueblo Viejo-Pucará on the left bank of the Lurín
Valley; here Watson (2008) reported the presence of corrals for camelids that were probably
brought from the Huarochirí highlands in the Late Horizon, i.e. during the Inca occupation.
Clearly at least the elites at this site ate this animal’s meat. Besides, the tombs of the people
who may have herded them were found in the vicinity. Watson presents evidence showing
camelids were being eaten in residential areas. The marks on some of the bones apparently
indicate direct exposure to a fire, i.e. roasting [asado]. Other cuts in the bone are interpreted
as evidence of skinning during preparation and removal of the flesh (Watson 2008: 140). So
this type of cooking was also practiced on the coast in Inca times.
We now turn to the alpaca in the archaeological record. We should bear in mind these are
animals that were probably raised mostly for wool rather than for consumption due to their
meagre amount of meat, save for the fact that it is fatty.
Lavallée’s team probably is the one that has best documented the process of alpaca domestication
(Lavallée et al. 1985: 66-67). They believe the alpaca had already been domesticated ca. 5600
B.C. in the Telarmachay rock shelter at around 4420 masl in the Junín puna (close to San Pedro
de Cajas, in the central Peruvian puna. Late Preceramic sites like Acomachay and Cuchimachay
seem to show this trend since at least 4000 B.C. (Bonavia 2008: 92-93).
Yet as far as antiquity goes we should point out the possibility, despite the absence of the
respective zooarchaeological studies, that the most ancient alpacas come from Jaywamachay
and date to ca. 8000 B.C., or a more reliable 6550-5100 B.C. (Bonavia 2008: 95-96). Bonavia
likewise notes the occurrence of alpaca bones at the site of Asia (Cañete) that fall within the
305
Elmo Leon
third millennium B.C. Also at Paracas: Cabezas Largas, ca. 3000 B.C., and Santo Domingo de
Paracas, in the form of a vicuña skin (Bonavia 2008: 101).
Bonavia (1982: 201) recorded the remains of alpaca hairs at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower
Huarmey Valley, in a context that was dated to 2300-1480 B.C.; however, their specific use
cannot be identified.
In his handbook on camelids, Bonavia (2008: 118, 125) reported the occurrence of alpacas at
the site of Pucara (Lampa province in Puno) ca. 200 B.C. and even in the first centuries of our
era. The alpaca is also present in the context of Huayhuaca, a site in Huancavelica.
The remains of at least nine of these animals have been found at Cerro Baúl, in the context
of the Wari occupation in A.D. 631-1000. They were apparently meant for sacrifice in a ritual
event (Moseley et al. 2005: 17269).
Bonavia (2008: 99) has pointed out that the alpaca bones analysed at the Chiribaya site of El
Yaral (Moquegua) evince herding of this type of camelid ca. A.D. 900-1000, probably to grow
fibre for textiles.
We thus find that in general, in pre-Hispanic Peru the alpaca was meant to acquire wool and
other by-products. It still isn’t clear whether its meat was eaten or not, but it would not come
as a surprise.
We now turn to the pre-Hispanic vicuña. We actually have very few specimens of this species
that have been identified. One of the oldest pieces of evidence of vicuña consumption comes
in fact from the Telarmachay rock shelter, where it was the main food eaten, at least since
the beginning of the human occupation of this site around 8000 B.C. The site is close to San
Pedro de Cajas, as has already been pointed out, in the middle of the puna of the modern
department of Junín, at ca. 4420 masl (Lavallée et al. 1985: 64).
Bonavia (2008: 101) reported the find Fréderic Engel made of vicuña at Chilca, a site south of
Lima, which dated to ca. 3025 B.C. It has also been found at Asia, Cañete (Lima), where it dates
to the third millennium B.C.
The people of the Wanka culture occupied the upper Mantaro Valley (3200-3900 masl) and
partially fed themselves with vicuña meat starting in A.D. 200 (Sandefur 2001: 181).
In conclusion, there is very little evidence of the consumption of vicuña meat, but we can
glimpse that it was eaten both on the coast and in the highlands since quite an early date.
We turn now to the guanaco—a wild species—in the pre-Hispanic record. This is one of
the first alimentary resources recorded at 4420 masl in the Telarmachay rock shelter, in
the central Peruvian puna in the department of Junín. The bones of this animal have been
found in fragmentary condition in significant amounts that were dated starting from ca.
306
14,000 years of food in Peru
8000 B.C., which shows their remains were processed for consumption (Lavallée et al.
1985: 64).
Guanaco bone remains have been found at Quebrada de los Burros, a site in Tacna. Lavallée et
al. (1999: 45) note they were found in all levels, starting from ca. 7200 B.C. It should be pointed
that that the respective documentation is still missing because the study is not yet over.
From both studies we can reach the preliminary conclusion, thanks to the dedication shown
by Danièlle Lavallée’s French School, that the guanaco was being consumed both in Peru’s
puna and coast since around 10,000 or 9000 years ago.
Although the radiometric age of the guanaco remains from Pampa Colorada, a site in Camaná
(Arequipa) is hard to establish, it may go back up to at least 6000 B.C. (Bonavia 2008: 101).
Robert Benfer reported the presence of guanaco bones at Paloma, a site close to San Bartolo
beach south of Lima, which roughly date to 3000 B.C. (Bonavia 2008: 101).
Finally, in their faunal analysis of the Old Temple of Chavín de Huántar and its associated
domestic settlements, Miller and Burger (1995: 430) found that guanaco meat was being eaten
since at least 900 B.C.
We now leave the camelids in order to continue our review of the animal species that were
probably eaten, and some that were in fact consumed, by the people of pre-Hispanic Peru.
Taruca, Deer (Hippocamelus antisensis)
The Hippocamelus genus is represented by two living species, H. bisulcus and H. antisensis.
The latter is smaller and has a lighter-coloured coat. It is mostly distributed over the
northern Andean countries. This animal migrates to higher areas in summer and lower
ones in winter because of the cold. It prefers the rugged terrain that extends from 2500
to 5200 masl, where it feeds mostly on herbs and shrubs. The taruca measures on average
about 145 cm and weighs between 60 and 75 kilos. Although a shy species, it freezes in
the presence of human groups In Peru its tradition is connected with the material used to
manufacture leather (Díaz 1995).
The taruca is one of the possible foods eaten by the early people of Telarmachay, at 4420
masl in the Junín puna, where it has been documented in layers that date at least to 8000 B.C.
(Lavallée et al. 1985: 64), i.e. the first occupation of this rock shelter.
Carmen Cardoza (1993: 392) reported the discovery of taruca bones with traces of
combustion at Chavín de Huántar, in the Gallery of Offerings, that date to the period
1218-812 B.C. We cannot thus rule out the possibility that it was eaten, but it may also
have been an offering.
307
Elmo Leon
The remains of a taruca have likewise been found in the excavation of Cerro Baúl, and
correspond to the Wari occupation in A.D. 631-1000 (Moseley et al. 2005: 17269). The report
does not state whether it was consumed or not.
In short, although these animals seem to be associated with the remains of various human
occupations, the evidence is actually scant and it cannot be reliably proved if they were indeed
eaten. The issue remains open and will only be settled once more research has been carried out.
White Tailed Deer [Venado de Cola Blanca] (Odocoileus virginianus, Odocoileus peruvianus) and
Red Brocket [Ciervo Rojo] (Mazama americana, Mazama rufina)
Álvarez-Romero (2005) described Odocoileus virginianus as a deer species known as the mid-
sized white tailed deer, which is characterised by its long and relatively thick neck, and its coat
that changes according to the season. It has a highly variable weight that ranges between 18
and 215 kilos. As its habitat, this species prefers wooded areas but is able to adapt to a series
of ecosystems. They do not form big families and migrate from 10 up to 200 km.
Barrio (2010) defined the red brocket as a species that is found from Colombia to Argentina,
weighs 20-30 kilos, and is often associated with a habitat in the tropical eastern Andes.
Cervids most likely were present since the beginning of the human peopling of Peru, and were
therefore part of the human diet. This was shown by the study Elizabeth Wing (1980: 155)
made when analysing the remains from Guitarrero Cave, where cervid bones are found since
Complex I, i.e. ca. 9500 B.C. In 8500-6700 B.C. cervids were the food that most provided meat
to the inhabitants of the cave, as they come second only to rodents.
An even older date was obtained in strata from the Puente phase in Jaywamachay Cave,
Ayacucho, where long cervid bones (from an unidentified species) were found (MacNeish et
al. 1981: 157); this gives a time period of approximately 10,085-6960 B.C.
We have evidence from more controlled excavations at Nanchoc, in the upper Zaña Valley (in
the department of Lambayeque), and in the middle Jequetepeque Valley. Here Dillehay (2011:
333) reported finding the remains of Odocoileus virginianus and Odocoileus peruvianus in
contexts that indicate they were food resources and which dated to 8011-5954 B.C. Mazama
sp. was identified in this same zone with dates between 9700 and 9200 B.C.
Odocoleius virginianus has also been found in the remains of food at Pampa de Llamas, a site
in the lower Casma Valley, where it has been dated to the period 2088-1243 B.C. (Pozorski and
Pozorski 1986: 398). The bones of this animal have been found in great numbers, so it may have
been frequently eaten.
The research done by Sheila Pozorski on the North Coast of Peru reported deer remains, and it
comprised a significant part of the diet at the site of Caballo Muerto (dated to ca. 1200-200 B.C.).
308
14,000 years of food in Peru
Ruth Shady and Hermilio Rosas (1979: 123) in turn report that bones of Odocoleius virginianus
have been found in the excavation of Alenya (Bagua Bajo), at about 522 masl on the Utcubamba
River, close to the Marañón River (department of Amazonas), in what may be interpreted as
part of the food eaten by this culture ca. 1500-1200 B.C.
The remains of Odocoileus virginianus (white tail deer) were found in significant amounts
in the excavation of the town adjacent to the famed temple of Chavín de Huántar since at
least 900 B.C., which means it was evidently consumed in this zone since that time (Miller
and Burger 1995: 428). Thanks to the research done by Carmen Rosa Cardoza (1993: 392), the
red brocket has been identified, albeit in small amounts, in the Gallery of the Offerings
at Chavín de Huántar, in the period ca. 1218-812 B.C. It is not known whether they were
consumed or not.
Peter Kaulicke (1991: 414) found deer remains (Odocoileus virginianus) further to the north in
domestic contexts at Loma Valverde, in the Upper Piura. They dated to ca. 300 B.C.-A.D. 450,
which means the Mochica population was already consuming it. These remains also included
bones of Mazama americana, which is another type of ‘red’ deer that was also part of the diet
in this part of Piura. The presence of these animals’ faecal remains close to the archaeological
sites suggests they were kept close to the site, and one could even speculate they were being
raised in some kind of corral.
Vásquez et al. (2003: 53) recorded the occurrence of the bones of Odocoleius virginianus at
the site of Huaca del Sol in Moche—up to 40%—but llamas clearly were more abundant. We
have to mention in this regard the depictions of deer this culture made.
The bones of two deer were found in the excavation of Cerro Baúl (A.D. 635-1000). Moseley
et al. (2005: 12769) claim these animals were eaten.
White tailed deer have been recorded in the food middens left by the ancient population
of the lower Lambayeque Valley between 1300 B.C. and A.D. 1400 (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596).
Lockard (2005: 201) also showed the significant presence this animal had in the diet of the
Moche people of Galindo (ca. A.D. 600-800), a site in the middle Moche Valley, and partially
so during the Chimu occupation of this site. The presence and probable consumption of the
white tailed deer on Peru’s North Coast is thus clear.
The white tailed deer was apparently also eaten by the Wanka in the Junín puna, in the upper
Mantaro Valley. Cervids were hunted here as a supplement for their food since at least A.D.
200 (Sandefur 2001: 181).
Watson reported finding partially burned deer bones at the site of Pueblo Viejo (on the
Central Coast in the Lurín Valley). The bones have cut marks in the diaphysis, and were even
intentionally split in order to extract the bone marrow as part of food preparation (Watson
2008: 136-137). This is one of the few, scant pieces of evidence of its consumption.
309
Elmo Leon
The northernmost find of white tailed deer thus far comes from Loma Saavedra, a site on the
banks of the Zarumilla River (Tumbes, a short distance away from the frontier with Ecuador).
Its fates fall between A.D. 1070 and A.D. 1520, which corresponds to the Jambelí, Garbanzal,
Chimu, and Chimu-Inca cultures (Moore 2007a: 16).
Peccary [Chancho de Monte, Jabalí Americano, Pecarí] (Tayassuidae)
This is a fruit-eating ungulate of neotropical provenance (López et al. 2006). The only evidence
of peccary found in a Peruvian context comes from the Nanchoc sites in the upper Zaña
Valley and the middle Jequetepeque Valley. Here, Dillehay (2011: 333) says, peccary has been
found to have been a possible alimentary source in strata that dated to 9700-9200 B.C. It
should be noted that the sites lie in the low-altitude Andes of northern Peru, which can be
points of connection between this zone and the Amazon.
Rodents
Guinea Pig [Cuy, Cobayo, Quwe, Wanchu] (Cavia porcellus)
We now turn to an animal that is typical of Andean, and nowadays Peruvian, cuisine, and
which certainly is characteristic of Peru: the guinea pig or cuy. Guinea pigs were the main
source of meat for some in pre-Hispanic Peru, because although camelids are evidently much
bigger, they do not reproduce at the same rate as the cuy and they are not killed in order
to prevent strife among them; in fact, usually a male and many females are left alive, which
means cuy consumption may have been massive. Hans Horkheimer (1960: 44) believed the
guinea pig was native to Peru, probably to the highlands.
When the Spaniards reached the New World the found the guinea pig widely distributed,
from the Venezuelan northwest to central Chile and northern Argentina. In a fascinating
study, Piguière et al. (2012) presented evidence of sixteenth-century guinea pig remains found
in excavations in Belgium and England—i.e. almost immediately after the Spanish conquest—
that according to the contexts were kept as curios or as pets. Although it is believed that at
this time guinea pigs were not considered eatable in Europe, it is worth recalling that in his
Theatre d´agriculture (1563), the French agronomist O. de Serres pointed out that the connins
d´Inde exported from Brazil, had been domesticated in France for food. De Serres himself
pointed out that for guinea pigs to have a good taste, they must be prepared with several
species. This means the question regarding whether guinea pigs were being eaten in Europe
right after the conquest is still open.
In wild state the guinea pig is part of the Cavia genus, which was widespread in South
America since the Miocene. Once domesticated it was given different names in the native
languages, like wanchu (Aymara); conejo peruano or nativo (Spanish); acuri, huimbo or cobayo
(Colombia); cobaiao porquinho da India (Brazil); acurito (Venezuela); curiel (Cuba); and cuy/
310
14,000 years of food in Peru
quwi (Quechua). The English term guinea pig may refer to Guinea [?: Guyana] on the coast of
Africa, or to a type of colonial coin (Stahler 2008: 124). Its distribution is on the other hand
vast, not just across the Andes as far as Chile, but also for instance archaeological sites in the
savannah of Bogotá. It was so widespread that Sauer tells us the chroniclers found it in an area
that extended from the Antilles as far as Yucatán.
Valdez and Valdez (1997) proved not just the inefficiency shown by archaeologists when
documenting these remains, but also the scant attention that has been paid to them. For
example, one problem when excavating guinea pigs in situ is that according to the ethnographic
evidence marshalled by Valdez and Valdez they are usually found in every room and not in
specific sites. They may have eventually been eaten by dogs (Cutright 2009: 161), a not-too
rare occurrence. I myself recall as a child (1970s-1980s) in the Hacienda Cultambo, (middle
Jequetepeque Valley, La Libertad), that the guinea pigs in the house belonging to my relatives
where we used to spend the summer holidays were in many places and just a few in the
kitchen.
Let us now consider some general characteristics of this species. Daniel Gade (1967) is one of
the scholars who first made a holistic study of the guinea pig in the context of the Andean
culture. Gade believes the guinea pig species is more related to the chinchilla and the capybara
than to rodents. As regards its ancestor, it was domesticated from Cavia cutleri Bennett,
which was originally described in the department of Ica in the late nineteenth century.
A guinea pig measures on average 20-28 cm, and weighs between 500 grams and one kilo. Gade
also says it was consumed by pre-Hispanic populations and that in one cooking method—
roasting—it was eviscerated and had its stomach filled with pebbles in order to facilitate
cooking. Guinea pigs lived inside the house, where one usually finds 8-15 individuals.
Edmundo Morales (1994) studied guinea pigs from several perspectives and supplemented
Gade’s work. For Morales, the domestication of the guinea pig began in the Altiplano, where
wild cuys (Cavia aparea) still live. Besides the ease with which it reproduces (up to 72 offspring
every year), it can live up to nine years but on average live three. Its high adaptive capacity
means it can live in temperate environments as well as in cold altitudes, i.e. from sea level
up to 4000 masl. The amount of calories found in guinea pig milk is far higher than in most
mammals, which means it is a significant source of fat. On average every family has at least
twenty guinea pigs.
Before reviewing the presence of the guinea pig in Peru’s archaeological record let us examine
its nutritional value, and then its origin and domestication. The cuy probably is the animal
Andean people from all walks of life had access to, with a high supply of high-value animal
protein. The well-known study by Bolton (1979: 240) estimates the chemical composition of
guinea pig meat comprises 70% water, 20% protein, 7% fat, and 0.8% minerals. An average cuy
should provide at least 100 grams of pure protein. In his study of food in pre-Hispanic Peru,
Horkheimer gives 95 calorie units for every 100 grams of guinea pig (Horkheimer 1960: 110).
Bolton points out the consumption of at least six guinea pigs a year per individual, combined
311
Elmo Leon
with the protein and vegetable carbohydrates, should fulfil FAO’s recommendations. Besides,
recent studies indicate guinea pig consumption is a main factor in the struggle with tuberculosis
(Gregoire et al. 2010).
Let us return now to the study by Bolton (1979) mentioned above. He made his observations
in Santa Barbara, a town in the province of Canchis (Cuzco). Interestingly enough, in this case
guinea pig is important not just for this population, it is also distributed in the midst of a ritual
in moments when food is scant. For Bolton, the extensive knowledge the Indians in this zone
have of the guinea pig apparently allowed them to realise the high value guinea pig protein
has in terms of the development of antibodies with which to fight infectious diseases. This is
a point that should also be considered when discussing the issue of pre-Hispanic pathologies
derived from food ingestion.
We now turn to the origins and domestication of the guinea pig. Sauer (1952: 52) believed
this animal was the earliest one to be domesticated in the Peruvian Andes. He believed its
domestication was based on patterns of preference in fertility, size, and colour. A suggestive
observation Saur made is that the alteration or manipulation of the guinea pig in wild state
has been significant; this entails a great antiquity so the archaeological documentation will
be limited in this regard, and it can even be considered that its domestication began long
before the dates to be discussed below. This should be borne in mind when we present the
archaeological record. On the other hand, Hans Horkheimer (1960: 44) was convinced the
guinea pig had been domesticated in Peru.
In recent years Spotorno et al. (2006) seem to have shown through haplotypes and genetics
that guinea pigs are derived from a wild ancestor called Cavia tschudii. They posit that its
domestication took place in three phases, an early one (probably in Puno or in the southern
Altiplano), another during the colonial period, and finally a third phases from which modern,
pre-selected guinea pigs derive.
Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 27) in turn pointed out that at the time of the Spanish conquest
this animal was found from the coast up to the selva baja; that there were up to four varieties
were being raised; and that it was considerably bigger in size, but this requires further research.
We have just seen some parts of this position in Sauer.
Stahler (2008: 123-126) made a summary of the guinea pig in the pre-Hispanic period, in
which he raises a debate concerning the closes non-domesticated ancestor. Most point to
Cavia aperea as the most likely candidate even though molecular research indicates that the
ancestral species is Cavia tschudii tschudii (Drunnum and Salazar Bravo 2010), which spread
over almost all of the Amazon; some experts however believe it was a variant of Cavia aperea.
Cavia tschudii has a more restricted distribution from Peru to the northernmost part of Chile,
and partially in the Argentinian northwest. Stahl points out that domesticated guinea pigs can
essentially be identified through changes in the head and in their size. Stahl likewise notes
that the living conditions of this carrion-eating type animal, and the fact that it feeds in the
312
14,000 years of food in Peru
midst of refuse, were selective factors that influenced its domestication. It was subsequently
easy finding it in pre-Hispanic kitchens and even in our time [?: incluso en nuestra época].
We now begin the archaeological review. In the South American context, the most ancient
guinea pig remains seem to come from Tequendama, a site in Colombia, and to date to 9000-
5000 B.C. Danièlle Lavallée (1990: 28) says in Colombia, guinea pig appears in many sites
belonging to this early period like El Abra, Sueva 1, and Nemocón. This means it had already
dispersed in northern South America shortly after the last ice age.
In his famed Peru before the Incas, Edward Lanning (1967: 18) had already considered the
significant role the guinea pig had in the diet of Peru’s pre-Hispanic population, which was
one of the major alimentary sources in pre-Columbian Peru, and that it had a role comparable
to that of fish.
MacNeish and his team claim the research they carried out in various early archaeological
sites in Ayacucho recorded domesticated guinea pigs in the Puente phase—i.e. 10,085-6960
B.C.—but not all of the evidence required to fully support this find has been published (León
2007: 224). This find corresponds to Jayhuamachay, a site that lies at about 3350 masl.
Stahler (2008: 125) has drawn attention to the discovery of guinea pig bones that he believes
may have been selected or ‘trapped.’ He believes this may mark the beginning of this animal’s
manipulation towards the end of this phase [Puente] at Ayamachay, a rocky shelter in a wet
environment in Ayacucho that lies at 3000 masl and dates to ca. 8000 B.C. The trapping and
collecting of guinea pigs perhaps indicates the use of triangular mouse traps; we should not,
however, discard the use of ‘encierros.’ i.e. some type of pigeonholes where the animals were
placed in.
This type of selection, trapping and “enclosing” of guinea pigs persisted in Ayacucho during
the Jaywa and Piki phases, i.e. in 6350-5460 B.C. However, Richard MacNeish believes a large
concentration of charcoal found in the rock shelter of Ayamachay (Ayacucho), where the
bones of a dozen guinea pigs lay, can be taken to be one of the first signs of truly domesticated
guinea pigs in a Chihua phase context in 5600-4140 B.C. However, there are no specific studies
that prove this.
Lavallée (1990: 29) has pointed out that Elizabeth Wing claimed the domestication of the
guinea pig took place between 5500 and 2500 B.C. because shortly after this last date there
is a continuous increase of the remains. Still, Lavallée adds that more studies are required in
order to establish that these really were domesticated guinea pigs.
Other guinea pig remains found at Rosamachay, a site that lies at about 2650 masl in Ayacucho
itself belong to this same epoch. Even so, the size of the height of the diastema in guinea
pig jaws dating to the first millennium B.C. categorically shows they had already been
domesticated by this epoch, and we even have a guinea pig mummy from Rosamachay Cave
that dates to ca. 500 B.C. (Stahler 2008: 125).
313
Elmo Leon
Guinea pig remains that date to an early epoch perhaps come from the earliest levels to the
early Holocene of Guitarrero Cave, in the Callejón de Huaylas. But as was noted by Peter
Stahler (2008: 125), they may have been introduced fully domesticated in this zone from the
Central Andes to the north only since the first millennium B.C.
Cuy has also been documented during the third millennium B.C. in the Huallaga basin,
particularly in the Kotosh site at about 2000 masl, but without specifying whether they were
domesticated or wild animals (Stahler 2008: 125).
Elizabeth Wing (1972) showed the presence of guinea pig remains at the archaeological site of
Kotosh in Huánuco, presumably from the late third millennium B.C.
Bonavia (1982: 176, 200-201) likewise documented guinea pig remains at Los Gavilanes, a site in
the lower Huarmey Valley with dates ranging from 3200 to 1480 B.C. The preservation of these
remains is such that in this case they are guinea pig hair.
Izumi and Melody Shimada (1985: 8) pointed out that guinea pigs have been identified at
Huaca Lucía (Bosque de Poma), in the department of Lambayeque. This site dates to the Initial
Period, ca. 1300 B.C.
Domesticated guinea pigs have also been excavated at Chavín de Huántar with a date of ca.
900 B.C., as well as in northern Cajamarca in contexts dating to the second millennium B.C.
(Stahler 2008: 125).
Miller and Burger (1995: 427) reported finding guinea pigs in the well-known site of Chavín de
Huántar since at least the Urabarrio phase ca. 900 B.C. This means it was already being eaten in
this part of the Callejón de Huaylas, and at a highest rate than all other species eaten at this site.
The study made by Carmen Cardoza points out that guinea pig remains were also found in
the excavation of the Gallery of the Offerings at Chavín de Huántar, which dated to 1218-812
B.C. (Cardoza 1993: 373). It may also have been consumed around this same time at the site of
Kuntur Wasi in Cajamarca (Uzawa 2007: 6). Even so, establishing whether these animals were
in fact eaten is not easy due to the lack of evidence for their processing and of any type of
combustion.
Shelia Pozorski (1979: 169) documented guinea pig consumption at Cerro Arena, in the lower
Moche Valley, as part of an archaeological project that comprised several North Coast
sites. This is also true of Moche sites like Huaca de la Luna, where Cárdenas et al. (1997: 138)
managed to identify cuy fibres in Mochica faecal remains, which makes it clear it was eaten
by the Mochica population. To this all we should add the depictions of guinea pigs on both
Mochica and Chimu pottery.
To this we can add that Van Gijsehem (2001: 261) found a cache of food remains on the floor
of one of the enclosures at Huaca de la Luna that included guinea pigs and several species of
314
14,000 years of food in Peru
molluscs, fish, and llama remains. These animals were evidently eaten at the site, but we do
not know whether they were all eaten at the same time.
Guinea pig was also consumed by the Mochica who lived at Huaca del Sol, in the lower
Moche Valley, as an alternative resource to the llama (the main meat source at this site), as
shown by its remains found as food residues at the site. Vásquez et al. (2003: 53) found up to
285 of guinea pig remains among the animals consumed at this site.
The presence of guinea pigs has been recorded around A.D. 400 at Ciudad de Dios, a site
in the middle Moche Valley, which means the Moche living in this zone also consumed it
(Gumerman and Briceño 2003: 235). This was also confirmed by the cuy find at Pampa Grande,
a site in the Lambayeque Valley that belongs to Moche V, i.e. A.D. 700-800 (Shimada and
Shimada 1981: 30).
The Paracas and the Nasca were eating guinea pig on the Central-South Coast two thousand years
ago. Cavia porcellus was found at Cerrillos, a major early Paracas site (ca. A.D. 800-600) in the Ica
Valley (Splitstoser 2009: 93). As for the Nasca, Kellner and Schoeninger (2008) found through O13y
N15 [?]—i.e. through the stable isotope analysis of human bones—that part of the meat eaten by
the people of Las Trancas in A.D. 100-1000 (including the Wari occupation) came from guinea pigs.
Lidio Valdez showed guinea pig consumption was a second source of protein for the Nasca of
Cahuachi (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 4), a point supported by previous research like that of Johnny Isla
at Usaca , where these animals were found in a domestic context (Silverman and Proulx 2002: 57).
Guinea pig was being eaten by the people of the Recuay culture in A.D. 200-800 at Chinchawas,
a site some 3850 masl in the Callejón de Huaylas excavated by Georges Lau (2002).
Cuy was also part of the food eaten by the Wari at Cerro Baúl (Moquegua) in A.D. 635-1000
(Moseley et al. 2005: 17269) , as well as at the site of Conchopata, in the same time period
(Finucane et al. 2006: 1171).
Guinea pig remains have even been found in the Rivero Citadel during its Chimu occupation.
Thanks to the research carried out by Keating (1975: 226) at the site of Cerro La Virgen (Chimu
culture), we also know that cuy was being eaten at Chan Chan. The guinea pig remains found
at Cerro Arena, and which date to ca. 60 B.C., are particularly relevant. Cuy apparently was a
relatively important part of the food eaten by its early inhabitants
Guinea pig remains have been found in domestic contexts in various sites in the lower
Lambayeque Valley. This can be interpreted as cuy consumption throughout a very long
period, from the Cupisnique (1300 B.C.) to the Sicán (A.D. 1400) cultures (Klaus and Tam 2010:
596). Cuy was an important part of the diet of the people who lived at Pedregal in the Chimu
epoch (ca. A.D. 1000-1460), where it came second (19%) only to the llama (Cutright 2009: 158).
Lockard (2005: 201) reports the relative amount of guinea pigs eaten at Galindo, a site in the
middle Moche Valley, not just during the Mochica occupation of this site (ca. A.D. 600-800)
315
Elmo Leon
but also under the Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460). The analysis concluded cuy was eaten with the
same intensity both by the lower population strata as well as by the elites, which means it was
the most popular food, at least at this site.
Melissa Vogel (2012: 127) recorded guinea pig remains at Cerro La Cruz (Chao Valley), which
dates to A.D. 900-1350, as well as the wild plants taken to the site to feed them.
The guinea pig apparently was also part of the Wari diet. Tung (2012: 52) reports the occurrence
of cuy bones at the site of Beringa (Arequipa) in a Wari context (A.D. 650-1000).
The Wanka of the upper Mantaro Valley (3200-3900 masl) also ate guinea pig between A.D.
200 and the Inca period (cf. Hastorf 2002: 157).
Ugent and Peterson (1988: 8) report having found several remains of guinea pig bones at El
Centinela, a site in the lower Chincha Valley that is almost on the seashore some 200 km
of Lima; this means cuy was also eaten here. Lo Demás is a site in this same valley that was
occupied in Inca times, in which fishing was the main activity. Here Sandweiss and Wing (1997)
reported a series of evidence showing the presence of guinea pigs, including bones, coproliths,
and mummified remains.
Williams (2005: 166) found through stable isotope analysis of bones and organic remains, that
the people of the Puruchuco-Huaquerones site in the Lima Valley ate guinea pig at the time of
the Inca Empire. Isotopic studies likewise showed the guinea pigs were fed first maize and then
quinoa. Corrals for cuy had previously been found in some kind of patio, thus supplementing
the isotopic result (Horkheimer 1960: 44).
Watson (2008: 137-138) recorded the presence of guinea pigs that were eaten at the site of
Pueblo Viejo-Pucará in the Lurín Valley during the period of the local Inca occupation. Marcus
et al. (1999: 6569) found cuy remains in significant amounts within a Chincha context at Cerro
Azul, a site in Cañete that is also on the Central Coast. Guinea pig were found throughout all
of the Caribbean, and even in La Hispaniola by the time the Spaniards reached America, which
means it must have been taken there from the Andes by sea (Stahler 2008: 126).
Loma Saavedra, an archaeological site on the southern banks of the Zarumilla River in Tumbes,
close to the modern-day frontier with Ecuador, probably marks the northernmost presence of
the guinea pig. This site dates to A.D. 1070-1520, so it is contemporary [se conjuga] with several
cultures like Jambelí, Garbanzal, Chim, and Chimu-Inca (Moore 2007a: 16).
Vizcacha (Lagidium peruanum)
There are three species, L. peruanum, L. viscacia, and L. wolffsohni, the former of which is
known as vizcacha. It usually lives in the western Andes in the central Peruvian puna, as well
as on the coastal lomas both of Peru and northern Chile. It is frequently found between 3000
316
14,000 years of food in Peru
and 5000 masl, but it can sometimes come down as low as 600 masl. Crags are its habitat, but
always in areas close to water and plants on which it can feed. They are very agile, so the best
way to catch them is using traps (Pearson 1948).
To the best of my knowledge there is no study of the way this species was treated or prepared.
However, the vizcacha pampeana, one of its relatives, has been studied in Argentina during
the Late Holocene. It was shown that once the animal had been killed it was skinned using a
ventral aperture in the skin; it was then sectioned in the hind part and the head was removed.
The muscles were then removed and finally the marrow was extracted, probably to expose it
during boiling. Although this is not the Andean vizcacha, we can surmise a similar process was
followed with this animal (Quintana y Mazzanti 2011).
Let us see some of the pre-Hispanic evidence. One of the oldest vizcacha remains excavated
in archaeological contexts comes from Guitarrero Cave (2850 masl) in the Callejón de Huaylas.
It was found starting in complex I, i.e. ca. 9500 B.C., at the very beginning of the Holocene and
almost at the end of the last ice age. Although there are no remains of combustion of any
trace of some other form of preparation, it is clear the animals were taken to the cave with
some end in mind, which includes that of using them as food.
Chauchat and his team (1992: 145) have found vizcacha remains on the coast that date to a
very similar time. These remains were quite probably eaten at the sites in Pampa de los Fósiles,
which belong to the Paiján culture and date on average to 9300 B.C.
Lavallée et al. (1985: 64) excavated somewhat more recent vizcacha remains at Telarmachay, in
the Junín puna, that begin appearing ca. 8000 B.C. It is assumed that it was part of the food
eaten by these early peoples who lived at an altitude of 4420 masl.
Vizcacha remains were also found at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey Valley. Here
Bonavia (1982: 176, 200) recorded their presence since at least 2200-1480 B.C.
From these first pieces of information we can surmise these animals were probably consumed
since the beginning of the Holocene in both the central Peruvian puna and the intermontane
valleys as well as the coast. This means it may well have been an important part of the food
eaten by the first Peruvian peoples.
Miller and Burger (1995: 427) subsequently found vizcacha remains at the famed site of Chavín
de Huántar in the Callejón de Huaylas since at least 900 B.C. It is believed to have been part of
the food eaten by the early inhabitants of this site. Vizcacha remains have likewise been found
in the Gallery of the Offerings at Chavín, where they date to 1218-812 B.C. (Cardoza 1993: 372);
it is however not easy establishing whether they were eaten or not.
The studies done at Huaca de la Luna, a site in the lower Moche Valley, showed the
occurrence of vizcacha bones in Mochica contexts that date to A.D. 300-750. However,
the main point here is they were charred. This has been interpreted as a result of their
317
Elmo Leon
being cooked, which means this animal was part of the Moche diet (Vásquez and Rosales
1998: 188). The Moche of Pampa Grande, a site east of the modern city of Chiclayo, in
the department of Lambayeque, apparently also ate vizcacha in A.D. 711-800 (Shimada and
Shimada 1981: 30).
Vizcachas were also eaten at Cerro Baúl, albeit in small amounts, at the time of the Wari
Empire in A.D. 631-1000 (Moseley et al. 2005: 17269).
Canids
Sechuran Fox [Zorro de Sechura] (Dusicyon sechurae, Pseudolopex sechurae) and Andean Fox [Zorro
Andino or Colorado] (Pseudolopex culpaeus)
We have grouped here two species under the common denomination of fox. The Sechuran
fox is a typical animal of the frontier region between Peru and Ecuador, but it may also
have occupied other environments such as the wet tropical forest and even areas like the
department of Lima. The fossil remains of this animal have been found in Piura and Guayas
(Ecuador) (Martínez and Cadenillas 2011). On the other hand the Andean fox Pseudolopex
culpaeus has the latter name—derived from the Mapuche [?: mauche] term culpem, which
means madness—due to its habit of revealing himself to the hunter, this facilitating its hunt.
This is the biggest fox of its genus in South America. It is slightly smaller than the wolf and has
one of the largest distributions, from Nariño in Colombia to Tierra del Fuego in Chile, where
it has adapted to several habitats up to 4800 masl. Both are essentially solitary and highly
carnivore animals (Romo 1995).
Let us turn now to the archaeological record. The most ancient remains of the Sechuran fox
come from Quebrada Tacahuay, a site south of Ilo in the modern department of Moquegua
that is almost on the seashore. Here, the excavations found some bones of Dusycion sechurae
that have been dated to 9370-9377 B.C. (DeFrance y Umire 2004: 271). This shows its current
distribution does not reflect the past one, as we have just seen.
The remains of Sechuran fox that were possibly eaten by the first inhabitants of the north
coast were found at the site of Ascope 5 (unit 4), in a Paiján context that dates to 7725 B.C.
(Chauchat 1992: 311).
The Andean fox (Pseudolopex culpaeus) rivals the Sechuran fox in age as it has been found
in the excavations of the archaeological sites in the upper Jequetepeque Valley as well as
at Nanchoc, in the upper Zaña Valley (department of Lambayeque). Its presence is probably
associated with human consumption in dates that surprisingly range between 11,572 and 5954
B.C. The interesting thing about these sites is that both foxes were eaten, as Ducicyon sechurae
appears somewhat later in 8011-5954 B.C. (Dillehay 2011: 333). This means both fox species
probably were part of the food eaten by our most ancient ancestors both on the north and
the south coast, during the last glaciation and shortly afterwards.
318
14,000 years of food in Peru
Quilter et al. (1991: 279) report the scant presence of fox bones (no taxonomic specification is
given) eaten at least since 2150 B.C. at the site of El Paraíso, which is almost on the mouth of
the Chillón Valley north of Lima.
Five fox vertebrae were found at the site of Los Gavilanes, in contexts that date to 3200-1460
B.C. (Bonavia 1982: 200). The remains of this animal have also been found in Mochica contexts
(ca. A.D. 400-750) at Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 134).
The northern Moche apparently also knew and ate Ducycion sechurae, as follows from the
finds made at Pampa Grande, a site on the coast of Lambayeque (Shimada and Shimada 1981:
30). We should recall in this regard that Moche pottery includes fox depictions.
The research undertaken by Carmen Rosa Cardoza (1993: 372) in the Gallery of the Offerings at
Chavín de Huántar recorded the occurrence of Dusicyon sechurae in the time period 1218-812
B.C. These remains have been found in contexts of offerings, but it may have been part of the
food eaten by the people of Chavín.
Pseudolopex culpeus or Andean fox was found in the excavation at Cerrillos, a site in the
upper Ica Valley that dates to A.D. 800-600. It may have been consumed by the Paracas at this
time (Splitstoser 2009: 93).
The excavation of Cerro Baúl (Moquegua) found at least one Andean fox (Moseley et al. 2005:
17269-17270), but it has been attributed a ritual function.
Finally, fox remains have been identified in the lower Lambayeque Valley, in midden contexts left
behind by the consumption of food by cultures from Cupisnique (1300 B.C.) to Sicán (A.D. 1400).
Mustelids
Andes Skunk [Zorrino de los Andes] (Conepatus rex, Conepatus chinga rex)
These are mustelid mammals endemic on the American continent that live in caves, cracks
in stones and in hollow trees. The most ancient remains of this animal in Peru come from
complex I at Guitarrero Cave in the Callejón de Huaylas, which dates to ca. 9500 B.C. (Wing
1980: 155). It may have been eaten by the people who then lived in this. It was in fact consumed
even more in 8500-6700 B.C.
Lavallée et al. (1985: 64) reported the occurrence of Andes skunk bones in the rock shelter of
Telarmachay, in the Junín puna; they were found in the most ancient strata that date to ca.
8000 B.C.
Rodríguez Loredo (2012) report having found skunk bones in domestic contexts—which
presumably means they were eaten—at Quebrada de los Burros, on the Tacna littoral, with
dates that fall between 7900 and 4800 B.C.
319
Elmo Leon
Andes skunk was subsequently also eaten at Chavín de Huántar since at least 900 B.C. (Miller
and Burger 1995: 429).
Watson (2008: 137) reports finding skunk remains, possibly the result of their being consumed,
in the Inca occupation of Pueblo Viejo-Pucará, an Inca site in the Lurín valley.
Peruvian Hairless Dog [Perros Peruanos] (Canis lupus familiaris)
Were dogs eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru? It is very likely. In a review of dogs in the Cambridge
world history of food, Stanley Olsen (2000: 508-517) says there is some evidence of its
consumption by native Americans, including the fact that they were strangled in order to
avoid shedding the blood, which was then extracted and poured in gourd vessels. This blood
was then cooked, i.e. it was coagulated by placing it on hot stones, whilst the meat was placed
on plant leaves and then boiled.
Olsen says some parts, like the backbone and the ribs (curiously enough the same is true
of the llama, as was already noted) seem to have been favoured, as well as the encephalic
mass—a practice proven by archaeology as dog crania with holes have been found. Olsen has
the theory that dogs are domesticated wolves, and that the initial process may have taken
place between China and the Ukraine.
The oldest domesticated dog in the world probably is the one found in Russia at Eliseevichi I, on
the banks of the Dnieper River, with dates that range between 17,000 and 12,900 B.C. (Sablin and
Khlopachev 2002). Based on the bones from various archaeological sites, from Alaska to South
America, Leonard et al. (2002) showed through genetic analysis that Canis familiaris, a native to
America [?: nativo de América], entered this continent with the first groups of humans who peopled
it by crossing through Bering Strait. The clades found in the analysis also show that one remained
isolated—the American one—and that dogs had arrived domesticated from a series of lines from Asia
and Eurasia. These scholars drew attention to the fact that both dogs and gourd vessels [calabazas-
recipientes] are two of the most ancient domesticated species in America, not precisely as food but
tor utilitarian reasons (but there is evidence showing they were both eaten at an early date).
Even so, some claim the dog was domesticated from the wolf in China around 14,300 B.C.,
precisely when the cultivation of rise was under experimentation (Pang et al. 2009).
Prates et al. (2010) summarised the scientific information available for South America at
the moment the dogs spread. They conclude the introduction of the domesticated dog in
different parts of the Andes, and particularly in Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia, must have taken
place in the Middle Holocene, or even better the late Holocene.
We thus find there are three points that seem clear: that the dog entered America already
domesticated; that this may have taken place in the Terminal Pleistocene or the Middle
Holocene; and that it descends from the wolf itself (lupus).
320
14,000 years of food in Peru
Which dog breeds had their origin in South America? Is it correct calling the hairless dog
“Peruvian”? Given the relevance of this subject, there are three sources of information that
will be presented to the reader so each can draw his or her own conclusions.
First, Gilmore (in Allison et al. 1982) lists nine South American dog breeds:
· Inca (medium size).
· Long-haired Inca (medium size).
· Peruvian pug-nosed (small bulldog-like) [One of the first to be identified in 1896 by Max
Uhle’s excavation at Pachacamac, Lima].
· Fuegian (small terrier-like) [South American terrier].
· Ona (medium setter-like).
· Tehuelche (large, foxhound-like).
· Techiche (small terrier-like).
· Hairless (small) (Mexican and not Peruvian, as is commonly believed, until new evidence
appears).
· Perro cimarrón (wild of European Stock).
This same study by Allison et al. (1982) reports the discovery of eight dog mummies from
Arica, which date from ca. 500 B.C. to Inca times.
In Peru, dog remains usually have two sources. On the one hand there is a sizable number of
dog burials, and on the other they are frequently found among the refuse in archaeological
sites, thus suggesting their consumption amongst other possible uses.
Second, we have one of the first scholars who discussed dogs as food in pre-Hispanic Peru:
Hans Horkheimer (1960) and his pioneering study of this subject. Horkheimer classified
the dogs of aboriginal America as follows: Canis caraibicus, a small hairless dog with high
body temperature; and Canis ingae—alco in Quechua—of which there are three variants: a
shepherd dog, a small, long-haired dog, and one type of dog with just the shepherd’s nose.
For Horkheimer, Canis ingae is by far the dog most frequently found in Peruvian pre-Hispanic
burials, i.e. the hairless dog is less frequently found.
Third and most recently, Vásquez et al. (2009: 20) made a major summary of this issue, albeit
paying special emphasis to the “hairless dog.” Nehring (cited by the author [which one?])
had already concluded in the late nineteenth century that there are three dog races in pre-
Hispanic Peru: the Peruvian dachshund [perro salchicha peruano] (hairless, with different traits
than the other two varieties); the long-haired Inca dog [perro inca de pelo largo] (which is
bigger and usually lives in high-altitudes); and the short-haired Peruvian bulldog, which is a
type of mastiff that seems to have vanished. All of these races are compatible with those
mentioned by Gilmore (see above).
The classic but still useful study by Pedro Weiss (1976) comes next. Weiss distinguished
and described the “chino,” “viringo,” “ccala,” or “calato” races, with the latter actually being
321
Elmo Leon
a pathology: hereditary ectodermic hypoplasia [hipoplasia ectodérmica hereditaria]. The
reader should bear with me as I explain the origin of this dog, as this is currently a subject of
interest for the public.
This race is characterised not just by its lack of hair, but also of canines and premolars, which
means its identification is feasible. It is found depicted in the iconography of Moche, Chimu,
Vicus, and Chancay pottery (Vásquez et al. 2009: 26), which means it was widespread across the
Peruvian coast from the beginning of the Christian era some two thousand years ago. One of
the most important observations made by Vásquez et al. (2009: 29) concerns what is probably
the oldest identification of a hairy dog in the tomb of the lord of Sipán, i.e. at least A.D. 200,
which comes close to the dates for the Mesoamerican hairless dogs. Assuming it reached
the Andes from Mesoamerica, Schwartz (1997, cited by Vásquez et al. 2009: 31) concludes it
reached what is now Peru shortly after A.D. 500, and then it dispersed. We should, however,
recall the hairless dog did not have a sacred import for the Moche; on the contrary, it seems
to have been part of its domestic life.
In order to finish with this subject we now turn to the invaluable study by Alana Cordy-Collins
(1994). She believes the hairless dog comes from the western Mexican Colima culture in 250
B.C.-A.D. 450, where a large number of vessels depict it, even wearing some kind of coat.
On the contrary, the depictions of the Peruvian hairless dog go back to the Moche period,
a culture that spread from Piura to Huarmey, and there is no earlier archaeological evidence
than this. What we do have according to Cordy-Collins, is abundant depictions of hairless
dogs in later cultures like Chancay and Lambayeque. Cordy-Collins therefore bases herself on
the pottery and claims this dog must have been taken from Mexico to Peru around A.D. 300-
400. We now turn to the archaeological record where we find several breeds, one of which
is the hairless one.
Perhaps the oldest Peruvian dogs ever found come from sites in the upper Zaña Valley
(department of Lambayeque), in archaeological contexts that date to 8011-5954 B.C.
Next in the chronology comes the discovery MacNeish made of Canis familiaris, which dates
to ca. 8600 B.C. yet it is still questionable due to the lack of documentation (León 2007: 224).
Schwartz (1997) mentions the discovery in Ayacucho itself, of dogs in the cave of Rosamachay,
which date on average to 4307 B.C.
Lavallée et al. (1985: 251) subsequently recorded one Canis familiaris in a stratum she dated
to ca. 5700-4480 B.C. in the Telarmachay rock shelter, in the Junín puna. This find is important
because it shows dog was present in the central Peruvian puna in the Middle Holocene and
at 4420 masl.
Another early find of Canis familiaris comes from the most recent stratum of Guitarrero Cave
in the Callejón de Huaylas (Wing 1980: 153). These remains belong to a period that extends from
the late Preceramic (ca. 3000 B.C.) to more recent times, but they may also have been part of the
food eaten by the people who lived in the cave. More studies are required in order to prove this.
322
14,000 years of food in Peru
Elizabeth Wing (1972) mentioned the dog as a food source in archaeological sites such as
Pacopampa (Amazonas, ca. 1000 B.C.) and Kotosh (Huánuco, around the third millennium B. C.).
Ikehara and Shibata (2005: 144) point out the possible consumption of dog in one of the feasts
they have identified at Cerro Blanco, a site in the Nepeña Valley at least in 1100-250 B.C. The
parts eaten are some of the vertebrae, ribs, and leg bones.
Cardoza (1993: 372, 379) reported the discovery of dog bones in the Gallery of the Offerings at
Chavín de Huántar. These remains date to ca. 1218-812 B.C. It should be noted that the bones
are scorched, which means they were subjected to fire and perhaps cooked, but it has not
been proven they were eaten.
In a discussion of the Peruvian hairless dog, Cardoza identified some of them (Canis
caraibicus) from the two mandibles along with other pieces like the incisors, the molars, and
the premolars (key diagnostic pieces when determining the “hairless” species, particularly
the lack of a fourth premolar which is a congenital trait of this breed). Cardoza claims several
jaws were found, which means there was more than one dog of this breed. Besides, the fact
that they have scorched areas quite probably means they were eaten, in what is known as
cynophagy (Cardoza 1993: 383). Now, if they come from the Gallery of the Offerings and have
the dates given in the preceding paragraph, then it turns out that these dogs probably go back
to 1200 B.C. If this is correct, then we wonder whether their Mexican peers are older or not.
There is still room for discussion.
In an integral study of the food eaten in some archaeological sites close to the Moche Valley,
Shelia Pozorski (1979: 169) concluded that at least sites like Caballo Muerto (since about 1200
B.C.), Mochica sites like Huaca de la Luna, and part of the citadel of Chan Chan, had dog
bones that were the remains of the food eaten by these peoples on the North Coast of Peru.
A subsequent study (Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 124) recorded piled-up dog bones that were
interpreted as part of the food eaten by the Mochica of Huaca del Sol, in the Moche valley,
during the first centuries of our era. Dogs have also been identified at Huaca de la Luna in
this same zone (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 134) and even in another Moche site like Pampa Grande,
in the modern-day department of Lambayeque, throughout its Moche V occupation, i.e. in
A.D. 700-800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 30). From this all it follows that dogs were probably
consumed on the North Coast as part of a tradition since the first millennium B.C.
Somewhat more to the north, Jean Guffroy (1989: 193) revealed the discovery of what he
called big dogs in the middens of the ceremonial site of Ñañañique in Chulucanas (Piura), with
dates that fell between 1500 and 400 B.C.
Domesticated dog remains have been excavated at Huaca Lucía-Chólope (department of
Lambayeque) in an Initial Period context, i.e. since 1300 B.C. (Shimada and Shimada 1985).
Miller and Burger (1995: 429) in turn documented the occurrence of what perhaps are dog
remains in the vicinity of the site of Chavín de Huántar since at least 900 B.C. Around the same
323
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

time Uzawa (2007: 6) reported the presence of dogs at the site of Kuntur Wasi (Cajamarca). In
both cases it is by no means certain that they were eaten as food.

But as has already been noted, there can be no question that dogs were not just depicted
in Moche pottery—probably Peru’s most renowned pre-Hispanic documents—but have also
been found in Moche burials [?: y son probablemente los más reconocidos documentos
prehispánicos peruanos]. As regards the first point mentioned, the presence of the
domesticated dog in the first centuries of the Christian era was recorded, for instance in the
famed Moche site of Sipán (Alva and Donnan 1993).

Vásquez et al. (2009) made an interesting study of the dog in the context of the Mochica
culture in order to determine the Mochica breeds and morphotypes; they based themselves
on an analysis of pottery depictions, sculptures and bone evidence. Vásquez et al. concluded
that Moche society had a “primitive” (hairless variety) dog and another one called the
“Chiribaya shepherd” (a new morphotype for pre-Hispanic Peru). They believe the analysis
of the latter breed’s DNA seems to confirm that it was an isolated breed, which can be
considered to support its validity. Brothwell et al. (1979) had previously concluded there
were in fact two breeds or types based on an integral study of 42 pre-Hispanic dogs, which
dated to ca. 1000 B.C.-A.D. 1320.

Two juvenile [juveniles] dogs have also been found at Cerro Baúl, a site in Moquegua, with
dates that fall between A.D. 631 and 1000 (Moseley et al. 2005: 17269). The authors however
do not mention whether they were eaten or instead sacrificed in funerary contexts (they
favour a ritual function interpretation of the context). The possible breed of these animals is
not mentioned. Figura 17. Restos de huesos de perro con marcas de cortes para la extracción de carne y probable consumo. Pedregal, valle de Jequetepeque,
Cultura Chimú, aproximadamente 1000-1460 d.C. (CORTESÍA DE ROBYN CUTRIGHT).
Dog remains have also been found in the excavation of Cahuachi (Nasca), in what seems to be
a domestic context. Dogs may thus have been part of the food eaten by its first inhabitants
during the first centuries of the Christian era (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 5). Cutright (2009: 158) recorded dog remains at Pedregal, a site on the North Coast in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley He believes dogs occasionally served as food because they found bones
With his excavation and analysis of Chinchawas, a site in the Callejón de Huaylas, George Lau with the cut marks left when removing the flesh (Figure 17); however, this animal usually was
(2007) showed that dogs were at least partially eaten in small amounts in Recuay contexts a companion to the families that occupied this site. This also is one of the few pieces of
between A.D. 300 and 950. evidence of dog consumption.

Dog bones have also been found in domestic middens in some sites in the lower Lambayeque
Valley, which were dated to ca. 1300 B.C.-A.D. 1400. Dogs may thus have been eaten by the
ancient inhabitants of this region (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596), but it was not established whether
this was a hairless dog or not. This identification was confirmed for the site of Túcume in the
department of Lambayeque (ca. A.D. 1300). The remains found had cut marks in the epiphysis
of the long bones, so we may surmise they were eaten by the Lambayeque. It is even more
striking that they have cut marks at the atlas (neck) bone, which probably is the way they were
killed (Vásquez et al. 2009: 26). If we accept this, then this would be one of the scant pieces
of evidence of the hairless dog being eaten in the Andes.
In another part of Peru, in the highlands of the modern department of Junín, Christine Hastorf
(2002: 157) reports that dogs were partially consumed by the Wanka people between A.D. 200 and
the Inca occupation of this area. Hans Horkheimer (1960: 42) had already drawn attention to the
presence of hairless dogs of the Canis caraibicus type in Chimu pottery depictions. Horkheimer
likewise reported that the same Wanka (A.D. 200-1470) mentioned by Hastorf, were known as “dog
eaters.” This however was apparently due to religious reasons because the Huarochirí manuscript
claims they did so to propitiate their god Huallallo (Salomon and Urioste 1991: 70). For Horkheimer
this was a completely different attitude from that shown in Mexico where dogs were raised and
fed in order to kill and eat them later. However, recent research seems to question this.

