Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Upper Mantaro and Tarma Drainages, Junín, Peru: Volume 2, The Wanka Region 9781951519735, 9780915703814

Table of contents :
Contents
List of Figures
List of Plates
List of Tables
Preface, by Jeffrey R. Parsons
Acknowledgments, by Jeffrey R. Parsons
1. Introduction by Jeffrey R. Parsons, Charles M. Hastings, and Ramiro Matos M
The Definition of Substantive Issues
The Research Design
The Subsequent UMARP Investigations
A Retrospective Critique
2. Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology by Jeffrey R. Parsons
Introduction
Climate
Historic Records of Rainfall and Temperature
The Puna
The Kichwa
Paleo-Climate
Modern Population, Land Use, and Settlement Patterns
Traditional Central Andean Agricultural Ecology in the Kichwa Zone
Agricultural Tasks
Agricultural Zones
Sectorial Fallowing Regimes
The Annual Round
Settlement Patterns
Water Management
Agriculturalists’ Cosmology and Ritual
Traditional Interzonal Exchange
Overall Summary and Conclusions
3. Highlights of Wanka Ethnohistory by Charles M. Hastings and Jeffrey R. Parsons
Wanka Political Organization during the Late Horizon and Late LIP
Late Horizon Wanka Population
The Inca Impact
Dependent Communities in the Adjacent Montaña
Summary
4. Methodology by Jeffrey R. Parsons, Charles M. Hastings, and Ramiro Matos M
The Tactics of Field Survey
Survey Procedures
Surface Collecting
Recording Information in the Field
The Field Headquarters
Laboratory Procedures
Writing the Preliminary Site Reports
Ceramic Analyses in Lima
Map Making and Computations in Ann Arbor
Site Classification
Considerations in Developing a Site Classification
Settlement-Site Size: Surface Area
Settlement-Site Size: Population
Colca-Site Size: Numbers of Structures
Chronological Problems
Functional Considerations
Herders vs. Cultivators
Recognizing Residential Occupation
How Do We Recognize and Distinguish Permanent vs. Seasonal/Temporary/Sporadic/Ephemeral Residence, and How Do We Determine How Many Structures Comprise a Domestic Household?
Nonresidential Architecture
Public Architecture
“Defensive” Architecture
The Junín Archaeological Survey Project (JASP) Site Typology for the Wanka Region
Reactions to Our Fieldwork by Contemporary Inhabitants of the Study Area
5. History of the UMARP Project (1977–1986), and Comparisons of JASP and UMARP Site Data by Timothy K. Earle and Jeffrey R. Parsons
Part I
The Field Research Campaigns of UMARP
Field Campaign I (1977–1979)
Field Campaign II (1982–1984)
Field Campaign III (1986)
Analyses of Datasets Addressing Major UMARP Research Themes
1. Chronology
2. Changing Settlement Pattern and Sociopolitical Organization of the Wanka
3. Imperial Organization of the Inca in the Mantaro
4. Household Archaeology and the Subsistence Economy
5. Household Archaeology of Local Specialization, Exchange, and Consumption
6. Political Economy and Power
Conclusions, Part I
Part II
Comparison of JASP and UMARP Data on Site Size and Chronology
Summary and Conclusions, Part II
6. Data Patterning by Jeffrey R. Parsons
Settlement Sites
Long-term Population Trends
Occupation by Settlement Type through Time
The Distribution of Settlement by Altitude Zone
The Regional Configuration of Settlement Sites
Early Horizon
Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon
The Late Intermediate Period
Late Horizon
Inca Storage Facilities (Colcas)
The Forms and Volumes of Colca Structures in the Wanka Region
Colca-site Classes
The Architectonic Configuration of Colca Sites
The Distribution of Colca Sites by Elevation
The Distances of Different Colca Classes from the Inca Imperial Center at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550)
Distances between Colca Sites and Nearest LH Settlement Sites
The Regional Configuration of LH Colca Sites
The Problem of Pre-LH Public Storage
The Distribution of Sites Lacking Stone Rubble
Long-Term Settlement Continuity and Abandonment
The Early Horizon
The Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon
The Early Late Intermediate Period (UMARP Identified as Wanka I)
The Late Late Intermediate Period (UMARP Identified as Wanka II)
The Late Horizon
The Tarama-Wanka Frontier
7. Overall Summary and Conclustions by Jeffrey R. Parsons
The Survey Area
Methodology
Ceramic Chronology
The Archaic-Formative Transition
The Early Horizon
The Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon
The Late Intermediate Period
The Late Horizon
Pre-Late Horizon Storage
The Significance of Rock-Free Sites
The Occupation of the Main Mantaro Valley Floodplain
Settlement Continuity and Discontinuity
The Wanka-Tarama Frontier
Key Tasks for Future Research
8. Traducción al Español del Capitulo 7 Traducción de Apphia H. Parsons y Jeffrey R. Parsons
La zona del reconocimiento
Metodología
Cronología cerámica
La transición Arcaico-Formativo
El Horizonte Temprano
El Periodo Intermedio Temprano/Horizonte Medio
El Periodo Intermedio Tardio
El Horizonte Tardio
Depósitos de almacenamiento antes del Horizonte Tardio
La significación de asentamientos sin piedras
La ocupación del planicie aluvial central del Valle Mantaro
La continuidad y discontinuidad de asentamiento
La frontera Wanka-Tarama
Resumen de algunas tareas claves para investigaciones del futuro en y alrededor de la región Wanka
Bibliography
Appendix A: Site Descriptions by Jeffrey R. Parsons, Charles M. Hastings, and Terence N. D’Altroy
Introduction
The Individual Sites
UMARP Site Survey in the Jisse-Pomacancha Drainage by Terence N. D’Altroy
Appendix B: Ceramic Chronology by Jeffrey R. Parsons and Ramiro Matos M.
Early Horizon
Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon
The Late Intermediate Period
Continuities between MH and Wanka I Ceramics
Similarities and Differences between Wanka I and Wanka II Ceramics
The Late Horizon (Wanka III)
Inca and Wanka-Inca Pottery

Citation preview

Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan Memoirs, Number 53

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Upper Mantaro and Tarma Drainages, Junín, Peru Volume 2

The Wanka Region

edited by

Jeffrey R. Parsons Charles M. Hastings Ramiro Matos M.

with contributions by Terence N. D’Altroy Timothy K. Earle Charles M. Hastings Ramiro Matos M. Jeffrey R. Parsons

Ann Arbor, Michigan 2013

©2013 by the Regents of the University of Michigan The Museum of Anthropology All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America ISBN 978-0-915703-81-4 Cover design by Katherine Clahassey The University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology currently publishes two monograph series, Anthropological Papers and Memoirs, as well as an electronic series in CD-ROM form. For a complete catalog, write to Museum of Anthropology Publications, 4013 Museums Building, 1109 Geddes Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1079, or see www.lsa.umich.edu/umma/

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Parsons, Jeffrey R. Prehispanic settlement patterns in the upper Mantaro and Tarma drainages, Junín, Peru / Jeffrey R. Parsons, Charles M. Hastings, Ramiro Matos M. p. cm. -- (Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan ; no. 34) Includes bibliographic references ISBN 0-915703-49-1 (v. 1 : pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Indians of South America--Peru--Junín (Dept.)--Antiquities. 2. Land settlement patterns, Prehistoric--Peru--Junín (Dept.) 3. Archaeological surveying--Peru--Junín (Dept.) 4. Ethnoarchaeology--Peru--Junín (Dept.) 5. Junín (Peru : Dept.)--Antiquities. I. Hastings, Charles M. II. Matos Mendieta, Ramiro. III. Title. IV. Series. F3429.1.J85P37 2000 [GN2.M52) 306 s--dc21 [304.2’0985’2409] 00-030886

The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of the ANSI Standard Z39.48-1984 (Permanence of Paper)

The two cover drawings are adapted from Felipe Guaman Poma de Ayala, El Primer Nueva Crónica y Buen Gobierno (México, D.F.: Siglo Veintiuno editores, 1980 [1613]). The left-hand picture is an adaptation of Guaman Poma’s drawing in Vol. 3, Fig. 1144/1154, p. 1041; the right-hand picture is based on his drawing in Vol. 3, Fig. 1147/1157, p. 1044.

Dedicated to the memories of – Karen Mohr Chavez (1941-2001) Catherine Julien (1950-2011) Daniel E. Shea (1941-2012) – our friends and colleagues in Andean studies.

Contents ix xii xix xxiii xxv

List of Figures List of Plates List of Tables Preface, by Jeffrey R. Parsons Acknowledgments, by Jeffrey R. Parsons

1

Introduction

by Jeffrey R. Parsons, Charles M. Hastings, and Ramiro Matos M

The Definition of Substantive Issues The Research Design The Subsequent UMARP Investigations A Retrospective Critique

2

1 5 5 6

Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology by Jeffrey R. Parsons

Introduction Climate Historic Records of Rainfall and Temperature The Puna The Kichwa Paleo-Climate Modern Population, Land Use, and Settlement Patterns Traditional Central Andean Agricultural Ecology in the Kichwa Zone Agricultural Tasks Agricultural Zones Sectorial Fallowing Regimes The Annual Round Settlement Patterns Water Management Agriculturalists’ Cosmology and Ritual Traditional Interzonal Exchange Overall Summary and Conclusions

3

1

Highlights of Wanka Ethnohistory

by Charles M. Hastings and Jeffrey R. Parsons

Wanka Political Organization during the Late Horizon and Late LIP Late Horizon Wanka Population The Inca Impact Dependent Communities in the Adjacent Montaña Summary

v

9 9 10 11 15 16 17 17 19 23 24 24 25 26 27 27 28 28 29 29 32 33 34 35

4 Methodology by Jeffrey R. Parsons, Charles M. Hastings, and Ramiro Matos M

The Tactics of Field Survey Survey Procedures Surface Collecting Recording Information in the Field The Field Headquarters Laboratory Procedures Writing the Preliminary Site Reports Ceramic Analyses in Lima Map Making and Computations in Ann Arbor Site Classification Considerations in Developing a Site Classification Settlement-Site Size: Surface Area Settlement-Site Size: Population Colca-Site Size: Numbers of Structures Chronological Problems Functional Considerations Herders vs. Cultivators Recognizing Residential Occupation How Do We Recognize and Distinguish Permanent vs. Seasonal/Temporary/ Sporadic/Ephemeral Residence, and How Do We Determine How Many Structures Comprise a Domestic Household? Nonresidential Architecture Public Architecture “Defensive” Architecture The Junín Archaeological Survey Project (JASP) Site Typology for the Wanka Region Reactions to Our Fieldwork by Contemporary Inhabitants of the Study Area

5 History of the UMARP Project (1977–1986), and Comparisons of JASP and UMARP Site Data by Timothy K. Earle and Jeffrey R. Parsons



Part I The Field Research Campaigns of UMARP Field Campaign I (1977–1979) Field Campaign II (1982–1984) Field Campaign III (1986) Analyses of Datasets Addressing Major UMARP Research Themes 1. Chronology 2. Changing Settlement Pattern and Sociopolitical Organization of the Wanka 3. Imperial Organization of the Inca in the Mantaro 4. Household Archaeology and the Subsistence Economy 5. Household Archaeology of Local Specialization, Exchange, and Consumption 6. Political Economy and Power Conclusions, Part I Part II Comparison of JASP and UMARP Data on Site Size and Chronology Summary and Conclusions, Part II vi

37 37 38 38 39 40 40 40 41 42 42 43 43 43 43 43 47 47 48 48 49 50 50 51 52

53 53 53 54 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 58 64

6 Data Patterning by Jeffrey R. Parsons

Settlement Sites Long-term Population Trends Occupation by Settlement Type through Time The Distribution of Settlement by Altitude Zone The Regional Configuration of Settlement Sites Early Horizon Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon The Late Intermediate Period Late Horizon Inca Storage Facilities (Colcas) The Forms and Volumes of Colca Structures in the Wanka Region Colca-site Classes The Architectonic Configuration of Colca Sites The Distribution of Colca Sites by Elevation The Distances of Different Colca Classes from the Inca Imperial Center at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550) Distances between Colca Sites and Nearest LH Settlement Sites The Regional Configuration of LH Colca Sites The Problem of Pre-LH Public Storage The Distribution of Sites Lacking Stone Rubble Long-Term Settlement Continuity and Abandonment The Early Horizon The Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon The Early Late Intermediate Period (UMARP Identified as Wanka I) The Late Late Intermediate Period (UMARP Identified as Wanka II) The Late Horizon The Tarama-Wanka Frontier

67 67 67 69 71 77 77 79 81 84 86 86 86 86 87 87 95 95 97 97 99 99 99 99 100 101 101

7 Overall Summary and Conclustions

103

The Survey Area Methodology Ceramic Chronology The Archaic-Formative Transition The Early Horizon The Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon The Late Intermediate Period The Late Horizon Pre-Late Horizon Storage The Significance of Rock-Free Sites The Occupation of the Main Mantaro Valley Floodplain Settlement Continuity and Discontinuity The Wanka-Tarama Frontier Key Tasks for Future Research

103 104 104 104 104 104 105 106 106 106 106 107 107 107

by Jeffrey R. Parsons

vii

8 Traducción al Español del Capitulo 7 Traducción de Apphia H. Parsons y Jeffrey R. Parsons

La zona del reconocimiento Metodología Cronología cerámica La transición Arcaico-Formativo El Horizonte Temprano El Periodo Intermedio Temprano/Horizonte Medio El Periodo Intermedio Tardio El Horizonte Tardio Depósitos de almacenamiento antes del Horizonte Tardio La significación de asentamientos sin piedras La ocupación del planicie aluvial central del Valle Mantaro La continuidad y discontinuidad de asentamiento La frontera Wanka-Tarama Resumen de algunas tareas claves para investigaciones del futuro en y alrededor de la región Wanka

109 109 110 110 110 110 110 111 112 112 112 112 113 113 113

Bibliography

115

Appendix A: Site Descriptions

129

Introduction The Individual Sites UMARP Site Survey in the Jisse-Pomacancha Drainage by Terence N. D’Altroy

129 132 288

Appendix B: Ceramic Chronology

353

Early Horizon Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon The Late Intermediate Period Continuities between MH and Wanka I Ceramics Similarities and Differences between Wanka I and Wanka II Ceramics The Late Horizon (Wanka III) Inca and Wanka-Inca Pottery

353 353 355 355 363 363 363

by Jeffrey R. Parsons, Charles M. Hastings, and Terence N. D’Altroy

by Jeffrey R. Parsons and Ramiro Matos M.

viii

Figures inside front cover Elevation zones in the Wanka Region survey area and its immediate surroundings 1.1. 1.2. 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. 2.6. 3.1. 3.2. 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 4.5. 4.6. 6.1. 6.2. 6.3. 6.4. 6.5. 6.6. 6.7. 6.8. 6.9. 6.10. 6.11. 6.12. 6.13. 6.14. 6.15. 6.16. 6.17. 6.18. 6.19. 6.20. 6.21. 6.22. 6.23. 6.24. 6.25. 6.26.

Peru, showing modern cities and principal archaeological sites mentioned in the text, 2 The JASP survey areas: Tarama, Chinchaycocha, and Wanka Regions, 3 Average monthly rainfall, Jauja station, 1958–1972, 14 Average monthly rainfall, Huancayo station, 1921–1974, 14 Average maximum and minimum monthly temperatures, Jauja station, 1958–1972, 15 Average maximum and minimum monthly temperatures, Huancayo station, 1960–1975, 15 Average maximum and minimum monthly temperatures, Chinchaycocha Region, 16 The annual round of agricultural tasks in highland southern Peru, 26 Ethnohistorically documented saya divisions in the Wanka heartland, 30 Ethnohistorically documented dependent Wanka settlements in the montaña northeast of Jauja, 35 Site-area distribution for EIP/MH settlement sites, 43 Site-area distribution for all LIP settlement sites, 44 Site-area distribution for early LIP (Wanka I) settlement sites, 44 Site-area distribution for late LIP (Wanka II) settlement sites, 44 Site-area distribution for LH (Wanka III) settlement sites, 45 Histogram of Inca colca sites according to numbers of structures per site, 45 Histogram of occupied hectares for major periods, 68 Suggested overall long-term population profiles, 68 Histogram of percentages of numbers of settlement-site types for major periods, 70 Histogram of percentages of occupied hectares in different settlement-site types, by period, 70 Histogram of percentages of occupied hectares in different elevation zones, by period, 73 Histogram of percentages of numbers of Camp/Hamlet sites in different elevation zones, by period, 74 Histogram of percentages of numbers of Small Village sites in different elevation zones, by period, 74 Histogram of percentages of numbers of Large Village sites in different elevation zones, by period, 75 Histogram of percentages of numbers of Very Large Village sites in different elevation zones, by period, 75 Histogram of percentages of numbers of Local Center sites in different elevation zones, by period, 76 Histogram of percentages of numbers of Regional Center sites in different elevation zones, by period, 76 Histogram of percentages of occupied hectares of “small” settlements in different elevation zones, by period, 77 Histogram of percentages of occupied hectares of “large” settlements in different elevation zones, by period, 78 Schematic map of EH settlement sites, 78 Schematic map of EIP/MH settlement sites, 80 Schematic map of LIP–All settlement sites, 82 Schematic map of early LIP settlement sites, 83 Schematic map of late LIP settlement sites, 84 Schematic map of LH settlement sites, 85 Histogram of number of colca sites in different site classes, 89 Histogram of total number of individual colca structures in different colca-site classes, 89 Histogram of percentage of total storage volume in different colca-site classes, 91 Histogram of percentage of overall colca class volume in circular vs. rectangular colcas, 93 Histogram of percentage of total overall storage volume in circular vs. rectangular colcas, 93 Location of LH colca sites, 96 Distribution of sites lacking rock rubble, 98

ix

Appendices A1a. A1b. A1c. A2. A3. A4. A5. A6. A7. A8. A9. A10. A11. A12. A13. A14. A15. A16. A17. A18. A19. A20. A21. A22. A23. A24. A25. A26. A27. A28. A29. A30. A31. A32. A33. A34. A35. A36. A37. A38. A39. A40. A41. A42. A43. A44. A45. A46. A47. A48. A49. A50. A51.

The Wanka Region, showing base maps, 130 Example of a stone “hoe,” 131 Example of stone digging-stick weight, 131 Site 394 (Pancan), site plan, 136 Site 421, sketch plan of mounds, 147 Site 428, site plan showing colcas, 150 Site 430, site plan showing colcas, 152 Site 431, general site plan, 153 Site 431, typical patio group, 153 Site 459 canal complex, showing spatial relationship of canals to nearby LIP sites, 166 Site 461 (Chawin), site plans, 173 Site 468 (Tunanmarca), general site plan, 179 Site 468 (Tunanmarca), examples of patio groups, 179 Site 468 (Tunanmarca), central plaza area, 181 Site 472 (Hatunmarca), overall site plan, 185 Site 472 (Hatunmarca), example of Wanka II residential compound, 187 Site 472 (Hatunmarca), showing locations of JASP surface collections, 189 Site 476 (Umpamalco), general site plan, 191 Site 476 (Umpamalco), example of residential units around patios, 193 Site 485, site plan showing colcas, 200 Site 486, sketch plan of mound complex, 201 Site 491, site plan showing colcas, 203 Site 500, site plan showing colcas, 207 Site 502, site plan showing colcas, 208 Site 504, site plan showing colcas, 210 Site 509, plan of site complex, 212 Site 512-A, site plan showing colcas, 214 Site 514, site plan showing colcas, 215 Site 516, site plan showing colcas, 216 Site 517, site plan showing colcas, 217 Site 528, site plan showing colcas, 222 Sites 546 and 547, site plans showing colcas, 229 Site 547-A, site plan showing colcas, 230 Site 548, site plan showing colcas, 232 Site 554, site plan showing colcas, 235 Site 555, site plan showing colcas, 237 Site 556, general site plan, 238 Site 556, example of residential unit, 239 Site 558, site plan showing colcas, 240 Site 559, sketch cross sections of tomb chamber, 241 Site 562-A, site plan, 245 Site 563, site plan showing colcas, 247 Site 566, site plan showing colcas, 250 Site 573, site plan showing colcas, 254 Site 576, site plan showing colcas, 256 Site 577, site plan showing colcas, 258 Site 580, site plan showing colcas, 260 Site 590, site plan, 261 Site 590, complex of ancient drained fields, 265 Site 607-A, site plan showing colcas, 274 Sites 611, 612, 613, site plan showing colcas, 276 UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, showing principal survey transects, 289 UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, EIP/MH sites, 290

x

A52. A53. A54. A55. A56. A57. A58. A59. A60. A61. A62. A63. A64. A65. A66. A67. A68. A69. A70. A71. A72. A73. A74. A75. A76. A77. A78. A79. A80. A81. A82. A83. A84. A85. A86. A87. A88. A89. A90. A91. A92. A93. A94. A95. B1. B2. B3. B4. B5. B6. B7. B8. B9. B10. B11.

UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, LIP sites, 291 UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, LH sites, 292 UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, sites with Colonial Period occupation, 293 UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, distribution of sites with lithic component, 294 Hoja Yauli, EH + EIP/MH sites, 306 Hoja Yauli, LIP general sites, 307 Hoja Yauli, definite early LIP sites, 308 Hoja Yauli, definite late LIP sites, 309 Hoja Yauli, definite LH sites, 310 Hoja Acolla, EH + EIP/MH sites, 311 Hoja Acolla, LIP general sites, 312 Hoja Acolla, definite early LIP sites, 313 Hoja Acolla, definite late LIP sites, 314 Hoja Acolla, definite LH sites, 315 Hoja Pomacancha, EH + EIP/MH sites, 316 Hoja Pomacancha, LIP general sites, 317 Hoja Pomacancha, definite early LIP sites, 318 Hoja Pomacancha, definite late LIP sites, 319 Hoja Pomacancha, definite LH sites, 320 Hoja Apata, EH + EIP/MH sites, 321 Hoja Apata, LIP general sites, 322 Hoja Apata, definite early LIP sites, 323 Hoja Apata, definite late LIP sites, 324 Hoja Apata, definite LH sites, 325 Hoja Jauja, EH + EIP/MH sites, 326 Hoja Jauja, LIP general sites, 327 Hoja Jauja, definite early LIP sites, 328 Hoja Jauja, definite late LIP sites, 329 Hoja Jauja, definite LH sites, 330 Hoja Parco, EH + EIP/MH sites, 331 Hoja Parco, LIP general sites, 332 Hoja Parco, definite early LIP sites, 333 Hoja Parco, definite late LIP sites, 334 Hoja Parco, definite LH sites, 335 Hoja Concepción, EH + EIP/MH sites, 336 Hoja Concepción, LIP general sites, 337 Hoja Concepción, definite early LIP sites, 338 Hoja Concepción, definite late LIP sites, 339 Hoja Concepción, definite LH sites, 340 Hoja Sincos, EH + EIP/MH sites, 341 Hoja Sincos, LIP general sites, 342 Hoja Sincos, definite early LIP sites, 343 Hoja Sincos, definite late LIP sites, 344 Hoja Sincos, definite LH sites, 345 EH, sherd profiles, 354 EIP/MH, sherd profiles of bowls and jars, 356 EIP/MH, examples of decoration on bowls and jar, 357 LIP, examples of Base Clara bowl forms, 358 LIP, examples of Base Clara jar forms, 359 LIP, examples of Base Clara decoration, 360 LIP, Wanka II, examples of Base Roja jar forms, 361 LIP, Wanka II, examples of Base Roja decoration, 362 LH, Inca-style, examples of arybollid, or flaring jar, vessels, 364 LH, Inca-style, examples of closed bowls, 365 LH, Inca-style, examples of other typical vessel forms, 366

xi

Plates Appendices A1. A2. A3. A4. A5. A6. A7. A8. A9. A10. A11. A12. A13. A14. A15. A16. A17. A18. A19. A20. A21. A22. A23. A24. A25. A26. A27. A28. A29. A30. A31. A32. A33. A34. A35. A36. A37. A38. A39. A40. A41. A42. A43. A44. A45. A46. A47. A48. A49.

Site 382. Facing northeast at site, 132 Site 383. Facing southwest over general area of Sites 383 and 384, 132 Site 384. Facing northwest over site area, 132 Site 385. Facing southeast over site area, 133 Site 385. Remains of large rectangular structure (colca) at Collection 263-P, 133 Site 386. Facing southeast over site, 133 Site 388. Facing east toward site across Laguna Paca, 134 Site 389. Facing north over site, 134 Site 390. Facing east over Collection 140-P, 134 Site 391. Facing north over site, 135 Sites 394 and 395. Facing west over sites 394 and 395, 135 Site 397. Facing west over site, 137 Site 399. Facing north at site, 137 Site 399. Central site area, 137 Site 400. Facing southwest over site, 139 Site 401. Overview of site, 139 Site 401. Circular structure with preserved doorway and lintel, 139 Site 401. Detail of stone masonry, 139 Site 402. Facing northeast over site, 139 Site 402. Example of well-preserved structure, 139 Site 403. Facing north over site, 139 Site 403. Facing west down over site, 139 Sites 405 and 406. Facing south overlooking sites, 140 Site 406. Facing east over central site, 140 Site 407. Facing southwest at site, 141 Site 408. Facing northeast over site, 141 Site 408. Remnants of architecture and terracing, 141 Site 409. Facing northeast over site, 141 Site 410. Facing north at site, 142 Site 411. Facing north over site, 142 Site 412. Remains of small circular structure, 142 Site 412. Remains of large circular structure, 142 Site 413. Feature 21-P, remains of small circular structure, 143 Site 415. Facing southwest at site, 143 Site 416. Facing southeast over general site area, 144 Site 416. Facing northwest over western half of site, 144 Site 416. Facing south over southern part of site, with Laguna Paca in background, 144 Site 416. Facing west at small circular structure at south end of site, 145 Site 416. Circular structure, showing construction detail, 145 Site 417. Facing northeast over site, 145 Site 421. Facing northwest over site, 146 Site 421. Facing east over circular enclosure wall, 146 Site 421. Circular structure at south end of site, 146 Site 421. Example of stone-lined subterranean chamber in central mound, 147 Site 422. Example of circular structure, 147 Site 422. Facing east along row of circular structures, 147 Site 423. Facing southeast over general site area, with Laguna Paca in middle distance on right, 148 Site 425. Facing east over site, with Laguna Paca in background, 149 Site 425. Facing north at example of circular structure on stone-faced terrace, 149

xii

A50. Site 426. Facing south across top of site, 149 A51. Sites 427 and 428. Facing north over Site 427, with Site 428 in background, 150 A52. Site 428. Colcas and terracing in central site area, 150 A53. Site 428. Overlooking section of colcas, with Laguna Paca in background, 150 A54. Site 429. Rectangular structure at east end of site, 151 A55. Site 429. Large circular complex at center of site, 151 A56. Site 430. Facing southeast over site, 152 A57. Site 430. Section of well-preserved colcas, 152 A58. Site 430. Example of colca with “window” opening, 152 A59. Sites 429 and 431, 153 A60. Site 431. Facing south over east side of site, 153 A61. Site 431. Concentration of structures in central site area, 153 A62. Site 431. Section of large wall in central part of site, with Site 429 in background, 154 A63. Site 431. Facing northwest over terrace remnants on north side of hill, 154 A64. Site 433. Facing east over site, 156 A65. Site 434. Facing south over site, 156 A66. Site 435. Facing south over site, 156 A67. Site 438. Facing southeast over site, 157 A68. Site 439. Facing northeast over site, 158 A69. Site 444. Facing north over site, 160 A70. Site 445-B. Site area, 160 A71. Site 446. Facing south over site area, 160 A72. Site 447. Facing northeast over site, 161 A73. Site 449. Facing south over site, 161 A74. Site 450. EIP/MH slab figurine fragments from Collection 285-P, 162 A75. Site 450. EIP/MH slab figurine fragment from Collection 285-P, 162 A76. Site 451. Facing east over site, 163 A77. Site 452. Facing west over site, 163 A78. Site 453. Facing south toward site on hilltop, 163 A79. Site 454. Facing east over site, 163 A80. Site 454. Facing northwest over area of Collection 294-P, 164 A81. Site 455. Facing north over site, 164 A82. Site 456. Facing southeast at site, 165 A83. Site 456. EIP/MH slab figurine from Collection 298-P, 165 A84. Site 457. Facing southwest at site, 165 A85. Site 457. Facing north over portion of site, 165 A86. Site 458. Facing north along section of Inca road, 166 A87. Site 458. “Stairway,” 166 A88. Site 459. Facing north toward Feature 24-P canal, 167 A89. Site 459. Facing east toward Feature 24-P canal, 167 A90. Site 459. Facing northeast toward Feature 24-P canal, 167 A91. Site 459. Section of Feature 24-P canal, above Feature 25-P “aqueduct,” 167 A92. Site 459. Section of Feature 24-P canal, 168 A93. Site 459. Well-preserved section of Feature 24-P canal, 168 A94. Site 459. Section of Feature 24-P canal built along face of steep rock cliff, 168 A95. Site 459. Section of Feature 24-P canal, above Feature 25-P “aqueduct,” 168 A96. Site 459. Section of Feature 24-P canal cut through rock cliff face, 169 A97. Site 459. Facing west over top of Feature 25-P “aqueduct,” 169 A98. Site 459. “Megalithic” shrine (Fea. 26-P) at edge of stone-lined canal, 169 A99. Site 459. Facing north-northeast over general area of Feature 27-P aqueduct, 169 A100. Site 459. Facing south over Feature 27-P aqueduct, 169 A101. Site 459. Facing north along Feature 30-P aqueduct, 169 A102. Site 459. Facing southwest along Feature 30-P aqueduct, 170 A103. Site 459. “Stairway” at edge of Feature 32-P reservoir, 170

xiii

A104. Site 459. Looking down along length of Feature 24-P canal, 170 A105. Site 459. Feature 31-P “stairway” at edge of Feature 32-P reservoir, 170 A106. Site 459. Looking across Feature 32-P reservoir from top of Feature 33-P “stairway,” 170 A107. Site 459. Possible remnants of ancient stone-lined canal, 170 A108. Site 459. Feature 33-P “stairway,” 170 A109. Site 459-A. Intersection of Feature 28-P and Feature 29-P, 171 A110. Site 459-A. Section of Feature 29-P canal, 171 A111. Site 459-A. Section of Feature 29-P canal, below Feature 28-P, 171 A112. Site 460. Facing south-southeast over general site area, 172 A113. Site 461. Facing north toward site, 172 A114. Site 461. Vertical airphoto of site, 172 A115. Site 462. Facing south over general area of site, 174 A116. Site 462. Facing northeast over area of Collection 291-P, 174 A117. Site 462. Interior of circular structure in Collection 291-P area, 174 A118. Site 462. Facing northeast at rectangular structure in Collection 291-P area, 174 A119. Site 463. Facing east over general area of site, 175 A120. Site 463. Platform at highest point in site, area of Collection 274-P, 175 A121. Site 464. Facing north at site on slope above modern houses, 175 A122. Site 465. Facing north at site, 176 A123. Site 465. Facing west over area of Collection 275-P, 176 A124. Site 467. Facing northeast over site, 177 A125. Sites 461 and 468, 178 A125A.  Site 468, vertical airphoto, 178 A126. Site 468. Double exterior walls at south end of site, 178 A127. Site 468. Section of outer wall near north end of site, 178 A128. Site 468. Facing north over north half of site, 178 A129. Site 468. Detail of masonry construction on exterior of circular structure, 180 A130. Site 468. Example of well-preserved circular structure, 180 A131. Site 468. Structures near Collection 192-P, 180 A132. Site 468. Large rectangular structure at Collection 194-P, 180 A133. Site 468. Section of large “plaza” at Collection 194-P, 182 A134. Site 468. “Avenue” west of Collection 194-P, 182 A135. Site 468-A. Section of Feature 34-P canal, 182 A136. Site 470. Facing southwest over general area of site, 183 A137. Site 471. Area of Collection 104-P, 183 A138. Site 472. Facing northwest over general area of hilltop site, 184 A138A.  Site 472, vertical airphoto, 184 A139. Site 472. Facing north over northern third of site, 184 A140. Site 472. Facing northeast over southern two-thirds of site, 184 A141. Site 472. Example of prehispanic architecture incorporated into modern stone wall, 185 A142. Site 472. Facing north over area of Collection 96-P, 186 A143. Site 472. Rectangular structure south of Collection 96-P, 186 A144. Site 472. Large circular structure south of Collection 96-P, 186 A145. Site 472. Shaft tomb south of Collection 96-P, 186 A146. Site 472. Preserved circular structure near Collection 91-P, 186 A147. Site 472. Detail of stone masonry in circular structure, 186 A148. Site 472. Circular structures on terrace, near Collection 98-P, 187 A149. Site 472. Facing southeast along outer wall at south end of site, 188 A150. Site 472. Facing northwest along western edge of site, 188 A151. Site 473. Facing south over site, 190 A152. Site 473. Facing northeast over terraced field in area of Collection 87-P, 190 A153. Site 474. Facing northeast over area of Collection 89-P, 190 A154. Site 476. Facing northeast over general area of hilltop site, 191 A155. Site 476. Facing west over southeast side of site, 192

xiv

A156. Site 476. Facing northeast across east side of site, 192 A157. Site 476. Circular structure on southeast side of site, 192 A158. Site 476. Detail of stone masonry in circular structure on east side of site, 192 A159. Site 476. Circular structure with preserved doorway lintel, 192 A160. Site 476. Facing east along “alley” between structures on east side of site, 193 A161. Site 477. Facing southeast over area of site, 193 A162. Site 478. Remnant of possible ancient structure, 194 A163. Site 479. Facing west toward east side of hilltop site, 194 A164. Site 479. Looking across top of site, 194 A165. Site 479. Example of circular structure, 194 A166. Site 479. Small structure with partially intact roof, 195 A167. Site 479. Small “doorway,” ca. 50 cm square, 195 A168. Site 480. Facing north over north half of site, 195 A169. Site 480. Facing south over southern half of site, 195 A170. Site 480. Circular structures near south end of site, 195 A171. Site 480. Circular structures on terraces in southern half of site, 196 A172. Site 480. Looking along ridge crest in southern half of site, 196 A173. Site 480. Two-story rectangular structure, possibly a colca, 196 A174. Site 481. Facing south over area of site, 197 A175. Site 481. Facing southeast over south side of site, 197 A176. Site 481. Facing northeast from southwest end of site, 197 A177. Site 481. Example of small “doorway” in circular structure, 197 A178. Site 481. Large circular structure with attached tomb, 197 A179. Site 481. Two-story chullpa, 197 A180. Site 481. Two-story chullpa with intact roof, 198 A181. Site 481. Two-story chullpa with partially intact roof fragment, 198 A182. Site 481. Small “chullpa,” with intact roof, 198 A183. Site 482. Facing northwest over area of site, 199 A184. Site 483. Facing west over area of site, 199 A185. Site 485. Facing southwest over area of site, 200 A186. Site 485. Section of line of colcas, 200 A187. Site 486. Mound, 201 A188. Sites 488, 489, 490, 491, and 492, 201 A189. Site 490. Facing southwest at area of site, 202 A190. Site 490. Facing west at wall separating Sites 490 and 491, 202 A191. Site 491. Section of Unit 103-P, 203 A192. Site 491. West end of Unit 103-P, 203 A193. Site 491. Masonry detail in terrace, 203 A194. Site 492. Facing west over area of site, 204 A195. Site 495/545. Facing northeast over area of site, 204 A196. Site 496. Feature 16-P, 205 A197. Site 498. Facing east over area of site, 205 A198. Site 499. Facing west over area of Collection 145-P, 206 A199. Sites 500 and 501. Facing north over general area of sites, 206 A200. Site 500. Facing north over north half of site, 206 A201. Site 500. Example of preserved colca, 206 A202. Site 501. Facing south over area of site, 207 A203. Site 502. Facing south at hilltop site, 207 A204. Site 502. Section of relatively well preserved colcas, 207 A205. Site 502. Section of colca remnants, 208 A206. Site 502. Mound inside ellipse of colcas, 208 A207. Site 503. Facing south-southeast over area of site, 209 A208. Site 503. Facing southwest over site, 209 A209. Site 504. Facing south over area of site, 209

xv

A210. Site 504. Facing south over southern two-thirds of site, 209 A211. Site 506. Facing northeast over ridged fields, 211 A212. Site 507. Facing southeast at site, 211 A213. Site 509. Excavated architectural remains in “Sector A,” 212 A214. Site 510. Facing west at site, 212 A215. Site 511. Facing north over site, 213 A216. Site 513. Facing west at area of site, 214 A217. Site 513. Looted tombs at Collection 157-P, 214 A218. Site 514. Facing southwest over site, 215 A219. Site 516. Facing south over site, 216 A220. Site 517. Facing north at site, 217 A221. Site 517. Example of well-preserved colca, 217 A222. Site 517. Masonry detail, 217 A223. Site 518. Facing east at site, 218 A224. Site 519. Facing west over site, 218 A225. Site 522. Facing south over site, 219 A226. Site 523. Facing northwest at site, 219 A227. Site 524. Facing south over site, 219 A228. Site 525. Overlooking area of site, 220 A229. Site 525. Possible ancient structure at Collection 170-P, 220 A230. Site 526. Facing northeast at site, 221 A231. Site 526. Area of Collection 171-P, 221 A232. Site 527. Facing south over site, 221 A233. Site 528. Facing south at site, 221 A234. Site 528. Section of colcas, 222 A235. Site 528. Masonry detail, 222 A236. Site 528. Masonry detail of colca exterior wall, 222 A237. Site 529. Architectural remnants, 223 A238. Site 530. Facing west at site, 223 A239. Site 532. Facing southeast at site, 223 A240. Site 532. Recently looted tomb, showing abundant bone litter, 224 A241. Site 533. Facing southwest over site, 224 A242. Site 535. Site area, 225 A243. Site 537. Facing south over site, 225 A244. Site 539. Facing south over site, 226 A245. Site 539. Section of Inca road passing through site, 226 A246. Site 540. Facing south over site, 226 A247. Site 541. Facing east over site, 227 A248. Site 543. Facing southwest over site, 227 A249. Site 544. Facing east over site, 228 A250. Site 546. Facing north over area of site, 228 A251. Site 546. Two rows of colca remains, 228 A252. Site 547. Row of circular colcas, 230 A253. Site 547. Example of partially preserved circular colca, 230 A254. Site 547. Adjacent circular and rectangular colcas, 230 A255. Site 547. Surface pottery at Collection 117-P, 230 A256. Site 548. Facing north along line of colca remnants, 231 A257. Site 548. Line of rectangular colcas, 231 A258. Site 549. Facing north over site, 232 A259. Site 550. Facing southeast overlooking modern Sausa, overlying Site 550, 232 A260. Site 550. Facing west over site underlying modern Sausa, 232 A261. Site 550. Facing northwest over area of Collection 114-P, 232 A262. Site 550. Example of preserved wall with niche, 233 A263. Site 550. Facing west over area of Collection 115-P, showing preserved Inca walls, 233

xvi

A264. Site 550. Usnu platform, 234 A265. Site 554. Facing south at area of site, 235 A266. Site 554. Facing south at line of rectangular colcas at bottom of site, 236 A267. Site 554. Example of large rectangular structure near Collection 118-P, 236 A268. Site 554. Facing north over large rectangular structure, 236 A269. Site 555. Facing south along line of colca remnants, 237 A270. Site 556. Facing west over area of site, 238 A271. Site 556. Facing south over area of Collection 121-P, 238 A272. Site 558. Facing west over area of site, 239 A273. Site 558. Facing northwest over site, 239 A274. Site 558. Facing east over line of colcas, 240 A275. Site 558. Example of circular colca, 240 A276. Site 558. Circular colca atop a stone-faced terrace, 240 A277. Site 559. Facing north over eastern half of site, 241 A278. Site 559. Remnant of subterranean burial chamber, 241 A279. Sites 558 and 560. Facing north at the hilltop sites, 242 A280. Site 560. Circular structure near south end of site, 242 A281. Site 560. Facing northeast at wall-ditch at south end of Site 560, 242 A282. Site 561. Example of circular structure at north end of site, 243 A283. Site 562. Overlooking site, 243 A284. Site 562. Looking up at line of colcas on ridge crest, 244 A285. Site 562. Line of colcas, 244 A286. Site 562. Example of well-preserved circular colca, 244 A286A.  Site 562-D. Facing east over Inca and Colonial bridge foundations, 244 A286B.  Site 562-D. Close-up of Inca and Colonial bridge foundations, 244 A287. Site 563. Facing north overlooking site, 246 A288. Site 563. Examples of rectangular colcas, 247 A289. Site 563. Examples of circular colcas, 247 A290. Site 563. Line of colcas, showing terrace face along upper edge, 247 A291. Site 564. Facing northeast overlooking site, 247 A292. Site 565. Facing east over west end of site, 248 A293. Site 565. Facing south at site, 248 A294. Site 565. Facing east over terraced fields in area of Collection 125-P, 248 A295. Sites 565 and 566. Facing southeast at sites, 248 A296. Site 566. Facing east across top of site, 249 A297. Site 566. Example of circular colca, 249 A298. Site 566. Example of circular colca, 249 A299. Site 566. Example of stone masonry in circular structure, 250 A300. Site 566. Overlooking line of colcas at lower northwestern edge of site, 250 A301. Site 566. Example of circular colca with upwardly tapering walls, 250 A302. Site 567. Facing east at site, 251 A303. Site 567. Facing east over site, 251 A304. Site 569. Facing northeast over site, 252 A305. Site 571. Facing east over site, 252 A306. Site 571. Facing west across top of site, 252 A307. Site 571. Example of well-preserved circular structure, 253 A308. Site 572. Facing east over site, 253 A309. Site 572. Facing west at site, 253 A310. Site 572. Example of circular structure, 253 A311. Site 573. Row of colcas, 255 A312. Site 573. Colca exterior, 255 A313. Site 573. Colca interior, 255 A314. Site 574. Facing southwest at site, 255 A315. Site 576. Facing northeast overlooking site, 256

xvii

A316. Site 576. Interior of circular colca, showing opening, 256 A317. Site 577. Facing east overlooking site, 257 A318. Site 577. Examples of circular colcas, showing spacing between structures, 257 A319. Site 577. Circular colca with preserved doorway and lintel, 257 A320. Site 577. Example of colca with arrow pointing to projecting “peg,” 258 A321. Site 578. Facing north over site, 258 A322. Site 579. Facing north over area of site, 259 A323. Site 579. Facing northwest over area of Collection 213-P, 259 A324. Site 580. Facing northwest over area of site, 259 A325. Site 580. Facing north over site, 260 A326. Site 580. Example of circular colca, 260 A327. Site 580. Example of well-preserved rectangular colca, 260 A328. Site 580. Line of colcas atop stone-faced terrace, 260 A328A.  Site 582. Facing east at site, 261 A329. Site 583. Facing east overlooking site, 261 A330. Site 585. Remnant of circular structure, 262 A331. Site 585. Section of stone faced terrace, 262 A332. Site 587. Facing southeast over area of site, 263 A333. Site 589. Facing northeast over site, 263 A334. Site 590. Facing east overlooking site at edge of Lago Tragadero, 264 A335. Site 590. Facing north over site, 264 A336. Site 591. Facing east overlooking site, 266 A337. Site 592. Facing southwest at site, 266 A338. Site 593. Facing north at site, 267 A339. Site 594. Facing northwest at site, 267 A340. Sites 595 and 472. Facing northeast at sites, 267 A341. Site 595. Facing south over site, 268 A342. Site 596. Facing northwest toward hilltop site, 268 A343. Site 596. Facing northeast across top of site, 268 A344. Site 596. Ancient circular structure, 268 A345. Site 597. Facing south over area of surface collection, 269 A346. Site 598. Facing north over area of site, 269 A347. Site 599. Facing northwest over site at edge of Lago Tragadero, 270 A348. Site 599. Mound feature, 270 A349. Site 600. Facing east over area of site, 270 A350. Site 601. Facing south over area of site, 270 A351. Site 602. Facing south over area of site, 271 A352. Site 603. Facing south over area of site, 271 A353. Site 604. Facing northwest over site, 272 A354. Site 605. Facing south over area of site, 272 A355. Site 606. Facing southeast over area of Collection 75-H, 272 A356. Site 607. Facing east over site, 273 A357. Site 608. Facing southeast over area of site, 274 A358. Site 609. Facing east over site, 275 A359. Site 610. Facing south over area of site, 275 A360. Site 611. Facing east over area of site, 276 A361. Site 611. Facing east overlooking line of colcas in eastern part of site, 276 A362. Site 611. Facing north along eastern side of site, 276 A363. Site 611. Example of rectangular colca, 276 A364. Site 612. Facing south along line of colcas, 277 A365. Site 612. Example of rectangular colca, 277 A366. Site 613. Facing south over area of site, 278 A367. Site 613. Facing southeast overlooking line of colcas, 278 A368. Site 613. Example of circular colca, 278

xviii

A369. A370. A371. A372. A373. A374. A375. A376. A377. A378. A379. A380. A381. A382. A383. A384. A385. A386. A387. A388. A389. A390. A391. A392. B1. B2. B3. B4. B5. B6. B7. B8.

Site 613. Masonry detail, 278 Site 618. Facing west over area of site, 280 Site 618. Facing northeast overlooking site, 280 Site 618. Facing south over area of Collection 225-P, 280 Site 619. Facing northwest over site, 280 Site 621. Facing east over area of site, 281 Site 621. Facing northeast at site, 281 Site 621. Facing east over area of Collection 228-P, 281 Site 623. Facing north at area of site, 282 Site 623. Facing west across site, 282 Site 624. Facing west at site, 282 Site 625. Facing northeast at site, 283 Site 627. Facing east overlooking site, in area of Collection 236-P, 283 Site 630. Facing northeast at area of site, 284 Site 632. Facing east over area of site, 285 Site 632. Facing northwest over area of Collection 244-P, 285 Site 632. Well-preserved structure near Collection 244-P, 285 Site 632-A. Overlooking site, 286 Site 633. Facing north at area of site, 286 Site 633. Facing northwest over northwest end of site, 286 Site 634. Facing east over area of site, 286 Site 634. Circular structures in area of Collection 248-P, 286 Site 635. Example of circular structure in area of Collection 250-P, 287 Site 636. Facing southeast over site, 287 Examples of EH decorated pottery, 367 Examples of EIP/MH decorated bowls with pink paste, 368 EIP/MH, examples of decorated bowls, 369 EIP/MH, example of jar rim with painted decoration, and Wari-related MH sherd, 370 EIP/MH, examples of anthropomorphic slab figurines, 371 LIP, examples of Base Clara decoration, 372 LIP, Wanka II, examples of Base Roja decoration, 373 LH, examples of Inca-style ceramic decoration, 374

Tables 2.1. Terrain in different elevation zones, “region” vs. survey area, 10 2.1. Rainfall at Jauja station, 1958–1972, 11 2.3. Average monthly maximum and minimum temperatures in Jauja, 1958–1972, 12 2.4. Average temperatures and rainfall, Jauja station, 1943–1972, 12 2.5. Monthly rainfall, Huancayo station, 1921–1974, 13 2.6. Average monthly maximum and minimum temperatures, Huancayo station, 1960–1975, 14 2.7. Modern population in study area at the province level, 18 2.8. Modern population density in the study area at the province level, 18 2.9. Modern population in the study area at the pueblo level, 19 2.10. Modern population density in the study area at individual pueblos, 20 2.11. Indigenous kichwa and lower puna cultigens, 21 2.12. Introduced kichwa cultigens, 21 2.13. The annual round from two kichwa districts in central Peru, 21

xix

2.14. 2.15. 2.16. 2.17. 2.18. 3.1. 3.2 3.3. 3.4. 3.5. 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 5.1. 5.2. 5.3. 6.1. 6.2. 6.3. 6.4. 6.5. 6.6. 6.7. 6.8. 6.9. 6.10. 6.11. 6.12. 6.13. 6.14. 6.15. 6.16. 6.17. 6.18. 6.19. 6.20. 6.21. 6.22. 6.23. 6.24. 6.25. 6.26. 6.27. 6.28. 6.29. 6.30. 6.31. 6.32. 6.33. 6.34. 6.35. 6.36.

Month-by-month agricultural activities in a mestizo kichwa community, central Peru, 22 Traditional agricultural crop and land preparation activities in the kichwa valleys, 22 Agricultural tasks, 23 Agricultural zones in highland southern Peru, 24 Rotational sequence, 25 The three Wanka divisions and their subject pueblos in Mantaro Valley and montaña, 32 Wanka cincheconas and district capitals under Inca and Spanish rule, 32 Estimates of contact period Wanka population, 33 Quantities of material provided to the Spanish from Jauja storehouses, 34 Estimates of distances from Mantaro Valley centers to subject montaña communities, 36 Site report form, 41 UMARP site classification, 42 Regional chronology, 46 JASP and UMARP comparisons of site area and chronology, 59 Comparison of selected JASP and UMARP site areas, 65 JASP sites with no UMARP follow-up study, 65 Total occupied hectares in all settlement sites in major time periods, 68 Percentages of numbers of settlements in site categories, by period, 69 Occupied hectares in different settlement-site types, 69 Mean elevations for all settlement sites, 71 Distribution of numbers and percent of settlement sites by elevation zone, 71 Distribution of settlement sites by elevation zone, 72 Occupied hectares in different elevation zones, by period, 73 Percentages of occupied hectares in “small” and “large” settlement sites, 77 EH settlement sites, 78 EIP/MH settlement sites, 79 Comparison of the two EIP/MH settlement clusters, 81 LIP–All settlement sites, 82 UMARP-defined Wanka I and Wanka II settlement sites, 83 LH settlement sites, 85 Numbers and volumes of circular vs. rectangular colcas, 86 Colca-form distributions, 86 Summary tabulation of volume and form for Inca colca sites, 87 Numbers of sites and colcas in different site-size categories, 88 Numbers of sites and numbers of colca forms in different colca-site classes, 88 Number of colcas and storage volume by colca-site class, 90 Distributions of circular and rectangular colcas, 91 Percent of total overall storage volume and percent of total class storage volume in colcas, 92 Architectonic configurations of colca sites, 92 Architectonic configurations of different colca-site classes, 92 Colca-site elevations by site and class, 94 Distances from colca sites to Hátun Xauxa, 94 Distances between colca sites and nearest LH settlements, 95 Sites lacking stone rubble, 97 Distribution of rock-free sites by classification, elevation zone, and period, 98 Distribution of “small” and “large” rock-free sites by elevation zone, 98 Mean elevation of “small” vs. “large” rock-free sites, by period, 99 Long-term occupation of EH settlements, 99 Long-term occupation of EIP/MH settlements, 100 Long-term occupation of early LIP settlements, 100 Long-term occupation of late LIP settlements, 100 Long-term occupation of LH settlements, 101

xx

Appendices A1. A2. A3 A4. A5. A6. A7. A8. A9. A10. A11. A12. A13. A14. A15. A16. A17. A18. A19. A20. A21. A22. A23. A24. A25. A26. A27. A28. A29. A30. A31. A32. A33. A34. A35. A36. A37. A38. A39. A40. A41. A42. A43. A44. A45. A46. A47. A48. A49. A50. A51.

Terms and meanings for relative surface pottery density, relative soil depth, relative erosional severity, and relative vegetation density, 131 Abbreviations for major chronological periods, 131 JASP surface collections at Site 398, 137 JASP surface collections at Site 399, 138 Colcas at Site 428, 150 Colcas at Site 430, 152 JASP surface collections at Site 431, 155 Colcas at Site 431-A, 155 JASP surface collections at Site 435, 157 JASP surface collections at Site 440, 158 JASP surface collections at Site 442, 159 JASP surface collections at Site 446, 160 JASP surface collections at Site 449, 162 JASP surface collections at Site 454, 164 JASP surface collections at Site 461, 173 JASP surface collections at Site 462, 174 JASP surface collections at Site 463, 175 JASP surface collections at Site 464, 176 JASP surface collections at Site 465, 176 JASP surface collections at Site 468, 182 JASP surface collections at Site 469, 182 Summary of UMARP measurements of 139 circular structures at Site 472, 187 UMARP measurements of three rectangular structures at Site 472, 187 JASP surface collections at Site 472, 189 Estimates for site area and population for Wanka II vs. Wanka III occupations at Site 472, 189 JASP surface collections at Site 473, 190 JASP surface collections at Site 476, 193 Colcas at Site 485, 200 JASP surface collections at Site 489, 201 JASP surface collections at Site 490, 202 Colcas at Site 491, 202 JASP surface collections at Site 498, 205 JASP surface collections at Site 499, 206 Colcas at Site 500, 206 Colcas at Site 502, 208 JASP surface collections at Site 503, 209 Colcas at Site 504, 210 JASP surface collections at Site 504, 210 Colcas at Site 512-A, 214 Colcas at Site 514, 215 JASP surface collections at Site 515, 216 Colcas at Site 516, 216 Colcas at Site 517, 217 JASP surface collections at Site 519, 218 JASP surface collections at Site 522, 219 JASP surface collections at Site 525, 220 JASP surface collections at Site 526, 221 Colcas at Site 528, 222 JASP surface collections at Site 533, 224 Colcas at Site 546, 228 Colcas at Site 547, 230

xxi

A52. Colcas at Site 547-A, 231 A53. Colcas at Site 548, 232 A54. JASP surface collections at Site 550, 234 A55. Colcas at Site 554, 236 A56. JASP surface collections at Site 554, 236 A57. Colcas at Site 555, 237 A58. JASP surface collections at Site 556, 238 A59. Colcas at Site 558, 240 A60. JASP surface collections at Site 558, 240 A61. JASP surface collections at Site 559, 241 A62. JASP surface collections at Site 560, 242 A63. Colcas at Site 563, 247 A64. JASP surface collections at Site 564, 247 A65. JASP surface collections at Site 565, 248 A66. Colcas at Site 566, 250 A67. JASP surface collections at Site 566, 250 A68. JASP surface collections at Site 569, 252 A69. JASP surface collections at Site 571, 253 A70. JASP surface collections at Site 572, 254 A71. Colcas at Site 573, 254 A72. JASP surface collections at Site 574, 255 A73. Colcas at Site 576, 256 A74. Colcas at Site 577, 258 A75. JASP surface collections at Site 579, 259 A76. Colcas at Site 580, 260 A77. JASP surface collections at Site 587, 263 A78. JASP surface collections at Site 590, 264 A79. JASP surface collections at Site 594, 267 A80. JASP surface collections at Site 595, 268 A81. JASP surface collections at Site 596, 268 A82. JASP surface collections at Site 602, 271 A83. JASP surface collections at Site 606, 273 A84. Colcas at Site 607-A, 274 A85. JASP surface collections at Site 610, 275 A86. Colcas at Site 611, 276 A87. JASP surface collections at Site 611, 276 A88. Colcas at Site 612, 277 A89. Colcas at Site 613, 279 A90. JASP surface collections at Site 618, 280 A91. JASP surface collections at Site 621, 281 A92. JASP surface collections at Site 627, 283 A93. JASP surface collections at Site 632, 285 A94. JASP surface collections at Site 634, 287 A95. JASP surface collections at Site 635, 287 A96. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-108, 299 A97. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-109, 300 A98. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-113, 302 A99. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-116, 303 A100. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-117, 303 A101. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-121, 305 A102. Summary of ceramic chronology at sites in the Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, 305 A103. Overall summary of JASP and UMARP site chronologies, 346 A104. Number of identified chronological components in different periods for JASP and UMARP sites, 348 A105. Summary of chronology, elevation, surface area, and classification for residential settlement sites, 349

xxii

Preface Jeffrey R. Parsons

This monograph has been decades in the making. I have been working on it off and on, with assistance from Charles Hastings and Ramiro Matos, since we finished our fieldwork at the end of 1976. During much of the 1980s and 1990s, fieldwork in our study area was difficult, and even virtually impossible, because of widespread violence throughout highland Peru. This discouraged any immediate follow-up studies to our 1975–76 surveys. In 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, and 2010, I made short return visits to Lima in order to help reorder our ceramic collections housed at the Museo de Arqueología at the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, and to refresh my memory of what the pottery looked like and how it related to the more refined ceramic chronologies developed by UMARP archaeologists in their subsequent follow-up studies (especially as presented by LeBlanc 1981, Costin 1986, and D’Altroy 1981). It was not until after my retirement from the University of Michigan in 2006 that I was able to devote large blocks of time to completing the formidable task of ordering and presenting our data. I see many places where this monograph might be improved—especially re-analyzing our stored surface collections to refine our assessments of site occupational chronology. However, in order to get our data “out” without any further delay, this monograph comes in its present form, warts and all. This is the second volume in which we present the substantive results of a regional survey directed by Ramiro Matos and myself over two long fieldseasons (May–December) in 1975 and 1976 in the Upper Tarma and Upper Mantaro drainages, Departamento de Junín in the Peruvian sierra central. This volume contains data from the southern sector of the overall survey area, the Wanka Region. An earlier monograph, designated as Volume 1 (in two parts), detailed the results of our work in the northern sector, the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region (Parsons et al. 2000). Our overall survey results were previously reported in preliminary form in two unpublished reports (Parsons 1976; Parsons and Hastings 1977). Belatedly, we have designated our overall 1975–76 investigation as the Junin Archaeological Survey Project (JASP), in order to distinguish it conveniently with this acronym in this monograph from the Upper Mantaro Archaeological Research Project (UMARP), directed by Timothy K. Earle, then of the University of California at Los Angeles, that was subsequently undertaken in the same Wanka Region between 1977 and 1986, and to which we make frequent reference throughout this monograph. UMARP archaeologists used our data (in preliminary report and note form) as the foundation for their subsequent investigations in the Wanka Region, and over the course of several fieldseasons they made many important contributions. In this monograph we make no attempt to synthesize the numerous UMARP advances (e.g., D’Altroy and Hastorf 2001). Rather, our primary purpose is to describe the sites we encountered in our 1975–76 survey in as much detail as we can, using information from subsequent UMARP studies only where it helps refine our understanding of site chronology and function, and to expand and extend our understanding of the ethnohistoric contexts of our material remains. We also include as part of Appendix A a full description of the sites discovered by a systematic UMARP survey carried out by Terence N. D’Altroy in the Jisse-Pomacancha Region just beyond the far northwestern edge of our original survey area. It was always our intent to return to our survey area, especially to the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region where no follow-up UMARP studies were undertaken, in order to continue archaeological xxiii

research in an area where our regional surveys in 1975–76 had enabled us to pose many interesting and important questions that could structure future regional surveys and site-specific field research with more intensive techniques. Unfortunately, by the time we were prepared to begin this second stage of our investigations in the early 1980s, the entire sierra central, and many other parts of Peru, were engulfed in violent conflict between insurgent terrorist groups and the Peruvian armed forces. This violence, which persisted through the mid-1990s, precluded any additional fieldwork in the area until the late 1990s, and it was for this reason that UMARP archaeologists were forced to abandon their efforts by the mid 1980s. Alas!, by the time stability had returned to the region, I was pushing 60 years of age and beyond, and, as I discovered in short return visits in 1997 and 2002, no longer able to physically tolerate the extremes of high altitude in our study area. So, we must leave this important new work to younger scholars who hopefully, in better times, will eventually follow the paths blazed by JASP and UMARP fieldworkers in this part of the Peruvian sierra central during the 1970s and 1980s. It was not until the later 1990s that archaeological investigations in the Wanka Region, and, indeed, anywhere else in this part of the sierra central, began to once more get seriously underway. To date, this work in Junín has been carried out primarily by Elizabeth Bonnier, and by Ramiro Matos and his colleagues in the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region (Bonnier 1997; Brown 1998; Matos 1994, 1997, 2002; Matos et al. 1996), and by several dedicated young Peruvian archaeologists—including Manuel Perales and Luis Villegas and their colleagues—who have undertaken some exciting new field studies in the main Mantaro Valley itself and in the adjacent Ceja de Montaña north and northeast of Jauja (e.g., Mallaupoma and Perales 2005; Perales 2004a, 2004b, 2004c, 2005; Perales and Rodriguez 2003). I hope this volume will complement and assist their efforts. Despite the length of time that has passed since the JASP and UMARP projects were undertaken, only a few regional studies of comparable scope have been undertaken more recently in the greater Peruvian sierra central. These include the studies of Alexis Mantha and Carolina Orsini and their colleagues in the Sierra de Ancash to the north (Mantha 2004, 2006, 2009; Herrera 2003; Orsini 2006), and the investigations of Katherine Schreiber, Ruben Sanchez, and Brian Bauer and their colleagues in the Ayacucho, Andahuaylas and Apurimac regions farther south (Schreiber 1987, 1992, 1993; Bauer et al. 2010; Bauer and Kellet 2010). This monograph is intended to be a stand-alone volume with sufficient information to enable readers to make full use of our material independently of other publications concerning the study area. Nevertheless, this work is best consulted in conjunction with our first volume (Parsons et al. 2000), which contains more extensive discussions of Andean culture history, ethnohistory, and cultural ecology. In this second volume, we include discussions of environment, agricultural ecology, and survey methodology that repeat some of what we presented in Volume 1, but which we here adapt to the specific conditions of the Wanka Region.

xxiv

Acknowledgments Jeffrey R. Parsons

Our JASP study was jointly sponsored by the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, in Lima, Peru, and the University of Michigan, in Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A., with major funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation (Grant SOC-7508758). Our fieldwork in Peru was authorized and facilitated by the Peruvian Instituto Nacional de Cultura in Resolución Suprema No. 3101. The fieldwork was co-directed by Ramiro Matos and Jeffrey Parsons, and by the 1976 fieldseason, Charles Hastings emerged as our co-field director for investigations in the Tarama Region and adjacent Ceja de Montaña (Hastings 1985, 1987). We were ably assisted throughout the arduous and challenging fieldwork in the Wanka Region by several students from the University of Michigan and the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos: University of Michigan Students Kurt Anschuetz 1976 fieldseason Charles Hastings 1975 fieldseason Paul Liffman 1976 fieldseason Christine Rudecoff 1975 fieldseason Philip Tugendrajch 1975, 1976 fieldseasons

San Marcos University Students Ruben García 1975, 1976 fieldseasons Julia Medel 1975, 1976 fieldseasons Juan Ramirez 1975, 1976 fieldseasons

My wife Mary H. Parsons organized and supervised work in our field labs during both the 1975 and 1976 fieldseasons, and she encouraged me to keep working on the material over the subsequent decades. Our small daughter Apphia (who went from 4 to 23 months in age over the course of our fieldwork) added her own brand of enthusiasm—pointing out the truck window one day early in our 1976 fieldseason, she composed her very first complete sentence: “Llama eats grass.” Her dormant Andean interests have re-emerged in the form of her translations of several Spanish quotations in Chapter Three, and a translation to Spanish of Chapter Seven (Chapter Eight in this monograph). We are most grateful to my University of Michigan colleague Roberto Frisancho for the generous loan of his rugged Toyota Jeep for the entire 1975 fieldseason. The Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos also provided long-term storage space for our surface collections at its Museo de Arqueología in Lima. We are very grateful to the successive museum directors who have facilitated, and who continue to support, this essential part of our research mission: Freddy Cabanillas, Harold Hernandez, Jaiver Alcalde, Ruth Shady, Hernán Amat, Rafael Vega-Centeno, Carlos del Águila, and Fernando Fujita. We also thank several San Marcos University students who have assisted us in the study, maintenance, and curation of these stored collections: during the late 1970s, Vicky Perez and Nicedia Mediano; and since 2002, Christian Altamirano, Kasandra Gonzalez, María Elena Almestar, Ruben Sanchez, and Juan Yataco. In the field we encountered many local people as we walked across their lands, and we are grateful to those many who tolerated our unexpected presence and helped us along the way. We acquired local permits from the several Presidentes Municipales and their assistants. Their influence and

xxv

these documents proved immensely useful in sanctioning our field surveys in sometimes difficult circumstances (Liffman 1977). At the University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology, Charles Hastings was my principal assistant in compiling and ordering our data, in making maps and preliminary figures, and in preparing drafts of many final site descriptions. We were also assisted in these and other tasks by Museum students John Alden, Zoe Crossland, Joseph Hines, Seung Og Kim, and Renato Kipnis. Kay Clahassey prepared most of the final figures, and Jill Rheinheimer edited the final manuscript. The late James B. Griffin was director of the University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology during the period when our project was first conceived and undertaken, and he lent his own particular brand of support and encouragement to the effort; I think he would have been pleased to see that this monograph is finally seeing the light of day. Over the course of many years, in addition to my continuing interaction with Charles Hastings and Ramiro Matos, I have had useful conversations about our Wanka Region survey with UMARP archaeologists—especially Timothy Earle, Terence D’Altroy, Christine Hastorf, and Catherine LeBlanc—and with several other scholars with interests in the region, including Lorenzo Rosselló, Jorge Silva, David Browman, John Earls, David Brown, Peter Kaulicke, and Alexis Mantha. In recent years I have become acquainted with several dedicated young Peruvian archaeologists with interests in our study area and adjacent parts of the sierra central, and I have profited a great deal from knowing about their investigations and future plans: María Elena Almestar, Christian Altamirano, Manuel Perales, Ruben Sanchez, Luis Villegas, and Juan Yataco. Finally, I would like to belatedly thank Robert Scholten, my undergraduate geology professor at Penn State University, for showing me how to do systematic regional survey when I was his field assistant during the summer of 1960 along the Continental Divide in the Rocky Mountains of SW Montana and adjacent Idaho. Many of the techniques and approaches I learned about during that geological mapping project became directly applicable in subsequent years to archaeological surveys I became involved in Mexico and Peru. It was William T. Sanders, of course, who gave me the initial opportunity, beginning in 1961, of making the transfer between geological and archaeological survey.

xxvi

Chapter 1

Introduction Jeffrey R. Parsons, Charles M. Hastings, and Ramiro Matos M.

In the early 1970s, despite the early lead provided by the pathbreaking Viru Valley project in 1946 (Willey 1953), regionally oriented archaeological research in Andean South America had not kept pace with that in some other parts of the world. Ramiro Matos, who had been working at the site-specific level in the Peruvian sierra central for some 15 years, felt that a regional perspective was needed there, and he encouraged Parsons to collaborate with him in such an undertaking. By 1974, Parsons—then with over a decade of regional survey experience in the Valley of Mexico—felt ready to begin such a project in highland Peru, especially as he had the opportunity to work with Charles Hastings, a doctoral student with considerable Andean experience who had recently begun graduate work in anthropology at the University of Michigan.

This monograph is based on fieldwork carried out during May–December 1975 and May–December 1976 in the Departamento de Junín, Peru, by the Junín Archaeological Survey Project (JASP) under the codirection of Jeffrey R. Parsons and Ramiro Matos M. (Figs. 1.1, 1.2). On the positive side, this lengthy delay in final publication means that we have access to a large body of research published during the intervening decades that can provide insights that would not have been available to us had we produced this volume “on time” circa 1980. Nevertheless, the nature and quality of our data are, more than anything else, determined by our objectives and priorities at the outset of our field research: it was these that structured our research design and the crucial decisions about how to collect and record information, and how and where to extend our survey coverage. In this chapter we provide the reader with some sense of what we thought we were doing as this project developed in the early 1970s. A major stimulus for undertaking a regional survey in the Upper Mantaro-Tarma drainage was our conviction that a systematic regional perspective was needed in the Andean sierra to provide a new basis for generating good hypotheses about longterm prehistoric cultural change. This conviction had developed during the 1960s and early 1970s as productive regional studies were undertaken in several parts of the world (Parsons 1972). These regional studies had often radically altered previous archaeological interpretations, and many of them had stimulated a whole new genre of archaeological research, which is ongoing (Kowalewski 2008).

The Definition of Substantive Issues In the early 1970s, we were convinced that a systematic surface survey in the Mantaro Valley would be feasible and productive. The region is a semi-arid highland zone, generally lacking thick vegetation that would obscure archaeological surface remains. Pioneering studies in the sierra central prior to the 1970s had noted the presence of impressive prehispanic centers with abundant stone architecture and distinctive ceramics (Bonavía 1964, 1970; Bonavía and Ravines 1972; Gutierrez 1935, 1937; Guzman 1959; Horkheimer 1951; Kroeber 1944; Lumbreras 1

2

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure 1.1.  Peru, showing modern cities and principal archaeological sites mentioned in the text.

Introduction

Figure 1.2.  The JASP survey areas: Tarama, Chinchaycocha, and Wanka Regions.

3

4

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

1960; Nomland 1939; Tello and Miranda 1923; Tello Devotto 1959; Wells 1940; Ravines 1971). Matos’ earlier work (1959, 1966, 1968, 1971, 1972a, 1972b, 1973) had produced many examples of individual sites of different ages and the general outlines of a ceramic sequence. Lumbreras’ (1960) regional synthesis had suggested a series of general chronological and developmental issues that future archaeological research in the area might usefully address. Most importantly for our project, Browman’s pioneering survey (1970) in a section of the Mantaro Valley that partially overlapped our own proposed study area had demonstrated that archaeological sites of different size and character in this area could be recognized and dated on the basis of surface remains. By 1974, archaeological field research had been underway for about a decade in the Departamento de Ancash in the northern Peruvian sierra central where two different projects had been operating: (1) the ethnohistorical-archaeological studies at the Inca imperial center of Huánuco Pampa and its surroundings, being carried out by Murra, Morris, Thompson, and Matos (Matos 1972a; Morris 1966, 1972, 1973, 1974; Morris and Thompson 1970; Thompson 1968a, 1968b; Thompson and Murra 1966; Thompson and Ravines 1973; Murra 1972); and (2) the intensive study of Formative occupation at Kotosh and Shillacoto (Izumi 1971; Izumi et al. 1972; Izumi and Sono 1963; Izumi and Terada 1972; Lumbreras 1971). The latter work paralleled the ongoing studies further north at the highland Formative center of Chavin de Huantar (Tello 1960; Lumbreras and Amat 1969) and, in the far northern Peruvian highlands, early studies at the important Formative Kuntur Wasi and Pacopampa sites (Fung 1975; Kaulicke 1975, 1976). These investigations suggested that we might expect to encounter important occupations of all periods, including Formative, in comparable geographic settings in our study area. Indeed, Browman’s (1970) surveys between Jauja and Huancayo in the main Mantaro Valley had already revealed significant Formative and post-Formative occupation in the area around Huancayo. At about that same time, Matos’ (1973) excavations at the valleyfloor site of Ataura, near Jauja, had indicated the presence of Formative public architecture in an area we expected to survey. Somewhat surprisingly, our studies around Tarma and in the Junín puna subsequently revealed that this was not the case in that part of our survey region (Parsons et al. 2000). One of Browman’s contributions was an intriguing hypothesis that transhumant pastoralism had preceded fully sedentary agricultural adaptations in the Mantaro Valley, and that the transition from one mode of life to the other dated from the end of the Early Intermediate Period as Wari state authority began to be felt in the region (Browman 1974, 1976; MacNeish et al. 1975). In our view, Browman’s view remained incompletely developed because his surveys had not extended into the prime pastoral terrain in the puna above the agriculturally productive kichwa zone of the Mantaro Valley. Nevertheless, we admired the cogency and appeal of his argument, and we felt that the only way we could effectively evaluate his hypothesis would be to

generate a dataset that included a significant puna component. Unfortunately, we were unable to extend our Wanka Region survey far enough into the puna to be able to effectively critique Browman’s idea for that part of the sierra central. The investigations of I. Flores (1959), Matos (1968), Browman (1970), and Shea (1969) at the Middle Horizon Wari-related sites at Wari Wilka, Calpish, and Ñahuiraupukio near Huancayo were also important in our early thinking about the potential contributions of our survey: these three sites appeared to be important ritual foci, strongly associated ceramically and architecturally with Wari during the Middle Horizon. These three Wari-related sites seemed to represent a different kind of Wari regional “influence” than that indicated by planned administrative centers like Pikillaqta near Cuzco (McEwan 1996; Sanders 1973) or Viracochapampa in the Peruvian northern sierra (Topic 1991). Wari Wilka, Calpish, and Ñahuiraupukio were more comparable, perhaps, to the highland Honcopampa site in the Callejon de Huaylas in the northern sierra central later studied by Isbell (1989). We hoped that one contribution of our work might be to clarify the nature of this poorly understood Wari “influence” in our study area. In 1974, the most detailed published archaeological reporting for the post-Archaic Period in the sierra central consisted of the work of Danielle Lavallee and her colleagues working in the Mantaro Valley (Lavallee 1967, 1973) and in the Asto Region farther downstream to the southeast of Huancayo (Lavallee and Julien 1973, 1983). These pioneering excavation and mapping studies were focused on the Late Intermediate Period, and provided concrete information about ceramics, domestic architecture, and refuse deposits. Consequently, we had a good idea of the subsurface correlates of surface remains at sites of this period in our own survey area. Beginning in the late 1960s, the Ayacucho Region (approximately 150 km southeast of Huancayo) was the scene of important archaeological fieldwork. One project, carried out by R. S. MacNeish and his colleagues, focused on the preceramic Archaic sequence, with special emphasis on the origins and early development of agriculture (MacNeish 1969, 1970; Garcia 1974). A second group of investigators—W. Isbell (1974, 1977), L. Lumbreras (1972, 1974), and their colleagues—were mainly interested in the development of the Wari urban center during the Early Intermediate Period and the Middle Horizon. Isbell’s work, which addressed questions of Wari development from the perspective of a small, rural occupation, was particularly important for us because it had succeeded in locating and studying an outlying settlement of the type that we expected to encounter in our own study area. Isbell also illustrated the effectiveness of studying central questions (in his case, the nature of Wari imperialism) at small, comparatively peripheral sites of the sort that we felt might be common in the Upper Mantaro. Shortly after our own work got underway, Mario Benavides (1976) undertook a regional archaeological survey in the immediate Ayacucho Region—a site compilation that was an important first step of systematic regionally oriented study in that area.

Introduction Two comprehensive syntheses, which appeared at about the same time as our research was being designed and getting underway, presented several new ideas about the long-term development of agricultural and pastoral societies in the sierra central: Bonavia and Ravines (1972), and MacNeish et al. (1975). We were particularly interested in evaluating the suggestion of MacNeish and his colleagues (1975:56), following Browman’s earlier lead, that the middle first millennium A.D. in this region was characterized by a shift “from primary llama and alpaca pastoralism, with secondary hunting and horticulture, to an economic base of primary agriculture with secondary herding.” Similarly, we hoped our data might illuminate their views (1975:56, 60, 65–66) on the strong regional influence of Wari during the Middle Horizon, and of the regional isolation, raiding, and feuding that they saw as characteristic of the Late Intermediate Period. Thus, by the early 1970s, antecedent archaeological research throughout the sierra central had provided a good conceptual and methodological foundation upon which our own project could build. We knew that sites of all ceramic periods could be located and dated on the basis of surface remains; we had a fair idea about the main outlines of the ceramic sequence in our study area, and there was a basis for comparing our materials with those from adjacent regions; and a number of important hypotheses, problems, and questions had already been defined that could be addressed by our investigations. The Research Design We selected our particular survey area primarily because of Matos’ long-established interest in and familiarity with the ecology and prehistory of the area. In 2000 we published the first final volume of our results from the northern two-thirds of our survey area: the Tarama and Chinchaycocha Regions (Parsons et al. 2000). This present volume, the second in the series, deals with the southern third of our survey, the Wanka Region. We conceived this project as “Stage 2” research within a long-term, multistage archaeological research program (Redman 1973). Our work grew out of “Stage 1” investigations, carried out over the preceding decades by other investigators. Our overall goal was to define prehispanic regional settlement patterns in order to provide a foundation for more intensive “Stage 3” archaeological research directed at settlement systems definition in the same region. From the outset we were committed to fullcoverage surface survey, inspired and oriented by the proven productivity of such surveys in semi-arid regions of comparable cultural complexity in several other parts of the world and in parts of Andean South America and the Mantaro Valley itself. Our immediate objective was to define regional settlement patterns over as large an area as possible in two six-month fieldseasons during May–December 1975 and May–December 1976. We expected that our work would produce data that could serve to develop hypotheses about population size and change, local community structure, regional sociopolitical hierarchy, land use and

5

subsistence practices, economic production and exchange, and the local impact of distant imperial centers in Wari and Cuzco during Middle Horizon and Late Horizon times, respectively. Because we were mainly interested in problem definition and hypothesis development, we decided that we could not spend very much time at any single site during our 1975–76 fieldwork—that is, we could not incorporate time-consuming operations such as intensive surface collecting, test pitting, detailed map making, architectural drawings, and so on that would detract from our ability to define general occupational patterns over as large an area as possible. Our orientation was explicitly extensive, not intensive. Two big problems in working out our overall research strategy were (1) our inability beforehand to make reasonable predictions about how large our study area would be, and (2) our difficulty in determining how to configure our survey coverage so as to acquire a regional dataset that would be representative of ecological and cultural variability. For example, as noted above, our survey in the Wanka Region failed to include an adequate sample of puna environment above approximately 4000 masl. Unlike the Valley of Mexico, where surrounding high mountain ranges clearly delimited the extent of productive agricultural terrain in a setting that lacked a prehispanic pastoral economy, the Upper Mantaro lacked such natural borders that could have provided meaningful, ready-made boundaries for our survey areas. The full extent of our 1975–76 survey in the Tarama, Chinchaycocha, and Wanka Regions turned out to be roughly 1500 km2. However, as we planned our fieldwork in 1974, we had no idea whether we could handle as little as a few hundred kilometers or as much as a few thousand. Our strategy was to survey contiguous blocks of terrain, each as large as possible given the available time and personnel, in the three principal environmental subdivisions that we perceived within the Upper Mantaro-Tarma drainage: the Junín puna (the Chinchaycocha Region), the small kichwa valleys in the highly dissected Tarma drainage (the Tarama Region), and the broad kichwa floodplain and adjacent uplands of the main Mantaro Valley (the Wanka Region, the subject of this monograph). However, as we began fieldwork in May 1975, we still had virtually no idea about the ultimate size or configuration of our completed survey. One thing that we knew about, but did not adequately work into our research design, was the ethnohistorically documented border between the Tarama-Chinchaycocha ethnic groups to the north, and the Wanka ethnicity to the south—a border that ran right through our proposed study area (Rowe 1946). In retrospect, we should have incorporated more of this border zone into our survey area; as it was, we captured just enough of the area in question to be able to say that the archaeological data lend very strong support to the reality of this ethnohistorically defined border in Late Intermediate Period times. The Subsequent UMARP Investigations Between 1977 and 1986, a field project directed by Timothy Earle—a recent Michigan PhD and then an energetic young

6

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

professor at the University of California, Los Angeles—carried out intensive fieldwork in the Wanka Region using our survey data from this part of our overall 1975–76 fieldwork (then available in the form of preliminary maps and fieldnotes, which we made accessible to Earle) as a foundation from which to structure a research design that included excavations, detailed site mappings, intensive resurvey and surface collection at selected sites, detailed artifact analyses, detailed ethnohistoric studies, and a new regional survey that extended our 1975–76 survey beyond its southwestern limits over an additional 11 km2 (see map inside front cover; Figs. A50–A55, A61–A70, A81–A85). This project—the Upper Mantaro Archaeological Research Project (UMARP)—accumulated and published a large number of substantive, analytical, interpretive and conceptual studies that have significantly advanced our knowledge of this region’s prehistory, particularly for the Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon. These UMARP publications include dissertations and theses (LeBlanc 1981; D’Altroy 1981; Hastorf 1983; LeVine 1985; Costin 1986; LeCount 1987; Sandefur 1988; Russell 1988; Borges 1988; Hagstrum 1989), summaries and syntheses (Earle 2005; Earle et al. 1980, 1987), and major interpretive volumes (D’Altroy 1992; Hastorf 1993; D’Altroy and Hastorf 2001). The UMARP follow-up to our antecedent regional survey in the Wanka Region is a good example of what we referred to above as “Stage 2” (JASP) and “Stage 3” (UMARP) research, in which the latter is structured upon a foundation provided by the former. In an ideal world, of course, our data monograph would have been published (or at least available in finalized draft form) prior to the initiation of the UMARP investigations. As it is, there is now a wealth of additional information (some of which has been available for nearly three decades) about the chronology and function of artifacts and architecture, settlement and community structure, ethnohistory, and agricultural ecology that bears directly on many aspects of our own data. Consequently, we have had to decide what parts of the abundant UMARP contributions to incorporate into our own monograph. Clearly, any systematic attempt to incorporate such additional information would require extensive restudy of our original surface pottery collections in order to accommodate new insights about ceramic chronology derived by UMARP scholars. It would also necessitate a reexamination of our data on site size, and a significant reconsideration of the architectural features we encountered. We have not undertaken these important tasks because we believe that such efforts would significantly delay the already-much-toolong-delayed publication of this monograph. With this in mind, we have made use of the UMARP data in the following ways: (1) We present this monograph so that it can be used as a stand-alone document, but one that many readers will want to consult in conjunction with the first JASP volume (Parsons et al. 2000), and with all the relevant UMARP material cited above and in Chapter 5 of this monograph. This volume on the Wanka Region, for example, contains less in the way of ecological, ethnohistoric, and cultural historical background than did our first JASP volume.