324 325
Elmo Leon
Schwartz (1997) has recorded dog remains in Chiribaya contexts in the vicinity of Ilo, which
date on average to A.D. 1200-1400.
Moving on in the chronology, we now turn to the presence of dogs in Late Horizon or
Inca Empire contexts. For instance, there is evidence that dogs were eaten at the site of
Puruchuco-Huaquerones, albeit in small amounts. This was pointed out by Jocelyn Williams
(2005: 166) using stable isotopes in bones and other organic human remains. These dogs were
fed terrestrial food and marine plants (e.g. algae), whereas those from the sites in the upper
Mantaro Valley ate more maize and tubers.
Lucia Watson (2008: 133) managed to identify some dog bones in Pueblo Viejo-Pucará, a site
400-800 masl in the Lurín Valley. The bones were jumbled with a large number of camelids
raised in corrals, but no mention is made of their being eaten.
The site of Lo Demás is also on the Central Coast, practically on the Chincha River mouth.
Here Daniel Sandweiss and Elizabeth Wing (1997: 55) reported finding dog bones in the Inca
period (A.D. 1480-1535).
The dog remains from Huánuco Pampa and the famed shrine of Machu Picchu (Schwartz 1997)
date to this same period. It is not clear whether they were food or not.
Finally, it is at present likely that the northernmost dog remains, which were probably
consumed, are the ones found at Loma Saavedra, on the southern banks of the Zarumilla
River (Tumbes) and very close to the frontier with Ecuador. They were found in middens that
dated to A.D. 1070-1530, i.e. they correspond to cultures like Jambelí, Garbanzal, Chimu, and
Chimu-Inca (Moore 2007a: 16).
Lagomorphs (similar to rodents)
Brazilian Cottontail, Forest Cottontail, Tapet [Conejo Andino, Conejo de Monte, Tapet ] (Sylvilagus
brasiliensis)
The forest cottontail is spread from Mexico to the Atlantic coast line of Brazil. Its habitat
ranges from tropical forests and jungles to temperate woods. It does not appear at high
altitudes, yet in Colombia it is found in moors and high mountain ecosystems (Durant 1986).
Thus far we have only found the record of one of these animals in Peru’s archaeological
context. In Guitarrero Cave, in the Callejón de Huaylas, Elizabeth Wing (1980: 153, 155) recorded
the presence of the forest cottontail, which was probably consumed. The layers it comes
from date to ca. 8500 B.C.
326
14,000 years of food in Peru
Batrachians and Amphibians
It is likely that the oldest remains of amphibian that were part of our ancestors’ diet come from the
upper Zaña Valley (Lambayeque) and the archaeological sites excavated by Tom Dillehay and his
team. Bufonidae y Ranidae have been found here in contexts that date to 8011-5954 B.C. (Dillehay
2011: 334).
Bufo has also been found in significant amounts at Quebrada de los Burros, a site on the littoral
of Tacna, in 7900-4800 B.C. It may have been eaten at this time (Rodríguez-Loredo 2012).
A few amphibian remains have been extracted by the excavation of El Paraíso, a site that
dates to ca. 2150 B.C. and is close to the Chillón River mouth, north of Lima (Quilter et al.
1991: 279). This type of animal may have been part of the food eaten on the Central Coast
at this time.
Two toads (Bufo arequipensis) were recorded by the excavations at Cerro Baúl, in Moquegua
(Moseley et al. 2005: 17270). They are believed to have been part of the food eaten by the
Wari, who lived in this site in A.D. 631-1000. According to Cutright’s archaeological research
toads were also eaten, albeit in very small amounts, by the people of Pedregal, a Chimu
(A.D. 1000-1460) site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley (Cutright 2009: 158). Toads were
also found in the excavation of Huaca de la Luna, a site in the lower Moche Valley. They
date to the first centuries of the Christian era, which means they may have been eaten by
the Moche (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 341). This same report says Shimada and Shimada
(1981: 30) found toad and frog remains at Pampa Grande (Lambayeque) that correspond to
the Moche V phases, i.e. ca. A.D. 600-700. In this case the toad was classified as Bufo, cf.
marinus or blombergi, and the frog as Ranidae. They both may have been part of the food
eaten by the inhabitants of this site.
Sandefur (2001) recorded toads as part of the food eaten by the Wanka in the upper Mantaro
Valley (3200 masl) since at least A.D. 200.
Salamander (Caudata)
At present there is just one piece of evidence that comes from the archaeological research
undertaken by Tom Dillehay (2011: 334) and his team. They report having found the bones of
this animal in archaeological contexts in the upper Zaña Valley, in the modern department of
Lambayeque, and with dates that range between 9700 and 9200 B.C.
Northern Leopard Frog [Rana Leopardo] (Rana pipiens)
This batrachian lives in wet forests and grass. It can grow up to eight cm long. Some varieties
have adapted to cold climates (Smith and Keinath 2007).
327
Elmo Leon
The remains of this frog species have been excavated in Alenya (Bagua Baja), an
archaeological site that lies at 522 masl close to the Utcubamba River, in the department
of Amazonas. The indirect dates for this site average between 1500 and 1200 B.C. (Shady
and Rosas 1979: 111).
It is worth noting amphibian remains have also been found at Huaca de la Luna, where they
date to ca. A.D. 400-750, which means the Mochica may have eaten them (Cárdenas et al.
1997: 132), but no evidence of their consumption has been presented.
Lake Junín (Giant) Frog or Andes Smooth Frog [Rana de Junín or Rana Gigante] (Batrachophynus sp.,
Batrachophynus macrostomus)
This is a purely aquatic amphibian that provides 13.7% protein, and 80% fat, and is thus a first-
class alimentary source for the people of the Junín puna (Manyari and Ianaconne 2006).
The remains of this frog species have been found in a stratum dated to 5600-4480 B.C. at the
Telarmachay rock Shelter, which lies at 4420 masl close to San Pedro de Cajas (Junín) (Lavallé
et al. 1985: 66-67), so they may have been consumed starting at this time.
Batrachophynus macrostomus has also been recorded by the zoo-archaeological analysis
of Huaca de la Luna, a site in the lower Moche Valley, where it dates on average to A.D.
400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 132); it is thus assumed to have been consumed by the
Moche.
Reptiles
Sea Turtle [Tortuga Marina] (Chelonioidea)
The remains of four sea turtles were found in layers “J” and “O” at Huaca Prieta, and can thus be
dated to a brief span before 3000 and 2000 B.C. (this despite the lack of precision in the dates).
Some remains of Chelonidae have also been found at Ostra, a site immediately north of the
city of Chimbote in the Santa River mouth, with dates ranging between 5462 and 3711 B.C.
(Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
Reptiles (Lacertilia, Reptilia)
The most ancient evidence of reptile consumption comes from Quebrada Tacahuay south
of Ilo, on the littoral of Moquegua. A series of Lacertilia remains were found here in a strata
associated with archaeological remains dated to 10,730-9370 B.C. (DeFrance and Umire
2004: 271).
328
14,000 years of food in Peru
The zooarchaeological analysis of the deepest strata of Guitarrero Cave, in the Callejón de
Huaylas, identified anura that probably date to 9500 B.C. (Wing 1980: 155). They may have been
part of the food eaten by the earliest inhabitants of this part of Peru’s highlands.
Shady and Rosas (1979: 111) have reported lizards, albeit without taxonomic identification, at
Alenya (Bagua Baja), a site that lies at 522 masl close to the Utcubamba River, and so may have
been part of the food eaten at this site at least in 1500-1200 B.C.
The Mochica also seem to have eaten the Peru Pacific iguana (Tropidurus peruvianus) and the green
iguana (Iguana iguana) species because their remains have been found at Huaca de La Luna, with dates
between A.D. 400 and A.D. 750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 132). Attention has been drawn in this regard to
the major source of protein this species was for the Mochica (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 363).
Two lizards (Lacertilia) have been found in the excavation of Cerro Baúl (A.D. 631-1000) in
Moquegua (Moseley et al. 2005: 17270).
They were also consumed by the people of the lower Lambayeque Valley for a long period
of time that extended at least from the Cupisnique (1300 B.C.) to the Sicán culture (A.D. 1400)
(Klaus and Tam 2010: 596).
The iguana (Iguana sp.) has likewise been identified at Pedregal, a Chimu site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, not far from the Pacatnamú shrine (A.D. 1000-1460) (Cutright 2009: 158).
Cañán (Dricodon guttulatum)
This is a small lizard whose habitat extends from about the latitude of the modern department
of Tumbes and southern Ecuador to Chincha, on the Central Coast of Peru. It is a diurnal,
herbivore animal, and lives in deep burrows in the sand (Salízar Vásquez 2008).
Cañán is known to feed essentially on Acacia huarango, Acacia macracantha, and Scutia spicata
(Pollack Velásquez et al. 2007). Cárdenas et al. (1997: 40-41) present this lizard’s bromatology
and state it holds 232% calories, 4.2% fat, 4.6% ash, 25% calcium, and above all 225% carotene,
as well as the highest content of thiamine in comparison with all other species: 8.2%. Yet the
most impressive thing is that it has 45.6% protein, which means it is an extremely important
food as regards this type of nutrient.
Allan Holmberg (1957) published a now-classic study in this regard that is still a classic despite
being over half a century old, its holistic approach still unequalled. Holmberg says the cañán
was still being eaten at the time of his fieldwork; that they lived in pairs and made their nests
in holes they made in the sand close to carob trees, whose fruits were their sole subsistence
source. Adults can grow up to a metre long and are hunted mostly in the summertime, when
they leave their burrows for a short while in order to feed themselves. They are hunted with
traps formed by a sort of strips made out of maguey or reeds that can reach up to tens of
329
Elmo Leon
metres and which are placed close to the carob trees; when the animals come out of their
burrow they cannot reach the fruits and the hunters can catch them even by hand.
Cañán has been eaten on the North Coast of Peru since very ancient times, as was shown
by the study Claude Chauchat made at Pampa de los Fósiles (unit 7) in the context of the
Paiján culture, which has a mean date of 7876 B.C., virtually the oldest on the Peruvian coast
(Chauchat 1992: 90). It is said it was the most important food for these first inhabitants of the
North Coast (Chauchat 1992: 356).
The remains of Dricodon guttulatum have been discovered in archaeological contexts in
sites in the upper Zaña Valley (Lambayeque), with dates that fall between 8011 and 5954 B.C.
Dricodon sp. has even been dated since ca. 11,572 B.C., so it may have been part of the food
eaten by the most ancient inhabitants of this zone (Dillehay 2011: 334).
The Moche are also known to have consumed this type of lizard. Shimada and Shimada (1981:
30) reported the remains of these animals at Pampa Grande, a site in the modern department
of Lambayeque that dates to A.D. 711-800.
Cutright (2009: 158) found in his archaeological research at Pedregal, a Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460)
site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, the bone remains of cañán that were eaten at this site,
albeit in minimal amounts. Cárdenas et al. (1997: 132) have also recorded this species at Huaca
de la Luna in A.D. 400-750, which means the Mochica also consumed it.
Fernández and Rodríguez (2007: 217) points out that stalks of ... [chilco hembra] (Bacharis
glutinosa) are used ethnographically to trap the cañán.
False Monitor [Iguana] (Callopistes flavipunctatus)
The false monitor [iguana] lives in the riparian forest [?: monte ribereña]. Its biochemical
properties include 112% calories, 73% water, and a not inconsiderable 24% protein, and above
all calcium (1,231%), phosphorus (727%), and niacin (6.3%) (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 140-141).
The work done by Claude Chauchat and his team showed this lizard was eaten since at least
10,250 B.C. at Pampa de los Fósiles 14 (unit 2), south of the modern city of Pacasmayo, on the
North Coast of Peru (Chauchat 1992: 274). False monitor [iguana] remains have also been found in
the upper Zaña sites and perhaps correspond to archaeological contexts that date to 8011-5954
B.C., so it may have been part of the food eaten by the people in this zone (Dillehay 2011: 334).
Lizards [Lagartijas] (Teiidae)
Lizards of this species were part of the food eaten by the early people of Pampa de los Fósiles
14 (unit 2) in the context of the Paiján culture, and date to 10,350 B.C. (Chauchat 1992: 274).
330
14,000 years of food in Peru
Yellow Rat Snake [Serpiente Voladora] (Spilotes pullatus)
A few remains of this type of serpent have been recorded in the archaeological sites of the
upper Zaña Valley (Lambayeque), which dated to ca. 8011-5954 B.C.
Sea Lions [Lobos Marinos] (Pinnipedia, Otáridos) and Whales [Ballenas] (Cetacea)
Sea lions have been eaten since Peru was populated, first in the south and then in other
parts as follows from the archaeological record. The most ancient remains come from a site
called Quebrada Tacahuay south of Ilo, in the modern department of Moquegua. They were
found in a stratum that has been radiocarbon dated and calibrated to 10,730 and 10,080 B.C.
(DeFrance and Umire 2004: 271).
Lavallée et al. (1999: 45) reported the presence of pinnipeds in the Preceramic layers of
Quebrada de los Burros (Tacna), which they dated to at least 6200 B.C.; however, the
documentation presented is still scant. Their number is minimal in comparison with the fish,
and they may have been hunted using harpoons, or simply by beating isolated animals found
on the rocks or the beach to death. A subsequent publication noted that the remains of
Otaria flavescens were found at this site, but with dates that fall between 7900 and 4800
B.C. The remains had a series of marks left by cuts and by burning, thus clearly indicating their
processing for consumption. Remains of Arthocephalus australis were found that bore similar
marks (Rodríguez Loredo 2012: 154).
Other examples of very ancient evidence of sea lion (Pinnipedia) consumption come from
the deepest layers of the Ring Site, in the Mollendo area south of the modern city of Ilo,
which is just 750 m away from the current seashore (Sandweiss et al. 1989: 52). The materials
used for radiocarbon dating were not appropriate for such ancient remains, but they may
go back to 9560 B.C. It was evidently frequently eaten until 3800 B.C., which means it was
a favourite animal of the ancient Mollendinos. The presence of marine harpoons [arpones
marinos] proves they were hunted.
Elizabeth Reitz and Dan Sandweiss (2001: 1094) report having found sea lion (Pinnipedia) and
dolphin—albeit in very small numbers—remains at Ostra, a site immediately north of the
Santa River mouth and of the city of Chimbote, with dates that range between 5462 and
3711 B.C.
Further north at the site of Paloma, in the Chilca Valley, Reitz (1988: 316) observed the presence
of a series of sea lion (Otaria flavescens) bones. Although they are not represented among the
edible samples, the remains were however carried to the camps where they were presumably
consumed. The lack of bones perhaps indicates they were previously quartered and cut into
sections on the beach. The dates for the layers where these finds come from range between
5316 and 3630 B.C.
331
Elmo Leon
Bird et al. (1985: 243-244) report the presence at Huaca Prieta, on the northern Peruvian
coast, of Rattus sp. Canidae (they were unable to specify whether this was a dog or a fox),
Artocephalus (sea lion), and Cetacea (small whale or dolphin). Most of these remains come
from the deepest layers but not from the final occupation of the site. The Pinnipedia (sea
lions) were present in the food eaten by the population of Huaca Prieta since the oldest
periods prior to 3000 B.C. Some bones of Canidae, Pinnipedia, and Artocephalus have traces
of butchery cuts, whilst those of the Cetacea evince traces of combustion. This is a clear sign
that both the sea lion and the whale were prepared with fire, probably roasted.
Patterson and Moseley (1968) report sea lion consumption starting around 5000 B.C. with the
Encanto phase of Ancón, north of Lima, but the lack of documentation means we cannot be
more conclusive.
Lanfranco et al. (2009: 5) observed that sea lions were part of the food eaten at Puémape, a
site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, during the occupation dated to 3008-2329 B.C.
On the other hand Creamer and his team (2011: 186) reported the presence of sea lion bones at
Huaricanga, a Late Preceramic site that dates to ca. 3600-600 B.C. This site is in the Fortaleza
Valley some 23 km away from the sea.
Sea lions were also been eaten in Mórrope and Lambayeque, at least from Cupisnique to the
Late Sicán times, from 1300 B.C. to A.D. 1400 (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596).
Shelia Pozorski (1979: 169) made a comprehensive study—also for the North Coast—of the
food eaten by the ancient peoples in the area that extends from Huanchaco to the Moche
Valley, as was documented by the presence of sea lions in many [lobo marino] of these sites,
including Padre Abán (2300 B.C.) and Alto Salaverry (1600 B.C.), Moche sites with early Chimu
(ca. A.D. 800) occupations, and even in parts of the Chan Chan citadel. The frequency in which
these otaridae were eaten in the above-mentioned sites, as well as at Choroval (Chimu-Inca)
and Alto Salaverry, where the highest proportion of bones was found, is striking. In this regard
we should bear in mind the Mochica depictions of sea lions.
Birds
Birds are one of the major resources associated with the Peruvian Current. Sánchez Romero
(1973: 416) has recorded 90 species on the Peruvian littoral, including resident and migratory
birds. Although archaeology does not let us reconstruct the methods used to catch the birds,
they clearly were many. Father Cobo (1893: 225-226) says they were hunted using nets and were
killed more for their feathers than for their meat (Cobo possibly means the cultures at the
beginning of the Christian era, when textiles and other handcrafts frequently used bird feathers).
We shall now review the bird remains found in archaeological contexts, which are believed to
have been used by humans as food.
332
14,000 years of food in Peru
Tinamou [Perdiz Andina, Tinamú] (Nothoprocta cf. taczanoskii)
The tinamou is one of the first birds that formed part of ancient Peruvian cuisine (probably
Nothoprocta pentlandii), a kind of big partridge that runs relatively fast and cannot fly.
Cárdenas et al. (1997:140-141) documented the bromatology of partridges, so we can have some
idea of its alimentary significance even though these are not the same species. Partridges have
279% calories, 18.6% protein, 22% fat, 411% phosphorus, and 5.6% niacin. Its ingestion was
therefore an essential part of the diet in the pre-Hispanic period. These same scholars also
point out that its meat is exquisite, and that it had a first-rate value as regards the protein
consumed by the Moche.
The evidence for its most ancient consumption was found in Moquegua. Tinamou remains
were found in a site called Quebrada Tacahuay on the southern Peruvian Littoral south of the
modern-day city of Ilo. Here the dates range on average to 10,730-10,080 B.C. This means it was
probably eaten at that time, literally during the last ice age (DeFrance and Umire 2004: 271).
The remains from Guitarrero Cave (Wing 1980: 155), in the Callejón de Huaylas, starting in
complex I, i.e. 9500 B.C., date to around this same time.
The archaeological research carried out by Richard MacNeish and his team in Ayacucho also
found tinamou remains at Ayamachay during its Puente phase, i.e. ca. 10,085-6960 B.C. after
my calibration (MacNeish et al. 1981: 157).
Tinamou has also been detected in the archaeological sites in the upper Zaña Valley in Lammbayeque,
where it was probably consumed by human groups in 8011-5954 B.C. (Dillehay 2011: 333).
Rick and Moore (1999: 288) Rick y Moore (1999: 288) documented the intense consumption
of this bird throughout all of the preceramic period in their excavation of Panalauca (in the
district of Tarma and in the Junín puna), ca. 10,000 B.C.-A.D. 1195.
It follows from these finds that the tinamou adapted to a series of environments during the
last ice age, and that it was a resource frequently eaten by the first Peruvians after their arrival.
Notropacta was later documented at Huaca de la Luna (in the lower Moche Valley) in the
midst of Mochica development (A.D. 400-750), and so it may have formed part of their diet
(Cárdenas et al. 1995: 132).
Cormorant, Guanay Cormorant [Cormorán, Guanay, or Patillo] (Phalacrocorax sp., Phalacrocorax
bougainvillii)
This is a species that has adapted to the Peruvian Current. It is found from the southern
Peruvian coast up to the northern coast of Chile. It lives in colonies on the littoral on islands
333
Elmo Leon
Figura 18. Restos de consumo de cormorán o guanay en las excavaciones de Quebrada Tacahuay (Tacna) aproximadamente 10000 a.C. Nótese
en la parte superior las huellas de corte para remover la carne para consumo humano. (CORTESÍA DE SUSAN DEFRANCE).
and headlands. The cormorant essentially feeds on anchovies (Sánchez Romero 1973: 416), so
its associations in pre-Hispanic sites should come as no surprise.
The first sign in our review of cormorant consumption comes from Quebrada Tacahuay, a site
south of Ilo on the southern Peruvian coast. Here over two thousand bone fragments indicate
this was the animal most eaten at this site since at least 10,730 B.C. (DeFrance and Umire 2004:
271), i.e. since the last ice age (Figure 18).
Also on the south coast, the cormorant was not just the bird but also the most eaten animal at least
throughout the seven thousand years of human occupation of the Ring Site south of the modern city
of Ilo, just 750 metres away from the seashore. Sandweiss et al. (1989: 52) exhaustively documented
this animal in domestic consumption contexts since the beginning of this human occupation, ca.
9600 B.C.—if we accept the reliability of the radiocarbon results obtained for seashells.
On the North Coast, Chauchat (1992: 90) and his team found cormorant remains in domestic
contexts at Paiján-Pampa de los Fósiles 12 (unit 7). They dated to ca. 7876 B.C., which means it
was being eaten at such a distant age.
334
14,000 years of food in Peru
Rodríguez Loredo (2012) recently documented cormorant remains bearing traces of combustion
and cut marks at Quebrada de los Burros, a site on the Tacna littoral, and have dates ranging
between 7900 and 4800 B.C.
Cormorant remains were also found in the excavation of the archaeological sites at Nanchoc,
in the upper Zaña Valley. They date to 8011-5954 B.C., so this bird may have been part of the
food eaten in this area (Dillehay 2011: 334).
Cormorant remains have been found at Ostra, a site north of the modern city of Chimbote
and the Santa River Mouth. It was consumed by the people of this site between 5462 and 3711
B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1094).
From this record it clearly follows that birds were part of the diet eaten by the most ancient
Peruvians since the ice age, particularly on the northern and southern coast.
In general it is known that birds were also part of the food eaten by the people from the preceramic
site of Huaca Prieta (Bird et al. 1985: 241). There is a report that I have thus far been unable to read
and which apparently is important, but it is only available through the above-mentioned study.
I mean a study Diana Matthiesen made of the bird remains found at Huaca Prieta. One of her
conclusions is that some bones have cut marks showing they were processed, and others show
they were subject to combustion. Most of the species are local ones, and only a few are migratory
birds. Seabirds are overwhelmingly present; they include cormorants (Phalacrocoracidae), which
were being eaten on the north coast since at least the third millennium B.C. This is significant
because the flesh was probably removed from this type of birds and roasted prior to consumption
some three thousand years ago.
A similar piece of evidence comes from the Central Coast of Peru about a thousand years after
Huaca Prieta. Cormorant bones were found at Caral that show they were roasted. Proximal
fragments of this bird’s femur and sternum belonging to this context have been found, which
means it was evidently being eaten at least in 2600-1800 B.C. (Flores Blanco 2006: 148). These
modifications are interesting because they are the parts close to the animal’s legs and crop, which
usually have more meat.
Bonavia (1982: 194) points out that cormorant bones are amongst the most numerous at Los Gavilanes,
at least since the third millennium B.C. The oldest ones were however found at La Laguna, site PV35-
106, which is also in the Huarmey area and was dated to 5320 B.C. (Bonavia et al. 2001: 304). The
cormorant was thus quite frequently consumed on the Central coast some seven thousand years ago.
The cormorant was also the bird most eaten by the people of Gramalote, a site close to
Huanchaco on the North Coast, since 1800 B.C. (Pozorski and Pozorski 1979: 425).
Rick and Moore (1999: 288) found the remains of this type of bird in Panaulauca Cave in the
puna of Junín at about 4150 masl, in strata that have been dated to 3800-1620 B.C. This means
it may have been part of the food eaten by this cave’s inhabitants in said period.
335
Elmo Leon
The Mochica, Chimu, and Nasca later ate guanay somewhat frequently. In this context it is
worth recalling the depictions of this bird the Mochica left in their pottery. It was eaten for
instance at Galindo, a site in the mid-Moche Valley, both during its Mochica (A.D. 600-800) as
well as its Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations, and was thus a favourite staple in the diet of
these ancient peoples (Lockard 2005: 201). Cutright (2009: 158) also identified some cormorant
bone remains in Chimu-context (A.D. 1000-1460) middens at the site of Pedregal, in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, so it can be inferred that it was consumed at least sporadically.
Roselló et al. (2011: 79) excavated Huaca del Sol and Huaca de la Luna and managed to recover
cormorant remains albeit in very small amounts, so it may have been part of the food eaten
by the Mochica in these sites in A.D. 470-600. Interestingly enough, some of these bones have
cut marks which show they were prepared for consumption.
The same thing seems to be true of the Nasca. At least those who lived in the Cahuachi
shrine quite possibly ate this type of bird, because it is found at this site in domestic contexts
(Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 5).
Peruvian Booby [Pájaro Bobo, Piquero Peruano or Alcatraz Piquero] (Sulidae, Sula variegata)
This species is distributed along the coast from Peru to Arica. It nests on cliffs and on the flat
surface of the islands off the coast. It feeds above all on anchoveta, just like the guanay we
have just seen (Sánchez Romero 1973: 416, 429). This is the second species on the Peruvian and
Chilean coast that is associated with the Cold Current (Reitz 2001: 164). It feeds mainly on fish
like the anchovy and the Chilean jack mackerel (Ludynia et al. 2010); just like with the guanay
bird, its association with the remains of these fishes in Peru’s archaeological sites should come
as no surprise.
The most ancient evidence of the consumption of Peruvian booby goes back to 10,730-
10,080 B.C., when the area of Quebrada Tacahuay south of Ilo, in the modern department of
Moquegua, was being occupied by its first inhabitants still during the last ice age. The Peruvian
booby was by far the most-eaten bird at this site after the cormorant (cf. DeFrance and Umire
2004: 271).
This species was also found in the excavation of Quebrada de los Burros, a site on the Tacna littoral,
where it dates to 7900-4800 B.C. It may also have been eaten here (Rodríguez Loredo 2012).
The Peruvian booby was one of the ten most eaten food resources since the Early Holocene in
the Ring Site south of the city of Ilo, in the Mollendo area. This site is just 750 metres away from
the seashore. It comprised domestic encampments that were mostly dependent on marine
resources. Sandweiss et al. (1989: 52) have recorded the bones of this bird in contexts that
can be interpreted as food since at least 9000 B.C. It was constantly consumed, particularly
since ca. 7500 B.C. This means these birds were quite frequently eaten since Peru began to be
populated.
336
14,000 years of food in Peru
Peruvian booby remains (probably Sula variegata) have likewise been found at Huaca Prieta. It
was apparently consumed since the beginning of the occupation, i.e. since at least the third
millennium B.C. (Bird et al. 1985). This bird, along with seagulls and pelicans, comprised 80%
of the birds eaten at this site.
On the Central Coast, Sula variegata was also frequently found at Los Gavilanes, a site in the
lower Huarmey Valley. It is believed to have been eaten here by its preceramic population
ca. 3200-1480 B.C. (Bonavia 1982: 194). Close by is PV35-4, a Middle Horizon 3 (ca. A.D. 800)
camp on the littoral immediately north of the Huarmey Valley. Here Bonavia et al. (2009: 265)
excavated the remains of this species, which may have been part of the food eaten by the
people living at this site. Even earlier remains of the Peruvian booby have been found at La
Laguna, site PV35-106 north of the Huarmey River mouth, where it dates to 5320 B.C. (Bonavia
et al. 2001: 304).
The Peruvian booby may likewise have been part of the food eaten by the Mochica, albeit
in very small amounts, as was shown by Roselló et al. (2001: 78) with their findings at Huaca
de la Luna and Huaca del Sol, in the Moche Valley, ca. A.D. 470-600. Vásquez et al. (2003)
supplemented these finds and documented cut marks on the bones that were probably made
to dismember the birds prior to their consumption. This means the Mochica living at this site
learned how to prepare this bird’s flesh (as well as the guanay, as was seen above).
The bones of Peruvian booby have also been found in domestic contexts at the site of
Cahuachi in Nasca. It would come as no surprise to find it was eaten by the early peoples of
this so-called “desert” culture (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 5).
Calidris [Playero], Puna Plover (Calidris sp., Charadris alticola)
As of this writing, the only actual evidence for the consumption of this bird come from the
site of Quebrada Tacahuay south of Ilo, on the littoral of Peru’s southern coast. Although the
remains are few, it apparently was part of the food eaten by the early people at this site. Its
bones were recorded in a stratum that dates to 10,730-10,080 B.C. (DeFrance and Umire 2004:
271), so it may have been eaten at that time.
Scant remains of Charadris alticola have been recorded at Panalauca Cave, which lies at about
4150 masl in the Junín puna. The remains were found in strata that were dated to 3800-1620
B.C., so it may have been part of the food eaten by the early people living at this site (Rick and
Moore 1999: 288).
Seagull (Laridae, Larus sp.)
The most ancient record of seagull consumption Peru perhaps comes from Ostra, a site
north of the Santa River mouth, in the modern-day city of Chimbote. Here the bones of
337
Elmo Leon
this bird were found in an archaeological stratum that dates to 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and
Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44). No data has however been provided showing it
was cooked.
The bone remains of some birds found in the middens of Huaca Prieta have been classified
as belonging to the Laridae family; they were probably consumed since 3000 B.C. (Bird et al.
1985). It comprised a large part of the bird food eaten at this site, as was seen in regard to
Sulidae.
The somewhat significant presence (up to 16%) of seagulls has been reported for the Huaca
del Sol and the Huaca de la Luna in the Moche Valley; it may have been eaten, as is borne out
by the cut marks on the bones (Vásquez et al. 2003: 51). The continuity of seagull consumption
on the North Coast is visible at Pedregal, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, where
Cutright (2009: 158) found some remains in what apparently is a domestic context—the food
residues left behind by this Chimu rural population. On the other hand it must be pointed out
that this bird appears on Moche pottery.
Lockard (2005: 201) likewise reports seagull being eaten throughout both the Mochica (A.D.
600-800) and the Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations of Galindo, albeit in small amounts.
In the case of the Nasca culture, the excavations of the Cahuachi shrine found seagull remains
in domestic contexts. It can thus be inferred that its people ate it throughout the first centuries
of the Christian era (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 5).
In her interesting thesis on camelid raising at Pueblo Viejo-Pucará, a site in the Lurín Valley,
Lucia Watson (2008: 140) observed the presence of some seagull bones that had traces of
their having been directly placed on fire as if for cooking. This means seagulls were also being
eaten on the coast in Inca times.
Albatross [Albatros] (Diomedeae sp.)
Albatross has been found in the excavation of Huaca de la Luna, on the lower Moche Valley. It
may have been part of the food eaten by the Mochica people in the first centuries of our era
(Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 342).
Puna Ibis [Yanavico or Ibis de Puna] (Plegadis ridgwayi)
At present the only find thus far comes from the uppermost layers of Panalauca Cave, at
about 4150 masl in the Junín puna, which dated to ca. 1620 B.C.-A.D. 1195 (Rick and Moore 1999:
288). It may thus have been part of the food eaten by the people living in this cave, but no
data have been given regarding its preparation.
338
14,000 years of food in Peru
Melodious Blackbird [Tordo Cantor] (Dives dives)
The remains of this bird found at Galindo, a site in the middle Moche Valley, probably
correspond to its consumption both during the Mochica (A.D. 600-800) and the Chimu (A.D.
1000-1460) occupations (Lockard 2005: 201); however, more evidence is clearly required before
it can be considered as part of the pre-Hispanic food.
American Coot [Gallinet n or Gallareta Americana] (Fulica americana peruviana)
The remains of this bird have been found at Huaca de la Luna. They dated to A.D. 400-750, so
it may have been part of the food eaten by the Mochica who lived in this part of the Moche
Valley (Cárdenas et al. 1995: 132). However, without any traces of preparation its consumption
can be doubted.
[Garza Blanca] (Egretta sp.)
The Egretta may have been part of the food eaten by the ancient Mochica because its remains
have been found at Huaca de la Luna; they date on average to A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al.
1997: 132) but there is no evidence of its consumption.
Great Heron [Garza Grande] (Casmerodius sp.)
The remains of this bird were recorded by the excavation of Huaca de la Luna in the lower
Moche Valley. It may have been part of the food eaten by the Mochica throughout the first
centuries of the Christian era (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 342).
[Aguilucho Grande] (Geranoaetus fuscescens australis)
This bird was recorded at Huaca de la Luna in the lower Moche Valley. Its date ranged between
A.D. 400 and A.D. 750. It may thus have been eaten, but it was more likely used in falconry, as
was pointed out by its discoverers themselves (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 134).
Silver Teal [Pato] (Anas versicolor)
The remains of just one specimen of this bird have been found at Panalauca Cave, at around
4150 masl in the Junín puna. They were found in the upper strata that date to ca. 1620 B.C.-
A.D. 1195 (Rick and Moore 1999: 288). Just like in the previous cases, it is not easy establishing
whether it was consumed or not.
339
Elmo Leon
Dabbling Ducks [Pato Silvestre] (Anas sp.)
The remains of this duck were excavated at Huaca de la Luna se. It probably was part of the
food eaten by the Mochica in the first centuries of the Christian era (Vásquez and Rosales
2004: 342).
Crested duck [Pato] (Anas speculorides)
Rick and Moore (1999: 288) reported the presence of a few remains of this bird in the upper
strata of Panalauca Cave, at about 4150 masl in the Junín pun. They date to CA. 1620 B.C.-A.D.
1195, and so may have been part of the food eaten by this cave’s inhabitants.
Muscovy Duck [Pato Joque or Moscovita] (Cairina moschata)
The Spanish settlers first found this bird in the Lesser Antilles, the Caribbean, Honduras,
Mexico and northern South America. It was exported quite early to Europe, where it was
described around 1555. It was used by the Aztecs at the time of the Spanish Conquest, and it is
believed to have been domesticated in the Amazon, particularly on the northern part of the
American [sic] subcontinent (Stahler 2008: 121).
Sauer (1952: 48-49) believed this was the only native American animal. Its name apparently
comes from the Muisca Indians of Central Colombia. Stahler (1988: 122) says the term joque
was perhaps derived from the smell of muscone [muscona almizclada] (the strong smell some
animals and plants have); it may also come from Mexico or from the Muisca Indians on the
Miskito Coast in Nicaragua.
This is a tropical nesting bird that avoids human habitation. It lives wild across a vast American
expanse, from the Pacific coast of Mexico to southern Peru, northern Argentina and Uruguay
(Stahl et al. 2006: 658). Its domestic form extends from the Araucano villages in Chile up to
the tropical areas of Mexico.
Let us review some of its characteristics. Stahler (2008: 122) says the Muscovy duck is
remarkable because of its large size, which is due to sexual dimorphism. Adult males can grow
up to 84 cm and weigh four kilos (and even six when domesticated. At night they frequently
move to the trees, and they tend to be close to water sources on rivers, small lakes and
mangroves. These ducks are extremely strong and they give out a whistle when setting out to
fly, otherwise it is silent and remains quiet. If flies in flocks when free, but once domesticated
it remains in the group and mates with several females. The male is omnivorous and tends to
be strongly territorial. It feeds on aquatic plants and animals, reptiles, insects, and termites;
it is in fact a strong, insectivorous animal at night on the fields. Its meat is quite meagre in
comparison with the fowl domesticated in Asia.
340
14,000 years of food in Peru
As regards linguistics, Daniel Gade (2000: 559-561) points out in the Cambridge World History
of Food that contrary to what is usually believed due to the name, this duck actually does
not have anything to do with “muscovite;” it can, however, be connected with the canard
musqué (pato almizclero). Other names given it are for instance pato criollo, pato real, pato
machacón, and pato perulero. In Brazil it is known as the pato do mato. It obviously has a
Quechua name— ñuñuma—while in Chibcha it is sumne, and tlatalacatl in Náhuatl.
As regards its domestication, Gade believes there are two possible scenarios. In the first
scenario, the duck was first caught in the grain fields where it used to eat; in the second
scenario, the eggs were removed by human groups in order to hatch them in specially prepared
places, so that thirty days later, when the ducklings were born, they bonded with those who
cared for them. The areas posited as centres of domestication for this bird comprise the
Central Andes, the southern Caribbean coast, the Paraguay region of the Chaco in Argentina,
and the lower Amazon basin (Donkin 1989). Donkin emphasises the preference this bird had
for cultivated grains, its gregarious behaviour, and particularly its compatibility for cohabiting
with humans.
The bone, ethnohistorical, and ethnographic evidence that Angulo (1998) examined led him to
the conclusion that the Muscovy duck was domesticated in southern Brazil and the Bolivian
and Paraguayan lowlands, i.e. the Chaco. For Angulo, insect control was the main reason it
was domesticated by the communities that raised it. Another characteristic this bid has is its
resistance to disease and its reproductive efficiency.
The Muscovy duck has three characteristics once domesticated, i.e. the males grow twice as
large as the females; they give out a hiss; and have a constant polygamous sex drive.
In America the Muscovy duck is grown not just for its meat, but also for its fat and, to a
lesser extent, for its eggs. Gade cites Raymond Gilmore, who mentioned the preparation of
a dry Muscovy duck meat-based aromatic powder, and particularly this duck’s insect-eating
capability that makes it extremely useful in tropical areas as it keeps the fields clean and
may thus have been very useful for pre-Hispanic farmers. When it was exported to Europe
the Germans called it tuerkische Ente, but it was the French who managed to cross it with
the conventional duck (Anas platyrhynchos) and obtained the canard mulard. This is an
exceptionally strong duck that has been overfed, thus hypertrophying its liver in order to
make paté de foie gras, particularly in south western France.
Stahl (2005) and Stahl et al. (2006) probably are the most recent efforts made in order to
characterise this species not just from an anatomical and taxonomic standpoint, but also in
terms of providing archaeozoology the tools it requires to document this major Peruvian (and
Mexican) alimentary source. It is known that it is used ethnographically in domestic labours
such as the cleaning of drains and irrigation areas. Stahl defined this bird’s characteristics
osteologically from 35 specimens held in museum collections, as well as the bones from
two Ecuadorian sites on Guayas Bay; one of them is Peñón del Río, where this bird’s remains
have been found in a cultural context where raised fields were used. Although Stahl was
341
Elmo Leon
unable to establish whether the Muscovy duck was domesticated in Ecuador, he did raise the
possibility these animals were exchanged with Panama, considering the relations between
both American regions.
Citing Larco Hoyle, Hans Horkheimer (1960: 44-45) pointed out that the depictions on Mochica
pottery show there were at least five types of duck—an animal this people was quite familiar
with—in pre-Hispanic Peru. At least one of them is the black duck [?: pato negro (choca)]
found in the Titicaca area. Following Gilmore, Horkheimer believed Cairina moschata may
have originated in Peru; he also noted that Garcilaso de la Vega claimed some sort of dry,
aromatic duck meat powder was manufactured in the Inca Empire.
Let us turn now to the archaeological evidence. There are in fact few remains of this animal
in pre-Hispanic Peru. Its remains have been found quite scattered throughout South America
in various archaeological contexts: Panama, Venezuela, Trinidad, Ecuador, Peru, the Bolivian
lowlands, and the far Argentinian northwest.
Stahl (2008: 123) reported the presence of Muscovy duck bones at El Hatillo, Sitio Sierra, and
Sitio Conte (Panama), where it was dated to the terminal Pleistocene, i.e. to at least 12,000
years ago. It has also been found in the western lowlands of Ecuador (at the sites of Salango,
Ayalán, Penon, and Jerusalén), which date to some thousand years before our era. Although
there is no reliable chronological framework, they seem to have been eaten mostly in periods
that have A.D. dates. Many relatively recent bone remains have also been found in Bolivia at
the site of Pailón (A.D. 600-1300) (Pruemers 2002).
Lavallée (1990: 28) pointed out that within the South American context, the Muscovy duck
is an animal that does not belong to the Andean Cordillera, which means its origins must be
traced elsewhere.
In Peru, the Muscovy duck appears both on the North Coast’s Moche and Chimu pottery
(Bennett 1939: 84, Donnan 1978). The use of its feathers is likewise documented in Chimu
textiles (O´Neill 1984). Lavallée (1970: 28) notes the oldest references on ceramic depictions
appear in cultures like Salinar, Vicús, and even Virú starting in the first millennium B.C. (ca.
1300-500 B.C.). In the Ecuadorian context Lavallée observed depictions of this bird in Chorrera
pottery, on the southern Pacific coast of Ecuador (Lavallée 1990: 28).
Kaulicke (1991: 414) reports Muscovy duck bones found in domestic food contexts at Loma
Valverde, in the upper Piura Valley, with dates that range between A.D. 350 and A.D. 450. It was
thus eaten not just by the Mochica people living in this area, but also by the Salinar people.
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 132) report the presence of Anatidae—i.e. quite possibly Muscovy duck—
at Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, with dates that range between A.D. 400 and
750, and may thus have been part of the food eaten by the Mochica. Shimada and Shimada
(1981: 131) also reported this duck during the Moche occupation of Pampa Grande, a site in the
modern department of Lambayeque ca. A.D. 711-800.
342
14,000 years of food in Peru
Stahl (2008: 123) has pointed out that this bird’s feathers are found in Chimu textiles, which
means its presence on the North Coast in A.D. 1000-1460 is clear. They have also been found
in Inca contexts in north western Argentina. Here we should draw attention to the fact that
Muscovy duck has been documented around this time in Santa Elena Peninsula (Ecuador), in
the excavation of human burials (Lavallée 1990: 28).
Enrique Angulo (1998) made a major review of this species in Peru, which must be summarised
here. Angulo examined the evidence for human-Muscovy duck interaction in the pre-Hispanic
period and even in more recent times. One of his major points is that the ethnohistorical data
claims it was raised by families in fully domestic contexts. Angulo notes the evidence of this
duck’s depictions in Olmeca (Mexico) contexts since 2000 B.C., and in Ecuador even since
1600 B.C., which includes the above-mentioned Chorrera culture.
Pampero Peruano (Geossita paytensis)
The remains of Geossita paytensis have been excavated and identified in fully Mochica
contexts at Huaca de la Luna (in the lower Moche Valley), in A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al.
1997: 134).
Rufous-Collared Sparrow [Gorrión Andino or Vinchi] (Zonotrichia capensis peruviensis)
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 134) reported a series of this bird’s remains in a Mochica context at Huaca
de la Luna that dated to ca. A.D. 400-750, so it can be assumed it was being eaten.
Peruvian Pelican [Pelícano Peruano or Alcatraz] (Pelecanus thagus, Pelecanidae)
Pelicans prefer eating anchovies. They live on the islands and cliffs of the Peruvian littoral
(Sánchez Romero 1973: 416, 430).
The bones of pelicans eaten at Quebrada Tacahuay, a site south of Ilo in the modern
department of Moquegua, were the most ancient ones at the time the study was made, as
they had been found in a stratum that dated to 10,736-10,080 (DeFrance and Umire 2004: 271).
Another of the most ancient pieces of evidence of pelican consumption was found at the
Ring Site, in the area of Mollendo (Moquegua). These are camp-type human occupations that
lived quite close to the seashore (south of the city of Ilo) and essentially fed on food. The
layers where these remains come from date to before 7300 B.C. (cf. Sandweiss et al. 1989: 52).
Ostra, the site where Sandweiss and Reitz (2001: 1094) found pelican remains, lies north of
the modern city of Chimbote. Although scant, this animal was part of the food eaten by the
people who lived at this site ca. 5462-3711 B.C.
343
Elmo Leon
Pelecanus thagus is probably the species found at Huaca Prieta (Bird et al. 1985), that was
eaten since 3000 B.C. Shelia Pozorski analysed a series of archaeological sites that lie some
20 km south of this area, between Huanchaco and the lower Moche Valley. Pozorski recorded
pelican consumption at sites like Padre Abán (ca. 2300 B.C.) and Chan Chan throughout the
Chimu-Inca occupation (Pozorski 1979: 169). A significant amount of birds were eaten but they
have not been identified. Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 123) also recorded pelican consumption
at Gramalote, in the vicinity of Huanchaco, since 1800 B.C., as well as at the Mochica site of
Huaca del Sol. Cárdenas et al. (1997: 132) reported the presence of this bird at Huaca de la Luna,
so it may have been part of the Mochica diet at this site in A.D. 400-750.
Bonavia (1982: 194) reported the strong presence of pelican bones on the Central Coast at Los
Gavilanes—a site in the lower Huarmey Valley—between 3200 and 1480 B.C. Bonavia et al.
(2009: 265) also recorded some pelican remains that were probably consumed in the Middle
Horizon 3 camp site (ca. A.D. 800) that lies on the littoral north of the Huarmey Valley. Pelican
was thus clearly long eaten in the lower part of this valley.
In Ica the Italian archaeological team headed by Giuseppe Orefici reported the presence
of significant amounts of pelican bones in apparently domestic contexts. It is thus quite
likely that the Nasca ate its meat in the first centuries of the Christian era (Piacenza and
Pieri 2012: 5).
Pigeons [Palomas] (Columbidae)
Pigeons have apparently been part of the food eaten by our first Peruvian ancestors since the
last Ice Age or Younger Dryas. A small number of young pigeons, which were grouped under
the general heading of Columbidae, have been found on the North Coast of Peru in Paiján
contexts in the middens of Pampa de los Fósiles, which date to ca. 9000-7000 B.C. (Chauchat
1992, Credou 2008: 27).
Pigeon remains have likewise been found in archaeological contexts in sites found in the
upper Zaña Valley in Lambayeque. Their dates range between 9700 and 9200 B.C., so they
may have been part of the food eaten by the early inhabitants of this area (Dillehay 2011: 334).
A series of birds eaten at the archaeological site of Huaca Prieta since ca. 3000 B.C., have been
grouped under this family.
Quilter et al. (1991: 279) reported the presence of a few pigeon remains that may have been
part of the food eaten by the people of El Paraíso, a site that is almost on the Chillón River
mouth, since ca. 2150 B.C.
Pigeons were probably also eaten in A.D. 711-800 by the Mochica of Pampa Grande in
Lambayeque (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 131). It should likewise be pointed out that the
Mochica depicted this type of bird on their pottery.
344
14,000 years of food in Peru
Spot-Winged Pigeon [Paloma “manchada”] (Columba maculosa)
The remains of this pigeon species, which was probably consumed in A.D. 631-1000, have been
excavated in the Wari site known as Cerro Baúl (Moseley et al. 2005: 17269).
White-Winged Dove [Cucula o tórtola aliblanca] (Zenaida asiatica meloda)
Bone concentrations of this bird have been found in some enclosures at Huaca del Sol and
Huaca de la Luna in the lower Moche Valley. They apparently bore cut marks, so they may
have been consumed in A.D. 670-780 (Vásquez et al. 2003: 51). This bird would have been
important due to the availability of its meat (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 186).
Eared Dove [Paloma de Campo o Tórtola “Torcaza”] (Zenaida auriculata)
This bird was apparently eaten by the Mochica at Huaca de la Luna, a site in the lower Moche
Valley (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 342).
The presence of eared doves has been recorded at Cerro Baúl (Moquegua) throughout its Wari
occupation (A.D. 631-1000). They were apparently eaten (Moseley et al. 2005: 17270).
Sparrow [Gorrión Casero] (Passeridae)
A species like Passer domesticus may have been part of the food eaten by the people of
Guitarrero Cave since at least 9500 B.C. The remains of this bird have been found in the
deepest strata at this site (Wing 1980: 155).
Remains of passerines have been recorded in the excavation of archaeological sites in the
upper Zaña Valley, with dates that range to about 9700-9200 B.C. (Dillehay 2011: 334). The
sparrow may thus have been part of the food eaten by the earliest peoples of pre-Hispanic
Peru.
Shearwater [Pardela] (Pruffinus, Procellaridae, Laridae)
This is a type of migratory bird found in cold and temperate climates like that of the Peruvian
coast. The excavation Sandweiss et al. (1989: 57) conducted at the Ring Site south of the
modern city of Ilo, in Moquegua, recorded shearwater remains. Although scant, they do point
out it may have been consumed since at least 8000 B.C.
Bonavia (1982: 195) found shearwater remains at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey
Valley that can be dated to ca. 3200-1480 B.C.
345
Elmo Leon
The analysis undertaken at Huaca de la Luna (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 132) showed the presence
of shearwater remains, in contexts that were dated to A.D. 400-750. It can be assumed it was
part of the food eaten by the Mochica who lived in the lower Moche Valley.
Mimids [Calandria] (Mimidae)
The oldest possible record of mimid consumption comes from the upper Zaña Valley, where
Dillehay (2011: 333) recorded a series of bone remains in very early archaeological contexts
that were dated to 8011-5954 B.C.
At El Paraíso, a site close to the Chillón River mouth north of Lima, Quilter et al. (1991: 279)
found that some bones belonged to this bird family. They may have been part of the food
eaten by the people who occupied this preceramic site at least since 2150 B.C.
Inca Tern [Zarcillo, Gaviot n, or Charrán Inca] (Larasterna inca)
This is a rocky shore bird found on the Peruvian coast. DeFrance (2005: 1137) recorded a few
bones from this bird that probably was part of the food eaten by the people of Quebrada
Tacahuay, some 30 km away from the modern city of Ilo, on the Southern Coast of Peru. Their
dates ranged between 10,736 and 10,080 B.C.
Sandweiss et al. (1989: 57) found one bone belonging to this bird at the Ring Site south of Ilo
(Moquegua)—the outcome of consumption ca. 7500 B.C.
Black Vulture [Gallinazo] (Coragyps atratus)
Shimada and Shimada (1981: 131) report black vulture remains in their list of birds found at
Pampa Grande, a Moche site in Lambayeque. The context is not reliable, so this bird was
perhaps part of the food the Moche ate in A.D. 711-A.D. 800.
Andean Goose [Huashua or Ganso Andino] (Cloephaga melanoptera)
Rick and Moore (1999: 288) have documented a significant number of Andean goose remains
at Panalauca Cave in the Junín puna, at about 4150 masl. They were found in strata that date
to 10,000-1620 B.C. If there was any evidence it was eaten, it would make it one of the birds
with the highest consumption records ever.
346
14,000 years of food in Peru
Andean Coot [Gallareta] (Fulica ardesiaca)
This coot species has been excavated in the upper strata of Panalauca Cave, which lies at
4150 masl in the Junín puna. The radiocarbon dates for these layers date on average to 1620
B.C.-A.D. 1195 (Rick and Moore 1999: 288). It may thus have been part of the food eaten by the
inhabitants of this site.
Giant Coot [Gallareta Gigante] (Fulica gigantea)
Rick and Moore (1999: 288) documented the remains of this bird species in Panalauca Cave,
which lies at about 4150 masl in the Junín puna. The strata where it comes from was dated to
1620 B.C.-A.D. 1195, It may have been part of the food eaten by its early inhabitants.
Andean Avocet [Avoceta Andina] (Recurvirostrus [Recurvirostra?] andina)
Rick and Moore (1999: 288) recorded a few remains of this bird in their excavation of Panalauca
Cave, which lies at about 4150 masl in the Junín puna. The remains were found in strata that
dated to between 10,000-3800 B.C., and 1620 B.C.-A.D. 1195, and may thus have been part of
the food eaten by the people living in this cave.
Andean Flicker [Pito] (Colaptes rupicolor [rupicola?])
Many remains of this bird have been documented in some strata in Panalauca Cave, which lies
at about 4150 masl in the Junín puna. The strata span all of the human occupation between
ca. 10,000 and 330 B.C. (Rick AND Moore 1999: 288), which means it was probably consumed
by those who lived in the cave.
African Penguin, Humboldt Penguin [Pingüino peruano] (Spheniscus demersus, Spheniscus
humboldti)
Probably one of the earliest pieces of evidence of Humboldt penguin consumption comes
from the Ring Site south of Ilo, in the Mollendo area. This is a site with occupations that lived
mainly exploiting the littoral as it is just 750 metres away from the seashore (Sandweiss et al.
1989: 52). It follows from the radiocarbon dates that its consumption goes back at least to
8000 B.C.
Rodríguez Loredo (2012) reported finding Humboldt penguin remains at Quebrada de los
Burros, in the Tacna littoral, that dated to 7900-4800 B.C. The bones had cut marks that
evinced it was eaten.
347
Elmo Leon
Reitz (2001: 164) says the presence of this species indicates the subtropical area had a cold
temperate climate. Klaus and Tam report that Humboldt penguin was eaten in a compilation
of the food eaten by the inhabitants of the lower Lambayeque Valley, in the period that
extend at least from the Cupisnique (1300 B.C.) to the Sicán (A.D. 1400) cultures.
This species was also found in the excavations of the site of Los Gavilanes, in the lower
Huarmey Valley, in a context dating to 2300-1480 B.C. (Bonavia 1982: 223).
The remains of this penguin species were recovered in the excavations undertaken at the
site of Pampa Grande (Lambayeque) in Mochica context, and dated to ca. A.D. 711-A.D. 800
(Shimada and Shimada 1981: 131).
Sea Fish
We now turn to the sources that include data regarding fish consumption in pre-Hispanic
Peru. Twenty-five fish species were mostly consumed along the Peruvian littoral, at least until
the 1970s; there are however some seventy species ideal for human consumption, which can
comprise up to 9-17 kilos per capita per year (Sánchez Romero 1973: 237). The question is
whether this was the record of fish eaten and individually consumed in the pre-Hispanic
periods.
I am not aware of any effort made to reconstruct the fishing techniques used in Peru’s pre-
Hispanic context based on a comprehensive overview of the archaeological data. It is therefore
worth citing in this regard some of the observations made by Father Bernabé Cobo, who was
a great observer during the early [primera: NO] stages of the colonial period, particularly
considering that part of what he recorded was of native origin.
When discussing fishing techniques used at sea, in rivers or in lakes, Cobo (1893: 227) points
out that fishhooks, nets, and basket traps were used, and that it was usually two people who
fished from small rafts using small nets.
One type of fishing that took place both in the marine littoral as well as from river banks,
involved building stone ‘fences’ made out of stones and tight-fitting wooden stakes, so that
when the water ran through the fish were left behind and could even be caught by hand. Cobo
claims Peruvian Indians frequently used barbasco (a preparation made out of ground plants
that seems to come from the Amazon), which seems to have a sleeping effect on fish, thus
facilitating their being caught. A river branch was usually dried up in order to catch shrimp.
When discussing the rafts made out of reeds such as the well-known ‘caballitos de totora’
(tule boats), Cobo claims Indian fishermen could sail up to 20 or 40 km into the sea in groups
of twenty or forty (Cobo 1893: 219); this distance is considerable, particularly considering the
small size of these rafts. Another type of raft, also small, is frequently found in the south,
particularly in northern Chile, where it is made by inflating the skin of a sea lion.
348
14,000 years of food in Peru
Fish was eaten very early not just on the coast but also in the Peruvian highlands. Although
very little information is available, MacNeish et al. (1981: 160) identified remains at a site called
Puente that dated to 5460-6350 B.C. It is regrettable that no specific information is provided
regarding the species found here.
Besides the remains found in archaeological contexts, we also have evidence that fish was
eaten thanks to isotopic and coprolith studies. For instance, the human faeces found at El
Paraíso, a site north of Lima in the lower Chillón Valley that dates back to 2150 B.C., included
traces of fish bones (Quilter 1991: 280).
Bird et al. (1985: 242-243) recorded the discovery of a series of fish remains at the well-known
site of Huaca Prieta, which evidently were part of the food eaten by this people. 80% of the
remains come from the lowest strata and clearly indicate they were more frequently eaten
in older periods. It seems, despite the small size of the bones and spines that smoothounds
[tollo], rays and sharks were eaten. Regrettably no scientific names are given that would
have given more credence to the report. The only reference the report makes is to the
Chaetodipterus genus, a type of swordfish found on the Pacific coast of South America.
We will now review what is known of the fish eaten in the pre-Hispanic period. Since the
taxonomic variety is not affected by domestication or by multiple taxonomies, as was the case
with the Andean plants, here I have taken the liberty of simply dividing the fish into osteichthyes
and chondrichthyes. Taxonomic determinations are based on Chirichigno’s fish handbook (1998).
Osteichthyes
Peruvian Anchoveta [Anchoveta or Peladilla] (Engraulis ringens, Engraulidae)
Peruvian anchoveta is highly consumed on the coast. It actually is a small fish 12-18 cm long that
form huge shoals on the Peruvian littoral and in northern Chile up to 80 km in the open sea.
The area where they lay their eggs extends from Chicama to Huarmey (Sánchez Romero 1973:
159-160). The shoals often draw closer to the shore, especially during the summer, because the
temperate band in the sea narrows as it is pressed by the marine flow from the west.
The Peruvian anchoveta is characteristic of the cold waters of the Peruvian Current (Reitz 2001:
164). Its yield is one of the most important for Peru despite the weather crisis. It is widely spread
throughout the Southern Pacific from 4°S (Piura, Peru) to 42°S (Isla Chiloé, Chile), and the Peruvian
banks are the most important ones in all of the world (Tarifeño et al. 2008). Several accounts
left by the first Spanish chroniclers who saw the anchoveta being fished all concur in that the
Indians caught them using buckets, baskets and even just their hands (Béarez 2012: 103).
The anchoveta is by far one of the major fish species that supported civilisation on
the western South American coast, as can be seen just by reviewing the archaeological
documentation below.
349
Elmo Leon
The anchoveta is found all year long, and moves southward in the summer, between January
and March. It feeds on the plankton found in the marine currents close to the coast. The
anchoveta lives in shoals in the trophic chain of the Peruvian sea, as it is part of the food
eaten not just by other fish but also by guanay birds, for instance (Gálvez Mora and Quiroz
Moreno 2008: 70). Fishing it requires the use of netting, and this must be borne in mind when
discussing the antiquity of its presence in coastal Peru’s archaeological sites.
The bromatological values of the anchoveta have to be included here because it was a
major food source for the pre-Hispanic population. A first glance confirms we are before an
excellent nutrient base. FAO claims every 100 grams of anchoveta hold 21 g of protein, 9 g of
fat, 276 mg of phosphorus, 1.4 mg of iron, 8.7 mg of vitamin C, and 0.01 of vitamin B1. It follows
then that these values for protein and fat are among the highest found in the fish that live on
the Peruvian sea; they were thus a major part of the diet of the pre-Hispanic population, and
should still be so.
Is there any t race of the preservation and culinary preparation of the anchoveta in the pre-
Hispanic period? Although no direct evidence is available, we do have ethnographic evidence
of this. Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 24) claims the anchoveta was preserved in saltpetre (as was
noted in a previous chapter), and that it was often toasted in order to be eaten along with
toasted maize.
We now turn to the archaeological record. According to the scientific literature, the most
ancient evidence of anchoveta consumption apparently comes from Quebrada Tacahuay,
a site south of Ilo on the Moquegua littoral. Here, DeFrance and Umire (2004: 271) found
anchoveta remains that were eaten along with cormorants by our most distant ancestors,
in a stratum that was dated to 10,370-9370 B.C. The significant presence of this fish at the
site made the researchers consider the possible use of netting at such an early date. We
can thus imagine the people on the coast of Moquegua eating anchoveta (roasted perhaps?)
and cormorant whilst still in the Ice Age. On the other hand, should the use of netting be
confirmed, we would have to completely reconsider the precocious use of these fishing
techniques on the Peruvian coast. More research is required.
Following the chronology we come next to also very early anchoveta remains from Pampa de
los Fósiles 12 (unit 7) that belong to the Paiján culture and date to ca. 7,876 B.C., which means
it was being eaten on the North Coast since the early Holocene (Chauchat 1992: 47). In this
same area, albeit at Ascope 5 (unit 4), in the department of La Libertad, Chauchat (1992: 47)
noticed the presence of anchoveta in a site that has been dated at most to 88733 B.C.; it is
thus possible that this fish was being eaten at this time, on average 36 grams.
Since it is essentially caught using netting as at Quebrada Tacahuay, it can be speculated
that this method was also used at Ascope, which means it would have been a usual
technique on the Peruvian coast. However, more research is needed in order to be
conclusive in this regard.
350
14,000 years of food in Peru
McInnis (2006: 383) reported the presence (albeit scant) of anchoveta remains at site PC-500
in the Pampa Colorada complex, which lies almost on the Ocoña River mouth (Arequipa).
Here a camp has been found that dated to 9200-7490 B.C.
Béarez (2012: 107) likewise reported the presence of anchoveta also on the South Coast at
Tacna in Quebrada de los Burros, in strata they dated to 7900-4800 B.C.
According to the evidence, the possible anchoveta remains Tom Dillehay (2011: 334) and his
team found in the sites in the upper Zaña Valley (Lambayeque) are even older, and have been
dated to 9700-9200 B.C.
One of the sites on the Central Coast where anchoveta was eaten earliest is Paloma, some
65 km south of Lima in the vicinity of the Chilca River mouth, and close to a loma with
seasonal resources. A large number of organic remains was found here, including 56 camps
and over 200 burials that provided abundant and invaluable information. Reitz (1988: 313) says
anchoveta comprised almost 60% of marine remains, which means the people here were
somewhat dependent on this fish in 5316-3630 B.C. according to the calibrated radiocarbon
dates for this site. Reitz points out that anchoveta shoals can live in dips on the beaches, and
in some cases they can be caught in the best of cases with netting or with some type of big
spoon or a similar instrument.
One of the most significant finds made at Paloma was a storage pit with anchoveta that had
their head cut off; Robert Benfer (2008: 372) believes this was done for better preservation
(lime or salt were probably added, as happened with saltpetre according to Antúnez de
Mayolo). Other storage bins have complete anchovetas. This shows the farsightedness of this
Lima people in the late Middle Holocene, at least since 6000 years ago.
Anchoveta remains have been found at Ostra, a site on the right bank of the Santa River
mouth and just a short distance away from the modern city of Chimbote. They were probably
part of the food eaten by the people at this site in 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001:
1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
Also on the Central Coast is the study Harvey Coutts et al. (2011) made of stable C13 isotopes
and other trace elements in the skeletons of some offerings made at Bandurria, a site some 70
km north of Lima. They verified that the main foods eaten were fish and molluscs. If this data
is combined with that which has been excavated archaeologically, we reach the conclusion
that in fact the foods most consumed were anchoveta and sardine. This was confirmed by
the excavations of Bandurria, which turned up anchoveta remains that date to 3170-1610 B.C.
(Chu 2008: 136). Due to the large amount of remains found, Chu claims that marine fish and
invertebrates formed the alimentary base of this people.
A considerable amount of anchoveta has been found on the northernmost Peruvian coast in
the mounds of the site known as El Porvenir, which is close to the Zarumilla River (Tumbes)
and to the frontier with Ecuador. Its dates range between 4700 and 300 B.C. (Moore 2007a: 15).
351
Elmo Leon
A large amount of anchoveta (Engraulis ringens) was found at Cerro Lampay, in the Fortaleza
Valley (on the coast of the department of Lima), in the midst of the refuse left by humans
eating and which can be dated to 2410-2064 B.C. (Vega-Centeno 2007).
Abundant anchoveta remains have also been found in the monumental centre of Caral in the
Supe Valley (Shady et al. 2001, Flores Blanco 2006: 278), which dates to 2585-1938 B.C., which
were used by its people as food. The available information shows it was the major resource
since the initial occupation of Caral in the third millennium B.C. as it comprised between 74
and 93% of the food eaten by this people. Besides, Flores Blanco (2006: 148) reports finding
anchoveta in a hearth at Caral, so it was clearly cooked in the fire. Anchoveta was definitely
the most-eaten fish in Sector A (74% of all the remains found at this site) (Shady and Leiva
2003: 115). This is one of the few pieces of data on its preparation, in this case exposed to the
fire as roasted anchoveta.
Jeffrey Quilter et al. (1991: 279) showed that at the archaeological site of El Paraíso, in Lima, the
people who lived around this preceramic ritual edifice since ca. 2150 B.C. depended on marine
resources, specifically on the anchoveta.
Bonavia (1982: 194) reported finding anchoveta in significant amounts at Los Gavilanes, a site in the
lower Huarmey Valley, with dates that ranged between 3200 and 1480 B.C. It is worth pointing out
that Bonavia and other colleagues (2009: 242) found a few remains of anchoveta in a heart at the
Wari (A.D. 800) site called PV35-4, albeit in the beach zone north of the Huarmey River mouth. This
fish was clearly being eaten for thousands of years on this part of the Peruvian coast.
In regard to fish-eating consumption traditions on the Peruvian coast, the anchoveta was also
long eaten in the Lambayeque area, from at least the Cupisnique culture up to Late Sicán, i.e.
A.D. 1300 a.C.-1400 (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596). Anchoveta also comprised a significant part of
the food eaten by the ancient people in the Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) site of Pedregal in the
lower Jequetepeque Valley, where it comprised up to 37% of the fish eaten there (Cutright
2009: 166-167).
The remains of at least two anchovetas have been found later at Cerro Baúl (Moquegua), during
the Middle Horizon or Wari Empire; the site lies at about 2590 masl and dates to A.D. 631-
1000 (Moseley et al. 2005: 17269). This involved the transportation of these fish from the Pacific
Ocean to the southern highlands of Peru, where they were consumed. This datum also raises the
question of whether the anchoveta was also eaten in other parts of the Peruvian highlands in
the pre-Hispanic period using the preservation method used for instance at Paloma.
Cerro Azul, a Chincha site some 120 km south of Lima in Cañete, was a veritable centre of
anchoveta extraction and processing (Marcus et al. 1999: 6568). The structures excavated
there show anchoveta comprised 25%-50% of the food eaten by the inhabitants of this site.
The intensive consumption of this fish throughout almost 13,000 years, particularly on the
coast, is thus clear.
352
14,000 years of food in Peru
Lo Demás is a site in this same area but north of the Chincha River mouth. Here Sandweiss et
al. (2004: 332) report that in Inca times the people essentially based their diet on anchoveta
and sardines.
Béarez et al. (2003: 58) likewise recorded 11% anchoveta remains in enclosures 24 and 25 of
the Pachacamac shrine, in the lower Lurín Valley, in A.D. 1520—evidently at the end of the
Inca Empire.
Sardine or Herring [Sardina or Arenque] (Sardinops sagax sagax, Clupeidae)
Gálvez Mora and Quiroz Moreno (2008: 70) aver that the sardine is a small-sized, highly
migratory species that lives in shoals and feeds several predators. We can assume it was
fished using nets, so perhaps watercrafts were used. Sánchez Romero (1973: 188-189) says
this species lives along the coast as far as the Galapagos Islands. It is fished above all in
summer, measures 22-37 cm, and weighs on average 162 grams, and very rarely up to 300
grams. Reitz (2001: 164) summarised the presence of sardines in the oldest occupations on
the Peruvian coast.
The most ancient sardine remains comes from Quebrada Tacahuay, a site south of Ilo on the
Moquegua littoral, where a few of these fish have been found in a stratum that is associated
with archaeological remains that are dated to 10,736-9370 B.C. (DeFrance and Umire 2004: 271).
As was the case with anchovy, which was found in abundance at this site, it has been inferred
that nets were used at that time to fish sardines.
Following the chronology, probably one of the oldest pieces of evidence showing sardines
were eaten on the North Coast comes from the Paiján-culture contexts in the sites at Ascope.
Chauchat (1992: 311) found sardine remains in the middens of the groups who peopled this
zone, which have been radiocarbon dated at 7333 B.C. Chauchat estimated that on average
these small fish weighed 41 grams (which is far less than the mean given above). Just like at
Quebrada Tacahuay, these were probably caught using netting—another indication that this
technique was in use at such a remote past (Gálvez Mora y Quiroz Moreno 2008: 72).
Sardines were also eaten in a quite distant past at Quebrada de los Burros, in the modern-
day Tacna Region (Lavallée et al.. 1999: 42), where their remains have been found in layers
belonging to the Middle Holocene and which were dated at 7900-4500 B.C. Lavallée claims
these feed on plankton, which is found offshore, so they may have been fished using watercraft
and netting fin (Lavallée et al.. 1999: 43), which is what I have been claiming in regard to the
anchovy.
Paloma, some 65 km south of Lima and 7.7 km from the sea, is another site where sardine remains
have been found. Reitz (1988: 314) reports this fish comprised 8.8% of marine vertebrates. The
dates range between 5316 and 3630 B.C. We have already seen that the people in this site also
ate the anchovy as its main food source.
353
Elmo Leon
The remains of this fish have been found at Ostra, an archaeological site on the northern
Peruvian littoral north of the mouth of the modern-day city of Chimbote, and were dated to
5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
Duccio Bonavia (1982: 195) also excavated several sardine remains at Los Gavilanes, a site in the
lower Huarmey Valley, which have been dated to 3200-1480 B.C.
Alejandro Chu (2008: 136) also found sardines in the excavations he made at Bandurria, a site
close to Huacho and north of Lima, which was dated to 3170-1610 B.C. This fish, along with
the anchovy, comprised the major part of the food eaten by the early people of this site, and
from what we have seen also in other sites dating to the late Holocene. This combination of
anchovies and sardines prevailed in the diet of the early Central Coast population.
Sardine distribution extends up to Tumbes, as was shown by Jerry Moore (2007a) with his
excavations at El Porvenir, a site on the southern flank of the Zarumilla River and very close to
the border with Ecuador, between 4700 and 300 B.C.
Vega-Centeno (2007) found sardine (Sardinops sagax) remains at Cerro Lampay, a Preceramic
temple over 200 km north of Lima. They have been dated to 2410-2064 B. C., and were
consumed in the midst of several feast-type activities that hinged upon the erection of public
edifices.
Sardinops sagax has been found in large amounts at the monumental site of Caral (Shady et
al. 2001, Flores Blanco 2006). The dates range between 2585 and 1938 B.C. Sardines were the
second most important fish for the people of this site since the beginning of the occupation,
after anchovies. They were also placed on the embers to be cooked, as was shown by Flores
Blanco (2006: 148) and by Shady and Leiva (2003: 115).
Quilter et al. (1991: 279) reported having found the remains of sardine consumption at Paraíso,
a site close to the mouth of the Chillón River north of Lima, which were dated to ca. 2150
B.C. Significant amounts of this fish have also been documented at Los Gavilanes, a site in the
lower Huarmey Valley, which dates to the third millennium of our era (Bonavia 1982: 194).
Few sardine (Sardinops sagax) vertebrae have been excavated in the Gallery of the Offerings
at Chavín de Huántar, and they fall in the period 1218-812 B.C. (Astocóndor 1993: 474). Although
these remains do not come from consumption or alimentary preparation events, they may
have been part of the diet of the people of Chavín.
The people of Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, also ate sardines, at least
between 200 B.C. and the beginning of our era (Elera et al. 1992: 19).
Unlike the scant archaeological documentation for anchovies among the Mochica, it has been
confirmed that Sardinops sagax was eaten at the sites of Huaca de la Luna and Huaca del Sol
in the Moche Valley specifically during the Mochica occupation, in A.D. 470-600 (Cárdenas et
354
14,000 years of food in Peru
al. 1997: 131, Roselló et al. 2001: 77). In a subsequent study, Vásquez et al. (2003: 37) concluded
that hake and this sardine species were the fish most eaten in A.D. 570-685. It has also been
suggested that since these fish live out at sea, they had to be fished using small watercraft,
which means the Moche used tule boats.
Thanks to the archaeological research undertaken by Shimada and Shimada (1981: 131) it is also
known that the Mochica who lived in Pampa Grande, in the modern-day Lambayeque region,
probably consumed this fish in A.D. 711-800.
As with anchovies, so too were sardines moved from the coast to the highlands of
Moquegua, as is verified by the finding of at least four specimens at the Cerro Baúl site
(Moquegua), which dates to the time of the Wari Empire (Moseley et al. 2005. 17269), at
around 2,590 masl.
On the North Coast the Mochica and Chimu continued eating sardines, as was shown at
Pedregal, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley (Cutright 2009: 167). Even so, Cutright proved
that they were eaten more frequently at this same site by the people of Late Moche times, ca.
A.D. 800. There was thus lower sardine consumption in Chimu times in comparison with the
Moche, probably due to climate change.
Gumerman (1991) found a similar trend in sardine consumption on the North Coast at
Pacatnamú during Chimu times.
Joyce Marcus et al. (1999: 6568) in turn reported having found large amounts of sardines at
Cerro Azul (Cañete), a site on the littoral some 120 km south of Lima, which were dated to
the Chincha culture ca. A.D. 1000-1470. Sardines were the second most important fish at this
site after the anchovy, and were meant first of all for consumption and only secondarily for
export.
Sandweiss et al. (2004: 332) found a large amount of sardine remains, the basic foodstuff at
a site called Lo Demás, which dates to Inca times and is to the north of the mouth of the
Chincha Valley.
Finally, sardines comprised 11%-44% of the fish eaten in enclosures 24 and 25 of ramp pyramid
III B at Pachacamac, a site on the Central Coast in the lower Lurín Valley, which dates to A.D.
1520 (Béarez et al. 2003: 58).
Peruvian Silverside (Odonthestes regia regia, Atherinidae)
This is a pelagic fish species that is often 14-30 cm long and weighs 44 grams on average. It is
often fished from the shore using nets and fishhooks (Sánchez Romero 1973: 184). This fish is
often close to the littoral.
355
Elmo Leon
The archaeological record still holds little evidence of Peruvian silverside consumption in
comparison with that of anchovy. At present the oldest evidence comes from Caral, where
scant remains of this fish have been found in the middens, the remains of the food eaten at
this site in the Supe Valley, which dates to ca. 2595-1951 B.C. (Shady and Leyva 2003: 115).
The Mochica apparently also ate the Peruvian silverside during the first centuries of the
Christian era because it was found in the excavations at the Huaca de la Luna, in the lower
Moche Valley (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 341).
The remains of at least one Peruvian silverside (Atherinidae) were recorded at the archaeological
site of Cerro Baúl during the Wari occupation (A.D. 631-1000) (Moseley et al. 2005: 17269). Like
other marine species from the Pacific Ocean, this implies its transportation at least to this
place, which is over 80 km away from the sea.
The Nasca also ate Peruvian silverside. Piacenza and Pieri (2012: 5) have reported the interesting
find of a series of silverside heads buried in some sort of silo, and covered with algae of the
species Macrocystis integrifolia, so it can be assumed that the algae may have been used as a
preservative when moving fish from the sea to Cahuachi, some 40 km away. This type of find,
which shows interest in preserving this fish, allows one to speculate on the possible use of
these techniques throughout all of the pre-Hispanic period.
Dark-Spot Mojarra, Periche (Eucinostomus entomelas)
The dark-spot mojarra is on average 24 cm long, lives in shoals on soft bottoms (0-100 m
deep) and bays, and eventually in estuaries and lagoons. It has a tropical area of origin and its
distribution extends from California to Northern Peru (Chirichigno 1998: 347, 415).
The only—scant—dark-spot mojarra remains were found in the middens at Pampa de los
Fósiles 12 (unit 7), in a zone that lies between Pacasmayo and Paiján on the North Coast, that
dates to ca. 7876 B.C. (Chauchat 1992: 47).
Croaker, drums, minor Stardrum (Stellifer minor)
The minor stardrum is a small fish (15-20 cm long) that weighs about 100-200 grams. It is
associated with the Peruvian Current and lives in shallow waters in muddy and sandy sea
floors, so it can be fished all year long using nets and fishhooks. It essentially feeds on small
crustacea and it is found from Paita to Valparaíso (Sánchez Romero 1973: 208).
The evidence showing the minor stardrum was part of the Peruvian diet is quite ancient
and was found at Pampa de los Fósiles 12 (unit 7), a site between Pacasmayo and Paiján,
in the middens left by the people who inhabited this site ca. 7876 B.C. (Chauchat et al.
1992: 47).
356
14,000 years of food in Peru
The site of Puémape, close to the mouth of the Jequetepeque River, is not far away from
Pampa de los Fósiles. Here Elera et al. (1992: 19) reported the presence of minor stardrum
during the Salinar occupation, i.e. from ca. 200 B.C. to the beginning of our era.
A few vertebrae of minor stardrum (Stellifer minor) were documented in the Gallery of the
Offerings at Chavín de Huántar ca. 1218-812 B.C. (Astocóndor 1993: 474).These however may not
have been edible offerings.
The Mochica on the contrary did eat this fish. Cárdenas et al. (1997: 131) have reported the
presence of minor stardrum remains at Huaca de La Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, with
dates that fall in A.D. 400-750.
Minor stardrum bones have been reported for Cerro Azul (Cañete), where they were found in
human feeding contexts that date to the Chincha (A.D. 1000-1460) and Inca occupation of this
zone (Marcus et al. 1999: 6568).
The minor stardrum was also consumed by the ancient inhabitants of enclosures 24-25
of ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley, which dates to A.D. 1520.
This means it was eaten here at least during the final Imperial Inca phase (Béarez et al.
2003: 66).
Peruvian Banded Croaker, drums (Paralonchurus peruanus)
With its long record and great antiquity in Peru’s archaeological sites, the Peruvian banded
croaker comes close to that of the anchovy.
This fish lives in sandy seabeds and bays, so it can be caught by lining and eventually with nets
too. Paralonchurus peruanus is a fish that belongs in the cold waters of the Peruvian Current
(Reitz 2001: 164). Sánchez Romero (1973: 181) points out that it is mainly distributed along the
North and Central Coast. Its size ranges between 17 and 56 cm, and it weighs 800 grams on
average. It is fishes particularly during the Southern Hemisphere’s spring and summer.
Probably the earliest evidence of this fish’s consumption comes from the archaeological site
in the upper Zaña Valley, in the modern-day Lambayeque region (Dillehay 2011: 334), where its
remains have been found in strata that dates to 9700-9200 B.C. and 5855-3029 B.C.
Ancient Peruvian banded croaker remains also come from the Paiján culture, which mainly
lived in the Paiján-Pampa de los Fósiles area south of Pacasmayo. In this case this fish’s remains
come from a site that was dated to 6556 B.C. on average (Chauchat 1992: 47). Researchers
estimate that 1,178 grams was the mean weight of the fish eaten here, i.e. more than one kilo
(Chauchat 1992: 356), and that it has a significant alimentary value from the perspective of its
body mass in comparison with smaller fish.
357
Elmo Leon
Later in the record we have (in minimum amounts) the people in Paloma, a site in the Chilca
Valley some 65 km south of Lima, who according to Elizabeth Reitz (1988: 314) ate Peruvian
banded croaker. The radiocarbon dates indicate that it was consumed in 5316-3630 B.C.
At Ostra, a Preceramic camp north of the city of Chimbote, the Peruvian banded croaker was
infrequently eaten in 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
The remains of Paralonchurus peruanus were also found in the excavations at Bandurria,
a monumental Preceramic site close to Huacho and north of Lima, with dates that range
between 3170 and 1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 136).
Vega-Centeno (2007) found a few Peruvian banded croaker remains at Cerro Lampay, an
archaeological site on the North-Central Coast in the Fortaleza Valley, which has been dated
to 2410-2064 B.C.
Bonavia (1982: 194) also found remains of Peruvian banded croaker at Los Gavilanes, a site in the
lower Huarmey Valley, so it may have been eaten by its inhabitants at least in 3200-1480 B.C.
At present the Gallery of the Offerings in Chavín de Huántar is the only place where
Paralonchurus peruanus has been found in the Peruvian highlands, in the period 1218-812 B.C.
(Astocóndor 1993: 474).
Puémape, a site on the North Coast in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, covers a similar period.
Here Lanfranco et al. (2009: 5) reported the remains of Peruvian banded croaker, which was
an essential part of its people’s diet in 3008-2329 B.C. It is even known to have been eaten
in the upper Piura River at Loma Valverde, a site dated at 350 B.C-A.D. 450, i.e. the Mochica
population here also ate this fish (Kaulicke 1991: 414). It was also eaten south of Piura by the
Mochica who lived at Pampa Grande, a site in the modern-day region of Lambayeque ca. A.D.
711-800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 131). It is therefore clear that this fish was much eaten on
the North Coast, and also more to the south.
The Moche in La Libertad apparently had Paralonchurus peruanus frequently. Roselló et al.
(2001) documented the relatively significant consumption of this fish at Huaca del Sol and
Huaca de La Luna in the Moche Valley ca. A.D. 470-600. The analysis of the fish remains by
Vásquez and Rosales (1998: 186) seems to show they were transported whole from the sea to
the site in a Mochica context, probably to salt and dry them.
Van Gijsehem (2001: 261) showed that Paralonchurus peruanus was the main food in a
kitchen sector at the Huaca de la Luna, in association with a type of clam, llama meat,
and cormorant. This is one of the few cases in which we can draw closer to answering
the question of what foodstuffs were eaten together in the pre-Hispanic period. If this
combination is valid, we can assume that at Huaca de La Luna the Moche had at one time
a dish with—possibly roasted [asados]—llama, cormorant, Peruvian banded croaker, and
358
14,000 years of food in Peru
landsnail. This will obviously remain within the realm of speculation as long as the methods
and analysis archaeologists use do not improve.
The Chimu seem to have continued the tradition of eating this fish on the North Coast.
Pozorski (1979: 168) found remains of Paralonchurus peruanus in large amounts at the site of
Chan Chan, but the tradition goes back to A.D. 2300, in the Moche Valley, in sites like Padre
Abán and Gramalote.
This trend towards an intensification of Peruvian banded croaker consumption was likewise
observed in the Chimu occupation of Pedregal, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley where it
comprised no less than 44% of the fish eaten (Cutright 2009: 166-167) both by the elite as well
as by the rural population. It was thus widespread in this zone throughout various populations.
Gumerman (1991) showed at Pacatnamú (which is almost on the mouth of the Jequetepeque
River) that Paralonchurus peruanus was the most eaten fish species in Chimu and Inca times.
Marcus et al. (1999: 6568) found the bones of the Peruvian banded croaker on the Central
Coast at Cerro Azul, a site in the mouth of the Cañete Valley south of Lima. Although few,
this evinces its consumption by the people of the Chincha culture (A.D. 1000-1460) and even
during the Inca occupation of this zone.
Paralonchurus peruanus was also eaten in enclosures 24-25 of ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac,
in the lower Lurín Valley, a context that was radiocarbon dated to A.D. 1520 (Béarez et al. 2003: 66).
Pacific Porgy [Marotilla, peje chino, sargo, taca] (Calamus brachysomus)
The Pacific porgy is a benthonic fish found in coastal environments with sandy seabeds and
of varying depth. It grows up to 50 cm long and it is found from California to Pisco (Sánchez
Romero 1973: 217).
There is scant evidence of this fish in the archaeological record. At present the earliest data comes
from the upper Zaña Valley (Lambayeque), where Tom Dillehay (2011: 334) and his team found the
remains of Calamus brachysomus in archaeological contexts that date to 9700-9200 B.C.
This species is extremely rare among the food remains left behind by the ancient Peruvians,
but it has been found at Ostra, a site north of the mouth of the Santa River that dates to 5462-
3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
Skipjack Tuna or Oceanic skipjack [Barrilete, listado] (Katsuwonus pelamis)
This is a member of the tuna family. It is one of the pelagic species that most migrates in the
high seas. It adapts to several temperatures and travels a lot. Its mean size is 60 cm and its
359
Elmo Leon
weight 3.5 kilos. Specimens up to 90 cm long and 12 kilos have been rarely caught (Sánchez
Romero 1973: 170-171).
The skipjack tuna was probably eaten by the ancient dwellers of enclosures 24 and 25 of ramp
pyramid III B in the monumental Pachacamac site, in the lower Lurín Valley, during the final
phase of the Inca Empire ca. A.D. 1520 (Béarez et al. 2003: 66).
Bullseye Puffer, Network puffer [Tamborín, botete diana] (Sphoeroides annulatus)
The bullseye puffer lives in rocky reefs and in areas close to the sands. It can g row up to 48
cm. Its area of distribution extends from San Diego to Pisco, including the Galápagos Islands
(Chirichigno 1998: 437). Sphoeroides annulatus was probably eaten in small amounts by the
people of Ostra, a site north of the modern city of Chimbote and on the mouth of the Santa
River, on the Central Coast. The dates available for this site average to 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and
Sandweiss 2001: 1094).
Peruvian sea catfish [Bagre con faja –bagre del norte] (Galeichthys peruvianus)
Galeichthys peruvianus is a benthonic catfish-type fish. It lives in sandy-muddy environments
not far from the coast and in shallow waters, and it can be fished from the shore using nets
and hooks. The Peruvian sea catfish is also found in river mouths and in mangrove swamps.
In Peru it is found between Chimbote and Pisco, but the ‘northern variety’ is concentrated
between Puerto Pizarro and Talara (Sánchez Romero 1973: 222). Catfish no longer than 25-35
cm and which do not weigh more than 600 grams are common. In fresh condition they hold
136% calories, 75% water, 17.6% proteins, 16.8% fat, just 16% calcium, 173% phosphorus, and 5.0%
niacin (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 140-141). It clearly is a good food source. Béarez (2012) points out
that its pectoral and dorsal fins are poisonous just like those of all catfish, so the pre-Hispanic
population must have taken its precautions in order to fish and eat them.
The oldest evidence of Peruvian sea catfish consumption comes from Quebrada de los Burros,
a site on the Tacna littoral where Béarez (2012: 107) reports it in strata that go back to 7900 B.C.
Early documentation also comes from Ostra, a site immediately north of the city of Chimbote
and on the Santa River mouth, with dates that average 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss
2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
Galeichthys peruvianus was also found in the excavations at Bandurria, a monumental
Preceramic site close to Huacho and north of Lima, with dates that average to 3170-1610 B.C.
(Chu 2008: 136).
Very few remains of catfish (Geleichistis [sic] peruvianus) have been found at Caral, and it may
have been eaten by the inhabitants of this site in 2595-1951 B.C. (Shady and Leyva 2003: 115).
360
14,000 years of food in Peru
Based on these data it can be said that catfish has been eaten on the Central Coast for about
7000 years.
In Lima, one of the scant pieces of evidence of its consumption comes from El Paraíso, which
is north of Lima in the vicinity of the Chillón River, with dates from middens that begin in 2150
B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 279).
A similar age was established for catfish consumption at El Porvenir, a site in the zone of
the Zarumilla River, in the modern Tumbes Region, which is quite close to the border with
Ecuador. The dates for this site range between 4700 and 300 B.C., so catfish consumption in
this northernmost part of Peru in this period is highly likely (Moore 2007a: 15). These dates
rival those available for other sites on the Peruvian coast, and it opens the possibility that
more remains of this fish will be found not just in Tumbes, but also in Ecuador itself.
Catfish was also eaten by the people at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley,
at least between 200 B.C. and the beginning of our era (Elera et al. 1992: 19). The tradition of
catfish consumption persisted even in Chimu times, albeit in small amounts Cutright (2009:
167) documented the presence of catfish remains on the North Coast at Pedregal, a site in the
lower Jequetepeque valley, during its Chimu occupation (A.D. 1000-1470).
The Mochica also ate catfish. Roselló et al. (2001: 77) and Cárdenas et al. (1997: 131) found the
remains of this fish in the sites of Huaca de la Luna and Huaca del Sol in the Moche Valley, in
Mochica contexts that dated to A.D. 470-600.
Lockard (2005: 201) reported the presence of catfish remains in Chimú contexts at Galindo, a
site in the mid-Moche valley. It was little eaten during both the Mochica (A.D. 600-800) and
the Chimú (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations.
Catfish have also been found in small amounts in the excavations at Cerro Azul, in Cañete, that
dated to A.D. 1000-1470 and to Inca times (Marcus et al. 1999: 6568).
Pacific Jack mackerel, Jack mackerel, Inca Scad [Jurel, Furel] (Carangidae, Trachurus symmetricus
murphyi, Trachurus picturatus murphyi)
This is a pelagic fish species (it lives between the tide and continental shore. That abounds in the
Southern Pacific ocean. It measures 60 cm on average. According to FAO (2010), every 100 grams of
Chilean jack mackerel holds 21.6 g of proteins, 3.9 g of fat, 325 mg phosphorus, and 1.8 mg of iron.
This is one of the fish with highest proteic content eaten in the Peruvian Andes. It lives in shoals,
so it can be inferred that it was fished with nets and probably from watercraft. It lives all along the
coast, but is mostly concentrated between Chimbote and Callao. Its size ranges between 41 and 74
cm long, with the most frequent one being 45-70 cm, and it weighs on average 2.2 kilos. It is usually
fished using hooks or nets (Sánchez Romero 1973: 177). Reitz (1988: 317) noted that the Chilean jack
mackerel abounds more in winter, yet Béarez (2012) claims it draws closer to the coast in summer.
361
Elmo Leon
The earliest evidence of Chilean jack mackerel consumption—and the most ancient along
with anchovy—comes from Peru’s southernmost coast at Quebrada Tacahuay, which is south
of Ilo on the coast of Moquegua. Here DeFrance and Umire (2004. 271) have reported the
presence of bones in archaeological contexts that imply it was eaten since at least 10,730 B.C.,
i.e. since the end of the last ice age.
Also in Moquegua, the oldest dates obtained for layers with Chilean jack mackerel bones in the Ring
Site south of the city of Ilo, in Mollendo, may go back to 8000 B.C. (cf. Sandweiss et al. 1989: 54).
In the littoral of Tacna Chilean jack mackerel would have been eaten by 7900 B.C., as was
evinced at the site of Quebrada de los Burros (Lavallée et al. 1999: 41-42). The size of the fish
found at this site is at least 50 cm—a large size, even when compared with modern averages.
Although when this site’s occupation began the consumption of this fish seems to have been,
its demand grew towards the end of its occupation around the fifth millennium of our era,
and reached second place amongst the fish eaten at this site.
Chilean jack mackerel was eaten in much lower amounts at Paloma, an archaeological site
some 65 km in the Chilca Valley south of Lima, some 7 km away from the sea (Reitz 1988: 314).
Robert Benfer (1990) found a series of villages and human remains from the Middle Holocene.
The fish bones were found in layers that date to 5316-3630 B.C.
Chilean jack mackerel was part of the food eaten in small amounts by the people of Ostra, which
is north of the modern-day city of Chimbote and on the Santa river mouth. These remains were
in a stratum dated to 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
It was also almost certainly eaten by the people of Bandurria, a site on the Central Coast close
to Huacho and north of Lima ca. 3170-1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 136).
Chilean jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) was eaten at Caral, albeit very sparingly. According
to Shady and Leyva (2003: 115) the dates range on average between 2595 and 1951 B.C.
The remains of Chilean jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) have been found on the Central
Coast at Cerro Lampay in the Fortaleza Valley, where it was the second most important
species at this site, which dates to 2410-2064 B. C. (Vega Centeno 2007).
Significant amounts of Trachurus murphyi were found at Los Gavilanes, in the lower Huarmey
Valley, as part of the food eaten at this site in Preceramic times in 3200-1480 B.C. (Bonavia 1982:
194-195). Also in this zone is site PV35-106, La Laguna, where Trachurus sp. was found, which dated
to 5320 B.C. Its consumption on the South and Central coasts since very ancient times is clear.
The bones of Trachurus symmetricus have also been discovered in the excavations at Puémape,
a site immediately south of the mouth of the Jequetepeque River at least between 200 B.C.
and the beginning of our era, as was shown by Elera et al. (1992: 19). Interestingly enough, it is
on the south coast that the earliest consumption of this fish was recorded.
362
14,000 years of food in Peru
We now jump in time to the Wari Empire (A.D. 631-1000). The remains of Chilean jack mackerel
(Carangidae) were found in the excavations at Cerro Baúl, in the highlands of Moquegua
(Moseley et al. 2005: 17269), thus evincing anew the movement of fish to the high altitude
areas—2590 masl in this case—as was the case with other fish species reviewed here.
On the North Coast, Roselló et al. (2001: 77) and Cárdenas et al. (1997: 131) pointed out the
presence of Chilean jack mackerel remains at the sites of the Huaca del Sol and the Huaca
de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, with dates that ranged between A.D. 470 and A.D. 600,
i.e. the time of the Moche culture. Complete specimens of this fish were found in the urban
area of the Huaca de la Luna. The researchers believe this could mean the fish were moved
this way in order to salt or dry them, so it is possible that the Mochica expanded their protein
intake by eating the Chilean jack mackerel, given the effects this type of techniques have on
preservation (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 186).
Chilean jack mackerel was also eaten on the North Coast at a later period, in the Chimu
culture (A.D. 1000-1460), as was shown by Cutright’s research (2009: 158) at Pedregal, a site in
the lower Jequetepeque Valley.
Marcus et al. (1999: 6568) found few remains of Chilean jack mackerel for this same period on
the Central Coast at Cerro Azul, where it was eaten.
Finally, Béarez et al. (2003: 58) report that this fish was the most eaten species in enclosures
23-25 of ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley ca. A.D. 1520.
Pompano, Paloma [Pámpano] (Trachinotus sp.)
Trachinotus is a pelagic species that can grow up to 60 cm long, lives close to the littoral and
on the sandy seabed (Sánchez Romero 1973: 204).
The archaeological record of its (probable) consumption has evidence only for the North
Coast some three thousand years ago. This is a fish that was discovered in the midden at
Puémape, a site south of the Jequetepeque River mouth, in Cupisnique to White-on-Red
Horizon contexts, i.e. from 1000 B.C. to the beginning of our era, which means Trachinotus
may have been eaten on the North Coast in this period.
Trachinotus has been found outside context at Pampa Grande (in the Lambayeque Region), so
it may have been eaten by the Moche in A.D. 711-800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 131).
Lorna Drum [Lorna, Cholo, Losna] (Sciaena deliciosa)
Sciaena deliciosa is one of the fish that belongs in the Peruvian Cold Current (Reitz 2001:
164). It may have been caught through hook and line fishing or even with nets. Although
363
Elmo Leon
it can live throughout the entire Peruvian coast it usually concentrates in its northern and
central sections. This is a pelagic fish at home in waters close to the shore (the area where
the waves), but it is also found on sandy seabeds. The lorna drum measures 16-32 cm long
(Sánchez Romero 1973: 178), rarely grows more than 50 cm, and weighs more than 1.5 kilos
(Béarez 2012: 99).
The oldest record of lorna drum consumption is in Arequipa, at a site called Quebrada Jaguay
that is very close to the littoral and just 14 km to the northeast of the modern city of Camaná.
It was dated to 11,040-9384 B.C., i.e. to the last ice age (the Younger Dryas). Here Daniel
Sandweiss et al. (1998) found that its ancient inhabitants caught (very likely using nets) small
(17 cm on average) lornas for food.
The lorna drum was also part of the alimentary stock of the people in the sites at Pampa
Colorada. This site is a few kilometres away from Quebrada Jaguay on the Ocoña River mouth
on the coast of Arequipa, and its dates range between 9200 and 5400 B.C. (McInnis 2006: 373).
South of Camaná is Quebrada Tacahuay, a site south of Ilo on the Moquegua littoral, that
dates to 10,730-9370 B.C. (DeFrance and Umire 2004: 271).
The Ring Site is also on the Moquegua littoral south of Ilo, in Mollendo. Here Sciaena deliciosa
was eaten in domestic contexts since 8000 B.C., which means it was eaten on the Peruvian
coast since at least then (Sandweiss et al. 1989: 54). Abundant remains of lorna drum found in
the excavations, so it is believed to have been the fish most eaten at this site.
Quebrada de los Burros (Tacna) is also on the South Coast. Here Lavallée et al. (1999: 41)
found remains of Sciaena deliciosa amongst the remains excavated since 7900 B.C. (but they
could also belong to Sciaena callaensis). This was the species most eaten in this site. The
observations made by Philipe Béarez, the palaeoicthyologist in Lavallée’s team are interesting.
He claims that lorna drums are fish that feed on molluscs and crustaceans, so they draw close
to the shore and can be easily caught. According to Béarez, this fish could have been caught
by angling. Béarez also measured the lornas found at this site, which ranged between 9 and 52
cm (Béarez 2012: 112).
These finds all suggest an intensive consumption of Sciaena deliciosa on the southern Peruvian
coast since the last ice age.
Moving along in time is a site called Ostra north of the modern city of Chimbote. Here Reitz
and Sandweiss (2001: 1094) report that Sciaena deliciosa comprises 16% of the marine species
eaten. The dates available for this site average to 5462-3711 B.C. (Sandweiss 1996: 44).
The archaeological site of Paloma, in the Chilca valley some 65 km south of Lima, dates to this
same epoch. It comprised several camps with a large amount of organic remains left by the
Middle Holocene people. Reitz (1988: 314) found lorna drum remains among the food refuse,
thus showing as a food it was second only to the anchovy. The dates range to 5316-3630 B.C.
364
14,000 years of food in Peru
Like Béarez, Reitz claims these are high seas fish, but are occasionally found on rocky and
sandy seabeds; furthermore, they sometimes draw close to river deltas.
The consumption of Sciaena deliciosa, along with that of other types of fish, could have given
rise to the ingestion of parasites by the pre-Hispanic population. Raúl Patrucco et al. (1983:
393) detected the presence of Diphyllobothrium pacificum eggs in the faecal remains of an
individual from Los Gavilanes—a Central Coast archaeological site in the Huarmey Valley
that is very close to the Peruvian littoral—that dated to 2642 B.C. Patrucco et al. believe this
individual quite possibly ate fish like lorna drum, Chilean jack mackerel, medusafish or corvine
drum raw, thus allowing the parasite to lodge in his intestines.
Duccio Bonavia (1982: 194) documented the remains of lorna drum as part of the food refuse
left by the early people of Los Gavilanes since around the third millennium before our era. It
was also eaten in the Huarmey Valley at a much earlier date (ca. 5,320 B.C.) at La Laguna, site
PV35-106, to the north of the Huarmey River mouth (Bonavia et al. 2001: 304). Bonavia et al.
(2009: 265) noted the presence of lorna drum remains at site PV35-4—a camp with Middle
Horizon 3 affiliation (ca. A.D. 800) on the Huarmey Valley’s littoral. The tradition of lorna drum
consumption in the lower part of this valley is thus clear.
Vega-Centeno (2007) reported the presence of lorna drum (Sciaena deliciosa) at the
archaeological site of Cerro Lampay where it was evidently eaten in 2410-2064 B.C.
Remains of Sciaena deliciosa that dated to almost the same period have been found at Caral
(Flores Blanco 2006). Besides, one of these fish was found calcined in a heart; it is therefore
clear that it was placed on the fire in order to cook it. According to Shady and Leyva (2003:
115), lorna drum (Sciaena deliciosa) was not much eaten at this site (just 0.22% of all fish eaten).
This is one of the few pieces of evidence that shows fish being prepared or cooked: roast
[asada] lorna drum some 4,500 years ago.
It was also part of the diet during the earliest occupation of Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley that dates to 3008-2329 B.C (Lanfranco et al. 2009: 5). Its presence on the
North Coast is perhaps somewhat later.
Quilter et al. (1991: 279) reported the presence of lorna drum in their excavations in the temple
of El Paraíso, which dates to 2150 B.C. and is north of Lima, close to the Chillón River mouth.
A small amount of lorna (Sciaena) was found in the Gallery of the Offerings at Chavín de
Huántar, with a mean date of 1218-812 B.C. These are offerings, but it is possible that this fish
was also eaten here (Astocóndor 1993: 474).
Lorna consumption rose on the North Coast during the first millennium of our era, as was
documented by Shelia Pozorski (1979: 168) for the ancient population of the Moche Valley. It
was apparently also consumed, especially at Alto Salaverry (1600 B.C.) and Chan Chan, for its
density in the middens at both sites rose.
365
Elmo Leon
Slightly more to the north, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, Cutright (2009: 158) researched
a rural Chimú site called Pedregal and documented that its ancient dwellers only occasionally
ate lorna drum. Not far from this zone, in the Middle Moche Valley, Lockard (2005: 201)
excavated a few remains at Galindo from the Mochica (A.D. 600-800) and Chimú (A.D. 1000-
1460) occupations.
In the Moche context there is also evidence of somewhat frequent lorna drum consumption
in the lower Moche Valley at the sites of the Huaca de la Luna and the Huaca del Sol, in the
Late Moche stage in A.D. 470-600 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 131, Roselló et al. 2001: 77). Besides,
Vásquez and Rosales (1998: 186) claim they were evidently taken whole to the Huaca de la
Luna, so they assume the lorna drum was dried or salted just like the Chilean jack mackerel.
Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 123) claim the lorna drum was the fish most eaten by the Mochica
inhabitants of the Huaca del Sol in the lower Moche Valley. It was also eaten by the Moche
at Pampa Grande, in the modern Lambayeque Region, in A.D. 711-800 (Shimada and Shimada
1981: 131). It follows from this all that lorna drum comprised a significant part of northern pre-
Hispanic cuisine since the beginning of our era, slightly over two thousand years ago.
As has already been widely documented, fish from the Pacific Ocean appear in the Cerro
Baúl site. In this case we mean at least one lorna drum (Sciaena deliciosa) that was probably
eaten during the activities carried out in the site during the Wari occupation (A.D. 631-1000)
(Moseley et al. 2005: 17269).
Lorna drum was eaten at a later time in small amounts (3-7%) at Cerro Azul in the lower
Cañete Valley, almost on the littoral, in a Chincha cultural context (A.D. 1000-1460) and even
during the Inca occupation of this site (Marcus 1999: 6568).
Sciaena deliciosa was also eaten, albeit to a lesser extent, by the inhabitants of enclosures 24-25 of
Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley south of Lima, with a date of A.D. 1520 (Béarez et al. 2003: 58).
Kingfish, Mis-Mis, Misho or Muchachita (Menthicirrus sp.)
Chirichigno (1998: 307-308) discussed several species that include this genus, because lacking
a taxonomic determination we are forced to consider the possibility of having to identify
several species. Thus far the archaeological record only holds one piece of evidence. This is a
fish similar to the lorna drum or the corvinita that is little known in the archaeological record.
According to Sánchez Romero (1973: 209) it can grow up to 40 cm and weigh 500 grams. This
is a temperate-water benthic fish [pez bentónico] that lives on the sandy and muddy seabed
close to the shore. It is a common species in the littoral that is associated with the Peruvian
Current, of pleasant taste, and is often fished with a net or by angling all year long.
Menthicirrus was found in small amounts in the Gallery of the Offerings at Chavín de Huántar,
in the time period 1218-812 B.C. (Astocóndor 1993: 474).
366
14,000 years of food in Peru
This type of fish was little eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru. For instance, the excavation team at the
Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, has documented the scant remains left by the
Mochica during the first centuries of our era (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 342).
The remains of this fish has been found in the excavations of the Huaca de la Luna in the lower
Moche Valley, which dates to A.D. 400-750, so it may have been part of the Mochica diet
(Cárdenas et al. 1997: 131). Joyce Marcus et al. (1999: 6568) in turn excavated Menthicirrus remains
at Cerro Azul, during the Chincha occupation in A.D. 1000-1460 and during the Inca period.
Croaker [Pintadilla, Peje Burro, Arnillo, Burro, Caracha] (Sciaena fasciata)
Chirichigno (1998: 435) records its distribution between Paita and Valparaíso. Just like in the
previous case only one piece of evidence is available. Joyce Marcus et al. (1999) found some
drum remains at Cerro Azul, a site on the littoral of the Cañete Valley that dates to the
Chincha culture (A.D. 1000-1460) and the Inca occupation.
Drums [Róbalo or Lubina] (Sciaena wieneri)
Sciaena wieneri lives in habitats very close to the corvine drum and can move through the
area where the waves break, because they feed on crustacea that live buried in the sand and
on Pacific sand crab, and can thus be harpooned under the surface. Chirichigno (1998: 435)
identified Sciaena wieneri in Guañape Island.
The oldest remains of Sciaena wieneri come from Quebrada de los Burros, a site in the Tacna
littoral and has dates that begin at 5400 B.C. (Béarez 2012: 107).
Philipe Béarez et al. (2003: 66) found the remains of Sciaena wieneri in enclosures 24 and 25
of ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac (in the lower Lurín Valley), which had an average date of
A.D. 1520, and so may have been consumed in this site at least during the Imperial Inca epoch.
The specimens at this site weighed up to seven kilos, so Sciaena wieneri must have been the
main source of protein for its inhabitants.
Drums [Robalo orLubina] (Sciaena starksi)
This is a benthic-pelagic fish that lives in sandy and sandy-rocky seabeds. It can be between 40
cm and 1 m long, and weighs up to 25 kilos (Sánchez Romero 1973: 204). Its area of distribution
extends from Huanchaco to Pisco, so it can be said that this is an almost exclusively Peruvian
fish in the modern sense of the word.
The vertebrae of this fish have been found at Caral, so we can deduce its potential consumption
in 2600-2000 B.C. Large amounts of Sciaena starksi were consumed in this Preceramic site
towards the end of is occupation ca. 1800 B.C. (Flores Blanco 2006).
367
Elmo Leon
Sciaena starksi has also been identified at the Huaca de la Luna, a site in the lower Moche
Valley, and may have been part of the diet of the Mochica people in the first centuries of our
era (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 342).
Marcus et al. (1999: 6568) report the remains of Sciaena starksi at Cerro Azul, a site in the
Cañete littoral, in Chincha (A.D. 1000-1460) and Inca contexts.
Drums [Corvina, corvinilla] (Cilus gilberti, Sciaena gilberti A)
This fish is found all over the Peruvian coast, and is more abundant in the Centre and South.
It is a pelagic fish that lives in sandy seabeds, but of waters close to the coast. It likes to go
where the waves break to hunt for the Pacific sand crab and the crustacea buried in the sand,
and it is easily fished using nets, hooks, and even harpoons [arpones de punta] (Béarez et al.
2003: 60). Its size ranges between 25 and 100 cm, and its weight from two to four kilos, but the
specimens are clearly smaller in the southern coast of Peru. It is caught using ... [chinchorros]
and its exquisite meat is highly appreciated (Sánchez Romero 1973: 179).
Although it does not have the biochemical potential of the anchovy or the pacific bonito,
it does have a higher proportion of vitamin B1 with 0.08 mg per each 100 grams. It also
has 19.5 g of protein (that is to say, it is not far removed from the mean values for other
fish listed here), 4.5 g of fat, 182 mg of phosphorus, 1.1 mg of iron, and 1.5 mg of vitamin C
(FAO 2010). Reitz (2001: 164) believes it belongs to the group of fish in the Cold Peruvian
Current.
The most ancient evidence of corvina consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru comes from
Quebrada Tacahuay, a site south of Ilo on the littoral of Moquegua. Here a human camp
with food remains was found, which in this case were associated with this fish, which date to
10,730-9370 B.C. (DeFrance and Umire 2004: 271).
There is also evidence of its consumption on the North Coast in the early Holocene. The
archaeological research undertaken by Tom Dillehay et al. (2011: 334) shows this fish was
probably eaten in the sites found in the upper Zaña Valley (Lambayeque), where they have
been dated to 9700-9200 B.C.
Like the lorna drum, remains that are believed to be corvina were also found on the South
Coast at Quebrada de los Burros (Tacna), which dates to at least 7900 B.C., but it was more
abundant in later layers (5000-4000 B.C.; Lavallée et al. 1999: 41). Corvinas usually live in
sandy littorals, especially where the waves break. Béarez believes angling must have been
somewhat difficult because the waves sometimes break far away from the shore. This would
have made shore fishing difficult, so Béarez suggests the corvina was more likely fished
from small watercraft (Lavallée et al. 1999: 43), which raises the possibility these were being
used some seven thousand years ago, which clearly is mere speculation. A corvina from the
layers that dated to 5000-4500 B.C. was 1.40 m long and weighed 30-40 kilos, which Béarez
368
14,000 years of food in Peru
believes is not seen today (Lavallée et al. 1999: 41). The large size not just of this fish but of
others as well and their current decrease in size, should be the subject of an ichthyological
inquiry in order to better improve Peru’s marine resources.
A similar radiocarbon date was obtained also in the Moquegua littoral zone in the excavations
at the Ring Site south of Ilo, in Mollendo. Corvina was eaten here since around 7600 B.C. It was
also found, albeit in small amounts, at the complex of sites at Pampa Colorada, immediately
to the northeast of Camaná on the coast of Arequipa, with dates that range between 9200
and 5400 B.C. (McInnis 2006: 373).
A similar age has been documented for corvina consumption in the middens of the Paiján
culture south of Pacasmayo, at Pampa de los Fósiles 13 (unit 1), a site where the radiocarbon
dates average 6556 B.C. (Chauchat 1992: 47, 356). According to these studies corvina was
abundantly eaten at this time, particularly in the sites at Ascope. The mean weight of the
fishes was 533 grams but they could reach almost two kilos, which supports the claims Béarez
made for Tacna.
Corvina drum (Cilus gilberti) was documented at Bandurria, a site close to Huacho (Lima), so it
was part of the diet of the people who lived at this site. This is a Late Preceramic monumental
edification that dates to ca. 3170-1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 136).
Cilus gilberti was also documented at Caral, a site dated to 2595-1951 B.C. (Shady and Leyva
2003: 115). Several vertebrae and otoliths from Cilus gilberti have been found in this site, thus
implying it was eaten in 2600-1800 B.C. Several bones were found semi-calcined in the context
of hearths (Flores Blanco 2006: 157-158), so we can well imagine corvina was roasted [asada]
since the third millennium B.C. on this part of the coast.
Corvina remains have been discovered at Cerro Lampay, an archaeological site in the Fortaleza
Valley north of Lima. Vega-Centeno (2007) believes they were eaten during ritual activities
held whilst building temples in 2410-2064 B.C.
Shelia Pozorski (1979: 168) documented a series of corvina remains between the modern city of
Huanchaco and the lower Moche Valley. These are food remains eaten at least since 2300 B.C.,
as was shown at the site of Padre Abán. It is interesting that its consumption rose considerably
during the Chimu-Inca occupation of Choroval.
Corvina remains due to human consumption have been found at Cerro Azul, on the littoral
south of Lima in the Cañete Valley, in a Chincha cultural context (A.D. 1000-1470) .C.), and even
the Inca occupation of this site (Marcus 1999: 6568).
Béarez et al. (2003: 66) reported corvina consumption, albeit in small amounts, in
enclosures 24-25 of ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley, with
a mean date of A.D. 1520. This means it was eaten at this site at least during the final
Imperial Inca epoch in Lima.
369
Elmo Leon
Pacific croaker [Corvina Dorada, Guavina] (Micropogon altipinnis)
Micropogon altipinnis can be fished from the shore using hooks or nets. It has been
abundantly documented in the middens of the Paiján culture south of Pacasmayo at the
site of Pampa de los Fósiles 13 (unit 1), where the radiocarbon dates obtained averaged
6556 B.C. (Chauchat 1992: 47, 356). According to these studies, abundant Micropogon
altipinnis was eaten starting in this epoch, particularly in the Ascope sites. The mean
weight of the fish eaten ranged between half a kilo and two kilos. Credou (2008: 60), who
made the most detailed study of this type of fauna, established that in those ancient
times this fish weighed between half and five kilos, thus providing abundant food for the
Paiján people. Although it has been claimed that Paiján-type points may have been used
to harpoon fish of this size, Crédou’s study does not support this hypothesis due to the
brittleness of these points.
Micropogon altipinnis also seems to have been found in archaeological contexts in the Upper
Zaña Valley sites (Lambayeque). Here Tom Dillehay (2011: 334) reports fish remains in contexts
dated to 9700-9200 B.C. It is thus clear that this fish has been eaten on the North Coast since
quite ancient times.
Micropogon has been found in small amounts due to its having been eaten at Ostra, a site
north of the Santa River mouth and the city of Chimbote. The dates for this site give an
average of 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1094). Micropogon altipinnis has also been
documented at the Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, and may thus have formed
part of the food the Mochica had in this part of the valley during the first centuries of our era
(Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 342)—a tradition that was, after all, initiated by the Paiján people
some eight thousand years ago.
Whitefin Weakfish [Corvineta Reina, Corvina Real] (Cynoscion albus)
The whitefin weakfish has a tropical distribution that extends from Mexico to northern Peru
(Chirichigno 1998: 411). Crédou (2008: 47) includes it among the fish eaten by the Paiján people
on the North Coast of Peru since at least 9000 B.C. She estimates that one specimen weighed
over ten kilos, which means this fish held second place for this culture in terms of biomass.
Elera et al. (1992: 19) documented Cynoscion albus at Puémape in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley, since at least 1000 B.C. and the beginning of our era.
Quilter et al. (1991: 279) have also sown the presence of Cynoscion albus at El Paraíso, a site
north of Lima and in the vicinity of the Chillón Valley that dates to 2150 B.C.
Thanks to the research undertaken by Shimada and Shimada (1981: 131) we also know that the
Mochica of Pampa Grande (Lambayeque) probably consumed Cynoscion albus (corvina real)
in A.D. 711-800.
370
14,000 years of food in Peru
Ground drummer [Ronco, bocón] (Bairdiella spp.)
Bairdiella is a tropical fish found from Mexico to Paita (Piura) (Chirichigno 1998: 405). It has
been found at Ostra, a camp site that is very close to the sea shore to the north of the city of
Chimbote, as part of the refuse left after eating it. The dates for this site average to 5462-3711
B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1094).
Bairdiella has also been found—context-less—at the site of Pampa Grande (Lambayeque)
where it was dated to A.D. 711-800. It may have been eaten by the Mochica (Shimada and
Shimada 1981: 131).
Grunt [Corcovado, callana] (Orthopristis spp.)
A few remains of Orthopristis were found in the excavations at Ostra, a site north of the city
of Chimbote and of the Santa River mouth. Its dates average between 5462 and 3711 B.C. (Reitz
and Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
Flathead Grey Mullet, striped mullet [Lisa] (Mugil cephalus L.)
The flathead grey mullet lives out at sea on the seabed, so nets or some kind of tool, fishhook
included. Its presence on the Peruvian coast is interesting because this is a tropical sea fish, but
it clearly is highly mobile and moves from warm to eventually cold waters (Reitz 2001: 164).
Sánchez Romero (1973: 195) says its mean size is 20-30 cm, but it can reach 45 cm. Some juvenile
specimens head inland through the rivers searching for less salty zones. They are fished all
along the Peruvian littoral, almost all year long. For instance, there is modern day evidence
of their being fished and dried under the sun at Virrilá in Piura, and it could hypothetically
been feasible in the pre-Hispanic epoch (José Antonio Huldtwacker, August 2011, personal
communication). Its distribution extends from California to the Galápagos Islands.
The consumption of flathead grey mullet is significant because it contains 106% calories, 76%
water, 2.6% fat, and above all 19.4% proteins, and 194% phosphorus (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 140-141).
There is however one point to consider. The flathead grey mullet must have been ingested
cooked in order to avoid the presence of parasites and other potential infestations, but this
means a significant loss of vitamins (vitamin C falls 16%, B2 20%, and even worse is B1, which falls
78%). The alternatives were clear: eat the fish raw and run the risk of developing pathologies,
or eat it cooked, which meant no pathologies but with a lower vitamin consumption index
(Antúnez de Mayolo 1996).
Paiján-Pampa de los Fósiles (12 and 13), a series of human camps south of Pacasmayo, is
one of the first (if not the earliest) coastal sites where the flathead grey mullet has been
371
Elmo Leon
documented. In this case the oldest radiocarbon date averaged 10,249 B.C. (Chauchat 1992:
47, 356), which means the flathead grey mullet probably was one of the earliest and most
abundantly eaten fish in Peru within the context of the Paiján culture; its remains abound in
Paiján archaeological contexts.
Still in northern Peru, the remains of flathead grey mullet were documented by the
archaeological work done by Tom Dillehay (2011: 334) and his team, who suggest it may have
been part of the diet of the people in the upper Zaña Valley between 9700-9200 B.C. and
5855-3029 B.C.
The remains of flathead grey mullet excavated at Quebrada Tacahuay, a site on the southern
Peruvian littoral south of Ilo, in the modern-day Moquegua Region, are even older. Here they
have been found in an archaeological context that dates to at least 10,730-9370 B.C. (DeFrance
and Umire 2004: 271).
These data clearly show that the flathead grey mullet was one of the first fish to be eaten on
the Peruvian coast after the ice age.
The site of Ostra is north of the city of Chimbote and it dates to 5462-3711 B.C. (Sandweiss
1996: 44). It is a simple camp adapted to the sea. Reitz and Sandweiss (2001: 1086) found
that the presence of flathead grey mullets averages more than 7%, which means it was eaten
somewhat frequently.
It was also eaten by the early people of El Paraíso, a site close to the Chillón River mouth
north of Lima, which has been dated to ca. 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 279).
On the North Coast after the Paiján cultural tradition, the successive human occupations show
the flathead grey mullet was highly consumed. Shelia Pozorski made a study of the food eaten
by the early populations in the lower Moche Valley and Huanchaco, which documented the
relatively significant presence of this fish since the Final Preceramic Period at sites like Padre
Abán (ca. 2300 B.C.) and Alto Salaverry (1600 B.C.), but it was eaten more during the Chimu Inca
occupation in the zone of Chan Chan (Pozorski 1979: 169).
The flathead grey mullet has been found in the excavations made at the Huaca de la Luna in a
Mochica context, so it was part of their diet in A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 131).
Its remains have been found, albeit in very scant amounts, in the Chimu occupation of
Pedregal, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, thus showing it was also consumed in this zone
(Cutright 2009: 168).
The Moche who lived in the Huaca de la Luna and the Huaca del Sol in A.D. 470-600 also did
the same (Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 123, Roselló et al. 2001: 77). Thee Mochica of Pampa
Grande, a site in the modern-day Lambayeque Region, quite probably ate flathead grey mullet
too in A.D. 711-800, as follows from the research done by Shimada and Shimada (1981: 131).
372
14,000 years of food in Peru
At Cerro Azul, in Cañete, a few remains of flathead grey mullet have been found during the
Chincha (A.D. 1000-1470) and even the Inca occupations. They had been eaten (Marcus et al.
1999: 6568).
The remains of this fish found at Loma Saavedra also date to this time. This is a site south of
the Zarumilla River and close to the Peruvian frontier with Ecuador that dates to A.D. 1040-
1520, i.e. the Chimu, Garbanzal, Jambelí, and Chimu-Inca cultures (Moore 2007a: 15).
Palm Ruff, Blackruff [Cojinova, palmera, palmerita (Seriolella violacea G.)]
This is a pelagic fish that lives on sandy seabeds close to the beach, but it migrates between
the high seas and the coat. In order to fish it one must have nets or hooks (Sánchez Romero
1973: 177), as well as watercraft. It often feeds on anchovies, Pacific sand crabs, and Peruvian
silverside, and may weigh up to 2,600 grams. Its size ranges between 54 and 67 cm, but there
are smaller specimens. Its meat is highly valued, especially when fresh.
The palm ruff lives in temperate waters between Talara and Valparaíso, but it abounds on the
Central coast of Peru. Flores Blanco (2006) reports having found its remains in the midden at
Caral, where it was apparently eaten in 2600-1800 B.C.
Bonavia found palm ruff remains at Los Gavilanes, in the lower Huarmey Valley, that dated
to 3200-2200 B.C. Bonavia (1982: 195). La Laguna, site PV35-106, where the palm ruff was also
eaten, is close to Los Gavilanes and dates to 5320 B.C. (Bonavia et al. 2001: 304). Perhaps this
fish’s consumption in Huarmey is traditional.
Alejandro Chu found palm ruff (Seriolella violacea) in the excavations at Bandurria, in the
vicinity of Huacho and north of Lima, with dates that ranged between 3170 and 1620 B.C. (Chu
2008: 136).
The research team at Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, identified the remains of
this fish during the first centuries of our era, so the Mochica may have eaten it (Vásquez and
Rosales 2004: 342).
Peruvian Weakfish, drum [Cachema, Cachema Sechurana or Ayanque] (Cynoscion analis)
For Sánchez Romero (1973: 181) this species is frequently found on the North and central coast,
where it lives in shallow waters, usually on sandy and rocky seabeds. Its size ranges between
19 and 52 cm, and it has a mean weight of 350 grams (Sánchez Romero 1973: 181).
The Peruvian weakfish can be fished from the shore using nets and hooks because it often
lives close to the beach, where there are whirlpools and shoals of fish form both in tropical
as well as in temperate waters between Colombia and Chile (Coquimbo).
373
Elmo Leon
One of the most ancient pieces of evidence of Peruvian weakfish consumption comes from
the Ring Site south of Ilo, in the zone of Mollendo (Moquegua). Sandweiss’s excavations
showed that it was eaten here since 7500 B.C. (Sandweiss 1989: 54). It has likewise been
reported at Quebrada de los Burros in the Tacna littoral, with dates that go back to 7900
B.C. (Béarez 2012: 107).
Reitz observed the presence of Peruvian weakfish south of Lima at Paloma, where it was eaten
in small amounts (Reitz 1988: 314). Paloma comprises a series of camps and burials where organic
refuse from their food has been found. The site gave radiocarbon dates of 5316 and 3630 B.C.
This fish was also eaten in small amounts at Ostra, a site north of the modern city of
Chimbote, which has dates that average to 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086,
Sandweiss 1996: 44).
The remains of Peruvian weakfish have been found at Cerro Lampay, a Preceramic site of
a monumental nature in the Fortaleza Valley, on the coast of the Lima Region. Here Vega-
Centeno (2007) found the remains of this fish eaten by the ancient inhabitants of this site
around 2410-2064 B.C. It was apparently also eaten at Caral during the same period (Flores
Blanco 2006).
Puémape is a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley. Here Lanfranco et al. (2009: 5) noticed
remains of Peruvian weakfish, which were among the fish eaten in 3008-2329 B.C.
It is very likely that what Bonavia recorded at Los Gavilanes, in the lower Huarmey Valley,
was Peruvian weakfish, which was dated—at least for epoch 2—to ca. 3200-2200 B.C.
(Bonavia 1982: 195),
Although scantly documented in the Gallery of the Offerings at Chavín de Huántar in 1218-812
B.C., Peruvian weakfish (Cynoscion analis) may have been consumed at this site (Astocóndor
1993: 474).
The Mochica also ate Peruvian weakfish. Its remains have been found at the Huaca de la Luna
in the lower Moche Valley, with dates that ranged between A.D. 400 and A.D. 750 (Cárdenas
et al. 1997: 131). It may even have been eaten dry and salted, because it was documented that
it was brought whole from the sea to this site (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 186).
Peruvian weakfish was apparently also eaten by the Mochica of Pampa Grande (Lambayeque),
which dates to ca. A.D. 711-800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 131).
The Chimu who lived at Pedregal, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, also ate Peruvian
weakfish, albeit in small amounts (Cutright 2009: 158).
The Chincha who occupied Cerro Azul, a site in the Cañete River mouth, ate this fish in small amounts
even during the Inca occupation of this site on the Central coast (Marcus et al. 1999: 6568).
374
14,000 years of food in Peru
Peruvian weakfish was also eaten in small amounts in enclosures 24 and 25 of Pachacamac,
south of Lima in the lower Lurín Valley, in a context that was dated to A.D. 1520 (Béarez et
al. 2003: 66).
Mahi-Mahi, common dolphinfish [Perico, dorado] (Coryphaena hippurus)
Mahi-mahi is a pelagic high seas fish in tropical waters that feeds voraciously on smaller fish,
crustaceans and cephalopods. It can grow up to two metres. It is found far away from the
shore, which means high-seas fishing from watercraft using nets or hooks. Mahi-mahi is found
in warm seas from California Chile (Sánchez Romero 1973: 220).
At present the remains of this fish have only been documented in the urban zone of the Huaca
de la Luna, in a Mochica context that dates to A.D. 400-750 (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 186).
Peruvian Hake, Pacific Hake [Merluza] (Merluccius gayi peruanus)
The Peruvian hake lives close to the shore and out at sea between 0°30 and 13°56`S, so it is
assumed that watercraft were required to fish it. It measures 20-55 cm long (and sometimes
reaches up to 80 cm), and weighs 512 grams on average (Sánchez Romero 1973: 174). According
to Cárdenas et al. (1997: 140-141), its biochemistry when fresh is 90% calories, 78% water, and
a not inconsiderable 19.3% protein, so in this it is almost like the flathead grey mullet. It also
holds 30% calcium, and particularly a great amount of phosphorus.
In comparison with other fish, Peruvian hake appears relatively late in the pre-Hispanic record.
Elera et al. (1992: 19) found its remains at Puémape, in the occupation that extended from 200
B.C. to the beginning of our era.
Although it does not abound on the North Coast, the Peruvian hake frequently appears
in Peru’s archaeological records. Roselló et al. (2001: 75) and Cárdenas et al. (1997: 131) have
documented Peruvian hake as comprising at least 4% of the food consumed at Huaca de la
Luna and Huaca del Sol, in the Moche Valley. And in a subsequent study of the plain that
extends between both huacas, Vásquez et al. (2003: 37) documented a high percentage of this
fish eaten by the Moche in A.D. 571-685. Complete skeletons of this fish have been found in
the urban zone of the Huaca de la Luna, which for Vásquez and Rosales means it was dried
or salted—an interesting observation in a Mochica context (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 186).
It is worth noting that because of the environment it lives in, fishing Peruvian hake must have
involved the use of tule boats.
Cutright (2009: 167) documented remains of Peruvian hake in very small amounts during the
Chimu occupation of Pedregal—a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley—in A.D. 1000-1460,
and in somewhat higher amounts during the late Moche occupation of this same site.
375
Elmo Leon
Pacific Menhaden [Machete o machuelo] (Ethmidium maculatum, Brevoortia maculata)
The Pacific menhaden is a pelagic fish that lives at a mean depth of five metres in temperate
to cold waters. It forms shoals, so it is easier to fish using nets. It is found from the South
Coast of Peru to northern Chile. Its size can range between 16 and 34 cm, and has an average
weight of 206 grams (Sánchez Romero 1973: 188). It is fished all year round.
The consumption of Pacific menhaden in Peru goes back to the Middle Holocene. Lavallée
and her archaeological research team have identified its remains at the site of Quebrada de
los Burros (Tacna), where it dates to 6275-4500 B.C. (Lavallée et al. 1999: 42).
Very few remains of Pacific menhaden have been found left in the middens of Cerro Lampay
as food refuse. Vega-Centeno (2007) reports having found it in this site that is on the North-
Central Coast (Lima Region) and dates to 2410-2064 B.C. It was being eaten almost at the same
time at Caral, in the Supe Valley (Flores Blanco 2006).
Remains of have been found in the Gallery of the Offerings at Chavín de Huántar (Áncash)
that dates to the time period of 1218-812 B.C. It may have been part of the food eaten by the
inhabitants of this site (Astocóndor 1993: 474).
On the other hand, Bonavia documented significant amounts of Pacific menhaden remains at
Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey Valley, which means it comprised a significant part
of the food eaten by Preceramic people in this valley (Bonavia 1982: 194).
Spanish Mackerel [Pez Sierra] (Scomberomorus maculatus sierra J&S)
The Spanish mackerel is a pelagic fish found in warm coastal waters that lives close to the
beach. It can be fished by angling. Spanish mackerel usually measures 60-70 cm, and weighs up
to five kilos. It is found from California to Pisco Bay (Sánchez Romero 1973: 200).
Bonavia (1982: 194) documented this fish in his excavations at Los Gavilanes, a site in the
lower Huarmey Valley, at least in 3200-1480 B.C. It has also been found in a Mochica
context in the urban site of Huaca de la Luna, between A.D. 400 and A.D. 750 (Vásquez
and Rosales 1998: 186).
Pacific Bonito [Bonito] (Sarda sarda, Sarda chiliensis chilensis)
The bonito is one of the most representative fishes of Peru’s pre-Hispanic diet. It is a subtropical
pelagic species that is found from Máncora to Talcahuano (Chile), and which measures about
80 cm (FAO 2010). Béarez says it can weigh up to eight kilos. Since anchovies are its main food
it follows it and thus draws closer to the coast in summer. The bonito is probably the fish with
the highest amount of proteins eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru—almost 23.4 g per 100 grams, a
376
14,000 years of food in Peru
quarter of which is protein, a biochemical luxury amongst fish nutrients on the Peruvian coast.
Other values (also in every 100 grams) are instead below those found in the anchovy, like 258
mg of phosphorus, 0.7 g of iron, 1.6 mg of vitamin C, and 0.01 mg of vitamin B1. Horkheimer
(1960: 110) claimed every 100 grams of bonito held 135 calories.
Sánchez Romero (1973: 168-169) believes the bonito is characteristic of the Cold Peruvian
Current even though it is more accessible during the summer months, when the coastal strip
gets narrower. The bonito is a carnivorous fish that preys mainly on anchovies and eventually
on some crustacea. It usually moves about at low depths.
The bonito is an almost permanent resource because females are constantly laying eggs in
high number. Their mean length in Callao is 60 cm and they weigh three kilos. Bonitos live
at 14-23°C temperature and move in shallow waters, some six and a half metres below the
surface (Sánchez Romero 1973: 168). They can be fished using nets or fishhooks, but this is best
done using watercraft.
Bonito bones were found in the food refuse in the middens of the Quebrada de los Burros, a
site in Tacna (Lavallée et al. 1999: 42). This shows it was eaten in 6200-4500 B.C. The Ring Site
in Mollendo lies slightly more to the north. Here Sandweiss (1989: 54) found the remains of
this fish albeit in small amounts, which dated to ca. 7500 B.C.
The initial evidence thus makes it clear that bonitos have been eaten in Peru for about nine
thousand years.
Scant remains of this fish (Sarda chiliensis chilensis) have been found in the archaeological
excavations at Caral, in the Supe Valley, so it can be assumed that it was eaten here in 2595-
1951 B.C. (Shady and Leyva 2003: 115).
Vega-Centeno (2007) found that bonito (Sarda chiliensis) was eaten at the Cerro Lampay
archaeological site (in the Fortaleza Valley, in Lima) around 2410-2064 B.C. It was also
eaten around this same time at Caral, a site in the Supe Valley, as reported by Flores
Blanco (2006).
Elera et al. (1992: 19) pointed out that bonito was eaten at Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley, during the Cupisnique and Salinar occupations, i.e. from 1000 B.C. to the dawn of our era.
The bonito was without question one of the fish most eaten on the North Coast. In her
study of the fauna and flora eaten by the pre-Hispanic populations of the North Coast, Shelia
Pozorski (1979: 169) found the presence of bonito bones at Alto Salaverry (1600 B.C.) and at
Chan Chan (A.D. 1460). It was clearly eaten at these sites, albeit in very small amounts.
Vásquez and Rosales (2004: 342) reported the presence of this fish at the site of Huaca de la
Luna in the lower Moche Valley, and so it may have been part of the Mochica diet during the
early centuries of our era in this region.
377
Elmo Leon
At Cerro Azul, a Chincha (A.D. 1000-1470) and Inca archaeological site in Lima, Joyce Marcus et
al. (1999: 6568) found the remains of bonito that were part of the food eaten by its inhabitants.
The ancient Tumbesinos also ate bonito. Jerry Moore (2007a: 15) found several bones belonging
to this fish at Loma Saavedra, a site on the southern banks of the Zarumilla River that is quite
close to the modern-day frontier in Ecuador. The bones were found in contexts that were
dated to A.D. 1070-1520, and so belong to the period in which cultures like Jambelí, Garbanzal,
Chimu, and Chimu-Inca developed.
Bonito was also eaten in low amounts by the ancient population of the Pachacamac
archaeological site in the lower Lurín Valley south of Lima. Its remains have a mean average
date of A.D. 1520, i.e. during the final phase of the Inca Empire (Béarez et al. 2003: 1520).
Peruvian Rock Seabass [Cabrilla, cabrilla loca, cabrillón] (Paralabrax humeralis)
The Peruvian rock seabass is a cold water species found on the Peruvian coast (Reitz 2001:
164). It lives on rocky seabeds and it can be fished using fishhooks (Béarez et al. 2003: 60), but
watercraft are believed to have been used for this. The seabass feeds on crustacea and small
fishes. It measures on average 22-42 cm, and weighs 1,200 grams. Its meat is highly prized, but
it is often salted in Northern Peru (Sánchez Romero 1973: 178).
The consumption of seabass goes back at least to around 7500 B.C. at the Ring Site south of
the city of Ilo, in Mollendo (Sandweiss et al. 1989: 52). Béarez (2012: 107) found it in contexts
that go back to 7900 B.C. at the Quebrada de los Burros site on the Tacna littoral.
Seabass has been eaten on the coast of Lima since at least the Middle Holocene. This was
evinced by a report authored by Elizabeth Reitz (1988: 314), who studied the fauna from
Paloma, a site south of Lima in the vicinity of the Chilca valley bot far from the modern San
Bartolo Beach. The dates range between 5316 and 3630 B.C.
Ostra is a site north of the Santa River mouth and close to the city of Chimbote that lies
almost on the littoral. Seabass remains that dated to 5462-3711 B.C. have been documented
here (Reitz y Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
At Cerro Lampay, a site in the Fortaleza Valley, Vega-Centeno (2007) found remains of seabass
eaten in 2410-2064 B.C.
Peruvian rock seabass also had an alimentary role because its remains have been found in kitchen
contexts at the site of the Huaca de la Luna and the Huaca del Sol in the lower Moche Valley. These
contexts date to A.D. 470-600 (Roselló et al. 2001: 77), which clearly means the Moche were eating it.
Marcus et al. (1999: 6568) have reported the presence of seabass—albeit small amounts—
during the Chincha (A.D. 1000-1470) and Inca occupation of Cerro Azul, a site that is in Cañete.
378
14,000 years of food in Peru
Béarez et al. (2003: 66) have also shown that seabass was eaten at least in enclosures 24 and
25 of ramp pyramid III B in Pachacamac, and dated to A.D. 1520.
Brick Seabass [Cherlo, chancharro o choromelo] (Acanthistius pictus)
This is a benthic fish that lives in rocky waters with sandy seabeds, and which can swim upriver
in river mouths. It feeds mainly on crustacea and can measure up to 45 cm. It is quite common
on the North Coast, and its distribution extends from Ecuador up to Chile (Sánchez Romero
1973: 212).
At present it is known to have been eaten only by the Mochica. Its remains have been reported
at the Huaca de la Luna site in the lower Moche Valley, and dated to the first centuries of our
era (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 342).
Bullet Tuna, bullet mackerel, wide corseleted [Barrilete negro, melva] (Auxis sp.)
This is a circumtropical species that lives in the warm seas of the world. Its mean weight is 12
kilos (Sánchez Romero 1973: 173). The bullet tuna has been found at Cerro Baúl and was dated
to the main occupation of this site by the Wari Empire (A.D. 631-1000) (Moseley et al. 2005),
which clearly indicates it was carried from the seashore up to an altitude of 2590 masl.
Cabinza Grunt [Cabinza] (Isacia conceptionis)
This is an epipelagic, coastal and gregarious species that lives on the seabed of bays and
feeds on crustacea. It can weigh up to 300 grams and measures between 16 and 24 cm. the
cabinza grunt is often associated with the lorna drum. It is fished using fishhooks or ... [cortina],
particularly in calm waters (Béarez 2012: 103).
The cabinza grunt has been found among the remains left behind by the inhabitants of the
Quebrada de los Burros site in Tacna (Lavallée et al. 1999: 42), which can be dated to at least 6270-
4500 B.C. Béarez claims this species readily bites the hook even though it is away from the shore,
Few remains of cabinza grunt have been found in the excavations made at Ostra, a site north of
Chimbote that dates to ca. 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
The cabinza grunt was eaten by the people at the site of Paloma, some 65 km south of Lima in
the Chilca Valley, and around 7 km away from the sea. Reitz (1988: 314) reported cabinzas that
may have been eaten in 5316-3630 B.C.
Flores Blanco (2006: 157) reported finding cabinza grunt vertebrae at Caral, where it was
probably eaten in 2600-1800 B.C. It should be pointed out that Flores Blanco found this fish’s
379
Elmo Leon
remains calcined as if they had been subjected to fire in order to cook them, and thus proves
it was prepared at this time.
The cabinza grunt was part of the food eaten in enclosures 24-25 of the ramp pyramid III B at
Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley, where it dated to A.D. 1520, i.e. it literally dates to the
end of the Inca Empire (Béarez et al. 2003: 66).
Peruvian Grunt, Pacific sargo [Chita o sargo] (Anisotremus scapularis)
The Peruvian grunt is a benthic fish that lives on sandy seabeds, in rocky areas and where
the waves ... [resaca], and it is fished using fishhooks (Béarez et al. 2003: 60). It belongs to
the group of fish characteristic of the cold waters of the Peruvian Current (Reitz 2001: 164).
The Peruvian grunt has a mean length of 40 cm and weighs seven and a half kilos. It lives
in temperate waters at low depths. Juvenile specimens particularly get close to the shore
and can be fished all year long (Sánchez Romero 1973: 216). The Peruvian grunt ranges from
northern Peru to northern Chile, and it ventures into areas where the waves break in order to
look for clams [choritos] and purple keyhole limpets [lapas].
The Peruvian grunt has been found in the food refuse at Quebrada de los Burros in Tacna,
which may date to 7900-4500 B.C. (Lavallée et al. 1999: 42). Even earlier remains were found
at the Ring Site south of the modern city of Ilo, and which date to ca. 8000 B.C. (Sandweiss
1989: 54). Béarez, who was in charge of reconstructing the type of fishing technique, believes
that angling would have been easy because the fish draw close to the shore. Sandweiss et al.
(1989: 58) reached the same conclusion.
A significant amount of Peruvian grunt was also eaten at Paloma, a site in the Chilca Valley
south of Lima, near an extinct loma and very close to the sea. Reitz (1988: 314) showed that
according to the radiocarbon dates, it was eaten in layers that date to 5316-3630 B.C.
Haemulidae, which can be included in the Peruvian grunt taxon, have been reported in the
excavations undertaken at Ostra, a site on the right bank of the Santa River mouth and north
of the modern city of Chimbote. They dated to 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086,
Sandweiss 1996: 44).
Bonavia (1982: 195) recorded Peruvian grunt remains at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower
Huarmey Valley that dates at least to 3200-1480 B.C.
Elera et al. (1992: 19) mentioned having found Peruvian grunt in the middens of Puémape, a site
in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, in the Cupisnique and Salinar epochs (ca. 1000 B.C. to the
beginning of our era).
Galindo is a site on the middle Moche Valley on the North Coast. Here Lockard (2005: 201)
found the remains of Peruvian grunt that had been eaten by the Mochica around A.D. 600-800.
380
14,000 years of food in Peru
The Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, was occupied by the Mochica in A.D. 400-
750, and the remains of Peruvian grunt have been found here; it may well have been part of the
Mochica diet (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 131). The Mochica of Pampa Grande, a site in the modern-day
Lambayeque Department, also ate Peruvian grunt in A.D. 711-800 (Shimada y Shimada 1981: 131).
Marcus et al. (1999: 6568) found in more recent times that small amounts of Peruvian grunt were
eaten at the site of Cerro Azul in Cañete, during the Chincha (A.D. 1000-1470) and Inca occupation.
Peruvian grunt was also eaten in small amounts in ramp pyramid IIB at Pachacamac, which
dates on average to A.D. 1520, a final imperial Inca context (Béarez et al. 2003: 66).
Blue-Bronze Sea Chub [Salema, Chopa] (Kyphosus analogus)
A few remains of this species have been found at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey
Valley that dates to 2300-1480 B.C. (Bonavia 1982: 222).
Sheephead, wrasses [Mulato, Peje Perro, or Vieja] (Pimelometopon sp.)
This is a slow-swimming benthic fish [pez bentónico de natación lenta] that lives on rocky
seabeds in temperate waters close to the coast, and feeds on algae and invertebrates. It can
be fished using hooks all-year long. Its range extends from the Lobos de Afuera Island (Peru) to
the Gulf of Arauco (Chile). It can grow up to a metre long (Sánchez Romero 1973: 229).
Some bones of this fish species have been found at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey
Valley, which dated to 3200-1480 B.C. (Bonavia 1982: 222). Bonavia et al. (2009: 265) also
recorded this type of fish remain at site PV35-4, a camp on the littoral immediately north of
the Huarmey Valley. This fish had traces of burning, which implies it was grill cooked.
Clingfishes, Pejesapo [Pejesapo or Shinguillo] (Sicyases sanguineus M&T)
Sicyases sanguineus or pejesapo is a typical species found in rocky and pebbly shorelines. Its
adhesive disk allows it to cling to rocks, and it thus lives some time out of the water. It grows
up to 35 m long and its distribution extends from Salaverry to Punta Arenas (Chile). It can be
fished all year long (Sánchez Romero 1973: 227) and it feeds on molluscs (Béarez 2012: 105).
Sicyases sanguineus is included in the family of small fish (Gobiesociedae) that were eaten by
the ancient Peruvians, in which it stands out because it can grow up to 30 cm long. It is found
along the Peruvian-Chilean littoral.
According to the radiocarbon datings of the layers in which Sicyases sanguineus was found
at Quebrada de los Burros (Tacna), these can be dated to ca. 7900-4800 B.C. Béarez (Lavallée
381
Elmo Leon
et al. 1999: 43) claims the pejesapo can be collected walking, as is the case with octopi and
several other shellfish. They are caught in the rocks left uncovered by the tides, where they
can survive several hours and even days, simply by hand or using a harpoon.
Sicyases sanguineus was also eaten at Cerro Azul, a site in the Cañete littoral, in Chincha (A.D.
1000-1460) and Inca contexts, which means it was still being eaten on the Central Coast at this
time (Marcus et al. 1999: 6568).
Peruvian Morwong [Pintadilla, Páramo or Pintacha] (Cheilodactylus variegatus)
According to Béarez (Lavallée et al. 1999: 42) this is a benthic fish species that lives on rocky
seabeds covered by algae, and less frequently on sandy and rocky seabeds. It is 25 to 35 cm
long but it can grow up to 50 cm long, and it weighs a kilo and a half. It is fished all year long,
particularly using fishhooks. It is found between Paita (Peru) and Talcahuano (Chile) (Sánchez
Romero 1973: 223).
Peruvian morwong remains have been excavated in the food refuse left at Quebrada de los
Burros (Tacna) and they can be dated to 7900-4500 B.C. They may have been fished by angling.
Sandweiss (1989: 54) likewise reported a good amount of remains at the Ring Site south of Ilo,
in the zone of Mollendo, which considering the radiocarbon dates found at this site dated at
least to ca. 8500 B.C.
Peruvian morwong was also eaten at Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, as shown by
the archaeological research undertaken by Elera et al. (1992: 19). Lockard (2005: 201) recorded
the remains of Peruvian morwong at Galindo, in the middle Moche Valley, where it was eaten
by its Mochica population in A.D. 600-800. Cárdenas et al. (1997: 131) have on the other hand
recorded its remains at the Huaca de la Luna, a site in the lower Moche Valley, which means
the Mochica may have eaten it in A.D. 400-750.
Peruvian morwong was also found amongst the fish eaten at Cerro Azul, a site on the littoral
south of Lima in the Cañete Valley, in a Chincha context (A.D. 1000-1460) and even during the
Inca occupation of this site (Marcus et al. 1999: 6568).
Pacific Chub Mackerel [Caballa, estornino] (Scomber japonicus peruanus, Scombridae)
The Pacific chub mackerel is a fish found in the Cold Peruvian Current (Reitz 2001: 164) that
lives close to the beach, and which can be caught by angling. Sánchez Romero (1973: 171) notes
that it lives not far away from the coast. These are small fish that measure 26-34 cm long and
weigh 114-368 grams.
Fish from the Scombridae family of a pelagic nature have been found as food refuse left in
the middens at Quebrada de los Burros (Lavallée et al. 1999: 42), in excavation layers that date
382
14,000 years of food in Peru
to 7900-4500 B.C. Because of their habitat, it is possible that they were fished angling from
watercraft.
Sandweiss (1989: 54) reported discovering bone remains of Pacific chub mackerel not far away
at the Ring Site south of Ilo, in the zone of Mollendo, which dated to ca. 8000 B.C. This means
that Pacific chub mackerel has been long eaten.
Bonavia (1982: 195) found the remains of Pacific chub mackerel in medium-sized amounts at Los
Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey Valley, in a stratum that dates at least to 3200-2200 B.C.
Roselló et al. (2001: 77) recorded the remains of Pacific chub mackerel at Huaca del Sol and
Huaca de la Luna in A.D. 470-600, in Mochica contexts.
Pacific chub mackerel has been found, albeit in small amounts, as part of the food eaten in
enclosures 24 and 25 of ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley, which
date to the final imperial Inca occupation ca. 1520 (Béarez et al. 2003: 58).
Giant Blenny, scaleless blenny [Borracho, Borracho Gigante] (Scartichthys gigas)
At present the most ancient evidence of this fish being eaten comes from Quebrada de los
Burros, a site on the Tacna littoral where it has been found in strata that date to ca. 5400 B.C.
(Béarez 2012: 107).
The giant blenny was quite likely eaten at Puémape, a site in the Jequetepeque River mouth
that dates at least to 200 B.C. and the beginning of the Christian era (Elera et al. 1992: 19). This
means the giant blenny appears later in the record than other species.
It has also been recorded at the Huaca de la Luna, where it was presumably eaten by the Mochica
who lived in this site during the first centuries of our era (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 342).
Giant blenny bones have likewise been found among the refuse left behind by the people
of Cerro Azul, a site in the Cañete River mouth, during the Chincha (A.D. 1460) and the Inca
occupation of this zone (Marcus et al. 1999: 6568).
Blenny, scaled blenny, trambollo or Chalapo Clinid [Trambollo or Chalapo] (Lepisoma philipii,
Labrisomus philippii)
This is a benthic fish that lives on sandy seabeds, but it often draws close to the coast and
is preferentially fished with fishhooks, and eventually with nets (Béarez et al. 2003: 60). It
usually is 35 cm long on average and it weighs 200 grams. It is fished all year long, especially in
November. It is found mainly between the Lobos de Tierra Island (Peru) and Coquimbo (Chile)
(Sánchez Romero 1973: 225, 227).
383
Elmo Leon
The chalapo clinid has been found in North Coast sites like Padre Abán (2300 B.C.), Alto
Salaverry (1600 B.C.), and in some zones of the Chan Chan complex (Pozorski 1979: 169). Elera
et al. (1992: 19) also recorded its remains on the North Coast at Puémape, a site south of the
Jequetepeque River mouth, so it may have been eaten in this area at least between 200 B.C.
and the beginning of our era.
On the other hand, according to the archaeological research undertaken by Cutright (2009:
158), small amounts of trambollo remains have been found at Pedregal, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, within the context of the Chimu occupation (A.D. 1000-1460).
The Moche also ate trambollo during the first centuries of the Christian era, for its remains
have been found at the Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche valley (Vásquez and Rosales
2004: 342).
Trambollo remains have also been found—albeit in small amounts—in Chincha (A.D. 1000-
1460) and Inca contexts at Cerro Azul, an archaeological site on the coast of Cañete, which
means it was eaten on the coast in late periods (Marcus et al. 6568).
Béarez et al. (2003: 66) have shown that the ancient inhabitants of the Pachacamac ramp
pyramids, in the lower Lurín Valley), ate trambollo at least during the final phase of the Inca
Empire, as its mean radiocarbon date comes to A.D. 1520.
Flounder, [Lenguado de ojos chicos] Paralitchthys microps (Paralitchthys microps)
According to FAO (2010), Paralitchthys microps has 19.1% proteins and 0.5% fat, as well as
phosphorus, iron, and vitamin B1.
Daniel Sandweiss et al. (1989: 62) found remains of Paralitchthys microps at the Ring Site south of
the modern-day city of Ilo, in Moquegua. The site’s inhabitants began to eat it around 8000 B.C.
Sea bass, Pacific Mutton Hamlet [?] [Mero] (Epinephelus sp., Alphestes fasciatus)
This species lives in rocky seabeds at shallow and middle-depth warm waters. It can grow up
to 1.20 m long and is usually fished using a net or a harpoon (Sánchez Romero 1973: 196).
Few remains of the Pacific mutton hamlet have been found at Ostra, a site that lies very close
to the Santa River mouth, so it may have been part of the food eaten by the people that
inhabited this site in 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
Bonavia (1992: 195) recorded some Pacific mutton hamlet remains at Los Gavilanes, a site in the
lower Huarmey Valley, in a stratum that dates to 3200-1480 B.C. To these finds we must add
the depictions of this fish found on Mochica ceramics.
384
14,000 years of food in Peru
Fine Flounder, lefteye Flounder, halibut, [Lenguado común] (Paralichthys adspersus)
This is a pelagic fish that lives half-buried in sandy and muddy seabeds off the beaches, and yet
it likes to venture where the waves break in order to catch Pacific sand crabs, which means it can
be fished using nets, fishhooks or harpoons with points (Béarez et al. 2003: 60). Fine flounders can
grow up to 80 cm long, but most frequently range between 35 and 55 cm long, and weigh 1-3 kilos
(very rarely five). The people of Puémape, south of the Jequetepeque River mouth, were already
eating this type of fish at least between 200 B.C. and the beginning of our era (Elera et al. 1992: 19).
The most ancient evidence of the fine flounder apparently come from the site of Quebrada
de los Burros on the Tacna littoral, where the remains of this fish have been found since ca.
5400 B.C. (Béarez 2012: 107).
Bonavia (1982: 195) recorded the presence of the fine flounder in the Huarmey Valley in small
amounts, at least in 3200-1480 B.C.
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 131) recorded flounder remains at the Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche
Valley, so it can be inferred that it was part of the food its population ate ca. A.D. 400-750.
Flounders have been found in small proportion in the middens and in the food remains left
behind by the people of Cerro Azul in the Cañete Valley, in Chincha (ca. A.D. 1000-1460) and
Inca contexts (Marcus et al. 1999: 6568).
Flounders were also eaten by the inhabitants of the Pachacamac ramp pyramids in the lower
Lurín Valley, where Béarez et al. (2003: 66) found a date of A.D. 1520, i.e. during the final
Imperial Inca phase.
Speckled-Tail Flounder [Lenguado de Cola Manchada] (Bothidae, Engyophrys sanctilaurentia)
At present the evidence of the potential consumption of this fish comes from the upper Zaña
Valley, in Lambayeque. Here Tom Dillehay (2011: 334) reported it in archaeological contexts
that date to 9700-9200 B.C., which means that it has long been eaten.
Bothidae (which quite probably are speckled-tail flounders) have been found in the excavations
made at Ostra, a site north of the Santa River mouth and the city of Chimbote, which dated
to 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
Spotted Scorpion Fish [Pez Diablo] (Scorpaena plumieri mystes)
The spotted scorpion fish has been excavated by the research team of the Huaca de la Luna,
in the lower Moche Valley, so it may have been eaten by the Mochica throughout the first
centuries of our era (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 342).
385
Elmo Leon
Sandperch [?] [Bacalao, Rollizo] (Mugiloides chilensis)
Codfish have been eaten in the southern Peruvian coast since the early Holocene, as was evinced
by the finds made at the Ring Site, which is south of Ilo (Moquegua) and only 750 meters away from
the sea shore. Here Sandweiss (1989: 62) has reported the presence of cod bones since ca. 8000 B.C.
This fish was found in very small numbers at the Pampa Colorada group of sites close to the
Ocoña River Mouth, to the northeast of Camaná, which have dates that range to 9200-5400
B.C. (McInnis 2006: 373).
Pacific Golden-Eyed Tilefish or Ocean Whitefish [Peje blanco, blanquillo] (Caulolatilus cabezon,
Caulolatilus cabezon affinis Gil)
Sánchez Romero (1973: 184) notes that it has been found from Manta (Ecuador) to Chimbote
(Peru), but it usually is concentrated in northern Peru. This fish lives on sandy and shelly
seabeds. Its size ranges between 20 and 55 cm long. It is usually eaten fresh and salted. It is
fished using nets or fishhooks.
The Pacific golden-eyed tilefish was probably eaten—albeit in very small numbers—at
Pedregal, a Chimu site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, and its date ranges to ca. A.D. 1000-
1460 (Cutright 2009: 158).
Parrot Fish [Pococho perico] (Xenoscarus denticulatus, Scarus perico)
Shelia Pozorski (1979: 169) has reported the presence of this fish at Alto Salaverry and at Chan
Chan, in the middens of both sites. This means it was eaten in this part of the North Coast ca.
1600 B.C.-A.D. 1400.
Black Cusk-Eel [Congrio, congrio moreno] (Genypterus maculatus)
This fish can grow up to more than a metre long, but it usually measures 50-90 cm. It is a
benthic species that can live in sandy-muddy seabeds up to a depth of 300 metres.
At present the archaeological record for this fish mostly comes from the North Coast. Very
low percentages of its remains have been found in two North Coast sites—Alto Salaverry,
which dates to ca. 1600 B.C., and part of the architectonic complex of Chan Chan during the
Chimu-Inca occupation (Pozorski 1979: 169).
Black cusk-eel remains have been found in the same proportion—i.e. very small amounts—at
Gramalote, a North Coast site close to Huanchaco that has been dated to 1800 B.C. (Pozorski
and Pozorski 1979: 423).
386
14,000 years of food in Peru
The black cusk-eel has also been recorded in the excavation of the Huaca de la Luna, in
the lower Moche Valley, and so it may have been part of the Mochica diet during the first
centuries of our era (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 341).
Bonefish [(Pez) Zorro, Macabi] (Albula vulpes)
The bonefish lives between California and Chimbote. Gálvez Mora and Quiroz Moreno
(2008: 70) note that it lives in tropical waters with temperatures that are over 20 °C. Some
are highly migratory but swim close to the surface, thus forming concentrations with many
specimens.
The oldest find in Peru was probably made at Pampa de los Fósiles 12 (unit 7), which is on
the North Coast between Pacasmayo and Paiján, and which has a mean date of 7876 B.C.
(Chauchat 1992: 47).
The remains of this fish have also been excavated at Ostra, a site north of Chimbote and
on the Santa River mouth, which dates to 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086,
Sandweiss 1996: 44).
Catfish [Bagre negro] (Cathorops)
This type of fish was eaten since at least 10,250 B.C. at the site of Pampa de los Fósiles 14 (unit
2), south of Pacasmayo, where Chauchat (1992: 274) found it in a context pertaining to the
Paiján culture.
Catfish [Bagre] (cf. Ariopsis)
At present this species has only been found at the site of Pampa Grande (Department of
Lambayeque) which dates to A.D. 711-800, so it may have been eaten by the Mochica who
peopled this site (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 31).
Cartilaginous Fish
Snake Eel [Ánguila] (Ophichthus sp.)
Vásquez and Rosales (1998: 182) found the remains of some type of snake eel, which hails from
tropical climates, in a context in the urban area of the Huaca de la Luna that has been dated
to A.D. 400-750.
387
Elmo Leon
Smooth-Hound and Spotted Houndshark [Tollo (Mustelus spp.) and Tollo Manchado] (Triakis
maculata)
These live on sandy seabeds, in both tropical and subtropical waters. They can be caught from
the shore just using cords and simple nets. Sánchez Romero (1973: 189) defines four major
species, i.e. sharptooth smoothhound (Mustelus dorsalis), Mustelus maculatus, speckled
smoothhound (Mustelus mento), and Mustelus spp. aff. Dorsalis.
The sharptooth smoothhound is the most abundant species but Mustelus maculatus is
the biggest one, and can reach up to two metres. The Mustelus spp. aff. Dorsalis species is
characteristic of the Peruvian coast. The most frequent sizes range between 55 and 70 cm, and
may weigh up to 2.4 kg. They are fished all year long in the littoral.
According to FAO (2010), every 100 grams of Mustelus [tollo] have 18.7 g of protein, 229 mg of
phosphorus, 0.7 of iron, 0.04 of vitamin B1, and—most notably—29.3 mg of vitamin C, which
make it the main provider of this vitamin in comparison with other fish found on the Peruvian
coast. Antúnez de Mayolo (1996) drew attention to the fact that when cooked Mustelus loses
92% of its vitamin B2 component.
The oldest remains eaten in Peru have been found at Quebrada de los Burros (Tacna), in strata
that were dated to 6275-4500 B.C. In this site Mustelus spp., Trakidae reached up to 1.20 m
and almost ten kilos (Lavallée et al. 1999). Bonavia (1982: 195) found Mustelus remains at Los
Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey Valley, which appeared since the beginning of the
human occupation of this site, i.e. ca. 4000 B.C.
Mustelus sp. has likewise been excavated at Bandurria, a site close to Huacho and north of
Lima, and was so part of the food eaten by the ancient people of this site ca. 3170-1610 B.C.
(Chu 2008: 136).
Lanfranco et al. (2009: 5) have noted that Mustelus remains formed part of the diet of the
early population of Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, which dates to 3008-
2329 B.C. Mustelus and ... [“angelote”] comprised 62% of the food eaten at this site.
Another of the oldest pieces of evidence of Mustelus consumption comes from Caral, where
it has been found in food refuse that dates to 2600-2000 B.C. (Flores Blanco 2006). The
biomass of Mustelus eaten at Caral, at least ca. 1800 B.C., is impressive.
Mustelus was also frequently eaten on the North Coast since ca. 2300 B.C. This was shown by
the study of pre-Hispanic food undertaken within the framework of the Chan Chan-Moche
Project. Pozorski (1979: 168) was able to establish that although its consumption was low, it
was constant in at least three sites, to wit Padre Abán, Alto Salaverry, and Gramalote, in the
lower Moche Valley. For instance, it was the main source of meat for the people of Gramalote
since around 1800 B.C. (Pozorski and Pozorski 1979: 424).
388
14,000 years of food in Peru
Besides, the research undertaken by Elera et al. (1992: 19) showed Mustelus was also eaten at
Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, from 1000 B.C. to the beginning of our era.
These studies showed that Mustelus was eaten in smaller amounts during the Moche epoch
and Early Chimu. Such is the case of the Huaca del Sol in the Moche Valley, where Pozorski and
Pozorski (2003: 123) noted the presence of few Mustelus remains, the residue of the Mochica
food eaten during the first centuries of our era.
Cutright (2009: 167) also found Mustelus was eaten, albeit in small amounts, by the people of
Pedregal, a site on the North Coast in the Jequetepeque Valley, during the Chimu epoch (A.D
1000-1460). Mustelus was recorded at La Mina, a site in the valley of the same name, thanks
to the analyses Vásquez and Rosales (1994: 86) made, so it is possible that in this zone the
Mochica may have eaten it since the first century of the Christian era.
Mustelus was also eaten since quite early dates in Piura. Kaulicke (1991: 414) reported this in his
excavation of the Loma Valverde site, in the upper Piura Valley, around 350 B.C.-A.D. 450, i.e.
whilst the Salinar and Mochica cultures developed in this zone.
Sharptooth Smoothhound [Tollo blanco] (Mustelus dorsalis)
The only remains thus far found of the sharptooth smoothhound were discovered in the
Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, in Mochica contexts that dated to A.D. 400-750
(Cárdenas et al. 1997: 131).
Requiem shark, Galeorhinus sp. [Tiburón sopa de aleta, cazón o cazón de aleta] (Galeorhinus sp.)
This species can be confused with tollo (Mustelus sp.). Females grow to about two metres
long while the males are slightly smaller, and weigh 25-35kilos. These are pelagic fish that are
usually found as shoals. Their liver potentially has the highest vitamin A content thus far found.
Galeorhinus sp. is widely distributed along the Peruvian coast (Sánchez Romero 1973: 236).
At present Galeorhinus sp. has only been recorded by the excavations undertaken at the
Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley. The remains date to the first centuries of the
Christian era, so this fish may have been part of the food eaten by the Mochica in this zone
(Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 341).
Pacific Guitarfish [Guitarra] (Rhinobatos planiceps)
Sánchez Romero (1973: 192) points out that the Pacific guitarfish is similar to rays and can be
one metre long. The weight usually ranges between two and five kilos. This is a shallow water
389
Elmo Leon
benthic species that lives on flat, sandy seabeds. It can be fished from the shore using nets or
fishhooks.
The Pacific guitarfish was found by Bonavia (1982: 195) in his excavations at Los Gavilanes, a
site in the lower Huarmey Valley, and it dated to 2200-1480 B.C. Bonavia and his team also
recorded its remains in site PV35-4, a Middle Horizon 3 (ca. A.D. 800) camp in the littoral north
of the Huarmey valley (Bonavia et al. 2009: 265). The remains have traces of burning, which in
Bonavia’s opinion indicates they were grill-cooked [cocinados a la brasa].
The Pacific guitarfish was scarcely eaten at Gramalote and Alto Salaverry, two North Coast
sites in the Moche Valley (Pozorski 1979: 168), i.e. since at least 1800 B.C.. It was likewise eaten
at Chan Chan.
At Pedregal, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley that dates to Chimu times, Cutright reports
having found Pacific guitarfish, albeit in very small amounts (Cutright 2009: 169). Cutright also
reports that more Pacific guitarfish was eaten in this site during its Late Moche occupation
ca. A.D. 800.
Lockard (2005: 201) found scant remains of this fish at Galindo that dated to the Mochica (A.D.
600-800) and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations. Roselló et al. (2001: 77) and Pozorski and
Pozorski (2003: 123) report having found remains of Pacific guitarfish at the Mochica Huaca de
la Luna and Huaca del Sol sites in the lower Moche Valley, which dated to A.D. 470-600.
Chilean Angelshark, Angelshark [Angelote, Tiburón Ángel] (Squatina armata)
The Chilean Angelshark is a pelagic fish that can live in sandy and muddy seabeds, and can
grow up to 1.50 m long. Its distribution extends from Northern Peru to Northern Chile (Sánchez
Romero 1973: 203).
The Chilean Angelshark can be fished from the shore using nets or fishhooks. The angelshark,
like the Mustelus, was an essential part of the diet of the early people of Puémape, a site in
the lower Jequetepeque Valley, as posited by Elera et al. (1992: 19) and Lanfranco et al. (2009:
5). The date of this occupation ranges between 3008 and 2329 B.C.
Rays [Raya] (Batoideo, Myliobatidae, Chondrichthyes, Dasyatis, Psammobatis caudispina sp.)
Rays live in sandy-rocky environments and were frequently eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru. Their
ingestion is significant particularly because it has a 31% protein content, which is quite close
to the protein content of land animals (it has more than what is found in fresh llama meat,
which has 24%). This means rays probably were the marine animals that provided the most
protein to our ancestors (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 40-41).
390
14,000 years of food in Peru
The earliest evidence showing Chondrichthyes being eaten was found in sites in the upper
Zaña Valley (in the modern-day Lambayeque Department), in strata dated to 11572-5954 B.C.
(Dillehay 2011: 334). The consumption of Chondrichthyes is striking because these sites are
nowhere near the littoral. It is therefore assumed that some type of resources was used in
order to preserve them until they reached their destination.
Eagle rays (Myliobatidae) and ... [“espinosas”] (Psammobatis caudispina, Rajidae) have been
found at Quebrada de los Burros, in strata dated to 6275-4500 B.C. (Lavallée et al. 1999: 42).
Chondrichthyes (which also include cartilaginous fish such as sharks) have been found in the
excavations undertaken at Quebrada de los Burros (Tacna) (Lavallée et al. 1999: 42). In general,
this type of fish dates to 7900-4500 B.C. in this site. Since these are pelagic fish, Béarez suggests
that they may have been fished using nets (Lavallée et al. 1999: 43).
A few remains of rays were recorded in the excavations of Huaca Prieta on the North Coast,
thus indicating they were fished and probably eaten. We can speculate, despite the problems
that arise when dating these and other remains found at this major site, that rays were being
eaten since the second or third millennium B.C.
From these data we can conclude that rays were part of the food eaten by the pre-Hispanic
populations in both the North and the South Coast since literally the last Ice Age. Rays are
thus one of the earliest fish eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru.
Quilter (1991: 279) points out that eagle rays (Mylobatidae) were part of the food eaten 2150 B.C.
by the ancient people of El Paraíso, a monumental site in the vicinity of the Chillón Valley, in Lima.
The remains of the rays eaten by the Mochica in the upper Piura Valley were recorded in the
research Kaulicke carried out in this area (Kaulicke 1991: 414). The dates indicate they were
eaten between 350 B.C. and A.D. 450.
Cárdenas et al. (1997:131) reported finding the remains of Dasyatis sp. or stingray [“raya coluda”]
at Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, which was thus part of the Mochica diet in A.D.
400-750. We should bear in mind in this regard the Mochica ceramic depictions of this fish.
Rays have also been found in contexts with food refuse left behind by the populations in the lower
Lambayeque Valley throughout a long period of time (Cupisnique, 1300 B.C.-Sicán, A.D. 1400) (Klaus
and Tam 2010: 596). This shows the long tradition ray consumption has on the northern coast of Peru.
Round Stingrays [Tapadera, Raya, Raya con Espinas] (Urotrygon sp.)
Round stingrays can be caught from the shore either using fishhooks or nets. The remains of
this species have been recorded in the urban area of the Huaca de la Luna, and may have been
eaten by the Mochica population of this site in A.D. 300-750 (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 186).
391
Elmo Leon
Blue Shark, Smooth Hammerhead Shark, Shortfin Mako Shark, Tiger Shark, Pacific Sharpnose Shark,
Great White Shark [Tintorera (Prionace glauca), tiburón martillo (Sphyrna zygaena L.), tiburón
bonito (Isurus oxyrinchus, Lamna nasus, Lamnidae), tiburón tigre (Galeocerdo cuvier), tiburón
hocicón (Rhizoprionodon longurio), tiburón blanco (Carcharadon carcharias)]
Of the sharks we must mention the blue shark (Prionace glauca) that is also known as “azul”
or “azulejo.” In Peru this fish can grow at most up to two metres long, but common specimens
usually measure one metre long. The blue shark is a warm- and temperate water pelagic species
that lives both close to the coast and in the high seas. It is extremely voracious, aggressive, and
feeds on fish and cephalopods. Fishermen consider it is one of the most dangerous sharks. It is
usually fished using nets. This is a cosmopolitan fish for its distribution extends from Alaska to
Chile (Sánchez Romero 1973: 232 y 235).
The smooth hammerhead (Sphyrna zygaena L.), another shark that was eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru,
is also known as “cruz” or “cruceta.” This species can grow up to four metres long (specimens that
were almost two metres long have been recorded at Puerto Pizarro). This shark lives in the high seas
and in coastal waters, feeds on small fish, and is considered a dangerous species. Its liver has a high
vitaminic content. Its distribution extends from California to Chile (Sánchez Romero 1973: 234-235).
The shark remains excavated at Quebrada de los Burros (Tacna) probably are the oldest eaten by
coastal groups of humans in the Early Holocene (6275-4500 B.C.). The blue shark or “tintorera”
(Prionace glauca, Charcharhinidae) was for instance eaten here.
The shortfin mako shark or “bonito” (Isurus oxyrinchus, Lamnidae) was also eaten at this site. This
is an equally aggressive species that draws closer to the shore, and may thus have been more
easily accessible to the early populations. Since these are pelagic species, Béarez concludes that
they must have been fished from the shore using nets that had been laid out perpendicularly
to the coast, or instead using chinchorro rafts. The presence of the remains of very small fish
indicates the use of very fine nets that may have been cast from watercraft. This once again
raises the question of whether nets were used to catch these sharks seven thousand years B.C.
Béarez, the ichthyologist in Lavallée’s project, believes these shark species can grow up to three
metres long and weigh over a hundred kilos, which means they comprised a high percentage of
the meat the people in this site potentially ate.
Quilter (1991: 279) reports that some time later, around 2150 B.C., sharks (Carcharhinidae) comprised
a small part of the diet of the early inhabitants of El Paraíso, a site north of Lima and almost on the
Chillón River mouth (Quilter 1991: 279).
The presence of Carcharhinidae was detected at Ostra, an archaeological site that is some sort of
camp close to the littoral north of the Santa River mouth. This means it may have been eaten at
least in 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
In his excavations at Los Gavilanes, Duccio Bonavia (1982: 194) recorded the presence of both
the tiger shark (Galeocerdo cuvier) and the Pacific sharpnose shark (Rhizoprionodon longurio),
392
14,000 years of food in Peru
which may thus have been part of the food eaten by these early settlers of the lower Huarmey
Valley. Bonavia noted that both species live close to the shore and can be fished by angling,
as is still being done at present.
Rays were also eaten on the North Coast in the Moche Valley at sites like Padre Abán, Alto Salaverry
or Gramalote during both the Moche and the Chimu occupations. It follows that though it was not
heavily consumed, it was indeed eaten in almost all periods (cf. Pozorski 1979: 168).
The Mochica who lived at Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, ate great white sharks
(Carcharadon carcharias) ca. A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 131).
Carcharhinidae and even rays were also found by the excavation of the Mochica occupation of
Pampa Grande (Lambayeque) in A.D. 711-800 (Shimada y Shimada 1981: 131).
A shortfin mako shark (Isurus oxyrinchus) tooth was found in a Wari context (A.D. 631-1000) at
Cerro Baúl, a site in the highlands of Moquegua (Moseley et al. 2005: 17269). This is an important
find because it shows that the shark, or part of it, was taken 83 km inland from the coast up to
an altitude of almost 2590 masl.
The smooth hammerhead shark (Sphyrna zygaena) was also eaten throughout a long period
(from Cupisnique in 1300 B.C., to Sicán in A.D. 1400) in the lower Lambayeque Valley (Klaus y
Tam 2010: 596).
We even have previous documentation because the remains of this shark were found in the
excavations at the site of Pampa Grande (Lambayeque), which was dated to A.D. 711-800, i.e. in a
Late Mochica context (Shimada y Shimada 1981: 131).
Requiem Sharks [Tiburón o cazón] (Carcharhinus)
This fish was found in the food refuse at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey Valley, so that
it dates at least to the third millennium B.C. (Bonavia 1982: 194).
Thus far we have listed the fish found in archaeological contexts, which in the best of cases
included the respective taxonomic identifications. Before leaving marine fish behind, there is
however a category that is find important because although no species data is provided, it does
provide some generalities.
The Fish of Huaca Prieta
Callen and Cameron (1960: 39) published their analysis of the faeces found in a human burial
at the well-known North Coast site of Huaca Prieta. This type of analysis is essential as it
directly establishes what food was ingested by our pre-Hispanic ancestors. One interesting
393
Elmo Leon
conclusion drawn by Callen and Cameron is that the individual ate fish and marine produce
abundantly before dying. Layer F is the context and while it has not been radiocarbon
dated, its position between two layers means that it can be dated between 1576-771 B.C.
and 2817-1191 B.C. Bird et al. (1985: 241) claims that fish and marine mammals were the major
dietary resources in the Preceramic epoch.
Freshwater Fish
Bryconamericus peruanus [Blanquito or Lisita de Río] (Bryconamericus peruanus)
The archaeological research undertaken at the Huaca de la Luna has documented the significant
presence of this fish in this zone in the lower Moche Valley, and which was occupied by the
Mochica in A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129). It holds 60% calories, 72% water, 13%
protein, 1% ash, 140% calcium, and is particularly rich in niacin (2.12%) and vitamin C (4.8%)
(Cárdenas et al. 1997: 141).
Pencil Catfish [Life] (Trichomycterus sp., Pygidium dispar)
The pencil catfish is a freshwater fish that was found in the excavations at the Huaca de la
Luna, in the lower Moche Valley, specifically in the Moche occupation that dates to A.D.
400-750. It may thus have been part of the food eaten by this people (Cárdenas et al. 1997:
131). The catfish’s biochemical content is 80% calories, 80.9% fat, and 15% protein (Cárdenas
et al. 1997: 140).
Gálvez Mora and Runcio (2009: 55-87) recently published an in-depth study of this fish not
just in Mochica iconography, but also in archaeological contexts. This catfish shared its
habitat with Cryphiops caementarius (Víctor Vásquez, in Gálvez Mora and Runcio) which
has yet to appear in the archaeological record, but which it is hard to believe was not eaten.
Lebiasina binaculata [Pejerrey de Río or “Charcoca”] (Lebiasina binaculata)
The remains of this fish have been recorded in the excavations of the Huaca de la Luna, so it
very likely was part of the food eaten by the Mochica in this part of the Moche valley in A.D.
400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 131). Cárdenas et al. (1997: 140-141) give the bromatology of this
fish: 75% calories, 76% water, 14% protein, 160% calcium, 165% iron, and particularly niacin (3%)
and vitamin C (5.1%).
We now leave the fish eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru and turn to other types of resources.
394
14,000 years of food in Peru
Molluscs and Crustacea
Within the context of Peru’s sea and land, molluscs and crustaceans occupy the following
position in human consumption as regards volume, and potentially protein content too. The
exoskeleton of molluscs and bivalves have been found in archaeological sites, so clearly other
types of invertebrates such as Dosidicus gigas (Humboldt squid) were most probably eaten
by the ancient Peruvians, yet no trace has been found of them. The list here made dos not
include the whole range of pre-Hispanic human consumption—a point we would do well to
bear in mind.
The study of mollusc remains found in faeces or coproliths has an enormous potential but there
are as yet very few studies in this field. Bird et al. (1995) for instance point out that in the case of
the human burial at Huaca Prieta, which probably dates to the second millennium B.C., seashells
were eaten even without first having removed their shell simply by roasting [asado] them. This
was found recorded in the human faeces remains studied by Callen and Cameron (1960). Bird
et al. (1995: 241) report various genera and occasionally some species, including Mytilus (mussel,
choro), Dosinia (semele, almeja blanca), Protothaca (Venus shell) Donax (wedge shell), and Anadara
(arck shell, concha negra) amongst the bivalves. As regards gastropods (terrestrial snails), Diadora,
Fissurela (keyhole limpet, lapa), Tegula (lapa), Crepidula striolata, Nautica, Sinum cymba, Bursa,
Ocenebria, snail (Thais), Concholepas (rock shell, pata de burro), Nassarius, and Mitra.
Crab claws indicate the ancient people of Huaca Prieta ate this crustacean probably during the
second millennium B.C. (Callen and Cameron 1960). Although all seem to be edible, very few
of them show traces of having been roasted [asados]. The largest bivalves (clams, choros, and
keyhole limpet, lapas) are the ones that most frequently appear. Snails and Concholepas (rock
shell pata de burro) were also consumed in relatively high amounts. Although there is no clear
chronological sequence that shows that changes in the diet of the people of Huaca Prieta,
molluscs were apparently eaten mostly in epochs that followed the early periods of this site.
We now turn to a list of molluscs and crustacea in terms of their respective orders and
taxonomic families (if applicable) for which archaeological information is available, i.e. whether
they were definitely or quite likely eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru, paying special attention to the
oldest evidence.
Chitons
Chiton, Acanthopleura echinata [Barquillo, Barbón, Barbudo] (Acanthopleura echinata)
Its name derives from the fact that whereas other species have ... [cerdas], Acanthopleura
echinata has spines in its cingulum. This is one of the biggest chitons on the Peruvian coast.
It also lives in rocky environments and it is found from Paita to Chile (Bonavia 1982: 188).
Scholars have recognised its high nutritional value (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 184).
395
Elmo Leon
A fair number of Acanthopleura echinata in the process of being cooked have been found, but
these were apparently eaten raw because there is no evidence of their being roasted [asado]
or cooked. This find took place at a site called PV35-4, a Middle Horizon 3 epoch (ca. A.D.
800) camp on the Central Coast’s littoral immediately north of Huarmey. Bonavia et al. (2001:
303) reported having found Acanthopleura echinata at La Laguna (PV35-106), a site close to
the former one that dates to 5320 B.C., so the consumption of Acanthopleura echinata in the
lower Huarmey Valley is well documented.
This species has also been found at Galindo, in the lower Moche Valley, during the
Mochica occupation of this site (A.D. 600-800), as follows from Lockard’s data (2005:
195). Vásquez et al. (2003: 38) and Vásquez and Rosales (2004: 340) in turn documented a
minimum amount of this species in the archaeological zones of Huaca del Sol and Huaca
de la Luna that date to the Late Moche Period, ca. A.D. 571-685, so it may have been also
eaten at this site.
Chitons [Quitones / Barquillos] (Chitonidae and Polyplacophora)
The most ancient chiton remains thus far found by scientific expeditions, which have t races
showing they were eaten, come from the Quebrada Tacahuay site on the coast of Moquegua,
just south of the modern-day city of Ilo (DeFrance and Umire 2004: 271), in a layer that was
dated to 9730-9370 B.C.
Early evidence of chiton consumption has also been found for instance at the Pampa de
los Burros site in Tacna (Lavallée et al. 1999: 38), where it was found that these were roasted
[asado] directly over bonfires that have been radiocarbon dated to 6454-4501 B.C.
The evidence for chitons found in the Ring Site south of Ilo, in Moquegua, is even more
ancient. Here Sandweiss et al. (1989: 63) found large numbers of chitons in contexts clearly
derived from consumption and which date to the first occupation of this site ca. 9500 B.C.
It should be noted that chitons were also found in domestic contexts at Pampa Colorada,
a complex of sites in the Ocoña River mouth, in the Arequipa littoral, with dates that range
between 9200 and 5400 B.C. (McInnis 2006: 381).
Another chiton species (Polyplacophora) was eaten at Paloma, a site some 65 km south of
Lima in the Chilca Valley. Here Benfer (1990) found several Middle Holocene camps. Reitz
(1988: 314) identified this species in layers that were radiocarbon dated to 5316-3630 B.C.
A small amount of chitons have been documented at Cerro Lampay, an archaeological site in
the Fortaleza Valley on the coast of Lima (Vega-Centeno 2007). El Porvenir is a site in this same
valley, albeit on the other bank, where Creamer et al. (2011: 1859) have reported the presence
of chitons that were apparently eaten and whose consumption was somewhat significant in
the diet (almost 11%). The site has been dated to 3720-1280 B.C.
396
14,000 years of food in Peru
Chitons were also part of the food eaten at Pampa de Llamas, a site in the lower Casma Valley
that dates to 2088-1243 B.C. (Pozorski and Pozorski 1986: 397).
Chitons have also been found in the ceremonial site of El Paraíso, close to the Chillón River
mouth north of Lima, with a date of around 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 280).
These molluscs have been excavated in the middens of sites such as Padre Abán, Alto Salaverry,
and Gramalote, i.e. since at least 2300 B.C. in the vicinity of the lower Moche Valley. Their
remains have also been found at Choroval, a Chimu-Inca occupation (Pozorski 1979: 168). The
tradition of chiton consumption is thus long.
Chiton [Barquillo, chitón] (Chiton granosus)
According to the research undertaken by Bonavia at Los Gavilanes, it is quite likely that this
species was not part of the diet, at least at this site (Bonavia 1982: 188). Chiton granosus lives
in the rocky littoral environment zone, between Paita and Chile.
Chiton granosus has been found in the excavations of the Mochica occupation (A.D. 600-
800) of Galindo, a site in the middle Moche Valley, so it was already being eaten at that time
(Lockard 2005: 195).
Chiton [Barquillo, chitón] (Chiton cumingsii)
This type of mollusc has only been recorded at the Huaca de la Luna and the Huaca del Sol in
minimum amounts, in a Mochica context that dated to ca. A.D. 571-685 (Vásquez et al. 2003:
38). There is no certainty as regards its consumption.
Chiton [Barquillo, chitón] (Enoplochiton niger)
Although common in Chile, Enoplochiton niger seems to be found mainly in Peru. Bonavia
(1982: 188) documented this species—which also lives in rocky littoral environments—as part
of the food eaten by the preceramic population of Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey
Valley. Close by is La Laguna (PV35-106), a site also north of the Huarmey Valley that dates to
5,320 B.C., where Bonavia et al. (2001: 303) found from the remains that Enoplochiton niger was
the animal most eaten here.
Creamer et al. (2011: 186) found chitons at Huaricanga, a preceramic public building-type site
on the left bank of the Fortaleza River Valley, on the Central Peruvian Coast, that dates to
3600-620 B.C. Its consumption comprised 4.2% of the remains found—relatively little, but it
was the fourth most eaten mollusc at the site.
397
Elmo Leon
Bonavia et al. found thirty quite well-preserved chitons (Enoplochiton niger), with their
plates and ... [placas y cinturones], close to a hearth on the littoral north of the Huarmey
River mouth at site PV35-4, have been found at site PV35-4, (Bonavia et al. (2009: 263). All
were missing their foot and visceral mass [contenido visceral], which had been evidently
removed before they were eaten, probably in raw condition as they showed no traces of
having been cooked. This type of food can be dated to ca. A.D. 800, ad this is a Middle
Horizon 3 camp-type site.
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 129) and Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 123) noted the presence of
Enoplochiton niger at the Huaca del Sol and the Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche Valley,
so the Mochica may have eaten it.
Lockard (2005: 195) reported several edible remains of this species at the Moche site of Galindo
(in the middle Moche Valley), which was occupied mainly in A.D. 600-800, so Enoplochiton
niger may already been eaten around this time.
Chiton [Barquillo] (Chaetopleura hennahi)
Chaetopleura hennahi has been reported in the Cupisnique, White-on-Red, and Chimu
occupations of the site of Puémape, thus showing its continuity throughout time at least
between 1000 B.C. and A.D. 1000-1470 (Elera et al. 1992: 17).
Limpets
Limpet (Fissurella crassa)
Fissurella crassa lives in the rocky intertidal zone from Galapagos to Chiloé Island. Bonavia
claimed its consumption in the pre-Hispanic period was relatively high, particularly in central
and southern Peru (Bonavia 1982: 185). Limpets cling to rocks and must therefore be removed
using some kind of tool.
One of the earliest pieces of evidence of medium-scale limpet consumption comes from
Quebrada de los Burros in Tacna (Lavallée et al. 1999: 37), a site that comprises small camps
with hearths used to cook this type of gastropod. Radiocarbon dates obtained in these
hearths range to 6454-4501 B.C., but there are some indications that suggest it may have been
consumed since at least 7900 B.C.
Assuming the validity of the dates obtained for the seashells from the Ring Site in Moquegua,
just south of the modern city of Ilo, limpets would have begun to be eaten in this zone around
9500 B.C., and were constantly consumed throughout this site’s occupation up to 3800 B.C.
(cf. Sandweiss et al. 1989: 63).
398
14,000 years of food in Peru
An even older date for Fissurella sp. comes from Quebrada Tacahuay, south of the city of Ilo
(Moquegua), where the remains of this species have been found in association with human
remains that date to 9730-9370 B.C. (DeFrance and Umire 2004: 271).
Fissurella sp. was reported, albeit in small amounts, in the excavations of Pampa Colorada, a
complex of sites close to the Ocoña River mouth on the coast of Arequipa, with dates that
fall between 9200 and 5400 B.C. (McInnis 2006: 381).
At Paloma, Robert Benfer’s excavations found camps and human burials, along with a large
amount of refuse left during the occupation of this site (Benfer 1990). Limpets were found
here in layers that date to entre 5316-3630 B.C.
Fissurella crassa has also been dated around this time—5320 B.C.—at La Laguna, a site (PV35-
106) that is almost on the littoral north of the Huarmey Valley (Bonavia et al. 2001: 303). Capps
(1987: 49) in turn reported finding a significant amount of this type of limpet at the site of
Chilca, so it may have been eaten between 3794 and 1530 B.C.
Fisurella sp. (limpet) has been found, albeit in scant numbers, in the archaeological middens
of Bandurria, a site close to Huacho north of Lima, so it may have been part of the resources
eaten by the inhabitants of this site between ca. 3170 and 1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 138).
Very few limpet remains were found in the excavation of Cerro Lampay, a site in the Fortaleza
Valley north of Lima (Vega Centeno 2007), which dates to 2410-2064 B.C. Porvenir is a site
in this same valley but on the other side of the rive that dates to 3720-1280 B.C. Creamer et
al. (2011: 185) reported that Fissurella was eaten up to 20% more than other molluscs, so it
comprised a significant part of the food eaten in this part of Lima in the above-mentioned
epoch.
Fissurella sp. has also been found in many archaeological sites on the North Coast, from the
Moche River mouth to the modern-day town of Huanchaco. It is present in the diet since
2300 B.C. at Padre Abán, up to sites that date to Inca times like Choroval (Pozorski 1979: 167).
Some limpet remains have also been found in the food refuse of El Paraíso, a site close to the
Chillón River mouth north of Lima, which probably date to 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 280).
Lockard (2005: 195) likewise reported a significant amount of limpet remains left behind as
food remains at Galindo, a site in the middle Moche Valley that dates to A.D. 600-800.
This species of limpet was also recorded by Bonavia et al., albeit in small amounts, at a Middle
Horizon 3 (ca. A.D. 800) site known as PV35-4, which is on the littoral north of the Huarmey
River mouth Bonavia et al. (2009: 262).
Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 123) have pointed out the presence of Fissurella sp. at Huaca
del Sol, in the lower Moche Valley, and so it was eaten by the inhabitants of this site during
399
Elmo Leon
the first centuries of the Christian era. The presence of this mollusc at the Huaca de la Luna
was also corroborated by the research undertaken by Cárdenas et al. (1997: 129) around A.D.
400-750.
Béarez et al. (2003: 59) reported the presence of a few limpets in enclosures 24 and 25 of
ramp pyramid III B in the archaeological shrine of Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley, a
context dated to A.D. 1520.
Giant Keyhole Limpet [Blanco o lapa reina] (Fissurella maxima)
The giant keyhole limpet, which clings firmly to the rocks on the littoral and withstands
the pounding of the waves, is greatly esteemed for its meat (Bonavia 1982: 185). It lives from
Manta (Ecuador) to Valparaíso (Chile) (Sánchez Romero 1973: 264), and is likewise highly
known for its great nutritional value (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 184).
Duccio Bonavia (2009: 262) showed the giant keyhole limpet was present in site PV35-4, on
La Honda beach north of the Huarmey Valley, but it was not frequently eaten. Bonavia et al.
likewise recorded the presence of this limpet at a site known as La Laguna (PV35-106) close
to Huarmey, where it has been dated to 5320 B.C. Its consumption thus seems to go back at
least to the Middle Holocene.
This type of limpet has also been found in no small amounts of food refuse (particularly
that left behind by the ruling elite) during the Mochica occupation of Galindo, a site in the
middle Moche Valley, which dated to ca. A.D. 600-800 (Lockard 2005: 195).
Statistically significant remains of this species have also been reported at Huaca de la Luna
and Huaca del Sol, with dates that ranged between A.D. 571 and A.D. 685 (Cárdenas et al.
1997: 129, Vásquez et al. 2003: 38).
Keyhole limpet [Lapa viuda] (Fissurella latimarginata)
Fissurella latimarginata was found in the excavations undertaken at Puémape, a site in the
Jequetepeque River mouth (Elera et al. 1992: 17), during its Cupisnique (ca.1000-200 B.C),
White-on-Red Horizon (300-100 B.C.) and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470) occupations.
Peruvian Keyhole Limpet [Lapa] (Fissurella peruviana)
The Peruvian keyhole limpet has been recorded at Puémape, a site in the Jequetepeque
River mouth (Elera et al. 1992: 17), during its Cupisnique (ca.1000-200 B.C), White-on-Red
Horizon (300-100 B.C.) and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470) occupations.
400
14,000 years of food in Peru
Keyhole limpet [Lapa “gaviota”] (Scurria parasítica) y Fissurella limbata
These are often found moving between chitons and limpets, and they leave their trace over
[??: e impregnan su huella sobre] Fissurella limbata (Guzmán et al. 1998: 28-29, 31-32), so they
live lodged in other molluscs. Their high nutritional value is well-known (Vásquez and Rosales
1998: 184). Reitz recorded their presence at the site of Paloma, on the coast some 65 km south
of Lima, in association with the above-mentioned bivalves. It was [fue] apparently eaten by
the ancient inhabitants of this site. The calibrated dates of the layers these remains come
from range between 5316 and 3630 B.C.
Scurria sp. has been recorded, albeit in small numbers, at Pampa Colorada, a complex of sites
in the vicinity of the Ocoña River mouth on the Arequipa littoral, with dates ranging between
9200 and 5400 B.C. (McInnis 2006: 381).
Bonavia has however suggested that this probably is an incidental species at preceramic sites
that may not have been eaten at all (Bonavia 1982: 185). Both Fissurella limbata and Scurria
parasítica are amongst the molluscs most recorded at PV35-4—third and ninth, respectively—a
site on La Honda beach north of the Huarmey River mouth dated to ca. A.D. 800 (Bonavia et
al. 2009: 264).
Bonavia et al. recorded this same species at La Laguna (PV35-106), a site close to the coast on the
northern side of the Huarmey Valley, which means it dates to ca. 5300 B.C. (Bonavia et al. 2001: 303).
Fissurella limbata was found at Galindo, a site on the North Coast’s middle Moche Valley. Here it
has been recorded among the Mochica, and was especially eaten by the elite (Lockard 2005: 195).
Fissurella limbata was found when the molluscs from the Huaca de la Luna site, in the Moche
Valley, were analysed (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129). Both Fissurella limbata and Scurria parasitica
thus have a relative presence at Huaca del Sol and Huaca de la Luna in a fully Mochica context
that dates to ca. A.D. 571-685 (Vásquez et al. 2003: 38).
[Patela] (Collisella ceciliana)
Just one fragment of Collisella ceciliana has been detected in the food refuse left by the
ancient inhabitants of Cerro Lampay in the Fortaleza Valley (Vega-Centeno 2007). The dates
for this site range between 2410 and 2064 B.C. It is to be wondered whether this can be
considered food residue.
Green Chilean Limpet [Señorita o sombrerito chino] (Scurria viridula, Acmaeidae)
This is a big limpet that lives in the rocky littoral environmental zone, on rocks covered with
algae, and which is only occasionally eaten (Bonavia 1982: 185-186).
401
Elmo Leon
The green Chilean limpet has been found for instance at El Paraíso, a site north of Lima close
to the lower Chillón River Valley, so it can be dated starting in 2150 B.C.
Scurria viridula has also been recorded in the excavations at the Huaca de la Luna, in the
lower Moche Valley, where it dated to ca. A.D. 400-750, and so was part of the Mochica diet
(Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129).
The green Chilean limpet was also recorded in the excavations at Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque River during its Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.) and
Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470) occupations.
Small Snails [Caracolitos]
[Caracol Negro or Caracol Turbante (Tegula atra), Caracol Negro (Tegula euryomphalus)]
This snail lives in a rocky littoral environment but on small rocks, and it is not eaten nowadays
even though its meat is delicious (Bonavia 1982: 186) and has a high nutritional value (Vásquez
and Rosales 1998: 184).It is found from Pacasmayo to the Strait of Magellan and the Patagonia.
Lavallée and her team found a series of hearths at Quebrada de los Burros. Here a few snail
(Tegula) remains that were part of human consumption were uncovered (Lavallée et al. 1999:
38). The radiocarbon dates range between 6454 and 4501 B.C., but they may go back to the
eight millennium B.C. Since they were found in combustion contexts, it is conceivable that
they were eaten roasted [asados].
Sandweiss et al. reported finding Tegula atra, albeit in small amounts, at the Ring Site south
of Ilo, in the modern department of (Sandweiss et al. 1989: 63). They go back to ca. 8000 B.C.
Tegula has also been found among the food refuse at the site of El Paraíso, which is in the
lower Chillón Valley north of Lima, and for a period that begins around 2150 B.C. (Quilter et
al. 1991: 280).
Cárdenas recorded this type of snail in her excavations at Salinas de Chao as part of the food
eaten since at least 1900 B.C. (Cárdenas 1999).
Tegula sp., Tegula euryomphalus, and Tegula atra comprise less than 1% of all the molluscs
consumed in Caral’s Sector A, which dates to 2418-2185 B.C. (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
Tegula atra (the ‘caracol turbante’) was excavated in the Gallery of the Offerings at Chavín de
Huántar, where it dated to 1218-812 B.C. (Sandweiss and Rodríguez 1993: 406-407). Although
this was an offering made at this site, it may have been part of its people’s diet.
402
14,000 years of food in Peru
Tegula atra has likewise been found in the middens of archaeological sites like Padre Abán
(2300 B.C.), Alto Salaverry (1670 B.C.), Gramalote (1810 B.C.), Caballo Muerto (Early Horizon, i.e.
ca. 1200-300 B.C.), and even in sites that date to the Chimu-Inca epoch (Pozorski 1979: 167).
Pedregal is a site also in the lower Jequetepeque Valley where Cutright recorded Tegula atra
remains during the Chimu epoch (Cutright 2009: 178). Gumerman showed the Chimu people
of Pacatnamú also ate this snail (Gumerman 1991). El Túnel is a site in this same area that
dates to the initial phase of the Mochica culture (around the first century of our era), where
significant amounts of Tegula atra have also been recorded (Vásquez and Rosales 1993: 86).
Tegula atra was eaten in significant amounts—especially by the elites—at Galindo, in the
North Coast’s middle Moche Valley, by the Mochica, and somewhat less by the Chimu
(Lockard 2005: 195). This same snail species was found in domestic contexts in the Huaca del
Sol and the Huaca de la Luna alongside Tegula euryomphalus, with dates that go back to A.D.
470-600; this means it was also eaten in the centre of the Moche culture (Cárdenas et al. 1997:
129, Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 123).
Gumerman and Briceño likewise showed the relative abundance of this snail in Santa Rosa
Quirihuac (ca. A.D. 100) and Ciudad de Dios (ca. A.D. 400, in a fully Mochica context), two sites
in the middle Moche Valley (Gumerman and Briceño 2003: 237).
Tegula atra had a low occurrence in the excavation of a Middle Horizon epoch 3 (ca. A.D. 800)
camp site on the littoral immediately north of the Huarmey Valley (Bonavia et al. 2009: 264).
Tegula sp. has likewise been reported among the food remains left by the Mochica in the site
of Pampa Grande (Lambayeque), with dates that range between A.D. 711 and 800, as has been
interpreted (Shimada y Shimada 1981: 32).
Tegula euryomphalum has been recorded in the excavations of Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque River during its Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.) and
Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470) occupations (Elera et al. 1992: 17).
This snail species has also been recorded in the excavations of enclosures 24 and 25 of ramp
pyramid III B at Pachacamac, thus evincing its consumption (Béarez et al. 2003: 66). The mean
radiocarbon date gave A.D. 1520.
Snail [Caracol] (Tegula tridentata)
Tegula tridentata lives in the rocky littoral environment, and is sometimes appears
associated with Tegula atra (Bonavia 1982: 186). Tegula atra and Tegula tridentate were
found in association at the site of La Laguna (PV35-106), on the littoral to the north of the
Huarmey River mouth; they dated to 5320 B.C. (Bonavia et al. 2001: 303), and are assumed
to have been eaten.
403
Elmo Leon
[Caracolito negro, lapa] (Turbo niger, Prisogaster niger)
This mollusc lives in small, algae-covered rocks in the littoral and the supralittoral environment;
it is of scant alimentary value due to its size (Bonavia 1982: 186), but others disagree (Vásquez
and Rosales 1998: 184).
The consumption of this bivalve species goes back around to 8000 B.C. if we consider the
finds Sandweiss et al. made at the Ring Site south of Ilo, in Moquegua (Sandweiss et al.
1989: 63).
This mollusc has also been found in the Tacna littoral at Quebrada de los Burros, with dates
that range between 7900 and 4500 B.C. (Lavallée and Béarez 2012: 128).
Prisogaster níger comprises just 0.16% of all of the molluscs found at Caral in the Supe
Valley. They were found in this site’s Sector A, so it dates to ca. 2418-2185 B.C. (Shady and
Leiva 2003: 114).
These snails were also eaten at the site of El Paraíso north of Lima, in the lower Chillón Valley,
since around 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 280).
A small number of snails (Turbo niger) have been excavated in some archaeological sites in the
lower Moche Valley like Padre Abán and Caballo Muerto, even in the Chimu-Inca epoch (2300
B.C.-A.D. 1460) (Pozorski 1979: 167).
We know from the research undertaken by Robyn Cutright at Pedregal, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, that this small snail species comprised a relatively significant part (11% of
molluscs) of the food eaten by this population in the Chimu epoch (Robyn Cutright 2009: 177).
La Mina is a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley where Mochica tombs have been found
that date to the first century of our era, i.e. the first phase of this culture. Here, Vásquez and
Rosales (1994: 86) recorded the remains of this type of mollusc, so it was quite probably part
of the food eaten by this people.
This type of small snail has been recorded in the excavation of Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque River, for its Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.) and Chimu
(A.D. 1000-1470) occupations (Elera et al. 1992: 17).
Lockard (2005: 198) excavated Galindo in the lower Moche Valley, where he found significant
numbers of Prisogaster niger; this was part of the food eaten in the Moche culture (A.D. 600-
800), but was little consumed during the Chimu occupation of this site.
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 129), Roselló et al. (2001: 76), and Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 123) have
reported the presence of this snail in the Huaca del Sol and the Huaca de la Luna, where it
comprised 1.6% of the molluscs eaten in this zone.
404
14,000 years of food in Peru
Prisogaster niger has been somewhat frequently found at Santa Rosa-Quirihuac and Ciudad
de Dios, two sites in the middle Moche Valley (Gumerman and Briceño 2003: 237). Turbo niger
was recorded by the excavations of Pampa Grande (A.D. 711-800), a site in the modern-day
Lambayeque department so it may have been part of the diet eaten at this time (Shimada and
Shimada 1981: 32).
This type of snail has been found as a relict of the food eaten in enclosures 24 and 25 in ramp
pyramid IIB at Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín valley (Béarez et al. 2003: 66), which gave a mean
date of A.D. 1520.
Snail [Caracolillo] (Littorina peruviana)
Littorina peruviana lives in rocky areas in the infralittoral zone. It is considered to be of very
low alimentary value (Bonavia 1982: 186). It is found from Nicaragua to Chile (Sánchez Romero
1973: 266).
Littorina peruviana has been found in very low numbers at Galindo, a site in the North
Coast’s middle Moche Valley, in contexts pertaining to the Mochica culture (A.D. 600-800)
per Lockard (2005: 195).
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 129) and Vásquez et al. (2003: 38) reported this type of snail at Huaca
del Sol and Huaca de la Luna in the Moche Valley, with dates that fall in the late stage of the
Mochica culture in A.D. 571-685.
Elera et al. (1992: 17) in turn reported the remains of this mollusc at Puémape a site in the
lower Jequetepeque River, for its Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.) and
Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations.
Snail [Caracolito] (Collumbella fuscata)
Collumbella fuscata may have been part of the food eaten by the ancient inhabitants of
Puémape, a North Coast site on the littoral south of the Jequetepeque River mouth, as
remains that go back to the Chimu occupation (ca. A.D. 1000-1460) have been found (Elera et
al. 1992: 18).
Snails and Cone Snails [Caracoles y conos]
[Caracol tornillo] (Turritella sp.)
At present it has only been recorded in the Chimu occupation of Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley (Elera et al. 1992: 17).
405
Elmo Leon
Snail [Caracolito] (Cerithium stercusmuscarum)
This mollusc has been recorded at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque River, in
its Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.) and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460)
occupations (Elera et al. 1992: 17). There is no evidence of culinary processing, but we can
speculate that it was indeed consumed.
Snail [Caracolito] (Cerithidea valida)
The only evidence of its probable consumption comes from the archaeological sites in the
upper Zaña Valley, where Tom Dillehay (2011: 334) has reported the presence of this species’
remains in strata that date on average to 8011-5954 B.C.
[Caracol cresta de gallo] (Epitonium sp.)
This mollusc has only been recorded during the Chimu occupation (ca. A.D. 1000-1470) of Puémape,
a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley (Elera et al. 1992: 17), and is assumed to have been eaten.
[Caracol blanco] (Polinices cf. Cora, Polinices uber)
This gastropod feeds on other snails, which it pierced in order to eat their flesh. It lives on
the sandy intertidal seafloor up to a depth of a hundred metres (usually at a depth of 15-20
metres), and is found from Baja California to southern Peru.
Lanfranco et al. (2009: 5) observed that in the most ancient occupation of Puémape, a site
south of the lower Jequetepeque Valley, Polinices uber was the most important food item at
the site—it comprised about 59% of the diet along with [??: así como] Balanus tintinnabulum
in 3008-2329 B.C., which means it was eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru some five thousand years ago.
Polinices uber was also significant for the diet of the people of Pedregal, a site in this same
valley but in Chimu times, where it comprised 38% of all molluscs (Cutright 2009: 177). The
data on this species thus evidently comes from the North Coast.
Sandweiss et al. (1989: 63) observed the presence of scant remains of this species at the Ring
Site south of Ilo (Moquegua), where it was eaten around 4000 B.C.
Polinice sp. was part of the food eaten at Caral, where it was found, albeit in scant numbers, in
Sector A of this site, with dates that range to 2418-2185 B.C. (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
With his excavations at Bandurria, Alejandro Chu (2008: 138) showed that Polinices uber was
the second mollusc most eaten by the inhabitants of this site in 3170-1610 B.C.
406
14,000 years of food in Peru
Quilter et al. (1991: 280) showed this snail was eaten at El Paraíso, a site in the lower Chillón
Valley north of Lima, at least since 2150 B.C.
Shelia Pozorski (1979: 167) reported the presence of Polinices uber at Chan Chan, which shows
it was eaten in negligible amounts on the North Coast at least in A.D. 1000-1460. It was also
eaten during the Chan Chan occupation of Pacatnamú, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley
(Gumerman 1991), and somewhat frequently at Pedregal—a site not far away from Pacatnamú—
during the Chimu period (Cutright 2009). It was eaten in higher numbers at Pedregal during the
late Moche occupation around A.D. 800. This is confirmed on reviewing the results attained
by the research undertaken by Vásquez and Rosales (1993: 86, 91) at La Mina, a site on the left
bank of the Jequetepeque River mouth that dates to the early Mochica culture, around the
first century of our era. Polinices uber is also by far the most eaten mollusc. The evidence of
its consumption is that it is the only mollusc species in this site that has traces of combustion,
which means it was subjected to fire in order to roast it.
This species has likewise been found at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque River,
where it has been identified in its Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.) and
Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470) occupations.
Polinices uber was consumed at Galindo, albeit in small amounts, both in Mochica (A.D. 600-800)
as well as in Chimu times (Lockard 2005: 195). Also in the Moche Valley, the presence of this snail
has been reported in small number at Huaca de la Luna and Huaca del Sol, with dates that range
to A.D. 571-685 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129, Vásquez et al. 2003: 38). The Mochica of the site of Pampa
Grande (Lambayeque) also consumed Polinices uber in A.D. 711-800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 32).
Polinices sp. was also eaten in enclosures 24 and 25 of ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac, in the
lower Lurín Valley (Lima). The radiocarbon date of this context is A.D. 1520, which falls in the
Inca Empire (Béarez et al. 2003: 66).
Moonsnail [Caracol luna] (Polinices intermeratus)
At present the only find made of this snail comes from Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley where Elera et al. (1992: 17) have reported it for the Cupisnique (1000-
200 B.C.) and White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.) occupations.
Concave Ear Moon Snail [Orejón, Abalón, Caracol Babosa, Chanque] (Sinum cymba)
The concave ear moon snail lives in the sublittoral zone on sandy-muddy floors, but it is not
often used as food according to Bonavia (1982: 186).
Only one fragment of the concave ear moon snail has been found in the excavations of Cerro Lampay,
a site in the Fortaleza Valley north of Lima (Vega Centeno 2007), which dates to 2410-2064 B.C.
407
Elmo Leon
This snail has also been found in the excavations of Huaca del Sol, in the lower Moche Valley,
during the first centuries of the Christian era (Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 123), as well as in the
Huaca de la Luna in A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129). It is thus likely that it was eaten
by the people of these Mochica sites.
At Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, Elera et al. (1992: 17) have reported the
presence of this mollusc during its Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.)
and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470) occupations.
Snail [Caracol] (Cymatium wiegmani)
Thus far this snail has only been found in the zone of Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley (Elera et al. 1992: 17), in Chimu contexts (ca. A.D. 1000-1470), but it is not clear whether
it was eaten or not .
[Caracol Rosado, Caracol Gringo] (Bursa ventricosa)
Bursa ventricosa lives at a depth of about 50 metres, but in Callao it has been gathered at
four metres. Bonavia claims this type of gastropod may have been part of the diet since the
Preceramic Period (Bonavia 1982: 187).
Bursa ventricosa was likewise recorded in the excavations undertaken by Elera et al. (1992:
17) at Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, during the site’s three occupations, i.e.
Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.), and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470), so its
long-lasting consumption along the North Coast of Peru can be inferred.
Lockard (2005: 195) recorded just one specimen of Bursa ventricosa in a Chimu context— A.D.
1000-1460—at Galindo, a site in the middle Moche Valley
[Caracol Sapo] (Bursa nana)
Bursa nana has thus far been recorded only at Puémape (Elera et al.1992: 17), a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley where it is exclusively associated with the Chimu occupation (A.D. 1000-
1470), so we can assume that the inhabitants of this site ate it.
Chilean Abalone or Rock shell [Pata de Burro, Chanque, or Loco] (Concholepas concholepas)
Duccio Bonavia (1982:187) believed that Chilean abalone was one of the species most
consumed in Peru during the Preceramic Period. It lives in rocky areas in the littoral, and still
408
14,000 years of food in Peru
makes a major contribution to the coastal diet. Some kind of lever, like stone chips or tools,
had to be used in order to remove it from the rocks, as was reconstructed by Bonavia with his
experiments in shellfish gathering at Huarmey.
Chilean abalone has a high alimentary value. Lavallée et al. (1999: 39) point out it probably
has the highest amount of protein in comparison with other molluscs (21%). It also has a high
sodium (318.6 mg), potassium (317.3 mg), and magnesium (119.1 mg) content in every 100 grams.
The significance of sodium as regards its salt content and the benefit of the body’s acid base
balance—and other properties like the fact that it enables an efficient digestion—follow from
this mollusc’s consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru.
The most ancient evidence of Chilean abalone consumption comes from Quebrada Tacahuay,
a site south of Ilo on the coast of Moquegua, where its remains have been found in a stratum
that dated to 9730-9370 B.C. (DeFrance y Umire 2004).
Chilean abalone comprises the second most important group of molluscs eaten that was
excavated at the Ring Site (in Moquegua south of Ilo). Sandweiss et al. found it was present
from the beginning of the occupation, i.e. ca. 9500 B.C. if we accept the validity of the shells’
radiocarbon dates (Sandweiss et al. 1989: 63).
A significant amount of Concholepas concholepas was found in the Pampa Colorada complex
on the Arequipa littoral, almost on the Ocoña River mouth, where site PC-500 was excavated;
they are believed to have been collected as food. This site has dates that range between 9200
and 7490 B.C. (McInnis 2006: 340).
Large numbers of Chilean abalone were roasted in simple hearths in the archaeological site
of Quebrada de los Burros since at least 7900 B.C. (Lavallée et al. 1999: 37). It apparently was
the major component in the diet of this people, the first inhabitants of Tacna (Lavallée and
Béarez 2012: 128).
From this information it follows that Chilean abalone was often eaten on the South coast of
Peru since literally the last Ice Age, some ten thousand years ago.
Duccio Bonavia et al. (2001: 303) found remains of Chilean abalone among the food refuse of
La Laguna (PV35-106), a site close to the Huarmey River mouth, which dated to 5320 B.C.
This mollusc was also found to have been part of the food eaten by the early inhabitants of
Tablada de Lurín, a site close to the mouth of the Lurín Valley on its right bank, with dates that
fall between 5621 and 5040 B.C. (Makowski 2004).
Capps has reported the presence of Chilean abalone at Paloma, a series of Middle Holocene
huts south of Lima that date to 5316-3630 B.C., as well as at Asia in the Mala Valley, which
dates to 1490 B.C. (Capps 1987: 36, 58).
409
Elmo Leon
It is thus clear that Chilean abalone was eaten on the Central Coast since at least the Middle
Holocene.
Concholepas concholepas was the third most eaten mollusc (10.33%) at Caral, a site with
monumental archaic architecture, at least in 2418-2185 B.C. (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
Scant remains of Chilean abalone have been excavated in the middens at Cerro Lampay, close
to the Fortaleza Valley (Vega-Centeno 2007). The dates from this site show snails were eaten
in 2410-2064 B.C. For this same valley Creamer et al. reported just a 2.94% occurrence of
Chilean abalone in 3600-600 B.C. at Huaricanga, a Late Preceramic site, and 6% at Porvenir, a
site also in this valley just six kilometres away from the littoral, with dates that fell in 3720-
1280 B.C. (Creamer et al. (2011: 185-186).
El Paraíso is a site close to the Chillón River mouth north of Lima, where Quilter et al. have recorded
the remains of Chilean abalone, which possibly date to 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 280).
This mollusc was thus much consumed on the Central Coast of Peru in 5000-2000 B.C.
Chilean abalone was frequently eaten on the North Coast since the first millennium B.C. Its
consumption has been documented both in Alto Salaverry (1600 B.C.) as well as at Choroval, as
part of the Chimu-Inca occupation of the North Coast (Pozorski 1979: 168). The site of Galindo is
not far away in the middle Moche Valley. Here Lockard recorded a small amount of Concholepas
concholepas remains from Moche times, between A.D 600 and 800 (Lockard 2005: 195). Cárdenas
et al. (1997: 129), Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 123), and Vásquez et al. (2003: 38) likewise noted the
occurrence of Chilean abalone in a Late Mochica context dating to A.D. 571-685 at the Huaca de
la Luna and the Huaca del Sol, in the lower Moche Valley.
Concholepas concholepas has been recorded at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley, associated with the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.), and
Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470) occupations (Elera et al. 1992: 17). Its consumption in certain parts of
the North Coast thus seems to be a tradition.
Chilean abalone has also been excavated—albeit in small amounts—at site PV35-4, at La Honda
beach, immediately to the north of the Huarmey River mouth (Bonavia et al. 2009: 264).
It has also been found as food remains in enclosures 24 and 25 of ramp pyramid III B at
Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley, and has a date that averages to A.D. 1520, i.e. in the final
phase of the Inca Empire (Béarez et al. 2003: 66).
Snail [Caracol] (Thais callaoensis)
Thais callaoensis lives in the rocks in the littoral environment and even in the sublittoral zone,
and is found from Paita to Mala (Bonavia 1982: 187).
410
14,000 years of food in Peru
Thais callaoensis has been reported, albeit in scant number, in the excavation of the mausoleum
of a Mochica individual from the beginning of our era at La Mina, a site on the left bank in the
lower Jequetepeque Valley (Vásquez and Rosales 1994: 86).
Thais callaoensis has been found at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley but only in
two of its occupations, Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.) and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470) (Elera et al.1992: 17).
[Caracol negro, caracol plomo] (Thais -Stramonitae - chocolata)
Lavallée et al. claim this snail has a high protein value (20.6%, just below that in machas)
as well as the highest rate of magnesium in comparison with other molluscs (538.7 mg per
every 100 grams) (Lavallée et al. 1999: 39). Its ingestion was thus highly nutritional for the pre-
Hispanic population of the Peruvian coast.
This snail lives on the rocks in the littoral environment and is frequently gathered, even today. In Peru
it is found from Paita to Mala (Bonavia 1982: 187), and as far as Valparaíso (Chile). It is usually caught
between May and December. It is usually found in association with clams [choros], so it should come
as no surprise if both species are found in archaeological sites (Sánchez Romero 1973: 255).
It was found at Quebrada de los Burros, a site in Tacna, that Thais chocolata was roasted
[asado] for consumption in hearths. The radiocarbon dates for these hearths came to 7626
and 4501 B.C., but it is believed that some dates go back to the eighth millennium B.C.
Similar dates (around 8000 B.C.) were given for the remains of this snail found at the Ring Site
in southern Ilo (Moquegua), where Sandweiss et al. recorded Thais chocolata in a domestic
food context (Sandweiss et al. 1989: 63). A somewhat more recent date for this mollusc was
reported for La Laguna, site PV35-106 in the littoral close to the Huarmey River mouth, which
was supposedly consumed around 5320 B.C. (Bonavia 2001: 303).
Lanfranco et al. observed the presence of Thais chocolata as part of the diet of the people
at Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, in 3008-2329 B.C. (Lanfranco et al. (2009: 5).
Thais chocolata also frequently appears at sites like Ancón, a midden known in Lima that has a series
of occupations, one of which can be tentatively dated in the late Preceramic, around 3000 B.C..
This type of snail was also reported by Quilter et al. for the ceremonial site of El Paraíso in
the Chillón Valley, north of Lima, where it was evidently consumed, probably since 2150 B.C.
(Quilter et al. 1991: 280).
Mercedes Cárdenas recorded Thais chocolata at Salinas de Chao on the North Coast, where
it was eaten by humans at least since 1900 B.C. (Mercedes Cárdenas 1999). Also on the coast
is Asia, a site in the Mala Valley where Capp reported Thais chocolata amongst the food
remains left by the inhabitants of this site around 1490 B.C.
411
Elmo Leon
Thais chocolata was also reported by Pozorski in some North Coast sites, and in different periods
around the Moche Valley (Pozorski 1979: 167). It was clearly eaten since at least 1600 B.C., as can
be shown at Alto Salaverry, and also during Moche and later in Chimu-Inca occupations.
Still in the Moche Valley, Cárdenas et al. (1997: 129), Roselló et al. (2001: 76), and Pozorski and
Pozorski (2003: 123) recorded at least 1% of Thais chocolata in the remains of the food eaten
by the Moche people of Huaca del Sol and Huaca de la Luna in A.D. 470-600. In the middle
Moche Valley, Gumerman and Briceño noted the presence of this snail at the sites of Santa
Rosa-Quirihuac (ca. A.D. 100, i.e. the Gallinazo culture-Moche 1) and at Ciudad de Dios (ca.
A.D. 400) (Gumerman and Briceño 2003: 237). It has also been noted that the Mochica of
Pampa Grande also ate it (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 32).
Thais chocolata has likewise been recorded at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley where Elera et al. (1992: 17) have reported it in the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-
on-Red (300-100 B.C.), and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470) occupations.
This snail was also identified amongst the food remains at Pedregal, a Chimu site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley (Cutright 2009: 178). La Mina is a site in this same valley where a Mochica
tomb that dated to around the first century of the Christian era was found. Here Vásquez and
Rosales (1994: 86) recorded a few remains of this snail, which must have been part of the food
eaten by the Moche people at this time.
Thais chocolata was also recorded as food residues in the excavations of enclosures 24 and 25
in ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac (in the lower Lurín Valley). The radiocarbon date for this
context is A.D. 1520 (Béarez et al. 2003: 66).
Snail [Caracol] (Thais -Stramonita - biserialis)
Very little is as yet known regarding the consumption of this type of snail in Peru’s archaeological
record. All that could be established is that in his excavations at Pacatnamú, Gumerman (1991)
was able to identify some remains of this species, which was part of its population’s diet
during the Chimu epoch. It may likewise have been eaten by the Mochica, as it has been found
at the site of the Huaca de la Luna in A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129).
Carlos Elera et al. (1992) noted that this species has been found at Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, in Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.) and Chimu
(A.D. 1000-1470) contexts.
Snail [Caracol] (Thais - Stramonita - delessertiana)
This gastropod does not frequently appear in Peruvian sites, but in her study of pre-Hispanic
food around the Moche Valley and at Chan Chan, Pozorski was able to record its presence
412
14,000 years of food in Peru
since the late Preceramic—ca. 2330 B.C.—at Padre Abán, as well as at Alto Salaverry, Gramalote,
and parts of the Chan Chan citadel, albeit in scant number (Pozorski 1979: 167).
Like Thais biserialis, some remains of Thais delessertiana have been recorded only at Pacatnamú
(Gumerman 1991), where it was eaten during its Chimu occupation. A Mochica burial was recorded
in the Early Mochica (around the beginning of the Christian era) site of La Mina, on the other ...
[vertiente] of the Jequetepeque Valley, which included a series of snails of this species; although few
in number, they may have been part of the food eaten at the time (Vásquez and Rosales 1994: 86).
Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 123) found some remains of this snail at Huaca del Sol, so it was
quite likely eaten (albeit in very small numbers) by the Mochica at this site during the first
centuries of the Christian era. This was confirmed by Cárdenas et al., who recorded it at Huaca
de la Luna in A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129). Thais delessertiana was also eaten by the
Mochica people of Pampa Grande (Lambayeque) in A.D. 711-800 (Shimada y Shimada 1981: 32).
Thais delessertiana was also found at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley where
Elera et al. (1992: 17) identified it in the site’s three occupations—Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.),
White-on-Red (A.D. 300-100), and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470).
Snail [Caracol] (Thais - Thaisella - kiosquiformis)
Lockard (2005: 185) showed the presence of this type of snail—albeit is small amounts—in
Galindo, a site in the middle Moche Valley. This has been interpreted as meaning this snail
could have been part of the food its Mochica population had in A.D. 600-800.
Rock snail [Caracol de Roca] (Thais - Stramonita - haemastoma)
This snail lives in the rocky littoral environment and in some cases in the sublittoral zones and
is spread all over the Peruvian coast (Bonavia 1982: 187). It has a high nutritional value (Vásquez
and Rosales 1998: 184).
Lanfranco et al. (2009: 5) documented its presence—5.43%—in the earliest human occupation
of Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley dated to ca. 3008-2329 B.C. Cutright
(2009: 177) observed the presence of Thais –Stramonita during the Chimu occupation (A.D.
1000-1460) of Pedregal, a site in this same valley.
Lockard (2005: 198) documented large numbers of Thais –Stramonita at Galindo, a site on the
Northern Coast of Peru in the middle Moche Valley that were part of the food its people had
particularly during the Moche epoch in A.D. 600-800, and much less in Chimú times.
Roselló et al. (2001: 75) documented Thais –Stramonita at the Huaca del Sol and the
Huaca de la Luna in the Moche Valley that dated to A.D. 470-600 (Cárdenas et al. 1997:
413
Elmo Leon
129). It has also been recorded, albeit in small amounts, in the Middle Horizon epoch 3 (ca.
A.D. 800) camp site PV35-4, which is on the littoral north of the Huarmey Valley (Bonavia et
al. 2009: 264).
Elera et al. (1992: 17)found the remains of this mollusc at Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, in contexts belonging to the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red
(300-100 B.C., and Chimú (A.D. 1000-1460) cultures.
Béarez et al. (2003: 66) documented the remains of this type of snail as food residues in
enclosures 24 and 25 of ramp pyramid IIIB in the Pachacamac archaeological shrine in the
lower Lurín Valley, which were dated on average to A.D. 1520.
[Caracolito] (Xanthochorus buxea)
The utmost northern distribution of Xanthochorus buxea extends to the mouth of the
Jequetepeque River.
One of the most ancient finds of Xanthochorus buxea comes from the well-known site of
Caral, where Flores Blanco (2006: 148) reports it was eaten albeit in small amounts. These
snails were subjected to fire for cooking, because hearths have been found at this site. We
thus know that it was eaten on the coast of Peru since at least 2600 B.C. Another report points
out that Xantochorus buxea was excavated at Caral in Sector A and dated to 2418-2185 B.C.
Although it scantly appeared (0.24% of the molluscs eaten), Xantochorus buxea may have
been part of the food its ancient inhabitants had (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
Xantochorus buxea has also been found at Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, where
Elera et al. (1992: 17) reported it for the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (300-100
B.C.), and Chimú (A.D. 1000-1470) occupations.
In her study of the resources found in Chimú times at Pedregal, in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley, Cutright (2009: 178) discovered that this site’s population fed minimally on this snail.
According to Lockard (2005: 198), Xantochorus buxea was eaten in small amounts at Galindo,
in the middle Jequetepeque Valley, between A.D. 600 and 800.
Xantochorus buxea has been detected at the Huaca del Sol and the Huaca de la Luna with
a similar date (A.D. 470-600) (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129, Roselló et al. 2001: 76). It has likewise
been recorded in food residues from the excavations made in enclosures 24 and 25 of ramp
pyramid III B in Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley. Radiocarbon dates gave a mean of A.D.
1,520 (Béarez et al. 2003: 66).
414
14,000 years of food in Peru
[Caracol Buccino] (Cantharus cf. Inca, Cantharus elegans, Cantharus fusiformes)
Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 123) have documented the remains of this type of snail at Huaca
del Sol, in the lower Moche Valley, so it is highly likely that it was eaten by the people of this
culture during the first centuries of our era. Cantharus elegans in turn has been documented
in small amounts at La Mina, a Moche site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, approximately
during the first century of our era (Vásquez and Rosales 1994: 86).
Cantharus elegans has also been found at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley
where Elera et al. (1992: 17) recorded the remains of this species in association with the White-
on-Red Horizon (300-100 B.C.) and Chimú (A.D. 1000-1470) cultures.
The only evidence of the possible consumption of Cantharus fusiformes comes from Pampa
Grande (Lambayeque), a site where Shimada and Shimada (1981: 32) have found it in Mochica
contexts that dating to ca. 711-800 B.C.
Snail [Caracol] (Solenosteira fusiformis)
Solenosteira fusiformis lives at a depth of between five and eight metres on sandy, and muddy
surfaces, and on algae. Its distribution extends from Panamá to Chincha (Bonavia 1982: 187).
Elera et al. (1992: 18) found this type of snail on the North Coast at Puémape, south of the
mouth of the Jequetepeque River, during the White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100) and Chimú
(A.D. 1000-1460) occupations, so it may have been part of this site’s diet.
Solenosteira fusiformis has also been found at the Huaca de la Luna in the lower Moche Valley
during the early centuries of our era, so it is possible that it was part of the food eaten by the
Mochica (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 341).
[Caracol Buccino] (Columbrella paytensis)
Columbrella paytensis was documented at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley,
but only for Chimú times (Elera et al. 1992: 18). It is not clear whether it did form part of the
food eaten at this archaeological site.
[Caracolito] (Anachis sp.)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) documented Anachis sp. at Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley,
particularly during the Chimú occupation (ca. A.D. 1000-1460), so it may have been part of the
food eaten at this site.
415
Elmo Leon
Snail [Caracol] (Mitrella buccinoides)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) noted the presence of this type of snail on the North Coast in the White-
on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100) and Chimú (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations at Puémape south of the
Jequetepeque River, so it may have been part of the food eaten at this site.
It has also been found in a Mochica context at Huaca de la Luna in the lower Moche Valley
(Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 341).
Snail [Caracol] (Nassarius dentifer, Nassarius gayi)
Bonavia believes that it is possible this species was not eaten due to its small size. The species
grouped in Nassarius live in the rocky sublittoral zone at a depth between four and thirty
metres. They are often gathered along with Aulacomya ater or the common mussel (Bonavia
1982: 188), so its association in archaeological sites should come as no surprise.
Sandweiss et al. (1989: 63) found that the oldest human occupation strata at the Ring Site south
of Ilo (Moquegua) held few remains belonging to this species, which was evidently eaten around
9500 B.C., if we accept the validity of the radiocarbon dates available for the shells from this
site. This means its consumption goes back almost to the earliest people of Peru.
Nassarius gayi was the seventh most-eaten mollusc at Bandurria, a site in the vicinity of
Huacho with dates that range between 3170 and 1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 138).
Nassarius sp. was found in the excavations at Caral, in the Supe Valley, but in small amounts of
total available for molluscs (0.45%), and with dates ranging between 2418 and 2185 B.C. (Shady
and Leiva 2003: 114).
Quilter et al. (1991: 280) documented the presence of these gastropods at El Paraíso, an
archaeological site north of Lima in the Chillón Valley, which dated to ca. 2150 B.C.
A small percentage of this gastropod has been found at Pedregal, a site in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley that was occupied mostly during Chimú times, and it may have been part of the food eaten
by its people (Cutright 2009: 178). Gumerman (1991) showed that this species was also eaten in this
same period at the nearby site of Pacatnamú. And Elera et al. (1992: 18) documented the remains of
Nassarius dentifer in this same zone but at Puémape, in contexts belonging to the Cupisnique (1000-
200 B.C.) and White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100) cultures. Vásquez and Rosales (1994: 86) likewise
reported finding some remains of this species on the other side of the lower Jequetepeque Valley
at La Mina, a Mochica site during its early occupation that dates to around the first century of our
era, so Nassarius dentifer may have been part of the food its early population ate.
Both Cárdenas et al. (1997: 129) and Roselló et al. (2001: 75) reported this species in the edible
remains found at the Huaca del Sol and the Huaca de la Luna, which dated to A.D. 470-600.
416
14,000 years of food in Peru
Nassarius sp. formed part of Moche food at Pampa Grande (Lambayeque), where the dated
obtained range between A.D. 711 and A.D. 800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 32).
Snail [Caracol] (Nassarius luteostoma)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) recorded this type of mollusc in the White-on-Red occupation (ca. 200
B.C.-A.D. 100) of Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley and almost on the littoral, so it
may been part of the food available at this site.
Snail [Caracol] (Oliva peruviana)
Bonavia (1982: 188) believes this species was not used for human consumption, and was
instead required to make adornments and other objects. It usually lives at depts. Of five
to eight metres, somewhat buried or on the surface of the sandy soil.
Oliva peruviana has been found in domestic consumption contexts at the Ring Site in
southern Ilo (Moquegua), with dates that probable average to 9000 B.C. (Sandweiss et al.
1989: 63).
Oliva peruviana has been documented by the research undertaken in the Gallery of the
Offerings at Chavín de Huántar, with dates that gave the period 1218-812 B.C. (Sandweiss
and Rodríguez 1993: 407), but it is unknown whether it was eaten or not.
Elera et al. (1992: 18) documented the remains of this mollusc in more recent times at
Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley. It may have been part of the food stocks at this
site during the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.) and Chimú (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations.
Olive shell [Olivela] (Olivella sp.)
Olivella sp. is a snail found in the excavations at Pacatnamú, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley,
which means it was part of the diet of the people who lived here during the Chimú occupation
(A.D. 1000-1460) (Gumerman 1991).
Olive shell [Olivita] (Olivela columellaris)
Olivela columellaris is a type of snail found at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley, on the North Coast’s littoral (Elera et al. 1992: 18). The contexts where it was found
date to Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimú (ca. A.D.
1000-1460) times.
417
Elmo Leon
The consumption of this type of snail has likewise been reported at Huaca del Sol, in the lower
Moche Valley, so it was eaten by the Moche during the first centuries of our era (Pozorski and
Pozorski 2003: 123).
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 129) documented the remains of this snail at the Huaca de la Luna that
dated to A.D. 400-750, so the Mochica must have included them in their diet. It was also
eaten by the Mochica inhabitants of Pampa Grande (Lambayeque) in A.D. 711-800 (Shimada
and Shimada 1981: 32).
[Caracolito] (Prunum curtum)
Bonavia (1982: 188) claims that despite being found in archaeological sites, this species was
probably not eaten due to its small size. It lives on sandy soils and at a depth of 16-20 metres
below sea level. In modern times this species extends from Tumbes to Pisco.
Prunum curtum (snail) has been found—albeit in very small amounts—in the excavations
undertaken in the Gallery of the Offerings at Chavín de Huántar. It was dated to 1218-812 B.C.
(Sandweiss and Rodríguez 1993: 407), but can hardly be considered food.
Prunum curtum has also been found at the Huaca del Sol and the Huaca de la Luna, where
it comprises at least 0.3% of the total food remains; these were to A.D. 570-600, but were
apparently used for personal adornment, because the shells have perforations used to suspend
them (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129, Roselló et al. 2001: 76). This means Bonavia’s conclusion may
be correct.
Snail [Caracol] (Mitra orientalis)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) found the remains of this type of mollusc on the North Coast at Puémape,
in the lower Jequetepeque Valley and almost on the littoral, in occupations belonging to the
Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimú (A.D. 1000-1460)
cultures.
Mitra orientalis has also been documented in the excavations at Huaca del Sol, in the lower
Moche Valley, which means it was eaten by the Mochica in the early centuries of our era
(Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 123).
[Cancelaria] (Cancellaria urceolata sp.)
Cancellaria urceolata is of tropical provenance and has been documented at the Huaca
de la Luna in the lower Moche Valley, and so it may have been part of the food eaten by
the Moche during the first centuries of our era (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 341). Elera et al.
418
14,000 years of food in Peru
(1992: 18) reported this type of mollusc for the various occupations of Puémape, a North
Coast site on the mouth of the Jequetepeque River that is almost on the littoral, at least
during the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimú (A.D.
1000-1460) cultures.
Cancellaria indentata
This type of mollusc has been identified at Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley (Elera
et al. 1992: 18), during the Cupisnique occupation (1000-200 B.C.)
Cancellaria decussata
Elera et al. (1992: 18) showed that this mollusc may have been eaten at Puémape, a North Coast
site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley close to the littoral, during the Cupisnique (1000-200
B.C.), White-on-Red (200 B.C.- A.D.100), and Chimú (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations.
[Alas de Ángel] (Pholas chiloensis)
A species that is literally scattered all over the littoral of the South American Pacific Ocean
(in Chile it is known as comé), Pholas chiloensis has been recorded at some North Coast
archaeological sites like Padre Abán, Alto Salaverry, and Gramalote in the vicinity of the
Moche Valley, between 2300 B.C. and the early Christian era.
Pholas chiloensis was probably eaten at Puémape at least in 200 B.C.-A.D. 100 and in Chimú
times, ca. A.D. 1000-1460 (Elera et al. 1992: 18). This same species has been reported, albeit
in a minimum amount, at Galindo, a site in the middle Moche Valley during the Mochica
occupation (A.D. 600-800) (Lockard 2005: 195).
Crassilabrum crassilabrum
This type of mollusc has only been found at Puémape in the lower Jequetepeque Valley,
where Elera et al. (1992: 17) documented it in contexts belonging to the White-on-Red (300-
100 B.C.) and Chimú (A.D. 1000-1470) cultures.
Snail [Caracol] (Homolocantha multicrispata)
This type of snail has only been documented at Puémape in the lower Jequetepeque Valley,
and only during the Chimú occupation (Elera 1992: 17).
419
Elmo Leon
Snail [Caracol] (Bostryx turritus)
A negligible amount of snails from this species have been documented at Galindo, a North
Coast site in the middle Moche Valley, in domestic contexts dating to A.D. 600-800 (Lockard
2005: 195), so it is possible that it was eaten by the Mochica.
Snail [Caracol] (Bostryx elongatus)
Bostryx elongatus has its habitat in the mountains and is found beneath stones or on bushes;
it is also common on the central coast up to 800 masl (Bonavia 1982: 188).
Caracol chayote (Drymaeus sp., Drymaeus tigris)
This is an endemic species that has been excavated in some archaeological middens,
particularly on the North Coast, including Alto Salaverry (in the Moche Valley), which
dates at least to 1670 B.C.; Cerro Arena (60 B.C.), and Galindo (A.D. 600-820), so it can be
inferred that it was eaten throughout this time on the North Coast of Peru (Pozorski 1979:
1966, table 1).
Recent research has also shown that this type of snail was more intensively eaten at Galindo,
in the middle Moche Valley, during the Chimú occupation (Lockard 2005: 195).
Sea Snail (Naticide sp.)
The only find thus far made of the possible consumption of sea snails were made during the
excavation of archaeological sites in the upper Zaña Valley, in the modern Lambayeque-region
which dated to 8011-5954 B.C. (Dillehay 2011: 334).
[Trochita] ([Caliptraea?] trochiformis)
This is a unique mollusc found at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley in its
three occupations: Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.), and Chimú
(A.D. 1000-1470) (Elera et al. 1992: 17). It may thus have been eaten by the people who
inhabited this site.
Ferguson’s Cone [Cono de Ferguson] (Conus fergussoni)
This mollusc species found in equatorial waters from the Gulf of California to Tumbes
(Sánchez Romero 1973: 272).
420
14,000 years of food in Peru
Vásquez and Rosales have documented Ferguson’s Cone in the Huaca de la Luna, in the lower
Moche Valley, so it was perhaps part of the Mochica diet during the first centuries of our
era (Vásquez and Rosales 2004: 341). According to the information provided by Shimada and
Shimada (1981: 132), the Mochica of Pampa Grande (Lambayeque) apparently consumed this
species because it was found in the excavations made at this site, which dated to A.D. 711-800.
Freshwater Snail [Caracol de Agua Dulce] (Physa venustula)
The analyses Vásquez and Rosales (1994: 86) made at La Mina, in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley, reported just one fragment from this type of snail, and in the context of a Mochica
tomb that probably dated to the first century of our era.
[Caracol de los Acuarios] (Helisoma - Planorbis - sp., Helisoma peruvianum)
Helisoma peruvianum is a land snail that lives in wetlands and ponds. Bonavia (1982: 188)
documented some specimens of this species at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower Huarmey
Valley, and were dated to 3000-2300 B.C.
The research carried out by Vásquez and Rosales (1994: 86) documented Helisoma peruvianum
in scant numbers at La Mina, an early Mochica site (probably from the first century of our era)
in the lower Jequetepeque Valley.
This type of snail has also been found at Huaca de la Luna with dates that ranged between
A.D. 400 and A.D. 750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129), and at Pampa Grande (Lambayeque) with
dates ranging between A.D. 711 and A.D. 800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 32), so it is presumed
to have been eaten in pre-Hispanic times.
Landsnail [Caracol de Loma] (Scutalus mutabilis, Scutalus proteus, Scutalus versicolor)
The habitat of Scutalus mutabilis is in the mountains as well as on plants. It is very common on
the North Coast of Peru and up to 1000 masl (Bonavia 1982: 188). We will now see how it has
been long eaten, particularly on the North Coast, since humans began to occupy this region.
There are some prominent studies on this species that it is worth briefly presenting here.
César Gálvez et al. (1996) made a key study of the role the consumption of land snails had
in ancient Peru, which includes archaeological observations and important ethnographic
observations, describing modern ways in which snails were gathered and prepared. We now
turn briefly to it.
Gálvez et al. give an account of Scutalus sp. since the beginning of the Holocene. Its strong
presence in the middens of the Paiján culture (11000-6000 B.C.) is evinced, as well as in sites
421
Elmo Leon
that extend from the first millennium B.C. to the epoch prior to the Inca. This means its use in
pre-Hispanic Peru is one of the most long-lasting ones.
The study Gálvez et al. made focuses on the North Coast valleys, especially the Virú, Jequetepeque,
and Moche Valleys, but it is clear that Scutalus mutabilis must have been frequently consumed
in places like Lima and Cajamarca, where the snails can be gathered between 500 and 1800
masl during the winter months, particularly when there is a greater concentration of fogs—i.e.
humidity—their favourite habitat. It has also been observed that Scutalus mutabilis abounds
whenever there is an ENSO phenomenon due to the rains and moisture this generates, with
figures close to a hundred specimens per square decimetre (Gálvez Mora et al. 1996: 55-56), so
its occurrence may also be connected to changes in the climate.
A bromatological study by Duccio Bonavia, Claude Chauchat, and Holger reported values of
74.8% calories, 4.6% ashes, 4.7% fat, 1% proteins, and 8.4% carbohydrates (Gálvez Mora et al.
1996: 57).
Gálvez et al. likewise documented ethnographically the consumption of this type of snail on
the North Coast. Gillin for instance reported they were eaten parboiled, while Gerdt Kutscher
claimed they were “purged,” i.e. detoxified before consumption. One common way of doing
so, particularly in the Jequetepeque Valley, was spraying them with maize flour until they lose
the slime; the internal flesh was then removed (especially the feet and the head, because the
other organs taste bitter). In general, Gálvez et al. do not go into details but believe they were
eaten raw, roasted, boiled or parboiled, and even toasted. César Gálvez himself collected five
kilos of land snails in the Moche Valley in just one hour. These are at present eaten in cebiches,
stews and as snail soup. Nowadays these snails abound in most of the sites located in the
vicinity of the modern-day town of Paiján, south of Pacasmayo (Chauchat 1992: 358).
As noted above, the caracol de loma was eaten since the time of the Paiján culture, which is
virtually the first on the Peruvian coast around 10,000 B.C. This also means this early population
exploited the resources found in the lomas since the very beginning.
It has already been pointed out that Gálvez Mora (1999: 43) believes Scutalus mutabilis was an
extremely significant edible resource for the human groups of the Paiján culture in the middle
Chicama Valley and the Moche Valley. They in fact appear associated to early Holocene
middens around 9500 B.C.
Even more ancient dates were found further north. Dillehay et al. (2011: 335) documented
the presence of these snails in archaeological sites in the upper Zaña Valley that dated to
11572-3029 B.C.—a record in terms of duration, with this snail species literally consumed for
thousands of years.
Scutalus sp. has been found in significant amounts in the Pampa Colorada sites complex close
to the mouth of the Ocoña River, in the littoral of the modern region of Arequipa, with dates
ranging between 9200 and 5400 B.C. (McInnis 2006: 381).
422
14,000 years of food in Peru
Reitz (1988: 314) found that the molluscs eaten by the early people of Paloma south of Lima in
the Chilca Valley, close to what may have been a very active loma some seven kilometres from
the sea was Scutalus. Radiocarbon dates fell between 5316 and 3630 B.C. As their common
name indicates, these are molluscs that live in the lomas.
Callen (1965: 335) noted the presence of snails—albeit without specifically establishing the
species—in human faecal remains at Huaca Prieta on the North Coast, which can be dated at
least to the fourth millennium B.C., and which are a direct evidence of its consumption.
The Scutalus sp. snail was eaten at Caral in Sector A but only comprised 3.7%. Its dates ranged
between 2418 and 2185 B.C. (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
Scutalus was likewise found in the excavations at El Paraíso north of Lima, in the lower Chillón
Valley (Quilter et al. 1991: 280). The site dates to around 2150 B.C.
This snail has also been documented at the site of Pampa de Llamas, in the lower Casma Valley,
where it was eaten and dates to 2088-1243 B.C. (Pozorski and Pozorski 1986: 390). Mercedes
Cárdenas (1999) in turn documented Scutalus sp. at Las Salinas de Chao, a site in the valley of
the same name, with a date of at least 1900 B.C.
Capps (1987: 58) reported the consumption of Scutalus in Asia, a site in the lower Mala Valley
that dates to around 1490 B.C.
Scutalus spp. (caracol de loma) was detected in the malacological analysis of the organic
remains found in the Gallery of the Offerings at Chavín de Huántar. They gave a date of 1218-
812 B.C., so they may have been part of the food this culture ate (Sandweiss and Rodríguez
1993: 407).
The greatest evidence of caracol de loma consumption goes back almost two thousand years
ago on the North Coast—i.e. the Mochica occupation—in some of the sites studied by the
Chan Chan Project in the Moche Valley in La Libertad. Here the remains of these snails have
been found in the middens that grew out of the food eaten at sites like Padre Abán, Alto
Salaverry, Gramalote, Caballo Muerto, Cerro Arena, Galindo, and even Chan Chan, which
indicates its large-scale consumption since at least 2330 B.C. up to the Inca occupation (A.D.
1460) in the area that extends from modern-day Huancaco in the north to the Moche Valley
in the south (Pozorski 1979: 166, table 1).
It should here be noted that abundant Scutalus proteus remains have been found at Galindo
in association with Moche remains. It was the mollusc most eaten at this site in A.D. 600-800,
and even during the Chimú occupation (Lockard 2005: 195).
Cutright (2009: 178) recorded the presence of Scutalus proteus at Pedregal, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, but it was not frequently eaten. This type of snail was also documented
among the remains of a cooking zone in the Huaca de la Luna, in the Moche Valley, which
423
Elmo Leon
evinces it was consumed by the Moche at this site in A.D. 300-600 (Cárdenas et al. 1997:
129, Gijsehem 2001: 261).
A species known as Scutalus versicolor was also documented at the Huaca de La Luna, at
about A.D. 400-750 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129).
Further to the north, in the modern-day region of Lambayeque, Shimada and Shimada
(1981: 32) discovered that the Mochica had consumed this species in A.D. 711-800.
Scutalus proteus has also been documented at the Huaca del Sol (Pozorski and Pozorski
2003: 123). Also in the middle Moche Valley are the sites of Santa Rosa-Quirihuac, which
dates to the Gallinazo-Moche 1 period, i.e. ca. A.D. 100, and Ciudad de Dios which dates
to A.D. 400, when the Moche were in full development, and where a significant amount
of Scutalus has been found (Gumerman and Briceño 2003: 237).
Scutalus was also eaten at Pacatnamú (Gumerman 1991), but according to the statistics of
this research it was apparently consumed mostly by the common people but not by the
elite. This is one of the few cases in which we find the caracoles de loma eaten mostly by
the subject populations.
Elera et al. (1992: 18) also showed the occurrence of Scutalus proteus at Puémape, a site
in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, particularly during the White-on-Red occupation (200
B.C.-A.D.100).
A significant amount of these snails has likewise been recorded at the site of Cerro
Lampay, a preceramic temple in the Fortaleza Valley, on the coast of the modern-day
department of Lima (Vega-Centeno 2007). The radiocarbon dates for this site gave the
range 2410-2064 B.C.
According to Piacenza and Pieri (2012: 4), it is also highly likely that it was eaten by the
inhabitants of the monumental site of Cahuachi.
Its significance must extend further back in time, because its ceramic depictions also
appear in the Inca culture.
[Caracol de Plantas] (Systrophia sp.)
This is a land mollusc that comes from the Amazon forest, i.e. rainy tropical biota. Bonavia
(1982: 188) identified some specimens of this species in epoch 2 at Los Gavilanes, a site in
the lower Huarmey Valley. Strophocheilus popelairianus has been excavated at Alenya (Bagua
Baja), a site in the Utcubamba River zone in the modern-day Amazonas region at about 522
masl, which dates to 1500-1200 B.C. (Shady and Rosas 1979: 111).
424
14,000 years of food in Peru
Cups, saucer limpets [Piques]
Cup [Caracol “Pantufla,” Pique Señorita] (Creppatella dilatata)
This snail is found in the sublittoral zone and is often adhered to the valves of some
lamellibranchia, especially mussels (Aulacomya ater), and is eaten in large amounts in modern
times (Bonavia 1982: 186).
Its ingestion literally goes back to the beginning of human occupation in Peru. Sandweiss et
al. (1989: 63) found remains of this species in domestic contexts that indicate its consumption
at least since 9500 B.C. at the Ring Site on the coast of Moquegua, immediately to the south
of the modern-day city of Ilo.
Bonavia et al. (2001: 303) showed that this snail was consumed at La Laguna (PV35-106), in the
lower Huarmey Valley close to Los Gavilanes, which was dated to 5320 B.C.
Crepipatella was somewhat frequently consumed (fourth place in molluscs) at the monumental
site of Bandurria, which dates to 3170-1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 138).
Some pique remains were also found in the excavations at Cerro Lampay, to the north of
the modern-day region of Lima (Vega-Centeno 2007). The radiocarbon results of the midden
where these were found average 2410-2064 B.C.
Cerro Blanco is somewhat more to the north in the lower Nepeña Valley. Here Ikehara and
Shibata (2005: 144) found that the piques señorita were an important part of the feasts they
believe were held at this site in 1100-250 B.C.
The piques señorita were likewise documented at Caral in the Supe Valley, but it is even more
important pointing out that these were found in hearths, which means they were clearly eaten
roasted or after being exposed to fire, at least in 2600-1800 B.C. (Flores Blanco 2006: 148).
Even earlier dates are available for pique consumption at Huaricanga, a site on the left bank
of the Fortaleza River some 23 km from the littoral, with dates that range between 3600 B.C.
and 620 B.C. This is the third mollusc most eaten at this site with 7.8% (Creamer et al. 2011: 185).
Quilter et al. (1991: 280) also pointed out the presence of pique at El Paraíso, a ceremonial
site close to the mouth of the Chillón River north of Lima, which has been dated to 2150 B.C.
Crepipatella dilatata was found, albeit in very small amounts, at site PV35-4 to the north of
the mouth of the Huarmey River, which dated to ca. A.D. 800 (Bonavia 2009: 264).
This type of snail also seems to have been part of the Mochica diet, at least in the first century
of our era, as its remains have been found at a site called La Mina, which is in on the left bank
of the lower Jequetepeque Valley (Vásquez and Rosales 1994: 86).
425
Elmo Leon
It was also found in the excavations at Cerro Culebras, north of the lower Chillón Valley
in Lima, in contexts that dated to A.D. 100-550, which can be interpreted as having been
part of the food this people ate during the first centuries of our era (Bazán del Campo
1988: 31-33).
Béarez et al. (2003: 66) found pique (Crepipatella sp.) remains in enclosures 24 and 25 of
ramp pyramid IIIB at Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley, in a context dated to around
1520 B.C.
It was also consumed in regular amounts in Inca times at Pueblo Viejo-Pucará, a site in the
Lurín Valley (Watson 2008: 121).
Cup [Pique, Señorita] (Crepidulla incurva)
This is a small mollusc that usually lives adhered to another as a parasite. Béarez (2012: 131)
found it at Quebrada de los Burros, a site in the Tacna littoral, so it may have been part
of the food its early people had in 7900-4500 B.C.
Crepidulla incurva was also found at Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, during
the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.), and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470)
occupations (Elera et al. 1992: 17).
Cup [Pique, Señorita] (Crucibulum lignarium)
The only find of this species comes from the excavations at Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, where it was found in contexts belonging to the White-on-Red
(300-100 B.C.), and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470) cultures (Elera et al. 1992: 17).
Cup [Pique, Señorita] (Crucibulum spinosum)
This species has thus far only been documented at Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, where Elera et al. (1992: 17) found it in the White-on-Red (ca. 300-
100 B.C.) and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1470) occupations.
Cup [Pique] (Caliptrea trochiformis)
Caliptrea trochiformis lives on the lower zone of the rocky littoral and is found in the
sublittoral zone, adhered to rocks or the valves of some mollusc. Little used as food, it is
instead used as bait when fishing (Bonavia 1982: 186).
426
14,000 years of food in Peru
Bivalves, Mussels, Oysters, Clams
Black Ark [Concha Negra] (Anadara tuberculosa)
Anadara tuberculosa is a bivalve on the Peruvian coast that is only found in the marshlands of
the modern region of Tumbes, where it lives in muddy soils, among the roots of the mangroves.
It can be taken to Lima without taking any special precautions because it has a great tolerance
to conditions outside the water (up to seven days). It extends from California (Unites States)
to Tumbes (Peru) (Sánchez Romero 1973: 274).
The oldest evidence of its consumption comes from the camps of Amotape in Piura,
where Richardson (1979: 282) found remains that can be calibrated to around 10535 B.C.
This was a group of hunters from almost the end of the ice age that settled in the zone
of Sullana and Talara.
Elera et al. (1992: 18) recorded the remains of Anadara tuberculosa at Puémape, a site in
the lower Jequetepeque Valley, particularly during the White-on-Red occupation (ca. 200
B.C.-A.D. 100).
According to the research carried out by Kaulicke (1991: 414), the earliest settlers in the Alto
Piura at Loma Valverde, a site occupied by the Mochica and Salinar between 350 B.C. and A.D.
450, were already eating Anadara tuberculosa, albeit in small amounts.
Anadara tuberculosa has been found in small amounts in the domestic garbage,
consumption relicts at the Huaca de la Luna and the Huaca del Sol in the Moche Valley,
which date to around A.D. 470-600 (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129, Roselló et al. 2001: 75). We
see that Anadara tuberculosa was preferentially eaten almost since the dawn of human
occupation in this zone.
Concha Prieta (Anadara nux)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) found the remains of Anadara nux during the Chimu occupation (ca. A.D.
1000-1460) at Puémape, south of the mouth of the Jequetepeque River on the North Coast,
which means it may have been eaten at this time.
Mussels [Concha Pata de Burro] (Anadara - Grandiarca - grandis)
Although these shells were gathered to make utensils or tools, they may have been also
eaten at Cabeza de Vaca, a site some six kilometres from the city of Tumbes, on the left
bank of the river. The workshop dates to A.D. 1100-1520, i.e. the Chimu and Inca occupations
(Hocquenghem and Peña Ruiz 1994: 214).
427
Elmo Leon
Mussels [Mejillón] (Glycymeris ovata)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) showed that mussels were quite probably part of the diet of the people
of Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, during the White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D.
100) and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations.
Common Mussel [Choro Común, Choro o Mejillón Mussel] (Aulacomya ater)
The habitat of Aulacomya ater is the rocky floor of the littoral, where it lives adhered at
depths ranging between three and thirty metres in large colonies and clumps, so one has
to dive to gather it. Its ingestion is widely documented in Peru since the beginning of the
human occupation of the coast. From an alimentary standpoint it was important because it
has 13% proteins and at least 2.3% fat, a large proportion of sodium (329.3 mg for every 100
grams), potassium (172.2 mg for every 100 grams), calcium (119.4 mg for every 100 grams), and
magnesium (102.2 mg for every 100 grams) (Lavallée et al. 1999: 39).
Almost forty years ago Aulacomya ater was the most consumed bivalve on the coast, but
this now does not seem to be the case. It should come as no surprise that it is found
associated with other snails like Thays chocolate. It is most gathered between May and
December. Its range extends from Salaverry to the Straits of Magellan (Sánchez Romero
1973: 256, 274).
The consumption of choro mussels by the first Peruvians goes back to the dawn of the human
settlement of modern-day Peru. Sandweiss et al. (1989: 63) found in their excavations at the
Ring Site south of the city of Ilo (Moquegua), that it was eaten since at least 9500 B.C.
The remains of the common choro have been documented at the other end of Peru
in the upper Zaña Valley (in the modern region of de Lambayeque). This is a series of
archaeological sites that date to 8011-5954 B.C., so here it was also consumed quite early
(Dillehay 2011: 334).
Aulacomya ater was eaten in small amounts at Paloma in the Chilca Valley south of Lima. Here
several camps and organic remains due to human consumption have been found. Reitz (1988:
314) and Capps (1987: 36) established the presence of this species in 5316-3630 B.C. Interestingly
enough, the remains of choros were found in the faeces discovered at Paloma, thus providing
a direct evidence of its consumption at that time (Weir and Dering 1986: 38). This is one of the
few cases where its ingestion is clear.
On the other hand Bonavia (1982: 227) found fragments of Aulacomya ater at Los Gavilanes,
in the lower Huarmey Valley, also in human faecal remains, in strata that dated to 3200-1460
B.C., so it was evidently eaten at this site. La Laguna (site PV35-106) is not far away, almost on
the littoral on the right bank of the mouth of the Huarmey River. Here Bonavia et al. (2001:
303) notices the presence of Aulacomya ater, which was dated to 5320 B.C.
428
14,000 years of food in Peru
Scant remains of Aulacomya ater were recovered at Cerro Lampay, a site on the northern
coast of the modern-day Lima region (Vega-Centeno 2007). This, as has already been noted, is
a complex of preceramic public buildings that dates to 2410-2064 B.C.
The remains of Aulacomya ater were found at Caral (Shady et al. 2001) in the Supe valley
north of Lima, that were apparently eaten by its people. The site gave was dated to 2585-1938
B.C. In another report Aulacomya ater just comprises 1.61% of Sector A at Caral, which means
it may have been eaten in very small amounts at this site on the Peruvian coast that dates to
2418-2185 B.C. (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
Aulacomya ater was eaten at Huaricanga, a public preceramic monument in the Fortaleza
Valley some 23 km away from the seashore, on the Central Coast, and dating to ca. 3600-670
B.C., albeit in small amounts (Creamer et al. 2011: 186).
Elera et al. (1992: 18) have documented the remains of this bivalve at Puémape, a site almost
on the littoral in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, where it was eaten only during the Chimú
occupation of this site.
Quilter et al. (1991: 279-280) claim this type of bivalve was one of the main foods eaten by
the people of El Paraíso, a site almost on the mouth of the Chillón River north of Lima, which
they began to eat ca. 2150 B.C.
Aulacomya ater (the common mussel has been excavated in the Gallery of the Offerings at
Chavín de Huántar, and was dated to the period 1218-812 B.C. (Sandweiss and Rodríguez 1993:
407). Although this was an offering, it may have been consumed by the inhabitants of this
famed site.
Bonavia et al. (2009: 264) showed the choro was the main mollusc eaten (over 37%) at site PV35-
4 in the vicinity of Huarmey during Middle Horizon epoch 3, around A.D. 800. The evidence
that this mollusc was eaten in this zone is also documented by the discovery of this species
at the site of La Laguna (PV35-106), where it dated to 5320 B.C. (Bonavia et al. 2001: 303). It is
therefore clear that this mussel was eaten in the lower Huarmey valley for thousands of years.
Mercedes Cárdenas (1999) recorded a large percentage of Aulacomya ater at Salinas de Chao,
a site in the lower section of the valley with the same name on the North Coast. The dates
for this site average 1900 B.C.
Aulacomya ater was also found in the monumental site of Cahuachi in Nasca, so it may have
been eaten by this people throughout the early centuries of the Christian era (Piacenza and
Pieri 2012: 4).
Aulacomya ater was recorded in small amounts at Cerro Culebras, a site in the Chillón Valley,
in a culture pertaining to the Lima culture (A.D. 100-550). This could be interpreted to mean
the people in this culture ate it (Bazán del Campo 1988: 31-33).
429
Elmo Leon
Watson (2008: 121) points out that Pueblo Viejo-Pucará, a site in the Lurín Valley, favoured the
consumption of choros during the Inca occupation. These were also part of the food eaten
by the people of enclosures 24-25 in ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín
Valley, and which has been dated to A.D. 1530, i.e., just before the Spanish contact (Béarez et
al. 2003: 58).
[Mejillín Púrpura] (Brachidontes purpuratus)
Brachidontes purpuratus is apparently an uncommon species in the list of seafood on the
Peruvian coast, but there evidently remains much that has to be explored in this regard.
Pozorski (1979: 166) recorded the remains of these molluscs, albeit in very small numbers, in
all of the sites she studied from modern-day Huanchaco to the Moche Valley, for instance
Padre Abán, Alto Salaverry, Gramalote, Cerro Arena, Huaca de la Luna, Galindo, and Chan
Chan, which comprise a period that extends from 2300 B.C. to A.D. 1460. This means that it
was eaten in small amounts by almost all communities in this part of the North Coast of Peru.
Pozorski and Pozorski (1986: 397) likewise reported that this mollusc was frequently eaten at
Pampa de Llamas, in the lower Casma Valley, in the period 2088-1243 B.C.
Elera et al. (1992: 18) found the remains of this mollusc in the middens at Puémape, a site
on the North Coast littoral in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, where it was eaten by the
Cupisnique (1,000-200 B.C.) and White-on-Red (200 B.C.- A.D. 100) cultures.
Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 123) discovered the remains of this type of shell at the Huaca del
Sol, which corresponds to the Moche culture, so it is assumed that it was part of the food
eaten by this well-known northern culture.
Mussel [Choro or Choro Zapato] (Choromytilus chorus)
This is a staple food par excellence not just in modern Peru but surely also in pre-Hispanic
Peru, as we will now see.
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 140-141) claim the consumption of boiled choros provides 76% calories,
84% water, 14.8% proteins, 1.8% fat, 2.1% ash, and 1.3% niacin, particularly iron (5.8%), which
means Choromytilus chorus is highly nutritious (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 184). These early
coastal populations of Peru must have gathered Choromytilus chorus by diving because
it belongs in the rocky infralittoral zone that is always below sea level (between four and
thirty metres).
At present, the oldest evidence that Choromytilus chorus was perhaps part of the pre-
Hispanic diet comes from the archaeological contexts Tom Dillehay et al. (2011: 334) found in
430
14,000 years of food in Peru
the upper Zaña Valley (in the Lambayeque region). Here choro remains were found in strata
dated to 8011-5954 B.C., which means Choromytilus chorus has long been eaten in Peru.
Lavallée et al. (1999: 37) excavated Quebrada de los Burros (Tacna) and found a series of
hearths with ashes and the remains of choros roasted in them. Radiocarbon dates show this
consumption took place in 7900-4500 B.C. This is one of the few pieces of evidence that
choros were roasted ten thousand years ago.
Even so, the dates obtained for the choros zapato from the preceramic strata at Quebrada
Tacahuay, a site in the littoral south of Ilo, in the modern region of Moquegua, gave an average
date of 10730-9370 B.C., which implies it was already being eaten at this early date.
Sandweiss et al. (1989: 63) found a large amount of Choromytilus chorus at Ring Site, an
archaeological site known on the coast of Moquegua south of Ilo and very close to the
seashore. If the radiocarbon samples taken from molluscs are given credence, this means
Choromytilus chorus was being eaten since around 9500 B.C. its consumption rose around
8000 B.C.
Choromytilus chorus was also found in the middens left by the people of Paloma, a site south
of Lima in the Chilca Valley that is just seven kilometres away from the coast (Reitz 1988: 314,
Capps 1987: 36). The radiocarbon dates of the layers where these remains come from average
5316-3630 B.C.
The site of Tablada de Lurín in the lower Lurín Valley can be dated to 5621-5040 B.C. Here
Makowski (2004) found the remains of camps where the first people in this zone briefly stayed
and ate large amounts of choro.
Lanfranco et al. (2009: 5) have reported the finding of choro zapato in the earliest occupation
of Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, which date to 3008-2329 B.C.
Choromytilus chorus was also eaten somewhat frequently at Bandurria, a site on the coast
close to Huacho. The dates obtained at this site average 3170-1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 138).
Choromytilus chorus was the main edible resource—37% of the molluscs eaten—at Huaricanga
in 3500-670 B.C. (Creamer et al. 2011: 185). This site rises on the Central coast some 23 km away
from the littoral, on the left side of the Fortaleza River, and is part of the preceramic building
complexes in this part of the Andes. This same study confirms that choro was the main mollusc
eaten at Porvenir (up to 42%), a site also in the Fortaleza Valley only six kilometres away from
the littoral. The dates for this site average between 3720 and 1280 B.C. (Creamer et al. 2011: 185).
Large amounts of choros were found in the excavations at Cerro Lampay (Vega Centeno 2007)
on the North-Central Coast, in the Fortaleza Valley, which date to 2410-2064 B.C. On the
North Coast, Mercedes Cárdenas (1999) found this type of choro at the site Las Salinas de
Chao which was eaten at least since 2000 B.C.
431
Elmo Leon
According to Shady’s excavations, Choromytilus chorus also formed part of the diet of the
people of Caral (Shady et al. 2001). The site is dated to 2585-1938 B.C., which means these
molluscs were eaten during this period, and according to their number abundantly so. Flores
Blanco (2006: 148) also found choros in a hearth, thus clearly indicating these were subjected
to fire at this time to cook them. In this case these are roasted choros just like at Quebrada de
los Burros (see above), a cooking method frequently used in pre-Hispanic Peru. It has likewise
been documented at Sector A in Caral (Shady y Leiva 2003: 114), which dates to 2418-2185 B.C.,
where the presence of Choromitylus chorus comes to 41.26% and is by far the mollusc most
eaten at this site (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
El Paraíso is slightly more to the south near the mouth of the Chillón River. Here Quilter et al.
(1991: 279-280) found that choros were one of the main food resources, at least since the time
of the first population of this site ca. 2150 B.C.
All of this abundant information tells of the intensive consumption of choros on the Central
Coast ca. 6000-2000 B.C.
Elera et al. (1992: 18) showed the choros zapato were eaten at Puémape, which is almost in the
littoral in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, by the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red
(200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimú (A.D. 1,000-1,460) cultures. This means it has long been eaten
in this part of Peru.
Choromitylus chorus was also recorded during the excavation of the Gallery of the Offerings
at Chavín de Huántar, with a date of 1218-812 B.C. (Sandweiss and Rodríguez 1993: 406), but
there is no clear evidence of its consumption.
Pozorski (1979: 166) on the other hand recorded at Padre Abán that Choromytilus chorus
comprised 31.5% of the diet of the ancient population of this site—one of the largest amounts
of this mollusc eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru. The site has a date of at least 2330 B.C., so the
choro already was an important component of the diet at this time.
The percentages in which this mollusc was eaten were also relatively significant ones in other
sites Shelia Pozorski studied, like Alto Salaverry, Gramalote (7.1%), and Caballo Muerto (21.9%), with
dates that range between the second millennium B.C. and our era. Unlike Béarez, Pozorski (1979: 172)
believes the choros may have been removed from the rocks and gathered during low tide.
Cutright (2009: 177) has reported finding the remains of choro zapato on the North Coast at
Pedregal, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, albeit in small amounts that were eaten by the
inhabitants in the context of the Chimú culture.
The site of La Mina, which dates to the first phase of the Mochica culture (ca. the beginning
of our era) is not far away from Pedregal, on the left bank of the lower Jequetepeque Valley.
Here Vásquez and Rosales (1994: 86, 89) recorded the largest amount of Choromitylus chorus
eaten, and their occurrence suggests that it is highly likely these were gathered by diving.
432
14,000 years of food in Peru
Given the relatively small size of this bivalve, Vásquez and Rosales suggest that its decrease in
amounts may have been due to its overexploitation, at least before Mochica times during the
first millennium before of our era.
This type of choro was also found in the excavations Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 123) made
at the Huaca del Sol, in a fully Mochica culture between A.D. 300 and A.D. 600. Similar dates
were obtained at Huaca de la Luna (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129).
Piacenza and Pieri (2012: 4) reported the discovery of Choromitylus chorus in the excavations
at Cahuachi, a Nasca site, so it clearly was consumed by the people of this culture during the
first centuries of the Christian era.
Choros were found in small amounts in the excavations at Cerro Culebras in the lower
Chillón Valley, in contexts pertaining to the Lima culture (ca. A.D. 100-550) (Bazán del
Campo 1988: 31-33).
[Chorito playero] (Perumytilus purpuratus)
Perumytilus purpuratus lives on the upper rocky intertidal zone on the shoreline as well as
on the rocky bottom. Bonavia (1982: 184) believes it was not eaten by humans due to its very
small size but others differ (cf. Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 184). This species ranges from Peru
to the Straits of Magellan (Sánchez Romero 1973: 274).
A few remains of Perumytilus purpuratus were found in the hearths of the site known as
Quebrada de los Burros in Tacna (Lavallée et al. 1999: 37). The excavation of the hearths
where these were roasted was dated to 7900-4500 B.C. which means Perumytilus purpuratus
has been eaten since that time in pre-Hispanic Peru already cooked.
Earlier dates for choritos go back to 9000 B.C. at the so-called Ring Site south of the city of
Ilo in Moquegua, which is almost on the shoreline (Sandweiss et al. 1989: 63). Heather McInnis
(2006: 343) found small amounts of Perumytilus purpuratus to the north on the coastlands of
Arequipa, almost in the mouth of the Ocoña River, which he dated to 9200-7490 B.C. These
remains were surely part of the food eaten by the groups who settled at this encampment.
Perumytilus purpuratus was also documented at La Laguna (PV35-106), a site on the northern
Huarmey Valley that dates to 5320 B.C. (Bonavia et al. 2001: 303).
It is also known that the people of the Central Coast ate Perumytilus purpuratus. Reitz
(1988: 314) and Capps (1987: 36) identified large amounts among the food remains at Paloma,
a Middle Holocene site south of Lima, in the Chilca Valley. The strata from which these
remains come date to ca. 5316-3630 B.C. It is in fact the mollusc most eaten at this site.
Capps (1987: 58) also found the remains of this mollusc at Asia, a site in the Mala Valley that
date to 1490 B.C.
433
Elmo Leon
Perumytilus purpuratus (chorito) was eaten somewhat frequently at Bandurria, a Central
Coast site that is very close to Huacho, with dates that range between 3170 and 1,610 B.C.
(Chu 2008: 138).
Perumytilus purpuratus was found in the excavations of Caral, where it had tenth place (0.9%)
among the molluscs most eaten at this archaeological site. The remains come from Sector A,
which means they can be dated to 2418-2185 B.C. (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114). Flores Blanco
(2006: 157) claims this type of mollusc was found along with the remains of combustion in the
hearths, thus concluding that it was placed on the fire to cook it, i.e. it was roasted.
Choritos playeros have also been identified on the North Coast at Salinas de Chao in
the valley of the same name, where Mercedes Cárdenas (1999) headed archaeological
excavations and obtained dates that began at 1900 B.C.
A small fragment was found in the excavations at Cerro Lampay, an archaeological site
north of Lima that is dated to 2410-2064 B.C. (Vega-Centeno 2007).
Even so, Ikehara and Shibata (2005: 144) excavated large amounts of choritos at Cerro
Blanco (in the lower Nepeña Valley), which just like Cerro Lampay is believed to have been
a building where ritual activities were held. These remains were found in contexts that date
to 1100-250 B.C.
Quilter et al. (1991: 280) reported a significant amount of choritos at El Paraíso, a site that is
almost on the mouth of the Chillón Valley, where they were eaten since at least 2150 B.C.
Perumytilus purpuratus has also been identified in the excavations of the Gallery of the
Offerings at Chavín de Huántar. It has an average date of 1218-812 B.C. (Sandweiss and
Rodríguez 1993: 407), but it is as yet unknown whether it was eaten or not.
Elera et al. (1992: 18) found remains of this type of chorito on the North coast at Puémape,
in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, which means it was eaten in at least three periods:
Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimú (A.D. 1000-1460).
There is thus a long tradition of eating this mollusc on the North Coast.
The Mochica who lived at Huaca de la Luna in A.D. 400-750 were also acquainted with
Perumytilus purpuratus, so it may have been part of its diet (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129).
Perumytilus purpuratus held second place among the most eaten molluscs at site PV35-3,
a sort of camp from Middle Horizon epoch 3—i.e. ca. A.D. 800—which is on the littoral
immediately north of the mouth of the Huarmey Valley (Bonavia et al. 2009: 264).
Perumytilus purpuratus was a major part in the diet of the early Lima culture (ca. A.D.
100-550). Bazán del Campo (1988: 31-33) found a series of remains from this shells at Cerro
Culebras, a site in the lower Chillón Valley.
434
14,000 years of food in Peru
Lucia Watson (2008: 122) reported the occurrence of choritos at Pueblo Viejo-Pucará, an
Inca site—i.e., Late Horizon—in the Lurín Valley, which was also eaten around this time on
the Central Coast. These data were confirmed by Béarez et al. (2003: 66) whose research
documented the discovery of Perumytilus purpuratus in enclosures 24-25 of ramp pyramid III
B at Pachacamac, with a mean date of A.D. 1520, i.e. at the end of the Inca Empire.
Chorito negro (Semimytilus algosus)
Semimytilus algosus lives along the rocky littoral environment and is the most frequent
population in this zone along with Perumytilus purpuratus, but it is not eaten at present (Bonavia
1982: 183-184). Even so it is believed to have been eaten and was a major nutritional source
(Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 184). It extends along the coasts of de Peru and Chile (Sánchez
Romero 1973: 274). It was gathered on the lower part of the rocks in the intertidal zones.
This chorito species has been consumed in Lima since at least the Middle Holocene. The
excavations by Benfer and his team (1990) revealed that it was eaten at Paloma, close to
an extinct loma south of Lima in the Chilca Valley in 5316-3630 B.C., and reached 25% of
the molluscs eaten (Capps 1987: 36).
Minimum amounts were found in the excavations at the monumental preceramic site
of Bandurria, so it may have been part of the food eaten at this site. The dates range
between 3170 and 1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 138).
Semimytilus algosus holds fourth place among the molluscs eaten at Caral, but it only
comprised 4.29% in Sector A of this monumental site dated to 2418-2185 B.C. (Shady and
Leiva 2003: 114).
Scant remains have been documented at Cerro Lampay, an archaeological site north of Lima
that dates to 2410-2064 B.C. (Vega-Centeno 2007). On the contrary, a relative amount of
remains was excavated at Cerro Blanco, a site in the lower Nepeña Valley, which according to
Ikehara and Shibata (2005: 144) were eaten in feasts around 1100-250 B.C.
Pozorski and Pozorski (1986: 397) documented a significant amount of these remains at
Pampa de Llamas, a site in the lower Casma Valley that dates to 2088-1243 B.C.
Quilter et al. (1991: 279-280) reported the presence of chorito at El Paraíso, a site north of
Lima and almost on the mouth of the Chillón Valley, among the refuse left by the people
who lived here, at least since 2100 B.C.
Semimytilus algosus holds fourth place amongst the molluscs most present at site PV35-
4, which dates to A.D. 800 and is on a beach zone immediately north of the mouth of the
Huarmey River (Bonavia 2009: 264). Bonavia et al. (2001: 303) also reported the discovery
of this type of bivalve in this same zone at the site of La Laguna (PV35-104), in the lower
435
Elmo Leon
Huarmey Valley and in a littoral context that dates to 5320 B.C. Just like the continuity
in the consumption of other molluscs, the evidence seems to indicate this was also the
pattern in the case of the chorito in the lower Huarmey Valley.
As part of the Chan Chan Project, Pozorski (1979: 166) managed to document the
consumption of Semimytilus algosus in some of the site she studied: Padre Abán, Alto
Salaverry, Gramalote, and in minimum amounts in later sites up to the Chimú culture,
which means it was eaten in this zone since at least 2330 B.C. It was evidently also eaten in
previous epochs, as with the Moche, for it has been found in the excavations at the Huaca
del Sol, ca. A.D. 300-600 (Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 123), as well as in the associated
Huaca de la Luna (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129).
Elera et al. (1992: 18) showed the presence of the chorito at Puémape which is also on the
North Coast, which was eaten in three periods: during the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.),
Red-on-White (200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimú (1,000-1,460) occupation.
Lockard (2005: 195) documented the food eaten at the site of Galindo in the middle
Moche Valley during the Mochica occupation (A.D. 600-800), which was eaten with less
intensity during the Chimú occupation (A.D. 1000-1460).
Semimytilus algosus has also been found in the excavations at the monumental site of
Cahuachi, so it was probably also consumed by the Nasca people during the first centuries
of the Christian era (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 4).
The presence of Semimytilus algosus was also recorded at the ceremonial site of Cerro
Culebras which belongs to the Lima culture (A.D. 100-550). This indicates it was part of
the alimentary stock of the people who lived in this site in the Chillón Valley (Bazán del
Campo 1988: 31-33).
Chorito was also in regular demand during the Inca occupation of the site of Pueblo Viejo-
Pucará in the lower Lurín Valley, as follows from the archaeological research undertaken
by Lucia Watson (2008: 121).
Semimytilus algosus comprised 10%-14% of the total molluscs eaten in enclosures 24-25
of ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley, which has been dated to
A.D. 1520, i.e. literally at the close of the Inca Empire (Béarez et al. 2003: 58).
[Ostra Negra] (Ostrea columbensis)
Domestic accumulations of shells where Ostra columbensis abound have been at El Porvenir,
a site on the southern banks of the Zarumilla River (Tumbes) with dates that range between
4700 and 4300 B.C. They comprise 97% of the food (Moore 2007a, 2007b, 2011).
436
14,000 years of food in Peru
Ostrea columbensis has also been found in shell workshops at Cabeza de Vaca, some six
kilometres away from the city of Tumbes, which date to the Chimú and Inca occupations (ca.
A.D. 1100-1520) (Hocquenghem and Peña Ruiz 1994: 214). It is believed even so that it may have
been part of the food eaten at this site.
Oyster [Ostra] (Ostrea angelica)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) discovered remains of Ostrea angelica during the White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D.
100) and Chimú (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations of Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley.
Peruvian Scallop [Conchuela, Concha de Abanico or Se orita] (Argopecten purpuratus)
This is a species of the Pectinidae family that lives at the bottom of the sandy and gravel zone
in the sublittoral, at depths of 4-30 metres, that was highly regarded for its meat (Bonavia 1982:
184). It certainly was an essential part of the pre-Hispanic diet (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 184).
Argopecten purpuratus ranges from Nicaragua to Coquimbo (Chile), but in Peru it concentrates
from Sechura to Asia. It is found at a depth of 6.50-19 metres, in sheltered areas and in
association with algae, so its presence entails diving (Sánchez Romero 1973: 257).
Probably the earliest remains showing this shell was eaten come from the upper Zaña Valley
(in the Lambayeque region), where Tom Dillehay (2011: 334) and his team recorded remains in
strata whose date averages to 8011-5954 B.C.
Few remains of Argopecten purpuratus have been excavated at Cero Lampay, a site north
of Lima that dates to 2410-2064 B.C. Even so, at present the documentation available on
the consumption of this mollusc comes from La Laguna, a site north of the mouth of the
Huarmey River that dates to around 5320 B.C., where it comprised over 9% of the diet of the
early population in this zone (Bonavia et al. 2001: 303).
Argopecten purpuratus has been found in middens—the remains of the food eaten—at
Bandurria, a site close to Huacho on the Central Coast of Peru (Chu 2008: 138).
Argopecten purpuratus was also excavated in the garbage of the domestic dwellings in Chilca,
south of Lima, so it may have been consumed in this site between 3794 and 1530 B.C. It should
be noted that its consumption comprised 19% of the total, which means it was significant in
the diet of this early group (Capps 1987: 49). Capps himself (1987: 58) noted its presence in
Asia, a site in the Mala Valley that dates to 1490 B.C.
Mercedes Cárdenas (1999) excavated Salinas de Chao, a site on the North Coast of Peru, where
she documented a large amount of Argopecten purpuratus. This means it may have been
eaten somewhat intensively in this zone since at least 1900 B.C.
437
Elmo Leon
Quilter et al. (1991: 280) noticed the remains of Argopecten purpuratus in the archaeological rubbish
at the ceremonial site of El Paraíso in the Chillón Valley north of Lima, which dates to 2150 B.C.
Remains of Argopecten purpuratus were identified in the Gallery of Offerings at Chavín de
Huántar, with dates that ranged to 1218-812 B.C. It may have been part of the diet at this site
even though these remains do not come from domestic contexts (Sandweiss and Rodríguez
1993: 407).
Argopecten purpuratus has likewise been documented in sites on the North Coast like Padre
Abán and Caballo Muerto even in the Late Intermediate Period, albeit in low frequencies.
These sites fall between 2300 B.C. and A.D. 1460, which means it was eaten throughout this
period on the North Coast.
In the modern-day Piura region slightly further north is Loma Valverde, a site in the upper
Piura River, in the province of Morropón, for which Peter Kaulicke (1991: 414) reported the
discovery of Argopecten purpuratus in the midst of the food refuse left by the Salinar and
Mochica population of this area ca. 350 B.C.-A.D. 450.
Argopecten purpuratus was found in the excavations at Puémape in association with the
Cupisnique (1,000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460)
occupations (Elera et al. 1992: 18). Lockard (2005: 195) reported a very low consumption of
Argopecten purpuratus during the Moche occupation (A.D. 600-800) of Galindo, in the lower
Moche Valley.
The consumption of Argopecten purpuratus has also been reported in Mochica contexts at
the Huaca del Sol and the Huaca de la Luna, in the Moche Valley (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129,
Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 123).
The Mochica of Pampa Grande (Lambayeque) also seem to have consumed Argopecten
purpuratus, at least in AD. 711-800 (Pozorski and Pozorski 1981: 32).
Miller and Burger (1995: 435) found remains of Argopecten purpuratus in the town beside the
temple of Chavín de Huántar, which was literally an exotic item in a site far-removed from the
sea (at least 120 km in a straight line) in 500-400 B.C. Since these are offerings it is not easy
establishing whether it was eaten.
The research undertaken at the monumental site of Cahuachi likewise found Argopecten
purpuratus as part of the food eaten by its people during the first centuries of the Christian
era (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 4).
Argopecten purpuratus has been documented in the excavations of the ceremonial site of
Cerro Culebras—which belongs to the Lima culture (A.D. 100-550). It is therefore clear that
this type of mollusc was already being eaten in Lima by its ancient inhabitants (Bazán del
Campo 1988: 31-33).
438
14,000 years of food in Peru
Watson (2008: 121) documented a sizable amount of Argopecten purpuratus in domestic
contexts during the Inca occupation of Pueblo Viejo-Pucará, a site in the Lurín Valley. Béarez
et al. (2003: 66) reported the presence of this type of bivalve as food residues in enclosures
24-25 of ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley, with a mean date of
A.D. 1520.
Scallop [Conchuela, Concha de Abanico] (Argopecten circularis)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) documented this type of Argopecten circularis at Puémape, in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley during the White-on-Red occupation (200 B.C.-A.D. 100).
It was also eaten by the inhabitants of the Ostra archaeological site immediately north
of Chimbote, with dates that average 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and Sandweiss 2001: 1086,
Sandweiss 1996: 44). Cárdenas et al. (1997: 129) reported the presence of Argopecten
circularis during the Mochica occupation of the Huaca de la Luna, in the lower Moche
Valley, ca. A.D. 400-650.
Scallop. [Ostión] (Chama pellucida)
Bonavia (1982: 184) documented the remains of Chama pellucida in the lower Huarmey Valley,
so it is possible that it was eaten since the third millennium B.C. According to Bonavia this is a
species that is found strongly adhered to large rocks in the high and low tide marks. The rocky
littoral is its habitat. This is a warm-seas species.
Scallop [Ostión] (Pseudochama corrugata)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) have shown that this mollusc was found the middens of Puémape, in the
lower Jequetepeque Valley, so it is quite possible that it was consumed at least during the
Chimu occupation of this site (A.D. 1000-1,460).
[Concha Pata de Mula, Piconuda] (Trachycardium procerum)
Trachycardium procerum has a high nutritional value (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 184). Once
again, Elera et al. (1992: 18) documented the discovery of Trachycardium procerum at Puémape,
in the lower Jequetepeque Valley. It may have been part of the food eaten by its inhabitants
during the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimu (A.D.
1000-1460) occupations. It may thus have been eaten for a very long time.
439
Elmo Leon
[Almeja Fina, Berberecho] (Mexicardia procera)
At present only one find has been made of this bivalve at Pampa Grande (Lambayeque), a
Mochica site, dated to ca. A.D. 711-800. It may thus have been eaten since then (Shimada and
Shimada 1981: 132).
[Piconudo] (Trachicardium sp.)
Peter Kaulicke (1991: 414) reported the presence of the mollusc called piconudo at Loma
Valverde, a site in the upper Piura Valley that was dated to 350 B.C.-A.D. 450, i.e. the Salinar
and Mochica occupations. It formed part of this people’s diet, albeit in small amounts.
Clam [Almeja] (Transenella pannosa)
This species lives buried in the sandy littoral environment, and is quite frequent in the sea
south of Callao. Bonavia (1982: 185) reported its presence at Los Gavilanes, a site in the lower
Huarmey Valley, so it may have been consumed since the third millennium B.C.
[Piojosa] (Dosinia dunkeri)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) have documented this mollusc on the Peruvian north at Puémape, a site
in the lower Jequetepeque Valley. It may have been eaten during the White-on-Red (200 B.C.-
A.D. 100), and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations.
[Concha Rayada] (Chione sp., Chione subrugosa)
The oldest evidence that Chione was eaten comes from Ostra, a site north of Chimbote
where it has been found somewhat frequently. This site is dated to 5462-3711 B.C. (Reitz and
Sandweiss 2001: 1086, Sandweiss 1996: 44).
Elera et al. (1992: 18) recorded the remains of Chione at Puémape in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley, so it is possible that it was eaten in the White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100) and Chimu
(A.D. 1000-1460) cultures.
Venus shell... [Almeja or Almeja Rayada] (Protothaca thaca)
This is a mollusc that lives buried in the sandy littoral zone, which in recent times has
been little eaten (Bonavia 1982: 185). It is known to have a high nutritional value (Vásquez
and Rosales 1998: 184). According to Elizabeth Reitz (1988: 314), Protothaca thaca can be
440
14,000 years of food in Peru
gathered on sandy soils close to rocky areas, at a depth between one and thirty metres in
the intertidal area.
Scant remains of Protothaca thaca have been excavated at the site of Quebrada de los Burros in
Tacna (Lavallée et al. 1999: 38). The clams were roasted directly over the campfires, along with
wedge clams (machas) and rock shells chanques. The hearths were radiocarbon dated to 7900-
4500 B.C.
Further north from Quebrada de Los Burros is the Ring Site south of Ilo, in Moquegua. Here
Sandweiss (1989: 63) documented remains of Protothaca thaca that were apparently eaten
since around 4000 B.C.
Even so, at present the earliest possible case in which this clam was eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru
was found by Tom Dillehay et al. (2011: 334) in the Upper Zaña Valley (Lambayeque), where it
has been found in contexts that date to 8011-5954 B.C.
Protothaca thaca has also been found south of Lima in the middens of Paloma, a site that
comprises several camps, human burials and food refuse left by its inhabitants (Reitz 1988:
314). The strata where it was found date to 5316-3630 B.C.
Only a small clam fragment was found at Cerro Lampay in the Fortaleza Valley north of Lima
(Vega-Centeno 2007). The site, as has been shown, dates to 2410-2064 B.C. Small amounts
of Protothaca thaca were found in the hearths at Caral in the Supe Valley, some even with
charcoal remains indicating they had been roasted [asadas] around 2600-1800 B.C. (Flores
Blanco 2006: 148). Protothaca taca was likewise discovered at Caral in Sector A with a date
of ca. 2418-2185 B.C. It may have been eaten then but in very small amounts, as it comprises
0.49% of the molluscs eaten (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
Quilter et al. (1991: 280) showed that Protothaca thaca was eaten at least since 2150 B.C.
in places like El Paraíso, in the lower Chillón Valley and very close to modern-day Lima.
Protothaca thaca was excavated among the food remains found at Pampa de Llamas, a site in
the lower Casma Valley that dates to 2088-1243 B.C. It has been found in such amounts that it
must have filled large containers (Pozorski and Pozorski 1986: 397).
Kaulicke (1991: 414reported clam remains in the domestic areas of Loma Valverde, a site in the
upper Piura River, in the modern Piura region. Based on this evidence, Kaulicke believes that
this site’s Salinar population ate this mollusc around 350 B.C.-A.D. 450.
A large percentage of Protothaca thaca has been documented somewhat further to the north
at El Porvenir, a site on the southern bank of the Zarumilla River (Tumbes) and almost on the
frontier with Ecuador, which dated 790-400 B.C. (Moore 2007a: 15).
Clam remains have been found for later dates in some North Coast sites like Padre Abán,
Caballo Muerto, and Caracoles, all around the Moche Valley (Pozorski 1979: 166), and all dating
441
Elmo Leon
to at least ca. 2300 B.C. It is striking that at Gramalote (a site that dates at least to 1810 B.C.),
this clam comprised 13.6% of the food found in the middens, which means it was an important
component in the diet of this North Coast people.
Cutright (2009: 177) found few remains of Protothaca thaca at Pedregal, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, where it was eaten during the Chimu epoch. Puémape is in this same
zone in the Jequetepeque Valley. Here Elera et al. (1992: 18) documented the remains of this
species, which means that it was probably eaten during the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-
on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) epochs.
Lockard (2005: 195) also reported the presence of this species during the Mochica occupation
(A.D. 600-800) of Galindo, a site in the middle Moche Valley, albeit in very small amounts.
Pozorski and Pozorski (2003: 123) likewise documented this species in their excavation of the
middens at Huaca del Sol during its Mochica occupation in the first centuries of our era, as
well as in the Huaca de la Luna (Cárdenas et al. 1997: 129), which has similar dates, which means
the Mochica were familiar with Protothaca thaca and ate it.
Dating to this same epoch—i.e., the Mochica epoch—is La Mina, a site on the left lower
Jequetepeque Valley where a very small amount of remains of this bivalve, which may have
been eaten, has been found (Vásquez and Rosales 1994: 86). The Italian team at Cahuachi on
the other hand found several remains of this type of clam, which means the Nasca ate it
during the first centuries of the Christian era (Piacenza and Pieri 2012:4).
[Concha Tabaco] (Protothaca aspérrima)
Protothaca aspérrima was found on the North Coast at Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, particularly during the White on Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100) and Chimu (A.D.
1000-1460) epochs (Elera et al. 1992: 18).
Clam [Almeja] (Petricola rugosa)
Petricola rugosa has been excavated in very small amounts at Caral, in the Casma Valley, and
more specifically in Sector A, which dates to 2418-2185 B.C. (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
The research undertaken by Elera et al. (1992: 18) recorded this mollusc at Puémape, in the
lower Jequetepeque Valley It is therefore very likely that it was eaten during the Cupisnique
(1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) occupations.
Clam [Almeja, Taquilla] (Mulinia edulis)
This type of clam was consumed in pre-Hispanic Peru since the late last Ice Age. DeFrance and
Umire (2004: 271) documented the few remains of the clams eaten by the first inhabitants of
442
14,000 years of food in Peru
Quebrada Tacahuay, a site south of the modern-day city of Ilo in the Moquegua littoral, in a
stratum that was radiocarbon dated to 10730-10080 B.C.
Mulinia edulis has also been found in considerable amounts at Quebrada de los Burros, a site
in the Tacna littoral dated to 7900-4500 B.C. (Lavallée and Béarez 2012: 128).
Mulinia edulis came third among the molluscs eaten by the inhabitants of the monumental
pre-Hispanic site of Bandurria, which dates to 3170-1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 138).
Evidence that this bivalve was eaten, this time from the Late Holocene, come from Caral, a
site excavated by Ruth Shady. Flores Blanco (2006: 157) reports that remains were found in
semi-charred hearths. This means they were roasted before being eaten around 2600-1800
B.C. It was likewise reported that Mulinia edulis is also found at Caral (sector A), but it just
comprises 1.15% of all molluscs. It may thus have comprised a small part of the diet of its early
inhabitants in 2418-2185 B.C. (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
Mulinia edulis clams have been found—albeit averaging only 2.17%—in the excavations at
Huaricanga in the Fortaleza Valley north of Lima, with dates that range between 3600 and
600 B.C. It may have been part of the diet of the people who inhabited this site (Creamer et
al. 2011: 186).
Quilter et al. (1991: 280) documented the remains of this bivalve in the middens left behind as
refuse of the food eaten at El Paraíso, a site immediately north of Lima in the mouth of the
Chillón River, dated to at least 2150 B.C.
Few remains have been found at Ring Site south of the city of Ilo, in Moquegua (Sandweiss et
al. 1989: 63), so it is highly likely that it formed part of the food eaten by the inhabitants of
this site since around 8000 B.C.
Mulinia edulis was also found in the analysis of enclosures 24-25 of ramp pyramid III B at
Pachacamac, in the lower Lurín Valley, as was noted by Béarez et al. (2003: 66), which means
it was part of the food the people in this zone ate at least in A.D. 1520, according to the
radiocarbon dates obtained.
[Almejita] (Spisula adamsi)
Spisula adamsi is known for its high nutritional value (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 184). The
research by Elera et al. (1992: 18) documented it at Puémape in the lower Jequetepeque Valley,
so it was probably consumed at this site during the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red
(1000 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimu (1000-1460) occupations.
It has also been found by Mercedes Cárdenas (1999) in her excavations at Salinas de Chao,
where it was determined to have been the most important foodstuff in this people’s diet
since at least 1900 B.C.
443
Elmo Leon
The same can be said for La Mina, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, where an early
Mochica tomb was found with remains of this mollusc, albeit in small amounts (Vásquez and
Rosales 1994: 86).
Clam [Almeja, Se orita, Conchita, Palabrita, Mariposa] (Donax peruvianus, Donax obesulus)
This type of bivalve is found buried in sandy soils, particularly south of Piura (Bonavia 1982:
185), and it has a high nutritional value (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 184).
It is quite probably eaten since 8011-5954 B.C., as was shown by the archaeological research
undertaken by Tom Dillehay et al. (2011: 335) in the upper Zaña Valley (Lambayeque), which is
at present the earliest record of this bivalve being eaten.
An early record of palabritas being eaten was found on the Central Coast. Donax obesulus
was found in the excavations at Sector A of Caral, with dates that range to 2418-2185 B.C., so
it may have been consumed at this time (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
Donax obesulus has been documented in North Coast archaeological sites since at least 2300
B.C. (Pozorski 1979: 166, table 1). It is not too representative, but it is interesting that it was
found in all of the sites Pozorski studied, including Padre Abán, Alto Salaverry, Gramalote,
Caballo Muerto, Cerro Arena, Huaca de la Luna, and above all Cerro La Virgen, a Chimú-Inca
occupation where it comprised 25% of the diet. According to Pozorski, palabritas can simply
be gathered by hand when the tide retreats.
Mercedes Cárdenas (1999) found a large amount of Donax peruvianus in her excavations at
Salinas de Chao (North Coast), with dates that begin at 1900 B.C.
Kaulicke (1991: 414) reported the presence of this type of clam in domestic contexts somewhat
further to the north at Loma Valverde, a site in the upper Piura River, in 350 B.C.-A.D. 450, i.e.
the Mochica and Salinar populations in this region.
In their research on the type of food eaten at Cerro Blanco (a site in the lower Nepeña Valley),
Ikehara and Shibata (2005: 144) found the remains of this type of clam, which had been part of
the feasts they reconstructed at this site and that were held in 1100-250 B.C.
Donax obesulus was found in the Gallery of Offerings at Chavín de Huántar, in the period
1218-812 B.C. (Sandweiss and Rodríguez 1993: 406). Although it was not found in contexts of
domestic consumption, it may have been part of the food the people in this well-known
archaeological site had.
Donax obesulus was also documented at Puémape, at least since the time of the Cupisnique
(1000 B.C.) culture, through the White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100) and even during the Chimu
culture (A.D. 1000-1460); so it is very likely that it was eaten at this archaeological site in those
times (Elera et al. 1992: 18).
444
14,000 years of food in Peru
It was perhaps most eaten during the Mochica (A.D. 600-800) and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) occupation
of Galindo, a site in the middle Moche Valley, especially by the elite (Lockard 2005: 195).
Cutright (2009: 177) reported, also for the North Coast, that palabritas comprised 33% of all
molluscs eaten at Pedregal (a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley), so it was a major part of the
diet of this rural Chimu population. In this same valley, the people of Pacatnamú ate this mollusc
preferentially during the Chimu occupation (Gumerman 1991).
Cárdenas et al. (1997: 129) and Roselló et al. (2001: 75-76) found that palabritas were eaten by the
Mochica population at the Huaca del Sol and the Huaca de la Luna in the Moche Valley, with dates
ranging between A.D. 470 and A.D. 600. It was, in fact the mollusc most eaten (it provided 2.7% of all
the meat eaten) at the Huaca del Sol or in the Moche Valley, in a Mochica context, ca. A.D. 300-500.
Several shells from this type of mollusc have been found in houses and kitchens in these classic
Moche sites. These for instance include a Gallinazo-Moche settlement that dates to ca. A.D. 100
in the Middle Moche Valley called Santa Rosa-Quirihuac, where a significant presence of Donax
was detected; an even more significant presence was recorded at Ciudad de Dios, a Moche site just
four kilometres away from the previous site, ca. A.D. 400 (Gumerman and Briceño 2003: 231-238).
Vásquez et al. (2003: 37) drew attention to the significant presence of this mollusc in the plain
that extends between the Huaca del Sol and the Huaca de la Luna in the Moche Valley, where it
comprised 64% of the molluscs eaten during the Final Moche occupation (ca. A.D. 571-685). The
Lambayeque Moche, like in the case of Pampa Grande, consumed this type of mollusc ca. A.D.
711-800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 32).
The clams from this species were a major resource in the zone of Lambayeque, at least from the
Cupisnique culture to Late Sicán, i.e. ca. 1300 B.C.-A.D. 1400 (Klaus and Tam 2010: 596).
It is also known that considerable amounts of this mollusc were eaten in Chimu times (A.D. 1030-
1230) by the people of Santa Rita B, a site in the Chao Valley (Bethard et al. 2008: 25).
The people of Pueblo Viejo-Pucará, a site in the lower Lurín Valley, ate small amounts of this
mollusc in Inca times (Watson 2008: 120).
In their excavations in ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac, in the Lurín Valley, Béarez et al. (2003:
58) found the mollusc most eaten in enclosures 24 and 25 was Donax obesulus, which comprised
38% of all molluscs eaten here. This context gave a date of A.D. 1520, i.e. during the fall of the
Inca Empire in this zone.
Razor clam [Navaja or Pico de Pato] (Tagelus peruvianus)
Tagelus peruvianus is found from Panamá to Tumbes and Valdivia (Sánchez Romero 1973: 278).
Elera et al. (1992:18) reported the discovery of this mollusc at Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley, where it apparently was used as food, particularly during the Chimu occupation of this site.
445
Elmo Leon
Razor clam [Chaveta] (Tagelus dombeii)
This type of mollusc was very probably eaten at Puémape, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley,
during the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (300-100 B.C.), and Chimu (A.D. 1000-
1470) occupations (Elera et al. 1992: 18).
Clam [Almeja] (Semele corrugata)
The habitat of Semele corrugata is the sandy littoral is the Central and South Coast (Bonavia
1982: 185), where it is found from Chimbote (Peru) to the Chonos archipelago (Chile) buried
at a depth of some 10 cm. However, unlike machas, it is found farther away from the littoral
and is concentrated on the South Coast, particularly around Pisco (Sánchez Romero 1973: 257).
The consumption in Peru of this type of clam, which has a high nutritional value (Vásquez
and Rosales 1998: 84), goes back to the Terminal Pleistocene. DeFrance and Umire (2004: 271)
excavated Quebrada Tacahuay, a site on the littoral immediately south of Ilo in Moquegua,
where they found few remains of Semele corrugata in a stratum that was dated to 10730-
10080 B.C.
Semele sp. has been found in negligible amounts (0.34%) but it quite possible was part of
the food eaten by the ancient people of Caral’s Sector A, dated to 2418-2,185 B.C. (Shady
and Leiva 2003: 114).
Like Protothaca thaca, only a fragment of Semele corrugata has been excavated in an
archaeological midden at Cerro Lampay, in the Fortaleza Valley (Vega-Centeno 2007). The
site dates to 2410-2064 B.C.
Capps (1987: 36 and 58) found some remains of this species at Paloma, in the vicinity of
Chilca south of Lima, with dates that ranged between 5316 B.C. and 3630 B.C., as well as in
Asia (in the Mala Valley) at ca. 1490 B.C.
Some time ago Patterson and Moseley (1968: 117) reported the presence in their excavations at
Ancón, of Semele corrugata in the Camino component of the Playa Hermosa (Ancón) phase,
which dates to 3063 B.C. We have seen, however, that there is no in-depth documentation
of these finds.
Shelia Pozorski (1979: 167) reported the presence of Semele corrugata in some North Coast
sites between ca. 2300 B.C. and the time of the Inca, but it is worth pointing out that
this clam was important in the diet of sites such as Gramalote—which dates at least to
1810 B.C.—and Caballo Muerto—which developed between the Initial Period and the
Early Horizon (ca. 1800-300 B.C.); for instance, at Gramalote it comprised up to 25% of the
resources eaten (Pozorski and Pozorski 1979: 422).
446
14,000 years of food in Peru
The Mochica ate Semele corrugata at the Huaca del Sol in the lower Moche Valley (Pozorski
and Pozorski 2003: 123), and those of the Huaca de la Luna had it in similar epochs (Cárdenas
et al. 1997: 129).
Vásquez and Rosales (1994: 86) documented Semele corrugata at La Mina, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley that belongs to the initial phase of the Mochica culture. It was also eaten
by the Pampa Grande (Lambayeque) Mochica around A.D. 711.800 (Shimada y Shimada 1981: 32).
Semele corrugata was reported at Loma Valverde, a site in the upper Piura River, and dated to ca.
350 B.C-A.D. 450, which corresponds to the Salinar and Mochica occupations (Kaulicke 1991: 414).
Clam [Almeja] (Semele solida)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) showed the presence of the remains of this type of clam, which probably
was part of the diet eaten by the people of Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley,
during the Cupisnique (in the first millennium B.C.) and Chimu (ca. A.D. 1000-1460) cultures.
Wedge clams... [Machas] (Mesodesma donacium)
Mesodesma donacium was one of the bivalves most eaten during the pre-Hispanic epoch.
Its habitat is the sandy, mid-littoral zone where it lies buried, and it is characterised by its
good locomotion and the greatly developed foot (Bonavia 1982: 185). Lavallée et al. (1999: 39)
claim it may hold the largest proportion of protein among all of the shellfish that were eaten
by ancient Peruvians (23.2%), as well as a high calcium value (171.8 mg for each 100 grams).
We should recall in this regard that calcium is essential for the organism as it forms and
strengthens bones, prevents circulatory diseases, has cicatrizant properties, etc. We therefore
need to bear these values in mind when assessing the quality of the pre-Hispanic diet.
Mesodesma donacium comprises 143 kilo/calories for each 100 grams. With these 100 grams
as a referential value, these have sodium (248.3 mg), potassium (119.7 mg), and magnesium (83.6
mg). Mesodesma donacium can be gathered both on the beach as well as on sandy bottoms. Its
spatial distribution extends from Sechura Bay (Peru) to Chiloé Island (Chile) (Sánchez Romero
1973: 257), 5-15 metres behind the tide line, so that it can be pulled out using the foot, especially
during the summer months (Nancy Chávez Cornejo, personal communication, 17.8.2010).
Macha consumption in Peru goes back in time to the arrival of the first human groups
to this part of the Andes. Some macha shell mounds reach up to ten metres high, which
shows how intensively this bivalve was gathered and eaten since the preceramic epoch
(Carré 2007).
Mesodesma donacium has been eaten on the South Coast since the last Ice Age. Daniel
Sandweiss et al. (1998) discovered that 99% of the molluscs at Quebrada Jaguay, a site in the
447
Elmo Leon
vicinity of the modern city of Camaná, are machas. The dates for this site range between
11040 B.C. and 9384 B.C.
A few kilometres to the north on the littoral is the complex of sites known as Pampa Colorada,
which is almost on the mouth of the Ocoña River (Arequipa). Here Heather McInnis (2006)
headed intensive excavations and found a large amount of machas at site PC-500, with dates
ranging between 9200 B.C. and 7490 B.C. Machas are massively found in the others sites, of
which there are dozens.
One of the earliest finds of macha consumption comes from Quebrada de los Burros (Lavallée
et al. 1999: 37), an archaeological site where hearths or campfires were found in encampments
made out of perishable materials. These hold a regular amount of machas, many of which had
traces of charcoal, due to their exposition to fire. The dates given by these hearths range to
7900-4500 B.C.
Mesodesma donacium was also eaten in Southern Peru even in most ancient times, as follows
from the finds made at the Ring Site on the coast of Ilo, in Moquegua. Here Sandweiss et al.
(1989: 63) have reported its presence since the beginning of this site’s occupation ca. 9500 B.C.,
as follows from the validity of the radiocarbon dates obtained from seashells. This is the third
most-eaten mollusc at this site.
But Mesodesma donacium was apparently also eaten at quite an early date on the North
Coast, as shown by the excavations made by Tom Dillehay (2011: 334) in the upper Zaña Valley,
where it has been found several archaeological sites that date to 8011-5,954 B.C.
At Paloma, a Middle Holocene site south of Lima in the Chilca Valley, just seven kilometres
away from the sea, Benfer (1990) and Capps (1987: 36) excavated a large number of camp sites
of a domestic nature, where the remains of the machas eaten were found. The radiocarbon
dates place this in 5316-3630 B.C. A similar date—5320 B.C.—was documented for macha
consumption at La Laguna (PV35-106), a site in the littoral zone immediately north of the
Huarmey Valley (Bonavia et al. 2001: 303). Again, Capps (1987: 58) showed that at Asia (a site in
the Mala Valley, on the Central Coast) most of the molluscs eaten were machas ca. 1490 B.C.
Krzysztof Makowski (2004) pointed out that machas were the major item consumed at the
preceramic site of Tablada de Lurín (Lima). The site, which comprises a series of camps and
lithic workshops, is close to the mouth of the Lurín Valley and dates to ca. 5621-5040 B.C.
Creamer et al. (2011: 185) reported that in 3600-670 B.C. the mollusc most eaten at Huaricanga,
a public preceramic monument on the left margin of the Fortaleza Valley, some 23 km from the
sea, was the macha—38% overall. A lower proportion of machas (12%) was found at Porvenir,
a site in this same valley, which dated to 3720-1280 B.C. (Creamer et al. 2011: 185).
Puémape is south of the lower Jequetepeque Valley on the North Coast, and its oldest
occupation is dated to 3008-2329 B.C. Lanfranco et al. (2009: 5) showed that machas comprised
over 11% of this site’s diet.
448
14,000 years of food in Peru
Alejandro Chu (2008: 138) reported that the macha was the mollusc most frequently eaten at
Bandurria, in the vicinity of Huacho north of Lima. The radiocarbon dates for this site range
between 3170 B.C. and 1670 B.C.
As with choros, a massive amount of machas has been excavated at Cerro Lampay, a Preceramic
ceremonial site in the Fortaleza Valley on the coast of Lima (Vega-Centeno 2007). These finds
were dated to 2410-2064 B.C.
The presence of Mesodesma donacium has been documented at Caral (Shady et al. 2001) as part
of the marine resources gathered during the occupation of the site, which is estimated to have
taken place in 2585-1938 B.C. Machas had a significant role among the food eaten by its inhabitants,
and may have even been subjected to fire as they have also been found in hearths (Flores Blanco
2006: 148). In another Caral (Sector A) report it is claimed that in 2418-2185 B.C. macha (Mesodesma
donacium) was the second most-eaten mollusc after choro with 27.35%. (Shady and Leiva 2003:
114). Just like at Quebrada de los Burros, here we see the machas were simply roasted.
Mesodesma donacium has been found in Ancón sites belonging to the Conchas phase
(Patterson and Moseley 1968: 117), which dates to 2722 B.C.
Although Mesodesma donacium was not significant in the diet of the archaeological sites
between the Moche and Huanchaco Valleys studied by Pozorski (1979: 166), it was still a part
of their diet. It has been found at Padre Abán, Alto Salaverry, and Galindo. The first of these
sites dates at least to 2300 B.C., and Galindo up to A.D. 800, so machas were eaten in this
part of Peru at this time.
The machas found at the Huaca del Sol, a site in the lower Moche Valley, also date to around this
time, so here they were also eaten by the Moche (Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 123). Pozorski and
Pozorski (1986: 397) reported the presence of large pockets of Mesodesma donacium due to its
consumption at Pampa de Llamas, a site in the lower Casma Valley that dates to ca. 2088-1243 B.C.
Quilter et al. (1991: 279) reported the high occurrence of machas at El Paraíso, a site quite close
to the mouth of the Chillón Valley, where they were eaten since at least 2100 B.C.
Machas (Mesodesma donacium) were also excavated in the Gallery of the Offerings at Chavín
de Huántar with a mean date of 1218-812 B.C. (Sandweiss and Rodríguez 1993: 406), but it is as
yet unknown whether they were eaten or not.
Elera et al. (1992: 18) reported the presence of Mesodesma donacium at Puémape, a site in the
lower Jequetepeque Valley, throughout all of the periods studied: Cupisnique (1000 B.C.-A.D.
200) White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460).
According to Lockard (2005: 195), machas were on the other hand the second bivalve most
eaten by the Mochica (A.D. 600-800) and the Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) of Galindo, a site on the
North Coast in the middle Moche Valley.
449
Elmo Leon
The excavations an Italian team has undertaken in the Cahuachi shrine, in a Nasca context,
reported the discovery of Mesodesma donacium as the residue of food eaten during the first
centuries of the Christian era (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 4).
Bazán del Campo (1988: 31-33) has also noted that Mesodesma donacium is the major mollusc
found in the excavations at Cerro Culebras, a Lima site (A.D. 100-550) in the lower Chillón
Valley.
Mesodesma donacium was also a significant part of the diet of the people of the Central Coast
in late epochs, like in Inca times. So much so that for instance Watson (2008: 121) reported
finding significant amounts of machas at Pueblo Viejo-Pucará, a Late Horizon—i.e. the Inca
epoch—site in the Lurín Valley.
Mesodesma donacium comprised 18-29% of the molluscs eaten by the people of enclosures
24-25 in ramp pyramid III B at Pachacamac, the archaeological shrine in the lower Lurín Valley
that dates to ca. A.D. 1520, i.e. the final phase of the Inca Empire, just shortly before the
Spanish (Béarez et al. 2003: 58); the importance its consumption had is therefore significant.
Venus shell [Abanico, Piojosa, Concha Blanca] (Tivella sp.)
Bonavia (1982: 184) documented some Tivella specimens (probably Tivella hians) at the site of
Los Gavilanes, which usually live buried in the sandy soil.
The oldest evidence of its possible consumption come from the excavation of archaeological
sites in the upper Zaña Valley that have been dated to 8011-5954 B.C. (Dillehay 2011: 334).
Gumerman (1991) found the remains of Tivella in his analysis of the food remains from
Pacatnamú, in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, where it was apparently eaten in considerable
amounts. So this type of mollusc was also eaten by the people of the Moche culture.
[Cascabel Peruano] (Anomia peruviana)
Anomia peruviana is a mollusc that has been found at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley, so it may have been eaten during the White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100) and Chimu (A.D.
1000-1460) periods (Elera et al. 1992: 18).
Clam [Almeja] (Eurhomalea rufa)
A series of hearths with remains of Eurhomalea rufo, which have been dated to 7626-4501
B.C., were excavated at Quebrada de los Burros, an archaeological site in Tacna (Lavallée et al.
1999: 38).
450
14,000 years of food in Peru
Eurhomalea rufa was excavated at Caral, where it was probably eaten albeit in very small
amounts (1.15%) in Sector A, which dates to 2418-2185 B.C. (Shady and Leiva 2003: 114).
Pozorski (1979: 166) also found the remains of this clam in some North Coast archaeological
sites like Padre Abán, Alto Salaverry, and Gramalote, which date to ca. 2300-1200 B.C. The
percentages in which it was consumed in these sites are not however significant.
Pozorski and Pozorski (1986: 397) also found the clams consumed at Pampa de Llamas, a site in
the lower Casma Valley, that dated to 2088-1243 B.C.
Clam remains (Eurhomalea rufa) have been found in the middens of El Paraíso, an
archaeological site north of Lima and close to the mouth of the Chillón Valley that goes
back to 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 280). Elera et al. (1992: 18) also showed that this type
of clam was quite probably eaten at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, by
the people of the Cupisnique (1000-200 B.C.), White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100), and Chimu
(A.D. 1000-1460) cultures.
[Concha] (Mactra velata)
Elera et al. (1992: 18) showed the presence of Mactra velata at Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, so that it may have been eaten in the White-on-Red (200 B.C.-A.D. 100)
and the Chimu (A.D. 1000-1460) epochs.
Concha Mariposa (Iphigenia altior)
Iphigenia altior was documented in the excavations Tom Dillehay (2011: 335) made in the upper
Zaña Valley, in archaeological contexts that date to 8011-5954 B.C., so it may have been eaten
since quite an early de time
Sea Urchins
Sea urchins have been eaten in Peru since at least 5,000 years ago. Bird et al. (1985: 242) point
out that their spines are common in the excavated layers of the site of Huaca Prieta, but no
reference is given regarding its chronology. These remains presumably date to at least the
second millennium B.C.
Even more ancient are the green sea urchins found in the excavations at Quebrada de los
Burros in the Tacna littoral, in strata dated to 7900-4500 B.C. (Lavallée and Béarez 2012: 135).
Echinoderms like this type of urchin were eaten at sites like El Paraíso north of Lima, at least
since 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 280).
451
Elmo Leon
Bonavia (1982: 190) documented the presence of two species of Echinoidea in his research
at the site of Los Gavilanes: Tetrapygus niger (erizo gallinazo) and Arbacia spatuligera (erizo
rojo or erizo colorado). Both live in the rocky littoral, but Bonavia (1982: 390) believes the
former was eaten more throughout the Peruvian coast since the Preceramic epoch.
Sea urchin remains were found in the middens at Cerro Lampay, an archaeological site
dated to 2410-2064 B.C. (Vega Centeno 2007), which means it may have been eaten during
this period of time.
It is therefore clear that the list of sea urchin consumption could grow if the archaeological
research teams determined the taxonomy of these marine species.
Sea Urchin [Erizos de Mar] (Loxechinus albus)
This type of sea urchin was consumed since at least 6500 B.C. at the site of Quebrada de
los Burros in the Tacna littoral.
Loxechinus albus has also been found in the excavations at Bandurria, a monumental
preceramic site on the Central Coast north of Lima and close to the modern city of Huacho.
The dates obtained for the site range between 3170 and 1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 134).
[Piure, Ciruelo Colorado, Ciruelo de Mar] (Pyura, Pyura chilensis, Ascidiacea)
A species from the Ascidiacea group like Pyura chilensis (en echinoderm similar to the sea
urchin that is commonly known as piure, ciruelo colorado or ciruelo de mar) was important
at the site of Padre Abán (with almost 17% of the overall consumption), so it was eaten since
at least 2300 B.C. (Pozorski 1979: 168).
At Los Gavilanes, in the lower Huarmey Valley, Bonavia (1982: 191) reported the presence of
significant amounts of Pyura chilensis, a species that lives on the rocks below the water, but
it can also do so on the hard surface of the brown algae. Bonavia notes that the Huarmey
fishermen ate it as a cebiche with just a dash of lemon and salt.
It is also found in significant amounts during the final Preceramic on the Central Coast, so
Bonavia believes that it was one of the molluscs most eaten on the coast in the pre-Hispanic
period, even though it is usually left out in the reports of archaeological excavations.
Bonavia et al. (2001: 304) also documented the remains of ciruelo de mar for an even older
date as 5320 B.C. at La Laguna, PV35-106, a site also on the littoral to the north of the
Huarmey Valley.
452
14,000 years of food in Peru
Percebes [Goose Barnacles?] and Crabs
Barnacles [Percebe, Pico de Loro] (Balanus spp.)
Balanus lives in the rocky littoral environment and it surely formed part of the pre-Hispanic
diet around 3000 B.C., as follows from the research done by Bonavia (1982: 189) at the site
of Los Gavilanes
The oldest remains found in pre-Hispanic Peru seem to be those of the site of Quebrada
Tacahuay (DeFrance and Umire 2004: 271), where they were found associated with evidence
of human activity in a stratum dated to 9730-9370 B.C. The barnacles found in the complex of
sites at Pampa Colorada, close to the mouth of the Ocoña River on the littoral of Arerquipa
have somewhat similar dates of 9200-5400 B.C. (McInnis 2006: 381).
Reitz (1988: 314) reported the presence of crustacea, crabs and barnacles (Balanus spp.) at
Paloma, an archaeological site south of Lima in the Chilca Valley, where they were eaten by
the early inhabitants of this zone ca. 5316-3630 B.C.
Barnacles was also found in the excavations at Huaca Prieta, usually attached to the shells of
the molluscs. According to the site’s chronology, these may date to the second millennium B.C.
The remains of barnacles percebes (Balanus tintinnabulum) dating to 3008-2329 B.C. have been
found at Puémape in Lambayeque, and were most probably eaten as part of the diet of this people.
Lockard (2005: 195) documented scant remains of Balanus in the excavations at Galindo, a site
in the Moche Valley, but it has also been found at Pampa Grande (Lambayeque) with dates
that go to A.D. 711-800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 32).
On the Central Coast, not far from Los Gavilanes, Bonavia (2009: 264) observed the presence
of pico de loro (Balanus) on the beach at site PV35-4 north of the Huarmey Valley, which
belongs to the Middle Horizon (ca. A.D. 800).
[Percebe] (Chthamalus cirratus)
Chthamalus cirratus has been documented in the excavations at Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, and was dated to ca. 200 B.C. (Elera et al. 1992: 19), but there is no clear
evidence that it was eaten.
The percentage of Chthamalus cirratus at the site of Galindo during its Moche occupation
ca. A.D. 600-800 was significant for its people, and particularly for the elite (Lockard 2005).
453
Elmo Leon
Taxonomically Unidentified Crabs (Pleocyemata cf. anomura and brachyura)
The alimentary value of the crab in fresh condition is 93% calories, 78% water, 17% proteins,
1.9% fat, 1.8% ash, and particularly thiamine and vitamin C (each approximately 2%) (Cárdenas
et al. 1997: 140), so its presence should indicate a major alimentary potential.
At present, apparently the earliest evidence of these crustacea having been eaten—the
common crab in particular—comes from the upper Zaña Valley in the modern-day Lambayeque
region, where Dillehay (2011: 334) documented a series of remains from these animals in a
stratum that dates to 8011-5954 B.C. So in Peru crabs have been eaten for over 10,000 years.
A few crab remains, albeit without any taxonomic identification, were excavated at Cerro
Lampay, a site close to the mouth of the Fortaleza Valley on the modern-day coast of Lima
(Vega-Centeno 2007). This is a midden with the food refuse close to a preceramic temple that
dates to 2410-2064 B.C.
Here we should likewise mention the crabs (just like that) Patterson and Moseley (1968: 117)
found in the Playa Hermosa phase of Ancón north of Lima. Although the documentation and
the radiocarbon dates for it are scant, we got an average of 2634 B.C.
Crabs [Cangrejos] (Calappidae)
Vásquez and Rosales (1998: 182) found this type of crabs in the Mochica urban site of Huaca de
la Luna in A.D. 400-750. Although there is no evidence of its consumption, it is possible that the
Moche may have eaten it, as is suggested by its multiple depictions in this culture’s ceramics.
Crab [Cangrejo Tijereta] (Petrolisthes spp., Porcellanidae)
In their excavations at the site of Quebrada de los Burros in Tacna, Lavallée et al. (1999: 40)
found the remains of this small crab that lives below the rocks in the intertidal zone, and is
captured in a simple way since at least 7600 B.C.
[Cangrejo Violáceo, Jaiva Morada, or Cangrejo Colorado] (Platyxanthus orbignyi)
This species lives in the rocky-sandy ground of the infralittoral zone, at depths ranging
between ten and fifteen metres. It is widely consumed on the Peruvian coast because it is a
species that measures at least 10 cm long and weighs no less than 400-500 grams.
Even so it is worth noting that thus far the oldest evidence of this crab having been eaten goes
back to 9000 B.C. as it has been found on the North Coast in the camps of the Paiján people,
in the middle Chicama Valley.
454
14,000 years of food in Peru
Lavallée et al. (1999: 40) reported the presence of Platyxanthus orbignyi (Xanthidae) (of a
larger size than the ... [tijeretas]) in the middle levels—7900-4000 B.C.—of Quebrada de los
Burros, on the Tacna littoral. It is worth pointing out they were frequently consumed because
they appear throughout all of the sequence (Lavallée and Béarez 2012: 135).
This species was also mentioned by Bonavia (1982: 190) at Los Gavilanes, where it was part of
the diet of its preceramic population since around 3000 B.C.
Alejandro Chu (2008: 134) reported the presence of Platyxanthus orbigny or cangrejo violáceo
in the food refuse left in the middens by the early people of Bandurria, a monumental
preceramic site in the vicinity of Huacho north of Lima, which was dated to 3170-1610 B.C.
Platyxanthus orbigny was eaten on North coast sites like Padre Abán, Alto Salaverry, and
Caballo Muerto, and even in Huaca de la Luna and Gramalote (ca. 1800 B.C.)—where it
comprised at least 5% of all food resources in this site—and others in the Chimu culture, i.e.
Chan Chan, that is to say 2300B.C.-A.D. 1460 (Pozorski 1979: 168).
This crab species has also been found at Puémape (a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley)
with a date of ca. 200 B.C. (Elera et al. 1992: 19).
Platyxanthus orbigny has been eaten by the Mochica and its ancestors on the North Coast,
because they were found as part of the food eaten at the Huaca del Sol and the Huaca de la
Luna in the Moche Valley, in A.D. 470-600 (Roselló et al. 2001: 78, Pozorski and Pozorski 2003:
123). According to Vásquez et al. (2003: 43), Platyxanthus orbignyi was the main crustacean
eaten at these sites in A.D. 571-685, i.e. during the late Moche culture in the valley of the
same name. This species also was a relatively major component of the diet of the Mochica
population of Galindo (Lockard 2005).
Platyxanthus orbignyi was also documented at Pampa Grande (in the modern region of
Lambayeque), a Late Moche site (A.D. 711-800) (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 131).
Robyn Cutright (2009: 177) found Platyxanthus orbignyi in the lower Jequetepeque Valley at
Pedregal, where it was eaten by the rural Chimu population that occupied the site ca. A.D.
1000-1460.
Rock crab [Cangrejo Peludo, Jaiva Peluda] (Cancer setosus)
This type of crab was eaten not just during the earliest stages of Quebrada de los Burros,
in the Tacna littoral, but also up to the Middle Holocene, i.e. 7900-4500 B.C. (Lavallée and
Béarez 2012: 135). It grows more than 10 cm long and weighs no less than 400-500 grams, which
means it is edible.
455
Elmo Leon
[Cangrejo de Agua] (Arenaeus mexicanus)
Arenaeus mexicanus has been documented at the urban site of Huaca de la Luna, so it is
possible the Mochica consumed it ca. A.D. 400-750 (Vásquez and Rosales 1998: 182).
[Cangrejo Araña] (Maidias) and Cangrejo Piedra (Xanthidae)
Bird et al. (1995: 242) reported the presence of at least two crab species in the food remains
left at Huaca Prieta, i.e. a species (cangrejo araña) belonging to the Maidias family, and a
cangrejo piedra (Xanthidae), so they may have been part of the food these early settlers had
some five thousand years ago.
Rock crab [Jaiva] (Cancridae)
This has been found in the urban zone of the Huaca de la Luna in the Moche Valley, specifically
in the context belonging to the culture of the same name in A.D. 400-750.
Sea Cucumber [Pepino de Mar] (Patabus mollis)
Patabus mollis is present in the middens of Bandurria, in the vicinity of Huacho and north of
Lima, which was dated to 3170-1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 134).
Crab [Cangrejo de Arena] (Hepatus chiliensis)
Bonavia (1982: 189) found the remains of this crab at the site of Los Gavilanes in the lower
Huarmey Valley, so its consumption can be dated to ca. 3000 B.C. This species lives in a sandy
environment in the infralittoral zone, at depths that range between ten and fifteen feet. At
present it is being consumed in large amounts.
Elera et al. (1992: 19) pointed out the presence of this crab at Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley that dated to ca. 200 B.C., but it has not been conclusively shown that
it was eaten.
Lockard (2005) reported the presence of this species at Galindo, in the Moche Valley, in
Mochica and Chimu contexts in ca. A.D. 600-800 and A.D. 1000-1460.
Crab [Cangrejo Negro] (Callinectes toxotes)
Just like in the case of other types of crab, it is possible that the remains that have been found
456
14,000 years of food in Peru
of this species were part of the food eaten at Puémape, a site in the lower Jequetepeque
Valley, ca. 200 B.C. (Elera et al. 1992: 19).
Remains of Callinectes toxotes were found at the site of Pampa Grande in the modern-day
Lambayeque region, which was dated to ca. A.D. 711-800 (Shimada and Shimada 1981: 131).
Freshwater Crab [Cangrejo de Agua Dulce] (Hypollobocera)
This crab species was discovered in the excavations at Puémape, a site in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley. It is not clear whether it was eaten or not, and its presence can be dated
towards 200 B.C. (Elera et al. 1992: 19). Hypollobocera was also found at Galindo, in the Moche
Valley (Lockard 2005), both in the Mochica and in the Chimu context.
Crab [Cangrejito] (Cycloxanthops sexdecimdentatus)
Cycloxanthops sexdecimdentatus has been documented in the excavations at Puémape, in the
lower Jequetepeque Valley, which has been dated to ca. 200 B.C. (Elera et al. 1992: 19). It is not
clear whether it was part of the food eaten by the inhabitants of this site.
Painted Ghost Crab [Cangrejo Carretero] ([Ocypode?] gaudicgaudii)
The remains of Ocypodo gaudicgaudii have been found at Puémape with dates that range
around 200 B.C., so it may have been part of the food eaten by the people who lived at this
site (Elera et al. 1992: 19).
River crab [Cangrejo de Rio] (Hypollobocera sp.)
Although scant, the oldest evidence of its consumption seems to come from the middle
Chicama Valley, where Gálvez Mora (1999: 44) excavated it at the domestic sites in Quebrada
Cuculicote; here the first human groups on the North Coast, i.e. people of the Paiján culture,
lived at least ca. 10,000 B.C.
According to the research undertaken by Vásquez et al. (2003: 43), Hypollobocera was
part of the food eaten at the sites of Huaca de la Luna and Huaca del Sol in A.D. 571-685,
i.e. in a Mochica cultural context. It should also be noted that its meat can carry parasites
that lodge in human lungs, so it must be eaten well-cooked. As for the finds made at the
Huaca de la Luna, Vásquez and Rosales (2004: 363) note that these crustacea abound in
the North Coast’s archaeological sites, and can even be caught just by hand.
The excavations Shady and Rosas (1979: 111) made at Alenya (Bagua Baja), a site in the vicinity
of the Utcubamba River in the modern-day region of Amazonas, recorded the remains of this
457
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