(2) We do not attempt to provide a comprehensive discussion of the numerous UMARP contributions to substance, method, and theory. This is beyond the scope of the present monograph, which, as indicated above, is intended primarily as a descriptive data volume. We do, however, consider those specific UMARP interpretations that we regard as directly relevant to our own discussions, especially as concerns site chronology and function. (3) In Appendix A (site descriptions), in addition to our original observations and calculations, we include details of UMARP restudies of site chronology, site size, and some detailed site maps for those numerous sites at which UMARP archaeologists subsequently carried out such restudies. (4) In Appendix A we include the full description of individual sites recorded by the UMARP survey in the Jisse-Pomacancha area beyond the southwestern limits of our JASP survey area. This section is authored by Terence N. D’Altroy, who directed this survey (D’Altroy participated in the 1973 fieldseason of archaeological survey in the Valley of Mexico [Parsons 2008], and was thus well acquainted with our own survey methodology so that the data from both UMARP and JASP surveys should be fully comparable). (5) We accept the UMARP recalibration of ceramic chronology for the Wanka Region, and include the highlights of this refined chronology as part of Appendix B (ceramic chronology) and in our perceptions of site chronology at those sites where UMARP and JASP investigations overlapped. We did not reexamine our original surface collections in light of the refined UMARP chronology, but we strongly recommend this as highly desirable in the future. At the time of this writing, our surface collections are housed at El Colegio Real, an annex of the Museo Arqueológico de la Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos on Calle Andahuaylas in downtown Lima. A Retrospective Critique Building on previous site-specific work and a handful of pioneering regional surveys in the Peruvian sierra, we originally saw our task as one of defining the “big picture” at the regional level in this part of the sierra central, focusing on “sites” and mostly ignoring what now might be termed “off-site” phenomena (e.g., isolated artifacts, small concentrations of potsherds or lithics, or small linear features such as sections of canals or roads). We did not expect to be able to deal systematically with such off-site materials, but we did expect to encounter such material from time to time and to at least consider how future studies to handle these subtle remains might be designed (e.g., the impressive work by Klink [2005] and Cipolla [2005] aimed at defining preceramic Archaic Period occupation at the regional level in the Titicaca Basin). Just as they had previously done in places like the Valley of Mexico, we expected that full-coverage site-oriented surveys in Junín would serve to define the general outlines of population, land use, and sociopolitical organization over an area of some

Introduction hundreds of kilometers—an area small enough to be manageable for a project of modest size and resources, and yet large enough to provide insight into general patterns. We expected that our periodic encounters of off-site remains during the course of our site-oriented surveys would tell us what kinds of off-site materials were “out there.” Such knowledge, in turn, could be expected to provide us with (1) some general understanding of what we might eventually learn from the off-site remains, and (2) some specific indication of how we might discover their distribution by means of more intensive surface surveys in the future. Such future surveys would necessarily involve some form of sampling, simply because of the intensity of observation that would be needed to locate and record the subtle material remains. We continue to agree with our original belief that the only way we could realistically cover a large area on a full-coverage basis would be to focus exclusively on sites and other features that were visible from a distance of no less than about 20 m. What we most profoundly did not adequately appreciate at the outset of our fieldwork was the richness of the surficial architectural data that would be available to us. Even once this became apparent early in our 1975 fieldseason, we were never able to record architectural information at a level of detail that would enable us to capture its most essential qualities, while at the same time permitting us to maximize our extensive survey coverage. The consequences of this incomplete and unsystematic recording of architectural detail will be considered in subsequent sections of this monograph. We also realize that our survey boundaries are completely arbitrary, determined all too often simply by how easily we were able to move about in the time available to us, and all too seldom by considerations of how representative our coverage might be. We tended to follow existing roads and paths as we extended our survey coverage outward from our central field quarters in those places where we were able to secure adequate housing. The reader has only to look at the configuration of our survey boundaries in order to visualize where these roads and pathways led us, and where they did not. We especially regret our failure to include more puna (> 4000 masl) terrain within our survey area. Consequently, we still lack a good understanding of prehispanic camelid pastoralism in the Wanka Region. Another problem was securing surface collections sufficiently large to provide reliable information about site chronology. This problem was particularly acute in the high puna grasslands, seldom if ever plowed, and in other less-cultivated areas where surficial artifact exposure was especially limited and occasionally virtually absent. We have subsequently thought that some form of “deep” surface sampling might have been achieved by troweling to the depth of a few centimeters in designated localities, or even by a few small test pits—this kind of “surface” sampling was subsequently employed by UMARP archaeologists at some key sites. However, this could only have happened at the cost of additional time and energy, both of which we were then reluctant to employ for such purposes in the context of our emphasis on extensive coverage.

7

Finally, our ceramic chronology was much too coarse for adequate definition of settlement patterns during phases short enough to capture potentially critical changes in regional occupation. This problem is particularly acute for the Middle Horizon, which remains difficult to separate archaeologically from the later Early Intermediate Period in the Wanka Region. Perhaps we should have devoted a full season, near the outset of our fieldwork, to the task of refining the existing ceramic chronology. One problem with this latter strategy, however, was the fact that at that time we did not know the locations of very many sites where we might expect to find good stratigraphic deposits spanning multiple periods, or of good single-component sites where specific ceramic phases could have been best recognized and defined. Now, of course, we do know of numerous such locations, some of them subsequently tested by UMARP archaeologists.

Chapter 2

Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology Jeffrey R. Parsons

Introduction

the broad tops of the high, bordering ridges. Zones 1, 2, and 3 correspond generally to what we refer to as the lower kichwa (3270–3600 masl) (Zones 1 and 2) and upper kichwa (3600–3800 masl) (Zone 3). Any southwest-to-northeast transect extending for about 30 km or more across the region at right angles to the Río Mantaro traverses the full range of this environmental diversity, and then farther northeastward descends into the cloud forest and tropical forest of the ceja de montaña (Pulgar Vidal 1967; Tosi 1960; Troll 1958, 1960, 1968). It is worth noting that we do not know to what extent the main Mantaro Valley floodplain zone—the presently intensively cultivated and often-irrigated area below 3400 masl—was as agriculturally productive during the prehispanic past as it has been in recent times. Parts of this floodplain, perhaps even much of it, could have been marshy, and only marginally productive for agriculture at some points in ancient times. Drainage projects may have been required to convert some marshland into agricultural fields, and certainly the continually meandering and occasionally flooding main river course would have created an additional problem for intensive agriculture without some form of water management. However, we are unaware of any good information about drainage or flood-control works in ancient or modern times in the main Mantaro Valley, and our survey has little to contribute to this question beyond noting that although many smaller archaeological sites dating to all prehispanic periods are found within the floodplain zone, no major prehispanic settlements, except for the Inca provincial capital at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550), are situated in this setting. The relative importance

Our Wanka Region study area is between latitude 11°34' and 11°56' S, and longitude 75°20' and 75°35' W. It occupies a sector of the Peruvian sierra central lying between two primary northwest-to-southeast trending mountain ranges. The westerly, and more distant, of these two ranges, the Cordillera Occidental, forms the continental divide separating the Pacific and Atlantic watersheds. Closer by on the east is the Cordillera Oriental, through which passes extend eastward and northeastward into lower elevations descending through the ceja de montaña, montaña, and into the selva of the upper Amazon Basin. Within our survey area and its surroundings (see color map inside front cover), we distinguish five principal elevation zones that correspond to distinctive topographic and ecological landscapes: (1) the nearly level to gently sloping main floor of the Mantaro Valley, much of which is irrigable today for agriculture, lying below 3400 masl with a minimal elevation of about 3300 masl; (2) and (3) the rolling plains and low hill ranges immediately above the main valley floor and grading upward through progressively steeper and more rugged terrain into the lowermost edge of the puna at approximately 3800 masl, the lower portions (ca. 3270–3600 masl) of which are often irrigable for agriculture with water from the numerous tributaries (mostly seasonal quebradas, and a few permanent streams) to the main Río Mantaro; (4) the rugged lower puna, composed of higher hills and moderate-tosteep slopes, between 3800 and 4000 masl; and (5) the higher puna above 4000 masl, composed mainly of rolling terrain along 9

10

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

during different prehispanic periods of agricultural vs. marshland resources in the main Mantaro Valley floodplain zone remains an open question. The term puna refers to high, grass-covered plateaus with moderate-to-gentle vertical relief at elevations between about 3800 and 4700 masl (Troll 1958). It is useful to distinguish between the lower puna (ca. 3800–4000 masl), where cultivation of some tubers and hardy cereals (quinoa) is possible, and the higher puna grasslands (ca. 4000–4700 masl), above the limits of fully effective agriculture, where herding has been the primary economic activity in historic times. Geological studies (Hansen et al. 1984; Wright 1980, 1983, 1984; Wright and Bradbury 1975; Wright et al. 1989) have revealed the powerful impact of Late Pleistocene glaciations in the formation of the puna landscape: the existing drainage network and numerous small lakes are products of glacial scouring and damming; glacial outwash fans and large fluvial-alluvial terraces cover much of the lower, flatter ground surfaces; many of the numerous hills and ridges are glacial moraines formed of coarse glacial deposits; and there is a high proportion of acidic soils of variable depth and texture (Matos 1994:41). In contrast to the broad puna expanses south of Lake Junín in the Chinchaycocha Region and southernmost Tarama Region to the northwest (Parsons et al. 2000), in the Wanka Region the puna terrain, while extensive, is configured in the form of broad ridges that separate kichwa valleys of varying size, of which the main Mantaro Valley southeast of the present-day city of Jauja is the largest example in the entire sierra central. In the Wanka Region, the term kichwa refers to semi-arid intermontane valleys and lower ridges at elevations between approximately 3300 and 3800 masl. It is useful to distinguish between lower and higher kichwa subdivisions: (a) the lower kichwa, about 3270–3600 masl, which has most of the best agricultural land on the drained valley bottoms and lowermost slopes, and where effective maize cultivation and canal irrigation is most feasible today; and (b) the upper kichwa, about 3600–3850 masl (sometimes referred to as the suni), where the terrain is typically much steeper, the valley floors narrower, soil cover shallower, maize cultivation not generally so effective, and irrigation less practicable. Well to the east and northeast of the Wanka Region, numerous passes descend into the moist and heavily vegetated ceja de montaña and become deep canyons and narrow gorges separated by extremely steep ridges. At varying elevations the ceja de montaña grades into the rugged foothills and broader valleys of the lower montaña. The thickly forested selva may be said to begin where the outermost hills of the montaña meet the edge of the main plain of the Amazon Basin. As Troll (1958, 1968) and others have observed, the gradation between kichwa or puna and ceja de montaña is very complex, with no fixed elevation limits and highly dependent upon the configurations of local topography that affect the patterning of wind, rainfall, cloud cover, and vegetation; variants of ceja de montaña can be found at elevations up to about 3700 masl. Our survey in the Wanka Region did not include any ceja de montaña terrain.

Table 2.1.  Terrain in different elevation zones, “region” vs. survey area (exclusive of the UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha subregion). Elevation Zone

“Region”

Survey Area

km

%

> 4000 masl (upper puna)

417

26.7

5

1.1

3800–4000 masl (lower puna)

303

19.4

71

16.1

3400–3800 masl (kichwa)

572

36.7

224

51.0

< 3400 masl (kichwa floodplain)

267

17.1

135

30.7

2

km2

%

lakes

5

0.1

5

1.1

total

1564

100.0

440

100.0

As indicated in Table 2.1, our Wanka Region survey area incorporated only a very small proportion of puna terrain—only 17.2% in our survey area vs. 46.1% in the general region. This is unfortunate, since we have acquired only a limited impression of puna occupation in the Wanka Region, especially in the higher puna zone. This contrasts to the nearby Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region, where roughly half our survey area consisted of puna terrain (Parsons et al. 2000). For additional information and insights, the reader may also want to consult discussions of the Wanka Region’s natural environment in Hastorf (1993, 2001a). Climate The Central Andean climate is characterized by strong seasonal fluctuations in precipitation and marked diurnal fluctuations in temperature. The rainy season peaks between January and March, and the dry season is normally driest from June through August. At high elevations in these tropical latitudes, temperature oscillations tend to be strong between day and night and weak between seasons (e.g., Troll 1958). Mild temperatures during the rainy season are due as much to the insulating cloud cover as to the timing of the austral summer. Temperatures drop to their lowest extreme on clear nights of the dry season, which corresponds to the austral winter (June–August), but radiant, mid-day heating from relatively unfiltered sunlight is also most intense during these same months. Kichwa valleys on the leeward (western) side of the outer ranges differ greatly from the perennially foggy mountainsides to the east. Relative to the ceja de montaña, the kichwa climate is much drier, more seasonally variable, and somewhat cooler during the dry season. Moving from the upper ceja de montaña westward into the adjacent kichwa and puna, conditions are correspondingly sunnier, drier, more seasonally varied and more generally typical of the Central Andean sierra. The dry season (May–September) is characterized by clear skies, very infrequent rainfall, dusty ground, and nightly frosts, and the extremes of

Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology

11

Table 2.2.  Precipitation (mm), Jauja meteorological station, 1958–1972. Year

Jan.

Feb.

March

April

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

1958

83.3

149.1

113.0

30.2

7.4

2.2

4.3

0.3

2.8

62.2

1959

83.0

181.3

96.0

60.8

22.5

6.0

1.2

5.1

38.7

104.3

1960

148.6

131.4

49.3

60.2

18.2

0.0

7.2

16.3

14.4

63.5

1961

157.9

138.3

112.3

67.3

13.6

0.0

0.0

6.6

23.6

23.5

1962

192.8

137.5

286.7

68.4

12.0

0.0

0.2

6.7

17.0

1963

183.0

150.7

179.0

54.1

3.5

1.0

0.8

4.0

24.6

1964

80.9

53.3

135.7

44.8

19.6

0.0

0.0

1.0

1965

88.0

90.4

90.7

64.5

0.0

0.0

1.0

22.0

Nov.

Dec.

Total

45.4

64.9

565.1

34.2

138.5

771.6

123.2

58.4

690.7

141.3

185.8

870.2

30.3

87.5

83.2

922.3

53.2

58.9

82.1

794.9

51.3

110.9

65.0

41.0

603.5

52.5

54.1

28.8

120.3

612.3

1966

118.9

80.9

88.1

64.5

24.0

1.0

0.0

4.0

22.3

92.5

70.4

119.0

685.6

1967

102.6

190.9

141.1

38.6

18.5

14.9

15.2

14.4

11.0

115.3

34.6

75.1

772.2

1968

56.1

63.1

132.6

11.0

15.8

0.6

14.2

33.2

22.6

57.0

58.6

95.0

559.8

1969

66.1

95.3

87.9

56.9

2.0

8.1

23.6

5.4

47.4

50.3

22.8

157.0

622.8

1970

143.4

100.6

63.2

55.6

1.0

0.0

1.2

3.5

20.8

71.1

53.7

156.9

671.0

1971

159.7

155.8

123.9

37.3

14.1

2.4

0.0

20.9

37.5

77.2

51.1

169.8

849.7

1972

127.1

85.3

143.3

129.9

8.3

0.0

20.5

0.0

44.3

59.0

55.4

109.8

782.9

Average

119.4 ± 43.3

120.3 ± 42.2

122.8 ± 56.3

56.3 ± 25.9

12.0 ± 8.0

2.4 ± 4.2

6.0 ± 8.2

9.6 ± 9.7

28.7 ± 15.5

68.3 ± 27.3

62.1 ± 33.2

110.4 ± 44.0

718.3 ± 114.6

(From unpublished data filed at the División de Ecología, ONERN, Jauja office) Elevation of measuring station: 3597 masl.

seasonal and diurnal temperature variation are notably more pronounced. This tremendous variation in local climate along an axis eastward from the puna through the kichwa and ceja de montaña and into the montaña and selva has significant implications for the complementarity of agricultural, herding, and hunter-gatherer economies within our study area and throughout the entire sierra central. Historic Records of Rainfall and Temperature We found temperature and rainfall data from only two recording stations within our general study area: (1) the local Oficina Nacional de Evaluación de Recursos Nacionales (ONERN) in Jauja; and (2) the Instituto Geofísico del Peru in Huancayo, a few dozen kilometers southeast of our survey area (Tables 2.2–2.6). Both these stations are on, or just above, the main valley floor, well within the kichwa zone. Unfortunately, we lack temperature and rainfall data for the puna zone in the Wanka Region. Figures 2.1–2.5 summarize our temperature and rainfall data in graphical fashion. Four patterns stand out particularly clearly from these climatic data: (1) there are marked differences in average monthly rainfall that characterize the dry (May–September) vs. the rainy (October–April) seasons; (2) there is variability in rainfall that can occur from one year to the next at the same location; (3) some months in some years are much drier than others, with rainfall well below the multiyear average; and (4)

there is extreme diurnal temperature variation, especially during the dry season (this phenomenon has been aptly characterized as a condition of “day-summer” and “night-winter” by Fjeldså and Krabbe [1990:17], especially in the puna zone). Although we have no climate data from the puna zone in the Wanka Region, measurements from several puna stations in the nearby Chinchaycocha Region show markedly lower temperatures and somewhat higher rainfall relative to these kichwa data (Parsons et al. 2000:15–26) (Fig. 2.5). These patterns of temperature and rainfall have significant implications for both pastoralists and agriculturalists in the Wanka Region: (1) because of occasional and unpredictable very low rainfall during critical planting and growing months, agricultural productivity and security is markedly increased by canal irrigation or some other means of water management, including drainage and flood control in marshy valley-bottom floodplains; (2) agriculture in the puna is constrained not only by the short growing season, but also by low soil fertility caused by the slow chemical weathering and slow breakdown of organic elements characteristic of low temperatures (e.g., Dollfus 1981:40; Matos 1994; Winterhalder and Thomas 1978:28–29); (3) the extremely cold puna nights, especially when accompanied by relative dampness that increases rate of heat loss at these high elevations (Winterhalder and Thomas 1978:23–24), require fully adequate shelter for resident human beings and special care for vulnerable young camelids during the period of their birth and early development

12

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table 2.3.  Average maximum and minimum monthly temperatures (°C) in Jauja, 1958–1972. Year

Jan.

Feb.

March

April

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

1958

19.6 7.5

18.2 8.1

18.8 7.6

20.2 6.9

20.2 6.0

19.5 2.1

18.8 2.6

20.9 3.6

21.2 6.2

20.2 6.6

21.1 6.6

22.0 6.1

1959

20.7 6.8

17.7 7.8

19.0 7.1

19.5 6.4

18.8 4.5

19.5 3.0

19.4 2.0

19.8 4.0

19.6 5.2

19.6 6.7

20.4 6.7

18.8 7.1

1960

18.9 7.2

18.1 7.2

20.2 6.2

18.5 5.9

19.6 4.6

19.7 2.2

19.9 3.0

20.0 4.0

19.6 6.2

20.6 6.3

18.9 6.6

20.8 5.6

1961

18.3 6.9

16.9 6.3

18.0 7.4

18.7 6.5

18.4 5.9

19.0 3.3

19.3 2.4

19.4 2.8

18.9 6.8

21.1 6.9

18.4 7.6

18.6 7.5

1962

18.0 7.4

18.1 7.8

17.0 7.4

18.2 5.4

20.0 4.2

19.8 1.3

19.3 3.4

19.8 2.9

20.1 5.9

20.7 6.0

20.9 5.6

19.6 6.7

1963

17.6 7.0

16.5 6.4

18.1 7.0

18.3 6.2

19.7 3.4

19.7 1.9

20.0 1.8

20.7 3.6

20.1 6.0

19.6 6.6

19.3 7.1

19.8 7.4

1964

20.3 7.5

19.7 8.0

18.4 6.8

18.8 5.8

18.6 4.0

19.5 1.3

19.5 2.4

19.8 4.3

19.4 4.7

19.0 5.3

19.7 5.1

19.4 5.2

1965

19.0 6.0

17.7 6.9

18.5 6.7

19.3 6.1

20.2 3.5

19.6 2.8

21.1 3.4

22.2 4.0

21.6 3.2

23.5 6.3

22.4 6.6

21.7 7.0

1966

21.6 6.0

22.4 6.8

20.9 5.8

21.7 5.5

20.8 4.7

20.7 2.1

21.1 1.9

21.6 3.7

21.2 5.6

20.6 7.2

21.2 6.4

20.8 7.2

1967

20.1 6.3

18.2 6.7

18.7 6.8

18.9 4.6

19.9 3.9

19.7 1.1

19.0 1.4

19.3 2.9

20.5 4.3

19.5 5.5

22.4 5.1

20.5 5.2

1968

19.1 5.2

17.9 6.2

16.8 5.5

19.6 4.0

18.6 3.4

18.6 2.4

17.4 2.2

18.2 4.4

19.0 4.8

19.2 6.5

20.1 6.1

19.8 6.1

1969

19.3 7.0

19.1 7.5

19.9 7.3

19.8 6.1

20.0 4.6

19.4 3.8

18.7 2.3

19.3 3.0

19.5 5.1

20.1 6.8

19.9 5.4

19.8 5.3

1970

19.7 6.6

18.8 7.3

19.4 7.1

18.5 6.2

19.0 5.9

19.6 4.2

19.6 2.7

19.1 3.3

20.4 2.8

19.2 4.8

21.2 6.3

20.5 5.7

1971

19.0 1.7

17.5 2.2

17.6 2.1

18.0 1.1

18.4 0.3

18.2 2.3

18.6 1.3

19.1 1.8

19.7 4.0

20.1 5.1

20.5 5.3

18.0 5.8

1972

17.8 5.6

19.4 5.5

17.0 6.5

19.2 5.8

19.1 3.4

18.9 2.0

19.5 1.8

20.4 2.4

19.8 4.3

20.0 6.2

20.9 6.8

20.2 7.0

Average

19.3 ± 1.1 18.4 ± 1.4 18.6 ± 1.2 19.1 ± 0.9 19.4 ± 0.8 19.4 ± 0.6 19.4 ± 0.9 20.0 ± 1.0 20.0 ± 0.8 20.2 ± 1.3 20.5 ± 1.4 20.0 ± 1.3 6.3 ± 1.5 6.7 ± 1.5 6.5 ± 1.4 5.5 ± 1.4 4.2 ± 1.4 2.4 ± 0.9 2.3 ± 0.6 3.4 ± 0.7 5.0 ± 1.2 6.2 ± 0.7 6.2 ± 0.8 6.3 ± 0.8

(From unpublished data filed at the División de Ecología, ONERN, Jauja office) Elevation of measuring station: 3597 masl. Maximum temperature on top, minimum temperature on bottom for each month.

Table 2.4.  Average temperatures and precipitation, Jauja, 1943–1972. Jan.

Feb.

March

April

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

average monthly temp. (°C)

11.5

11.3

11.2

11.3

10.7

9.8

9.7

10.4

11.2

11.7

11.9

11.6

average maximum monthly temp. (°C)

19.4

18.8

18.8

19.6

19.9

19.5

19.5

20.1

20.0

20.5

20.8

20.2

average minimum monthly temp. (°C)

6.2

6.4

6.2

5.6

3.8

2.5

2.2

3.0

5.0

5.9

5.8

6.0

absolute maximum temp. (°C)

29.0

28.2

24.0

27.0

25.0

24.0

25.0

27.0

25.0

26.8

28.0

26.0

absolute minimum temp. (°C)

-1.8

-1.8

0.4

-3.8

-4.4

-2.8

-3.0

-3.0

-0.2

0.0

1.0

0.0

average total monthly ppt. (mm)

107.1

117.0

111.3

49.2

13.2

4.6

3.7

6.6

24.7

62.6

68.3

85.9

maximum ppt. in 24 hours (mm)

69.0

39.1

41.0

37.0

16.0

21.0

14.0

1

27.0

27.0

36.0

44.5

(From unpublished data filed at the División de Ecología, ONERN, Jauja office) Elevation of measuring station: 3587 masl.

Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology

13

Table 2.5.  Monthly precipitation (mm), Huancayo station, 1921–1974. Year

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Total

n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. 142.8 121.9 66.0 92.2 88.4 161.3 125.2 116.6 105.2 67.3 32.0 4.1 95.3 66.8 72.9 41.2 25.4 28.2 120.4 112.0 13.6 84.3 18.0 1.3 97.6 88.3 81.0 125.7 43.7 2.5 83.3 87.1 75.2 21.3 40.4 10.7 107.7 90.4 98.3 54.5 20.3 5.0 73.2 169.4 121.2 42.7 19.1 31.0 158.2 128.4 123.3 51.8 44.5 4.3 83.3 67.8 70.4 73.7 3.3 1.8 111.8 91.4 109.2 34.1 41.9 4.8 171.2 129.9 202.2 31.8 17.0 12.2 133.9 120.4 128.3 15.8 27.2 22.9 179.6 116.4 232.4 41.1 1.0 10.7 179.3 71.9 56.9 51.8 15.3 0.3 99.8 90.7 76.2 53.6 2.5 6.6 77.7 99.3 61.0 43.3 13.0 15.2 86.6 118.9 194.5 41.7 15.5 11.4 194.8 79.2 74.9 87.4 1.3 1.0 187.4 154.6 82.0 46.7 77.7 1.3 106.4 63.3 129.5 69.6 65.8 6.1 107.4 185.9 95.0 2.5 24.4 1.5 185.4 138.2 136.7 49.8 2.3 1.5 126.2 86.4 113.8 38.9 4.1 0.0 154.2 115.4 105.4 50.0 41.7 3.6 91.7 61.0 70.0 53.7 16.5 10.0 91.2 82.3 97.0 72.9 31.2 11.9 119.1 112.0 132.6 63.0 1.0 22.9 111.0 134.5 114.3 53.5 15.8 3.8 138.4 154.7 104.4 31.8 29.7 17.3 130.6 182.1 179.3 42.9 6.1 8.4 165.4 101.1 95.0 75.7 7.3 6.4 141.0 138.2 121.4 33.8 22.9 9.7 107.2 125.5 125.4 23.4 31.5 7.6 113.0 195.3 67.3 42.7 12.7 0.8 83.7 152.4 106.9 106.2 24.9 11.4 141.7 137.1 65.1 44.9 35.4 8.6 102.2 198.3 151.9 89.1 25.2 35.3 88.4 112.5 39.1 66.6 18.4 0.3 199.6 165.0 101.1 63.6 62.8 0.0 92.2 110.4 140.9 63.2 53.0 0.5 183.8 114.0 104.0 69.9 13.6 2.5 99.0 74.8 127.4 50.2 39.3 0.0 93.6 124.8 117.3 59.5 11.2 0.0 102.2 42.5 67.8 24.9 42.4 6.1 107.5 142.9 184.7 39.9 41.5 1.5 152.2 93.8 118.3 40.9 1.5 3.5 51.9 78.1 59.0 65.3 6.1 12.8 178.4 121.0 69.5 40.9 25.3 5.5 83.5 177.6 150.0 45.0 4.5 3.5 94.3 121.9 148.0 135.7 38.4 4.3 152.8 153.7 137.1 97.4 12.9 3.6 154.9 176.8 67.9 56.6 0.5 26.6 123.8 118.8 107.3 56.0 24.9 14.5 ± 36.9 ± 37.3 ± 42.5 ± 25.6 ± 20.1 ± 22.7 (Unpublished data on file at the Instituto Geofisico del Peru, Huancayo) Elevation of measuring station: 3313 masl. n.d. = no data; inc. = incomplete

n.d. 10.2 13.7 0.0 7.6 3.8 21.3 1.8 6.1 29.1 19.6 1.3 6.4 5.6 4.3 11.2 0.3 0.5 14.2 0.0 0.2 0.8 1.2 0.3 0.0 14.0 11.9 0.8 21.8 9.9 0.0 7.9 0.0 1.5 1.0 22.4 1.5 4.9 1.0 10.1 0.0 4.3 0.0 1.3 9.7 0.0 23.4 20.6 21.9 4.0 6.1 9.2 23.9 2.8 7.5 ± 8.1

13.2 46.2 46.2 19.6 11.8 23.6 31.5 5.1 20.4 22.9 4.8 1.0 9.9 18.5 7.9 7.6 21.6 1.0 14.0 30.2 0.7 2.2 25.9 0.5 0.0 6.4 20.6 2.3 9.1 9.8 0.0 7.9 18.3 4.1 10.7 5.1 13.2 2.3 6.9 20.6 15.7 1.8 19.8 26.9 15.9 4.3 23.0 63.0 14.2 1.0 79.1 17.3 21.3 30.4 15.9 ± 15.6

40.1 36.6 147.3 56.9 19.6 50.6 35.6 52.6 34.5 34.8 35.6 67.1 31.0 38.6 56.6 4.2 6.2 80.5 65.0 69.3 68.1 42.7 35.4 40.9 32.0 52.6 22.1 19.1 25.7 47.0 24.4 30.5 19.6 57.1 21.6 38.6 58.2 23.0 36.0 31.4 26.1 29.0 32.3 71.4 95.5 46.9 52.2 18.5 37.6 67.7 24.5 21.0 48.1 13.2 42.1 ± 24.0

76.5 62.2 65.0 41.7 72.0 22.9 29.0 61.2 83.8 62.5 65.8 74.4 92.0 53.3 67.8 57.2 95.8 57.7 41.4 48.0 57.9 77.5 57.6 87.0 42.4 95.6 62.8 100.1 84.4 55.9 61.2 48.5 37.3 93.2 44.2 33.0 75.7 88.6 91.9 49.8 25.9 68.3 40.1 124.6 77.8 99.5 99.4 57.3 44.1 69.6 64.4 44.8 94.1 68.5 65.8 ± 22.1

41.0 62.5 74.4 72.7 134.4 86.4 79.9 53.1 34.3 83.6 57.7 106.4 32.0 68.2 77.7 140.6 77.7 40.6 93.7 33.3 89.7 38.9 42.4 35.8 55.9 81.8 57.4 88.7 59.7 47.8 102.1 97.5 132.6 97.3 32.8 50.0 59.9 66.4 43.5 115.1 97.7 71.0 62.1 93.5 68.2 64.8 43.6 42.2 73.3 37.5 60.3 45.7 39.8 82.4 69.0 ± 27.3

109.1 162.3 139.5 73.4 114.8 69.6 36.6 66.0 50.8 46.0 96.8 78.7 88.4 72.9 131.1 55.1 71.1 79.2 91.9 109.5 158.0 94.0 78.2 112.8 134.9 123.7 67.8 19.1 103.9 113.0 89.2 69.3 63.9 137.7 70.5 67.1 70.6 89.5 109.1 51.0 144.2 99.2 96.6 99.6 80.3 112.3 65.5 65.0 106.0 115.2 82.4 140.4 87.9 62.1 90.0 ± 31.0

inc. 1052.6 936.5 594.1 709.8 695.7 551.9 616.0 686.5 789.4 580.6 722.1 824.0 705.6 926.6 651.4 602.1 569.0 788.8 728.9 924.3 696.8 657.4 791.2 634.6 844.4 545.5 616.6 755.2 716.3 753.2 811.0 722.6 857.9 601.4 648.0 764.6 707.5 890.4 603.3 901.7 733.8 738.7 808.0 753.8 613.7 825.1 676.8 570.3 735.6 780.9 821.0 872.6 742.7 733.0 ± 112.0

1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 Average

Jan.

Feb.

March

April

May

14

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table 2.6.  Average maximum and minimum monthly temperatures (°C), Huancayo station, 1960–1975. Year

Jan.

Feb.

March

April

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

1960

18.3 7.5

17.5 7.1

19.6 4.6

18.3 5.5

19.3 3.1

19.6 -0.5

19.5 1.1

19.9 2.9

19.0 5.8

20.1 6.2

19.0 7.4

– –

1961

18.1 7.9

16.9 7.9

17.8 7.7

18.5 5.5

17.9 4.7

18.6 0.9

19.1 0.5

18.8 1.3

18.6 6.0

20.5 5.8

18.6 7.6

17.5 7.4

1962

18.3 8.2

18.1 7.5

16.9 7.0

18.2 4.5

18.6 3.0

18.7 -1.2

19.0 2.2

19.4 2.1

19.6 5.8

20.8 6.4

20.5 6.1

19.2 7.0

1963

17.4 7.4

16.8 6.8

17.1 7.5

17.4 6.0

18.6 1.9

18.7 0.8

19.0 0.7

20.3 2.5

19.0 6.6

19.3 7.1

19.7 7.8

19.5 7.6

1965

– –

16.8 7.0

17.2 6.4

18.7 4.8

19.6 1.2

18.9 0.2

18.8 2.0

19.2 3.1

19.5 6.6

20.8 6.3

20.7 6.6

19.4 7.2

1966

19.4 6.9

19.5 6.6

18.7 5.3

20.5 4.0

19.4 3.7

19.5 0.3

19.6 -0.4

20.3 2.1

19.9 5.1

18.9 7.4

19.2 6.8

18.6 6.8

1968

17.4 6.8

18.4 6.1

16.7 5.9

18.8 2.4

18.4 0.0

18.5 -0.7

18.0 0.6

18.8 4.3

19.9 4.2

20.0 6.0

20.3 5.9

19.6 5.4

1969

19.7 6.8

19.2 7.0

19.5 6.7

19.7 5.2

20.6 3.2

19.6 2.1

18.2 0.6

19.4 1.9

19.6 4.2

20.8 6.1

21.0 5.5

18.0 7.0

1970

17.4 8.0

– –

– –

– –

19.5 2.6

19.0 1.0

18.8 1.8

20.0 0.8

18.5 4.9

20.7 5.6

20.4 5.2

18.5 5.9

1973

17.6 8.0

18.7 7.6

18.4 7.8

18.8 5.2

19.8 1.4

19.7 1.4

18.8 0.9

19.6 2.5

19.2 3.9

20.5 5.5

20.0 5.7

18.0 5.9

1974

16.6 6.6

16.8 6.8

16.4 5.1

18.4 3.8

19.9 -0.5

18.7 0.5

18.9 -1.5

18.6 1.6

19.3 2.6

20.8 5.3

21.0 4.3

20.6 5.3

1975

17.5 6.0

18.4 6.7

17.2 6.5

18.7 3.0

18.1 2.9

18.4 1.0

18.6 -1.8

– –

– –

– –

– –

– –

Average

18.0 ± 0.9 17.9 ± 1.0 17.8 ± 1.1 18.8 ± 0.8 19.1 ± 0.8 19.0 ± 0.5 18.9 ± 0.5 19.5 ± 0.6 19.3 ± 0.5 20.3 ± 0.7 20.0 ± 0.8 18.9 ± 0.9 7.3 ± 0.7 7.0 ± 0.5 6.4 ± 1.1 4.5 ± 1.1 2.2 ± 1.4 0.6 ± 0.7 0.7 ± 0.9 2.3 ± 1.0 5.1 ± 1.3 6.2 ± 0.6 6.3 ± 1.1 6.6 ± 0.8

(From unpublished data on file at the Instituto Geofisico del Perú, Huancayo [no data for 1964, 1967, 1971, 1972]) Elevation of measuring station: 3313 masl. Maximum temperature on top, minimum temperature on bottom for each month.

Figure 2.1.  Average monthly rainfall, Jauja station, 1958–1972.

Figure. 2.2.  Average monthly rainfall, Huancayo station, 1921–1974.

Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology

15

(Flores Ochoa 1979; Webster 1971, 1973); and (4) on the other hand, it is these same cold puna temperatures that inhibit the parasites and bacteria that cause severe mortality in young camelids (Custred 1977:66), and so, given proper care, the puna environment can be an unusually healthy one for domestic camelids. Although their discussion pertains most specifically to the highlands of southern Peru, Winterhalder and Thomas’ characterization of fluctuating microclimates also seems apt for the Peruvian sierra central, including the Wanka Region:

Figure 2.3.  Average maximum and minimum monthly temperatures, Jauja station, 1958–1972.

The sources of [climatic] variability include sharp gradients of altitude and topography, and meteorological changes which occur daily, monthly, or annually. When these various elements are superimposed and interacting, a finely scaled mosaic of climatic conditions emerges. One valley has different weather from the next, and valley floor is different from the slopes of the surrounding hills. On a single hillside, the banks of a small stream or shelter of a rock outcrop offer unique microclimates. These all change over time [our emphasis]. . . . [T]he important point is that marginal availability of moisture and of protection from frost make these small changes critical to plants and animals, and to human horticulturalists and herders. [Winterhalder and Thomas 1978:27]

In sum, available climatic data suggest that herders and agriculturalists in our study area would always have benefited by maximizing their access over time to as many different productive zones as possible so as to counteract the potentially disastrous effects of serious and unpredictable local problems caused by frequent, albeit patchy, extremes of cold and drought. These considerations are common to the entire Central Andean highlands. Cultural responses to such climatic-induced stress may have included (1) technological innovations (including irrigation, drainage, flood control, and certain types of food processing) to increase local productive and surplus-storage capacity, and (2) sociological innovations, including new forms of land or herd tenure, interzonal exchange and redistribution, long-term surplus storage, and increased tribute demands. The Puna Weberbauer has noted that—in marked contrast to the drier puna farther south in the Central Andes—the puna in central Peru lacks great seasonal variation in vegetation cover:

Figure 2.4.  Average maximum and minimum monthly temperatures, Huancayo station, 1960–1975.

The change of seasons alters the aspect of the highAndean vegetation but little. . . . [N]o where does it cause a complete rest of vegetative processes. Humid places always retain their fresh green color. On waterpoor soil the growth at the end of the dry period is less

16

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure 2.5. Average maximum and minimum monthly temperatures from three puna stations in the Chinchaycocha Region, northwest of the Wanka Region.

dense and of paler color than in the wet season, because many of the plants are dry, but new leaves are sprouting on plants of many species. The scant precipitation of the dry season also is useful to the high-Andean vegetation, for the vessels of these tiny plants are very short, and the tufts and cushions hold the water like sponges. Also, the precipitation is almost always in a frozen or half frozen state. Snow flakes and hail stones melt slowly, and consequently their moisture can be utilized more completely than quickly running rain water. [Weberbauer 1936:39–40]

The open puna on the broad ridges surrounding the main Mantaro Valley in the Wanka Region survey area is characterized by perennial grasses (termed “bunch grasses” by Weberbauer 1936:40–41, and commonly referred to as ichu). This vegetation consists primarily of species of Festuca, Calamagrostis, Stipa, Agrostis, Bromus, Lolium, and Poa. These grasses typically occur in clumps that vary widely in height and density according

to grazing intensity and moisture availability; where not overgrazed, they may attain heights of about 70 cm. Higher grasses commonly shelter lower herbaceous plants (e.g., Astrágalus garboncillo, Perezia multiflora, Plantago spp., and Gentina spp.). As Matos (1980:98) has emphasized, it is primarily through the intermediation of grazing herbivores that this great store of plant energy becomes available to humans. The Kichwa Below about 3800 masl there is a rapid transition to terrain of gradually decreasing slope where modern agriculture is more productive and herding is secondary, and where there is steadily decreasing rainfall and a steady replacement of hygrophilous grasses, herbs, and shrubs by xerophilous cactus, trees, and woody shrubs. Below about 3500 masl the number and density

Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology of woody species and xerophytic vegetation increases notably in places that remain relatively undisturbed by agriculture. Fjeldså and Krabbe offer a useful general description of vegetation in the intensively cultivated kichwa valleys in central Peru: [T]he usual [wild] vegetation [on valley slopes] is low mesophytic shrub. The low bush Dodonea viscosa covers large areas, and other characteristic plants are bush Eupatorium, agaves, cacti, euphorbiads, and the introduced Spartium junceum. Pepper trees (Schinus molle) and thorny leguminaceous trees form a dense riparian vegetation. The small [agricultural] fields are often separated by hedgerows and small stands of Schinus and introduced Eucalyptus, and the ravines often have some coppice with [alder] Alnus acuminata. However, steep terrain of difficult access may have dense scrub, often thorny bushes (Cassia, Colletia, Barnadesia) or trees (. . . Ochroma and Bombax lagopus, and Escallonia in high parts). A few relict patches of true cloud forest can sometimes be seen on the ridges 1000–1500 meters above the valley bottoms. [Fjeldså and Krabbe 1990:19]

The steeply sloping sides (typically 15°–30°) of kichwa valleys pose special problems for agriculturalists (Dollfus 1981:48– 49). This terrain is subject to serious erosional problems, and soils tend to be thin, infertile, and subject to rapid drying out. Because the upper parts of the kichwa valleys are the main channels for the descent of cold puna air masses, severe frost often interferes with plant growth there. Due to topographic vagaries, differently facing slopes often have differing degrees of exposure to sunlight; slopes with limited sun exposure are often significantly cooler than neighboring slopes with greater exposure, and these differences may be exaggerated at certain seasons of the year according to whether the sun is relatively low or high in the sky. Artificial terracing, canal irrigation, crop rotation, and soil fertilization are obvious mechanisms for dealing with these problems. Despite their deep soils and abundant local moisture, floodplains in the lower kichwa valleys tend to be swampy and subject to annual flooding, and so they have limited agricultural potential unless they are artificially drained. The main Mantaro Valley in the Wanka Region is the largest kichwa valley in the entire sierra central in terms of the extent of its floodplain and extensive lowerlying uplands. Because this segment of the Mantaro Valley is so relatively broad and shallow, there is no notable rain shadow effect as in the much more highly dissected nearby Tarama Region. Once the main floodplain was adequately drained, it has supported one of the highest population densities in highland Peru during historic times. As previously noted, we are presently unaware of any information about if and when such floodplain drainage may have been undertaken during the historic and prehistoric periods. Paleo-Climate Recent studies of glacial moraines on the Nevada Huaytapallana southeast of Huancayo have revealed two brief periods of glacial advance during the Late Holocene (Seltzer and Hastorf 1990; Wright et al. 1989). These were apparently the only sig-

17

nificant advances since general deglaciation of this part of the sierra central by about 8200 years before present. The earlier, and less securely dated, of these advances probably occurred sometime between approximately A.D. 450 and A.D. 680 (late Early Intermediate Period and early Middle Horizon), while the second probably dates to between approximately A.D. 1300 and A.D. 1500 (late Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon) (Seltzer and Hastorf 1990:405). The latter advance appears to have been accompanied by notably colder and drier conditions relative to the present day, with a downward vertical shift of modern climatic conditions of roughly 150 m (Seltzer and Hastorf 1990:402). The climatic impact of the earlier advance remains uncertain. Recent studies of paleo-climate in other parts of the Central Andes have produced results that also point to generally cooler and drier conditions during the Late Intermediate Period (Abbott et al. 1997, 2000; Binford et al. 1997; Chepstow-Lusty et al. 2003; Thompson et al. 1985, 1986, 1995). Modern Population, Land Use, and Settlement Patterns As in much of highland Peru, modern land use and population distribution in the Wanka Region have been greatly affected throughout the historic period by several interrelated factors: (1) Spanish colonial policies (especially labor tribute [mita], settlement nucleation [reducción], and the rights of Spanish and Indian elites to land and Indian labor service [encomienda]); (2) the high rate of Indian population loss caused by the introduction of European diseases (primarily smallpox, measles, diphtheria, influenza, and plague) and the severe conditions of Indian labor service in silver mines and textile workshops (Cook 1981, 1982; Dobyns 1963; Smith 1970); (3) the expansion of commercial mining (mainly silver from the Cerro de Pasco sources north of Lake Junín throughout the Colonial Period), and wool production for export after the early nineteenth century, capitalized largely by North American and European firms, with a consequent expansion of the need for foodstuffs produced on nearby agricultural lands (Orlove 1977a); (4) a large expansion of aguardiente (cane alcohol) production in the adjacent ceja de montaña during the U.S. Civil War in the 1860s when Peruvian coastal sugar cane lands were converted to cotton production for export to Europe; (5) the growing alienation of Indian communities from access to productive lands increasingly appropriated by mestizo and European landowners in the decades of political anarchy following the end of Spanish colonial rule in 1825; (6) the violence and sociopolitical and economic dislocations resulting from the Chilean incursion into and occupation of the region during the War of the Pacific (1879–1884) (Alberti and Sanchez 1974; Stern 1987; Mallon 1987; Farcau 2000); and (7) the proximity and increasing accessibility after the mid-twentieth century of urban Lima on the Pacific coast with its huge market for agricultural and textile products that moved from highland producers to urban coastal consumers over improved roads and railways (e.g., Brush and Guillet 1985; Fonseca and Mayer 1988; Gade

18

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table 2.7.  Modern population in general study area, at the province level. Province* Jauja Concepción

1862

1876

1896

1940

1946

1961

1970

1993

2007

49,288

56,697

103,355

115,790

125,963

95,496

103,230

104,828

119,834

–

–

–

–

–

47,490

52,930

64,785

74,329

(Sources: República del Peru 1924, 1944, 1947, 1959, 1965, 1966, 1969, 1975, 1984, 1995, 2000, 2008; Webb and Fernández 1995) *Prior to 1951, Concepción was included in the Jauja province.

Table 2.8.  Modern population density (people/km2) in our general study area at the province level. Province* Jauja Concepción

1862

1876

1896

1940

1946

1961

1970

1993

2007

7.2

8.3

15.2

17.0

18.5

25.5

27.5

28.0

32.0

–

–

–

–

–

15.5

17.3

21.1

24.2

(Sources: República del Peru 1924, 1944, 1947, 1959, 1965, 1966, 1969, 1975, 1984, 1995, 2000, 2008; Webb and Fernández 1995) *Prior to 1961, the Jauja and Concepción areas were combined. Province surface areas: Jauja 3749.10 km2; ­Concepción 3067.52 km2.

and Escobar 1982; Orlove 1977b, 1985; Long and Roberts 1984; Mallon 1983; Wilson 1982). Burga’s (1983) study shows that these modern conditions of highly commercialized production and orientation toward the Lima market did not prevail everywhere during the midnineteenth century in the sierra central. The mining centers in La Oroya and Cerro de Pasco that developed after the end of the eighteenth century did acquire most of their foodstuffs from the surrounding highland regions, but coastal Lima was more effectively supplied with agricultural produce by ship from Chilean ports than from the adjacent highland valleys, even after the building of railroads late in the nineteenth century; these railroads served mainly to move refined metal ores and sheep’s wool down to the coast for export to North America and Europe. Because of these changes over the past 150-plus years, less now remains in our study area of the traditional, subsistenceoriented agricultural and pastoral lifeways that have been the focus of so much ethnographic study in more isolated parts of the Andes. Most contemporary agriculture and herding in the Wanka Region is commercially oriented, and a high proportion of the regional population is urban in character and involved in administrative, commercial, and service functions. Sheep predominate over llamas among puna herders, and alpacas are scarce. Some scattered flocks of wild vicuña survive in the more remote puna expanses beyond the limits of our Wanka Region survey area. Tables 2.7 and 2.8 give an indication of population within our study area over the past century and a half. These figures are for a region that comprises our immediate survey area plus a considerable surrounding region: the modern administrative provinces of Jauja and Concepción and their dependent communities (pueblos). Tables 2.7 and 2.8 give population size and density figures for the provinces as wholes, while Tables 2.9 and 2.10 show population size and density figures for individual pueblos within the provinces. In some cases administrative boundaries

may have changed (in ways unknown to us) from one period to another, and so the population figures are not always internally fully consistent. Nevertheless, they indicate the general demographic trends in this region over the past 150 years. At the time of our survey, the predominant land use in the Wanka Region survey area was for agriculture. Much land below approximately 3500 masl (the lower kichwa) is irrigated and intensively cultivated in a variety of cereals, tubers, and garden crops (including maize, barley, minor quinoa, potatoes and other tubers [oca, olluco, and mashua], fava beans, carrots, onions, artichokes, and alfalfa). The upper kichwa between 3600 and 3800 masl is generally much less intensively cultivated, with steeper slopes, shallower soil, more severe erosion, limited irrigation, and less crop diversity (quinoa, barley, fava beans, and tubers are predominant). Small flocks of sheep and cattle graze throughout the region on fallow fields and in upland kichwa pastures, and larger herds of these animals, plus a few camelids, are found in the higher puna grasslands beyond the limits of our survey where cultivation is minimal. Many agriculturalist households also have small numbers of cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, chickens, guinea pigs, burros, and horses. Relative to the adjacent puna, domestic camelids are virtually absent in the kichwa, and guinea pigs appear to be less numerous. Table 2.11 lists the most common indigenous cultigens in the Central Andean kichwa today; in most localities several kinds of introduced crops are also grown (Table 2.12). Numerous minor crops, both indigenous and introduced, are also cultivated. The great variability in crop productivity, both within and between species, reflects the very diverse conditions and circumstances in which these plants are grown today. As Hastorf (1993:123–35) points out, differences in the conditions of soil fertility, the use of irrigation or drainage, the use of organic or chemical fertilizer, the use of crop rotation sequences, the quality of seed stock, the technology of planting and harvesting, the

Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology Table 2.9.  Modern population in our general study area, at the pueblo level. Pueblo

Population 1940

1961

1966

1970

1993

2007

Concepción Aco Andamarca Chambará Cochas Comas Heroínas Toledo Manzanares Mariscal Castilla Matahuasi Mito Nueve de Julio Orcotuna San José de Quero Sta. Rosa de Ocopa Jauja Sausa Acolla Apata Ataura Chanchayllo Curicaca El Mantaro Huamali Huaripampa Huertas Janjaillo Julcán Leonor Ordoñes Llocllampampa Marco Masma Masma Chicche Molinos Monobamba Muqui Muquiyauyo Paca Pancán Parco Pomacancha San Lorenzo San Pedro de Chunán Sincos Tunanmarca Yauyos

5408 3713 10,945 n.d. n.d. 7692 n.d. n.d. n.d. 2368 3090 n.d. 7072 n.d. 2739 20,074 n.d. 5992 3382 857 n.d. n.d. 2646 1549 1170 n.d. n.d. 2441 1388 2842 6470 2184 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. 3144 n.d. n.d. 1368 n.d. n.d. n.d. 3078 n.d. n.d.

7661 2843 7649 2926 1920 6908 1161 1289 1091 3059 1470 n.d. 3498 4266 1929 14,298 n.d. 8207 4195 922 1730 n.d. 1902 2099 1265 1891 2020 1668 1568 2596 3807 2612 n.d. 1901 1455 1165 2743 2001 1600 2119 n.d. 1025 1507 3733 3703 n.d.

6251 3055 8026 3144 2063 7423 1247 1385 1172 3287 1580 1981 3759 4584 2073 15,605 931 9488 4850 1066 2000 1062 1960 1867 1462 2186 2335 1928 1813 3001 2418 3020 798 2198 1682 1347 3171 2313 1850 2450 921 1185 1742 4316 4281 n.d.

6483 3169 8325 3261 2140 7699 1293 1437 1216 3409 1639 2055 3899 4755 2150 17,173 1024 10,441 5337 1173 2201 1169 2157 2054 1609 2406 2570 2122 1995 3303 2661 3323 878 2419 1851 1482 3490 2545 2036 2696 1014 1304 1917 4750 4711 n.d.

12,720 2543 6807 3045 3038 10,022 1786 1736 1441 4966 1600 2232 4021 6614 2214 19,275 2318 10,149 6342 1406 1894 1868 2584 2153 1410 2173 1309 1147 1874 1966 2815 2413 1155 2272 1872 1181 2615 1698 1538 2127 2329 1841 1171 3678 1782 9012

16,582 2668 7009 3131 3579 11,135 2092 2001 1511 5569 1839 2981 4538 7158 2536 22,977 3140 11,239 8009 1627 2007 2046 2750 2487 1625 2297 1396 1219 1986 2103 3023 2547 1370 2506 2068 1230 2748 1816 1626 2284 2911 2420 1249 3916 1865 10,761

Total

101,612

121,402

136,276

146,741

162,152

185,577

(Sources: República del Peru 1924, 1944, 1947, 1959, 1965, 1966, 1969, 1975, 1984, 1995, 2000, 2008; Webb and Fernández 1995) Population figures include both urban and rural components. Not all these communities are within, or fully within, the borders of our Wanka Region survey area. n.d. = no data

19

care and labor investment of agricultural work, the distances between residences and fields, the tenure of agricultural land, and perceptions about a particular crop’s importance all have significant impacts on crop yields. Additional information about traditional modern land use in the Wanka Region is provided by Sikkink (2001) and Hastorf (2001b). Traditional Central Andean Agricultural Ecology in the Kichwa Zone Because our Wanka Region survey area comprises very little puna herding terrain, we assume that most of the inhabitants of the archaeological sites we located would have been engaged in agricultural, as opposed to pastoral, pursuits. Consequently, we do not include a detailed discussion of Andean herding ecology in this monograph (for such a discussion see Parsons et al. 2000:64–71). Because present-day agriculture in the Wanka Region is so predominantly commercial and mechanized in nature, in the following paragraphs we have synthesized the highlights of traditional agricultural ecology from ethnographic studies in other parts of the Central Andes where plant cultivation has been less affected by mechanization and commercial market forces. Information about planting, harvesting, and production from these regions should provide better analogies for prehispanic practices in the Wanka Region than do many of the modern agricultural lifeways in our immediate study area. There is one caveat regarding the full applicability of these “traditional” examples to the Wanka Region. As can be seen in the color map on the inside front cover of this monograph, there is less local vertical relief in our survey area than in most of the ethnographic cases examined. Consequently, the analogies drawn from the ethnographic studies may be less useful for the Wanka Region than for many other parts of the central Andean sierra. Additional agricultural annual-round data from more traditional regions in the Peruvian central highlands are summarized in Tables 2.13, 2.14, and 2.15. The data summarized in Tables 2.13 and 2.14 show that agriculture work of one type or another in the kichwa zone occurs throughout the annual cycle. Because of the great altitudinal range, planting, harvesting, and cultivating proceed throughout much of the year. Multiple harvests in fields at different altitudes, or in fields

20

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table 2.10.  Population densities in individual pueblos. Pueblo

Population Density (people/km2)

Surface Area* (km )

1940

1961

1966

1970

1993

2007

Concepción Aco Andamarca Chambará Cochas Comas Heroínas Toledo Manzanares Mariscal Castilla Matahuasi Mito Nueve de Julio Orcotuna San José de Quero Sta. Rosa de Ocopa Jauja Sausa Acolla Apata Ataura Chanchayllo Curicaca El Mantaro Huamali Huaripampa Huertas Janjaillo Julcán Leonor Ordoñes Llocllampampa Marco Masma Masma Chicche Molinos Monobamba Muqui Muquiyauyo Paca Pancán Parco Pomacancha San Lorenzo San Pedro de Chunán Sincos Tunanmarca Yauyos

18.29 37.80 694.90 103.27 165.05 825.29 25.83 20.36 743.84 24.74 25.21 7.28 44.75 317.00 13.91 10.10 4.50 122.40 421.62 5.90 974.69 64.68 17.76 20.19 14.19 11.82 31.57 24.78 20.34 110.60 28.80 14.26 29.86 312.17 295.83 11.74 19.86 34.22 10.89 32.82 281.61 22.15 8.44 236.74 30.07 20.54

295.7 98.2 15.8 n.d. n.d. 9.3 n.d. n.d. n.d. 95.7 122.6 n.d. 158.0 n.d. 197.0 1987.5 n.d. 49.0 8.0 145.3 n.d. n.d. 149.0 76.7 82.5 n.d. n.d. 98.5 68.2 25.7 224.7 153.2 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. 158.3 n.d. n.d. 41.7 n.d. n.d. n.d. 13.0 n.d. n.d.

418.9 75.2 11.0 n.d. 11.6 8.4 44.9 63.3 1.5 123.6 58.3 n.d. 78.2 13.5 138.7 1415.6 n.d. 67.1 9.9 156.3 1.8 n.d. 107.1 104.0 89.1 160.0 64.0 67.3 77.1 23.5 132.2 183.2 n.d. 6.1 4.9 99.2 138.1 58.5 147.0 64.6 n.d. 46.3 178.6 15.8 123.1 n.d.

342.8 80.8 11.5 30.4 12.5 9.0 48.3 68.0 1.6 132.9 62.7 272.1 84.0 14.5 149.0 1545.0 206.9 77.5 11.5 180.7 2.1 16.4 110.4 92.5 103.0 185.0 74.0 77.8 89.1 27.1 84.0 211.8 26.7 7.0 5.7 114.7 159.7 67.6 169.9 74.6 3.3 53.5 206.4 18.2 142.4 n.d.

354.5 83.8 12.0 31.6 13.0 9.3 50.1 70.6 1.6 137.8 65.0 282.3 87.1 15.0 154.6 1700.3 227.6 85.3 12.7 198.9 2.3 18.1 121.5 101.7 113.4 203.6 81.4 85.6 98.1 29.9 92.4 233.0 29.4 7.7 6.3 126.2 175.7 74.4 187.0 82.1 3.6 58.9 227.1 20.1 156.7 n.d.

695.5 67.3 9.8 29.5 18.4 12.1 69.1 85.3 1.9 200.7 63.5 306.6 89.9 20.9 159.2 1908.4 515.1 82.9 15.0 238.3 1.9 28.9 145.5 106.6 99.4 183.8 41.5 46.3 92.1 17.8 97.7 169.2 38.7 7.3 6.3 100.6 131.7 49.6 141.2 64.8 8.3 83.1 138.7 15.5 59.3 438.8

906.6 70.6 10.1 30.3 21.7 13.5 81.0 98.3 2.0 225.1 72.9 409.5 101.4 22.6 192.3 2275.0 697.8 91.8 19.0 275.8 2.1 31.6 154.8 123.2 114.5 194.3 44.2 49.2 97.6 19.0 105.0 178.6 45.9 8.0 7.0 104.8 138.4 53.1 149.3 69.6 10.3 109.3 148.0 16.5 62.0 593.9

Overall

6312.66

16.1

19.2

21.6

23.3

25.7

29.4

2

(Sources: República del Peru 1924, 1944, 1947, 1959, 1965, 1966, 1969, 1975, 1984, 1995, 2000, 2008; Webb and Fernández 1995) *Pueblo surface areas are listed on page 124 of República del Peru 1995. n.d. = no data

Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology

21

Table 2.11.  Principal indigenous kichwa and lower puna cultigens in the Wanka Region today. Category

Common Name(s)

Scientific Name

Effective Elevation Range (masl)

Average Yields (kg/ha)

cereals

maiz (maize), sara, sala

Zea mays

below ca. 3500

180–1800

quinoa, kinuwa

Chenopodium quinoa

2770–3800

600–2000

papa (potato)

Solanum tuberosum, etc. (many variants)

2600–4200

329 1500–2500

tubers

legumes

maca

Lipidium meyenii

4000–4500

n.d.

mashua, añu, isaño

Tropaeolum tuberosum

2800–4000

5500–6525

olluco, ullucu

Ullucus tuberosus

2800–3800

629

oca, oka

Oxalis tuberosa

2800–3800

2485–4500

arracacha

Arracacia xanthorrhiza

1500–3000

n.d.

achira

Canna edulis

2200–2800

n.d.

yacón

Polymnia sonchifolia

2500–3000

n.d.

mauka

Mirabilis expansa

ca. 3000

n.d.

ajipa

Pachyrhizus ahipa

ca. 2000

n.d.

common bean (frijol)

Phaseolus vulgaris

below ca. 3450

minor use

tarwi, tarhui, talwi

Lupinus mutabilis

2800–4000

280–2200

(Adapted from Hermann 1994; Hastorf 1993:111–19; Gade 1975:154, 203; Mayer 1979:49–50) n.d. = no data

Table 2.12.  Principal introduced kichwa cultigens in the modern Wanka Region. Category cereals

legumes

Common Name

Scientific Name

Elevation Range (masl)

Average Yields (kg/ha)

wheat

Triticum sp.

3300–3800

800–1600

barley

Hordeum vulgare

below 4000

1000–1600

oats

Avena sativa

below 4200

n.d.

fava bean (haba)

Vicia faba

3200–3650

315

pea (arveja)

Pisum sativum

2800–3800

442

(Adapted from Hastorf 1993:111–19; Gade 1975:166) n.d. = no data

Table 2.13.  The annual round from two kichwa districts in central Peru. Crop

Planting

Cultivating

Harvesting

maize

Nov.–Jan.

Jan.–March

May–July

potatoes

May–Sept.

Aug.–Oct.

Nov.–Jan.

oca, olluco, mishua

August–Oct.

Nov.–Jan.

April–June

quinoa

Jan.–Feb.

April

June–July

barley, wheat, fava beans

Jan.–Feb.

n.d.

Aug.–Sept.

(After Matos et al. 1958:56–58; Soler 1954:108–9) n.d. = no data

22

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table 2.14.  Month-by-month agricultural activities in a mestizo kichwa community at 3400 masl in central Peru. Month

Activity

January

Harvest of “new” potatoes planted in July and August. Cultivation of potatoes, wheat, and barley.

February

Harvest of “new” potatoes. Harvest of arvejas verdes (green peas). Weeding wheat and potatoes. Hilling-up potatoes.

March

Harvest of potatoes, arvejas, and quinoa. Plowing.

April

Harvest of green maize, potatoes, arvejas, and ocas. Plowing of fallow fields (with ox-drawn plow).

May

Harvest of maize and mashua. Beginning of barley harvest.

June

Harvest of barley and wheat in nonirrigated fields. Harvest of maize, potatoes, fava beans, wheat, and alfalfa in low fields.

July

Clearing fields before planting. End of wheat and barley harvest.

August September October

Pasturing livestock on fallow fields. Planting maize (Cuzco variant) in low fields. Planting “new” potatoes in low fields. Planting fava beans, oca, and mashua in low fields. Planting maize, wheat, and potatoes in rainfall-watered fields. Planting fava beans, arvejas, ocas, ollucos, and mashua in low fields.

November

Planting barley in rainfall-watered fields. Planting quinoa in low fields. Planting maize. First harvest of arvejas verdes in low fields.

December

Planting quinoa in low fields. Weeding and hilling-up maize. Final harvest of barley.

(Adapted from Escobar 1973:64–66)

Table 2.15.  Traditional agricultural crop and land preparation activities in the kichwa valleys of the Peruvian sierra central. Activity

Description and Timing

barbecho (chacmay)

Preparation of soil before planting. On higher, narrower fields this is done with hand tools (taclla, chaquitaclla); on lower, larger fields ox- or horse-drawn plows are used. Begins in March, after end of rainy season.

aporque (cuspo)

Mounding up earth around maize and potato plants; usually done about one month after planting.

irrigation (riego)

Usually begins in April; administered by community officials.

cleaning irrigation canals

Removing weeds and accumulated silt, and repairing damaged canal beds. A community-administered effort usually undertaken at the end of the rainy season (around April).

(Compiled from Escobar 1973; Matos et al. 1958; Soler 1954)

of different fertility where crop growth is more or less rapid and dependable, means that harvested crops are available throughout much of the year to people who have access to production from agricultural lands situated in different places. The scheduling of complementary subsistence activities in the kichwa and puna zones has significant implications for herder-cultivator interaction, including the timing, frequency,

and duration of interzone exchange activities and other forms of interaction, and the ability of individual households or individual settlements to engage simultaneously in both herding and agriculture. For example, both herders and agriculturalists appear to be unusually busy at very different tasks during December, January, and February—a period when female camelids give birth and when special intensive care of young animals is

Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology Table 2.16.  Agricultural tasks. Name of Task

Activity

abonamiento

fertilizing, with animal dung, grass, or ashes

barbecho or chacmay

breaking ground, usually with a foot plow

siembra

planting

aporque

mounding earth up around plant stalks

deshierbe

weeding

cosecha

harvest

(Adapted from Camino et al. 1981:176)

required at the same time that cultivators must be engaged in critical wet-season planting and harvesting tasks. Thus, we can expect that households involved in both agriculture and herding come under unusual stress at this time of year, and that the timing of such stress might be a major factor in the separation of herders and cultivators into specialized components of a single multicommunity, interzonal economy. In Table 2.11 we summarize the altitudinal and productive ranges of indigenous cereals and tubers. Only a few tuber species are important in the lower puna; in the higher puna above 4200 masl agricultural production is insignificant because of cold temperatures. Except for the lakeshore zone of Lake Titicaca in the southern Peruvian highlands where a large body of water ameliorates more typical puna temperature regimes (Chavez 1999), highly productive agriculture in the Central Andean sierra is confined to the kichwa, usually well below 3800 masl. Because of the rainfall uncertainties, canal irrigation is often necessary to achieve high agricultural productivity. At elevations above 3000 masl the unpredictable onset and termination of frosts compound agricultural problems. In addition to irrigation and drainage, high agricultural productivity is maintained by applying fertilizers (traditionally animal dung, ashes, household wastes, and grasses) and by maintaining sectorial fallowing regimes. The high proportion of sloping terrain means that terracing is often needed for sustained high production. Because there are so many different altitude-defined crop niches, and because there is usually such great altitude variation within short horizontal distances, agriculturalists who seek to exploit multiple niches face a complicated schedule of field preparation, fertilizing, planting, weeding, caring for growing crops, guarding and harvesting mature crops, and maintaining an infrastructure of terraces, irrigation canals, and field walls (Camino 1980; Camino et al. 1981; Matos et al. 1958). The variants of cereals and tubers have different planting and harvesting times. Many agricultural tasks must be performed at the same times as some of the most demanding activities related to herding. Growing and standing crops can be seriously menaced by the predations of domestic animals. Consequently, where herd-

23

ing and cultivation are locally combined, cultivated fields must be strongly fenced and/or the daily movements of local flocks must be carefully controlled (McCorkle 1987). The advantage of multi-niche cultivation is that different crops are available over a large part of an annual cycle, and poor harvests in one place may be offset by good harvests in another. Traditional agriculture employs a variety of sectorial fallowing regimes that help maintain long-term soil fertility and minimize the risk of poor harvests for individual households (e.g., Camino 1980; Camino et al. 1981; Goland 1992; Guillet 1981; Mayer 1985; Orlove and Godoy 1986). These regimes demand considerable investment in administration, definition and protection of community territory, and walking back and forth between scattered fields. Additional walking and camping time are necessary if some members of agricultural households also devote themselves to the care of domestic animals in higher puna pastures well away from their main residences in the kichwa villages. Agricultural Tasks Table 2.16 lists some principal agricultural tasks, not including the maintenance of irrigation, drainage, and terrace facilities. Much agricultural land in the Andean highlands is terraced. Some terraces, especially where irrigation is used, are wellmade, stone-faced constructions. Less elaborate terraces are also abundant—for example, the “andenes rusticas” (rustic terraces) described by Fonseca and Mayer (1988:70). The latter features lack stone retention walls, and take advantage of naturally occurring breaks in slope whose level or gently sloping surfaces are stabilized by rows of bushes, cactus, or small trees. These latter features are similar to what R. West (1968) has called “semi terracing” in highland Mexico. Traditionally, fertilizer is applied to agricultural plots in three main ways: (1) by setting up temporary corrals atop the terraced fields and placing livestock there for a few days; (2) by hauling animal dung from pastures to fields on pack animals; and (3) by covering the fields with cut grass (both local and brought in from the puna), which is allowed to dry and then turned under during the barbecho. Ashes from household cooking hearths are also used. Since the1970s there has been minor use of commercial fertilizers (which are quite common in modern agriculture in the Wanka Region). There are very few, if any, detailed studies of vegetal fertilizers in contemporary Andean agriculture. This is an important topic that merits more investigation. King (1911:202–12), for example, documented the critical importance of “green manure” (grasses, weeds, stalks, leaves) in intensive, nonmechanized Chinese agriculture in the early twentieth century, before the advent of chemical fertilizers in that part of the world, and in a context where animal dung was insufficient relative to the need to maintain continuously high agricultural productivity. King’s classic study suggests that the systematic and large-scale application of green manure could have been much more important in precolumbian Central Andean agriculture than it seems to be today.

24

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Land preparation prior to planting is usually done with the traditional Andean foot plow (chaquitaclla). Typically this hard work is performed by a husband and wife team: the man thrusting the iron-tipped tool into the earth to bring up the clods of fresh earth, and the woman overturning the clods to fully expose the newly turned soil. Planting is usually done in a field that has been plowed in this fashion some weeks or months earlier, with the woman inserting the seed into the turned (or re-turned) earth. The hilling-up (aporque) of crops is generally undertaken about a month or so after initial planting (Yamamoto 1981:126). Here the foot plow is employed to open a shallow ditch (surco), about 30 cm wide and 20 cm deep, alongside each row of plants. The earth from this ditch is then thrown up around the sides of the growing plants with a J-shaped wooden mattock tipped with an iron blade (Orlove 1977b:93–94). This operation serves to reduce the number of plant stems and to prevent the buildup of excessive humidity around the growing plant. Mature tubers are dug out of the earth with an iron mattock. Some are taken directly to the dwellings for consumption and storage, but many are placed in grass-lined, brush-covered pits in or near the field. Layers of tubers, usually separated by grass layers according to variety, are placed within such pits, from which they are removed as needed. These pits typically measure 1.2 m in diameter and 1.5 m deep (Fujii and Tomoeda 1981:47–48). Mature stands of wheat, barley, and quinoa are cut with an iron sickle, and are commonly threshed and winnowed in or near the fields. Threshing is accomplished by dumping the cut grain onto stone floors where it is trod upon by oxen or beaten with wooden rods. Winnowing is performed by tossing the threshed grain and chaff into the air with wooden forks so that the wind removes the lighter chaff, while the heavier grains sink back to the earth. Quinoa grains and adhering chaff are tossed by hand into the air from a small, circular screen device, onto which the chaff-free seeds fall back. Mature maize ears are left to dry on the stalks in the fields, then detached by hand and carried to the permanent residences where they are stored until used (ca. 70 percent for making chicha) (Fujii and Tomoeda 1981:45).

It is important to realize that one of the major documented ethnographic uses of maize in the Central Andes is for the production of chicha. This mildly alcoholic beverage has long been a key component of ritual at the household, community, and regional levels (Cutler and Cárdenas 1981; Morris 1982; Murra 1960; Meyerson 1990; Webster 1971; Yamamoto 1981:105). Consequently, the cultural significance of maize and the energy devoted to its cultivation, acquisition, and redistribution have often been far greater than might seem warranted by its purely economic importance as measured by caloric or nutritional yield. Agricultural Zones Camino’s (1980) and Camino and colleagues’ (1981) fivedivision classification of agricultural zones in southern Peru seems to have broad applicability to the entire Central Andes (Table 2.17). Ideally, each household has direct access to fields in each of the five zones within its community territory. Zone C is by far the most important in economic terms. Zone A, not listed in Table 2.17, is uncultivated herding land above 4100 masl. Sectorial Fallowing Regimes Orlove and Godoy (1986:171, 185) summarize the general characteristics of 51 ethnographically known sectorial fallowing regimes among traditional, subsistence-oriented agriculturalists in the kichwa and lower puna between central Peru and western Bolivia: (1) Each of the sectorial fallowing systems is a land-use system that consists of a set of lands associated with a set of households. (2) The set of lands are divided into a number (n) of sectors. The lands that make up each sector are contiguous. (3) All households own or control plots in most or all sectors. (4) There is a sequence of n-year-long uses for the lands. Some of these uses consist of the planting of a specific annual crop or small number of annual crops. The set of crops may be different among the successive cropping uses out of the total set

Table 2.17.  Agricultural zones in highland southern Peru. Zone

Elevation (masl)

Crops

B, “Luki Manda”

3800–4100

mainly bitter potatoes, plus oca and izaño

C, “Uray Manda”

3200–3800

potatoes, izaño, oca, olluco, habas

6-sector rotational sequence (see Table 2.18)

D, “Anexo”2

3200–3400

2 types of potatoes; minor maize

6-sector rotational sequence (see Table 2.18)

E, “Tierras de Maiz”

2600–3200

mainly maize; 3 some potatoes; minor beans, squash, yacón, and racacha

1 year of potatoes, followed by several years of maize interplanted with minor crops; use of ox-drawn plows

1

(Adapted from Camino et al 1981:176–87) Up to 30 varieties of potatoes are planted. 2 This sector is 12 km distant, and therefore less intensively used than Zone C. 3 Several varieties of maize are planted and kept separated. 1

Cultivation Practices 6 rotating sectors: 1 in cultivation and 5 in fallow

Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology of uses. The other uses are fallowing, combined with grazing. All the fallowing uses occur after all the planting uses. (5) All n sectors pass through the same sequence of n-year-long uses. In any given year, one and only one sector will have each cropping use, and the number of sectors that are fallowed is equal to the number of fallow uses in the n-year cycle. (6) When a sector is used for planting, each household has access to usufruct rights to its plot or plots in that sector. (7) When a sector is used for fallowing and grazing, all households have access and grazing rights to the entire sector. (8) This land use is maintained and enforced by communal institutional means. These modern fallowing systems occur only where rainfall-based cultivation predominates, and an average of 350 households participate in each system. Irrigated land tends to be privately controlled (Fonseca and Mayer 1988:78–80; Guillet 1981:142). Where commercial agriculture has made substantial inroads, there has been a considerable deterioration of traditional sectorial fallowing (e.g., Guillet 1987:86–87; Mayer 1979). Guillet (1981:145) argues that community oversight is necessary to maintain the long-term integrity and viability of sectorial fallowing regimes: the adherence of individual households to rules about fallowing, planting sequences, and grazing rights affects the well-being of the entire community. Individual households are often dependent upon infrastructural facilities (terraces, canals, roadways, fences) that can only be adequately built and maintained through community effort. The communities studied by Camino and colleagues (1981) employ a 6-sector fallowing system. This means that communal lands are subdivided into 6 different sectors. Each designated sector follows a specific crop rotational sequence (Table 2.18), and at any given time each of the other 5 sectors in the zone is at a different point in its rotational cycle. This deliberately produces a maximum mix of crops and fallowed land over time and space—a result that buffers against crop failures caused by unpredictable and highly localized climatic variations. For each household at any given time, all available cultigens are growing somewhere within its usufruct holdings, while some of its lands are always lying fallow. Fonseca and Mayer (1988:72–74) provide a detailed description of an 8-sector sectorial fallowing system in central Peru (Fonseca and Mayer 1988:72–74). In any given year there are 3 sectors in use and 5 in fallow. Individual households maintain use rights in each sector. Each year a new sector is opened to a 6-year rotational cycle, and each year a sector that was cultivated the previous year begins

Table 2.18.  Rotational sequence in a 6-year cycle in Zone C (see Table 2.17). Year

Crops

Tasks

1

potatoes interplanted with izaño

2 aporques (1st in Oct., 2nd in Nov.–Dec.)

2

mainly oca; sometimes olluco or izaño

no barbecho; no fertilizer applied

3

oca, olluco, izaño; sometimes fava beans

no fertilizer applied

4

fava beans

some fertilizer applied

5

fallow, grazed by livestock

grazed by livestock

6

fallow

barbecho and main application of fertilizer

(Adapted from Camino et al. 1981:179–82) After Year 6, the cycle begins again with Year 1.

25

a 3-year fallow period, whose conclusion will bring the full 6-year cycle to a close. Community management is crucial to the enterprise’s viability. The great variability of sectorial fallowing regimes reflects the flexibility of these systems as they are periodically readjusted according to changes in community and household demography (Mayer 1971). The basic factors that underlie and sustain sectorial fallowing systems are (1) low soil fertility, because of the slow buildup of organic material in soils of cold climates; (2) the scarcity and expense of fertilizer; and (3) the danger of erosion if sloping lands are cultivated or grazed too intensively (Fonseca and Mayer 1988:75). These circumstances are somewhat alleviated on irrigated land, and this is one reason why such land is usually not included in modern sectorial fallowing regimes. Locally elected officials (camayoq) enforce rules about planting, fallowing, crop rotation, and grazing by making frequent tours of inspection (Fujii and Tomoeda 1981:54). As recompense for their services, these officials are provided with residential structures and a small share of each household’s crop. The Annual Round Figure 2.6 graphically depicts a typical annual round of agricultural tasks in the south Peruvian highland region studied by Camino and colleagues (1981: Fig. 6) (excluding infrastructural maintenance tasks, such as cleaning irrigation canals or repairing terraces). This illustrates three key points. (1) Agricultural work is virtually continuous through the year, although there is comparatively more activity during two periods: March–June and September–November. The least busy time, late June through early August, is when chuño (freeze-dried potatoes) and ccalla (freeze-dried oca) are prepared in the puna where subfreezing nighttime temperatures are most common. (2) Tuber harvesting is nearly continuous during the year, excepting only October and November. Within any given sector and for any given crop variant, tuber harvesting begins earliest at lower elevations, and extends to fields at higher elevations through the year. (3) Two main agricultural-task seasons can be distinguished (especially within the economically most important terrain between 3200 and 3800 masl): (a) February–July, a time of land preparation and harvesting; and (b) August–De-

26

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure 2.6.  The annual round of agricultural tasks in highland southern Peru (adapted from Camino et al. 1981:188–89, Fig. 6). Each activity unit is shown as a discrete lineal segment that pertains to a specific crop in a specific sector rotation cycle. This diagram illustrates the tasks engaged in by each household within a sectorial fallowing regime.

cember, a time of planting and weeding. Harvesting invariably proceeds from lower to higher elevation for given sectors and crop variants; land preparation, planting, and weeding for given sectors and crop variants begin at higher elevation and proceed to lower elevations through the year. This dichotomy in the timing of agricultural tasks reflects the additional time required for plants to reach maturity in the colder, less fertile soils at higher elevations. Occasionally, labor demands exceed a household’s capacity, and temporary outside workers must be hired or reciprocal labor exchanges made with other households. Another response for households that also have small herds of llamas or sheep is to bring these animals to the agricultural fields during the busiest harvest periods: the animals can be cared for at the harvest site, and immediately put out to graze and defecate in the stubble of the harvested fields (Yamamoto 1981:123–24). In some cases, kichwa households that combine herding and agriculture find it convenient to combine all their flocks under the care of a few shepherds in the puna pastures during periods when agricultural tasks in the kichwa are particularly demanding (McCorkle 1987:65).

Settlement Patterns For most households, many different agricultural tasks are likely to be going on at the same time and in widely scattered fields. Many households also have some involvement in herding activities above 4100 masl. A typical household thus faces a major challenge in its efforts to effectively apportion and direct its labor force toward dispersed activities that often overlap in time. McCorkle (1987:59) has suggested that the complexities of labor allocation may select for extended family household structures, in which more people can cooperate in the performance of spatially dispersed essential tasks. The Christian ritual calendar, with its numerous saint’s days and fiestas distributed over the year, is an important reference for beginning and ending different agricultural activities (Camino 1980:29). The scheduling of labor demands often produces a dispersed settlement pattern, typically with a large, centrally situated settlement of a few hundred people situated at 3000–3600 masl in the heart of the most important tuber-producing zone, and numerous

Modern Environment, Demography, and Agricultural Ecology small hamlets (estancias) scattered widely at higher and lower elevations. Many households also have intensively cultivated kitchen gardens close to their houses inside the large villages (McCorkle 1987:62). Most people spend the majority of their time at the main settlements, but there is usually some permanent occupation of the smaller hamlets as well, although often not by complete households. In regions of especially high local vertical relief, some central settlements are actually mostly vacant much of the time, while most people spend the bulk of their time in small hamlets concentrated at higher elevations where it is more convenient to care for camelid herds (Webster 1971, 1973). In the Cuzco Region, small huts for temporary residence typically measure about 4 × 2 m in area, with stone walls and a thatched roof, a cooking hearth, and grinding stone. New roofing thatch and portable kitchen utensils are brought to the structure for use during the time of its occupation (Yamamoto 1981:119–20). Seed potatoes are usually stored in stone bins or atop straw mats at or near dwellings in the lower puna, where low temperatures prevent premature sprouting and rotting (Yamamoto 1981:124). At the appropriate time, these seed potatoes, together with loads of animal dung for fertilizer, are transported on pack animals to fields at lower elevations. Because domestic camelids defecate in a single locality in both corrals and pastures, it is particularly convenient to collect their dung. Water Management Irrigation has greatly expanded agricultural production in the kichwa and lower puna; in many cases, irrigation canals are directly incorporated into extensive systems of terraced fields (e.g., Fonseca and Mayer 1988; Mitchell and Guillet 1993; Treacy 1989). Highland irrigation systems are usually relatively small scale, fed by springs or streams emanating from puna lakes. They are usually managed at the local community level, with annual communal canal cleaning and repair operations overseen by locally elected officials (Fujii and Tomoeda 1981:56–57; Matos et al. 1958:63). Irrigation management can be difficult. Skar (1982:150–51), for example, has noted that “more than 10 households sharing the same irrigation ditch tends to lead to trouble.” Irrigation networks often provide the economic foundations for important social units, and the canals themselves often serve to physically delineate and symbolize these units on the ground (B. Isbell 1974; Ossio 1978; Sherbondy 1982, 1986, 1993; Zuidema 1986). Fonseca and Mayer (1988:78–80) distinguish two different types of irrigation systems: intensive (watara) and extensive (vichka). Watara land typically comprises 10–20 percent of a community’s total irrigated terrain and is cultivated every year. The irrigated plots are on well-built terraces, close to the largest settlements, and are heavily fertilized with household wastes and animal dung. Multi-household work groups usually cultivate these watara fields cooperatively, and also work together to maintain the irrigation canals. Vichka land is farther away from the settlements, with casually built terraces, less irrigation, little

27

or no fertilization, lengthy periodic fallowing, and with fields worked by single household units. Marshy zones in several parts of the Central Andean highlands contain numerous prehispanic ridged fields (Erickson 1985, 1987, 1988; Hastorf and Earle 1985; Kolata 1986). These fields, analogous to Mexican chinampas (Armillas 1971; Parsons et al. 1985), apparently did not continue to be used in historic times. Marsh drainage outside the Titicaca Basin remains an understudied topic in highland Andean anthropology and geography. Agriculturalists’ Cosmology and Ritual Agriculturalists are concerned with propitiating and thanking wamani spirits who are typically associated with neighboring hills, rock formations, lakes, springs, and other places. The wamani are ultimately responsible for the supply and well-being of crops and domestic animals. Christian beliefs and ceremonies have become part of modern agriculturalists’ ritual performances. Duviols (1973:167, 171, 178–79) has emphasized the degree to which herders’ and agriculturalists’ cosmologies were strategically integrated to facilitate complementary exchange between the two highland groups in the seventeenth century. B. Isbell’s (1974) study of the Chuschi community in southcentral highland Peru provides a good example of the kichwa agriculturalists’ vertically structured local universe. There are four perceived ecological zones: (1) the main settlement itself (pueblo), situated at 3150 masl; (2) the quichwa, agricultural land where maize can be grown, immediately surrounding the village at elevations between 2600 and 3300 masl; (3) the mayo patan, a zone of low-lying land, below 2600 masl, along the river; and (4) the sallqa, more distant terrain between 3300 and 4000 masl, where maize is not grown. Each of these four principal zones is, in turn, subdivided into two sectors, referred to as “upper” (hanay) and “lower” (uray). Variations on this vertical zonation are widely known throughout the Central Andean highlands. In many cases these local universes also contain a puna herding niche, at elevations above the limits of effective agriculture (e.g., Bastien 1978a; Harris 1978, 1982, 1985; Platt 1982, 1986; Skar 1982; Valderrama and Escalante 1988; Valle 1970). Zonal subdivisions are typically complementary in their functions—for example, the upper and lower sectors of the main village contain, respectively, the architectural centers of religious (the church) and secular (the district administrative building) authority. The borders of these ecological divisions and subdivisions are often physically marked with shrines (often small chapels) where formal rituals are performed. Integrative ritual performances focus on the saints’ images and crosses associated with the main church and with many of the border-defining chapels. At intervals the “minor” saints and crosses are brought in ritual processions from the small chapels to the main church, where they are briefly reunited with their “mother” images. Many of these community rituals are associated with communally performed tasks, such as cleaning irrigation canals. Other

28

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

components of community ritual focus on water sources (springs and lakes) to which offerings (including coca and chicha) are carried in formal processions from one chapel to another, and where offerings are made and the minor saints’ images replaced after their stays in the main church. Processions to and from the chapels typically begin and end at the main settlement, where additional offerings and feasting often occur. Ritual significance is often attached to points at which major irrigation canals converge; community cemeteries may be placed at such locations. Traditional Interzonal Exchange Matos (1994:49–50) has emphasized the key role of llamaback transport in the traditional exchange of complementary products between puna, kichwa, montaña, and coastal zones. Caravans of 20–30 llamas, each animal capable of carrying loads of approximately 40 kg over distances of 25–30 km per day, continue to be important in regional and interregional exchange, as do motorized vehicles in recent decades. In these networks, textiles, chuño, salt, dried meat, and animal skins from the puna move against maize, tubers, and other vegetables from the kichwa, and coca and a wide variety of subtropical and tropical products from the montaña and Pacific coast. Additional detailed information about agricultural ecology in the Mantaro Valley, especially in regard to potato production, can be found in Mayer (1979, 1981). Overall Summary and Conclusions Our study area comprises a highland region of great natural diversity in the Peruvian sierra central. Puna and kichwa landscapes are internally varied in terms of rainfall, temperature, soil cover, and vegetation. Paleo-environmental research suggests that there may have been two Late Holocene episodes, both of several centuries’ duration, of significantly colder and drier climate: one in the middle first millennium A.D., and a second in the early to mid-second millennium A.D. Throughout the historic period, most of the inhabitants in the Wanka Region and its environs have been agriculturalists and pastoralists who have sought access to complementary products and materials through varied forms of interhousehold, intercommunity, and interzonal interaction and exchange. The historic period has witnessed major transformations wrought by (1) the varied efforts of Spanish imperial administrators and elite landlords to impose order, collect tribute, access the most productive lands, and exploit Indian labor; (2) large losses of Indian population owing to introduced diseases

and the onerous labor demands of Spanish overlords; (3) the long-term development of commercial mining and textile fiber industries; and (4) after A.D. 1825, efforts to build an independent nation-state centered in Lima (about 125 km to the west on the Pacific coast) during a long period of sociopolitical instability that included a short occupation in the late nineteenth century by outside (Chilean) military forces. Since the mid-sixteenth century, urban Lima has been the major center of Spanish imperial and republican political and economic forces that have had profound effects on the adjacent sierra central. Because of its proximity to Lima and its strategic location along the main axis of east-west transportation and communication across the Andes between Lima and its highland and montaña hinterlands, the Wanka Region has been strongly affected by the mainstreams of colonial and republican polity and economy. Spanish encomienda and reducción policies radically altered indigenous settlement patterns and land use, and commercialized agriculture, herding, and mining increasingly took hold in the nineteenth century, especially after an extensive railroad system had been completed by the early twentieth century. Over the past half century, a steadily expanding network of improved roads has extended and intensified the strategic importance of valleybottom towns, like Jauja. Agriculture is most productive in deeper soil areas at elevations below about 3600 masl, although some hardy tubers can be produced up to 4200 masl, or even slightly higher. The best agricultural lands are on the lower slopes and bottom lands of the kichwa valleys, especially where drainage, terracing, and canal irrigation have been implemented. Such prime agricultural land has supported the largest communities and most nucleated and urbanized populations in our study area throughout the historic period. In the nearby puna grasslands, at elevations mainly well in excess of 3800 masl, herding of camelids and (after the midsixteenth century) sheep has long been the economic mainstay. Most of this modern herding-based population has remained modest and dispersed in small hamlets and seasonally occupied estancias. The great ecological diversity of our study area provides the foundation for a great diversity of traditional subsistence strategies. The complementarity between production at different elevation zones is particularly important in terms of relationships between herding and agricultural lifeways. A very important problem for archaeological research in this region concerns the changing nature of these relationships over time. Unfortunately, because our survey did not extend very far into the puna zone that borders the main Mantaro Valley, we have only limited archaeologically based insights into these relationships in the Wanka Region.

Chapter 3

Highlights of Wanka Ethnohistory Charles M. Hastings and Jeffrey R. Parsons

conditions during and before the time of Inca rule (1460–1532). It must be remembered, of course, that despite their advanced ages, even the oldest of these men in the late sixteenth century would have been born well into the period of Inca domination, and so could have had no personal memory of pre-Incaic conditions. Obviously, their knowledge came from what they had been told in childhood and youth by their elders, and perhaps also by their perceptions of what their former Inca overlords and the newly arrived Spanish conquerors may have wanted to hear. Also useful for our purposes are the writings of Pedro Cieza de Leon (Cieza 1862, 1929, 1946, 1959), a Spanish soldier who passed through Jauja in 1549 and left some detailed descriptions from a time only 17 years after initial Spanish contact.

The Wanka are one of the better-described groups from the Peruvian sierra central in sixteenth-century Spanish sources, and several studies based on these chronicles and other documents have been published over the past half century (e.g., Horkheimer 1951; Matos 1959; Espinosa Soriano 1969, 1971, 1977; LeVine 1979, 1985; Hastings 1978; D’Altroy 1981, 1987, 1992; Earls 1981). This chapter is not intended to be a full, detailed discussion or synthesis of these ethnohistoric studies. Rather, our intent is to provide those highlights most useful in complementing the archaeological survey data in this monograph. Because of its large expanse of productive agricultural and herding terrain, its relatively large and dense indigenous population, and its strategic location athwart a major crossroads that links the coast, the sierra, and the montaña, and facilitates communication between the northern and southern sectors of the Inca and Spanish Andean domains, the Wanka Region was of great strategic importance for both Spanish and Inca imperial interests. This fact is reflected by the placement of the original (though short-lived) Spanish colonial capital at the site of the Inca provincial center of Hatun Xáuxa, which became the Spanish town of Jauja. The two major primary sixteenth-century documentary sources are detailed inquiries made in 1570 by Viceroy Francisco de Toledo (Toledo 1940a, 1940b), and in 1582 by Andrés de Vega (Vega 1965). Spanish authorities interviewed elderly local men, then said to be aged 83–95, whom they judged to be the most capable persons they could locate for remembering events and

Wanka Political Organization during the Late Horizon and Late LIP Under the Inca, the Wanka province was divided into three subdivisions (saya) for the purposes of imperial administration: Hatunxauxa, Lurinwanka (or Hurinhuanca), and Ananwanka (or Hananhuanca) (Fig. 3.1). These saya extended southwestnortheast, crosscutting the full ecological variability of the puna and kichwa zones, and extending northeastward into the ceja de montaña beyond the Wanka heartland. As indicated in Figure 3.1, our survey was confined to a portion of the Hatunxauxa saya and the northernmost edge of Lurinwanka, with no exten29

30

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure 3.1.  Ethnohistorically documented saya divisions in the Wanka heartland. Adapted from D’Altroy 1987:80, Fig. 1.

Highlights of Wanka Ethnohistory sion into the ceja de montaña, and only limited coverage in the puna. Browman’s (1970) archaeological survey had also included kichwa-zone portions of Lurinwanka and Ananwanka, but there has never been any systematic archaeological study of the main puna or ceja de montaña components of the Wanka Region. In the past two decades, Manuel Perales and his colleagues have undertaken pioneering archaeological field studies along two approaches to the upper ceja de montaña to the north and northwest of Jauja and have located several late prehispanic settlements of likely Wanka affiliation (Perales 2004a, 2004b, 2004c, 2005; Perales and Rodriguez 2003; Mallaupoma and Perales 2005). Hastings has done some very brief preliminary reconnaissance in a few scattered areas farther down these valleys and deeper into the montaña. Ethnohistoric sources indicate that dependent Wanka communities were based in several upper montaña locations during Late Horizon and Colonial times, and perhaps earlier, but as yet there is only very limited archaeological evidence of their existence. There is some indication that the three saya divisions imposed by the Inca had some basis in late pre-Inca organization in the Wanka Region. However, the Wanka informants asserted that the pre-Inca polities in the Wanka Region were uncentralized and unstable, with shifting intergroup alliances and considerable competition and claims of intensive warfare, with leaders (cinchecona) who often acquired and maintained their positions primarily on the basis of proven prowess in warfare, and who wielded little real power beyond their military functions. A few quotes will illustrate the general tenor of the statements about pre-Incaic conditions made to the Spanish authorities by the elderly Wanka informants noted above: [A]ntes del Inca, traían Guerra unos con otros por adquirir más tierras, y no salían fuera deste valle a pelear, sino era, dentro del valle, los de la una bandda del río que por él pasa con los indios de la otra. [Vega 1965:169] [B]efore the Inca, people would fight wars with one another to acquire more land, and they did not leave the valley to fight, but did so within the valley, those from one side of the river against those from the other. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons] [S]iempre tenyan guerras unos lugares con otros por sus chacras y sus ganados y por sus mujeres . . . y procuravan siempre de tomar las tierras de los otros. [Toledo 1940a:19] [D]ifferent areas were always fighting over their fields, their livestock and their women . . . and they always tried to take each others’ land. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons] Antes que los yngas los gobernasen no auia entrellos Reyes ni señores de prouincias grandes . . . y que cada pueblo se gobernaua de por sy syn que rrconosciesen a otros a manera de comunidades y que cada yndio gozaua de su cassa y de los que tenia y solamente tenian estos cincheconcas a quien ellos helegian e rrespetuan por que los defendia e guardaua de los contrarios como tal su capitan. [Toledo 1940a:34]

Before the Inca, governing was not done by kings or señores of large provinces . . . and each town was governed on its own without recognizing others in the way of communities and each Indian had his own house and possessions, and they only had the cincheconas (leaders) who they elected and respected because they defended and guarded them against their enemies as their captain. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons] [S]in rreconocer a ningun señor mas de rrespetar a los dichos cincheconas a los quales tampoco les daban tributo ny otra cossa syno quando vencian a los enemigos les daban tierras. [Toledo 1940a:23] [W]ithout recognizing any señor other than paying respect to the aforementioned cincheconas who received no tribute or other thing except for when they defeated enemies and were given lands. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons] [Q]uando no querian venire de paz algunos pueblos los cincheconas con los yndios contrarios los hazian guerra y los matauan y los tomauan sus tierras y otras vezes los sujetauan a los pueblos de donde heran cincheconas e a los que venian de paz los dejauan sus tierras porque dezian que querian ser sus vasallos. [Toledo 1940a:24] [W]hen they did not want some towns to be at peace, the cincheconas made war with the Indians who opposed them and killed them and took their lands, and other times they subjugated the towns the cincheconas were from and to those who did not oppose them, they left their lands alone because they had said they wanted to be their followers. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons] [Y] que a esos [cincheconas] no les daban tribute ninguno mas de respetalles y hacelles sus sementeras. [Vega 1965:169] [A]nd to these [leaders] they gave no tribute other than to respect them and do their planting for them. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons] [Q]uesto se dezia también entre otros viejos e questos cincheconas deseauan siempre que ouiese guerras entrellos porque le hiziesen fiestas y los rrespetasen major a que quando vencian a algunos pueblos salian los mgeres con cántaros de chichi e otras cossas. [Toledo 1940a:31] [H]e also said that the other elders and the cincheconas always wanted to have wars between each other because they had celebrations and were paid more respect and when they defeated a town, the leaders came out with pitchers of chichi [chicha] and other things. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons] [E]stos yndios cincheconas desauan mucho que ouiese guerras entre los unos pueblos y los otros para efeto de hazerse entrellos que fuesen rrespetados y estimados en mucho ser mas señores. [Toledo 1940a:34] [T]hese cinchecona Indians very much wanted the towns to make war on each other, for the effect it had of making them respected and valued and raised their status. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons]

31

32

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru [C]ada parcialidad tenya un cinchecona y que en este valle de Xauxa hasta la mitad de los ananhuancsas los guardaua. [Toledo 1940a:18] [E]ach group had a cinchecona and in this Valley of Xauxa he controlled up to half of the Ananwankas. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons] [Q]uando moria alguno de aquellos cincheconas elexian al hijo que tenya ay hera valiente por cinchecona e que quando no hera valiente helegian otro a que en vida de los cincheconas acontecia que una cinchecona tenya hijos y enbiaua algunos a la Guerra con gente e quando salia valiente dezian los yndios que hera bueno para cinchecona e aquel elegian por cinchecona y lo hera después de muerto su padre y aquel los guardaua e defendia e que sy un cinchecona tenya dos o tres hijos abiles y valientes aquellos todos elegian por cincheconas y quando no lo heran elegian otros a que quando heran chiquitos los hijos de los tales cincheconas nombrauan otros hasta que heran grandes y si no heran valientes no los helegian por cincheconas. [Toledo 1940a:23–24] [W]hen a cinchecona died, his son was chosen, if he was valiant enough to be a cinchecona, and when he was not valiant, they would choose another, so that in the life of a cinchecona, it would happen that he would have sons and send some of them to war and when one proved himself valiant, the Indians said he was suited to be cinchecona and he was chosen to be cinchecona, which would happen after his father’s death, and he would guard and defend them. And if a cinchecona had two or three able and valiant sons, all were chosen to be cincheconas and when they were not, others were chosen, [so that] the sons of [some] cincheconas were named when they were young, while others were not chosen until they were older and if they were not valiant they were not chosen to be cincheconas. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons]

There are also indications of the existence in late pre-Inca times of other territorial groups that were subsequently incorporated into one or another of the Inca saya (Tables 3.1, 3.2). The largest of these—the Chongos, situated at the far southern end of the heartland region—are said to have been incorporated into Ananwanka under Inca authority. There are also hints of a major pre-Inca distinction between the northern section of the Wanka Region, referred to as the Xauxas, and the rest of the Wanka heartland zone. These groupings are said to have been characterized by distinguishing modes of dress and possibly even dialectal linguistic differences. Late Horizon Wanka Population The most acceptable estimates of early sixteenth-century Wanka population are usually derived from reports of the numbers of warriors fielded at the time of initial Spanish contact in 1532 (Table 3.3). These “warriors” are assumed to represent adult male tribute payers, and so the total population is estimated by using a multiplier, ranging from 5 to 9 according to different authorities. In Table 3.3 we employ a multiplier of 6.44, derived from the documented ratio reported between contact

Table 3.1.  The three Wanka divisions and their subject pueblos in Mantaro Valley and in the montaña. Spanish Repartimiento (Inca saya)

Principal Mantaro Valley Pueblos

Dependent Montaña Pueblos

Hatunxauxa (north valley)

Hatun Jauja

Monobamba

Jaujatambo

Uchumbamba

Huaripampa Yauyo Lurinwanka (center valley)

Apata

Uchumbamba

Matahuasi

Comas

Concepción

Andomayo

Tunanmarca Cincos Mito Urcortuna Ananwanka (south valley)

Chupaca

Cochangara

Guancayo

Paucarbamba

Cicaya

Vitoc

Chongos

Pampavilla Corupa Guaynacapa

(Based on information in Vega 1965; adapted from LeVine 1979:26 and ­Hastings 1978: V-16, Table 9)

Table 3.2.  Wanka cincheconas and district capitals under Inca and ­Spanish rule. Division

Cacique in 1533

Capital in 1533

Capital in 1582

Hatunxauxa (Sausa, Jauja)

Cucixaca

Santa Fe de Hátun Xauxa

–

Lurinwanka (Marcavillca)

Guacarapora

San Jerónimo de Túnan

Concepción de Achi

Ananwanka (Llacsapallanca)

Alaya

Santo Domingo de Cicaya

San Juan de Chupaca

(Adapted from Hastings 1978: V-13, Table 8)

period military strength from the 1582 relación (Vega 1965) and population figures from the 1570 census (Toledo 1940), to give a total Wanka population of 172,710 for the early sixteenth century. Obviously, this is an imprecise figure, and should be taken only as an indication of the order of magnitude. Other multipliers would, of course, yield different figures. LeVine (1985:365), for example, estimates a Late Horizon Wanka population figure of 189,000, while D’Altroy (1987:81) estimates a total Wanka population of approximately 200,000 at the time of Inca conquest (ca. A.D. 1460).

Highlights of Wanka Ethnohistory

33

Table 3.3.  Estimates of contact period Wanka population. Wanka District

Prehispanic Military Strength (Vega 1965)

Tribute Payers 1570–1571 (Toledo 1940)

Total Population 1570–1571 (Toledo 1940)

Ratio of Total Population to Tribute Payers

Prehispanic Population Estimate (× 6.44)

Hatunxauxa

6000

1079

7117

6.60

38,640

Lurinwanka

12,000

3374

21,874

6.49

77, 280

Ananwanka

9000

2500

15,767

6.31

56,790

total

27,000

6953

44,758

6.44

172,710

(Adapted from Hastings 1978: V-7, Table 7)

These figures also indicate that the Lurinwanka sector had substantially more population than either Hatunxauxa or Ananwanka at the end of the Late Horizon. The apparent population contrast between Hatunxauxa and Lurinwanka is interesting because archaeological evidence clearly shows that the northern sector (Hatunxauxa) was demographically dominant during the late Late Intermediate Period (Wanka II phase)—the early sixteenth-century figures apparently reflect the archaeologically observed substantial relocation during the Late Horizon of Wanka population out of the old Wanka II heartland in the Yanamarca subvalley at the northern end of the province (see Chapter 6). The Inca Impact Although some sectors of the Wanka apparently acquiesced to Inca demands for submission, other sectors did not, and there are reports of serious fighting between Inca and Wanka forces. For example, Los del valle de Xauxa, sabida la venida de los enemigos [Incas]. Mostraron temor y procuraron vavor de sus parientes y amigos . . . venídoles los socorros como ellos fuesen muchos, porque dicen que había más de cuarenta mill hombres. . . . ­[L]os capitantes del Inca llegaron hasta ponerse encima del valle y deseaban sin Guerra ganar las gracias de los Guancas . . . mas, no aprovechando nada . . . se dio una gran batalla en que dicen que murieron muchos de una parte y otra mas que los del Cuzco quedaron por vencedores. [Cieza 1967:163–64] Those in the valley of Xauxa knew of the coming of their enemies (the Inca). They showed fear and sought and received aid from their relatives and friends . . . as they were many, because they said that there were more than 40,000 men. . . . [T]he Inca captains arrived at the top of the valley and wanted to gain the favor of the Guancas [Wanka] without war . . . but not having any success . . . they fought a great battle in which it is said many died on both sides, with those of Cuzco remaining as victors. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons] [L]a nacion de los Wankas, naturales del valle de Jauja, se defendieron al principio valientemente, los cuales eran mas de treinta mil, aunque al fin fueron vencidos y sujetados. [Cobo 1956:81]

[T]he Wankas, native to the Jauja valley and numbering more than 30,000, at first defended themselves valiantly, although in the end they were conquered and subjugated. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons]

The lack of a unified Wanka response to Inca conquest is sometimes taken as an indication of the comparatively uncentralized and internally contentious nature of the late Late Intermediate Period Wanka political order. Because several Wanka groups collaborated with the Spanish in 1532–33, some Wanka elites and their followers subsequently received a degree of favored treatment during the Early Colonial Period (Espinosa Soriano 1971, 1977), analogous to the Tlaxcalans in Mexico, who aided the Spanish in their conquest of Aztec Tenochtitlán (Gibson 1952). In addition to imposing a variant of their well-known multitiered administrative structure above the individual household level (saya, waranqa, pachaca) (Julien 1988), the Inca required a substantial contribution in labor on agricultural fields whose input was destined for imperial storehouses (colcas): [D]espués entraron los Incas en esta provincial y los sujetaron. . . . [L]es mandó que le hiciesen chácras de comidas, y ropa . . . de todo cuanto podían trabajar. [Vega 1965:169] [T]hen the Inca arrived in this province and subjugated them. . . . [T]hey made them make clothing and fields for food . . . as much as they could do. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons]

These storehouses apparently continued to function as deposits for different kinds of tribute required by Spanish authorities and their Wanka lieutenants for some time into the Early Colonial Period. As late as 1547, for example, Spanish military forces were apparently still able to acquire large quantities of foodstuffs and other material from the Inca storehouses near Jauja: [Y] anise quando el señor presidente Gasca passó con la gente de castigo de Gonzalo Plizarro por el valle de Jauja, estubo allí siete semanas, a lo que me acuérdo se hallaron en deposito mayz de quarto y de tres y de dos años, mas de quinze mill hanegas junto al camino, e allí comyó la gente y se entendió que si fueran menestar muchas más, no faltaran en el valle en aquellos depósitos conforme a la horden Antigua. [Polo 1916:36]

34

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Dependent Communities in the Adjacent Montaña

[A]nd so when President Gasca passed through the Jauja valley with the prisoners of Gonzalo Plizarro, he was there for seven weeks, and I remember that they found storehouses of maize, four, three, two years old, more than 15,000 hanegas, near the road, and there the people ate and it was understood that if they were to need much more, it was not lacking in the valley in those storehouses holding the old hordes. [English translation by Apphia H. Parsons]

The quantities and varieties of material placed in these storehouses is indicated by an analysis (Murra 1975) of an archived “translation” of a quipu (knotted cord record) submitted as part of a legal case in the late sixteenth century involving Wanka elites who claimed recompense for their assistance to the Spanish forces in 1532–33. Table 3.4 indicates the kinds and quantities of goods and services enumerated in that quipu record. If these figures are to be believed, Lurinwanka (probably combined with Ananwanka) provided a far larger quantity of maize, while Jauja contributed much more quinoa, ceramics, footgear, and clothing. Potatoes, a regional mainstay staple, came in roughly equal quantities from both divisions. As LeVine (1979:58) suggests, these differences may reflect the relatively higher elevation (less favorable for maize, and easier access to puna pastures) and the greater number of skilled artisans in the Jauja sector.

Several crops that are said to have been grown for Wanka leaders (who were variously referred to as cinchecona, caciques, or curacas) with community labor are exotic to the Mantaro Valley, especially ají, camotes, yucca, cotton, and coca. Then and now, these crops would have been derived from lower, warmer, wetter lands in the ceja de montaña to the north and northeast of the main Mantaro Valley: [A] la mano izquierda deste valle está l otra cordillera de nieve y a las vertientes de la otra parte están seis pueblos poblados en tierra caliente de montaña, que llaman Andes. . . . [S]on pueblos sujetos a los tres repartimientos deste valle. Son los caminos para ir a estos seis pueblos de pasadas seis jornadas de tierra muy asperisima y montaña. [Vega 1965:168] [A]nd on the left-hand side of this [Mantaro] valley is the other snow-covered cordillera [Huaytapallana], and on the slopes of the far side are six occupied villages in warm land of the montaña, called Andes. . . . [T]hese villages are subject to the three divisions of the valley. The roads to these six Andes villages are very steep, and it takes six days through extremely steep and mountainous terrain to reach the vicinity of these six villages. [English translation by Charles M. Hastings]

These dependent Wanka settlements were widely dispersed in the montaña northeast of the Mantaro Valley (Fig. 3.2). Ties between the Wanka heartland and the montaña communities were still evident in a 1785 census listing the ayllus (descent

Table 3.4.  Quantities of material provided to the Spanish from Jauja storehouses.1 Product corn (maize)

1532–1537

1533

Lurinwanka

Jauja

Lurinwanka

Jauja

5,029,000 fanegas2

68,000 fanegas

2,001,000 fanegas

39,000 fanegas

quinoa

900 fanegas

3700 fanegas

360 fanegas

2900 fanegas

potatoes

6900 fanegas

5400 fanegas

2600 fanegas

3700 fanegas

young llama

2,000,800

319

2,000,400

–

mature llama

519,000

49,300

2,016,400

12,400

game birds

2400

3100

2400

1250

fish

2,004,000

28,000

2,004,000

12,400

firewood

75,000,000 cargas

558,000 cargas

36,000,000 cargas

230,500 cargas

ceramics

19, 200

35,672

4400

13,832

grasses

–

117,000 cargas

–

49,000 cargas

straw

–

361,000 cargas

–

321,000 cargas

footgear

500 pairs

4900 pairs

200 pairs

3800 pairs

blankets

8

18

–

2

clothing

85

2500

–

2200

(Adapted from LeVine 1979:58, Table 1) 1 Using data from Espinosa Soriano 1971:201–407 and Murra 1975. LeVine (1979:58) suggests that the Lurinwanka list includes tribute from the Ananwanka province. 2 1 fanega = ca. 1–1.5 bushels; 1 carga = 5 or 6 bushels; 1 libra = ca. 0.46 kilos, 1.01 pounds.

Highlights of Wanka Ethnohistory groups) of each Wanka division (reproduced in Espinosa Bravo 1936:98–100). The Wanka evidently maintained their claim to distant warmer agricultural lands throughout at least 250 years of Colonial rule. Staple crops grown by the Wanka in the valleys northeast of the Cordillera Oriental included maize and beans. Vega names a long list of other products brought to the Mantaro Valley from the montaña villages, among which are coca, ají, bananas, guayabas, guaya, other citrus fruits, grapes, pomegranates, quince, peanuts, sugar cane, avocados, and small amounts of honey (Vega 1965:171). Cacique control of montaña lands has been noted for Lurinwanka. The pueblo of Andamarca, for example, was described as the place where the head cacique of Lurinwanka had his chacras of ají in 1538 (Espinosa Soriano 1971:223). Not every household was able to directly produce montaña crops for its own needs, and the political leaders apparently attempted to

35

monopolize access to these highly desired products. By controlling a lion’s share of the montaña resources, the caciques could manipulate the distribution of these exotic products to further their own ends and enhance their status as generous rulers. Little is known about the nature of these montaña settlements, the trails providing access to them, or the intervening areas passed along the way (Table 3.5). Summary By comparison to two adjacent Inca provinces farther north in the sierra central (the Tarama and the Chupachu) that have been studied by modern scholars (e.g., Arellano 1984, 1988a, 1988b, 1994; Parsons et al. 2000; Thompson 1968a; Morris and Thompson 1970, 1985; Murra 1972; Grosboll 1988), the Wanka were much larger in terms of the size of their population and

Figure 3.2.  Ethnohistorically documented dependent Wanka settlements in the montaña northeast of Jauja. Adapted from Hastings 1978: Map 15.

36

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table 3.5.  Estimates of distances from Mantaro Valley centers to subject montaña communities. From

Destination and Elevations

Distances in Vega 1965:172–74 (leagues)

Estimated Distances (km)

Jauja

Monobamba 1400 masl

18–20

114

Lurinwanka

Cómas 3300 masl?

9

54 (actual)

Andamarca 2500 masl

21

101

Uchubamba 1700 masl

10

60

Cochangara ? masl

9

54

Paucarbamba ? masl

23

138

Vítoc 1000 masl

25

150

Ananwanka

(Adapted from LeVine 1979:69, Table 2; Hastings 1978: V-16, Table 9)

their major settlements, and the productivity of their immediate sustaining area. The total Wanka population appears to have been several times larger than the combined total of the other groups. The sustaining area of the Mantaro Valley is much greater than the steep, dissected topography of the Tarama and Chupachu Regions. Archaeological research shows that larger settlements were both possible and practicable in the Wanka Region, undoubtedly linked to the broader surface areas of hilltops and ridge crests and the high local productive potential. Mantaro farmland in the Wanka heartland produced basic staples—potatoes and other tubers, quinoa, and some maize—in sufficient quantities to support a large overall population and large population concentrations. The Wanka subsistence economy was broadened beyond these minimal staples by cultivating distant chacras in the ceja de montaña to the north and northeast on the far side of the Huaytapallana range, where crops such as cotton, ají, camotes, peanuts, coca, and more productive maize could be grown. Comas is the nearest of the known Wanka villages in the eastern valleys and was probably settled for this purpose. Other settlements were located farther down the same valleys in the upper montaña, where coca could be grown. If we take literally the testimonies in the late sixteenth-century visitas, in late pre-Inca times the Mantaro population had expanded to a pressure point at which communities competed fiercely with each other over farmland. As noted in Chapter 2, this may have been happening during a period of increased drought and cold. This competition was felt at various levels. At some undetermined upper level, villages or clusters of villages fought over land rights. At the lowest economic level, resources of the eastern valleys were unevenly shared by households. Some households procured their montaña crops directly from fields they

farmed there, and others relied on exchange. The Inca center at Hátun Xauxa could have been a place where such exchanges were realized. The demand for montaña crops obviously exceeded the supply, especially considering the necessary investments in labor to cultivate these remote fields and transport the harvest over such long distances through difficult terrain. The Wanka caciques apparently emerged as the dominant figures in these supply lines by gaining control of a relatively large portion of the eastern lands each community maintained and farming them with community labor. With respect to the reported competition between whole communities or larger units in late pre-Inca times, two problems need to be considered. First, if the pre-Inca Wanka were fragmented into small, warring factions competing over limited agricultural resources, how did they maintain remote settlements in the distant montaña? The exploitation of montaña resources would have been severely hampered by the degree of warfare described in the visita testimonies, and some degree of political unification and cooperation seems necessary for these agricultural outposts to have been maintained prior to Inca conquest of the region. Secondly, what do the ethnohistoric sources say about the level of political unification that had been attained prior to Inca conquest? The archaeologically attested large late Late Intermediate Period (Wanka II) settlements in the Yanamarca subvalley must have been the loci of the dominant forces in Wanka politics, by virtue of the available human labor and the administrative organization necessary to sustain and maintain order with such unusually large, urbanized population concentrations as Hatunmarca (Site 472) and Tunanmarca (Site 468). There are simply no other known Late Intermediate Period archaeological sites of comparable size and nucleation anywhere in the Wanka heartland region. While the existence of state-level organization in the Wanka heartland in pre-Inca times remains problematic, it seems likely that by late pre-Inca times the governing units of the Wanka had become more powerful and more complex than those of the native Tarama and Chupachu, and perhaps more centralized than the ethnohistoric sources would suggest. The antiquity of the dependent montaña settlements and the economic system of which they were a part is not known. They could possibly be an Inca development, although the sixteenthcentury sources acknowledge no such debt to the Incas. If, as seems likely, they date to the Late Intermediate Period era of Wanka autonomy, then their chronological placement relative to the emergence of major Wanka II centers in the Yanamarca Valley must be determined to address an important problem: how are long-distance economic affairs related to the development of complex political organization in this part of highland Peru? Are the widely scattered, faraway montaña outposts of the sixteenth-century Wanka a product of a relatively advanced, centralized political structure of the Late Horizon, or had they been established in earlier centuries prior to Inca conquest? Obviously, these questions cannot be answered without more archaeological research north and northeast of the Huaytapallana range and without refining the present level of chronology.

Chapter 4

Methodology Jeffrey R. Parsons, Charles M. Hastings, and Ramiro Matos M.

site discovery and location, for example, simply was not feasible in our semi-arid highland setting where archaeological remains were typically much more obscured by vegetation and degraded by centuries of intensive plowing, field clearance, terrace construction, and corral building. In Junín we wanted to develop survey procedures in this highland context that would permit us to (1) discover all site types, and (2) accurately determine site size and inter-site spacing.

At the time we began our fieldwork in 1975, there were few examples of systematic regional archaeological survey anywhere in the Andean sierra. The three closest approximations known to us were: (1) Browman’s work (1970) in a section of the main Mantaro Valley, part of which we later included in our Wanka Region survey area (and which provided us with some of the original inspiration to undertake our own research in a partly overlapping region); (2) the work of Morris, Murra, Thompson, and Matos (Matos 1972; Morris 1966, 1967, 1972, 1973; Morris and Thompson 1970; Thompson 1967, 1968b, 1972, 1974; Thompson and Murra 1966) in the Huánuco Region in the northern Peruvian sierra central; and (3) the work of Dwyer (1971) at and around Cuzco in the southern Peruvian highlands. These important pioneering studies did not provide us with useful methodological models for our own contemplated survey because they were too much oriented toward the discovery of obvious sites, and overly dependent on site discovery though airphoto images and from information in ethnohistoric sources and from local inhabitants. In the early 1970s, the major published example of truly systematic regional archaeological survey in the Central Andes was still the Viru Valley project, carried out some 25 years earlier on the Peruvian north coast (Willey 1953). Although the Viru survey provided a useful strategic model, its placement in a desert coastal valley with extraordinary site preservation and surface visibility made direct methodological transfers to our highland study area impossible. Willey’s dependence upon airphotos for

The Tactics of Field Survey When we came to Junín in 1975, Parsons already had well over a decade’s worth of regional survey experience in highland Mexico (Parsons 1969, 1971, 1974, 2008; Parsons et al. 1982, 1983; Sanders et al. 1979). Our intention in Peru was to adapt the Valley of Mexico survey methodology to the Andean context, much as Parsons had done very briefly at Tiwanaku, Bolivia, a few years earlier (Parsons 1968). We realized we would have to modify our survey tactics to fit the Andean situation; however, we were uncertain about what specific modifications would actually be necessary. Consequently, the first few weeks of our 1975 fieldseason were a critical period during which we worked out these specifics through trial-and-error procedures. Parsons’ earlier experience in Mexico had emphasized in-thefield plotting of extensive surface remains on large-scale (1:5000) airphotos. In the intensively cultivated plains and gently sloping 37

38

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

piedmonts of highland central Mexico, prehispanic occupation was often readily apparent to close inspection in the form of concentrations of potsherds and lithic artifacts on plowed field surfaces. Mounds of variable size and degree of preservation, representing public and domestic architecture, were often visible, but the quality of ancient architectural preservation was generally poor owing to centuries of wear by plowing and field clearing in this intensively cultivated region (2240–2800 masl, ca. 19 degrees north latitude). In Junín we were faced with radically different topography and modern land use. First, local vertical topographic relief was often quite extreme, especially in the Tarama Region but elsewhere as well, with numerous slopes of astonishing steepness that were virtually impossible for us to navigate. Second, only a small proportion of the total landscape (usually the valley bottoms and adjacent lower slopes) was intensively cultivated, often by means of complex terrace systems. Thus, relative to the Valley of Mexico, there was poor surface visibility of artifacts, but often very good surficial preservation of stone architecture. In the Wanka Region, the closest approximations to the Valley of Mexico were the broad alluvial plains and immediately adjacent lowermost piedmonts of the main Mantaro Valley. We also quickly discovered that large-scale airphotos were simply unavailable for most of our Junín survey area, and we usually had to work with imagery between 1:25,000 and 1:40,000, and, more rarely, approximately 1:15,000—all good for orienting our field surveys and plotting the general locations of archaeological sites, but virtually useless for the kind of detailed field mapping that Parsons had been accustomed to in highland Mexico. Survey Procedures After some early experimentation, we succeeded in devising a set of survey procedures that served us reasonably well. We maintained several aspects of the Valley of Mexico methodology: systematic full regional coverage, working in teams of 2–4 persons spread out at intervals of 25–50 meters, and using airphotos taped to plywood boards for general field orientation and denoting site location. As in the Valley of Mexico, one member of each survey team would carry the airphoto and use it to direct and control the movements of the whole team. In contrast to our previously reported surveys in the adjacent Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region (Parsons et al. 2000), in the Wanka Region we encountered few of the very steep slopes that so strongly impacted our field logistics in these northern sectors of our Junín study area. Consequently, in the Wanka Region we were able to walk over virtually all open terrain not occupied by modern settlement. A major difference between our Junín survey and those carried out earlier in the Valley of Mexico relates to the field procedures used for recognizing, defining, and dating archaeological sites. In highland Mexico these tasks were usually accomplished by plotting distributions of surface pottery, and only secondarily on

the basis of architectural remains; most concentrations of surface pottery could be readily dated, by means of simple visual inspection, with reference to a comparatively well developed ceramic chronology. In Junín, however, many sites were recognized and defined on the basis of the remains of stone architecture—either fairly well preserved or in rock-rubble form—while surface pottery was usually scarce, and often could not be readily dated in the field. This was particularly the case in the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region, where relatively few fields were extensively plowed year after year. The Wanka Region was intermediate in this regard between the extremes posed by the Valley of Mexico, on the one hand, and the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region, on the other. Many large expanses of the valley floor and adjacent uplands (generally speaking, those elevations below about 3600 masl in the Wanka Region) have been intensively plowed, and exposures of surface pottery were notable, albeit usually in far lighter density than we had been accustomed to in Mexico. In the Valley of Mexico, with its relatively well known ceramic chronology and great abundance of surface artifacts, for most of our chronological inferences we relied upon simple visual inspection of surface pottery as we trod over it in the field; surface collections served primarily to provide checks on the accuracy of our in-the-field visual appraisals about ceramic chronology. Consequently, we did not feel we had to make a great many surface collections, especially in cases where occupational chronology was judged to be simple and uncomplicated. Because sizable surface collections could be made from relatively small areas virtually anywhere within the borders of most sites, our main problem with surface collecting in the Valley of Mexico was to determine which small part of any particular site surface was to be collected. In Junín we were often unable to make dependable chronological inferences on the basis of inspecting surface pottery in the field. Furthermore, because surface pottery was generally so limited, our collection units typically comprised entire sites, or very large parts of them. Even so, many surface collections turned out to be quite small. In many cases, our best collections were invariably made at recently looted sites, where clandestine excavations had exposed moderate quantities of potsherds. At the time we began our surveys, in May 1975, the available ceramic chronology was still underdeveloped, and it was not until the subsequent UMARP investigations got underway in the late 1970s that a more refined ceramic chronology for the Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon became available. Surface Collecting As in the Valley of Mexico, our surface collections in Junín were made with only one objective: to infer occupational chronology. Our surface collection procedures varied according to the relative quantity and condition of the surface pottery. We made at least one surface collection at every site where surface pottery existed. At sites where surface pottery was very sparse and badly weathered, we attempted to collect every sherd we

Methodology could find from the entire site within a reasonable amount of time (usually 30–60 minutes). Wherever surface pottery was more abundant and better preserved, we usually designated two or three sectors of a site, where we made separate collections of diagnostic pottery (decorated sherds, rim sherds, basal sherds, handles, and figurines). Where feasible, we made an effort to separate material from residential vs. cemetery vs. storage areas, or from ridge crests vs. lower slopes, or from areas separated by major quebradas that cut through the site. More often, however, an entire site was collected as a single unit because this was the only way we could obtain a sufficiently large collection for dating purposes. At a few unusually large and well-preserved sites, such as Hatunmarca (Site 472), we designated multiple sectors from which we made separate surface collections. Recording Information in the Field In highland Mexico, archaeological surveys relied heavily upon in-the-field recording of artifact distributions, architectural remnants, modern land use, and so on, penciled directly onto 1:5000 airphotos. Other kinds of fieldnotes and records were also made, of course, but the airphotos themselves were usually the primary medium for recording basic survey information. This was not possible in Junín because the available airphotos were simply too small in scale. It usually even proved difficult to accurately plot site borders on these airphotos: this was particularly unfortunate because it prevented us from using the airphotos to provide an accurate measure of site surface area. Consequently, one of our major methodological challenges was to work out effective and efficient procedures for recording basic survey data. Some of our efforts were comparatively successful; others were less so. Our recording problems were complicated, to some degree, by the good architectural preservation at many of our Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon sites. This meant that we had to decide how to deal with an almost embarrassingly rich mass of architectural detail. The situation was such that full architectural recording at only a handful of the larger, better-preserved sites would by itself have absorbed a large proportion of an entire fieldseason. Obviously, such full recording was simply out of the question for our project with its extensive, regional focus. On the other hand, it seemed equally undesirable to ignore architectural detail completely, and we quickly realized that some sort of a compromise would have to be worked out. Our inability to encode much data on the airphotos meant that we had to record more information about site size and artifact distribution in the form of fieldnotes, site maps, and photographs. Our decision not to make detailed architectural drawings meant that we had to make greater use of photography to record architectural characteristics and detail. At the same time, our logistical situation was such that we could generally transport only a bare minimum of notebooks, mapping equipment, and photographic apparatus as we moved about laboriously on foot over a rugged landscape with few roads suitable for our field vehicles (in 1975 a recent-vintage Toyota Jeep; in 1976 a new Dodge pickup truck).

39

Frequent and prolonged exposure to rain and wind (and sometimes snow and hail) while working in the field further restricted our ability to use sensitive or delicate recording equipment (we could have used a good GPS device!). Each survey team carried a small Rollei 35 camera—one of the smallest 35-mm film cameras available in the mid-1970s (the model was subsequently discontinued)—and two or three rolls of black-and-white film (Kodak Plus-X, with 36 exposures each). We restricted color-slide photography to the most accessible sites, which we could get fairly close to in our vehicle on weekends or on other special occasions. We took a great many black-andwhite photographs, and in this way attempted to capture the full range of architectural variability at every site we examined. We supplemented this photography with a few drawings of especially well preserved or particularly interesting architectural features. Each survey team carried a small (10 × 20 cm) notebook, with water-resistant paper (a very important feature), in which we recorded two principal kinds of information: (1) a daily log of what area was covered, what sites and features were encountered, and what surface collections were made and where they were placed; and (2) a detailed photographic record. We did not use standard site-report forms in the field (we experimented with them but found that, as had been the case in Mexico, they were too heavy, too apt to blow around a great deal in the wind, and likely to get too wet to be of much use), but at the front of the notebook we placed a checklist of all the kinds of information we wanted to record about each site. This notebook was also used to record general descriptions of architecture, site configuration, and overall site size. We had to discipline ourselves not to get so caught up in individual site detail as to impede the overall progress of the regional survey; at the same time, we needed to record enough information so as to capture what we then perceived as the essential qualities of each site. This difficult task was usually accomplished by having one member of the survey team make a general inspection of the entire site as it was encountered in survey, then write a general narrative description of its general characteristics, referring to the checklist at the front of the notebook in order not to forget to include any specific category of information. Depending on the complexity of the situation, the person writing the site description might ask another team member for assistance in counting buildings of different types, making pace measurements of the site’s maximum length and width (these provided the basic indices for estimating site area), or providing other types of information. Usually the person who wrote the site description would also be responsible for making the photographic record. The other team members would usually spend most of their time making the surface collection. With a few exceptions, we rarely spent more than three hours at even the very largest sites, and we were usually through with our observations within an hour or two; some smaller sites took less than an hour. Only in the case of a handful of exceptionally large, complex sites did we spend a full day, or parts of several days, in collecting and recording information.

40

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

We worked out a recording system in which virtually all our basic survey data were subsumed within four separate categories: Units, Features, Locations, and Collections. Units were coherent architectonic complexes, with well-defined borders (some, in fact, were walled or partially walled). Most Units appear to have been residential settlements, but some were not. Features were isolated architectural remnants—for example, terraces, canals, roads, shrines—that did not appear to have any residential function. Locations were any small areas, either within or outside a Unit or Feature, that attracted our attention for some reason, but which did not have any visible architecture (e.g., an isolated concentration of surface pottery or amorphous rock rubble, or an interesting natural rock formation), or were subdivisions of a Unit that we wanted to designate separately because of local topography or some other consideration. Any area where we made a surface collection—unless it was a complete Unit or Feature—was designated as a Collection. Units, Features, Locations, and Collections were numbered sequentially in the field by each survey team, with an attached suffix (usually the first letter of the team leader’s last name [P = Parsons; H = Hastings]) that identified to which survey team they pertained (e.g., Unit 62-P, Feature 29-H). Due to time constraints, we made no detailed site maps. In retrospect, we realize that our interpretations would have benefited from the availability of more good site maps, and we regret that we did not devote more time to this task. At the time of our fieldwork, however, we felt overwhelmed by what we perceived as an enormous mapping operation. We decided to restrict ourselves to fairly detailed verbal descriptions and photographic recording of the general characteristics of architecture and overall configuration. At many sites we made quick sketch maps of the physical setting and primary architectonic features—such maps were typically drawn in 5–10 minutes from a convenient high point from which the entire site was visible. Fortunately, subsequent UMARP investigations produced several excellent site maps, some of which we have included in Appendix A of this monograph. An approximation of overall site size (in hectares) was usually determined by simply pacing the site’s length and width, refined in some cases in our laboratory with our 1:25,000 base map (see below). Also in retrospect, we wish we had carried out a few smallscale and carefully placed excavations, designed to provide new information about artifact chronology. Such excavations would probably have best been done about one or two years after the main survey had been completed, at a point when we would have been in good position to make sound judgments about which specific sites would have been potentially most useful for this purpose. Had we done this, we would have been able to reanalyze our surface collections to produce a much improved understanding of occupational chronology. Subsequent UMARP investigations did address this chronological issue very successfully for the Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon, although we were not able to reanalyze our own surface collections in light of the UMARP refinements.

The Field Headquarters Our fieldwork in the Wanka Region took place September– December 1975 and May–September 1976. In 1975 we operated from a small hotel near the city of Jauja, and in 1976 we occupied a rented house in Jauja. We spent a total of about seven months at Jauja (about four months with two survey crews in 1975 and three months with one crew in 1976, for a total of eleven crewmonths). We spent an additional four weeks analyzing ceramics at the Museo de Arqueología de la Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos in Lima (two weeks at the end of each fieldseason). Once established in our field headquarters, we simply extended our survey operations as far in all directions as time, energy, and the configuration of local roads and trails permitted. As noted in Chapter 2, because we tended to follow the pattern of existing roads and trails, and because few of these roads penetrated into the high puna ridges adjacent to the main valley floor, we badly undersurveyed the puna component of the regional environment. The comparatively high site density in the kichwa zone of the Wanka Region also meant that because we spent so long recording these remains, we simply ran out of time before we could get very far into the less accessible puna. Laboratory Procedures We performed two kinds of laboratory work in Peru during the course of our fieldwork: (1) writing preliminary site reports at our field headquarters, and (2) completing ceramic analyses at our main storage facility in Lima at the Museo de Arqueología, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos. After we had returned to Ann Arbor, three additional laboratory tasks were carried out: (1) transferring survey data to 1:25,000 base maps, (2) computing site areas, and (3) preparing final site reports. Writing the Preliminary Site Reports We prepared a formal descriptive report for each designated site. However, as noted above, this report was not prepared at the time of the field survey; rather, it was written within one or two weeks of the survey date, on the basis of fieldnotes, maps, and photographs, by one of the persons who had participated in the original survey. Once the survey was underway, our normal practice was to have each person spend an average of one day per week (our normal schedule was five days of fieldwork per week) writing site reports at our field base. In this way, site descriptions were prepared continuously throughout the fieldseason, by individuals who were closely involved in the primary data collection and who were able to bring their fresh memories of the site-survey experience to rounding out the site descriptions. We had our black-and-white film processed locally, and were usually able to have contact prints within about a week or ten days of the survey date. These quickly available photographic prints were a very important part of site-report preparation. Another

Methodology key factor in our ability to order our sites in space was the availability of accurate 1:25,000 contour maps, which we obtained from the national office of the Reforma Agraria in Lima. We soon found that the combination of fieldnotes, topographic maps, photographs, and fresh memories enabled us to put together a fairly complete description of each individual site within less than two weeks of its original survey. Our primary difficulty in describing sites was in assessing occupational chronology. Although the broad, general outlines of ceramic chronology were understood by Matos, the rest of us were less familiar with its details. We learned a good deal as the fieldwork progressed, but our ability to infer chronology in the field was always a problem. Nevertheless, we did make preliminary chronological assessments as we went along, largely based on our examination of surface pottery at the sites and in our field laboratory where the potsherds were washed and labeled soon after they were collected. As noted below, a final examination and reevaluation of all our surface collections was made by Matos and Parsons in Lima during a two-week period at the end of each fieldseason. When we prepared each site description, we also assigned a formal site number. These field numbers were not intended to be permanent; rather, their primary purpose was to help organize and keep track of our growing body of data in the field and laboratory. The site numbers were assigned sequentially, for each major chronological period, by each of the two survey teams we had in operation at any given point in time. Thus, we differentiated discrete Early Horizon (EH), Early Intermediate Period (EI), Middle Horizon (MH), Late Intermediate Period (LI), Late Horizon (LH), and Colonial (Col) occupations by assigning each a number in sequence, as it was located and described. For example, the fifteenth Late Intermediate Period site described by the survey team headed by Parsons in the Jauja subarea would be designated “Jau-LI-15(P).” The numbering sequence was continued sequentially from the 1975 to the 1976 fieldseasons. A multicomponent site would receive a separate site number for each significant component. Thus, if the above-noted Jau-LI15(P) site also had a recognized Early Intermediate Period component, and if this EIP component was the tenth one described by the Parsons team, it would be designated as Jau-EI-10(P). A major problem with our initial site-numbering system was that it was structured on preliminary chronological assessments, which were not always fully secure. In many cases, our more detailed examination of the surface collections in Lima at the end of each fieldseason revealed significant errors in our initial chronological judgments. For example, in some cases our earlier assessments were simply incorrect; in other cases we had not initially recognized other components that existed. Thus, while our initial site-numbering system worked well enough to organize data in the field, we had to devise a different numbering system for the final presentation of our material in this monograph (Appendix A). We used a standard form (Table 4.1) for each site report, with headings that could be expanded and elaborated as appropriate for

41 Table 4.1.  Site-report form. Site No. – Area – Date of Survey – Photo Grid – Crew – Reported by – I.

Natural Environment Elevation – General Zone – Topography of Site Area – Vegetation – Drainage – Erosion – Soil Depth –

II. Modern Land Use III. Archaeological Remains General Condition of Site – Surface Pottery – Architecture – IV. Concluding Remarks V. Photographic Record

Compressed for purposes of easy ­illustration.

specific site conditions. These site reports provided the base from which our final site descriptions in Appendix A have been prepared. Ceramic Analyses in Lima At the end of each fieldseason we transported our surface collections to an archaeological laboratory at the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos in Lima. Here, Matos and Parsons spent a total of approximately four weeks (two weeks in 1975 and two weeks in 1976) examining the collections and appraising their contents. Our main concern was to make more reliable inferences about occupational chronology than had been possible during the preceding months in the field. Our appraisals were largely based on Matos’ insights formed during the course of his earlier studies in the general area. Our procedure was to lay out each collection on a table and examine it carefully. Matos would comment on each sherd and on the collection as a whole, while Parsons took notes and prepared a summary appraisal of the chronology. Some of the better collections and individual specimens were drawn and photographed by Parsons and several laboratory assistants; several additional drawings were subsequently made under Matos’ supervision in 1990 and 1991, and Parsons carried out additional photography in Lima in 2006 and 2010.

42

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Our difficulties in assessing chronology were compounded by (1) the small size of many of our surface collections, and (2) the poor condition of many sherds (badly weathered, small size). Thus, the best chronological markers—vessel form and surface decoration—were often obscure or questionable in our surface collections. As noted above, during the years subsequent to the end of our fieldwork in December 1976, UMARP archaeologists restudied many of the sites we had discovered during our 1975 and 1976 fieldseasons, and additional surveys were undertaken in small areas adjacent to our original survey borders (the largest of which was designated as the Jisse-Pomacancha subregion). A major UMARP contribution was to refine the Late Intermediate Period (LIP) and Late Horizon (LH) ceramic chronology, with definition of early LIP (Wanka I), late LIP (Wanka II), LH (Wanka III), and Colonial (Wanka IV) phases (Appendix B). The occupational chronologies of many (but not all) LIP and LH sites were significantly refined on the basis of published UMARP reports, and we have integrated the UMARP chronological assessments into our site descriptions and maps (Chapter 5, Appendix A). UMARP was just beginning to refine the pre-LIP ceramic chronology when their field operations were suspended after 1986 owing to security problems caused by armed conflicts in the region between Sendero Luminoso guerrillas and the Peruvian armed forces. Hence, our pre-LIP chronology remains much as we left it after our 1976 fieldseason, with the addition of some refinements by Katherine Borges (1988) in her master of arts thesis. Map Making and Computations in Ann Arbor Once back from the field we began the task of transferring our survey data from the field airphotos onto the 1:25,000 Reforma Agraria topographic base maps. The topographic detail on the 1:25,000 maps was usually detailed enough to permit us to position and plot our sites reasonably accurately, once their outlines had been adjusted to the different scales. We then employed a compensating polar planimeter to compute the site areas in hectares from the site outlines on the 1:25,000 base maps. This work was complemented by our practice of systematically pacing the maximum lengths and widths of many sites in the field. Once accurate site positions and outlines had been established on the 1:25,000 base maps, we made inked tracings of these maps, reduced them photostatically, and subsequently scanned them into Adobe Photoshop to a publishable size (Figs. A56–A95). Estimating site area posed a special problem for us, both in the field and in the lab, especially for the numerous multicomponent sites we encountered. As noted earlier, in the field our small-scale airphotos were virtually useless for drawing in site borders and for measuring site areas from such marked boundaries. Our length-width pacing measurements in the field produced fairly reliable rough estimates of site area for the maximum or dominant occupational component, but not necessarily for secondary components, some of which we recognized only after we went back through our collections in the lab in Lima. And, because most

of us lacked good familiarity with the ceramic chronology as we walked over the ground surface, we made no effort in the field to calculate the extents of different chronological components. This meant that we usually had to rely on arbitrary, intuitive means to make rough estimates of site area for secondary components, and too often we had no other recourse than to simply assume that all components extended over the same surface area. UMARP archaeologists subsequently improved upon our efforts at those sites they remeasured in the field, and we have incorporated these refinements into our site descriptions in Appendix A. Site Classification Our site classification should be regarded as tentative and provisional: a heuristic construct that facilitates preliminary interpretation and hypothesis development at an early stage of a long-term, multistage research program, but which may eventually have to be substantially modified or even discarded in light of new information or different perspectives. Earle and colleagues (1987:7) developed a five-level ­typology (Table 4.2) for classifying Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon settlements in the Wanka Region based on UMARP studies in the years subsequent to our JASP fieldwork. This typology, with its emphasis on site population and public architecture, appealed to us, and we have developed a similar classification (see below). We originally considered adopting a site classification, based mainly on the number of structures within a site, similar to what we had used in presenting our data from the adjacent Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region (Parsons et al. 2000). However, this seemed unsuited for the Wanka Region because it was usually much more difficult in this sector of our Junín survey area to estimate the number of structures at a site than it had been for the generally architecturally better-preserved sites in the less intensively cultivated Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region. Furthermore, our Tarama-Chinchaycocha site classification had proved difficult to apply to the pre-Late Intermediate Period sites in those regions where architectural preservation was generally quite poor, and so some variant of the Earle et al. typology seemed preferable.

Table 4.2.  UMARP site classification. Settlement Type

Characteristics

center

over 7500 people; with ceremonial-civic a­ rchitecture and public space

town

2000–7500 people; no clear-cut public architecture

large village

500–2000 people; generally no public architecture

small village

100–500 people; no public architecture

hamlet (Earle et al. 1987:7)

fewer than 100 people; no public architecture

Methodology Considerations in Developing a Site Classification There are two site categories that require classification according to size: (1) settlement sites, where people once lived and performed most domestic tasks, and (2) formal Inca storage facilities (colca sites). As discussed below, we classify settlements primarily in terms of site surface area, and Inca colca sites in terms of numbers of structures per site. Settlement-Site Size: Surface Area As noted above, we faced some significant difficulties in estimating site area, especially at multicomponent sites. Despite these problems, surface area (measured in hectares) is typically our best-controlled and most consistent variable for sites of all periods in the Wanka Region. The histograms in Figures 4.1–4.5 show the site-area distributions of residential sites in the Wanka Region for major periods (also see Table A105). These distributions, together with certain architectural features, provide our best bases for residential site classification. Settlement-Site Size: Population After considerable thought, we decided not to make any systematic attempt to estimate absolute site populations. As noted above, we did make such an effort in the adjacent TaramaChinchaycocha Region (Parsons et al. 2000), where architectural preservation was often good enough in Late Intermediate Pe-

43

riod and Late Horizon sites to permit credible estimates of the numbers of households (structures) at individual sites, with an extension to numbers of people who would have resided in these households. With several important exceptions, we felt that such an effort was not warranted with the information available to us in the Wanka Region where architectural preservation, even for most Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon sites, was usually poor. On the basis of their intensive site mapping and excavations, UMARP archaeologists were subsequently able to produce credible estimates of absolute population for a number of key sites in the Wanka Region—and we note these estimates in individual site descriptions in Appendix A. Nevertheless, because these high-quality data were unavailable for the great majority of our sites in the Wanka Region, we have not followed the UMARP’s lead in estimating site population. Instead, we use site area (in hectares) as the best proxy for site population. Colca-Site Size: Numbers of Structures The histogram in Figure 4.6 suggests six different size classes according to numbers of colcas per site. We label these Classes A (more than 350 structures), B (170–175 structures), C (91–120 structures), D (56–75 structures), E (31–50 structures), and F (fewer than 30 structures). Chronological Problems Our chronological inferences are primarily based upon the surface pottery we collected at each site. Because our ceramic

Figure 4.1.  Site-area distribution for EIP/MH settlement sites.

44

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure 4.2. Site-area distribution for all LIP settlement sites.

Figure 4.3. Site-area distribution for early LIP (Wanka I) settlement sites.

Figure 4.4. Site-area distribution for late LIP (Wanka II) settlement sites.

Methodology

45

Figure 4.5. Site-area distribution for LH (Wanka III) settlement sites, exclusive of Inca imperial centers, facilities, and installations.

Figure 4.6. Histogram of Inca colca sites according to numbers of structures per site.

chronology is still quite coarse, and we have difficulty distinguishing between later Early Intermediate Period and Middle Horizon occupations, we have only four main time periods: (1) the Early Horizon (EH), (2) the Early Intermediate Period/ Middle Horizon (EIP/MH), (3) the Late Intermediate Period (LIP) (divided at many sites restudied by UMARP into early [Wanka I] and late [Wanka II] phases); and (4) if distinctive Inca-style pottery occurs, we can also confidently recognize Late Horizon (LH) occupation (Table 4.3). Where more than one chronological component exists at a site, we attempt to classify each component separately. Consequently, most of our inferences are founded on data that remain chronologically less precise than ideal. This is particularly true for the pre-Late Intermediate Period, and especially for the long Early Intermediate Period and Middle Horizon, which we are usually forced to lump together. We believe that our EIP/ MH designation usually applies to the later Early Intermediate Period and/or Middle Horizon, although in a very few cases (partly thanks to the subsequent efforts of UMARP archaeolo-

gists), we have been able to recognize earlier Early Intermediate Period phases in our collections. Early Horizon pottery, while present at only a few sites in our survey area, was relatively easy to identify, but sometimes proved difficult for us to recognize when overwhelmed by larger quantities of younger occupation. It has proved difficult to define Middle Horizon occupation in several parts of the Andean sierra, especially outside the Tiwanaku and Wari Regions, the heartlands of the two largest highland Middle Horizon centers. Topic and Topic (1978) note that they were unable to do it satisfactorily in the Cajamarca Region of northern Peru. Grosboll (1988:74) reports a similar difficulty in the Huánuco Region of north-central highland Peru. And, much more recently, the Qasawirka phase defined by Bauer and colleagues (2010:61–64) in the Andahuaylas Region is dated 300 B.C.–1000 A.D., essentially equivalent to the time span of our Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon. LeBlanc (1981) and Hastorf and colleagues (1989) note a comparable problem in the Wanka Region (although Browman [1970] felt he could distinguish two Middle Horizon phases

46

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table 4.3.  Regional chronology. Estimated Absolute Chronology

This Project (adapted from Rowe 1962)

1532 A.D.

Colonial

1470 A.D.

Late Horizon

Late Intermediate Period 1000 A.D.

Middle Horizon 600 A.D.

Browman 1970 Wanka Region Main Mantaro Valley

Colonial (Wanka IV) Arhuaturo-Inca

Wanka III

Arhuaturo

Wanka II

Matapukio

Wanka I

Quinsahuanca Calpish Huacrapukio

Early Intermediate Period 0 A.D./B.C.

Huacrapukio II–III/Wanka 0 (difficult to identify) Huacrapukio II

Usupukio Uchupas

Huacrapukio I

(Late Formative)

...................................... Cochachongos (Early Horizon 5–10)

........................................... Cochachongos (Late Formative)

Early Horizon

Pirawapukio (Early Horizon 1–4)

Pirawapukio (Early Formative)

1000 B.C.

800 B.C.

300 B.C.

900 B.C.

Hastorf et al. 1989 Wanka Region Main Mantaro Valley

(Middle Formative)

Initial Period (Early Formative) 1800 B.C. Archaic (Preceramic)

there). Borges’ (1988) analyses of ceramics from excavations in a pre-Late Intermediate Period site near Jauja suggested an ability to distinguish Middle Horizon ceramics in both excavation and survey collections in the Wanka Region, but her differentiation is based on subtle shifts in the percentages of key decorated types, and there were close resemblances in her Middle Horizon phases between antecedent Early Intermediate Period and subsequent early Late Intermediate Period ceramics (Borges 1988:34). Investigators working in rockshelter deposits in the Junín puna consistently find an apparent occupational gap between Formative (Initial Period and Early Horizon) and Late Intermediate Period levels (Lavallee and Julien 1975; Lavallee 1977). Working in the Huanuco Region at the northern edge of the sierra central,

Tinyari Jurpac

Grosboll (1988:74) reports that “little differentiation exists in the [ceramic] wares that post-date the Early Intermediate Period” and in her survey she was able to identify very few sites from her “Middle Period” (ca. A.D. 500–1300). Recent studies on the Peruvian south coast also indicate considerable difficulty in separating traditionally defined Early Intermediate and Middle Horizon ceramic phases (Silverman 1988, 1993a, 1993b). McEwan (1989:55) notes a similar problem with the definition of Early Intermediate Period ceramics in the Lucre Basin, near Cuzco in Peru’s southern sierra: here it has proved difficult to define a ceramic assemblage chronologically intermediate between the Late Formative and Middle Horizon. These diverse investigations indicate that our study is not unique

Methodology in its definitional problems with Middle Horizon and Early Intermediate Period ceramic chronology. Although we found that it is relatively easy to distinguish between Formative and Early Intermediate Period ceramics (Appendix B), we have been unable to subdivide the long Formative Period (Initial Period and Early Horizon) in our surface collections from the Wanka Region. At the other end of the sequence, we are still unable to recognize Late Horizon occupation unless Inca-style pottery occurs. While such Inca-style pottery is usually unmistakable, it is not fully clear that all Late Horizon occupation in the Wanka Region necessarily contains these easily recognizable ceramic types, and thus it remains potentially indistinguishable from the antecedent late Late Intermediate Period (LeBlanc [1981:173–74] and Costin [1986:40] report a similar problem in the study of UMARPcollected ceramics). Furthermore, when Inca-style pottery cooccurs with local Late Intermediate Period ceramics, we cannot be sure whether the occupation is pure Late Horizon or a mixture of Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon; consequently, we label such sites as LIP/LH. UMARP studies subsequently made some progress on this difficult issue, and we have incorporated their insights wherever relevant in Appendix A. Even our chronologically most secure phase, the Late Intermediate Period, is over 400 years long, and until the subsequent UMARP refinements, we were unable to subdivide it. We have integrated the UMARP chronological refinements into our site descriptions (Appendix A) in the cases of those JASP sites where UMARP archaeologists subsequently carried out additional studies. However, there remains a large residue of JASP sites (n = 90) that were not restudied by UMARP, and so the Late Intermediate Period sites in this residue group remain dated only to the general Late Intermediate Period level. We follow the traditional pan-Andean chronology (Rowe 1962) (Table 4.3). Although this still has only a limited (although increasingly strong) foundation in absolute dating in the Peruvian sierra central, radiocarbon dates from Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon and Late Intermediate Period occupations in the Wanka Region generated by UMARP (Borges 1988:21; Costin 1986:46; D’Altroy 1992:55–57; Earle et al. 1987; Hastorf 1983:216) suggest that the later part of the traditional chronology is essentially correct, at least in its general outlines, in our survey area. Recent radiocarbon dates from Middle Horizon and Late Intermediate Period contexts in the Andahuaylas Region (Bauer and Kellett 2010:95–96) also fit reasonably well into the traditional chronological framework. Functional Considerations Inferences about site function remain more problematic than we would like. One of our most basic assumptions is that there are valid prehispanic analogs to historically known patterns of “traditional” human occupation in the Andean sierra. Although this might seem inherently reasonable, it must be kept in mind that the further removed in time a site is from the historic period, the less likely it is that the site can be understood in terms of

47

known historic patterns. Furthermore, it must always be remembered that “traditional” historic period Andean adaptations have developed in the face of two overwhelming external influences during the centuries since initial European contact in A.D. 1532: (1) Spanish conquest in the 1530s and three subsequent centuries of colonialism, including the reducción policies implemented under Viceroy Franciso de Toledo between 1570 and 1580 that so greatly altered indigenous settlement patterns as new, nucleated villages and towns were formed from previously much more dispersed occupation, and as indigenous populations declined in the face of introduced diseases and onerous labor demands (e.g., Gade and Escobar 1982); and (2) the industrial revolution and the world system it spawned during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (e.g., Orlove 1977a, 1977b, 1985). These forces produced profound technological, demographic, sociological, organizational, ideological, ecological, and environmental changes whose impacts have been strongly felt at virtually every level from the household to the nation-state, even in the most isolated parts of the Andean sierra. Consequently, historically documented adaptive patterns must be carefully “filtered” before they can be projected back with any confidence to the prehispanic era. Herders vs. Cultivators Historic analogy permits us to draw a very basic distinction between camelid herders and plant cultivators in the Central Andean sierra: herders can be associated with settlements in the puna grasslands (> 4000 masl), above the limits of effective agriculture, especially when these sites include walled enclosures similar to historically known livestock corrals (Flannery et al. 1989; Flores 1975, 1976, 1977, 1979, 1988; Kuznar 1990; Palacios 1977). Cultivators, on the other hand, can be associated with lower-elevation settlements in the agriculturally productive kichwa zone (Bastien 1978a; Brush 1976; Camino et al. 1981; Goland 1992; Matos et al. 1958; Mayer 1979; Mitchell 1976; Skar 1982; Treacy 1989). This neat herder-cultivator dichotomy becomes somewhat less tidy when one realizes, as noted in Chapter 2, that many historic adaptations in the Andean sierra have directly combined herding and plant cultivation (Brush 1976; Brush and Guillet 1985; Fonseca and Mayer 1988; McCorkle 1987; Molinié-Fioravanti 1986; Webster 1971, 1973; West 1988; Winterhalder and Thomas 1978). Equally discomforting, from an archaeological perspective, is the common spatial discontinuity of such multizone adaptations: the classic “archipelago” pattern so typical of the historic period in the Central Andes whereby components of individual households, individual communities, and individual local polities may be physically represented by contemporary “sites” in several different attitudinally defined ecological niches (Murra 1972; Webster 1971). Thus, we cannot assume that the often-assumed equation “site = settlement = community” is necessarily valid for any particular time or place. Indeed, the historic and ethnographic literature clearly indicates that for preindustrial adaptations, such an equation has seldom been applicable to the Andean sierra.

48

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Ethnographic studies of Central Andean puna pastoralists (e.g., Flannery et al. 1989; Flores 1977, 1988) indicate that communities of herders are often composed of multiple local settlements. Many (even most) of these settlements are not fully occupied over a complete annual cycle as flocks and shepherds move throughout a landscape on a transhumant round in the quest for adequate pastures. Recognizing Residential Occupation At an even more basic level, we distinguish between “settlements” (i.e., locations with significant domestic residential functions) and a variety of non-settlements. This distinction is sometimes based on the distribution of architectural remains for which residential or nonresidential function may reasonably be inferred. In this regard we have been assisted greatly by the findings of several earlier archaeological studies in other parts of the Andean sierra that have revealed that circular or rectangular buildings—very comparable in size and character to those we find at so many of the sites in the Wanka Region—contain cooking hearths and the loci for various domestic activities, such as grinding seeds, storage, and refuse disposal (Browman 1970; Earle et al. 1987; Hastings 1985; Hastorf et al. 1989; Lavallee 1973; Lavallee and Julien 1973, 1983; Morris 1972; Morris and Thompson 1985; Schjellerup 1997; Thompson 1974). Our ability to infer a domestic residential function is directly dependent upon the preservation of recognizable circular (or approximately circular) structures, with diameters between about 3.0 and 7.0 m. Where architectural preservation is poor, as is so often the case for pre-LIP periods, our inferences about this function are correspondingly weaker. Furthermore, our observations of architecture were too cursory to permit us to systematically make reliable inferences about the elite vs. commoner status of the inhabitants (as has been done, for example, by subsequent UMARP studies [e.g., Hastorf and Johannesson 1993; D’Altroy and Hastorf 2001]). Nevertheless, subsequent UMARP excavations in several structures we had previously regarded as “residential” did indeed produce convincing evidence of domestic functions. Consequently, we are reasonably confident that most Late Intermediate Period circular structures between about 3 and 7 m in diameter were residential buildings. We paid only limited attention to lithic artifacts in our survey, and the distribution and occurrence of stone tools and debris played no role in our site classification. However, we did notice some stone tools, and almost invariably they occur at “residential” sites—some of these are grinding stones (fragments of manos and metates), which can be associated with standard domestic activities (e.g., Russell 1988). How Do We Recognize and Distinguish Permanent vs. Seasonal/ Temporary/Sporadic/Ephemeral Residence, and How Do We Determine How Many Structures Comprise a Domestic Household? Although we feel fairly confident in associating circular structures measuring 3–7 m in diameter with domestic residence,

it is much more difficult to deal with the degree to which such residences were permanent at any specific locality where some type of householding activity may have occurred. Similarly, it remains difficult for us to estimate how many structures a household might expectably have had, or what architectonic configuration might signal a household unit (e.g., clustering of buildings around a common patio). We have little way of approximating past household composition. All of these questions are, of course, basic to our notion of what prehispanic “residential occupation” actually involved, and our present inability to resolve these critical issues poses additional problems in our effort to develop a useful site classification. Subsequent UMARP studies made substantial contributions to these very basic questions (e.g., D’Altroy and Hastorf 2001). Ethnographic sources tell us that over an annual cycle both agriculturalists’ and herders’ households in highland Peru can be widely dispersed and quite varied in location, social composition, architectural character, and types of domestic functions performed. For example, in the case of people who are predominantly agriculturalists but who care for some camelids, the members of some households are not always fully assembled at any given place or time, as some subset of household personnel is away for extended periods caring for flocks at small huts in high pastures, or planting or harvesting maize at temporary camps at lower altitudes (Brush 1976, 1977; Camino 1980; Camino et al. 1981; Fonseca and Mayer 1978, 1988; Goland 1992; Isbell 1978; Mayer 1979, 1985; Skar 1982; Urton 1986; Valderrama and Escalante 1988; Valle 1970; Webster 1971, 1973; Yamamoto 1981, 1985). In the case of full-time herders, the seasonal search for better pasture often requires that some, many, or all members of a household move to different quarters for some period of time— especially as better grass becomes available at some higher elevations during the rainy season, or as good grass is reduced to a few well-watered localities during the dry season (Flannery et al. 1989; Flores 1977, 1979, 1988; Ossio 1978; Palacios 1977; Rabey and Merlino 1988). It is also clear from these ethnographic sources that land tenure arrangements have a profound impact on the manner and degree to which households periodically relocate or break up or reunify over an annual cycle. Many people are severely constrained in their use of natural resources by communally administered sectorial fallowing regimes, by communally sanctioned differential access to pasture lands, or by the unavailability of private land in the hands of elite landlords (e.g., ranchers, hacendados, industrial corporations). One comparatively uniform element in all these descriptions of household movement, relocation, fission, and fusion is that the size, formality, and quality of domestic architecture at any given residential locality seems to correlate directly with how much time the full household spends there. At such places, where household members spent most of their time together as a complete unit (even though this time may be comparatively short), one is apt to find the fullest complement of features associated with household cooking, storage, sleeping, ritual, and

Methodology craft production; and, there is some indication that such localities are often (although not always) the largest relatively nucleated settlements in any local region (e.g., Webster 1971, 1973). As we attempt to appraise the residential nature of archaeological sites on the basis of surficial architectural remains, we have been conditioned by the Andean ethnographic literature to assume that higher degrees of residential permanence are associated with: (1) larger site size, larger building size, higher quality construction (e.g., use of mud mortar, door lintels, wall niches), and greater architectonic formality (e.g., structures grouped around common patios; the presence of streets and alleyways; the presence of separate storage and living buildings); and (2) the degree to which both household and supra-household ritual activities may be apparent. The Andean ethnographic literature also contains outstanding exceptions to these generalizations— for example, the large, nucleated, architecturally complex, strategically located central Q’eros settlements that are largely vacant most of the year (Webster 1971, 1973). We recognize the tentative and uncertain character of our inferences about residential permanence. In well-preserved sites where architectural remains are abundant and clearly recognizable, it is necessary to consider how many buildings comprise a household if we are interested in estimating the numbers of households residing there. A complicating factor is that we cannot always be certain about the possible specialized use of some circular buildings for storage, cooking, or other single-use, or limited-use, functions. UMARP archaeologists have made a convincing case for the sociological significance of patio groupings comprising multiple Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon structures arranged around a single open area in which different kinds of activities were carried out by a number of closely linked households. Our interpretations of structure function are more difficult, of course, for settlements with long-term occupation where the possibility of modifications over time of specific structures and locations for different uses (including burial, storage, abandonment, and/or trash deposition) must be considered. At this point we merely assume that a site’s total building count offers a reasonable proxy for the total number of households that formerly inhabited a settlement at any given time, and that settlements with greater or fewer numbers of buildings contained, respectively, greater or fewer numbers of households. Nonresidential Architecture The functions of some nonresidential archaeological features (e.g., tombs [chullpas], storage structures [colcas], agricultural terraces, ancient ridged fields, roads, canals, and camelid corrals) often (although not always) seem fairly clear-cut on the basis of straightforward ethnographic analogy. However, some tombs and storage structures are often more difficult to discern on the basis of surface remains. Tombs sometimes proved very easy for us to recognize: looting and erosion had sometimes exposed quantities of human

49

bone, and local informants occasionally told us about localities where such bone had been recently exposed and removed in the course of modern cultivation or construction activities. As in the adjacent Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region, as our work proceeded in the Wanka Region, we encountered some cases of exposed human bone in association with distinctive architectural features: usually small structures, both above-ground and subterranean, of both circular and rectangular form. We sometimes associate these relatively small architectural forms with tomb functions, even where we did not find associated human bone. At the same time, we recognize the possibility that similar architectural forms may have had different or multiple functions, and that some of the features we classify as “tombs” may actually have been intended for certain types of utilitarian storage, for ritual offerings, or for some still-unrecognized activity. There is also the possibility that structures used for storage or ritual offerings or domestic activities during earlier stages of use could have been subsequently adapted as tombs—for example, the Colonial Period burials in abandoned prehispanic sites as indigenous people strove to remove their recently deceased relatives from newly imposed Christian cemeteries (e.g., Allen 1982; Bandelier 1904). Our potential difficulty in distinguishing tombs on the basis of surface architectural remains is highlighted by Grosboll’s (1988:93–96) report of the considerable variety of Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon tomb and burial types in her study area in the highland Huánuco Region of north-central Peru. Our own finding of multiple Late Intermediate Period tomb types in the adjacent Tarama-Chinchaychocha Region (Parsons et al. 2000:172–74) reinforces this issue. Storage has proved to be an even more difficult function for us to deal with. Except for Grosboll’s (1988) investigations in the Huánuco Region, most archaeological studies of storage in the Peruvian highlands have dealt exclusively with the very distinctive Inca imperial facilities that usually occur in formal terraced rows, well detached from other types of architecture (D’Altroy 1992; D’Altroy and Hastorf 1984; Hyslop 1990; LeVine 1985, 1992; Matos 1994; Morris 1967, 1981; Morris and Thompson 1970, 1985). Grosboll (1988:92–93), on the other hand, has found that non-imperial Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon storage facilities can take diverse and subtle forms, including subterranean well-like shafts, chambers attached to houses, and small cabinet-like structures inside houses. Aside from Grosboll’s diverse categories, we have few guides to the physical appearance of pre-Inca or non-imperial domestic, community, or regional storage facilities. In the adjacent Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region, we were able to associate pre-Late Horizon storage at the community or regional-polity levels with distinctive multistory rectangular structures (Parsons et al. 2000:175–79). However, these distinctive structures are virtually absent in the Wanka Region, and we still are not altogether certain that those in the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region functioned exclusively for storage.