crab but the taxonomic classification was not supplied. The site literally lies on the ceja de
selva at 522 masl, and can be dated to 1500-1200 B.C.

River crab [Cangrejo de Río] (Procambarus clarkii)

Procambarus clarkii was eaten at El Paraíso, a site north of Lima close to the mouth of the
Chillón River, since ca. 2150 B.C. (Quilter et al. 1991: 280).

Shrimp [Camarones] (Cryphiops caementarius)

Shrimp are crustacea and the species Cryphiops caementarius is the most common one in
Peru. It can be up to 30 cm long and weighs up to 200 grams. Its distribution extends from
6° and 33°S in the rivers of the Western Andean watershed, particularly in those of Arequipa
which carry a larger amount of water.

Orefici and Drusini (2003) have apparently also found Cryphiops caementarius in the rubbish
of the Nasca and Wari cultures (ca. A.D. 100-1000) in Ica. In a subsequent report, other
members of the Italian archaeological research team at Nasca mentioned the finding of
shrimp, sea urchin, and crab remains at the monumental site of Cahuachi, which dated to the
first centuries of the Christian era (Piacenza and Pieri 2012: 4).
There is also evidence of this shrimp species in the ceramic depictions left by cultures like
the Moche, Nasca itself in its Terminal phase (ca. A.D. 400-600); Chancay (Figure 19) on the
Central Coast of Peru (A.D. 1000-1460); and Inca-Ica pottery (A.D. 1460-1532) (Francisco Merino
and Lyda Casas, personal communication, 23.1.2013). Shrimp were also consumed by the Wari
because the remains of this species have been found at Beringa, a Wari site in Arequipa, in
contexts that dated to A.D. 650-1000 (Tung 2012). Its widespread consumption on the coast,
which can even go back to the Preceramic epoch, is thus evident. More studies are required in
order to document them in the analyses.
Insects: entomophagy
Despite the scant evidence available, entomophagy must have been a custom not just in pre-
Hispanic Peru but in all of South America. Even so, it may be surmised that there was a greater
availability of insects in the tropics, and so more of them would have been consumed in this area.
Figura 19. Representación de camarón. Cultura Chancay, Costa Central, aproximadamente 1000-1460 d.C. (CORTESÍA GUIDO DEL CASTILLO,
MUSEO ANDRÉS DEL CASTILLO, FOTOGRAFÍA DE LIDA CASAS).
the fat of their immature eggs, which were simply removed with the teeth; all the rest was
discarded. Ethnographic reports support the consumption of worms, beetles, and so on. It is
also reported that a group of Indians harvested a worm species in the Peruvian ceja de selva
called poshori, which piled up on maize.
Dufour and Sander’s list of the insects eaten by South American populations includes for
instance Pediculidae (lice), coleoptera—Cerambycidae, Elmidae, Passalidae— (beetles),
Diptera—Stratomidae—(flies), Homoptera—Cicadidae and Membracidae—(cicadas and
cigarritas), Hymenoptera—Formicidae, Meliponidae, Vespidae—(ants, bees, and wasps),
Hesperidae—Megathymidae and Saturnidae—(butterflies), Noctuidae (owlet moths,
Lacosomidae and Notodontidae (moths), Corydalidae (insects), Aeschnidae (dragonflies),
Acrididae (locusts), and Tettigonidae (grasshoppers).

In their summary of insects used as food, Dufour and Sander (2000) mention for instance
the giant queen ants (Atta) of Colombia, which have probably been consumed since pre-
Hispanic times. Not only was this ant considered some type of delicatesse, its aphrodisiac
properties were also esteemed. According to Alfred Wallace (cited by Dufour and Sander),
Atta were in fact eaten raw in the Amazon Valley, especially their abdomen because of
The nutritional value of insect ingestion is evidently high. It should be noted that the
biochemical table points out in this regard that a female ant], for instance, has 39.7%-48.1%
proteins at a rate of 580-628 kilo/calories, whereas termites have 58.9% and ants 52.6%
proteins (the latter when smoked). Even so, one issue concerns the problems we have in
establishing the date in which it was consumed in the pre-Hispanic period.

458 459
Elmo Leon
In fact, the recorded consumption of insects in pre-Hispanic Peru is extremely scant. Weir and
Bonavia (1985: 98) identified remains in the form of a beetle’s chitin (coleoptera in faecal matter,
i.e. coproliths) at site PV35-6, which dates to 2450 B.C. and is in the Huarmey area on the Central
Coast. This is no news for Weir and Bonavia because insects were already being eaten in pre-
Hispanic North America. What is still missing is research in this regard. And it is precisely on this
subject that Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 24) claims that larvae, insects, caterpillars, and
ants were sources of protein and lipids in the pre-Hispanic diet. We can only hope that research
in palaeoscatology will expand the list of insects eaten in that period.
Humans: Anthropophagy or Cannibalism
Cannibalism is certainly a taboo subject, but it is at the same time attractive (due to the
natural human morbidness). It has been defined as the act of eating tissue derived from
individuals from one’s same species; the reason for this can be quite varied in the case of
humans: nutritional, social, economic, political, and even cosmogonic Carbonell 2010: 539).
Lindenbaum (2004) presented a recent approach in which she tries to systematise what has
been written on this subject until the turn of the century. She points out that there are a series
of studies showing anthropophagy not just in prehistoric but also in modern times. Lindenbaum
classifies cannibalism into two types, i.e. endogamous and exogamous. The first type involves
eating a human from the same group one belongs to, whilst the exogamous type is the opposite.
Endocannibalism frequently appears in the form of mortuary or funeral consumption, where
the body is usually ingested for reasons of affection, renewal, or the group’s reproduction.
Exocannibalism, on the other hand, involves an act of aggression in which someone’s body is
consumed by his or her opponent, particularly in the case of conflicts or wars.
Frequent cases of cannibalism are mentioned for the South American Amazon rainforest.
Cannibalism for social control is also mentioned (Carbonell 2010: 539). The most ancient
evidence of cannibalism in the world comes from Gran Dolina (in the Atapuerca highlands), a
prehistoric site in modern Spain about a million years ago, in a context pertaining to a species
called Homo antecesor. In this case it was cannibalism out of necessity, i.e. nutritional.
It is possible that the oldest evidence of cannibalism in pre-Hispanic Peru, presumably from a ritual
context, come from the upper Zaña Valley in Lambayeque (Rossen and Dillehay 2001). Here John
Verano and Jack Rossen (2011) reported possible evidence of cannibalism at an archaeological site
called CA-09-52, which dates to 8011-5954 B.C. This site is in the vicinity of the Quebrada de las
Pircas, not far away from the Cerro El Coche, in the upper Zaña Valley and in the locality of Nanchoc.
A small circular pit was found with highly fragmented human bones. This indicator would not be
valid without the discovery made at a nearby site called CA-09-77 which has dates that range
between 5855 and 3029 B.C., where very small fragmented bones were found alongside animal
remains, which the researchers presume were carved ... and were then consumed. Sonia Guillén, an
expert in bioanthropology, has examined these remains and concluded they were fragmented in
fresh condition, shortly after death. Many of the bones also showed traces of combustion. Rossen
460
14,000 years of food in Peru
and Dillehay (2001) likewise noted that the emphasis was on human males, and even the anvils
where the flesh of the victims was processed have been found.
Robert Feldman (1980) reported evidence that could be interpreted as cannibalism at
Áspero, a site in the lower Supe Valley. Feldman however cautiously pointed out that these
could be due to subsequent activities that altered this preceramic site. The intriguing thing
here is the (apparently) homogeneous account of human body parts in which bones from
the pelvis, feet, cranium, and the long bones predominate, but without any intentional cut
marks or combustion as yet being reported
Bonavia (1982: 397) on the contrary believes that at Los Gavilanes, the removal of the bones
was due to the constant modifications brought about by the erection of the preceramic
buildings, and so was not inclined to interpret the disturbed remains, frequent in Late
Preceramic sites, as evidence of cannibalism.
There seems to be another piece of evidence of this practice somewhat further to the
north, in Piura. At Loma Valverde, in the upper Piura Valley, Kaulicke (1991: 414) observed
the presence of burned human bones in domestic contexts, which could be interpreted as
an indication of ‘roasted’ human beings. Some of these bones, Kaulicke says, bore traces of
having been bitten by dogs.
The ceremonial centre of Ñañañique is also in Piura, in the province of Chulucanas. Here
Jean Gufroy (1989: 193-194) reported the discovery of broken and burned human bones
among consumption refuse. The dates for this site range between about 1500 and 400 B.C.
In his study of the human bones found in the Gallery of the Offerings at Chavín de Huántar,
José Pablo Baraybar (1993: 394-402) concluded these belonged to eight individuals: three
adults, three teenagers, and a child between one and three years of age. The cadavers were
dismembered by disarticulating some joints, and by the deliberate fragmentation brought
about by some blunt object. Cuts were also found in certain bones that are explained by the
techniques used to remove muscular insertions. It was shown that some parts like heads,
necks and body had already been cut off before the remains were subjected to fire. Even so
it was mostly scorching, for burning or incineration have been documented on scant cases.
For Baraybar, the fact that some limbs were missing as well as the smoking process both can
be interpreted as possible evidence of anthropophagy (Baraybar 1993: 398).
It is worth adding in regard to this subject that Lumbreras (1989: 206-216) listed the occurrence
of a series of human bones that have been removed, scorched, cut, and destroyed, both in
late Preceramic (ca. 4000-2000 B.C.) and Early Horizon (1200 B.C.-0 of our era) ritual contexts
and domestic sites like Huacaloma (Cajamarca) and Huaca Prieta (La Libertad). These could
be interpreted as the residue left behind by cannibalistic practices, but they are neither
conclusive nor sufficiently clear to determine whether this type of activity was indeed
frequent. Even so, from what has been said, particularly from the research undertaken by
Dillehay and his team, it clearly seems to have been present.
461
Elmo Leon
Earth and Clays: Geophagy. Pre-Hispanic Chemical Cuisine
Earths and clays were eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru, albeit essentially for medicinal and nutritional
ends. The consumption of clays is so current that even today these can be bought and sold
for little money, for instance at Azángaro (Puno), and they have a nice taste because salt and
cheese are added (Omar Pinedo, personal communication, 30.7.2012). Let us turn to this now.
According to Browman (2004: 133), the consumption of edible earths is meant to provide
supplementary minerals, counteract harmful components found in the human diet (such as
phytotoxins), and it is carried out in regard to certain medical treatments. Newman (2000: 843)
in turn points out that clays contain potassium-rich mica and feldspars, so their consumption
in pre-Hispanic Peru should come as no surprise. The reader should not fault us now for
following Browman’s work as a guide, given its interdisciplinary nature.
When touching the subject of pre-Hispanic Geophagy we face one problem first of all,
for as Browman himself points out, archaeological excavations hardly document this type
of consumption; this means that we will have to base ourselves mostly on other types
of reference (chronicles, ethnography, and so forth). However, we shall see below that
there are some indications that suggest this type of consumption has taken place since the
Preceramic Period.
The need to eat earths and clays has its starting point in the premise that it helps complete
the human diet. Browman for instance points out how camelids lick minerals rich in hydrated
phyllosilicates (smectites, kaolinite, chlorites, and illites) found in earths known as p’asa o
ch’aqo, which heal gastrointestinal problems caused by the ingestion of phytotoxins in major
highland domesticated plants, like solanine in potatoes, saponin in quinoa, lunatin in beans,
etc. This means an essential function is the detoxification and adaptation of plants that
are important for human consumption, as is attested by both ethnography and by Andean
ethnohistory itself.
Based on a study of ethnographic samples, Browman classified the earths eaten even today
into four groups that he believes can be documented in archaeological excavations. They are:
phyllosilicates, sodium and calcium, sulphur minerals, and finally iron and copper.
OF these the phyllosilicates group is represented in human consumption for instance by p’asa,
i.e. smectites (potassium, magnesium or iron Potassium aluminium hydrated silicate that are
prepared like a sauce to accompany cooked tubers and which can be eaten several times a
week in order not just to eliminate these tubers’ phytotoxins, but also to provide rich mineral
components to the Andean diet.
The sodium and calcium group, and particularly that which derives from saltpetre, are and
have been diet supplements. For instance we have katawi, a mixture of lime or calcite with
illite or sylvite that is also prepared as a sauce and is consumed with quinoa or cañihua
(p’asao chako); then there is llipta or lye, which is nothing more than calcined lime usually
462
14,000 years of food in Peru
made out of plants like quinoa or cañihua, and which is used to chew (chacchar) coca
(Browman 2004: 136-138).
Several researchers had shown interest for this type of consumption. In his handbook on pre-
Hispanic foodstuffs, Horkheimer (1960: 86) for instance pointed out that the ancient Peruvians
ate earth simply because they needed mineral supplements unavailable because they did not
have livestock and its derivatives. According to Mejía Xesspe our aborigines ate lime, which
was augmented with salt to eat potatoes and other tubers—probably in order to eliminate
toxins, as has just been noted.
Georg Petersen (2010: 19) mentions a natural greyish-white product that he calls edible plastic
clay that “sticks to the tongue”—a sort of white chalk that was eaten since pre-Hispanic times
for alimentary reasons. For Petersen, edible earth could be obtained in the Arequipa-Chupa
and Huajachani-Azángaro regions; it was even prepared with human or rectangular shapes in
order to be eaten like a sweet or with cooked potatoes.
Besides the consumption of clays and earth, another important subject is the chemical
treatment that the preparation of pre-Hispanic food may have undergone. There obviously
is no archaeological documentation that can be used to explore this subject. We therefore
turn to the rich ethnographic source provided by Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo, the weakness
of his archaeological sections notwithstanding. Antúnez de Mayolo also mentions the so-
called chaco or pasa, which were much used both as food as well as a condiment during
tuber-harvesting season in order to avoid digestive disorders, and even to season toasted
maize, thus providing a large range of minerals. On the other hand Antúnez de Mayolo claims
that limestones were calcined albeit with brine, and was most used in health treatments or
culinary preparation. The diluted lime was added to the food when it was being prepared or
cooked (boiled or toasted (Antúnez de Mayolo 1996: 42-43). Does this procedure have pre-
Hispanic roots?
Ashes were also used when consuming coca and maize. Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 43) points
out in regard to the chemical properties ashes have, that the ashes left behind by burning the
stalks of some plants like quinoa or cañihua were consumed when chewing coca or eating
toasted maize.
Another interesting point concerns the effects of lye, because Antúnez de Mayolo claims
it was used along with ashes in the pre-Hispanic cuisine (Antúnez de Mayolo 1996: 43). For
instance, the ashes of the wood used previously to cook the food were mixed with water,
and maize, squash (Cucurbita maxima), fique buds (Fourcroya andina) and mutuy (Cassia
tomentosa) were then processed using this lye. This treatment would have improved the
quality of the nutrients and it reacted with the alkaloids these plants held, lixiviating them
and making them non soluble. Antúnez de Mayolo claimed using lay expanded the range of
dietary oligoelements available in the diet. It may thus have had a major role in the culinary
preparation and subsequent digestion of Andean foodstuffs. Only a high-resolution chemical
analysis of the cooked plants can shed some light in this regard.
463
Elmo Leon
Let us turn now to the archaeological record of Geophagy in pre-Hispanic Peru. Was sand
consumed in that time? The human burial from Huaca Prieta, which probably dates to the
second millennium B.C., had faeces which showed sand packets. Callen and Cameron (1960:
39) believe this individual probably consumed them—intentionally or by chance—before
death, for instance to heal a disease. Callen and Cameron point out that sand or geophagy
may be connected with blood recovery in the face of a potential anaemia, an interesting
hypothesis they tried to support ethnographically.
Weir and Bonavia (1985: 98) found some sand and earth in the faecal remains from site PV35-6,
which dates to ca. 2450 B.C. and is close to the mouth of the Huarmey River on the Central
Coast. Weir and Bonavia claim this was a frequent practice amongst the aborigines, and that
it may have been necessary whenever no food was available, or when mineral supplements
had to be ingested; it may also have had medicinal reasons, including eliminating intestinal
parasites, or eventually alleviating stomach infections.
Glendon Weir and Vaughn Bryant (in Browman 2004: 134) reported geophagy in Ayacucho
some five thousand years ago because they had access to MacNeish’s excavations. We now
turn to Browman’s record.
Browman has also noted that lye with earth was discovered in Chiripa contexts in the Andean
Altiplano, with dates that range between A.D 510 and A.D. 470. Browman likewise points out
that lye or llipta was found inside some vessels from the Pucara site, in the same context from
the Pucara culture that dates to the last centuries before our era. Besides, gypsum was found
in Nasca contexts according to the research carried out by Kroeber y Collier.
Paz Soria, also according to Browman, seems to have shown that p’asa was eaten along with
potatoes and other tubers within the context of the Tiahuanaco culture. This same type of
edible earth has been detected in samples from the Estuquiña culture (Moquegua), just a few
centuries before the Inca Empire. Browman ended his major review citing Rowe (1946), who
had drawn attention so many decades ago to the fact that in the Inca Empire edible clays
were gathered and frequently exchanged in the southern highlands (Browman 2004: 134-135).
There is scant evidence as regards the ways in which the clays and earths were consumed.
For instance, in her excavations in tola (artificial archaeological mounds) contexts at Manabí
(Ecuador), Mercedes Guinea (2006) identified a series of small, baked earth- and carbonate-
based packets (paquetillos) called tamales, bollos, and empanadillas that dated to A.D. 1100.
This line of research must be encouraged in Peru because it is part of the culinary preparation.
Salt
Kuester (2000: 431) claims that salt was valued not just as a condiment or as a supplement
of food, but also for its use preserving food for a long time. This systematic exploitation
throughout the world goes back at least 2,500 years especially through the evaporation of sea
water or even or even to salt fish, as was seen in previous chapters.
464
14,000 years of food in Peru
Petersen (2010: 11) says that natural salt was gathered by Peru’s pre-Hispanic peoples particularly on
the shores of the Pacific Ocean, but also around Lake Titicaca. He adds that other sources were
the Huallaga River basin, and in general all lakes and springs on the eastern flank of the Andes. The
chroniclers instead mention other places with salt outcrops like in the vicinity of Oruro, Puerto
Viejo, Tumbes, and the Salinas de Huacho (Huaura). The chronicles also tell us there were salt
outcrops in Trujillo, Collique, Jauja, and even in inclusive Chilca.
Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 42) claims that in pre-Hispanic Peru impure salts were favoured when
eating and this may have caused cancer, but it was stopped by the consumption of maize chicha.
In most of the cases the salt was obtained by processing salty waters or wood, but mineral salt
was also used.
Hans Horkheimer (1960: 84-85) emphasised the ease with which the peoples who had settled on
the littoral of pre-Hispanic Peru gathered sea salt. Horkheimer claimed that the formation of layers
of sodium chloride, as at Salinas de Huacho, gives out sixty thousand tonnes a year of salt. Besides,
there is a large amount of ceramic sherds around this site, thus evincing it was frequently visited
in the pre-Hispanic period in order to acquire this resource. These people may have used salt to
exchange it with highlanders for other produce such as wool and potatoes. Another place salt was
found is the Salinas de San Blas. Horkheimer points out the intriguing fact that in pre-Hispanic Peru
salt was not added during cooking, and was instead licked straight from blocks of salt.
An important study of the pre-Hispanic salt exploitation system from an archaeological standpoint
was made on the North Coast at the site of Salinas de Chao, in the valley of the same name. Here
Mercedes Cárdenas (1997, 1999) found evidence showing that human groups were exploiting salt at
least since ca. 1900 B.C. For instance, a series of mortars that may have been used to gather brine
and obtain salt by evaporation were found on the surface of site 7. The mortars were associated
with crushing stones that were perhaps used to grind the salt.
Pozorski et al. (1983) documented the presence of a salt upwelling at least two thousand years ago
on the Casma River mouth, close to the hacienda La Munga. Here there are Chimu and Chimu-Inca
settlements that Pozorski et al. believe had the role of exploiting this major resource in the pre-
Hispanic epoch. This upwelling was partly due to marine transgression and partly to the low aquifer
flow in the above-mentioned region, which means the minerals settled throughout centuries of
irrigation. This is one of the few documented sites where this resource was perhaps obtained.
Another interesting study concerns the Salinas de San Blas (Morales 1998), which are at 4100 masl
in the modern-day Junín Region. Daniel Morales found evidence of salt exploitation close to Lake
Chinchaycocha. A camp was excavated here that dates to the Late preceramic (ca. 3000 B.C.),
whose inhabitants exploited the salt continuously for thousands of years.
Breast Milk
Readers by now may be wondering why breast milk has been included amongst pre-Hispanic
foodstuffs as strictly speaking it is not of animal, plant or mineral origin and is instead
465
Elmo Leon

anthropogenic (but it is of animal origin to a point). The reason is that breast milk was supplied
by Andean women who breastfed children in pre-Hispanic Peru, and therefore nourished
them in their early years. We have no coprolith or table isotope studies for the newborn
or for babies, so here just the main characteristics and properties of breast milk that can be
attributed not just to Peru but to other cultures as well will be mentioned. The field is ready
to be explored following using research approaches.

When assessing the significance breastfeeding has had for humans in past times, Antoinette FARMING, FOOD PRESERVATION,
Fauve-Chamoux (2000: 626-634) points out that breast milk (in general) comprises 87 g of
water, 1.5 g of protein, 4 g of fat, 6.8 g of carbohydrates, 7 g of lactose, and 2 g of minerals, as AND STORAGE TECHNIQUES
well as vitamins and casein. We will be in condition to expand this point only when the food
eaten by the newborn is analysed.

Having reviewed the plants and animals that may have been consumed in pre-Hispanic
Peru, a very brief account must be given of pre-Hispanic farming in order to complete our
presentation of the archaeobotanical and archaeozoological picture. This will give readers an
overview of Andean human skill in developing agriculture, the basis of Peruvian society since
about nine thousand years ago, in such a complex environment.

This is just a very brief introduction to this subject. The emphasis will be on some recent
discoveries that are not well-known, like the book La recuperación de tecnologías indígenas
(Herrera 2011), or the pre-Hispanic irrigation channels Tom Dillehay and his team from Vanderbilt
University discovered in the Upper Zaña Valley, which date to ca. 5600 B.C.—an impressive and
extremely early date in the context of the origins of agriculture throughout the world.

The reader should bear in mind this is not a complete presentation of pre-Hispanic agriculture;
these are just some brief and incomplete notes meant to contextualise Andean ethnobotanics. Two
books are here suggested for interested readers: R. A. Donkin’s Agricultural Terracing in the Aboriginal
New World (1979) for those interested in an overview of agricultural terraces in the Americas; and
Alexander Herrera’s above-mentioned book La recuperación de tecnologías indígenas. Arqueología,
tecnología y desarrollo (2011) for a more recent account that focuses on the Central Andes.

Pre-Hispanic Agriculture
The development of pre-Hispanic agriculture began with the coming of the first inhabitants
of this part of the Andes and reached its climax with the Inca. Herrera (2011) made an extensive
and up-to-date study of pre-Hispanic agriculture, and it is worth citing its main conclusions.
The first horticultors must have practiced dry farming, taking advantage of seasonal floods
and perhaps using small canals and ditches. In time, the development of farming technology
perhaps had its focus not just in the intermontane valleys but also in the dry lowlands, like
the valleys on the coast of the Pacific Ocean.

466 467
Elmo Leon
But the development of Andean agriculture was not easy due to the specific characteristics
of the Peruvian terrain. John Earls (1998) made a good presentation of its development. Earls
emphasised three major problems the Incas overcame through intelligent management—
poor soils, geoecological spatial diversity, and climate uncertainty. We will now briefly go
over each point.
Geoecological diversity is shown by the impressive presence of 104 of Holdridge’s (1947) life
zones, for instance ingenious ways in which spatial diversification and the diversification of
seasonal labour lowered farming risks. Spatial heterogeneity is likewise reduced by zoning
and technology that mitigated the risk due to climate. Earls believes that agricultural
experimentation and astronomical observations in terms of controlling agricultural timing
helped in this task. In this context the Moray observatory is pointed out as an example of
this type of technology; besides, Earls claims maize a palynological study suggests maize
was grown at this site. He believes this system of related tasks had its origin at least in the
Wari Empire.
Water Sourcing?
Although the mesothermal valleys in the Central and Eastern Andes are the place of origin
of many Andean plants, many of the pre-Hispanic cultivated plants reviewed here come
from the coastal desert environment.
This type of environment gave rise to farming techniques like irrigation, which drove pre-
Hispanic farming on the dry Peruvian coast.
Mark Cohen (1978: 25) points out in this regard that the ancient peoples used the water
from puquios in areas far removed from the irrigated valley, by digging up to the level
where the plant roots could tap onto underground waters. Katharina Schreiber and Josué
Lancho (1995) published an interesting study in this regard on the Nasca puquios, which they
defined as underground filtration galleries that provide water to the fields and for domestic
use in valleys where no water is found on the surface.
Schreiber and Lancho hold that the construction and use of these puquios goes back to
ca. A.D. 500, i.e. the final phases of the Nasca culture. The engineering of these systems
includes accessories such as the “ojos” found along the path followed by the puquios, i.e.
holes that were dug to allow oxygen into the underground canals and let them be cleaned.
The galleries seem to have been built first by digging trenches; the roof was then filled
in with wooden beams and ... [bases], and the trenches were then filled in. Some puquios
were over a kilometre long but most ranged between 250 and 500 metres. A study of the
settlement patterns also showed that the main settlements were strategically sited beside
these water extraction systems. This is obtaining water in a desert.
468
14,000 years of food in Peru
Pre-Hispanic Irrigation Canals
Our aim here is just to give the reader some examples of the creativeness and skill found in
this type of engineering, which attained a high crop yield.
Perhaps the most ancient evidence of the use of irrigation canals, not just in Peru but in the
whole world, comes from the headwaters of the Nanchoc Valley in Zaña (Lambayeque), which
is very close to La Libertad. Here Dillehay et al. (2005) reported the presence of at least three
canals, and perhaps an older fourth one, in the vicinity of the Cerro El Coche, close to the
zone of Tierra Blanca and Quebrada Canutillo. All these canals have in common that they take
advantage of the slope in order to irrigate the fields, which essentially grew squash [calabazas].
The three upper canals date between 4156 B.C. and A.D. 1285, which entails the early and
prolonged use of this type of irrigation, which is contemporaneous with the so-called
emergence of complex Andean civilisation. Even so, these researchers have documented an
even older canal, for the mean date obtained surprisingly was 5579 B.C., which is probably
the most ancient irrigation canal in America (and perhaps in the world). Dillehay et al. (2005)
believe this is quite a basic canal that is just 20 cm deep and 50 cm wide, which carried the
water driven by gravity to a squash field. It was established that around that time the river’s
waters channels were man-made down driven until they reached five metres above this same
level, which implies a basic hydraulic design in order to make the water go up. Some hoe-like
stone tools have also been ascribed to this time and may have been used to harvest or in
other agricultural labours. At this time cassava, peanuts, squash and quinoa-like seeds were
already under cultivation.
Ian Farrington studied pre-Hispanic irrigation canals in pre-Hispanic Peru (1980) and it is worth
going over his conclusions. Farrington made a detailed presentation of the characteristics
of two canal systems he personally studied: Moche and Cusichaca, on the coast and in the
northern highlands. Like Farrington notes, the impression one gets, particularly from the way
the canal that diverted water in sloping areas was managed, is of a great knowledge and
management of water discharge velocity, not just to irrigate but also to control local erosion.
Finally, Farrington believes that pre-Hispanic irrigation canals are the result of the ample
experience of farmers who knew their environment by heart, local hydrology included, which
can be easily explained for relatively flat lands, but is much more complex when it comes to
diverting water from inclined areas to flat ones.
Various cultures used irrigation canals, including the Wari. Moseley et al. (2005) reported
the presence of irrigation canals and terraces in the vicinity of Cerro Baúl (Moquegua),
the southernmost Wari bulwark on its frontier with Tiahuanaco. The canal system was
developed on Cerro Mejía and Cerro Petroglifo, two hills adjacent to the site. Each hill had
low-status residents living on the inclined area whilst the elites lived in the summit and in
the highest parts. The canal, which had a 400-litre per second capacity, began in the highest
part and descended through low-relief grooves that ran down Cerro Petroglifo and irrigated
the terraces on Cerro Mejía. A canal branch passed through “El Paso,” the area between
469
Elmo Leon
Cerro Baúl and Cerro Mejía, ad reached the upper part of both hills. The farming settlers
grew maize, potatoes, tubers and other foodstuffs including Schinus molle, the well-known
“Peruvian pepper [pimienta],” which is a kind of small seed used to ferment chicha. 324
hectares were irrigated according to the calculations made by Moseley et al. (2005: 17265),
and these could have supported around two thousand people. The canal system was about
20 km long but it was abandoned after A.D. 1000, when the colony was deserted.
Another example of irrigation comes from the North Coast. Charles Ortloff (1995) devoted
a study to reconstructing the engineering and the functioning of Chimu irrigation canals.
Ortloff points out that a massive irrigation system was developed through a canal network
that diverted water from the coastal valleys under Chimu political control. Impressively, an
inter-valley network up to 70 km long was also implemented in order to have a balanced water
supply. Building and maintaining these canals required great knowledge of civil engineering, as
well as of hydraulics and water flow.
Several implements have been found like yupanas (counting tables that were probably used
to calculate angles of inclination and other hydraulic calculations such as the velocity of the
water, the slope, and so on), tools used for maintenance and to calculate angles, thus giving
us an idea of the planning that went into the design of these water canals.
Raised Field Systems (Waru-Waru and Ridges)
Raised field farming is an ingenious system used in South America in order to attain the maximum
exploitation possible of land. Intriguingly, researchers were long unaware of this type of farming
technology. One of the first to observe it may have been Karger, the German consul in Argentina
in the late nineteenth century. Karger had been officially commissioned to study Peruvian
agriculture, and he identified raised fields as an ancient farming technique whilst on the train
from Juliaca to Sicuani. Ironically his Peruvian companions were unable to answer the questions
made by their German visitor (Gondard 2006: 46). We now turn first to the information available
for the southern Altiplano around Lake Titicaca, and then to an overview of South America.
The ancient peoples of the southern Andean Altiplano made the most of the lakeshore or of
the land close to the lake. These areas are not so harsh, have a more temperate climate and
relatively more precipitation, but they do run the risk of being flooded and do have poor soils.
C. L. Erickson (1988) is probably the scholar who has most studied these areas.
What are raised fields? Why were they built, and how? For Erickson, these are huge raised
platforms that provide water flow, and improve soil conditions and the temperature for
cultivation. The fields are built by excavating parallel canals, and the earth in-between them
is piled up to form long, low-lying mounds on flat or convex surfaces.
The system is designed to avoid the risk posed by frosts. The canals that run between the
raised fields provide the required, essential moisture during long or short droughts. The water
470
14,000 years of food in Peru
in the deep canals seems to have been used to cultivate water plants and even to raise fish;
this could have incorporated lake birds to the system, which in turn would have been part of
the pre-Hispanic population’s diet. Besides, these systems avoid the leaching of the salts and
brought about a microclimate that favoured the crops. The system was fed with water derived
from rivers, rains and from groundwater (Ordóñez Colque 2006).
Gondard (2006) has likewise explained the multiple roles raised fields have and concisely
presented the impressive range of benefits provided by its use in the Titicaca zone. These
include lowering the risk in tuber grain cultivation, a regular distribution of drainage, extending
moisture to benefit the crops, lowering the risks posed by frosts, lowering the Ph, and above
all the impressive increase in the amount of nitrogen and phosphorus available once the fields
are raised, and all of this in terms of attaining the maximum productivity of the earth.
The National Research Council (1989a: 8) believers it was an ingenious technique used to
regulate framing output in areas susceptible to drought, floods, or simply to floods. Attempts
at reconstruction have even estimated that raised fields could have trebled the output of
potatoes. One of the keys in this process was the exchange of energy between day-time and
night-time. The canals that receive solar energy by day give it off at night, thus protecting
the grains and the sown fields from the frost—this literally is a big, self-regulating energy and
temperature machine that benefits agriculture. The temperature in the areas under cultivation
are thus stabilised and tempered. The areas immediately around can be several degrees colder.
And to this we must add the richness of a soil that has been fertilised with algae, thus ensuring
not only a high agricultural performance, but also a high output eventually.
In answering the question of why the raised fields were built, Godard points out there are
two main positions. The first one, held by Alan Kolata, believes they were an outcome of the
hydraulic control of the Tiahuanaco State cultivation. The second position is held by Erickson
based on his excavations at Huanta (Puno), and posits instead that these works were of a social
nature and a result of agreements reached by communities in order to ensure a more rational
agricultural exploitation of the earth.
What was grown on these farming systems? Erickson believes that high altitude crops like
potatoes, cañihua, and quinoa were sown once the problem raised by flooding had been
overcome. The process of selection these types of plants had undergone, and quinoa in
particular, meant they had developed the capacity to grow under low temperatures intense
solar radiation, and in the presence of grain pests. This type of technology must have gone
hand in hand with dry-freezing, food preservation techniques that allowed grains and meat
to be stored for unlimited time. Also used were tools such as digging spades, hoes, and clod-
breaking sticks, as well as plates of wood or stone Erickson claims the analyses show raised
fields were less alkaline and held more nutrients, which favoured the crops.
Erickson also points out that the analysis of pollen made by Fred Wiseman showed that
soil samples evince quinoa and potato cultivation (Erickson 1988: 10). How were they built?
In trying to explain the construction, functioning, and distribution of raised fields, Denevan
471
Elmo Leon
(2006: 17) claims their preparation included the transfer of earth materials in order to ‘raise’
the fields over the natural surface, particularly when there is poor drainage.
Even so, viable locations for raised fields are restricted in the southern Altiplano. Bouysse-
Cassagne (1992: 114, fig. 4) points out raised fields were applicable only in floodable areas like
those around the Azángaro River to the northeast of Lake Titicaca (in the vicinity of Juliaca,
Buena Vista, and Paucarcoya, which clearly is the largest zone of raised fields), and south of
the lake, in the areas of Desaguadero (6,500 hectares) and Pomata (5,100 hectares), which both
have the biggest expanses of same field constructions in the Altiplano.
When did this type of farming technology appear in the Altiplano? According to Bouysse-
Cassagne, Kolata mostly associates Puno’s raised fields with the Tiahuanaco 3-5 phases, i.e.
during the first millennium of our era. After making an in-depth description of the raised
fields in the Altiplano, Smith et al. (1968) were unable to reach a satisfactory chronological
conclusion regarding this question. Erickson (1994) later mentioned four thermoluminescence
dates from which he deduced there were two phases in the construction and use of thee
raised fields northeast of Lake Titicaca at Huata, a site south of Pucara (in the Puno Region):
a first phase ca. 1000 B.C. and A.D. 300 that is associated with Kaluyo, Wankarani, and Chiripa
pottery. It is interesting that this first construction phase was contemporary with the Pucara
culture, and that it benefitted from the last time there was a high water level due to rainfall
and a wet phase.
There was then a period in which the raised fields were abandoned, followed by a second
phase of use in A.D. 1000-1450, this last date being when the Inca conquered this region
(Erickson 1994 n Godard 2006: 43). Bouysse-Cassagne (1992) also notes that the raised fields
south of the lake were still in use in A.D. 350-1100. This picture points towards the end of the
second millennia B.C., at least in the southern Altiplano.
Erickson also discussed the chronology and explained that although some radiocarbon dates
suggest these technologies were used between 1000 B.C. and A.D. 1100, directly dating raised
fields has proven much more difficult; however, the thermoluminescence dates of ceramic
sherds found in the canals seem to support this chronology. Erickson was able to localise
archaeological sites—simple villages and enclosures—that seem to have been places from
where agriculture was controlled, to judge by the organic remains of the plants found, as well
as some farming tools. Remains of fish, camelids, guinea pigs and so on have likewise been
found in these places, thus suggesting domestic activities that were related with farming.
The associated cultural materials seem to indicate that the Pucara culture developed this
agricultural system. It is strange that raised fields seem to have been no longer used after the
decline of Pucara, and were then reused in the late Aymara epoch.
In this context, Erickson and Candler (1989) claim that in order to increase the efficiency of
raised fields during the Late Formative Period and the first centuries of our era, the people who
lived close to Lake Titicaca may have permanently stored irrigation waters using a technique
they call splash irrigation. This in turn would have brought about part of the boom that led to
472
14,000 years of food in Peru
the rise of the Tiahuanaco civilisation. Bandy (1992) believes this technique was complemented
by the use of canal sediments as fertilisers in anticipation of the soil’s depletion, and the
improvement in thermal conditions in the canals in order to avoid the effects of frosts.
Were there raised fields in other parts of South America? Yes, there were. Denevan (2006)
made an overview of their history and verified their pre-Hispanic presence in countries
like Colombia, Guyana, Ecuador, the Orinoco area and, in Peru, in the Casma Valley and the
Altiplano.
The raised fields in the Casma Valley were detected by Denevan during an analysis of the
condition the Peruvian coast was in after the 1970 earthquake. Pozorski et al. (1983) in turn have
extensively reported the presence of these fields. Pozorski et al. based themselves especially
on the studies made in the vicinity of the La Muenga canal, in the Casma River mouth, and
made comparisons with a series of slightly raised fields which exhibit similar patterns to those
found in the Guayas area in Ecuador, and even amongst the Beni in the Bolivian Amazon.
They estimated this canal may have covered more than 3000 hectares in non-specified pre-
Hispanic times—probably during the Chimú or Chimú-Inca occupation of this zone.
Reservoirs in the Central Highlands
A relatively recent study summarised pre-Hispanic irrigation in Peru (Lane 2009), which will be
used here in order to present a brief overview of this subject. Pre-Hispanic irrigation systems
have been studied above all on the coast and less so in the highlands, and the Altiplano
in this case. Lane (2009: 171) claims the reason why there are few studies for the highlands
is due to the ruggedness of the terrain. Yet the systems have common characteristics like
canals and reservoirs, the geographical differences notwithstanding. With its more or less
permanent river drainages, the coast was provided of permanent water by means of irrigation
canals, filtration galleries, and embankments designed to use flowing waters for farming and
herding. On the contrary, the verticality of the highlands was used instead in water storage
technologies. Students of pre-Hispanic irrigation systems believe in the highlands water had
multiple tasks, including herding and above all farming.
Lane made a contribution when he classified hydraulic architecture into two large groups,
which were defined from moisture-dryness. ‘Dry’ hydraulic architecture includes terraces,
irrigation canals and chakras [i.e. cultivated fields], whilst moist architecture comprises raised
fields, q’ochas, water embankments, reservoirs, and silt storage. Lane believes the latter fed
the bofedales meant to enrich the pastures where camelids grazed. These last technologies
characterised in particular cultures like that of the Lupaca of the Andean Altiplano (Erickson
1988, 2000, Murra 2002). Their contribution focuses on the use of bofedales in an area within
the Callejón de Huaylas. One of the most impressive silt storage sites is called Colpacocha,
which can hold three million cubic metres of water, whilst Agococha, a water dam, held 687
thousand cubic metres of water; this points towards large-scale hydraulic engineering in this
part of the Cordillera Negra, probably during the Late Intermediate Period (A.D. 1000-1460).
473
Elmo Leon
Tuber, Grain, and Meat Preservation Techniques
The immediate answer on being asked whether Peruvians eat dehydrated food will perhaps
be chuño and charqui, which are based on two permanent Andean resources, the potato and
llama meat. Both are ancestral forms of food processing and consumption that are at least
three thousand years old. We have eaten them, and still do so, but perhaps less than we used
to—perhaps due to globalisation—but they are still on our plates. But what about the ways in
which food was preserved in the pre-Hispanic period? What role did sand, lime, salt and ice
have in this process? Can this be documented by archaeology? We will now present a very
general overview of the above-mentioned points.
Ethnography is one of the key techniques that will let us answer at least some of these
questions. A first-rate informant here is Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo, even though some
consider his publications are not scientific enough. Antúnez de Mayolo has studied and
published some very interesting data in regard to food preservation and consumption, so the
reader will find his name throughout this book; these references must not be taken literally,
but are invaluable due to his lifespan. We now list the ethnographic methods Antúnez de
Mayolo summarised, which can give us an idea of their range, something that the pre-Hispanic
record has not (yet) yielded.
Above all, Antúnez de Mayolo (1980, 1996) assumed that our Andean ancestors were fully
acquainted with the biochemistry of foodstuffs and with the concept of metabolism; he
mentioned “chemical inhibitors” and “inter elements” in this regard. This type of information
was included here because it will hardly be found out by archaeology, given the problems
faced by available methods in recovering organic data. Antúnez de Mayolo is probably the
scholar who has most focused on this field.
We turn first to natural substances that are mostly found on the soil of the coast and the
intermontane areas that may have been used for this purpose. As regards preservation,
Antúnez de Mayolo states that saltpetre (naturally upwelling sodium nitrate and potassium
nitrate) and caliche (hardened calcium carbonate) were used to dehydrate and preserve food.
This premise suggests that in future the remains found in excavations must be more closely
examined in terms of detecting these substances in order to corroborate these observations.
On the other hand salt and the salty sands of the littoral were used to preserve fish on the
coast, whilst it dehydrated under the sun and the wind. Lime was also used to prevent tubers
from getting maggoty. Smoke was also used to dehydrate meat and tubers. According to
Antúnez de Mayolo, this method is frequently used in the Amazon to prepare meat. Although
it does not belong in ethnography, the significance of salting or desiccating fish is clear; we
need just recall that fish was salted since ca. 11,000 B.C. at Quebrada Jaguay, in Camaná, still
during the ice age (cf. McInnis 2006: 10).
One interesting piece of information in Antúnez de Mayolo concerns the use of casana in the
Amazon; this is a toxic substance that is prepared like dough and spread over the food that
474
14,000 years of food in Peru
is to be transported or left for a long time in the green mountains so that animals cannot eat
it. To eat the food without running any risk one just has to remove the outer part. The same
thing holds for a bush called amarakay; after it has been boiled, maize and pulses are briefly
dunked in in it and made immune to insects, worms or rodents.
Antúnez de Mayolo also mentioned the waicha—which protects tubers from worms—and
the ishmuña (Minthosthosthacys tomentosa), which makes worms leave the tubers and die
outside it, perhaps because of its calcium arsenate content. It is possible that capsaicin (found
in chili pepper) may have also been used to preserve meat. This possibility is open, considering
that chili peppers go back to around 9000 B.C.
Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 45) also mentioned the use of bentonite, which absorbs
humidity; of sand, which was combined with cereals, pulses, and so on in order to prevent
rodent and insect infestation; and finally the use of clays to bury tubers like cassava or
sachapapa (a wild Amazonian potato), thus preventing floods from affecting them, so
they could be later recovered and consumed. Maize storage at Los Gavilanes, in the lower
Huarmey Valley some five thousand years ago, is a typical case of food preserved in sand,
where bentonite may have had an effect. It is intriguing that no similar sites have been
found for later periods.
Second, besides employing natural substances as agents, the weather and the environment
along with a supplementary human intervention were also used. The technique of dehydrating
through heat and cold may have been used. Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 45-46) also points out
that searing -dehydration was a practice commonly used to preserve meat, fish, cereals, and
tubers. In this case heat blocks the enzymatic action whilst the wind favours dehydration.
There obviously is no archaeological evidence of this, but should the methods of analysis
improve in the future, we may be in position to detect these ancestral practices.
Another procedure is boiling-dehydration, which was used in particular to preserve vegetables,
and to a lesser extent cereals, pulses, tubers and some dry legumes.
Here it is also worth mentioning the freezing-leaching method. In this case the water found in
the food was first removed, and then the bitter, alkaloid properties were removed by washing
the food.
Leaving aside the food preservation techniques and turning to the biochemical processes that
take place through boiling , the question that arises on reviewing the publications made by the
prolific Antúnez de Mayolo is whether cooking made these foodstuffs ‘edible’ and uninfested,
or at least ruled out the possibility of any infestation taking place. This question is certainly
important in the final overview made in this book, when discussing palaeoparasitology and
the diseases caused by the ingestion of food in bad condition. For instance, Antúnez de
Mayolo (1996: 46) mentioned tocosh, which is a generic name for the treatment of the fungi
and bacteria that affect the use of potatoes, maize, and olluco as food and as antibiotics
(forerunners of penicillin).
475
Elmo Leon
Antúnez de Mayolo that when storing food, both raw and cooked, places with a mean
temperature of 5 ºC were chosen, but other zones with a higher temperature (12 ºC) were also
used (Antúnez de Mayolo 1996: 46).
We now leave Antúnez de Mayolo for a moment and turn instead to some of the products
mentioned in order to explore whether there is any relevant documentation in Peru’s
archaeological record.
Chuño is one of the techniques—probably the most well-known one—used to preserve
tubers including the potato. On this topic we have some ideas gleaned from the scientific
information we compiled. The National Research Council (1989a: 10-11) made a good summary,
which we will now briefly present.
Nights are so cold and daytime so dry at high altitudes in the Andes, that the tubers left
outdoors for a few days are desiccated because they freeze in-between at night. Throughout
the process people trample the potatoes during the day to remover the water acquired at
night whilst freezing. The outcome was known as chuño and was a staple of the Inca diet. It is
impressive that chuño can be preserved for years without any refrigeration or great care being
needed. The National Research Council reports that even today chuño can support 80% of
the Andean population despite the problems farming faces.
There is, however, another position in this regard. Although chuño is a practical and efficient
way of storing potatoes, Haan et al. (2010) experimented with different types of chuño and
concluded that once dry, the tuber loses a considerable amount of minerals such as zinc,
potassium phosphorus and magnesium, especially in the case of white chuño. This should be
borne in mind when discussing the disadvantages chuño has.
Latcham (in Horkheimer 1960) presented a more specific account of chuño processing. Here it is
claimed that first the potatoes are spread on the ground over straw and are exposed to sunlight
and the nightly frosts for twelve days in different positions, so that their entire surface is exposed.
The potatoes are placed over a new layer of straw once they are soft and not frozen, and then
they are trampled in order to extract the remaining water. Finally, the potatoes are left outdoors
for some more days until they were completely dry but not when the sun shone, nor at night so
as to avoid the frost. They were stored once they had turned into chuño for the winter season.
As regards moraya, Horkheimer (1960: 88-89, based once again on Latcham) states its
preparation involved first selecting the potatoes that were to be used, then came their
process of desiccation under the sun, and were later rehydrated with water several times. The
water was changed from time to time until the bitter taste was gradually removed.
Once the process was over the moraya or tunta was boiled, and above all toasted. Eventually
the moraya was grated and turned into a kind of flour. Horkheimer points out that both methods
reduced the size and weight of the potatoes and made them lighter for transportation. In the
form of chuño, the potato loses at least a third of its weight, and up to a sixth part as moraya,
476
14,000 years of food in Peru
which was thus highly ‘movable.’ The investment made in, and the benefits accruing from,
preparing moraya more than compensated the procedure.
Potatoes stored in both ways could even resist bugs, rats, and other insects for years. The
wonderful thing here is not just that this eased transportation and storage, but that the loss
of water in the case of chuño turned into just 10% water as opposed to 75% for carbohydrates.
Experts believe that chuño was eaten by the Inca elite, while moraya was instead meant for
all social classes.
In his handbook on pre-Hispanic Peruvian food, Hans Horkheimer (1960: 110) notes that every
100 grams of chuño have 1.8 g of protein, 0.2 g of fat, 77 g of carbohydrates, and 323 units of
proteins, which is a high figure in the context of this type of plant.
Chuño, as was noted above, can also be made using oca (kaya), olluco (llingli), and boiled
potatoes (papa seca). It is worth noting that although the Spanish chroniclers did include
chuño in their accounts, the analysis of stable isotopes in human bones from the burials at
Machu Picchu have established its consumption, presumably before the Inca period (Turner
et al. 2010: 524).
Horkheimer (1960: 88) had already drawn attention to the types of preservation, for instance
of oca grains that once dry are stored as preserves. They did the same with potatoes when
they dried by adding muña, a type of natural Andean mint that was quite effective in providing
protection from fungi, bacteria or insects; it was already noted some paragraphs above that
Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo had pointed out that Minthosthosthacys tomentosa was used to
protect tubers—something that it will be very hard to document archaeologically.
We now leave the dehydration of potatoes and turn to the effects it has on llama meat or
charqui. The latter is camelid meat that has been desiccated in high altitude environments
like the puna at more than 3700 masl at least, under the dry Andean sunlight and during the
nightly frosts. Charqui is prepared while the flesh is still on the bones, except for the toes and
head (but the specific presence of the bones depends on the tradition followed in each study
site where charqui was prepared).
This Quechua term is so important that it has even been adopted by the English language, in
which jerky means boned, desiccated meat, which probably passed through Spain as charque
or charqui (Stahl 1999: 1347).
The advantages this type of food has are, for instance, that it can be preserved in good
condition for a long time (3-4 months on average and even more), ad that it facilitates its
transportation (Miller and Burger 2000).
Stahl (1999: 1359) also pointed out that meat in charqui form prevents the formation of bacteria
and increases—through desiccation—the biochemical content of salt, proteins, fat and ashes.
477
Elmo Leon
Charqui has twice the amount of calories as fresh meat, sometimes at a rate of 4:1, so it is a
first-rate food. It can be rehydrated by soaking it several times and is usually eaten in soups
and stews. Scholars have reached a consensus that it was usually eaten during Inca rituals, but
also in military contexts. Charqui was in fact stored in the colcas as tribute in order to provide
food for combatants (Stahl 1999: 1359).
There is, however, one conceptual discussion regarding charqui that we must briefly touch. It
concerns the two positions regarding its preparation that are held on the one hand by Miller
and Burger and on the other by Valdez.
Miller and Burger envisioned charqui within a context of definitions, i.e. the way the camelids
are killed, which is not slitting their throat as in the Western tradition, but by cutting through
the belly. Finding an overlarge number of camelid (llamas included) heads, toe, and leg bones
at Chavín de Huántar, Miller and Burger (1995: 438-440, 2000) posit that this was because
charqui was prepared at this site since at least 900 B.C. using other parts of the body. Valdez
(2000) however has questioned the evidence available for Chavín.
The technique used to record these animal parts has been used in other sites like Kotosh
(Huánuco), where Elizabeth Wing (1972) noticed the increase in this type of body parts. Miller
and Burger therefore believe that this may have been the same procedure, i.e. that meat was
being dried in this major highland temple.
Hans Horkheimer (1960: 90) also mentioned this technique. For him, charqui is no more than
salted and dehydrated meat. Horkheimer pointed out that fish were also dried by placing
them under the sun in order to take them to the highlands. He claimed that drying up food
was the most characteristic technique of food preservation in Peru, and that it was even used
with modern foodstuffs. Such is the case of preserves, especially when tenderising meat,
which in pre-Hispanic Peru was done using papaya leaves—here Horkheimer once again cites
Latcham and describes how the Indians wrapped the meat in these leaves.
Peter Stahl (1999) made a very interesting study of charqui where he examined it through
photon densitometry. He concluded that the site of Chavín de Huántar was a production
centre of charqui or chalona (dried mutton).
Cerro Azul (Cañete) is one site where the consumption of dried meat has been documented
during the Chincha and Inca occupations (A.D. 1000-1432) (Marcus et al. 1999: 6569). According
to Marcus et al. the common people had access to charqui but not to whole llamas—the
charqui eaten sometimes included parts of the spinal column.
Finally, let us go over some important data regarding food storage structures. In pre-Hispanic
Peru storage, both of plant and animal foodstuffs, was of the utmost importance.
Information on Cerro Azul regarding the processing and preservation of fish like the anchovy
is available. Archaeological excavations have on very few occasions been able to document
478
14,000 years of food in Peru
the location of kitchens in sites and their layout. Joyce Marcus et al. (1999) studied the output
and the cooking, particularly of fish and guinea pigs, during the Chincha and Inca occupations
(A.D. 1000-1470).
The team excavated some kind of elite family residential dwelling with servants or retainers.
There were a dozen rooms and four patios. The most striking thing was a large kitchen with
several rooms for food storage and processing, especially fish. Another associated structure
that was excavated was made out of rammed earth [tapia] and had some fifteen rooms, seven
of which were used to dry and store fish— anchovies and sardines in particular—by filling
them in with sand. These anchovies were part of the surplus output of this culture’s fishermen
and were most likely taken to the highlands by caravans of llamas. As evidence we have the
patios and courtyards that lie around the sites, and which contained llama excrement.
The fishermen of Cerro Azul on average fished twenty species of fish such as anchovies,
sardines, flathead grey mullet, Pacific bonito, and even small sharks and manta rays. The big
specimens were eaten by the people in these sites and the small ones were exported. It is
however clear that anchovies and sardines were often eaten because their bones are found
not just in the storage structures but also in kitchens, patios and on the floors.
Anchovies were mainly caught using baskets. Other techniques were cast nets, which
were used in rocky areas, and curtain-type nets that were used on the beach Marcus et
al. 1999: 6568).
Sand was also used to preserve a series of organic foodstuffs in pre-Hispanic Peru. Such was
the case at Cerro Azul, where Joyce Marcus (1987: 55-56) found that there were several rooms
full of sand during the Inca occupation in which anchovies, sardines and other small fish were
stored in perfect condition.
Sandweiss (1992) excavations at Lo Demás, a site that dates to the Inca epoch, likewise
uncovered fish-preservation systems, like some kind of racks or grills on which fish were dried,
mats on which they were dried on a large scale, and a large amount of salt—in comparison
with other animals—in fish. Robyn Cutright notes that Sandweiss believes that preserving fish
with salt is clearly of pre-Hispanic origin.
To this it should be added that Heather McInnis (2006: 10) has presented interesting evidence
from Quebrada Jaguay, not far away from the city of Camaná, that suggests the whole process
of salting fish, which includes the removal of the heads and a specific distribution of the
bones, goes back to the Terminal Pleistocene ca. 11,000 B.C. This probably is one of the most
ancient preservation processes found in America.
In her excavations at Pedregal, a Chimu site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, Cutright (2009)
observed that food was stored below floor level in especially made holes, as well as in vessels
that were embedded in the floor of small storage rooms, and in storage containers. In Pedregal,
a rural Late Moche and Chimu site, maize was shelled for storage.
479
Elmo Leon

Another Chimu settlement like Puerto Pobre was also characterised by having food stored in
this same way (Koschmieder and Vega-Centeno 1996).

In the above-mentioned study, Cutright (2009: 191) notes that Carol Mackey found a series
of big jars at Farfán that were used to store chicha during the Chimu-Inca occupation of the
Jequetepeque Valley.

Cerro La Virgen is a site in the so-called “zona de barriada” or the area surrounding the well-
known citadel of Chan Chan. Here Keatinge (1975) made an interesting study of the layout of the
rooms used by the rural people who worked for the Chimu State. Some kind of storage units
that literally were silos in the floors, as well as vessels that were also used for storage, have been
found in the rooms inside these houses that are usually rustic and of irregular shape.

The silos were daubed with a layer of mud and their surface was lined with pebbles in order
to provide them with a structure and greater stability. On the other hand the vessels used
for storage were simply placed inside holes in the ground. Many of them had small pebbles
around their edge and half a squash was eventually used to stop the mouth and avoid Chapter 3
unwanted substances. Keatinge was unable to identify the type of food placed inside these
vessels, but from information available from other Chimu sites it is believed that it may have
included maize, among other foodstuffs.
THE PRE-HISPANIC DIET FROM
D’Altroy and Hastorf (1984) documented a series of storage structures at Hatun Xauxa, an
archaeological site in the Mantaro Valley at around 3600 masl. These structures were built as part
THE STANDPOINT OF
of the Inca provisioning system in this part of the empire. The colcas had water and ventilation
that favouring the preservation of the items stored, including maize, potatoes, quinoa, fruits,
MODERN SCIENCE
salt, fish, firewood, and chicha. The excavations showed that abundant maize and quinoa kernels
in particular were stored. Vessel fragments were associated with a large amount of potatoes and
lupinus (Fabaceae) (chochos). Ethnography has shown that tubers were stored in roof supporting
stocks...and/or in gourds placed on the floor with branches of Mintostachys sp. (Andean mint)
in order to better preserve them and drive coleoptera away (pirwa storage structures).

We should recall that two square metres of Peruvian silverside remains covered with algae
(Macrocystis integrifolia) have been found at Cahuachi, in a Nasca context (Piacenza and Pieri 2012:
5-6), which shows that fish was already being preserved on the Peruvian coast at least since the first
centuries of our era. In this case this algae species, which contains alginic acid, was being used; the
acid adheres to the fish like a film and prevents its spoiling, but the effect is short-lived. Even so,
Piacenza and Pieri believe that fish may also have been dried or immersed in salt (in brine).

We cannot end this brief introduction to storage structures in pre-Hispanic Peru without
mentioning Los Gavilanes, a site specifically meant for maize storage some five thousand
years ago. The people who settled in the lower Huarmey Valley stored maize massively and
efficiently. The cobs were removed from the panca, piled up in holes and covered with sand.
There were 47 silos that could have stored between 460 thousand and 700 thousand tons,
which evidently shows the significance this activity had on the Peru’s pre-Hispanic coast.

480
THE PRE-HISPANIC DIET OF PERU
THROUGH CARBON AND NITROGEN
ISOTOPES AND COPROLITHS (EXCREMENT)

Two uses have been made in this book regarding isotopic applications in archaeological
research. We have previously noted the significance radiocarbon isotopes in calibration, as
they allow us to specify the actual time an event took place in. Another important issue in
which isotopes can make a contribution is the type of food our ancestors had. After presenting
the taxonomy of the food actually and potentially consumed, we now supplement it with
additional biochemical data—which includes isotopes and other methods—and the analysis
of human faecal remains (coproliths or palaeoscat) in order to reconstruct the ancient diet,
albeit with the exceptions that arise (cf. Cadwallader et al. 2012). Let us then enter this topic.
We present the data divided into two parts, one in regard to the Preceramic Period, and
another in in regard to the periods that extend since about the first millennia B.C. We now
turn to the first and most ancient one.

Elizabeth Wing (1980: 159-162) made one of the first pioneering studies with stable isotopes
on the fauna and vegetables consumed in various sites in the Callejón de Huaylas. Wing
studied strontium isotopes and reached the conclusion that more meat was eaten at sites
found at higher altitudes than those in valleys. This explains the higher consumption of plants
throughout the process of domestication as well as those that had been domesticated at an
early date as in Guitarrero Cave, which precisely is in an intermontane valley.

Benfer (2008: 377) reported the analysis of stable isotopes DeNiro made with various human
bones from Paloma, a preceramic coastal site south of Lima, in the Chilca Valley. Benfer
showed that on average the peoples on the coast based their diet on marine products, which
agrees with the analysis of macroremains presented in the first part of this book. Barium and
strontium concentrations gave similar results. Fluorine studies likewise provide a more solid
base to the predominance of the marine diet. It should be noted that the dates at Paloma
range between 5316 and 3630 B.C. (Benfer 1999).