50

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Public Architecture Except for presence-absence information about a few types of decorated pottery, we have virtually no control over the spatial variability within or between sites of ceramic, stone, bone, or metal artifacts. Thus, our ability to discern “centrality” must depend largely on variability in stone architecture and settlement size. In this regard, we have been guided by the work of de Montmollin (1989), working in southern Mexico, who has demonstrated the importance for site classification at the regional level of the ability to recognize architectural features associated with public functions. Just as importantly, he has shown that site area is not necessarily the most important index of a site’s sociopolitical centrality. Following de Montmollin’s lead, we have tried to recognize and use public (i.e., supra-household) architecture in a similar way in the Wanka Region. This has not been an easy or straightforward task, in large part because the specific forms and configurations of post-Formative public architecture are not always well understood in the Andean sierra, especially for pre-Inca contexts. This contrasts to the comparatively well known plazatemple complex that appears to characterize formal public ritual architecture over time and space throughout much of prehispanic Mesoamerica. We have tried to be sensitive to the occurrence and distribution of unusual architecture. The main problem has been that the greater part of this sensitivity developed only after our fieldwork was completed, and we paid less attention than we should have to the niceties of architectural and architectonic detail when we were actually in the field. Throughout our fieldwork in the Wanka Region, we were unable to recognize public architecture in any systematic or predictable way outside a few of the very largest Late Horizon sites with obvious Inca overlay. Rarely, if ever, did we encounter clear-cut examples of such architecture while we were in the field. From time to time we recognized that some architectural features were unusually large, unusually prominent, unusually well built, or unusually styled. Similarly, we occasionally realized that we were encountering complexes of architecture that, despite the unprepossessing appearance of any individual element, stood out as unusual in their architectonic totality. However, it was not until we went systematically back over our fieldnotes years later that we came to have more confidence in our ability to infer the presence of public architecture in our survey area. At least one other regional archaeological study in the Andean sierra has reported a similar dearth of easily recognizable public architecture (Hyslop 1976:154, 1977a, 1977b, for the western part of the Titicaca Basin). In most cases, even the pre-Late Horizon architecture that we now suggest might have had public functions is subtle and seldom “jumps out of the ground” at the archaeologist. Furthermore, we are far from completely confident that these architectural complexes do, in fact, reflect public functions, and we have little expectation that this list necessarily includes all sites where public architecture may actually exist. Our difficulty in incorporating

public architecture into our site typology reflects an uncertainty about the degree to which we control this important variable. Isolated shrines, where a variety of community and regional rituals are performed at localities well removed from residential activities, are another form of public architecture that has been historically and ethnographically documented in the Andean sierra (e.g., Bastien 1978a, 1978b; Bauer 1991, 1992a; Dillehay 1990; Duviols 1984; Mariscotti de Gorlitz 1978; Poole 1982, 1984, 1991; Quispe 1984; Rowe 1980; Sallnow 1991; Sherbondy 1986; Thompson 1982). These include both natural features (e.g., caves; rock outcrops; prominent hills and mountains; springs, streams, and lakes; flat surfaces) and artificial features (stone altars and platforms; pits; wooden crosses; piles of stone). Historically and ethnographically documented shrines of this type commonly occur at topographically prominent or regionally strategic localities, although sometimes they are not placed so as to be easily seen. Although we recognize that isolated shrines, as a class, are likely to be difficult to recognize archaeologically, we are nevertheless persuaded that their importance merits the effort to do so; consequently, we include Isolated Shrines as a formal site category. In any event, we recognized only a few such sites in the Wanka Region. “Defensive” Architecture Andean archaeologists commonly assume that walled sites, especially those on hilltops, reflect a defensive function in the context of intensive warfare (e.g., Arkush and Stanish 2005; D’Altroy 1992; Earle 1972; Earle et al. 1980, 1987; Hastorf 1989; Hyslop 1976, 1977a; Lathrap 1970; Thompson 1970; Lumbreras 1974; Matos 1980; Parsons and Hastings 1988; Topic and Topic 1978; Schjellerup 1997; Willey 1953). We recognize that walled hilltop sites are highly defensible, and we also have some sympathy with the notion that people would not normally have chosen to reside at such hilltop locations (which are so difficult of access and “inefficient” in terms of conducting normal socioeconomic routines) without great need. We had originally planned to incorporate defensibility considerations into our site classification. However, as we continued to reflect on the nuances of our data, we became convinced that we could not simply assume that intensive warfare or fear of attack necessarily produced the walled hilltop settlements that are an important component of the archaeological landscape in our Junín survey area (Parsons et al. 1997, 2000). We decided not to formally incorporate defensibility as an element in our site typology because we came to believe that it is necessary to demonstrate, rather than to simply assume, that walled hilltop sites are a response to intensive warfare.

Methodology The Junín Archaeological Survey Project (JASP) Site Typology for the Wanka Region As discussed above, our site classification attempts to combine basic economic orientation, physical size, and sociopolitical centrality, but recognizes the difficulty and imprecision of this task. We use site area as the primary variable in our classification of settlement sites with a primary residential function, taking into account, where possible, complementary information about architecture, abundance of rock rubble, and artifact density. In distinguishing our site-size categories, we note that in the histograms shown in Figures 4.1–4.5, five general site-size groupings seem to emerge: (1) < 1.0 ha, (2) 1–5 ha, (3) 5–10 ha, (4) 10–20 ha, and (5) > 20 ha. We label these, respectively, as (1) hamlets/ camps, (2) small villages, (3) large villages, (4) very large villages/local centers, and (5) local or regional centers. I. Settlements. Sites where we are confident that the main function was domestic residence. Because our survey extended so little into the puna zone, we do not formally distinguish between agricultural and herding sites as we did in the TaramaChinchaycocha Region, where our survey included a high proportion of puna terrain (Parsons et al. 2000). Camp or Hamlet. Usually less than 1.0 ha in area. Many may represent temporary or seasonal occupation. Small Village. Generally 1–5 ha in area. Probably mostly with permanent occupation. Large Village. Generally 5–10 ha in area. Probably all with permanent residential occupation. Very Large Village/Local Center. Villages generally lack any indication of public architecture; local centers sometimes contain evidence of such architecture, or are unusually large compared to other contemporary sites. Probably all with permanent residential occupation. We suspect that these two site classes may best be combined into a single category. Center. Defined as “local” or “regional” depending on relative size and architectural complexity, sometimes with good evidence of public architecture. Probably all with permanent residential occupation. II. Isolated Cemeteries. In contrast to the adjacent TaramaChinchaycocha Region (Parsons et al. 2000), we found relatively few of these sites in the Wanka Region. We suspect that there were probably originally many more that are now very difficult or impossible to recognize in the intensively cultivated kichwa landscape where so many small archaeological sites have been obliterated by historic period land-use practices.

51

III. Inca Imperial Installations. Sites of unquestionably Incaic architectonic inspiration and construction. Provincial Center. Relatively large nucleus, and substantial public architecture and associated storage facilities. Local Center. Relatively small nucleus, with modest public architecture and storage facilities. Imperial Installation. Comparatively small sites, with clear architectonic Incaic affiliations, such as tambos, way stations, or ritual complexes. Storage Facility. Formal configurations of circular and/ or rectangular structures (colcas) usually constructed atop stone-faced terraces and situated outside residential settlements. As noted above, our Inca colca sites fall into six classes in terms of numbers of structures per site: Class A. More than 350 structures. Class B. 170–175 structures. Class C. 91–120 structures. Class D. 56–75 structures. Class E. 31–50 structures. Class F. Fewer than 30 structures. Road. A section of a formal roadway, often connecting two or more Inca imperial sites (Hyslop 1984). Sometimes only identifiable in segments. IV. Isolated Features. No residential functions. Camelid Corral. Irregular stone-walled enclosures. Agricultural Terrace. We recorded only stone-walled terraces. Although we casually noted the presence of numerous, less formal earth terraces (referred to as “lynchets” by Hastorf [1983:151] and others) throughout our survey area, we did not systematically record their presence. Ridged Field. These have also been previously reported for the Wanka Region by Earle et al. (1980), Hastorf and Earle (1985), and Hastorf (1983). These features are similar to those studied extensively in the Titicaca Basin (Erickson 1985, 1987, 1988; Kolata 1986; Lennon 1983; Smith et al. 1968) and elsewhere in South America (Parsons and Denevan 1967), and they bear some resemblance to the “chinampas” of highland Mexico (Armillas 1971; Parsons et al. 1985). Shrine. Usually a mound or architectural complex in a hilltop setting. Canal Segment. Usually a linear stone-lined feature, sometimes with a substantial stone foundation. V. Uncertain Function. Any site that does not fit into any of the above categories. This designation is most commonly used for a site’s secondary (or tertiary) chronological component whose character is totally obscured by the primary occupation (either prehispanic or modern). Occasionally we use this category for sites about which we have very little information because of erosion, destruction through looting, and so on.

52

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Reactions to Our Fieldwork by Contemporary Inhabitants of the Study Area

Although it took us some time to fully realize it, our survey operations were regarded with suspicion and concern by some modern inhabitants of the Wanka Region. This created some problems for our fieldwork. Parsons’ earlier surveys in highland Mexico had encountered their share of suspicion and mistrust on the part of modern local people. In Mexico these problems invariably related to local concerns about development projects and their impact on continued access to agricultural lands and water sources: archaeologists were often mistaken for engineers engaged in preliminary studies to implement such projects as road building, housing developments, or water-source diversions. In virtually all cases, concerned local people in the Valley of Mexico were reassured when the archaeologists presented supporting documents from local community authorities that explained and sanctioned their activities. When we began our fieldwork in Junín, we anticipated this same kind of concern on the part of local people, and we took care to acquire similar kinds of supporting documentation from local authorities. Such documents sometimes proved to be useful, and, in fact, we experienced no undue difficulty in the northern sector of our Junín study area (the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region). However, what we were completely unprepared for in the Wanka Region was the degree to which we were sometimes equated with legendary vampire-like beings (pistakos) who, according to long-established local traditions, prey upon native Peruvians

in order to consume their blood and flesh, or to acquire these substances for the consumption of others similar to themselves. Pistakos are typically reputed to be tall, light-skinned, and fairhaired—a generic description that fitted several members of our group fairly well. Perhaps half the people we encountered during our field surveys regarded us as somewhat interesting and unusual, but essentially harmless, and even deserving of some assistance in making our way through their community landscapes. Another third, or more, of those we met simply ignored us, perhaps out of fear but perhaps simply because of their disinterest, making no effort to either help or hinder us. On the other hand, a small number of individuals reacted to our presence with open hostility, which on one occasion erupted into actual physical violence, and which on two or three other occasions posed the threat of such violence (Liffman 1977). Once we fully realized what we were up against, we felt obliged to mount a major public relations campaign. This took the form of interviews with local newspaper and radio reporters, discussions of our work at local schools, and hiring local escorts to accompany us as we moved around the peripheries of modern settlements. These measures were all effective to some degree, but we never completely recovered psychologically from the few frightening encounters we did have, and we were seldom fully at ease at any time during our fieldwork in the Wanka Region. All of these problems, of course, occurred well before the massive escalation of political violence and tension throughout much of Peru during the 1980s and early 1990s.

Chapter 5

History of the UMARP Project (1977–1986), and Comparisons of JASP and UMARP Site Data Timothy K. Earle and Jeffrey R. Parsons

The first part of this chapter, Part I, by Timothy K. Earle, provides a brief history of the UMARP research activities and the results of fieldwork carried out between 1977 and 1986. The second part, Part II, by Jeffrey R. Parsons, compares the sites studied by both JASP and UMARP in terms of their respective estimates of site size and occupational chronology.

The Field Research Campaigns of UMARP Descriptions of the fieldwork provide references to the primary publications that present details on sites, architectural layout, chronology and function of UMARP sites. Listed are the primary sources available for the long-term settlement occupations at Pancan (UMARP Site J1, JASP Site 394), Hatunmarca (UMARP Site J2, JASP Site 472), Tragadero (UMARP Site J3, JASP Site 591), and Tragadero Viejo (UMARP Site J71, JASP Site 474); the Wanka settlements of Tunanmarca (UMARP Site J7, JASP Site 468), Chawin (UMARP Site J40, JASP Site 461), Umpamalca (UMARP Site J41, JASP Site 476), Ushnu (UMARP Site J49, JASP Site 449), Marca (UMARP Site J54, JASP Site 431), Huancas de la Cruz (UMARP Site J59, JASP Site 611), and Chucchus (UMARP Site J74, JASP Site 556); the distinctive puna settlement of J66 (JASP Site 401); the Inca administrative center of Hátun Xauxa (UMARP Site J5, JASP Site 550); and all known Inca facilities in the Upper Mantaro research region including the large storage silo complexes (colcas) found above Hátun Xauxa and distributed through the valley. In addition to major grants described below, numerous small grants from UCLA were given to UMARP’s participants. Although studying common themes, work was organized into three field campaigns, each with distinctive goals, field methods, and personnel.

Part I In 1977, based on the extensive settlement survey that is reported in this monograph—the Junín Archaeological Survey Project (JASP) conducted in 1975–76 by Jeffrey Parsons, Charles Hastings and Ramiro Matos—a University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) research team established the Upper Mantaro Archaeological Research Project (UMARP) to investigate research themes related to the growth of chiefdoms, Inca imperial conquest, and changing subsistence and political economies. The codirectors of UMARP were Timothy Earle, Terence D’Altroy, Christine Hastorf, and Catherine Scott (LeBlanc); the doctoral students involved in the UMARP field research included Cathy Costin, Melissa Hagstrum, Heidi Lennstrom, Terry LeVine, Glenn Russell, and Elsie Sandefur. I summarize briefly the UMARP fieldseasons and provide a bibliography of publications describing the field investigations and analyses of datasets according to the project’s major research themes. Reference is made to specific sites on which UMARP conducted research so as to provide linkage to the settlement descriptions in this monograph. 53

54

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Field Campaign I (1977–1979) Field strategy, operations, and preliminary results are available in our first monograph (Earle et al. 1980). Jeffrey Parsons provided copies for all original site-survey forms and aerial photographs with site locations, and UMARP conducted three fieldseasons focused on refining the ceramic chronology, and collecting primary data on the Late Intermediate Period to Late Horizon transition and the changing subsistence economy linked to the growth of Wanka chiefdoms. In the first season (1977), we worked initially in Ramiro Matos’ laboratory on Parsons’ Mantaro ceramic collections, then established the logistics for UMARP in the highlands, and excavated test units in the deeply stratified settlement deposits at the multicomponent sites of Pancan (UMARP Site J1, JASP Site 394), Tragadero (UMARP Site J3, JASP Site 591), and Hatunmarca (UMARP Site J2, JASP Site 472). We also conducted exploratory mapping and surface collections at the large Wanka settlement of Hatunmarca (UMARP Site J2, JASP Site 472) and the Inca administrative site of Hátun Xauxa (UMARP Site J5, JASP Site 550). The primary goals were to recover collections to refine the ceramic seriation that could separate the Late Intermediate Period into two phases (Wanka I and Wanka II) and to demonstrate the feasibility for surface collection and mapping procedures as means to characterize sites prior to large-scale excavations. Two houses were excavated at Hatunmarca (UMARP Site J2) to determine site preservation, especially of botanical remains. For her master’s thesis at UCLA, Terry LeVine (1979) compiled ethnohistorical documents available for the Upper Mantaro region. In the second season (1978), we collected the primary evidence to describe two topics: the development of Wanka chiefdoms during the Late Intermediate Period (LeBlanc 1981; see also Earle 2005), and the sociopolitical transformations associated with Inca imperial conquest in the Late Horizon (D’Altroy 1981, 1992, 2002). To continue work on the ceramic chronology, test units were excavated at the small settlement of Tragadero (UMARP Site J3, JASP Site 591) and at the large Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon settlements respectively of Tunanmarca (UMARP Site J7, JASP Site 468) and Marca (UMARP Site J54, JASP Site 431). Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon settlements originally located by Parsons were revisited, surface collected, and tested to refine their dates of occupation, functions, and relationships to the conquering empire. Inca storage facilities and other Inca sites were mapped and described (D’Altroy 1981, 1992). In the third season (1979), we collected the primary evidence to describe the changing subsistence base for Wanka I and II (LIP) and Wanka III (LH) settlements. Work included a modern landuse survey; an ethnoarchaeological study of farming practices; mapping of agricultural sites (including terrace complexes, ridged fields and drained field complexes) and irrigation systems; and test excavations of midden deposits for the recovery of macrofossil botanical remains. Prehistoric settlements excavated include

the multicomponent sites of Pancan (UMARP Site J1, JASP Site 394), Tragadero Viejo (UMARP Site J71, JASP Site 474), and Ushnu (UMARP Site J49, JASP Site 449); the Late Intermediate Period sites of Tunanmarca (UMARP Site J7, JASP Site 468) and Umpamalca (UMARP Site J41, JASP Site 476); and the Late Horizon settlement of Marca (UMARP Site J54, JASP Site 431). The excavations and regional mapping are available in the dissertation and subsequent book and articles by Hastorf (1983, 1993; Hastorf and Earle 1985). Additionally, individual storage silos (colcas) were excavated at the Inca storage complexes of UMARP Sites J16 and J17 (JASP Sites 547 and 554) (D’Altroy and Hastorf 1984). A Fulbright-Hays Fellowship awarded to Christine Hastorf funded this work. Field Campaign II (1982–1984) Large-scale excavations were conducted on a range of Wanka II and III settlements. The work stands as the largest and most comprehensive study of household archaeology in the Andes. Field strategies, operations, and preliminary results are presented in our second monograph (Earle et al. 1987). A multiyear grant from the National Science Foundation (BNS8203723) supported household excavations in six Wanka II and III settlements. The goal was to describe the changing nature of subsistence, craft production, and consumption activities within households representing elite and commoner households at central and secondary settlements both immediately before (Wanka II) and after (Wanka III) imperial conquest. The first step was to obtain new aerial photographs of the settlements (on which we mapped the extensive standing architecture) and to estimate the size, architectural density, and population of the settlements. The unit of analysis for excavation was the patio group, a residential complex with one or more stone houses facing a separate patio space. We started with nearly complete excavations of several patio groups to determine the patterning of archaeological remains, and then sampled a much larger number of households to assess the nature of variability in household activities. We excavated in total 30 patio groups as follows: 6 from the large multicomponent site of Hatunmarca (UMARP Site J2, JASP Site 472); 8 from the large Wanka II site of Tunanmarca (UMARP Site J7, JASP Site 474); 6 from the mid-sized Wanka II site of Umpamalca (UMARP Site J41, JASP Site 476); 7 from the mid-sized Wanka III site of Marca (UMARP Site J54, JASP Site 431); 2 from the small Wanka III site of Chucchus (UMARP Site J74, JASP Site 556); and 1 from the small Wanka III site of Huancas de las Cruz (UMARP Site J59, JASP Site 611). Excavations included screening the excavated deposits, recovery of all artifacts, and systematic soil sampling for flotation. Results from the analyses are found in the dissertations by Cathy Costin (1986), Glenn Russell (1988), and Elsie Sandefur (1988), and in the master’s thesis of Bruce Owen (1986). Two related ethnoarchaeological studies in the Mantaro included the doctoral dissertation of Melissa Hagstrum (1989) on modern practices in two Mantaro ceramic-producing

History of UMARP and Comparison with JASP Site Data villages, and the master’s thesis of Banks Leonard (1984) on the effects of land scarcity on farming practices. For her dissertation, LeVine (1985, 1992) compared the Inca imperial footprint in the Mantaro with two other highland regions to evaluate the extent of administrative adaption to local conditions. This second campaign emphasized a household-based, bottom-up approach to the changes taking place in the Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon. The household excavations and analyses of recovered data are available in the comprehensive edited volume by D’Altroy and Hastorf (2001). Our goal was to follow up this research with a top-down study with excavations at Inca imperial settlements and the central facilities at Wanka settlements. Although funded by NSF for a 1988 research season, we had to abandon this project because of rising threats from the Shining Path insurgency. Field Campaign III (1986) Led by Christine Hastorf, a new initiative focused attention on household archaeology and social change in the Early Intermediate Period and Middle Horizon. Based on the 1977 excavations, we knew that this sequence was well documented at the multiplecomponent settlement of Pancan (UMARP Site J1, JASP Site 394). The basic style and methods of research were similar to excavating a tell site in the Old World. This involved a large lateral exposure, keeping close temporal control with a Harris-Matrix recording system. Field strategy, operations, and preliminary results are presented in Hastorf et al. (1989). The project’s goal was to adapt a basic household strategy to excavate a deeply stratified site. Especially important was systematic recovery and analysis of paleo-botanical and zooarchaeological samples as a means to study the changing subsistence economy. Overall data collection and analysis followed earlier UMARP protocol so as to obtain directly comparable data. Four levels of occupation were identified in excavation; three of these had represented fragments of preserved buildings and open space comparable to patio groups. A second goal of this season was to formulate a new ceramic seriation of the Formative to Middle Horizon based on the excavations from Pancan and other settlements. A field survey team (Earle and Tim Kane) revised all pre-Wanka settlements in Parsons’ survey region and made systematic surface collections of at least 100 sherds for the statistical seriation. Funding for this season’s fieldwork included the National Science Foundation (BNS 84-51369) and the National Geographic Society. Using soil sampling based on UMARP’s archaeological protocol, Lynn Sikkink (2001) conducted an ethnoarchaeological study of plant processing and use in contemporary farming households in the Mantaro. Analyses of Datasets Addressing Major UMARP Research Themes Here I briefly present references to UMARP publications dealing with the six major research themes and the data catego-

55

ries analyzed. Presentations of the databases are available in the project’s reports, dissertations, and major books and articles. I summarize our findings only in rough outline to guide searches of the publications. 1. Chronology In 1977, we quickly realized that the existing ceramic chronology was insufficient for the study of social, political, and economic change that we envisioned. The solution was to excavate stratified deposits to collect large assemblages for new quantitative seriation. The first job was to divide the late (post-Middle Horizon) sequence, which we called the Wanka series, into four phases: Wanka I, early Late Intermediate Period; Wanka II, late Late Intermediate Period; Wanka III, the Late Horizon under Inca domination; and Wanka IV, following Spanish conquest. Cathy Scott presents the new Wanka chronology in her dissertation (LeBlanc 1981; also Earle et al. 1980). Based on the excavations of 1986, Lisa LeCount (Hastorf et al. 1989) seriated collections from the Formative to Middle Horizon and created a revised early chronology for the Upper Mantaro. The Scott-LeCount chronology provided dating of Mantaro settlement sites described in this monograph and for the UMARP analyses of changing settlement patterns and population. 2. Changing Settlement Pattern and Sociopolitical Organization of the Wanka The reconstruction of Wanka sociopolitical organization as chiefdoms is based first on two visitas from the early Spanish period (LeVine 1979; see also LeBlanc 1981; Hastorf 1993; Earle 1997; D’Altroy 1992). This historical picture was elaborated and complicated by the detailed analysis of the settlement data for the Wanka I and II (LeBlanc 1981; Hastorf 1993, 1990a; D’Altroy 1992) and Wanka III under Inca domination (D’Altroy 1981, 1992). A rapid increase in settlement size and number documents a surge in population from Wanka I (early LIP) to Wanka II (late LIP). Then population appears to have decreased into the Late Horizon following Inca conquest. Prior to imperial conquest, settlements were primarily placed in fortified locations, especially as population grew, and the ethnohistorical documents describe intense intra-valley warfare. In Wanka I, population was distributed in village-sized settlements with a possible hierarchy documented by variation in size from under a hectare to over 11 ha. Then, in Wanka II, associated with the population surge, sizes rapidly increased for major settlements, and a pronounced settlement hierarchy was formed. Very large central settlements included Hatunmarca (UMARP Site J2, JASP Site 472), Tunanmarca (UMARP Site J7, JASP Site 468), and Llamap Shillón (UMARP Site J109, in the Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, no JASP site number). They dominated mid-sized and village settlements to create a distinctive settlement hierarchy. Based on the pattern of the settlement hierarchy, we believe that a fairly large set of chiefdoms formed at this time, with populations in each ranging over 10,000 people (Earle 2005). The polities, probably

56

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

mutually antagonistic to each other, were closely packed into the Yanamarca Region, apparently focused on highly productive upland soils. We believe that population increase was significant in the establishment of relatively complex chiefdoms at this time. Into the Late Horizon, Wanka III settlements document an apparent decrease in the region’s population. Although settlement hierarchies continued, the sizes of the largest settlements were cut in half. The very large settlement Tunanmarca was abandoned, and it was apparently replaced by the new settlement of Marca (UMARP Site J54, JASP Site 431). The largest settlements continued to be located in defensive positions, but no evidence exists for new fortification at the new settlement of Marca. Many new small Wanka III settlements were founded at lower elevations and in unfortified positions. We believe that the local Wanka polity structure probably continued, but a dispersal of population to lower elevation was probably part of pacification and agricultural intensification. For the Formative to Middle Horizon Periods, changing sociopolitical organization in the Mantaro is still little studied beyond the patterns of settlement. In UMARP, we relied on the results of Parsons’ settlement survey and our 1986 restudy of settlement sites (Hastorf et al. 1989). In the Formative Period (Pirwapukio and Cochachongos phases), only 6–8 sites were identified. These were scattered small villages or hamlets located near streams, probably representing a low-density horticultural society. Settlements were placed fairly low down in locations that were not easily defensible. In the Early Intermediate Period (Huacrapukio I and II), site numbers increased by a factor of ten; the average size of sites also increased. We interpreted this as the first population surge in the valley. The Early Intermediate Period surge is associated with the formation of a settlement hierarchy and the location of larger settlements on fortified, hilltop positions. Then, probably in the Middle Horizon, population declined and settlement locations shifted lower in elevation, often into indefensible positions. In the Middle Horizon, the presence of Wari in the valley is poorly understood (Borges 1988). Although Wari Wilka, probably an administrative settlement, is located in the valley about 30 km to the south, the Middle Horizon in our research area was identified only by a handful of distinctive sherds scattered across a few settlements. The apparent decrease in fortified settlements during Huacrapukio II mirrors the shift seen in Wanka III, and may have been the result of regional pacification. Probably during the Middle Horizon, the distinctive ceramic shift from Huacrapukio to Wanka and a fall in population may have been tied to Wari imperial intervention and restructuring. Much new work is obviously needed on this problem. 3. Imperial Organization of the Inca in the Mantaro Sometime in the middle 1400s, the Inca Empire conquered the Upper Mantaro Region and established an imperial superstructure of control, administration, and ideological domination. The imperial footprints are described in detail by D’Altroy (1981, 1992). They included the Inca administrative center of Hátun Xauxa,

an imperial road system with a suspension bridge crossing the Mantaro, a series of several thousand storage silos (colcas), and various poorly preserved sites associated with unusually high frequencies of Inca-style ceramics. The Upper Mantaro Region sat astride the primary north-south imperial road network (Hyslop 1984) and became a central place for imperial penetration into local Wanka affairs involving changes to ceremonial practice, pacification, and the mobilization of local resources including maize and other staple crops. The Mantaro study region provides arguably one of the very best archaeological cases of imperial interactions with conquered people. It thus offers a critical example for comparison to other regions conquered by the Inca (D’Altroy 2002), to the Wari Empire (Schreiber 1992), and to empires outside the Andes (Alcock et al. 2001). Detailed excavations at the Inca imperial sites and the central, nonresidential sectors of Wanka III settlements are still required to specify Inca imperial activities in the Upper Mantaro Region. 4. Household Archaeology and the Subsistence Economy During the second campaign, UMARP focused on Wanka household archaeology, its variation, and change following Inca imperial conquest. The primary unit of analysis was the domestic patio group, described by Scott (LeBlanc 1981). The summaries of our household excavations and artifact analyses appear in D’Altroy and Hastorf (2001). Preserved stone architecture defines these units and made excavation relatively easy. Because sites were primarily single-component units, the spatial layout of activities and the rapid collection of household debris were possible. Based on a map of the residential areas at the Wanka II settlement of Chawín (UMARP Site J40, JASP Site 461), Umpamalca (UMARP Site J41, JASP Site 476), and Tunanmarca (UMARP Site J7, JASP Site 468), DeMarrais (2001) shows that settlements were internally fairly unstructured, seeming to be rather chaotically placed clusters of patio groups interconnected by a noncoherent network of paths. Household architecture helped define social status, based on patio group size and on the labor invested in construction (DeMarrais 2001). During Wanka III, household architecture of elite patios included rectangular structures, copying Inca styles. Overall, the pattern of consumption showed statistically significant but subtle differences in household inventories (Earle et al. 1987; Costin and Earle 1989; D’Altroy and Hastorf 2001). The status of elite personages was not absolutely distinguished, but was a matter of degree as expected in chiefdoms. Elite and commoner households combined a similar range of productive activities, indicating generalized production for household consumption. Some of our best evidence derived from the analysis of botanical and faunal remains, made possible with routine and systematic sampling. The botanical data are presented by Hastorf (1990b, 1993, 2001; Johannessen and Hastorf 1989, 1990), and the zooarchaeological data by Sandefur (1988, 2001). Overall the basic patterns of household activities showed only variations on a common theme of quite generalized production. In Wanka

History of UMARP and Comparison with JASP Site Data II, the differences in consumption between elite and commoner households appear to reflect differences in the amount of feasting because the consumption data (based on stable isotopes) show little difference. Overall, diet improved with more maize and meat from Wanka II to Wanka III; this improvement probably resulted from imperial pacification, movement of population to lower elevation (away from fortified redoubts), and freer movement for animals and farming. Work at Pancan (UMARP Site J1, JASP Site 394) in 1986 provided directly comparable data on households from earlier periods. Although the sample size of excavated households is small (one or two per period), the results show a household subsistence economy not unlike that described for the Wanka phases (Hastorf et al. 1989). Evidence on subsistence practices and their health effects derived from studies of ceramics and burials. An analysis of changing vessel shapes helped us understand possible changes in food culinary practices (LeCount 1987), and an early stable isotope study of food residues provided direct evidence of food preparation (Hastorf and DeNiro 1985). Human burials were found in the subfloors of many houses (Owen and Norconk 1987). The survivorship curves reconstructed from these burials suggest a remarkably early death for Wanka II populations, improving significantly in Wanka III following imperial pacification. The stable isotope analyses for diet were run on these householdassociated burials (Hastorf 2001). 5. Household Archaeology of Local Specialization, Exchange, and Consumption The excavations of patio groups provide considerable evidence on household production, exchange, and consumption of everyday goods, including cooking and serving vessels, stone cutting and grinding tools, and a variety of bone tools such as needles. Overall, household activities were quite uniform across both time and space (Costin and Earle 1989; D’Altroy and Hastorf 2001). This we take to indicate a generalized, householdbased economy for most daily activities. Elite households were organized much like commoner households, although the larger number of rooms in elite patio groups suggests larger social units (DeMarrais 2001). To understand the household economy, we analyzed the extent of specialization as indicated by the ratio between production debris (lithic waste and wasters) and finished objects (chert blades and ceramics) (Russell 1988; Costin 1986, 2001). The distribution of spindle whorls and bone needles indicated areas of spinning or textile manufacture (Costin 1993). Overall, production was variable between households. Some households appear to have specialized in stone tool manufacture, potting, and textile production, meaning that they produced more than they consumed and presumably exchanged products with neighboring families and communities. Specialization concentrated in particular communities, often determined by resource access (Costin 1996). Thus, communities closest to good chert sources or good grasslands for animals were partly specialized in blade or textile production. Exchanges of most products were

57

between households and neighboring communities (Earle 2001; Costin 1986, 2001; Russell 1988). Markets were not present, and Inca imperial conquest did not change in a top-down fashion most patterns of production or consumption (Earle et al. 1986; Costin and Earle 1989). Consumption patterns showed considerable similarities across households both elite and commoner and across the Wanka II/III contract (D’Altroy and Hastorf 2001) and from pre-Wanka to Wanka households (Hastorf et al 1989). The primary exceptions were for commodities important to the political economy (Costin and Earle 1989; Owen 2001). 6. Political Economy and Power All complex societies require means to mobilize surplus to support institutions of rule (Earle and D’Altroy 1989). Based on work in the Mantaro, we have argued that methods of surplus mobilization combined staple and wealth finance (D’Altroy and Earle 1985). Staple finance mobilized food and everyday products as obligations to the ruling sector of society, and these products were then “redistributed” to support those working for the state. The simplest way to document staple finance was the pattern of storage (Earle and D’Altroy 1982). Prior to the Inca imperial expansion, Wanka communities apparently maintained storage exclusively within household contexts, and no specialized storage facilities have been documented. Based on the pattern of paleobotanical remains in level 3 (EIP/MH) at Pancan (UMARP Site J1, JASP Site 394), crops appear to have been stored in “flammable, organic containers” within households (Hastorf et al. 1989:94). In the Wanka sequence, storage in large jars appears likely; these larger jars were concentrated in elite households in Wanka II, but became less concentrated there under Inca domination. It seems likely that during the Late Intermediate Perod, as political scale increased among the Wanka, a staple surplus was mobilized by chiefs and used to support feasts at the household level. During the Late Horizon in the Mantaro, the Inca ordered built 2743 storage silos (colcas) (combined estimated volume of 122,000 m3). D’Altroy (1981, 2001; D’Altroy and Earle 1985; Earle and D’Altroy 1982; LeVine 1992) describes the individual colcas, colca complexes, and the distribution of the imperial storage. Storage units were either circular or rectangular, arranged in uniform rows along the contours of the hills. Nearly half of storage was concentrated directly above the imperial center of Hátun Xauxa. Another major concentration was across the Mantaro in an area without local settlements; we believe that this area was developed as a specialized state farm (D’Altroy 1992). Other storage complexes were more broadly distributed through the valley, often in association with local villages, but decreasing in numbers with greater distance from the central administrative settlement. No storage was found in the Yanamarca Valley, where the state probably sought to distance the large Wanka settlements from storage facilities. Storage contained a variety of local crops and probably other staple items (D’Altroy and Hastorf 1984; LeVine 1979). We conclude that the Inca expanded traditional surplus mobilization on a massive scale as the foundation for the state’s

58

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

political economy. Both household production of crops (more hoes) and textiles (more spindle whorls) increased at this time, probably to meet surplus demands (Russell 1988; Costin 1993). Wealth finance, in contrast, involves the manufacture of prestige goods by attached specialists, prestige goods exchanges, and the local “redistribution” of prestige objects as a means of payment and to control social status (D’Altroy and Earle 1985). Wealth finance was apparently a secondary part of the political economy before Inca expansion and was selectively co-opted by the empire to control status-defining items. Previous to imperial expansion, prestige goods included metal, shell, and semiprecious stone items of personal decoration (Owen 1986, 2001). Overall, the frequency and distribution of these status-defining objects changed only subtly from Wanka II to Wanka III. Silver became less frequent in household and burial excavations, presumably because the Inca expropriated it, and copper objects became more common. Marine shells and semiprecious stone (always rare as beads and pendants) remained unchanged. Overall, prestige items were statistically (but not absolutely) concentrated in elite households, and this concentration decreased following imperial conquest. The most dramatic change was in the alloys of copper used to produce decorative and utilitarian objects. The use of tin has not been dated to Wanka II times, but, under the Inca, tin was added to all objects of copper to create a distinctive bronze. Copper (sometimes with a natural arsenic) was regionally available in the central highlands, but the tin had to be imported from a distance and thus created an opportunity for state control. Very little evidence exists for local manufacture of metal or other wealth items, although the scattered finds of waste suggest an association with elite households. Throughout the Andes, textiles are known as important prestige objects defining a person’s status. We have almost no evidence of textiles except for the tools used in their manufacture. Spindle whorls were very broadly distributed, indicating that spinning was a part of general household activities (Costin 1993). Presumably used in the final assembly of textiles, needles were concentrated in elite households in Wanka II, but became less concentrated in Wanka III (Owen 2001). High-end decorative ceramics also changed dramatically. Prior to Inca conquest, the primary decorative styles were the polychrome Andesite wares, which included elaborately decorated, large face-necked jars and serving bowls (Costin 2001). These items were manufactured in the Mantaro, but outside the research region. They were evidently traded in the Upper Mantaro Region as part of prestige goods exchanges among elites (Earle 2001). These ceramics were strongly concentrated in elite households in Wanka II contexts and were probably involved in ceremonial feasting. In Wanka III, Andesite wares continued to occur in households, but they became much less common in elite contexts. In these elite contexts, highly decorated Inca ceramics became common, probably linked to feasting. By replacing regional ceramics with state ceramics, the state may have controlled how Wanka elites performed their leadership roles (Costin and Earle 1989). Inca-style ceramics were manufactured locally

(D’Altroy and Bishop 1990), presumably by specialists attached directly to state institutions (Hagstrum 1986). Conclusions, Part I The systematic survey of Parsons, Hastings, and Matos reported in this monograph provided a systematic regional documentation of settlements in the Upper Mantaro Region. From this foundation, UMARP was able to design strategies of surface collection and test excavations and then larger-scale excavations of households. Each step of work represents much more labor per unit area investigated, requiring correspondingly a much smaller sample of spatial variation in human activities. Settlement survey, rapid site characterization, and intensive excavations represent the value of multistaged research design (Redman 1973, 1987; Earle et al. 1980). To investigate such topics as long-term sociopolitical change, linked population growth, warfare, political economy, the increasing settlement sizes and hierarchical arrangement, and the eventual conquest of the region by the Inca state, a grand scope of work needs to be conceived at many different levels of work. All is based on the comprehensive survey documented in the present volume, and much work remains to be done in the Mantaro, for which the Parsons-Hastings-Matos survey will continue to be the foundation. PART II Comparison of JASP and UMARP Data on Site Size and Chronology Tables 5.1 and 5.2 show how JASP data on site size and chronology compare with those of UMARP at sites investigated in the field by both projects. Although there is broad general agreement, there are three notable kinds of differences between how the two projects assessed site area and occupational chronology at the same sites. (1) The JASP data do not systematically distinguish between Wanka I and Wanka II occupations for the Late Intermediate Period; the JASP LIP sites are usually simply identified as generalized LIP. This is because during our 1975–76 fieldwork we did not have the level of ceramic chronological control that was subsequently achieved by the UMARP investigations, and we have not gone back to our original surface collections in order to reevaluate them in light of the UMARP refinements (this is an essential task that should eventually be undertaken). In this monograph we use the UMARP chronological assessments to separate the early (Wanka I) and late (Wanka II) phases of the Late Intermediate Period, and to recognize Late Horizon occupation (Wanka III), at those sites examined in the field by both projects. (2) There are numerous examples where the JASP chronological assessments failed to distinguish adequately between Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon and early Late Intermediate Period (Wanka I) occupations at the same site. The principal

History of UMARP and Comparison with JASP Site Data

59

Table 5.1.  JASP and UMARP comparisons of site area and chronology (sites arranged in order of JASP enumeration). Site No. JASP 383

Chronology UMARP JASP J-238

EIP/MH and LIP

Area (ha) UMARP

JASP

UMARP

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

0.1

7.0 (Borges 1988:69)

385

J-9

LIP/LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:191)

7.9

9.3 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

388

J-233

LIP/LH + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka III, EIP/MH (Hastorf 1993:229)

4.2

5.0 (Hastorf 1993:229–30; Borges 1988:70)

389

J-234

EIP/MH + LIP

Wanka I, Wanka III (Hastorf 1993; D’Altroy 1992)

11.2

10.4 (Hastorf 1993:230; Borges 1988:70) 10.3 (D’Altroy 1992:191)

391

J-133

EIP/MH

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69)

0.6

0.6 (Hastorf 1993:229; Borges 1988:69)

394

J-1

LIP/LH + EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka I, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981; D’Altroy 2001:90)

1.4

0.7 (LeBlanc 1981:34) 1.8 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

395

J-235

LIP + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka I (Borges 1988:70)

2.6

3.0 (Borges 1988:70)

396

J-240

LIP/LH

Wanka I, Wanka III (Borges 1988:70; D’Altroy 1992:192; Hastorf 1993:230)

2.5

2.5 (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:230) 2.6 (D’Altroy 1992:192)

398

J-245

LIP/LH + EIP/MH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192)

6.3

4.7 (D’Altroy 1992:192; Hastorf 1993:230)

399

J-243

EIP/MH + LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka I, Wanka III (Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91; Borges 1988:70)

5.6

4.8 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91; Hastorf 1993:229) 2.9 (Borges 1988:70)

415

J-231

EIP/MH + LIP

Wanka II (D’Altroy 2001:89) Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:91)

2.5

2.1 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:89, 91)

416

J-236

LIP + EIP/MH

Wanka I, EH (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:230)

4.0

8.0 (Borges 1988:69–70; Hastorf 1993:230)

417

J-237

EIP/MH

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69)

1.7

2.5 (Borges 1988:69)

422

J-56

LIP

Wanka I (LeBlanc 1981:439)

5.8

2.5 (LeBlanc 1981:438; Hastorf 1993:71, 230)

423

J-229

EIP/MH + LIP

EIP/MH + EH (Borges 1988:56, 69)

2.1

2.1 (Borges 1988:69)

424

J-228

EIP/MH + LIP/LH

Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89, 91; Hastorf 1993:230)

3.1

2.7 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89, 91; Hastorf 1993:230) 3.1 (Borges 1988:70)

425

J-317

LIP

Wanka I (Borges 1988:70)

1.2

1.2 (Borges 1988:70)

426

J-53

LIP + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka I, II, III (LeBlanc 1981:436; Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 2001:89–90)

4.2

428

J-11

LIP/LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

0.3

n.a.

429

J-55

LIP/LH

Wanka I, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:438; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

1.9

1.1 (LeBlanc 1981:437; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

430

J-10

LIP/LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

0.5

n.a.

431

J-54

LIP/LH + EIP/MH

Wanka III + minor EIP/MH (LeBlanc 1981:437; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

35.1

30.8 (LeBlanc 1981:436) 33.0 (Costin 1986:26; Russell 1988:104; Earle et al. 1987:11) 27.6 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

432

J-86

EIP/MH + LIP/LH

EIP, Wanka I, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69–70; D’Altroy 1992:191; Hastorf 1993:230)

10.5

6.0 (Hastorf 1993:230) 10.5 (Borges 1988:69–70)

433

J-205

EIP/MH + minor LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1990)

1.4

1.0 (Hastorf 1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:191) 1.4 (Borges 1988:69)

434

J-206

EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka I (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:230) Wanka II (D’Altroy 2001:89)

1.0

1.0 (Borges 1988:69–70; Hastorf 1993:229–30) 6.0 (Wanka II) (D’Altroy 2001:89)

435

J-130

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

10.3

436

J-208

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

2.0

0.8 (Hastorf 1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:191)

437

J-140

EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191)

5.8

6.3 (Hastorf 1993:229; Borges 1988:69) 1.1 (LH) (D’Altroy 1992:191)

438

J-135

EIP/MH

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

1.7

0.9 (Hastorf 1993:229) 1.7 (Borges 1988:69)

440

J-209

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

5.3

5.3 (Borges 1988:69)

1.4/1.5 (LeBlanc 1981:435; Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 2001:89) 1.7 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

10.0 (Hastorf 1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90) 10.3 (Borges 1988:69)

60

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table 5.1 cont. 441

J-210

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka I (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:230)

3.5

2.0 (Hastorf 1993:229–30) 3.5 (Borges 1988:70)

442

J-136

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka I (Borges 1988:69; Hastorf 1993:230)

4.3

2.4 (EIP/MH), 4.3 (Wanka I) (Hastorf 1993:229–30) 4.3 (Borges 1988:69–70)

443

J-52

LIP

Wanka I (LeBlanc 1981:435)

1.9

444

J-21

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka I (Borges 1988:69; Hastorf 1993:230)

10.1

0.9 (LeBlanc 1981:435) 10.5 (EIP/MH), 10.1 (Wanka I) (Hastorf 1993:229) 10.1 (Borges 1988:69–70)

445-A

J-318

EIP/MH

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

1.4

1.4 (Borges 1988:69)

446

J-216

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

11.4

20.0 (Borges 1988:69)

447

J-45

EIP/MH + LIP/LH

Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:229, 440)

3.1

2.5 (LeBlanc 1981:429; D’Altroy 1992:191) 1.2 (Wanka III) (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

448

J-213

EIP/MH

Wanka II (D’Altroy 2001:89) Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:191)

0.4

0.5 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:89)

449

J-49

LIP + minor EIP/MH

Wanka I, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:229, 433; Hastorf 1993:71, 229; D’Altroy 2001:90)

6.6

450

J-214

EIP/MH

EIP, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191)

1.2

451

J-319

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:39)

0.9

0.5 (Hastorf 1993:229)

452

J-212

EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:91)

0.5

1.0 (Hastorf 1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:91) 1.1 (Borges 1988:69)

454

J-48

EIP/MH + LIP

Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:229, 432; Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 2001:90)

3.5

3.1 (LeBlanc 1981:432; Hastorf 1993:230) 5.3 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

455

J-219

EIP/MH

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

0.4

6.5 (Borges 1988:69)

456

J-75

EIP/MH

Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:440; D’Altroy 2001:90)

1.0

1.5 (LeBlanc 1981:440) 1.0 (D’Altroy 1992:191)

461

J-40

LIP

Wanka II (LeBlanc 1981:427; D’Altroy 2001:89)

11.5

4.1 (LeBlanc 1981:426) 5.6 (Hastorf 1993:71, 230; D’Altroy 2001:89)

462

J-37

LIP

Wanka II, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:424; D’Altroy 1992:191)

9.3

4.1/8.7 (LeBlanc 1981:424) 6.0 (Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:89–90)

463

J-220

EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka I (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:230) Wanka II (D’Altroy 2001:89)

5.3

5.8 (EIP/MH), 8.0 (Wanka I) (Borges 1988:69; Hastorf 1993:229–30) 12.2 (Wanka II) (D’Altroy 2001:89)

464

J-46

EIP/MH + LIP/LH

EIP/MH, Wanka II, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:119, 431; Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 2001:89)

5.0

3.6 (LeBlanc 1981:431) 6.0 (Hastorf 1993:229–30; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:89–90) 2.0 (EIP/MH and Wanka I) (Borges 1988:69)

465

J-46

LIP + tr. EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:229, 430; Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 2001:90)

5.7

4.6 (LeBlanc 1981:430) 3.4 (Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

468

J-7

LIP

Wanka II (LeBlanc 1981:115–19; D’Altroy 2001:89)

45.7

469

J-222

EIP/MH + LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka I (Borges 1988:69; Hastorf 1993:230)

7.0

7.0 (Borges 1988:69–70; Hastorf 1993:229–30)

470

J-141

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka I, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 1990)

4.1

5.1 (EIP/MH and Wanka I), 4.1 (Wanka III) (Borges 1988:69–70; D’Altroy 1992:191; Hastorf 1993:229–30), 1.5 (Wanka II) (D’Altroy 2001:89)

471

J-145

EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:89)

2.1

1.5 (Borges 1988:69–70; D’Altroy 1992:191) 2.1 (Hastorf 1993:229–30)

4.7 (LeBlanc 1981:432) 4.3 (Wanka I), 2.0 (EIP/MH) (Hastorf 1993:229) 11.1 (D’Altroy 2001:90) 0.9 (D’Altroy 1992:191) 0.45 (Borges 1988:69)

32.2 (within outer wall), 23.1 (residential) (LeBlanc 1981:109) 25.4 (residential) (Hastorf 1993:71, 230; D’Altroy 2001:89) 33.0 (residential) (Costin 1986:19) 22.0 (residential) (Earle et al. 1987; Russell 1988:104)

History of UMARP and Comparison with JASP Site Data Table 5.1 cont. 472

J-2

473

J-132

61

LIP/LH + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka I (?), Wanka II, Wanka III, + minor EIP/MH (LeBlanc 1981:90–91; Costin 1986:25; D’Altroy 1992:55–56, 186–89, 2001:89–90)

130.0

130.0 (within outer wall), 73.7 (residential), 4.9 (Wanka I) (LeBlanc 1981:55–56; Hastorf 1993:71, 230; D’Altroy 2001:89) 95.0 (Costin 1986:24) 27.4 (Wanka III) (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191)

17.9

17.9 (Hastorf 1993:229; Borges 1988:69)

474

J-71

EIP/MH

EIP/MH (Hastorf 1993:229)

5.3

476

J-41

LIP

Wanka II (LeBlanc 1981:427–28; D’Altroy 2001:89)

19.3

477

J-81

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH

3.6

3.3 (Hastorf 1993:229) 3.6 (Borges 1988:69)

479

J-38

LIP/LH

EIP/MH, Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:428; D’Altroy 1990, 2001:89)

6.4

4.2 (LeBlanc 1981:425; Hastorf 1993:71, 230) 4.9 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

481

J-39

LIP

Wanka II, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:426)

4.4

4.1 (D’Altroy 2001:89)

482

J-328

LIP

Wanka I (Borges 1988:70)

3.4

5.0 (Borges 1988:70)

483

J-327

LIP

Wanka II, Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89)

1.6

1.1 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89)

485

J-36

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

–

489

J-322

EIP/MH + LIP/LH

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69)

n.a.

4.0 (D’Altroy 1992:192)

490

J-323

LIP/LH + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

3.4

4.0 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

491

J-35

LIP/LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

0.4

n.a.

497

J-247

LIP/LH + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

0.1

0.3 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

498

J-246

LIP/LH + minor EIP/MH Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 2001:89, 91)

2.9

2.8 (Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89, 91) 2.9 (Borges 1988:70)

500

J-21

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

502

J-22

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

503

J-253

LIP + EIP/MH

Wanka I (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:230)

6.6

8.0 (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:230)

504

J-23, J-252

LIP/LH

Wanka I, Wanka III (Borges 1988:70; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91; Hastorf 1993:230)

9.4

9.2 (Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91) 9.4 (Borges 1988:70)

505

J-251

LIP

LIP and EH (Borges 1988:69)

6.4

6.4 (Borges 1988:69)

508

J-134

EIP/MH

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69; Hastorf 1993:229)

3.0

3.0 (Borges 1988:69; Hastorf 1993:229)

509

J-250

EH

EH (Borges 1988:56, 59)

0.6

0.8 (Borges 1988:69)

510

J-142

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:89–91; Hastorf 1993:230)

3.1

2.8 (EIP/MH), 3.1 (Wanka I) (Hastorf 1993:229) 2.8 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:89, 91) 3.1 (Borges 1988:69–70)

511

J-256

EIP/MH

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

8.0

6.0 (Borges 1988:69)

514

J-25/258

LIP/LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

0.7

–

515

J-257

LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka I (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:229)

4.8

4.5 (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:229–30)

516

J-26

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

–

–

517

J-27

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

–

–

520

J-263

EIP/MH

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

2.1

1.8 (Borges 1988:69)

521

J-262

EIP/MH

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

5.2

5.0 (Borges 1988:69)

522

J-267

LIP + EIP/MH

EIP, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

4.8

6.7 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91) 8.0 (Borges 1988:69)

524

J-264

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

1.3

1.5 (Borges 1988:69)

525

J-60, J-265

LIP/LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 2001:90)

4.3

2.3 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

526

J-268

EIP/MH + LIP/LH

EIP/MH, Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

6.3

3.8 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

– –

1.9 (residential) (Hastorf 1993:71, 229) 12.4 (LeBlanc 1981:427) 14.8 (Hastorf 1993:71, 230; D’Altroy 2001:89) 10.0 (Costin 1986:21; Earle et al. 1987; Russell 1988:104)

–

– –

62

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table 5.1 cont. 527

J-269

EIP/MH + LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka II, Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89, 91)

2.6

528

J-34

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

529

J-270

EIP/MH + LIP

EIP, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

3.1

1.6 (D’Altroy 1992:192) 1.4 (D’Altroy 2001:91) 2.0 (Borges 1988:69)

530

J-272

LIP + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

3.5

2.5 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

531

J-271

LIP

Wanka I (Borges 1988:70)

2.0

2.0 (Borges 1988:70)

532

J-260

LIP

Wanka I (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:230)

2.5

2.5 (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:70)

533

J-266

EIP/MH + LIP/LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

5.4

3.4 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

534

J-273

EIP/MH

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

0.1

0.2 (Borges 1988:69)

535

J-275

LIP

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69)

1.5

1.0 (Borges 1988:69)

537

J-274

LIP/LH + tr. EIP/MH

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69)

1.7

2.0 (Borges 1988:69)

539

J-58

LIP/LH

EIP/MH, Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

0.9

2.0 (D’Altroy 1990)

540

J-278

LIP + tr. EIP/MH

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

2.8

3.0 (Borges 1988:69)

541

J-279

EIP/MH

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

4.8

6.0 (Borges 1988:69)

542

J-277

EIP/MH

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69)

1.9

1.5 (Borges 1988:69)

546

J-15

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

2.3

2.3 (D’Altroy 1990)

547

J-16

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

12.1

–

–

1.2 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89, 91) –

547-A

J-62

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

–

–

548

J-18

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

–

–

550

J-5

LIP/LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:191)

33.4

46.6 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

553

J-6

LIP/LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

1.2

0.7 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

554

J-17

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

12.3

–

555

J-19

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

2.2

–

556

J-74

LIP/LH

Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:439; D’Altroy 2001:90)

10.5

557

J-286

LIP/LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

1.2

1.3 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

558

J-20, J-73

LIP/LH + EIP/MH

EH, Wanka I, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1990)

7.1

7.1 (Hastorf 1993:229)

560

J-281

LIP

Wanka I, Wanka III (Borges 1988:70; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

3.9

3.9 (Borges 1988:70) 2.9 (Hastorf 1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

561

J-282

LIP + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka I (Hastorf 1993:230)

1.4

1.4 (Hastorf 1993:230)

563

J-57

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

0.3

–

564

J-285

LIP/LH + tr. EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91; Hastorf 1993:229)

7.8

6.4 (Hastorf 1993:229–30; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

565

J-287

LIP + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka I, Wanka II (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 2001:89)

6.4

6.5 (Hastorf 1993:230) 6.4 (Borges 1988:70) 5.1 (D’Altroy 2001:89)

566

J-28, J-289

LIP

Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (Borges 1988:70; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89; Hastorf 1993:230)

16.2

567

J-291

LIP + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (Borges 1988:70; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89, 91; Hastorf 1993:230)

3.3

2.4 (Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89) 2.2 (Wanka III) (D’Altroy 2001:91) 3.3 (Borges 1988:70)

568

J-292

LIP

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192)

2.0

3.6 (D’Altroy 1992:192)

569

J-290

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

Wanka I, Wanka II (Borges 1988:70; Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 2001:89)

9.8

7.4 (Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 2001:89) 9.4 (Borges 1988:70)

571

J-293

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69) Wanka III (D’Altroy 2001:91)

12.2

11.7 (LeBlanc 1981:439) 12.0 (Earle et al. 1987:11; Russell 1988:104) 13.2 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

15.1 (Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89) 16.2 (Borges 1988:70)

9.1 (Hastorf 1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91) 12.2 (Borges 1988:69)

History of UMARP and Comparison with JASP Site Data

63

Table 5.1 cont. 572

J-294, J-295

LIP/LH + EIP/MH

Wanka I, Wanka III (Borges 1988:70; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

3.2

2.8 2.4 1.6 6.2

573

J-29

574

(D’Altroy 1992:192) (Wanka III) (D’Altroy 2001:91) (Wanka II) (D’Altroy 2001:89) (Borges 1988:70)

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

0.2

–

J-296, J-297

LIP/LH

Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (Borges 1988:70; D’Altroy 1990, 2001:89, 91)

2.5

7.4 (Borges 1988:70) 0.8 (J-297) (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91) 1.6 (Wanka II) (D’Altroy 2001:89)

575

J-298

LIP

Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (Borges 1988:70; D’Altroy 1990, 2001:89, 91)

1.0

0.8 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89, 91) 1.0 (Borges 1988:70)

576

J-30

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

0.1

–

577

J-31

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

0.5

–

579

J-300

EIP/MH + LIP/LH

EIP/MH, Wanka I, Wanka II, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

6.3

8.1 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89, 91) 7.0 (Borges 1988:69–70)

580

J-32

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

–

583

J-299

EIP/MH + tr. LIP, tr. EH

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69)

1.6

1.5 (Borges 1988:69)

587

J-301

LIP + EIP/MH

Wanka I (Borges 1988:69–70)

4.4

5.0 (Borges 1988:70)

–

588

J-308

EIP/MH

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69)

n.a.

1.2 (Borges 1988:69)

589

J-309

EIP/MH

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69)

1.3

n.a.

590

J-4

LIP/LH + tr. EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka I, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:49–53)

4.2

3.7 (LeBlanc 1981:44) 4.8 (Hastorf 1993:230) 5.9 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

591

J-3

LIP/LH

EIP/MH, Wanka I (?), Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:49; D’Altroy 1992:191)

3.0

1.7 (LeBlanc 1981:46) 1.4 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

592

J-131

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:91)

2.2

1.7 (Hastorf 1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:91) 2.2 (Borges 1988:69)

593

J-218

EIP/MH + tr. LIP/LH

EIP, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191)

10.4

595

J-78

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191)

4.5

4.5 (D’Altroy 1992:191) 2.5 (EIP/MH) (Borges 1988:69)

596

J-8

LIP + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka II (?), Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:423; D’Altroy 1992:191)

6.5

5.9 (LeBlanc 1981:423) 5.4 (Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:89–90)

597

J-42

LIP/LH

Wanka II (?), Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:229; D’Altroy 1992:191)

3.3

2.6 (LeBlanc 1981:428) 3.3 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

598

J-217

EIP/MH

EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69)

3.9

3.4 (Hastorf 1993:229) 3.9 (Borges 1988:69)

599

J-51

LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka I (?), Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:229; D’Altroy 2001:90; Hastorf 1993:229)

0.8

0.4 (LeBlanc 1981:434; Hastorf 1993:230) 0.7 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

600

J-50, J-229

LIP/LH + tr. EIP/MH

EIP, Wanka I, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:433–34; Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

2.2

1.3 (LeBlanc 1981:433) 1.6 (D’Altroy 1992:191–92, 2001:90) 1.7 (J-229) (Borges 1988:69)

601

J-43

LIP + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:429; D’Altroy 1992:191)

10.1

1.8 (LeBlanc 1981:429) 1.9 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

602

J-203

EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka I, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191; Hastorf 1993:230)

8.0

5.5 (Hastorf 1993:229–30; Borges 1988:69–70; D’Altroy 1992:191)

603

J-202

EIP/MH

EIP, Wanka I (Borges 1988:69; Hastorf 1993:230)

2.3

2.3 (Borges 1988:69; Hastorf 1993:229–30)

604

J-201

EIP/MH + LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka II, Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:89, 91)

3.0

1.5 (Wanka II, Wanka III) (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:89) 0.4 (Wanka III) (D’Altroy 2001:91)

605

J-200

EIP/MH

EIP, Wanka I (Borges 1988:69)

3.2

2.2 (Hastorf 1993:229) 3.2 (Borges 1988:69–70)

606

J-221

EIP/MH + LIP/LH

EH, EIP/MH, Wanka I, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; Hastorf 1993:230; D’Altroy 1992:191)

14.0

10.2 (D’Altroy 1992:191) 10.4 (Borges 1988:69)

10.0 (Hastorf 1993:229–30; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:91) 14.0 (Borges 1988:69)

64

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table 5.1 cont. 608

J-224

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191)

2.7

1.4 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:91) 1.8 (Borges 1988:69)

609

J-223

EIP/MH

EH, EIP/MH, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191)

1.9

4.3 (D’Altroy 1992:191; Hastorf 1993:229) 5.8 (Borges 1988:69)

610

J-225

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP (Borges 1988:69)

5.8

2.7 (Borges 1988:69)

611

J-13, J-59

LIP/LH

Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:228–29; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

12.9

612

J-12

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

0.2

–

613

J-14

LH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1990)

0.4

–

617

J-312

EIP/MH

EH, EIP/MH (Borges 1988:69)

1.5

618

J-304

LIP/LH + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka II, Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89, 91)

12.6

11.8 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89) 11.6 (Wanka III) (D’Altroy 2001:91

621

J-306

EIP/MH + LIP

EH, EIP/MH, Wanka II, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1990, 2001:89)

8.3

11.6 (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:89)

623

J-307

EH + tr. EIP/MH

EH (Borges 1988:56, 69)

3.5

3.6 (Borges 1988:69)

624

J-137

EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:91)

2.6

2.6 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:91) 6.0 (Borges 1988:69)

626

J-310

LIP/LH + tr. EIP/MH

Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

0.8

0.8 (D’Altroy 1992:192) 0.7 (Wanka III) (D’Altroy 2001:91)

627

J-311

EIP/MH + LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka I (Borges 1988:39)

5.1

5.5 (Borges 1988:70)

630

J-139

EIP/MH + tr. LIP

EIP/MH, Wanka II (D’Altroy 2001:89) Wanka III (Borges 1988:69; D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:91)

7.6

7.0 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:89, 91) 8.0 (Borges 1988:69)

631

J-314

EIP/MH

EIP/MH, Wanka III (D’Altroy 1992:192)

5.1

632

J-313

LIP/LH

Wanka II, Wanka III (LeBlanc 1981:228–29; D’Altroy 1992:192, 2001:91)

14.1

consequence of this is that we sometimes identified Wanka I occupations as Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon. In this monograph we have used the more refined UMARP chronology to recognize and separate the two periods at those sites studied in the field by both projects. (3) With some exceptions, there is a general tendency for JASP estimates of site area to be somewhat larger than those of the subsequent UMARP studies. This undoubtedly reflects the relatively less precise way we estimated surface area in 1975–76 vs. the more accurate (and time-consuming) methods typically employed by UMARP archaeologists a few years later. With only a few exceptions, however, the site-area estimates of both projects are of the same order of magnitude. To some extent, variability in

9.0 (Costin 1986:29; Earle et al. 1987:11; Russell 1988:104) 11.2 (D’Altroy 1992:191, 2001:90)

n.a.

n.a. 13.3 (D’Altroy 1992:192) 13.0 (Wanka III) (D’Altroy 2001:91)

site-area measurement reflects inherent uncertainties in making judgments about the placement of site borders on the basis of often-subtle surface remains. Table 5.3 lists which JASP sites were not subsequently restudied by UMARP archaeologists. For these 90 sites, of course, we are unable to apply the more refined UMARP ceramic chronology or site-size estimates. Summary and Conclusions, Part II UMARP archaeologists reexamined all but 90 of the 287 sites located in our 1975–76 JASP survey. These subsequent UMARP studies usually included new surface collections, new

History of UMARP and Comparison with JASP Site Data Table 5.2.  Comparison of selected JASP and UMARP site areas. JASP Site No.

UMARP Site No.

JASP Area (ha)

UMARP Area (ha)

Ratio JASP/ UMARP

394 “Pancan”

J-1

1.4

0.7

2.00

422

J-56

5.8

2.5

2.32

426

J-53

4.2

1.4

3.00

429

J-55

1.9

1.1

1.73

431

J-54

35.1

30.8

1.14

443 “Marca”

J-52

1.9

0.9

2.11

447

J-45

3.1

2.5

1.24

449

J-49

6.6

4.7

1.40

454

J-48

3.5

3.1

1.13

456

J-75

1.0

1.5

0.67

461 “Chawin”

J-40

11.5

4.1

2.80

462

J-37

9.3

4.1

2.27

464

J-47

5.0

3.6

1.39

465

J-46

5.7

4.6

1.24

468 “Tunanmarca”

J-7

45.7 (total walled area)

32.2 (total walled area) (23.1 = residential area)

1.42

472 “Hatunmarca”

J-2

130.0 (total walled area)

130.0 (total walled area) (95 = residential area)

1.00

476 “Umpamalco”

J-41

19.3

12.4

1.56

479

J-38

6.4

4.2

1.52

556

J-74

10.8

11.7

0.90

590 “Tragadero”

J-4

4.2

3.7

1.14

591

J-3

3.0

1.7

1.76

596

J-8

6.5

5.9

1.10

597

J-42

3.3

2.6

1.27

599

J-51

0.8

0.4

2.00

600

J-50

2.2

1.3

1.69

601

J-43

10.1?

1.8?

?

65

Table 5.3.  JASP sites with no UMARP follow-up study (n = 90). 382

418

494

578

384

419

495

581

386

420

496

582

387

421

499

584

390

427

501

585

392

439

506

586

393

445-B

507

594

397

453

512

607

400

457

513

614

401

458

518

615

402

459

519

616

403

460

523

619

404

466

536

620

405

467

538

622

406

475

543

625

407

478

544

628

408

480

545

629

409

484

549

633

410

486

551

634

411

487

552

635

412

488

559

636

413

492

562

414

493

570

μ = 1.59 ± 0.58 The selected UMARP sites are those judged to be most accurately measured by UMARP archaeologists.

measurements of site area, new evaluations of site chronology, and, in some cases, detailed site mapping and excavations to clarify social organization, function, and time depth. The most intensive UMARP investigations were undertaken at Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon sites. We have used the UMARP chronological refinements where they exist. UMARP and JASP site-area estimates are generally fairly close, although a handful of significant differences exist for which we cannot

presently account. UMARP interpretations of site chronology are especially important in their discrimination between early Late Intermediate Period (Wanka I) and late Late Intermediate Period (Wanka II) occupations, and for their recognition of Wanka I occupations at some sites that we had previously attributed to the Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon. UMARP excavations and detailed mapping tend to support our original view that most sites represent foci of nucleated domestic residence.

Chapter 6

Data Patterning Jeffrey R. Parsons

Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon settlement patterning in D’Altroy (2001a, 2001b, 2001c).

Unless otherwise noted, the data tabulations in this chapter are based on sites within the JASP survey area, excluding those sites within the UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, and a few other UMARP-studied sites beyond the JASP survey borders. Because not all our JASP sites were restudied by UMARP, there is a residue (n = 90) of our JASP sites for which UMARP-supplied chronological refinements (Wanka I vs. Wanka II vs. Wanka III phases) are unavailable; where applicable, this residue is included within our “LIP–All” category. As noted in Chapter 5, the discussion in this chapter is complemented, and in many cases greatly extended, by recent syntheses of UMARP project results (e.g., D’Altroy and Hastorf 2001) and by several major studies by UMARP scholars of ethnohistoric and archaeological data from the Wanka Region (LeBlanc 1981; LeVine 1979, 1985, 1992; Costin 1986; Earle et al. 1987; Russell 1988; Sandefur 1988; Borges 1988; D’Altroy 1992; Hastorf 1993).

Long-Term Population Trends As discussed in Chapter 4, we feel that at this stage of our investigations the best proxy for the number of a settlement’s inhabitants is the surface area (hectares) of that settlement. Figure 6.1 and Table 6.1 show the overall occupied hectares in settlement sites for our four major periods. Figure 6.2 presents our best sense of the long-term population profile, with the shape of the curve varying according to whether or not we assume that most of the sites we label EIP/MH are actually Middle Horizon, and whether or not we assume that the UMARP chronological refinements of the Late Intermediate Period adequately reflect overall population levels during the earlier (Wanka I) vs. later (Wanka II) phases of our entire LIP sample (which includes some LIP sites not subsequently restudied by UMARP). Other possible demographic scenarios could be imagined with other assumptions about chronological phasing. Nevertheless, we feel that the two alternative profiles in Figure 6.2 are reasonable given our present information. These approximations are subject to substantial future revision as chronological refinements are made. Nevertheless, they do suggest several major long-term demographic trends in the Wanka Region survey area:

Settlement Sites In this section we are concerned mainly with sites that we interpret as places of permanent, or relatively permanent, domestic residence. A later section of this chapter deals with specialized storage sites with little or no domestic residential function. Some readers may also want to consult complementary discussions of 67

68

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table 6.1.  Total occupied hectares in all settlement sites in major time periods. Period EH

Occupied Hectares

Percentage of Total Occupied Hectares

31.3 (?)

1.9

EIP/MH

495.4

30.3

LIP–All

633.0

38.7

Wanka I

260.7

16.0

Wanka II

335.2

20.5

LH

474.3

29.0

total

1634.0

99.9

EH figures include questionable sites. Wanka I and Wanka II figures are based on UMARP-­identified sites.

(left) Figure 6.1.  Histogram of occupied hectares in settlement sites for major periods in the Wanka Region. (below left) Figure 6.2.  Suggested overall long-term population profiles for the Wanka Region.

Data Patterning (1) The EH population was very modest. (2) Population apparently expanded only very slowly throughout much of the earlier EIP. (3) There was probably a significant increased rate of population growth during the later EIP and MH. (4) If we ignore the distinction between Wanka I and Wanka II, population would appear to have continued to grow throughout the LIP, but notably more slowly than during the preceding centuries. In this case, there would appear to have been a slight, although significant, population decline during the LH. (5) If we assume that the UMARP distinction between Wanka I and Wanka II sites reflects the overall relative population trends for the Wanka Region within the general LIP, then there would have been a moderate, but significant, population decline after the MH, with a slight recovery during Wanka II times, and a modest increase during the LH when overall population may have approximated the old MH level. The uncertainties in our attempt to construct a long-term population profile for the Wanka Region reflect the critical need for further chronological refinements of the archaeological record in this part of the Peruvian sierra central. Occupation by Settlement Type through Time Table 6.2 shows the percentage distribution of the numbers of settlement-site types for our major time periods, and for the UMARP-identified Wanka I and Wanka II phases of the LIP;

69

Figure 6.3 shows the same data in histogram form. These distributions reveal several general tendencies: (1) Small sites (Camps, Hamlets, and Small Villages) are numerically dominant for all periods. (2) Large Villages, although moderately numerous in most periods, are apparently absent in the EH. (3) Very Large Villages are comparatively uncommon in all periods, and entirely absent in the EH. This may mean that our Very Large Village sites should be included within our Local Center category, at least for pre-Wanka II periods. (4) Local Centers are absent prior to the LIP, and may be absent until the later LIP (Wanka II). These sites are relatively numerous only in Wanka II times. (5) Regional Centers are present only during later LIP (Wanka II) and LH times. Table 6.3 shows how occupation (as measured in occupied hectares) is distributed in different types of settlement sites, and Figure 6.4 depicts these data in histogram form. The patterning of occupied hectares by settlement-site type generally complements that shown by the numbers of sites in each site type, but it does show one major tendency that stands out less clearly on the basis of site numbers alone: Wanka II is clearly a unique period in terms of the proportion of population residing in large settlements, especially of the Regional Center category. In sum, prior to the MH there appears to have been no more than a weakly developed site-size hierarchy, and large settlement sites of any sort were probably absent in the Wanka Region until

Table 6.2.  Percentages of numbers of settlements in site categories, by period. Site Category

Percentage of Settlement Sites EH

EIP/MH

LIP–All

Wanka I Wanka II

LH

camp and hamlet

10.0 ?

22.1

17.7

9.3

13.3

14.9

small village

90.0 ?

52.1

53.1

56.1

36.7

54.3

large village

0.0

21.4

22.1

31.6

26.7

22.3

very large village

0.0

4.3

2.7

3.5

10.0

5.3

local center

0.0

0.0

2.7

0.0

6.7

2.1

regional center

0.0

0.0

1.8

0.0

6.7

1.1

Table 6.3.  Occupied hectares in different settlement-site types.  Period

Site Type Camp and Hamlet

Small Village

Large Village

Very Large Village

Local Center

Regional Center

Total

# ha

%

# ha

%

# ha

%

# ha

%

# ha

%

# ha

%

# ha

%

EH

0.6

1.9

30.7

98.1

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

31.3

100.0

EIP/MH

14.4

2.9

193.4

39.1

208.3

42.1

78.7

15.9

–

–

–

–

494.8

100.0

LIP–All

10.8

1.7

173.5

27.5

178.9

28.4

41.5

6.6

49.4

7.8

175.7

27.9

629.8

100.0

Wanka I

3.3

1.3

99.1

38.1

130.1

50.1

27.4

10.5

–

–

–

–

259.9

100.0

Wanka II

3.1

0.9

33.7

10.1

58.8

17.5

33.1

9.9

30.8

9.2

175.7

52.4

335.2

100.0

7.4

1.6

126.8

27.0

161.6

34.4

77.5

16.5

62.5

13.3

33.4

7.1

469.2

100.0

LH

EH sites include those considered questionable.

70

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure 6.3.  Histogram of percentages of numbers of settlementsite types for major periods.

Figure 6.4.  Histogram of percentages of occupied hectares in different settlement-site types, by period.

Data Patterning Table 6.4.  Mean elevations for all settlement sites. Period

Number of Settlement Sites

Mean Elevation (masl)

EH

10

3494 ± 187

EIP/MH

138

3544 ± 174

LIP–All

116

3613 ± 222

Early LIP (Wanka I)

57

3537 ± 154

Late LIP (Wanka II)

28

3480 ± 675

93

3553 ± 176

LH (Wanka III + LIP/LH)

EH includes possible sites. Sites listed as Wanka I, Wanka II, and Wanka III are those identified as such by UMARP.

71

Table 6.5.  Distribution of numbers and percent of settlement sites by elevation zone. Period

< 3400 masl

3401–3600 masl

3601–3800 masl

3801–4200 masl

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

EH

4

40.0

4

40.0

1

10.0

1

10.0

EIP/MH

32

23.2

65

47.1

29

21.0

12

8.7

LIP-All

23

19.8

42

36.2

26

22.4

25

21.6

Early LIP (Wanka I)

12

21.1

30

52.6

12

21.1

3

5.3

Late LIP (Wanka II

6

20.0

10

33.3

9

30.0

5

16.7

23

24.7

40

43.0

22

23.7

8

8.6

LH

Sites listed as Wanka I, Wanka II, and Wanka III are those identified as such by UMARP.

the early centuries A.D. Except for the Wanka II phase, a high proportion of people always lived in settlements of relatively modest size—this included the LH when the Wanka Region was absorbed into the Inca empire. The Distribution of Settlement by Altitude Zone In Chapter 2 we defined five major altitude zones in the Wanka Region: (1) < 3400 masl (the main Mantaro Valley floodplain, a variant of the lower kichwa), (2) 3400–3600 masl (lower kichwa above the main floodplain), (3) 3600–3800 masl (upper kichwa), (4) 3800–4000 masl (lower puna), and (5) > 4000 masl (upper puna). Because our survey included such a small puna component, we have combined the lower and upper puna elevations in the tabulations for Tables 6.4–6.7 (see Figs. 6.5–6.11). These data on settlement intensity by elevation zone show several general trends within the Wanka Region: (1) During the EH, settlement was relatively low-lying, with a tendency toward concentrations of occupation in the lower kichwa around the upper edges of the main Mantaro Valley floodplain. (2) Settlement during the EIP/MH and early LIP (Wanka I) gravitated to comparably slightly higher elevations within the lower kichwa. (3) During the LIP, settlement shifted to its highest overall elevation. During the later LIP (Wanka II), a high proportion of occupation was concentrated in large settlements on hilltops that rise into the upper kichwa in the Yanamarca subvalley. (4) During the LH there was a tendency for settlement to shift into lower kichwa elevations roughly similar to those of the EIP/ MH and early LIP (Wanka I). (5) It seems useful to compare the elevation distributions over time of “small” (Camps, Hamlets, and Small Villages) vs. “large” (Large Villages, Very Large Villages, Local Centers, and Regional Centers) settlement sites (Table 6.8; Figs. 6.12, 6.13), in part because our category of “small” sites may be likely to contain a higher proportion of temporary, seasonal, nonpermanent, or informal kinds of residence, whereas most settlements in our “large” settlements were probably places of permanent, full-time

residential occupation. “Small” settlements may thus reflect those locations where secondary, seasonal, or more specialized and restricted kinds of activities were carried out, whereas we might expect that more generalized activities—those focused on the most strategic resources, activities, and social relationships—were concentrated in our “large” settlements. Following this reasoning, the following three patterns emerge: (a) During the EH, with an absence of “large” settlements, it appears that both permanent and impermanent occupations were distributed throughout the elevation zones, although the much higher proportion of EH settlement in the 3400–3600 masl zone might indicate that this was where permanent occupation was concentrated, with secondary activities carried out at lower and higher elevations. Perhaps the EH economy was more narrowly focused than in subsequent periods. (b) The EIP/MH and the early LIP (Wanka I) were both characterized by an unusually high proportion of “large” settlement occupation in the 3400–3600 masl zone. This suggests that the principal resources exploited during both periods were comparable, and, perhaps most importantly, indicates the ease of access to small-scale canal-based irrigation in the well-drained lower kichwa. This same tendency, not quite so marked, characterizes the LH. Judging by the elevation distribution of both “small” and “large” settlements, the economies of the EIP/MH, early LIP (Wanka I), and LH were comparably diversified and broadly focused. The absence of “large” EIP/MH settlements in the puna zone (3800–4200 masl) might indicate that puna resources were still of secondary importance at that time, at least in terms of the predominantly kichwa-focused occupation presently visible to us. Our lack of survey coverage in the main blocks of puna terrain to the northeast and southwest of our survey area limits our understanding of the significance of puna resources and pastoral lifeways for all periods. (c) Although late LIP (Wanka II) settlements are distributed across the full elevation range, the unusually high proportion of “large” Wanka II settlements at hilltop locations in the upper kichwa (3600–3800 masl) is unique within the prehispanic sequence in the Wanka Region. This must reflect a unique set of circumstances that pertained only during Wanka II times in this region.

72

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table 6.6.  Distribution of settlement sites by elevation zone. Site Category

< 3400 masl n %

3401–3600 masl n %

3601–3800 masl n %

3801–4200 masl n %

n

Total

EH Settlement Sites1 camp and hamlet small village large village very large village local center regional center overall

1 3 0 0 0 0 4

100.0 33.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.0

0 4 0 0 0 0 4

0.0 44.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.0

0 1 0 0 0 0 1

0.0 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0

0 1 0 0 0 0 1

0.0 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0

1 9 0 0 0 0 10

10.0 90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

EIP/MH Settlement Sites camp and hamlet small village large village very large village local center regional center overall

8 20 5 0 0 0 33

25.8 27.4 16.7 0.0 0 0 23.6

12 34 17 5 0 0 68

38.7 46.6 56.7 83.3 0 0 48.6

7 12 7 1 0 0 27

22.6 16.4 23.3 16.7 0 0 19.3

4 7 1 0 0 0 12

12.9 9.6 3.3 0.0 0 0 8.6

31 73 30 6 0 0 140

22.1 52.1 21.4 4.3 0.0 0.0 100.0

LIP–All Settlement Sites camp and hamlet small village large village very large village local center regional center overall

4 17 2 0 0 0 23

20.0 28.3 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.4

5 15 13 3 0 0 36

25.0 25.0 52.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 31.9

6 15 6 0 0 1 28

30.0 25.0 24.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 24.8

5 13 4 0 3 1 26

25.0 21.7 16.0 0.0 100.0 50.0 23.0

20 60 25 3 3 2 113

17.7 53.1 22.1 2.7 2.7 1.8 100.0

Early LIP Settlement Sites2 camp and hamlet small village large village very large village local center regional center overall

0 9 2 0 0 0 11

0.0 28.1 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.3

2 15 11 2 0 0 30

40.0 46.9 61.1 100.0 0.0 0.0 52.6

3 7 3 0 0 0 13

60.0 21.9 33.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.8

0 1 2 0 0 0 3

0.0 3.1 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3

5 32 18 2 0 0 57

8.8 56.1 31.6 3.5 0.0 0.0 100.0

0 5 1 0 0 0 6

0.0 45.5 12.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0

2 2 3 3 0 0 10

50.0 18.1 37.5 100.0 0.0 0.0 33.3

1 4 3 0 0 1 9

25.0 36.4 37.5 0.0 0.0 50.0 30.0

1 0 1 0 2 1 5

25.0 0.0 12.5 0.0 100.0 50.0 16.5

4 11 8 3 2 2 30

13.3 36.7 26.7 10.0 6.7 6.7 100.0

3 15 2 0 0 1 21

21.4 29.4 9.5 0.0 0.0 100.0 22.3

8 20 10 4 1 0 43

57.1 39.2 47.6 80.0 50.0 0.0 45.7

3 9 7 1 1 0 21

21.4 17.6 33.3 20.0 50.00 0.0 22.3

0 7 2 0 0 0 9

0.0 13.7 9.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6

14 51 21 5 2 1 94

14.9 54.3 22.3 5.3 2.1 1.1 100.0

Late LIP Settlement Sites3 camp and hamlet small village large village very large village local center regional center overall LH Settlement Sites4 camp and hamlet small village large village very large village local center regional center overall

Includes uncertain sites. Where appropriate, questionable EH sites are placed in the same class as the overlapping EIP/MH sites. UMARP identified as Wanka I. 3 UMARP identified as Wanka II. 4 LIP/LH and UMARP identified as Wanka III. 1 2

%

Data Patterning

73

Table 6.7.  Occupied hectares in different elevation zones, by period. Period

< 3400 masl

3401–3600 masl

3601–3800 masl

3801–4200 masl

# ha

%

# ha

%

# ha

%

# ha

%

EH (?)

5.8

18.5

17.3

55.3

4.2

13.4

4.0

12.8

EIP/MH

86.6

17.7

279.8

57.2

94.3

19.3

28.5

5.8

LIP–All

56.8

9.0

193.1

30.6

220.8

35.0

161.0

25.5

Wanka I

40.5

15.4

159.2

60.6

46.8

17.8

16.2

6.2

Wanka II

23.2

6.9

61.7

18.4

163.8

48.9

86.5

25.8

LH

93.9

20.1

234.8

50.2

125.0

26.7

14.0

2.9

overall

243.1

15.0

725.0

44.8

444.3

27.4

207.5

12.8

Note: LIP totals are for LIP–All only.

Figure 6.5.  Histogram of percentages of occupied hectares in different elevation zones, by period.

74

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure 6.6. Histogram of percentages of numbers of Camp/Hamlet sites in different elevation zones, by period.

Figure 6.7. Histogram of percentages of numbers of Small Village sites in different elevation zones, by period.

Data Patterning

Figure 6.8. Histogram of percentages of numbers of Large Village sites in different elevation zones, by period.

Figure 6.9. Histogram of percentages of numbers of Very Large Village sites in different elevation zones, by period.

75

76

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure 6.10. Histogram of percentages of numbers of Local Center sites in different elevation zones, by period.

Figure 6.11. Histogram of percentages of numbers of Regional Center sites in different elevation zones, by period.

Data Patterning

77

Table 6.8.  Percentages of occupied hectares in “small” and “large” settlement sites in different elevation zones, by period. Settlement Sites “Small”

“Large”

Elevation (masl)

Period EH

EIP/MH

LIP–All

Wanka I

Wanka II

LH

The Regional Configuration of Settlement Sites With reference to the accompanying schematic settlement maps (Figs. 6.14–6.19), this discussion continues and extends some of the issues touched upon above.

< 3400

11.8

7.0

20.4

20.5

35.4

27.3

3400–3600

62.0

19.2

37.4

51.7

24.9

53.1

3600–3800

13.4

52.1

19.1

21.7

27.9

16.3

Early Horizon

3800–4200

12.8

21.7

23.1

6.1

1.9

3.2

< 3400

–

14.2

3.8

14.5

3.2

14.8

3400–3600

–

68.0

29.7

67.6

17.5

50.2

3600–3800

–

17.9

39.8

10.2

50.4

29.5

3800–4200

–

0.0

26.8

7.7

28.8

5.6

Our investigation makes no contribution to the preceramic (Archaic) occupation of the Wanka Region (Tschopik 1946; Hurtado de Mendoza 1982; Hurtado de Mendoza and Chahud 1984). Consequently, our data do not illuminate the important problem of the transition to sedentary life of ceramic-using people in this part of the Peruvian sierra central. To date, this important issue has been best addressed in the Ayacucho Region (Garcia Cook 1974) and in the Titicaca Basin (Klink 2005; Cipolla 2005). This key problem should obviously be a focus of future archaeological research in the Wanka Region and elsewhere. Early Horizon settlement sites, including those with questionable EH occupation, are listed in Table 6.9 and are depicted schematically on Figure 6.14. Because we did not originally recognize EH occupation at several multicomponent sites later restudied by UMARP archaeologists, we include sites for which UMARP identified surface pottery of this period at sites where we did not. Although most EH site classifications are uncertain, all these sites certainly qualify as “small” in terms of the criteria used in Tables 6.10–6.14. We have already noted that EH occupation of the Wanka Region survey area is decidedly sparse. Browman’s earlier survey (1970), which extended farther than ours to the southeast, showed that EH occupation intensifies in that direction as the valley floor gradually descends toward the modern city of Huancayo (elevation 3259 masl). Figure 6.14 shows a broad scatter of 10 small EH settlements, in which three very loose clusters might be tentatively defined: (1) a southeastern “cluster” south of the Río Mantaro, composed of Sites 583, 617, 621, and 623; (2) a central “cluster” on both sides of the Río Mantaro, composed of sites 505, 509, 558, and 606; and (3) a small northwestern “cluster,” composed of Sites 416 and 423. Broad stretches of the region apparently remained unoccupied by the kind of permanent settlements that would have left material remains visible to our survey.

“Small” = Camps/Hamlets (C/H) and Small Villages (SV); “Large” = Large Villages (LV), Very Large ­Villages (VLV), Local Centers (LC), and Regional Centers (RC).

Figure 6.12.  Histogram of percentages of occupied hectares of “small” settlements in different elevation zones, by period. (“Small” = Camps/Hamlets, Small Villages.)

78

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table 6.9.  EH settlement sites, including uncertain sites. Site Number 416

583

423

606

505

617

509

621

558

623

(left) Figure 6.13.  Histogram of percentages of occupied hectares of “large” settlements in different elevation zones, by period. (“Large” = Large Villages, Very Large Villages, Local Centers, Regional Centers.) (below left) Figure 6.14.  Schematic map of EH settlement sites.

Data Patterning Each of the three EH “clusters” might be considered a village- or hamlet-cluster in a simple ranked, or even egalitarian, society. The presence of what appears to be modest public architecture detected by excavation at Site 509 (Ataura) in the central cluster (Matos 1973) hints that still-undetected structures of this nature might also exist at one or more settlements in the other site clusters. Alternatively, Site 509 may have been a ritual focus of more than purely local significance during the Early Horizon, and in that case perhaps we should not expect to find additional comparable examples of public architecture elsewhere in our survey area. Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon settlement sites are listed in Table 6.10 and depicted schematically on Figure 6.15. We stress that our impressions of EIP/MH settlement patterning remain blurred because of the absence of more refined ceramic phasing. The map (Fig. 6.15) should probably be regarded as best reflecting late EIP and MH occupation. Consequently, it is difficult to assess the early post-EH changes during the half millennium prior to the early centuries A.D. Nevertheless, several significant trends are apparent. (1) There is a marked increase in the sizes and number of sites relative to the antecedent EH, and a notable filling-in of landscapes that had lacked permanent settlement during the EH. We still cannot assess the rapidity with which these increases and filling-in occurred. Our impression is that these changes began slowly and accelerated over time. (2) There are two large site clusters—one in the northwest, and another in the southeast—of roughly similar size and configuration. These macro-clusters are separated by a notable settlement “gap” in the central part of the survey area. Interestingly, this “gap” conforms approximately to the territory of the EH central site cluster proposed above (a cluster that includes the only known example of EH public architecture in our survey area, at Site 509). This “gap” appears to persist through the end of the LIP, and is only “filled” during the Late Horizon when the Inca imperial provincial capital at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550), together with much of the regional imperial storage infrastructure, was situated there (as was the short-lived early Spanish colonial capital at Jauja partially overlapping the Inca center) (Espinosa 1971). The early appearance and long persistence of these two settlement macro-clusters hint at the origins of the socio-territorial diversity of the Wanka Region that is ethnohistorically documented for the LH, most specifically the distinction between the northern “Xauxas” and the remainder of the Wanka ethnicity (see Chapter 3). (3) Although the two settlement macro-clusters are roughly similar in size and configuration, Table 6.11 indicates that the northwestern cluster has more settlements and occupied hectares. (4) There are no obvious EIP/MH primary “centers” in the survey area—that is, no sites that stand out as unusually large in size or with evidence of major public architecture such as we might expect to see at a local or regional capital. From this perspective, overall sociopolitical organization during the EIP/MH does not appear to have been strongly hierarchical. (5) Nevertheless, five EIP/MH sites, which we classify as Very Large Villages, do stand out as somewhat larger than the rest: Sites 389, 446, 473, 571, and 606. As seen in Figure 6.15, four of these VLV sites occur within the northwestern macro-cluster, and only one (Site 571) in the southeastern. This, together with the demographic primacy of the northwestern macro-cluster, and the higher proportion of the population residing in “large” settlements there (Table 6.11), suggests a certain relative ascendency of the northwestern macro-cluster—anticipating the clearly elevated importance of the northwestern sector during the later LIP (Wanka

79 Table 6.10.  EIP/MH settlement sites. “Small” Sites and Classification

“Large” Sites and Classification

383 H 522 SV 384 LV 386 H 524 SV 389 VLV 388 SV 527 SV 398 LV 391 H 529 SV 399 LV 392 SV 535 SV 432 LV 394 SV 537 SV 435 LV 397 H 538 H 437 LV 403 SV 539 H 440 LV 404 SV 540 SV 444 LV 415 SV 541 SV 446 VLV 416 SV 542 SV 463 LV 417 SV 543 SV 469 LV 419 H 544 H 473 VLV 420 SV 549 SV 474 LV 423 SV 552 H 489 LV 424 SV 560 SV 511 LV 433 SV 562-A H 519 LV 434 H 570 H 521 LV 436 SV 572 SV 526 LV 438 SV 579 SV 533 LV 441 SV *583 SV 564 LV *442 SV 587 SV 569 LV 447 SV *589 SV 571 VLV 448 H 590 SV 593 LV 449 SV 591 SV 594 LV 450 SV 592 SV 602 LV *451 H 595 SV 606 VLV 452 H 598 SV 610 LV 453 H 599 H 621 LV 454 H 600 SV *627 LV 455 H 601 H 630 LV 456 SV 603 SV 631 LV *464 SV 604 SV 470 SV 605 SV 471 SV 607 SV 472 SV 608 SV 477 SV 609 SV 484 SV 616 H 487 SV 617 SV 488 SV 619 SV 490 SV 620 SV 492 H 622 SV 503 SV *624 SV 508 SV 625 H 510 SV 628 H 515 SV 636 SV 520 SV “Small” sites are those defined as Hamlets (H) and Small Villages (SV); “Large” sites are Large Villages (LV) and Very Large Villages (VLV). Sites with questionable EIP/MH occupation are not included. Sites with recognized MH Wari-related sherds are denoted with an asterisk.

80

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure 6.15.  Schematic map of EIP/MH settlement sites.

II) that is most strongly indicated by the concentration of the four Wanka II Regional Centers in the Yanamarca subvalley. (6) Recognizable MH Wari-related ceramics are rare in our survey area, and we do not know if what little we recognized was imported or made locally. We noted only six sites where one or more (never more than two or three) such sherds occurred in our surface collections (Sites 442, 451, 464, 583, 589, and 624) (see Plate B4b in Appendix B). None of these are large sites: we classified five as Small Villages and one (Site 451) as a Hamlet. As can be seen in Figure 6.15, three of these sites (442, 451, and 464) are in the northwestern settlement macro-cluster, and three (583, 589, and 624) are in the southeastern. There is no known association of this material with any of the relatively largest settlements, and there is no particular spatial concentration of this pottery. The presence of this Wari-related pottery in seemingly similar quantities in both EIP/MH settlement macro-clusters might be taken as another indication of the sociocultural “reality” of these spatial clusters.

As noted in Chapter 4, distinctive MH Wari-style pottery is generally scarce in much of the Central Andes outside the Wari Region itself and its immediate surroundings, and at a few special sites in other areas with particularly close links to Wari. Nevertheless, the scarcity of this Wari-related material in our survey area is somewhat surprising given the presence of an important MH Wari-linked site at Wari Wilka near the modern city of Huancayo, situated at an elevation of approximately 3260 masl, only about 30 km from the southeastern border of our survey area (Flores Espinosa 1959; Matos 1968; Shea 1969). Despite this apparent dearth of clear linkage (as measured by ceramics) to Wari during MH times, some of the notable increases in settlement size and demographic intensity we observe in this area during the EIP/ MH may well have been related to the sociopolitical pressures and socioeconomic opportunities emanating from the rapidly developing Wari center some 200 km to the southeast.

Data Patterning Table 6.11.  Comparison of the two EIP/MH settlement macroclusters. Northwestern Macro-Cluster Small Sites site no. ha

Large Sites site no. ha

Southeastern Macro-Cluster Small Sites site no. ha

Large Sites site no. ha

383 386 388 391 392 394 397 403 404 415 416 417 419 420 423 424 433 434 436 438 441 442 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 464 470 471 472 477 590 591 592 595 598 600 601 603 604 605 607 608 606

0.1 0.6 4.2 0.6 1.5 1.4 1.0 2.0 1.4 2.5 4.0 1.7 0.2 1.1 2.1 3.1 1.4 1.0 2.0 1.7 3.5 4.3 3.1 0.4 3.3 1.2 0.9 0.5 0.3 1.7 0.4 1.0 3.7 4.1 2.1 5.0 3.6 4.2 3.0 2.2 4.5 3.9 2.2 0.1 2.3 3.0 3.2 2.6 2.7 1.9

384 389 398 399 432 435 437 440 444 446 463 469 473 474 593 594 602 606 610

7.3 11.2 6.3 5.6 10.5 10.3 5.8 5.3 10.1 11.4 5.3 7.0 17.9 5.3 10.4 5.4 8.0 14.0 5.8

484 497 488 490 492 503 508 510 515 520 522 524 527 529 535 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 549 552 560 562-A 570 572 579 583 587 589 616 617 619 620 622 624 625 628 636

1.4 2.6 2.6 1.7 0.1 1.6 3.0 3.1 4.8 2.1 4.8 1.3 2.6 3.1 1.5 1.7 0.3 0.9 2.8 4.8 1.9 2.9 0.8 3.4 0.4 3.9 0.1 1.0 3.2 2.7 1.6 4.4 1.3 2.3 1.5 4.0 1.9 2.0 2.6 0.9 0.4 2.9

489 511 519 521 526 533 564 569 571 621 627 630 631

8.7 8.0 5.3 5.2 6.3 5.4 7.8 9.8 12.2 8.3 5.1 7.6 5.1

n = 50

108.5

n = 19

162.9

n = 42

92.9

n = 13

94.8

total n = 69

total ha = 271.4

total n = 55

total ha = 187.7

81

The Late Intermediate Period When all Late Intermediate Period settlement sites, regardless of their Wanka I vs. Wanka II phasing, are plotted schematically on a single map (Table 6.12, Fig. 6.16), the contrast with the antecedent EIP/MH is striking. There are more occupied hectares, and, most particularly, four unusual sites (461, 468, 472, and 476, all on previously unoccupied hilltops in the Yanamarca subvalley in the northwestern sector of our survey area) that are much larger and more nucleated than any earlier settlements in the survey area—a notably more hierarchical settlement system with a radical shift in settlement pattern. However, when the settlements identified by UMARP as early LIP (Wanka I) and late LIP (Wanka II) are plotted separately (Table 6.13; Figs. 6.17, 6.18), the transition from EIP/MH to LIP seems more gradual, with Wanka I similar to the later EIP/MH in terms of settlement size and configuration, and only Wanka II radically different. Although the large number of JASP sites unphased by UMARP (n = 90) makes it difficult to be precise, it still seems clear that the major transformations of the EIP/ MH site patterning are confined to Wanka II: a time of major settlement nucleation into a few unusually large, walled hilltop locations in the Yanamarca subvalley and an apparent substantial population loss in the large expanses of low-lying land along the main valley floor in the southeastern two-thirds of the survey area, accompanied by what may have been a major slowing of the overall population growth rate. Wanka II represents a major break with an overall regional settlement configuration that had previously characterized this region for well over a millennium. Another notable aspect of the Wanka II settlement distribution is the extent to which the population that remained in the southeastern sector of the survey area was concentrated south of the Río Mantaro; the north side of the river in this sector apparently remained almost uninhabited—this was the only time that this part of the Wanka Region was so sparsely occupied. As in the northwestern sector, Wanka II occupation in the southeastern sector was concentrated in a relatively small number of “large” settlements, although none of them appear to be walled, and none are anywhere near as large as the Regional and Local Centers in the northwestern sector. Despite the late LIP (Wanka II) transformation of long-term trends, there are some strong continuities between the overall EIP/MH and early LIP (Wanka I) settlement configurations: (1) The long-established settlement gap between northwestern and southeastern settlement macro-clusters continues to be sparsely occupied. (2) The overall distribution of settlements is similar, with all parts of the survey area occupied, and with a continued demographic predominance of the northwestern macro-cluster. (3) This latter overall pattern is essentially reestablished in the Late Horizon under Inca domination, with the only radical change being the placement of the Inca provincial capital, Hátun Xauxa (Site 550), and a large portion of the regional imperial storage infrastructure in the former settlement gap—a pattern

82

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure 6.16.  Schematic map of LIP–All settlement sites. Table 6.12.  LIP–All settlement sites. “Small” Sites and Classification

“Large” Sites and Classification

Centers and Classification

387 SV 412 H 464 SV 535 SV 603 SV 389 VLV 565 LV 461 LC 388 SV 414 SV 466 H 536 H 605 SV 393 LV 566 VLV 468 RC 390 H 416 SV 470 SV 538 H 614 H 398 LV 560 LV 472 RC 394 SV 418 SV 471 SV 540 SV 616 SV 422 LV 579 LV 476 LC 395 SV 424 SV 478 H 560 SV 627 SV 432 LV 596 LV 396 SV 425 SV 482 SV 561 SV 629 SV 444 LV 602 LV 399 SV 426 SV 493 SV 567 SV 632-A SV 449 LV 606 LV 400 H 427 SV 494 H 568 SV 633 SV 462 LV 632 VLV 401 SV 429 SV 495 SV 572 SV 635 SV 463 LV 634 LV 402 SV 434 H 498 SV 574 SV 465 LV 403 SV 441 SV 501 SV 575 H 469 LV 404 SV 442 SV 507 H 584 SV 479 LV 405 H 443 SV 510 SV 587 SV 480 LV 407 H 445-B H 512 SV 590 SV 481 LV 408 SV 454 SV 515 SV 591 SV 503 LV 409 SV 456 H 518 SV 594 SV 504 LV 410 SV 457 SV 523 H 599 H 505 LV 411 SV 460 SV 531 SV 600 SV 564 LV “Small” sites are those defined as Hamlets (H) and Small Villages (SV); “Large” sites are Large Villages (LV) and Very Large Villages (VLV); “­Centers” are Local Centers (LC) and Regional Centers (RC). Camps and sites with highly questionable LIP occupation are not included.

Data Patterning

83

Figure 6.17. Schematic map of early LIP (UMARPidentified Wanka I) settlement sites.

Table 6.13.  UMARP-defined Wanka I and Wanka II settlement sites. Wanka I* “Small” Sites and Classification

Wanka II* “Lg” Sites and “Sm” Sites and “Lg” Sites and Classification Classification Classification

Centers and Classification

387 SV 498 SV 389 VLV 415 SV 462 LV 461 LC 388 SV 510 SV 398 LV 424 SV 463 LV 468 RC 394 SV 512 SV 422 LV 426 SV 465 LV 472 RC 395 SV 515 SV 432 LV 434 H 481 LV 476 LC 399 SV 531 SV 444 LV 448 H 565 LV 416 SV 560 SV 449 LV 454 SV 566 VLV 424 SV 561 SV 463 LV 464 SV 569 LV 425 SV 567 SV 465 LV 471 SV 579 LV 426 SV 572 SV 469 LV 478 H 596 LV 429 SV 574 SV 470 LV 483 SV 618 VLV 434 H 575 H 503 LV 498 SV 630 LV 441 SV 587 SV 504 LV 527 SV 632 VLV 442 SV 590 SV 564 LV 567 SV 443 SV 591 SV 565 LV 572 SV 454 SV 599 H 566 VLV 574 SV 456 H 600 SV 569 LV 575 H 470 SV 603 SV 579 LV 604 SV 471 SV 605 SV 602 LV 472 H 627 SV 606 LV 482 SV “Small” sites are those defined as Hamlets (H) and Small Villages (SV); “Large” sites are Large Villages (LV) and Very Large Villages (VLV); “Centers” are Local Centers (LC) and Regional Centers (RC). *There are no Wanka I sites that qualify as Centers. Sites with highly questionable Wanka I occupation are not included. Sites with highly questionable Wanka II occupation are not included.

84

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure 6.18.  Schematic map of late LIP (UMARP-identified Wanka II) settlement sites.

similar to the placement of new Inca imperial centers in previously unsettled areas in the adjacent Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region (Parsons 1998; Parsons et al. 2000:138–41). There is an interesting contrast between “small” and “large” Wanka II settlements: all but one “small” site (Site 426) are situated on topographically low-lying ground, whereas all “large” sites and all centers are on hilltops or ridge crests. However, none of the Wanka II sites are walled except for the four centers in the Yanamarca subvalley. Obviously, we require a greater understanding of the cause(s) of the radical changes that occurred over a comparatively short period during the late LIP (Wanka II), and that were apparently confined to that period.

Late Horizon As noted above, the Late Horizon (LH settlement sites are listed in Table 6.14 and depicted schematically on Fig. 6.19) saw a return to a long-established overall settlement configuration characterizing EIP/MH and early LIP (Wanka I) occupation in the survey area—a general configuration that had been interrupted significantly for only a few centuries during the late LIP (Wanka II). The entire region was once more fully occupied with an overall population roughly similar in size to that of Wanka I and the later EIP/MH. Nevertheless, the LH also witnessed a radical transformation of its own: the overlay of Inca imperial authority coinciding with the virtual abandonment of three of the four Wanka II hilltop centers in the Yanamarca subvalley, and the placement of the new Inca provincial capital at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550), together with much of its specialized imperial storage infrastructure, squarely within the long-enduring central settlement gap at the center of our survey area.

Data Patterning

85

Figure 6.19.  Schematic map of LH settlement sites. Table 6.14.  LH settlement sites (JASP-defined LIP/LH and UMARP-defined Wanka III sites). “Small” Sites and Classification

“Large” Sites and Classification

Centers and Classification

388 SV 464 SV 557 SV 624 SV 389 VLV 606 LV 431 LC 394 SV 470 SV 560 SV 626 H 398 LV 611 VLV 462 LC 396 SV 471 SV 567 SV 630 SV 432 LV 618 VLV 550 RC 399 SV 473 H 568 SV 435 LV 621 LV 406 SV 483 SV 571 H 449 LV 631 LV 415 SV 490 SV 572 SV 465 LV 632 VLV 424 SV 498 SV 574 SV 479 LV 426 SV 499 SV 575 H 481 LV 429 SV 504 SV 590 SV 526 LV 433 SV 510 SV 591 SV 556 VLV 436 SV 515 SV 592 SV 558 LV 437 H 522 SV 595 H 564 LV 448 H 525 SV 597 SV 566 VLV 450 SV 527 SV 599 H 579 LV 452 H 529 SV 600 SV 593 LV 454 SV 530 SV 604 SV 596 LV 456 H 533 SV 608 SV 601 LV 462 SV 553 H 609 SV 602 LV “Small” sites are those defined as Hamlets (H) and Small Villages (SV); “Large” sites are Large Villages (LV) and Very Large Villages (VLV); “­Centers” are Local Centers (LC) and Regional Centers (RC). Sites with highly questionable LH occupation are not included.

86

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Inca Storage Facilities (Colcas)

Colca-site Classes

Although in many cases ceramic evidence clearly indicates a Late Horizon age and Inca imperial affiliation for these distinctive sites, occasionally the ages and sociocultural contexts of colca construction and use are less clear. As discussed in Chapter 4 and Appendix A, where such uncertainty does exist we have assigned a Late Horizon age on the basis of overall architectonic resemblances with better-dated colca sites in the Wanka Region and throughout the Central Andes. With a few exceptions, most of these sites are physically detached from contemporary residential settlements, and there is good reason to infer their supra-community significance. Inca-affiliated colcas have been widely studied throughout the Central Andes, most notably by Morris (1967, 1972, 1981), Grosboll (1988), LeVine (1985, 1992), and D’Altroy (1992); their function as specialized storage structures for staple, craft, and ritual related materials has been demonstrated. Inca-affiliated colcas typically occur in both circular and rectangular forms, and these architectural form categories probably functioned to help order and organize the storage of different kinds of products. UMARP archaeologists calculated the colca volumes presented in this section on the basis of their detailed mapping and measurements (Appendix A).

Colca sites are very variable in the numbers of structures they contain (Table 6.18). As discussed in Chapter 4, we have defined six classes of colca sites on the basis of numbers of colca structures: Class A (> 350 colcas), Class B (170–175 colcas), Class C (91–120 colcas), Class D (56–75 colcas), Class E (31–50 colcas), and Class F (< 30 colcas). Table 6.19 indicates the numbers of sites and numbers of colcas for each class (see Figs. 6.20, 6.21). Table 6.20 (see Fig. 6.22) indicates the total storage volume within each colca-site class, and also differentiates between the volumes of circular vs. rectangular colcas within each class. Tables 6.21 and 6.22 and Figures 6.23 and 6.24 indicate the numbers of colca sites with purely circular colcas vs. purely rectangular colcas vs. mixed circular and rectangular colcas, and also indicate which colca sites are closely associated with contemporary Wanka III settlement sites. Because of its unique elliptical site configuration, a single colca site (No. 502, Fig. A22) appears to have special, possibly ritual significance. These tabulations regarding the colca-form composition of colca-site classes indicate the following: (1) Although there are a great many more numbers of colca sites in the smaller classes (E, F), there are many more individual colcas and much more storage volume in the larger classes (A, B, C, D). The two Class A colca sites, for example, contain about a quarter of the total storage volume of circular colcas in the Wanka Region, although their share of the total rectangular colca storage volume is comparable to that of several other site classes. Class B is unique in that all its 175 colcas are circular in form in the single site (562) belonging to this class. (2) In terms of numbers and volumes of colcas, some classes (A, B, F) are dominated by circular colcas, while others (C, D) are strongly dominated by rectangular colcas. Only Class E contains roughly similar numbers and volumes of both colca forms. Thus, the largest and smallest colca-site classes (A, B, F) have predominately circular colcas, while the mid-range classes (C, D) contain mainly rectangular structures.

The Forms and Volumes of Colca Structures in the Wanka Region Colca sites in the Wanka Region vary considerably in both the number and form of the structures they contain (exclusively circular vs. exclusively rectangular vs. mixed circular and rectangular) (Tables 6.15–6.17). These tabulations show that while the absolute total numbers of circular and rectangular colcas are similar (n = 1146 circular vs. 1036 rectangular), the overall storage volume capacity of rectangular colcas is significantly higher than that of the circular colcas (73,667 vs. 50,900 cubic meters, respectively). On average, individual rectangular colcas are substantially larger than the circular structures (71.1 vs. 44.4 cubic meters, respectively). While all-circular colca sites are the most numerous, there are nearly as many all-rectangular and mixed-circular-rectangular sites.

Table 6.15.  Numbers and volumes of circular vs. rectangular colcas in the Wanka Region. Total

Circular

Rectangular

total number of structures

2182

1146

1036

% total structures

100.0

52.5

47.5

total volume (m3)

124,567

50,900

73,667

100.0

40.9

59.1

% total volume

The Architectonic Configuration of Colca Sites Colca sites occur in four kinds of configurations: (a) simple linear (a single line of structures), (b) simple multiple linear (two

Table 6.16.  Colca-form distributions. Form sites with pure circular colcas

No. of Sites

%

13

40.6

sites with pure rectangular colcas

9

28.1

sites with mixed circular and rectangular colcas

10

31.3

sites with all circular colcas except for one rectangular structure

2

6.3

Data Patterning

87

or more lines of structures), (c) irregular multiple linear, and (d) elliptical (Table 6.23) (detailed site plans are in Appendix A). Table 6.24 shows the distribution of colca-site configurations within different size classes. Local topography and numbers of colcas were probably the most significant factors in the spatial configuration of colcas: lines of colcas are usually arrayed parallel to the topographic contours, and larger numbers of colcas are typically accommodated in two or more roughly parallel lines. The irregularity of the single largest colca site, Site 554, can probably be attributed to the very large numbers of colca structures within a comparatively small area at this location. Not surprisingly, colcas in larger colca-site classes (A, B, C) are generally arrayed in a more complex manner than those in smaller site classes. It is also possible that colca units

at the larger storage facilities were constructed over a longer period of time, and perhaps by different social units, than were those at smaller sites. This might account for the irregular or more complex configurations of colca structures at some larger colca sites. The elliptical configuration of Site 502 is unique in the Wanka Region. This quality, plus the presence of a unique central platform at this site, suggests that Site 502 had a unique function, perhaps primarily ceremonial in nature, among colca sites in our survey area. Site 502, for example, may have been a place where uniquely significant ritual paraphernalia and/or material dedicated to the support of religious ceremonies were stored, and where some such ceremonies were performed.

Table 6.17.  Summary tabulation of volume and form for Inca colca sites. Site No.

385 428 430 431-A 485 491 500 502 504 512-A 514 516 517 525 528 546 547 547-A 548 554 555 558 562 563 566 573 576 577 580 607-A 611 612 613 total

Total Structures

Circular Structures

Rectangular Structures

No.

Volume (m3)

No.

Volume (m3)

No.

Volume (m3)

15 24 29 4 38 39 39 75 66 63 23 15 42 ? 17 93 359 20 118 479 99 18 175 37 21 15 8 41 46 37 35 60 32

ca. 800 ? 1286 1760 183 1226 1517 3272 6278 5661 5079 1286 838 3515 ? 689 5251 23,398 1730 7164 27,075 7269 684 ? 1838 901 490 313 2207 2078 1861 2758 4048 2112

14 24 29 0 19 39 0 0 0 0 23 15 1 ? 17 19 128 0 0 415 0 18 175 21 21 15 8 35 33 36 0 9 32

ca. 746 ? 1286 1760 0 681 1517 0 0 0 0 1286 838 30 ? 689 1011 7898 0 0 22,659 0 684 ? 591 901 490 313 1516 1526 1824 0 542 2112

1 0 0 4 19 0 39 75 66 63 0 0 41 ? 0 74 231 20 118 64 99 0 0 16 0 0 0 6 13 1 35 51 0

ca. 54 ? 0 0 183 545 0 3272 6278 5661 5079 0 0 3485 ? 0 4240 15,500 1730 7164 4416 7269 0 0 1247 0 0 0 691 552 37 2758 3506 0

2182

124,567

1146

50,900

1036

73,667

The Distribution of Colca Sites by Elevation As indicated in Table 6.25, there is not a great deal of variation in the elevations of colca sites. Nevertheless, Class F, Class A, and Class C sites tend to be somewhat lower than the others, and Class D sites tend to be a little higher. In virtually all cases, colca sites are situated either on ridge crests, on hilltops, or well up on the slopes above the main valley floor. As others have suggested, the typically windy nature of these locations may have facilitated the storage of perishables by providing better natural ventilation. The Distances of Different Colca Classes from the Inca Imperial Center at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550) Table 6.26 indicates the straight-line distances between the mid-point of the Inca center at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550) and individual colca sites in different colca classes. These tabulations indicate that smaller colca sites (Classes E and F) are significantly more distant than larger colca sites from the Inca imperial center. This impression might be more meaningful, of course, if our survey had extended farther to the northwest and southeast along the Mantaro Valley. We know from casual observations and from Browman’s (1970) earlier survey that more colca sites occur outside our survey area in both directions along the main valley margins, especially to the southeast along the edges of the main Mantaro Valley as it gradually descends toward the modern city of Huancayo. Nevertheless, the observed tendency for their spatial proximity to the Inca center at Hátun Xauxa to be directly proportional to colca-site size is notable: it appears that minimizing physical distance to the Hátun Xauxa center was an important consideration for Inca imperial authorities in maximizing their control over, and access to, stored materials. At the same time, however, the presence of numerous colca sites at considerable distances from

88

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table 6.18. Numbers of sites and colcas in different site-size categories. # Structures in Site

# Sites in Size Category

Total # of Colcas in This Size Category

3800 masl

15 27 4 1

Period EH 1 EIP/MH 23 LIP–General 5 Wanka I 8 Wanka II 1 LH 9 Each chronological component counted as one site.

Table 6.30.  Distribution of “small” and “large” rock-free sites by elevation zone. Sites

Elevation (masl)

No. Sites

%

“Small”

< 3400 3400–3600 3600–3800 > 3800

10 21 2 1

29.4 61.8 5.9 2.0

“Large”

< 3400 3400–3600 3600–3800 > 3800

4 6 2 0

33.3 50.0 16.7 0.0

“Small” = Hamlets and Small Villages; “Large” = Large Villages and Very Large Villages. Each chronological component counted as one site.

Data Patterning Table 6.31.  Mean elevation of “small” vs. “large” rock-free sites, by period. Period

“Small” Sites

EH EIP/MH LIP–General Wanka I Wanka II LH

“Large” Sites

Mean Elev. (masl)

Sites (n)

Mean Elev. (masl)

Sites (n)

3505 3470 ± 142 3437 ± 124 3483 ± 64 3380 3448 ± 83

1 17 5 5 1 7

– 3473 ± 113 – 3438 ± 54 – 3523 ± 123

0 6 0 3 0 3

“Small” = Hamlets and Small Villages; “Large” = Large Villages and Very Large Villages.

Table 6.32.  Long-term occupation of EH ­settlements. EH Only

EH and EIP/MH

EH, EIP/MH, and Wanka I

n

%

n

%

n

%

2

20.0

6

60.0

2

20.0

Questionable EH sites included.

(1) Most rock-free sites are small (Hamlets and Small Villages) (n = 34), although there are also significant numbers of Large Villages (n = 10); there are very few Very Large Villages (n = 2), and no Local Centers or Regional Centers. (2) Most rock-free sites are below 3600 masl (n = 42), and a significant proportion of these (n = 15) are within or immediately around the main Río Mantaro floodplain. (3) Although rock-free sites occur in all periods, a high proportion are early (EH and EIP/MH) (n = 24). By contrast, the late LIP (Wanka II) is represented by only one such site. We suspect that there is a greater likelihood that “small” sites could represent special-purpose occupations with relatively impermanent residential structures. Furthermore, we suspect that impermanent occupation might be more prevalent in agriculturally marginal areas: for example, poorly drained localities within the main floodplain, and higher elevations above the most productive agricultural zones. With these considerations in mind, in Table 6.30 we compare smaller (Hamlets and Small Villages) and larger (Large Villages and Very Large Villages) rock-free sites by elevation zone, and in Table 6.31 we compare mean elevations of “small” vs. “large” rock-free sites. These distributions reveal that very high proportions of both kinds of sites are situated at elevations below 3600 masl, but with a greater tendency for small rock-free sites to be situated at such relatively low elevations as compared to small settlement sites in general (Table 6.6). This might indicate that more small sites situated below 3600 masl were characterized by impermanent kinds of occupation than for settlement sites in general. Table 6.31 does not suggest any notable inter-period differences in mean site elevation.

99

Long-Term Settlement Continuity and Abandonment The absence of a more refined ceramic chronology, especially for pre-LIP periods, hampers efforts to discern long-term trends in settlement continuity and abandonment. Nevertheless, we are able to make some suggestive general observations. In Tables 6.32–6.36, we have used only those sites where UMARP archaeologists differentiated Wanka I, II, and III components at post-EIP/MH sites. The Early Horizon Table 6.32 indicates that 80% of EH sites apparently continued to be occupied into the EIP, but that only a third of those continued to be occupied into the Wanka I phase. As noted earlier, we presently have no information about the occupation of these EH settlement locations in preceramic/Archaic Period times. From our perspective, all EH settlements appear to be newly occupied at some point early in the first millennium B.C. The Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon Table 6.33 indicates that nearly a third of EIP/MH settlements continued to be occupied into early LIP (Wanka I) times, whereas only a tiny fraction of those settlements continued to be occupied through later LIP (Wanka II) and into LH (Wanka III) periods. On the other hand, some 40% of all EIP/MH settlement locations were reoccupied during the LH after a long period of apparent abandonment. When “small” (Hamlets, Small Villages) vs. “large” (Large Villages, Very Large Villages) EIP/MH settlements are considered separately, these proportions are somewhat different (Table 6.33). This may be an important distinction, because a higher proportion of “small” settlements may represent temporary, seasonal, specialized, or irregular kinds of occupation, whereas “large” settlements probably represent more permanent and enduring kinds of residential activity. (1) A significantly smaller proportion of “large” EIP/MH settlements were occupied exclusively during the EIP/MH Period—that is, proportionately fewer of these “large” settlements were abandoned in Wanka I times. (2) A significantly larger proportion of “large” EIP/MH settlement locations, abandoned during Wanka I and/or Wanka II times, were reoccupied during the Late Horizon. The Early Late Intermediate Period (UMARP Identified as Wanka I) Table 6.34 indicates that when all Wanka I settlements are considered together, nearly two-thirds have EIP/MH antecedents, relatively few are pure Wanka I, and relatively few continued to be occupied through Wanka II times and into Wanka III. On the other hand, nearly half were reoccupied during Wanka III times after a period of apparent abandonment during the Wanka II phase.

100

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table 6.33.  Long-term occupational continuity in EIP/MH settlements. Settlements

EIP/MH only

EIP/MH + Wanka I

EIP/MH + Wanka I and Wanka II

EIP/MH + Wanka I, EIP/MH + Wanka III Wanka II, and Wanka III (includes sites with Wanka I occupation)

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

All EIP/MH n = 116

48

41.4

36

31.0

1

0.9

3

2.6

47

40.5

“Small” EIP/MH n = 85

38

44.7

26

30.6

3

3.5

3

3.5

36

42.4

“Large” EIP/MH n = 30

9

30.0

11

36.7

1

3.3

0

0.0

17

56.7

“Small” = Hamlets and Small Villages; “Large” = Large Villages and Very Large Villages. Percentages may add up to over 100% because some sites are counted in more than one category.

Table 6.34.  Long-term occupational continuity in early LIP settlements. Settlements

Wanka I Sites with EIP/MH Antecedents

Pure Wanka I Occupations

Wanka I + Wanka II

Wanka I + Wanka II + Wanka III

Wanka I + Wanka III (incl. sites with EIP/MH)

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

All Early LIP n = 58

37

63.8

10

17.2

9

15.5

7

12.2

30

51.7

“Small” Early LIP n = 39

23

59.0

8

20.5

5

12.8

5

12.8

19

48.7

“Large” Early LIP n = 39

23

59.0

8

20.5

5

12.8

5

12.8

19

48.7

“Small” = H ­ amlets and Small Villages; “Large” = Large Villages and Very Large Villages. UMARP-identified Wanka I settlements. Percentages may add up to over 100% because some sites are counted in more than one category.

Table 6.35.  Long-term occupational continuity in late LIP settlements. Settlements

With Wanka I Antecedents

Pure Wanka II

Wanka II + Wanka III

n

%

n

%

n

%

All Late LIP n = 33

15

24.5

4

12.1

24

72.7

“Small” Late LIP n = 17

9

52.9

1

5.9

14

82.4

“Large” Late LIP n = 12

5

41.7

0

0.0

9

75.0

Late LIP “Centers” n=4

1

25.0

3

75.0

1

25.0

“Small” = Hamlets and Small Villages; “Large” = Large ­Villages and Very Large Villages; “Centers” = Local Centers and Regional Centers. UMARP-identified Wanka II settlements. Percentages may add up to over 100% because some sites are counted in more than one category.

When “small” and “large” Wanka I settlements are considered separately (Table 6.34), these same tendencies also hold. This absence of significant differences in occupational continuity between “small” and “large” Wanka I settlements suggests that all these sites represent comparatively permanent settlement, or, alternatively, that sites with temporary, seasonal, or specialized occupation tended to be reoccupied with some regularity.

The Late Late Intermediate Period (UMARP Identified as Wanka II) Table 6.35 indicates that, except for the large hilltop sites classified as “centers,” nearly three-quarters of all Wanka II settlements, both “small” and “large,” continued to be occupied during the Late Horizon (Wanka III). Conversely, only a quarter

Data Patterning

101

Table 6.36.  Long-term occupational continuity in LH settlements. Settlements

With Wanka II Antecedents

Pure Wanka III

Reoccupied in Wanka III at Wanka I and/or EIP/MH Site Locations

n

%

n

%

n

%

All LH n = 82

25

30.5

9

11.0

49

59.8

“Small” LH n = 55

17

30.9

6

10.9

33

60.0

“Large” LH n = 24

7

29.2

3

12.5

14

58.3

LH “Centers” n=3

1

33.3

0

0.0

2

66.7

“Small” = Hamlets and Small Villages; “Large” = Large ­Villages and Very Large Villages; “Centers” = Local Centers and Regional Centers. UMARP-identified Wanka III settlements. Percentages may add up to over 100% because some sites are counted in more than one category.

(one of four) of Wanka II centers continued to be occupied (at a much reduced scale) during LH times, and a much smaller proportion of these Wanka II centers had Wanka I antecedents as compared to “small” and “large” settlements. While only a few “small” and “large” Wanka II sites were pure Wanka II occupations (lacking both Wanka I and Wanka III components), some three-quarters of Wanka II centers appear to have been occupied exclusively in Wanka II times. These distinctions between Wanka II centers and all other categories of Wanka II settlements are particularly notable. The Late Horizon Table 6.36 indicates that while less than a third of Wanka III settlements have Wanka II antecedents, a much higher proportion represents resettlement at locations previously occupied much earlier during Wanka I and EIP/MH times and abandoned during the Wanka II phase. There are only a relatively few Wanka III settlements that lack earlier components—although the Inca imperial center at Hátun Xauxa has only a very minor Wanka I component, and thus should probably be considered as a pure LH occupation. The Tarama-Wanka Frontier The southernmost part of the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region (Parsons et al. 2000) and the northernmost portion of the Wanka Region roughly correspond spatially to the ethnic border between the Inca Wanka and Tarama provinces as defined by ethnohistoric sources (Rowe 1946; Hastings 1985; Perales 2004a). Although we surveyed only a limited portion of this bordering region, the

available data suggest that there is a reasonably good fit between the ethnohistoric and archaeological borders. A more precise and extensive definition of this archaeological border is much needed, but even the limited information we now possess indicates a very pronounced difference between these regions in terms of ceramics and architecture, at least during the LIP and LH. The pre-LIP situation is much less well defined, and at present no such border is archaeologically apparent in this locality. Archaeologically this LIP/LH border zone is marked by both ceramics and architecture. The distinctive LIP ceramic types—San Blas Red/Buff, Wanka Base Roja, and Wanka Base Clara—co-occur at Tarama Sites 378, 379, and 381, and at very few other sites in the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region (Parsons et al. 2000:455–59), and at Wanka Sites 479, 480, and 481 (Appendix A); we found no San Blas Red/Buff anywhere else in the Wanka Region, and Wanka ceramic types are rare in the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region (Parsons et al. 2000:142). The distinctive two-story rectangular structures (which we interpret as LIP colcas), so abundant in the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region, occur in the Wanka Region only at Sites 479, 480, and 481—the same sites with intermixed San Blas Red/Buff pottery. Interestingly, Perales (2004a:516–20) reports a comparable co-occurrence of Wanka and Tarama-Chinchaycocha ceramics and architecture on the western flanks of Cerro Apohuayhuay in the upper Ricran Valley, about 30 km to the north of Jauja at the edge of the ceja de montaña. This locality may mark the eastern end of the Wanka-Tarama frontier along the edge of a lower, warmer, wetter area beyond the sierran heartlands of these respective “ethnic” groupings, in a region where ethnohistoric sources indicate that both Wanka and (perhaps) Tarama exercised a degree of control and interaction during LH and possibly LIP times (see Chapter 3).

Chapter 7

Overall Summary and Conclusions Jeffrey R. Parsons

This monograph presents the data from the 1975–76 JASP investigations in the Wanka Region, together with some important additional information and refinements concerning occupational chronology, site configuration, and expanded site survey subsequently collected by UMARP archaeologists in the same area. In this overdue monograph we have attempted to consider our archaeological data with reference to the natural and cultural environment, with emphasis on insights from historically and ethnographically documented demography and agricultural ecology. As its name indicates, the Wanka Region was the heartland of the ethnohistorically documented Wanka, one of the major socio-territorial groups within the Inca empire. Our survey was designed to help provide a regional perspective on the longterm development of Wanka society, polity, and economy, and it served as the foundation upon which UMARP archaeologists subsequently designed their more intensive studies. Taken together, the JASP and UMARP projects provide a good example of the efficacy of regionally oriented multistage archaeological research. The main issues considered in this monograph may be summarized as follows:

The Survey Area The Wanka Region is one of the very largest expanses of productive agricultural terrain in the Peruvian sierra central. During historic times it has supported a large, dense, and comparatively urbanized population—one of the major concentrations of modern population and urbanism in the Andean sierra. Our surface survey covered an area of 435 square kilometers, most of which was between 3350 and 3800 masl in what we refer to as the upper and lower kichwa zones. We did extend our survey into a small portion of the adjacent puna zone (3800–4200 masl), but our reduced coverage of this higher terrain and the absence of survey data from the adjacent major puna expanses to the immediate northeast and southwest pose major interpretive problems for understanding long-term change in the relationships between puna camelid pastoralists and kichwa agriculturalists in the Wanka Region. This is in marked contrast to the adjacent Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region, where our surveys extended over a large expanse of puna terrain. We cannot emphasize strongly enough that our lack of coverage in the main puna to the northeast and southwest of our survey area makes it impossible to evaluate the role of the main

103

104

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

puna landscape above 3800 masl, especially above 4000 masl, in prehispanic economy and polity in the Wanka Region. We particularly regret that we are unable to use our survey data to help evaluate Browman’s (1974, 1976) provocative (and still largely untested) hypothesis regarding the primacy of herding economies during the Formative era in this part of the sierra central. Similarly, we are unable to illuminate with our data the intriguing suggestion by Bauer and Kellett (2010:106) that pastoralism played an increasingly important role in the Andahuaylas Region, and perhaps elsewhere in the sierra central, during a time of apparent drought and cooler temperatures throughout the Central Andes during the Late Intermediate Period. Methodology When we originally designed our research in the early 1970s, we wanted to help expand regionally oriented archaeological research in the Andean sierra. With few methodological precedents available to us from the Andean highlands, we implemented a modified version of surveys previously undertaken in the Valley of Mexico, making necessary, and sometimes radical, modifications in survey tactics to accommodate the lack of large-scale airphotos, the reduced density of surficial artifacts, the much better architectural preservation, and the absence of well-defined natural borders that we encountered in highland Peru relative to central Mexico. We recognize the arbitrary nature of our survey borders and our limitations in dealing with the full range of the architectural variability preserved at Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon sites. Ceramic Chronology The absence of a more refined ceramic chronology has made it difficult to perceive clearly several critical stages in long-term cultural change in the Wanka Region. Although the UMARP refinement of the Late Intermediate Period ceramic sequence has greatly assisted our understanding of this previously undivided period, we still cannot effectively separate the Middle Horizon from the antecedent half millennium of the Early Intermediate Period, and so our attempt to discern the impact of Wari development and expansion is greatly constrained. We also continue to be uncertain about whether or not we have been able to detect Late Horizon (Wanka III) occupation at sites where Inca-style pottery might be absent for cultural, instead of chronological, reasons, or to be sure in all cases that late Late Intermediate Period (Wanka II) occupation is necessarily absent in contexts where Inca-style pottery does occur.

The Archaic-Formative Transition We understood from the outset that our survey methodology could not deal meaningfully with the subtle surficial lithic traces of preceramic occupation. Consequently, we can add nothing to the understanding of Archaic lifeways, and the transition from Archaic to Early Horizon in the Wanka Region remains opaque. This was an era in the Wanka Region during which the emergence of the first fully sedentary, and probably agriculturally based, society presumably occurred. Obviously, this is a key problem for future research throughout the sierra central. The Early Horizon Early Horizon occupation was very sparse, with no indication of a site hierarchy. Although Early Horizon ceramics are distinctive, we had difficulty in detecting their presence at several multicomponent sites with heavier overlays of younger occupation where subsequent, more intensive UMARP restudy revealed Early Horizon surface pottery. There is a continuing uncertainty about overall Early Horizon settlement patterning. There are hints of three small territorial groupings, and the existence of modest public architecture at one partially excavated site (Ataura, Site 509) may indicate some social ranking. We know that Early Horizon occupation intensifies to the immediate southeast of our survey area as the main Mantaro Valley floor gradually descends toward the modern city of Huancayo, some 30 km downstream to the southeast. Nevertheless, the Wanka Region and this part of the sierra central in general is clearly on the periphery of the florescent Early Horizon developments in the core areas of this development in the central and northern Peruvian coasts and highlands. The basis for this notable north-south differentiation in central Andean Formative-era cultural development remains an important research question. The Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon Although the Early Horizon to Early Intermediate Period transition in the Wanka Region remains murky, the centuries following the mid-first millennium B.C. saw the beginning of a long and sustained population growth, a filling-in of the kichwa landscapes, a much greater diversity of settlement sizes and locations, and the apparent development of two major settlement “macro-clusters” (a northwestern and a southeastern) that may represent multicommunity sociopolitical entities, and perhaps the beginnings of the ethnohistorically documented division between the “Xauxa” ethnicity at the northwestern end of the main Mantaro Valley and the rest of the Wanka ethnicity farther south (Chapter 3). The ascendancy of the northwestern macrocluster in late Late Intermediate Period times (Wanka II) seems

Overall Summary and Conclusions to have been foreshadowed in the later Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon, when this part of our survey area was also characterized by a higher population and more large sites relative to its southeastern neighbor. These general Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon tendencies probably peaked during the Middle Horizon, perhaps linked to some still poorly understood impact of the developing state centered at Wari, about 200 km to the southeast. We continue to be uncertain about how the inhabitants of the Wanka Region may have been impacted by the expansion of the Wari-centered polity during Middle Horizon times. The scarcity of Wari-style pottery in our survey area, although comparable to what has been observed in other parts of the Peruvian sierra central, is quite different from some other surveyed areas geographically closer to Wari where archaeologists have found Wari ceramics to be much more widespread and abundant (e.g., in the Andahuaylas Region [Bauer and Kellett 2010:94]). This may suggest that the most direct Wari impact was in the regions immediately surrounding the expanding Middle Horizon center itself. Nevertheless, as in the adjacent Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region, it could well be that much (or even most) of the population expansion and settlement pattern changes we detected for our Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon Period actually occurred primarily in the Middle Horizon. Once again, these questions about the larger impact of Wari development throughout the sierra central can only be resolved by a more refined artifact chronology and a much better understanding of the late Early Intermediate Period and Middle Horizon settlement systems. The Late Intermediate Period Contrary to our initial expectations, there does not appear to be any major change in overall settlement patterning from Middle Horizon to the early Late Intermediate Period (Wanka I). This revelation is a major contribution of the ability of UMARP archaeologists to separate the early (Wanka I) and late (Wanka II) phases of the Late Intermediate Period. However, the later Late Intermediate Period (Wanka II) saw a major transformation in the Wanka Region, with a concentration of regional population in the northwestern sector of the survey area (the Yanamarca subvalley), and the development there of four unusually large and densely nucleated walled hilltop centers. As far as we can determine, the larger two of these centers (Tunanmarca and Hatunmarca, Sites 468 and 472) are by far the largest known Late Intermediate Period archaeological sites in the entire sierra central between Ayacucho and Cajamarca, and they rank among the largest sites anywhere in the Andean sierra. These radical late Late Intermediate Period settlement pattern changes in the Wanka Region are comparable to what has been observed in several other surveyed parts of the Central Andean sierra, where sites of this period were typically located

105

on previously unoccupied defensible hilltops and ridge crests—a pattern often taken to indicate intensive conflict and an absence of political centralization (Covey 2008; D’Altroy 1992; Arkush and Stanish 2005; Arkush 2011). The only known exception to this general late Late Intermediate Period pattern is the Cuzco Region in southern Peru, where Late Intermediate Period settlements are typically on low-lying ground (Parsons and Hastings 1988; Bauer and Covey 2002; Covey 2006; Bauer et al. 2010)—a feature that has sometimes been taken as indicative of an unusual measure of sociopolitical integration and centralization in and around the Cuzco Basin during this period just prior to Inca imperial expansion. Settlements occur in all elevation zones throughout the postEarly Horizon periods. However, during most periods, settlements tended to be situated within a smaller range of relatively low elevation zones below about 3600 masl within the lower kichwa zone. This tendency broke down notably only during Wanka II times, when an unusually high proportion of occupied hectares occur at higher elevations in large hilltop centers. The radical changes during Wanka II times in terms of settlement location and settlement size are an especially striking feature of the archaeological record in the Wanka Region. Indeed, the large size and nucleation of the major Wanka II hilltop centers in the Wanka Region, together with their comparatively close proximity to each other, might suggest that the Wanka II polity was more centralized than the ethnohistoric sources seem to indicate. The Wanka II settlement pattern—especially the defensible, walled locations of the four large centers in the Yanamarca subvalley—is commonly regarded as reflecting intensive conflict and political fragmentation during late Late Intermediate Period times in the Wanka Region. However, it is interesting to note that only the four Yanamarca subvalley centers are clearly walled, and only the “large” Wanka II non-center settlements (Large Villages and Very Large Villages) are situated on hilltops or ridge crests that might be deemed defensible. Many of the “small” (Hamlets and Small Villages) Wanka II settlements are situated on topographically low-lying ground. Future archaeological research in the Wanka Region should consider reevaluating the nature of regional political integration and the significance of warfare during the late Late Intermediate Period. It is interesting in this regard that one of the major, newly founded Late Horizon local centers (Marca, Site 431) also appears to be walled—and the Late Horizon is often regarded as a relatively peaceful era (the pax incaica). Because our survey did not extend far enough to the southeast along the main Mantaro Valley, we are unable to evaluate the ethnohistorically based indications of territorial subdivisions (Hatunxauxa, Lurinwanka, Ananwanka, and Chongos) that existed during the Late Horizon and which may have originated during the Late Intermediate Period, or earlier. Nor do we have anything to add to the suggestions in the ethnohistoric sources, and in a few pioneering archaeological studies, about the exten-

106

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

sion of Wanka “influence” during Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon times into the ceja de montaña (to the north and northeast of our survey area) in order to secure access and control of lowland products. The importance of the control of such resources in the development of prehispanic social hierarchies in the Wanka heartland is another important problem for future research. The Late Horizon The imposition of Inca imperial authority in the Wanka Region is marked by the reemergence of an overall settlement configuration broadly similar to that of the Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon and early Late Intermediate Period, but is accompanied by several major transformations of the antecedent Wanka II cultural landscape: an abandonment of most Wanka II centers; the resettlement of the southern two-thirds of the survey area that had been quite sparsely occupied during Wanka II times; and the rapid development of a new imperial Inca provincial center and much of its associated storage infrastructure in the central survey area, precisely in the long-established gap that had separated two major settlement macro-clusters of earlier periods. The Inca provincial center at Hátun Xauxa became an important imperial node during the Late Horizon, and the strategic macro-regional importance of this locality continued into the Early Colonial Period when Hispanic Jauja emerged for a short time as the Spanish imperial capital prior to the ascendancy of Lima on the Pacific coast. An archaeologically very apparent impact of the Inca conquest was the construction of standardized imperial storage facilities throughout the Wanka Region—one of the very largest concentrations of Inca storage structures anywhere in the sierra central, and perhaps anywhere in the Central Andes. Although over half of the overall storage capacity was concentrated within a few kilometers of the Inca center at Hátun Xauxa, these distinctive groupings of specialized circular and rectangular colca structures occur on hillslopes and ridge crests along the margins of the main valley floor out to the limits of our survey and beyond—excepting only in the middle and upper Yanamarca subvalley, the heartland of antecedent Wanka II occupation. With a few exceptions, these colca sites are found well outside contemporary Wanka III settlements. Circular and rectangular structures co-occur at some colca sites, but often are found in pure-circular or pure-rectangular contexts, and most rectangular structures are found exclusively on the north side of the Río Mantaro, possibly reflecting different kinds of production in different parts of the main valley. Some smaller colca sites—mostly with circular storage structures, and usually at some distance from Hátun Xauxa—were apparently managed by local administrators from nearby settlements.

Pre-Late Horizon Storage The apparent absence of obvious pre-Late Horizon colcas in our survey area raises the question of how supra-household storage was handled during earlier periods, especially during the late Late Intermediate Period (Wanka II) era, which was also characterized by a markedly hierarchical settlement system. There are almost no examples of the abundant two-story rectangular structures that we believe to be Late Intermediate Period colcas with supra-household storage functions in the neighboring Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region (Parsons et al. 2000). Pre-Late Horizon supra-household storage may have been handled quite differently in the Wanka Region. However, it is also quite possible that we simply failed to recognize storage structures, particularly in the architecturally complex major Wanka II settlements. The Significance of Rock-Free Sites Although we suspect that the scarcity of rock rubble at some sites might indicate an absence of permanent occupation at these localities where people resided in less permanent structures made of adobe or wattle-and-daub, our data simply do not enable us to make any meaningful inferences at this point. Relatively rockfree sites occur throughout all elevation zones, although no sites larger than Large Villages lack rock rubble. Such questions about site function and residential permanence should obviously be the foci of more intensive future archaeological study. The Occupation of the Main Mantaro Valley Floodplain The relative abundance of smaller settlements in the surveyed sectors of the main Mantaro Valley floodplain (3350–3400 masl) during all prehispanic periods indicates that this zone, despite its possibly marshy nature at some points in time, was economically important throughout the prehispanic era. Nevertheless, we continue to wonder if the high modern agricultural productivity of this zone (much of it based on canal irrigation) necessarily represents what would have been available in prehispanic times. Obviously, we need to know a great deal more about the activities carried out at these floodplain sites at different points in the past. It would also be useful to know a great deal more about drainage and flood-control projects that may, or may not, have been undertaken in this floodplain during both prehistoric and historic times. A related question is the matter of how many floodplain sites may be buried by deep alluvial cover and thus invisible to our survey. The presence of intriguing low-elevated areas on some floodplain sites hints at the possibility of deep, well-preserved occupations at settlements of all ages that may be significantly larger and more complex than they now appear on the modern ground surface. Obviously, future research should include a

Overall Summary and Conclusions geoarchaeological component to clarify this question. Future geoarchaeological research should also be directed at the stilltricky questions relating to paleoenvironment: although there are indications, for example, that the Late Intermediate Period was characterized by cooler and drier climate than the present, many uncertainties remain about how uniform and extensive such cooling and drying intervals may have been. Settlement Continuity and Discontinuity Major discontinuities in long-term settlement continuity occur in only two cases: (1) the new establishment on previously unoccupied hilltops of major Wanka II centers, and (2) the “filling in” of the long-established settlement gap in the central Wanka Region by the Inca imperial center at Hátun Xauxa and the buildup in the same general area of a massive infrastructure of state-controlled storage facilities. Otherwise, many settlements of other periods show considerable long-term occupational continuity and a significant degree of reoccupation of old settlement locations during the Late Horizon that had apparently been abandoned in Wanka II times. This degree of settlement continuity indicates an absence of any major settlement dislocations in the Wanka Region at the time of Wari collapse at the end of the Middle Horizon. This contrasts to the Early Intermediate Period/ Middle Horizon to Late Intermediate Period transition in most other surveyed areas in the Peruvian sierra central where archaeologists have detected much more settlement discontinuity during this era—for example, in the adjacent Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region (Parsons et al. 2000), and in the Andahuaylas and Sondondo Regions farther south (Schreiber 1991:212; Bauer and Kellett 2010; Bauer et al. 2010). The bases for this variability in comparative continuity and discontinuity in different parts of the sierra central remain unclear. The Wanka-Tarama Frontier Data on ceramic and architectural variability indicate a welldefined Late Intermediate Period archaeological frontier between the northern end of the Wanka Region and the southern side of the adjacent Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region. Recent investigations in the upper Ricran Valley to the north indicate a similar Late Intermediate Period frontier at the upper edge of the ceja de montaña. This archaeological frontier corresponds nicely with the ethnohistorically defined border between these different socio-territorial groups in late prehispanic times. There is no clear archaeological indication of such a north-to-south differentiation in pre-Late Intermediate Period times, and so the origins and development of this frontier remain unclear. Our present impression is that no comparable frontier existed prior to the Late Intermediate Period, but this is another obvious problem for future research.

107

Key Tasks for Future Research A summary of some of the especially key tasks for future archaeological research in and around the Wanka Region includes the need to: (1) Refine the ceramic chronology, especially for pre-Late Intermediate Period times. (2) Extend investigations into the puna zones to the southwest and north-northeast in order to understand the role of pastoral economies through time. Similarly, extend coverage north and northeastward toward and into the ceja de montaña to illuminate how access to tropical forest products was managed and controlled from the Wanka heartland. Although the dry Pacific coastal valleys are more distant, and there is little ethnohistoric documentation about prehispanic contacts in that direction, we might ask similar questions about the importance over time to the inhabitants of the Wanka Region of accessing lowland and marine resources available from the west and southwest (e.g., Dillehay 1979; Morris 1985). (3) Design research that can deal effectively at the regional level with the Archaic Period and the Archaic-Early Horizon transition. This might be extended to deal systematically with “off-site” survey focused on diffuse distributions of ceramic and lithic artifacts indicative of activities outside residential settlements. (4) Determine the impact of Wari development and decline. (5) Continue the interrupted efforts of UMARP archaeologists to define pre-Late Intermediate Period settlement systems. (6) Rethink the nature of Wanka II polity in view of the fact that many Wanka II settlements are situated on low-lying ground, and only the four centers in the Yanamarca subvalley are walled. Do we have a state in the making? (7) Introduce a geoarchaeological component, especially in terms of understanding prehispanic floodplain occupation.

Chapter 8

Traducción al Español del Capitulo 7 Traducción de Apphia H. Parsons y Jeffrey R. Parsons

Esta monografía presenta los datos de los investigaciones JASP de 1975–1976 en la Región Wanka, junto con otras perspicaciones importantes en tema de cronología ocupacional y configuración de asentamiento conseguidas por estudios posteriormente llevados a cabo por los arqueólogos UMARP. En esta monografía hemos tratado de considerar nuestros datos arqueológicos con referencia al ambiente natural y cultural, con énfasis sobre las perspicacias de la demografía documentado en manera histórica y etnográfica, y de ecología agrícola. Como indica el nombre, la Región Wanka era el corazón del groupo Wanka como documentado por la etno-história, uno de los mayores grupos socio-territoriales dentro del imperio Inca. Nuestro reconocimiento fue planeado para dar una perspectiva regional en el desarrollo de largo plazo de la sociedad, economía y organización política Wanka, y sirvió como base para que los arqueólogos UMARP posteriormente pudieron diseñar sus estudios más intensivos. Tomado juntos, los proyectos JASP y UMARP ofrecen un buen ejemplo de la eficacia de investigaciones arqueológicas regionales y multi-etapa. Los puntos centrales en esta monografía pueden ser resumidos así:

La zona del reconocimiento La región Wanka es uno de los espacios más amplios de tierra agrícola en la sierra peruana central. Durante tiempos históricos, ha sostenido una población grande, densa y comparativamente urbanizada—una de las mayores concentraciones de población moderna y de urbanismo en la sierra andina. Nuestro reconocimiento de la superficie extendía sobre un terreno de 435 kilómetros cuadrados, la mayoría de que se encontró entre 3350–3800 msnm en lo que referimos las zonas kichwa inferior y superior. Prolongamos nuestro reconocimiento en un área pequeño de la zona puna vecina (3800–4200 msnm), pero la cobertura reducida de este terreno más alto y la falta de datos de los terrenos de puna al alrededores noreste y sureste plantea grandes problemas de interpretación para comprender los cambios de largo plazo en las relaciones entre los pastores de la puna y los argricultores de la kichwa en la Región Wanka. Este es en oposición notable a la región vecina de Tamara-Chinchaycocha donde nuestros reconocimientos cubrieron una gran extensión de terreno puna. No podemos poner énfasis tanto fuerte en que nuestro falta de cobertura en la puna principal al noreste y sureste de nuestra

109

110

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

zona de reconocimiento le hace imposible de evaluar el papel del paisaje de la puna principal encima de 3800 msnm, especialmente encima de 4000 msnm, en la economía y organización política prehispánica durante cualquier época prehispánica en la Región Wanka. Especialmente nos da pena que no pudimos utilizar nuestros datos del reconocimiento para evaluar el provocante (y todavía en gran parte no probado) hipótesis de Browman (1974, 1976) sobre la primacía de economías de pastoreo durante la época Formativa en este parte de la sierra central. De manera similar, nuestros datos no nos permiten aclarar la sugerencia fascinante de Bauer y Kellet (2010:106) que el pastoreo juega un papel de importancia creciente en la Región Andahuaylas, y quizás por otra parte en todo la sierra central, durante un periodo de aparente sequía y con temperaturas más bajos en toda los andes centrales durante el Periodo Intermedio Tardio. Metodología Cuando primero planeamos nuestra investigación, a principios de los años 70, queríamos ayudar a desarrollar investigaciones de arqueología regional en la sierra andina. Con pocos precedentes metodológicos de las tierras altas andinas, usamos una modificación de reconocimientos que tenían lugar en el Valle de México, haciendo modificaciones necesarios, y a veces drásticos, en las tácticas del reconocimiento para adaptar a la falta de fotos aéreos de escala grande, una densidad reducida de artefactos de superficie, la preservación arquitectónica mucho mejor, y la falta de fronteras naturales bien definidas que encontramos en la sierra peruana con relación a México central. Reconocemos el carácter arbitrario de las fronteras de nuestro reconocimiento y nuestras limitaciones ocupándose del ámbito completo de la variedad arquitectónica mantenido en los yacimientos del Periodo Intermedio Tardio y Horizonte Tardio. Cronología cerámica La falta de una cronología cerámica más refinado ha hecho difícil de percibir con claridad unas etapas críticas en el cambio cultural de largo plazo en la Región Wanka. Aunque nuestro conocimiento de esta época anteriormente no-dividido fue aumentado mucho por el mejoramiento UMARP de la secuencia de cerámica del Periodo Intermedio Tardio, todavía no podemos separar en manera definitiva el Horizonte Medio del Periodo Intermedio Temprano, antecedente por medio milenio. Por eso, nuestro intento a percibir el impacto del desarrollo y expansión Wari es limitado. Al mismo tiempo, no estamos ciertos si detectábamos ocupación del Horizonte Tardío (Wanka III) en los sitios donde la falta de cerámica de estilo Inca puede ser por causas culturales en vez de causas cronológicas; otro problema a veces es la cuestion de la presencia o ausencia de ocupación Wanka II en sitios con cerámica de estilo Inca junto con cerámica de tradición local (Wanka III).

La transición Arcaico-Formativo Sabíamos desde el principio que nuestra metodología de reconocimiento no podía tratar de modo sistemático con los sutiles rastros líticos de ocupación pre-cerámica en el superficie. En consecuencia, no podemos añadir nada al conocimiento de modas de vida arcaica, y la transición del Arcaico al Horizonte Temprano en la Región Wanka sigue opaco. Era una época cuando suponemos que emergió la primera sociedad basicamente sedentaria y probablemente agrícola. Es un problema clave para futuras investigaciones en la Región Wanka. El Horizonte Temprano Ocupación durante el Horizonte Temprano era muy escaso, sin indicación de una jerarquía social. Aunque la cerámica del Horizonte Temprano es distinta, era difícil detectar su presencia en algunos yacimientos multi-componentes con revestimientos más grandes de ocupación de menos antitigüedad donde investigaciones posteriores de UMARP desvelaron cerámica formativa en la superficie. Persiste una incertidumbre sobre el modelo de asentamiento total del Horizonte Temprano. Hay indicios que existían tres pequeños agrupaciones territoriales y la existencia de una modesta estructura pública en un sitio parcialmente excavado (Sitio 509, Ataura; Matos 1973) puede indicar alguna diferenciación social. Sabemos que la ocupación del Horizonte Temprano se intensifica al sureste de nuestra zona de reconocimiento donde el fondo del Valle Mantaro baja gradualmente hasta la ciudad contemporánea de Huancayo, unos 30 kilómetros al sureste. Sin embargo, la Región Wanka, y este parte de la sierra central en general, evidentemente existen sobre la periférica de los desarrollos florescentes del Horizonte Temprano en la mitad norteña del Perú. El base para este diferencia considerable entre norte y sur en el desarrollo cultural de los andes centrales en la época formativa queda como una cuestión importante para la investigación futura. El Periodo Intermedio Temprano/Horizonte Medio Aunque la transición desde el Horizonte Temprano hasta el Periodo Intermedio Temprano en la Región Wanka persiste poco claro, en los siglos siguiendo el primer milenio a. de C. empezó un aumento de población largo y continuo, rellenando el paisaje kichwa, una diversidad mucho más amplio del tamaño y ubicación de asentamientos y la presencia de dos principales “macro-clusters” de asentamientos (al noroeste y al sureste) que quizás representan entidades socio-políticos de multiples comunidades, y también una manifestación del origen de las divisiones documentadas etnohistoricamente entre los “Xauxa” en el noroeste del Valle Mantaro central y el resto de los Wanka más al sur (Capítulo 3). El ascendiente del “macro-cluster” noroeste en el Periodo Intermedio Tardio (Wanka II) parece

Traducción al Español del Capitulo 7 había prefiguarado a finales del Periodo Intermedio Temprano/ Horizonte Medio. Este ascendiente del Periodo Intermedio Temprano/Horizonte Medio fue caracterizado por una población más numerosa y más yacimientos extensos en comparación con su vecino macro-cluster al sureste. Estas tendencias generales del Periodo Intermedio Temprano/Horizonte Medio probablemente alcanzaron su nivel más alto durante el Horizonte Medio, quizás enlazado con un impacto, todavía mal entendido, del estado en desarrollo centrado a Wari, unos 200 km al sureste. Nuestro incertidumbre continua sobre como la expansión del entidad político Wari afectó a los habitantes de la Región Wanka durante el Horizonte Medio. La escasez de cerámica Wari en nuestro zona de reconocimiento, aunque similar a lo que ha sido observado en otras partes de la sierra peruana central, es muy diferente de otras zonas reconocidas más cercana a Wari donde arqueólogos han encontrado un cantidad mucho más grande de cerámica Wari (por ejemplo en la región Andahuaylas [Bauer y Kellett 2010:94]). Este puede sugerir que el impacto más directo del Wari fue en las regiones en los alrededores inmediatos de Wari, el creciente centro más importante del Horizonte Medio en la sierra central. Sin embargo, como en la región vecina de Tarama-Chinchaycocha puede ser que un gran parte (o quizás todo) del crecimiento de la población y de los cambios en modelo de asentamiento que detectamos para nuestro Periodo Intermedio Temprano/Horizonte Medio en realidad ocurrieron principalmente durante el Horizonte Medio. Otra vez estas preguntas solamente se resolverán con una cronología más fina y un conocimiento mucho mejor de las sistemas de asentamiento del Periodo Intermedio Temprano y Horizonte Medio. El Periodo Intermedio Tardio Al contrario de lo que habíamos pensado al principio, no parece que había un gran cambio en el modelo de asentamiento desde el Horizonte Medio hasta la primera parte del Periodo Intermedio Temprano (Wanka I). Esta revelación es gracias a la capacidad de los arqueólogos UMARP de separar las fases temprano (Wanka I) y tarde (Wanka II) del Periodo Intermedio Tardío. No obstante, había una transformación grande durante el fase Wanka II del Periodo Intermedio Tardio con una concentración de población regional en el sector noroeste de la zona de reconocimiento (el sub-valle Yanamarca), y el desarrollo allí de cuatro centros amurallados que eran excepcionalmente grande y espesamente nucleado y que se ubican en cumbres de cerros. Por lo mejor que podemos establecer, los dos centros más grandes (Tunanmarca y Hatunmarca, Sitios 468 y 472) son con por mucho los yacimientos arqueológicos más grandes del Periodo Intermedio Tardio en toda la sierra central entre Ayacucho y Cajamarca y están entre los sitios más grandes en cualquier lugar de la sierra andina. Estos cambios radicales en el modelo de asentamiento en la Región Wanka durante el fase Wanka II son comparables a los que han sido observados en en otras partes de la sierra

111

andina central donde yacimientos de esta época normalmente se situaba en cumbres y crestas defendibles y anteriormente noocupados—un modelo que a menudo es tomado como indicación de conflicto intenso y la falta de centralización política (Covey 2008; D’Altroy 1992; Arkush and Standish 2005; Arkush 2011). La única excepción conocida a este modelo general es la región de Cuzco en la sierra sur de Peru donde los asentamientos del Periodo Intermedio Tardío típicamente se ubican en terrenos bajos (Parsons and Hastings 1988; Bauer and Covey 2002; Covey 2006; Bauer et al. 2010)—una característica que a veces ha sido tomado como un señal de una alta nivel de integración sociopolitica poca común afuera de la cuenca de Cuzco durante este periodo directamente antes de la expansión imperial de los Inca. Los asentamientos en el periodo después del Horizonte Temprano ocurren en todas las zonas de elevación en la Región Wanka. Sin embargo, durante el Horizonte Temprano, y en un menor grado durante el Periodo Intermedio Temprano/Horizonte Medio, Wanka I, y el Horizonte Tardio, los asentamientos solían ubicarse dentro de un ámbito de zonas debajo de 3600 msnm en la zona Kichwa Baja. Esta tendencia acabó de funcionar solamente durante la época de Wanka II cuando una proporción extremamente alta de hectáreas ocupadas se encuentran a alturas más altas en grandes centros situados en cumbres. Los cambios radicales durante la fase Wanka II son características destacadas del registro arqueológico en la Región Wanka. En efecto, el tamaño grande y la nucleación de los centros Wanka II en cumbres de cerros, junto con su proximidad relativo entre si de estos centros, puede sugerir que las entidades políticas Wanka II fueron más centralizadas que indican las fuentes etno-historicas. El patron de asentamiento Wanka II—especialmente la localización sobre cerros defensibles de los cuatro grandes centros amurallados en el sub-valle Yanamarca—comunamente se toma como reflejo de conflicto intenso y fragmentación política durante esta época. Sin embargo, es interesante notar que de todos los sitios Wanka II, solamene los cuatro centros principales son claramente amurallados, y solamente los sitios “grandes” no-centros de Wanka II (Pueblos Grandes y Pueblos Muy Grandes en nuestra clasificación) se encuentran sobre cerros defensibles. Muchos de los sitios “pequeños” de Wanka II (nuestros Pueblos Pequeños y Aldeas) se encuentran en terrenos bajos. La futura investigación arqueológica en la Región Wanka debe seguir enfocandose en la naturaleza de la integración política y el significado de la guerra durante la fase Wanka II. Es interesante notar que uno de los mas importantes nuevos centros del Horizonte Tardio (Sitio 431, Marca) también parece ser amurallado—a pesar de su presencia en la epoca del supuesto Pax Incaica. En otras palabras, los muros pueden tener otras funciones aparte de la defensa. Como nuestro reconocimiento no extendía bastante lejos al sureste, no podemos evaluar las indicaciones etnohistóricas de las subdivisiones territoriales (Hatun Xauxa, Lurinwanka, Ananwanka y Chongos) que existían durante el Horizonte Tardio y que quizás empezaron durante el Periodo Intermedio Tardio, o aun más temprano. Tampoco podemos añadir nada a las sugerencias de las fuentes etnohistóricas, y en algunos estudios arqueológi-

112

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

cos vanguardistas sobre la ampliación de la influencia Wanka durante el Periodo Intermedio Tardio y el Horizonte Tardio hasta la Ceja de Montaña al norte y noreste para obtener acceso a la selva tropical y control sobre sus productos. La importancia del control de tales recursos en el desarrollo de las jerarquías sociales entre los Wanka es otro problema importante para investigación en el futuro. El Horizonte Tardio La imposición de la autoridad imperial Inca durante el Horizonte Tardio en la Región Wanka está marcada con la reaparición de una configuración de asentamiento que en líneas generales es similar a la del Periodo Intermedio Temprano/Horizonte Medio y del primer parte del Periodo Intermedio Tardio (Wanka I). Pero también hay algunos cambios considerables del paisaje cultural antecedente de Wanka II: un abandono de la mayoría de los principales centros Wanka II; la repoblación de los dos terceros de la Región Wanka en el sur de la zona de reconocimiento que tenía una población escasa durante la época Wanka II; y el desarrollo rápido de un nuevo centro imperial (Hatun Xauxa) de los Inca y mucho de su infraestructura de almacenamiento asociada en el parte central del reconocimiento—exactamente en el espacio vacío entre los dos “macro-clusters” de épocas anteriores. Hatun Xauxa se hizo un centro importante imperial durante el Horizonte Tardío y la importancia estratégico macro-regional de esta localidad continuó hasta la época Colonial Temprano cuando el Jauja hispano apareció como el capital español imperial para un tiempo breve antes del ascendiente de Lima. La construcción de instalaciones de almacenamiento imperial estandarizados por toda la Región Wanka es un impacto muy óbvio de la conquista Inca. Esta construcción fue una de las concentraciones más grandes de estructuras de almacenamiento Inca en cualquier parte de la sierra central, y quizás en cualquier parte de los andes centrales. Aunque más de la mitad de la capacidad de deposito fue concentrado dentro de pocos kilómetros de Hátun Xauxa, estas colocaciones distintas de estructuras (colcas) en forma circular o rectangular ocurren en cerros y crestas a lo largo de los márgenes del fondo del valle principal hasta los limitos de nuestro reconocimiento y más allá – excepto solamente en el sub-valle Yanamarca medio y alto, el corazón de la ocupación antecedente de Wanka II. Con pocas excepciones, estos yacimientos de colcas se ubican afuera de los asentamientos contemporáneos Wanka III. En algunos yacimientos de colcas ocurren juntos estructuras circulares y rectangulares, pero con frecuencia se encuentran en contextos puro-circular o puro-rectangular. Se encuentra la mayoría de estructuras rectangulares exclusivamente al norte del Río Mantaro, quizás reflejando diferentes tipos de producción en distintos partes del valle central. Algunos yacimientos más pequeños de colcas, la mayoría con estructuras de almacenamiento circular y ubicads a un distancia de Hátun Xauxa, fueron manejado, por lo visto, por administradores locales.