The study Burger and Van der Merwe (1990) made was possibly foundational in this regard
for the Andes. Burger and Van der Merwe analysed stable isotopes in human bones from two

483
Elmo Leon
sites, Chavín de Huántar and Huaricoto, a small temple in the Callejón de Huaylas. Chavín is
some 3150 masl and is considered the major religious centre of the Peruvian Formative Period.
The researchers reported five human bone specimens for this site, both from the Initial Period
as well as the Early Horizon. Four of the samples were crania of people who served the temple
(men, women, and infants). The main conclusion the analysis reached is that maize comprised
less than one fourth part of the carbon proteins in the bones of the individuals analysed; the
rest comprised other types of plants, possibly potatoes and quinoa, as well as camelid meat.
Assuming the validity of the isotopes, we can conclude that the coast was highly dependent
on fish and marine resources, whereas in the highlands there was an intense consumption of
tubers and cereals, in which maize had a not-too significant role.
We now turn to pre-Hispanic Cajamarca, both in Pacopampa—i.e. in the vicinity of the ceja de
montaña—as well as in other sites in the intermontane valleys in this same department. Tykot
et al. (2006) made a significant contribution in this regard. They presented a series of stable
isotopes bone analysis in human bones that included, nitrogen, carbon, C13 and even bone
apatite, in order to establish what proteins were eaten.
The first site we turn to is Pacopampa, some 2140 masl in the province of Chota (region of
Cajamarca), that dates to the Initial Period and the Early Horizon, and which is characterised
architectonically by plazas and temples. Its iconography shows a connection with the famed
site of Chavín de Huántar. The bone samples come from a monumental site in its vicinity known
as El Mirador, which is believed to have been part of the Pacopampa complex. Abundant food
remains were found in this context. The associated ceramics suggest that this zone was occupied
ca. 900-600 B.C. Eleven human ribs were analysed. The isotopic results show that at least 25% of
the diet was based on maize but the proteins must have come from animals such as camelids,
guinea pigs and so on. Maize thus had a higher consumption in Pacopampa in this epoch.
Seki and Yoneda (2005) used stable isotopes to establish what food was consumed in the
Cajamarca region, albeit in its intermontane zone outside the Pacopampa area. The site of
Huacaloma, a temple two kilometres to the southwest of the modern-day city of Cajamarca,
has dates that go from about 1500 B.C. to A.D. 50. Around 250 B.C. there was a series of
enclosures that resembled small rooms, some of which evinced the presence of hearths.
Kunturwasi, another prominent archaeological site where this type of research has been
undertaken, lies some 30 km away from the city of Cajamarca, in the headwaters of the
Jequetepeque Valley. In this site the radiocarbon dates average between 1000 B.C. and 50 B.C.
The authors studied 37 human bone remains both from Kunturwasi and Huacaloma as well
as from Loma Redonda and Colguitín, two other sites in the vicinity of Huacaloma, in the
Cajamarca Valley. Of these, 17 came from adult men (mostly 20-40 years old, with just one
sexagenarian), and 10 from adult women (mostly young, about 20 years of age).
The studies established that the people of Huacaloma consumed very little maize, both at the
beginning of its occupation (1500 B.C.) as well as at its end (500 B.C.). They instead depended
484
14,000 years of food in Peru
of land animals and plants like beans, quinoa, potatoes, cassava, sweet potato, olluco and
mashua, amongst others.
In Kunturwasi on the contrary there was a higher trend towards maize consumption in 800-
500 B.C. According to isotope O13, its consumption was apparently encouraged between 500
B.C. and the year one A.D. Marine animals also comprised part of the diet the people at this
site had despite being some 80-120 kilometres from the mouth of the Jequetepeque River.
Although no isotopic record is available, the authors supplemented the alimentary picture for
these early populations in Cajamarca with data from Shimada (1985, in Seki and Yoneda 2005: 125),
who claims camelids were eaten in these zones, particularly since 250 B.C., whereas before this
deer were more frequently eaten. We thus see that plant foods were supplemented with camelids.
Seki and Yoneda (2005) even tried to establish the dinnerware used and drew attention to
the constant increase in open-bowl-type vessels, which were probably meant to serve food.
As for maize consumption, Seki and Yoneda believe that it may have been connected with
certain practices regarding the multiple uses this plant had not just as a cereal, but possibly
also in chicha preparation (which seems to have been shown at Cerro Blanco, as seen above)
and even fodder for camelids, whose number constantly rose.
We turn now to the Central Coast. Here another group of sites—in this case Cardal and
Manchay Bajo in the Lurín Valley to the south of Lima—has been the subject of this type of
study. This complex is part of a tradition of public or ceremonial buildings that are U-shaped,
and which are presumably the forerunners of what was found at Chavín de Huántar. They
are often dated between 2000 and 200 B.C. Maize phytoliths had already been identified at
Cardal. Several human bones from burials both from Manchay Bajo and Cardal were subjected
to isotopic analyses.
Remains were also found at the Mina Perdida site, which is also in the Lurín Valley. This is a
U-shaped temple that dates to 2000-900 B.C. Here mostly fish were eaten. The archaeologist
Richard Burger, who excavated this site, therefore believes these were farmers who obtained
the fish through exchanges made with beach-sites like Chira-Villa. The results show the
people of Cardal also fed on maize alongside marine resources, albeit to a lesser extent than
at Pacopampa. We should remember that fish and shellfish remains abound in this context—
Cardal—but their combination with maize is clear.
The project also included the Tablada de Lurín in the valley of the same name, some 12 km
from the littoral. This is some sort of cemetery with a large number of tombs that can be dated
between 200 B.C. and A.D. 200. Several excavations yielded a large amount of food refuse,
which indicates that marine products such as fishes and bivalves had a special role. These data
have been corroborated with stable isotope analyses. These established the five individuals
analysed fed primarily on fish and marine mammals, but C13 indicated that maize comprised a
significant part of the diet. We see that the data approximately matches that of Cardal.
485
Elmo Leon
Villa del Salvador is a site in this same region that helps supplement this type of trend. This
is a large sandy area in front of the Pacific Ocean on the coast immediately south of Lima,
that dates to the beginning of the Early Intermediate (ca. 100 B.C.-A.D. 100). This is a large
pre-Hispanic cemetery with a large number of offerings. Falk et al. (2004) and Pechenkina and
Delgado (2006) have emphasised that two different populations have been identified. The
first group is taller even with the skull deformed and was connected with agriculture, whilst
the second group is of smaller height, did not have deformed skulls, and were highlanders and
herders. Both groups were sampled in order to trace what type of food they ate, including
stable carbon and hydrogen isotopes in bone apatite, as well as dental enamel in order to
establish the C3-C4 diet and the potential consumption of marine products. The analyses
indicated a predominance of these staples (fish and molluscs), which even gave rise to parasitic
infections typical of coastal fishermen, but the diet was supplemented with plants, as had
been suggested by the activities these individuals carried out.
It is therefore clear that several sites show that food consumption varied; the littoral sites
indicate the predominance of fish consumption, whilst others evinced the beginning of maize
consumption, which was apparently increasing.
According to the isotope analysis of human bones, it was precisely in the first millennium
of the Christian era that maize consumption gradually began to predominate in the record.
In a somewhat pioneering article, Burleigh and Brothwell (1978) showed through the isotope
analysis of carbon derived from ten pre-Hispanic dog hairs from Ecuador and Peru, that a
considerable part of their diet comprised maize. Although no context is provided with which
to determine the age of these remains, Burleigh and Brothwell state that most of them came
from the Central Coast, and the oldest may date to ca. 1800 B.C.
Samples were in fact taken at Ancón, Mala and Chancay, so we can speculate they extend
from the first millennium B.C. to late times such as the development of the Chancay culture
between the eleventh and fourteenth centuries A.D. These are coastal cultures that bred
dogs which were fed on maize. An examination of table 1 in Burleigh y Brothwell (1978: 357)
clearly shows that the Chancay culture had a greater dependence on maize, i.e. greater than
in previous cultures. This suggests that its consumption gradually increased in late periods in
all of the Central coast’s archaeological record.
There are other sites in this same zone where human remains, e.g. hairs, were acquired for
a food consumption analysis. Bergfield (2007) specifically reviewed several chemical trace
elements that were essentially used to reconstruct the diet and a partial pathology of three
key sites, Chongos, Huaca Malena and Buena Vista (which has already been discussed). Let us
see these results.
Chongos is an archaeological site in the Pisco River some 14 kilometres from the Pacific Ocean.
It has been dated to 300B.C.-A.D. 400, i.e. the transition between the Paracas and the Nasca
culture, which in this zone is known as the Topará tradition. Seventy human remains from this site
were analysed. Huaca Malena in turn is in the Asia Valley, between the Mala and Cañete Rivers
486
14,000 years of food in Peru
and even closer to Lima. It has been dated to around A.D. 600-1470. Bergfield says the marine
component in the diet at both sites was significant, agriculture was intense, and that it combined
with gathering fishing and other marine resources. We thus find that on the Central Coast—at
least in Ica—resources were combined in the pre-Hispanic diet from 300 B.C. to A.D. 1470.
For Chongos we have a more specific analysis that is worth including here in terms of
reconstructing the diet at this site (Dietz 2009) and of our goal of reproducing the cooking
methods of pre-Hispanic Peru. The remains include guinea pig hairs, which Dietz believes
were passed on to the food at the time it was grill roasted. In this case apparently little care
was taken when the skin of this animal was removed whilst preparing it.
There likewise was a differential access to food in gender terms. Males seem to have had a
diet that combined marine and agricultural items, and in fact ate more meat than the women.
In general, the population of Chongos can be interpreted as a mixture of fishermen and
farmers with a slight predominance of the latter activity, as is shown by the high rates of
caries, gum hypoplasia, systemic infections, cribra orbitalia, and so forth.
Tykot et al. (2011) presented a stable isotope analysis based on segments of hair derived from
seven individuals from the site of Chongos. They concluded there were major differences in
the food this people had particularly due to the seasons [la rotación de estaciones], so that
maize was not a permanent staple. The evidence presents individuals from the Paracas and
Topará cultures, who possibly even covered vast expanses of land making the most of the
surrounding environment, and which resulted in diversification.
José Pablo Baraybar (1999) made an interesting study in which he reconstructed the pre-
Hispanic diet on the Central Coast with skeletons found in the Malanche 22 site, in the lomas
that extend between the Lurín site and Chilca Ravine south of Lima, and which were dated to
ca. A.D. 1200-1450. Baraybar found that the people at this site essentially ate land resources,
but there was one woman who mostly fed on marine resources. These people made the most
of loma resources, where they probably practiced agriculture.
We now turn to this type of information from the North Coast. Celeste Gagnon (2004, 2008)
made an interesting study of dental pathology that provides us with an idea of what type
of food the ancient people of Cerro Oreja had. This is a cemetery and a pre-Hispanic urban
centre from Gallinazo and Salinar times (i.e. ca. 400 B.C.-A.D. 400) in the lower Moche Valley,
right in the middle of what would later be the area of the Mochica culture. Gagnon examined
a total of 681 burials, most of them Salinar and Gallinazo, studying caries and dental abscesses,
and the ante-mortem loss of teeth. She concluded that both adult women as well as infants
who showed an increase in caries and periodontal diseases, were eating more staples which
carbohydrates and sugars, like maize or potatoes. The male diet seems however to have
been more evenly balanced between animal and plant resources. So by this period maize
consumption in the Moche Valley was already significant, but a gender-based differential
access to food is noticeable.
487
Elmo Leon
Ericson et al. (1989) attempted to reconstruct the pre-Hispanic diet studying stable isotopes
in human bones in conjunction with coproliths at several sites in the famed Virú Valley. A
remarkable site they analysed was Puerto Moorin (ca. A.D. 200 a.C.-100), from whence came
25 human coproliths that essentially contained plant fibres and carbon. They also found the
following, in order of frequency: minute bone fragments, shells, seeds, hair, and fish vertebrae,
as well as sand and mud.
Ericson and his colleagues believe many of these foods were cooked due to the presence of
carbon or carbonised vegetables, and they ate vegetables (maize, beans, potatoes, peanuts)
with fish and shells that had proteins of animal origin. Although the specific content of
each human faecal remain has not been singled out, we can hypothesise based on the data
that the last supper these individuals had probably included at some point—or at the same
time—the above-mentioned vegetables with fish, shellfish and seeds (the sand and mud may
have been eaten with the food by chance, but as has already been noted we must bear in
mind the importance of its mineral content). The analyses corroborate that at least some of
these items were subjected to fire from embers, which we have seen was a typical cooking
procedure in pre-Hispanic Peru. This is, then, one of the few times in which we can come close
to reconstructing the pre-Hispanic diet.
As regards the human diet, which is the subject that concerns us, the same study cited in
the previous paragraph seems to indicate outstanding progress in the effort to detect a
maize-based diet through the analysis of stable isotopes. Using independent research lines—
coproliths and the analysis of stable N15 and C13 isotopes—Ericson et al. (1989) were able to
determine several natural products eaten by the people of the Virú Valley since about the
beginning of the Christian era up to A.D. 1000 (including the Mochica and Wari in this valley),
which we have already seen in the previous sections on the vegetable and animal species
presented in the previous chapter.
A long list of food items has been established thanks to the coproliths. Amongst others
it includes maize, sweet potato, cassava, chili pepper, yacón, peanuts, lima beans, carobs,
and lúcuma. In other words, this verifies the taxonomic list of plants found in, for instance,
the excavations at Huaca de la Luna. The rationale behind the location of the sites had a
determining role in regard to the consumption of local resources—whereas populations close
to the littoral would eat more marine products supplemented with farm food, people inland
preferred animal resources and local plant foods Maize was the common denominator eaten
in all recorded sites. This trend is observable since at least the Gallinazo phase, presumably
slightly before the beginning of the Christian era.
We can continue this analysis on the North Coast, this time in the Huaca de la Luna,
which dates to A.D. 400-750, and thus examine the Mochica diet (Cárdenas et al. 1997:
138-139). The work Cárdenas and his colleagues have made reconstructing this diet is
excellent, and provides much information based on the recovery of organic remains from
human excrement.
488
14,000 years of food in Peru
Besides the taxonomic identification of the remains, Cárdenas and his colleagues analysed
the content of five faecal remains in order to establish what people ate before they died. It
is clear that all had eaten maize (at least in three cases this included stem and cob fibres, so
evidently they ate other parts), lima beans, beans, and chili peppers. They also ate fruits like
the guava, coca seeds, and—in one case only—guinea pig and river fishes. The joint analysis of
the organic remains found in the excavations as well as the content of the coproliths made
Cárdenas and his colleagues conclude that the Mochica inhabitants of the Huaca de la Luna
had a balanced diet of on average more than 2,300 calories and 60 grams of proteins a day.
The ingestion of lipids from the meat of llamas, guinea pigs, birds, iguana lizards and fish may
have been catalysed and regulated through chicha consumption. This allowed the easy digestion
and absorption of maize carbohydrates as well as a better splitting of proteins and amino acids;
it also passively broke up the fatty acids of guinea pigs, limited the absorption of calcium
and phosphorus when eating fish, and enabled a better synthesis of vitamins to take place,
especially vitamin E. Following Antúnez de Mayolo, Cárdenas and his colleagues suggest that
drinking Cyperus sculentus (coquito) could have regulated the amount of uric acid and iron in the
organism; the leaves and bark of Salix chilensis (sauce amargo) may likewise have been used as
a purgative, Scutia spicata (negrito) as an astringent substance and a tranquiliser, and Equisetum
giganteum (cola de caballo) as a diuretic. In this regard we must recall that the consumption of
diuretics must have been mare more frequent than has been believed because as Melissa Vogel
(2012: 127) points out, it is clear that the food prepared at the site of Cerro La Cruz (Chao Valley,
ca. A.D. 900-1350) may have been accompanied by the consumption of flor de arena (Tiquilia
paronychioides) and grass [grama] (Paspalum peruvianum). This means both the Wari and the
Chimú would have known the properties of both plants.
Can we reconstruct what it was that the Moche ate at this site? Cárdenas et al. (1997: 138-139) made
a study of this kind. They explain that coprolith A had maize fragments, grains, fibres and stems
(probably due to its diuretic properties), bean shells, and remains of guinea pig and chili pepper
(Capsicum pubescens and Capsicum frutescens). We can imagine they ate this combination of
food alone or as a group. In another case there is maize, but along with peanuts, rocoto, beans,
and coca. Except for the guinea pig and the still unidentified fish, the food essentially comprised
fibres and vegetables. Cárdenas et al. furthermore claim that the configuration and colour of
the faeces suggests these individuals consumed food that held little water. Did the Moche in
general eat like this some 1500 years ago? Only studies of this type can provide answers and
more promising perspectives on a veritable reconstruction of pre-Hispanic cookery.
Gumerman is one of several archaeologists who in recent decades have studied stable isotopes
in human bones, particularly those from North Coast archaeological sites. Gumerman (1988)
studied 14 young male individuals from the archaeological site of Pacatnamú, a ceremonial
centre located on the mouth of the Jequetepeque River on the North Coast. Collagen-based
radiocarbon dates ranged around A.D. 1100, but the site is believed to have been occupied in
A.D. 600-1460, i.e. between the final phase of the Mochica culture, the Wari occupation, and
the Chimu epoch.
489
Elmo Leon
Bone collagen was used to reconstruct the diet of the people who lived in this site. These
actually had been victims of violence, whose bodies exhibited traumas and even post-mortem
exposure to the elements. Prior to this analysis, the excavations revealed that the middens
left behind by human consumption included fish bones, marine shellfish, llama and alpaca
bones, and the remains of C4 plants like maize and C3 like beans, pumpkins, chili peppers,
and fruits. Three population groups were analysed in order to establish their origins. Indeed,
one group was identified that essentially fed on marine products whilst others fed on land
resources, and partially had a mixed diet. This means these groups had a varied diet.
Also at Pacatnamú, John Verano and Michael DeNiro (1993) made a stable isotope study on
human bones that includes C13 and N13 in a collagen series. They managed to establish that
some individuals combined marine and land products in their diet, but it is possible that other
groups in the same part of the littoral may have consumed more marine resources, whilst a
third group, which probably came from higher-altitude areas (presumably Cajamarca), had
a more land-based diet. The pattern has a slight resemblance to that of the Chiribaya, who
essentially fed on products from areas adjacent to their home territory.
A study of stable isotopes—this time human hair from four adults, two newborn babies, and
a child from Pacatnamú itself—was undertaken by a group of researchers (White et al. 2009).
This shows that in Moche times less fish was eaten than in the Lambayeque epoch, so that a
change took place in the type of food consumed by the people who were buried here.
We now leave Pacatnamú for the Chao Valley which lies to the south but is still on the North
Coast. Here a study of stable isotopes—in this case carbon 13 and nitrogen 15—was made with
eleven human burials from the Santa Rita B archaeological site, which is in the lower Chao
Valley, at an average altitude of 484 masl, some 25 km from the Pacific Ocean (Bethard et al.
2008: 19-27). The Chimú occupation of the site comprises 400 enclosures and some corrals. The
dates range between A.D. 1030 and A.D. 1230. Studies have shown the intensive consumption
of maize among this people. It is likewise known that Donax peruviana (palabritas) was eaten
as a supplement, so these people depended mostly on maize consumption.
We now turn to the scientific data available for the South Coast. The Chiribaya culture is one
that has most been studied from this perspective. Here Paula Tomczac (2003) analysed finds
from the Osmore Valley in the southernmost Peru, which extends over some 139 km up to the
southern Peruvian puna. The Chiribaya culture held sway over the middle and lower sections
of the valley during the Late Intermediate Period (ca. A.D. 1000-1450).
Tomczac examined stable C13 and N15 isotope levels in human bone remains from several
archaeological cemeteries in the valley’s littoral up to 2000 masl. The individuals buried in
the cemetery of San Gerónimo, close to the littoral, had bones that indicated they obtained
most of their proteins from marine resources, supplemented with C3 carbohydrates from
land resources. The nearby cemetery of Chiribaya Alta showed that the people in this zone
likewise consumed marine resources. Chiribaya Baja, another cemetery somewhat higher up
on the river bank, exhibited a higher dependency of land resources than the cemetery of San
490
14,000 years of food in Peru
Gerónimo, particularly in C3 and C4 resources (which include plants such as potatoes and
maize), albeit with a wider range of edible resources. The trend towards a greater dependence
of land resources is observable in the cemetery of El Yaral in the middle valley; here both
carbohydrates and proteins were obtained almost exclusively from C3 and C4 plants, as well
as from zones immediately adjacent to the middle valley. The C13 values in bones from El Yaral
may even indicate that most of the proteins were obtained for instance from eating camelids
(Tomczac 2003: 270-273).
It follows, from the study of stable isotopes in human bones from the Chiribaya cemeteries
in various altitudinal tiers, that whereas the inhabitants of each ecological tier consumed
mostly local resources, those in the littoral were mainly fishermen whilst those in the highest
part (El Yaral) were herders. Even so, the cultural links and even the exchange networks that
surfaced in the valley’s material culture were present as cohesive factors (Tomczac 2003: 275,
Knudson and Buitkstra 2007).
More recently, Knudson et al. (2007) provided data on the seasonal dependency of the diet
through the study of stable nitrogen and carbon isotopes obtained from Chiribaya sites such
as El Yaral and Chiribaya Alta. In the case of at least of one female individual it was verified
that while she ate mostly marine resources almost all of her life, she changed her food in the
last twenty months, which is when maize became important. Knudson et al. hypothesise that
an El Niño is one of the factors that may have influenced this change in the diet, particularly
in the individuals who lived in Chiribaya Alta.
Having seen the ample coastal evidence available, we will now review this type of source in
order to approach the diet of cultures that lived in the highlands. Our review begins with the
Wari Empire, but with the caveat that our review may include parts of the coast due to the
varied expansion of cultures like the Wari or the Inca.
Brian Finucane et al. (2006) analysed the human and animal remains from the well-known
Wari site of Conchopata in Ayacucho (2700 masl), which was occupied ca. A.D. 550-1000.
Stable isotopes (C13 and N15) were used and it was concluded that maize was the main staple,
both for people (the rural population and the elite) and animals.
Two types of management follow from the study of camelids. Some came from pastures with
C3 plants, possibly tubers, whilst other camelids ate maize. In the cases of the animals from
high-altitude sites it is possible that these were alpacas because the way these animals graze
is known. It is worth noting that one camelid had isotopic values from which it can be inferred
that it may have eaten marine algae like cochayuyo (Porphyra columbina). It is possible that
this animal was brought here from the coast, and even from Camaná, as happens nowadays.
Guinea pig bones were also found in these contexts, which were probably also eaten. The
study showed that these animals were fed above all with maize. The high N15 values in human
infants reflect an intensive maternal breastfeeding particularly during their first year of life. As
for food differentiation, it was found that both males and females had equal access to various
491
Elmo Leon
resources. The analysis showed that in Conchopata, maize was the food staple par excellence
both in children as well as in adults, for males and females, and even for animals like camelids
and guinea pigs.
Finucane (2007) studied stable C13 and N15 isotopes in the bones from six individuals from
the site of Vinchos (Ayacucho). He showed these individuals essentially ate maize during the
transition that extended from the fall of the Inca Empire to the beginning of the colonial
period, i.e. A.D. 1490-1690. Unlike Conchopata, no sign that camelid meat was eaten has been
found in this population. Research has also shown the fields where maize was cultivated were
fertilised with dung. These results show maize became the main food staple from the time of
the Wari Empire to that of the Inca Empire, at least in this site. In a more recent study of stable
isotopes, Finucane (2009) concluded that maize was the main food in the Ayacucho region
even in A.D. 800. This means maize was the dietary base between 800 B.C. and A.D. 1535, i.e.
for 2,300 years up to Inca times.
Continuing with the Wari context, albeit a regional one (Ica) now, there is another study
that is worth including in this review of the attempts at reconstructing pre-Hispanic food
through stable isotope analysis. Kellner and Schoeninger (2008) studied hydrogen 15 and
oxygen 13 isotopes and concluded that maize was the main grain consumed, at least at Las
Trancas, close to the monumental site of Cahuachi, while animal proteins came mostly from
camelids and guinea pigs. Kellner and Schoeninger point out there is scant evidence of the
consumption of marine resources, and that men and women had equal access to chicha. Just
like at Conchopata, both the elite and the common people ate maize.
We leave Ayacucho and move to the zone of Junín. An invaluable interdisciplinary project
studied the archaeological sites in the upper Mantaro (Junín) Valley. The study made a
comprehensive exam of the Wanka culture and the Inca occupation in the area close to
Tunanmarca (D’Altroy and Hastorf 2002). According to D’Altroy and Hastorf there are three
relevant phases, Wanka 1 (A.D. 1000-1350), Wanka 2 (A.D. 1350-1450), and Wanka 3 (A.D. 1450-
1533). Hastorf (2002) states that maize, potatoes and quinoa were frequently cultivated, but
during the Late Horizon—i.e. the Inca occupation—maize was preferred to the detriment
of other crops due to imperial pressure. Stable isotopes in 47 human skeletons from this
site were studied in order to confirm this trend (DeNiro and Hastorf 1985, Hastorf 2002). A
first conclusion is that maize, potatoes and quinoa were probably grown in this zone since
2000 B.C., which means they were eaten since early periods. Besides, the cultivation and
consumption of maize did indeed increase towards Inca times, both in rural populations and
amongst the elite (Hastorf 2002: 176), as was also the case in Conchopata.
Finally we turn to the Inca Empire. The archaeological site of de Waman Wain, which
was studied by Richard Burger, is in the Callejón de Huaylas at about 3500 masl. The
materials found evince occupations that extend from the Early to the Late Horizon.
Burger presented the results achieved by the study of three cranial fragments dating to
the Inca occupation. Carbon and hydrogen isotopes indicate that during this phase the
people mostly ate maize.
492
14,000 years of food in Peru
A report by Burger et al. (2003) for the famed archaeological shrine of Machu Picchu presents
the results for stable isotope analysis in bones from human skeletons. The mean C13 in the
individuals studied was -11.9‰, which means 65% of the bone collagen came from C4 plants.
This means that maize may have been the main food staple. It should be noted that the mean
was similar in men and women, which can be interpreted as equal access to this staple.
Another significant conclusion reached is that there were diverse C13 values, which reflects a
varied diet. For Burger et al. this is explained by the varied provenance of the individuals buried
at Machu Picchu. Such variability seems likewise reflected in the strontium values found in
the bones. The consumption of both marine and high-altitude resources—that may well have
come from the Titicaca Altiplano—was detected. This means the human composition was
variable and came from various parts in the Central Andes.
More recently, Turner et al. (2010) published the results of their research on the food of the
people buried at this site. In this case the researchers used strontium and nitrogen isotope
markers in dentine and dental enamel, as well as O13. The study was based on 71 adult
individuals. The analyses showed the wide range of food eaten by these individuals who
apparently were retainers—literally yanacona or mitmacona immigrants—who managed and
served the temple, came from various parts in the Andes and were not part of the elite.
Strontium analysis established some came from the coasts of Southern Peru or Northern
Chile, or from the Andean highlands.
Before migrating to Machu Picchu and being buried, these individuals had more llama meat in
their homelands and presumably also kiwicha, lima beans, quinoa, fish and other items (potatoes
and chuño); quinoa and lima beans were what they had most eaten. Later they had more maize
as adults and left behind the food they ate when younger. Very few of them changed their food
habits during their life which bespeaks in this regard of very conservative societies.
The analysis of O13 detected that during their childhood, these people drank water from
various sources. Wright et al. (1997) found that agriculture in Machu Picchu and its environs
could not have supplied a population of more than one thousand inhabitants, so they people
who lived here did so temporarily or were simply passing through.
Another important contribution that was recently presented as a doctoral dissertation
examines the food of the people in the well-known site of Puruchuco-Huaquerones in Lima.
Jocelyn Williams (2005) from Alberta University (Canada) studied stable carbon and nitrogen
isotopes in a total of 72 mummified individuals, most of them from the Inca Period (A.D. 1476-
1532) and natives to the coast, i.e. local people. Williams analysed five types of tissue: bones,
hair, skin, nails and muscles. She established that maize was their main food; then came the
meat from animals like llamas and guinea pigs, and even additional C3 plants like potatoes and
other tubers (albeit cyclically, probably in winter, at harvest time).
The dental studies made with the remains from individuals likewise clearly indicate their basic
diet abounded in carbohydrates, particularly maize-derived ones, and as a result there were 25
493
Elmo Leon

dental caries. Due to the dental wear it is believed that charqui and toasted maize were eaten.
Although the site lies close to the sea, the isotopic evidence shows no marine food was eaten.
Williams likewise noted that men had more access to maize (probably as chicha) and fish.

In a subsequent study (Williams and Katzenberg 2007) it was established that more tubers
(e.g. potatoes) and more maize were eaten during the winter months. The study of stable
isotopes in the hair indicates the diet of the people of Puruchuco-Huaquerones was varied.
For Williams and Katzenberg this means that grains were not stored except for toasted maize FROM HEARTH TO OVEN:
or as fermented beverages.
PRE-HISPANIC PERUVIAN CUISINE
As part of her isotopic studies, Williams (2005: 196) also examined five individuals from the
Cajamarquilla site, which was mainly occupied during the Late Intermediate Period (ca. A.D.
1000-1470). She concluded that unlike Puruchuco-Huaquerones, more C3 plants (quinoa,
potatoes and other tubers) were eaten than maize. Williams believes this is a model for what This section will examine just some of the archaeological sources that can provide details on
happened at Puruchuco, i.e. that various tubers and seeds were eaten in the sites within the how the pre-Hispanic people organised their space, their habitation areas and their houses in
valley of Lima, but with Inca control the pressure to expand maize consumption increased, as terms of the preparation and consumption of food.
Hastorf claims for the upper Mantaro Valley.
It is a fact that careful excavations that reveal this kind of data have only recently appeared.
Andrushko et al. (2006) studied a total of 43 skeletons from the famed site of Sacsayhuaman Up to the 1970s, archaeology paid attention mostly to ceramic sherds, pieces of metal and the
and 89 individuals from Choquepuqio in order to determine the type of food they ate and architecture. The interest in expanding our knowledge of the types of food in pre-Hispanic
the subsequent pathologies. The former site is in the vicinity of the modern-day city of Cuzco Peru only appeared some forty years ago.
and the second is in the Lucre Valley, some 30 km away from this city. Both were occupied in
Inca times. Here we shall include some additional anthracological data recently published regarding the
fuel used in kitchen fires. First we shall see how pre-Hispanic groups may have organised to
The analyses showed that the high maize consumption, particularly at Sacsayhuaman, resulted procure fuel, i.e. the initial activity required for cooking. Then we will reconstruct as far as
in 79% of dental caries as well as bacterial infections and abscesses in the skeletons under possible the activities that surrounded the preparation of food and the related tasks.
study. This can be attributed to the imposition of maize consumption by the Inca. Hypoplasias
that were probably generated by nutritional deficiencies in children up to seven years of age
were also identified. Andrushko et al. (2006) believe, much like other scholars, that the rise Firewood and Mortars
of a diet that was increasingly based on maize and other Andean cereals led to conditions
that were derived from anaemia or were related with it. This is evinced by cribra orbitalia and At the beginning of this chapter we discussed combustion structures but we did not really
porotic hyperostosis, which have been recorded at Sacsayhuaman. discuss the issue of firewood, which is essential if the kitchen fire is to last and be effective.

Deborah Pearsall (1978-80: 66) documented the use of wood, camelid dung and champa7*
since around 8100 B.C. in Pachamachay Cave, in the Junín puna, at about 4300 masl. The
woods Pearsall identified were Margyricarpus strictus, Schinus molle (molle), Chuquiraga
huamanpinta (huamanpinta), Ribes, Dodonaea viscosa, Proustia pungens, Polylepis, and
Ephedra americana (cola de caballo).

Fanny Moutarde (2006b) devoted her whole dissertation to Peruvian anthracology and the
second volume deals with the wood used as fuel in pre-Hispanic Peru. Moutarde mentions
several plants, shrubs and trees that may have been used for this purpose: Schinus molle

*
7 Grass and wood.

494 495
Elmo Leon
(molle), Ambrosia arborescens (altamisa, which reaches up to 4000 masl), Mutisia acuminata
(huariruma, which reaches up to 3,800 masl), Tessaria dendata (pájaro bobo), Verbesina
tomentosa (putka), Eriotheca ruizii (Schum.) Robyns (pati), Bursera graveolens (HBK) Tr. et
Pl. (palo santo), Espostoa melanostele (Vaup.) Borg (porgón), Capparis avicennifolia HBK
(guayabito del Inca), Cercidium praecox (R&P) Harms (palo verde), Acacia huarango Ruiz ex J. F.
Macbride (huarango, from 0 to 1000 masl), Acacia macracantha H&B ex Willdenow (huarango,
faique), Inga feuillei DC (pacay, guava, from 0 to 3000 masl), and eventually Mimosa pellita
H&B ex Willd (uña de gato), Salix chilensis Molina (willow), and even Pouteria lucuma (lúcuma).
Gynerium saggitatum (caña brava) has been found in charred condition in cooking context in
the Chimú Pedregal site, on the North Coast. It was a firewood much used by these people
alongside carob trees (Cutright 2009: 186), and probably even before.
Even so Moutarde (2006: 124) insists that carob wood—(Prosopis juliflora (Sw.) DC var.
juliflora (Kunth) Burkart) and Prosopis pallida (H&B ex Willd.) H.B.K)—is exceptionally good
as firewood when making and keeping a fire alive, as was shown by Beresford-Jones (2004) in
her dissertation, which was reviewed when discussing the properties of the carob tree. In this
regard, Cutright (2009: 185) concluded from her excavations at the Late Moche-Chimú site of
Pedregal (in the lower Jequetepeque Valley) that the main fuel used here was carob wood.
Plants that abound on the Peruvian coast, like Tillandsia (achupalla), were used directly
as coal fuel at Cerro La Virgen, which is part of the rural zone of the Chan Chan citadel.
Remains of Tillandsia have been found in holes with hearths that were used to cook food
(Keatinge 1975: 223).
Nor should we forget the potential of camelid dung as fuel. In this regard we should bear in
mind the above-mentioned study by Cutright (2009) on Pedregal, where piles of camelid dung
and maize husks have been found that may have had this use.
The site of Bandurria, a monumental architectural centre, is near Huacho to the north of Lima.
Its dates range from 3170 B.C. to 1610 B.C. (Chu 2008: 134-135). Here Tillandsia sp. appeared
profusely in the excavations. Alejandro Chu believes this was the main fuel used to make fire
at this site, as it is mainly associated with hearths and burned materials.
Mortars were a key element in all pre-Hispanic cookery. Milling and grinding are inconceivable
without them. Let us review some of the data that concerns them.
Paloma, to the south of Lima, in the Chilca Valley, is an archaeological site where a large
amount of organic remains have been recovered. It was occupied from 5316 B.C. to 3630 B.C.
(Benfer 1999). At least 75% of the food here was based on fish and a large part on shellfish.
Benfer, the archaeologist who heads this project, reports that at that time, in the huts or
villages he had excavated, mortars were already used for milling. The analysis of these mortars’
surfaces showed that it was not just plants that were ground for small fish were also ground,
possibly anchovies and sardines (Benfer 2008: 377).
496
14,000 years of food in Peru
As was already noted, human faecal remains have been shown to hold remains of Chenopodium
(which need not be quinoa) associated with small stones and charcoal remains. This implies
that this type of grain was probably ground on the mortars along with Solanaceae, and was
then fire cooked or roasted. A piece of wood which has traces of having been used to make a
fire to cook the food before ingestion also dates to this time (Benfer 2008: 379).
The excavations at Paloma recorded other materials used as fuel. These are branches and
shrubs found in the lomas close by to the archaeological site, such as Piqueria sp., Croton
alnifolius, Heliotropium (heliotrope), and Tillandsia sp. This is evinced by their frequently
being found burned (Weir and Dering 1986: 29).
These data on the plants chosen as fuel can be supplemented with an interesting study made by
Hastorf et al. (2005). Hastorf and her colleagues studied the wood used as fuel in at least five Late
Intermediate Period and Late Horizon—i.e. the Inca empire—pre-Hispanic sites in A.D. 1300-1350.
The sites of Hatunmarca, Tunanmarca, Umpamalca, Chuccus, and Marca, which lie on the upper
part of the Mantaro Valley (to the north of the modern city of Jauja) between 3200 and 3400
masl, belong to the Wanka and Jauja cultures, both as autonomous polities and then under Inca
occupation.
Hastorf and her colleagues concluded that at least a dozen plants provided firewood for the
kitchens and other uses—Buddeja sp., (colle) Polylepis sp. (queñual), Oreopanax sp., Colletia
spinosissima (akash), Caesalpinia (chara), and Alnus jurulensis HBK (aliso, a good fuel). The use
of three types of wood— Buddeja, Colletia, and Alnus—rose under the Inca. As for Caesalpinia
there even is evidence that it was used as firewood by at least 2200 B.C. in Huarmey, and
specifically at the site of Los Gavilanes (Weir and Bonavia 1985: 107).
We should add that grass was used as fuel in hearths even during periods like the Wari Empire.
Such was the case of a camp located on the beach north of the Huarmey Valley, which
probably dates to A.D. 800. Here Bonavia et al. (2009: 242) documented abundant saltgrass
(Distichlis spicata) and reeds or carricillo (Phragmites communis) that were evidently used as
fuel to keep the fire alive.
497
PRE-HISPANIC CUISINE AND CULINARY
TRADITIONS: THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL
AND ETHNOGRAPHIC DATA

The Food and Cuisine of the oldest inhabitants of Peru

Leaving aside the fuel and firewood of pre-Hispanic cuisine, how did the people organise
themselves to cook? The oldest data from an archaeological standpoint probably come
from two projects developed by the French school in Peru, and which were headed by
Danièle Lavallée, from the Université Paris 1. One of the sites was on the coast, in the Tacna
region, and the other one was in the highlands, in the puna of the modern Junín region. The
results achieved by both projects will be here briefly presented, as we are here interested in
finding out the oldest “Peruvian” traditions in food preparation, between 10,000 and 5,000
years ago.

Quebrada de los Burros, in Tacna (Lavallée et al. 1999) is one of the most remote and interesting
sites connected with this issue. This is a kind of camp on the coast that dates to the Early
to Middle Preceramic Period (about 8000-4500 B.C.). It lies between the Caplina and Sama
Rivers, just a few kilometres away from the modern Chilean border. Hearths, mostly shallow
ones] used to cook were found in the oldest layer. The radiocarbon dates of these ovens
come from layer N3, which means they can be dated between 6454 and 6095 B.C. One of
them may even date to 7287 B.C.

It has been noticed that hearths built in this period were protected from the wind, because they were
intentionally built alongside a small stone promontory. The hearths overlap; this means they were
built on the same sites so that the fires were lit in the same places. A large number of pata de burro
snails (Concholepas concholepas) were roasted in these preceramic ovens; a small number of other
kinds of snails (Tegula) as well as limpets (Fissurella) and black mussels [choros] (Chroromytilus).
Mesodesma [machas] (Mesodesma donacium) and choritos (Perumytilus purpuratus) were also
roasted. All of these hearths and habitation areas were found in encampments which had on the
floor an arc-form three-metre in diameter that opened to the west.

499
Elmo Leon
Hearths were still used in a second phases in the occupation of the archaeological site in
5,991-4,501 B.C., of which ashes and charcoal remains have remained as evidence. In general
the same species of shells and snails were roasted on a direct fire as in the earlier phase.
Some had a burned surface due to combustion. The presence of a hearth about 20 cm thick
was documented in the most recent phase. Despite the existing doubts, it may have been
used to open Mesodesma through heat. It is also remarkable that a harpoon point made out
of mammal bone was also found in the midst of these remains, thus evincing harpoons were
used to fish at this time.
The palaeo-icthyologist Philippe Béarez (Lavallée et al. 1999: 38-40), a member of Lavallée’s
team, authored one of the few reconstructions available made in terms of documenting
the provenance of the shellfish and fish eaten at Quebrada de los Burros. His results at the
site indicate that the people gathered shellfish since ca. 7600 B.C. and exploited shellfish in
practically all biotypes in the area around the site, from the marine littoral (at a depth of
four metres) to the rocky promontories close to the river’s mouth. The gathering of shellfish
probably did not entail the use of specialised tools, as they were simply collected using
baskets or nets to take the shells and molluscs back to the camp. In the case of gastropod
molluscs attached to rocks, these were perhaps extracted using stone chips. On the other
hand, net fishing since the terminal Pleistocene (11,000 B.C.) should come as no surprise
due to the evidence shown for Quebrada Tacahuay. Here anchovies and sardines for human
consumption were literally caught off the coast of Moquegua during the last Ice Age.
One question that is still unanswered is why the big molluscs were taken back whole to
the camp instead of previously extracting the meat in order to reduce the weight. Their
transportation is explained with the fact that they could be heated in the campfire in order
to extract the meat.
Molluscs must have been placed directly over the embers or very close to the fire to cook
them. There are, however, accounts that suggest they may have been eaten raw directly after
being extracted from the sea. Such may have been the case of the site of Gramalote, which
is close to Huanchaco. Here Shelia and Thomas Pozorski (1979: 424) found recurring fracture
patterns that may have been caused by repeated glows from pebbles; they believe these
fractures are due to the way the molluscs were opened to extract the meat, both bivalves and
gastropods.
A series of dark spots and even carbonised parts are clear evidence that the shellfish were
subjected to fire to open and cook them. The hearths meant for this may have been used
repeatedly. Crabs would have been cooked over the embers or small racks made out of
branches, as is evinced by a series of charcoal particles that have remained as residues left
behind by this procedure.
A large amount of crustacean remains were also found in the levels excavated at Quebrada de
los Burros beginning at ca. 7600 B.C., as well as a large range of fish, particularly sardine, horse
mackerel, lorna, sea bass, machete [Elopidae?], cabinza grunt, pejesapo [Sicyases sanguineus?],
500
14,000 years of food in Peru
Atlantic mackerel, chita [Anisotremus], bonitos, and morwongs, as well as several sharks and
rays. Béarez notes they may have fished from the shore a fishing line and a hook, and from
boats using netting.
The most impressive thing here is that the use of netting is being suggested for the Middle
Holocene, i.e.—if we consider the dates—the seventh millennium B.C., but no direct evidence
has as yet been found. The development of net-making can even be followed right up to the
Nasca culture. For instance, nets of various forms and sizes made using cotton fibres have
been reported at the shrine of Cahuachi. Piacenza and Pieri (2012: 5) believe this perhaps
entails different types of fishing. We should not forget that fish such as anchovies are present
since ca. 10,000 B.C. in the context of the Paiján culture, so the use of netting since the last
ice age should come as no surprise.
Returning now to the analyses made by the palaeo-icthyologist Philippe Béarez (2012: 99-123),
he concluded that the people in the camps at Quebrada de los Burros in Tacna, must have had
a vast knowledge of the sea and its environs since 7900 B.C. They were acquainted with the
range of fish found in the Peruvian Cold Current and accordingly developed techniques adapted
to the exploitation of the littoral environment such as fishing hooks. They may also have used
some kind of raft to catch fish from deep-sea environments, like horse and Atlantic mackerel,
cabinza grunts, and bonitos. Rushes and perhaps sea lion skins may have been used to make
rafts, as could still be verified ethnographically many years ago. Béarez also points out that local
fishermen could have benefitted when hundreds of fishes were washed out and beached.
We now turn to the Telarmachay rock shelter, which is some 4420 masl in the vicinity of San
Pedro de Cajas, in the modern Junín region. The deepest layer was dated to 8000-6000 B.C. It
has been suggested that the fire in, this layer was made by striking stones or rubbing wooden
sticks as was found at Guitarrero Cave, where five branches where found with hollows where
sticks were placed in order to rub them and cause ignition (Lavallée et al. 1985: 279-280).
According to Lavallée and her team, the fuel used to cook was perhaps found in fragmented
bones, moss, dry branches, grass, and perhaps even camelid dung. There were three types of
hearths, plain open hearths, hearths surrounded by stones, and stone-lined hearths. The first
two were mainly used in 8,000-6,000 B.C.; the third was built later (Lavallée et al. 1985: 280-
281). The open ovens in this first epoch suggest two types of cooking, roasting and grill-type
cooking. It cannot be established whether the vicuña or guanaco meat was placed directly
over the embers or not, i.e. whether it was spit roasted or hung over the flames (roasting).
A question the reader should ask is how water was boiled 10,000 years ago, when there was
no pottery or fire-resistant vessels. Lavallée et al. (1985: 282) believe the remains of animal
stomachs or vesicles may have been used as vessels and filled with water. Stones were heated
as far as possible before they were calcined, and were submerged in the water held in the
animal vessel. When it boiled it could have been used as a cooking base for broth or stews.
Thermofractured stones due to this procedure have been found at Huaca Prieta, a site on
the North Coast. In this case Lavallée] believe the stones heated as far as possible would
501
Elmo Leon
have boiled water in pumpkins and not in bags or in vessels made out of animals. This type
of fracture is quite common and gives an idea of how frequent this procedure was. This
technique has apparently been documented in other more or less contemporary sites with
Los Gavilanes, like Áspero or Río Seco de León, where stones used to roast the food have
been reported (Bonavia 1982: 268). This must have been the method par excellence used to
boil water between 10,000 and 2500 B.C. before the development of pottery.
How long has the pachamanca cooking technique existed? Lavallée and her team found some
evidence at the Telarmachay rock shelter that could be interpreted as the remains of this type
of cooking in level VI, which means it could be 8,000 years old in Peru. The hearth was slightly
excavated in the ground. The inside walls were lined with stone slabs and were then covered
with earth. The internal heat generated by the oven fractured the stones and gave rise to a
type of fracture known as thermofracture, which has evidently been found at Telarmachay.
What items were cooked using this technique? Lavallée believes cut-up camelid or deer meat
was placed in these hearths alongside tubers; the latter cannot be determined because there
are no vegetable remains in the excavations due to the type of climate and soil present in the
Peruvian puna, which does not preserve organic remains. It is striking that the stones used in
pachamancas were small. Lavallée believes that cooking might have been fast. If we assume
that this shelter was a way station and that the people who lived there were acquainted
with this technique, it can be assumed more evidence, as yet unknown, exists in this zone.
It is therefore clear that this potential “pachamanca” in the Telarmachay rock shelter, in the
vicinity of San Pedro de Cajas (Junín), is the oldest in Peru and dates to 6000 B.C.
Once the technique required to cook food underground had been found, it was applied
at several sites. For instance, Engel (1957b) found at Río Seco a “series of circular platforms
full of pebble-type stones, which were removed when they fell apart due to the heat.”
Thermofractured stones have also been found on the upper part of the cooking pits at
Jiskairumoko, a site in Puno, which have been interpreted as the first evidence of the well-
known huatia of southern Peru, at least until 3000 B.C. (Craig 2005: 386).
Danièle Lavallée made an interesting deduction. Due to the scarcity of fuel in the puna, food
may have been processed up to a minimum before boiling. The discovery of may fragmented
bones close to the hearths suggests that the marrow was also extracted and was perhaps
eaten roasted or in soups prepared as was noted above, boiling the water by immersing hot
stones in it.
There are other relevant details in this 6000 year B.C. cuisine. For instance, a hearth was
discovered not just with stone tools like knives, but also cobbles with traces of their use in
grinding, i.e. part of the tools used to prepare food. One pebble showed traces of having been
used to fracture bones (Lavallée et al. 1985: 311). On the other hand, finding grinding tools in
the archaeological record should come as no surprise, as all we need recall is that ground
maize remains have been found in sites in northern South America.
502
14,000 years of food in Peru
Several stone tools were also found close to the ovens or hearths. This shows the food was
processed alongside the cooking areas, and was added as cooking took place. This evidence
appears around 8,000 B.C. (Lavallée et al. 1985: 300).
Hearths that lie quite close to the rocky wall of the shelter also suggest the possibility
that meat was hung to dry it by smoking, a frequent technique not just in South American
ethnography but also in Peruvian ethnography (Lavallée et al. 1985: 283).
We now leave the Junín puna and move to another example rescued through a type of
detailed archaeological excavation (which is known as décapage). We include it here because
it can provide data in terms of understanding how space was organised for subsistence and
food preparation in the earliest periods of pre-Hispanic Peru. This is the work of Claude
Chauchat on the North Coast, between the modern-day port of Pacasmayo and the site of
Paiján (Chauchat et al. 1992).
This group of people lived on the North Coast in ca. 11,000-7,000 B.C. They were nomads, at
least as regards the zone that extends between Pacasmayo and Paiján, and fed essentially on
reptiles (up to 74% desert tegus), fish (16%), land mammals like vizcachas and deer (just 7%),
and birds. The desert tegus and lizards could clearly be caught with traps in the vicinity of
their camps, whilst the fish had to be taken from the sea to their dwelling zones. We may
thus speculate on the presence of some type of method used to preserve food for medium
distances.
According to Julie Crédou (2006) they may also have fed on shellfish and molluscs, but these
must have been eaten in situ as they cannot resist transportation to sites that are at least 15
km away from the shoreline.
The presence of small fish like sardines and anchovies suggests they may have used some
kind of netting or meshes, as was speculated when discussing these fishes. The netting must
have been “primitive,” like that found nowadays on the north that is known as “cortina” or
“agallero” (Gálvez Mora and Quiroz Moreno 2008: 72). Fishing using fish hooks must have
evidently prevailed.
Birds are a type of fauna of which very little is known from an archaeological and taphonomic
perspective in terms of the lists of foods consumed by ancient Peruvians. The recent research
undertaken at sites like Quebrada Tacahuay is an exception. Yet we must review this point in
view of the documentation presented in this book.
Susan DeFrance and her team showed that birds were part of the food eaten by ancient
Peruvians since the last glaciation—ca. 11,000 B.C.—at the site of Quebrada Tacahuay, in the
vicinity of the modern city of Ilo (Moquegua). Thanks to her detailed analysis, DeFrance
showed that the birds were hunted or captured. This activity was undertaken on several
occasions and left behind the ashes and fragmented bones of the birds that were processed
in order to consume them.
503
Elmo Leon
DeFrance also managed to identify the traces of food preparation through the calcination of
bird and even fish bones. The colours due to combustion were identified and ranged from dark
to whitish hues; most of these specimens came from the hearths and places of combustion
themselves. Many of the bones also showed cut marks received as part of their processing
prior to cooking using stone tools, probably cutting stone chips that acted as prehistoric
knives.
Bones of larger mammals, like seals and sea lions, have this type of cuts, which means they
were also prepared for consumption. In birds the cuts were mostly located in the pectoral
wing area, so we can imagine that the bones in this part of the bird were removed in order to
roast or spit roast them.
If we now take a chronological leap from this ancient period to a period of time before the
Incas, we can briefly present the case of the research undertaken in the Mantaro Valley, in the
central puna of Peru. These are high-altitude occupations between ca. A.D. 100 and the Inca
Period, i.e. populations with a perfect command of farming and herding.
The plants cooked here have been partially identified (Hastorf and DeNiro 1985). For instance,
this study concluded that food was frequently prepared in big, jug-type pots with lips. First a
series of grains, legumes and tubers were boiled and then squashed, after which some were
toasted. Here we should mention tarwi, beans, potatoes, quinoa, olluco, oca and maize, but
the latter was eaten boiled (mote) or toasted (cancha) since ca. 100 B.C.
Based on the archaeological research in the Mantaro Valley, Coleman (2008) drew attention
to the mortars in sites such as Hatunmarca o Tunanmarca, which were meant to grind grains
like maize, quinoa, and kiwicha. She also suggested that big mortars that were long used
correspond to families with a long tradition behind them. This point may give an idea of the
familial concept of cuisine in pre-Hispanic Peru.
Additional studies suggest some speculations regarding the combination of inputs during the
culinary preparation. Such is the case of room D3R1 in the Cerro La Cruz site (Chao Valley),
which is dated between A.D. 900 and A.D. 1350, and was related with the Wari, Casma, and
Chimú cultures. Maize, chili pepper, squash, guava and carobs were found in situ in this room.
Coleman speculates with the possibility that these were the ingredient in one (or some)
dish(es), particularly in regard to the viability of combining maize and chili peppers as is done
nowadays (Vogel 2012: 127).
Reconstructing the Menu: Case Studies in Pre-Hispanic Peru
Hans Horkheimer (1960) made one of the most important and pioneering studies of pre-
Hispanic food in Peru. Some of Horkheimer’s data will be included here because the time that
has passed since its publication notwithstanding, it can help us fill out the culinary scenes that
are reconstructed through archaeology.
504
14,000 years of food in Peru
Horkheimer notes that food was cooked in relatively simple ways, e.g. over stones warmed in an
open fire, as was documented by the burned and thermofractured stones found at Huaca Prieta
and other coastal sites (Horkheimer 1960: 87), as was noted above. The food was cooked over
the embers, on ashes, ceramic vessels or in holes (pachamanca); roasting and toasting were the
classic methods, as in the case of maize. Horkheimer cited Bernabé Cobo in particular. Cobo
gave “locro” as an example. This is a typical, stew-like dish that has chili pepper, potatoes and
potato flour, to which fresh or dried meat, and even dried fish, are added. Cobo stated that
Andean food was cooked in this way without frying. He believed this was primitive—we would
say it was healthier. But Horkheimer was apparently right as regards the limited diversity in the
types of culinary preparation, as we are finding in the archaeological record.
Is there another way of establishing what pre-Hispanic Peruvians ate? We believe there is. One
way could be through the study of ancient human faeces, which aw we have seen can reveal
what food was ingested up to at least the last 24 hours before death. The bioarchaeological
study of a human burial from Huaca Prieta that probably dates to the second millennium B.C.,
is an example of the potential this type of study holds. Let us review some revealing details.
At the time of death, the individual had at least three varieties of fruit in the stomach and a
high fish content. A modern nutritionist could interpret this group of foods as a balanced diet—
varied and not concentrating on one single species at a time (Callen and Cameron 1960: 39).
Fragments of marine shells, crab claws, and remains of sea lions and even birds were found in
the faeces. This shows the large range of the early diet on the Peruvian coast, but it also points
towards a digestion that subjected to challenging habits.
Strangely enough, fish do not seem to have comprised a significant part of the diet despite
the fact that the sea is quite close. What do exist are combinations of cultivated plants,
fruits and marine shellfish. Bird et al. (1985: 241) however emphasised that marine foodstuffs,
including fish and mammals, were eaten in more ancient epochs. We thus probably have
incomplete data.
The remains allow us to presume the use of cooking-types like roasting, which as has been
seen throughout this book, seems to have been the technique par excellence of the pre-
Columbian Andean world. According to Bird et al. (1985: 240), the food was simply subjected
to fire (without peeling it or removing the skin), which calcinated the exterior and completely
or partly cooked the inside. They were then eaten with the roasted skins.
Some mammal bones—e.g. dogs, foxes and sea lions—had been cut up into pieces, in what can
be interpreted as a slaughterhouse. Finally, some dolphin or whale bones had been roasted.
We should recall, in this regard, that Bonavia et al. (2009: 265) found dolphin bones with chew
marks in the camp type-site of Middle Horizon epoch 3 (ca. A.D. 800) on the littoral north
of the Huarmey Valley; its consumption is thus clear, but we have not documented it in the
taxonomy of the list presented.
505
Elmo Leon
Before we leave Huaca Prieta, it is worth recalling the Callen (1965: 335, 337) has identified plant
seeds that were simultaneously eaten fresh and toasted in the faecal remains or coproliths
from the people who lived in this site on the edge of the Peruvian North Coast littoral,
since at least the fourth millennium B.C. This means that combining culinary techniques was
customary at that time. And it so happens that in this field, pioneers of Peruvian ethnobotany
like Duccio Bonavia et al. (2009: 242) have pointed out that the people who lived in a camp
that dated to Wari times (ca. A.D. 800), north of the mouth of the Huarmey Valley, essentially
ate roasted cassava and sweet potatoes.
Buena Vista is another archaeological ceremonial site that dates to some millennia B.C., and
is about 35 km away from the mouth of the Chillón valley, where the food its inhabitants ate
has been analysed. It is worth reviewing the data because this site opens a window to Peru’s
“culinary past”, as it is provides one of the few cases in which the content of the gourd vessels
was identified.
Duncan et al. (2009) presented the results of their research, which was based on an examination
of the grains of starch from edible plants excavated in archaeological contexts. This showed
that the tools under study had been used in the production and serving of food. Gourds
(Lagenaria) and pumpkins (Lagenaria) were excavated in the central context of the Zorro
temple in the archaeological site of Buena Vista, which is in the lower Chillón Valley (Lima)
and dates to ca. 2193-2164 B.C. According to the archaeologists the remains of food were
found under the surface inside a subterranean hole—a custom that is also visible in other
ritual Preceramic sites in Peru like Kotosh.
The middens where the food lay comprised remains of plants, some mollusc shells, and
the remains of small fishes. Archaeologists found a large amount of remains of chili pepper
(Capsicum sp.), guava (Psidium guayaba), lucuma (Pouteria lucuma) and pumpkins [calabazas]
(Cucurbita maxima, Cucurbita moschata y Cucurbita ficifolia). Sweet potato (Ipomoea
batatas), cassava (Manihot esculenta), and potato (Solanum sp.) sins were also found. These
plant remains were found in association with other, non-edible ones like cotton (Gossypium
barbadense), fragments of agave leaves (Furcraea andina), small, partially burned branches and
charcoal (Duncan et al. 2009: 13202).
To these plants we must add those uncovered by a microscopic analysis of the surface of the
pumpkins and gourds found in relatively good condition. What is important here is that a pumpkin
fragment (which it was believed had been mostly used as food) held starch from another plant;
it is therefore inferred that it was used as a vessel, either to hold or to serve food. These seem
to have been cassava (Manihot esculenta), the potato (Solanum), arrowroot or yuquilla (Maranta
arundinacea), carob algarrobo (Prosopis), and chili pepper (Capsicum). Of this group, cassava
seems to have been brought from an Amazonian lowland zone that may have been as distant
as Brazil, whilst arrowroot (like the potato) has been documented in the archaeological site of
Huaynuná, on the central Coast of Peru, in the mouth of the Casma Valley, some 315 km to the
northeast of Buena Vista, and which has been dated between 2050 and 1650 B.C.
506
14,000 years of food in Peru
Although it is not typical to the coastlands, arrowroot may have been cultivated in the vicinity
of the Buena Vista site. Finally, carob starch was found on the pumpkin’s surface, specifically
the starch from this plant’s sweet seeds. These would be the oldest microremains of carob as
food that have been found in pre-Hispanic Peru (Duncan et al. 2009: 13204).
Duncan et al. believe the combinations of starches documented by the pumpkin vessels
provide data of what plants were eaten simultaneously. They also do not reject the possibility
that two of them—carob and cassava—may have been used to prepare fermented beverages.
The ingestion of this type of beverage at the archaeological site of Buena Vista, either as part
of a feast or as a potation, must be associated with activities related with the erection or
destruction of temples (this, of course can be extended to include other sites of this type). In
this case, the above.-mentioned activity took place in relation with the ritual burial of the Fox
temple of this preceramic site in Lima.
Bergfield (2007: 67) analysed stable Ba/Sr isotopes from human hairs in Buena Vista, and
concluded that the people in this site had scant access to marine resources. When they did
have access, it was the men who consumed more marine resources than the women, a trend
observed in other pre-Hispanic sites.
A list has been made at Cerro Lampay of the plants and animals that were eaten during a period that
is almost contemporary with Buena Vista. Rafael Vega-Centeno (2007) reported his excavations in
this site, which lies almost on the mouth of the Fortaleza Valley, some 220 km to the north of Lima,
between 60 and 80 masl; nowadays it is some eight kilometres away from the seashore.
Cerro Lampay comprises a series of public edifices or temples that rose on the Central Coast
before the development of pottery, in a period currently known as the Archaic Period. It
is characterised by the presence of mounds with a quadrangular courtyard and an below-
surface circular area below the surface, which is typical of various similar sites. The age of
this architectonic complex is based on a total of 27 radiocarbon dates, which gave a date of
2410-2064 B.C., i.e. in the late third millennium B.C. From the analyses made it follows that the
feasts were related with construction activities of a ritual nature, as well as with a sense of
oneness of the group that undertook them.
The middens that grew out of the food consumed in these activities hold fishes like the
horse mackerel, amongst others. Few remains have traces of having been roasted, some show
carbonisation, and there even are pebbles that have broken up due to the fire, which all evince
combustion.
Bivalves and the incomplete bones of fish were also found, as well as fragments of pumpkin
skin. In general, the fragmentary condition and the processed state of the plant and animal
remains suggest these were edible products (Vega-Centeno 2007: 163).
We now turn to the data on pre-Hispanic food for the North Coast, particularly in cultures
like the Moche and the Chimú. Cutright (2009) made one of the major archaeological studies
507
Elmo Leon
to date in terms of reconstructing the food and the types of cooking applied at the Pedregal
site, which was occupied from Late Moche times to the Chimú period.
Van Gijseghem (2001) made an interesting study of the areas which had rooms meant for
food preparation in the Huaca de la Luna, a Moche site. Van Gijseghem documented kitchen
areas that were evinced by culinary refuse, combustion areas and burned clay. The ceramic
wares found in the kitchen areas are plain and are undecorated. The kitchen includes a series
of burnt adobe bricks and a large grinding stone. Here the remains of molluscs like clams
or palabritas (Donax obesulus), land snails (Scutalus proteus), cormorant (Phalacrocorax sp.)
and camelids were also found, above all remains of Peruvian banded croaker (Paralonchurus
peruanus). A kind of cylindrical chimney and ten large pots lined against a wall were also
found in this area. The combination of fish, clam, land snail and llama consumption is proven
because the remains of these items were found mixed in the hearths. Plain wares and storage
jars were also found associated (Van Gijsehem 2001: 261).
Another broad study specifically meant to examine how it was that pre-Hispanic groups
organised themselves for of cooking, was the subject of a doctoral dissertation (Cutright 2009,
2010) on the Pedregal archaeological site. This settlement was occupied from the Middle
Moche epoch (ca. A.D. 300) to the Late Moche period (ca. A.D. 850), the Late Intermediate
Period (A.D. 1000-1460), and right up to Inca times. Robyn Cutright conscientiously excavated
the food residues left behind by the people in this site and made a detailed record of their
provenance. It is therefore worthwhile summarising her finds, just like we have done with the
research made by Tamara Bray (see below). By their very nature, this is one of the few studies
of this type that is relevant for the goals set for this book.
Pedregal is an archaeological site on the on the right bank of the valley floor in the lower
Jequetepeque Valley, literally in front of the Cerro Faclo. Cutright documented that its people
lived in small rooms during the Late Intermediate Period (A.D. 1000-1460), which they cared
for and maintained. The site also has areas for food preparation—literally kitchens—as well as
small silos in the ground meant to store food and in some cases rubbish or refuse, and even
to store and finish chicha processing.
Cutright’s descriptions are fascinating, and let us envision the activities the people in this
site during Chimú times carried out in regard to their food. The hearths on the floor, which
were used as ovens, were set up with pebbles in order to structure them and provide support
for the vessels where food was prepared. Mortars and pestles were found close by to these
combustion areas, which means that food or grains were processed. Large mortars have been
found, usually inside the kitchens.
The walls’ lower section had benches that were also found in the kitchens, so they may have
been used as seats. The remains likewise found in these rooms indicate that some of them
were used as dining rooms and even as bedrooms (Cutright 2009: 120-124). The author recalls
that as a child in the early 1970s he spent his holidays at Cultambo (also in the Jequetepeque
Valley), where this type of domestic spatial organisation existed at the time, with an outer
508
14,000 years of food in Peru
façade, a living room, bedroom and kitchen in the middle, and a patio with corrals where
other activities were carried out. The spatial organisation around the kitchen thus seems to
be a tradition that has spanned thousands of years.
The pottery found is limited to plain, utilitarian wares, e.g. pots, bowls, plates, jars and other
types of storage jars. A large amount of organic remains, both plant and animal, left over when
the food was prepared and consumed, has also been found. The stone artefacts found are
mostly clodbreakers that were evidently used when farming the fields around the dwellings.
The traces left on the surface of these stone tools are proof of their use (Cutright 2009: 188).
Camelid and guinea pig dung was also frequently found in the rooms excavated, from which it
follows that these animals lived freely in corrals or inside the house, like the guinea pigs this
writer saw in Cultambo as a child, which were kept both as pets and as food.
Cutright then points out—based on the studies made by John Topic—that a system of similar
dwellings during the Chimú occupation was discovered at Chan Chan. Because there is one
kitchen, Topic believes that one family lived per dwelling. Kitchen patterns are similar both at
Chan Chan and in Pedregal. There is an entrance, a central section with a hearth, and at least
one bench that was probably used as a seat.
Places where pestles could be placed were set up in the benches themselves. Some of the
pestles had traces of their use, such as pounding or crushing. Lockard (in Cutright 2009:
130) found a similar pattern of central hearths and benches attached to the kitchen walls at
Galindo, a site in the Moche Valley that dates to the final Moche epoch and the beginning
of the Chimú culture (A.D. 600-900). This seems to have been a typical pattern on the
North Coast for at least a thousand years. Cooking and eating must have taken place there.
The results reached by Cutright and Lockard are more than interesting, as they let us see what
was the main source of food for the Chimú of the Jequetepeque Valley. An examination of
the botanical remains shows fruit were preferred, particularly guava and the pacay. In all, fruit
comprised 35% of plant food at this site. Tubers like the potato and the sweet potato had a
lesser participation, but Cutright believes they were eaten more than has been documented.
Legumes like lime beans or beans instead only comprised almost 2% of plant foods.
We should bear in mind that the population of Pedregal comprised mostly rural inhabitants,
so its food is not necessarily representative of Chimu society as a whole.
Crops were grown close to what is now known as the Pampa de Faclo, i.e. they were local
crops. Palynological research showed the presence of maize, and potato pollen, as well as
that of other plants like the chili pepper. The remains of fishes such as suco and anchovy
have also been found; since these are open sea fishes, they may have been acquired through
exchanges made with other populations. Both at Pedregal and Pacatnamú, the fishermen lived
and practiced their craft of fishing, processing and salting fish amongst the other people.
Apparently such was not the case of fishermen on the south coast, who specialised and even
isolated themselves. This is an issue that requires more research.
509
Elmo Leon
From the percentages of food remains that have been recovered, it is known that the people
in this site collected mostly gastropods, i.e. snails were often eaten.
Cutright’s dissertation on Chimú cuisine at Pedregal includes a chapter that reconstructs the
type of cooking and food preparation that is worth repeating here because it is an exceptional
case. She used ethnoarchaeology for this. Depending on the type of food, it was first carved
up or even salted, maize was husked and/or ground, and so on.
During the harvest the food was prepared not just to eat but also for storage, as when maize
or chili pepper were dried. The discovery of whole maize plants at Pedregal suggests they
were taken thus to the site and were then processed, and had their leaves, roots and stem
removed except for the dried leaves, which were removed in the field. It has in fact been
verified that the kernels of maize were frequently removed from the cob and stored, but they
were also stored on the cob. This means maize was processed at the site. It is clear that some
parts of the plant were used as food and as fuel. Beans and lima beans were on the contrary
peeled before being taken to the site.
If we go back in time, in Late Moche times, around A.D. 800, the people of Pedregal ventured
out to the open sea to catch fish like the anchovy, but during the Chimú occupation they
preferred to get their fish from the shore close by, as with the suco (Cutright 2009: 175).
On the other hand the milling process is evinced by the presence of mortars, some of which
were embedded on the floor or in benches; they were also found outside the houses. Small
mortars were instead used to grind chili peppers (Cutright 2009: 201).
Maize, cotton and soursop remains appear outside the houses, in what was a kind of patio where
these plants were processed. The significance soursop consumption had at this site is striking.
How were the meat and fish processed at Pedregal? Fish, llamas, guinea pigs and dogs were
butchered for domestic consumption. Cutright believes that camelid butchering was a male
task, whilst guinea pigs were left to the women. All of the bones from these animals found at
Pedregal also indicate they had been completely cut up.
According to ethnographic reports, camelids may have had their throat slit or a cut in the
abdominal cavity in order to stop the heart. The procedure may have continued with the
removal of the skin, the dismembering of the limbs at the joints and the removal of the
entrails. The camelid bones were not fragmented during butchering, but were after being
subjected to culinary preparation.
Cutright brings up that according to the research done by Aldenderfer (1998, in Cutright 2009:
214); camelids were processed and cut up into five parts, i.e. head-neck, forelimbs, trunk,
hindlimbs, and the lumbar region. Following Aldenderfer’s concept, the trunk was apparently
favoured. For instance, the markings at the joints are typical of dog femurs camelid astragali,
which means the legs were removed.
510
14,000 years of food in Peru
Regarding camelid quartering, Rodríguez Loredo (2012) noted in a recent publication that
lower limbs and cut marks were found at the site of Quebrada de los Burros, in the Tacna
littoral, which date to 7900-4800 B.C. This means the animals were processed by removing
their limbs.
Another interesting effort in reconstructing camelid processing for food was made by Shelia
and Thomas Pozorski (2003: 122-124) in their study of the Templo del Sol, a Mochica ceremonial
site. The Pozorskis claim very young adult llamas were chosen, which ate valuable fodder. The
study of the cut marks in the bones indicates the animal was dismembered after removing
the leather, usually at the joints. They believe a large part of the small chunks of meat may
have been cooked with the bones; the flesh however was cut according to the divisions in the
skeleton in order to get larger chunks, thus reducing them to more manageable chunks. The
long bones were broken up to extract the marrow.
Most of the bones are not burned, and this made the Pozorskis believe they were cooked or
boiled in containers of vessels. Even so, the highest frequency of burned bones corresponded
to ribs and vertebrae, which can be interpreted to mean they may have been roasted. From what
we have seen in this book, this part of the animal was favoured in the pre-Hispanic world.
As for the vegetables eaten, the Pozorskis have pointed out that the three favoured by the
Moche were squash, peanuts, and beans, supplemented by chili peppers. Lucuma was the
favourite fruit (Pozorski and Pozorski 2003: 127).
Let us see now how they processed fish. Processing was similar because almost all the bones
have been found at the site. It is possible that some fish were ground, salted or dried but this
practice was infrequent—unlike sites like Lo Demás and Cerro Azul south of Lima, where the
fish were essentially processed and preserved to be exchanged and transported. The drying
of the meat may have begun before this, as was suggested by Pozorski and Pozorski (1986: 388)
for the site of Pampa de Llamas in the lower Casma valley, where they found dried fish in a
stratum that was occupied in the period 2088-1243 B.C.
The cooking ware and dinnerware used to cook and eat at Pedregal present a very interesting
research path is. Pots are the most common wares. Cutright (2009: 233-236) points out that
these pots were clearly used when serving food, especially liquids and concoctions like soups
or stews. The soot many of these pots are covered with evinces they were placed directly
over the fire to cook.
Pots are found in large numbers in the burials in the Jequetepeque Valley, thus showing their
significance. Their presence during the Chimú occupation comprises about 30%. One of the
Chimú pots at Pedregal had a textile fragment, probably a covering. jars, another type of
cooking ware, have been found in similar amounts as the pots.
Food was served in ceramic vessels and gourds as well as in clay plates (Cutright 2009: 238).
Even so, the accounts left by the chroniclers suggest that gourd bowls were perhaps the ones
511
Elmo Leon
most used every day. This type of tableware however comprises a minimum percentage at
Pedregal, at least since the Lambayeque occupation ca. A.D. 800-900.
Another type of vessel Cutright identified are the large jars or paicas meant to store food
or liquids. This type of vessel is relatively big and has a rounded base that must have been
embedded in the floor of the house. Cutright reports in this regard that it was not rare
finding that many of the floors had been dug precisely in this shape, thus proving this
hypothesis.
The vessels used in preparing food include “graters”, a type of ceramic bowl which has a series
of diagonal markings on the walls like bulging parallel lines that would have been used to grate
some foods in order to soften them. This type of vessel does not abound in the inventory
of cooking instruments of Pedregal (Cutright 2009: 244). Finally, the presence of mortars
presumably means maize milling and that of pestles chili pepper grinding, but evidently there
are no biochemical studies that support this.
Although there is as yet no study of the changes in culinary style that have been documented
at Pedregal, Cutright (2010: 40) does note a major conclusion Swenson reached in his
archaeological research in the Jequetepeque Valley itself. Swenson suggested that the clear
difference between Late Moche and Late Intermediate ceramics in domestic contexts can be
interpreted in terms of culinary changes that took place from one period to another.
We now move southwards. The Italian team working in the monumental Nasca shrine of
Cahuachi, close to the city of Nasca, made another interesting study that is concerned with
documenting culinary and feeding techniques in the pre-Hispanic period. Although no report
as extensive as Cutright’s dissertation for northern Peru is available, the data, though brief, is
particularly valuable, particularly as regards the preservation of the remains found. We will
now present a brief summary.
Piacenza and Pieri (2012) reported finding several plants, but the important thing here is that
these had traces of having been prepared, i.e. cooked. For instance, they found cassava, sweet
potato and achira specimens which had been subjected to fire, thus making it clear that the
Nasca ate these tubers roasted.
Piacenza and Pieri also report having found a considerable amount of purple maize, as well
as the remains of substances with this same colour on the inner surface of some gourds; the
gourds had been cut like bowls. Based on this evidence, Piacenza and Pieri deduce that these
bowls may have held this type of liquid, i.e. some sort of “purple maize juice” that would be
the original version of the modern chicha morada or purple chicha.
The microtraces of bean pods found are extremely interesting, and allow for a reconstruction
of the technique used to remove the seeds. Piacenza and Pieri believe the nails were used for
this, as is still done today—a simple but efficient technique, and quite domestic indeed.
512
14,000 years of food in Peru
These studies also documented a very interesting technique used to preserve herring smelt.
A series of smelt heads were found wrapped in the leaves of some kind of algae (Macrocystis
integrifolia). Piacenza and Pieri interpreted this as a fish “conservant” that was used to preserve
the fish whilst being taken from the seashore to Cahuachi, some 40 kilometres away.
What types of tools were used in cooking? Piacenza and Pieri reported having found a series of stone
chips—quartzite, basalt, diabase, some of chalcedony—and blades ... that seem to have been used as
“knives,” as well as grinding tools like pebbles, mortars, and so on. There also were wooden tools like
spoons, ladles and ... carefully carved and smoothed, which may have also been used for this.
According to Piacenza and Pieri, food was cooked in clay pots of various sizes. This seems to
be evinced by the presence of soot, particularly on the base of vessels of an approximately
globular shape. Bigger pots may have served as chicha containers.
It has already been noted that roasted sweet potatoes have been found at Cahuachi (Piacenza and Pieri
2012: 6). Piacenza and Pieri mention in this regard the properties that toasting has, as both the quality
and the taste of the food improve. Carbohydrates, on the one hand, turn into sugary substances and
the cuticle’s fragmentation makes the grains more edible, and on the other hand toasting preserves
the food and allows it to be transported, so that it can be eaten whilst walking or travelling.
Cut gourds (Lagenaria siceraria) may have been used to hold and serve liquids, and perhaps
soups. This took advantage of their shape. The gourds were closed using wooden stoppers.
Another fascinating field of study concerns changes in feeding traditions because, as was
noted at the beginning, these are the ones that least change throughout time. Can these
changes be explored and their cause ascertained?
A pioneering study in this regard was undertaken at Los Gavilanes (Bonavia 1982: 197, 200). Here
it was shown that whereas in 4000-3000 B.C. it was mostly sea lion and horse mackerel that
were eaten, in 3000-1400 B.C. sharks, birds, and anchovies were the types of meat preferred.
This trend was probably due to the gradual settling of the cooling and upswelling of the
Cold Peruvian Current. Or perhaps it was, as Bonavia suggested, because in winter sea lions
do not go to the coast to mate; if the human occupation at Los Gavilanes was just a seasonal
occupation, its inhabitants would not have had access to this resource. The higher presence
of anchovies may likewise be reflecting the massive amounts of anchovies netted. These
captures are instead perhaps associated with late sites where great stocks of anchovies were
stored, like Cerro Azul in Chincha (Marcus et al. 1999), which we have already discussed.
Andean Food in Ethnography and Ethnohistory
At this point we ask the reader to bear with us as we briefly leave the archaeological record
and review some data derived from Andean ethnography and ethnohistory. These data will
supplement our data which, if limited to archaeology, seems insipid and incomplete.
513
Elmo Leon
The following lines include several descriptions derived from ethnography and ethnohistory,
which provide detailed illustrations of some alimentary customs, the culinary way in which food
was prepared, the organisation that sprung around cooking, and so on. These descriptions are
revealing and supplement the archaeological record, which many find lifeless. In fact, several of
the following references can be applied when reconstructing the past, at least up to a certain
point. First we will discuss the dinnerware and cooking methods citing Hans Horkheimer (1960:
92-98), who recounts some details that are important in terms of forming an approximate idea
of feeding modes in the pre-Hispanic past. The interesting thing about Horkheimer is that he
made an effort to develop a comprehensive reconstruction of this cuisine.
From ethnographic comparisons, Horkheimer believes fire may have been made with the sparks
given by a wooden stick, and it could have been kept alive using bits of cotton or straw. When
gathering plants and fruits baskets, nets or small sacks made out of camelid or sea lion skins may
have been used. Ceramic vessels, usually 3-4 cm in width and a diameter of up to 1.5 metres were
used for storage, simply placing them on the floor. Whenever large amounts of grains or maize
were available they were stored in this kind of urn, for which a support hole was dug in the
ground. For Horkheimer, evidence of this type abounds in sites like Cajamarquilla or Huaycán, in
the vicinity of Lima, and this confirms the results of some of the studies reviewed here.
As regards feeding traditions, Horkheimer points out that both the Aymara and the
Quechua only ate two times a day, between 8-9 in the morning and 4-5 in the afternoon.
The description of a typical Andean kitchen is quite revealing and it seems to complete the
archaeological record: the kitchen was usually located outside the habitation rooms, which
were just one or two. The ovens, open or partially covered with a mat, were made using
plain stones or mud, and had a hole in the base for the fire. The upper part had two or three
apertures where the lidless wares were placed on.
Camelid (llama or alpaca) dung was used when no firewood was available. The niches in
the walls may have been used as shelves. Jars or jugs were held by vines that hung from
protruding stones. No tables or chairs were used, so they simple ate squatting on the floor.
In Inca times men and women supposedly ate turning their back to each other; the man
would eat and the woman would eat what he left over.
Cooking tools were taken in the case of festivities or when purchasing in non-local markets which
the woman carried along with the children. Although we know from the archaeological evidence
that wooden and ceramic spoons did exist, the food was usually eaten with the hands. There were
several types of plates, bowls, jugs, and cups, some of which were made out of wood, particularly
in Inca times. Even so the most frequent wares were plates and bowls made out of pumpkins.
Dinnerware and Culinary Modes
We can now combine some of our information sources in order to approach the dinnerware
and the types of culinary preparation from the standpoint of ethnography and history.
514
14,000 years of food in Peru
In the first case we have a study by John Hildebrand and Melissa Hagstrum (1999) that is both
more recent and focused than that of Horkheimer, and which tries to reproduce some conducts
regarding the preparation of food in pre-Hispanic Peru. This study will be cited here because it
can shed some light on the issue at hand, and more specifically on Andean dinnerware.
Hildebrand and Hagstrum studied contemporary Wanka populations in the Mantaro Valley.
Pots have a predominant position in their account of the ceramic wares used in food. The
pots come in four sizes (small, medium-sized, family size, and broad-sized), the vessels (small,
medium-sized and broad-sized) come second, and third come the corn poppers (small,
medium-sized, and broad-sized).
In this context pots are mainly used to boil and stew (soups, potatoes, meat) while the vessels
are flatter, have a wider mouth and can be used to boil (and even fry) quinoa. The corn poppers
have an even more flattened shape and a wider mouth, and are used especially to toast maize
kernels. The average lifespan of the pots are 2.4 years: 1.4 years for the big pots, 2.2 years for
the vessels, and 1.3 years for the corn poppers. The question is whether these time ranges are
the same as in the pre-Hispanic past.
Tamara Bray (2003a, 2003b) authored an interesting essay in pre-Hispanic cuisine. She coined
the phrase “Inka haute cuisine” based on the range of dishes and on the long time invested
in preparing food in the Inca Empire. After the dryasdust archaeological and botanical
presentation above, we shall devote a large section to Bray’s work on the pre-Hispanic cuisine.
This is one of the few exceptions here made because Bray reviewed the Spanish chroniclers
in regard to alimentary modes and cooking in the first decades after the Spaniards arrived
to Peru. In her introduction to this subject Bray cites Cobo and Atienzo, who claimed in Inca
times the dinnerware of the common people comprised pots, large pitchers, cups and jugs.
The second room in the house was usually set aside to store large and small vessels, some on
the floor whilst others were buried, and above all to store alcoholic beverages (Bray 2003a: 6).
Bray believes pots were used to cook (boiling or stewing) while a type of pan was used to
toast. The largest variety of jugs, pitchers, and cups was used to prepare and drink chicha,
which shows how important this beverage was. In fact, the analysis of a large number of Inca-
style ceramic vessels reduces them to two types: the aryballos and two-handled pedestal
pots (Bray 2003a: 17-20).
The reference to dinnerware is once again Cobo (Bray 2003a: 10). Pots, pitchers, and dishes
made out of gourds, pottery or wood were used, as well as small pans. Bray cites him in order
to reconstruct a typical pre-Hispanic kitchen:
They have inside their houses all the instruments necessary to grind, prepare, and cook their basic
foodstuffs. Each house, no matter how small, had a hearth behind the door which consisted of
a small, had a hearth behind the door which consisted of a small, clay oven, no taller than one
palm and closed on all sides save for a small mouth through which one stirs the fire; one the
top part are two or three round holes on which they place the cooking pots (Bray 2003b: 103).
515
Elmo Leon
In her ethnoarchaeological research in the Mantaro Valley Hagstrum (1989) found that the
autochthonous populations had five or six cooking vessels per family. The pots were for soups
and stews, while rice was prepared in the vessels. In general the lifespan of these cooking
vessels was two years. The vessels used in repairing and consuming beverages were on the
contrary few but lasted longer, between five and twenty years. However, on the North Coast
the vessels used for chicha seem to have had a shorter lifespan (Cutright 2009: 189).
Cutright (2009: 222) made an effort to reconstruct Chimú dinnerware. She believes the serving
ware comprised a kind of flat-based plates with high walls, deeper than those Bray described
for Inca times, so they could also have been used to serve the stews. They also had black
polished pots. For me the culinary techniques used at Pedregal in A.D. 1000-1450 were boiling,
stewing, and serving “wet” foods like soups and stews.
Gillin (1940) made an interesting albeit ethnographic study that can provide some details on
what the use of pre-Hispanic dinnerware may have been like. Gillin reported that in the 1940s,
each family living in the Moche Valley had between five and ten ceramic pots.
We now turn to the available references to food preparation in ethnography and ethnohistory.
Bray (2003a: 10) says that men could not eat in the same plate as a woman because it
boded ill. In communal festivals the guests usually took their own food and chicha. Food
was also stored at home. Cobo notes that maize, chuño and quinoa were stored in large
jars or jugs inside or outside the house, in the place so designated. For Bray, produce like
sweet potatoes or chili peppers may have had to be stored for a long time in special
purpose vessels. Stews also required large amounts of water, so we can infer there were
many storage vessels for liquids.
Bray first approaches the way maize and other plants were prepared. The chroniclers state
that food essentially comprised maize, potatoes and beans. Little salt was used but it was
seasoned with a lot of chili pepper. The grains most eaten include maize, which the chroniclers
claim was the most eaten one in the Andes. Once dried it was eaten boiled or toasted. Bray
cites Cobo, who says maize was toasted (cancha) in perforated pans, and was then ground to
turn it into the flour used to make “tortillas” in ceramic pans placed over the fire. This means
tortillas were not exclusive to Mesoamerica and Mexico, and were also present in the Andes.
The ethnographic data can give us an idea in this regard. It is known that some twenty five
years ago, maize tortillas cooked over flat stones were eaten at Simiris (in the district of Santo
Domingo, province of Morropón, Piura) (Manuel Merino, personal communication, 25.7.2012).
According to Bray, Cobo described another type of preparation: balls of maize dough known
as humintas, which could be roasted directly over the charcoal, usually accompanied the
stews and were typical on festive occasions. Peruvian Indians apparently were also acquainted
with popcorn because they had a type of maize called pisancalla, which was toasted and
popped until it opened (Bray 2003b: 97-98). This means that the tamal, the humita, and the
toasted cancha eaten today are ancient traditions.
516
14,000 years of food in Peru
Chicha was also made out of maize. Women were in charge of its preparation, as Bray emphasises
(2003b: 132). Part of the process involved chewing the kernels and then spitting them into a
vessel with warm water. More kernels were then added and the desired fermentation level
was sought. Besides being the most consumed beverage by the inhabitants of the Inca Empire
and a social element par excellence, chicha was also used in ceremonies in which intoxication
was a ritual obligation. It is not hard explaining current behaviours whose roots seem to
extend into the past. The impressive amount of chicha, its storage in large ceramic vessels,
and the wide range of cups and drinking vessels related with this product indicate that it was
of utmost importance. Bray also reports the presence nowadays of handcrafted vessels in the
Peruvian highlands that can hold up to 45 litres of chicha.
The ways in which maize was prepared were captured by some Quechua words that
ethnohistorians believe may go back to ca. A.D. 1000. Tonko means boiled and toasted maize,
ttanta is maize bread (let us imagine a “tortilla”), api means gelatinised food (i.e. cooked at 100
degrees centigrade), and allpi means maize flour (Antúnez de Mayolo 1981).
Bray mentions other grains and tubers frequently eaten in the Peruvian Andes. Both the
potato and quinoa evidently stand out. Citing Murra, Bray holds life in this part of the Andes
would have been impossible without these tubers and grains, alongside olluco, mashua, maca,
and quinoa. Potatoes for instance were roasted, boiled or stewed. Other potatoes that were
not eaten in these ways were separated and exposed to the sun and frost to make chuño
(dehydrated potato). Cobo (Bray 2003a: 7) claims the uses given to chuño included making
soups thicker. Flour of rehydrated, toasted and ground chuño was also made.
Oca was eaten raw, stewed or roasted. Like the potato, it could be dehydrated and stored
for a long time. The olluco was not just eaten, because its medicinal properties alleviating
stomach and labour pains were known. The list of seeds eaten included peanuts, which were
usually eaten toasted (Bray 2003b: 99).
For Bray, quinoa was the major grain that supported high-altitude populations in the Andes.
She cites Rodríguez de Ocampo, who claimed quinoa was used as an ingredient in beverages
(chicha) or eaten stewed like rice. She then notes, following Cobo, that quinoa was often
cooked with other herbs, chili pepper in particular, with which a dish called piski was prepared.
Kiwicha and cañihua were other grains eaten at high altitudes and both, as we have seen, had
a high protein content.
Based on Cobo’s account, Bray reports the preparation of legumes that could be washed and
eaten raw, stewed and boiled, or dehydrated to store them. They were also toasted and milled
to get flour, which was used particularly in beverages and poultices. Tarwi was also cultivated,
but clearly to a smaller extent (Bray 2003a: 7).
In Andean America, the chili pepper is the most widely dispersed plant. Frequently prepared
as a sauce, it is so pleasing that the Indians could eat many grains and tubers—even sour
ones—accompanied with a spicy sauce. Mint was used as a condiment in stews and was eaten
517
Elmo Leon
raw, minced, dry or ground. Bray cites here Atienza, who claimed chili pepper was the main
seasoning followed by salt, which was good enough to cool the body heat, and with a bit of
chicha to drink. Following Cobo, Bray distinguishes three types of salt, sea salt, mineral salt,
and the salt collected from streams after boiling the water in vessels.
As for meat, it is said that the common people ate it sparingly as it was a privilege of the
elites. In any case domesticated animals like dogs, Muscovy ducks, camelids and guinea pigs
formed part of the domestic food, but only occasionally. People who lived on the coast
had a more frequent access to fish, either fresh or dried. Cobo claims there was not much
variety in the way meat was prepared because it was either stewed, dried (like charqui), or
roasted. Roasting underground using hot stones was known as pachamanca (Bray 2003a: 8),
and we saw its origins in the rocky shelter of Telarmachay, in the central puna (Junín) some
8,000 years ago.
The elite apparently had a more sophisticated diet, but as Bray correctly notes there are few
references in this regard. For instance she cites Garcilaso de la Vega, who claims the Inca ate
select maize, soft potatoes, white llama meat, high-quality fish, white guinea pigs, much fruit
and Muscovy ducks, and also drank a chicha that was fermented for about a month.
Bray (2003a: 8) cites Murúa, who claimed that the diet followed by Mama Ocllo consisted of
maize taken almost every day, either as locro or as mote, combined in various ways with other
plants. Dinner was accompanied with chicha. Ethnohistorians in general seem to agree that
the Inca elite ate selected maize and meat, whilst the common people ate more tubers and
vegetables.
Bray mentions an interesting concept—diversity. The ability to prepare various dishes for the
occasion was apparently exquisite, as well as that of preparing one single dish with many
ingredients.
In general, the cooking method mentioned in ethnohistorical sources consists in boiling food,
which ended up as soups or stews. Roasting was also frequent, and the sources indicate that
the food was usually placed directly over the charcoals. Roasting over embers and toasting
were the usual preparation techniques. Bray notes that Bertonio included in his dictionary a
word for pots used to toast. The embers were frequently used to prepare maize flour (Bray
2003a: 9).
When reviewing ethnohistorical documentation we should briefly cite Bernabé Cobo (1893:
173) at least once, in order to illustrate some culinary aspects that cannot be approached
through archaeology alone. The produce most consumed in pre-Hispanic Peru were maize,
chuño, dehydrated and green potatoes, and quinoa.
Cobo claims the dishes in Peru were limited: a stew called motepatasca was prepared
with maize, chili pepper and some herbs, with maize being cooked until the kernels burst;
another stew called pisqui was prepared with quinoa seeds. As for meat, these were eaten
518
14,000 years of food in Peru
more as in the form of salted meats (fresh meat cut up into thick and thin strips that were
hung out in the cold, and then thinned using two stones). Fresh meat was prepared only as
a stew with much chili pepper, chuño, potatoes and other legumes. A type of dry stew was
often prepared with fish.
We have already noted that Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo provided first hand ethnographic
data, which is why we will include here some relatively long descriptions that will help
reconstruct pre-Hispanic food.
Some of the information Antúnez de Mayolo (1996) presents in regard to the consumption
of animal protein, the properties of vegetables, native cooking methods and more is not
based on clear scientific studies. Even so we cannot discard them because the data show a
great acquaintance with traditions he must have witnessed, and we hence believe his account
literally opens a “window” to the past.
Antúnez de Mayolo claims that animal proteins were derived from various sources. Fish, for
instance, were eaten raw, as kanka (slightly roasted), toasted, on a barbecue or in locros. On
the coast in particular fish were dehydrated by burying them under layers of salt and bentonite
(which by the way has detoxifying properties). Caliche was used to preserve anchovies, which
were eaten toasted and with toasted [torrado] maize (Antúnez de Manolo 1996: 24-25).
Another type of animal protein consumed came from land and sea molluscs. We should also
include here insects and birds. The latter were supposedly caught using traps or nets, as was
also verified by the research undertaken at the Quebrada Tacahuay site. Partridges and ducks
were also sources of animal protein. As for camelids, most of their meat was turned into
charqui, which means it went to the storage houses; it is possible that the entrails were eaten
when the animal was captured (Antúnez de Mayolo 1996: 25).
Marine mammals like eared seals, which could weigh over 300 kilos, provided large amounts
of meat and fat. According to Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 25) there were “aquariums” in the
coastal rivers made using stone walls, whilst netting may have been used in the Amazon.
Ethnographic reports of turtle breeding may give us an idea of what happened in the past. It
will not be easy proving this for the pre-Hispanic period, and ethnographic references must
be handled cautiously.
Besides these sources of meat, Antúnez de Mayolo lists some other species eaten for their flesh
like the Muscovy duck (Cairina moschata), the pavo de monte or pavo peruano (also known as
aruncha), the white-winged guan or perus (Penelope albipennis), and the tinamou or perdiz de
Puná (Tinamidae). Two other species—the “gallina de papada” and the “huayco gallareta”—were
probably a part of the stock of fowl used as food in the past, but unfortunately no remains have
as yet been recorded. We were unable to find the respective taxonomic references.
To this list we have to add guinea pigs and collared peccaries even though the latter have
not been archaeologically recorded; it is however possible that these were domesticated,
519
Elmo Leon
because Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 28) claims having seen them under human care. Capybaras,
tapirs and dogs may also have been eaten, but we only have archaeological evidence for the
latter. Finally, camelids must have supplied at least enough meat for the whole population.
According to Antúnez de Mayolo, vegetables were eaten both cooked and raw. Despite the
lack of archaeological documentation, Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 30) claims on the basis of
ethnographic observations that people used to eat leaves, shoots and the heart of plants.
People would eat fresh vegetables and when these were lacking consumed them dehydrated.
Antúnez de Mayolo likewise claims that potato or olluco leaves were eaten in various dishes,
including the well-known chupes. The leaves must have been eaten above all when they were
germinating, as in the case of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) and gourds (Lagenaria siceraria).
Ulloa (2006: 322) based himself on the chroniclers and claims that mashua (Tropaloeum
tuberosum) and mastuerzo (Tropaloeum majus) flowers, flower buds, and leaves were eaten as
salads in Inca times. To this list Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 34) adds contoya (Lobelia sp.), huicontoy
(Tillandsia sp.), mutuy (Cassia tomentosa), pataw (Tropaleoum majus L.), pisonay (Eritrina edulis
triana), quishuar (Buddeja utilis kranzlin), and others. Unfortunately there is no reference to
these species in the archaeological record, but they do appear in these ethnographic sources. It
is quite likely that in future, more detailed research will document them,
A different way of preparation included ash alkalis, as was done with squash or suyu (Cucurbita
maxima), the fruits of Fourcroya sp. (chuchau), or the flower buds of Cassia tomentosa (mutuy)
(Antúnez de Mayolo 1996: 32).
As for the consumption of bulbs, rhizomes, roots and tubers, Antúnez de Mayolo lists a series
of wild tubers that may have been eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru, including aaraku, amancay,
apilla, cuncu, and akatraq (all part of Solanum sp.), acausho (Neowedermannia vorwerckii),
achancara (Begonia fagopryoides A, DC), aucca papa (Dioscorea sp.), chumpac (Oxalis sp.),
and chanquillo (Pachyrryzus sp.), to name just a few. According to Antúnez de Mayolo (1996:
36-37), the advantage tuber, roots and relatives have is they are more resistant to the climate
(droughts and frosts ten degrees below zero) and can be stored underground for some time.
As regards cereals and grains, Antúnez de Mayolo (1996) states that quinoa and cañihua were
the most cultivated crops in the upper quechua and lower puna zones (approximately 3500-
4200 masl)—but quinoa was also grown on the Peruvian coast. We have already seen that
kiwicha, which has a high alimentary potential, was also eaten.
As for pulses, Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 39) claims the major ones were Canavalia (cazza or
parca)—which was still eaten toasted in the eighteenth century—lima beans (native to the
banks of the Manu River), Inca beans, pashuru or Inca fava beans [habas del inca: broadbeans?]
(Eythrina edulis L.), and carobs (Prosopis chilensis).
The domesticated oilseeds include peanuts and sacha inchic (Plukenetia volubilis L.), a seed that
not only has a high oil content but also a high protein content (Antúnez de Mayolo 1996: 40).
520
14,000 years of food in Peru
Honey is one of the hardest food items to record archaeological. Its consumption is feasible
when there are bees. Although no archaeological evidence is available in this regard, Antúnez
de Mayolo believes that it is possible the natives knew how to transform starch into dextrin
and so toasted the grains, ground them and left them in vessels without any fat or salt. This
procedure was used to prepare the api, i.e. a mazamorra or a kind of pudding that is essential
during breastfeeding. Either way, it could have been obtained from boiling maize stalks or
from leaching the fructose in the cuticle of molle seeds (Antúnez de Mayolo 1996: 40).
As for vinegars and fermented beverages, Antúnez de Mayolo claims vinegar was used to
ferment maize chicha. He also claims (Antúnez de Mayolo 1996: 40-42) that ashipa, which has
a juicy bulb, was cultivated on the edges of the farmed field, so an abundant sweet juice was
taken. But chicha consumption was even more intense. Antúnez de Mayolo claims it had three
goals, i.e. avoiding the diseases carried by the waters (the boiling and fermentation destroyed
parasites, yeasts, and bacteria), and thus acted as some kind of germicide; it provided almost a
third part of the daily calories and a large amount of nutrients; finally, chicha enables a better
absorption of the nutrients the human body requires.
Contrary to what most chroniclers state, Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 47-48) claims that food
was spiced with a great variety of flavouring and fragrant plants. Cooking methods were also
varied. Some of these were for instance caui (a reduction of tuber oxalates in starchy sugars. by
exposing them to the sun), susana (food cooked using ashes), kaska (meats slightly roasted in a
fire, kalapurka (a stew usually made with guinea pigs and using hot stones), huaytiyani (cooking
in a hole burned by the fire; in this case the cooking was known as phayana and huaycuni,
whereas a simple boiling was timpuni or wallaqueña), kamka ([toasted cereal), putukkchi (soft,
toasted grains), chupi (food prepared in a liquid environment), lawa o sakue (somewhat thick
creams), uchu (waika; it is given this name when the spicy taste predominates), chamca (a
sweet mazamorra or pudding), machka (cereals or pulses toasted and milled), sthancu (cereals
combined with fat and other elements, like chicha, blood, and so on), champu (a dough with
little liquid in it that has been slightly fermented), humintas (balls made out of soft or mature
maize, which were wrapped in leaves and then served), and ttanta (concentrated hard bread
with many nutrients).
We now turn to flavouring substances because if these are native products, then some of
them may surely have been used in pre-Hispanic seasoning. Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo
(1996: 32-33) and Carmen Ulloa (2006: 315-322) give us a chance to peek inside this world of
supplementary data on pre-Hispanic Peruvian food.
Antúnez de Mayolo posits that several pre-Hispanic condiments not only supplemented the
diet, but also contributed to nutrient absorption because they contained substances that
activated the functioning of glands and organs.
Ulloa (2006) claims that the significance of the supplementary consumption of these
flavouring spices lies in that they were a sine qua non element in ancestral Peruvian cuisine.
She mentions marmaquilla (Ageratina azangaroensis), whose branches were used to cover
521
Elmo Leon
and aromatise the pachamanca; kiwicha (Amaranthus caudatus L.), quishuar (Buddleja incana
L. Ruiz & Pav.), and Buddleja coriacea, which is considered the Andean saffron crocus and was
used to aromatise and give colour to the food.
Ulloa includes in her list the achira (Canna edulis), the fruits of which are as we know
edible, while the leaves were used in the Andes to wrap food; chili pepper (Capsicum L.),
he common denominator in Andean spices as it is not only a food because it has fungicide,
antiviral and antibacterial properties; papaya (Carica papaya); paico (Chenopodium
ambrosoides L.), a well-known herb used in stews, soups and chupes because of its
medicinal properties; canelo (Drimys granadensis L.); palillo (Escobedia grandiflora L. F.
Kunze), which is not to be confused with Campomanesia, discussed above, and which is
also known as suana or saffron crocus; muña (M. mollis, M. tomentosa, M. diffusa y M.
andina), which is used in Peru in at least tens of spices in soups, meat and stews and even
to season the trout of Lake Titicaca; molle (Schinus molle L.), used as an aromatic spice
in chicha and vinegar; wakatay (Tagetes minuta and Tagetes graveolens); and chincho
(Tagetes eliptica), with essential aromatic oils.
To this interesting list we must add that of Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 33), which includes
spices such as amancay (Senecio condimentarius), Tagetes, anchis (Satureja elliptica R&P),
canlli (Margyricarpus sp.), carpunya (Pipar carpunya R&P), cayhua (Diantera multiflora R&P
sic Tschudi), chilca (Baccharis sp.), achiote (Bixa orellana), miskiuchu (Capsicum frutescens),
piuchuysita (Nectandra pichurim HBK-Mez), and so on.
Antúnez de Mayolo (1996: 48) claims the pre-Hispanic population ate three times a day. The
first and last times took place inside the house, while the second one was a multi-family affair
that took place at noon, whilst resting at work. The food taken at noon probably included
dried fruits, sugar and chicha to restore their energies. The last food was taken in the afternoon
and was frugal. Antúnez de Mayolo states that even today, the natives begin eating with dried
food like a toasted, dried or half-ground cereal, slightly roasted and half boiled potatoes or
pulses, a not-too liquid stew, and when dinner was over, chicha.
Before ending this section on dinnerware and Andean cuisine from an ethnographic and
ethnohistorical perspective, it is worth reviewing briefly some cooking techniques that may
have been used during the pre-Hispanic period.
Pachamanca, Stew, and Toasted Food
We see that for most of the chroniclers, boiling and stewing were two of the most common
ways in which food was prepared in the Andes. Cobo, for instance, is the chronicler who
most space dedicates to the preparation of maize, boiled and then served in stews. Cutright
(2009: 224) in turn recalls that Cobo claimed that maize was used to prepare a dish known
as motepatasca by boiling the kernels still on the cob accompanied with chili pepper and
other plants.
522
14,000 years of food in Peru
Beans, quinoa and fresh meat (or dried meat, as charqui) were eaten in stews like locro, which
included chili pepper, chuño, potatoes and other vegetables. A similar, fish-based stew was
also frequently eaten. Stews were spiced with chili pepper, salt and other herbs.
Following the ethnographic data provided by Gillin, Cutright believes that on the North Coast,
stews and soups may have been enriched by including gastropods and small snakes. Gillin
notes that even today, maize is previously boiled when used to prepare tamales, humitas and
mote. It should be added that humitas are prepared with fresh maize but the tamal used dry
maize or mote.
The boiling process often uses ashes in order to facilitate the removal of the skins. Gillin also
reports that cacti are burned on the North Coast, and their ashes are used especially when
maize is boiled for this end. Here we should bear in mind the observation made by Antúnez
de Mayolo regarding the use of ashes in cooking, as has already been noted.
By now the question that readers are probably asking is whether there is any archaeological
evidence that supports boiling. Studies involving ceramics with traces of use or content
residues are still extremely rare in the Central Andes. For instance, Cutright notes that
Phaseolus (beans or lima beans), maize and the remains of small fish were found in pots in
some human burials at Farfán, a site that corresponds to the Lambayeque culture (ca. A.D.
800-1350); it can be inferred that these items were cooked in this type of vessel.
Cutright (2009: 225) reports that at Pedregal, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley with
Mochica occupations, some of the long bones (we are assuming these are camelid bones)
had traces of having ‘rubbed’ against the edges of the pots in which they were cooked. These
traces took the form of a gloss (a kind of patina) and are interpreted as evidence of having
been boiled in the vessels. Cutright found food remains in the form of greasy bone fragments.
Even so, the cooking method par excellence in pre-Hispanic Peru seems to have been roasting
or a direct exposure to fire. According to Cutright (2009: 226), Cobo claims it was a typical
way of cooking food in the Andes. It usually took place directly over charcoal or in pits dug in
the ground. Our review of archaeological food suggests this is correct.
The pachamanca probably was the most common cooking technique. Robyn Cutright, whose
work in Pedregal has been extensively cited here, made an interesting description of this pre-
Hispanic cooking technique. She says that hot stones were placed inside a hole and then a
series of previously seasoned tubers and meats were placed, after which more stones were
added (nowadays they also add banana leaves). The pit was then covered with earth and
the food was allowed to cook for several hours. Cutright emphasises that in this case the
key is knowing the correct placement of the food and correctly estimating its cooking time.
Nowadays this technique is usually practiced by men and is usually associated with large
feasts of a communal type. The watia technique is somewhat different: a fire is lit inside a pit
until it is sufficiently hot; it is then put out and the food that is to be roasted is put inside the
pit, which is finally covered until everything has cooked.
523
Elmo Leon
We have evidence of this type of cooking at Telarmachay (near San Pedro de Cajas, in the Junín
puna) that dated to ca. 6200 B.C., as was previously noted. It has also been recorded both at
Jiskairumoko (Puno) as well as at Río Seco (Chancay, Central Coast) between the second and
the third millennium B.C. (Craig 2005).
We should likewise bear in mind that this cooking technique was an international invention in
Palaeolithic times, so that the pachamanca is not exclusively Andean. Even so, it is true that
this tradition has endured amongst Peruvians for over eight thousand years.
Carl Sauer (1952: 10-11) made an interesting description of pachamanca in which he noted
that this cooking technique extends from Cape Cod (Massachusetts, USA) to Chiloé (Chile),
i.e. from 41°N to 42°S, which is to say almost all of the American continent. The object here
is cooking various items—usually fish, meat, tubers and grains—by combustion and smoking
inside a hole underground. In the island of Chiloé, for instance, a hole is dug in the sand close
to the littoral and it is filled up with coal on top of which goes a layer of algae followed
by shellfish, fish, potatoes, ocas, leaves for cooked grains, and finally by algae again. Sauer
likewise mentions that the Indians of Baja California cook tubers and grains in underground
holes with coal.
According to Cutright (2009: 227) toasting is another dry-cooking method over a hot surface,
which yields a crispy product. Cutright states that Cobo noted that maize was toasted in clay
pans with holes that were quite similar to bread in Western societies. This was the food most
commonly taken after work, particularly as maize flour. In fact I remember that one of the
ways I learned to eat maize as a child was when my grandmother gave me ‘máchica,’ in which
flour was made and was then toasted.
Chicha was another way in which maize was prepared, this time as a beverage. According to
Cutright (2009: 228), Gillin claimed that in the early twentieth-century Northern Coast of
Peru, the aboriginal population in this zone consumed at least two litres per day, and so was
definitely an essential part of the daily diet.
Chicha is prepared in at least three stages, germination, boiling and its mixture in order to
produce fermentation. On the North Coast, the distinctive trait of jora (germinated maize)
production is that the kernels are allowed to pop throughout various days. The kernels are
then boiled for one or two days; the resulting liquid is cooled and then strained, and sugar is
added to it. It can be taken in 4-6 days. Gillin points out that chicha can be made from other
plants like molle, as was partly seen above.
Chicha was not just a common beverage; it was also used in elite rituals. Cutright notes that
the Inca had a special service formed by women (acllacuna) who fermented chicha and
manufactured textiles for the State.
Sand was also used in pre-Hispanic Peru to preserve several types of organic food. Such was
the case at Cerro Azul, on the coast a few kilometres south of Lima. Here Joyce Marcus (1987:
524
14,000 years of food in Peru
55-56) found that during the Inca occupation there were several rooms full of sand and with
perfectly preserved anchovies, sardines and other small fish.
The excavations undertaken by Sandweiss (1992) at the site of Lo Demás likewise found fish
preservation systems, the grills used to dry it, straw mats for large-scale salting, and a large
amount of salt. Sandweiss believes, just like Cutright had pointed out, that preserving fish
through salting is a method that goes back in time up to the pre-Hispanic period.
In her excavations at Pedregal, a late Chimú site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley, Cutright
(2009) found that food was stored in holes especially dug in the floor for this purpose, as well
as in vessels that were dug into the ground in the floor of small storage rooms, or in storage
containers. At this same site maize was stored with the kernels already cut off. Another Chimú
settlement like Puerto Pobre also stored food in this way (Koschmieder and Vega-Centeno 1996).
Cutright (2009: 191) also notes that Carol Mackey found several large jars for chicha storage at
the site of Farfán during the Chimú-Inca occupation of the Jequetepeque Valley.
Cerro la Virgen is a site in the so-called “zona de barriada,” the outlying areas surrounding the
citadel of Chan Chan. Here Keatinge (1975) made an interesting study of the composition of the
dwellings of the rural population that worked here for the Chimú State, which are usually rustic
and of irregular shape. Here some kind of storage was found—silos in the ground and the remains
of vessels that had this same purpose. The silos were daubed with mud and their openings on
the surface were lined with pebbles in order to structure and stabilise them. The vessels used in
storage were on the other hand simply placed in holes in the ground, also with pebbles around
the edges and eventually half a pumpkin used as a lid in order to avoid the presence of undesirable
substances. Keatinge was unable to identify what types of food were stored in these vessels, but
the data available for other Chimú sites suggests it may have been maize and other foodstuffs.
D’Altroy and Hastorf (1984) documented several storage structures in the archaeological site
of Hatun Xauxa in the Mantaro Valley, some 3600 masl. These storehouses were built as part
of the Inca supply policy for this part of the empire. The colcas had water and ventilation, thus
favouring the preservation of the items stored such as maize, potatoes, quinoa, fruits, salt, fish,
firewood, and chicha. The excavations showed particularly larger amounts of maize kernels
and quinoa were stored. Fragments of jars [cántaros] were found in association with large
amounts of potatoes and Lupinus, Fabaceae (chochos). Ethnographic observations showed
the tubers were stored in the roof and/or in gourds placed on the floor (pirwa storage) with
branches of Mintostachys sp. (the Andean mint), which ensures a better preservation of the
tubers and drives the coleoptera away.
We now leave the subject of culinary preparation, dinnerware, and preservation, and turn to a
very interesting topic that has been dealt with for some time now—the consumption of food
and maize chicha in contexts that seem to have been feasts, which are usually related with the
erection of public or domestic buildings, agreements exchanges or ritual ceremonies inter alia.
It behoves this book to cover this topic as it concerns the food eaten in the pre-Hispanic period.
525
Elmo Leon
Chicha and Food: Feasts in pre-Hispanic Peru
One subject that is drawing the attention of scholars researching food consumption is the
preparation of chicha using different seeds and plants and its ingestion as a beverage, both in
pagan as well as ritual occasions. We now turn to this record, albeit briefly, in order to explore
the interesting world of this liquid beverage since ancestral times.
Jennings (2004) explored the consumption of chicha in pre-Hispanic Peru and concluded that
it intensified throughout time. Even so its perennity means that it did not entail specialisation
as its preparation was sporadic. Jennings and Brenda Bowser (2008) then published a book
devoted to chicha and its significance in the pre-Hispanic world. Both emphasise basic areas
of interest, e.g. that the process of fermentation not only enhances food consumption, it also
preserves surpluses, detoxifies food and even lowers the time it took to cook it.
When presenting the evidence of feasts in pre-Hispanic Peru we can begin with the research
undertaken at Cerro Blanco, which showed the consumption of food in vessels specially
chosen for this (Ikehara and Shibata 2005, Ikehara 2007). Both scholars made interesting
studies of this site, which lies on the right bank of the Nepeña River. Here the vessels used
to prepare and serve food, food remains, and other artefacts consistently abound in similar
ratios for three events that were related with feasts.
When did this happen? According to the radiocarbon evidence the dates range between 1100
and 450 B.C. The researchers suggest these were recurring activities, albeit spaced throughout
this period of time. The vessels were classified in terms of their use, i.e. those used to serve
food (bowls and bottles), food preparation (pots, jars [cántaros], and buckets), and others whose
function has yet to be established (pots and handle-less bowls or compoteras). Neither the pots
nor the buckets bore traces of soot but they did have microscopic remains of cassava, potato
and maize starch, which is why Ikehara and Shibata believe these plants were previously boiled
in other vessels and were then macerated; the soup derived from these plants may have been
eventually placed alongside the remains of a cooked camelid, in a context that certainly was not
a frequent one and corresponded to a festivity (Ikehara 2007: 148).
In a subsequent study Ikehara (2010) argues that the largest vessels were meant for feasts
and were not exclusively for domestic activities. Ikehara also reviewed the archaeological
literature in terms of estimating the capacity the vessels had in different periods, in order to
prove these were vessels made with the same goal in mind, preparing beverages for feasts.
Of the sites examined by Ikehara we need just mention some remarkable ones by periods, e.g.
Kotosh/Wairajirca (Huánuco), in 1800-1400 B.C., where the vessels could hold more than 77
litres; Huaca de la Luna (ca. A.D. 300-600), where vessels held up to 170 litres; sites belonging
to the Lima culture (ca. A.D. 300-60), with ceramic containers that could hold up to 343 litres;
Cajamarquilla (A.D. 600), with ceramic vessels that could hold up to 175 litres; Cerro Baúl, in
Moquegua (see above), with vessels that held up to 150 litres; Conchopata (Wari), which dates
to A.D. 600-800, and has vessels that held up to 800 litres; Cerro Azul, on the Central Coast,
526
14,000 years of food in Peru
takes however firsts place with jars that could hold no less than 700-2,000 litres (Ikehara 2010:
55). This means these events were a frequent occurrence, and that they were present in almost
all Peruvian cultures.
Ikehara and Shibata suggest that it is possible that each community that reached the site
provided the vessels made by its members. Most vessels were apparently of local provenance.
The event that gathered most people together, which may have taken place around 700 B.C.
used some 92 vessels to prepare food and beverages, and to serve the food. The groups which
partook in this feast apparently took their own vessels with them (an interpretation borne
out by the high variety of wares found). Ikehara and Shibata estimate that over 300 litres of
liquids were stored in the vessels, and 68 to 113 people were presumably present (Ikehara and
Shibata 2005: 137, 144).
On the other hand there are several vessels that seem to have been meant to ferment maize
and cassava in order to consume chicha made with both types of plant. This means that for
Ikehara and Shibata, both the chicha made out of maize and out of cassava (or masato) were
consumed on the Central Coast at least three thousand years ago.
As for the serving ware, like the bowls used for the food, Ikehara and Shibata assume due to
their small size that these may have been used individually with just one hand. Bigger bowls
would have been passed along in larger groups in accordance with the analogies proposed by
ethnoarchaeology.
We now turn to the southern Altiplano in order to explore the proposition that the Pucara
people were already consuming chicha made out of quinoa two thousand years ago. It has
also been posited that during the late Formative Period food was prepared and consumed in
the central plaza of Pucara. Karlich (2009: 296) found garbage and charcoal remains left behind
when food was prepared. It can be assumed that quinoa may have been present amongst these
remains. No evidence of permanent dwellings has been found in this epoch. If this is correct,
this would be one of the first examples of Andean spatial organisation for the consumption
of food that had the plaza as its central element. We have already seen the work done by
Chávez (1992) in this cultural context, which posits that some ...-type vessels were used both
to prepare and eat food. Chávez also claims that quinoa-based alcoholic beverages were also
prepared. This type of ‘chicha’ may have been consumed in the centre of the Pucara culture.
If we accept the results attained by the Italian mission at Cahuachi, then purple chicha or
chicha morada is another beverage that was consumed in pre-Hispanic Peru. A not-too-
documented but extremely interesting study was preliminary presented by Piacenza and Pieri
(2012: 3), in which they claim to have found more than 15 kilos of gourds (Lagenarias) with a
series of violet-coloured stains inside. Piacenza and Pieri believe this is some kind of ‘chicha
morada’ or purple chicha considering the huge amount of purple maize found at the site, but
no analysis has yet been made. Giving free rein to our imagination, this would be the earliest
evidence of the consumption of ‘purple chicha’—obviously fermented— around A.D. 400.
527
Elmo Leon
Maize chicha was also taken in Wari, and this plant was the main edible resource of this
Ayacucho-based culture. Cook and Glowacki (2003) have made a praiseworthy study as regards
the reconstruction of the food consumed by this empire’s elites. They however acknowledge
the problems they meet with when reconstructing the Wari imperial cuisine. This was due
to the lack of scientific reports that analyse the flora and fauna found in the archaeological
sites excavated, or the remains of the foods prepared in the vessels and sherds found. Faced
with these problems Cook and Glowacki turned to three sources, ethnohistory, ethnography,
and the remains found in the excavations, which they believe reflect diners eating as part of
the State’s administrative activities. This type of banquet took place in the open air, in patios
surrounded by narrow chambers. This patio and rooms complex is typical of Wari architecture,
both in the capital city as well as in the provinces (Cook and Glowacki 2003: 174-175).
Cook and Glowacki approached this type of feasts with the ceremonial pottery known as
Robles Moqo and Conchopata as their starting point. These are distinguished by their huge
size and comprise urns, jars and ceremonial cups in various shapes, including keros. These
wares also included vessels modelled like llamas, twin drinking vessels similar to the Inca
pacchas, and vessels that have a cup connected to a human or animal effigy.
A first argument concerning the presence of this type of vessel in the patio of the main Wari
political centres suggests they were used in libations (Cook and Glowacki 2003: 178). These
centres must have been run by Wari rulers who were in charge of matters of State, and as part
of them organised rituals in which these vessels had a decisive role. The vessels known as
Robles Moqo have also been found on the coast in sites like Maymi, in the Pisco Valley, thus
proving that these activities were widespread all over the Wari Empire.
A second argument has the evidence of the food prepared for the banquets as its starting
point. For Cook and Glowacki (2003), the best evidence for this type of activity currently
available comes from the two centres of Pikillaqta—the major imperial southern administrative
centre—and Wari itself (Ayacucho).
A series of wide-mouthed jars and vessels have been reported at Pikillacta; ethnographic
analogies show these are usually used to prepare molle chicha (which does not require
boiling), are known as rakis, and their mouth has a diameter of 40-55 cm. A sector that was
identified as a kitchen, and which operated during the site’s construction, had several holes in
the ground that were a perfect match for the diameter of the above-mentioned vessels, and
some even included the remains of a similar fragmented vessel. These vessels with a relatively
wide mouth may have been used to store the chicha and ferment it. From researchers like
Chávez we know that this type of underground storage not only prevents the weight of the
liquid from breaking the vessel, but also allow chicha to remain fresh and cool.
Due to the type of distribution of fragmentation in the vessels, it is assumed that whereas
garbage was removed from the patios where the feasts took place, in the adjacent rooms
food was prepared. Cook and Glowacki (2003: 182) believe the associated vessels can be split
up into five types:
528
14,000 years of food in Peru
∙ Vessels used to prepare beverages (jars with a particularly wide mouth).
∙ Vessels meant for the consumption of beverages (keros, beakers).
∙ Vessels used to serve beverages (jars with a decorated neck and urns).
∙ Vessels used to eat and possibly drink (especially the standard bowls).
∙ Vessels in which food was served (typically wide, deep dishes).
Cook and Glowacki recall that it has been suggested that both the Inca aryballoi and keros had
their origin in Wari times; this evidently implies that the Inca carried out the same activities
on a more standardised scale. Both the everyday tableware and the pieces decorated with
iconography in both empires—Wari and Inca—had a common base.
One interesting suggestion is that due to their practicality bowls may have been used both
to eat and to drink liquids. In the latter case they were only half full, as it is assumed from
ethnographic observations that these vessels may have been placed on the knees of seated
diners. On the other hand the drinking cups are distinguished by their carefully crafted
decoration in comparison with the plain bowls, which may have been meant for a more
massive consumption. This was more practical due to the frequent custom of intentionally
smashing the vessels (Cook and Glowacki 2003: 194).
The rituals performed during this type of festivities held with elite guests were usually
related with deity and ancestor cults. The feast system included terraced fields meant for
the cultivation of maize and its by-products, as well as to prepare maize chicha. Because of
the architectonic evidence and Wari ceramics, Cook and Glowacki believe that food and
beverages had a key role in this empire’s expansion. Other provincial sites like Pikillacta and
Azángaro also had this type of spatial distribution, which implies rituals held in banquets
where chicha was imbibed in compliance with the Wari administrative and governance
systems. We attempted to calibrate some of the radiocarbon dates available for the
Conchopata urns, but this did not prove possible due to the way the original publication
was made (Cook and Isbell 2002).
Chicha consumption, even in the Ayacucho region itself, goes back to a previous culture
known as Huarpa. Leoni (2004) discovered a series of grinding stones at Ñahuinpukio that had
maize kernels on them. This has been interpreted as part of the process of chicha preparation,
thus confirming in Brian Finucane’s opinion that chicha and maize were the main alimentary
resources in Ayacucho at the beginning of the Christian era. We have seen that based on their
studies, Cook and Glowacki (2003) showed that maize chicha was also intensively consumed
at Wari sites like Marayniyoc and Conchopata.
The select elite consumption apparently was common in other pre-Hispanic cultures of Peru,
as was shown by Gumerman (1991) on the North Coast. Gumerman excavated and researched
the alimentary customs of the dominant sector of the Sicán or Lambayeque culture that
was established in the famed Pacatnamú shrine, on the mouth of the Jequetepeque Valley,
between ca. A.D. 1000 and 1460. Whilst the elite lived in differentiated zones, the rural
population essentially dedicated itself to fishing and farming in order to support the upper
529
Elmo Leon
stratum. Besides this division, the daily food they ate was also different. The average individual
essentially ate maize while the elite consumed more camelid meat and chili pepper, both of
which were considered ‘sumptuary’ items. Not many comparisons can be made with this type
of information because this is a relatively new line of research.
The trend towards a more varied and better diet amongst the elites is also visible since the
most ancient times, as was shown by the analysis of the malacological and faunal remains
from the Mochica site of Galindo, in the middle Moche Valley, which dates to around A.D.
600-800. According to Lockard (2005: 196) it seems clear that elite populations had a more
varied access to clams, black snails and especially bean clams or conchitas (Donax obesulus),
and even to llama meat, while the common people did not have access to such resources.
Moseley et al. (2005) made another study of this kind as regards the consumption of food and
beverages in the Wari Empire, this time in the famed archaeological site of Cerro Baúl, which
rises on a geologic mesa over the Torata River, in the arid highlands of Moquegua. Cerro Baúl
was occupied by the Wari slightly before A.D. 600 for political and strategic defence reasons,
like an embassy on its southern frontier with the Tiahuanaco Empire through which they may
have communicated.
Moseley et al. (1995) noted that part of the Wari paraphernalia and ceremonies at their Cerro
Baúl colony comprised the offering of tribute in exchange for food, beverages and eventually
presents. Chicha was the preferred beverage. Food and beverages were served in this colony
in accordance with the rank individuals had. This also included rewards such as food vessels.
Human settlements dating to the Wari epoch have been found at Cerro Mejía, the hill to the
north of Cerro Baúl. These are the non-sumptuary homes of the common people. The layout
of these family or multifamily dwellings surrounded by low stone walls included an open
patio where general activities were carried out. These patios are connected to rooms which
may have had thatch roofs and were perhaps used as kitchens, for storage or as bedrooms
(Moseley et al. 2005: 17265).
Unlike this type of room, an enclosure on the upper part of Cerro Mejía has the characteristics
of an elite residence. This is a four-room complex around a central patio north of a series
of platforms that probably were of a ritual nature. For Moseley et al. passageways, niches
and courts indicate elite distinctions. The northern enclosure was especially equipped for
banquets with three large combustion areas where the food was cooked, and four box-
shaped stone structures—a kind of oven where large boiling vessels may have been placed.
The researchers argue that these vessels were probably used to cook the grains and fruits to
sugary and fermented dough, as well as to prepare the chicha that may have gone with the
food served during the reception ceremonies held in the adjacent room.
A whole architectonic complex has been detected on the upper part of Cerro Baúl itself,
where palaces, temples, food storage areas and a chicha brewery have been detected. This
brewery has been studied in depth, so it is worth briefly going over its characteristics given
its novelty in archaeological research. The brewery is of trapezoid shape and many tupus
530
14,000 years of food in Peru
(female pins) have been discovered inside; this may mean that women had a key role in the
preparation of this brew.
The building has compartments where the kernels were milled, boiled, and fermented. The
milling room, where maize kernels were probably ground, had a roof fully made of thatch and
the chemical analysis of the ground revealed a large amount of phosphates, which evinces
this activity. At least seven holes for combustion were found in the north room, each of them
with a pair of stone pedestals. These structures originally supported vessels of the oven-type
ceramics that are now broken and associated with ashes. A large amount of Schinus molle
was found among the waste in this room; this probably means that this plant was processed
in order to obtain its saccharose, which was then stored in resin bags. This ground syrup was
used to ferment molle chicha.
For Moseley et al. (2005: 17267) it is not clear whether two different types of chicha (jora
and molle) were prepared in this workshop, or whether the former was mixed with the latter.
After boiling the macerate was taken to the fermentation area in at least 12 containers where
it stayed for 3-5 days for fermentation, depending on the strength desired. It was t hen placed
in jars [cántaros] from which it was directly served. Each container may have held 150 litres of
de chicha which gives about 1,800 litres per lot, which clearly is a high figure.
Moseley et al. even estimated the amount consumed based on the capacity of the cups
or keros (the smallest on average held 12 ounces) assuming each had four keros. The cups
and other offerings were then probably burned together along with the building where this
activity took place as an offering, as was often the case in other pre-Hispanic sites. Maize and
molle were apparently previously stored outside this chicha processing area in a room some
12 metres to the north of this area.
According to Moseley et al., all of the inhabitants of the Cerro Baúl complex ate maize,
Chenopodium (i.e. probably quinoa), legumes (probably beans and lima beans), peanuts and
chili pepper, whilst the people living on the summit had access to chicha, coca, and tobacco.
This type of beverage must have been taken along with food, particularly camelids and guinea
pigs, the latter apparently pertaining solely to the lords. Less consumed were vizcachas, two
kinds of deer, tinamous, pigeons, squabs and even at least ten kinds of fish imported from the
Pacific Ocean, from the shore some 83 km to the Southwest and up 2800 masl, where the
Cerro Baúl site lies.
The chronology of these events at Cerro Baúl and Cerro Mejía is based on 33 radiocarbon
dates, processed in three labs and taken from charcoal, one of the most reliable materials in
archaeology for a reliable chronology. We took the sequence in general and arrived at a mean
A.D. 635-997, but it may have been reused up to A.D. 1138.
Subsequent research and experiments that tried replicating molle chicha showed that
the accumulation of molle seeds found at the Cerro Baúl site actually correspond to the
531
Elmo Leon
procedure followed when preparing this chicha. Goldstein and Coleman (2004) tried to
replicate its preparation based on ethnographic observations from Moquegua and they did
succeed. After use, the amount of seeds was six times bigger than that found at the Cerro
Baúl site, but this could be explained by the dryness of this zone. For Goldstein and Coleman,
the potential preparation of molle chicha can also be documented at Conchopata, a Wari
archaeological site in Ayacucho. In this case however the seeds concentrated in the storage
containers reached on average some 10,000 units, whereas at Cerro Baúl they were more
scattered in the wastage left by its preparation. Goldstein and Coleman (2004: 528) believe
this can be interpreted as a communal output.
We have seen that chicha especially that made from maize has had a key role in various pre-
Hispanic societies. Chicha was the everyday beverage and not just a crucial element in social
and ritual interactions (Moore 1989). Moore (1989) reported his research on chicha preparation
and the contexts in which it was consumed at the Chimú site of Manchán in the lower Casma
Valley. This site extends over some 63 hectares and is by far the biggest Chimú settlement in
the south. It comprises several enclosures—administrative ones, cemeteries, and even corrals
where llamas were raised.
The research undertaken of the Chimú occupation of Manchán showed that chicha was not
just prepared communally, but was also prepared individually in various domestic contexts.
Moore found what he estimated to be 300 kilos of bran in a pit that was apparently used to
strain the chicha. According to his estimates this gives some 513 litres of chicha, of which more
may have been consumed than at present (Moore 1989: 687). Even so, Moore found evidence
comparable to those which ethnohistory presents in regard to specialisation, as suggested for
instance by María Rostworowski, who suggested the presence of a trade such as “chichero”
(chicha brewer) on the North Coast. It so happens that throughout the Chimú occupation of
Manchán there was no specialisation nor did the State exert any pressure in this regard; chicha
was instead prepared domestically.
Strong evidence has also been found of maize chicha being prepared during the Chimú
occupation of the site of San José de Moro, in the excavations that Luis Castillo has been heading
for several years now. The report for the 2005 fieldwork season (Prieto 2005) documents 13
occupation layers all from the Chimú occupation, and the evidence they provide allows one
to infer that chicha brewing was a specialised and intensive occupation. Prieto believes this
activity was controlled by the Chimú administrative centre of El Algarrobal de Moro, which
is in the vicinity of San José de Moro. A significant number of vessels with soot were found
in one sector of the excavation, and these would have been used for boiling whilst making
jora. Prieto estimates that some 1,400 litres of chicha were produced just in this sector alone
(Prieto 2005: 48).
The maceration of chicha would have taken place in an outer patio. Boiling [??: cocción] and
the subsequent settling would have taken place in another area. The patio may have been
used to serve chicha to the diners and visitors. The discovery of a burial that corresponds
to this period is interesting, and Prieto tries to explain as an offering derived from a human
532
14,000 years of food in Peru
sacrifice. Evidence was also found of the consumption of fruits that may have been used to
prepare the liquor.
The discovery of big jars [tinajas] dating to Lambayeque and Chimú times has been reported
Prieto (2004: 142), including one that could have held 408 litres. The jars were associated with
textile pieces used perhaps for transportation or to cover the jars, and large wooden lids
to preserve the contents. Even more fascinating is the discovery of large “wooden stirrers
[removedores]” in the shape of large spoons, supposedly used to stir the chicha whilst
preparing it. Several small pots were found in this same room that had been on fire for a long
time; Prieto interprets this as a group of characteristics indicating this area was a chichería
or chicha brewery. Although there is in fact a series of pre-Hispanic spoons, these must be
analysed in order to establish their use at that time, as in the case of the Pillistay site on the
coasts of Arequipa and in the vicinity of Camaná.
On the other hand the research undertaken by Georges Lau (2002) showed the presence of
festivities in contexts pertaining to the Recuay culture. Here solid and liquid consumption
took place as part of communal political rituals held since at least A.D. 500 to about A.D. 800
in the site of Chinchawas, in the highlands of Ancash, at some 3580 masl. The contexts contain
abundant camelid bones, particularly feet bones, in what Lau believes evinces the preparation
and consumption of a large number of these animals during the ceremonies.
Joan Gero (2001), who focused her research on “gender” in this same area of the Callejón de
Huaylas, presented an interesting paper on the role women had in festivities held within the
context of the Recuay culture, in which maize chicha was consumed.
Gero excavated the site of Queyash Alto, where she found evidence of feasts such as jars and
vessels, which she interprets as libation vessels and maize chicha containers dating to the first
centuries of the Christian era. Other artefacts and evidence such as bowls, spoons, cut marks
on llama bones and the remains of hearths indicate activities pertaining to feasts. Gero also
found elements that correspond to the female gender such as tupus (pins), and so on, which
Gero believes can be interpreted as elite women who participated in this type of ritual.
Sandefur (2002) made an interesting study of some patios in the site of Hatunmarca in the
upper Mantaro Valley, in the puna of Junín, at more than 3000 masl, and found evidence of
banquets dating particularly to the Wanka II epoch. These activities are evinced by the tools
used to cut and dismember, as well as the cuts in the bones of camelids found in the meat
extraction zone. Thin-necked vessels type vessels, and maize were found in the contexts.
Sandefur believes this can be interpreted as the consumption of maize chicha.
Finally, Tamara Bray published an important study of chicha consumption in the Inca culture
in the above-mentioned volume. Bray presents an interesting perspective in terms of
characterising maize chicha as an Inca tax standardised with the aryballoi. She cites a study
by Arminda Gibaja (2004, in Bray 2008: 108) that I was unable to find, which documents the
discovery of the chemical remains of chicha on the walls of aryballoi from Ollantaytambo,
533
Elmo Leon