Depósitos de almacenamiento antes del Horizonte Tardio La falta aparente de colcas antes del Horizonte Tardío en nuestra zona de reconocimiento invita a preguntar cómo fueron manejados los depósitos supra-hogares durante épocas anteriores, especialmente durante el fase Wanka II que también fue caracterizado por una sistema de asentamiento con jerarquía notable. En contraste notable con la región vecina de TaramaChinchaycocha, hay casi ningún ejemplo en la Región Wanka de las estructuras rectangulares de dos pisos que abundan al otro lugar y que probablemente funcionaron allí como colcas con depósitos supra-hogares del Periodo Intermedio Tardio (Parsons el al. 2000). Depósitos supra-hogares antes del Horizonte Tardío podían ser tratados de una manera muy diferente en la Región Wanka. Sin embargo, también es bastante posible que nosotros no reconocíamos las estructuras de almacenamiento, especialmente en los asentamientos de Wanka II que tenían una arquitectura compleja. La significación de asentamientos sin piedras Aunque imaginamos que la escasez de escombros de piedras en algunos yacimientos puede indicar una falta de ocupación permanente en estos lugares donde la población usó estructuras menos permanentes de adobe o una mezcla de zarzo y barra, nuestros datos simplemente no nos permiten tomar conclusiones significativos, de un modo o de otro, en este momento. Ocurren yacimientos casi sin piedras por todas las zonas de altura, aunque muy pocos de estos yacimientos mayor que nuestros “Grandes Pueblos” existen sin escombros de piedras. Tales preguntas sobre la funcion del yacimiento y permanencia de habitacion deben ser focos de un estudio futuro más intensivo. La ocupación del planicie aluvial central del Valle Mantaro La abundancia relativa de asentamientos pequeños en los sectores del planicie aluvial central (3350–3400 msnm) del Valle Mantaro durante las épocas prehispánicas indica que esta zona fue importante en la economía prehispánica, no obstante su carácter quizás pantanoso en algunos periodos. Sin embargo, continuamos de preguntarnos si la productividad alta de tiempos modernos en esta zona representa algo que habría sido disponible en épocas prehispánicas. Claramente necesitamos saber mucho más sobre las actividades que llevaban a cabo en estos yacimientos de la planicie aluvial a puntos diferents del pasado. También sería útil de saber mucho más sobre los proyectos de drenaje que quizás fueron hecho en esta planicie aluvial durante ambas las épocas prehistóricas y históricas. Una pregunta relacionada es cuántos yacimientos de la planicie aluvial sean enterrados debajo de cubierta aluvial profunda y por eso invisible a nuestro reconocimiento. La presencia fascinante de áreas elevadas en algunos yacimientos del planicie

Traducción al Español del Capitulo 7 aluvial da a entender a la posibilidad de ocupaciones profundas y bien preservadas en sitios de todos edades que quizás sean mucho más grande y más complejo que aparecen actualmente en la superficie del terreno moderno. Por claro, investigaciones del futuro deben incluir un componente geo-arqueológico para aclarar esta cuestión. Estas investigaciones geo-arqueológicas del futuro deben ser también dirigidos a las cuestiones todavía dificiles relacionadas al paleo-ambiente. Aunque hay indicaciones, por ejemplo, que el Periodo Intermedio Tardio fue caracterizado por un clima más frio y más seco que hoy en dia, quedan muchos incertidumbres sobre la uniformidad y extension de tales intervalos refrescante y secante. La continuidad y discontinuidad de asentamiento Hay solamente dos casos de grandes discontinuidades en la estabilidad de ocupación de largo plazo de asentamientos: (1) una fundación nueva en cumbres de cerros anteriormente no ocupados de los principales centros Wanka II, y (2) el rellenamiento de un zona vacía de mucha antigüedad en la Región Wanka central por el centro imperial Inca de Hátun Xauxa y la acumulación en la misma zona general de una infraestructura masiva de facilidades de almacenaje controlado por el estado Inca. Por lo demás, muchos asentamientos de otras épocas muestran una continuidad considerable de ocupación a largo plazo y un nivel significativo de reocupación de lugares de asentamiento antiguo durante el Horizonte Tardío que aparentemente fueron abandonado durante la época Wanka II. Este nivel de continuidad de asentamiento indica una falta total de dislocaciones grandes de asentamiento en la región Wanka durante la época del derrumbe del estado Wari a fines del Horizonte Medio. Es un contraste con la transición del Periodo Intermedio Temprano/Horizonte Medio al Periodo Intermedio Tardio en la mayor parte de las zonas del reconocimiento en la sierra peruana central, donde los arqueólogos han detectado mucho más desplazamiento de asentamiento durante esta época—por ejemplo en la región vecina de Tarama-Chinchaycocha (Parsons et al. 2000) y en las regiones Andahuaylas y Sondondo más al sur (Schreiber 1991:212; Bauer y Kellett 2010; Bauer et al. 2010). No son claros los bases para esta variación en la continuidad y desplazamiento comparativa en partes diferentes de la sierra central. La frontera Wanka-Tarama Los datos sobre la variación de cerámica y arquitectura indican una frontera arqueológica muy definida durante el Periodo Intermedio Tardio entre la parte norte de la Región Wanka y la parte sur de la region vecina de Tarama-Chinchaycocha. Investigaciones recientes en el Valle Ricran alta, al norte, indican una frontera similar durante el Periodo Intermedio Tardio al borde superior de la Ceja de Montaña. Esta frontera arqueológica concorda bien con la frontera definida por la etnohistória entre

113

estos grupos diferentes étnicos y territoriales en la época prehispánica tardía. No hay una indicación arqueológica clara de un tal diferenciación norte-sur antes del Periodo Intermedio Tardio, y por eso los origines y el desarrollo des esta frontera queda confuso. Nuestra impresión actual es que no existía una frontera comparable antes del Periodo Intermedio Tardio, pero eso es otro problema óbvio para una investigación futura. Resumen de algunas tareas claves para investigaciones del futuro en y alrededor de la región Wanka (1) Refinar la cronología cerámica, especialmente para las épocas antes del Periodo Intermedio Tardio. (2) Ampliar unas investigaciones hasta las zonas de la puna al suroeste y noreste para comprender el papel de economías pastorales a través del tiempo. En manera similar, ampliar la cobertura de reconocimiento sistemático al norte y noreste hasta y adentro de la Ceja de Montaña para iluminar como el acceso a los productos de la selva fue dirigido y controlado desde la corazón Wanka. (3) Planear una investigación que puede ocuparse al nivel regional del periodo Arcaico y la transición Arcaico-Horizonte Temprano. Este puede ser extendido para tratar de manera sistemática con un reconocimiento “afuera de sitio” enfocado en las distribuciones difusas de artefactos aislados que indican la presencia de actividades fuera de los asentamientos residenciales. (4) Establecer el impacto del desarrollo y declive de Wari a fines del Horizonte Medio. (5) Continuar los esfuerzos interrumpidos de los arqueólogos UMARP para definir los sistemas de asentamiento antes del Periodo Intermedio Tardio. (6) Pensar otra vez sobre la organización política del Wanka II: ¿había un estado en proceso de formación? (7) Introducir un componente geo-arqueológico, especialmente para comprender la ocupación prehispánica de las planicies aluviales.

Bibliography

Arellano Hoffman, C. 1984 Notas sobre el Indigena en la Intendencia de Tarma: Una Evaluación de la Visita de 1786. Bonner Amerikanistische Studien 13. Bonn. 1988a Apuntes Históricos sobre la Provincia de Tarma en la Sierra Central del Perú. Bonner Amerikanistische Studien 15. Bonn. 1988b Anotaciones del clima, ganado, y tenencia de pastos en la puna de Tarma, siglo XVIII. In Lamichos y Paqocheros – Pastores de Llamas y Alpacas, compiled by J. Flores, pp. 77–84. Universidad Nacional de Cuzco, Cuzco. 1994 Los títulos de comunidades como fuentes para una reconstrucción histórica de límites de las antiguas etnías andinas: El ejemplo de Tarma en la sierra central del Perú. América Indígena 54:99–132. México, D.F.

Abbott, M. H., M. Binford, M. Bennet, and K. Kelts 1997 A 3500 14C year high resolution record of water level changes in Lake Titicaca. Quaternary Research 47:169–80. Abbott, M. H., B. Wotte, R. Aravena, A. Wolfe, and G. Seltzer 2000 Holocene hydrological reconstructions from stable isotopes and paleolimnology, Cordillera Real, Bolivia. Quaternary Science Reviews 19:1801–20. Adams, Richard N. 1959 Community in the Andes: Problems and Process in Muquiyauyo. University of Washington Press, Seattle. Alberti, Giorgio, and R. Sanchez 1974 Poder y Conflicto Social en el Valle del Mantaro, 1900–1974. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima.

Arkush, E. 2008 War, chronology, and causality in the Titicaca Basin. Latin American Antiquity 9:4:339–73. 2011 Hillforts of the Ancient Andes: Colla Warfare, Society, and Landscape. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Alcock, S., T. D’Altroy, K. Morrison, and C. Sinopoli (eds.) 2001 Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Allen, Catherine 1982 Body and soul in Quechua thought. Journal of Latin American Lore 8:179–96.

Arkush, E., and C. Stanish 2005 Interpreting conflict in the ancient Andes: Implications for the archaeology of warfare. Current Anthropology 46:3–28.

115

116

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Armillas, P. 1971 Gardens on swamps. Science 174:653–61. Bandelier, A. 1904 On the relative antiquity of ancient Peruvian burials. Bulletin, American Museum of Natural History 20:217–26. Bastien, J. 1978a Mountain of the Condor: Metaphor and Ritual in an Andean Ayllu. West Publishing Co., St. Paul, Minnesota. 1978b Marriage and exchange in the Andes: How weddings symbolize exchange between communities who live on different levels of Kaata, a mountain in the Bolivian Andes. Actes de XLII Congrès International des Americanistes 1976 4:149–64. Paris. Bauer, B. 1991 Pacariqtambo and the mythical origins of the Inca. Latin American Antiquity 2:7–26. 1992a Ritual pathways of the Inca: An analysis of the Collasuyu Ceques in Cuzco. Latin American Antiquity 3:183–205. 1992b The Development of the Inca State. University of Texas Press, Austin. 2011 The Chanka: Archaeological Research in Andahuaylas (Apurimac), Peru. Monograph 68. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles. Bauer, B., and A. Covey 2002 Processes of state formation in the Inca heartland (Cuzco, Peru). American Anthropologist 10:3:846–64. Bauer, B., and L. Kellett 2010 Cultural transformations of the Chanka homeland (Andahuaylas, Peru) during the Late Intermediate Period (A.D. 1000–1400). Latin American Antiquity 21:1:87–111. Bauer, B., L. Kellett, and M. Aráoz Silva 2010 The Chanka: Archaeological Research in Andahuaylas (Apurimac), Peru. Monograph 68. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Benavides, Mario 1976 Yacimientos arqueológicos en Ayacucho. Universidad Nacional San Cristóbal de Huamanga, Ayacucho. Binford, M., A. Kolata, M. Brenner, J. Janusek, M. Seddon, M. Abbott, and J. Curtis 1997 Climate variation and the rise and fall of an Andean civilization. Quaternary Research 47:235–48. Bonavía, Duccio 1964 Investigaciones en la Ceja de Selva de Ayacucho. Arqueologias No. 6. Universidad Nacinal Mayor de San Marcos, Lima. 1970 Investigaciones arqueológicas en el Mantaro Medio. Revista del Museo Nacional 35:211–94. Lima. Bonavía, D., and R. Ravines (eds.) 1972 Pueblos y Culturas de la Sierra Central. Cerro de Pasco Corp., Lima. Bonnier, E. 1997 Morfología del espacio aldeano y su expression cultural en los Andes Centrales. In Arqueología Peruana 2:28–41, edited by

E. Bonnier and H. Bischof. Sociedad Arqueológica PeruanoAlemana, Reiss Museum, Mannheim. Borges, K. 1988 Political Organization in the Upper Mantaro Valley during the Middle Horizon. Master’s thesis, Archaeology Program, Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Browman, D. 1970 Early Peruvian Peasants: The Culture History of a Central Highlands Valley. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, Cambridge. 1974 Pastoral nomadism in the Andes. Current Anthropology 15:188–96. 1976 Demographic correlations of the Wari conquest of Junin. American Antiquity 41:465–77. Brown, D. 1998 Water and power in the provinces: Water management in Inca centers of the central highlands of Peru. Tawantinsuyu 5:23–36. Brush, S. 1976 Man’s use of an Andean ecosystem. Human Ecology 4:147–66. 1977 Mountain, Field, and Family: The Economy and Human Ecology of an Andean Valley. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Brush, S., and D. Guillet 1985 Small-scale agro-pastoral production in the central Andes. Mountain Research and Development 5:19–30. Burga, M. 1983 La sierra central Peruana (1821–1870): Una economía regional andina. Allpanchis 22:103–24. Cuzco. Camino, A. 1980 Tiempo y espacio en la estrategía de subsistencia Andina: Un caso en las vertientes orientales Sud-Peruanas. In El Hombre y su Ambiente en los Andes Centrales, pp. 11–38. Senri Ethnological Studies No. 10. National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka, Japan. Camino, A., J. Recharte, and P. Bidegaray 1981 Flexibilidad caléndrica en la agricultura tradicional de las vertientes orientales de los Andes. In La Tecnología en el Mundo Andino, Vol. 1, edited by H. Lechtman and A. Soldi, pp. 169–94. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México, D.F. Chavez, Sergio 1999 Historical, Ethnographic, and Ecological Data regarding Zea Mays (Tonqo) Cultivation at High Altitude: Implications for the Archaeology of the Lake Titicaca Basin. Manuscript on file, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Chepstow-Lusty, A., M. Frogley, B. Bauer, M. Bush, and A. Tupayachi 2003 A late Holocene record of El Niño/arid events from the Cuzco region. The Journal of Quaternary Science 18:491–502. Cieza de Leon, P. 1862 [1551] La Crónica del Perú. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles 26:349–458. Ediciones Atlas, Madrid.

Bibliography 1929 [1553] La Crónica General del Perú. Col. Urteaga, Historiadores Clásicos del Perú, No. 8. Imprenta Gil, Lima. 1946 [1553] La Crónica General del Perú. In Crónicas de la Conquista del Perú, edited by J. le Riverend, pp. 125–497. Editorial Nueva España, México, D.F. 1959 [1541] The Incas, translated by H. de Onis, edited by V. von Hagen. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. 1967 [1553] El Señorío de los Incas. Segunda Parte de la Cronica del Peru. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima. 1973 [1554] La Segunda Parte de la Crónica del Perú que Trata del Señorio de los Incas. Editorial Universo, Lima. 1984 [1551] La Cróica del Perú: Primera Parte. Fondo Editorial, Pontífica Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima. Cipolla, L. 2005 Preceramic period settlement patterns in the Huancane-Putina River valley, northern Titicaca Basin, Peru. In Advances in Titicaca Basin Archaeology–I, edited by C. Stanish, A. Cohen, and M. Aldenderfer, pp. 55–64. Publication No. 54. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Cobo, Bernabé 1890 [1653] História del Nuevo Mundo. E. Rasco, Sevilla. 1956 [1653] História del Nuevo Mundo. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles. Ediciones Atlas, Madrid. 1964 [1653] História del Nuevo Mundo. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles, Vol. 92. Ediciones Atlas, Madrid. Cook, N. D. 1981 Demographic Collapse: Indian Peru, 1520–1620. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1982 Population data for Indian Peru: Sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Hispanic American Historical Review 62:73–120. Costin, C. L. 1986 From Chiefdom to Empire State: Ceramic Ecology among the Prehispanic Wanka of Highland Peru. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. 1993 Textiles, women, and political economy in late prehispanic Peru. In Research in Economic Anthropology, Vol. 3, edited by B. Isaac, pp. 3–28. JAI Press, Greenwich, Connecticut. 1996 Craft production and mobilization strategies in the Inka empire. In Craft Specialization and Social Evolution: In Memory of V. Gordon Childe, edited by B. Wailes, pp. 211–25. University of Pennsylvania Museum Publications, Philadelphia. 2001 Production and exchange of ceramics. In Empire and Domestic Economy, edited by T. D’Altroy and C. Hastorf, pp. 203–42. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York and London. Costin, C. L., and T. K. Earle 1989 Status distinction and legitimation of power as reflected in changing patterns of consumption in late prehispanic Peru. American Antiquity 54:691–714. Costin, C. L., T. K. Earle, B. Owen, and G. S. Russell 1989 Impact of Inka conquest on local technology in the Upper Mantaro Valley, Peru. In What’s New?: A Closer Look at the Process of Innovation, edited by S. E. van der Leeuw and R. Torrance, pp. 107–39. Unwin and Allen, London.

117

Covey, R. Alan 2006 How the Incas Built Their Heartland: State Formation and Innovation of Imperial Strategies in the Sacred Valley, Peru. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. 2008 Multiregional perspectives on the archaeology of the Andes during the Late Intermediate period (c. A.D. 1000–1400). Journal of Archaeological Research 16:287–338. Custred, G. 1977 Las punas de los Andes centrales. In Pastores de Puna, compiled by J. Flores, pp. 55–85. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima. Cutler, H., and M. Cárdenas 1981 [1947] Chicha, una cerveza sudamericana indígena. In La Tecnología Andina, edited by H. Lechtman and A. Soldi, pp. 247–59. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México, D.F. D’Altroy, T. 1981 Empire Growth and Consolidation: The Xauxa Region of Peru Under the Incas. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. 1987 Transitions in power: Centralization of Wanka political organization under Inka rule. Ethnohistory 34:78–102. 1990 Site Descriptions: Wanka III and Inka. Site Survey in the Jisse-Pomacancha Drainage. State Storage Facilities. Manuscript on file, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 1992 Provincial Power in the Inka Empire. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 2001a The cultural setting. In Empire and Domestic Economy, edited by T. D’Altroy and C. Hastorf, pp. 27–53. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, New York and London. 2001b The archaeological context. In Empire and Domestic Economy, edited by T. D’Altroy and C. Hastorf, pp. 65–96. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York and London. 2001c State goods in the domestic economy: The Inka ceramic assemblage. In Empire and Domestic Economy, edited by T. D’Altroy and C. Hastorf, pp. 243–64. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York and London. 2002 The Inca. Blackwell, Oxford. D’Altroy, T. N., and R. A. Bishop 1990 The provincial organization of Inka ceramic production. American Antiquity 55:120–38. D’Altroy, T., and T. Earle 1985 Staple finance, wealth finance, and storage in the Inka political economy. Current Anthropology 26:187–206. D’Altroy, T., and C. Hastorf 1984 The distribution and contents of Inca state storehouses in the Xauxa region of Peru. American Antiquity 49:334–49. D’Altroy, T., and C. Hastorf (eds.) 2001 Empire and Domestic Economy. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York and London. DeMarrais, E. 2001 The architecture and organization of Xauxa settlements. In Empire and Domestic Economy, edited by T. D’Altroy and C. Hastorf, pp. 115–54. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York and London.

118

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

de Montmollin, O. 1989 The Archaeology of Political Structure: Settlement Analysis in a Classic Maya Society. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Earle, T., T. D’Altroy, C. LeBlanc, C. Hastorf, and T. LeVine 1980 Changing settlement patterns in the Upper Mantaro Valley, Peru. Journal of New World Archaeology 4:1–49.

Dillehay, T. 1979 Pre-hispanic resource sharing in the central Andes. Science 204(4388):24–31. 1990 Mapuche ceremonial landscape: Social recruitment and resource rights. World Archaeology 22:223–41.

Earle, T., T. D’Altroy, C. Hastorf, C. Scott, C. Costin, G. Russell, and E. Sandefur 1987 Archaeological Field Research in the Upper Mantaro Valley, Peru, 1982–1983: Investigations of Inka Expansion and Exchange. Monograph 28. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Dobyns, H. F. 1963 An outline of Andean epidemic history to 1720. Bulletin of the History of Medicine 37:493–515. Dollfus, O. 1981 El Reto del Espacio Andino. Instituto Francés de Estudios Andinos, Lima. Duviols, P. 1973 Huari y Llacuaz: Agricultores y pastores, un dualismo prehispánico de oposición y complementaridad. Revista del Museo Nacional 39:153–91. Lima. 1984 Albornoz y el espacio ritual andino prehispánico. Revista Andina 2:169–222. Cusco. Dwyer, E. 1971 The Early Inca Occupation of the Valley of Cuzco, Peru. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. Earle, T. 1972 Lurin Valley, Peru: Early Intermediate period settlement development. American Antiquity 37:467–77. 1997 How Chiefs Come to Power. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 2001 Exchange and social stratification in the Andes: The Xauxa case. In Empire and Domestic Economy, edited by T. D’Altroy and C. Hastorf, pp. 297–314. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York and London. 2005 The Tunanmarca polity of highland Peru and its settlement system (AD 1350–1450). In Settlement, Subsistence, and Social Complexity: Essays Honoring the Legacy of Jeffrey R. Parsons, edited by R. E. Blanton, pp. 89–118. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Earle, T. K., C. Costin, and G. Russell 1986 Specialization and the Inka state. In Social and Economic Contexts of Technological Change, edited by S. E. van der Leeuw and R. Torrence. Allen and Unwin, London. Earle, T., and T. D’Altroy 1982 Storage facilities and state finance in the Upper Mantaro Valley, Peru. In Contexts for Prehistoric Exchange, edited by T. Earle, pp. 265–90. Academic Press, New York. 1989 The political economy of the Inka empire: The archaeology of power and finance. In Archaeological Thought in America, edited by C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, pp. 183–204. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Earle, T., T. D’Altroy, and C. LeBlanc 1977 Regional Archaeology of the Late Prehispanic Periods in the Upper Mantaro. Report on the 1977 Field Season of the Upper Mantaro Research Project. Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Earls, J. 1981 Patrones de jurisdicción y organización entre los Qaracha Wankas: Una reconstrucción arqueológica y etnohistórica de una época fluida. Etnohistória y Antropología Andina 2:55–92. Erickson, C. 1985 Applications of prehistoric Andean technology: Experiments in raised field agriculture, Huatta, Lake Titicaca, Peru. In Prehistoric Intensive Agriculture in the Tropics, edited by I. Farrington, pp. 209–32. B.A.R. International Series No. 359, Pt. 1. Oxford, U.K. 1987 The dating of raised-field agriculture in the Lake Titicaca Basin, Peru. In Prehispanic Agricultural Fields in the Andean Region, edited by W. Denevan, K. Mathewson, and G. Knapp, pp. 373–84. B.A.R. International Series No. 359. Oxford, U.K. 1988 Raised field agriculture in the Lake Titicaca Basin: Putting ancient agriculture back to work. Expedition 30(3):8–16. Escobar, G. 1973 Sicaya: Cambios Culturales en una Comunidad Mestiza Andina. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima. Espinosa Bravo, Clodoallo Alberto 1936 Facetas de Jauja. Carlos E. Sanguinetti, Jauja. Espinosa Soriano, W. 1969 Lurinhuaila de Huacjra: Un ayllu y un curacazgo Huanca. Casa de la Cultura de Junín, Huancayo, Peru. 1971 Los Wanka, Aliados de la Conquista. Anales Científicos de la Universidad del Centro del Perú 1:3–407. Huancayo. 1977 La Destrucción del Imperio de los Incas, 2nd ed. Retablo del Papel, Lima. Estete, Miguel de 1917 [1533] La relación del viaje que hizo el Señor Capitán Hernando Pizarro por mandado del Señor Gobernador, su hermano, desde el pueblo de Caxamalca, a Pachacamac y de allí a Jauja. In Verdadera Relación de la Conquista del Perú, by Francisco de Xérez, edited by H. H. Urteaga, pp. 77–102. San Martí, Lima. 1946 [1533] La relación del viaje que hizo el Señor Capitán Hernando Pizarro . . . In Crónica de la Conquista del Perú, edited by J. le Riverend, pp. 90–108. Editorial Nueva España, Churubusco, Mexico. Farcau, Bruce 2000 The Ten Cents War: Chile, Peru, and Bolivia in the War of the Pacific, 1879–1884. Praeger, Westport, Connecticut. Fjeldså, J., and N. Krabbe 1990 Birds of the High Andes. Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen. Apollo Books, Svendborg, Denmark.

Bibliography Flannery, K., J. Marcus, and R. Reynolds 1989 The Flocks of the Wamani: A Study of Llama Herders on the Punas of Ayacucho, Peru. Academic Press, New York. Flores Espinosa, I. 1959 El sitio arqueológico de Wari Willka, Huancayo. Actas y Trabajos del II Congreso Nacional de História del Perú 2:177–86. Lima. Flores Ochoa, J. 1975 Pastores de alpacas. Allpanchis 8:5–24. Cusco. 1976 Enqa enqaychu, illa i khuya rumi: Aspectos mágico-religiosos entre pastores. Journal of Latin American Lore 2:115–86. 1977 Pastores de alpacas en los Andes. In Pastores de Puna, compiled by J. A. Flores, pp. 15–52. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima. 1979 Pastoralists of the Andes, translated by R. Bolton. Institute for the Study of Human Issues, Philadelphia. 1988 Clasificación y nominación de camelidos sudamericanos. In Llamichos y Paqocheros—Pastores de Llamas y Alpacas, compiled by J. Flores, pp. 121–37. Centro de Estudios Andinos, Cusco. Fonseca, C., and E. Mayer 1978 Sistemas agrárias y ecología en la Cuenca del Río Cañete. Debates en Antropología 2:25–51. Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima. 1988 Comunidad y Producción en la Agricultura Andina. Asociación Peruana para el Fomento de las Ciencias Sociales, Lima. Fujii, T., and H. Tomoeda 1981 Chacra, laime, y auquénidos: Explotación ambiental de una comunidad andina. In Estudios Etnográficos del Perú Meridional, edited by S. Masuda, pp. 33–63. University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo. Fung, R. 1975 Excavaciones en Pacopampa. Revista del Museo Nacional 41:129–207. Lima. Gade, D. 1975 Plants, Man, and Land in the Vilcanota Valley of Peru. Junk Pub., The Hague. Gade, D., and M. Escobar 1982 Village settlement and the colonial legacy in southern Peru. Geographical Review 72:430–49. Garcia Cook, A. 1974 El origen del sedentarismo en el area de Ayacucho, Peru. Boletín del Instituto Nacional de Antropología e História 11:15–30. México, D.F. García Rosell, César 1942 Los monumentos arqueológicos del Perú. Lima. Gasparini, G., and L. Margolies 1980 Inca Architecture. Indiana University Press, Bloomington. Gibson, Charles 1952 Tlaxcala in the Sixteenth Century. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.

119

Goland, C. 1992 Cultivating Diversity: Field Scattering as Agricultural Risk Management in Cuyo Cuyo, Peru. Production, Storage, and Exchange Research Project, working paper no. 4. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Grosboll, S. 1988 An Archaeological Approach to the Demography of Prehispanic Andean Communities. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, Madison. Guaman Poma de Ayala, Felipe 1936 [1613] Nueva Crónica y Buena Gobierno. Institut d’Ethnologie, Paris. 1980 [1613] El Primer Nueva Crónica y Buen Gobierno, edited by J. Murra and R. Adorno, translated by J. Urioste. 3 vols. Siglo Veintiuno, Mexico City. Guillet, D. 1981 Land tenure, ecological zone, and agricultural regime in the central Andes. American Ethnologist 8:139–56. 1987 On the potential for intensification of agropastoralism in the arid zones of the central Andes. In Arid Land Use Strategies and Risk Management in the Andes, edited by D. Browman, pp. 81–98. Westview Press, Boulder. Gutierrez, C. 1935 Jatun Mallka. Revista del Museo Nacional 4:105–10, Lima. 1937 Ciudades chulparias de los Wankas. Revista del Museo Nacional 6:43–51. Lima. Guzman, C. 1959 Algunos establecimientos Incas en la sierra central, hoyas del Mantaro y Pampas. Actas del II Congreso Nacional de História del Peru 1:243–52. Lima. Hagstrum, M. 1986 The technology of ceramic production of Wanka and Inka wares from the Yanamarca Valley, Peru. Ceramic Notes 3:1–29. 1989 Technological Continuity and Change: Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology in the Peruvian Andes. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. Hansen, B., H. Wright, and J. Bradbury 1984 Pollen studies in the Junin area, central Peruvian Andes. Geological Society of America, Bulletin 95:1454–65. Harris, O. 1978 Kinship and the vertical economy of the Laymi Ayllu, Norte de Potosí. Actes du XLII Congres Int. des Americanistes, 1976 4:164–77. Paris. 1982 Labour and produce in an ethnic economy, northern Potosí, Bolivia. In Ecology and Exchange in the Andes, edited by D. Lehman, pp. 70–96. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1985 Ecological duality and the role of the center: Northern Potosí. In Andean Ecology and Civilization, edited by S. Masuda, I. Shimada, and C. Morris, pp. 311–55. University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo. Hastings, C. 1978 Huánuco, Tarma, and Jauja: A Study of Interzonal Economic Organization in Central Peru. Manuscript on file, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

120

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

1985 The Eastern Frontier: Settlement and Subsistence in the Andean Margins of Central Peru. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Hastorf, C. 1983 Prehistoric Agricultural Intensification and Political Development in the Jauja Region of Central Peru. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. 1989 The use of paleoethnobotanical data in prehistoric studies of crop production, processing, and consumption. In Current Paleoethnobotany, edited by C. A. Hastorf and V. S. Popper, pp. 119–44. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 1990a One path to the heights: Negotiating political inequality in the Sausa of Peru. In The Evolution of Political Systems, edited by S. Upham, pp. 146–76. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1990b The effect of the Inka state on Sausa agricultural production and crop consumption. American Antiquity 55:262–90. 1993 Agriculture and the Onset of Political Inequality before the Inca. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 2001a The natural environment. In Empire and Domestic Economy, edited by T. D’Altroy and C. Hastorf, pp. 55–64. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York and London. 2001b Agricultural production and consumption. In Empire and Domestic Economy, edited by T. D’Altroy and C. Hastorf, pp. 155–78. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York and London. Hastorf, C., and M. DeNiro 1985 Reconstruction of prehistoric plant production and cooking practices by a new isotopic method. Nature 315:429–91. Hastorf, C., and T. Earle 1985 Intensive agriculture and the geography of political change in the Upper Mantaro region of central Peru. In Prehistoric Intensive Agriculture in the Tropics, edited by I. Farrington, pp. 569–95. B.A.R. International Series No. 232, Pt. 1. Oxford, U.K. Hastorf, C., T. Earle, H. Wright, L. LeCount, G. Russell, and E. Sandefur 1989 Settlement archaeology in the Jauja region of Peru: Evidence from the EIP through the LIP: A report of the 1986 field season. Andean Past 2:81–129. Hastorf, C., and S. Johannessen 1993 Pre-hispanic political change and the role of maize in the central Andes of Peru. American Anthropologist 95:115–38. Henestrosa, Juan de 1965 [1582?] Relación de los pueblos que hay en la provincial de Xauxa y distancia dellos y las leguas que hay de uno a otro. In Relaciones Geograficas de Indias, Vol. 1, edited by Marcos Jiménez de la Espada, pp. 155–94. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles, Vol. 183. Ediciones Atlas, Madrid. Hermann, M. 1994 Achira and arracacha: Processing and product development. International Potato Center Bulletin 20(3):10–12. Lima. Herrera, A. 2003 Patrones de asentamiento y cambios en las estrategias de ocupación en la cuenca sur del río Yanamayo. In Arqueología

de la Sierra de Ancash: Propuestas y Perspectivas, edited by B. Ibarra, pp. 221–49. Instituto Cultura Runa, Lima. Horkheimer, H. 1951 En la región de los Huancas. Boletín de la Sociedad Geográfica de Lima 68:3–29. Hurtado de Mendoza, Luis 1982 Patrones prehispánicos de uso de diversos tipos de piedra en la region del Río Cunas, Huancayo. Revista del Museo Nacional 46:39–53. Lima. Hurtado de Mendoza, Luis, and Carlos Chahud 1984 Algunos datos adicionales acerca del sitio Callavallauri (Abrigo Rocoso No. 1 de Tschopik). Arqueología y Sociedad 10:34–60. Lima. Hyslop, J. 1976 An Archaeological Investigation of the Lupaca Kingdom and Its Origins. Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. 1977a Hilltop cities in Peru. Archaeology 30(4):218–25. 1977b Chullpas of the Lupaca zone of the Peruvian high plateau. Journal of Field Archaeology 4:149–69. 1984 The Inka Road System. Academic Press, New York. 1990 Inka Settlement Planning. University of Texas Press, Austin. Isbell, B. 1974 Parentesco andino y reciprocidad kuyaq: Los que nos aman. In Reciprocidad e Intercambio en los Andes Peruanos, edited by G. Alberti and E. Mayer, pp. 110–52. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima. 1978 To Defend Ourselves: Ecology and Ritual in an Andean Village. University of Texas Press, Austin. Isbell, W. 1974 Ecología de la expansión de los Quechua-hablantes. Revista del Museo Nacional 40:139–55. Lima. 1977 The Rural Foundations for Urbanism: Economic and Stylistic Interaction between Rural and Urban Communities in Eighth-Century Peru. Illinois Studies in Anthropology No. 10. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. 1989 Honcopampa: Was it a Huari administrative denter? In The Nature of Wari: A Reappraisal of the Middle Horizon in Peru, edited by R. Czwarno, F. Meddens, and A. Morgan, pp. 98–115. B.A.R. International Series No. 525. Oxford, U.K. Izumi, S. 1971 Development of the Formative culture in the ceja de montaña of the central Andes. In Dumbarton Oaks Conference on Chavin, edited by E. Benson, pp. 49–72. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Izumi, S., P. Cuculiza, and C. Kano 1972 Excavations at Shillacoto, Huanuco, Peru. University of Tokyo, Bulletin No. 2. Tokyo. Izumi, S., and T. Sono 1963 Andes 2: Excavations at Kotosh, Peru. University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo.

Bibliography Izumi, S., and K. Terada 1972 Andes 4: Excavations at Kotosh, Peru, 1963 and 1966. University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo. Johannessen, S., and C. Hastorf 1989 Corn and culture in central Andean prehistory. Science 244:690–92. 1990 A history of Andean fuel management (A.D. 500 to the present) in the Mantaro Valley, Peru. Journal of Ethnobiology 10(1):61–90. Julien, C. 1988 How Inca decimal administration worked. Ethnohistory 35:257–79. Kaulicke, P. 1975 Pancanche: Un caso del Formativo en los Andes de Cajamarca. Departamento de Antropología, Universidad Pontífica Católica, Lima. 1976 El Formativo de Pacopampa. Seminario de História Rural Andina, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima. Kendall, A. 1976 Descripción e inventario de las formas arquitectónicas Inca. Revista del Museo Nacional 42:13–96. Lima. King, F. H. 1911 Farmers of Forty Centuries: Permanent Agriculture in China, Korea, and Japan. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Reprinted by Rodale Press, Erasmus, Pennsylvania. Klink, C. 2005 Archaic period research in the Rio Henque Valley, Peru. In Advances in Titicaca Basin Archaeology–I, edited by C. Stanish, A. Cohen, and M. Aldenderfer, pp. 55–64. Publication No. 54. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Kolata, A. 1986 The agricultural foundations of the Tiwanaku state: A view from the heartland. American Antiquity 51:748–62. Kowalewski, S. A. 2008 Regional settlement pattern studies. Journal of Archaeological Research 16:225–85. Kroeber, A. 1944 Peruvian Archaeology in 1942. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology No. 4. Wenner Gren Foundation, New York. Kuznar, L. 1990 Economic Models, Ethnoarchaeology, and Early Pastoralism in the High Sierra of the South-Central Andes. Doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. Lathrap, D. 1970 The Upper Amazon. Praeger, New York. Lavallee, D. 1967 Types ceramiques des Andes Centrales du Perou (Periode Intermediaire Récente). Journal de la Société des Americanistes 56:323–64. Paris.

121

1973 Estructura y organización del habitat en los Andes Centrales durante el Periodo Intermedio Tardío. Revista del Museo Nacional 39:91–116. Lima. 1977 Telarmachay: Campamento de Pastores en la Puna de Junín del Período Formativo. Revista del Museo Nacional 43:61– 102. Lima. Lavallee, D., and M. Julien 1973 Le establissements Asto a l’epoque prehispanique. Institut Francais d’Etudes Andines, Lima. 1975 El habitat prehistórico en la zona de San Pedro de Cajas, Junín. Revista del Museo Nacional 41:81–128. Lima. 1983 Asto: Curacazgo Prehispánico de los Andes Centrales. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima. LeBlanc, C. 1981 Late Prehispanic Huanca Settlement Patterns in the Yanamarca Valley, Peru. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles. LeCount, L. 1987 Towards Defining and Explaining Functional Variation in Sausa Ceramics from the Upper Mantaro Valley, Peru. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles. Lennon, T. 1983 Pattern analysis of prehispanic raised fields of Lake Titicaca, Peru. In Drained Field Agriculture in Central and South America, edited by J. Darch, pp. 183–200. B.A.R. International Series No. 189. Oxford, U.K. Leonard, B. 1984 Land Scarcity and Communal Use among Andean Peasant Farmers. Master’s paper, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles. LeVine, T. Y. 1979 Prehispanic Political and Economic Change in Highland Peru: An Ethnohistorical Study of the Mantaro Valley. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles. 1985 Inka Administration in the Central Highlands: A Comparative Study. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles. 1987 Inka labor service at the regional level: The functional reality. Ethnohistory 34:14–46. 1992 Inka state storage in three highland regions: A comparative study. In Inka Storage Systems, edited by T. Y. LeVine, pp. 107–50. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. LeVine, T. (ed.) 1992 Inka Storage Systems. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Liffman, P. 1977 Vampires of the Andes. Michigan Discussions in Anthropology 2:205–26. Ann Arbor, Michigan. Long, N., and B. Roberts 1984 Miners, Peasants, and Entrepreneurs: Regional Development in the Central Highlands of Peru. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

122

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Lumbreras, L. 1960 Esquema arqueológico de la sierra central del Perú. Revista del Museo Nacional 28:64–117. Lima. 1971 Towards a Re-evaluation of Chavin. In Dumbarton Oaks Conference on Chavin, edited by E. Benson, pp. 1–28. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. 1972 De los Origenes del Estado en el Perú. Milla Batres, Lima. 1974 Las Fundaciones de Humanga. Editorial Nueva Educación, Lima. Lumbreras, L., and H. Amat 1969 Informe preliminar sobre las galerias interiores de Chavin. Revista del Museo Nacional 34:143–97. Lima. MacNeish, R. 1969 First Annual Report of the Ayacucho Archaeological-Botanical Project. R. S. Peabody Foundation, Andover. 1970 Second Annual Report of the Ayacucho Archaeological-Botanical Report. R. S. Peabody Foundation, Andover. MacNeish, R., T. Patterson, and D. Browman 1975 The Central Peruvian Prehistoric Interaction Sphere. Papers of the R. S. Peabody Foundation for Archaeology, No. 7. Andover. Mallaupoma, Rolando, and M. F. Perales 2005 Un asentamiento prehispánico en la ceja de selva de Curimarca, Jauja. Unay Runa, 2005 issue, pp. 209–18. Instituto Cultura Runa, Lima. Mallon, F. E. 1983 The Defense of Community in Peru’s Central Highlands: Peasant Struggles and Capitalist Transition, 1860–1940. Princeton University Press, Princeton. 1987 Nationalist and antistate coalitions in the War of the Pacific: Junin and Cajamarca, 1879–1902. In Resistance, Rebellion, and Consciousness in the Andean Peasant World, 18th to 20th Centuries, edited by S. Stern, pp. 232–79. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. Mantha, Alexis 2004 Rapayán: Une culture tardive du Haut Marañón dans les Andes centrales du Pérou. Doctoral dissertation, University of Montréal, Montréal. 2006 Late prehispanic social complexity in the Rapayán Valley, upper Marañon drainage, central Andes of Peru. In La Complejidad Social en la Sierra de Ancash, edited by A. Herrera, C. Orsini, and K. Lane, pp. 35–61. Civiche Raccolte D’Arte Applicata del Castello Storzesco-Raccolte Extraeuropee, Milan. 2009 Territoriality, social boundaries and ancestor veneration in the central Andes of Peru. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28:158–76. Mariscotti de Gorlitz, A. 1978 Pachamam Santa Tierra. Contribución al Estudio de la Religión Autoctona en los Andes Centro-Meridionales. Indiana, Beiheft 8, Ibero-Amerikanisches Institut, Preussischer Kulturbesitz. Gebr. Mann, Berlin. Matos, J., T. Guillen de Boluarte, J. Colter, E. Soler, and F. Boluarte 1958 Las Actuales Comunidades de Indigenas: Huarochiri en 1955. Instituto de Etnología y Arqueología, Lima.

Matos Mendieta, R. 1959 Los Wanka, datos históricos y arqueológicos. Actas y Trabajos del II Congreso Nacional de História del Perú: Epoca Prehispánica 2:187–210. Lima. 1966 La economía durante el período de reinos y confederaciones en Mantaro, Perú. Actas y Memorias del 36 Congreso Internacional de Americanistas 1:509–18. Sevilla. 1968 Wari-Wilka, santuario Wanka en el Mantaro. Cantuta 2:116– 27. Lima. 1971 El período Formativo del Mantaro. Revista del Museo Nacional 37:41–51. Lima. 1972a Wakan y Wamalli—Estudio arqueológico de dos aldeas rurales. In Visita de la Provincia de León de Huánuco en 1562, Iñigo Ortiz de Zuñiga, Visitador, Vol. 2, edited by J. Murra, pp. 367–82. Universidad Nacional Hermillio Valdizán, Huánuco, Peru. 1972b Alfareros y agricultores. In Pueblos y Culturas de la Sierra Central, edited by D. Bonavía and R. Ravines, pp. 34–43. Cerro de Pasco Corporation, Lima. 1973 Ataura: Un centro Chavin en el Valle del Mantaro. Revista del Museo Nacional 38:93–108. Lima. 1978 The cultural and ecological context of the Mantaro Valley during the Formative period. In Advances in Andean Archaeology, edited by D. Browman, pp. 307–25. Mouton, The Hague. 1980 La agricultura prehispánica en las punas de Junín. Allpanchis 14:91–108. Cusco. 1994 Pumpu: Centro Administrativo Inka de la Puna de Junín. Editorial Horizonte, Lima. 1997 Incas y etnias regionales en Junín: Una vision arqueológica. In Arqueología, antropología e história en los Andes: Homenaje a María Rostworowski, edited by R. Varón and J. Flores, pp. 397–413. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima. 2002 El awana wasi de Tarmatambo: Una aproximación etnoarqueológica. In El hombre y los Andes: Homenaje a Franklin Pease, edited by J. Flores and J. Varón, pp. 679–94. Pontífica Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima. Matos M., R., C. Arellano, and D. Brown 1996 Asentamientos inca en Chakamarka y Tarmatambo (Depto. de Junín): Problemas y criterios de interpretación para la reconstrucción de una provincial inca. In I Encuentro Internacional de Peruanistas 1:181–90. UNESCO, Universidad de Lima, Fondo de Cultura Economica, Lima. Matos M., R., and J. R. Parsons 1979 Poblamiento prehispánico en la cuenca del Mantaro. In Arqueología Peruana, edited by R. Matos, pp. 157–71. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima. Mayer, E. 1971 Un carnero por un saco de papas: Aspectos del trueque en la zona de Chaupiwaranga, Pasco. Revista del Museo Nacional 37:184–96. Lima. 1979 Land Use in the Andes: Ecology and Agriculture in the Mantaro Valley of Peru, with Special Reference to Potatoes. Centro Internacional de la Papa, Lima. 1981 Uso de la Tierra en los Andes: Ecología y Agricultura en el Valle del Mantaro del Perú con Referencia Especial a la Papa. Centro Internacional de la Papa, Lima. 1985 Production zones. In Andean Ecology and Civilization—An Interdisciplinary Perspective on Andean Ecological Complementarity, edited by S. Masuda, I. Shimada, and C. Morris, pp. 45–84. University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo.

Bibliography McCorkle, C. 1987 Punas, pastures, and fields: Grazing strategies and the agropastoral dialectic in an indigenous Andean community. In Arid Land Use Strategies and Risk Management in the Andes, edited by D. Browman, pp. 57–70. Westview Press, Boulder. McEwan, G. 1989 The Wari empire in the southern Peruvian highlands: A view from the provinces. In The Nature of Wari: A Reappraisal of the Middle Horizon in Peru, edited by R. Czwarno, F. Meddens, and A. Morgan, pp. 53–71. B.A.R. International Series No. 525. Oxford, U.K. 1996 Archaeological investigations at Pikillaqta, a Wari site in Peru. Journal of Field Archaeology 23:169–86. McLaughlin, D. 1924 Geology and physiography of the Peruvian cordillera, Departments of Junín and Lima. Geological Society of American Bulletin 35:591–632. 1958 Notas sobre la geología y fisiografía de los Andes Peruanos en los departamentos de Junín y Lima. Boletín de la Sociedad Nacional de Minería y Petróleo 63:171–88. Lima. Meddens, F. 1991 A provincial perspective of Huari organization viewed from the Chicha-Soras Valley. In Huari Administrative Structure: Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government, edited by W. Isbell and G. McEwan, pp. 215–31. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Meyerson, Julia 1990 Tambo: Life in an Andean Village. University of Texas Press, Austin. Mitchell, W. 1976 Irrigation and community in the central Peruvian highlands. American Anthropologist 78:25–44. Mitchell, W., and D. Guillet (eds.) 1993 Irrigation at High Altitudes: The Social Organization of Water Control Systems in the Andes, Vol. 12, Society for Latin American Anthropology, Pub. Series, J. Ehrenreich, general editor. American Anthropological Association, Washington, D.C. Molinié-Fioravanti, A. 1986 The Andean community today. In Anthropological History of Andean Polities, edited by J. Murra, N. Wachtel and J. Revel, pp. 311–41. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Morris, C. 1966 El tampu real de Tunsucancha. Cuadernos de Investigación Antropológica 1:95–107. Universidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizán, Huánuco, Peru. 1967 Storage in Tawantinsuyu. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Chicago, Chicago. 1972 El almacenaje en dos aldeas de los Chupaychu. In Visita de la Provincia de León de Huánuco en 1562, I. Ortiz de Zuñiga, Visitador, Vol. 2, edited by J. Murra, pp. 383–404. Universidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizán, Huánuco, Peru. 1973 State settlements in Tawantinsuyu: A strategy of compulsory urbanism. In Contemporary Archaeology, edited by M. Leone, pp. 393–401. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

123

1974 Reconstructing patterns of non-agricultural production in the Inca economy: Archaeology and documents in instituted analysis. In Reconstructing Complex Societies, edited by C. Moore, pp. 49–68. Supplement to the Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research, No. 20. Cambridge. 1981 Tecnología y organización Inca del almacenamiento de víveres en la sierra. In La Tecnología Andina, edited by H. Lechtman and A. Soldi, pp. 327–75. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City. 1982 The infrastructure of Inka control in the Peruvian central highlands. In The Inca and Aztec States, 1400–1800: Anthropology and History, edited by G. Collier, R. Rosaldo, and J. Wirth, pp. 153–71. Academic Press, New York. 1985 From principles of ecological complementarity to the organization and administration of Tawantinsuyu. In Andean Ecology and Civilization, edited by S. Masuda, I. Shimada, and C. Morris, pp. 477–90. University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo. Morris, C., and D. Thompson 1970 Huanuco Viejo: An Inca administrative center. American Antiquity 35:344–62. 1985 Huanuco Pampa: An Inca City and Its Hinterland. Thames and Hudson, London. Murra, J. 1960 Rite and crop in the Inca state. In Culture in History, edited by S. Diamond, pp. 393–407. Columbia University Press, New York. 1972 El ‘control vertical’ de un máximo de pisos ecológicos en la economía de las sociedades andinas. In Visita de la Provincia de León de Huánuco en 1562, I. Ortiz de Zuñiga, Visitador, Vol. 2, edited by J. Murra, pp. 427–76. Universidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizán, Huánuco, Perú. 1975 Las etno-categorias de un khipu estatal. Formaciones Economicas y Politicas. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima. Nomland, G. 1939 New archaeological site at San Blas, Junín. Revista del Museo Nacional 8:61–66. Lima. Orlove, B. 1977a Alpacas, Sheep, and Men: The World Export Economy and Regional Society in Southern Peru. Academic Press, New York. 1977b Integration through production: The use of zonation in Espinar. American Ethnologist 4:84–101. 1985 The history of the Andes: A brief overview. Mountain Research and Development 5:45–60. Orlove, B., and R. Godoy 1986 Sectorial fallowing systems in the central Andes. Journal of Ethnobiology 6:169–204. Orsini, C. 2006 ¿Metáforos de complejidad social? Huari, Llacuaz, organización del territorio y especialización económica a Chacas (valle de Chacapata, Perú). In La Complejidad Social en la Sierra de Ancash, edited by B. Ibarra, pp. 151–63. Civiche Raccolte D’Arte Applicata del Castello Sforzesco-Raccolte Estraeuropee, Milan.

124

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Ossio, J. 1978 Relaciones interétnicos y verticalidad ecológica en la comunidad de Andamarca (Ayacucho, Perú). Actes du XLII Congrés International des Americanistes 4:179–98. Paris. Owen, B. D. 1986 The Role of Common Metal Objects in the Inka State. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles. 2001 The economy of metal and shell wealth goods. In Empire and Domestic Economy, edited by T. D’Altroy and C. Hastorf, pp. 265–96. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York and London. Owen, B. D., and M. Norconk 1987 Analysis of the human burials, 1977–1983 field seasons: Demographic profiles and burial practices. In Archaeological Field Research in the Upper Mantaro, Peru, 1982–1983: Investigations of Inka Expansion and Exchange, edited by T. K. Earle, T. N. D’Altroy, C. A. Hastorf, C. J. Scott, C. L. Costin, G. S. Russell, and E. Sandefur, pp. 107–23. Monograph 28. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Palacios, R. 1977 Hiwasaha Uywa Uywataña, Uka Uywaha Hiwasaru Ugusity: Los Pastores Aymara de Chichillapi. Master’s thesis, Pontífica Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima. Parsons, J. J., and W. Denevan 1967 Pre-Columbian ridged fields. Scientific American 217:92–100. Parsons, Jeffrey R. 1968 An estimate of size and population for Middle Horizon Tiahuanaco, Bolivia. American Antiquity 33:243–45. 1969 Patrones de asentamiento prehispánico en la región Texcocana. Boletín del Instituto Nacional de Antropología e História 35:31–37. México, D.F. 1971 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region, Mexico. Memoirs, no. 3. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 1972 Archaeological settlement patterns. Annual Review of Anthropology 1:127–50. 1974 The development of a complex society: A regional perspective from the Valley of Mexico. Journal of Field Archaeology 1:81–108. 1976 Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Upper Mantaro, Peru: A Preliminary Report of the 1975 Fieldseason. Manuscript on file, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 1978 El complejo hidráulico de Tunanmarca: Canales, acueductos y reservorios. In III Congreso Peruano: El Hombre y la Cultura Andina, edited by R. Matos, 2:557–66. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima. 1998 A regional perspective on Inka impact in the sierra central, Peru. Tawantinsuyu 5:153–59. Canberra. 2008 Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Northwestern Valley of Mexico: The Zumpango Region. Memoirs, no. 45. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Parsons, J. R., and C. Hastings 1977 Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Upper Mantaro, Peru: A Progress Report for the 1976 Fieldseason. Submitted to the Instituto Nacional de Cultura and the National Science

Foundation. Manuscript on file, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 1988 The Late Intermediate period. In Peruvian Prehistory, edited by R. Keatinge, pp. 190–229. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Parsons, J. R., C. Hastings, and R. Matos 1997 Rebuilding the state in highland Peru: Herder-cultivator interaction during the Late Intermediate period in the TaramaChinchaycocha region. Latin American Antiquity 8:317–41. 2000 Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Upper Mantaro and Tarma Drainages, Junín, Peru: Vol. 1, The Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region, Parts 1 & 2. Memoirs, no. 34. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Parsons, J. R., and R. Matos 1978 Asentamientos prehispánicos en el Mantaro, Perú: Informe preliminar. In III Congreso Peruano: El Hombre y la Cultura Andina, edited by R. Matos, 2:539–55. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima. Parsons, J. R., E. Brumfiel, M. Parsons, and D. Wilson 1982 Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Southern Valley of Mexico: The Chalco-Xochimilco Region. Memoirs, no. 14. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Parsons, J. R., K. Kintigh, and S. Gegg 1983 Archaeological Settlement Pattern Data from the Chalco, Xochimilco, Ixtapalapa, Texcoco, and Zumpango Regions, Mexico. Technical Reports, no. 14. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Parsons, J. R., M. Parsons, V. Popper, and M. Taft 1985 Chinampa agriculture and Aztec urbanization in the Valley of Mexico. In Prehistoric Intensive Agriculture in the Tropics, edited by I. Farrington, pp. 49–96. B.A.R. International Series No. 232, Pt. 1. Oxford, U.K. Perales, Manuel 2004a El Control Inka de las Fronteras Étnicas: Reflexiones desde el Valle de Ricrán en la Sierra Central del Perú. Chungara 36:515–23. 2004b El sitio arqueológico de Arhuaturo y la ocupación inca en la sección inferior del valle de Cunas (ca. 1470–1533): Notas sobre sus implicancias en el contexto regional. Revista Arqueología y Sociedad 15:155–72. Museo de Antropología y Arqueología de la Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima. 2004c Ancestros y muerte en las sociedades prehispánicas tardías del alto Ricrán, sierra central del Perú: Una aproximación arqueológica. In Imagen de la Muerte, Primer Congreso Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, compiled by N. Leonardini and V. Cabinillas, pp. 49–57. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima. 2005 Apuntes sobre el Período Intermedio Tardío y la presencia inca en la Cuenca alta del Río Ricrán, sierra central del Perú. Estudios Atacameños 29:125–42. Perales, Manuel, and A. Rodriguez 2003 Asentamientos prehispánicos tardíos en la puna de Chongos Bajo (Chupaca-Junín). Unay Runa 6:55–59.

Bibliography

125

Pizarro, Hernando 1959 [1533] Carta a Oidores de Santo Domingo, Panama. In La Historia General y Natural de las Indias, [1550], by Gonzalo Fernandez de Oviedo y Valdes, pp. 84–90. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles, Vol. 121. Ediciones Atlas, Madrid.

Redman, C. 1973 Multistage fieldwork and analytical techniques. American Antiquity 38:61–79. 1987 Surface collection, sampling, and research design. American Antiquity 52:249–65.

Pizarro, Pedro 1917 [1571] Relación del Descubrimento y Conquista del Perú. Colección de Libros y Documentos Referentes a la História del Perú, 5 vols, edited by H. Urteaga. Sanmartí, Lima. 1965 [1571] Relación del Descubrimiento y Conquista de los Reinos del Perú. In Crónicas del Perú, Tomo V, edited by Juan Pérez de Tudela Bueso, pp. 159–242. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles, Vol. 168. Ediciones Atlas, Madrid. 1986 [1571] Relación del Descubrimento y Conquista de los Reinos del Peru, 2nd ed. Colección Clásicos Peruanos, Pontífica Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima.

República del Perú 1924 Statistical Abstract of Peru 1923. Dirección de Estadística y Censos, Lima. 1944 Censo Nacional de Población, 1940. Dirección de Estadística y Censos, Lima. 1947 Anuario Estadística del Perú. Dirección Nacional de Estadística y Censos, Lima. 1959 Boletin de Estadística Peruana, Vol. 2. Dirección Nacional de Estadística y Censos, Lima. 1965 Sexto Censo Nacional de Poblaciónm 1961, Vol. 4. Dirección Nacional de Estadística y Censos, Lima. 1966 Centros Poblados: Ica, Junín, La Libertad, Lambayeque, Loreto, Lima, Madre de Díos, Moquegua, Tomo III. Dirección Nacional de Estadística y Censos, Lima. 1969 Resultados de 1958 a 1966–1970 a 1971. Dirección Nacional de Estadística y Censos, Lima, 1975 Censos Nacional: VII de Población, 1972. Oficina Nacional de Estadística y Censos, Lima. 1984 Censos Nacionales, VIII de Población, 1981. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos, Lima. 1995 Anuario Estadistica del Peru. Dirección Nacional de Estadística y Censos, Lima. 2000 Perú, Sumario Estadístico. Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática, Lima. 2008 Peru, Compendio Estadístico, Vol. 2007. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Informatica, Lima.

Platt, T. 1982 The role of the Andean Ayllu in the reproduction of the petty commodity regime in northern Potosí (Bolivia). In Ecology and Exchange in the Andes, edited by D. Lehman, pp. 27–69. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1986 Mirrors and maize: The concept of Yanantin among the Macha of Bolivia. In Anthropological History of Andean Polities, edited by J. Murra, N. Wachtel, and J. Revel, pp. 228–59. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Polo de Ondegardo, Juan 1916 [1571] Relación de los fundamentos acerca del notable daño que resulta de no guarder a los indios sus fueros. Colección de Libros y Documentos Referentes a la História del Perú, Ser. 1, Vol. 3. Imprenta y Librería Sanmarti y Cia., Lima. Poole, D. 1982 Los santuarios religiosos en la economía regional andina. Allpanchis 19:79–116. Cusco. 1984 Ritual-Economic Calendars in Paruro: The Structures of Representation in Andean Ethnography. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. 1991 Rituals of movement, rites of transformation: Pilgrimage and dance in the highlands of Cusco, Peru. In La Peregrinación: Pilgrimage in Latin America, edited by N. Crumrine and A. Morinis, pp. 307–38. Greenwood Press, New York. Pulgar Vidal, J. 1967 Geografía del Perú: Las Ocho Regiones Naturales del Perú. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima. Quispe, U. 1984 La ‘Chupa’: Rito ganadero andino. Revista Andina 2:607–28. Cusco. Rabey, M., and R. Merlino 1988 El control ritual-rebaño entre los pastores del sur de los Andes (Argentina). In Llamichos y Paqocheros: Pastores de Llamas y Alpacas, compiled by J. Flores, pp. 113–20. Cusco. Ravines, R. 1971 La Alfarería Tardía del Valle del Mantaro: Una Aproximación Ecológica. Tesis de Bachiller, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima.

Rowe, J. 1946 Inca culture at the time of the Spanish conquest. In Handbook of South American Indians, edited by J. Steward, 2:183–330. Bulletin 143. Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 1962 Stages and periods in archaeological interpretation. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 18:40–54. 1980 An account of the shrines of ancient Cuzco. Ñawpa Pacha 17:2–80. Rudecoff, C. 1982 The Higueras-Huallaga Archaeological Survey—A Report on the Field Research and Preliminary Analyses. Report submitted to Sigma Xi. On file, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 1991 Archaeological Survey in the Upper Huallaga and Lower Higueras Valleys, Peru. Manuscript on file, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Russell, G. 1988 The Impact of Inka Polity on the Domestic Economy of the Wanka in the Central Highlands of Peru: Stone Tool Production and Use. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. Sallnow, M. 1991 Dual cosmology and ethnic division in an Andean pilgrimage cult. In Pilgrimage in Latin America, edited by N. Crumrine and A. Morinis, pp. 281–305. Greenwood Press, New York.

126

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Sandefur, E. C. 1988 Andean Zooarchaeology: Animal Use and the Inka Conquest of the Upper Mantaro Valley. Doctoral dissertation, Archaeology Program, Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. 2001 Animal husbandry and meat consumption. In Empire and Domestic Economy, edited by T. D’Altroy and C. Hastorf, pp. 179–202. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York and London. Sanders, W. 1973 The Significance of Pikillaqta in Andean Culture History. Miscellaneous Papers in Anthropology No. 8. Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park. Sanders, W., J. R. Parsons, and R. Santley 1979 The Basin of Mexico: Ecological Processes in the Evolution of a Civilization. Academic Press, New York. Sarmiento de Gamboa, Pedro 1960 [1572] Historia Indica por Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa. Appendix. In Obras Completas del Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, IV, edited by Carmelo Saenz de Santa María. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles, Vol. 135. Ediciones Atlas, Madrid. Schjellerup, I. 1997 Incas and Spaniards in the Conquest of the Chachapoyas: Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Research in the Northeastern Andes of Peru. Series B, Gothenburg Archaeological Thesis No. 7, Department of Archaeology, Gothenburg University. National Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen. Schreiber, K. 1987 Conquest and consolidation: A comparison of the Wari and Inka occupations of a highland Peruvian valley. American Antiquity 52:266–84. 1991 Jincamocco: A Huari administrative center in the south central highlands of Peru. In Huari Administrative Structure: Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government, edited by W. H. Isbell and G. F. McEwan, pp. 199–214. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. 1992 Wari Imperialism in Middle Horizon Peru. Anthropological Papers, no. 87. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 1993 The Inca occupation of the province of Andamarca Lucanas, Peru. In Provincial Inca: Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Assessment of the Impact of the Inca State, edited by M. Malpass, pp. 77–116. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City. Seltzer, G., and C. Hastorf 1990 Climate change and its effect on prehispanic agriculture in the central Peruvian Andes. Journal of Field Archaeology 17:397–414. Shea, D. 1969 Wari-Wilka: A Central Andean Oracle Site. Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. Sherbondy, J. 1982 El regadío, los lagos, y los mitos de origen. Allpanchis 20:17:3–32. Cuzco. 1986 Los ceques: Código de canales en el Cusco incaico. Allpanchis 27:39–74. Cusco.

1993 Water and power: The role of irrigation districts in the transition from Inca to Spanish Cuzco. In Irrigation at High Altitude: The Social Organization of Water Control Systems in the Andes, edited by W. Mitchell and D. Guillet, pp. 69–98. Society for Latin American Anthropology Publication Series, Vol. 12. American Anthropological Association, Washington, D.C. Sikkink, L. 2001 Ethnoarchaeology and contemporary domestic economy in the Mantaro Valley. In Empire and Domestic Economy, edited by T. D’Altroy and C. Hastorf, pp. 91–111. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, New York and London. Silverman, H. 1988 Cahuachi: Non-urban cultural complexity on the south coast of Peru. Journal of Field Archaeology 15:403–30. 1993a Cahuachi in the Ancient World. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City. 1993b Patrones de asentamiento en el Valle de Ingenio, cuenca del Río Grande de Nasca: Una propuesta preliminar. Gaceta Arqueológica Andina 7:23:103–24. Lima. 1996 The Formative period on the south coast of Peru: A critical review. Journal of World Prehistory 10:95–146. Skar, H. 1982 The Warm Valley People: Duality and Land Reform among the Quechua Indians of Highland Peru. Columbia University Press, New York. Smith, C. 1970 Depopulation of the central Andes in the sixteenth century. Current Anthropology 11:453–64. Smith, C., W. Denevan, and P. Hamilton 1968 Ancient ridge field cultivation in the Lake Titicaca area. The Geographical Review 134:353–67. Soler, E. 1954 Proyecto Yauyos-Huarochiri: La agricultura en la comunidad de San Pedro de Huancaire. Revista del Museo Nacional 23:90–139. Lima. Stanish, C., E. de la Vega, L. Steadman, C. Chavez, K. Lawrence Frye, L. Onofre, M. Seddon, and P. Calisaya 1997 Archaeological Survey in the Juli-Desaguadero Region of Lake Titicaca Basin, South Peru. Fieldiana Anthropology, n.s., No. 29. Field Museum of Natural History, Publication 1488, Chicago. Stern, S. J. (ed.) 1987 Resistance, Rebellion, and Consciousness in the Andean Peasant World. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. Tello, J. 1960 Chavin: Cultura Matriz de la Civilización Andina. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima. Tello, J., and P. Miranda 1923 Wallallo: Ceremonias gentílicas realizadas en la región cisandina del Perú central. Inca 1:475–549. Museo de Arqueología de la Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima.

Bibliography Tello Devotto, R. 1959 Arqueología Wanka: Doce ruinas existentes en la provincia de Huancayo. Actas del II Congreso Nacional de História del Perú 1:275–83, Lima. Thompson, D. 1967 Investigaciones arqueológicas en las aldeas Chupachu de Ichu y Aqumarca. In Visita a la Provincia de León de Huánuco en 1562, Vol. 1, edited by J. Murra, pp. 357–62. Universidad Nacional Emilio Valdizán, Huáuco, Peru. 1968a An archaeological evaluation of ethnohistoric evidence on Inca culture. In Anthropological Archaeology in the Americas, edited by B. Meggers, pp. 108–20. Anthropological Society of Washington, Washington, D.C. 1968b Huánuco, Peru: A survey of a province of the Inca empire. Archaeology 21:174–81. 1970 Habitantes del Período Intermedio Tardío en la Sierra Central del Perú (I). El Serrano 19:16–20. Cerro de Pasco Corporation, Lima. 1972 La ocupación incaica en la sierra central. In Pueblos y Culturas de la Sierra Central del Perú, edited by D. Bonavía and R. Ravines, pp. 77–89. Cerro de Pasco Corporation, Lima. 1974 Architectural continuities in the north central highlands of Peru. Monograph IV, Archaeological Survey, pp. 81–89. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. 1982 Tower hill, water of life, and the black pool. Ñawpa Pacha 20:183–90. Thompson, D., and J. Murra 1966 The Inca bridges in the Huanuco region. American Antiquity 31:632–39. Thompson, D., and R. Ravines 1973 Tinyash—A prehispanic village in the Andean puna. Archaeology 26:94–100. Thompson, L. G., E. Mosley Thompson, J. Bolzan, and B. Koei 1985 A 1500 year record of tropical precipitation in ice cores from the Quelccaya ice cap, Peru. Science 229:971–73.

127

Topic, T. 1991 The Middle Horizon in northern Peru. In Huari Administrative Structure: Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government, edited by W. Isbell and G. McEwan, pp. 233–46. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Tosi, J. A. 1960 Zonas de Vida Natural en el Perú. Instituto Interamericano de Ciencias Agrícolas de la OEA, Zona Andina, Proyecto 39, Programa de Cooperación Técnica, Boletín No. 5. Lima. Treacy, J. 1989 The Fields of Coporaque: Agricultural Terracing and Water Management in the Colca Valley, Arequipa, Peru. Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. Troll, C. 1958 Las culturas superiores Andinas y el medio geográfico. Instituto de Geografía, Serie 1, Monografías y Ensayos Geográficos, No. 1. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima. 1960 The relationship between the climates, ecology, and plant geography of the southern cold temperate zone and the tropical high mountains. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 152:529–32. 1968 The cordilleras of the tropical Americas: Aspects of climatic phytogeographical and agrarian ecology. In Geo-Ecology of the Mountainous Regions of the Tropical Americas, edited by C. Troll, pp. 15–56. Ferd. Dummlers Verlag, Bonn. Tschopik, H. 1946 Some notes on rock shelter sites near Huancayo, Peru. American Antiquity 12:73–80. Urton, G. 1986 Calendrical cycles and their projections in Pacaiqtambo, Peru. Journal of Latin American Lore 12:45–64.

Thompson, L. G., E. Mosley Thompson, W. Dansgaard, and P. Grootes 1986 The Little Ice Age as recorded in the stratigraphy of the tropical Quelccaya ice cap. Science 234:361–64.

Valderrama, R., and C. Escalante 1988 Del Tata Mallku a la Mama Pacha: Riego, Sociedad y Ritos en los Andes Peruanos. Centro de Estudios y Promoción del Desarrollo, Lima.

Thompson, L. G., E. Mosley Thompson, M. Davis, P. Nan Lin, K. Henderson, J. Cole-Dai, J. Bolzan, and K. Liu 1995 Late glacial stage and Holocene tropical ice core records from Huascaran, Peru. Science 269:46–50.

Valle, L. 1970 La ecología subjectiva como un elemento essencial de la verticalidad. Revista del Museo Nacional 37:167–75. Lima.

Toledo, Francisco de 1940a [1570] Información hecha por orden de Don Francisco de Toledo en su visita de las provincias del Perú. In Don Francisco de Toledo: Su Vida, Su Obra, Vol. 2, edited by Roberto Levillier, pp. 14–37. Espasa-Calpe, Buenos Aires. 1940b [1571] Información hecha en el Cuzco por orden del Virrey Toledo, con respuestas al mismo interrogatorio utilizado en las cuatro informaciones anteriores. In Don Francisco de Toledo: Su Vida, Su Obra, Vol. 2, edited by Roberto Levillier, pp. 6598. Espasa-Calpe, Buenos Aires. Topic, J., and T. Topic 1978 Prehistoric fortification systems of northern Peru. Current Anthropology 19:618–19.

Vázquez de Espinosa, Antonio 1948 [1628] Compendio y Descripción de las Indias Occidentales. Smithsonian Institution Miscellaneous Collections 108. Washington, D.C. 1969 [1617] Compendio y descripción de las Indias Occidentales. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles, Madrid. Vega, Andrés de 1965 [1582] La Descripción que se hizo en la Provincia de Xauxa. In Relaciones Geográficas de Indias, Tomo 1, edited by Marcos Jiménez de la Espada, pp. 166–75. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles, Vol. 183. Ediciones Atlas, Madrid. Webb, R., and G. Ferdández B. 1995 Peru ’95 En Números, Annuario Estadístico. Cuanto S.A., Lima.

128

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Weberbauer, A. 1936 Phytogeography of the Peruvian Andes. In Flora of Peru, Pt. 1, edited by J. F. MacBride, pp. 13–81. Field Museum of Natural History Publication 351, Botanical Series 13. Chicago.

Winterhalder, B., and R. Thomas 1978 Geoecology of Southern Highland Peru: A Human Adaptation Perspective. Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, Occasional Paper No. 27. University of Colorado, Boulder.

Webster, S. 1971 An indigenous Quechua community in exploitation of multiple ecological zones. Revista del Museo Nacional 37:176–83. Lima. 1973 Native pastoralism in the south Andes. Ethnology 2:115–33.

Wright, H. E. 1980 Environmental history of the Junín Plain and the nearby mountains. In Prehistoric Hunters of the High Andes, edited by J. Rick, pp. 253–56. Academic Press, New York. 1983 Late Pleistocene glaciation and climate around the Junín Plain, central Peruvian Andes. Geografiska Annaler 65A:35–43. 1984 Late Glacial and Late Holocene moraines in the Cerros Cuchpanga, central Peru. Quaternary Research 21:275–85.

Wells, R. 1940 A superficial survey of archaeological sites near La Oroya, Peru. Actas y Trabajos Científicos del XXVII Congreso Internacional de Americanistas 1:347–54. Lima. West, R. 1968 Population densites and agricultural practices in pre-Columbian Mexico, with emphasis on semi-terracing. Verhandlungen des XXXVIII Internationalen Amerikanistenkongresses, Band 2, pp. 361–69. Munich. West, T. 1988 Rebaños familiares propietarios individuales: Ritual ganadero y herencia entre los Aymara de Bolivia. In Llamichos y Paqocheros—Pastores de Llamas y Alpacas, compiled by J. Flores, pp. 191–201. Centro de Estudios Andinos, Cusco. Wiener, C. 1880 Perou et Bolivie. Librarie Hachette, Paris. Willey, G. 1953 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Viru Valley, Peru. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 155. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Wilson, F. 1982 Property and ideology: A regional oligarchy in the central Andes during the nineteenth century. In Ecology and Exchange in the Andes, edited by D. Lehman, pp. 191–210. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Wright, H. E., and P. Bradbury 1975 História ambiental del Cuaternario Tardío en el área de la planicie de Junín, Perú. Revista del Museo Nacional 41:75–76. Lima. Wright, H. E., G. Seltzer, and B. Hansen 1989 Glacial and climatic history of the central Peruvian Andes. National Geographic Research 5:439–45. Yamamoto, N. 1981 Investigación preliminar sobre las actividades agro-pastoriles en el Distrito de Marcapata, Depto. de Cuzco, Perú. In Estudios Etnográficos del Perú Meridional, edited by S. Masuda, pp. 85–137. University of Tokyo, Tokyo. 1985 The ecological complementarity of agro-pastoralism: Some comments. In Andean Ecology and Civilization: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on Andean Ecological Complementarity, edited by S. Masuda, I. Shimada, and C. Morris, pp. 85–100. University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo. Zuidema, R. T. 1986 Inka dynasty and irrigation: Another look at Andean concepts of history. In Anthropological History of Andean Polities, edited by J. Murra, N. Wachtel, and J. Revell, pp. 177–200. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Appendix A

Site Descriptions Jeffrey R. Parsons, Charles M. Hastings, and Terence N. D’Altroy

Introduction The conclusions reached in this volume are based upon the distributions and characteristics of 287 individual archaeological sites. Our numbering sequence runs continuously with the sequence of JASP site numbers in the nearby TaramaChinchaycocha Region, which ended with Site 381 (Parsons et al. 2000). The JASP sites in the Wanka Region are numbered consecutively from 382 to 636, with the following modifications: (1) Due to clerical errors in the original site numbering process, there are no Sites 445 or 545. (2) Nine sites with –A or –B suffixes have been added after the original site numbering process had been completed: 431-A, 445-A, 445-B, 459-A, 468-A, 512-A, 547-A, 607-A, and 632-A. (3) Four sites, surveyed by UMARP just outside the southern edge of our JASP survey area and close to JASP Site 562 on Hoja Jauja and Hoja Parco, have been added, designated as Sites 562-A, 562-B, 562-C, and 562-D. We lack site descriptions for Sites 562-B and 562-C. (4) Twenty-four UMARP-surveyed sites in the slightly detached JissePomacancha survey area, just beyond the western edge of our JASP survey area, have been added, using only the original UMARP site numbers (J-93–J-99, and J-105–J-121). In sum, this compilation includes 259 JASP-surveyed sites (all but 90 of which were also subsequently reexamined by UMARP archaeologists, as noted in the individual site descriptions); 4 UMARP-surveyed sites near JASP Site 562, all with JASP-linked site numbers; and 24 UMARP-surveyed sites in UMARP’s Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, with the original UMARP site numbers. Each discrete JASP-surveyed archaeological site receives a single identifying number, regardless of the number of chronological components it contains. These numbers are assigned progressively from northeast to southwest on each of the eight individual 1:25,000 Reforma Agraria base maps (hojas) that cover our survey area (Fig. A1a). These base maps are arranged in three east-to-west rows and four north-to-south columns over the survey area (Figs. A56–A95). We begin our numbering sequence in the northeasternmost base map (Hoja Yauli). Once we have numbered all sites from northeast to southwest within the Hoja Yauli, we proceed westward to the next adjacent base map to the west on the east-west row (Hoja Acolla), where we continue the numbering sequence from northeast to southwest within that base map. In similar fashion we move westward along the top row to Hoja Pomacancha. Then we drop down (southward) to the eastern end of the next row, from Hoja Apata westward to the Hoja Parco base map, and continue the numbering sequence westward across the row. In this fashion we progress with our numbering sequence from east to west and from north to south, ending with the Hoja Sincos. In sum, the JASP sites are numbered consecutively from northeast to southwest within each 1:25,000 base map, in the following order (refer to Fig. A1a): Yauli, Acolla, Pomacancha, Apata, Jauja, Parco, Concepcion, and Sincos. In the maps labeled as Figures A56–A95, each base map is usually represented five times: one map showing all EH and EIP/MH sites; a second showing all

LIP sites; a third showing those LIP sites identified as Wanka I by UMARP; a fourth showing those LIP sites identified as Wanka II by UMARP; and a fifth showing all sites with LH occupation (Wanka III). All sites of uncertain age are shown on the general LIP maps. The information for each site is subsumed under eight self-explanatory categories: Site No., Date of Survey, Location, Natural Setting, Modern Land Use, Archaeological Remains, Discussion, and Classification. Next to each site number we have included our original field number and other field designations (Unit, Feature, Location, Collection, and the corresponding UMARP site number [if applicable]), plus whatever local place name we were able to obtain for the site. We include the original field designations because our surface collections stored at the Museo de Arqueología, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, in Lima and our notes and field maps at the University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology in Ann Arbor are labeled with these site designations. Under Location, we include the site’s UTM coordinates, obtained from the 1:25,000 base map for the site’s midpoint (easting and northing coordinates, Zone 18 South, International Sphere); the UTM coordinates are followed by the corresponding south latitude and west longitude coordinates, computed as degrees and metric fractions of degrees. All site elevations (meters above sea level [masl]) are taken from the 1:25,000 base maps, and are for the site’s approximate midpoint. In the site descriptions we employ several different terms indicating the relative abundance of surface pottery: trace, very light, light, light-to-moderate, and moderate. These are subjective, impressionistic terms, whose meanings are summarized in Table A1. Because our main concern was what surface pottery could tell us about occupational chronology, we paid much less attention to lithic artifacts beyond a very general sense of their relative abundance and a casual appraisal of their forms. In addition to occasional fragments of groundstone grinding tools (manos, metates, pestles), two types of stone tools were particularly notable: artifacts that we designated as “hoes” and “digging-stick weights” (Figs. A1b, A1c). These artifacts, and the entire lithic assemblage in the Wanka Region, were subsequently studied in considerable detail by Russell (1988). Similarly, we employ impressionistic terms for soil depth, erosional severity, and vegetation density. Their meanings are summarized in Table A1. We employ the abbreviations listed in Table A2 for frequently used major chronological periods. We also use the UMARP phase terms for LIP and LH: Wanka I (early LIP), Wanka II (late LIP), and Wanka III (LH). In describing architectural features, unless otherwise noted, all measurements in length, width, and height are for building exteriors. As discussed in Chapter 4, our site typology is a provisional one, and questions about site classification exist for virtually every site. Sites for which our classifications or chronological assessments are unusually tenuous or uncertain are indicated by the insertion of a question mark (“?”) at the appropriate point(s) in each individual site description and in the summary table; in cases where the classification is unusually questionable, a pair of question marks is inserted. All locational data, names of topographic features (hills, rivers, quebradas) and modern communities are taken from two different series of topographic maps:

129

130

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A1a. The Wanka Region, showing locations of 1:25,000 base maps in the Tarama-Chinchaycocha and Wanka Regions.