thus clearly showing the Inca stored maize chicha in this type of vessel. Bray also showed that
while the smallest aryballoi came mainly from Cuzco and were apparently connected more
with ritual offerings, the medium- and large-sized ones are mostly found in the Inca provinces
throughout the empire, and were essentially used to prepare large amounts of chicha for
festivities involving a larger number of people.

We have thus far presented the reader with a brief overview of pre-Hispanic food. There
are however some questions that follow from reading the book, and which are precisely THE NUTRITIONAL BALANCE
those which were raised by several previous scholars like Hans Horkheimer or Santiago
Antúnez de Mayolo, and perhaps also by recently deceased ethnobotanists like Don
Ugent or Luigi Piacenza: was the diet of Peru’s pre-Hispanic populations balanced or not?
What of public health in regard to the diet? The brief notes that follow are meant to
spur the study of both issues. This is a brief essay that presents our current knowledge as Did the pre-Hispanic Peruvian diet give rise to pathologies? Here we will discuss first some of
regards these research areas. the biochemical bases of feeding in general and will attempt to contextualise them with the
Andean resources, and will then finish with these diet-derived pathologies.

At this point it is worth briefly discussing the vitaminic properties and the mineral content
of the Peruvian products that were eaten in the pre-Hispanic period. Since this writer is no
expert in this subject or in this specialised field, I will base myself on the Cambridge History
of World Food (2000), one of the best sources on the international diet. The goal is to obtain
information of this kind on Andean pre-Hispanic food, so as to be able to assess the role of
alimentary biochemistry in the epilogue to this book.

In 1897 the Dutch scholar Christian Eijkman was studying beriberi in the Dutch East Indies
(Indonesia) when he realised that it was triggered by the consumption of cooked white rice.
Fifteen years later the Polish scholar Casimir Funk posited that it was not just beriberi that was
caused by the lack of substances known as “vitamins,” but also pellagra, scurvy and rachitism.
The age of vitamins had been born.

We have seen that pellagra significantly affected pre-Hispanic populations due to the lack of
niacin brought about by a high consumption of maize. Even so, this disease was only definitely
eradicated after it decimated whole populations in southern Europe and in the southern
United States. Let us turn now to some of the main characteristics of the vitamins consumed
by ancient Peruvians.

Vitamins
Wolf (2000: 740-750) notes that vitamin A Wolf (2000: 740-750) is a liposoluble substance that is
vital for the health, the reproduction and the survival of all vertebrates on earth. Human beings
only require 1-1.5 grams a day. Although it is not found directly in plants, these have carotenoids
and betacarotenoids that on entering the organism turn into vitamin A. In general there are
betacarotenoids in all vegetables with a yellow or red colour. Yet the main sources for this
vitamin are animal livers and eggs, precisely foodstuffs which were missing almost completely in

534 535
Elmo Leon
the diet of the early people of the Andes. The major pathologies derived from this deficiency or
from the inadequate consumption of this vitamin are nyctalopia (night blindness), xerophtalmia,
and a high infection potential in children, as it destabilises the immune system. Some experiments
also seem to show that children who have not taken milk have a higher possibility of developing
nyctalopia. If this disease is not solved it ends up in blindness. Diarrhoea and respiratory diseases
have been observed in some cases. In the ranking of diseases caused by a vitamin A deficiency,
Peru appears under the heading “severe.” This should make us ponder whether this problem
existed in pre-Hispanic times, but we should not forget that fish liver oil, especially oily ones
like salmon, has a significant vitamin A content. Sweet potatoes and yellow maize have beta-
carotene, but typical pre-Hispanic Andean staples like potatoes and cassava do not.
We can now briefly review the main results attained by the study of the B complex, i.e.
thiamine, riboflavin, niacin, pantothenic acid, pyridoxine, cobalamin, and folic acid (Roe 2000:
750-754). The B factor was first isolated but it then derived into vitamin B1—thiamine—whose
absence or a deficiency of which causes beriberi. Vitamin B2 later included riboflavin (which
used to be known as vitamin G in honour of Joseph Goldberger and his classic studies of
pellagra in the United States). The isolation of vitamin B3 established that it is a pantothenic
acid, but it is sometimes incorrectly called niacin. Biotin (known as vitamin H in German labs
from haut, skin in German) and folic acid, which used to be called vitamin M because monkeys
needed it, have also been documented.
The absence or low ingestion of thiamine may lead to diseases such as beriberi or muscular
paralysis. A disorder in the consumption of nicotinic acid or niacin may cause pellagra, a
disease that as we have seen may have been frequent in pre-Hispanic Peru due to a diet
that abounded in maize but included few animal proteins (which have tryptophan-acid and
combat pellagra). This disease is expressed by dermatitis and/or diarrhoea. In this context
it is believed that nicotinic acid is a key factor in the development of some bacteria. It was
precisely the above-mentioned Joseph Goldberger who devoted more time and research to
pellagra due to the difficult pathologies present in the United States in 1914.
As for riboflavin, its deficiency is observed when populations do not eat enough green
vegetables, which causes fissures at the corners of the mouth, dermatitis, and so on. It was
also shown that people who suffered pellagra in the United States had a diet that was poor in
riboflavin and niacin. The absence of pantothenic acid may be associated with malnutrition,
that of folic acid with anaemia, and that of cobalamin with pernicious anaemia.
Hughes (2000: 754-763) summarised vitamin C (ascorbic acid). Its deficiency in the organism is
directly connected with scurvy. Recent research is showing that its absence does not seem to
be connected with deficiencies in the immune system or with infections, as happens with the
common cold. Even so it is possible that it may have anti-infection functions, that it favours
the lipid metabolism, and even lowers cholesterol. Nor should we forget that Pauling believed
that ascorbic acid increased the production of lymphocytes or white globules. The properties
of vitamin C are strengthened when dehydrated potatoes or chuño are eaten, as this prevents
the saturation of phenolic acid in the organism. Besides it is known that the organism’s iron
536
14,000 years of food in Peru
requirements many be moderately covered if maize is eaten alongside foods that contain
ascorbic acid, like fish (Wilbur et al. 2008: 970).
Glenville Jones reviewed and updated the main characteristics of vitamin D (Jones 2000: 763-
768). The sun is its main source and it prevents rachitism, a relation that was discovered only in
1919. Jones suggests that it was precisely because of this that most great civilisations appeared
in tropical environments, and that the people who inhabited these zones may have used few
clothes in order to receive solar energy, and even spent most of the day out in the open.
The interesting point here is noting that precisely the same circumstances may hold for the
Andean area (now Peru) because pre-Hispanic dwellings were never big and were instead
small, and give the impression that few activities can have taken place in such small rooms. It
is therefore possible that ancient Peruvians carried out their activities in the open most of the
time, which for conscious or unconscious reasons may have prevented or at least avoided an
increase in the rate of rachitism. Rachitism is also prevented in populations that have access
to marine or river resources such as fish with a high fat content. This point must be considered
in regard to our sea and rivers in the pre-Hispanic period.
We now turn to vitamin E (Jones 2000: 769-774). This vitamin has tocopherol, which in the
Andes is found in quinoa and maize. This was at first a free radical that is found in some plant
oils as well as in animal fat, including fish. Its major properties include preventing abortions,
and it may also be beneficial for the cardiovascular and muscular system. On the contrary,
vitamin E deficiency apparently causes neuronal and muscular degeneration. Besides, when
vitamin D is inhibited by the human organism it can generate several problems in the liver, or
cause a cystic fibrosis whenever there is pancreatic blockage.
Vitamin K, which has phylloquinone, is found particularly in legumes like beans, but also in
chili pepper, avocado, and maize. It has several functions that are carried out by coagulant and
anticoagulant proteins, and by two bone proteins. So if there is a deficiency in its intake there
is a risk of non-coagulation and bleeding; in some cases this can lead to death, particularly in
children (Thierry Palmer 2000: 774-784).
Minerals
What of the minerals contained in pre-Hispanic food? One first mineral to consider is calcium
because it is proven that its absence can lead to osteoporosis and rachitism when as we have
already seen, alterations in the consumption of vitamin D intervene. Spencer (2000: 785-797)
provides a summary of this invaluable mineral. The interaction of vitamin D, calcium, and the
parathyroid hormone is crucial for calcium metabolism. Osteoporosis is more frequent in
women about one decade after menopause, whereas in men it can take place much later. In
general 800-1200 mg of calcium a day are required. Calcium also requires minerals to interact
and fix. Such is the case of phosphorus, which also interacts with proteins.
537
Elmo Leon
Magnesium likewise is an essential nutrient that is highly important for regulating the cardiac
rhythm and the intravascular function. Its low consumption is associated with arrhythmia and
brain-vascular dysfunctions. Men require 300 mg of magnesium a day and women 400 mg.
Magnesium also promotes the intestinal absorption of calcium. Fluorite is another mineral
that interacts with calcium and prevents dental caries, particularly in children, and also
normalises the bone structure. Zinc seems to be localised in the intestine along with calcium;
its daily recommended intake is 12-15 mg a day. Strontium and proteins seem to interact with
calcium; the latter lower its presence in bones. Interestingly enough, alcoholism is connected
with osteoporosis due to the pancreatic disorders it generates.
Iodine is another mineral to be considered. Hetzel (2000: 797-811) made a summary of the
importance the consumption of this chemical element has, and the diseases that appear
whenever there is iodine deficiency, like goitre and cretinism. Nowadays we consume iodised
salt precisely to avoid the goitre, as was shown by several experiments made since the early
twentieth century. A deficiency in iodine consumption reduces the production of the thyroid
hormone. Disorders due to the absence of iodine or its low consumption have been listed,
and they include abortions, congenital anomalies, an increase in perinatal mortality, cretinism,
mental deficiencies, goitre, hypothyroidism, and retarded physical development.
Iron is probably the most prominent of the minerals because its consumption can be
documented through a series of biological evidences in pre-Hispanic human remains (Kent and
Stuart-Macadam 2000: 811-824). There are many sources where iron can be obtained but in
general those of animal origin seem to be the main ones, with vegetables as the supplementary
ones (particularly molluscs and dry legumes). Besides, water can contain iron, especially if it
comes from wells like those used on the coast to extract water from the water table, which may
have been a pre-Hispanic supplement. It has been shown that humans in general only require 10
mg of iron a day. It can also be inhibited in the organism by several factors, which in pre-Hispanic
Peru may have been calcic phosphate. On the contrary, citrus may have been iron absorption
fixers or promoters, as well as various Peruvian fruits and chili peppers. And although the pre-
Hispanic diet did not focus on the consumption of animal meat, the need for iron was at least
partially covered in infants because they absorb 40% of the iron in breast milk.
Kent and Stuart-Macadam point out that there are several kinds of anaemia, but a review of
its characteristics show that microcytic hypochromic anaemia is the one type that may have
existed in the pre-Hispanic Andes—this type is precisely the one that arises due to the absence
of a basic diet that contains iron. The body fights infections, bacteria or swellings, and even
neoplasms or rheumatoid arthritis by lowering the amount of iron. In the pre-Hispanic Andes
there were few ways in which animal iron could be directly obtained, but newborn babies and
those that were breastfed acquired it through the lactoferrin found in breast milk. Examining
the mortality index of the newborn and breastfed babies in pre-Hispanic times is important.
The combination of resources, an element that has a determinant role, should also be borne in
mind when assessing pre-Columbian anaemia. For instance, it has been shown that populations
that consume milk had anaemia, whereas those who had milk and fish ingested a third more
538
14,000 years of food in Peru
of iron than the previous groups and had no anaemia but did suffer from malaria, brucellosis,
diarrhoea, and common warts [this means a fish-based diet actually was an open door to a
series of pathologies. It should also be noted that anaemia can lead to heart pathologies such
as coronary diseases.
Another element that activates anaemia and which is also relevant for the pre-Hispanic
Andean area is the occurrence of nematodes that infect the blood of human beings, including
ancylostoma, intestinal worms, whipworms, etc. There are three ways in which these parasites
can cause anaemia. The first way is through anaemia as a chronic disease; the second one
arises due to the competition over the nutrients found in the individual; and the third one is
by loss of blood. Malaria parasites also depend on the iron of their host.
Magnesium is another mineral in the diet of ancient Peruvians that must be assessed.
Mountokalakis (2000: 824-834) points out that the main causes for low magnesium absorption
in human beings are for instance malnutrition both in terms of proteins as well as of calories,
prolonged diarrhoea, chronic diseases, renal deficiency, and some metabolic and endocrine
disorders. On the other hand the symptoms associated with the disordered consumption
of magnesium are for instance neuromuscular manifestations such as convulsions, ataxia,
apathy, coma, tetanus (on rare occasions), cardiac disorders—especially ventricular ones—
metabolic effects such as hypokalaemia, hypocalcaemia, and possibly others such as learning
retardation, dysplasia of dental enamel, and so on.
Based on previous research, Mountokalakis also drew attention to the content of ‘heavy’ water,
which unlike non-heavy or non-treated waters basically contains calcium and particularly
magnesium, which prevents cardiac diseases. 300-350 mg is the daily recommended dose of
magnesium; in children this falls to 100-200 mg a day. It is found in cereals, legumes, marine food,
etc. The daily recommended dose of phosphorus is 1,600-2,400 mg a day, which in women comes
to 1,200-1,600 mg a day. It has also been shown that a balance between the consumption of calcium
and phosphorus is required (0.5/1). A disorder in the consumption of phosphorus can lead from
dysfunctions in renal functioning to the loss of bone density and an increase in fractures.
We now turn briefly to the required consumption of potassium in pre-Hispanic Peru. Newman
(2000: 843-848) holds that potassium is the third element in importance for human beings
after calcium and phosphorus. It is found mainly in seawater in the form of natural brine as
sodium chloride, as well as in mica and feldspar. It is known that clays contain these elements,
so pre-Hispanic geophagia should come as no surprise. Potassium has crucial properties; for
instance, it regulates the mechanical function of soft muscles like the heart and even vascular
muscles; it regulates protein synthesis, controls renal functions and so forth. Potassium is
found in practically all foods, but hypokalaemia and even hypertension can appear whenever
its intake is deficient. The National Academy of Sciences states that humans must consume at
least between 1,875 and 5,626 mg of potassium every day. It has been shown that people who
ingest four grams a day avoid many diseases. Of native Peruvian foodstuffs, fish and potatoes
are recommended in this regard. It is likewise evident that the first human groups consumed
more potassium, which is ideal in the daily diet.
539
Elmo Leon
Sodium is another basic mineral. Wilson and Grim (2000: 848-856) connect it with salt in
terms of its use in the consumption, preservation and storage of food, and fish in particular,
which is made more resistant to bacterial attacks by extracting water and its subsequent
dehydration. These effects must be similar in the processing of some plants. Sodium is the
sixth most abundant element in nature, and 40% of the weight of salt is sodium. It has a
crucial role in maintaining and regulating blood pressure and its volume in the organism,
so it has the task of carrying nutrients to the cells; it also metabolises carbohydrates and
proteins. It has been shown that the ingestion of sodium acts as electrolytes in children’s
infectious diarrhoea, thus controlling the loss of water and salt. Human beings who do not
consume salt experience apathy, anorexia, low pressure and finally circulatory collapse,
shock and death, as has been observed in cases of cholera. Wilson and Grim note that in
prehistoric times human on average ingested 690 mg a day, 148 mg derived from vegetables
and 542 from meat; even so the recommended dose nowadays is 2,400 mg a day. The diet
of the first human groups had a low consumption of sodium in comparison with that of
potassium, which is ideal for health.
We now need to examine why the ingestion of phosphorus was essential in both pre-Hispanic
and—evidently—modern Peru. Anderson (2000: 834-843) made an interesting summary that is
worth briefly presenting here. Although it would seem that phosphorus is a toxic element, it is
an essential nutrient for human health when it appears in nature as phosphate salts. Phosphates
are found mostly in animals, but vegetables also make a contribution in this regard. In the
Andes phosphates are found mostly in fish, maize, potatoes and most of the fruits eaten. The
peanut, in particular, a resource that was highly consumed in the pre-Hispanic period, seems
to be a good source of phosphates, as well as molluscs and crustacea.
Nielsen (2000: 856-868) partially summarised other trace elements found in Andean products.
There are seven biochemical elements known as trace and ultratrace elements. The trace
elements are copper, iron, and zinc, and the ultratrace elements are cobalt, iodine, molybdenum,
and selenium. Chromium and boron are some additional elements that have been studied, but
their specific biochemical functions are not fully clear. There are however four more elements
that are essential for humans, i.e. arsenic, nickel, silicon and vanadium, as well as fluorine and
lithium. We will now explore the main characteristics of each of these elements.
Arsenic is for instance used in the treatment of several pathologies, including nutritional
disorders, neuralgia, rheumatism, asthma, malaria, tuberculosis, cardiac muscle problems, and
various haematological anomalies. On the other hand the preservative properties of boron,
which were discovered during the Second World War, increase the body fat when required,
and regulate the amount of potassium in the liver; it also seems clear that the ingestion of
boron prevents osteoporosis and regulates the organism’s micromineral metabolism. As for
chromium, its contribution as a hormonal regulator is known, as well as its role regulating the
aorta plaques, the metabolism, and above all regulating glucose.
Among its properties copper includes preventing anaemia and osteoporosis; it contributes
to bone formation, to the cardiac function, to myelinisation, keratin, and the spine.
540
14,000 years of food in Peru
Fluorine in turn reduces the incidence of dental caries and osteoporosis, and it combats
the demineralisation of calcified tissues. Manganese, an essential component of plants
and animals, regulates the reproductive and development functions, and prevents skeletal
abnormalities and defects in the metabolism of lipids and carbohydrates. Molybdenum
fixes nitrogen and nickel as a catalyst of the development and metabolism of vitamin B12,
and of selenium as a possible replacement of vitamin E. Finally, silica seems to act against
hypertension, arteriosclerosis, osteoarthritis and dermatitis, whilst in the Andes vanadium is
found in algae and helps transport glucose in plasma, as well as in the effects of oxidation-
reduction.
Zinc is the last element that we must review. Prasad (2000: 868-875) notes that the symptoms
caused by its deficient consumption include diarrhoea, dermatitis, alopecia, infections,
deficiencies in the immune system and above all anaemia and malnutrition. Even so it should
be considered that zinc consumption blocks copper absorption, which as we have seen is also
an essential element.
Proteins and Fatty Acids
Before making a biochemical assessment of food in pre-Hispanic Peru we still have to review
the group of proteins and fat acids. The importance the consumption of linoleic acid has
for human beings has been proven. Even so, the data requires a more in-depth review due to
the information regarding the proteins found in local Andean foodstuffs. Kenneth Carpenter
(2000: 882-888) claims that proteins are the muscular engine and includes a list—based on
other studies—which shows the amino acids required by rats: lysine, tryptophan, histodine,
phenylalanine, leucine, isoleucine, threonine, methionine, valine, and arginine. On the other
hand the non-essential amino acids are glycine, alanine, serine, cystine, tyrosine, aspartic
acid, glutamic acid, proline, hydroxyprolina, and citrulline. Carpenter showed that a much
larger amount of animal protein is available than in vegetables. In the protein table, poached
eggs have the highest content (86 mg) and are followed by grilled salmon (50 mg), Cheddar
cheese (25 mg), salami (25 mg), and milk (21 mg). As for legumes we have beans (25 mg) but
unfortunately not tarwi, which is the tuber with the highest protein content in the whole
planet. The table also includes potatoes (10 mg) and sweet potatoes (4 mg).
Sauer (1952: 53) believes that Peru’s pre-Hispanic nutritional diet was incredibly low in protein
and above all in fat. For Sauer the main protein supply was provided by goniocalyx (found in
potatoes) and some other quinoa and maize proteins. Little can be said of animal proteins
because the frequency in which guinea pigs were eaten is still unclear, and it is known that
llamas were rarely eaten. Sauer claimed that the Andes had too little fish, fuel or game,
and on this basis he believed that even the Inca had to venture onto other lands in order
to satisfy the desired protein level. A series of diseases were mentioned in this regard that
would be the result of a farming-based diet, particularly maize (Bryant 1995). Yet it should be
acknowledged that thus far there is no long-term study on the biochemistry of pre-Hispanic
Peruvian foodstuffs and an ideal nutritional balance.
541
Elmo Leon
One subject that has yet to be discussed is the presence of minerals in the food eaten in pre-
Hispanic Peru. Sodium is one element that carries out several functions in the human organism
because liquids, the body’s acid-base equilibrium and even sugar, have to be regulated. And
although salt was obtained both in natural ocurrences and salt pans, it actually abounded
more in some foods such as molluscs and crustacea from the Peruvian sea.
Calcium is another essential mineral as it is the one which is most present in the human
organism. It is a well-known fact that no animal milk was available for the newborn or infants,
and breast milk was apparently used to try and compensate this lack during the first years
of life of children. This was shown by the analysis of the N15 isotope in the human remains
of babies and children—mummies—from the site of Puruchuco-Huaquerones, where Jocelyn
Williams (2005: 190-191) found that mothers breastfed their children until they were four years
old, but this may have stopped slightly before, at three years of age. Williams notes that in
ethnographic terms, in modern publications breastfeeding on average lasts one or two years,
but in some cases, like the Jivaroan peoples, it lasts seven years. In this context we should
recall that Horkheimer (1960: 46) pointed out that in 1609 Garcilaso noted that due to the lack
of bovine milk, mothers often breastfed their children for more than two years.
Horkheimer (1960: 99-110) presented a pioneering early review of the bromatology of pre-
Hispanic foodstuffs in his oft-cited handbook, which is worth summarising here. Horkheimer
began by comparing the archaeological and historical evidence available in the late 1950s
with the available data on current plant and animal consumption, and noted that farming
conditions as well as the consumption of fish and molluscs have fallen, and the same thing
had happened with the consumption of mammal protein. He then discussed some positions
regarding the bromatological content of quinoa and cañihua as major sources of proteins,
iron, and vitamin D. Horkheimer claimed that the cultivation of these plants could not replace
foods based on European livestock, and that their consumption had a local or regional basis,
yet it was not so extended that any generalisations could be made.
Horkheimer concluded that from a bromatological perspective, the diet of pre-Hispanic Peru
was not balanced. Whereas on the coast seafood exerted a strong influence, in the highlands
it was essentially a vegetarian diet except in the case of the elite. The highland diet mostly
comprised carbohydrates as it was based on the potato and its by products like chuño and
moraya, particularly during the months in which these items were most consumed. In case of
alimentary need, the use of coca alleviated this problem.
542
DIET-RELATED DISEASES
Although we cannot expand on this subsection, we do have to present at least a summary of
another type of record—the diseases caused by a deficiency in the pre-Hispanic diet, because
these do not just concern the past, they potentially concern the present too.
How can we establish whether nutrition was good or poor in pre-Hispanic Peru? How far can
we go in establishing a good nutrition through combinations of the foodstuffs? Were they
aware that iron absorption, for instance from fish, was inhibited if it was eaten simultaneously
with maize, and that it was best eaten with some tuber, like the potato or the sweet potato?
The question can even be made for present times: is it known that when white rice is eaten—
which is how most Peruvians like it—this is a rice from which the husk has been removed and
which can cause xerophtalmia, blindness or beriberi? We should however remember that
although it has a low protein value, rice has more carbohydrates than wheat.
Having presented the main staples of the ancient Peruvians, this is a good moment to make
an assessment, as far as the evidence allows it, of whether they had a balanced diet and were
healthy, moderately healthy, or suffered instead diseases due to deficiencies in their diet.
On summarising the foodstuffs eaten by human beings since the most ancient times in The
Cambridge World History of the Food, Clark Larsen (2000: 28) points out that nutrition
anomalies can be detected through the study of prehistoric human bones, which are generally
detectable in specific characteristics of the teeth, crania, long bones and even coproliths or
past human faecal remains. In general, Larsen’s conclusions are partially applicable to the
Andes, like the thesis that the rate of porotic hyperostosis increased once farming had been
adopted, and that the heightened consumption of maize may have led to iron deficiency
(maize limits iron consumption per se), particularly if the sources that provide it fall, as
happens when eating fish. The latter may give rise to the presence of several parasites in the
human organism, including the ingestion of contaminated water, and, again, iron deficiency.
The same thing holds for the documenting and assessment of criba orbitalia, which is often
associated with sedentary farming populations, and which is assumed to be due to a lack of
iron that is reflected in the cranial bones. Hyperostosis on the contrary may be due to episodes
of anaemia during the first years of growth and development. After all, iron deficiency is due
543
Elmo Leon
to several factors that may include parasitic infections, haemorrhages, and loss of blood. In
children anaemia may be due to the low weight of the newborn, sex, and even having the
umbilical cord in a position that affects the foetus.
Tuberculosis, Parasites, Infections, and Malnutrition
In pre-Hispanic Peru tuberculosis was a disease in part due to a deficient diet. Wilbur et al.
(2008: 976) point out that tuberculosis was present in the human genus 35,000 years ago,
and dendritic DNA suggests it may even be 2.5 million years old. In a summary of this type
of disease, Wilbur et al. state that it is caused by several factors including ecology, the type
of food eaten, the immunology function and the genetics of the pathogen agent and its
receptor. Even so, it is a fact that the type of food may cause the dispersal of the bacillus
Mycobacterium tuberculosis.
The direct consumption of infected animals is an originary source of this disease. Another
source is its transmission from human to human by sneezing or coughing, as may well have
been the case in the pre-Hispanic context. Once tuberculosis has spread outside the primary
area of infection, the bacillus establishes itself in the bone lymphatic system where arterial
blood pressure creates tension and elevates the oxygen content which is ideal for the pathogen
agent. Osteoblasts are stimulated under these conditions and thus destroy the bones, and as
the disease advances an anoxic environment develops in the blood. This type of alteration
is visible in the long bones, the spinal column, ribs, joints, etc. It is precisely under these
circumstances that poor nutrition makes the antimicrobial activities decrease. Iron levels also
have a role here; when these are inadequate macrophagous bactericidal activities decrease
and thus contribute to the disease (Aufderheide and Rodríguez Martin 1999: 118-140).
Several diseases derived from food or water infections were apparently frequent in pre-
Hispanic Peru. Panikker (2000: 1033-1048) summarised these diseases, e.g. Diphyllobothriasis in
the tapeworm group (Cestoda), which usually appears when fish is eaten raw. Diphyllobothrium
latum is between three and ten metres long and it adheres to the mucosa of the large intestine.
From the faeces it can pass to fresh water where it lays its eggs; when these are ingested by
fish as larvae they perforate the intestine walls and develop in infectious form lodged in the
fish’ muscles. The people who eat these fish raw suffer several problems such as diarrhoea,
vomiting, fatigue, abdominal pains, fainting, and megaloblastic anaemia. This picture may have
been possible in pre-Hispanic Peru due to the conditions in which the food was eaten and
imbibed.
As for nematodes, in pre-Hispanic Peru two types of parasites have been documented. The
first one is Trichuriasis trichiura, which can be up to 40 cm long and usually lives in the colon;
their eggs settle in the faeces, from which they move to the ground and can attack another
human being. Finally, when assessing Trichuriasis, Leles et al. (2010) state that the consumption
of Chenopodium (as in paico or quinoa?) has an antihelmintic function as both have even been
found associated in coproliths.
544
14,000 years of food in Peru
Enterobios vermicularis in turn causes enterobiasis, a disease that is characteristic of many
parts of the world and especially tropical countries. It lodges in the intestines and usually lays
its eggs around the anus thus causing an itch; when one scratches the larvae are transmitted
to the hands and contagion thus takes place.
A significant number of diseases are due to a lack of iron, which gives rise to the chronic
disease anaemia. Susan Kent (2000: 919-939) defines it as a below-normal number of red blood
cells, and among the causes she gives Kent includes hypoferremia—an iron-deficient diet—
which would have been the main cause in the Andes. Although several Peruvian foodstuffs,
both vegetables and animals, have iron, Kent lists a series of inhibitors for its absorption that
include calcic phosphate and peanuts. In general, the more phytates (phosphorus) that are
ingested, the lower iron absorption will be.
In her account of anaemia, Kent shows that although it was not too frequent during the
Palaeolithic Period, it did increase in the Neolithic when agriculture was developed, and
expanded during the Bronze Age, and did so even more intensely in recent times, as in the
case of the Anasazi during the first centuries of the Christian era. It so happens that anaemia
is one of the few pathologies that can be documented by the bones archaeologists find when
anomalies like porotic hyperostosis is detected (which is known as cribra orbitalia when the
eye sockets are affected), and a ‘sieve’-type porosity on the outer part of the cranium.
In the Americas, an iron-poor diet along with a series of infectious diseases gave rise to several
cases of anaemia. In some pre-Hispanic cultures the predominant ingestion of maize was
not the main cause for anaemia, which was instead due to sedentism and to certain parasitic
diseases that spread rapidly. It would be worth exploring these results in the Andes and checking
whether all cases of anaemia in pre-Hispanic Peru were solely due to maize and no other agent.
Anaemia was also frequent in other pre-Hispanic populations like the Maya, as is observed
in very many skulls exhibiting porotic hyperostosis, which includes children six years old and
upwards. At Chichen Itzá 675 individuals affected by anaemia have even been recorded.
In Peru and Ecuador the consumption of fish and marine foodstuffs apparently was ideal
to include iron in the diet, yet health conditions gave rise to several diseases, especially
respiratory diseases and pneumonia, which were even lethal for 67% of the individuals in
one culture. Parasites apparently had a major role here because they enter fish and can be
transferred to human beings, and they then compete for iron in humans. This is not found to
such an extent in highland populations that fed mainly on maize and far away from the sea.
Even so, we should not forget that coastal populations that fed on fish and shellfish were
already combining plants and animals in their diet since the Late Preceramic (ca. 3000 B.C.).
However, Philip Walker et al. (2009) recently challenged this classic interpretation by
questioning the hypothesis that anaemia is caused by iron deficiency, particularly in children.
This seems instead to cause porotic hyperostosis, which is manifested as a rapid loss or red
blood cells, i.e. haemolytic and megaloblastic anaemia (the former is also caused by malaria).
545
Elmo Leon
According to these researchers, the real cause of anaemia is a deficient ingestion of vitamin
B12 (cobalamin) associated with symptoms of neurological instability, which may even have
led pre-Columbian populations to anthropophagy, as was the case of the Pueblo Indians in
southern North America. This is a subject that has yet to be explored in Peru in terms of
assessing whether resources such as coca or marine bivalves, which have vitamin B12, had a
role in counteracting the effects of iron deficiency in the organisms of our forebears.
Scurvy and rachitism are other diseases due to malnutrition. Whereas the former is due to
a lack of vitamin C (ascorbic acid, which reduces the process of bone remineralisation), the
latter is caused by the absence of vitamin D (found essentially in fish) and mostly affects
infants and young people; it may even be caused by not being exposed to the sun. Frequent
results observed include a deficient bone mineralisation, particularly in the long bones.
In the case of odontological research, it is clear that food consumption causes teeth wear, a
type of decalcification by erosion, attrition, and abrasion. Populations that eat hard foodstuffs
will leave teeth with large cavities, whereas populations eating softer ones will have teeth
with smaller cavities and narrow wear lines.
Caries and even the loss of teeth may lead to serious infections and eventually death. Teeth
with wear marks and food residues concentrate from bacteria to cariogenesis. Cariogenic
diets also give rise to hypoplasia and hypocalcification. All of these symptoms [cuadros] can
be assessed by studying palaeopathology.
Alimentary deficiencies can also be detected in the dentition through the so-called Wilson
bands, which are usually correlated with hypoplasias. Dental enamel is highly sensitive to a
low nutrition. It is claimed that a high consumption of maize along with a lower intake of
animal proteins would have these bands as a result, which in turn expose the population to
infections, particularly the younger ones. Some researchers even attribute the reduced size of
the teeth to maize consumption.
Zein, a maize protein that is deficient in leucine and isoleucine, has likewise been connected
with retarded human growth unless it is supplemented with the consumption of beans.
Besides, although maize has niacin (vitamin B3), it is bonded with other chemical elements
that prevent its absorption by the human tissues, thus raising the risk of generating pellagra
that is observable in cutaneous reactions, mental alterations, and diarrhoea.
Even so, it has been shown that some Native American groups treated maize with wood
ash and silt, thus freeing niacin and avoiding pellagra. We have already seen ethnographic
observations as well as some coproliths that indicate that both silt and wood were consumed
in pre-Hispanic Peru. The question is whether these were exceptions or were instead
traditionally taken during ingestion.
Weight loss in adults, slow growth in children, malaria, gastroenteritis, intestinal infections
and intestinal parasites are other diseases that appear instead within the context of farming
546
14,000 years of food in Peru
peoples, or with climate change, rainfall, insects and plagues. In her summary, Larsen notes
that the nutritional state can also be assessed in prehistoric populations through anomalies in
growth. Such would be the case of, for instance, populations that developed smaller femora
after maize was introduced into their. This hypothesis should be tested for pre-Hispanic Peru.
The adequate ingestion of food can also be reflected by a decrease in the size of the cortical
bones, which can usually be observed on the outer surface of the long bones. Low calcium
consumption can similarly degenerate into osteoporosis, but there are other factors that
trigger this type of pathology. Finally, an increase in the density of the so-called Harris lines
can also indicate alimentary deficiencies, but these may be due to other agents, and can be
reabsorbed during adulthood (Larsen 2000: 15-23).
In this same handbook on food, when discussing alimentary deficiencies Ortner and Theobald
(2000) attribute them to a deficiency in vitamins C and D, iodine and iron deficiency, excessive
fluorite deficiency in protein calories, and a deficiency in trace elements.
The deficiency in vitamin D, which causes rachitism, can likewise be due to poor renal
functioning and eventually to a disease called osteomalacia, which is due to a decrease in
calcium particularly in pregnant women or in breastfeeding babies, as they retain the calcium
from their mothers’ bodies.
Ortner and Theobald emphasise the singular fact that vitamin C must be permanently
consumed because the human body does not store it. It is hard to trace in the archaeological
record. Fluorosis can also reveal the consumption of water with fluorite. All of these elements
must be considered when assessing nutrition.
Nutrition and infection are other major subjects that have yet to be assessed (Cohen 2000).
Parasites may cause diarrhoea and accelerate the flow of nutrients in the intestine and
interfere with nutrition from the intestine to the blood vessels. Parasites destroy or consume
human tissues— usually red blood cells that must be replaced—in the case of diseases such
as malaria or ancylostomiasis.
Parasites like taenia compete with humans in the consumption of vitamins and minerals in
the human intestinal tract. The infection may end up with the organism refusing to consume
nutrients in an attempt to destroy the invader, as is the case when the body retains iron. Parasites
often gather in wet and warm environments, as well as in the midst of large populations and in
food containers. Food or water contaminated with faeces are extremely rare problems in mobile
populations. The eggs of parasites are usually found in the faeces in areas close to them, so
that on being stepped on they can enter the organism through the sole of the feet. They then
migrate to the intestine, consume red blood cells, and reproduce through their eggs.
It is therefore worth presenting a brief review of this issue. No pretence is made of having
reviewed all of the existing literature, but it is still worthwhile as a supplement to this book in
terms of answering the question of whether pre-Hispanic Peru had a good diet or not.
547
Elmo Leon
First, parasites must not have been unknown for the pre-Hispanic population. For instance,
some of the fowl found in the puna, like partridges and ducks, were raised to eliminate liver
flukes (Fasciola hepatica), thus limiting the proliferation of this worm that settles in human
and animal tissue (Antúnez de Mayolo 1996: 25).
Although few studies provide information regarding the condition of the food eaten in pre-
Hispanic Peru, it is clear that the existing salubrity and the alimentary balance were not ideal,
and this gave rise to several types of diseases. A conclusive answer however has yet to be given.
Such is the case of the studies that allow us to follow this type of research line, like the
study made at the camp-type site known as PV35-4 on a beach north of the Huarmey Valley,
and which was dated to Middle Horizon 3, i.e. ca. A.D. 800. The analysis of human faecal
remains at this site made by Bonavia et al. (2009: 269) found bird bones and feathers, fish
bones and scales, mammal bones and hair, shells of univalve and bivalve molluscs, charred
remains, charcoal, wooden fragments, etc., which means that at least some of them come
from foodstuffs that were not washed, or which were simply picked up from the sand.
This same study recounted the location of human faeces and concluded that humans defecated
in the hearth zones where food was cooked. Bonavia et al. (2009: 281) noted the same thing
at Los Gavilanes (coastal Peru), that is to say at least 2,000 years earlier, and mentioned the
faecal remains found at the site of Paloma, where human coproliths were documented on the
floor of the houses. This type of behaviour has yet to be analysed. There are indications that
people defecated or urinated where they ate, which seems to be an ideal environment for the
proliferation of parasites amongst other diseases. Why did people defecate where they ate?
Only more specific studies will shed light over this issue.
Having presented a list of the main diseases derived from Peru’s pre-Hispanic diet, we have to
see some basic ideas or notions regarding our subject.
We begin with palaeopathology, which is broadly defined as the study of disease in ancient
populations. Verano and Lombardi (1999: 94) believe there are three major sources with which
this subject can be studied in the Andes, to wit, the Spanish colonial chronicles, the sculpted
depictions in Andean ceramics, and the bones of the individuals themselves, which are our
most reliable and direct source. Now, one of the major problems the bones show concerns
nutritional disorders (Verano 1997). In fact, the intensification of farming activities and social
stratification led to a less-varied diet, which exacerbated the effects of infectious diseases
and parasitism.
In this regard, an additional research point clearly concerns pathologies due to the diet and
its sanitary conditions.
In an overview on this subject in regard to pre-Hispanic America, Carvalho Gonçalves et al.
(2003) concluded that arid regions, including the Peruvian desert, have the great advantage
of a dry climate and the potential for the preservation of human faeces in which the remains
548
14,000 years of food in Peru
of parasites can be found, especially eggs and larvae. We are thus in a virtually privileged
position to delve in this fascinating area that is partially related with the diet.
In this regard it is not just the study of faeces in pre-Hispanic sites that is important—their
location is also significant. To the best of my knowledge, except for the pioneering efforts of
Duccio Bonavia no study has considered possible infections and pathologies due to exposure
to faeces in a pre-Hispanic settlement.
Bonavia (1982: 225) showed the presence of faeces at the mouth of the maize bins at the
site of Los Gavilanes, in the lower Huarmey Valley. If faeces are found in this area, we have
to ask whether our ancestors really defecated where they ate and stored food. This will
not be an easy question to answer without specific studies. In this regard, Bonavia (1982:
229-232) documented at Los Gavilanes the presence of eggs belonging to Heteroderia sp.,
a helminth present due to the ingestion of contaminated plants. Faecal remains contained
abundant vegetable fibres indicating the consumption of plants, both leaves and roots, yet
no cell contained meat fibres, so in this site at least the consumption of vegetables was the
rule. Given the list and the evidence thus far reviewed, it can be said that this was a common
denominator in our pre-Hispanic Andes.
Anaemia, Caries, and Pellagra
We now turn to the chronological record of these diseases in pre-Hispanic Peru.
One of the most ancient pieces of evidence of malnutrition was found whilst Sonia Guillén
(1985: 426-427) studied the human bone remains from the Telarmachay rock shelter. Of the
three burials studied, two evinced nutritional disorders both in the woman more than fifty
years old as well as in the infant, who had an infection that was probably due to malnutrition.
Both burials come from level VI, which means they date to around 6000 B.C.
In a pioneering article for Peruvian archaeology, Benfer et al. (1978) published the results of the
research undertaken with the hair from some Peruvian mummies. It is worth pointing out that the
two mummies found in Paracas—one of which was dated to a very early context in 7866 B.C., and
the other one to 4337 B.C.—both evince anaemia which the authors attribute to malnutrition.
Sites like Paloma, on the coast south of Lima, were the focus of the study by Robert Benfer
and his team, which aimed to examine the effects the diet had in Preceramic populations
in the area ca. 5316-3630 B.C. Reitz (1988: 314) points out that marine foodstuffs comprised
almost 90% of the diet whilst only 10% came from the land—animals and mammals. Fish
in fact comprised 76% of the biomass exploited and were the main source of meat. The
researchers analysed a large number of human skeletons from burials found at this site. They
concluded that the process of sedentism due to an improvement in the population’s diet not
only diminished the rate of infant mortality, but also lowered the living standards of the adult
population (Benfer 1990; Benfer 1999, 2008; Quilter 1989).
549
Elmo Leon
Benfer was able to establish that at this time part of the infant population suffered anaemia
(cribra orbitalia in the frontal bones) but this disease apparently fell in less ancient populations,
just like parasitism. It is possible that this type of anaemia and parasites were due to a diet
based on fish and marine mammals (Benfer 1990: 301).
Caries only appear when the consumption of plants and carbohydrates begins to increase
towards the end of the occupation, i.e. the fourth millennium B.C. Similar results were
obtained with the analysis of dental wear. Whilst at first there was very little dental abrasion,
this seems to have increased once plants gained significance in the diet. Osteomas in the male
ear, which usually appear when one dives, are a pathology that is not directly derived from
the diet but from catching molluscs and other edible marine animals. An interesting detail of
a sanitary type is the discovery of shell fragments associated with faecal remains, which were
found during excavations in some kind of latrine. Benfer believes the shells may have been
used in the Preceramic period like toilet paper, but this is mere speculation (Benfer 2008: 376).
More recently it was that the people in the site of Quebrada de los Burros, in the Tacna
littoral, had cribra orbitalia and porotic hyperostosis between 7900 and 4800 B.C. This may
be indicating some symptoms of malnutrition, but the relevant point is that no caries lesions
were found (Dalabarde et al. 2012).
It is thus clear that anaemia and malnutrition have been present since Peru was populated and
not just on the coastlands but on the Central puna too.
A cutting-edge study on the identification of the food eaten from an analysis of dental
plaque was made with human bone remains from Nanchoc, in the Zaña valley on the North
Coast. In this case plaque must not be interpreted as a pathology but as an invaluable source
of information on the food ingested. We have seen that several plants like the pumpkin
(Cucurbita moschata) or peanut (Arachis hipogaea) clearly were already being consumed by
7200 B.C. Piperno and Dillehay (2008) reported the presence of plaque on human molars and
canines, thus providing direct evidence of their consumption during the late Early Holocene
and the Middle Holocene. Starch from the seeds of beans or lima beans (Phaseolus) and
pacay (Inga feuilleei) were discovered in the plaque of the teeth studied. Pumpkin (Cucurbita
moschata) pulp and peanut fragments were also recovered in the plaque studied. These finds
were made in preceramic layers that dated to 7173-5816 B.C.
We now turn to the Mochica and their ancestors on the North Coast. Anaemia was identified
long before them in a child ten to eleven years old that was buried in the site of Alto Salaverry
south of the mouth of the Moche River, on the North Coast (Trinkaus 1977). The remains
had evidence of cribra orbitalia, which for Trinkaus is indicative of this type of pathology,
i.e. a lack of iron consumption. The child was buried in a part of the structure of a temple
at this site that must date to ca. 1600 B.C. For Trinkaus this may have been essentially due
to the consumption of large molluscs and the lack of an adequately balanced diet, and iron
in particular, which may have been represented by small mammals. Large molluscs mostly
contain haemocyanin, a copper-based protein, but no iron.
550
14,000 years of food in Peru
An interesting analysis of human coproliths in several archaeological sites in the lower Virú
Valley showed that maize consumption can disturb iron metabolism and have several effects,
such as anaemia due to iron deficiency, porotic hyperostosis, and so on (El-Najjar 1976, in
Ericson et al. 1989: 97). For El-Najjar maize does not have phytase, an enzyme that counteracts
phytic acid, which is precisely what affects iron absorption. Besides, starch-based foods
usually limit the absorption of iron. These deficiencies in iron consumption would have a
greater impact on infants, who cannot absorb it from food.
John Verano (1994) later studied human bone remains from three Mochica sites—Pacatnamú, La
Mina (both in the lower Jequetepeque valley), and the well-known site of Sipán (Lambayeque).
One of his results was that indicators of nutritional deficiency—for instance, the hypoplasia of
dental enamel, cribra orbitalia, porotic hyperostosis or non-specific periostitis—are actually
rare, thus giving him the impression that the Mochica had a balanced diet. Even so there was
a strong presence of dental caries which gave rise to infections that Verano attributes to
the high consumption of carbohydrates, something which we have seen happened in several
agrarian societies the world over, but there is some discussion in this regard (Verano 1994: 324).
The anaemic condition of pre-Hispanic peoples apparently did not improve in later periods.
Verano (1992) even showed that bone samples from the Early Moche period have less signs of
anaemia than those from later Moche periods, and he believes that in later populations social
stratification did not allow access to better resources. The skeletons analysed from Pacatnamú
(Late Moche, ca. A.D. 600) exhibited less characteristics of anaemia than the human bones
from more recent epochs like the Late Intermediate Period. This simply corroborates previous
information, i.e. that more recent pre-Hispanic populations suffered from anaemia.
On another part of the coast south of Lambayeque is the archaeological site of El Brujo.
Here Backo and Verano (2001) recorded an individual who had an infection due to chronic
tuberculosis in the Moche culture (A.D. 200-450).
Izumi Shimada et al. (2004: 381-382) showed the presence on the North Coast—albeit in a
later period—of cribra orbitalia, dental enamel hypoplasia, dental caries, porotic hyperostosis
and Harris lines, particularly in low resource populations from the Sicán culture at sites such
as Batán Grande, El Brujo, and Huaca Loro in Lambayeque (ca. A.D. 900-1100). We may also
infer that here there was not much access to iron or that this was a case of malnutrition.
The results of a study on very long-term cultural development from the Lambayeque
culture to the early Colonial Period—ca. A.D. 900-1750—are even more interesting. Applying
analyses that integrated several methods—including the macroscopic observation of lesions,
radiographic images and CT, the analysis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and DNA (IS6110)—
Klaus et al. (2010) documented destructive lesions that were diagnosed as tuberculosis and
chronic tuberculosis in three native adults, a teenage woman from the early colonial period,
and in the cranium of a sub-adult individual from the sites of Íllimo (A.D. 900-1100, very close
to Túcume), the Caleta de San José (Chimú culture, ca. A.D. 1375-1450), and San Pedro de
Mórrope (ca. A.D. 1536-1750). All cases of tuberculosis were verified through genetic analysis.
551
Elmo Leon
What of the Nasca did they suffer anaemia and malnutrition? Indeed they did. The pioneering
study in the field of clinically-diagnosed anaemia identification was the study authored by Allison
et al. (1973), which was based on bone lesions in mummified soft tissues, and bone lesions in a child
from the Nasca culture dated to about A.D. 700. The researchers were even able to identify and
isolate Mycobacterium tuberculosis (which has also been detected in the Chiribaya culture).
Cribra orbitalia apparently was a frequent disease on the South-Central Peruvian Coast. In
Chongos (Ica), a site occupied from 200 B.C. to A.D. 400, Dietz (2009) identified this disease in
over half of the individuals studied. Dietz concluded that this was due to the evident anaemia
in this population.
The study of caries and dental plaque in regard to food, a subject that is closely related with
the study of the pre-Hispanic diet has now been studied for several decades. Steward (1931)
included a poor nutrition among the factors generating caries in pre-Hispanic Peru. Elsay et
al. (1977) reported one of the first studies of pre-Hispanic teeth based on 101 skeletons from
the department of Ica and from cultures like Paracas, Nasca, Tiahuanaco, and Inca. Most of
the jaws with teeth affected by caries and plaque belonged to the Paracas and Inca cultures,
whilst those from Nasca and Tiahuanaco were affected to a lesser extent. It is possible that
in the highlands, water with fluorine contributed towards a better preservation of the dental
health of the people in those regions (Elsay et al 1977: 138). At the site of Los Gavilanes, in
the lower Huarmey Valley, Bonavia (1982: 203) recorded plaques that ultimately gave rise to
gingivitis and which were caused by abrasion due to the consumption of hard foodstuffs
Within the context of the Nasca culture it is worth noting that caries and dental abrasion
have been found in individuals from the monumental site of Cahuachi. Piacenza and Pieri
(2012: 12) documented the consumption of toasted peanuts and jíquima along with a series of
molluscs that were apparently consumed with sand.
Moving along in time we have to examine the evidence for this type of disease within
the context of the Wari culture. Cribra orbitalia is present in some of the Wari burials at
Conchopata, albeit with a low index and having apparently been healed (Tung and Cook
2006), so that some kind of alimentary deficiency can also be inferred here. This type of
disease derived from low iron consumption was however more evident among the child
population at sites like Beringa (ca. A.D. 600-1150) in the modern region of Arequipa, but it has
also been detected in adult populations, both male and female. It has been estimated that
at least 40% of the child population at this site during the Wari occupation died of anaemia
due to the frequent occurrence of cribra orbitalia. Tung and Cook also point out that the
anaemia may have been brought about by the presence of intestinal parasites rather than by
a deficient nutrition. This may have been because of the condition of the water, which they
probably took from the same river where they caught the shrimp, in the Majes and Camaná
Valleys. The evidence also indicates it was due to the excessive consumption of maize and
molle, foodstuffs that also increased the index of dental abscesses and are cariogenic.
Tung and Cook (2006) also found that more than 70% of the people interred in the Wari
cemetery of Conchopata, Ayacucho (ca. A.D. 600-1000) had caries due to the intensive
552
14,000 years of food in Peru
consumption of maize, or the eventual libation of maize chicha. They consider this a highly
cariogenic product. The consumption of maize has been documented in various population
sectors and not necessarily in the elite.
We now move to evidence of this kind in cultures that preceded the Inca in the Late
Intermediate Period (ca. A.D. 1000-1460). The Chiribaya, on the coast of Moquegua, is a case
study. Blom et al. (2005) based themselves on an enormous collection of human bone remains
(1,465 skeletons from the Field Museum of Natural History and 953 skeletons excavated in
the Moquegua context) from various parts on the Peruvian coast and found many cases of
anaemia, particularly in children and teenagers; this however seems to be due not to the diet
but to diseases such as tuberculosis and to parasites. Even so, the burials that were closer to
the littoral—which may be indicating that these were people who consumed more fish and
marine products—had less cribra orbitalia than those from higher altitudes. Many children
from the Chiribaya culture (at sites like Estuquiña, El Yaral or Chen Chen) died precisely
because of tuberculosis.
Wilbur et al. (2008: 972-973) examined each site in a more recent overview of the occurrence of
tuberculosis in the Chiribaya culture; it is therefore worthwhile examining somewhat in depth
the variables this pathology caused amongst the ancient inhabitants of the Osmore Valley
in Moquegua. For instance, at Chen Chen we have a population with a moderate ingestion
of iron despite feeding on non-sea animal proteins and maize (probably camelids and other
animals). The presence of cribra orbitalia in 36% of the adults and of porotic hyperostosis in
more than 50% are good indicators that tuberculosis was instead endemic, as well as showing
the presence of macroparasites. Wilbur et al. believe that although in this case iron was indeed
consumed, it went to the microbacteria.
At the site of Estuquiña (ca. A.D. 1200-1460) we have the evidence of at least ten people
found in tombs who suffered tuberculosis. The individuals who lived here fed both on marine
resources as well as on C3 and C4 plants. Although there was a higher iron consumption at
this site, it is probable that the population here suffered more from tuberculosis because they
manipulated camelids, animals which potentially had these bacteria and disseminated it.
On the other hand, as was expected the occurrence of tuberculosis was higher at El Yaral, an
inland site that evinced a greater dependency on maize. What these cases in general show is
that tuberculosis depends on several interrelated factors like those listed above, and not just
on the type of food.
There are several studies that do touch this subject but within a very broad temporal span. This
makes them extremely interesting because they trace the occurrence of this type of disease
in the longue durée. For instance, Klaus et al. (2010: 2588) noted that tuberculosis apparently
reached its peak in Peru around A.D. 1000. It is possible that social differentiation contributed
to this result. The doctoral dissertation prepared by Julie Farnum (2002) does in fact seem
to support this, as it shows that the differences between the elite and the common people
gave rise to several diseases amongst the latter due to an unequal treatment, a differentiated
553
Elmo Leon
access to resources and so forth. This seems to have been precisely the case on the North
Coast of Peru during the Lambayeque culture and the Colonial Period.
Toyne (2002) made a broad study of some 1200 individuals and concluded that most children
and teenagers frequently suffered dental enamel hypoplasia and porotic hyperostosis.
Mujica et al. (1992: 93-94) claim to have detected evidence of cribra orbitalia in a child a
year and a half old at the Malanche 22 site, which is on a loma between the Lurín Valley and
Chilca Ravine south of Lima; the child was dated to A.D. 1200-1450. Baraybar conducted the
palaeopathological analysis and concluded that although this type of disease was healing at
the time the child died, it does evince a high carbohydrate diet that somehow inhibited iron
consumption, a circumstance that is repeated in several of the contexts we are reviewing.
Lanfranco and Eggers (2010) have presented a study of dental caries in a total of 263 individuals,
i.e. more than 5,600 teeth studied. The human burials come from Puémape, a site south of the
Jequetepeque Valley with samples dated between 3008 and 339 B.C., and Los Pinos, a cemetery
site in the Huaura Valley that dates to the Late Intermediate Period (ca. A.D. 1000-1450) and
which can be assigned to the Chancay culture. Some of the dental lesions, like the caries, are
not just due to foodstuffs like cooked maize, which contain gelatinised carbohydrates—as
is evident in the Chancay occupation—but also to the consumption of natural sugars from
non-domesticated tubers in wild state. The caries present in the Salinar epoch occupation at
Puémape (339 B.C.) can be explained in this way.
The presence of diseases like pellagra has been above all associated, in the American context,
with a diet poor in proteins and vitamin D (which is precisely found in meat, milk and so on,
which were not part of the pre-Hispanic diet, and the absence of niacin), and an increase
in the consumption of maize (Buikstra, in Bryant 1995: 217, Brenon and Paine 2000). Pellagra
causes dermatitis, diarrhoea, dementia and eventually death. Jocelyn Williams (2005: 190)
however argues there are mechanisms that make maize more alkaline and endow it with the
potential to absorb proteins, particularly when planted associated with beans (bear in mind
here the triad maize-pumpkins-beans), as was the case in the Peruvian Andes, so this subject is
open to debate. If this is so, then a maize-based diet would have provided better nutrition to
the people of Puruchuco-Huaquerones, and by extension to other regions where the massive
consumption of this cereal prevailed.
An invaluable study of the type of pre-Hispanic food and the pathologies it can give rise
to comes from the burials at the famed site of Machu Picchu (Verano 2003: 65-117). In an
extensive palaeopathological study of 178 skeletons of individuals from different parts of
the Andes including the coast, Verano concluded that dental diseases predominated—e.g.
caries, abscesses, periodontal diseases, and even ante-mortem dental loss—due to a high
consumption of carbohydrates like maize or potatoes. Another factor behind so many caries
may have been coca chewing, which gave rise to inflammations, abscesses and loss of teeth.
There are besides nine cases of anaemia in adults, who had it since childhood. As we know,
this disease can be due to parasites, infections or the diet.
554
14,000 years of food in Peru
As has been noted, the presence of Harris lines is an indicator of potential alimentary
deficiency. The significance of this type of trait goes back some decades, for Allison et al.
(1974) had already documented it in a considerable number of skeletons from cultures like
Paracas, Nasca, Huari, Tiahuanaco, and Inca. The researchers detected more lines of this type
in coastal cultures in comparison with highland ones; according to their study the Tiahuanaco
were in fact healthier. The main groups affected were children and teenagers, but the authors
discussed other causes that may have caused this type of line.
In her study of the mummified remains from Puruchuco-Huaquerones in Lima, Williams
(2005: 97) documented the presence of both cribra orbitalia and porotic hyperostosis in
the individuals studied. It turns out that whereas half the people analysed suffered from
the first disease, 33% suffered the second one (infants in particular), which gives us an idea
of the poorly balanced food these people ingested. This trend is likewise evident in the
high tuberculosis index, which affected more than half of the individuals analysed. Other
diseases like osteoarthritis, periostitis and fractures are interpreted by Williams as evidence
of alimentary deficiency.
Parasites, Agents of Malnutrition
The presence of parasites in the pre-Hispanic period due to the type of food is at least 5,000
years old. We have already mentioned the presence of parasites such as Diphyllobothrium in
the human coproliths from Los Gavilanes (in the lower Huarmey Valley) as a result of ingesting
fish, and this was dated to ca. 3200-1480 B.C.
We should recall in this regard the identification of this type or parasite made in faeces found at
the site of Huaca Prieta. Bonavia holds that in both cases they seem to be due to D. pacificum as
has already been noted, and the result of eating raw or little cooked fish, particularly lorna drum,
Chilean jack mackerel, cojinova or corvina. The presence of these parasites entails a moderate
anaemia of the microcytic/hypochromic type (Bonavia 1982: 230).
On the other hand, the presence of Enterobios vermicularis in at least one faecal remain from
Los Gavilanes can be considered the cause of infections and pruritus because this type of
nematode eggs often migrate outside the digestive apparatus. Besides Ascaris lumbricoides
has been found, which may have more dangerous effects such as pneumonia, intestinal
obstruction and acute appendicitis (Bonavia 1982: 231-232).
On a Middle Horizon epoch 3 (ca. A.D. 800) site known as PV35-4, which is on the beachline
north of the Huarmey Valley, Bonavia et al. (2009: 270) managed to document many eggs
of Trichuris trichiuria and Chriptosporidium sp. in human faecal remains. The first parasite
frequently passes from one person to another so its transmission is not complex, and it causes
intense infections and diarrhoea. Its survival is facilitated by the conditions found in warm and
sheltered soils, as is the case on the Peruvian coast. The infection takes place when the eggs
555
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

are eaten directly or indirectly on the ground. The second parasite appears in cosmopolitan megavisceral syndrome (cardiomegalia, gastric ectasia, and megacolon with a large amount
areas and can cause the faecal contamination of the environment as well as of water, food, of faeces). Nests of these protozoa were in the myocardio, thus indicating the disease was
and even the air. It causes acute diarrhoea, which can be more problematic in children and can already chronic.
even end in death (Bonavia et al. 2009: 283).

Let us see other evidence from the Middle Horizon. Fouant et al. (1982) documented amoebas
in cyst form that are known as Entamoeba in the excrement of bodies belonging to the
Wari culture; they may have caused dysentery or amoebic dysentery. This type of parasite
is transmitted when non-boiled water is taken or contaminated food is eaten. Guhl (2005:
237) noticed the occurrence of Trypanosoma cruzi (flagellated protozoa) parasites in several
individuals from the Chiribaya Alto site; these frequently cause the Chagas disease, which
is characterised by an infection tht can result in the long term in malnutrition and anaemia.
Rothhammer et al. (1985: 495) claim that this type of disease is partly due to guinea pig and
camelid raising—these animals may have hosted Trypanosoma infestans, especially before
domestication. Rothhammer detected this problem in various cultures on the South American
Pacific Coast, from southern Peru to northern Chile, including the well-known Chinchorro
culture.
It was precisely in the case of the Chiribaya culture that Martinson et al. (2003) found a
series of parasites that passed from mammals—llamas, guinea pigs, dogs—to human beings
on ingestion. These include for instance Pulex sp., a type of flea that causes plagues and
typhus. Human beings were evidently infested by them by consuming guinea pigs and dogs.
Trypanosimiasis has also been documented and it resulted in a megacolon in a human mummy.
Besides, a facial skeleton with osteolytic lesions in this same cultural context is interpreted
as leishmaniasis.
Pre-Hispanic Scurvy
We left scurvy for this final section on food-derived diseases, not because it is a secondary
pathology, but because of the scant research that has been made in this regard.
Here we can only report in this regard the study by Ortner et al. (1999), who studied the
documentation on scurvy in pre-Hispanic Peru. Out of a total of 363 crania from various
archaeological sites, Ortner et al. were able to detect the presence of scurvy in 38 individuals.
Nineteen of these come from Pachacamac and apparently had different occupations; two are
from Chilca and probably date to 2000 B.C.-A.D. 300; eight are from the Chicama Valley and
date to A.D. 300-800, i.e. they belong to the Mochica culture; one comes from Huarochirí and
dates to A.D. 1100-1450; another one is from Caudivilla (Junín) and dates to the same period,
and two crania are from the zone of Huacho, in A.D. 500-1450.
This means that the disease disseminated since at least 2000 B.C. to just before the time of the
Inca, and from the north coast to the central coast, including the central highlands. In all cases
one observes porosity (hyperplasia) in the cortex of the crania and lesions in the left sphenoid
wing where we find inflamed vessels in response to the scurvy-derived pathology. For these
researchers this is a clear indication of this disease. Interestingly enough, the pre-Hispanic group
mainly affected by it comprised children between seven and twelve years of age.

Martinson et al. found evidence of T. trichiura among the human faecal remains at the
Chiribaya site of San Gerónimo. Even so, the common denominator in almost all Chiribaya
mummies is the taenia, particularly D. pacificum, a frequent outcome of eating fish. Carvalho
Gonçalves et al. (2003: 114) states that the presence of T. trichiura increases in terms of the
temperate climate and has been present in South America not just in pre-Columbian times,
but also during the Colonial Period. In the above-mentioned Chiribaya contexts there is also
evidence of ticks.

There is a relatively pioneering study that should be mentioned in the context of this culture.
Salo (1984) et al. announced the discovery of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in a Chiribaya
mummy through a DNA analysis of a pulmonary lesion. The mummy dried up spontaneously
and came from the Alto Chiribaya cemetery site, in the lower Osmore Valley, and even has a
radiocarbon dating of A.D. 995-1134.

Fornaciari et al. (1992) observed that Trypanosoma cruzi, which entails the presence of “Chagas
disease,” have also been detected in the remains of an Inca mummy. In this case the authors
examined a mummified woman some twenty year of age from Cuzco that is at present in the
National Museum of anthropology and Archaeology of Florence (Italy). The remains exhibited

556 557
CONCLUDING REMARKS

A brief review from a chronological standpoint clearly shows that the radiometric results
completely turned around the history of the antiquity of domesticated plants in pre-
Hispanic Peru. We just need scan overviews like that of Smith (1965), who sketched a history
of American cultigens that included the following in chronological order: squash (Cucurbita
ficifolia), Canavalia, lima beans and chili pepper between ca. 2300 and 1500 B.C. in the zone of
Huaca Prieta. In its time this sequence was completed with the finds made in the Virú Valley,
which included plants only since about 800 B.C.; it started with maize, and then came the
Gallinazo culture (in this framework from the year 0 to A.D. 400) with plants like peanuts,
beans, avocado, and lucuma, amongst others (Smith 1965: 327).

In her study of pre-Hispanic food at Puruchuco, Williams (2005: 29) mentions the significance
food has in the world and the agents that influence its consumption. An interesting aspect in
countries like Peru and others in South America is that they produce tropical fruits and vegetables,
but eat less of them than other countries like Denmark. Children in Kenya likewise eat more
cereals and less meat, whilst adults have more meat. This is not just a matter of resources but of
education regarding the properties of foodstuffs, which must also be learned in Peru.

Although our overview is not the biggest, we at least have a sampling of the pre-Hispanic
foods that we need to assess briefly in order to answer the question this book raised regarding
the alimentary quality of the resources presented. Let us therefore make some general
observations on pre-Hispanic Peru’s diet. We start with plant foods (Diagram 1) and follow the
same order as throughout the book.

The case of achira is interesting, for this rhizome dates to at least the beginning of the third
millennium B.C. (some even believe it could go back to the sixth millennium). Judging by the
sites where it has been found, its occurrence is clearly focused on the central coast and in
the Andean highlands below 3000 masl. Besides, the fact that it has been found in charred
condition at Caral, Ancón, and Casma indicates that it was roasted on the Central Coast since
at least four thousand years ago. The evidence amassed clearly shows it was eaten.

Don Ugent, the botanist who examined the remains from the Casma Valley, established that
there were spiral-shaped cut marks in this rhizome, which can be interpreted as the result of

559
Elmo Leon
TIME CHART OF TUBERS, RIZOMES, CEREALS AND LEGUMES IN ANCIENT PERU
11 000 10 000 9 000 8 000 7 000 6 000 5 000 4 000 3 000 2 000 1 000
Arracacha
Sweet potato
Lima beans
Common beans
Algarrobo/Carob tree
a procedure followed before its consumption. Some specimens likewise have charcoal stains,
which evidently indicates they were roasted beside hearths at least four thousand years ago.
The same thing was found at Cahuachi, the Nasca shrine, so this type of cooking endured
throughout time.
These data, supplemented with those from Huaca Prieta—where achira remains were found
that included not just the tubers but the chewed leaves and branches too—clearly indicate
its consumption either cooked or baked since almost five thousand years ago. The findings
Bonavia made at the site of Los Gavilanes, in Huarmey, simply reinforce these dates for achira
consumption.
The constant ingestion of achira in pre-Hispanic Peru, which is mostly documented on the
Central Coast up to 2000 masl, implies an optimal ingestion of a large amount of starches
that were essential for the life of these early inhabitants. It is also widely documented for the
Moche, Nasca, Lima, and Chancay cultures, and in the highlands—particularly in Ancash—from
the Preceramic Period to Chavín. It is evident—either due to the lack of documentation in
archaeology or to its real distribution—that this plant was consumed in Central Peru some five
thousand years ago in significant amounts, and that it covered the starch and carbohydrates
requirements of pre-Hispanic populations.
Arracacha was another major tuber in pre-Hispanic Peru. It was even more special because
it was not just an excellent source of starch and carbohydrates but also of ascorbic acid,
560
14,000 years of food in Peru
which improved the absorption of the scant iron found in this tuber; it also does not contain
undesirable substances like oxalates during the cooking process. These properties increase
0 a. C.
with the added value of dry storage for up to seven years and retaining about 12% of its
Achira protein value. This is thus a major past food resource that should be retaken now.
As for its consumption in pre-Hispanic Peru, once the tuber arrived—probably from northern
Maca
South America—it was found in the lower Huarmey Valley in an archaeological site known
Cassava
Oca
as Los Gavilanes since at least 3200 B.C. The evidence indicates it was eaten at that time by
Jiquima
a human group because it has been directly found as pollen in human excrement. Nasca
Yacón
iconography shows that this culture consumed it in the first centuries of the Christian era, but
Olluco
it is also possible that the Mochica ate it too. One can thus speculate that this tuber was more
Mashua extensively consumed due to its great properties and the ease in its preparation. We have
Papa the impression that no archaeological record is available due to the deficient preservation of
Kiwicha any remains other than pollen or starch. The impression that this plant was more extensively
Quinoa consumed in pre-Hispanic Peru thus seems warranted.
Corn
Peanut The sweet potato is a tuber that apparently had a key role in the diet of pre-Hispanic Peru,
not just because of its carbohydrates but because of its ascorbic acid content which made
possible the absorption of its low protein density. And if, as has been shown, it was usually
Pacay
cooked by subjecting it to a bonfire or a hearth, then its lysine content would not have lost its
value. We should remember that this is one of the ten amino acids that are crucial for humans;
it has a relevant role in the absorption of calcium (in the Andes animal calcium is missing
almost completely) and in the formation of antibodies and enzymes (infection prevention).
The question here is whether ancient Peruvians consciously used this type of knowledge
when fire cooking the sweet potato, a move that was so beneficial for the human organism.
If carobs, beans, quinoa and mashua, which are all rich in lysine, were all cooked in this way,
then we could risk giving an affirmative answer; this however will not be possible because this
is precisely the type of record that is missing.
Research indicates, like in few other cases, that the sweet potato was definitely eaten in the
pre-Hispanic period, and furthermore that it as roasted. It is evident that it was cooked in
the Nasca shrine of Cahuachi, in Ica, because remains have been found that were placed on
open hearths. To judge by the evidence from Caral—in Supe—and Huaynuná—in Casma—this
type of cooking seems to go back at least to the third millennium B.C. Bonavia even recorded
it in a site on the lower Huarmey Valley that dates to the Wari period, i.e. A.D. 650-1000, so
that roasted sweet potatoes seem to have always been with us. If we had better publications
on the finds made at Chilca Canyon we could assume that this type of ‘barbecued sweet
potatoes’ are at least eight thousand years old—but these are mere speculations.
According to the data available, there is evidence that sweet potatoes were consumed in
domestic contexts—i.e. evidence of culinary activities—by the common people of the past,
as in the case of Punta Grande, but this also happened in ritual contexts, as in the ‘feast’ at
Buena Vista in the Chillón Valley—both events are dated to 2200 and 200 B.C., which means
it was consumed in various occasions.
561
Elmo Leon
Despite the deficient documentation of sweet potatoes in Chilca Canyon as well as at
Huaynuná, the remains come from strata which also held potatoes. We can thus speculate
not only that both tubers were being eaten at the same time on the Central Coast, but also
that others were also being consumed—probably achira, as was noted above.
On the other hand the human excrement found in the excavations at the Puerto Moorin site,
in the Virú Valley, bears witness that during the final centuries before the Christian era—and
even during the Wari occupation of this zone (A.D. 800-900)—its inhabitants were eating
sweet potatoes on the North Coast of Peru. So there is little to discuss in this regard.
Another relevant point is the probable manipulation of the size of sweet potatoes throughout
time—both within the context of the sites in Casma as well as those of the Chimú—from
slightly more than one centimetre to more than six (which when multiplied by two gives us
an idea of its original size) between 3000 B.C. to A.D. 1500—i.e. some four thousand years of
experimentation, probably always with the intention of improving its quality and size. The
question then is: did they know genetic engineering, or was this just intuition? Agricultural
engineers have the floor.
Since when was the sweet potato eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru? The answer is at present
twofold: if we accept the data Engel published for Chilca Canyon then it would be about
7000 B.C.; however, if we accept the better-controlled data of the Pozorskis and the analyses
made by Don Ugent, then a more prudent date would be 2900 B.C. Once included in the
diet, sweet potato was a very constant presence in various cultures that extended from the
North Coast to Ica.
Maca is a more complex case. We still have very little evidence of its consumption. It was
apparently domesticated in the Central Andean Altiplano, and everything seems to indicate
this took place in the modern Junín region. This can be dated to about 4000 B.C., but we still
have insufficient data. Nor is its consumption on the coast clear, but it may have taken place
in the Mochica context.
Attributing maca consumption to the Central Altiplano indicates that those who ate it had
not just abundant animal proteins, but also of good quality. The 10% proteins that each tuber
has must have been a significant resource for highland Andeans, particularly in modern-day
Junín and probably in Puno, i.e. the area around the lake during the first centuries of the
Christian era.
Cassava was another major tuber. Besides a large amount of starch and sugar it also has minerals
that are nutrients for human beings, like calcium and certain vitamins, but only 1% proteins;
most researchers concur that it is often supplemented with fish. Besides, as alimentary stock
it survives in good condition for several years and this means it can support large populations,
as was noted in regard to the Xingu in Brazil. It was believed that cassava had been eaten in
Peru since the third millennium B.C., but the finds Tom Dillehay and his team made in the
Nanchoc Valley, in the southern Lambayeque region, show it was eaten there since 6800 B.C.
562
14,000 years of food in Peru
Once its consumption had been adopted it became very popular, as can be seen not just in
the pottery of cultures like Moche or Nasca, but also in the finds made of remains that had
cassava—even coproliths— particularly from the first millennium B.C. to Inca times.
The studies regarding the origin and domestication of cassava have had divergent results.
Whereas botany and cladistics show that it must have originated in southern Brazil, in the
area known as El Cerrado, from where it spread northwards, archaeology and linguistics
seem to point towards northern South America (Colombia in particular, and by extension
Venezuela and the Caribbean). On the other hand the Mesoamerican and Mexican
evidence (which include the southern zone of the Gulf of Mexico) have dates that go
back at least to the Middle Holocene, but the Colombian dates are still the earliest
ones. We should however emphasise that the nature of the Brazilian terrain including El
Cerrado, does not allow the preservation of organic remains, so that not much can be
inferred regarding this issue.
The discovery of roasted cassava both at Cahuachi (a Nasca context) as well as at a Wari
camp (in the lower Casma Valley), are additional pieces of evidence that underline the type
of tuber cooking we have been discussing from the very beginning. On the other hand the
discovery of milling to make flour or other ground-up substances allows one to suppose
that similar techniques for cassava processing probably existed in the Peruvian Amazon, and
these unfortunately have left no evidence due to preservation factors. Some inferences have
therefore to be made through ethnography while exerting all due caution.
The oca is another invaluable tuber due to its protein content. This means that a tuber
documented at a given site can be interpreted as a good source of amino acids.
Although there are some indications that Oxalis may have been consumed some ten thousand
years ago both in the Callejón de Huaylas as well as in Lima, between 2000 and 3000 masl,
these do not strictly refer to the ocas as a domesticated plant but as a wild plan of this genus.
This means the process of domestication must have taken place between this moment and
that when the first real indications appear around 3000 B.C. Besides, for experts its presence
on the coast entailed its exchange or transportation, because this is not its original habitat.
Oxalis seems to have been eaten regularly on the Peruvian coast from this moment on. And
although it is found on Moche, Chimú and Wari ceramics, the finds concentrate in the modern
Junín region, thus suggesting it may well have been where its domestication and distribution
took place. There is no need to emphasise that this is the realm of botanists; all that was done
here is make some remarks.
Jíquima is another prominent tuber in the pre-Columbian period, but its cultivation and
consumption are currently fading away. It improves the soil where it is planted due to the
amount of hydrogen it generates, and is often cultivated in association with potatoes. It can
thus be deduced that cultures that ate jíquima also ate potatoes. This holds true for the
Mochica, the Paracas and the Nasca, among others.
563
Elmo Leon
It is hard to pass judgement on the antiquity of jíquima consumption, the main problem being
the lack of reliable documentation for the caves of Tres Ventanas and Quipché, in the highlands
of Lima, which have been dated to 7000 B.C. Even so, a specialist like Deborah Pearsall agrees
that this plant goes back to around 5700 B.C. The evidence begins to accumulate around the
third millennium B.C. and is more frequent from around 400 B.C. to later periods. Cultures
like Moche, Nasca, and Chimú evidently consumed these tubers and used its known anti-
inflammatory and disinfectant properties.
Yacón was apparently domesticated throughout a large expanse of the Andes from Colombia
to North-Western Argentina, but some scholars believe this process may have taken place
in Peru. Two of the substances derived from this tuber are a wonder—the large amount of
proteins in their leaves, and natural sugar.
Three areas are known where yacón was eaten—Nasca-Ica, Lima, and the North Coast
Moche—but we can speculate that other cultural groups also ate it.
The case of olluco is crucial because although there is very little documentation on its
presence in pre-Hispanic Peru, it is worth studying in depth because it has great properties as
measured by the protein, sugar, and particularly by the vitamin C index. It is known to have
been placed cooked almost grill-like.
Olluco consumption since the most ancient period is one of the best documented records.
The evidence comes from Guitarrero cave in the Callejón de Huaylas, and if we accept some
stratigraphic problems present in this archaeological site it is possible that its consumption
dates to at least 9000-8500 B.C. Lower-quality evidence from the questionable caves of Tres
Ventanas y Quipché on the other hand suggests that it was also eaten in the highlands of Lima
around 7000 B.C.
Although there is no evidence available for subsequent periods, the olluco was clearly known
and eaten by the Moche, Wari, Chimú, and Wanka cultures, and so was part of the diet of
these pre-Hispanic populations both on the coast and in the highlands, probably longer than
is believed. Its ingestion ensures a greater consumption of proteins and vitamin C, amongst
other nutrients found in olluco.
The two species of totora are another edible root eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru. Its consumption
probably ensured the presence of two essential elements for pre-Hispanic groups due to
the 16% proteins and 7% calcium it holds. The archaeological data assembled in this book
suggests that totora may have been an ideal supplement on the North Coast, particularly in
the La Libertad region, since at least four thousand years ago, as well as in the Huarmey Valley
and even on the Central Coast. One overwhelming fact is that most of the totora residues
have been found in human faeces in these sites, which is direct proof of its ingestion.
Mashua, a tuber that originated in the southern Altiplano is associated with olluco, oca, and
even the potato. Its consumption entails the ingestion of 7.7% proteins which is considerable,
564
14,000 years of food in Peru
given the low presence of mammal protein. The evidence goes back to the beginning of our
era in the vicinity of the Mantaro River, in the modern Junín region. Mashua was also eaten in
Ayacucho during the Wari Empire ca. A.D. 800-900.
But given its significance, there is no question that the top spot in this discussion falls to the
potato. Here we will not concern ourselves with its origins; interested readers are referred
to the documentation in the section on Solanum tuberosum. What is at present clear is that
the species in the Solanum genus do in fact have several uses, which presumably include that
of food. Such may have been the case of S. maglia in in the midst of a Terminal Pleistocene
context at Monteverde, a site not far away from Puerto Montt. The evidence published in
scientific publications, which was unfortunately poorly documented, only allows for the
possibility that wild potatoes were used as food both in Ayacucho as well as in Chilca Canyon
some nine to eight thousand years ago. According to botanists, its domestication—for which
the evidence is lacking, all the more so considering the difficult conditions in which this type
of organic material is preserved as starch—would also have begun in this period.
In archaeology, if we start from facts that are supported and have been analysed, then we
have to agree with Pearsall when she states that the most ancient evidence of domesticated
potatoes appear only in the third millennium B.C. The finds made by the Pozorskis, which
along with the analyses made by Don Ugent showed some of the characteristics some of the
most ancient potatoes in the Andes had, fall in this period. But perhaps the most striking fact
is that the potatoes had traces that showed its peels were removed with a cutting instrument
(which may for instance have been a stone flake), which shows they had been at least peeled,
possibly in a context prior to consumption, i.e. a culinary one. Some of the traces suggested
the possibility that the potatoes had been exposed to fire, quite possibly to roast them with
coal or in an open hearth. This same procedure of cooking on an open fire was evinced by
Margaret Towle in a Chiripa cultural context in the Bolivian Altiplano. And there were starch
grains in this same site that Towle believed corresponded to chuño (dehydrated potatoes).
This virtually is the first evidence of a culinary procedure in Peruvian history. Other pieces of
evidence, for instance in the vicinity of the Mantaro River after A.D. 1000, clearly indicate that
potatoes were also boiled and kneaded.
Besides, human excrement remains found at Puerto Moorin and Dos Cabezas, in the modern La
Libertad region, seem to reliably verify that some people in this culture were eating potatoes
during the first centuries of our era.
As of the third millennium there is much evidence that essentially comes from the North
Central and Central Coasts—including Chincha and Nasca—the Central puna (Junín), and the
Titicaca Altiplano where remains have been found indicating its cultivation and consumption
in pre-Hispanic Peru. They were also well-preserved even in Pachacamac during the Inca
occupation of this famed shrine.
Although the distribution of the potato is problematic because preservation is not ideal, we
can speculate that it was known in a bigger area than what the current archaeological repertoire
565
Elmo Leon
presents; in fact, at present it is much larger than that of any other tuber considering the
various Andean regions up to the Southern Altiplano. Research using finer-grained methods
will surely allow the handling and usage of the potato as food to be better documented.
The role some rhizomes like reeds (Cyperus sp. and Cyperus esculentus) had in the pre-Hispanic
diet is as yet unknown, particularly as regards its protein, fibre, and natural sugar content.
They are known to have been taken both in the valleys as well as in the Altiplano, and that
they were eaten since around four thousand B.C., because their remains have been found in
human excrement both on the North Coast as well as in the Huarmey Valley. The Nasca also
consumed reeds.
Cereals also had a major role in the pre-Hispanic Andean diet. Let us begin with kiwicha.
Its value in proteins and amino acids with essential properties like lysine (which helps with
calcium absorption) and methionine amongst others, make kiwicha a first-rate food. Although
its area of origin is not clear, the mapping of the archaeological sites where it has been
found place it essentially in the Altiplano and—across the highlands—literally over a large
part of the coast. Wild kiwicha may have been consumed in Ayacucho around 5600 B.C., but
it was apparently only domesticated in more recent millennia. It is also interesting that a
map showing the location of kiwicha—albeit mostly in wild state—extends not just over the
Peruvian coast, but also across the southern Andes. Is this its origin place?
Cañihua is the major plant resource as regards its protein content, which is not surpassed by
any other. If we add amino acids like lysine and tryptophan, as well as its high oil content, then
we clearly can call it the food par excellence of the puna.
This is an extreme cereal because it can be cultivated at very high altitudes and is very
resistant, so it is believed to have been an alimentary stock for populations living in this type
of environment, including those affected by frosts. It is somewhat anecdotal that kiwicha
appeared during the excavation of Galindo in the Moche Valley. The Mochica however
evidently ate it and so we can assume that it was also eaten by other coastal cultures, and all
the more so by the cultures inland.
The Andean pre-Hispanic cereals include maize and then quinoa, but it is possible that this
ranking changed depending on the altitude at which one lived. Let us begin with quinoa.
Despite being a cereal with such a high proteic value, quinoa unlike maize has not yet received
the attention it should.
What can apparently be concluded is that quinoa in fact had its origin in the Central-
Southern Andes, probably around six thousand B.C. The evidence indicates that quinoa with
domestication underway was already present around 6800 B.C. at Nanchoc, in the upper
Zaña Valley, in a land where this cereal is not native to. It is only logical that the process of
domestication probably must have begun before this period; based on the archaeological
evidence we can speculate that this happened one or two thousand years earlier. This
hypothesis does not seem to be that far-fetched when we consider the discovery of
566
14,000 years of food in Peru
Chenopodium in unknown condition (wild or domesticated), with an average date of 6000-
3000 B.C., both on the Central Coast and in the puna of Junín or Ayacucho (the more reliable
site being Telarmachay). All that remains doing is doing research to discard it or correct it. In
fact, what seems to be clearest is the evidence Maria Bruno found in the shelter of Panaulauca,
where quinoa had apparently already been domesticated around 3000 B.C. On the other hand
this date is not far from that which has been ascribed to Jiskauromoko in Puno, a site where
domesticated quinoa clearly was found. It is thus possible that this process began almost
simultaneously in both puna areas.
There is scant evidence of the culinary preparation of quinoa, but Chávez has discovered
a series of vessels in a Pucará culture context (1000 B.C.-A.D. 50) that held substances that
showed they had been used to place and cook quinoa as well as lime, which made the
researchers presume that coca was also processed, and even that some sort of fermentation
or quinoa chicha may have been prepared.
Still in the Altiplano but now in the context of the Tiahuanaco culture, the excavations
showed the massive amount of quinoa remains in the domestic sediments of this culture,
which indicate that the alimentary base of its people lay on quinoa and secondarily on the
potato.
The evidence likewise indicates that domesticated quinoa was consumed by the Moche, the
Wari and the Chimú, as well as by coastal populations before the coming of the Incas as
well as by the Wanka in the Central Puna, including some of the individuals buried at Machu
Picchu. Its consumption evidently was in high demand since at least 3,600 years ago, and
possibly some time before.
But there is no question that the most representative plant in the Central Andes, alongside
the potato and quinoa is maize. The human manipulation it has been subjected to since its
domestication made it more adaptable to different environments. And although its Mexican
or Mesoamerican origins are clear, the information Bonavia and Grobman provide plus the
recent finds at Huaca Prieta on the North coast, suffice to hold that wild maize, carried
perhaps by birds as pollen, landed in the sheltered intermontane valleys and gave rise to a
potentially independent domestication in the Andes.
One argument favouring a positive reply to the question regarding how balanced the pre-
Hispanic diet was, arises precisely when discussing the cultivation triad of maize, squash,
beans presented in this book. The plants mutually benefit each other in their development
and contribute to the diet of the human groups cultivating them. The combination of maize
carbohydrates, squash oil and bean proteins, along with some fruits like guava and legumes
like carobs, should have sufficed—as Bonavia claimed—to sustain the pre-Hispanic population,
even with bromatological values that draw close to those of animal protein. These three
plants evidently are much present in the archaeological record. This is precisely one of the
arguments Bonavia raised against those who claim pellagra was extensively spread throughout
the Central Andes, which we tried here to asses with the scant information available.
567
Elmo Leon
It is likewise known that two basic varieties developed in the Andes, i.e. sandy maize and pop
corn. One can be used for milling and to make dough to eat, as happened in Mexico, while the
pop-corn probably appeared when the kernels were beside the embers and they began to ‘pop,’
as is still the case today. In Peru maize must have been prepared in both ways throughout the
pre-Hispanic period, which is why the chroniclers noted the presence of humitas and tortillas.
The former tradition survives, the latter does not. The point here is improving our recording
methods in order to better document the ways in which pre-Hispanic maize was prepared.
Now then, preparing maize (and purple maize in particular) raises its protein level. Whereas
their percentage naturally reaches 7.6%, on being boiled (choclo and mote) it reaches 16.5%.
The same thing happens with calories, which reach their highest level toasted as popcorn
with almost 23%, but fall when parboiled. On the other hand, its carbohydrate content is just
slightly higher than that of quinoa.
We have reviewed the archaeological record and shown that the oldest maize in Peru found
at Huaca Prieta dates to 5250 B.C., followed by the maize found at Casma. The value of
the finds made at Huaca Prieta lies in that they not only show an independent process of
domestication in Peru, i.e. in the Central Andes, but also that the Peruvian races were already
definable in that millennium. It should be noted that pop corn and flour maize were already
known by six thousand B.C., which suggests two different ways this plant was prepared in
Peruvian food seven thousand years ago.
As for the maize found at Cerro Julia and Cerro el Calvario, two sites in Casma which clear
and scientifically excavated contexts, it simply corroborates the existence of Peruvian maize
in the sixth and fifth millenniums B.C. If we include Rosamachay and Guitarrero Cave in this
review, its presence since the Middle Horizon becomes evident but (this is the most important
point) with native Peruvian races like Proto Confite Morocho and Confite Chavinense, and
even the last race discovered at Huaca Prieta called Proto-Alazán. This means there is a solid
supporting base for the Grobman-Bonavia hypothesis on independent maize domestication
in pre-Hispanic Peru since (at least) the Middle Holocene (ca. 6,000 B.C.).
The effort at manipulation was in fact due to the need of obtaining more and better-quality
food, to the point that during this process 12-row maize was generated, for instance during
the Chimú occupation of Pedregal, a site in the lower Jequetepeque Valley.
The evidence presented in this book also points towards two results. First, the significance of
maize increased throughout time; whereas it was still a—probably incipient—consumer plant
by 5000 B.C., several thousand years later, at the beginning of our era it had become one of
the essential cereals of pre-Hispanic Peru, and was definitely the major one for the Incas, who
imposed its cultivation in various intermontane Andean regions. There are valleys, like Virú
on the North Coast, where maize is the plant that has most been found by archaeological
excavations (up to 50%) as of the first millennium B.C.; during the Mochica occupation of
Huaca de la Luna it comprised up to 71% of the food eaten by its inhabitants, and it was also
the most eaten plant in the Wari Empire.
568
14,000 years of food in Peru
But—this is the second result—it did not have the same significance everywhere. This is
understandable given the high variability in microregions, which must have correlated with a
great diversity in edible resources in the different environments. This simple means that more
site research that provides more information in this regard is required.
The continual increase in the significance of maize is verified not just by its persistent presence
in the archaeological record, but also by the discovery of large storage bins like those of Los
Gavilanes in the lower Huarmey Valley. (This is a peculiar site because there is no other like
it on the Peruvian coast, and it gives us an idea of the need there was of installing storage
bins that would literally hold tons of maize cobs since around 3000 B.C. Los Gavilanes also
confirms the inventiveness of the pre-Hispanic population with their idea of covering these
bines with sand in order to prevent the food from spoiling.
The answer to the question whether maize was eaten is yes, and not just because of the stains
left by the fire that partially burned the cobs—which means they were roasted since at least
seven thousand years ago—but also because it has been found in pre-Hispanic faecal remains,
particularly at Mochica archaeological sites, and even at earlier sites like Puerto Moorin (in the
Virú Valley) or Dos Cabezas (in the Jequetepeque Valley), and Cahuachi (Central-South Coast),
the Nazca shrine. The massive presence of purple maize at this site has attracted attention
but it actually is not a strange thing; in fact, this same phenomenon has been documented in
other coastal sites, precisely due to the cyanogenic factor, which indicates this is a highland
crop. Besides, this is confirmed by the study of stable isotopes in human bones.
And although it was eaten by pre-Hispanic populations, it is possible that at certain moments,
certain types of maize were meant to be exclusively eaten both by the elite as well as by
males.
It is also evident that maize must have been prepared by grinding, as is shown by the analysis
of starch at Huaynuná, a site in the lower Casma Valley known for being where the most
ancient potato remains in Peru were found. Maize, as has already been noted, was eaten as
popcorn not just in preceramic times, but also for instance in the case of the Wari camps in
the vicinity of the mouth of the Huarmey River, where popped or partially burned maize has
been found.
Another cooking method was simply by boiling, i.e. our well-known (and delicious) choclo—
when fresh—or mote—when mature. It was apparently possible to infer this type of cuisine
from the evidence both for the Inca occupation of Machu Picchu, as well as for the sites in
the Mantaro Valley. In the latter case maize starch was specifically found on the inner walls of
the ceramic vessels in which it was apparently boiled. Quinoa was also boiled in these same
vessels. Archaeologists also claim there is a clear evidence that maize was prepared roasted
and toasted, i.e. in the early Wanka occupation of Junín since A.D. 200. This means mote and
cancha have been eaten in this region modern-day for at least two thousand years. Toasted
maize or cancha was eaten by the inhabitants of Puruchuco (Ate-Vitarte, Lima) during the Inca
occupation of this site, as was evinced by the attrition in their teeth.
569
Elmo Leon
On the other hand we should not forget that maize was eaten along with other types of
resources by populations like that of Chincha—south of Lima—where mounds of food refuse
have been found that contained maize, sweet potato, cassava and guinea pigs.
Chicha was another way in which maize was consumed. In this case my research on the central
coast seems to show that it may have been drunk since at least the first millennium B.C. Chicha
has been found in ceremonial ritual contexts, when architectonic modifications were made in
the temples. And it clearly was imbibed, as is shown by the high record of pre-Hispanic caries that
are partially due to the consumption of maltose and maltodextrin, both cariogenic substances,
particularly after cooking and gelatinisation, which are harmful for teeth. We should not forget
in this regard the uncooked and ungerminated maize saccharose that was used for this.
Later finds of maize appear all over the Peruvian coast, from Piura to Ica. This suggests this
plant was eaten on the South Coast, so if there is no record of it in this region it probably is
due to the lack of preservation, or research has simply still not found it.
My assessment of tubers, rhizomes and cereals ends here. The novelty here seems to be
that the domestication of the olluco preceded that of all other plants in this section as it
took place in 9000 B.C. The sweet potato, cassava, and jíquima enter the scene in 7000-5500
B.C., i.e. when the climate improved. In chronological order they were followed by quinoa,
maize and kiwicha in 6200-4000 B.C., i.e. in the Maximum Holocene when the temperature
rose. Potatoes, maca, arracacha, oca, and achira appeared in that order in the pre-Hispanic
food record in 4200-3000 B.C., when the Peruvian Current stabilised and the climate became
steady. Mashua and yacón close the list; the oldest case goes back to the first millennium B.C.
We now turn to the Peruvian legumes. Peanuts are a relevant case because its original territory
is vast—it extends from the Peruvian ceja de selva to the Bolivian tropical forest and southern
Brazil—yet it was present in Peru at Nanchoc with a date that goes back almost to 7000 B.C.,
but it was still under domestication. Part of this documentation is also found in the plaque of
the human burials in this zone, which show its direct consumption at this time. Peanuts beside
are an excellent source of proteins and fat or oil, which were potentially nutritive for the pre-
Hispanic population. The amount and quality of the amino acids found in combination in this
plant is unique; fat, on the other hand, reaches more than 50% and contrary to common belief
is non-saturated, which favours the control of the cholesterol that is harmful for health. Like
many other Andean foodstuffs, peanuts were eaten toasted, which considerably increased its
quality and proteic amount. Toasted peanuts are thus more nutritive.
Peanut consumption abounds in the archaeological record from 7000 B.C. to Inca times, e.g.
in various coastal cultures like Moche, Nasca, Lambayeque or Chancay. In the case of the
Mochica it was the most-eaten legume, but there is also direct evidence of its ingestion
(seeds and shells) in the faeces.
As regards its preparation, it has already been noted that it was most frequently eaten toasted.
The best example comes from Cahuachi, a Nasca shrine that dates to the first centuries of
570
14,000 years of food in Peru
our era, where the strong dental wear of the individuals here buried has been interpreted as
a result of high peanut consumption. We should likewise bear in mind the so-called peanut
chicha, which is particularly typical of Bolivia—one of the countries where it had its origin.
One thing we should bear in mind is that the peanuts were extremely big and the favourite
food at Cerrillos, a Paracas site in the Ica Valley. Some packets of peanuts were found below
thick layers of stray, which indicates they were placed to preserve them in this way.
Lima beans are legumes that also stood out in the pre-Hispanic diner’s table. Although its
presence is not overwhelming numerically, it is present in almost each and every record for
the coastal cultures. Its presence is remarkable due to its alimentary properties; proteins,
which comprise 22%, stand out and even though they may have had a toxic effect in the past,
this was handled using desiccation. Its bromatological properties include its potassium and
phosphorus content, which must be taken into account when considering the dietary balance.
Establishing what is the oldest evidence of lima beans in pre-Hispanic Peru is not easy. The
new evidence and new radiocarbon dates from Guitarrero Cave indicate it could go back to
9600 or 5600 B.C. The first date is problematic due to the possible alteration of the strata
where the lima beans were found in; as for the second one, although it comes directly from
the lima beans themselves, there is a possibility that some kind of contamination took place
due to the log time they were in storage. As for the first date, we likewise have to emphasise
their large size and large colour range; for botanists, this may be indicating that this plant had
already undergone some of the phases of experimentation in its domestication process. This
would support the idea that lima bean domestication may have begun in the Andes even
before 9000 B.C. We are talking of a period closer to the Younger Dryas, the last ice age.
It we wonder since when have lima beans been eaten, the research at Nanchoc, in the upper
Zaña Valley, clearly indicates the presence of dental plaque in part of the human dentition in
the sites in this zone, which have been dated to 7100-6900 B.C. This also is an additional piece
of evidence of the great antiquity of the Guitarrero lima beans. It is therefore clear that lima
beans have been eaten since ca. nine thousand years ago.
The subsequent presence of lima beans in other cultures is evident, but attention should be
drawn to the presence of potential lima bean remains in the faeces of the ancient inhabitants
of Huaca Prieta, which is almost on the littoral on the mouth of the Chicama River, and in
the modern-day La Libertad region. This is another clear evidence of its consumption almost
5000 years ago on our North Coast.
Even so, the remains of this legume are not just found on the coast, but also in highland sites in
Áncash or Cajamarca, between 1,000 and 3,000 masl. The record shows that it was regularly eaten
up to Inca times. In fact, some of the individuals buried at Machu Picchu had eaten lima beans.
Reconstructing the ways in which lima beans were prepared in the pre-Hispanic period is
also difficult. Human faecal remains have been found at Huaca de la Luna, a Moche site, with
571
Elmo Leon
lima bean skins and residues of burned lima beans, which can be interpreted as “roasted lima
beans,” a simple and quite frequent cooking method in the pre-Hispanic culinary inventory,
as we are now seeing. Bonavia made a similar find in a camp dated to A.D. 800 on the coast
of Huarmey. The size of the lima beans eaten here and their varied colours drew Bonavia’s
attention. We can speculate that these were also boiled, but there is no evidence of this.
Beans are the most recurring foodstuff in the pre-Hispanic food inventory. Evidence for
an independent process of domestication—not just botanical and archaeological, but also
genetic—of this legume in the Andean area has been presented. Mexico was another centre
of domestication.
The presence of beans in Peru’s pre-Hispanic diet is quite relevant because this legume holds
up to 25% proteins and various vitamins that the Andean population needed, in conjunction
with other products. We should also not forget that beans were grown alongside maize and
squash in a kind of triad that has been mentioned here several times, so it was always part of
the pre-Hispanic table.
One datum that should be considered is that we do have evidence that dry bean seeds are a
palliative for anaemia and malnutrition. This is probably because of the process of desiccation
(due to a trend in other resources, which enhances its proteic quality and quantity, thus making
it more efficient in the treatment of these diseases.
The oldest available evidence for beans certainly comes from Guitarrero Cave, and just like
in the case of lima beans its date can average 9000-6000 B.C. Smith categorically claims that
beans had already been domesticated in the Callejón de Huaylas by 9200 B.C. If we take the
most recent datings, its antiquity could go back up to 6000 B.C. This mater is open to debate.
Beans appear not just on the coast but also in the highlands. There is direct evidence that it was
consumed, for instance the human faecal remains from Puerto Moorin, on the North Coast,
with dates that go back to the beginning of our era. And beans were permanent companions
of the Mochica according to the results yielded by the archaeological research at Huaca de la
Luna. Although its consumption was intense in Moche times, for some reason it fell with the
Chimú. Beans have also been found at Cahuachi in human faeces, so this is direct evidence
that the Nasca ate them.
Little is known of how beans were prepared. For instance, at Santa Rosa-Quirihuac they have been
found in hearth a combustion context, which means they were eaten roasted. The interesting
thing is that up to ten types of beans were found at this site, which supports its manipulation.
Beans were eaten toasted at Cahuachi, and have been found thus in human excrement. One
thing that may interest the culinary world is that bean pods have been found that were removed
using the nails; this may seem logical but to the best of my knowledge it is the first time it has
been shown archaeologically. We also know beans were boiled in the context of the Wanka
culture, in the modern-day Junín region, because they have been found embedded in ceramic
vessels. The researchers believe they were then kneaded to prepare other dishes and eat them.
572
14,000 years of food in Peru
The presence of tarwi indicates that there is a high possibility that it was eaten, thus taking
advantage of its great alimentary potential—this legume holds up to 40% proteins, i.e. less
than half its weight. To this we must add its high content.
Tarwi formed a triad alongside potatoes and quinoa, so we can assume they were eaten conjointly.
Both it and quinoa clearly held a great alimentary potential for the pre-Hispanic table.
The evidence for this plant’s consumption is restricted to the last two thousand years and
it appeared in Mochica and Wanka contexts, where it was prepared by boiling. Although it
possibly comes from the southern Altiplano there is no evidence for this, surely because of
the deficient preservation of organic remains in this zone.
Although usually considered a fruit, the pacay actually is a legume that was also much eaten
in pre-Hispanic Peru. Its presence in archaeological contexts implies a large supply of vitamin
C, and particularly water and calories.
Pacay has been eaten since at least 7100 B.C. as follows from the evidence found at Nanchoc,
and 7800 B.C. if we consider the data from the famed Guitarrero Cave, but it has still to be
established whether it was still undomesticated pacay. What is clear is that it was already
eaten by 7100 B.C. because it has been found in the dental plaque of some of the human
dentition found at Nanchoc, in the upper Zaña Valley. Its presence is repeated even in human
faeces such as at Puerto Moorin, on the North Coast at the beginning of our era, so it was
frequently part of the pre-Hispanic diet.
The carob is another major legume that is usually found in archaeological dumps. Its high
sugar (natural saccharose), carbohydrate, and protein content turned its pods into an
invaluable feeding resource in the pre-Hispanic period. It should also be noted that it also
has high potassium, and vitamins C and E values. Yet the type of sugar it holds meant that its
consumption brought about a series of cariogenic lesions. During the early human occupation
of Peru it apparently was a highly valued alimentary source, but this decreased as of A.D. 1000.
Its use as food is one of the most ancient in pre-Hispanic Peru. For instance, Claude Chauchat
assumes that the Paiján mortars from the North Coast of Peru, between southern Pacasmayo
and the Moche Valley, were perhaps used to grind its seeds in order to eat them later. Conclusive
evidence of its consumption comes from Buena Vista, a site in the Chillón Valley north of
Lima, where carob remains left behind from some dinner have been found on the walls of
squash bowls. It is thus clear that it was eaten since at least 3200 B.C. What probably happens
with the evidence is that it has not been identified, or it simply has not been presented.
The evidence for carob consumption extends over a large part of the Peruvian coast,
particularly on the North and Central coast. It has also been found in human faecal remains
at the site of Puerto Moorin, so it was clearly eaten in this zone since the beginning of our
era. Carob remains were likewise found in the faeces of the Nasca. Its significance can be
illustrated for instance with Pacatnamú, where it was second only to guava.
573
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

We now turn to the fruits that were consumed in pre-Hispanic Peru (Diagram 2). Many TIME CHART OF FRUITS IN ANCIENT PERU
carbohydrates, water and particularly vitamins and minerals are obtained from them. Fruits
11 000 10 000 9 000 8 000 7 000 6 000 5 000 4 000 3 000 2 000 1 000 0 a. C.
are always present in archaeological sites as discarded seeds or skins, so we can imagine
they were profusely consumed. We should add that those with vitamin C or ascorbic acid Pineapple
Cherimoya
were essential because they facilitated iron absorption in the organism of the pre-Hispanic
Soursop
population.
Chili pepper
Squash
There are several positions regarding the origin of the pineapple, yet no one doubts that it Avocado
is of tropical origin or that its centre lay in the Amazonian savannah in Brazil, from where Guayaba
it may have reached the tropical zones of Peru. Its dissemination at the hands of the Molle
Europeans shows that it was widely accepted, probably even before their intervention. Sweet Granadilla
Although no archaeological evidence is available, it may have already been present in Tumbo
wild condition in some part of Brazil around 8000 B.C., and its domestication may have Kaywa
begun around 4000 B.C. Papaya-Mito
Palillo
Pineapple also does not appear in the Peruvian archaeological record (because organic remains Peanut butter fruit
are not preserved in the Peruvian Amazon), but its consumption cannot be ruled out due to Sweet cucumber

its vitaminic properties (C and B1), along with minerals like calcium, and fibre. We should bear Inca berry
Peach palm
in mind that its ingestion allows a better absorption of iron, so that if it was present in the
Wild tuna
pre-Hispanic diet it was ideal in this regard.