Appendix A

Figure A1b. Example of a stone “hoe” (units in centimeters) (adapted from Russell 1988:140).

Table A1. Terms and meanings for relative surface pottery density, relative soil depth, relative erosional severity, and relative vegetation density. Terms

Meanings

Surface Pottery Abundance trace A sherd seen every few meters. Surface pottery could be missed in our survey. very light A consistent scatter, with sherds appearing every 1–2 m. Surface pottery would probably not be missed in our survey. light A consistent scatter, with sherds at intervals of no more than 1 m. ­Surface ­pottery could not normally be missed in our survey. light-to-moderate A consistent, but variable, scatter, with intervals of 20–100 cm between ­individual sherds. Surface pottery could not be missed in our survey. moderate A consistent scatter, with intervals of less than 20 cm between individual sherds. Surface pottery could not be missed in our survey. shallow medium deep slight moderate severe

sparse moderate thick

Less than 10 cm. 10–50 cm. Greater than 50 cm.

131

Figure A1c. Example of a stone digging-stick weight (units in centimeters) (adapted from Russell 1988:195).

Table A2. Abbreviations for major chronological periods. Abbreviation

Chronological Period

EH EIP EIP/MH MH LIP LIP/LH LH

Early Horizon Early Intermediate Period Early Intermediate/Middle Horizon Middle Horizon Late Intermediate Period Late Intermediate Period/Late Horizon Late Horizon

Soil Depth

Erosional Severity Very little erosion. Substantial erosion, but no major sheet wash, and with some remnants of topsoil still in place. Serious erosion, with substantial sheet wash, no remaining topsoil, and ­significant scarring and removal of the subsoil. Vegetation Density Individual clumps separated by at least 20 cm of open space. Individual clumps separated by less than 5 cm of open space. No separation between individual clumps.

(1) a 1:100,000 series published in Lima by the Peruvian Instituto Geográfico Militar (now the Instituto Geográfico Nacional) between 1969 and 1973; and (2) an unpublished 1:25,000 series prepared in Lima in 1972 by the Convenio Reforma Agraria SINAMOS-ONERN (which we use as our base maps for plotting the archaeological sites). The locational coordinates in our descriptions represent site midpoints. The final site descriptions for all JASP-surveyed sites were prepared by Jeffrey Parsons and Charles Hastings. For those UMARP-studied Inca-related sites in the JASP survey area, there is a substantial contribution to these site descriptions by Terence D’Altroy, who also wrote the site descriptions for all UMARP-surveyed

sites not surveyed by JASP archaeologists in the Jisse-Pomacancha subarea. D’Altroy also wrote most of the final descriptions of Inca storage facilities (colca sites), and much of the final description of the Inca provincial center at Hatun Xauxa (Site 550). Where relevant, referenced details of site architecture, contents, and chronology made subsequently by UMARP archaeologists in their various publications have been quoted in the site descriptions in this appendix. Except where noted, all accompanying photographs were taken by JASP archaeologists in the course of daily survey routine. Unless otherwise noted, all references to past and present time are relative to 1975 and 1976.

132

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru The Individual Sites

SITE NO. 382 [Jau-?-38(P), Fea. 20-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 15, 1976 Location: Hoja Yauli [453100 E, 8705300 N; 11.7116° S, 75.4304° W] Natural Setting: 3820 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on a saddle between two lobes of higher ground, on the top of a long ridge that extends southward between two major quebradas (Plate A1). The site lies on gently sloping ground; erosion has been moderate; soil depth is shallow, with sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep. Archaeological Remains: An old stone-walled corral, roughly square, ca. 45 × 45 m in area, and standing only one course high. The feature is considerably overgrown with grass. No surface pottery or lithic remains were detected. Site area 0.2 ha. Discussion: This appears to be a corral for camelids or sheep. Although it is obviously “old,” its age is uncertain; nevertheless, we think it is probably prehispanic. Its location near the uppermost edge of the kichwa zone may be significant—it might have functioned as a collection point for animals brought up from lower terrain to the west to graze on the higher pastures in the nearby puna to the east and north. Classification: Unknown age: Isolated corral, perhaps a Herding Camp SITE NO. 383 [Jau-EI-62(P), Coll. 259-P; UMARP Site No. J-238] Date of Survey: Aug. 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Yauli [449500 E, 8705000 N; 11.7143° S, 75.4634° W] Natural Setting: 3590 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the top of a long ridge (Plate A2). Erosion has been moderate to severe; soil depth is generally shallow. There is sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based barley cultivation. The area is presently fallow and used for sheep pasture. Archaeological Remains: A very light scatter of surface pottery extending over an area about 40 m in diameter (ca. 0.1 ha). We saw no lithic remains. Borges (1988:69) subsequently remeasured the site area as 7.0 ha. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The surface pottery is badly weathered, with few diagnostics. The ceramic material appears to be mixed EIP/MH and LIP. Borges’ (1988:69) subsequent restudy revealed a primarily early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). Discussion: We are very puzzled by the large discrepancy between our site area measurement and that of Borges. This discrepancy could be explained if Borges lumped our closely spaced Sites 383 and 384 together as a single site for the purposes of her study. We originally interpreted this site as a small occupation, perhaps a detached household linked to the larger settlement at Site 384, some 250 m to the south. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet, or Camp LIP: Hamlet, or Camp SITE NO. 384 [Jau-EI-61(P), Coll. 258-P; UMARP Site No. J-239] Date of Survey: Aug. 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Yauli [449300 E, 8704600 N; 11.7179° S, 75.4653° W] Natural Setting: 3580 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley, atop a broad ridge (Plates A2, A3). Moderate to severe erosion, with shallow to medium soil and a sparse cover of grass and low bushes. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of potatoes and barley. Land is presently fallow and used for sheep pasture. Archaeological Remains: Very light surface pottery over an area of ca. 7.3 ha. No visible surface mounding. We also noted one basalt scraper and one groundstone digging-stick weight. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. Although the surface pottery is badly weathered, with few diagnostics, it appears to be EIP/MH. Discussion: This appears to be a substantial agricultural occupation, with an outlier at Site 383, ca. 250 m to the north. Borges (1988:69) may have combined our Sites 383 and 384 as a single large site. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village SITE NO. 385 [Jau-LI-57(P)/Jau-LH-28(P), Coll. 263-P; UMARP Site No. J-9] Date of Survey: Aug. 14, 1976 Location: Hoja Yauli [447800 E, 8705800 N; 11.7070° S, 75.4790° W]

Plate A1. Site 382. Facing northeast at site. Arrow indicates approximate center of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 27-34)

Plate A2. Site 383. Facing southwest over general area of Sites 383 and 384. Arrows point to approximate site centers. (UMMA Neg. No. 7-13)

Plate A3. Site 384. Facing northwest over site area. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-19)

Natural Setting: 3565 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain atop a minor hill that rises from the top of a ridge spur at the edge of the valley floor (Plate A4). The site area is about 125 m above the general level of the floodplain to the south and east. Erosion has been moderate to severe, and there are some exposures of bedrock. Soil cover is shallow to medium, with sparse grass and scattered bushes. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of wheat, barley, and fava beans. Some fields are terraced (no stone retaining walls). Some fields on the northern side of the site have recently been plowed.

Appendix A

Plate A4. Site 385. Facing southeast over site area. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 27-26)

Plate A5. Site 385. Remains of large rectangular structure (colca) at Collection 263-P. (UMMA Neg. No. 27-22)

Plate A6. Site 386. Facing southeast over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Note archaeologist making surface collection at right-center. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-5)

Archaeological Remains: The site area measures ca. 7.9 ha, and comprises a continuous scatter of surface pottery, a few lithic artifacts, and a cluster of probable Inca colca structures at the northwestern end of the site. UMARP archaeologists subsequently mapped the site and measured its area as 9.3 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191). Structural Remains. There are no definite architectural remains, except for a cluster of poorly preserved probable Inca colcas at the upper, northwestern end of the site. It is likely that whatever other stone-walled buildings may have existed elsewhere in this site have been obliterated in the course of modern field

133

clearing; however, there are several piles of rock rubble scattered throughout the site area where walled structures may once have existed. The probable Inca colcas are arranged in two lines, about 8 m apart, oriented NW to SE. We were able to distinguish 15 separate structures, about half in each line; there may have been a few more colca structures. All except one are circular in form and usually spaced about 1–3 m apart, except for two apparent gaps of ca. 13 m (in one line) that separate a single rectangular structure from its neighbors in this cluster of buildings. The circular structures measure ca. 5 m in external diameter, with walls ca. 35 cm thick, and are now rarely more than 75 cm high. The single rectangular structure is located at about the center of the westernmost line of colcas. This building measures ca. 8.5 m long by 5 m wide (external measurements), with walls ca. 40 cm thick (Plate A5). Some of its walls stand up to 1.5 m high. This rectangular structure is probably prehispanic, although it is difficult to be certain since it has been disturbed by modern land use. Surface Finds. Very light to light surface pottery over the site area. We also noted one basalt hoe fragment, two complete basalt hoes, and one groundstone digging-stick weight. We made a surface collection over an area of ca. 15 × 40 m in the north-central part of the site area. Most of the diagnostic ceramic material is LIP, with a definite trace of Inca-style LH pottery. Subsequent investigations here by UMARP archaeologists indicated that the occupation is exclusively LH (Wanka III) (D’Altroy 1992:191). Discussion: This site apparently represents a substantial LH (Wanka III) residential settlement closely associated with a cluster of Inca-style colcas. The colca were probably managed and provisioned by a residential population put in place at this location after Inca conquest. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class F, + Wanka III Large Village SITE NO. 386 [Jau-?-1(P), Coll. 52-P] Date of Survey: Sept. 30, 1975 Location: Hoja Yauli [445800 E, 8705600 N; 11.7088° S, 75.4974° W] Natural Setting: 3520 masl, in the lower kichwa zone, on the north side of the Mantaro Valley, along the upper northern side of a ridge. The site occupies moderately sloping terrain just below the gently sloping ridge crest, and just above steeply sloping ground to the east and south (Plate A6). Erosion has been severe; soil cover is shallow, with substantial exposure of bedrock. Vegetation consists of sparse grass and scattered bushes. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is marginal pasture. The higher ground on the ridge crest is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields serve as sheep pasture. The nearby valley bottoms are intensively cultivated, some on the basis of irrigation and high-water table agriculture. Archaeological Remains: Light surface pottery over an area of ca. 0.6 ha. There are no visible architectural remains, and we saw no lithic artifacts. We made a single surface collection over the entire site area. Although the sherds are badly weathered and relatively undiagnostic, they appear to be EIP/ MH. Discussion: A small site of questionable date and function. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Hamlet (?) SITE NO. 387 [Jau-LI-7(P), Coll. 60-P; UMARP Site No. J-232] Date of Survey: Oct. 1, 1975 Location: Hoja Yauli [446300 E, 8705000 N; 11.7142° S, 75.4928° W] Natural Setting: 3425 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping terrain near the base of a hill spur, 10–20 m above the level of the nearby valley floor. The site area is moderately to severely eroded, with moderate grass cover. A small permanent stream, the Río Huambo, flows along the valley floor just east of the site. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area serves as pasture for sheep and cattle. The valley floor to the east is intensively cultivated. Archaeological Remains: Generally light and light-to-moderate surface pottery over an area of ca. 3.6 ha. We detected no architectural remains or lithic artifacts. We made a single surface collection over an area ca. 30 × 40 m in the central site area. Although the surface pottery is badly weathered, it all appears to be early LIP (Wanka I). Discussion: Probably a small agricultural settlement at the edge of the valley floor. The low-lying placement of this apparently early LIP site is consistent with the general pattern for early LIP occupation in this region. Classification: LIP: Wanka I Small Village

134

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A7. Site 388. Facing east toward site across Laguna Paca. Arrow indicates approximate site center on hill. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-8) Plate A8. Site 389. Facing north over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-18) SITE NO. 388 [Jau-LI-1(P), Colls. 53-P, 54-P; UMARP Site No. J-233] Date of Survey: Sept. 30, 1975 Location: Hoja Yauli [445700 E, 8704700 N; 11.7169° S, 75.4983° W] Natural Setting: 3460 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain atop a low ridge spur (Cerro Umpan), immediately east of Laguna Paca (Plate A7). There has been slight erosion in the immediate site area; the slopes above the site are severely eroded. Shallow to medium soil cover, with sparse grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Rainfall cultivation of cereals and fava beans. Part of the site area has recently been plowed. Fallow fields used for grazing livestock. There has been substantial disturbance of the site area in modern times through the clearing of stone to create agricultural fields. Archaeological Remains: We saw no definite architectural remains, but several substantial piles of cleared stone rubble may represent the remains of prehispanic structures. We noted several small, crude basalt scrapers and groundstone digging-stick weights. The site area measures ca. 4.2 ha, as defined by the distribution of surface pottery in concentrations ranging from very light to lightto-moderate. Hastorf (1993:229–30) reports a site area of 5.0 ha for both the EIP/ MH and Wanka I components. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 5.0 ha for the Wanka I component (she does not identify an EIP/MH component at this site). We made surface collections from two different locations on the ridge crest where the surface pottery was most highly concentrated—these areas each measured ca. 15 × 15 m in area. The surface pottery is very predominantly LIP, with traces of EIP/MH and Inca-style pottery. UMARP archaeologists subsequently found a more substantial EIP/MH occupation than we originally noted (Hastorf 1993:229). Discussion: UMARP restudy indicates that this is a substantial EIP/MH settlement that continued to be occupied into early LIP (Wanka I), apparently followed by abandonment during late LIP (Wanka II), and a reoccupation during LH times (Wanka III). The proximity of Laguna Paca, a probable source of aquatic resources, is likely to have been significant in this settlement’s economy. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 389 [Jau-LI-3(P), Colls. 55-P, 59-P; UMARP Site No. J-234] Date of Survey: Sept. 30, 1975 Location: Hoja Yauli [446000 E, 8703800 N; 11.7251° S, 75.4956° W] Natural Setting: 3440 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site is situated atop a slight elevation along the crest and upper slopes of a low ridge spur (Cerro Jalmacosma) along the eastern edge of Laguna Paca (Plate A8). To the east and west of the site there is a steep drop down to the valley floor. Slight to moderate erosion, with shallow to medium soil cover, and a sparse cover of grass and low bushes. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. The adjacent lower ground to the east and west is intensively cultivated, with some irrigation agriculture. Fallow fields serve as pasture for livestock. The site area has been substantially impacted by modern rock clearing and plowing. Archaeological Remains: We saw no definite architectural remains, but several large piles of cleared rock rubble may represent the remains of prehispanic structures. We noted several stone hoes and groundstone digging-stick

Plate A9. Site 390. Facing east over Collection 140-P. Arrow points to approximate site center. Site 384 is on the ridge above, as indicated. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-1)

weights. The site is defined by surface pottery that ranges in density from very light to light-to-moderate over an area of ca. 11.2 ha. Hastorf (1993:230) and Borges (1988:70) report an area of 10.4 ha for the Wanka I component. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 10.3 ha. We made two separate surface collections at locations along the ridge crest with the highest sherd densities. Both collection areas measured about 15 × 15 m in area. Both collections are mixed EIP/MH and LIP. Subsequent restudies by Hastorf (1993) and D’Altroy (1992) revealed early LIP (Wanka I) and LH (Wanka III) components. Discussion: Apparently a substantial settlement in both EIP/MH and early LIP (Wanka I) times, with abandonment during late LIP (Wanka II) and a reoccupation during the LH (Wanka III). Since UMARP archaeologists do not report any EIP/MH surface pottery here, it is possible that we may have confused Wanka I and EIP/MH in our original sherd analysis. Thus, the EIP/MH component of this site must be regarded as questionable. An agricultural function seems probable, and the proximity of Laguna Paca suggests the importance of aquatic resources in the settlement’s economy. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Very Large Village LIP: Wanka I Very Large Village LH: Wanka III Very Large Village SITE NO. 390 [Jau-?-2(P), Coll. 140-P; UMARP Site No. J-241] Date of Survey: Nov. 18, 1975 Location: Hoja Yauli [448000 E, 8704000 N; 11.7233° S, 75.4772° W] Natural Setting: 3390 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level ground on the valley floor (Plate A9), about 200 m southeast of the Río Huambo, a sizeable permanent stream. There is little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area, but at the south edge of the site there is a large marshy zone full of grass and reeds.

Appendix A Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is intensively cultivated in tubers, fava beans, and cereals (including maize). Soil cover is deep, and there has been little, if any, erosion. Several outlying houses of the modern village of San Pedro Chunan encroach onto the site area from the north and east. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.9 ha is defined by the distribution of a continuous scatter of very light surface pottery. We also noted two stone hoes. No definite architecture is visible, although the site area as a whole is slightly elevated, to a maximum of ca. 50 cm, above the general level of the surrounding fields—this may reflect the presence of subsurface building foundations, or perhaps an ancient platform constructed to provide a dry living surface in this comparatively marshy area. Substantial rock rubble throughout the site area may represent the remains of prehispanic structures that have been cleared away by modern farmers. We made a small surface collection from the entire site area—there are few good diagnostics, but the material appears to be LIP. Discussion: Although the limits of the site could not be defined with confidence because of encroaching modern settlement, this site appears to represent a small LIP hamlet or camp, perhaps oriented toward marshland resources. Classification: LIP: Hamlet SITE NO. 391 [Jau-EI-26(P), Coll. 141-P; UMARP Site No. J-133] Date of Survey: Nov. 18, 1975 Location: Hoja Yauli [447700 E, 8703700 N; 11.7260° S, 75.4800° W] Natural Setting: 3380 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on a low (natural?) rise in an otherwise nearly level and somewhat marshy area south of the modern village of San Pedro de Chunan and north of the modern village of Pichus (Plate A10). Modern Land Use: Intensive high-water table cultivation of cereals, tubers, and beans. Several fields were being plowed at the time of survey, while other fields had stands of immature crops. Archaeological Remains: Light surface pottery over an area of ca. 0.6 ha. Subsequent UMARP restudies report the same site area (Hastorf 1993:229; Borges 1988:69). There is no definite architecture, although the slight elevation of the site area may represent subsurface construction of some sort. We saw no lithic artifacts. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The pottery is all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) determined that the primary EIP/MH occupation dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Discussion: A small EIP/MH hamlet, probably with an agricultural function, although marshland resources may also have been important. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet SITE NO. 392 [Jau-?-24(P), Coll. 262-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Yauli [450500 E, 8704000 N; 11.7233° S, 75.4543° W] Natural Setting: 3580 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest of a low hill. Erosion has been moderate, and soil cover is shallow to medium, with sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Sheep pasture. The nearby valley floor is intensively cultivated using both rainfall and irrigation techniques. Modern field clearing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery over an area of ca. 1.5 ha. We saw no lithic artifacts. There are no definite architectural remains, but the presence of several piles of rock rubble suggests the former presence of prehispanic structures. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. There are few good diagnostics, but the ceramics appear to be very predominantly EIP/MH, with a possible trace of LIP material. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, probably with an agricultural orientation. The significance of the possible trace of LIP surface pottery is unclear. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: ? SITE NO. 393 [Jau-LI-56(P), Coll. 260-P; UMARP Site No. J-242] Date of Survey: Aug. 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Yauli [450400 E, 8703100 N; 11.7315° S, 75.4552° W] Natural Setting: 3700 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain at the highest point along

135

Plate A10. Site 391. Facing north over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-2)

Plate A11. Sites 394 and 395. Facing west over sites 394 and 395. Arrows indicate approximate site centers. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-20)

the crest and upper slopes of a large ridge. There has been severe erosion, and soil cover is shallow, with sparse grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Sheep pasture. Archaeological Remains: Very light surface pottery over an area ca. 6.9 ha. There are no definite architectural remains, but several piles of cleared stone rubble suggest the former presence of prehispanic structures. We noted several crude basalt scrapers. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. There were few good diagnostics, but the material appears to be all LIP. Discussion: Apparently a substantial LIP agricultural occupation. Classification: LIP: Large Village SITE NO. 394 [Jau-LI-5(P), Coll. 57-P; “Pancan”; UMARP Site No. J-1] Date of Survey: Oct. 1, 1975 Location: Hoja Yauli [446500 E, 8702900 N; 11.7332° S, 75.4910° W] Natural Setting: 3370 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level ground, about 1.5–2.0 m above the general level of the nearby marsh and edge of Laguna Paca (Plate A11). To the east of the site the terrain rises abruptly to the top of a large hill. There has been little or no erosion, and soil cover is deep. The limited natural vegetation consists of some bushy and cactus cover along stone-lined walkways in the central site area. The extensive marsh immediately west of the site has dense reed vegetation, with a large population of waterfowl. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is intensively cultivated, and has been recently plowed. There is no canal irrigation, but the naturally high water table apparently provides adequate moisture for productive agriculture. Modern cultivation and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area is defined by the distribution of lightto-moderate and moderate surface pottery over an area of ca. 1.4 ha. We also noted several small basalt scrapers and knives. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:34) remeasured this site area as 0.7 ha, while D’Altroy (1992:191) reports the site area as 1.8 ha. In her subsequent analysis, Hastorf (1993:71, 230) reports

136

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A2. Site 394 (Pancan), site plan (from LeBlanc 1981:37, Fig. 2.1).

the “residential area” of this site as 1.4 ha, with an estimated population of 60–88 inhabitants for the EIP/MH and 126–168 people for the Wanka I component. We were unable to detect any definite architectural remains, but substantial rock rubble over much of the site suggests the former presence of prehispanic structures. However, a closer examination of the surface remains by UMARP archaeologists a few years later detected the remnants of a small walled compound “which may date to the Late Horizon or the early colonial period” (LeBlanc 1981:36) (Fig. A2). Based on subsequent UMARP excavations, Hastorf (1993:71) estimates a “structural density” of 35 structures per hectare for the EIP/MH component, and 50 structures per hectare for the Wanka I component. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The pottery is very predominantly LIP, with a trace of EIP/MH, and a trace of Inca-style material. The UMARP Investigations at This Site: A few years after our survey, UMARP personnel carefully mapped this site, made nine new surface collections, and excavated three 2 × 2 m stratigraphic test pits: two down to the water table at a depth of 2.8 m below ground level, and the third to a depth of 1.8 m—in all cases, the bottom of the cultural deposits was not encountered. These excavations penetrated “what appeared to be midden-like deposits with quantities of charcoal, burned clay, paleobotanical remains, bone (including Camelidae), as well as artifactual material” (LeBlanc 1981:38). Remains of stone-walled structures were encountered in the lower levels of the two deeper excavations. LeBlanc’s ceramic analysis showed that the lowermost levels contained EIP/MH pottery, the middle levels were early LIP (Wanka I), and the upper levels were Late Horizon (Wanka III), in which local ceramics were intermixed with Inca-style pottery. Discussion: A small agricultural settlement with a long occupational history. The presence of stone-walled architecture in both early and late parts of the sequence suggests permanent residence. The aquatic resources of the nearby lake and marsh were undoubtedly significant in the site’s economy. LeBlanc’s study indicates that this site was first occupied during EIP/MH times, with occupation continuing into the early LIP (Wanka I phase), with an apparent abandonment during later LIP (Wanka II) and a reoccupation during the Late Horizon (Wanka III). We assume that the site functioned similarly in all phases of its occupation. It is notable that UMARP excavations showed that our “trace” of EIP/MH surface pottery actually reflected a substantial subsurface EIP/MH occupation at this deep-soil deposit. The close proximity of Sites 394 and 395 suggests that the two locations may have comprised a single settlement, although Site 395 appears to lack Inca-style surface pottery. The presence of EIP/MH surface pottery suggests an early occupation of the lakeshore/marshland locale. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

SITE NO. 395 [Jau-LI-4(P), Coll. 56-P; UMARP Site No. J-235] Date of Survey: Oct. 1, 1975 Location: Hoja Yauli [446600 E, 8702700 N; 11.7350° S, 75.4901° W] Natural Setting: 3370 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level ground, about 1 m above the general level of the nearby marsh and edge of Laguna Paca (Plate A11). To the east of the site the terrain rises abruptly to the top of a large hill. There has been little or no erosion, and soil cover is deep. The limited natural vegetation consists of some low bushes and cactus along stone-lined walkways in the central site area. The large marsh immediately west of the site has dense reed vegetation, with a large population of waterfowl. Sites 394 and 395 are separated by an expanse of marshy terrain. Modern Land Use: The western half of the site area is intensively cultivated, and has been recently plowed. The eastern half is presently fallow, and used for grazing livestock. There is no canal irrigation, but the naturally high water table apparently provides adequate moisture for productive agriculture. Modern cultivation and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area is defined by the distribution of light-to-moderate and moderate surface pottery over an area of ca. 2.6 ha. We also noted several small basalt scrapers and one groundstone digging-stick weight. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 3.0 ha for the Wanka I component. There is no definite architecture, but substantial rock rubble over much of the site suggests the former presence of prehispanic structures. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 15 × 20 m on the western side of the site where surface pottery is relatively most dense. The pottery is very predominantly LIP, with a possible trace of EIP/MH. Borges’ (1988:70) subsequent reanalysis indicated that this is primarily a Wanka I occupation. Discussion: A small early LIP (Wanka I) agricultural settlement. The aquatic resources of the nearby lake and marsh were probably also significant in the site’s economy. The close proximity of Sites 394 and 395 suggests that the two locations may have comprised a single settlement, although Site 395 appears to lack Inca-style surface pottery. The significance of the trace of EIP/MH surface pottery is uncertain, although the likelihood of a significant EIP/MH occupation here seems probable given the results of UMARP excavations at nearby Site 394. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 396 [Jau-LI-6(P), Coll. 58-P; UMARP Site No. J-240] Date of Survey: Oct. 1, 1975 Location: Hoja Yauli [447400 E, 8702700 N; 11.7350° S, 75.4827° W] Natural Setting: 3530 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain on the top and upper slopes of a prominent hill at the end of a long ridge spur above the edge of the valley floor. The site is about 150 m above the level of the surrounding valley floor. Erosion has been severe, and soil cover is shallow to absent, with sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is used only for sheep pasture. The hillslopes below the site area are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Archaeological Remains: The site area is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery over an area of ca. 2.5 ha. Hastorf (1993:230) and Borges (1988:70) both report the same area for the Wanka I component. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 2.6 ha. There are no definite architectural remains, but the presence of substantial rock rubble in the central site area may represent the remnants of former prehispanic structures. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The pottery is predominantly LIP, with a trace of Inca-style ceramics. Subsequent restudies by Hastorf (1993), Borges (1988), and D’Altroy (1992) revealed that the site was occupied during early LIP (Wanka I) and LH (Wanka III) times. Discussion: A substantial early LIP (Wanka I) settlement, apparently abandoned during the late LIP (Wanka II), and reoccupied during the LH (Wanka III). Classification: LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 397 [Jau-EI-27(P), Coll. 142-P] Date of Survey: Nov. 18, 1975 Location: Hoja Yauli [447800 E, 8701900 N; 11.7423° S, 75.4791° W] Natural Setting: 3380 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level ground on the valley floor (Plate

Appendix A

137

Plate A12. Site 397. Facing west over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Note archaeologist seated at center-right. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-3)

A12), about 100 m east of the Río Huala, a sizable permanent stream. There has been little or no erosion, and soil cover is deep. There is little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Intensive high-water table cultivation of beans and cereals. Some crops were standing about 20 cm high at the time of our survey. Archaeological Remains: The site area is defined by the distribution of very light and light surface pottery over an area of ca. 1.0 ha. There are no definite architectural remains, and the absence of rock rubble suggests that there were never any substantial stone-walled structures at this location. We made a single surface collection over an area of ca. 20 × 20 m in the area of the densest surface pottery. The sample is badly weathered, but appears to be all EIP/MH. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, probably with an agricultural function. The apparent absence of stone-walled structures suggests a seasonal or impermanent occupation. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet SITE NO. 398 [Jau-EI-16(H), Colls. 100-H, 101-H, 102-H, 103-H; UMARP Site No. J-245] Date of Survey: Nov. 24, 1975 Location: Hoja Yauli [449200 E, 8702000 N; 11.7414° S, 75.4662° W] Natural Setting: 3380 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level ground on the valley floor, about 150 m north of the braided course of the Río Puyhuan, a sizable permanent stream. There has been little or no erosion, and soil cover is deep. Grasses, bushes, and eucalyptus trees grow at the edges of cultivated fields. Modern Land Use: Intensive agriculture, both rainfall and irrigation based. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: There are no architectural remains. The site area of ca. 6.3 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in trace to very light concentrations. Hastorf (1993:230) reports an area of 4.7 ha for the Wanka I component, and D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 4.7 ha. We also noted the fragment of a stone hoe and a broken groundstone digging-stick weight. The scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made four collections of badly weathered surface pottery from different parts of the site (Table A3).

(top) Plate A13. Site 399. Facing north at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 27-4) (bottom) Plate A14. Site 399. Central site area. (UMMA Neg. No. 27-2)

Subsequent restudy by D’Altroy (1992:192) revealed a significant Wanka III occupation. Discussion: A mixed occupation, with partly overlapping EIP/MH and LIP/ LH occupations. The absence of Wanka II pottery in the UMARP investigation of this site indicates that the site was abandoned during late LIP times and reoccupied during the LH (Wanka III). Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Wanka I Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village SITE NO. 399 [Jau-LI-54(P), Colls. 254-P, 255-P; UMARP Site No. J-243] Date of Survey: Aug. 9, 1976 Location: Hoja Yauli [451200 E, 8701900 N; 11.7423° S, 75.4479° W] Natural Setting: 3445 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the top and upper slopes of a prominent hill that rises from the northern end of a ridge at the edge of the valley floor (Plate A13). Erosion has been moderate to severe; soil cover is generally shallow, with sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock.

Table A3. JASP surface collections at Site 398. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

100-H 101-H 102-H 103-H

50 m diameter 70 × 40 m, ca. 40 m SE of Coll. 100-H 25 × 25 m, southeast sector 70 × 40 m, SE of Coll. 101-H

very light, in plowed field very light very light very light

all EIP/MH all EIP/MH all LIP mixed EIP/MH, LIP, and Inca-style pottery

138

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table A4. JASP surface collections at Site 399. Coll. No. 254-P 255-P

Area

Chronology

20 × 25 m, in central site area EIP/MH 25 m dia., in SE site area EIP/MH and LIP

Archaeological Remains: Very light surface pottery over an area of ca. 5.6 ha. Hastorf (1993:229) reports a site area of 4.8 ha for both EIP/MH and Wanka I components. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 2.9 ha for the Wanka I component (she does not identify an EIP/MH component at this site). D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 4.8 ha. We also saw a few basalt scrapers. There are no visible architectural remains, although abundant rock rubble piled up by modern farmers in clearing their fields suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures (Plate A14). We made two surface collections (Table A4). Restudy of this site by Hastorf (1993) and D’Altroy (1992) indicates that the occupation is early LIP (Wanka I) and LH (Wanka III). Discussion: This site was occupied over a long period, and may have been larger in EIP/MH times than in the early LIP. Although Hastorf (1993:229–30) reports that the EIP/MH and early LIP occupations cover the same area, we arbitrarily assigned a surface area of 2.4 ha to the LIP occupation, slightly less than half that of the EIP/MH settlement. UMARP analyses indicate that the site was apparently abandoned during the late LIP (Wanka II), and reoccupied during LH (Wanka III) times. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 400 [Jau-?-23(P), Coll. 261-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Yauli [450900 E, 8703800 N; 11.7251° S, 75.4506° W] Natural Setting: 3610 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the broad crest of a ridge spur that projects southwestward from the main ridge to the northeast on the north side of the Mantaro Valley (Plate A15). Erosion has been severe; soil depth is shallow, with sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: The site area is presently used only for sheep pasture, although it appears to have been plowed sometime within the past 10–20 years. There is a small modern building at the southern edge of the site. Archaeological Remains: Very light surface pottery over an area of ca. 1.1 ha. There are no definite architectural remains, and little rock rubble. We also noted two stone hoes and one groundstone digging-stick weight. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. Although there are few diagnostics, the pottery seems to be all LIP. Discussion: A small LIP occupation, probably with an agricultural function. The absence of rock rubble suggests the absence of ancient stone-walled structures, and perhaps a temporary or seasonal occupation. Classification: LIP: Hamlet SITE NO. 401 [Jau-LI-64(P), Unit 112-P; UMARP Site No. J-66] Date of Survey: Aug. 17, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [443000 E, 8713600 N; 11.6364° S, 75.5229° W] Natural Setting: 4110 masl, in the upper puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain on the upper slopes of a prominent hill that projects northeastward into the upper edge of the Quebrada Huambo (Plate A16). To the north, west, and south the terrain is rolling, hilly country, while to the east of the site the land drops away steeply for over 200 m into the upper Quebrada Huambo. Erosion has been moderate to severe; soil cover is generally shallow, with medium grass and bush cover. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. The construction of modern corrals in the site area, and the modern reuse of some older corrals, has disturbed and obscured the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area extends over an area of ca. 2.5 ha, and contains both surface pottery and remains of stone-walled architecture. Structural Remains. We detected the remains of approximately 30 stonewalled circular structures throughout the site area (Plate A16). Occasionally these structures occur in clusters of up to 4 buildings. These measure 3.5–4.0 m in exterior diameter, with walls ca. 40 cm thick, constructed of unworked

stone set in mud mortar, that occasionally stand up to 2 m high (Plates A17, A18). These well-preserved walls lean slightly inward, and have trapezoidal doorways. Although no definite prehispanic corrals could be identified, there are several modern corrals that appear to rest atop foundations of ancient, probably prehispanic, stone-walled corrals. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in trace to very light densities. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. There are few diagnostics, but all the material appears to be LIP. Discussion: We infer that the circular structures were primarily residential in function. This appears to have been a substantial settlement, probably with a herding orientation. This site—together with nearby Sites 402, 403, 404, and 405—forms part of a tight LIP settlement cluster around the slopes of a prominent hill. As a group, this site cluster sits on the topographic divide between rolling puna to the west and north, and narrow, rugged kichwa valleys to the east. Classification: LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 402 [Jau-LI-67(P), Unit 115-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 17, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [442600 E, 8713600 N; 11.6364° S, 75.5266° W] Natural Setting: 4125 masl, in the upper puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated along the crest and upper slopes of a ridge spur. The site is situated on moderately to gently sloping terrain on the ridge crest, with steep slopes on its southern and, particularly, its northern flanks (Plate A19). The site area is divided into two halves by a depression ca. 4 m deep and roughly 10 m wide, which may be partially artificial. Erosion has been moderate to severe; soil cover is generally shallow, with considerable exposure of bedrock. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. Archaeological Remains: The site comprises a cluster of stone-walled, circular structures and surface pottery in trace to very light concentrations, over an area of ca. 1.2 ha. Structural Remains. Although their preservation is generally poor, several structures remain in comparatively good condition. These typically measure 4–5 m in exterior diameter, and some walls are preserved to heights of over 2 m (Plate A20). We estimate that there were originally approximately 25 of these buildings, for which we infer a primarily residential function. Surface Finds. Surface pottery is quite sparse, never exceeding very light density. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. There are few good diagnostics, but the material appears to be predominantly LIP, with a possible trace of EIP/MH. Discussion: A small LIP settlement, probably with a herding function (although stone-walled corrals apparently were absent here). The presence of a large, possibly artificial ditch that divides the site into two sections may indicate some form of social duality. The significance of the possible trace of EIP/MH surface pottery is uncertain. This site—together with nearby Sites 401, 403, 404, and 405—forms part of a tight LIP settlement cluster around the slopes of a prominent hill. As a group, this site cluster sits on the topographic divide between rolling puna to the west and north, and narrow, rugged kichwa valleys to the east. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 403 [Jau-LI-66(P), Unit 114-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 17, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [442500 E, 8713400 N; 11.6382° S, 75.5275° W] Natural Setting: 4050 masl, in the upper puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site is situated on moderately to steeply sloping terrain on the western side of a large hill, and extending northwestward up onto the crest of a small ridge spur (Plate A21). Erosion has been generally severe, and soil cover is shallow, with many bedrock exposures. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. There is a cluster of modern stone-walled corrals in the northwestern sector of the site area. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 2.0 ha contains many circular stone-walled structures and traces of surface pottery. There are several small caves within and around the site. One of these served as a prehispanic tomb, with some remains of human bone and pottery. Structural Remains. We counted 47 definite structures distributed throughout the site, and estimate that there were originally about 90. All are circular in form. These presumably residential structures measure 2.5–5.0 m in exterior diameter (some of the smaller buildings may have functioned for storage), with walls ca.

Appendix A

Plate A15. Site 400. Facing southwest over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 27-18)

139

Plate A19. Site 402. Facing northeast over site. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-24)

Plate A16. Site 401. Overview of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-18) Plate A20. Site 402. Example of well-preserved structure. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-26)

Plate A17. Site 401. Circular structure with preserved doorway and lintel, with Paul Liffman. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-15) Plate A21. Site 403. Facing north over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-23)

Plate A18. Site 401. Detail of stone masonry. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-20)

Plate A22. Site 403. Facing west down over site. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-25)

140

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

40 cm thick, occasionally still standing up to 2 m high. Most of these structures were packed closely together atop irregular, stone-faced terraces in groups of 3–4 buildings (Plate A22). Surface Finds. Traces of surface pottery occur throughout the site area, including the tomb in the cave noted above. We saw no lithic artifacts. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. Although there are few good diagnostics, the material appears to be mixed EIP/MH and LIP. Discussion: This site has a long occupational history, unusual in this immediate area. We presume that it had a herding function, although there are no definite ancient corrals at the site—the modern corrals on the northwestern end of the site may have obliterated them. Together with nearby Sites 401, 402, 404, and 405, Site 403 forms part of a tight LIP settlement cluster around the slopes of a prominent hill. As a group, this site cluster sits on the topographic divide between rolling puna to the west and north, and narrow, rugged kichwa valleys to the east. Site 403 is the largest site in this settlement cluster, and it appears to be the only one with a substantial EIP/MH component. We assume the visible structures are LIP, so it is more difficult to infer the character of the EIP/MH settlement here. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 404 [Jau-LI-66(P), Unit 114-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 17, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [442600 E, 8713200 N; 11.6400° S, 75.5266° W] Natural Setting: 4050 masl, in the upper puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site is situated on moderately to steeply sloping terrain on the western side of a large hill. Erosion has been generally severe, and soil cover is shallow, with many bedrock exposures. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. Archaeological Remains: A cluster of approximately 10 stone-walled circular structures, and traces of surface pottery within an area of ca. 2.4 ha. We made a surface collection over the entire site area, and included it with that of nearby Site 403. As noted for Site 403, this surface collection contained both EIP/MH and LIP pottery. Discussion: This site was originally included as part of nearby Site 403, ca. 80 m to the northwest. Because of the gap between the two occupations, we now prefer to distinguish them as two separate sites, and we arbitrarily assign Site 404 an area of ca. 1.4 ha. Together with nearby Sites 401, 402, 403, and 405, Site 404 forms part of a tight LIP settlement cluster around the slopes of a prominent hill. As a group, this site cluster sits on the topographic divide between rolling puna to the west and north, and narrow, rugged kichwa valleys to the east. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 405 [Jau-LI-68(P), Unit 116-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 17, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [442700 E, 8713100 N; 11.6409° S, 75.5257° W] Natural Setting: 4030 masl, in the upper puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground atop a low hillock near the base of a steep hill, below Sites 404 and 403 to the northwest and Site 406 to the southwest (Plate A23). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow, with some rocky outcrops. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. There are several modern corrals in the area, and these have probably damaged some archaeological features. Archaeological Remains: A small cluster of circular structures and a trace of surface pottery over an area of ca. 0.1 ha. Structural Remains. A cluster of about a dozen circular, stone-walled structures. These buildings measure ca. 2.5–4.0 m in exterior diameter, and are constructed with mud mortar, with some walls that still stand up to 2 m high. There are also a number of vague, old stone-wall foundations on the slopes above the site to the north (not included in the measured site area)—these may be ancient terraces contemporary with the circular structures within the site. Surface Finds. Traces of surface pottery throughout the site area. We saw no lithic artifacts. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. Although there are few good diagnostics, all the material appears to be LIP. Discussion: Together with nearby Sites 401, 402, 403, and 404, Site 405 forms part of a tight LIP settlement cluster around the slopes of a prominent hill.

(top) Plate A23. Sites 405 and 406. Facing south overlooking sites. Arrows indicate approximate site centers. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-30) (bottom) Plate A24. Site 406. Facing east over central site. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-13)

As a group, this site cluster sits on the divide between rolling puna to the west and north, and narrow, rugged kichwa valleys to the east. Classification: LIP: Hamlet SITE NO. 406 [Jau-LI-63(P), Unit 111-P; UMARP Site No. J-70] Date of Survey: Aug. 17, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [442900 E, 8712800 N; 11.6436° S, 75.5238° W] Natural Setting: 3975 masl, in the lower puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated in a topographic saddle on a ridge crest between a steep hillslope to the southwest and more gently sloping terrain to the northeast (Plate A23). Erosion has been severe. Soil depth is shallow, with a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. Archaeological Remains: A tight cluster of circular, stone-walled structures and surface pottery over an area of ca. 1.0 ha. Structural Remains. We estimate about 50 circular, stone-walled structures. These are tightly nucleated within the site area (Plate A24), with no indication of internal corrals. The structures are 2.5–5.0 m in exterior diameter, and some walls survive up to 2 m high. We infer a residential function, although some of the smaller buildings may have served primarily for storage. Many of the structures rest on irregular, stone-faced terraces. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site area in trace to very light densities. We also noted one basalt knife. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. Although there are few diagnostics, the ceramic material is primarily LIP, with a trace of Inca-style pottery.

Appendix A

141

Discussion: A substantial residential occupation, probably with a herding function. This is the only site in this general area with definite Inca-style pottery. We do not know if this settlement was newly established after Inca conquest, or if it was also occupied during the antecedent LIP. Classification: LIP: ? LIP/LH: Small Village SITE NO. 407 [Jau-LI-69(P), Unit 117-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 17, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [442600 E, 8712600 N; 11.6454° S, 75.5266° W] Natural Setting: 3850 m, in the lower puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground at the base of a rocky, steepsided, isolated hill (Plate A25). Erosion has been moderate. Soil cover is shallow, with some rocky outcrops. There is moderate grass cover, with some low bushes. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. Archaeological Remains: The site area measures ca. 0.1 ha. There is a bare trace of surface pottery (we made no surface collection). The site comprises a small cluster of 5 circular, stone-walled structures, averaging 2.5–5 m in exterior diameter. We saw no lithic artifacts. Discussion: A small residential occupation, probably with a herding function, although there are no ancient corrals in the immediate site area. With virtually no surface pottery, the chronological placement is difficult. However, the stonewalled architecture replicates that in better-dated LIP sites in the region, and so we assign an LIP date to this site. Classification: LIP (?): Hamlet SITE NO. 408 [Jau-LI-59(P), Coll. 268-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 22, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [442800 E, 8712200 N; 11.6491° S, 75.5248° W] Natural Setting: 3870 masl, in the lower puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on a shelf of gently sloping terrain that rises slightly above the level of a topographic saddle, lying between two large hills (Plate A26). Moderate to severe erosion, with shallow to medium soil cover, and moderate grass and bush cover. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. There are several modern stone-walled corrals in the area, and their construction has probably disturbed some of the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site comprises a diffuse cluster of circular, stone-walled structures, stone-faced terracing or retaining walls, and surface pottery over an area of ca. 3.2 ha. Structural Remains. Preservation of the circular structures is generally poor. We could distinguish the bases of 5 structures, but there were probably originally at least twice that number. Many of the circular structures rest atop irregular stone-faced terraces (Plate A27). Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in densities ranging from trace to very light. We noted one groundstone digging-stick weight, and one chert scraper. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. Although there are few good diagnostics, all the material appears to be LIP. Discussion: A modest residential settlement, probably with a herding function, although there are no definite remains of ancient corrals within the site or nearby. Classification: LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 409 [Jau-?-27(P), Coll. 269-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 22, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [442900 E, 8711700 N; 11.6536° S, 75.5239° W] Natural Setting: 3850 masl, in the lowermost puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level terrain on a topographic saddle on the lower flanks of an isolated low hill (Plate A28). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil cover is shallow to medium. There is sparse to moderate grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. There are several modern stone-walled corrals, and a small herder’s hut, in the immediate site area, and their construction has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: Surface pottery occurs in trace, very light, and light concentrations over an area of ca. 4.8 ha. There are no definite structural remains although, as noted above, the modern corrals have almost certainly destroyed some prehispanic structures. We noted one chert scraper. We made a single surface collection over the entire site area. The material is primarily late LIP, with a trace of EIP/MH pottery.

Plate A25. Site 407. Facing southwest at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-31)

Plate A26. Site 408. Facing northeast over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-9)

Plate A27. Site 408. Remnants of architecture and terracing. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-8)

Plate A28. Site 409. Facing northeast over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-10)

142

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A29. Site 410. Facing north at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-6) Plate A31. Site 412. Remains of small circular structure, with Ruben García. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-17)

Plate A30. Site 411. Facing north over site. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-19)

Discussion: The probable destruction of archaeological remains through modern corral construction makes it difficult to infer the original character of this site. We believe it represents a substantial herding settlement. The significance of the trace of EIP/MH surface pottery remains uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 410 [Jau-?-26(P), Coll. 267-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 22, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [441800 E, 8712200 N; 11.6490° S, 75.5339° W] Natural Setting: 3840 masl, in the uppermost kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level terrain along the top and sides of a low ridge at the edge of a broad plain (Plate A29). Erosion has been moderate. Soil cover is shallow to medium, with a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. Several modern corrals in the site area have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: There are no definite architectural remains. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site area of 3.1 ha in trace to very light concentrations. We noted no lithic artifacts. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. Although there are few diagnostics, all the material appears to be LIP. Discussion: Destruction caused by modern corral building makes it difficult to infer the original character of this site. It appears to represent a small LIP herding settlement. Classification: LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 411 [Jau-?-29(P), Coll. 272-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 23, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [440500 E, 8711800 N; 11.6526° S, 75.5459° W] Natural Setting: 3830 masl, in the uppermost kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated in a topographic saddle of gently sloping terrain lying

Plate A32. Site 412. Remains of large circular structure, with Ruben García. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-18) between two low hills (Plate A30). To the north and east the land slopes steeply down into the upper reaches of the Quebrada Yanacancha. Erosion has been moderate. Soil cover is shallow to medium, with a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: A combination of herding and rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and barley. There are several modern stone-walled corrals in the site area, and their construction has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: There are no definite architectural remains. We strongly suspect modern corral building has obliterated the remains of several stone-walled residential structures. Traces of surface pottery occur over an area of ca. 2.1 ha. We saw no lithic artifacts. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. Although there are few diagnostics, most of the material appears to be LIP, with a possible trace of EIP/MH pottery. Discussion: Modern destruction by corral building makes it difficult to evaluate the site’s original character. It probably represents a small herding settlement. The significance of the possible trace of EIP/MH surface pottery is uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 412 [Jau-?-35(P), Unit 120-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 23, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [439700 E, 8712100 N; 11.6499° S, 75.5532° W] Natural Setting: 3900 masl, in the lower puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping terrain on the crest and upper slopes of a prominent ridge that lies between two major quebradas. Below the site to the west the terrain slopes away steeply; on all other sides the descent is more moderate. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil cover is shallow, with numerous rocky outcrops. There is a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. Several modern stonewalled corrals have been constructed in the site area, and there is also a small herder’s hut. These modern constructions have almost certainly damaged the archaeological remains.

Appendix A

143

Plate A33. Site 413. Feature 21-P, remains of small circular structure. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-15)

Plate A34. Site 415. Facing southwest at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-13)

Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.4 ha contains several circular, stone-walled structures and traces of surface pottery. Structural Remains. The site is defined primarily by the distribution of stonewalled architecture. Toward the northwestern end of the site there is a cluster of 5 or 6 small circular structures that each measures 1.5–2.0 m in diameter (Plate A31)—these seem too small to be residential buildings, and some may represent tombs (although we saw no bone remnants or associated ceramics). At the southeastern end of the site there are 2 large circular stone-wall foundations measuring ca. 14 m in diameter, and with walls 35–40 cm thick (Plate A32). These could be the remains of ancient corrals. Some of the modern corrals may be built atop ancient corral wall foundations. Surface Finds. Traces of surface pottery occur throughout the site area. We saw no lithic artifacts. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The small collection contains few good diagnostics, but the material appears to be LIP. Discussion: Destruction caused by modern corral building makes it difficult to evaluate this site’s original character. However, it appears to be a small LIP herding settlement. Classification: LIP: Hamlet

Archaeological Remains: Trace and very light concentrations of surface pottery over an area of ca. 3.9 ha. There is no visible architecture, but rock rubble scattered throughout the site area hints at the former presence of a few stone-walled structures. Modern corral building has probably damaged the archaeological remains. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. There are few diagnostics, but the ceramics seem to be LIP. Discussion: A small occupation, of uncertain character and function. The site’s location near the kichwa-puna contact zone might imply a mixed agricultural-pastoral economy. Classification: LIP: Small Village

SITE NO. 413 [Jau-?-39(P), Fea. 21-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 23, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [440300 E, 8711700 N; 11.6535° S, 75.5477° W] Natural Setting: 3760 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper sides of a low knoll on the southeastern flanks of a major hill. Erosion has been moderate. Soil cover is medium, with sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of the stone foundations of a single small, circular structure, measuring ca. 3 m in diameter (Plate A33). There is no prehispanic surface pottery on or around this feature (although there is a thin scatter of modern sherds). Discussion: The absence of prehispanic surface pottery, and the fragmentary nature of the stone structure makes it difficult to assign a function or date to this feature. It was probably a herder’s residence, probably dating to the LIP. Classification: LIP (??): Camp (?) SITE NO. 414 [Jau-?-28(P), Coll. 271-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 23, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [441600 E, 8710800 N; 11.6617° S, 75.5358° W] Natural Setting: 3800 masl, in the uppermost kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground in the topographic saddle between the upper reaches of two major quebradas. Moderate erosion, with medium soil and sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Mixed grazing of livestock and rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Some modern corrals have been constructed in the site area.

SITE NO. 415 [Jau-LI-60(P), Coll. 270-P; UMARP Site No. J-231] Date of Survey: Aug. 23, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [441800 E, 8710500 N; 11.6644° S, 75.5340° W] Natural Setting: 3800 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground on and around a low knoll overlooking the modern village of Pichapukio to the south (Plate A34). Moderate erosion, with shallow to medium soil and a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Mixed grazing of livestock and rainfall-based cultivation of wheat, barley, and potatoes. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: A concentration of stone-walled structures and surface pottery over an area of ca. 2.5 ha. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 2.1 ha. Structural Remains. One foundation of a stone-walled structure, ca. 2 m in diameter, is visible. There are no other definite architectural remains, but there is considerable piled-up rock rubble, cleared for modern agriculture, that may represent the remains of an additional 1–2 prehispanic structures. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in very light and light concentrations. We also noted a number of lithic artifacts: chert scrapers and choppers, and considerable debitage. We made a single collection of surface pottery from the entire site area. The material is predominantly EIP/MH, with a minor LIP component and a trace of Inca-style pottery. D’Altroy’s (1992, 2001:89) subsequent restudy revealed significant late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) components. Discussion: This small EIP/MH site was apparently abandoned during the LIP and reoccupied during LH (Wanka III) times. We have arbitrarily estimated the LH site area as half that of the EIP/MH: 1.3 ha. The site’s proximity to the puna-kichwa juncture may indicate a mixed pastoral-agricultural economy. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

144

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

SITE NO. 416 [Jau-LI-2(H)/Jau-LI-58(P), Unit 54-H, Coll. 264-P; UMARP Site No. J-236] Date of Survey: Sept. 30, 1975; Aug. 16, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [443000 E, 8709200 N; 11.6762° S, 75.5230° W] Natural Setting: 3940 masl, in the lower puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the top and upper slopes of a small, rocky peak that rises from the crest of a broad ridge that separates rolling puna and kichwa terrain to the west from the steep-sided, highly dissected kichwa valleys to the east (Plate A35). The supporting ridge makes a sharp bend at the site and is flanked by steep drop-offs to the west and south. Erosion has been moderate. Soil cover is generally shallow, with some rocky outcrops. There is a fairly dense cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. Stone-walled corrals and other structures as small as 5 m2 (herders’ shelters?) have been built over the site area in recent years, undoubtedly using stone from prehispanic structures (Plate A36). These modern walls are of dry-laid stone, and generally stand 1–2 m high. Archaeological Remains: Despite the destruction caused by modern corral construction, remnants of prehispanic stone-walled buildings and corrals are abundant, although poorly preserved (Plate A37). Rock rubble, probably deriving from destroyed prehispanic buildings, is abundant throughout the site area. One or two peripheral walls enclose the site, and surface pottery is scattered throughout the area. The site area inside the outermost wall is 4.0 ha. Hastorf (1993:230) reports an area of 8.0 ha for the Wanka I component of this site, and Borges (1988:69–70) also reports a site area of 8.0 ha for the EIP/MH and Wanka I components. Structural Remains. A large number (probably 50–100) of circular structures, measuring 3–5 m in exterior diameter and probably residential in function, are recognizable (Plate A38). The walls are well built of unworked cobbles with mud mortar; sometimes large boulders and bedrock outcrops are incorporated into the masonry (Plate A39). Some walls are preserved up to 1.8 m high, and they lean inward. A few trapezoidal doorways, ca. 80 cm wide at the base, have been preserved. The sides of preserved doorways are faced with squared-off stone blocks, and the tops are capped with stone lintels. We detected a single rectangular building, measuring ca. 4.0 by 2.5 m. Stone walls are discernable around most of the site’s perimeter. The steep west and south sides of the site are enclosed by two concentric walls spaced 20–30 m apart; at least one of these walls continues around the site’s northern and southern sides. A few modern corrals and corral remnants within and outside the peripheral walls have noticeably sturdy, well-built foundations—these are probably prehispanic structures that have been rebuilt in modern times. Surface Finds. The site area is unplowed, with substantial vegetation cover. Surface pottery occurs in very light and light concentrations. Traces of surface pottery occur around the site’s outer walls, and a very light sherd scatter continues along the open ridge crest beyond the bordering eastern wall. Two surface collections were made (one in 1975, the other in 1976) over the entire site area. The pottery is primarily LIP, with a minor EIP/MH component. Hastorf (1993:230) and Borges (1988:70) both report that the occupation is early LIP (Wanka I). Borges (1988:56, 69) also reports a significant EH component that we did not originally recognize. Discussion: A substantial early LIP residential settlement, with a clear herding orientation. The presence of EIP/MH surface pottery suggests a long, sustained occupation, probably beginning in EH times. This site is part of an apparent loose cluster of sites where EH occupation definitely, or possibly, occurs (see also Sites 423, 505, 509, 558, 583, 606, 609, 617, 621, 623); in our original survey, we detected EH occupation only at Sites 509 and 623. Classification: EH: ? EIP/MH (?): Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 417 [Jau-EI-3(H)/Jau-EI-63(P), Colls. 50-H, 266-P; “Sujo”; UMARP Site No. J-237] Date of Survey: Oct. 1, 1975; Aug. 16, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [441600 E, 8708800 N; 11.6798° S, 75.5358° W] Natural Setting: 3850 masl, at the puna-kichwa juncture on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain on the top and sides of a small spur in a broad saddle between hills that rise steeply to the north and south of the site from the crest of the supporting ridge (Plate A40). The main

(top) Plate A35. Site 416. Facing southeast over general site area. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-7) (middle) Plate A36. Site 416. Facing northwest over western half of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-4) (bottom) Plate A37. Site 416. Facing south over southern part of site, with Laguna Paca in background. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-9)

Appendix A

145

supporting ridge separates the Paca (on the east) and Yanamarca (on the west) drainages. To the east the land surface descends steeply into the Quebrada Paca. Erosion has been slight, and there is deep soil cover with a moderate grass cover. Modern Land Use: Mixed sheep pasture and rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. The site lies at the edge of Sujo, a dispersed modern hamlet. The hillslopes above the site area are partitioned into large, unterraced fields, and part of the site area was plowed at the time of our survey. Modern stone-walled corrals have been built on and around the site. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined by a scatter of very light to light surface pottery over an area of ca. 1.7 ha. Subsequent UMARP restudy remeasured the site area as 2.5 ha for the EIP/MH component (Borges 1988:69). The corral walls in and around the site are clearly modern, but several seem unusually and unnecessarily massive, and these may be rebuilt ancient corrals. There is very little natural rock in the site area, and it seems likely that stones for the modern corrals were taken from prehispanic structures. Two surface collections were made from the entire site area in both the 1975 and 1976 fieldseasons. All the pottery appears to be EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) subsequently identified both Huacrapukio 1 and 2 phases here. Discussion: Although architectural preservation is very poor, this appears to represent a substantial EIP/MH herding settlement. The site’s situation at the puna-kichwa juncture may indicate a mixed pastoral-agricultural economy. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 418 [Jau-?-25(P), Coll. 265-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 18, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [442800 E, 8708000 N; 11.6870° S, 75.5248° W] Natural Setting: 3680 m, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain along the crest and upper slopes of a prominent ridge along the upper northern side of the Quebrada Paca. Erosion has been moderate to severe, with shallow soil cover and a sparse cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is used only for sheep pasture. The slopes below the site to the west are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. There are a few modern corrals at the upper, northwestern part of the site, and the construction of these features may have destroyed some prehispanic structures. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined primarily by a very light concentration of surface pottery over an area of ca. 1.5 ha. We detected no definite prehispanic architecture. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. There are few diagnostics, but the pottery appears to be all LIP. Discussion: A small LIP settlement, probably with an agricultural function. Classification: LIP: Small Village

(top) Plate A38. Site 416. Facing west at small circular structure at south end of site, with Phil Tugendrajch. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-6) (bottom) Plate A39. Site 416. Circular structure, showing construction detail. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-7)

Plate A40. Site 417. Facing northeast over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-16)

146

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

SITE NO. 419 [Jau-?-1(H), Coll. 47-H] Date of Survey: Sept. 28, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [443300 E, 8707700 N; 11.6898° S, 75.5203° W] Natural Setting: 3625 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground on the rounded top and upper slopes of a small hill that rises from the crest of a ridge spur. Erosion in the immediate site area has been moderate to severe, while the steep slopes below the site are severely eroded. Soil depth is shallow to medium, with considerable natural stone debris on the ground surface. There is a sparse cover of grass and bushes on the uncultivated parts of the site. Modern Land Use: Most of the site area had been recently plowed, but not planted, at the time of our survey. Much of the surrounding area on the ridge spur is marginal pasture for sheep and cattle. Archaeological Remains: A few traces of ancient architecture and sparse surface pottery over an area of ca. 0.2 ha. Structural Remains. On the highest point of the site is a heap of cobbles and boulders, within which is a short, straight section of an old, lightly mud-mortared stone wall. Another wall section, obviously recent, indicates that a crude hut (now collapsed) was subsequently built from the ruins of an older structure. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in trace and very light concentrations throughout the site area. We made a small surface collection of badly weathered sherds from the entire site area. There are few diagnostics, but the material appears to be EIP/MH. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, probably with an agricultural orientation. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet SITE NO. 420 [Jau-EI-2(H), Coll. 48-H; UMARP Site No. J-230] Date of Survey: Sept. 28, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [443000 E, 8707300 N; 11.6934° S, 75.5230° W] Natural Setting: 3535 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on a gently sloping plateau on the side of the Paca Valley, just above a steep, 40-m drop-off into the adjacent quebrada. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. The site area had been recently plowed at the time of our survey. Archaeological Remains: Surface pottery in very light concentrations over an area of ca. 1.1 ha. We saw no traces of architecture. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The sherds are badly weathered, with no good diagnostics, but the material appears to be EIP/MH. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, probably with an agricultural orientation. The apparent absence of stone-walled architecture may indicate seasonal or impermanent residence. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 421 [Jau-?-33(P), Unit 118-P, Coll. 51-H] Date of Survey: Oct. 4, 1975; Aug. 21, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [441500 E, 8708000 N; 11.6870° S, 75.5368° W] Natural Setting: 4030 masl, in the upper puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and sides of a small knoll that rises from the crest of the supporting ridge (Cerro Yanapampa) (Plate A41). Erosion has been severe, and there are many bedrock outcrops. Soil depth is shallow, with a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. There are several modern stone-walled corrals on the slopes below the site. Archaeological Remains: The site comprises an architectural complex and surface pottery over an area of ca. 2.3 ha. Structural Remains. The principal architectural feature is a stone wall standing ca. 1 m high and encircling an area ca. 48 m in diameter (Plate A42) that contains a low central mound, ca. 10 m in diameter. There are two possible smaller ancillary mounds on the northern side of the main mound; there are also two mounds, measuring ca. 2.0 and 2.5 m in diameter, just outside the southwestern corner of the enclosure wall, the larger of which directly abuts the enclosing wall (Fig. A3; Plate A43). Looter’s pits in the central mound have exposed at least two distinct stone-lined circular subterranean chambers: the better-preserved one measures ca. 1.5 m in diameter and at least 1.2 m deep (Plate A44). Surface Finds. There is a very light concentration of surface pottery throughout the site. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. This small collection contains few diagnostics, but the material appears to be LIP.

(top) Plate A41. Site 421. Facing northwest over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-32) (middle) Plate A42. Site 421. Facing east over circular enclosure wall. Note archaeologist seated at center of photo. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-18) (bottom) Plate A43. Site 421. Circular structure at south end of site, with Kurt Anschuetz. (UMMA Neg. No. 28-35) Discussion: This is probably not a residential occupation. Although we saw no bone remnants, we suspect this is a formal LIP tomb complex, probably associated in some way with nearby Site 422, some 150 m to the southeast on the same ridge crest. Such isolated cemeteries are relatively uncommon in our survey area (see also Sites 496, 513, 532, 534, 559, 578, 581, 588, 615). Classification: LIP: Small Isolated Cemetery

Appendix A

147

(above) Plate A45. Site 422. Example of circular structure, with Kurt Anschuetz. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-1) (left) Plate A46. Site 422. Facing east along row of circular structures, with Phil Tugendrajch. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-24)

(top) Figure A3. Site 421, sketch plan of mounds. (bottom) Plate A44. Site 421. Example of stone-lined subterranean chamber in central mound, with Phil Tugendrajch. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-21)

SITE NO. 422 [Jau-?-34(P), Units 119-P, 55-H, Coll. 52-H; UMARP Site No. J-56] Date of Survey: Oct. 4, 1975; Aug. 21, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [441700 E, 8707600 N; 11.6906° S, 75.5349° W] Natural Setting: 4015 masl, in the upper puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and uppermost slopes of a broad ridge crest. The site occupies a topographic saddle between higher elevations to the northwest and south. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow, with many rock outcrops and a sparse cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Sheep pasture. Numerous modern stone-walled corrals have been built within the site area. The construction of these modern corrals has damaged the prehispanic architectural remains. Archaeological Remains: A cluster of stone-walled structures and traces of surface pottery over an area of ca. 5.8 ha. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:438) remeasured this site as “about 2.5 ha” (also Hastorf 1993:71, 230). Structural Remains. The poorly preserved remnants of a considerable number of ancient circular stone-walled structures are visible throughout the site area. Although it is difficult to estimate their number, there were originally roughly 90–110 of these structures (LeBlanc [1981:438] estimated that the number of structures is “perhaps on the order of 50–80”). These measure 2–4 m in diameter, most commonly 2.5–3 m (Plate A45), and occur throughout the site, occasionally in linear clusters (Plate A46); some of the smaller buildings may have had primarily storage functions.

In addition, 2 possible stone-walled prehispanic corrals are visible—one in the central site area and the other just outside the northwestern edge. In her subsequent analysis, Hastorf (1993:71) reports a “structural density” of 50 structures per hectare for the Wanka I component of this site, with an estimated population of 225–300 inhabitants. Surface Finds. We found traces of surface pottery throughout the site area. We saw no lithic artifacts. We made two surface collections from the entire site area, one in 1975 (Coll. 52-H) and the other in 1976 (Unit 119-P). All the material in these small collections appears to be LIP. On the basis of ten new “excavated surface collections” made at this site a few years after our own survey, LeBlanc (1981:439) concluded that this is an early LIP (Wanka I) occupation, “although this is in doubt because of the very small sample [24 diagnostic sherds] of ceramics recovered.” Discussion: Probably a substantial early LIP (Wanka I) settlement with a herding orientation. It may be directly linked to Site 421, an isolated cemetery, on a higher hilltop ca. 150 m to the northwest. LeBlanc (1981:439) suggested that “the very low quantities of cultural material, especially in light of the number of structures present, and the atypical architecture, suggests that this is not a typical residential site.” LeBlanc’s subsequent ceramic analysis indicates an apparent absence of late LIP (Wanka II) occupation at this site. Classification: LIP: Wanka I Large Village

148

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A47. Site 423. Facing southeast over general site area, with Laguna Pacain, middle distance on right. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-3)

SITE NO. 423 [Jau-EI-1(H), Coll. 46-H; UMARP Site No. J-229] Date of Survey: Sept. 28, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [443600 E, 8706600 N; 11.6997° S, 75.5175° W] Natural Setting: 3400 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground atop a series of terraced fields just above the main floor of the Paca Valley (Plate A47). Erosion has been slight. Soil cover is deep. The uncultivated parts of the site area have a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. The site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. The stone-faced terracing in the site area may be primarily modern, but sections could date to prehispanic times. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined primarily by the scatter of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations over an area of ca. 2.1 ha. Borges (1988:69) also reports an area of 2.1 ha. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, although some of the stone-faced terracing could be ancient. We saw no lithic artifacts. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The pottery is very predominantly EIP/MH, with a possible trace of LIP material. Borges (1988:56, 69) also detected a significant EH component. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, almost certainly with an agricultural orientation, apparently with EH antecedents. The significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery is uncertain. This site is part of an apparent loose cluster of sites where EH occupation definitely, or possibly, occurs (see also Sites 416, 505, 509, 558, 583, 606, 609, 617, 621, 623); in our original survey, we detected EH occupation only at Sites 509 and 623. Classification: EH: ? EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: ? SITE NO. 424 [Jau-LI-1(H), Coll. 49-H; UMARP Site No. J-228] Date of Survey: Sept. 30, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [443900 E, 8706200 N; 11.7033° S, 75.5148° W] Natural Setting: 3390 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground at the edge of the valley floor and extending up onto the lowermost slopes of the adjacent higher ground. Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil is generally deep, except in a few areas where bedrock is exposed. The few uncultivated parts of the site have a moderate cover of grass, bushes, and cactus, with scattered eucalyptus trees along field borders. Modern Land Use: The site is at the edge of the modern village of Paca, and is partitioned into small, terraced fields and house lots. Most of the site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Much of the site was plowed, but not planted, at the time of our survey. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.1 ha is defined by a scatter of surface pottery in concentrations that vary from moderate in the central site area to light and very light around its peripheries. Hastorf (1993:230) reports an area of 2.7 ha for both the Wanka I and Wanka II components of this site. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 2.7 ha. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 3.1 ha for the Wanka I component.

We noted an adult human skull lying against a stone wall in a sloping field within the site area—we suspect it may have rolled down to this location from a disturbed tomb slightly higher up on the slope. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is mixed EIP/MH and LIP, with a trace of Inca-style pottery. Subsequent restudies by Hastorf (1993) and D’Altroy (1992) revealed the presence of early LIP (Wanka I), late LIP (Wanka II), and LH (Wanka III) components. Discussion: This site appears to have a long occupation, probably with an agricultural orientation. However, since UMARP archaeologists did not report any EIP/MH ceramics, it is possible that we may have confused EIP/MH and Wanka I pottery in our original analysis. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Small Village LIP: Wanka I and Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 425 [Jau-LI-10(P), Unit 68-P; UMARP Site No. J-317] Date of Survey: Oct. 6, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [444200 E, 8702700 N; 11.7350° S, 75.5121° W] Natural Setting: 3540 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on the side of a large hill overlooking the narrow lakeshore plain of Laguna Paca to the east (Plate A48). Severe erosion, with shallow soil, and a moderate cover of grass, bushes, and cactus. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers in the immediate site area; higher slopes used for sheep pasture. Clearing stone for modern agriculture has probably damaged some archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: A cluster of stone-walled structures and surface pottery over an area of ca. 1.2 ha. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 1.2 ha for the Wanka I component. Structural Remains. Remnants of 10–15 poorly preserved small circular structures are scattered over the site area. These probably represent nearly all the original buildings. These measure 2.5–3.0 m in diameter, and are constructed of small, unworked stone cobbles; these appear to be dry-laid, without mud mortar. The circular structures rest atop irregular stone-faced terraces (Plate A49). Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in trace to very light concentrations throughout the site area. We also noted one fragment of a stone hoe. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. All the material appears to be LIP. Borges (1988:70) subsequently identified this as an early LIP (Wanka I) occupation. Discussion: A small early LIP (Wanka I) settlement, probably with an agricultural orientation. Proximity to Laguna Paca suggests that aquatic resources may have been important in the local economy. Classification: LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 426 [Jau-LI-2(P), Unit 69-P; UMARP Site No. J-53] Date of Survey: Oct. 6, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [443400 E, 8702900 N; 11.7332° S, 75.5194° W] Natural Setting: 3630 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the crest and uppermost slopes of a major hill overlooking the valley floor some 100–120 m below. Erosion has been slight within the immediate site area, and moderate to severe on the steep slopes below the site. Soil cover within the site is shallow to medium. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushes in the uncultivated parts of the site and along piles of rock rubble throughout the site. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Some of the cultivated fields are defined by stone-faced terraces. Modern field clearance and terrace building have almost certainly damaged some archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area is defined by surface pottery in trace to very light concentration and abundant stone rubble over an area of ca. 4.2 ha. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:435) remeasured this site area as 1.4 ha. Hastorf (1993:230) reports a site area of 1.4 ha for the Wanka I component and 1.5 ha for the Wanka II component. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 1.7 ha. Although there are no preserved stone-walled structures, the abundant piles of cleared rock rubble attest to the former presence of a number of prehispanic buildings (Plate A50). We also noted several stone hoes. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. Although this collection contains few good diagnostics, the material appears to be predominantly LIP, with a possible trace of EIP/MH.

Appendix A

149

Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Wanka I and Wanka II (?) Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 427 [Jau-LI-9(P), Unit 67-P; UMARP Site No. J-316] Date of Survey: Oct. 6, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [444200 E, 8702200 N; 11.7395° S, 75.5121° W] Natural Setting: 3630 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on the upper slopes of a high ridge overlooking Laguna Paca and the valley floor to the east (Plates A51, A343). Erosion has been slight, checked by the presence of stone-faced terracing throughout the site area. Soil cover is shallow, with numerous bedrock outcrops. Uncultivated areas have a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers, carried out in narrow fields defined by stone-faced terracing. The modern hamlet of Chucllu lies at the base of the supporting ridge. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined by surface pottery and stonewalled structures over an area of ca. 2.6 ha. Structural Remains. We counted 8–10 circular stone-walled structures scattered throughout the site areas. These measure ca. 2.5–3.0 m in diameter, with walls ca. 40 cm thick, and resting atop narrow, stone-faced terraces. Just below the site (immediately to the east) there is a row of Inca-style storage structures (colcas) built atop a well-made stone-faced terrace (visible in Plate A51); these are described below as a separate site (Site No. 428). Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in very light density throughout the site. We also noted several groundstone grinding tools, and the base of a stone mortar. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. All the material appears to be LIP. Discussion: We found no Inca-style pottery at this site, and so we assume that its occupation is primarily prior to the construction of the Inca-style colcas that lie just below the eastern edge of this site (Site 428). The relationships between Sites 427 and 428 are uncertain; it is possible that Site 427 continued to be occupied during the Late Horizon, despite the apparent absence of Incastyle pottery at both sites. Site 427 appears to have been a small LIP settlement, probably with an agricultural orientation. Classification: LIP: Small Village LH: ?

(top) Plate A48. Site 425. Facing east over site, with Laguna Paca in background. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Note archaeologist at center-right. (UMMA Neg. No. 38-12) (middle) Plate A49. Site 425. Facing north at example of circular structure on stone-faced terrace, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 38-13) (bottom) Plate A50. Site 426. Facing south across top of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 38-14)

On the basis of eight new surface collections (six “excavated” and two “normal”) made at scattered locations along the hill, but concentrated along the eastern edge where the sherd density is highest, LeBlanc (1981:436) subsequently concluded that this occupation was early LIP (Wanka I) and Late Horizon (Wanka III). However, Hastorf (1993:230) reports that both Wanka I and Wanka II pottery are present. Subsequent UMARP investigations apparently did not detect an EIP/MH component. Discussion: A substantial LIP settlement, probably occupied during both early LIP (Wanka I) and (probably) late LIP (Wanka II) times, with some occupation continuing into the LH (Wanka III). UMARP studies suggest a Wanka III population of 15–26 inhabitants. The significance of the possible trace of EIP/MH pottery is uncertain.

SITE NO. 428 [Jau-LH-2(P), Unit 65-P; UMARP Site No. J-11] Date of Survey: Oct. 5, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [444300 E, 8702200 N; 11.7395° S, 75.5111° W] Natural Setting: 3600 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on the northern side of a large ridge, overlooking Laguna Paca to the northeast (Plate A51). The easiest access to the site is from the west; in the other directions the slopes descend steeply to the valley floor. Erosion has been slight, checked by the presence of stone-faced terracing throughout the site area. Soil cover is shallow, with numerous bedrock outcrops. Uncultivated areas have grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers, carried out in narrow fields defined by stone-faced terracing. The modern hamlet of Chucllu lies at the base of the supporting ridge (Plate A52). Archaeological Remains: The site is defined by a scatter of surface pottery and two rows of well-preserved stone-walled buildings (colcas) that rest atop stone-faced terraces constructed parallel to the topographic contours. We estimate the site area as 0.3 ha. Structural Remains. The lower terrace supports 16 circular structures; there are 8 circular structures on the upper terrace (Fig. A4) (Table A5). Preservation is generally very good, as some walls stand over 3.0 m high, with the maximum height being about 3.5 m (Plate A53). The uphill side of all structures has collapsed, which may be from structural weakness stemming from placement of entrances on that side. The masonry consists of uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. The walls were smoothly finished on the interior and exterior. No ground-level entrances were preserved, but some well-preserved buildings contain rectangular openings elevated about 1 m above the ground that measure ca. 40 cm high by 30 cm wide, through which entrance must have been effected (unless there was an opening in the pole-thatch roof). Wall-fall on the uphill side and standing walls on the downhill side suggest that entrances may have been situated uphill.