In Peruvian archaeology, the pineapple only appears on the coast in 1200-800 B.C., but the
references are not clear. The Spanish chroniclers likewise provide some information regarding
its cultivation on the coast, so this is a subject that remains to be studied.
Cherimoya had its origin in southern Ecuador and northern Peru, and was eaten quite
frequently by the pre-Hispanic population. Its main contribution lies in its sugar, carbohydrate
and ascorbic acid content. Its consumption since around 3000 B.C., clearly shows these
alimentary conditions were available for the pre-Hispanic population, particularly on the
North and Central Coast, for instance for the Nasca.
Soursop consumption in the pre-Hispanic context also entailed the obtention of saccharose,
water, minerals and vitamins B and C. Like cherimoya it was consumed in southern Ecuador
but evidently also in Peru, at least since ca. 3000 B.C. This fruit essentially appears in the
archaeological record for the North and partly the Central Coast. It was much eaten by
the Chimú, as is shown by Pedregal, where it comprised up to 43% of plant foods in this
Jequetepeque Valley site.
Chili pepper or ají is another fruit for which we have ample information regarding its
consumption. Its almost permanent association with maize, both in cultivation as well as in
consumption, is almost proven. Perhaps nowadays every time we have corn-on-the-cob with
chili pepper (choclo con ají), we are actually seeing a part of this tradition. Different kinds of
chili pepper —rocoto, ají limo, ají mirasol, ají panca, and pipí de mono—have a long record in
Peruvian archaeology.
Chili pepper consumption provided not just an invaluable source of vitamin C (ascorbic acid
for the pre-Hispanic population that ate it), they could also benefit from its high protein
content (rare in fruits), as well as calcium, phosphorus, and carotene. We should not forget
that chili pepper has more vitamin C than the lemon itself. It therefore follows that its
consumption may entail a better iron absorption in the sites where it has been documented.
The type of chili pepper eaten so long ago as 9000 B.C. in Guitarrero Cave is of the limo
variety. Scholars agree that it was a domesticated chili pepper, so its process of domestication
perhaps goes back to Younger Dryas (11,000 B.C.), the last ice age. The ají limo is also present
in the Callejón de Huaylas itself around 2100 B.C. From this moment on it is found in various
forms throughout Peru, but in many cases the variety has yet to be specified.
The ají escabeche variety was documented in Huaca Prieta—which is almost on the mouth
of the Chicama River—around 3000 B.C. The remains of this variety were also found in the
faeces of this population. Specialists concluded that limo, escabeche, and rocoto varieties of
chili pepper were already being eaten in various parts of Peru by 2000 B.C. The pipí de mono
variety was being eaten on the Central Coast of Peru around 1490 B.C.
The research at Huaca de la Luna is very interesting because it allows us to conclude that the
Mochica ate various chili peppers in their dishes, such as limo, escabeche, rocoto, and pipí de
mono. The latter was the variety most eaten by Nasca, as is claimed by experts on this culture.
The lack of research and of chili pepper remains in southern Peru precludes all references,

574 575
Elmo Leon
but since the escabeche variety originated in Bolivia it evidently may have been eaten by the
population of southern Peru.
Squash is another botanical resource that was apparently profusely consumed in the
pre-Hispanic period. C. moschata is a prominent species with new dates that go back
to 8200 B.C., which indicates Peru was a centre where this species was domesticated
independently of Mexico. This may also have been the case of C. ficifolia. C. maxima
(in its loche variety) probably originated on the North Coast of Peru around 2500 B.C.
The rich pulp was an excellent food source, particularly of oils—its content reached
up to 35% in squash seeds—as well as a greater presence of phosphorus and potassium.
The highest proportion of iron is in its leaves, and it is presumed that several parts of
the plant were eaten in the past, and especially their germinates, due to their vitaminic
content—carotene, ascorbic acid, and so on.
The antiquity of squash consumption (in this case C. moschata) in pre-Hispanic Peru goes
back to ca. 8400 B.C., as shown by the recent research undertaken by Tom Dillehay and his
team in the upper Zaña Valley. The discovery of this plant in the dental plaque of the people
who ate it is conclusive. Researchers claim that it has been found in different environments
throughout Peru (Áncash, Ayacucho, etc.). Huge amounts of squash (C. moschata) seeds
have been found on the North Coast at Huaca Prieta, not just in contexts but also in human
excrement too.
Little evidence is available as regards the ways in which squash was cooked. It was apparently
roasted in most cases, because remains are occasionally found with burned areas due to the
combustion it was subjected to in the hearth, or eventually because of the pots’ heat.
Lucuma is another fruit that was consumed relatively frequently. Unlike other fruits which
held a large amount of water, Lucuma has a solid, thick texture and makes a big contribution
in carbohydrates, starch, various vitamins, minerals, and above all a high iron percentage that
is not common in fruits. This is a highly profitable resource because its wood is excellent
firewood, its dried fruits can be stored for years, and its trees are highly productive. Lucuma
was eaten since around 8500 B.C. if we consider the evidence from Guitarrero Cave, and it was
widespread in many archaeological sites up to Inca times. This was one of the favourite fruits
eaten by the Moche, and there is evidence that shows they planted lucuma trees.
Although its archaeological record is not so extensive, avocado did form part of the diet of
ancient Peru. Its pulp is highly digestible and provides a large amount of carbohydrates and
vitamins. It should be noted that dried avocado seeds were used against parasites. Botanists
believe the avocado was domesticated in Mexico and was then taken to Peru around 2200
B.C., because it has been documented at that time in the Valdivia culture. However, the dates
in which it was consumed in Peru are earlier; for instance, it has been found in the lower
Huarmey Valley around 3000 B.C. The cotyledons and other characteristics of Peruvian
avocado are different from the Mexicans, so some researchers use this to posit that Peru
probably was another centre of domestication of this essential plant.
576
14,000 years of food in Peru
Several pre-Hispanic Peruvian cultures consumed avocado but the finds come particularly
from the North Coast. Here it was present even in human faeces, which shows its direct
consumption.
But the fruit most eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru according to the documentation here assessed
was the guava. Although its provenance is not specifically known, it probably was in the
Amazon as some researchers have suggested. What is clear is that the record of its consumption
abounds. This implies a high absorption of vitamin C (ascorbic acid), which means that iron
nutrients may have been better assimilated by the organisms of the pre-Hispanic populations.
Guava also has more vitamins than other known fruits, like bananas. It has been eaten since
around 5300 B.C., and its consumption gradually increased on the Peruvian coast. Guava, coca,
and pacay are associated and their development had beneficial effects, particularly on the
North Coast. It is also known that this date marks the first presence of molle in archaeological
contexts, and this later gave rise to what is known as molle chicha in other contexts.
There is very scant information on the grenadia. Its record probably begins around 1870
B.C. in the Callejón de Huaylas. On the other hand there is evidence of the consumption
of passionfruit in a Moche cultural context around A.D. 400. Tumbo has similar provenance
and dates.
The caigua (Cyclanthera pedata) has been reported on the Central Coast with dates that fall
around 3800 B.C. Its consumption provides a high amount of vitamins, minerals, carbohydrates
and even proteins. The papaya has a high content of vitamin C amongst others, and dates that
go back to 5200 B.C., whilst Campomanesia with its high calcium, iron, and phosphorus values
goes back to around 2600 B.C. This fruit has a high vitamin B content and comes from the
Peruvian. Brazilian, and Bolivian Amazon; it should be noted that it was the most eaten fruit at
Cahuachi (Nasca) during the first centuries of our era.
The ciruela del fraile (peanut butter fruit, Bunchosia armeniaca) is a fruit that has lost favour
despite having a high vitaminic potential, particularly due to its carbohydrate and vitamin C
content. The oldest evidence of its consumption comes from Nanchoc, a site in the upper
Zaña Valley on the North Coast, around 7200 B.C. It can be found at various altitudes up to
300 masl. It was permanently consumed in Inca times, but apparently not abundantly.
The sweet pepino, which was also present in the diet of some of our pre-Hispanic population
essentially holds water and vitamin C, and has an anti-scurvy effect. Although it comes from
Ecuador and Colombia it is frequently found in Salinar sites some centuries before our era,
particularly on the North Coast.
On the other hand our well-known aguaymanto or capulí was also present in the pre-Hispanic
diet. We should not forget the amount of ascorbic acid it has or its iron absorption capacity,
and it also holds vitamins and minerals. Several pieces of evidence indicate that it was eaten
on the Central Coast since ca. 3000 B.C. Its seeds have been found in the excrement at the site
of Los Gavilanes, so its consumption at that time is clear.
577
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

The wild tomato was eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru since at least 5300 B.C., and it was present in ORÍGENES DEL CONSUMO DE ANIMALES EN EL PERÚ PRE HISPÁNICO
the Nasca culture.
11 000 10 000 9 000 8 000 7 000 6 000 5 000 4 000 3 000 2 000 1 000 0 a. C.

Although there is no record of it, it still is possible that chonta or peach palm was eaten in Llamas

the pre-Hispanic period. It has a high nutritional potential not just because of its vitamins, but Venado de cola blanca
Cuy
also because of its high iron content. The same thing can be said for the caimito. Finally, the
Vizcacha
wild prickly pear was already eaten on the Central Coast around 3000 B.C.
Zorros
Perros
Coca is one plant that always gives rise to comments and debates. It has been included Batracios /Anfibios
in this book as a stimulant, but the bromatological evidence indicates it potentially was a Lagasrtijas
food resource for the pre-Hispanic population. It truly is an alkaloid, but several parts of Lobos marinos/ballenas
the plant—like its leaves and their calcium content—may have had a determinant role in a
society without dairy products. We have already assessed the various biochemical studies
and its consumption evidently was due not just to its stimulant effects. Its presence goes
back at least to 6200 B.C., as follows from the research undertaken by Tom Dillehay in the favoured for consumption or to prepare what is known as charqui, i.e. dry and salted llama
upper Zaña Valley. Then we have a series of contexts that include coca leaves and go beyond meat. The latter considerably increased the proteic value of meat (up to 57%) and made it last
consumption, which could be interpreted instead as rituals. This subject is still being studied. longer.

Thallophyte plants, i.e. algae, were also profusely eaten in the pre-Hispanic period, and this
entailed an excellent nutritional potential that included elements such as magnesium, calcium,
phosphorus, potassium, and even vitamin C (ascorbic acid) which, as is known, makes iron
absorption viable. Algae also hold 10-12% proteins and are an ideal foodstuff. Its consumption
is evident since around 3000 B.C., but we can speculate that it began before and that it was
extensive on the Peruvian coast wherever it took place. Conclusive evidence that algae were
eaten comes from Virú, a site on the North Coast where algae remains were found in human
excrement, which can be dated to around the first centuries of our era.
Assessing the significance and antiquity of the consumption of animals in pre-Hispanic Peru is
also a complicated matter. We have seen that the information is found segmented and just as
with plant foods, there is little evidence the animals were cooked (Diagram 3).
Camelids are the first case to be examined here. Being the biggest mammals in the Andes,
they clearly were a major source of animal proteins. Llamas have an overall weight of 90 kilos,
and each 100 grams of flesh provide over 24% proteins and almost 30 grams of fat. It is known
that camelids were essentially used as beasts of burden, but we cannot rule out that once
domesticated they were eaten as of 5400 B.C. onwards. There even is some more ancient
evidence of the processing and consumption of these animals from Pikimachay Cave, but it
still is not clear. In any case, once domesticated camelids would have formed a permanent
alimentary stock for the pre-Hispanic population both in the highlands as well as on the coast.
We have seen that at Telarmachay a series of fragmented rocks were found inside a pit in what
can be interpreted as a pachamanca, which quite probably included camelid flesh; this was
associated with pestle-like grinding stones, which evidently indicates the cooking process. In
Asana (in the highlands of Moquegua), on the other hand, a series of pits were found in the
ground that may have acted as heaters, ‘tables’ or kitchen stone tools where camelids were
processed; the latter’s long bones had cut marks that evinced their butchery during the fourth
millennium B.C.
The occurrence of llama bones is extensive, as shown by Bonavia’s compendium of camelids in
the Andean area, but the evidence of their consumption is always scant. For instance, pieces
of camelids have been found at the site of Chavín de Huántar, particularly from the rib area
and the legs; it is therefore believed these animals were roasted and served in bowls, but not
enough evidence is available to make a detailed reconstruction.
Some cases, like that of the Mochica culture, can be characterised by llama consumption
as food and as a major source of meat and proteins. For instance, Huaca del Sol held a large
number of cut and calcined llama bones, which can be interpreted as roast llama meat
that the Moche ate on the North Coast during the first centuries of our era. Young llamas
formed the herds used to provide meat, so it can be inferred that at this site the Moche
preferred soft meat. The Chimú likewise dismembered llamas to cook and eat them, as was
documented here.

Little is as yet known of how camelids were processed. A series of zoo-archaeological studies We can speculate regarding the processing these animals underwent from the moment they
have shown they were cut up and processed before consumption. The cuts in the diaphysis, were killed. Shelia Pozorski claims they were first skinned and then dismembered; the body parts
as well as in zones like the sternum and the spinal column seem to be commonplace in were then cut at the joints in order to make them smaller. Ribs and vertebrae are most of the
the archaeological sites where camelid remains are found. It follows that some parts were bones burned, so it can be inferred that the Moche favoured the flesh from these body parts.

578 579
Elmo Leon
The associated presence of some foodstuffs warrants speculation regarding possible
combinations, for instance llama meat, coconut and snails (caracol de loma) alongside other
molluscs.
For more recent times—immediately prior to Inca times, and in Inca times proper—it has
been found that llama flesh was also eaten in some sites in Tumbes like Cabeza de Vaca.
According to the study made by Alfredo Altamirano the meat was previously processed and
was particularly roasted, toasted, and boiled.
We should also ask ourselves what the roasted meat of these llamas tasted like, because
the llama excrement found in several of the sites analysed included maize, carob, and other
fruits. It can be surmised that it had a good taste even though we do not know what it was
seasoned with.
The taruca, the white-tailed deer and the collared peccary are three other mammals that
should be borne in mind as part of the pre-Hispanic alimentary resources. The taruca may
have been a substantial contribution to the diet of the first high altitude populations, at
least from 2500 masl upwards, whereas the white-tailed deer was spread over a larger area in
pre-Hispanic Peru; this means it was eaten in various parts of the Andes, particularly during
the Moche period, but the evidence of its oldest consumption probably dates to the early
Holocene around 10,000 B.C. The white-tailed deer was eaten both on the coast as in the
highlands, in the puna, and even in the ceja de selva. In some cases it was shown that the long
bones had been cur in order to extract the marrow and eat it.
Interestingly enough, the collared peccary has been found at Nanchoc, in the upper
Zaña Valley, but its natural habitat is not here but in the Amazon. One can well imagine a
varied environment by 9200 B.C., or simply exchange networks that go back to the earliest
occupations.
The guinea pig certainly is a characteristic rodent of the Central Andes, which probably was
first domesticated in the southern Altiplano and around the modern-day Puno region. It must
have been a major alimentary source because it comprises 20% proteins and 7% fat, which
were essential nutrients for our pre-Hispanic forebears. Its distribution and consumption were
extremely vast by the time of the Spanish conquest, so we can deduce it was profusely eaten
in various parts of the Andes.
Considering the Ayacucho documentation, the domestication of the guinea pig seems
to have paralleled that of the camelids around 5600 and 4100 B.C. There is a series of
evidence that indicates guinea pigs were consumed at high altitudes. The Moche, for
instance, consumed guinea pigs, as is evinced by their excrement. It is possible that guinea
pigs, molluscs, fish and llama meat were for instance prepared in one same Moche site.
Strangely enough the viscacha has a similar distribution, albeit more restricted than that
of guinea pigs. The dates when the consumption of this animal began also go back to the
early Holocene.
580
14,000 years of food in Peru
No zoo-archaeological reconstruction has thus far been made of guinea pig processing, but
the ethnographic observations are quite clear in this regard. Some of them state that the
animal is killed by breaking its neck; its skin is then removed and the animal is carved before
it is cooked. It should come as no surprise that guinea pigs were essentially roasted on the
hearth, a typical procedure followed with many pre-Hispanic foodstuffs.
The fox is another animal that formed part of the pre-Hispanic diet, or at least two species,
the Sechuran fox and the Andean fox. Its remains are spread all over Peru, but establishing
what species were eaten is not easy because there actually is no evidence of burned canids
or with traces of combustion.
What is clear is that dogs were eaten in pre-Hispanic Peru. No information is available
regarding their culinary preparation, but records from other parts of America indicate the ribs
and the spinal column were particularly favoured. Considerations on the dog races found in
pre-Hispanic Peru aside, these animals had a clear and wide distribution in the Andes since
ca. 8000 B.C. Even so, it is not that clear whether dogs were consumed or not. We only have
evidence for this on the Central Coast in the first millennium after Christ. Later there is much
more documentation on dog consumption, particularly for Moche and Chimú contexts on
the North Coast. The bones have cuts in the atlas that are interpreted as having been made to
kill the animal; however, there is also a series of cuts in the epiphysis of the long bones, which
several scholars believe are cuts made in order to remove the flesh from the bones prior to
its preparation and consumption.
Amphibians and batrachians seem to have been part of the pre-Hispanic diet since around
8000 B.C. They then appear in many contexts on the coast and in the central puna. Once
again however, there is no clear evidence of their consumption because there are no remains
of these animals with combustion marks, which would show they were roasted. The same
thing holds for the famed Junín frogs and for salamanders.
Several reptiles have been found in various sites, and can be interpreted as residues of pre-
Hispanic foodstuffs. Iguanas may have been eaten as well as the desert tegu, which have an
enormous potential in calcium and proteins. These animals are known to have been consumed
since the Paiján epoch because they have been found in large amount in the middens of Paiján
camps. Their consumption—roasted or spit roasted on the Northern Coast therefore dates
to around 8000 B.C.
Marine mammals evidently were part of the pre-Hispanic menu. Their consumption is
probably quite ancient and goes back to ca. 10,700 B.C.—i.e. during the last ice age or Younger
Dryas—on the Tacna littoral. This type of mammal surely guaranteed a large amount of animal
protein and fat.
Let us turn now to birds (Diagram 4). A coup de l’oeil clearly shows birds were eaten since
the last glaciation, particularly on the southern littoral. For instance, the Andean partridge
or tinamou has been found at Quebrada Tacahuay (in the vicinity of Ilo, in Moquegua)
581
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

TIME CHART OF BIRDS AS FOOD IN ANCIENT PERU Pelicans, on the contrary, were eaten earlier, around 10,700 B.C. at Quebrada Tacahuay, in the
vicinity of Ilo on the coast of Moquegua. During the pre-Hispanic period it was probably
11 000 10 000 9 000 8 000 7 000 6 000 5 000 4 000 3 000 2 000 1 000 0 a. C.
eaten both on the North as well as on the Central Coast.
Tinamou
Cormorant
Pigeons apparently were also consumed since the early Holocene around 9700 B.C., as
Peruvian booby
well as shearwaters and long-tailed mockingbirds ca. 8000 B.C. There is, however, no
Seagull
Muscovy Duck
clear evidence of its consumption, even though its continuous presence in archaeological
Peican
contexts and middens suggests it.
Pigeon
Shearwater Humboldt penguins may also have been part of the pre-Hispanic diet but there is not much
Mimids evidence other than the presence of its remains, which were probably transported for
Penguin consumption by human groups since ca. 8000 B.C.

in contexts that date to 10,700 B.C., as well as in Guitarrero Cave around 9,000 B.C. The
ingestion of this bird involves a great nutritional potential in proteins, calories, fat, and
phosphorus alone.
The probable consumption of cormorant in this same site has the same age, while on the
North Coast it dates to 8000 B.C. in a Paiján cultural context. A series of marks and burn marks
showing it was subjected to fire have been documented in some bones belonging to this bird
at sites like Huaca Prieta, on the North Coast of Peru. At Caral there seems to be evidence
that roast ormorants were prepared: several fragments of femurs and sternums suggest the
possible consumption of this bird’s pectoral zone and the lower limbs, which somewhat recalls
our modern day customs (nowadays we would say legs and breasts). Cormorant consumption
is clear in other, later cultures (Mochica, Chimú, Nasca).
The Peruvian booby is one of the birds eaten around this same epoch. It has been found in
Preceramic sites as well as in the Huaca de la Luna, so it has been inferred that the Mochica
cooked and ate it.
Gulls were probably eaten on the Central Coast since 5300 B.C. Later, it is evident that the
Moche ate them because the bones of these birds have been found with cut marks in certain
areas, indicating their dismemberment for culinary processing. The same thing has been found
in coastal Inca contexts.
There also are several ducks and herons for which there is no certainty as regards their
consumption. They do appear in archaeological contexts, so it is possible that they were part
of the pre-Hispanic diet.
Again, it is not easy establishing whether the Muscovy duck was eaten, and all the more so
considering Angulo’s hypothesis which claims this bird was used to exterminate plagues. This,
however, does not rule out it being eaten.
Our bromatological assessment unfortunately cannot go far due to a lack of figures for these
species, specifically for each of them. Even so they evidently were taken in many cases to the
respective archaeological sites in order to prepare and feed on them, even when the ice age
had just ended.
From a bromatological standpoint we have more sources on the fish eaten in pre-Hispanic
Peru (Diagram 5). When it comes to fish we should first of all give the anchovy its proper place.
Public monuments like Caral, Áspero and the truncated pyramids of the Central and North
Coast exist to a large extent due to the enormous stock of anchovies, along with the plants
that were already being consumed throughout the transition from the Middle to the Late
Holocene around 4000-3500 B.C. The anchovy is a fish that was much eaten by the pre-
Hispanic population in almost every Preceramic site, particularly between 3500B.C. and the
time of the Inca. Its alimentary significance lies in its content of iron, protein, and phosphorus,
as well as certain vitamins. Its most ancient association with alimentary consumption goes
back to ca. 10,700 B.C. on the South Coast of Peru (Moquegua).
An interesting datum is that a way to prevent the anchovy flesh from spoiling using Calclum
nitrate wrappings (caliche) had already been found at least by 5300 B.C. The head was removed
in order to ensure better preservation. As regards preparation, all that is known from certain
records is that the meat was roasted beside the hearths, but it can be assumed that once
pottery was used some of the dishes were stewed; what is missing here is more research in
order to confirm this. The amount of anchovies consumed was so huge that in Chincha, in
Inca times, there were storage houses solely to store and preserve these fish, both for local
consumption as well as for exchange. The history of the sardine on the table of pre-Hispanic
Peru is similar, albeit in a smaller proportion in comparison with the anchovy.
The consumption of Peruvian silverside on the coasts of Peru is more recent and goes back to
2500 B.C. The record is not as thick, but we do know that it was eaten both on the North and
the South Coast, and that in Wari times it was even exchanged with the highlands at sites like
Cerro Baúl. During the first centuries of our era the Nasca used algae to keep the silversides
in good condition, as was evinced by the excavations made at Cahuachi.

582 583
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

TIME CHART OF FISHES AS FOOD IN ANCIENT PERU then in various coastal sites, and somewhat more on the Central and South Coast. Mackerel
has also been found in the Moche sites examined in this book. Its occurrence indicates a
11 000 10 000 9 000 8 000 7 000 6 000 5 000 4 000 3 000 2 000 1 000 0 a. C.
good ingestion of proteins, calcium, fat, phosphorus, and iron.
Peruvian anchovy
Sardine
The pámpano is a fish eaten almost exclusively on the North Coast. It appeared much later
Peruvian silverside
around the first millennium B.C.
Croaker
Drum
Peruvian sea catfish
The record for the lorna drum is far older and it probably is the oldest fish eaten in Peru at
Pacific Jack mackerel
Quebrada Jaguay, a site close to Camaná where it goes back to 11,040 B.C. It was subsequently
Lorna/drum eaten particularly on the Central and South Coast, and apparently less on the North Coast.
Corvina/drum This is one of the most eaten fish of pre-Hispanic Peru.
Flathead Grey Mullet
Palm Ruff The corvine drum is another fish that was widely eaten quite early. Its bigger size and its
Peruvian Weakfish proteic, fat and vitamin C content made it an invaluable addition to the pre-Hispanic diet. It
Perico abounds on the far southern coast of Peru, between Tacna and Moquegua, since ca. 10,700
Robalo B.C. Similar dates for this fish have also been recorded in Paiján contexts on the North
Peruvian Hake Coast, so it was eaten a long a large part of the coast. The few data available regarding its
Pacific menhaden preparation simply indicate that it frequently was just roasted beside the hearths.
Pacific bonito
Peruvian grunt
The flathead grey mullet is another important fish. Its consumption began both on the
Smooth hound/Tollo
North as well as on the South Coast since around 10,000 B.C., but it seems to have focused
on the first of these two regions, where it even reached Tumbes in the period immediately
before the Inca.
The mojarrilla was also part of the pre-Hispanic diet since around 7800 B.C., particularly on
the North Coast. The medusafish is the most recent addition to resources of this kind, particularly on the
Central Coast of Peru, ca. 3200 B.C. Bonavia was able to verify its consumption at least four
The Peruvian banded croaker was favourite fish in pre-Hispanic Peru, especially on the North thousand years ago in the Huarmey Valley.
Coast, and secondarily on the Central Coast. Its consumption goes back to 9700 B.C. and
it has been found in sites very far inland, so it was presumably salted or dried in order to The Peruvian weakfish is also widespread and its consumption record begins in 7500 B.C.
preserve it until it reached its destination. The banded croaker has been found associated on the Moquegua littoral; it then spread to other parts of the coast. As for mahi-mahi, the
with other foodstuffs like llama and cormorant flesh, and even with snails, so it can be only record available is that of the Mochica area, but there may be more evidence that has
speculated that when these groups fed they combined these resources. not been included here. Snooks on the other hand are much more recent and their remains
date to 2500 B.C. on the Central Coast.
The Pacific porgy is another fish that appears quite early in the archaeological record since
9700 B.C. on the North and Central Coast, but in less profusion. The skipjack tuna is also scant The hake merluza is found exclusively on the North Coast, and only around 200 B.C. Like
and has been found only in Inca context, but we cannot rule out there are other records that many other fish in our list for pre-Hispanic Peru it has about 20% protein as well as a
I was unable to go over. The tamborín is a similar case—it has been found only in one site on sizable proportion of calcium, iron, phosphorus, and vitamins, which means it was a high-
the Central Coast and dates to around seven thousand years ago. quality food.

More data is available on the Central Coast for the Peruvian sea catfish, at least since 5300
B.C. Its high calcium and protein content made it an essential foodstuff in the diet of the pre-
Hispanic population, particularly on the North Coast.
The significance the Chilean jack mackerel had in the pre-Hispanic epoch is clear just from
the archaeological documentation. It appears in 10700 B.C. on the Moquegua littoral and
The oldest record of Pacific menhaden comes from the South coast, at Tacna ca. 6200 B.C. and
then spread to other sites in this zone as well as part of the Central Coast, but not northwards.
It is possible that the consumption of the Pacific bonito, which apparently began around 7500
B.C., provided a large amount of proteins, minerals, and vitamins. The Peruvian grunt appears
in the South Coast’s archaeological record around 8000 B.C., and it was consumed both on
the South and the Central Coast. Sicyases sanguineus or pejesapo, and the Peruvian morwong

584 585
Elmo Leon 14,000 years of food in Peru

were consumed as of 6200 B.C. mainly on the South and Central Coast. The horse mackerel TIME CHART OF MOLLUSCS AND CRUSTACEANS AS FOOD IN ANCIENT PERU
has been found in archaeological contexts on the South Coast starting in 6200 B.C., the giant
11 000 10 000 9 000 8 000 7 000 6 000 5 000 4 000 3 000 2 000 1 000 0 a. C.
blenny around 200 B.C., the Chalapo clinid around 2300 B.C., and the mero ca. 5400 B.C.
Chiton
Chiton/Barquillo
This list closes off with the fine flounder, which was frequently eaten since 3200 B.C., and the
Limpet
speckled-tail flounder since 9700 B.C.—one of the most ancient ones. The final part of the
Black snail
record includes the black cusk-eel, which goes back to 1600 B.C., while the bagre negro was Chiliean abalone
eaten since the Paiján occupation around 10,200 B.C. Tollo consumption was more widespread Land snail
since 6200 B.C., and the raya is found in many sites since around 11,200 B.C., which makes it Black ark
the most ancient fish in the record. Its high protein content seems to surpass that of all other Common mussel
fishes. To finish this review of marine fish we have the sharks, which were eaten in considerable Mussel
amounts as of 6200 B.C., like the blue shark off the coast of Tacna. Scallop
Wedge clam
River fish like, catfish life, and Peruvian silverside can be looked up in the book. They must have Sea Urchin
supplemented the diet of the valley dwellers both on the coast and in the highlands. Clearly Barnacle
there is not enough information in this regard due to the lack of research and of publications. Purple crab
Shrimp
We now briefly turn to the potential and antiquity of mollusc and crustacea consumption
(Diagram 6). Besides protein, this type of fauna contains several minerals that are crucial for
humans like magnesium, sodium, salt, and potassium inter alia. The various species of chiton instance, are typical of the far North Coast and were consumed since ca. 10,500 B.C. The “choro
and barquillo are present in certain sites since quite early. The former appeared in 6400 B.C. común” also appeared quite early in the pre-Hispanic record ca. 9500 B.C., and is widespread
in the Tacna littoral, and the latter in Huarmey in 5300 B.C. all over the coast. The antiquity of the “choro zapato” goes back to 8000 B.C. Both species of
choros are likewise strongly represented in the inventory of molluscs consumed, particularly
The various purple keyhole limpet presented in this book were part of the pre-Hispanic diet on the Central and South Coast, ant to a very lesser extent on the North Coast.
since 9500 B.C. A whole malacological family of little snails can be reviewed and it probably
formed part of the diet people had since the Early Holocene. Scallops date to 8000 B.C. and are widely represented in several coastal sites including
the North Coast, like in the previous case. Several clam species are present in various
The pata de burro snail was widely consumed in pre-Hispanic Peru since 9700 B.C. Thais archaeological sites on the littoral with dates that range between 10,000 and 9500 B.C. This
chocolata or caracol negro has a high protein content and it probably fed the pre-Hispanic also is an alimentary stock that must be borne in mind when considering the diet of these
coastal population since at least 7600 B.C. There was a score of snails that formed part of the pre-Hispanic populations.
alimentary stock presented in this book and which go back to the middle Holocene, which
had a high nutritional potential. Ensis macha or macha is a representative bivalve of the Peruvian coast. It has been dated on the
South Coast in Moquegua to ca. 11,000 B.C. Its presence in various sites indicates that it long was
The land snail (Scutalus) is probably the most studied of those eaten wherever there were an essential pre-Hispanic foodstuff. In some sites it has been found with traces of having been
lomas, but the evidence is concentrated on the North Coast since the time of the Paiján burned, which suggests it was cooked simply with the heat given out by the hearths.
culture around 11,000 B.C. In his excavations in the upper Zaña Valley, Dillehay dated them
at 11,400 B.C., so snails—which were probably roasted—are one of the earliest eaten in pre- Sea urchins were also consumed but in more recent dates, ca. 2500 B.C.
Hispanic Peru.
The marine diet was supplemented with barnacles, which have been documented since
On the other hand the consumption of piques like the caracol pantufla goes back to 9500 9700 B.C., and with various species of crabs whose dates begin around 8000 B.C., with the
B.C. Several other piques species were also part of the pre-Hispanic diet, and were apparently Platyxanthus orbignyi crab the crab which most abounds in the archaeological remains. Crab
concentrated on the North Coast. ingestion was significant not just because of their protein content, but also for their thiamine
and vitamin C. The fifteen crab species listed in this book were all found in archaeological
Bivalves are the molluscs that most appear in the pre-Hispanic record. Conchas negras, for excavations, thus clearly indicating they were consumed in most cases. On the other hand

586 587
Elmo Leon
shrimp has only been found once in a context at Cahuachi, the main Nasca shrine at the
beginning of our era.
There were other types of pre-Hispanic consumption like entomophagy. Although there is only
one piece of evidence of coleoptera consumption in the faecal materials of one individual
that dates to ca. 2450 B.C., it is possible that there is more evidence as yet not recovered.
Some types of insects are quite important in terms of fat and protein. Although the people in
the past had no knowledge of the ‘Western’ bromatology of this type of resource (like many
others), it is possible that they were able to intuitively glimpse some of these properties by
experience.
We should recall in this regard the insect-eating Amazonian customs, which are not few. As
Bonavia pointed out, this type of record should come as no surprise in the near future, once
archaeology’s recording methods become finer-grained.
The same holds for geophagy, a subject that has been broached by pioneers like Duccio
Bonavia. ‘Earth’ is often found when pre-Hispanic human excrement is analysed. Our Andean
forebears were acquainted with the essentially palliative and healing properties of this type of
ingestion, as well as the mineral properties of clays and earths—so they ingested them. Several
chemical properties were apparently known by these peoples, including ashes, alkaloids and
so on. Ethnographic data era essential for a clearer picture of the significance of geophagy,
as it lets us value the significance its ingestion had for the everyday life of the pre-Hispanic
population. The same holds for salt, which was found accumulated in various sites by marine
or lacustrine factors, and so on.
Since our main goal here is establishing the list of pre-Hispanic foodstuffs, dating and assessing
them, here we will not go into the techniques used to prepare and cook certain species, or
even the farming technology. We have been reassessing the real age of past events, so here
we should draw attention to the real antiquity of certain types of technology such as artificial
irrigation, which has now been dated to the sixth millennium B. C. Dates here are not worth
in and of themselves, but by what they imply in the world history of these technologies, Asia
included. Artificial irrigation techniques that appeared at such an early date do not abound
in the world. This was a result of the precocious and innovative Andean horticulturists, who
rose in the Middle Holocene
We have seen, on the other hand, the significance the desiccation of various natural resources
had, starting with potatoes, charqui and many others. The biochemical values and some
resulting beneficial effects of chicha, amongst other beverages, have to be emphasised. These
effects, which must one day be assessed through chemical analyses published in peer-review
journals, were most often been posited by Antúnez de Mayolo.
This chapter had two objectives. The first was to try and broadly verify the type of
information found in the archaeological contexts from over 120 sites in Peru. The impression
we get is that although maize was not at first too important, it gradually gained significance
588
14,000 years of food in Peru
throughout time. Even so, this does not explain the large maize storage bins dated mostly to
the third millennium B.C. I discussed this point with Bonavia several times and he believed
that the picture was incomplete, which was why it was hard to get an overall image of what
was happening since the Late Preceramic Period; besides there were other sites similar to
Los Gavilanes. But it is obvious that many other plants, like cereals and tubers, were more
important at higher altitudes where simply cannot be grown, as is the case of the central and
southern puna. What is apparently clear is that the Inca imposed its consumption and made
it the major foodstuff in their empire.
Our attempt to establish certain culinary techniques through the archaeological record alone
achieved poor results indeed because ethnography was not used. Kitchens seem to have been
extremely practical, with hearths and later with clay pots. The dinnerware was simple expect
when preparing chicha or other types of fermented beverages. Readers will notice that more
attention was given to an exam of the preceramic evidence, i.e. the most ancient one in
Peruvian sites. The surprising thing here is the wide range of resources—over three hundred
and this can easily rise.
The evidence likewise indicates that the highland populations that were experimenting with
pristine crops did so almost concurrently with those on the littoral, especially with the recent
research undertaken on the South Coast. These people ate a myriad fishes and molluscs.
Besides, the recent evidence clearly shows that marine resources were exploited along with
some very early plants, like pumpkins or squash, beans, chili peppers, and eventually peanuts.
The health condition of the pre-Hispanic population is hard to assess. We have included here
over a dozen cases of parasite-induced diseases, but it is still not clear whether these were
due to the ingestion of spoiled food, simply because some foodstuffs already had parasites,
or due to malnutrition. All three cases are feasible. However, the bromatological data clearly
shows that a wide range of resources was available for consumption, and that a balanced diet
existed not just on the coast but on the highlands as well. It is regrettable that no Amazonian
data are available because many of these plants had their origin in the arc that extends from
the Andes to the tropical forest, and it is crucial for a reconstruction of their specific routes
and histories, as well as to assess alimentary preferences.
Culinary techniques, on the other hand, seem basic, probably because there is no fine-grained
register that can detect them. Placing the fish, the tuber, mollusc or cereal beside the fire
seems to have been the technique par excellence. Following the ethnographic accounts, their
ingestion must have been supplemented with a series of herbs or condiments that we are in
no condition to perceive, because there is no evidence that provides this kind of information.
Heating techniques like thermal stones which has been translated here as pachamanca and
which go to 6200 B.C., were somehow replicated in other puna sites, as was surmised by
Danièle Lavallée, a French archaeologist who authored one of the excavation reports that can
be used as a yardstick against which other reports of this kind can be compared. Procedures
such as boiling or stewing cannot be ruled out, but the information available is extremely
scant; it does, however, warrant speculation regarding this type of cooking in pre-Hispanic
589
Elmo Leon
Peru. We have gone over some documentation for the Wanka culture in this regard, in which
a series of tubers and cereals were boiled for consumption in large vessels. Fruits were eaten
directly just like we now do, which means their vitaminic properties and mineral content
must have been intact at the time of ingestion.
Cutlery was not used, just like the chronicles reported. It was only used when preparing food
or in elite or ritual contexts. If I may speak out of personal experience, my grandmother
Dorila taught me to eat with my hands—obviously clean, because I washed them up as soon
as I returned from school. To tell the truth, I still dislike the metallic flavour of the fork in my
mouth. In their ancestral wisdom, the Japanese apparently did the same.
As an epilogue, we believe this subject requires a major, interdisciplinary roundtable to assess
the potential of some of Peru’s native foodstuffs, and reconsider the modern Peruvian diet.
Someone said that Peru has all regions; I would add that we have all flavours, and our palate
has developed the subtleness required to perceive them; hence many of our friends in the
Northern Hemisphere who taste the Peruvian cuisine are infatuated with it. But as my wife
says, the base ingredients are in Peru: our seasoning, our chili pepper, and some other spices
were completed after 1532, all of which, the readers willing, will be the subject matter of
another volume.
590
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
Aaronson, Sheldon. 2000. Algae. In: The Cambridge World
History of Food, volume 1, Kiple, Kenneth F., and Kriemhild
Connè. Ornelas (Editores), pp. 231-249. Cambridge
University Press.
Aceituno, F.J. and Castillo Espitia, N.C. (2005) Mobility strategies
in Colombia’s middle mountain range between the Early
and Middle Holocene. Before Farming 2: 1–17.
Aldenderfer, Mark. 1990. Late Preceramic ceremonial
Architecture at Asana, southern Peru. Antiquity 64: 479-493.
Allem, Antonio C. 1994. The origin of Manihot esculenta
Crantz (Euphorbiaceae). Genetic Resources and Crop
Evolution 41: 133-150.
Allison, Marvin J., D. Mendoza, and Alejandro Pezzia. 1973.
Documentation of a case of tuberculosis in Pre-columbian
America. American Review of Respiratory Diseases 107:
985-991.
Allison, Marvin J., Daniel Mendoza, and Alejandro Pezzia. 1974. A
radiographic Approach to Chilhood Illness in Precolumbian
Inhabitants of Southern Peru. American Journal of Physical
Anthropology 40: 409-416.
Allison, Marvin J., Guillermo Focacci and Calogero Santoro. 1982. The
Pre-Columbian Dog from Arica, Chile. American Journal of
Physical Anthropology 59: 209-304.
Alva, Walter and Christopher B. Donnan. 1993. Royal tombs of
Sipán. Los Angeles: Fowler Museum of Cultural History,
University of California.
Álvarez-Romero, J. and R. A. Medellín. 2005. Odocoileus
virginianus. Vertebrados superiores exóticos en México:
diversidad, distribución y efectos potenciales. Instituto de
Ecología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Bases
de datos SNIB-CONABIO. Proyecto U020. México. D.F.
Ambrose, S. H. 1993. Isotopic analysis of paleodiets:
methodological and interpretive considerations. En:
Investigations of Ancient Human Tissue, edited by M.
591
K. Sandford, pp. 59–130. Gordon and Breach Science
Publishers, Lkaplananghorne. Philadelphia.
Ambrose, Stanley and M. Anne Katzenberg (editores). 2002.
Biogeochemical Approaches to Paleodietary Analysis.
Published in cooperation with the Society for Archaeological
Sciences. Kluwer Academic Publishers. New York.
Ambrose, Stanley and M. Anne Katzenberg, pp. 159-171. Published
in cooperation with the Society for Archaeological
Sciences. Kluwer Academic Publishers. New York.
Anders, Martha B. 1981. Investigation of Stage Storage Facilities
in Pampa Grande, Peru. Journal of Field Archaeology 8 (4):
391-404.
Anders, Martha. 1991. Structure and Function at the Planned
Site of Azángaro: Cautionary Notes for the Model of Huari
as a Centralized Secular State. En: Huari Administrative
Structure: Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State
Government, edited by W. H. Isbell and G. F. McEwan, pp.
165–197. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C.
Anderson, Edgar. 1952. Plants, man and life. Little Brown and
Company. Boston.
Anderson, John, J. B. 2000. Phosphorus. The Cambridge World
History of Food, volume 1, edited by Kiple, Kenneth F.
and Kriemhild Connè. Ornelas, pp. 834-843. Cambridge
University Press.
Andrews, Jean. 2000. Chilli Peppers. The Cambridge World
History of Food, volume 1, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple
and Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 281-288. Cambridge
University Press.
Andrushko, Valerie A., Elva C. Torres Pino, and Viviana Bellifemine.
2006. The Burials at Sacsahuaman and Chokepukio: A
Bioarchaeological Case Study of Imperialism from the
Capital of the Inca Empire. Ñawpa Pacha 28: 63-92.
Angulo, Enrique G. 1998. Interpretación biológica acerca de
la domesticación del pato criollo (Cairina moschata).
Elmo Leon
Bulletin de l´Institut Francais d´Etudes Andins 27 (1): 17-40.
Antúnez de Mayolo, Santiago. 1981. La nutrición en el antiguo
Perú. Banco Central de Reserva del Peru. Lima.
Antunez de Mayolo, Santiago. 1996. Puede la dieta precolombina
superar la malnutrición contemporánea? En: Cultura,
Identidad y Cocina en el Perú, compilado por Rosario
Olivas Weston, pp. 17-53. Escuela Profesional de Turismo
y Hotelería. Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación,
Turismo y Psicología. Universidad de San Martin de Porres.
Lima.
Astocóndor, Mauro Gilberto Mariano. 1993. Identificación de
Muestras Ictiológicas. En: Chavin de Huántar. Excavaciones
en la Galería de las Ofrendas. Materialien zur Allgemeinen
und Vergleichenden Archaeologie. Kommission fuer
allgemeine und vergleichende Archaeologie, Band 51, pp:
414-415. Verlag Philipp von Zabern – Mainz am Rhein.
Aufderheide A. C, J. E. Buikstra, L. Cartmell, and C. Weems. 1991.
The prehistory of Andean coca leaf chewing practices.
Paper presented at the 90th annual meeting of American
Anthropological Association, November 20–24, Chicago,
Illinois.
Aufderheide, Arthur C. and Conrado Rodríguez-Martin. 1998. The
Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human Paleopathology.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Austin, Daniel. F. 1987. The taxonomy, evolution and genetic
diversity of the sweet potatoes and related wild species.
En: International Potato Center. Exploitation, maintenance,
and utilization of sweet potato genetic resources. Report
of the Sweetpotato Planning Conference. p. 27-59.
Austin, Daniel F. and Zósimo Huamán. 1996. A Synopsis of Ipomoea
(Convolvulaceae) in the Americas. Taxon 45 (1): 3-38.
Backo, H.C., Verano, J.W., 2001. Early tuberculosis in prehistoric
northern coastal Peru. In: Paper presented at the 28th
Annual Meeting of the Paleopathology Association,
Kansas City, Missouri.
Banack, Sandra Anne, Xanic J. Rondón, and Wilfredo Diaz-
Huamanchumo. 2004. Indigenous Cultivation of Totora
(Schoenoplectus californicus, Cyperaceae) in Peru.
Economic Botany 58 (1): 11–20.
Bandy, Matthew S. 1992. Population and History in the
Ancient Titicaca Basin. A dissertation submitted in partial
satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor
of Philosophy. University of California, Berkeley.
Baraybar do Carmo, José Pablo. 1993. Identificación de los
Huesos Humanos. En: Chavin de Huántar. Excavaciones en
592
la Galería de las Ofrendas. Materialien zur Allgemeinen
und Vergleichenden Archaeologie. Kommission fuer
allgemeine und vergleichende Archaeologie, Band 51, pp:
394-402. Verlag Philipp von Zabern – Mainz am Rhein.
Baraybar, José Pablo. 1999. Diet and Death in a Fog Oasis Site
in Central Coastal Peru: A Trace Element Study of Tomb 1
Malanche 22. Journal of Archaeological Science 26: 471–
482.
Barker Andrew, Barney Venables, Stanley M. Stevens Jr., Kent W Seeley,
Peggy Wang and Steve Wolverton. 2011. An Optimized Approach
for Protein Residue Extraction and Identification from
Ceramics After Cooking. Journal of Archaeological
Method and Theory 18: 407-439.
Barrio, Javier. 2010. First records and conservation status
of Mazama Rufina (Cervidae, Artiodactyla) from Peru.
Mastozoologia neotropical 17 (1): 117-122.
Barrios Healey, Sacha (2010). La Anatomia de la Hoja de Coca.
http://www.comunidadtawantinsuyu.org/articulos/
AnatomiadelaHojadeCoca.pdf.
Bauer, Brian S. 1992. The development of the Inca state.
Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bazan del Campo, Francisco. 1988. Malacología de Cerro
Culebras, Valle del Chillón. Boletín de Lima 56: 31-33.
Beadle, George W. 1939. Teosinte and the origin of maize.
Journal of Heredity 30: 245-247.
Beadle, George W. 1972. The mystery of maize. Field Museum
of Natural History Bulletin 43: 2-11.
Beadle, George W. 1977. The origin of Zea mays. En: Origins
of Agriculture, edited by C. A. Reed, pp. 615-635. Mouton
Press, The Hague.
Beadle, George. W. 1980. The ancestry of corn. Scientific
American 242: 112-119.
Béarez, Philippe, Manuel Gorriti, and Peter Eckhout. 2003. Primeras
Observaciones sobre el Uso de Invertrebrados y Peces
Marinos en Pachacamac (Perú) en el siglo XIV (Periodo
Intermedio Tardío). Boletín del Instituto Francés de
Estudios Andinos 32 (1): 51-67.
Benfer, R. A., Jr. 1990. The Preceramic Period site of Paloma,
Peru: Bioindications of improving adaptation to sedentism.
Latin American Antiquity 1 (4): 284-318.
Benfer, Robert, A., John T. Typpo, Vicki B. Graf and Edward E. Pickett.
1978. Mineral Analysis of Ancient Peruvian Hair. American
Journal of Physical Antrhopology 48: 277-282.
Benfer, Robert A., Jr. 1999. Proyecto de Eaxcavaciones en
Paloma, Valle de Chilca, Peru. Boletín de Arqueología
PUCP 3: 213-237.
Benfer, Robert A. 2008. Early villages. En: Encyclopaedia of
Archaeology, editada por Deborah Pearsall, pp. 368-380.
Elsevier.
Bennett, Wendell C. 1939. Archaeology of the North Coast of
Peru. An Account of Exploration and Excavation in Viru
and Lambayeque Valleys. American Museum of Natural
History Anthropological Papers vol. 37, No. 1, New York.
Bennett, Wendell C. and Junius B. Bird. 1949. Andean Culture
History. American Museum of Natural History Handbook
Series. No. 15. New York.
Beresford-Jones, David G. 2004. Pre-Hispanic Prosopis-Human
Relationships on the South Coast of Peru: Riparian Forest
in the Context of Environmental and Cultural Trajectories
of the Lower Ica Valley. Dissertation to obtain the degree
of Doctor of Philosophy. Magdalene College, University
of Cambridge.
Bergfield, Rebecca Ann. 2007. Dietary Analysis of
Archaeological Hair Samples from Peru. A Thesis
presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the
University of Missouri-Columbia. In Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts.
Betanzos, Juan de. 1880 (1551). Suma y narración de los incas.
M. Jimenez de la Espada. Biblioteca Ultramarina, tomo V.
Madrid.
Bethard, Jonathan D., Catherine Gaither, Victor Vasquez Sanchez, Teresa
Rosales Tham and Jonathan Kent. 2008. Isótopos estables, dieta
y movilidad de los pobladores de un conjunto residencial
en Santa Rita B, Valle de Chao, Peru. Archaeobios (2) 1: 19-
27.
Bird, Junius B., John Hyslop, and Milica Dimitrijevic Skinner1985 The
Preceramic Excavations at the Huaca Prieta, Chicama
Valley, Peru. Anthropological Papers of the American
Museum of Natural History 62 (Part 1). New York.
Bisognin, Dilson Antonio. 2002. Origin and Evolution of
Cultivated Cucurbits. Ciencia Rural Santa Maria 32 (5):
715-723.
Blanca, José M., Jaime Prohens, Gregory J. Anderson, Elena Zuriaga,
Joaquín Caizares, and Fernando Nuez. 2007. AFLP and DNA
Sequence Variation in an Andean Domesticate, Pepino
(Solanum muricatum, Solanaceae): Implications for
Evolution and Domestication. American Journal of Botany
94 (7): 1219–1229.
Blom, Deborah E., Jane E. Buikstra, Linda Keng, Paula D. Tomczak,
593
14,000 years of food in Peru
Eleanor Shoreman and Debbie Stevens-Tuttle. 2005. Anemia
and Childhood Mortality: Latitudinal PatterningcAlong
the Coast of Pre-Columbian Peru. American Journal of
Physical Anthropology 127: 152–169.
Bolton, Ralph. (1976). Andean coca chewing: A metabolic
perspective. American Anthropologist 78 (3): 630–634.
Bolton, Ralph. 1979. Guinea pigs, protein, and ritual.
Ethnology 3: 229-252. University of Pittsburgh- Of the
Commonwealth System of Higher Education.
Bonavia, Duccio. 1982. Los Gavilanes: Mar, Oasis y Desierto
en la Historia del Hombre. Corporación Financiera de
Desarrollo (COFIDE), Instituto Arqueológico Alemán. Lima.
Bonavia, Duccio. 1984. La Importancia de los Restos de Papas
y Camotes de Epoca Precerámica Hallados en el Valle de
Casma. Journal de la Societe des Americanistes 70 : 7–20.
Bonavia, Duccio. 1993. La papa: apuntes sobre sus orígenes
y domesticación. Journal de la Société des Américanistes
79 (1): 173-187.
Bonavia, Duccio. Laura W. Johnson-Kelly, Elizabeth J. Reitz and Elizabeth
S. Wing. 2001. El Precerámico Medio de Huarmey: Historia
de un Sitio (PV35-106). Bulletin de l`Institut Francais
d´Études Andines 30 (2): 265-333.
Bonavia, Duccio, Alexander Grobman, Laura W. Johson- Kelly, John G.
Jones, Ynés R. Ortega, Raúl Patrucco, Alberto Pumayalla D., Elizabeth J.
Reitz, Raúl Tello, Glendon H. Weir, Elizabeth S. Wing, and Angel Zárate
Zavaleta. 2009. Historia de un campamento del Horizonte
Medio de Huarmey, Perú (PV35-4). Bulletin de l’Institut
Français d’Études Andines 38 (2): 237-287.
Bonavia, Duccio. 2008. El Maíz. Su origen, su domesticación
y el rol que ha cumplido en el desarrollo de la cultura.
Universidad de San Martín de Porres. Fondo Editorial.
Bonavia, Duccio. 2008. The South American Camelids. An
expanded and corrected edition. UCLA. Cotsen Institute
of Archaeology Press.
Bonavia, Duccio, Carlos M. Ochoa, Óscar Tovar S., and Rodolfo Cerrón
Palomino. 2004. Archaeological Evidence of Cherimoya
(Annona cheromolia Mill.) and Guanabana (Annona
muricata L.) in ancient Peru. Economic Botany 58 (4): 509–
522.
Bonnier, Elizabeth, Rosaleen Howard, Lawrence Kaplan and
Catherine Rozenberg. 1983. Recherches Archeologiques,
Paleobotaniques et Ethnolinguistiques dans une Vallee
du Haut Maranon (Perou) : Le Projet Tantamayo Piruro.
Bulletin de l´Institut Français de Etudes Andins 12 (1-2) :
103-133.
Bourke, R. M. 2009. Sweetpotato in Oceania. En:
Elmo Leon
Sweetpotato, edited by G. Loebenstein y G. Thottappilly,
pp.: 489-502. Springer.
Bouysse-Cassagne, Thérèse. 1992. Le lac Titicaca: histoire
perdue d’une mer intérieure, Bulletin de l’Institut Français
d’Etudes Andines 21 (l): 89-159.
Bowser, Brenda J. and Justin Jennings (editors). 2008. Drink, Power,
and Society in the Andes. University Press of Florida.
Bradbury, Jane E. and Eve Emshwiller. 2011. The Role of Organic
Acids in the Domestication of Oxalis tuberosa: A New
Model for Studying Domestication Resulting in Opposing
Crop Phenotypes. Economic Botany 65 (1): 76-84.
Bray, Tamara L. 2003a. Inka Pottery as Culinary Equipment:
Food, Feasting, and Gender in Imperial State Design. Latin
American Antiquity 14 (1): 3-28.
Bray, Tamara L. 2003b. To Dine Splendidly. Imperial
Pottery, Commensal Politics, and the Inca State. En: The
Archaeology and Politics of Food and Feasting in Early
States and Empires edited by Tamara L. Bray, pp.: 93-142.
Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York.
Bray, Tamara L. 2008. The Role of Chicha in Inca State
Expansion. A Distributional Study of Inca Aríbalos. En: Drink,
Power, and Society in the Andes, edited by Justin Jennings
and Brenda J. Bowser, pp. 108-132. University Press of Florida.
Braziunas, Thomas F., Inez Y. Fung, and Minze Stuiver. 1995. The pre-
industrial atmospheric 14CO2 latitudinal gradient as related
to exchanges among atmospheric, oceanic and terrestrial
reservoirs. Global Biochemical Cycles 9 (4): 565-584.
Brenton, Barrett P., and Robert R. Paine. 2000. Pellagra and
Paleonutrition: Assessing the Diet and Health of Maize
Horticulturists through Skeletal Biology. Nutritional
Anthropology 22 (2): 2-9.
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2009. Bayesian Analysis of Radiocarbon
Dates. Radiocarbon 51 (1): 337-360.
Brothwell, D., A. Málaga and Richard Burleigh. 1979. Studies on
Amerindian Dogs, 2: Variarion in Early Peruvian Dogs.
Journal of Archaeological Science 6: 139-161.
Browman, D. L. 1986. Chenopod cultivation, lacustrine
resources, and fuel use at Chiripa, Bolivia. In New
worldpaleoetlrrrobotany: Collected papers in honor of
Leonard W Blake. Edited by E. E. Voigt and D. M. Pearsall,
pp. 137-172. TheMissouri Archaeologist Vol. 47. Columbia:
Missouri Archaeological Society.
Brücher, H. 1989. Useful Plants of Neotropical Origin and
Their Wild Relatives. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
594
Bruecher, Heinz. 1966. Solanum caripense HBK (subsect.
Basarthrum) in Venezuela. Feddes Repertorium 73: 216–221.
Bruno, Maria C. 2006. A Morphological Approach to
Documenting the Domestication of Chenopodium in the
Andes. En: Documenting Domestication. New Genetic and
Archaeological Paradigms. Edited by: Melinda A. Zeder,
Daniel Bradley, Eve Emshwiller, y Bruce D. Smith. University
of California Press. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London.
Bruno, Maria. 2008. Waranq waranqa: ethnobotanical
perspectives on agricultural. Intensification in the Lake
Titicaca basin (Taraco peninsula, Bolivia). Ph.D Dissertation.
Missouri.No publicado.
Bruno, Maria C. 2006. A Morphological Approach to
Documenting Chenopodium Domestication in the
Andes. In: Documenting Domestication: New Genetic and
Archaeological Paradigms, edited by Melinda A. Zeder,
Daniel G. Bradley, Eve Emshwiller, and Bruce D. Smith, pp.
32-45. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Bruno, Maria C. and William T. Whitehead. 2003. Chenopodium
Cultivation and Formative Period Agriculture at Chiripa,
Bolivia. Latin American Antiquity 14 (3): 339-355.
Bryant, Vaughn M. 1995. Eating Right is an Ancient Rite.
Natural Science January: 216-221.
Bryant, Vaughn M. and Glenna W. Dean. 2006. Archaeological
coprolite science: The legacy of Eric O. Callen
(1912–1970). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,
Palaeoecology 237: 51–66.
Buckler IV, Edward. S., Deborah. M. Pearsall, and Timothy. P. Holtsford.
1998. Climate, plant ecology, and Central Mexican archaic
subsistence. Current Anthropology 39 (1):152–164.
Burger, Richard L. 1983. Pojoc and Waman Wain: Two Early
Horizon Villages in the Chavin Heartland. Ñawpa Pacha
20: 3-40.
Burger, Richard. 1984. The Prehistoric Occupation of Chavin
de Huantar, Peru. University of California Publications in
Anthropology, No. 14. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Burger, Richard. L., and Nikolaas van der Merwe. 1990. Maize and
the origin of highland Chavín civilization: an isotopic
perspective. American Anthropologist 92: 85–95.
Burger, Richard L., Julia A. Lee-Thorp, and Nicholaas J. van der
Merwe. 2003. Rite and crop in the Inca state revisited:
An isotopic perspective from Machu Picchu and
beyond. En: The 1912 Yale Peruvian scientific expedition
collections from Machu Picchu human and animal
remains, edited by Richard L. Burger y Lucy C. Salazar,
pp. 119-137. Yale University Publications in Anthropology,
New Haven, CT.
Burkart, Arturo. 1976. A monograph of the genus Prosopis
(Leguminosae subfam. Mimosoideae). (Part 1 and 2).
Catalogue of the recognized species of Prosopis. Journal
of the Arnold Arboretum. 57: 219-249, 450-525.
Burkart, Arturo y H. Bruecher. 1953. Phaseolus aborigineous
Burkart, die mutmaasliche andine Stammform der
Kulturbohne. Zuechter 23 (3): 65-72.
Burleigh, Richard, y Don Brothwell. (1978). Studies on American
dogs, 1. Carbon isotopes in relation to maize in the diet
of domestic dogs from early Peru and Ecuador. Journal of
Archaeological Science 5: 355–362.
Burton, Frances D. 2009. The Spark that Ingnited Human
Evolution. University of New Mexico Press. Albuquerque.
Burton, James H. y Lori E. Wright. 1995. Nonlinearity in the
Relationship between Bone Sr/Ca and Diet: Paleodietary
Implications. American Journal of Physical Anthropology
96: 273-282.
Burton, James H. y T. Douglas Price. 2002. The Use and Abuse
of Trace Elements for Paleodietary Research. En:
Biogeochemical Approaches to Paleodietary Analysis,
edited by Stanley S. Ambrose and Anne Katzenberg, pp.
159-177. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Cabieses, Fernando. 1996. Cien siglos de pan. Escuela
profesional de Turismo y Hoteleria. Universidad de San
Martin de Porres. Lima. Pp. 258.
Callen, Eric. O. 1965. Food habitats in some Pre-Columbian
Mexican Indians. Economic Botany 19 (4): 335-343.
Callen, Eric O. and Thomas W. M. Cameron. 1960. A prehistoric diet
revealed in coprolites. The New Scientist VIII (190): 35-37,
39-40.
Capparelli, Ayllen. 2011. Elucidating post-harvest practices
involved in the processing of algarrobo (Prosopis spp.)
for food at El Shincal Inka site (Northwest Argentina):
an experimental approach based on charred remains.
Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 3: 93-112.
Capps, Keith William. 1987. The Archaeomalacology of four
Middle to Late Preceramic sites on the Central Coast of
Peru. Thesis submitted to Graduate College of the Texas
A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Arts.
Carbonell, Eudald, Isabel Cáceres, Marina Lozano, Palmira Saladié, Jordi
Rosell, Carlos Lorenzo, Josep Vallverdú, Rosa Huguet, Antoni Canals,
595
14,000 years of food in Peru
and José María Bermúdez de Castro. 2010. Cultural Cannibalism
as a Paleoeconomic System in the European Lower
Pleistocene. Case of Level TD6 of Gran Dolina (Sierra de
Atapuerca, Burgos, Spain). Current Anthropology 51 (4):
539-549.
Cárdenas, M. 1944. Descripción preliminar de las variedades
de Chenopodium quinoa de Bolivia. Revista de Agricultura
de Bolivia 2: 13-26.
Cárdenas, Mercedes. 1995. El sitio precerámico de Los
Morteros, pampa de Salinas de Chao. Boletín de Lima 100:
45-56.
Cárdenas Martin, Mercedes. 1999. El Periodo Precerámico en el
Valle de Chao. Boletin de Arqueologia PUCP 3: 141-170.
Cárdenas, J., J. Rodriguez, and L.Aguirre. 1997. El material orgánico
en Huaca de la Luna. Investigaciones en Huaca de la Luna
1995. Edited by S. Uceda, E. Mujica, y R. Morales, pp. 129-
149. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad Nacional
de La Libertad, Trujillo.
Cardoza, Carmen Rosa. 1993. Identificación de los Restos
Animales Depositados en las Galerías de las Ofrendas
de Chavin de Huantar. Identificación de los Huesos
Humanos. En: Chavin de Huántar. Excavaciones en la
Galería de las Ofrendas. Materialien zur Allgemeinen
und Vergleichenden Archaeologie. Kommission fuer
allgemeine und vergleichende Archaeologie, Band 51, pp:
371-393. Verlag Philipp von Zabern – Mainz am Rhein.
Carpenter, Kenneth. 2000: Proteins. En: The Cambridge World
History of Food, volume 1, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple
y Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 882-888. Cambridge
University Press.
Carré, Mathieu. 2007. El mes de recolección de la macha
(Mesodesma donacium) determinado por sus líneas de
crecimiento: aplicaciones arqueológicas. Bulletin de
l’Institut Français d’Études Andines 36 (2): 299-304.
Carter, G. F. 1945. Some archaeological cucurbit seed from
Peru. Acta Americana 3: 163-172.
Cartmell, Larry W., Arthur C. Aufderheide, Angela Springfield,
Cheryl Weems, and Bernardo Arriaza. 1991. The Frequency and
Antiquity of Prehistoric Coca-Leaf-Chewing Practices
in Northern Chile: Radioimmunoassay of a Cocaine
Metabolite in Human-Mummy Hair. Latin American
Antiquity 2 (3): 260-268.
Carvalho Gonzales, Marcelo Ruiz, Adauto Araújo, and Luiz Fernando
Ferreira. 2003. Human Intestinal Parasites in the Past: New
Findings and a Review. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de
Janeiro, Vol. 98 (Suppl. I): 103-118.
Elmo Leon
Castillo, Luis Jaime and Santiago Uceda. 2008. The Mochicas.
Handbook of South American Archaeology, edited
by Helaine Silverman y William H. Isbell, pp. 707-729.
Springer, New York.
Castillo Espitia, Neyla and Francisco J. Aceituno Bocanegra. 2006.
El Bosque Domesticado, el Bosque Cultivado: Un
Proceso Milenario en el Valle Medio del Río Porce en el
Noroccidente Colombiano. Latin American Antiquity
17 (4): 561-578Cerrate de Ferreira, Emma. 1979. El Molle.
Boletín de Lima 1 (2): 28-32.
Castro de la Mata, Ramiro. 2003. Inventario de la Coca.
Academia Nacional de Historia, Peru. Cedro.
Castro R. V. and Miriam Noemí Tarragó. 1992. Los inicios de la
producción de alimentos en el Cono Sur de América.
Revista de Arqueología Americana 6: 91–124.
Centro Nacional de Alimentación y Nutrición (Instituto Nacional
de Salud). 2009. Tablas Peruanas de Composición de
Alimentos. Ministerio de Salud. Lima.
Chandler-Ezell, Karol, Deborah M. Pearsall, and James A. Zeidler. 2006.
Root and Tuber Phytoliths and Starch Grains Document
Manioc (Manihot esculenta), Arrowroot (Maranta
arundinacea), and Llerén (Calathea sp.) at the Real Alto
Site, Ecuador. Economic Botany, 60 (2): 103–120.
Chapdeleine, Claude y Victor Pimentel. 2003. Un tejido único
moche III del sitio Castillo de Santa: una escena de
cosecha de yuca. Bulletin de l´Institut Francais d´Etudes
Andines 32 (1): 23-50.
Chauchat, Claude (avec la collaboration de Elizabeth Wing, Jean-
Paul Lacombe, Pierre-Yves Demars, Santiago Uceda et Carlos Deza).
1992. Préhistoire de la Cote Nord du Pérou. Le Paijanien
de Cupisnique. Cahiers du Quaternaire N°18. Centre
Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique. Paris.
Chrichigno F. Norma. 1998. Clave para identificar los peces
marinos del Perù (segunda edición, revisada y actualizada),
Instituto del Mar del Perú. Callao, Perú.
Chisholm, B., Nelson, D., Schwarz, H.P., 1982. Stable isotope ratios
as a measure of marine versus terrestrial protein in ancient
diets. Science 216: 1131–1132.
Chu Barrera, Alejandro. 2008. Bandurria. Arena Mar y Humedal
en el Surgimiento de la Civilización Andina. Proyecto
Arqueológico Bandurria. Huacho.
Clement, C. R., M.K. Aradhya and R.M. Manshardt. 1997. Allozyme
variation in spineless pejibaye (Bactris gasipaes Palmae).
Economic Botany 51 (2): 149-157.
596
Clement, Charles R., Michelly de Cristo-Araújo, Geo Coppens
d’Eeckenbrugge, Alessandro Alves Pereira, and Doriane Picanço-
Rodrigues. 2010. Origin and Domestication of Native
Amazonian Crops. Diversity 2: 72-106.
Clutton-Brock, Juliet and Norman Hammond. 1994. Hot dogs:
Comestible Canids in Preclassic MayaCulture at
Cuello,Belize. Journal of Archaeological Science 21: 819-826.
Cobo, Bernabé. 1893. Historia del Nuevo Mundo. Erasco.
Sevilla, pp. 1-245.
Cohen, Mark Nathan. 1978. Archaeological plant remains from
the Central Coast of Peru. Nawpa Pacha 16: 23-50.
Cohen, Mark Nathan. 2000. History, Diet and Hunther-
Gatherers. En: The Cambridge World History of Food,
volume 1, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple and Kriemhild
Coneè Ornelas, pp. 65-71. Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, Mark Nathan. 1975. Some problems in the
quantitative analysis of vegetable refuse illustrated
by a Late Henzen site on the Peruvian coast. Nawpa
Pacha 10-12: 49-60.
Cohen, Mark Nathan. 1978. Archaeological Plant Remains from
the Central Coast of Peru. Nawpa Pacha 16: 23-50.
Coleman Goldstein, Robin. 2008. Hearths, Grinding Stones, and
Households: Rethinking Domestic Economy in the Andes.
Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological
Association 18 (1): 37–48.
Collins, J. L. 1949. History, taxonomy and culture of the
pineapple. Economic Botany 3: 335.
Collins, J. L. 1960. The pineapple: botany, cultivation and
utilization. Edited by J. L. Collins y Leonard Hill. New York.
Cook, Anita G. and Mary Glowacki. 2003. Pots, Politics,
and Power. Huari Ceramic Assemblages and Imperial
Administration. En: The Archaeology and Politics of
Food and Feasting in Early States and Empires, edited by
Tamara L. Bray, pp. 173-202. Kluwer Academic/Plenum
Publishers, New York.
Cook, Anita G. and Nancy Parrish. 2005. Gardens in the Desert:
Archaeobotanical analysis from the Lower Ica Valley, Peru.
Andean Past 7: 135-156.
Cooley, J. S. 1948. Sweetpotatoes: World Production and
Food Value. Economic Botany 2 (1): 83-87.
Cooley, J. S. 1951. The Sweet Potato: Its Origin and Primitive
Storage Practices. Economic Botany 5 (4): 378-386.
Coppens d’Eeckenbrugge, Geo, Garth M. Sanewski, Mike K. Smith,
Marie-France Duval, and Freddy Leal. 2011. Ananas. En: Wild Crop
Relatives: Genomic and Breeding Ressources.Tropical and
Subtropical Fruits, edited by Chittaranjan Kole, pp. 21-42.
Springer.
Cordy-Collins, Alana. 1994. An unshaggy dog story. Natural
History 1994 103 (2): 34-41.
Correll, Donowan Stuart. 1962. The potato and its wild relatives.
Texas Research Foundation, Renner, Texas, USA.
Coutts Harvey, Karen, Alejandro Chu and Jon Krigbaum. 2011.
Paleodiet in Late Preceramic Peru: Preliminary Isotopic
Data from Bandurria. Journal of Island & Coastal
Archaeology 6: 196–210.
Craig, Nathan. 2005. The Formation of Early Settled Villages
and the Emergence of Leadership: A Test of Three
Theoretical Models in the Rio Ilave, Lake Titicaca Basin,
Southern Peru. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California
at Santa Barbara.
Creamer, Winifred, Jonathan Haas, Edward Jakaitis III and Jesus Holguin.
2011. Comparison of Marine Invertebrates in Midden
Deposits From Two Sites inthe Norte Chico, Peru. Journal
of Island & Coastal Archaeology 6: 176–195.
Crédou, Julie. 2006. Ressources Marines et Subsistance des
Paijániens à la Transition Pléistocene-Holocène (Désert
de Cupisnique, Pérou). Mémoire de Master 2 – Direction
Philippe Béarez Spécialité « Préhistoire et Quaternaire »
Muséum d’histoire Naturelle de Paris – Département de
Préhistoire - I. P. H.
Cruz-Suárez, L. Elizabeth , Denis Ricque-Marie, Mireya Tapia-Salazar
and Claudio Guajardo-Barbosa. 2000. Uso de harina de kelp
(Macrocystis pyrifera) en alimentos para Camarón. En: Cruz
-Suárez, L.E., Ricque-Marie, D., Tapia-Salazar, M., Olvera-Novoa,
M.A. y Civera-Cerecedo, R., (Eds.). Avances en Nutrición
Acuícola V. Memorias del V Simposium Internacional de
Nutrición Acuícola. 19-22 Noviembre, 2000. Mérida, Yucatán.
Cusak, D. F. 1984. Quinua: Grain of the Incas. The Ecologist
14 (1): 21-31.
Cutler, Hugh. C. and Thomas. H. Whitaker. 1956. Cucurbita mixta,
Pang. Its Classification and Relationships. Bulletin of the
Torrey Botanical Club 83 (4): 253-260.
Cutler, Hugh. C. and Thomas. H. Whitaker. 1961. History and
Distribution of the Cultivated Cucurbits in the Americas.
American Antiquity 26 (4): 469-485.
Daggett, Carole. 1983. Las Funciones del Masato en la Cultura
Chayahuita. Antropológica 1 (1): 301-310.
597
14,000 years of food in Peru
Cutright, Robyn E. 2009. Between the Kitchen and the
State: Domestic Practice and Chimú Expansion in the
Jequetepeque Valley, Peru. Submitted to the Graduate
Faculty of the Department of Anthropology in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor
of Philosophy. University of Pittsburgh.
Cutright, Robyn E. 2010. Food, Family and Empire. Relating
Political and Domestic Change in the Jequetepeque
Hinterland. En: Comparative perspectives on the
archaeology of coastal South America. Edited by Robyn E.
Cutright, Enrique López-Hurtado, and Alexander J. Martín,
pp. 45-62. Perspectivas comparativas sobre la arqueología
de la costa sudamericana / compiladores Robyn E. Cutright,
Enrique López-Hurtado, Alexander J. Martín, pp. 27-44.
Copublicado por el Center for Comparative Archaeology,
University of Pittsburgh y la Pontificia Universidad Católica
del Perú (Lima) y el Ministerio de Cultura de Ecuador, Quito.
D`Altroy, Terence and Christine Hastorf. 1984. The Distribution
and Contents of Inka State Storehouses in the Xauxa
Region of Peru. American Antiquity 49(2):334–339.
D´Altroy, Terence N., and Christine A. Hastorf. 2002. Empire and
Domestic Economy. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Debouck, Daniel G., Orlando Toro, Oscar Paredes, William C. Johnson, and
Paul Gepts. 1993. Genetic Diversity and Ecological Distribution
of Phaseolus vulgaris (Fabaceae) in Northwestern South
America. Economic Botany 47 (4): 408-423.
Debouck D. G. 1991. Systematics and morphology. En:
Common beans: research for crop improvement, edited
by van A. Schoonhoven and O. Voysest, pp. 55-118. C.A.B.
International, Wallingford, United Kingdom.
De Candolle, A. 1886. Origine des plantes cultivées. Paris.
English edition ed. 2. Origin of cultivated plants. London.
Decker-Walters, Deena S., Mary Wikins-Ellert, Chung, Sang-Sin and Jack E.
Staub. 2004. Discovery and Genetic Assessment of Wild Bottle
Gourd [Lagenaria Siceraria (Mol.) Standley; Cucurbitaceae]
from Zimbabwe. Economic Botany 58 (4): 501-508.
DeFrance, Susan D. and Adán Umire Álvarez. 2004. Quebrada
Tacahuay: Un Sitio Marítimo del Pleistoceno del Pleistoceno
Tardío en la Costa Sur del Perú. Chungara 36 (2): 257-278.
DeFrance, Susan D. 2005. Late Pleistocene marine birds from
southern Peru: distinguishing human capture from El
Niño-induced windfall. Journal of Archaeological Science
32: 1131-1146.
DeFrance, Susan D. 2009. Zooarchaeology in Complex
Societies: Political Economy, Status, and Ideology. Journal
of Archaeological Research 17: 105-168.
Elmo Leon
De Haan, Stef, Gabriela Burgos, Jesus Arcos, Raul, Ccanto, Maria Scurrah,
Elisa Salas, and Merideth Bonierbale. 2010. Traditional Processing
of Black and White Chuño in the Peruvian Andes: Regional
Variants and Effect on the Mineral Content of Native
Potato Cultivars. Economic Botany 64 (3): 217–234.
De Muizon, Christian. 2008. The Taxonomy and Phylogeny of
the South American Camelids. En: The South American
Camelids, pp. 1-10. UCLA, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology
Press.
Denevan, William M. 2006. Una perspectiva histórica sobre
el descubrimiento de Cmpos Elevados (Camellones)
prehipánicos en Sud América. En: Agricultura Ancestral
Camellones y Albarradas. Contexto cocial, usos y retos
del pasado y del presente, edited by Francisco Valdéz, pp.
17-21. Ediciones Abya-Yala. Quito. Ecuador.
DeNiro, Michael and Christine A. Hastorf. 1985, Alteration of
15N/14N and 13C/12C ratios of plant matter during the
initial stages of diagenesis: Studies using archaeological
specimens from Peru. Geochimica et Cosmochimica 49.
97-115.
Dennler, G. 1936. Reismelde und Inkaweizen. Tropenpflanzen
38: 97-108.
Department of Agriculture. 2000. Squash production guide.
Info Bulletin 159.
De Tommasi, Nunziatina, Giovanna Speranza, y and Cosimo Pizza. 1999.
Studies on the Constituents of Cyclanthera pedata Fruits:
Isolation and Structure Elucidation of New Triterpenoid
Saponins. Journal of Agricultural Food Chemical 47 (11):
4512-4519.
De Vries H. 1958. Variation in concentration of radiocarbon
with time and location on Earth. Proceedings Koninklijke
Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen Series B 61(2):
94–102.
Díaz, Norma Inés. 1995. Antecedentes sobre la historia
natural de la taruca (Hippocamelus antisensis d´Orbigny
1834) y su rol en la economía andina. Chungara 27 (1):
45-55.
Dietz, Michael J. 2009. Diet, Subsistence and Health:
A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Chongos, Peru. A
Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate
School at the University of Missouri-Columbia. In Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of
Philosophy.
Dillehay, Tom. 1979. Pre-Hispanic Resource Sharing in the
Central Andes. Science 204: 24-31.
598
Dillehay, Tom. D, Jack Rossen, Thomas C. Andres and David E. Williams.
2007. Preceramic Adoption of Peanut, Squash, and Cotton
in Northern Peru. Science 316: 1890-1893.
Dillehay, Tom D., Jack Rossen, Donald Ugent, Anathasios
Karathanasis, Víctor Vásquez and Patricia J. Netherly. 2010.
Early Holocene coca chewing in Northern Peru.
Antiquity 84: 939-953.
Dillehay, Tom D. (editor) 2011. From Foraging to Farming in the
Andes. New Perspectives on Foof Production and Social
Organization. Cambridge University Press.
Dillehay Tom D., Duccio Bonavia3, Steven Goodbred, Mario Pino,
Victor Vasquez, Teresa Rosales Tham, William Conklin, Jeff Splitstoser,
Dolores Piperno, José Iriarte, Alexander Grobman, Gerson Levi-Lazzaris,
Daniel Moreira, Marilaura López, Tiffiny Tung, Anne Titelbaum, John
Verano, James Adovasio, Linda Scott Cummings, Phillipe Béarez, Elise
Dufour, Olivier Tombret, Michael Ramirez, Rachel Beavins, Larisa
DeSantis, Isabel Rey, PhilipMink, Greg Maggard and Teresa Franco.
2012. Chronology, mound-building and environment at
Huaca Prieta, coastal Peru, from 13 700 to 4000 years ago.
Antiquity 86: 48-70.
Dillehay, Tom D, Herbert H. Eling and Jack Rossen. 2005. Preceramic
irrigation canals in the Peruvian Andes. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 102 (47): 17241-17244.
Dini, A., G. Migliuolo, B. L., Rastrell P.,P. Saturnino, and O. Schettino.
1994. Chemical composition of Lepidium meyeni. Food
Chemistry 49: 347-349.
Doebley, J., A. Stec and L. Hubbard. 1997 The evolution of apical
dominance in maize. Nature 386: 485-488.
Donkin, R. A. 1979. Agricultural Terracing in the Aboriginal
New World. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology.
Number Fifty-six. Wenner-Gren Foundation for
Anthropological Research, Inc. The University of Arizona
Press.
Donkin, R.A. 1989. The Muscovy Duck, Cairina moschata
domestica. Origins, Dispersal, and Associated Aspects
of the Geography of Domestication. A.A. Balkema.
Rotterdam.
Donnan, Christopher. 1978. Moche art of Peru, Pre-Columbian
symbolic communication. University of California
Museum of Cultural History, Los Angeles.
Douglas, James A., Merilyn Manley-Harris, John J.C. Scheffer and
Natalie A. Wong. 2003. Yacon an Ancient Crop in a New
Land. En: Oligosaccharides in Food and Agriculture edited
by Eggleston et al, pp: 253-165. ACS Symposium Series.
American Chemical Society. Washington DC.
Dufour, Darna L. and Joy B. Sandler. 2000. Insects. En: The
Cambridge World History of Food, volume 1, edited by
Kenneth F. Kiple y Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 546-554.
Cambridge University Press.
Duke, James A. David Auklik and Timothy Plowman. 1975. Nutricional
Value of Coca. Botanical Museum Leaflets 24 (6):113-119.
Duncan, Neil A., Deborah M. Pearsall, and Robert A. Benfer, Jr. 2009.
Gourd and squash artifacts yield starch grains of feasting
foods from preceramic Peru. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences 106 (32): 13202–13206.
Dunnum, J. L., Salazar-Bravo, J., 2010. Molecular systematics,
taxonomy and biogeography of the genus Cavia
(Rodentia: Caviidae). Journal of Zoological Systematics
and Evolutionary Research 48 (4): 376-388.
Durant, P., 1986.- Relaciones filogenéticas y ecología del
conejo de páramo andino. Monog., 6. CDCHT y Consejo
de Publs. Universidad de los Andes. Mérida. Venezuela.
Dwyer, Johanna T. Ritu Sandhu. 2000. Peanuts. En: The
Cambridge World History of Food, volume 1, edited by
Kenneth F. Kiple and Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 364-
374. Cambridge University Press.
Earls, J. 1998. The Character of Inca and Andean Agriculture.
Talk in Israel, PUCP. Manuscrito en http://macareo.pucp.
edu.pe/~jearls/documentosPDF/theCharacter.PDF
Eiselen, Elizabeth. 1956. Quinoa, A Potentially Important Food
Crop of the Andes. The Journal of Geography 55: 330-333.
Eisentraut, P. J. 1998. Macrobotanical remains from southern
Peru: A comparison of Late Archaic-Farly Formative period
sites from the Puna and Suni zones of the Western Titicaca
basin. 1’h.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology,
University of California, Santa Barbara. Ann Arbor, MI:
University of Michigan Microfilms.
Elera, Carlos, José Pinilla and Victor Vasquez. 1992. Bioindicadores
zoológicos de eventos enso para el formativo medio y
tardío de Puémape – Peru. Pachacamac 1 (1): 9-19.
Elsay, Richard P., Marvin J. Allison, y Alejandro Pezzia. 1977. A
Comparative Study of the Dental Health Status of Five
Precolumbian Peruvian Cultures. American Journal of
Physical Anthropology 46: 135-140.
Emshwiller, Eve. 1999. Origins of Domestication and
Polyploidy in the Andean Tuber Crop Oxalis Tuberosa
Molina. A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the
Graduate School of Cornell University in PartialFullfilment
of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of
Philosophy. Cornell, NY.
599
14,000 years of food in Peru
Emshwiller, Eve and Jeff .J. Doyle. 1998. Origins of domestication
and polyploidy in oca (Oxalis tuberosa: Oxalidaceae):
nrDNA ITS data. American Journal of Botany 85: 975–985.
Emshwiller, Eve, Terra Theim, Alfredo Grau, Victor Nina, and Franz
Terrazas. 2009. Origins of Domestication and Polyploidy in
oca (oxalis Tuberosa; oxalidaceae). 3. Aflp data of oca and
four Wild, tuber-bearing taxa. American Journal of Botany
96 (10): 1839–1848.
Engel, Fréderic. 1957. Early Sites on the Peruvian Coast.
Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 13: 54-68.
Engel, Frederic. 1970. Exploration of the Chilca Canyon, Peru.
Current Anthropology 11 (1): 55-58.
Ericson, Jonathon E., Michael West, Charles H. Sullivan and Harold
W. Krueger. 1989. The development of maize agriculture
in the Viru valley, Peru. En: The Chemistry of Prehisoric
Human Bone, edited by T. D. Price, pp: 68-104. Cambridge
University Press.
Erickson, C. L. 1988. Raised Field Agriculture in the Lake
Titicaca Basin. Putting Ancient Agriculture Back to Work.
Expedition 30 (3): 8-16.
Erickson, C. and Candler, K. 1989. Raised Fields and Sustainable
Agriculture in the Lake Titicaca Basin of Peru. En: Fragile
Lands of Latin America: Strategies for Sustainable
Development, edited by J. Browder, pp.: 230–248.
Westview Press, Boulder.
Erickson, Clark, L. 1994. Methodogical Considerations in the
Study of Ancient Andean Field Systems. En The Archeology
of Garden and Field, edited by Naomi F. Miller and Kathryn
L. Gleason, p. 111-151. University of Pennsilvanya Press.
Erickson, David L., Bruce D. Smith, Andrew C. Clarke, Daniel H.
Sandweiss, and Noreen Tuross. 2005. An Asian origin for a
10,000-year-old domesticated plant in the Americas.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102 (51):
18315-18320.
Evershed, Richard. P., Sebastian Payne, Andrew G. Sherratt, Mark
S. Copley, Jennifer Coolidge, Duska Urem-Kotsu, Kostas Kotsakis,
Mehmet Ozdogan, Asly Ozdogan, Olivier Nieuwenhuyse, Peter M.
M. G. Akkermans, Douglass Bailey, Radian-Romus Andeescu, Stuart
Campbell, Shahina Farid, Ian Hodder, Nurcan Yalman, Mirhiban
Ozbasaran, Erhan Bicakci, Yossef Garfinkel, Thomas Levy, and Margie
M. Burton. 2008. Earliest date for milk use in the Near East
and southeastern Europe linked to cattle herding. Nature
455: 528-531.
Eubanks, Mary. 1995. A cross between two maize relatives:
Tripsacum dactyloides and Zea diploperennis. Economic
Botany 49: 172-182.
Elmo Leon
Eubanks, Mary W. 2001. An Interdisciplinary Perspective on
the Origin of Maize. Latin American Antiquity 12 (1): 91-98.
Falk, N. L., N. H.Tykot, and M. Delgado. 2004. Differential
subsistence adaptations of agriculturalists and herders
of the early intermediate period in the Lurin valley, Peru:
New data from stable isotope analysis. American Journal
of Physical Anthropology 123: 93.
FAO. 2010. http://www.fao.org/fishery/species.
Farnum, Julie Faith. 2002. Biological Consequences of
Social Inequalities in Prehistoric Peru. Ph.D. dissertation,
Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri-
Columbia, Missouri, Columbia.
Farrington, I. S. 1980. The Archaeology of Irrigation Canals,
with Special Reference to Peru. World Archaeology 11 (3):
287-305.
Fauve-Chamoux, Antoinette. 2000. Breast Milk and Artificial
Infant Feeding. En: The Cambridge World History of Food,
volume 1, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple and Kriemhild Coneè
Ornelas, pp. 626-635. Cambridge University Press.
Feldman, Robert. 1980. Aspero, Peru. Architechture,
subsistence, economy and other artifacts of a preceramic
marine chiefdom. A thesis presented to the Department
of Anthropology in partialfullfilment of the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Phylosophy in the subject of
Anthropology, University of Harvard.
Fernández, Alejandro y Eric Rodríguez. 2007. Etnobotánica del
Perú Pre-Hispano. Ediciones HerbariumTruxillense (HUT),
Universidad Nacional de Trujillo, Trujillo, Perú.
Fernandez Distel, Alicia. 1986. Las cuevas de
Huachichocana, su posición dentro del precerámico
con agricultura incipiente del Noroeste Argentino.
Beiträge zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden
Archaeölogie 8: 353–430.
Finucane, Brian Clifton. 2009. Maize and Sociopolitical
Complexity in the Ayacucho Valley, Peru. Current
Anthropology 50 (4): 535-545.
Finucane, Brian, Patricia Maita, and William Isbell. 2006. Human and
animal diet at Conchopata, Peru: stable isotope evidence
for maize agriculture and animal management practices
during the Middle Horizon. Journal of Archaeological
Science 33 (12): 1766-1776.
Finucane, Brian Clifton. 2007. Mummies, maize, and manure:
multi-tissue stable isotope analysis of late prehistoric
human remains from the Ayacucho Valley, Peru. Journal of
Archaeological Science 34: 2115-2124.
600
Firon, N., D. LaBonte, A. Villordon, C. McGregor, Y. Kfir and E. Pressman.
2009. Botany and Physiology: Storage Root Formation
and Development. The Sweetpotato, edited by G.
Loebenstein y G. Thottappilly, pp. 13-26.
Flores Blanco, Luis Angel. 2006. Estudio de Unidades
Residenciales en el Subsector 12 de Caral, Valle de Supe-
Perú. Tesis para optar El Título Profesional de Licenciado
en Arqueología. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales. Escuela
Académico Profesional de Arqueología. Universidad
Nacional Mayor de San Marcos. Lima.
Fornaciari, Gino, Maura Castagna, Paolo Vicava, Adele, Tognetti,
Generoso Bevilacqua and Elsa L. Segura. 1992. Chagas’ disease in
Peruvian Inca mummy. The Lancet 339: 128-129.
Fouant Monique M, Marvin Allison, Enrique Gerszten, y Guillermo
Focacci. 1982. Parasitos intestinales entre los indigenas
precolombinos. Chungara 9: 285-299.
Fraser, James A. 2010. The Diversity of Bitter Manioc (Manihot
esculenta Crantz) Cultivation in a Whitewater Amazonian
Landscape. Diversity 2: 586-609.
Freitas, Fábio O., and Paulo S. Martins. 2000. FOCUS: Calcite
Crystals Inside Archaeological Plant Tissues. Journal of
Archaeological Science 27: 981–985.
Froehle, A. W., C.M. Kellner and M.J. Schoeninger. 2012.Multivariate
Carbon and Nitrogen Stable Isotope Model for the
Reconstruction of Prehistoric Human Diet. American
Journal of Physical Anthropology 147: 352-369.
Fuentes, S and E. Chujoy. 2009. Sweetpotato in South America.
En: The Sweetpotato, edited by G. Loebenstein and G.
Thottappilly, pp. 415-440. Springer.
Gade, Daniel W. 1966. Achira, the Edible Canna, Its Cultivation
and Use in the Peruvian Andes. Economic Botany (20) 4:
407-415.
Gade, Daniel W. 1967. The guinea Pig in the Andean Folk
Culture. Geographical Review 57 (2): 213-224.
Gade, Daniel W. 1970. Ethnobotany of Cañihua (Chenopodium
pallidicaule), Rustic Seed Crop of the Altiplano. Economic
Botany 24 (1): 55-61.
Gade, Daniel. 1999. South America. En: The Cambridge World
History of Food, volume 2, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple
and Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 1254-1260. Cambridge
University Press.
Gade, Daniel W. 2000. Llamas and Alpacas. En: The
Cambridge World History of Food, volume 1, edited by
Kenneth F. Kiple and Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 555-
559. Cambridge University Press.
Gade, Daniel W. 2003. Names for Manihot esculenta:
Geographical Variation and Lexical Clarification. Journal
of Latin American Geographers 1:43–57.
Gagnon, Celeste Marie. 2004. Food and the State:
Bioarchaeological Investigations of Diet in the Moche
Valley of Perú.” Dental Anthropology 17 (2): 45-54.
Gagnon, Celeste Marie. 2008. Bioarchaeological Investigations
of Pre-state Life at Cerro Oreja. En: Arqueología Mochica.
Nuevos Enfoques, edited by L. J. Castillo, H. Bernier, G.
Lockard, y J. Rucabado, pp. 173-185. Fondo Editorial de la
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú e Institut Français
d’Études Andines, Lima.
Galindo-Tovar, Maria Elena, Amaury M. Azarte-Férnandez, Nisao Ogata-
Aguilar, e Ivonne Landero-Torres. 2007. The avocado (Persea
americana Lauraceae) crop in Mesoamerica: 10,000 years
of history. Economic Botany 12 (2): 325-335.
Gálvez Mora, César A. 1999. Nuevos datos y problemas sobre
el Paijanense en el Chicama: Aportes para una evaluación
de la ocupación temprana en el Norte del Perú. Boletin de
Arqueologia de la PUCP 3: 41-54.
Gálvez Mora, Cesar A., y Carlos E. Quiroz Moreno. 2008. En Torno a
la Hipótesis del Uso de Puntas de Proyectil para Capturar
Peces en el Paijanense (ca. 11,000 a.P.). Arqueobios 2: 64-74.
Galvez Mora, Cesar A y Maria Andrea Runcio. 2009. El life
(Trichomycterus sp.) y su importancia en la iconografía
mochica. Archaeobios 3 (1): 55-87.
Galvez Mora, César, J., Juan Castañeda Murga y Rosario M. Becerra
Arteaga. 1996. Caracoles terrestres: 11,000 años de tradición
alimentaria en la Costa Norte del Perú. En: Cultura,
Identidad y Cocina en el Perú, compilado por Rosario
Olivas Weston, pp. 55-76. Escuela Profesional de Turismo
y Hotelería. Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación,
Turismo y Psicología. Universidad de San Martin de Porres.
Lima.
Gandarillas, H. 1984. Obtenci6n experimental de
Chenopodium quinoa Willd. Instituto Boliviano de
Tecnología Agropecuaria, La Paz.
Gandarillas, H. 1979. Genética y origen. En: Quinua y kañihua,
cultivos andinos. Edited by M. E. Tapia et al., pp: 45–64.
IICA, Bogota, Colombia.
Gepts, Paul. 1990. Evidence Bearing on the Domestication
of Phaseolus (Fabaceae) Beans. Economic Botany 44 (3):
28-38, Supplement: New Perspectives on the Origin and
Evolution of New World Domesticated Plants
Gero, Joan M. 2001. Field Knots and Ceramic Beaus:
Intepreting Gender in the Peruvian Early Intermediate
601
14,000 years of food in Peru
Period. Gender in Pre-hispanic America. Edited by Cecelia
F. Klein and Jeffrey Quilter,pp. 15-55. Dumberton Oaks
Research Library and Collection. Wasington DC.
Geyer, P. S., T. S. Larson, and L. Stroik. 2003. University of San
Diego Palynological Investigation of the Dos Cabezas
Giants. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 13: 275-
282.
Ghezzi, Iván and Clive Ruggles. 2007. Chankillo: A 2300-Year-Old
Solar Observatory in Coastal Peru. Science 315: 1239-1243.
Giovannetti, Marco A., Verónica S. Lema, Carlos G. Bartoli and Aylen
Capparelli. 2008. Starch grain characterization of Prosopis
chilensis (Mol.) Stuntz and P. flexuosa DC, and the analysis
of their archaeological remains in Andean South America.
Journal of Archaeological Science 35: 2973–2985.
Glimn-Lacy, Janice and Peter B. Kaufman. 2006. Botany Illustrated.
Introduction to Plants, Major Groups, Flowering Plant
Families. Second Edition. Springer.
Gnerre, Maurizio. 2002. L´Incontro con altri mondi: La
variegata percezione del peperoncino. En: Saperi e Sapori
Mediterranei. La Cultura dell´Alimentazionne e I Suoi
Riflessi Linguistici. Volume III, editada por Domenico
Silvestri, Antonietta Marra, y Immacolate Pinto. Universitá
degli Studi di Napoli “LÓrientale”. Napoli.
Goldstein, David John and Robin Christine Coleman. 2004. schinus
molle l. (Anacardiaceae) chicha Production in the Central
Andes. Economic Botany 58 (4): 523–529.
Goldstein, David J. Robin C. Coleman Goldstein, and Patrick R.
Williams. 2008. You Are What You Drink. A Sociocultural
Reconstruction of Pre-Hispanic Fermented Beverage
Use at Cerro Baúl, Moquegua, Peru. En: Drink, Power, and
Society in the Andes, edited by Justin Jennings and Brenda
J. Bowserpp. 133-156. University Press of Florida.
Gondard, Pierre. 2006. Campos elevados en llanuras
húmedas. Del modelado al paisaje Camellones, waru
warus o pijales. En: Agricultura Ancestral Camellones y
Albarradas. Contexto cocial, usos y retos del pasado y del
presente, edited by Francisco Valdéz, pp. 25-53. Ediciones
Abya-Yala. Quito. Ecuador.
Gosden, Chris. 2005. Food. Where Biology meets Culture.
En: The Prehistory of Food. Appetites for Change. Edited
by Chris Gosden and Jon Hather, pp. 1-8. One World
Archaeology. Routledge. London and New York.
Graham, P. H. and P. Ranalli. 1997. Common bean (Phaseolus
vulgaris L). Field Crops Research 53: 141-153.
Grau, Alfredo and J. Rea. 1997. Yacon. Smallanthus sonchifolius
Elmo Leon
edited by M. Hermann & J. Heller, 21. Institute of Plant
Genetics and Crop Plant Research, Gatersleben/
International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome,
Italy. pp. 199-242.
Grau, Alfredo, Ramiro Ortega Duenas, Carlos Nieto Cabrera y Michael
Hermann. 2003. Mashua. Tropaeolum tuberosum Ruiz &
Pavon, edited by J. M.M. Engels. IGPRI.
Grégoire, Anne, Thierry Joly, Ethel Huamán Fuertes, Rosa María Silva
Arce, Silvia León Trinidad. 2010. Crioconservación de los
recursos genéticos del cuy (Cavia porcellus): producción
y congelación de embriones. Bulletin de l’Institut Français
d’Études Andines 39 (1): 185-188.
Grieder, Terence, Alberto Bueno Mendoza, C. Earle Smith Junior Jr.
and Robert M. Malina (editores). 1988. La Galgada, Peru. A
Preceramic Culture in Transition. University of Texas Press,
Austin.
Grobman Alexander, Duccio Bonavia, Tom D. Dillehay, Dolores R.
Piperno, José Iriarte and Irene Holst. 2012. Preceramic maize
from Paredones and Huaca Prieta, Peru. Proceedings of the
NationalAcademy of Sciences 109 (5): 1755-1759.
Gross, R., F. Koch, I. Málaga, A. F. de Miranda, H. Schoeneberger, and L.
C. Trugo. 1989. Chemical Composition and Protein Quality
of Some Local Andean Food Sources. Food Chemistry 34:
25-34.
Guffroy, Jean. 1989. Un Centro Ceremonial Formativo en el
Alto Piura. Bulletin de l´ Institut Francais d´Études Andines
18 (2): 161-207.
Guhl, Felipe. 2005. AND Fósil. Arqueoparasitología en
América. Revista de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias
XXIX (111): 229-238.
Guillén, Sonia. 1985. Étude ostéologique des sépultures de
Telarmachay. En: Telarmachay. Pasteurs Prehistoriques des
Andes I (Tome1), edited by Danièle Lavallée, Michèle Julien,
Jane Wheeler, y Claudine Karlin, pp. 425-328. Synthese 20.
Institute Français d´Etudes Andines. Editions Recherche
sur les Civilisations Paris.
Guinea, Mercedes. 2006. El uso de tierras comestibles por los
pueblos costeros del Periodo de Integración en los Andes
septentrionales. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Études
Andines 35 (3): 321-334.
Gumerman, George. 1988. Dietary variation on the scale of
the social group: en example from the prehistoric site
Pacatnamu. Paper presented at the fifty-third Annual
Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology,
Phoenix, Arizona.
602
Gumerman, George. 1991. Subsistence and Complex Societies:
Diet Between Diverse Socio-economic Groups, Pacatnamu,
Peru. Ph.D dissertation. Department of Anthropology,
University of California, Los Angeles.
Gumerman, George. 1994. Corn for the dead: The significance
of Zea mays in Moche burials offerings. En: Corn and
Culture in the Prehistoric New World, edited by Sissel
Johannessen and Christine A. Hastorf, pp. 399-426.
Boulder, Westview Press.
Gumerman, George. 1997. Food and complex societies. Journal
of Archaeological Method and Theory 4 (2):105-139.
Gumerman IV, George y Jesus Briceno Rosario. 2003. Santa Rosa-
Quirihuac y Ciuda de Dios: Asentamientos Rurales en la
Parte Media del Valle de Moche. En: Moche. Hacia el Final
del Milenio. Actas del Segundo Coloquio sobre la Cultura
Moche. Trujillo, 1 al 7 de agosto de 1999. Editadopor Santiago
Uceda y Elias Mujica, pp. 217-243. Universidad Nacional de
Trujillo y Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.
Gutierrez-Noriega, Carlos and Victor Wolfgang Von Hagen. 1951.
The Mainstay of an Arduous Native Life in the Andes.
Economic Botany 5 (2): 145-152.
Gutierrez, Tania M., Olga L.Hoyos, y Martha I. Páez. 2007.
Determinación del Contenido de Ácido Ascorbico
en Uchuva (Physalis peruviana), por Cromatografía
Líquida de Alta Resolución (CLAR). Facultad de Ciencias
Agropecuarias 5 (1): 70-79.
Guzmán, Nury, Sheyla Saá y Luc Ortlieb. 1998. Catálogo descriptive
de los moluscos litorales (Gatropoda y Pelecypoda) de la
zona de Antofagasta, 23°S (Chile). Estudios Oceanológicos
17: 17-86.
Hanausek, T. F. 1918. Über die Samen der Reissmelde
(Chenopodium Quinoa Willd). Zeitschrift für
Lebensmitteluntersuchung und Forschung A 35 (6): 228-233.
Harshberger, J. W. 1896. Fertile crosses of teosinte and maize.
Garden and Forest 9: 522–523.
Harshberger, John. W. 1898. Uses of plants among the ancient
Peruvians. Bulletin of the Museum for Sciences and Arts 1:
1-4. University of Pennsylvania.
Hart, John P., William A. Lovis, Janet K. Schulenberg, and Gerald R.
Urquhart. 2007. Paleodietary implications from stable
carbon isotope analysis of experimental cooking residues.
Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 804-813.
Hastorf, Christine A. 1985. Dietary Reconstruction in the
Andes. A New Archaeological Technique. Anthropology
Today 1 (6): 19-21.
Hastorf, Christine. 1987. Archaeological Evidence of Coca
(Erythroxylum coca, Erythroxylaceae) in the Upper
Mantaro Valley, Peru. Economic Botany 41 (2): 292-301.
Hastorf, Christine A., and Sissel Johannessen. 1993. Pre-Hispanic
Political Change and the Role of Maize in the Central Andes
of Peru. American Anthropologist, New Series (95): 115-138
Hastorf, Christine. 1999. Cultural implications of crop
introductions in Andean prehistory. En: The Prehistory of
Food. Appetites for Change. Edited by Chris Gosden and
Jon Hather, pp. 33-56. One World Archaeology. Routledge.
London and New York.
Hastorf, Christine A. 2002. Agricultural Production and
Consumption. En: Empire and Domestic Economy edited
by Terence N. D´Altroy and Christine A. Hastorf. 2002, pp.
155-178. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hastorf, Christine A. 2008. The Formative Period in the Titicaca
Basin. The Handbook of South American Archaeology,
edited by Helaine Silverman and William H. Isbell, pp.:
545-561. Springer.
Hastorf, Christine A., and Michael DeNiro. 1985. Reconstruction
of Prehistoric Plant Production and Cooking Practices by a
New Isotopic Method. Nature 315: 489-491
Hastorf, Christine, William T. Whitehead, and Sissel Johannssen. 2005.
Late Prehistoric Wood Use in an Andean Intermontane
Valley. Economic Botany 59 (4): 337-355.
Hather, J.G. 1991. The Indenfitication of Charred
Archaeological Remains of Vegetative Parenchymous
Tissue. Journal of Archaeological Science 18: 661-675.
Hawkes, J. G. 1989. The domestication of roots and tubers in
the American tropics. En: Foraging and Farming, edited by
D. C. Harris y B. C. Hillman, pp. 481-503.
Heckenberger, Michael J. 1998. Manioc Agriculture and
Sedentism in Amazonia: The Upper Xingu Example.
Antiquity 72:633–648.
Heiser, Charles B., Jr. and Paul G. Smith. 1953. The Cultivated
Capsicum Peppers. Economic Botany 7 (3): 214-227.
Heiser, Charles B., and David C. Nelson. 1974. On the Origin of the
Cultivated Chenopodia (Chenopodium). Genetics 78: 503-
505.
Heiser, Charles. B. 1964. Origin and variability of the pepino
(Solanum muricatum): a preliminary report. Baileya 12:
151–158.
Heiser, Charles. B. 1978. The Totora (Scirpus californicus) in
Ecuador and Peru. Economic Botany 32 (3): 222-236.
603
14,000 years of food in Peru
Heiser, Charles B. 1979. Origins of Some Cultivated New
World Plants. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics
10: 309-326.
Hermann, Michael. 1997. Arracacha (Arracacia xanthorrhiza
Bancroft). En: Andean Root and Tubers: Ahipa, Arracacha,
Maca and Yacon, edited by Michael Hermann y J. Heller,
pp. 75-174. Centro Internacional de la Papa. International
Plant Genetic Resources Institute.
Hermann, Michael, and J. Heller (editores). 1997. Andean Root
and Tubers: Ahipa, Arracacha, Maca and Yacon. Centro
Internacional de la Papa. International Plant Genetic
Resources Institute.
Hernández-Ugalde, José Alfredo, Jose Mora-Urpi and Oscar J. Rocha.
2010. Genetic relationships among wild and cultivated
populations of peach palm (Bactris gasipaes Kunth, Palmae):
evidence for multiple independent domestication events.
Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 57 (8) 571-583.
Heron, C., R.P. Evershed, and l. J. Goad. 1991. Effects of Migration
of Soil Lipids on Organic Residues associated with Buried
Potsherds. Journal of Archaeological Science 18: 641-659.
Herrera, Alexander. 2011. La recuperación de tecnologías
indígenas. Arqueologia, Tecnoogía y Desarrollo en Los Andes.
Universidad de los Andes. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales-ceso,
Departamento de Antropología Consejo Latinoamericano
de Ciencias Sociales (clacso) Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
(iep) punku Centro de Investigación Andina.
Herrera, Fortunato L. 1942a. Etnobotánica. Plantas endémicas
domesticadas por los antiguos peruanos. Revista del
Museo Nacional 11: 25-30.
Herrera, Fortunato L. 1942b. Etnobotánica. Plantas tropicales
domesticadas por los antiguos peruanos. Revista del
Museo Nacional 11: 179-195.
Hershey, C. 1994. Manihot genetic diversity. Pages 111–134
in International Network for Cassava Genetic resources.
Report of the First Meeting of the International Network
for Cassava Genetic Resources, CIAT, Cali, Colombia, 18–23
August 1992. International Crop Network Series No. 10.
International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy.
Hetzel, Basil s. 2000. Iodine and Iodine-Deficiency Disorders.
The Cambridge World History of Food, volume 1, edited
by Kiple, Kenneth F., y Kriemhild Connè. Ornelas, pp. 797–
811. Cambridge University Press.
Hildebrand, John A. and Melissa B. Hagstrum. 1999. New
Approaches to Ceramic Use and Discard: Cooking
Pottery from the Peruvian Andes in Ethnoarchaeological
Perspective. Latin American Antiquity 10 (1): 25-46.
Elmo Leon
Hocquenghem, Anne Marie and Manuel Pena Ruiz. 1994. La talla del
material malacológico en Tumbes.Boletin del Instituto
Frances de Estudios Sndinos 23 (2): 209-229.
Hodge, W. H. 1951. Three Native Tuber Foods of the High
Andes. Economic Botany 5 (2): 185-201.
Hodge, W. H. 1954. The Edible Arracacha: A Little-Known
Root Crop of the Andes. Economic Botany 8 (3): 195-221.
Hodgson, Robert W. 1950. The Avocado: A Gift from the
Middle Americas. Economic Botany 4 (3): 253-293.
Hoffstetter, R. 1986. High Andean mammalian faunas during
the Plio-Pleistocene. En: Vuilleumier F (editor) High
altitude tropical biogeography. Oxford University, New
York.
Hogg, A., C. Bronk Ramsey, C. Turney, and J. Palmer. 2009. Bayesian
Evaluation of the Southern Hemisphere Radiocarbon
Offset During the Holocene. Radiocarbon 51 (4): 1165-1176.
Holdridge, L. R. 1947. Determination of world plant
formations from simple climatic data. Science 105 (2727):
367-368.
Holmberg, Allan R. 1957. Lizard hunts on the North Coast of
Peru. Fieldiana 36 (9): 203-220.
Holzman, Jon D. 2006. Food and Memory. Annual Reviw of
Anthropology 35: 361-378.
Horkheimer, Hans. 1960. Nahrung und Nahrungsgewinnung
im vorspanischen Peru. Bibliotheca Ibero-Americana.
Colloquium Verlag. Berlin.
Hughes, R. E. 2000. Vitamin C. The Cambridge World History
of Food, volume 1, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple and Kriemhild
Coneè Ornelas, pp. 754-763. Cambridge University Press.
Hunziker, A. T. 1943. Las especies alimenticias de Amaranthus
y Chenopodium cultivadas por los Indios de América.
Revista Argentina de Agronomía 10: 297-354.
Hunziker, A. T. 1952. Los pseudocereales de la agricultura
indígena de América. ACME Agency, Buenos Aires.
Ikehara, Hugo. 2007. Festines del Periodo Formativo Medio y
Tardío en Cerro Blanco de Nepena. Tesis presentada para
optar el Título de Licenciado en Arqueología. Pontificia
Universidad Católica del Perú. Lima.
Ikerara, Hugo. 2010. Social Organization, Technology of
Production, and the Function of Utilitarian Ceramics for
Feasting during the Middle and Late Formative Periods in
the Central Andes. En: Comparative perspectives on the
604
archaeology of coastal South America. Edited by Robyn
E. Cutright, Enrique López-Hurtado, y Alexander J. Martín,
pp. 45-62. Perspectivas comparativas sobre la arqueología
de la costa sudamericana / compiladores Robyn E.
Cutright, Enrique López-Hurtado, Alexander J. Martín,
pp. 45-62. Copublicado por el Center for Comparative
Archaeology, University of Pittsburgh y la Pontificia
Universidad Católica del Perú (Lima) y el Ministerio de
Cultura de Ecuador, Quito.
Ikehara, Hugo y Koichiro Shibata. 2005. Festines e Integración
Social en el Periodo Formativo: Nuevas Evidencias de
Cerro Blanco, Valle Bajo de Nepeña. En Encuentros:
Identidad, Poder y Manejo de Espacios Públicos. Boletín de
Arqueología PUCP 9 (2005), edited by Peter Kaulicke and
Tom. D. Dillehay, pp. 123-59. Pontificia Universidad Católica
del Perú, Lima.
Iltis, H. H. 1983. From teosinte to maize: the catastrophic
sexual transmutation. Science 222: 886-894.
Indriati, Etty and Jane E. Buikstra. Coca Chewing in Prehistoric
Coastal Peru: Dental Evidence. American Journal of
Physical Anthropology 114: 242-257.
Isendahl, Christian. 2011. The domestication and early spread
of manioc (Manihot esculenta Crantz): A brief synthesis.
Latin American Antiquity 22 (4): 452-468.
Jacobsen, S. E., H. Quispe, and A. Mujica. 1999-2000. Quinoa: An
Alternative Crop for Saline Soils in the Andes. CIP Program
Report-Andean Roots, and Tubers and other Crops, pp.
403-408. Lima
Jarret, R. L., N. Gawel and A. Whittemore. 1992. Phylogenetic-
relationships of the sweet-potato [Ipomoea-batatas (L.)
lam]. Journal of the American Society of the Horticultural
Scence: 117: 633–637.
Jennings, Justin. 2004. La Chichera y El Patrón: Chicha and
the Energetics of Feasting in the Prehistoric Andes.
Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological
Association 14 (1): 241-259.
Jimenez Borja, Arturo. 1953. La comida en el antiguo Peru.
Revista del Museo Nacional XXII: 113-134.
Johns, Timothy and Susan L. Keen. 1986. Taste evaluation pf
potato glycoalcaloides by the Aymara. A case studuy in
chemical ecology. Human Ecology 14 (4): 437-452.
Jones, Glenville. 2000. Vitamin D. En: The Cambridge World
History of Food, volume 1, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple
and Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 763-768. Cambridge
University Press.
Jones, Glenville. 2000. Vitamin D. En: The Cambridge World
History of Food, volume 1, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple
and Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 769-774. Cambridge
University Press.
Jones, John Glendon. 1988. Middle to Late Preceramic (6000-
3000 BP) Subsistence Patterns on the Central Coast of
Peru: The Coprolite Evidence. Submitted to the Office
of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial
fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master
of Arts.
Jones, John Glendon. 1988. Middle to Late Preceramic (6000-
3000 BP) Subsistence Patterns on the Central Coast of
Peru: The Coprolite Evidence. Thesis of Master of Arts.
Texas A&M University.
Kaplan, Lawrence. 1965. Archeology and Domestication in
American Phaseolus (Beans). Economic Botany 19 (4): 358-
368.
Kaplan, Lawrence. 1980. Variation in the Cultivated Beans. En:
En: Guitarrero Cave. Early Man in the Andes, edited by
Thomas F. Lynch, pp. 145-148. Academic Press.
Kaplan, Lawrence. 1981. What Is the Origin of the Common
Bean?. Economic Botany 35 (2): 240-254
Kaplan, Lawrence, Thomas F. Lynch, y C. E. Smith, Jr. 1973. Early
cultivated beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) from an Intermontane
Peruvian Valley. Science 179:76-77.
Kaplan, Lawrence and Thomas F. Lynch. 1999. Phaseolus (Fabaceae)
in Archaeology. AMS Radiocarbon Dates and their
Significance for Pre-Colombian Agriculture. Economic
Botany 53 (3): 261-272.
Kaplan, Lawrence. 2000. Beans, Peas, and Lentils. En: The
Cambridge World History of Food, volume 1, edited by
Kenneth F. Kiple y Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 271-281.
Cambridge University Press.
Karasch, Mary. 2000. Manioc. En: The Cambridge World
History of Food, volume 1, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple
y Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 181-187. Cambridge
University Press.
Katzenberg, M Anne and Roman G, Harrison. 1997. What’s in a Bone?
Recent Advances in Archaeological Bone Chemistry.
Journal of Archaeological Research 5 ( 3): 265-293.
Kaulicke, Peter. 1991. El perıodo Intermedio Temprano en
el Alto Piura: avances del proyecto arqueológico ‘‘Alto
Piura’’ (1987 a 1990). Bulletin de L’Institut Francais d’Etudes
Andines 20: 381-422.
605
14,000 years of food in Peru
Kaulicke, Peter. 1999. Contribuciones hacia la cronología
del periodo arcaico en las Punas de Junin. Boletin de
Arqueologia PUCP 3: 307-324.
Kautz, Robert R. and Richard W. Keatinge. 1977. Determining Site
Function: A North Peruvian Coastal. American Antiquity
42 (1): 87-97.
Keatinge, Richard W. 1975. Urban Settlement Systems and
Rural Sustaining Communities: An Example from Chan
Chan`s Hinterlands. Journal of Field Archaeology 2 (3):
215-227.
Kellner, Corina M. y Margaret J. Schoeninger. 2008. Wari’s imperial
influence on local Nasca diet: The stable isotope evidence.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 27: 226–243
Kent. Susan. 2000. Iron Deficiency and Anemia or Chronic
Disease. En: The Cambridge World History of Food,
volume 1, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple y Kriemhild Coneè
Ornelas, pp. 919-939. Cambridge University Press.
Kent, Susan and Patricia Stuart Macadam. 2000. Iron. In: The
Cambridge World History of Food, volume 1, edited by
Kenneth F. Kiple and Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 811-824.
Cambridge University Press.
Khare, C. P. (editor). 2007. Indian Medicinal Plants. An
Illustrated Dictionary. Springer Verlag.
Kickton, A, and A. Kueger. 1918. Zusammensetzung von
Reismeldesamen. Zeitschrift für Lebensmitteluntersuchung
und Forschung 34 (5): 236-241.
Kinupp, Valdely Ferreira e Ingrid Bergman Inchausti de Barros.
2008. Teores de proteína e minerais de espécies nativas,
potenciais hortaliças e frutas Protein and mineral contents
of native species, potential vegetables, and fruits. Ciência
e Tecnologia de Alimentos 28 (4): 846-857.
King, Stephen R. and Stanley N. Gershoff. 1987. Nutritional
Evaluation of Three Underexploited Andean Tubers: Oxalis
tuberosa (Oxalidaceae), Ullucus tuberosus (Basellaceae),
and Tropaeolum tuberosum (Tropaeolaceae). Economic
Botany 41 (4): 503-511.
Klarich, Elizabeth, A. 2003. Proyecto de Arqueología Doméstica
de Pucara. Instituto Nacional de Cultura. Lima. Peru.
Klarich, Elizabeth, A. 2009. Pukara: Investigaciones de la
temporada 2001 y un nuevo modelo para el desarrollo del
sitio. Andes 7: 283-303.
Klaus, Haagen D., Alicia K. Wilbur, Daniel H. Temple, Jane E. Buikstra,
Anne C. Stone, Marco Fernandez, Carlos Wester and Manuel E. Tam.
2010. Tuberculosis on the north coast of Peru: skeletal
Elmo Leon
and molecular paleopathology of late pre-Hispanic
and postcontact mycobacterial disease. Journal of
Archaeological Science 37: 2587-2597.
Klaus, Haagen D., and Manuel E. Tam. 2010. Oral Health and
the Postcontact Adaptive Transition: A Contextual
Reconstruction of Diet in Mórrope, Peru. American
Journal of Physical Anthropology 141: 594-609.
Knudson, K. J. and J. E. Buisktra. 2007. Residential Mobility
and Resource Use in the Chiribaya Polity of Southern
Peru: Strontium Isotope Analysis of Archaeological
Tooth Enamel and Bone. International Journal of
Osteoarchaeology 17: 563–580.
Knudson, Kelly J., Arthur E. Aufderheide and Jane E. Buikstra. 2007.
Seasonality and paleodiet in the Chiribaya polity of
southern Peru. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 451-
462.
Kobayashi, Masashi. 1984. The Ipomoea trifida complex
closely related to the sweet potato. In Symposium of
the International Society of Tropical Root Crops, ed. F. S.
Shideler and H. Rincon, 561–9. Lima.
Koon, H. E. C., T. P. O´Connor, and M. J. Collins. 2010. Sorting the
butchered from the boiled. Journal of Archaeological
Science 37 (2010) 62–69
Koschmieder, Klaus. 2004. Siedlungsweise und
Subsistenzstrategien an der südlichen Peripherie des Chimú-
Imperiums. Ergebnisse der archäologischen Untersuchungen
in Puerto Pobre, Casma-Ta, Peru. Inaugural-Dissertation zur
Erlangung des Dorktorgrades am Fachbereich Geschichte
und Kulturwissenschaften der Freien Universität Berlin.
Koschmieder, Klaus and Rafael Vega-Centeno. 1996 Puerto Pobre:
centro administrativo Chimú en el valle de Casma. Revista
del Museo de Arqueología, Antropología e Historia 6:161-
200.
Kramer, Fritz L. 1957. The Pepper Tree, Schinus Molle L.
Economic Botany 11 (4): 322-326.
Kuester, Hansjoerg. 1999. Northern Europe, Germany and
Surrounding Regions. The Cambridge World History of
Food, volume 2, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple y Kriemhild
Coneè Ornelas, pp. 1226-1232. Cambridge University Press.
Kuester, Hansjoerg. 2000. Trading in Tastes. The Cambridge
World History of Food, volume 1, edited by Kenneth F.
Kiple y Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 431-437. Cambridge
University Press.
Laferriere, Joseph. 1991. Begonias as Food and Medecine.
Botetin de Lima 46 (1): 114-116
606
Laferrerie, Joseph E. 1992. Begonias as Food and Medecine.
Economic Botany 46: 1.
Lane, Kevin. 2009. Engineered highlands: the social
organization of water in the ancient northcentral Andes
(AD 1000-1480). World Archaeology 41: 169-190.
Lanfranco, Luis Pezo, Sandro Pezo Lanfranco, and Sabine Eggers.
2009. Exostosis Auditiva como marcador osteológico
de actividad acuática en poblaciones nativas de la Costa
Norte del Perú. Paleopatología 6: 1-18.
Lanfranco, Luis Pezo and Sabine Eggers. 2010. The Usefulness of
Caries Frequency, Depth, and Location in Determining
Cariogenicity and Past Subsistence: A Test on Early and
Later Agriculturalists From the Peruvian Coast. American
Journal of Physical Anthropology 143: 75-91.
Langsjoen, Odin M. 1996. Dental Effects of Diet and Coca-Leaf
Chewing on Two Prehistoric Cultures of Northern Chile.
American Journal pf Physical Anthropology 101: 475-489.
Larsen, Clark Spencer. 2000. Dietary and Nutritional
Assessment of Past Peoples: The Bioanthropological
Record. In: The Cambridge World History of Food, volume
1, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple and Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas,
pp. 13-33. Cambridge University Press.
Latcham, Richard. E. 1936. Atacameño Archaeology. American
Anthropologist 38 (4): 609-619.
Lathrap, Donald. 1971. The Tropical Forest and the Cultural
Context of Chavin. En: Dumbarton Oaks Conference
on Chavin. Edited by Elizabeth Benson, pp.: 74-100.
Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC.
Latz, P. 1995. Bushfires and Bushtucker: Aboriginal plant use
in central Australia. IAD Press, Alice Springs
Lau, Georges. 2002. Feasting and Ancestor Veneration at
Chinchawas, North Highlands of Ancash, Peru. Latin
American Antiquity 13 (2): 279-304.
Lau, Georges F. 2007. Animal Resources and Recuay
Cultural Transformations at Lavallée, Danièle. 1970.
Les representations animales dans la céramique
Mochica. Mémoires de l`Institut d´Ethnologie IV, 210
pages. Paris.
Lavalée, Daniele. 1990. La domestication animale en
Amerique du Sud –le point des connaisances-. Bulletin
del´Insitut Français d´Etudes Andines 19 (1) : 25-44.
Lavallée, Danièle, Michèle Julien, Jane Wheeler, y Claudine Karlin.
1985. Telarmachay. Pasteurs Prehistoriques des Andes I
(Tome1). Synthese 20. Institute Français d´Etudes Andines.
Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations Paris.
Lavallée, Danielle, Michele Julien, Philippe Béarez, Pierre Usselmann,
Michel Fontugne, y Aldo Bolanos. 1999. Pescadores recolectores
arcaicos del extremo sur peruano. Excavaciones en la
Quebrada de los Burros (Tacna, Peru). Primeros resultados
1995-1997. Bulletin de l´Institut Francais d´Etudes Andines
28 (1): 13-52.Chinchawas (Ancash, Peru). Andean Past 8:
449-476.
Leles, Daniela, Karl J. Reinhard, Martín Fugassa, L. F. Ferreira, Alena M.
Iniguez and Adauto Araújo. 2010. A parasitological paradox:
Why is ascarid infection so rare in the prehistoric
Americas?. Journal of Archaeological Science 37: 1510–1520.
Lennstrom H. A. 1992. Botanical remains from the Calchaquí
Archaeological Project 1990, Archaeobotany Laboratory
Report No 29. University of Minnesota, USA.
Lennstrom, Heidi A. and Christine Hastorf. 1992. Testing Old
Wives´Tales in Palaeoethnobotany: A Comparison of Bulk
and Scatter Sampling Schemes from Pancan, Perú. Journal
of Archaeological Science 19: 205-229.
León, Jorge. 1964. The “Maca” (Lepidium meyenii), A Little
Known Food Plant of Peru. Economic Botany 18 (2): 122-127.
León, Jorge. 2000. Botánica de los cultivos tropicales (tercera
edición, revisada y aumentada). Instituto interamericano
de cooperación para la agricultura. Editorial Agroamérica.
San José, Costa Rica.
Leon Canales, Elmo. 2007a. Origenes Humanos en los Andes
del Perú. Universidad de San Martín de Porres. Lima.
León Canales, Elmo. 2007b. Cronología de los fardos
funerarios de Wari Kayan, Paracas Necrópolis. In: Hilos del
Pasado. El aporte Francés al Legado Paracas. Edited by the
MNAAHP, pp. 33-47.
Leonard, Jennifer A., Robert K. Wayne, Jane Wheeler, Raúl Valdez,
Sonia Guillén and Carles Vilà. 2002. Ancient DNA Evidence
for Old World Origin of New World Dogs. Science 298
(5598): 1613-1616
Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1969. The raw and the cooked:
Introduction to a science of mythology: 1. New York:
Harper and Row.
Lindenbaum, Shirley. 2004. Thinking about Cannibalism.
Annual Review of Anthropology 33: 475-498.
Locher, Julie L., William C. Yoels, Donna Maurer and Jillian van Ells.
2005. Comfort Foods: An Exploratory Journey Into The
Social and Emotional Significance of Food, Food and
Foodways 13 (4): 273-297.
Lockard, Gregory D. 2005. Political Power and Economy at
607
14,000 years of food in Peru
the Archaeological Site of Galindo, Moche Valley, Peru.
Abstract of Dissertation. Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of the University of
New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Loebenstein, Gad and George Thottappilly (editors). 2009. The
Sweetpotato. Springer.
Long. Janet. 2000. Tomatoes. In: Kiple, K., and K. Ornelas
(Editores), The Cambridge World History of Food, volume
1, pp. 351–358. Cambridge University Press.
López, B. C., S. Sabaté, C. A. Gracia, and R. Rodriguez. 2005. Wood
anatomy, description of annual rings, and responses to
ENSO events of Prosopis pallida H.B.K., a wide-spread
woody plant of arid and semi-arid lands of Latin America.
Journal of Arid Environments 61: 541–554.
López, Laura M., Aylen Capparelli and Axel Emil Nielsen. 2011.
Traditional post-harvest processing to make quinoa grains
(Chenopodium quinoa var. quinoa) apt for consumption
in Northern Lipez (Potosí, Bolivia): ethnoarchaeological
and archaeobotanical analyses. Archaeological and
Anthropological Science 3: 49-70
López Marco, Tulio, Mariana Altrichter, Joel Sáenz and Eduardo Eduarte.
2006. Valor nutricional de los alimentos de Tayassu
pecari (Artiodactyla: Tayassuidae) en el Parque Nacional
Corcovado, Costa Rica. Revista de Biología Tropical 54 (2):
687-700.
Luciani, Stefania, Gino Fornaciari, Olga Rickards, Cristina Martínez
Labarga, and Franco Rollo. 2006. Molecular Characterization of
a Pre-Columbian Mummy and In Situ Coprolite. American
Journal of Physical Anthropology 129: 620-629.
Ludynia, Katrin, Stefan Garthe and Guillermo Luna-Jorquera. 2010.
Distribution and foraging behaviour of the Peruvian Booby
(Sula variegata) off northern Chile. Journal of Ornithology
151: 103-111.
Lumbreras, Luis Guillermo. 1989. Chavín de Huántar en el
nacimiento de la Civilización Andina. Ediciones INDEA,
Lumbreras, Luis Guillermo. 1993. Chavin de Huántar.
Excavaciones en la Galería de las Ofrendas. Materialien
zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Archaeologie.
Kommission fuer allgemeine und vergleichende
Archaeologie, Band 51. Verlag Philipp von Zabern – Mainz
am Rhein.
Lynch, Thomas F., R. Gillespie, John. A. J. Gowlett, and R. E. M. Hedges.
1985. Chronology of Guitarrero Cave, Peru. Science 229:
864-867.
Macía, Manuel J. y Henrik Balslev. 2000. Use and Management
Elmo Leon
of Totora (Schoenoplectus californicus, Cyperaceae) in
Ecuador. Economic Botany 54 (1): 82-89.
Mangelsdorf, Paul C. 1947. The origin and evolution of maize.
Advances in Genetics 1: 161-207.
MacLelland, Donna. 2008. Ullucu, an Elussive Fruit. En: En: The
Art and Archaeology of the Moche. An Ancient Andean
Society of the Peruvian North Coast, edited by Steve
Bourget y Kimberly L. Jones, pp. 43-66. The University of
Texas Press.
MacNeish, Robert. 1970. Megafauna and Man from Ayacucho,
Highland, Peru. Science 168: 975-977.
Mac Neish, Richard. Stockon, Thomas Carl Patterson and David L.
Browman. 1975. The Central Peruvian prehistoric interaction
sphere. Papers of the Robert S. Peabody Foundation for
Archaeology 7: 1–97.
MacNeish, Richard, AngelGarcia Cook, Rochelle Lurie, Antoinette
Nelken Terner, and Robert K. Vierra. 1983. Prehistory of the
Ayacucho Basin,Peru: vol IV. The PreceramicWay of Life.
The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
MacNeish, Richard S. Angel García Cook, Luis G. Lumbreras, Robert
K. Vierra, and Antoinette Nelken-Terner. 1981. Prehistory of the
Ayacucho Basin. Volume II. Excavacions and Chronology.
Ann Arbor. The University of Michigan Press.
Makowski, Krzysztof. 2004. Tablada de Lurín: aspectos
cronológicos de la ocupación de lomas costeras de
Atocongo”. En: El Valle de Pachacamac I. El Vallede Lurin
en los Periodos inicial y Horizonte Temprano. Edited by K.
Makowski y Richard Burger. Fondo Editorial de laPontificia
Universidad Católica del Perú.
Mangelsdorf, Paul C. 1974. Corn. Its Origin Evolution and
Improvement. Harvard University Press, Cambridge,
Massachusetts.
Mangelsdorf, Paul C. 1986. The origin of corn. Scientific
American 254: 80-86.
Mangelsdorf, Paul C. 1961. Biology, Food and People. Economic
Botany 15 (4): 279-288.
Manyari, Galia and José Ianaconne. 2006. Relación pesp-longuitud
de la ranade Junín, Batrachophrynus macrostomus Peters
1873 (Anura: Leptodactylidae) para su uso en ecotoxicología
en condiciones de zoocriadero. Biologist 4 (2): 14-15.
Maquet, A., X. Vekemans 2, and J.-P. Baudoin. 1999. Phylogenetic
study on wild allies of Lima bean, Phaseolus lunatus
(Fabaceae), and implications on its origin. Plant
Systematics and Evolution 218: 43-54.
608
Marcus, Joyce. 1987 Late Intermediate Occupation at Cerro
Azul, Perú. Technical Report 20. University of Michigan
Museum of Anthropology, Ann Arbor.
Marcus, Joyce, Jeffrey D. Sommer, and Christopher Glew. 1999. Fish
and mammals in the economy of an ancient Peruvian
kingdom. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences 96: 6564-6570.
Marechal R., Mascherpa J.-M., Stainier F. 1978. Ètude taxonomique
d’un groupe complexe d’especes des genres Phaseolus
et Vigna (Papilionaceae) sur la base de donnés
morphologiques et polliniques, traités par l’analyse
informatique. Conservatoire et Jardin Botaniques de
Genève, Genève, Suisse.
Martin, Richard T. 1970. The Role of Coca in the History,
Religion, and Medicine of South American Indians.
Economic Botany 24 (4): 422-438
Martínez, Jean Noel and Richard Cadenillas. 2011. el zorro del
pleistoceno superior de la carolina (ecuador): ¿una forma
diferente del actual “zorro de sechura”?. XIII Congreso
Peruano de Geología. Resúmenes Extendidos Sociedad
Geológica del Perú.
Martinson, Elizabeth, Karl J. Reinhard, Jane E. Buikstra and Katharina
Dittmar de la Cruz. 2003. Pathoecology of Chiribaya
Parasitism. Memoiras do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de
Janeiro, Vol. 98 (Suppl. I): 195-205.
Matsuoka, Yoshihiro, Yves Vigouroux, Major M. Goodman, Jesús
Sanchez G., Edward Buckler, and John Doebley et al. 2002. A
single domestication for maize shown by multilocus
microsatellite genotyping. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences 99: 6080–6084.
McConnell, Kathleen. 1998. The prehistoric use of
Chenopodiaceae in Australia: evidence from Carpenter’s
Gap shelter 1 in the Kimberley, Australia. Vegetation History
and McClintock, B., 1929 Chromosome morphology in Zea
mays. Science 69: 629. Archaeobotany 7: 179-188.
McCormac, F. G., P J Reimer, A. G. Hogg, T. F. G. Higham, M. G. L. Baillie,
J. Palmer, and M Stuiver. 2002. Calibration of the Radiocarbon
Time Scale for The Southern Hemisphere: AD 1850–950.
Radiocarbon 44 (3): 641–651.
McCormac, F. G., A. G. Hogg, P. G. Blackwell, C. E. Buck, T. F. G.
Higham, and P. J. Reimer. 2004. Shcal04 Southern Hemisphere
Calibration, 0–11.0 Cal Kyr BP. Radiocarbon 46 (3): 1087-
1092.
McLeod, M. J., Sheldon I. Guttman, and Harry Eshbaugh. 1982. Early
evolution of chile peppers (Capsicum). Economic Botany
36 (4): 361-368.
Megnoni Gonalons, Guillermo Luis. 2008. Camelids in ancient
Andean societies: A review of the zooarchaeological
evidence. Quaternary International 185: 59–68.
Messer, Ellen. 2000. Maize. The Cambridge World History of
Food, volume 1, edited by Kiple, Kenneth F., and Kriemhild
Connè. Ornelas, pp. 97–112. Cambridge University Press.
Miller, George R. and Richard L. Burger. 1995. Our Father the
Cayman, Our Dinner the Llama: Animal Utilization at
Chavin de Huantar, Peru. American Antiquity 60 (3): 421-
458.
Miller, George R. and Richard L. Burger. 2000. Ch’arki at Chavin:
Ethnographic Models and Archaeological Data. American
Antiquity 65 (3): 573-576.
Miller, G. R., and Burger, R. L. 1995. Our father the cayman, our
dinner the llama: Animal utilization at Chavín de Huántar,
Peru. American Antiquity 60: 421–458.
Miller, G. R., and Burger, R. L. 2000. Ch’arki at Chavin:
Ethnographic Models and Archaeological Data. American
Antiquity 65 (3): 573-576.
Miller, Naomi F. and Wilma Wetterstrom. 1999. The Beginnings
of Agriculture: The Ancient Near East and North Africa.
En: The Cambridge World Historry of Food, edited by
Kenneth F. Kiple y Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 1123-1139.
Cambridge University Press.
Miller N. F. 1992. The origins of plant cultivation in the Near
East. En: The Origins of Agriculture: An International
Perspective, edited by C. W. Cowan, y P. J. Watson, pp.
39-58. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Moore, Jerry D. 1988. Prehistoric Raised Field Agriculture in
the Casma Valley, Peru. Journal of Field Archaeology 15 (3):
265-276.
Moore, Jerry. 1989. Pre-Hispanic Beer in Coastal Peru:
Technology and Social Context of Prehistoric Production.
American Anthropologist 91 (3): 682-695.
Moore, Jerry D. 2007a. Proyecto Arqueológico Tumbes: 2006
Annual Report. Annual Report to the National Science
Foundation. Summitted Mach 16, 2007.
Moore, Jerry D. 2007b. Early fifth millennium BC
prehispanic architecture from far northern Peru.
Antiquity 81 (312):
Moore, Jerry and Carol Mackey. 2008. The Chimu Empire.
Handbook of South American Archaeology, edited
by Helaine Silverman y William H. Isbell, pp. 783-807.
Springer, New York
609
14,000 years of food in Peru
Moore, Jerry D. 2011. Architecture, settlement, and formative
developments in the ecuatorial Andes:Ne discoveries
in the Department of Tumbes, Peru. Latin American
Antiquity 21 (2): 147-172.
Morales Chocano, Daniel. 1998. Importancia de Las Salinas de
San Blas durante el Periodo Formativo en la Sierra Central
del Perú. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 2: 273-288.
Morales, Edmundo. 1994. The Guinea Pigin the Andean
Economy: From Household to Market Commodity. Latin
American Research Review 29 (3): 129-142.
Mora, Santiago, Luisa Fernanda Herrera, Inés Cavelier, and Camilo
Rodríguez. 1991. Cultivars, Anthropic Soils and Stability: A
Preliminary Report of Archaeological Research in Araracuara,
Colombian Amazon. Latin American Archaeology Reports
No. 2. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh.
Mora Urp, Jorge. 1993. Diversidad genética del pejibaye: II
Origen y Evolución. En: Cuarto Congreso sobre Biología,
Agronomía, e Industralización del Pijuayo, Iquitos. Edited
by la Universidad de Costa Rica.
Mora-Urpí, Jorge, John C. Weber, and Charles Clement. 1997.
Palm Beach. Bactris gasipaes Kunth. Promoting the
conservation and use of underutilized and neglected
crops. 20. Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant
Research, Gatersleben/ International Plant Genetic
Resources Institute, Rome, Italy.
Morcote-Rios, Gaspar, and Rodrigo Bernal. 2001. Remains of Palms
(Palmae) at Archaeological Sites in the New World: A
Review. The Botanical Review 67 (3): 309-350.
Morton, Julia F. 1972. Cocoyams (xanthosoma caracu,
x. atrovirens and x. nigrum), ancient root- and
leafvegetables, gaining in economic importance. Florida
State Horticultural Society 85-94.
Moseley, M. E. 1975. The maritime foundations of Andean
civilization. Menlo Park, California.
Moseley, Michael E., Christopher B. Donnan, and David K. Keefer. 2008.
Convergent catastrophe and the Demise of Dos Cabezas:
Environmental Change and Regime Change in Ancient Peru.
En: The Art and Archaeology of the Moche. An Ancient
Andean Society of the Peruvian North Coast, edited by
Steve Bourget y Kimberly L. Jones, pp. 81-92. The University
of Texas Press.
Moseley, Michael E., Donna J. Nash, Patrick Ryan Williams, Susan D.
deFrance, Ana Miranda, and Mario Ruales. 2005. Burning down the
brewery: Establishing and evacuating an ancient imperial
colony at Cerro Baúl, Peru. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences 102 (48): 17264–17271.
Elmo Leon
Mostacero León, José, Freddy Mejía Coico, and Oscar Gamarra
Torres. 2009. Fanerógamas del Perú: Taxonomía, Utilidad
y Ecogeografía. Universidad Nacional de Trujillo.
Concytec. Trujillo.
Moutarde, Fanny. 2006a. L’évolution du couvert ligneux et de son
exploitation par l’homme dans la vallée du Lurín (côte centrale
du Pérou), de l’Horizon Ancien (900-100 av. J.-C.) à l’Horizon
Tardif (1460-1532 ap. J.-C.). Approche anthracologique. Volume
I. Thesis pour obtenir le grade de Docteur de l´Université de
Paris I. Université Paris I – Paris I-Panthéon Sorbonne, UFR 03
Histoire de l`Art et Archéologie.
Moutarde, Fanny. 2006b. L’évolution du couvert ligneux et
de son exploitation par l’homme dans la vallée du Lurín
(côte centrale du Pérou), de l’Horizon Ancien (900-100
av. J.-C.) à l’Horizon Tardif (1460-1532 ap. J.-C.). Approche
anthracologique. Volume II (Atlas Anthracologique).
Thesis pour obtenir le grade de Docteur de l´Université
de Paris I. Université Paris I – Paris I-Panthéon Sorbonne,
UFR 03 Histoire de l`Art et Archéologie.
Mountokalakis, Theodore D. 2000. Magnesium. The Cambridge
World History of Food, volume 1, edited by Kiple, Kenneth
F., and Kriemhild Connè. Ornelas, pp. 824–834.
Mujica, Elias. 1981. Fechados radiocarbónicos para el Altiplano
del Titicaca y su esfera de interacción (manuscrito).
Mujica B., Elias., José Pablo Baraybar a<nd Aldo Bolaños. 1992.
Malanche 22: prácticas mortuorias complejas y modo de
vida en una aldea de lomas tardia en la Costa Central del
Peru. Gaceta Arqueologica Andina 21: 81–107.
Naranjo, Plutarco. 1981. Social Function of Coca in
Precolumbian America. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 3:
161-172.
Nassar, Nagib M. A. 2000 Cytogenetics and Evolution
of Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz). Genetics and
Molecular Biology 23:1003–1014.
National Research Council (NRC). 1989a. Lost crops of the
Incas: little known plants of the Andes with promise
for worldwide cultivation. National Academy Press,
Washington, DC. (Offprint paper).
National Research Council. 1989b. Lost Crops of the Incas: Little-
Known Plants of the Andes with Promise forWorldwide
Cultivation: Report of an Ad Hoc Panel of the Advisory
Committee on Technology Innovation Board on Science
and Technology for International Development. National
Academy Press: Washington, DC. (libro).
Nee, Michael. 1990. The Domestication of Cucurbita
(Cucurbitaceae). Economic Botany 44 (3): 56-68.
610
Nelson, Kit y Enrique Bellido Cerda. 2010. Evidence of Botanical
Diversity and Species Continuity from Chancay Sites in
the Huaura Valley, Peru. Economic Botany 64 (1): 46–54.
Newman, David S. 2000. Potassium. Cambridge World History
of Food, volume 1. En: Kiple, K., y K. Ornelas (Editores), The
pp. 843–848. Cambridge University Press.
Nicholson, G. Edward. 1960. Chicha Maize Types and Chicha
Manufacture in Peru. Economic Botany 14 (4): 290-299.
Nielsen, Forrest H. 2000. Other Trace Elements. En: The
Cambridge World History of Food, volume 1, edited by
Kiple, Kenneth F., y Kriemhild Connè. Ornelas, pp. 856–
868. Cambridge University Press.
Noli, Dieter and Graham Avery. 1988. Protein Poisoning and Coastal
Subsistence. Journal of Archaeological Science 15: 395-411.
Nordstrom, C. 1990. Evidence for the Domestication of
Chenopodium in the Andes. Report to the National
Science Foundation. University of California. Berckeley
Paleoethnobotany laboratory.
Nordt, Lee, Frances Hayashida, Tom Hallmark, and Corey Crawford.
2004. Late Prehistoric Soil Fertility, Irrigation Management,
and Agricultural Production in Northwest Coastal Peru.
Geoarchaeology, An International Journal 19 (1): 21-46.
Noriega, Cristóbal. 2010. Algas comestibles del Perú: El pan del
futuro. Universidad de San Martín de Porres. Lima.
Novoa, Sidney. 2006. Sobre el Origen de la Tuna en el Perú.
Algunos Alcances. Zonas Áridas 10: 174-181.
O`Brien, Patricia J.. 1972. The Sweet Potato: Its Origin and
Dispersal. American Anthropologist 74 (3): 342-365.
Ochoa, Carlos. 1998. Ecogeography and breeding potential
of the wild Peruvian tuber-bearing species of Solanum.
Economic Botany 52: 3–6.
Oelke, E. A., D. H. Putnam, T. M. Teynor, and E. S. Oplinger. 1992.
Quinoa. Alternative Field Crops Manual. University
of Wisconsin Extension, Cooperative Extension and
University of Minnesota, center for Alternative Plant &
Animal Products and the Minnesota Extension Service.
Office of Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR). 2008. The Biology
of Ananas comosus var. cosmosus (Pineapple). Australian
Government. Department of Health and Ageing. Australia.
Oliver, José R. 2008. The Archaeology of Agriculture in
Ancient Amazonia. En: The Handbook of South American
Archaeology, edited by Helaine Silverman y William H.
Isbell, pp. 185-216, Springer Verlag.
Ologhobo Anthony D. and Babatunde L. Fetuga. 1983.
Compositional Differences in Some Limabean (Phaseolus
lunatus) Varieties. Food Chemistry 10: 297-307.
Olsen, Kenneth M. and Barbara A. Schaal. 2001. Microsatellite
Variation in Cassava (Manihot esculenta, Euphorbiaceae)
and its Wild Relatives: Furher Evidence for a Southern
Amazonian Origin of Domestication. American Journal of
Botany 88 (1): 131-142.
Olsen, Stanley, J. 2000. Dogs. In: The Cambridge World
History of Food, volume 1, edited by Kiple, Kenneth F., and
Kriemhild Connè. Ornelas Kiple, pp. 508–517. Cambridge
University Press.
Olsen, Kenneth.M. and Barbara A. Schaal. 1999. Evidence on the
origin of cassava: phylogeography of Manihot esculenta.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 96:
5586–5591.
Olsson, Ingrid U. 2009. Radiocarbon Dating History: Early Days,
Questions, and Problems Met. Radiocarbon 51 (1): 1–43.
O’Neill, J. P. 1984. Introduction: feather identification. Edited
by Anne P. Rowe. Costumes and Featherwork of the Lords
of Chimor, pp. 145-150, The Textile Museum, Washington,
DC.
Orozco, Olga L. and David L. Lentz. 2005. Poisonus Plants and
Their Uses as Insecticides in Cajamarca, Peru. Economic
Botany 59 (2): 166-173.
Ordoñez Colque, Samuel. 2006. Cualidades agrofisicas deI
sistema Waru Warus en el altiplano de Puno-Perú. En:
Agricultura Ancestral Camellones y Albarradas. Contexto
cocial, usos y retos del pasado y del presente, edited by
Francisco Valdéz, pp. 273-282. Ediciones Abya-Yala. Quito.
Ecuador.
Orefici, G. and A. Drusini. 2003. Nasca: Hipótesis y Evidencias de
su Desarrollo Cultural. BresciaLima: Centro Italiano Studi e
Ricerche Archeologiche Precolombiane, Lima, Peru.
Ortega, O. R., E. Duran, C. Arbizu, R. Ortega, W. Roca, D. Potter and
C. F. Quiros. 2007. Pattern of genetic diversity of cultivated
and non-cultivated mashua, Tropaeolum tuberosum, in
the Cusco region of Perú. Genetic Resource and Crop
Evolution 54: 807-821.
Ortiz, R and S. Huaman. 2001. Allozyme polymorphisms in
tetraploid potato gene pools and the effect on human
selection. TAG Theoretical Applied Genetics 103: 792-796.
Ortiz, R. and Z. Huaman. 2001. Allozyme polymorphisms in
tetraploid potato gene pools and the effect on human
selection. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 103: 792-
796.
611
14,000 years of food in Peru
Pang J.F., Kluetsch C., Zou X.J., Zhang A.B., Luo L.Y., Angleby H., Ardalan
A., Ekström C., Sköllermo A., Lundeberg J., Matsumura S, Leitner T.,
Zhang and Y. P, Savolainen P. 2009. mtDNA data indicates a
single origin for dogs South of Yangtze River, less than
16,300 years ago, from numerous wolves. Molecular
Biology Evolution 26: 2849-2864.
Ortloff, Charles R. 1995. Surveying and Hydraulic Engineering
of the Pre-Columbian Chimu State: AD 900-1450.
Cambridge Archaeological Journal 5 (1): 55-74.
Owen, Bruce. 2002. Marine Carbon Reservoir Age Estimates
for the Far South Coast of Peru. Radiocarbon 44 (3): 701-708.
Padmaja, G. 2009. Uses and Nutritional Data of Sweetpotato.
In: The Sweetpotato, edited by G. Loebenstein y G.
Thottappilly, pp.: 139-234.
Panikker, Sujatha. 2000. –Food-Borne Infection. En: The
Cambridge World History of Food, volume 1, edited by
Kiple, Kenneth F., and Kriemhild Connè. Ornelas, pp. 1031-
1048. Cambridge University Press.
Papa, R. and P. Gepts. 2003. Asymmetry of gene flow and
differential geographical structure of molecular diversity
in wild and domesticated common bean (Phaseolus
vulgaris L.) from Mesoamerica. TAG Theoretical and
Applied Genetics 106: 239-250.
Parker, Ingrid M., Isis López, Jennifer J. Petersen, Natalia Anaya, Luis
Cubilla-Rios and Daniel Potter. 2010. Domestication Syndrome
in Caimito (Chrysophyllum cainito L.): Fruit and Seed
Characteristics. Economic Botany 64 (2): 161–175.
Parsons, J. R. and C. M. Hastings. 1988. The Late Intermediate
Period. Pages 190–229 in R. W. Keatinge, ed., Peruvian
Prehistory: An Overview of Pre-Inca and Inca Society.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Pasiecznik, N. M., P. Felker, P. J. C. Harris, L. N. Harsh, G. Cruz, J. C.
Tewari, K. Cadoret, and L. J. Maldonado. 2001. The Prosopis
juliflora-Prosopis pallida Complex: A Monograph. HDRA,
Coventry, United Kingdom.
Pastor , S., B. Fuentealba, and M. Ruiz. 2008. Underutilized
species policies and strategies - Underutilized crops
in Peru: Some conceptual and political considerations.
Report commissioned by the Global Facilitation Unit for
Underutilized Species (GFU), Via dei Tre Denari, 472/a,
Maccarese (Fiumicino), Italy.
Pate, F. Donald. 1994. Bone Chemistry and Palaeodiet. Journal
of Archaeological Method and Theory 1 (2): 161-209.
Patiño, Victor Manuel. 1963. Plantas Cultivadas y Animales
Domésticos en América Equinoccial. I. Frutales. Imprenta
Departamental, Cali, Colombia.
Elmo Leon
Patiño, Victor Manuel. 2002. Historia y Dispersión de los
Frutales Nativos del Neotrópico. Centro Internacional de
Agricultura Tropical. Cali.
Patrucco, Raul, Raul Tello and Duccio Bonavia. 1983. Parasitological
studies of Coprolites of Pre-Hispanic Peruvian Populations.
Current Anthropology 24 (3): 393-394.
Patterson, Thomas C. and Edward Moseley. 1968. Late Preceramic
and Early Ceramic Cultures of the Central Coast of Peru.
Nawpa Pacha 6: 115-133.
Patterson, Thomas Carl. and Edward P. Lanning. 1964. Changing
Settlement Patterns on the Central Peruvian Coast.
Ñawpa Pacha 2: 113-123.
Patterson, Thomas C. and M. Edward Moseley. 1968. Late
preceramic and early ceramic cultures of the central coast
of Peru. Ñawpa Pacha 6: 115-134. Berkeley.
Pearsall, Deborah. 1978-80. Recursos y Utilización de Plantas
en Pachamachay. Revista del Museo Nacional XLIV: 65-68.
Pearsall, D. M. 1992. The origins of plant cultivation in
South America. In: The origins of agriculture, edited by
C. W Cowan and P. J. Watson, pp.: 173-205. Smithsonian
Institution Press, Washington, USA.
Pearsall, Deborah M. 1998. From Small-scale Horticulture to
the Formative Period: The Development of Agriculture.
In: The Origin of Agriculture in the Lowland Neotropics,
editado Dolores R. Piperno y Deborah M. Pearsall, pp. 243-
320. Academic Press.
Pearson, Oliver P. 1948. Life History of Mountain Vischachas
in Peru. Journal of Mammalogy 29 (4): 345-374.
Pechenkina, Ekaterina A. and Mercedes Delgado. 2006.
Dimensions of Health and Social Structure in the Early
Intermediate Period Cemetery at Villa El Salvador,
Peru. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 131:
218-235.
Penny, Mary E., Alfonso Zavaleta, Melanie Lemay, Maria Reyna Liria,
Maria Luisa Huaylinas, Marie Alminger, James McChesney, Franklin
Alcaraz, and Manju B. Reddy. 2009. Can coca leaves contribute
to improving the nutritional status of the Andean
population? Food and Nutrition Bulletin 30 (3): 205-216.
Pérez, Elevina, and Mary Lares. 2005. Chemical Composition,
Mineral Profile, and Functional Properties of Canna
(Canna edulis) and Arrowroot (Maranta spp.) Starches.
Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 60: 113–116.
Perry, Linda. 2002. Starch granule size and the domestication
of manioc (Manihot sculenta) and sweet potato (Ipomoea
612
batatas). Economic Botany 56 (4): 335-349.
Perry, Linda, Daniel H. Sandweiss, Dolores R. Piperno, Kurt Rademaker,
Michael A. Malpass, Adán Umire and Pablo de la Vera. 2004. Early
maize agriculture and interzonal interaction in southern
Peru. Nature 440/2: 76-79.
Perry, Linda. 2002. Starch Granule Size and the Domestication
of Manioc (Manihot esculenta) and Sweet potato (Ipomoea
batatas). Economic Botany 56 (4): 335–349.
Perry, Linda, Ruth Dickau, Sonia Zarrillo, Irene Holst, Deborah M.
Pearsall, Dolores R. Piperno, Mary Jane Berman, Richard G. Cooke,
Kurt Rademaker, Anthony J. Ranere, J. Scott Raymond, Daniel H.
Sandweiss, Franz Scaramelli, Kay Tarble and James A. Zeidler. 2007.
Starch Fossils and the Domestication and Dispersal of
Chili Peppers (Capsicum spp. L.) in the Americas. Science
315: 986-988.
Petersen, Georg G. 2010. Mining and Metallurgy in Ancient
Peru. A Translation by William Brooks. The Geological
Society of America. Special Papers 467. Boulder, Colorado.
USA.
Peters, Anne H. 1987. Chongos: Sition Paracas en el Valle de
Pisco. Gaceta Arqueologica Andina 16: 30-34.
Piacenza, Luigi. 2005. Evidencias botánicas en asentamientos
Nazca. Boletin del Museo de Arqueología y Antropologia
(UNMSM) 5 (1): 3-13.
Piacenza, Luigi y Elvina Pieri. 2012. Análisis de las costumbres
alimenticias basado en los hallazgos arqueológicos del
Proyecto Nasca en Cahuachi. Thule (n.30/31) - Rivista
italiana di studi americanistici con el titulo Sguardi italiani
sulle Ande peruviane La ricerca italiana sulle Ande del
Perù tra Archeologia, Storia, Atropologia e Scienze Sociali
Pickersgill, Barbara. 2007. Domestication of Plants in the
Americas: Insights from Mendelian and Molecular
Genetics. Annals of Botany 100: 925-940.
Pickersgill, Barbara. 1971. Relationships between weedy and
cultivated forms in some species of chili peppers (genus
Capsicum). Evolution 25: 683-691.
Pickersgill, Barbara. 1977. Taxonomy and the origin and
evolution of cultivated plants in the New World. Nature
268 (5621): 591-595.
Pickersgill, Barbara. 2007. Domestication of Plants in the
Americas: Insights from Mendelian and Molecular
Genetics. Annals of Botany 100: 925–940.
Pickersgill, Barbara. 1969. The Archaeological Record of
Chilli Peppers (Capsicum spp.) and the Sequence of Plant
Domestication in Peru. American Antiquity 34 (1): 54-61.
Pigière Fabienne, Wim Van Neer, Cécile Ansieau and Marceline
Denis. 2012. New archaeozoological evidence for the
introduction of the guinea pig to Europe. Journal of
Archaeological Science 39: 1020-1024.
Piperno, Dolores R. and Deborah M. Pearsall. 1998. The Origins of
Agriculture in the Lowland Neotropics. Academic Press.
Piperno, Dolores R, Anthony J. Ranere, Irene Holst, and Patricia Hansell.
2000. Starch grains reveal early root crop horticulture in the
Panamanian tropical forest. Nature 407: 894-897.
Piperno, Dolores R., and Karen E. Stothert. 2003. Phytolith
Evidence for Early Holocene Cucurbita Domestication in
Southwest Ecuador. Science 299: 1054-1057.
Piperno, Dolores R. 2006. Manioc (Manihot esculenta Crantz)
and other roots in Pre-Columbian tropical America
through starch grain analysis: a case study from Central
America. In: Documenting Domestication: New Genetic
and Archaeological Paradigms (Zeder, M.A. et al. eds), pp.
46–67, University of California Press.
Piperno, Dolores, R. 2009. Identifying crop plants with
phytoliths (and starch grains) in Central and South
America: A review and an update of the evidence.
Quaternary International 193: 146–159.
Piperno, Dolores, R. 2011. Northern Peruvian Early and Middle
Preceramic Agriculture in Central and South American
Contexts. In: From Foraging to Farming in the Andes. New
Perspectives on Food Production and Social Organization,
edited by Tom D. Dillehay, pp. 275-284. Cambridge
University Press.
Piperno, Dolores R. 2006. Identifying Manioc (Manihot
esculenta Crantz) and other Crops in Pre-Columbian
Tropical America through Starch Grain Analysis. A
Case Study from Central Panama. In: Documenting
Domestication. New Genetic and Archaeological
Paradigms. Edited by Melinda Zeder, Daniel G. Bradley,
Eve Emswiller, and Bruce D. Smith, pp: 46-68. University
of California Press.
Piperno, Dolores R. and Tom D. Dillehay. 2008. Starch grains on
human teeth reveal early broad crop diet in northern Peru.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105 (50):
19622–19627.
Plowman, Timothy. 1979. The identity of Amazonian and
Trujillo coca. Botanical Museum Leaflets 27 (1-2): 45–68.
Plowman, Timothy. 1984. The Ethnobotany of coca
(Erythroxylum spp. Erythroxilaceae). Advances in Economic
Botany 1: 62-111.
613
14,000 years of food in Peru
Plowman, Timoty and N. Henshold. 2004. Names Types and
distribution of Neotropical species of Erythroxylum
(Erythroxylaceae). Brittonia 56 (1): 1-5.
Pollack Velasquez, Luis, William Zelada Estraver, Alexander Tirado Pinedo,
and Luis Pollack Chinchay. 2007. Hábitos alimentarios de Dicrodon
guttulatum, “cañán” (Squamata: Teiidae) en Garrapón, Paiján
Eating habits of Dicrodon guttulatum, “cañán” (Squamata:
Teiidae) at Garrapón, Paiján. Arnaldoa 14 (2): 283- 291.
Pope, Kevin O., Mary E. D. Pohl, John G. Jones, David L. Lentz, Christopher
von Nagy, Francisco J. Vega, and Irvy R. Quitmyer. 2001. Origin and
Environmental Setting of Ancient Agriculture in the
Lowlands of Mesoamerica. Science 292: 1370–1373.
Pozorski, Thomas, and Shelia Pozorski. 1986. Recent Excavations
at Pampa de las Llamas-Moxeke, a Complex Initial Period
Site in Peru. Journal of Field Archaeology 13: 381-401.
Pozorski, Thomas, and Shelia Pozorski. 1987. Chavin, the Early
Horizon, and the Initial Period. In: The Origins and
Development of the Andean State, edited by Jonathan
Haas, Shelia Pozorski, and Thomas Pozorski, pp. 36-46.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pozorski, Sheila and Thomas Pozorski. 1979. An early subsistence
exchange system in the Moche Valley, Peru. Journal of
Field Archaeology 6: 413-432.
Pozorski, Thomas, and Shelia Pozorski. 1990. Huaynuná, a Late
Cotton Preceramic Site on the North Coast of Peru.
Journal of Field Archaeology 17 (1): 17-26.
Pozorski, Shelia and Thomas Pozorski. 2003. La arquitectura
residencial y la subsistencia de los habitantes del sitio de
Moche: evidencia recuperada por el proyecto Chan Chan
- Valle de Moche. En: Moche. Hacia el Final del Milenio.
Actas del Segundo Coloquio sobre la Cultura Moche.
Trujillo, 1 al 7 de agosto de 1999. Editadopor Santiago
Uceda y Elias Mujica, pp. 119-150. Universidad Nacional de
Trujillo y Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.
Pozorski, Shelia. 1979. Prehistoric Diet and Subsistence of the
Moche Valley, Peru. World Archaeology 11 (2): 163-184.
Pozorski, Thomas and Sheila Pozorski. 1990. Huaynuna, a Late
Cotton Preceramic Site of the North Coast of Peru.
Journal of Field Archaeology 17 (1): 17-26.
Pozorski, Thomas, Shelia Pozorski, Carol J. MacKey, and Alexandra M.
Ulana Klymyshyn. 1983. Pre-Hispanic Ridged Fields of the
Casma Valley, Peru. Geographical Review 73 (4): 407-416.
Pozorski, Thomas and Shelia Pozorski. 1997. Cherimoya and
Guanabana in the Archaeological Record of Peru. Journal
of Ethnobiology 17 (2): 235-248.
Elmo Leon
Prasad, Ananda S. 2000. Zinc. The Cambridge World History of
Food, volume 1, edited by Kiple, Kenneth F., and Kriemhild
Connè. Ornelas pp. 868-875. Cambridge University Press.
Prates, Luciano, Francisco J. Prevosti, and Mónica Berón. 2010. First
Records of Prehispanic Dogs in Southern South America
(Pampa-Patagonia, Argentina). Current Anthropology 51 (2):
273-280.
Prieto, Gabriel. 2004. Área 35 Ocupación Doméstico/
Productiva Chimú en San José de Moro, Temporada 2005.
En Programa Arqueológico San José de Moro, Temporada
2004, edited by Luis Jaime Castillo Butters, pp. 141-154.
Informe para el Instituto Nacional de Cultura. Lima.
Prieto, Gabriel. 2005. Informe técnico de las excavaciones en el
Área 35 de San José de Moro, Temporada 2005. En Informe
de Excavaciones, Proyecto Arqueológico San José de Moro,
Temporada 2005, edited by Luis Jaime Castillo Butters, pp.
43-86. Informe para el Instituto Nacional de Cultura. Lima.
Prohens, Jaime, Juan J. Ruiz, y Fernando Nuez. 1996. The Pepino
(Solanum muricatum, Solanaceae): A “New” Crop with a
History. Economic Botany 50 (4): 355-368.
Pruemers, Heiko. 2002. Excavaciones arquelológicas en Pailón
(Depto. De Sta. Cruz, Bolivia), Beitraege zur Allgemeinen
und Vergleichenden Archaologie 22: 95-213.
Quero-Garcia, José, Anton Ivancic, and Vincent Lebot. 2010. Taro and
Cocoyam. En: Root and Tuber Crops, Handbook of Plant
Breeding 7, edited by J.E. Bradshaw, pp: 149-172. Springer.
Quilter, Jeffrey. 1989. Life and Death at Paloma. Society
and Mortuary Practices in a Preceramic Peruvian Village.
University of Iowa Press.
Quilter, Jeffrey. 1991. Late Preceramic Peru. Journal of World
Prehistory 5 (4): 387-438.
Quilter Jeffrey, Bernardino Ojeda E., Deborah M. Pearsall, Daniel H.
Sandweiss, John G. Jones, and Elizabeth S. Wing. 1991. Subsistence
Economy of El Paraiso, an Early Peruvian Site. Science 251:
277-283.
Quintana, Carlos A. and Diana L.Mazzanti. 2011. Las Vischachas
pampeanas (Lagostomus maximus, Rodentia) en la
susbsitencia indígena delholoceno tardio de las sierrasde
tandialia oriental,Argentina. Latin American Antiquity 22
(2): 253-270).
Quiroz, Carlos F., Andrea Epperson, Jinguo Hu and Miguel Holle. 1996.
Physiological Studies and Determination of Chromosome
Number in Maca (Lepidium Meyenii (Brassicaceae).
Economic Botany 1996 50 (2): 216-223.
Quiróz, Carlos F. and Rolando Aliaga Cárdenas. 1997. Maca
(Lepidium meyenii Walp.). In: Andean Root and Tubers:
614
Ahipa, Arracacha, Maca and Yacon, edited by Michael
Hermann y J. Heller, pp. 173-198. Centro Internacional de la
Papa. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute.
Raviele, Maria E. 2011. Experimental assessment of maize
phytolith and starch taphonomy in carbonized cooking
residues. Journal of Archaeological Science 38: 2708-2713.
Reeve, R. M. 1967. A Review of Cellular Structure, Starch,
and Texture Qualities of Processed Potatoes. Economic
Botany 21 (4): 294-308.
Reimer, P. J. , M. G. L. Baillie, E. Bard, A. Bayliss, J. W Beck, P. G. Blackwell,
C. Bronk Ramsey, C. E. Buck, G. S. Burr, R. L. Edwards, M. Friedrich, P.
M. Grootes, T. P. Guilderson, I. Hajdas, T. J. Heaton, G. Hogg, K. A.
Hughen, K. F. Kaiser, B. Kromer, F. G. McCormac, S. W. Manning, R. W.
Reimer, D. A. Richards, J. R. Southon, S. Talamo, C. S. M. Turney, J van
der Plicht, and C. E. Weyhenmeyer. 2009. Intcal09 and Marine09
Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curves, 0–50,000 Years Cal
BP. Radiocarbon 51 (4): 1111-1150.
Reinhard, Karl J. and Vaughn M. Bryant. 1992. Coprolite Analysis:
A Biological Perspective in Archaeology. In. Advances in
Archaeological Method and Theory, edited by Michael
Shiffer, pp. 245-288.University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Reinhard, Karl J., Vaughn M. Bryant, and Sheila Dorsey Vinton. 2007.
Comment on Reinterpreting the Pollen Data from Dos
Cabezas. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 17:
531–541.
Reitz, Elizabeth J. and Elizabeth S. Wing. 1999. Zooarchaeology.
Cambridge University Press. NY.
Reitz, Elizabeth J. and Daniel H. Sandweiss. 2001. Environmental
Change at Ostra Base Camp, a Peruvian Pre-ceramic Site.
Journal of Archaeological Science 28: 1085-1100.
Reitz, Elizabeth J. 1988. Faunal Remains from Paloma, an Archaic
Site in Peru. American Anthropologist 9 (2): 310-322.
Reitz, Elizabeth J. 2001. Fishing in Peru between 10000 and
3750 BP. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 11:
163–171.
Repo-Carrasco-Valencia, R., J. Pena, H. Kallio and S. Salminen. 2009a.
Dietary fiber and other functional components in two
varieties of crude and extruded kiwicha (Amaranthus
caudatus). Journal of Cereal Science 49: 219–224.
Repo-Carrasco-Valencia, R., Alexander Acevedo de la Cruz, Julio
Cesar Icochea Álvarez and Heikki Kallio. 2009b. Chemical and
Functional Characterization of Kañiwa (Chenopodium
pallidicaule) Grain, Extrudate and Bran. Plant Foods and
Human Nutrition 64: 94-101.
Reynard, L. M., G. M. Henderson, and R. E. M. Hedges. 2011. Calcium
isotopes in archaeological bones and their relationship to
dairy consumption. Journal of Archaeological Science 38:
657-664.
Richardson III, James B. 1979. Early Mano n the Peruvian North
COSAT. Maritime Exploitation and the Pleistocene and
Holocene Environment. In: Early Man in America from a
Circuí-Pacific Perspective, edited by Alan L. Bryan, pp. 274-
289. Ocasional Papers of the department of Anthropology,
university of Alberta, Edmonton.
Richerson. n/d. http://www.des.ucdavis.edu/faculty/
Richerson/BooksOnline/He25-95.pdf
Richerson, Peter J., Robert Boyd, and Robert L. Bettinger. 2001.
Was Agriculture Impossible During the Pleistocene but
Mandatory During the Holocene? A Climate Change
Hypothesis. American Antiquity 66 (3): 387-41
Rick, John W. and Katherine Moore. 1999. El Precerámico de la
Punas de Junin: El Punto de Vista desde Panalauca. Boletin
de Arqueología PUCP 3: 263-296.
Rick, C. M. y M. Holle. 1990. Andean Lycopersicum esculentum
var. cerasiforme; Genetic Variation and Its Evolutionary
Significance. Economic Botany 44 (3): 69-78. 1.
Rick, John. 1983. Cronología, Clima y Subsistencia en el
Precerámico Peruano. Instituto Andino de Estudios
Arqueológicos. Lima.
Risi, J. C. and N. W. Galwey. 1984. The Chenopodium grains of
the Andes: Inca crops for modern agriculture. Advances in
Applied Biology 10: 145-216.
Robbins, C. R., 2002. Chemical and Physical Behavior of
Human Hair. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Rodriguez, C. T. and J. L.Quispe. 2007. Domesticated camelids,
the main animal genetic resource of pastoral systems
in the region of Turco, Bolivia. In: People and Animals.
Traditional Livestock keepers: Guardians of domestic
animal diversity, edited by Kim Anh Tempelman and
Ricardo A. Cardellino, pp. 33-46. FAO.
Roe, Daphne A. 2000. Vitamin B Complex: Thiamine,
Riboflavin, Niacin, Pantothenic Acid, Pyridoxine,
Cobalamin, Folic Acid. In: The Cambridge World History
of Food, volume 1, edited by Kiple, Kenneth F., y Kriemhild
Connè. Ornelas, pp. 750–754. Cambridge University Press.
Rogers, David J. 1965. Some Botanical and Ethnological
Considerations of Manihot Sculenta. Economic Botany 19
(4): 369-377.
Rohrbach, Kenneth G., Freddy Leal, amd Geo Coppens d`Eckenbrugge.
2003. History, Distribution and World Production. In: The
Pineapple, Botany, Production and Uses. Edited by D. P.
615
14,000 years of food in Peru
Bartholomew, R. E. Paull, y K. G. Rohrbach. CABI Publishing.
Oxon & New York.
Román-Valencia, César, María Dolly García and Hernán Ortega. 2011.
Revisión taxonómica y geográfica de Bryconamericus
peruanus (Teleostei, Characidae). Revista Mexicana de
Biodiversidad 82: 844-853.
Romo, M. C. 1995. Food Habits of the Andean Fox
(Pseudolopex culpaeus) and the notes on the mountain
cat (Felis colocolo) and puma (Felis concolor) in the Rio
Abiseo National Park, Peru. Mammalia 59 (3): 335-344.
Roque, José, Asunción Cano, and Anita Cook. 2003. Restos
vegetales del sitio arqueológico Casa Vieja, Callango (Ica).
Revista Peruana de Biología 10 (1): 33-43.
Roselló, E., V. Vásquez, A, Morales and T. Rosales. 2001. Marine
Resources from an Urban Moche (470-600 AD) Area in the
“Huacas del Sol y de La Luna” Archaeological Complex
(Trujillo, Peru). International Journal of Osteoarchaeology
11: 72–87.
Rossen, Jack, Tom D. Dillehay and Donald Ugent. 1996. Ancient
Cultigens or Modern Intrusions?: Evaluating Plant Remains
in an Andean Case Study. Journal of Archaeological
Science 23: 391–407.
Rossen, Jack and Tom D. Dillehay. 2001. Bone cutting, placement,
and cannibalism? Millde Preceramic mortoury patterns
of Nanchoc, Northern Peru. Chungara 33 (1): 63-72.
Rothhammer, Francisco, Marvin J. Allison, Lautaro Nunez, Vivien
Standen, and Bernardo Arriaza. 1985. Chagas Disease in Pre-
Columbian South America. American Journal of Physical
Anthropology 68: 495-498.
Ruehle, Geo. D. 1948. The Common Guava: A Neglected Fruit
with a Promising Future. Economic Botany 2 (3): 306-325.
Ryser, Gayl. 2008. Moche bean warriors and the paleobotanic
record: why privilege beans?.En: Arqueologia Mochica:
nuevos enfoques, pp. 297-409. Lima: Pontificia universidad
católica del Perú. PUCP - Institut français d’études andines.
Sablin, Mikhail V. and Gennady A. Khlopachev. 2002. The Earliest
Ice Age Dogs: Evidence from Eliseevichi 1. Current
Anthropology 43 (5): 795-799.
Safford, W. E. 1925. The Potato of Romance and of Reality.
III. Introduction of the Potato into Culture. Journal of
Heredity 16: 217-229.
Salazar Vásquez, Patricia Teresa. 2008. Helmintos parásitos de
Dicrodon guttulatum, Dúmeril y Bibron, 1893 (SAURIA:
TEIIDAE) de la costa del Perú. Tesis para optar el título
profesional de Biólogo con mención en Zoología.
Elmo Leon
Universidad Nacional Mayor De San Marcos. Facultad
Ciencias Biológicas. E.A.P. de Ciencias Biológicas
Salo, Wilmar L., Arthur C. Aufderheide, Jane Buisktra, and Todd
A. 1994. Identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis
DNA in a Pre-Columbian Peruvian Mummy. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences 91: 2091-2094.
Salomon, Frank, and David Urioste. 1991. The Huarochiri
Manuscript. A Testament of Ancient and Colonial Religion.
The University of Texas Press.
Sánchez Romero, Jorge. 1973. El Mar. Gran Personaje. Biologia.
Historia Marítima del Perú. Lima.
Sandefur, Elsie. C. 2002. Animal husbandry and meat
consumption. In D’Altroy, T. N. (ed.), Empire and Domestic
Economy, Kluwer Academic, New York, pp. 179–202.
Sandweiss, Daniel H. 1996. Mid-Holocene Cultural Interaction
between the North Coast of Peru and Ecuador. Latin
American Antiquity 7 (1): 41-50.
Sandweiss, Daniel H., James B. Richardson III, Elizabeth J. Reitz, Jeffrey
T. Hsu, and Robert A. Feldman. 1989. Early maritime adaptations
in the Andes: Preliminary studies at the Ring Site, Peru.
In: Ecology, Settlement, and History of the Osmore
Drainage, Peru, edited by Don S. Rice, Charles Stanish, y
Phillip R. Scarr., 35-84. Bar International Series 545.
Sandweiss, Daniel. 1992. The Archaeology of Chincha
Fishermen. Specialization and Status in Inka Peru. Bulletin
of CarnegieMuseum of natural History 29, pp.161. Carnegie
Institut. Pittsburgh.
Sandweiss, Daniel H. and Maria del Carmen Rodríguez. 1993. Restos
Malacológicos de La Galería. In: Chavin de Huántar.
Excavaciones en la Galería de las Ofrendas. Materialien
zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Archaeologie.
Kommission fuer allgemeine und vergleichende
Archaeologie, Band 51, pp: 406-413. Verlag Philipp von
Zabern – Mainz am Rhein.
Sandweiss, Daniel H., Kirk A. Maasch, Fei Chai, C. Fred T. Andrus, and
Elizabeth J. Reitz. 2004. Geoarchaeological evidence for
multidecadal natural climatic variability and ancient
Peruvian fisheries. Quaternary Research 61: 330– 334.
Sandweiss, Daniel H. and Elizabeth S. Wing. 1997. Ritual Rodents:
The Guinea Pigs of Chincha, Peru. Journal of Field
Archaeology 24 (1): 47-58.
Sanjur, Oris I., Dolores R. Piperno, Thomas C. Andres, and Linda
Wessel-Beaver. 2002. Phylogenetic relationships among
domesticated and wild species of Cucurbita (Cucurbitaceae)
inferred from a mitochondrial gene: Implications for crop
616
plant evolution and areas of origin. Proceedings of National
Academy of Sciences 99 (1): 535-540.
Sathe, S. K., and S. S. Deshpande. 2003. Beans. En: Encyclopaedia
of Food Science and Technology, Academic Press, London,
U. K, pp 403-412.
Sauer, Carl O. 1952. Agricultural origins and dispersals.
American Geographical Society. New York.
Sauer, Jonathan and Lawrence Kaplan. 1969. Canavalia Beans in
American Prehistory. American Antiquity 34 (4): 417-424.
Schery, Robert W. 1947. Manioc: A Tropical Staff of Life.
Economic Botany 1 (1): 20-25.
Schoeninger, Margaret J. and Katherine Moore. 1992. Bone Stable
Isotopes Studies in Archaeology. Journal of World
Prehistory 6 (2): 247-296.
Schreiber, Katharina J. and Josue Lancho Rojas. 1995. The Puquios
of Nazca. Latin American Antiquity 6 (3): 229-254.
Schultz, Michael. 2001. Paleohistopathology of Bone: A New
Approach to the Study of Ancient Diseases. Yearbook of
Physical Anthropology 44:106–147.
Schwarcz, Henry. 1991. Some Theoretical Aspects of Isotope
Paleodiet Studies. Journal of Archaeological Science 18:
261-275.
Schwartz, Marion. 1997. A history of dogs in the early
Americas. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Sealy, Judith, Richard Armstrong and Carmel Schrire. 1995. Beyond
lifetime averages: tracing life histories through isotopic
analysis of different calcified tissues from archaeological
human skeletons. Antiquity 69: 290-300.
Seibert, R. J. 1950. The importance of palms to Latin America:
pejibaye a notable example. Ceiba 1: 63-74.
Seki, Yuji y Minoru Yoneda. 2005. Cambios de manejo del
poder en el formativo: desde el analisis de la dieta
alimenticia. Perpectivas Latinoamericanas 2: 110–131.
Centro de Estudios Latinoamericanos, Universidad
Nanzan, Nagoya, Japon.
Seminario, Juan. 2004. Origen de las Raíces Andinas. In:
Raíces Andinas, Contribuciones al Conocimiento y a la
Capacitación, edited by Juan Seminario, pp. 1-38. Centro
Internacional de la Papa.
Shady Solis, Ruth, Jonathan Haas, and Winifred Creamer. 2001.
Dating Caral, a Preceramic Site in the Supe Valley on the
Central Coast of Peru. Science 292: 723-726.
Shady, Ruth and Hermilio Rosas. 1979. El Complejo Bagua y el
Sistema de Establecimientos durante el Formativo en la
Sierra Norte del Perú. Nawpa Pacha 17: 109-142.
Shady, Ruth and Carlos Leyva (editores). 2003. La Ciudad Sagrada
de Caral-Supe. Los orígenes de la civilización andina y la
formación del Estado prístino en el antiguo Perú.
Shankman P. 1969. Le Roti et le Bouilli: Levi-Strauss’ theory
of cannibalism. American Anthopologist, New Series 71
(1): 54-69.
Shimada, Melody e Izumi Shimada. 1981. Explotación y manejo
de los recursos naturales de Pampa Grande, sitio Moche
V, signficado del análisis orgánico. Revista del Museo
Nacional xlv:19-73.
Shimada, Melody, and Izumi Shimada. 1985. Prehistoric llama
breeding and herding on the north coast of Peru. American
Antiquity 50 (1): 3–26.
Shimada, Izumi, Ken-ichi Shinoda, Julie Farnum, Robert Corruccini,
and Hirokatsu Watanabe. 2004. An Integrated Analysis of Pre-
Hispanic Mortuary Practices. Current Anthropology 45 (3):
369-402.
Silverman, Helaine. 1993. Cahuachi in the Ancient Nazca
World. University of Iowa Press. Iowa.
Silverman, Helaine and Donald A. Proulx. 2002. The Nazca.
Blackwell Publishers.
Simmons, N. W. 1965. The Grain Chenopods of the Tropical
American Highlands. Economic Botany 19 (3): 223-235.
Simpson, C. E., A. Krapocickas, and J. F. M. Valls. 2001. History of
Arachis Including Evidence of A. hypogaea L. Progenitors.
Peanut Science: 28: 78-80.
Singh, Shree P., Paul Gepts and Daniel G. Debouck. 1991. Races of
Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris, Fabaceae). Economic
Botany 45 (3): 379-396.
Slovak, Nicole M, Adina Paytan and Bettina A. Wiegand. 2009.
Reconstructing Middle Horizon mobility patterns on the
coast of Peru through strontium isotope analysis. Journal
of Archaeological Science 36: 157–165.
Smith, B.E. and D.A. Keinath. (2007, January 16). Northern Leopard
Frog (Rana pipiens): a technical conservation assessment.
[Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region.
Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/ projects/scp/
assessments/northernleopardfrog.pdf [08.7.2012].
Smith, C. Earle, Jr. 1965. The Archeological Record of Cultivated
Crops of New World Origins. Economic Botany 19 (4): 322-334.
617
14,000 years of food in Peru
Smith, C. Earle, Jr. 1966. Archeological Evidence for Selection
in Avocado. Economic Botany 20 (2): 169-175.
Smith, Bruce D. 1997. The Initial Domestication of Cucurbita
pepo in the Americas 10,000 Years Ago. Science 276
(5314): 932-934.
Smith, Bruce D. 2005. Reassessing Coxcatlan Cave and the early
history of domesticated plants in Mesoamerica. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences 102 (27): 9438-9445.
Smith, C. E. 1967. Plant remains. En: The Prehistory of the
Tehuacan Valley. Vol. 1. Environment and Subsistence,
edited by D. S. Byers, pp. 220-255. University of Texas
Press, Austin.
Smith, C. E. 1968. The New World Centers of Origin of
Cultivated Plants and the Archaeological Evidence.
Economic Botany 22 (3): 253-266.
Smith, C. E. 1980a. Plant Remains from Guitarrero Cave.
En: Guitarrero Cave. Early Man in the Andes, edited by
Thomas F. Lynch, pp. 87-119. Academic Press.
Smith, C. E. 1980b. Ancient Peruvian Highland Maize. En:
Guitarrero Cave. Early Man in the Andes, edited by
Thomas F. Lynch, pp. 121-143. Academic Press.
Smith, C. Earle, Jr. 1988. Floral Remains. Inn: La Galgada, Peru. A
Preceramic Culture in Transition. Edited by Grieder, Terence,
Alberto Bueno Mendoza, C. Earle Smith Junior Jr. y Robert
M. Malina, pp.: 125-151. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Smith, C. T., W. M. Denevan, and P. Hamilton. 1968. Ancient Ridged
Fields in the Region of Lake Titicaca. The Geographical
Journal 134 (3): 353-367.
Sobolik, Kristin, D. 2000. Dietary reconstruction as seen in
coprolites. In: The Cambridge World History of Food,
volume 1. Edited by Kiple, Kenneth F. and Kriemhild Connè.
Ornelas, pp. 4–51. Cambridge University Press.
Sorensen, Marten. 1988. A taxonomic revision of the genus
Pachyrhizus Rich. ex DC. nom. cons. Nordic Journal of
Botany 8 (2):167-192.
Sorensen, Marten, Wolfgang J. Grueneberg, and Bo Ortling. 1997.
Ahipa (Pachyrhizusahipa (Wedd.) Parodi). In: Andean
Root and Tubers: Ahipa, Arracacha, Maca and Yacon
edited by Hermann, Michael, y J. Heller, pp. 13-74. Centro
Internacional de la Papa. International Plant Genetic
Resources Institute.
Soukup, Jaroslav. 1980. Vocabulario de los Nombres Vulgares
de la Flora Peruana y Catálogo de los Géneros. Editorial
Salesiana. Lima.
Elmo Leon
Spencer, Herta. 2000. Calcium. In: The Cambridge World
History of Food, volume 1, Kiple, edited by Kiple, Kenneth
F., and Kriemhild Connè. Ornelas, pp. 785-797. Cambridge
University Press.
Splitsloser, Jeffrey C. 2009. Weaving the Structure of the
Cosmos: Cloth, Agency, and Worldview at Cerrillos, An
Early Paracas Site in the Ica valley, Peru. A Dissertation
submitted to the Department of Anthropology. School of
Arts and Sciences of the Catholic University of America.
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy. Washington DC.
Spotorno, A. E., J. C.Marin, G. Manriquez, J. P. Valladares, E. Rico
and C. Rivas. 2006. Ancient and modern steps during the
domestication of guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus L.). Journal
of Zoology 270: 57-62.
Stahl, Peter. 1999. Structural Density of Domesticated
South American Camelid Skeletal Elements and the
Archaeological Investigation of Prehistoric Andean
Ch’arki. Journal of Archaeological Science 26: 1347–1368.
Stahl, Peter. 2006. An exploratory osteological study of
the Muscovy duck (Cairina moschata) (Aves: Anatidae)
with implications for neotropical archaeology. Journal of
Archaeological Science 32: 915-929.
Stahl, Peter W. 2008. Animal Domestication in South America.
In: The Handbook of Soout American Archaeology, edited
by Helaine Silverman y William Isbell, pp. 121-130. Springer
Verlag.
Stahl, Peter W., Michael C. Muse, and Florencio Delgado Espinoza.
2006. New evidence for pre-Columbian Muscovy Duck
Cairina moschata from Ecuador. Ibis 148: 657-663.
Stahl, Peter, W. and James A. Zeidler. 1990. Differential Bone-
Refuse Accumulation in Food-Preparation and Traffic
Areas on an Early Ecuadorian House Floor. Latin American
Antiquity 1 (2): 150-169.
Steadman, L. H. 1995. Excavations at Camata: an Early
Ceramic Chronology for the Western Titicaca Basin, Peru.
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California,
Berkeley.
Stegemann, H., S. Majino, and P. Schmiediche. 1988. Biochemical
Differentiation of Clones of Oca (Oxalis tuberosa,
Oxalidaceae) by Their Tuber Proteins and the Propierties
of These Proteines. Economic Botany 42 (1): 37-44.
Stevenson, F. J. 1951. The Potato: Its Origin, Cytogenetic
Relationships, Production, Uses and Food Value. Economic
Botany 5 (2): 153-171.
618
Steward, T. D. 1931. Dental caries in Peruvian skulls. American
Journal of Physical Anthropology 25 (2): 315-326.
Strong, W. D. and C. Evans. 1952. Cultural Stratigraphy in the Viru
Valley, Northern Peru. Columbia Studies in Archaeology,
vol. IV, Columbia University Press. New York.
Super, John C. and Luis Alberto Vargas. 1999. Mexico and Highland
Central America. En: The Cambridge World History of
Food, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple and Kriemhild Coneè
Ornelas, pp. 1248-1254. Cambridge University Press.
Tarifeño, M. Carmona, A. Llanos-Rivera, and L. R. Castro. 2008.
Temperature effects on the anchoveta Engraulis ringens
egg development: do latitudinal differences occur?
Environmental Biology of Fishes 81 (4): 387-395.
Tello, Julio Cesar y Toribio Mejia Xesspe. 1979. Paracas. Segunda
Parte. Cavernas y Necrópolis. Universidad Nacional Mayor
de San Marcos. Lima.
Teppner, Herwig. 2004. Notes on Lagenaria and Cucurbita
(Cucurbitaceae) – Review and New Contributions. Phyton
44 (2): 245-308.
The Potato Genoma Consortium. 2011. Genome sequence and
analysis of the tuber crop potato. Nature 475: 189-195.
Thierry Palmer. 2000. Vitamin K and Vitamin K dependent
proteins. The Cambridge World History of Food, edited
by Kenneth F. Kiple and Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 774-
784. Cambridge University Press.
Thomas W. Whitaker and G. W. Bohn. 1950. The Taxonomy,
Genetics, Production and Uses of the Cultivated Spe cies
of Cucurbita. Economic Botany 4 (1): 52-81.
Thottappilly, G. 2009. Introductory remarks. En: Sweetpotato,
edited by Loebenstein y Thottappilly, pp. 3-7. Springer.
Tomczac, Paula D. 2003. Prehistoric diet and socioeconomic
relationships within the Osmore Valley of southern Peru.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 22: 262–278
Towle, Margaret. 1961. The Ethnobotany of Pre-Columbian
Peru. Aldine Publishing Company. Chicago.
Toyne, J. M.. 2002. Tales Woven in their Bones: The
osteological Examination of the Human Skeletal Remains
from the Stone Temple at Túcume, Peru. M.A. thesis,
University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario.
Trinakaus, Erik. 1977. The Alto Salaverry Child: A Case of
Anemia from the Peruvian Preceramic. American Journal
of Physical Anthropology 46: 25-28.
Tung, Tiffiny A. and Anita G. Cook. 2006. Intermediate-Elite Agency
in the Wari Empire. The Bioarchaeological and Mourtuary
Evidence. En: Intemerdiate Elites in Pre-Columbian States and
Empires. Edited by Christina M. Elson y R. Alan Covey, pp. 68-
93. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Tung, Tiffiny A. and Mirza del Castillo. 2005. Una Vision de la
Salus Comunitaria en el Valle de Majes durante la época
Wari. Corriente Arqueologica 1: 149-172.
Turner, Bethany L., John Kingston, and George Armelagos. 2010.
Variation in Dietary Stories among the Immigrants of
Machu Picchu: Carbon and Nitrogen Isotope Evidence.
Chungara 42 (2): 515-534.
Tykot, Robert H. 2006. Isotope Analyses and the Histories
of Maize. En: Histories of Maize. Multidisciplinary
Approaches to the Prehistory, Linguistics, Biogeography,
Domestication, and Evolution of Maize, edited by John E.
Staller, Robert H. Tykot y Bruce F. Benz, pp. 131-142. Elsevier.
Tykot, Robert H., Nikolaas J. van der Merwe, and Richard L. Burger.
2006. The Importance of Maize in Initial Period and
Early Horizon Peru. In: Histories of Maize, pp.: 187-197.
Academic Press.
Tykot, R.,H., A. Metroka, M. Dietz and R. A. Bergfield. 2011. Chemical
Analysis of Hair Segments and Short-Term Dietary
Variation: Results for the Ancient Site of Chongos (Peru).
2011. Proceedings of the 37th International Symposium on
Archaeometry, 13th-16th May 2008, Siena, Italy, 441-446,
edited by Turbanti-Memmi (ed.), Springer.
Ugent, Donald, Shelia Pozorski y Thomas Pozorski. 1983. Restos
arqueológicos de tubérculos de papas y camotes de
Casma en el Perú. Boletín de Lima 25: 28-44.
Ugent, Donald y Carlos M. Ochoa. 2006. La Etnobotánica en el
Perú. Desde la Prehistoria al Presente. Consejo Nacional
de Ciencia, Tecnología e innovación Tecnológica. Lima.
Ugent, Donald. 1970. The Potato. What is the botanical origin
of this important crop plant, and how did it first become
domesticated?. Science 170 (3963): 1161-1166.
Ugent, Donald, Shelia Pozorski, and Thomas Pozorski. 1981.
Prehistoric remains of the sweet potato from the Casma
Valley of Peru. Phytologia 49 (5): 401-415.
Ugent, Donald, Shelia Pozorski, and Thomas Pozorski. 1982.
Archaeological Potato Tuber Remains from the Casma
Valley of Peru. Economic Botany 36 (2): 182-192.
Ugent, Donald, and Linda W. Peterson. 1988. Archaeological
Remains of Potato and Sweet Potato in Peru. Circular.
International Potato Center 16 (3): 1-10.
619
14,000 years of food in Peru
Uhl, Natalie. W. and John Dransfield. 1987. Genera Palmarum, a
classification of the palms based on the work of Harold
E. Moore Jr. Liberty Hyde Bailey Hortorium and the
International Palm Society, Lawrence, Kansas.
Ulloa, Carmen. 2006. Aromas y sabores andinos. In:
Botánica económica de los Andes Centrales, edited
by M. Moraes R, B. Ollgaard, L. P. Kvist, F. Borchsenius,
y H. Balslev, pp. 313-328. Universidad Nacional de San
Andres. Bolivia.
Ungar, Peter S. and Robert S. Scott. 2009. Dental evidence for
Diet of early Homo. F.E. Grine et al. (eds.), The First Humans:
Origin and Early Evolution of the Genus Homo, Vertebrate
Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology, © Springer Science
+ Business Media B.V. 2009, pp. 121-134.
Unkel, Ingmar and Bernd Kromer. 2009. The Clock in the Corn
Cob: On the Development of a Chronology of the
Paracas and Nasca Period Based on Radiocarbon Dating.
In: New Technologies for Archaeology, Natural Science in
Archaeology, M. Reindel, G.A. Wagner (eds.), pp. 231-244.
Springer Verlag. Berlin Heidelberg.
Uzawa, Kazuhiro. 2007. Un breve informe sobre algunos
estudios zooarqueológicos preliminares en el sitio de
KunurWasi, Cajamarca, Peru. Archaeobios 1 (1): 5-9.
Valcárcel, Luis E. 1948. El alimento en el Antiguo Perú. Revista
del Museo Nacional XVII: 3-33.
Valdez, Lidio M. 2000. On Ch’arki Consumption in the
Ancient Central Andes: A Cautionary Note. American
Antiquity 65 (3): 567-572.
Van der Merwe, Nikolaas J., and Hartmut Tschauner. 1999. C4 Plants
and the Development of Human Societies. In: C4 Plant
Biology, edited by Rowan F. Sage and Russell K. Monsoon
pp. 509-549. Academic Press.
Van Gijseghem, Hendrik. 2001. Household and Family at
Moche, Peru: An Analysis of Building and Residence
Patterns in a Prehispanic Urban Center. Latin American
Antiquity 12 (3): 257-273.
Van der Hammen, Thomas, and G. W. Noldus. 1985. Pollen analysis
of the Telarmachay Rockshelter (Peru). Étude specialisée
N. 1. En: Telarmachay. Pasteurs Prehistoriques des Andes
I (Tome1), edited by Danièle Lavallée, Michèle Julien, Jane
Wheeler, y Claudine Karlin, pp. 379-387. Synthese 20.
Institute Français d´Etudes Andines. Editions Recherche
sur les Civilisations Paris.
Vargas, César. 1962. Phytomorphic Representations of the
Ancient Peruvians. Economic Botany 16 (2): 106-115.
Elmo Leon
Vásquez Sánchez, Victor, Teresa E. Rosales Tham, and Gabriel Dorado.
2009. Morphotypes and Breeds of Dogs (Canis lups
familiaris L.) from the Moche Period. Arqueobios 3 (1): 20-
33.
Vásquez Sánchez, Victor y Teresa E. Rosales Tham. 1998. Zooarqueologia
de la Zona Urbana Moche. En: Investigaciones en la Huaca de
la Luna 1996, edited by S. Uceda, E. Mujica y R. Morales, pp:
173-193. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales.Universidad Nacional
de La Libertad. Trujillo, Peru.
Vásquez Sánchez, Victor y Teresa E. Rosales Tham. 2004.
Arqueozoología y Arqueobotánica de Huaca de la Luna,
1998-1999. En: Investigaciones en Huaca de la Luna 1998-
1999. Edited by S. Uceda, E. Mujica y R. Morales, pp.: 337-
366. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad Nacional
de Trujillo. Peru.
Vásquez Sánchez, Victor, Teresa E. Rosales Tham, Arturo Morales Muniz
y Eufrasia Roselló Izquierdo. 2003. Zooarqueología de la Zona
Urbana Moche. Complejo Huacas del Sol y de la Luna,
Vallede Moche. En: Moche. Hacia el Final del Milenio.
Tomo II. Edited by Santiago Uceda y Elias Mujica, pp: 33-
63. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú y Universidad
Nacional de Trujillo.
Vavilov, N. I. 1931. Mexico and Central America as the
principal centre of origin of cultivated plants in the New
World. Bulletin of Applied Botany, Genetics, and
Plant Breeding 26: 135–99.
Vega-Centeno Sara-Lafosse, Rafael. 2007. Construction, labor
organization, and feasting during the Late Archaic
Period in the Central Andes. Journal of Anthropological
Archaeology 26: 150–171.
Verano, John W. 1992. Prehistoric Disease and Demography
in the Andes. En: Disease and Demography in Americas,
edited by John W. Verano y Douglass H. Uberlaker, pp.15-
24. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.
Verano, John W. 1994. Características físicas y biologóa
osteológica de los Moche. En: Moche. Propuestas y
Perspectivas. Edited by Santiago Uceda y Elias Mujica,
pp.307-328. Universidad Nacional de la Libertad, Trujillo.
Instituto Francés de Estudios Andinos. Asociacion Peruana
para el Fomento de las Ciencias Sociales. Travaux de
l´Institut Francais d´Etudes Andines 79.
Verano, John W. 1997. Advances in the Paleopathology of
Andean South America. Journal of World Prehistory 11 (2):
237-268.
Verano, John W. 1999. Paleopatología en Sudamérica Andina.
Bulletin de l´Institute Français d´Études Andines 28 (1): 91-121.
620
Verano, John W. 2003. Human Skeletal Remains from Machu
Picchu: A Reexamination of the Yale Peabody Museum’s
Collections. In: Richard L. Burger and Lucy C. Salazar
(editores): The 1912 Yale Peruvian Scientific Expedition
Collections from Machu Picchu: Human and Animal
Remains, pp. 65-117 and Appendix A. Yale University
Publications in Anthropology 85, New Haven.
Verano, John y Michael DeNiro. 1993. Local sor Foreigners?
Morphological, Biometric, and Isotopic Approaches
to the Question of Group Affinity in Human Skeletal
Remains Recovered from Unusual Archaeological
Contexts. En: Investigations of Ancient Human Tissue.
Chemical Analyses in Anthropology, pp. 361-386, edited
by Mary K. Sandford, Gordon and Breach Science
Publishers.
Verano, John and Jack Rossen. 2011. Human Remains. In: From
Foraging to Farming in the Andes. New Perspectives on
Foof Production and Social Organization, edited by Tom
D. Dillehay, pp. 163-175. Cambridge University Press.
Vigouroux, Yves, Jeffrey C. Glaubitz, Yoshihiro Matsuoka, Major M.
Goodman, Jesús Sánchez G. and John Doebley. 2008. Population
structure and genetic diversity of New world maize races
assessed by DNA microsatellites. American Journal of
Botany 95 (10): 1240–1253.
Walker, Phillip L., Rhonda R. Bathurst, Rebecca Richman, Thor
Gjerdrum, and Valerie A. Andrushko. 2009. The Causes of Porotic
Hyperostosis and Cribra Orbitalia: A Reappraisal of the
Iron-Deficiency-Anemia Hypothesis. American Journal of
Physical Anthropology 139: 109-125.
Watson, Lucía. 2008. Élites y Camélidos: Excavaciones en los
Sectores I y II en Pueblo Viejo Pucará, Un asentamiento
del Periodo Horizonte Tardío en el Valle de Lurín. Tesis
para optar por el t#´tilo de Licenciada en Arqueología.
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Lima.
Weberbauer, Augusto. 1945. El mundo vegetal de los Andes
peruanos. Estudio fitogeográfico. Estación experimental
agrícola de la Molina, Dirección de Agricultura, Ministerio
de Agricultura, Lima.
Weir, Glendon H. and Duccio Bonavia. 1985. Coprolitos y Dieta
del Precerámico Tardío de la Costa Peruana. Bulletin de
l´Institut Francais d´Études 14 (2): 85-140.
Weir, Glendon, H. and J. Philip Dering. 1986. The Lomas of
Paloma: Human-Environment Relations in a Central
Peruvian Fog Oasis: Archaeobotany and Palynology. En:
Andean Archeology. Papers in Memory of Clifford Evans.
Edited by Ramiro Matos, Solveig Turpin, and Herbert
H. Eling, Jr., pp.: 18-44. Monograph XXVII. Institute of
Archaeology. University of California, Los Angeles.
Weiss, Pedro. 1976. El Perro Peruano sin Pelo (chino, viringo,
ccala y calato). Paleobiología 1: 33-54.
West, Michael and Thomas W. Whitaker. 1979. Prehistoric
Cultivated Cucurbits from the Viru Valley, Peru. Economic
Botany 33 (3): 275-279.
Whitaker, Thomas W. and Junius B. Bird. 1949. Identification and
Significance of the Cucurbit Materials from Huaca Prieta,
Peru. American Museum Novitates 1426: 1-15.
Whitaker, Thomas W., Hugh C. Cutler, and Richard S. MacNeish. 1957.
Cucurbit materials from caves near Ocampo, Tamaulipas.
American Antiquity 22: 353-358.
Whitaker, Thomas W., y W. P. Bemis. 1965. Evolution in the genus
Cucurbita. Evolution 18 (4): 553-59.
Whitaker, Thomas W. and Hugh C. Cutler. 1965. Cucurbits and
Cultures in the Americas. Economic Botany 19 (4): 344-
349.
Whitaker, Thomas W. 1981. Archaeological Cucurbits.
Economic Botany 35 (4): 460-466.
White C. D., A. J. Nelson, F. J. Longstaffe, G. Grupe, and A. Jung. 2009.
Landscape bioarchaeology at Pacatnamu, Peru: inferring
mobility from ฀13C and ฀15N values of hair. Journal of
Archaeological Science 36: 1527–1537.
Whitehead, William T. 2006. Redefining Plant Use at the
Formative Site of Chiripa in the Southern Titicaca Basin.
In Andean Archaeology III. North and South. Edited by
William H. Isbell and Helaine Silverman, pp. 258-278.
Springer Verlag.
Wilbur, A. K., A. W. Farnbach, K. J. Knudson, and J. E. Buikstra. 2008.
Diet, Tuberculosis, and the Paleopathological Record.
Current Anthropology 49 (6): 963-991.
Williams, Jocelyn S. 2005. Investigating Diet and Dietary
Change Using the Stable Isotopes of Carbon and
Nitrogen in Mummufied Tissues from Puruchuco-
Huaquerones, Peru. A thesis submitted to the Faculty of
graduate studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of Doctorate of Philosophy. Department
of Archaeology. Calgary, Alberta.
Williams, Jocelyn S. and M. Anne Katzenberg. 2007. Investigating
season of death using carbon isotope data from the hair
of 500 year old Peruvian mummies. Paper submitted
for publication in the Proceedings of the VI Mummy
Congress, Teguise.
Wilson, H. D. 1988a. Quinua Biosystematics II: Free-living
Populations. Economic Botany 42 (4): 478-494.
621
14,000 years of food in Peru
Wilson, H. D. 1988b. Quinua Biosystematics I: domesticated
populations. Economic Botany 42 (4): 461-477.
Wilson, H. D. 1990. Quinua and Relatives /Chenopodium
sect. Chenopodium subsect. Cellulata). Economic Botany
44 (3): 92-110.
Wilson, Samuel M. 2007. The Archaeology of the Caribbean.
Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, Thomas W. and Clarence Grim. 2000. Sodium and
Hypertension. In: The Cambridge World History of Food,
volume 1, edited by por Kenneth F. Kiple y Kriemhild
Coneè Ornelas, pp. 848-856. Cambridge University Press.
Wing, Elizabeth S. 1972. Utilization of Animal Resources in the
Peruvian Andes. In: Andes 4. Excavations at Kotosh, Peru
1963 and 1964. Edited by J. Seiichi and K. Terada, pp. 327-
351. University of Tokyo Press. Tokyo.
Wing, Elizabeth S. 1980. Faunal Remains. In: Guitarrero Cave.
Early Man in the Andes, edited by Thomas F. Lynch, pp.
149-172. Academic Press.
Wing, Elizabeth S. 2000. Animals Used for Food in the Past:
As Seen by Their Remains Excavated from Archaeological
Sites. In: The Cambridge World History of Food, volume
1, editted by Kenneth F. Kiple y Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas,
pp. 51-58. Cambridge University Press.
Wittmack, L. Die Nutzpflanzen der alten Peruaner. En: Congres
International des Américanistes 7 : 325-349. Berlin.
Wolf, George. 2000. Vitamin A. En: The Cambridge World
History of Food, volume 1, edited by Kenneth F. Kiple
and Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas, pp. 740-750. Cambridge
University Press.
Wollstonecroft, Michèle M. 2011. Investigating the role of food
processing in human evolution: a niche construction approach.
Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 3: 141-150.
Woolfe, Jennifer A. 1987. The Potato in the Human Diet.
University of Cambridge Press.
Wrangham, Richard. 2009. Catching Fire. How Cooking Made
Us Human. Basic Books. New York.
Wright, K. R., R. M. Wright, M. E. Jensen, and A. Valencia. 1997c.
Machu Picchu ancient agricultural potential. Applied
Engineering in Agriculture 13 (1): 39–47.
Wu Leung, W. T. and M. Flores. 1961. Food Composition Tables
for Use in Latin America. INCAP and NH.
Yacovleff, Eugenio. 1933. La jíquima, raíz comestible extinguida
en el Perú. Revista del Museo Nacional 2 (1): 51-66.
Elmo Leon
Yacovleff, Eugenio and Fortunato L. Herrera. 1934. El Mundo
Vegetal de los Antiguos Peruanos. Revista del Museo
Nacional 3 (3): 241-321.
Yacovleff, Eugenio and Jorge C. Muelle. 1934. Un Fardo Funerario
de Paracas. Revista del Museo Nacional 3: 63-153.
Yen, Douglas E. 1959. The Use of Maize by the New Zealand
Maoris. Economic Botany 13 (4): 319-327.
Zardini, Elsa. 1991. Ethnobotanical Notes on “Yacon,” Polymnia
sonchifolia (Asteraceae). Economic Botany 45 (1): 72-85.
Zeder, Melinda A, Eve Emshwiller, Bruce D. Smith and Daniel
G. Bradley. 2006. Documenting domestication: the
intersection of genetics and archaeology. Trends in
Genetics 22 (3): 139-155.
622
Ziólkowski, Mariusz S. 1994. Some problems of the
radiocarbon dating of the Central Andean cultures. En:
Andes. Radiocarbon Database for Bolivia, Ecuador and
Peru, edited by Mariusz Ziólkowski, Mieczslaw F. Pazdur,
Andrzej Krzanowski, y Adam Michczynski, pp. 7-23.Joint
publication. Andean Archaeological Mission of the
Institute of Archaeology, Warsaw University & Gliwice
Radiocarbon Laboratory of the Institute of Physics,
Silesian Technical University. Warsawa, Gliwice.
Zohary, Daniel. 2001. Domestication of crop plants.
Encyclopedia of Biodiversity vol. 2: 217-227.
Zúñiga Romero, Oscar. 2002. Guía de Biodiversidad N°1.
Volumen 1. Macrofauna y Algas Marinas. Moluscos.
Centro Regional de Estudios y Educación Ambiental. II
Region Antofagasta Chile. Crea.