150

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru All but 4 of the structures were buttressed on the downhill side by semicircular stone ledges, with a mean maximum height of 0.52 m (range = 0.26–0.94 m) and a mean minimum width of 0.63 m (range = 0.3–0.97 m). These ledges were built of the same limestone and mud masonry as the storehouses and were structurally joined to the buildings. Unmortared terrace retaining walls are preserved between nine pairs of colca structures. It is possible that the terrace walls existed between each pair of structures at one time, but deterioration has precluded settling this question without excavation. The terrace walls that remain are about 1.0 m high. A series of stone-and bedrock-faced terraces lie above and below the storehouses. These probably date to the time of use of the storage facility and the nearby habitation site (Site 429), given the structural incorporation of the storehouses and residences into the terrace system. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in very light concentrations throughout the site. We saw no other artifacts. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. All the ceramic material appears to be LIP, with a very few Inca ceramics. UMARP archaeologists made no systematic surface collection here. Discussion: The construction and form of this architectural complex are clearly in the Inca style. The storehouses (colcas) are distinguished from residential structures by their more regular architectural characteristics and linear layout. This site is an Inca state storage facility, one of a series lining the hillslopes of the main Mantaro Valley. There is another Inca colca complex ca. 200 m to the south on the same hillslope (Site 430). The information currently available suggests that the storehouses were constructed under Inca auspices, but were probably managed by local elites on behalf of the state. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class F

(top) Plate A51. Sites 427 and 428. Facing north over Site 427, with Site 428 in background, as indicated. (UMMA Neg. No. 38-4) (middle) Plate A52. Site 428. Colcas and terracing in central site area, overlooking modern hamlet of Chucllu on valley floor. (UMMA Neg. No. 38-8) (bottom) Plate A53. Site 428. Overlooking section of colcas, with Laguna Paca in background. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-37)

SITE NO. 429 [Jau-Col-1(P), Unit 66-P; UMARP Site No. J-55] Date of Survey: Oct. 6, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [444100 E, 8702100 N; 11.7404° S, 75.5130° W] Natural Setting: 3675 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level ground on the broad top of a high hill elevated ca. 300 m above the level of the valley floor (see Plate A59). Erosion has been moderate. Soil cover is shallow to medium, with a moderate grass cover. Modern Land Use: Primarily sheep pasture, although there are a few small fields devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals scattered throughout the general site area. Modern field clearing and corral building have probably significantly disturbed the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: This site comprises a cluster of unusual stone architecture and surface pottery extending over an area of ca. 1.9 ha. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:437) remeasured this site area as 1.1 ha. D’Altroy (1992:191) also reports a site area of 1.1 ha. Structural Remains. There are 6 architectural complexes, 2 of which are rectangular or square, and 2 are circular. (1) A large rectangular building near the east edge of the site. This measures ca. 7.5 × 3.5 m, with massive walls of large limestone blocks set in mud mortar and measuring about 60 cm thick. Some wall sections are preserved to a height of ca. 50 cm (Plate A54). Just outside the structure’s west wall we found one whole ceramic vessel (probably post-hispanic) buried just below the ground surface. (2) A large, poorly preserved stone structure, ca. 15 m north of Structure No. 1, and measuring ca. 15 m in diameter. This is now only a jumble of large unworked limestone blocks, and it is impossible to discern its original form. It may have contained up to three rooms. (3) A large, circular complex at the approximate center of the site, defined by 2–3 massive concentric circular walls that enclose an area ca. 50 m in diameter (Plate A55). These walls measure about 1 m thick, and stand ca. 1.0–1.5 m high. Table A5. Colcas at Site 428. Colcas total circular rectangular

Number

Volume

24 24 0

1286 m3 1286 m3 0

(left) Figure A4. Site 428, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Appendix A

(top) Plate A54. Site 429. Rectangular structure at east end of site, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 38-3) (bottom) Plate A55. Site 429. Large circular complex at center of site. Note archaeologist for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 38-2)

There is a considerable amorphous jumble of rock rubble that may represent the remains of several additional structures within the enclosing concentric walls. (4) A circular building, at the western edge of the site, measuring ca. 9 m in diameter and constructed of large blocks of unworked limestone, apparently without the use of mud mortar. The walls are preserved to a height of ca. 60 cm. No doorway is visible. (5) A poorly preserved square building, measuring ca. 4 m on a side, at the northwest corner of the site. Walls are preserved to a maximum elevation of only ca. 15 cm. Constructed of unworked limestone blocks set in mud mortar. (6) Two poorly preserved circular buildings, each measuring roughly 2.5 m in diameter, in an amorphous jumble of rock rubble that may represent the remains of additional structures. Surface Finds. There is light surface pottery in the central site area, and very light elsewhere. We saw no other artifacts. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The pottery is LIP, with a few Inca-style sherds. On the basis of six additional surface collections made at this site, LeBlanc (1981:438) determined that there are two separate occupations: an early LIP (Wanka I), and a Late Horizon (Wanka III). Discussion: This site is unusual for the type and variety of its architecture. The presence of Inca-style pottery suggests that this architectural complex may have been associated with Inca ritual or administration—perhaps related in some manner to the two nearby colca complexes below the site on the northern side of the hill (Sites 428, 430). LeBlanc’s subsequent ceramic analysis indicates that the site was apparently unoccupied during the later LIP (Wanka II), and was then reoccupied during the Late Horizon with clear Inca associations. Classification: LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village, possibly with administrative functions SITE NO. 430 [Jau-LH-1(P), Unit 64-P; UMARP Site No. J-10] Date of Survey: Oct. 5, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [444300 E, 8701800 N; 11.7431° S, 75.5112° W]

151

Natural Setting: 3520 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on the southeastern flank of a large hill, overlooking the valley floor some 200 m below to the southeast. The site rests just below (east of) the crest of a hill between Laguna Paca and the Yanamarca Valley, ca. 5.4 km north of the Inca Provincial Center at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550). The easiest access to the site is from the west; in the other directions the slope descends steeply to the valley floor. Erosion has been slight in the immediate site area, held in check by stone-faced terracing. Soil cover is shallow to medium, with some bedrock outcrops and a moderate cover of grass and bushes in uncultivated areas. Modern Land Use: Most of the site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers in narrow fields defined by stone-faced terraces. Archaeological Remains: This site comprises a single line of 29 wellpreserved Inca-style colcas and surface pottery over an area of ca. 0.5 ha (Plates A56, A57; Fig. A5). This site was subsequently restudied and mapped by UMARP archaeologists. Structural Remains. The architectural remains are generally well preserved. The maximum height of standing walls is ca. 4.1 m, the highest in the study area. Five entrances are intact, as is a drainage canal in the platform in front of the line of buildings. The masonry of the buildings consists of uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud and pebbles. Walls were smoothly finished interior and exterior. Small, elevated entrances are preserved on the uphill (west) side of 5 structures (Plate A58). They sit about 1.0 m above ground level and are ca. 0.45 m wide and 0.75 m high where sufficiently well preserved to permit measurements. It appears that the uphill openings were the only means of gaining access through the walls; access may also have been provided through the roofs (presumably constructed of pole and thatch). The individual colcas are spaced ca. 90 cm apart and measure ca. 4–5 m in diameter, with walls ca. 40–60 cm thick. The line of colcas is situated atop a terrace, one of a series currently cultivated by local farmers. Because the buildings were incorporated into the terrace support system, it seems likely that the terraces and colcas were built at the same time. A flat, stone-faced platform, ca. 1.5 m wide and 1.0 m high, was built in front (east) of the colcas. It is faced by unmortared fieldstone and is crosscut on top by a single drainage canal. The surface of the platform has been badly enough disturbed that it was not possible to determine if more than one canal had originally been present. Unmortared rock walls, not structurally joined to the storehouses, were also built between several pairs of adjoining colcas; these probably served to buttress the earth in a terrace above the line of colcas (Table A6). Surface Finds. Very light surface pottery throughout the site area. We saw no other artifacts. We made a single surface collection from the entire site. There are few diagnostics, but the material appears to be LIP with a trace of Inca-style pottery. Subsequent UMARP restudy also detected a few scattered Wanka II–III and Incaic sherds, but took no systematic surface collection. Discussion: Sites 430 and 428 comprise a pair of storage sites at the upper border of a Wanka village occupied during the LH and perhaps earlier; Site 428 lies about 200 m north and is at the same contour interval on the eastern face of the hill. The association of Inca storage complexes with Wanka villages is common in the Mantaro Valley, although the storehouses are usually separated from the residential areas by a gap of unoccupied terrain ca. 50–200 m across. In this case, the colcas lie virtually within the residential boundaries of the settlement (Site 429), but further work would be necessary to determine if the storage and habitation areas were used contemporaneously, as seems likely with the present information. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class F SITE NO. 431 [Jau-LI-8(P), Unit 63-P, Colls. 61-P, 62-P, 63-P, 64-P, 65-P, 66-P; “Marca”; UMARP Site No. J-54] Date of Survey: Oct. 5, 1975 Location: Hojas Acolla and Parco [444000 E, 8700800 N; 11.7522° S, 75.5140° W] Natural Setting: 3565 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the gently to moderately sloping flanks and top of a broad hill that immediately overlooks the valley floor at the juncture of the Paca and Yanamarca drainages (Plate A59). The site rests atop a W-shaped plateau that falls off precipitously to the north and south, gently to the west, and moderately steeply to the east. No springs are visible within the site boundaries; the closest perennial water source today is Laguna Paca, about 1.0 km to the north and 200 m below the top of the site. Erosion has been moderate to severe, with several deep tributary quebradas cutting into the hillside throughout the site area;

152

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A5. Site 430, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

(top) Plate A56. Site 430. Facing southeast over site. Arrow indicates approximate center of row of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-36) (middle) Plate A57. Site 430. Section of well-preserved colcas. Note archaeologist at center. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-32) (bottom) Plate A58. Site 430. Example of colca with “window” opening, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-35)

Table A6. Colcas at Site 430. Colcas total circular rectangular

Number

Volume

29 29 0

1760 m3 1760 m3 0

erosion has been particularly severe around the site’s lower peripheries (Plate A60). Off the north edge, erosion has cut quebradas over 100 m deep, and a few of the prehispanic structures are in danger of collapsing over the edge. Shallow to medium soil cover, with a moderate cover of grass, bushes, and cactus in uncultivated parts of the site. Modern Land Use: Most of the site is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Many of the agricultural fields had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Clearing stones from fields by modern farmers has severely damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: Architectural remains and surface pottery over an area that we originally estimated as ca. 35.1 ha (Fig. A6). A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:436) remeasured this site area as 30.8 ha. Costin (1986:26) reports a site area of 33 ha and an estimated population of 3000–5000 inhabitants. Russell (1988:104) and Earle et al. (1987:11) both report a residential area of 33 ha, with an estimated Wanka III population of 3500–5800 inhabitants. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 27.6 ha; in an earlier report (1990:37) he noted an overall site area of 42.6 ha, “of which 27.6 ha retain architectural remains and 15.0 ha of which comprise only a surface scatter of ceramics with occasional rubble piles at the far northwest end.” As seen in Figure A6, the site consists of two large occupational units, of approximately equal size, connected by a narrow band where archaeological surface remains are present but less concentrated. Structural Remains. Modern agricultural practices have damaged prehispanic architecture throughout most of the site through clearing fields of rock rubble and building stone walls around field borders. Most of the plateau on which the site is situated retains evidence of circular structures, either as building walls and foundations or as immense piles of limestone rubble, presumably from destroyed buildings. However, a few remnants of the site’s original stone-walled architecture have survived. Most of these are circular structures, but a few rectangular buildings are also present. The circular buildings generally measure ca. 5–6 m in diameter, with vertical walls up to 1.5 m high, doorways ca. 70 cm wide, and interior wall niches, with walls ca. 40 cm thick constructed of small, unworked stones set in mud mortar (Plate A61). Because of the destruction of the central architectural remains by modern agricultural practices, it is impossible to determine if the site was divided into two major sectors, although the layout of the remaining architecture indicates that some internal divisions were present. The site is terraced throughout, although the terraces in the east sector were far more extensively built up. UMARP archaeologists identified approximately 460 structures, and estimates that originally there were some 1600 structures at the site. They noted that the preserved architecture is concentrated on the east end of the site, while only scattered concentrations of buildings remain standing on the west end. Virtually no buildings are identifiable in the central “isthmus,” although the considerable amount of rubble piled between fields and the concentrated surface ceramics there indicate that this area had also been occupied. For the site as a whole, UMARP archaeologists estimate a density of approximately 50 structures per hectare. The identifiable architecture is organized into compounds throughout the site, as is characteristic of Wanka residences. The densest areas of occupation lie on the

Appendix A

(top) Plate A59. Sites 429 and 431. Facing west over general area of Sites 431 and 429, with Laguna Paca at right-center. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-21) (middle) Plate A60. Site 431. Facing south over east side of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-33) (bottom) Plate A61. Site 431. Concentration of structures in central site area. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-28)

(top right) Figure A6. Site 431, general site plan (from Earle et al. 1980:42, Fig. 11). (bottom right) Figure A7. Site 431, typical patio group (from Russell 1988:90, Fig. 3.18).

153

154

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

eastern side, overlooking the Mantaro Valley. On the east side, the groups were built along low terraces; there are fewer terraces on the west, because the slope is less precipitous. The identifiable compounds contain from 1 to 4 structures, usually set off from the adjoining groups by a terrace, a series of stone walls, or both (Fig. A7). About 90% of the buildings are circular in floor plan. The remaining structures are either rectangular or irregular in plan. Several buildings have multiple rooms, an unusual feature in Wanka architecture, although there were no passageways between neighboring rooms. The masonry in all structures was standard limestone pirka with mud mortar. The quality of execution varied somewhat among the buildings, with the larger and rectangular buildings displaying the finest execution. The circular structures excavated by UMARP archaeologists in 1982 and 1983 had a mean exterior diameter of 5.0 m and a range of 4.2–6.0 m (Earle et al. 1987:58–73). Doors are seldom preserved intact, but may be identified by the large, carefully worked blocks that extended across the wall profile; most face downslope, while a smaller number are oriented toward the interior of patios. Many structures are semi-subterranean, with the upslope walls of the buildings set into the upper bank of the terrace on which the structures rest. The upslope side of the structure thus acts as a retaining wall for the terrace above. The northeastern sector. A sector of large buildings is preserved on the north end of the eastern part of the site. The area is set off by a wall, 27.8 m long and 2.5–3.0 m high, that lies a couple of hundred meters to the southeast (Plate A62). Its effect is to restrict access to the northeast end of the site, where the large buildings are located. Within this group are 15–20 circular buildings and at least 5 rectangular structures. A number of these buildings have Incaic architectural features, such as trapezoidal niches and joined corners. The wall thicknesses exceed those measured across the rest of the site, ranging between 0.6 m and 0.8 m. Diameters of the circular buildings fall between 7.0 and 8.0 m, which is about 2–3 m larger than those measured at other places in the site. The general impression is that this grouping of dispersed, segregated structures comprised an elite residential area, comparable to those found at Hatunmarca (Site 472). Terraces. Most of the site is terraced, particularly on the north and east faces of the east wing of the site (Plate A63). A smaller number of terraces was erected in the western sector. They exhibit a wide range in size—from about 0.5 to 5.0 m in height and from 5 to 30 m in depth. The incorporation of many of the residential structures as part of the terrace support walls indicates that the terraces and buildings were constructed at the same time. The masonry of the terrace support walls is generally unmortared pirka, except where mortared residential building walls provided part of the support. Exterior wall. A stone wall runs along the perimeter of the eastern and northern sides of the site, about 50–75 m below the lowest residential architecture. The wall is about 1 m wide, presenting a vertical face ca. 2 m high to the downhill side. No comparable wall could be detected along the west wing of the site. Similar walls surround most Wanka II (late LIP) sites, but this is the only newly founded Wanka III site at which we have encountered such a feature. Just below this exterior wall is a small concentration of 4 Inca colcas (Site 431-A; UMARP Site J-91). Our original JASP survey did not detect either the perimeter wall or the colcas. Rockshelter tombs. Numerous rockshelters line the hill face along the east side of the site, below the residential architecture. Several of these have been used as prehispanic tombs, but the dates of use could not be ascertained from surface evidence of the disturbed features. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in densities generally ranging from light to light-to-moderate, with some areas of moderate and very light concentrations. The comparative abundance of surface pottery reflects the intensive modern plowing throughout the site area, but also suggests a fairly nucleated and substantial population. We also noted several chert scrapers, and one groundstone digging-stick weight. We made six surface collections, spaced fairly evenly through the site, beginning with Collection 61-P at the northeastern end (Table A7). A few years after our survey, UMARP archaeologists divided the site into three strata for surface collecting; a total of nine collections was taken. These nine collections yielded a total of 3153 diagnostic sherds. Of these, 502 (16.0%) are Inca and 86 (2.7%) are composite Wanka-Inca. The remainder are from either Wanka types or are undiagnostic. On the basis of this material, LeBlanc (1981:437) concluded that this is primarily a Wanka III (Late Horizon) occupation, probably with a minor EIP/MH component. The LH occupation continued into the early Colonial Period (Wanka IV).

Discussion: A major Wanka III settlement, apparently occupied exclusively during the LH, with an unrelated small EIP/MH component. UMARP studies suggest that this site represents primarily a large Wanka III “town,” with an estimated population of 2484– 4140. It continued to be occupied into Wanka IV (Early Colonial Period), probably with a reduced population. The Wanka III site was distinctive in ways that suggest that its residents held a position of considerable importance in the region. First, a very high proportion (up to 40%) of Inca ceramics in some residential compounds indicates a close state affiliation. Among contemporary sites, only Hatunmarca (Site 472) was comparable to Marca in size, architectural elaboration, and prevalence of Inca state ceramics. Chemical analyses found that the Inca pottery at this site is indistinguishable from that at the Inca provincial center, Hátun Xauxa (Site 550), but distinct from that at Hatunmarca (D’Altroy and Bishop 1990). Second, this site was the largest newly settled community in the study region under Inca rule. It was also the closest major Inca site to Hátun Xauxa (Site 550), lying about 5 km north of the state center. These factors together suggest that the Wanka III site was probably the residence of a number of the highest Wanka elites in the region, and that at least a number of its residents maintained close ties with the imperial administration. The small EIP/MH component may represent an outlier of the sizable EIP/ MH settlement a few hundred meters to the northwest (Site No. 432). Classification: EIP/MH: ? LH: Wanka III Local Center

(top) Plate A62. Site 431. Section of large wall in central part of site, with Site 429 in background. Arrow points to archaeologist at base of wall. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-30) (bottom) Plate A63. Site 431. Facing northwest over terrace remnants on north side of hill. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-24)

Appendix A Table A7. JASP surface collections at Site 431. Coll. No.

Area

61-P 62-P 63-P 64-P 65-P 66-P

50 × 80 m, northern end of site 40 × 25 m, north-central site 10 × 15 m, central site 10 × 15 m, central site 15 × 15 m, south-central site 10 × 25 m, southern end of site

155 Table A8. Colcas at Site 431-A.

Sherd Density

Chronology

light LIP, plus trace of Inca-style pottery light-to-moderate mixed LIP and Inca-style pottery, plus trace of EIP/MH moderate mainly LIP, plus light Inca-style and trace of EIP/MH light-to-moderate mainly LIP, plus trace of Inca-style pottery light-to-moderate mixed LIP and Inca-style pottery light-to-moderate mainly LIP, plus trace of EIP/MH

SITE NO. 431-A (UMARP Site No. J-91) Date of Survey: Aug. 23, 1982 Location: Hoja Parco [446000 E, 8700900 N; 11.7513° S, 75.4956° W] Natural Setting: 3550 masl, in the lower kichwa zone, on the east slope of the hill on which the Wanka III town of Marca (Site 431) is located, about 5.2 km north of the main Inca center at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550). Erosion has been checked by the presence of low terrace walls. Modern Land Use: The site is situated on a set of agricultural terraces on which maize, quinoa, barley, and potatoes are grown using rainfall techniques. Archaeological Remains: This site consists of a single line of 4 rectangular stone buildings that parallels the topographic contours. Because there is no concentrated rock rubble, it appears highly probable that these are the only ancient structures that ever existed at the site. Surface pottery is present in trace and very light concentrations. Structural Remains. All 4 structures are clearly visible on the ground surface. All 4 have walls preserved up to at least 2.3 m. The building masonry is limestone pirka set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. The limestone pieces are dressed, and the interior and exterior surfaces of the walls are carefully faced, but no effort was made to course the rock. Large squared pieces were used to build the columnar corners often characteristic of the rectangular storehouses. No entrances are preserved, but, because of the excellent preservation of the downslope (east) walls, it seems safe to assume that any entrances through the walls were situated on the uphill sides (which are much less well preserved). The line of storehouses lies on one of a series of terraces on the slopes below Marca (Site 431). It seems likely that these terraces were used for agriculture at the same time that the site was occupied, because the line of storehouses rests upon a terrace and functioned to help support the terrace immediately above. In addition, a retaining wall was erected between the 2 westernmost storehouses, apparently to help support the terrace that lies above the line of colcas (Table A8). Surface Finds. A surface collection was taken from the fields to either side of the storehouses. The small collection contained both late Wanka forms and some Inca-style sherds. Discussion: This is the smallest set of structures interpreted as Inca state storehouses (colcas) in the survey area. This site lies just below Marca (Site 431), a large Wanka III settlement. Here, as at most other locations where the two types of sites are juxtaposed, the Wanka architecture and the Inca storehouses are separated by a gap of about 75 m of clear land. In this case, a wall defining the perimeter of Site 431 lies between the storehouses and the residential architecture, emphasizing the separation. Neither the 1975 JASP survey nor the 1977–79 UMARP fieldwork recognized this storage facility, most likely because it was so small and was so close to a large residential community. Subsequent UMARP restudy detected the site as separate from Site 431. The possibility remains that the function of these structures was for something other than storage, such as guarding, or marking access to the Wanka III settlement from this eastern side. However, the architecture, layout, separation from the Wanka residential architecture, and location are all characteristic of Inca storage sites in the region. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class F SITE NO. 432 [Jau-EI-9(P), Coll. 73-P; UMARP Site No. J-86/J-207] Date of Survey: Oct. 11, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [443300 E, 8701200 N; 11.7485° S, 75.5204° W] Natural Setting: 3610 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated along the nearly level crest of a broad ridge that

Colcas total circular rectangular

Number Volume 4 0 4

183 m3 0 183 m3

rises about 100 m above the general level of the surrounding valley floor. The surrounding ridge slopes descend gently to the west and north, and quite steeply to the east and south. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Some fields were being plowed at the time of our survey. Fallow fields are used for sheep pasture. Modern field clearance and wall building have undoubtedly damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined primarily on the basis of the distribution of surface pottery in concentrations that vary from light throughout most of the site to light-to-moderate in the central area. We also noted several stone hoes. The site area measures ca. 10.5 ha. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 6.0 ha for the Wanka I component (Hastorf 1993:230), and 10.5 ha for the EIP and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69–70). There are no definite architectural remains, although the presence of several amorphous piles of rock rubble suggests the former presence of prehispanic structures. There is a curious mound of earth and rock rubble at the southern end of the site that may represent the remains of a prehispanic structure: this mound measures about 4 m long by 1.5 m wide, and rises ca. 25 cm high, with surface pottery in light-to-moderate concentration. We made a single surface collection over an area ca. 20 × 20 m in the central part of the site. This material is predominantly EIP/MH, with traces of LIP and Inca-style pottery. Borges (1988:69–70) found that the primary occupation is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase), and she also identified a significant early LIP (Wanka I) component. Hastorf (1993:230) and D’Altroy (1992:191) report significant early LIP (Wanka I) and LH (Wanka III) occupations here, one that we did not originally detect. Discussion: The dominant occupation appears to be EIP/MH, and this site seems to be one of the largest EIP/MH settlements in the local region. Occupation apparently continued into the early LIP (Wanka I), with abandonment during the late LIP (Wanka II), and a reoccupation during the LH (Wanka III). The proximity of a large LIP/LH site (Site 431) a few hundred meters to the southeast may account for the presence of Inca-style surface pottery here. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Wanka I Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village SITE NO. 433 [Jau-EI-7(P), Coll. 74-P; UMARP Site No. J-205] Date of Survey: Oct. 11, 1975 Location: Hojas Acolla and Parco [442400 E, 8701000 N; 11.7503° S, 75.5286° W] Natural Setting: 3490 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the crest of a low ridge that rises less than 25 m above the general level of the surrounding valley floor (Plate A64). Erosion has been slight to moderate, with medium to deep soil cover. The entire site area is intensively cultivated, and lacking in natural vegetation. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. The entire site area had been recently plowed at the time of our survey. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined by the distribution of light surface pottery over an area of ca. 1.4 ha. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 1.0 ha (Hastorf 1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:191), and 1.4 ha for the EIP/MH component (Borges 1988:69). There are no structural remains, and very little rock rubble. We noted no lithic artifacts.

156

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is predominantly EIP/MH, with a very minor LIP component. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. D’Altroy’s subsequent restudy revealed an LH (Wanka III) component, which we did not originally detect. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, which may be an outlier of the much larger EIP/MH site ca. 150 m to the west (Site 435). D’Altroy’s restudy indicates that this locality was reoccupied during LH (Wanka III) times. The dearth of rock rubble in the site area may indicate the absence of stone-walled structures, and perhaps some sort of impermanent occupation. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 434 [Jau-EI-8(P), Coll. 75-P; UMARP Site No. J-206] Date of Survey: Oct. 11, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [442400 E, 8701300 N; 11.7476° S, 75.5286° W] Natural Setting: 3490 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level terrain along the crest of a low ridge that rises a few meters above the general level of the adjacent valley floor (Plate A65). Erosion has been slight in the immediate site area. Soil cover is medium to deep. The entire site area is intensively cultivated, and there is no natural vegetation. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. The site area had been recently plowed at the time of our survey. Fallow fields in the area are used for livestock grazing. Archaeological Remains: There are no definite architectural remains. Rock rubble concentrations in some places may indicate the former presence of prehispanic structures. The site is defined by the distribution of light surface pottery over an area of ca. 1.0 ha. Subsequent UMARP restudies also report a site area of 1.0 ha (Hastorf 1993:229–30; Borges 1988:69–70). We noted no lithic artifacts. We made a single surface collection from an area of ca. 20 × 15 m in the central part of the site. We originally identified this material as all EIP/MH; Borges (1988:69) subsequently found that the primary EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Hastorf (1993:230), D’Altroy (2001:89), and Borges (1988:70) report a significant LIP (Wanka I and II) occupation here, one that we did not originally detect. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, perhaps an outlier of the much larger EIP/MH site (No. 435) ca. 150 m to the west. Occupation apparently continues into the subsequent LIP (Wanka I and II). The presence of some rock rubble suggests that, unlike nearby Site 433, there may formerly have been stone-walled buildings here. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet LIP: Wanka I Hamlet Wanka II Hamlet SITE NO. 435 [Jau-EI-6(P), Colls. 72-P, 76-P, 77-P; UMARP Site No. J-130] Date of Survey: Oct. 11, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [442100 E, 8701400 N; 11.7467° S, 75.5314° W] Natural Setting: 3480 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the broad crest of a low ridge that rises a few meters above the general level of the surrounding valley floor (Plate A66). Erosion has been slight to moderate. Soil depth is medium to deep. The entire site area is intensively cultivated, without natural vegetation. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Fallow fields serve as livestock pasture. Modern field clearing and plowing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined on the basis of surface pottery in variable light and light-to-moderate concentrations over an area of ca. 10.3 ha. Subsequent UMARP restudies report site areas of 10.0 ha (Hastorf 1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:191) and 10.3 ha (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite architectural remains. Moderate quantities of rock rubble throughout the site area may represent the remnants of prehispanic buildings, now plowed flat. We made three surface collections at approximately equal intervals along the north-south axis of the site (Table A9). Borges (1988:69) also reports EIP/MH occupation here. According to D’Altroy (1992:191), there also is a significant LH (Wanka III) occupation at this site, one that we did not detect.

Plate A64. Site 433. Facing east over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-4)

Plate A65. Site 434. Facing south over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-5)

Plate A66. Site 435. Facing south over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Note two archaeologists standing in different parts of the site. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-1)

Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation. This site, together with Site 432, ca. 1 km to the east, are the two major EIP/MH settlements in the local region. We were originally uncertain about the traces of LIP pottery in our surface collections, but D’Altroy’s restudy indicates a substantial LH settlement. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village SITE NO. 436 [Jau-EI-7(H), Coll. 55-H; UMARP Site No. J-208] Date of Survey: Oct. 7, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [441900 E, 8702800 N; 11.7340° S, 75.5332° W] Natural Setting: 3470 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level ground on the valley floor. Erosion has been minimal. Soil depth is medium to deep. The entire site area is intensively cultivated, without any natural vegetation.

Appendix A

157

Table A9. JASP surface collections at Site 435. Coll. No. 72-P 76-P 77-P

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

20 × 25 m, northern sector light-to-moderate mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP 15 × 15 m, central sector light-to-moderate mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP 15 × 15 m, southern sector light-to-moderate sherd density and heavy rock rubble mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP

Modern Land Use: The site is in an agricultural field at the edge of the modern town of Acolla; modern houses encroach onto the site area from both the east and the west. The immediate site area is devoted to intensive rainfallbased cultivation of cereals and tubers, and had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Archaeological Remains: There are no definite architectural remains, although we noted two vaguely mounded areas close together near the center of the site’s area in an area of substantial rock rubble—each of these measures about 4 m long and 1 m wide. The highest concentrations of surface pottery occur on and around these mounds, and it is likely they represent prehispanic structures, now largely plowed down. The site area of 2.0 ha is defined primarily on the basis of surface pottery that occurs in very light to light concentrations, with slightly heavier surface pottery around the two vague mounds. Hastorf (1993:229) reports a site area of 0.8 ha. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 0.8 ha. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. This material is very predominantly EIP/MH, with a trace of LIP ceramics. D’Altroy’s subsequent restudy revealed an LH (Wanka III) component, which we did not originally detect. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, possibly with surviving architecture a little below the present ground surface. Because modern occupation encroaches onto the site area from two directions, it is difficult to be confident of the site’s original surface area—for example, Sites 436 and 437 (ca. 200 m to the northeast, on the other side of modern Acolla) may originally have comprised a single settlement. D’Altroy’s restudy indicates that this locality was reoccupied during the LH (Wanka III). Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 437 [Jau-EI-4(H), Coll. 53-H; UMARP Site No. J-140] Date of Survey: Oct. 5, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [442100 E, 8703100 N; 11.7313° S, 75. 5314° W] Natural Setting: 3520 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground on the side of a broad, low ridge that rises from the edge of the valley floor just west of the site. The site begins at the edge of the valley floor, and extends up to where the slope levels out to a nearly flat crest. Erosion has been slight to moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium, with some bedrock outcrops. The soil is very stony. There is a moderate cover of grass, cactus, and bushes in uncultivated parts of the site. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals in fields 2–15 m wide defined by natural and stone-faced terraces. Fallow fields are devoted to livestock pasture. Archaeological Remains: Aside from the stone-faced terraces, there are no definite architectural remains. The age of the terracing is uncertain; if they are modern, their construction may have damaged the archaeological remains. The site area of 5.8 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in light and very light concentrations. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 6.3 ha (Hastorf (1993:229; Borges 1988:69). D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 1.1 ha for the Wanka III component. We saw no lithic artifacts, but we did detect a possible human bone fragment in a plowed field at the southeast end of the site. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:59) found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. In his subsequent restudy, D’Altroy (1992:191) defined a small LH (Wanka III) occupation, which we did not detect. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation. D’Altroy’s restudy indicates that this locality was reoccupied by a small settlement in LH (Wanka III) times. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LH: Wanka III Hamlet

Plate A67. Site 438. Facing southeast over site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of the site. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-26)

SITE NO. 438 [Jau-EI-5(H), Coll. 54-H; UMARP Site No. J-135] Date of Survey: Oct. 5, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [442000 E, 8704200 N; 11.7214° S, 75.5323° W] Natural Setting: 3725 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the top and uppermost slopes of a ridge spur that forms an isolated hill rising from the crest of a broad ridge (Plate A67). The site lies near the southeastern end of the supporting ridge, overlooking the valley floor some 150–200 m below to the west, south, and east. Erosion has been slight within the site area. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushes in uncultivated parts of the site. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers, plus some livestock pasturing. Within the general site area there are some stone-faced agricultural terraces, of uncertain age, and some modern stone-walled corrals. Modern field clearance and corral building have probably damaged some archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 1.7 ha contains 1 probable prehispanic structure and a scatter of surface pottery. Subsequent UMARP restudies report site areas of 0.9 ha (Hastorf 1993:229) and 1.7 ha (Borges 1988:69). Structural Remains. The highest point of the site is capped by a circular platform measuring ca. 8 m in diameter and 1 m high. The structure is enclosed by a poorly preserved retaining wall built of rough cobbles. Two large depressions in the mound’s surface may represent ancient stone-lined pits or chambers, now largely filled in. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in trace and very light concentrations throughout the site area. We noted no lithic artifacts. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. This material is all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) identified EIP/MH material at this site dating to both Huacrapukio 1 and Huacrapukio 2 phases. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, apparently occupied throughout the EIP and into the MH, possibly with partially intact architecture that may include two stone-lined burial chambers. The hilltop location may indicate some sort of ritual function. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 439 [Jau-EI-8(H), Coll. 56-H] Date of Survey: Oct. 7, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [441200 E, 8704000 N; 11.7232° S, 75.5396° W] Natural Setting: 3510 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground in the highly dissected

158

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru not be determined, the site may be significantly larger than our estimate. Site 440 should probably be considered part of a single large EIP/MH local community that also encompasses nearby Sites 441 and 442. The significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery is uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: ?

Plate A68. Site 439. Facing northeast over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-32)

piedmont that rises from the valley floor east of the modern town of Acolla (Plate A68). Erosion in the general area has been severe, although only slight to moderate in the immediate site area, where soil depth is deep. Uncultivated parts of the site area have moderate grass cover, with a few stands of eucalyptus trees. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Much of the site area had been recently plowed at the time of our survey. Archaeological Remains: There are no architectural remains and very little rock rubble. The site area of 0.1 ha is defined by a very light scatter of surface pottery. We saw no lithic artifacts. We made a single small collection from the entire site. The badly weathered material contains few diagnostics, but appears to be EIP/MH. Discussion: A very small EIP/MH occupation, perhaps temporary or seasonal in character. Classification: EIP/MH: Camp SITE NO. 440 [Jau-EI-10(H), Colls. 60-H, 61-H; UMARP Site No. J-209] Date of Survey: Oct. 11, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [440300 E, 8704400 N; 11.7195° S, 75.5478° W] Natural Setting: 3470 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the nearly flat valley floor near the northeast edge of the Yanamarca Valley. Soil is deep and un-eroded. Grass and weedy vegetation, and some eucalyptus trees, grow along field borders. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based and irrigation-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. A small irrigation canal cuts across the lower (western) edge of the site, and fields below it can be irrigated. The modern town of Acolla encroaches onto the site from the west. Archaeological Remains: The site comprises a scatter of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations over an area of ca. 5.3 ha; sherd concentrations are moderate in those areas where trenching for modern construction has disturbed the ground surface. Modern occupation makes it impossible to determine the western limits of the site. Borges (1988:69) also reports a site area of 5.3 ha. There are no visible architectural remains. We noted fragments of human bone in one of the construction trenches. The wall profiles of the recently dug trenches above the canal indicate a deep archaeological deposit at this location. We made two large surface collections, one on either side of the irrigation canal, in the areas of relatively high sherd density (Table A10). Borges’ (1988:69) subsequent restudy indicated that the primary occupation here is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, with clear indications of significant depth of the archaeological deposit. Because its western limits could

SITE NO. 441 [Jau-LI-3(H), Coll. 59-H; UMARP Site No. J-210] Date of Survey: Oct. 8, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [440700 E, 8704600 N; 11.7177° S, 75.5442° W] Natural Setting: 3520 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground atop an alluvial fan, about 40 m above the general level of the valley floor to the west. The supporting alluvial fan is at the mouth of a small quebrada and is now dissected by several deep gullies, the largest of which defines the southeastern border of the site. Soil is deep and only slightly eroded within the immediate site area. The site area is entirely cultivated, and lacks natural vegetation. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. The site area has been terraced into two large fields that were fallow at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and terrace building have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site comprises a sherd scatter of very light to light and light-to-moderate density over an area of ca. 3.5 ha. Hastorf (1993:229–30) reports a site area of 2.0 ha for the EIP/MH component, and 3.5 ha for the Wanka I component. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 3.5 ha for the Wanka I component. There are no architectural remains. We made a single surface collection from the area of highest sherd density in the central site area. The material is nearly all EIP/MH (including both Usupukio and Huacrapukio phase material), with a trace of LIP ceramics. Hastorf (1993:230) reports a significant early LIP (Wanka I) occupation, one that we did not originally detect. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation. The presence of both Usupukio phase and Huacrapukio phase ceramics suggests occupation over a long time span. Site 441 might be considered part of a single large EIP/MH local community composed of Sites 440, 441, and 442. Occupation apparently continues into the early LIP (Wanka I). Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 442 [Jau-EI-9(H), Unit 59-H, Colls. 57-H, 58-H; UMARP Site No. J-136] Date of Survey: Oct. 8, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [440800 E, 8705000 N; 11.7141° S, 75.5432° W] Natural Setting: 3575 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground overlooking the main Yanamarca Valley to the west. At the base of the site a broad alluvial fan from an adjacent quebrada descends gradually to the valley floor ca. 75 m below. Behind the site to the east the hillside rises steeply another 200 m to the main ridge crest. Erosion has been moderate to severe outside the terraced areas. Soil depth is shallow to medium, and bedrock outcrops are common. The cultivated terraces are separated by densely vegetated strips of grass and low shrubs; the hillslopes above the site are grassland. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Cultivation is confined mainly to long, narrow fields defined by stone-faced terraces. Some of these fields had been recently plowed, but still unplanted, at the time of our survey. The terrace walls are crudely constructed of dry-laid stone, and their age is indeterminate. If the terrace walls are modern, their construction has probably damaged the archaeological remains. The uncultivated higher hillslopes function as sheep pasture. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined principally by surface pottery in very light to light concentrations over an area of ca. 4.3 ha. Subsequent UMARP

Table A10. JASP surface collections at Site 440. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

60-H 61-H

100 m dia., above canal in area of recent trenching 25 × 20 m, below canal

variable light

mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP

Appendix A restudies report a site area of 2.4 ha for the EIP/MH component, and 4.3 ha for the Wanka I component (Hastorf 1993:229–30), and an area of 4.3 ha for the EIP/MH and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69–70). There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, although there is considerable rock rubble throughout the site area that may derive from ancient structures destroyed in the course of modern field clearing and terrace building. We made two surface collections (Table A11). Subsequent investigation by UMARP archaeologists revealed a much more substantial early LIP (Wanka I) occupation than we had originally detected (Hastorf 1993:230). Borges (1988:69) found that the primary EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase, and she also reports (1988:39) the presence of “a single fragment of a possible [MH] Wari imitation” sherd. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, probably originally with stone-walled structures that have been destroyed by modern terrace building. Site 442 might be considered as part of a single large EIP/MH local community comprised by Sites 440, 441, and 442. The presence of a single possible MH Wari imitation sherd is interesting, one of the very few such sherds ever found in the Wanka Region survey area (see also Sites 451, 464, 583, 589, 624, 627). UMARP restudy indicates that occupation continued into the early LIP (Wanka I). Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 443 [Jau-?-3(H), Unit 56-H; UMARP Site No. J-52] Date of Survey: Oct. 5, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [441600 E, 8705200 N; 11.7123° S, 75.5359° W] Natural Setting: 3800 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground along the narrow crest and upper slopes of a major ridge along the eastern flank of the Yanamarca Valley. The sides of the supporting ridge descend steeply to the east and west, and more gradually to the south. To the north of the site the supporting ridge dips ca. 30 m onto a saddle, and then ascends gradually northward. Erosion has been moderate to severe; soil depth is shallow to medium, with numerous small pebbles on the ground surface. The uncultivated parts of the site are sparsely covered by grass and scattered high bushes. Modern Land Use: Mixed sheep pasture and rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. The upper ridge slopes have been leveled into agricultural terraces with stone-faced retaining walls; parts of the ridge crest were plowed at the time of our survey. There are unterraced agricultural fields on the lower slopes well below the site area. Modern stone-walled corrals are scattered for ca. 1 km along the ridge crest to the south of the site. Modern terracing and corral building have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined primarily by surface pottery and 2 possible prehispanic structures over an area of ca. 1.9 ha. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:435) remeasured this site area as 0.9 ha. Structural Remains. Two bunker-like structures of uncertain age are situated near the ridge crest in the central part of the site. Both appear to have prehispanic foundations that have been substantially modified in modern times to create shelters for herders and/or cultivators. They have well-built, dry-laid stone walls and are partially or fully roofed with stone slabs and earth. Both structures are long and narrow, the larger building measuring ca. 8.0 × 1.5–2.0 m. The long wall of the small structure contains a doorway with tiny window holes on either side. Earth was recently piled onto one of the roofs, and some parts of the buildings have been built or repaired in recent years. Surface Finds. Surface pottery generally occurs in very light concentration, except for one patch of light density just north of the highest point on the supporting ridge crest. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. All the material appears to be LIP. In her subsequent restudy based on five new surface collections (three “excavated” and two “normal”), LeBlanc (1981:435) determined that this site dates to Wanka I, possibly intermixed with Colonial and Modern ceramics.

159

Discussion: A small early LIP (Wanka I) occupation, probably with a herding orientation. The location just below the puna-kichwa juncture suggests that this may have been a place where a mixed-economy community maintained its camelid flocks. Although none of the modern corrals in the general area have definite prehispanic foundations, it is probable that some corrals existed here in prehispanic times. Classification: LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 444 [Jau-EI-6(H), Unit 58-H; UMARP Site J-211] Date of Survey: Oct. 6, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [440200 E, 8705500 N; 11.7096° S, 75.5487° W] Natural Setting: 3530 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping terrain at the base of a large ridge at the eastern edge of the valley floor (Plate A69). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium, with many boulders and bedrock outcrops. The natural vegetation is predominantly grass, but also includes thorny shrubs and high cacti. Modern Land Use: The entire site area is terraced for rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Most terraces are supported by crudely constructed dry-laid stone retaining walls, of indeterminate age. A few modern corrals occupy a small plateau just above (to the east) the site. The adjacent valley floor to the west is devoted to irrigated agriculture. Some fields were plowed, but not planted, at the time of our survey. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined primarily by very light to light concentrations of surface pottery over an area of ca. 10.1 ha. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 10.5 ha for the EIP/MH component and 10.1 ha for the Wanka I component (Hastorf 1993:229), and 10.1 ha for the EIP/ MH and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69–70). There are no definite architectural remains, although the age of the stonefaced terracing is uncertain. Modern terrace construction may have damaged some archaeological remains. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. We judged the material to be all EIP/MH, with a possible trace of LIP surface pottery. Hastorf (1993:230) reports a significant early LIP (Wanka I) occupation here, one that we originally did not detect. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, apparently continuing into the early LIP (Wanka I). Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Wanka I Large Village SITE NO. 445-A [Jau-EI-11(H), Coll. 62-H; UMARP Site J-318] Date of Survey: Oct. 11 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [439800 E, 8706300 N; 11.7024° S, 75.5524° W] Natural Setting: 3535 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground on the lower flanks of a major ridge on the northern side of the Yanamarca Valley, ca. 30 m above the general level of the valley floor. East of the site there is a gently sloping descent to the valley floor, while above the site the terrain ascends steeply for some 300 m to the main ridge crest. Erosion has been slight to moderate, and soil depth is shallow to medium, with grass and bushes at the borders of cultivated fields. Modern Land Use: The site is terraced for rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Most terraces are supported by retaining walls of uncertain age crudely constructed of dry-laid stone. There is considerable stone rubble piled up in the course of modern field clearance throughout the site. Modern terrace building and field clearance have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in trace and very light concentrations over an area of ca. 1.4 ha. Borges (1988:69) also reports a site area of 1.4 ha.

Table A11. JASP surface collections at Site 442. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

57-H 58-H

ca. 50 m dia., southeastern sector ca. 50 m dia., northwestern sector

light light

mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP

160

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A69. Site 444. Facing north over site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-31)

Plate A71. Site 446. Facing south over site area. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 30-36) Table A12. JASP surface collections at Site 446.

Plate A70. Site 445-B. Site area. Arrow indicates approximate site center, and bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-35)

We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The material appears to be all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) subsequently found that the dominant occupation is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, perhaps an outlier of the much larger EIP/MH settlement ca. 700 m to the south (Site 444). Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 445-B [Jau-?-4(H), Unit 57-H] Date of Survey: Oct. 6, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [439900 E, 8706200 N; 11.7033° S, 75.5515° W] Natural Setting: 3535 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground on the lower flanks of a major ridge on the northern side of the Yanamarca Valley, ca. 30 m above the general level of the valley floor (Plate A70). East of the site there is a gently sloping descent to the valley floor, while above the site the terrain ascends steeply over a vertical distance of some 300 m to the main ridge crest. Erosion has been slight to moderate, and soil depth is shallow to medium, with abundant grass and bushes at the borders of cultivated fields. Modern Land Use: The site is terraced for rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Most terraces are supported by retaining walls crudely constructed of dry-laid stone and are of uncertain age. There is considerable stone rubble piled up in the course of modern field clearance throughout the site. Modern terrace building and field clearance have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: Surface pottery and a possible prehispanic structure. Site area 0.4 ha. Structural Remains. A single stone-walled structure measuring ca. 2 m in interior diameter, with a mud-mortared stone wall ca. 1 m high. The original stone walls have recently been extended in height with adobe bricks. A preserved doorway measures 1.3 m high and 60 cm wide, and is capped by a stone lintel. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in trace to very light concentrations. We made a single small collection from the entire site area. The material appears to be all LIP. Discussion: A small LIP occupation. Classification: LIP: Hamlet

Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

278-P

50 m dia., north sector

very light

279-P 280-P

50 m dia., central sector 50 m dia., southern sector

very light very light

mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP all EIP/MH all EIP/MH

SITE NO. 446 [Jau-EI-65(P), Colls. 278-P, 279-P, 280-P; UMARP Site No. J-216] Date of Survey: Aug. 28, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [439600 E, 8708400 N; 11.6834° S, 75.5542° W] Natural Setting: 3690 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on a broad shelf of gently sloping terrain overlooking the Yanamarca Valley (Plate A71). Within the immediate site area, three small hills rise 10–20 m above the general level of the supporting shelf. To the east and west of the site the slopes ascend steeply up to the main ridge crest and down to the valley floor. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is moderate grass cover and some bushes. Modern Land Use: Mixed sheep pasture and rainfall-based cultivation of cereals. The currently fallow agricultural fields are partially terraced with stonefaced retaining walls of uncertain age. There is one modern stone-walled structure on the northern side of the site. Modern terrace building and field clearance have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration over an area of ca. 11.4 ha. In her subsequent restudy, Borges (1988:69) reports an area of 20.0 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, although the general abundance of stone rubble and a few fragments of mud-mortared stone walls suggest the former presence of stone-walled structures that have been obliterated by modern terracing and field clearance. We made three surface collections, one from each of the three small hillocks on the supporting shelf (Table A12). Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH settlement. Borges (1988:69) subsequently identified the primary occupation here as early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). We are puzzled by the large discrepancy between the UMARP and JASP estimates of site area. The significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery is uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: Very Large Village LIP: ? SITE NO. 447 [Jau-EI-66(P), Coll. 281-P; UMARP Site No. J-45] Date of Survey: Aug. 28, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [439000 E, 8708600 N; 11.6815° S, 75.5597° W] Natural Setting: 3580 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on the eastern flank of the Yanamarca Valley, ca. 75 m above the general level of the valley floor (Plate A72). To the east of the site the terrain ascends steeply to the top of the ridge ca. 120 m above. Erosion has been generally slight to moderate, with severe erosion along the course of a quebrada on the northern side of the site. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushes in uncultivated areas.

Appendix A

161

Plate A72. Site 447. Facing northeast over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center, and bracket shows the approximate full length of the site. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-36)

Plate A73. Site 449. Facing south over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 30-37)

Modern Land Use: Most of the site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Some fields had been recently plowed at the time of our survey; others were fallow, with stubble from last year’s crop still standing. There is some stone-faced terracing of uncertain age in the lower, western sector of the site. Fallow fields serve as sheep pasture. Modern terrace building and field clearance have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery, fragmentary architectural remnants, and old terrace walls over an area of ca. 3.1 ha. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:429) remeasured this site area as 2.5 ha. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 1.2 ha for the Inca component, and 2.5 ha for the EIP/MH component. Structural Remains. Architectural preservation is poor. Some circular stone structures that were probably residential are still preserved in the eastern half of the site. These are concentrated on the low flanks of the hill in the area that appears to have contained exclusively EIP/MH surface pottery. No architecture has been preserved in the western part of the site, which contains almost exclusively LH Inca-style ceramics. The rustic terraces are supported by both dry-laid stone facing and earth embankments—these features range up to 10 m in depth and perhaps 30 m in length. From surface evidence it is difficult to ascertain if the terraces were constructed during the EIP/MH occupation or postdated it. Surface Finds. We made a single surface collection over the entire site area. The material is mixed EIP/MH and LIP, with a definite minor component of Inca-style pottery. In her subsequent restudy based on one new surface collection from the Inca component of the site, LeBlanc (1981:229, 430) found a mixture of Wanka III and Colonial/Modern ceramics. The UMARP surface collection yielded 222 diagnostic sherds, of which 74 (33.3%) were Inca and 7 (3.2%) were Wanka-Inca. The remaining pottery in the UMARP collection was not classifiable to type. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, apparently abandoned during the LIP and reoccupied during the LH (Wanka III). The LH occupation probably represents a population of only a few households, perhaps functioning as a small tambo or chaski way station to facilitate activities along the main Cuzco-Quito Inca road, which passes ca. 100 m to the west, underlying the modern road. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Small Inca Imperial Tambo

area from the south. The adjacent valley floor is intensively cultivated, partly with canal irrigation. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined by a scatter of surface pottery in light and light-to-moderate concentrations over an area of ca. 0.4 ha. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 0.5 ha. There are no structural remains. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material appeared to us to be all EIP/MH. D’Altroy’s (1992) subsequent restudy revealed significant late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) components, which we did not originally detect. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, with reoccupation during late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) times. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet LIP: Wanka II Hamlet LH: Wanka III Hamlet

SITE NO. 448 [Jau-?-31(P), Coll. 282-P; UMARP Site No. J-213] Date of Survey: Aug. 28, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [438200 E, 8707900 N; 11.6879° S, 75.5671° W] Natural Setting: 3505 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the top and sides of a low knoll that rises a few meters above the general level of the valley floor to the south, east, and west. To the north the terrain ascends at a moderate slope to the crest of a high ridge some 80 m above the site. Erosion has been generally slight. Soil cover is medium. Uncultivated areas have a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Mixed sheep pasture and rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Several modern houselots encroach onto the general site

SITE NO. 449 [Jau-LI-62(P), Colls. 283-P, 284-P; “Ushnu”; UMARP Site No. J-49] Date of Survey: Aug. 28, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [437900 E, 8708600 N; 11.6815° S, 75.5698° W] Natural Setting: 3590 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest of a low ridge spur. The site overlooks the valley floor some 75 m lower down on the east (Plate A73). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a substantial cover of grass, bushes, and cactus in uncultivated areas along modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Mixed sheep pasture and rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern field clearing may have damaged some archaeological remains. The adjacent valley floor is cultivated using canal irrigation. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 6.6 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery and the presence of possible prehispanic architecture. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:432) remeasured this site area as 4.7 ha. Hastorf (1993:71, 230) reports a surface area of 4.3 ha for the Wanka I component of this site, and 2.0 ha for the EIP/MH component (1993:229). D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 11.1 ha. Structural Remains. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but there is substantial rock rubble piled up around modern agricultural fields throughout the site—this suggests the former presence of numerous stone-walled buildings, all of which have been destroyed in the course of modern field clearance. The foundations of a few residential structures are still preserved in the southern part of the site: these exhibit the typical limestone pirka masonry. Where the structures foundations are preserved, the land has not been plowed, so that the relatively low density of visible structural remnants probably reflects the real prehistoric density. At the highest point on the supporting ridge in the central site area there is a probable prehispanic structure: a flat-topped, circular platform ca. 20 m in diameter and 1 m high, whose perimeter is defined by a wall of unworked limestone blocks set in mud mortar. This possible ceremonial-civic feature has been used as a threshing floor in modern times, and this activity may have significantly modified its original appearance.

162

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table A13. JASP surface collections at Site 449. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

283-P

50 m dia., southern sector

very light

284-P

50 m dia., central sector

very light

mainly LIP, plus trace of EIP/MH mainly LIP, with minor EIP/MH

Parts of the east and west faces of the hill have been terraced. It is likely that at least some of these old stone-faced terraces are prehispanic in age. Surface Finds. Very light surface pottery over the entire site. We also noted some chert debitage and two stone hoes. We made two surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A13). In her subsequent restudy based on five new surface collections (three “excavated” and two “normal”), LeBlanc (1981:229, 433) determined that there were Wanka I (early LIP), Wanka III (LH), and Colonial/Modern components. Hastorf (1993:71) reports a “structural density” of 50 structures per hectare, with an estimated population of 387–516 inhabitants for the Wanka I component and 599–999 for the Wanka III component. Discussion: This occupation is predominantly early LIP (Wanka I) and Late Horizon (Wanka III), with a probable minor EIP/MH component. The site was apparently abandoned during late LIP times (Wanka II). We have arbitrarily assigned the EIP/MH component an area (3.3 ha) half that of the LIP component as we measured it (6.6 ha) (as noted above, Hastorf [1993:229] estimates an EIP/MH site area of 2.0 ha). Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village

(above) Plate A74. Site 450. EIP/MH slab figurine fragments from Collection 285-P (scale in centimeters). (UMMA Neg. No. 45-35) (left) Plate A75. Site 450. EIP/MH slab figurine fragment from Collection 285-P (scale in centimeters). (UMMA Neg. No. 45-36)

SITE NO. 450 [Jau-EI-67(P), Coll. 285-P; UMARP Site No. J-214] Date of Survey: Aug. 28, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [437500 E, 8708600 N; 11.6815° S, 75.5735° W] Natural Setting: 3560 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper sides of a low hill that rises from a broad saddle at the eastern base of major ridge. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is medium. There is a sparse cover of grass and bushes in uncultivated areas. Modern Land Use: The entire site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Fallow fields function as sheep pasture. Modern field clearing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 1.2 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in trace to very light concentrations. Subsequent UMARP restudies report an overall site area of 0.9 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191), and 0.45 ha for the EIP component (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but the presence of abundant rock rubble suggests that ancient stone-walled buildings once existed here. We also noted some chert debitage. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. All the material appears to be EIP/MH (Plates A74, A75). Borges’ (1988:69) subsequent restudy indicated that the primary occupation is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). D’Altroy (1992) detected an LH (Wanka III) component, which we did not originally recognize. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, apparently reoccupied during LH (Wanka III) times. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

Archaeological Remains: The site area of 0.9 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in light concentrations. Hastorf (1993:229) reports a site area of 0.5 ha. There are no definite architectural remains, but the abundance of rock rubble piled up around the edges of modern agricultural fields suggests the former presence of stone-walled structures. We also noted two stone hoes. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 25 × 25 m in a recently plowed field at the highest point in the site. The material is predominantly EIP/ MH, with a trace of LIP ceramics. Borges (1988:39) reports the presence here of “a single fragment of a possible [MH] Wari imitation” sherd. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation. This site forms an EIP/MH settlement pair with Site 452, ca. 300 m to the west. The presence of a single possible MH imitation Wari sherd is one of the very few reported from the Wanka Region survey area (see also Sites 442, 464, 583, 589, 624, 627). The significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery is uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet LIP: ?

SITE NO. 451 [Jau-EI-70(P), Coll. 287-P; “Loma Corral”; UMARP Site No. J-319] Date of Survey: Aug. 30, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [438300 E, 8709700 N; 11.6716° S, 75.5661° W] Natural Setting: 3600 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper slopes of a low hill that rises ca. 50 m above the level of the valley floor to the south (Plate A76). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is medium. The borders of modern cultivated fields have a moderate cover of grass, bushes, and cactus vegetation. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern field clearance has probably damaged the archaeological remains.

SITE NO. 452 [Jau-EI-69(P), Coll. 286-P; “Pacti”; UMARP Site No. J-212] Date of Survey: Aug. 30, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [438000 E, 8709700 N; 11.6716° S, 75.5689° W] Natural Setting: 3600 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper slopes of a low hill that rises about 20 m above the level of a broad topographic saddle extending to the east (Plate A77). On the west there is a steep descent of ca. 50 m to the floor of the Acolla Valley. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is medium. There is a dense growth of grass, bushy, and cactus vegetation in uncultivated areas along field borders.

Appendix A

163

Plate A78. Site 453. Facing south toward site on hilltop. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-27) Plate A76. Site 451. Facing east over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 30-33)

Plate A77. Site 452. Facing west over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 30-34)

Plate A79. Site 454. Facing east over site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-29)

Modern Land Use: Mixed sheep pasture and rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. There has been substantial modern field clearance and terrace building within the site area, and these activities have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration over an area of ca. 0.5 ha. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 1.0 ha (Hastorf (1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:191), and 1.1 ha for the EIP/MH component (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite architectural remains, but the general abundance of rock rubble suggests the former presence of stone-walled structures now obliterated by modern field clearing and terrace building. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. We judged the material as all EIP/MH; Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. D’Altroy’s (1992) subsequent restudy revealed an LH (Wanka III) component, which we had not originally detected. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation. This site forms an EIP/MH settlement pair with Site 451, ca. 300 m to the east. The locality was apparently reoccupied during LH (Wanka III) times. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet LH: Wanka III Hamlet

Modern Land Use: Mixed sheep pasture and rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Modern terrace building, corral building, and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: Very light and light concentrations of surface pottery over an area of ca. 0.3 ha. There are no definite architectural remains, but abundant rock rubble in some parts of the site suggests the former presence of prehispanic stone-walled structures. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet

SITE NO. 453 [Jau-EI-71(P), Coll. 293-P; UMARP Site No. J-215] Date of Survey: Sept. 5, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [437600 E, 8709900 N; 11.6698° S, 75.5725° W] Natural Setting: 3580 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper slopes of a small hill that rises from a broad shelf of nearly level terrain on the western side of the Yanamaraca Valley (Plate A78). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow. There is a sparse cover of grass, bushy, and cactus vegetation in uncultivated parts of the site.

SITE NO. 454 [Jau-LI-72(P), Colls. 294-P, 295-P; UMARP Site No. J-48] Date of Survey: Sept. 5, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [436700 E, 8711400 N; 11.6698° S, 75.5725° W] Natural Setting: 3670 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground atop a low natural terrace that rises from a broad saddle of nearly level ground on the western side of the Yanamarca Valley, ca. 5–10 m above the valley floor (Plate A79). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is medium. There is a moderate grass cover, with some low bushes. Modern Land Use: Mixed sheep pasture and rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Part of the site area was recently plowed at the time of our survey. Modern field clearance has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light (on unplowed ground) to light (on plowed land) concentrations over an area of 3.5 ha. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:432) remeasured this site area as 3.1 ha. Hastorf (1993:230) reports an area of 3.1 ha for the Wanka II component. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 5.3 ha.

164

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A80. Site 454. Facing northwest over area of Collection 294-P. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-28)

Plate A81. Site 455. Facing north over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-30)

Table A14. JASP surface collections at Site 454. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

294-P 295-P

20 × 20 m, southern sector 20 × 20 m, northern sector

light light

all LIP mixed EIP/MH and LIP

A long-abandoned major irrigation canal runs along the base of the terrace on which the site is located. The date of construction and use of this canal are not clear. There are no definite architectural remains, although the general abundance of rock rubble suggests the former presence of prehispanic structures (Plate A80). We made two surface collections (Table A14). In her subsequent restudy based on six new surface collections, “primarily in the central and northern part of the site,” LeBlanc (1981:229, 432) determined that there are two occupational components: early LIP (Wanka I) and Late Horizon (Wanka III); she does not report any EIP/MH surface pottery in these resampled sectors. As noted above, Hastorf (1993:230) reports a significant Wanka II occupation. An additional four well-spaced surface collections were taken from the southern half of the site by UMARP archaeologists. Discussion: The apparent absence of EIP/MH material in the UMARP collections may mean that what we identified as EIP/MH is actually early LIP (Wanka I); on the other hand, later UMARP studies do not report a Wanka I component. This site may have been occupied during most of the LIP and into the LH. We have arbitrarily assigned the possible EIP/MH component an area of 1.7 ha, about half that of the more extensive LIP. UMARP studies estimate a Wanka III population of 60–99 inhabitants. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Hamlet (?) LIP: Wanka I (?) and Wanka II Hamlet LH: Wanka III Hamlet SITE NO. 455 [Jau-EI-72(P), Coll. 296-P; UMARP Site No. J-219] Date of Survey: Sept. 5, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [436700 E, 8711200 N; 11.6580° S, 75.5808° W] Natural Setting: 3780 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the crest of a low ridge spur on the western side of the Yanamarca Valley (Plate A81). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally shallow, with some rocky outcrops. There is a moderate cover of grass, with some bushy and cactus vegetation. Modern Land Use: Sheep pasture. There are numerous modern stone-walled corrals throughout the site area. Modern corral building has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: Surface pottery in trace to very light concentrations over an area of ca. 0.4 ha. Borges (1988:69) subsequently remeasured the site as 6.5 ha. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but some modern corrals may have ancient foundations. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Borges’ subsequent restudy revealed that the primary occupation is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase).

Discussion: The large discrepancy between our site area measurement and that of the subsequent UMARP restudy is puzzling. Whatever the case, the occupation here apparently dates mainly to the early EIP. This site is near the kichwapuna juncture, and so its economy may have included a pastoral component. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet SITE NO. 456 [Jau-EI-74(P), Coll. 298-P; UMARP Site No. J-75] Date of Survey: Sept. 7, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [435600 E, 8713500 N; 11.6372° S, 75.5908° W] Natural Setting: 3800 masl, in the uppermost kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain on the crest and upper slopes of a long ridge that separates two major quebradas (Plate A82) at the north end of the Yanamarca Valley. Moderate erosion. Medium soil depth. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushes in the few uncultivated parts of the site. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Modern field clearance has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: Surface pottery and probable structural remains over an area of ca. 1.0 ha. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:440) remeasured this site area as 1.5 ha. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports a site area of 1.0 ha. Structural Remains. In the central site area we detected the remains of about half a circular stone-walled building that is probably prehispanic. This feature is about 4 m in diameter, with walls preserved up to 1.8 m high, constructed of unworked stones set in mud mortar and measuring ca. 40 cm thick. Two other fragmentary ancient-looking mud-mortared stone walls nearby may represent the remnants of 2 additional prehispanic structures. A pathway that cuts across the central part of the site may be prehistoric. Surface Finds. Surface pottery in light concentration occurs over the site area. We also noted one groundstone digging-stick weight. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is mainly EIP/MH (including a distinctive slab figurine [Plate A83]), with a minor LIP component, and a definite trace of Inca-style ceramics. In her subsequent restudy based on four new “normal” surface collections “taken in each of the four quadrants of the site,” LeBlanc (1981:440) determined that there were both early LIP (Wanka I) and Late Horizon (Wanka III) components. She regarded the Wanka I component as questionable. UMARP archaeologists do not report an EIP/MH component. UMARP studies suggest a Wanka III population of 18–30 inhabitants. Discussion: This mixed occupation may represent a long-term settlement, beginning in EIP/MH times and possibly continuing into the early LIP (Wanka I), with apparent abandonment during the late LIP (Wanka II), and a reoccupation during LH (Wanka III) times. We have arbitrarily assigned the LIP and LH components surface areas of 0.5 ha, half that of the dominant EIP/MH site. The site’s location near the puna-kichwa juncture may indicate a significant herding component in the prehispanic economy. The fact that subsequent UMARP studies at this site did not identify an EIP/MH component may indicate that what we identified as EIP/MH may actually be Wanka I. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Small Village LIP: Wanka I (?) Hamlet LH: Wanka III Hamlet

Appendix A

165

(above) Plate A82. Site 456. Facing southeast at site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-19) (right) Plate A83. Site 456. EIP/MH slab figurine from Collection 298-P (scale in cm). (UMMA Neg. No. 46-7)

(top) Plate A84. Site 457. Facing southwest at site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-17) (bottom) Plate A85. Site 457. Facing north over portion of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-13)

SITE NO. 457 [Jau-EI-73(P), Coll. 297-P] Date of Survey: Sept. 7, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [432800 E, 8710800 N; 11.6615° S, 75.6165° W] Natural Setting: 3930 masl, in the lower puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper slopes of a large hill (Plate A84). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow, with some bedrock outcrops. There is a sparse to medium grass cover and a few scattered cacti. Modern Land Use: Primarily sheep and camelid pasture. There are numerous modern stone-walled corrals in the site area, and some of these may have ancient foundations. Modern corral building has obviously damaged the archaeological remains. Parts of the eastern slopes below the site are used for intermittent rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 1.3 ha is defined primarily on the basis of very light surface pottery and a dense cluster of modern (and probably prehispanic) corrals. There are no definitely prehispanic corrals, but several modern corrals appear to have ancient foundations. The largest corrals occur at the top of the hill, and are roughly rectangular (Plate A85). We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is primarily LIP, with a trace of EIP/MH ceramics. Discussion: The primary occupation is LIP, probably a small settlement with a pastoral orientation. The significance of the trace of EIP/MH surface pottery is unclear, but it may represent a significant occupation. Classification: EIP/MH: Camp? LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 458 [Jau-LH-30(P), Fea. 36-P, Inca road section; UMARP Site No. J-44] Date of Survey: Sept. 12, 1976; UMARP restudy Sept. 4, 1978 Location: Hoja Acolla, Hoja Pomacancha, and Hoja Huaricolca [southeast end: 432800 E, 8710100 N; 11.6679° S, 75.6166° W] [northwest end: ca. 425500 E, 8721000 N; 11.5691° S, 75.6833° W] Natural Setting: The roadway lies between 3740 and 3875 masl, in the uppermost kichwa and lowermost puna zones on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. It extends for at least 7.5 km to the west-northwest (onto the southern side of Hoja

Huaricolca, in the Tarama Region [Parsons et al. 2000]), generally at slightly below 3900 masl, across the lower puna on the Hojas Pomacancha and Huaricolca. The roadway crosses a wide diversity of topography, from steep to gently sloping terrain and occasionally nearly level ground; the southeastern end of the roadway occurs on steeply sloping ground. Erosion in the general site area has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium, with a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Primarily pasture for sheep and camelids, but with some small fields of rainfall-based cultivation. Lower slopes, below the 3900-m contour, are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers, with livestock grazing in fallow fields. Modern field clearing and plowing have damaged much of the roadway, and we were unable to trace the feature southeastward beyond the points whose coordinates are provided above. Much of the ancient road is still used as a footpath. Archaeological Remains: This site comprises the remains of the main Inca highland road along the eastern side of the Mantaro Valley, crossing the Río Yauli at Site 553 (UMARP Site J-6), just north of modern Ataura. It probably passed directly through Hátun Xauxa (Site 550), through the Yanamarca Valley, and over the Huaricolca puna on the way to Tarma. UMARP archaeologists subsequently detected another preserved section of the road to the west of Hátun Xauxa, ascending the hillslope from the Inca center to the storage facilities above. One section of the roadway at this locality is unusually well preserved in a steeply sloping area lacking modern cultivation. Here, the downhill side of the roadway is defined by a retaining wall of well-fitted stone blocks (Plate A86); the roadway surface is formed by a terrace behind the retaining wall that grades into the higher hillslope, providing a nearly level surface roughly 3.5–5.0 m wide. One section (which we designated as Feature 36-P) of the well-preserved roadway comprises a series of some half dozen stone “steps” constructed at intervals of 10–15 m at a point where the roadway descends a moderately steep slope. Each step in this “stairway” is defined by a row of stone blocks (ca. 20 cm high and totaling ca. 3.5 m in length) built parallel to the topographic contour and extending across the full width of the roadway at this point (Plate A87). We saw no surface pottery or other artifacts associated with the roadway. Discussion: This is a section of the Inca roadway that connected the centers of Tarmatambo (Site No. 283 [Parsons et al. 2000:2:396–98]) and Hátun Xausa (Site No. 550). Classification: LH: Inca Road Segment

166

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(top) Plate A86. Site 458. Facing north along section of Inca road, above (north of) contact with Feature 29-P canal. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-8) (bottom) Plate A87. Site 458. “Stairway,” with Julia Medel. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-20)

SITE NO. 459 [Canal-reservoir complex; Jau-LI-73(P), Features 24-P, 25-P, 26-P, 27-P, 30-P, 31-P, 32-P, 33-P; UMARP Site No. J-67] Date of Survey: Sept. 3, 4, 7, 10, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [Fea. 24-P (canal): upper end: 433850 E, 8711500 N; 11.6552° S, 75.6069° W] [Fea. 24-P (canal): lower end: 435400 E, 8703400N; 11.6552° S, 75.5927° W] [Fea. 25-P (upper aqueduct): 434200 E, 8710450 N; 11.6647° S, 75.6037° W] [Fea. 26-P (shrine?): 434650 E, 8710200 N; 11.6670° S, 75.5996° W] [Fea. 27-P (mid-aqueduct): 435300 E, 8709700 N; 11.6715° S, 75.5937° W] [Fea. 30-P (lower aqueduct): 435200 E, 8703400 N; 11.7285° S, 75.5947° W] [Fea. 31-P (west stairway): 435300 E, 8703400 N; 11.7285° S, 75.5919° W] [Fea. 32-P (reservoir): 435500 E, 8703400 N; 11.7285° S, 75.5919° W] [Fea. 33-P (east stairway): 435600 E, 8703500 N; 11.7276° S, 75.5910° W] Natural Setting: 3940 (upper end of canal)–3660 (lower end of canal) masl, extending over a distance of ca. 10 km. Situated in the upper kichwa and lowermost puna zones on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The canal (Fea. 24-P) appears to originate in a cluster of still-functioning springs in the region just above the point where the first traces of the canal can be detected. Over the course of its descent the canal crosses a wide variety of topography from gently to steeply sloping and some nearly level ground. Erosion has been slight to severe over this distance; soil depth ranges from shallow to medium. Vegetation cover in uncultivated terrain includes grass, bushes, and cactus. Modern Land Use: Variable pasture for sheep and camelids and rainfallbased cultivation of cereals and tubers. Portions of the lower area are devoted to more intensive, irrigation-based agriculture—some of the water for these irrigated fields is provided by modern canals that immediately overlie some sections of the ancient canal. Long-term maintenance and rebuilding of the modern canals have probably damaged the archaeological remains of the prehispanic canal. Archaeological Remains: This complex comprises a long, stone-lined canal (Fea. 24-P), three aqueducts that carry the canal across nearly level ground (Fea-

Figure A8. Site 459 canal complex, showing spatial relationship of canals to nearby LIP sites. tures 25-P, 27-P, 30-P), an apparent “megalithic” shrine (Fea. 26-P), a reservoir (Fea. 32-P), and two “stairways” (Fea. 31-P, Fea. 33-P). A discussion of this complex has been previously published (Parsons 1978) (Fig. A8). We saw no surface pottery or other artifacts associated with these prehispanic features. Feature 24-P (canal). This is a very distinct ancient canal, most of whose full extent can be traced along a linear distance of some 10 km from its origin just below 4000 masl to its terminus at 3660 masl. The only segment of the canal that remains invisible is the highest section, probably ca. 1.5–2.0 km in length, that led to the ultimate source at a cluster of springs higher up on the slope. We also lost the canal trace over a few short intervals of intensively plowed land, but in such cases we were always able to pick up its traces again with little problem at the edges of such terrain. For most of its length the stone-lined canal runs along uncultivated hillslopes where it is well preserved and clearly visible (Plates A88– A90). In some places it runs along the top of an earth-rock embankment whose height varies from ca. 0.5 to 2.0 m (Plates A91–A94), while in other localities the remains are more subtle (Plate A95); in some places the canal has been cut through solid rock outcrops (Plate A96).

Appendix A

167

(top) Plate A88. Site 459. Facing north toward Feature 24-P canal. Arrows indicate points along length of canal. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-10) (middle) Plate A89. Site 459. Facing east toward Feature 24-P canal. Arrows indicate points along length of canal. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-12) (bottom) Plate A90. Site 459. Facing northeast toward Feature 24-P canal, where the canal crosses a rock cliff at left-center. Arrows indicate points along length of canal. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-11)

Plate A91. Site 459. Section of Feature 24-P canal, above Feature 25-P “aqueduct.” (UMMA Neg. No. 32-22)

Feature 25-P (upper aqueduct). A well-defined aqueduct built of earth and rock rubble that carried the canal across a section of nearly level ground. The aqueduct measures ca. 85 m long and up to 2.2 m high at the center of its length (Plate A97). At its base it is ca. 4 m wide, while at its top it is ca. 1 m wide. The upper surface has been badly destroyed, and no traces of the original canal remain. Feature 26-P (shrine?). This feature is constructed at the south edge (uphill side) of the canal, about midway between Features 25-P and 27-P. It comprises a rough circle, ca. 25 m in diameter, of large, irregular limestone blocks standing up to 1.5 m high (Plate A98). Just uphill from this feature is a stone “stairway” with a single step of unworked limestone blocks extending in a line ca. 5 m long and 10 cm high. Feature 27-P (middle aqueduct). This badly destroyed feature occurs in a nearly level area where the canal has been obliterated by intensive plowing (Plate A99). The aqueduct measures ca. 55 m long and 4.5 m wide, with a maximum elevation of ca. 0.5 m (Plate A100).

Feature 30-P (lower aqueduct). This feature is situated at the southern base of Cerro Tunanmarca, where it supported the canal as it carried water over a stretch of nearly level ground and fed directly into the reservoir (Fea. 32-P) at its eastern terminus. The aqueduct is constructed of earth and rock fill, and measures ca. 80 m long, with a maximum height of ca. 1.8 m and a width of ca. 1.5 m (Plates A101, A102). The aqueduct is fairly well preserved, except at its eastern and western ends where it has been obliterated by modern plowing and field clearing. Feature 31-P (west “stairway”). This relatively well preserved feature appears to have been constructed at the point where the canal descends a short slope and empties into the reservoir (Plates A103, A104). The “stairway” consists of 16 steps defined by 17 rows of unworked limestone blocks, each row measuring ca. 15 cm high, 1.25 m wide, and 4 m long (Plate A105). The total length of the “stairway” is ca. 20 m. Although we describe this and Feature 33-P as “stairways,” these features may actually have functioned to reduce the velocity of the water

168

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(top) Plate A92. Site 459. Section of Feature 24-P canal. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-9) (bottom) Plate A93. Site 459. Well-preserved section of Feature 24-P canal, with Jeff Parsons. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-5)

as it flowed over moderately steep slopes into and out of the reservoir, thereby reducing the erosive potential of the flowing water (Parsons 1978). Feature 32-P (reservoir). This marks the termination of the Feature 24-P canal. It comprises a natural low area, surrounded on all sides by higher ground (Plate A106), except for a narrow exit at the northeastern end. Today the reservoir, which measures ca. 150 m × 50 m, is one of the largest expanses of nearly level ground in the immediate area, with intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals. The entrances and exits of the reservoir are marked by the two “stairways” (Features 31-P, 33-P, respectively), and there is some suggestion that the Feature 24-P canal continued out into the central part of the reservoir atop a slightly elevated aqueduct. The eastern exit feeds into what appears to be an artificial ditch/canal at the head of a small gully that descends onto another, larger natural topographic low (Plate A107). The old ditch/canal is ca. 50 m long, and its original upper base level appears to have been at the same level as that of the reservoir. Originally the ditch/canal would have been ca. 2.5 m deep, cutting across a narrow embankment between the reservoir and the quebrada. It is possible that this ditch/ canal once functioned to conduct water from the reservoir to the lower expanse of level ground, perhaps itself another reservoir. Feature 33-P (east “stairway”). Although this is badly destroyed, it appears to have been very similar in form and probable function to the better-preserved Feature 31-P on the western side of the reservoir. Some 15 steps can be discerned (Plate A108), forming two groups separated by 10–15 m of badly eroded ground where all traces of the feature have been obliterated.

(top) Plate A94. Site 459. Section of Feature 24-P canal built along face of steep rock cliff, with Jeff Parsons. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-7) (bottom) Plate A95. Site 459. Section of Feature 24-P canal, above Feature 25-P “aqueduct,” with Jeff Parsons. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-23)

Appendix A

(from top to bottom)

(top) Plate A96. Site 459. Section of Feature 24-P canal cut through rock cliff face, with Jeff Parsons. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-6) (bottom) Plate A97. Site 459. Facing west over top of Feature 25-P “aqueduct.” Note archaeologist for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-2)

169

Plate A98. Site 459. “Megalithic” shrine (Fea. 26-P) at edge of stone-lined canal. Arrows indicate opposing outer edges of the feature. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-24) Plate A99. Site 459. Facing north-northeast over general area of Feature 27-P aqueduct. Arrow points to the aqueduct. The possible canal source is at the upper left. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-12) Plate A100. Site 459. Facing south over Feature 27-P aqueduct. Arrow points to feature. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-11) Plate A101. Site 459. Facing north along Feature 30-P aqueduct. Note archaeologist at far end of the feature. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-24)

170

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(top) Plate A106. Site 459. Looking across Feature 32-P reservoir from top of Feature 33-P “stairway.” Arrow indicates approximate center of reservoir. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-30) (middle) Plate A107. Site 459. Possible remnants of ancient stone-lined canal in bottom of quebrada below Feature 32-P reservoir, with archaeologist for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-33) (bottom) Plate A108. Site 459. Feature 33-P “stairway.” (UMMA Neg. No. 33-31)

(from top to bottom) Plate A102. Site 459. Facing southwest along Feature 30-P aqueduct. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-25) Plate A103. Site 459. “Stairway” at edge of Feature 32-P reservoir. Arrow points to approximate center of the “stairway.” (UMMA Neg. No. 33-26) Plate A104. Site 459. Looking down along length of Feature 24-P canal leading into Feature 32-P reservoir. Arrow indicates top of Feature 32-P “stairway.” (UMMA Neg. No. 33-28) Plate A105. Site 459. Feature 31-P “stairway” at edge of Feature 32-P reservoir, with Phil Tugendrajch. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-27)

Discussion: Although the age of this impressive hydraulic complex remains uncertain, we believe it is contemporary with the large late LIP (Wanka II) site (Site 468) at the top of Cerro Tunanmarca, above the Feature 32-P reservoir. As discussed in a previous publication (Parsons 1978), we believe these features were constructed for the direct benefit of the inhabitants of the nearby large hilltop site (Site 468)—perhaps a combination of water for household and irrigation use. We found no traces of subsidiary canals leading off the main Feature 24-P canal at higher elevations. Interestingly, we found no comparable reservoircanal complex at the only other very large LIP/LH site in the Yanamarca Valley (Hatunmarca, Site No. 472). Classification: LIP/LH: Canal-Aqueduct-Reservoir Complex

Appendix A

171

SITE NO. 459-A [Canal and wall complex (no field site number); Fea. 28-P (wall?), Fea. 29-P (canal); UMARP Site No. J-79] Date of Survey: Sept. 7, 1976 Location: Hojas Acolla and Pomacancha [upper end of canal: 434200 E, 8713800 N; 11.6344° S, 75.6036° W] [approx. lower end of canal: 430900 E, 8710700 N; 11.6624° S, 75.6340° W] [approx. Fea. 28-P wall: 433600 E, 8712400 N; 11.6471° S, 75.6092° W] Natural Setting: Upper end of canal: 3945 masl; lower end of canal: 3825 masl, in the upper kichwa and lower puna zones, on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. There is moderate to severe erosion. Soil depth is generally shallow, with some bedrock exposures. Sparse to medium grass cover. Modern Land Use: Most of the terrain traversed by the ancient canal is used exclusively for livestock pasture. At its lower end, we were unable to trace the canal any further after it had descended into an area where modern plowing and field clearing, associated with rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers, had obliterated its remnants. Archaeological Remains: This site includes two features: Feature 28-P. This wall-like feature intersects the Feature 29-P canal approximately at right angles near the head of a tributary quebrada (Plate A109), ca. 1.5 km below the canal’s origin point. The feature is ca. 50 m long and up to 2 m wide, extending across the entire width of the quebrada and some 10–15 m up its sides, and is well constructed of dry-laid, unworked stone. We did not attempt to trace the feature on to the rocky higher ground, but we have the impression that it may once have supported other canals that fed water from higher sources (unknown to us) into the Feature 29-P canal. Feature 28-P does not appear to represent a takeoff point from which water might have been led into other channels or canals—there is simply no hint of any such associated subsidiary canals. Alternatively, Feature 28-P may represent some sort of a formal boundary or territorial marker. Feature 29-P. A well-preserved ancient canal that can be traced for approximately 7.5 km from its origin near the head of a large quebrada (Plate A110) to the point at an elevation ca. 120 m lower down where its traces disappear in modern plowed fields. The stone-lined canal, which originally measured ca. 50 cm wide, is extremely well built, and rests atop a low stone foundation, or causeway, for much of its length. We detected no traces of mud mortar. The underlying causeway is especially impressive where the canal crosses steeply sloping terrain and the causeway is built up to 2.5 m high (Plate A111). We saw no surface pottery or other artifacts in the vicinity of either feature. Discussion: An extremely well built canal complex. Its age is uncertain, but it is probably contemporaneous with the Site 459 canal-aqueduct complex, and probably supplied the same reservoir below Site 468. Classification: LIP (?): Canal Complex SITE NO. 459-B [ancient canal segment, fieldnotes lost] Date of Survey: Sept. 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [north end: 435600 E, 8710100 N; 11.6679° S, 75.5909° W] [south end: 437400 E, 8706000 N; 11.7050° S, 75.5744° W] Natural Setting: As Site 459-A. North end at 3720 masl; south end at 3530 masl in the upper kichwa zone. Modern Land Use: As Site 459-A. Archaeological Remains: Traces of abandoned, stone-lined canal, much as Site 459-A, extending over a linear distance of ca. 4.5 km. Remains of both northern and southern ends lost in modern agricultural fields, so that full extent, source, and termination point remain unknown. Discussion: The loss of our original fieldnotes makes it difficult to reconstruct the precise physical characteristics and overall function of this canal. It does not appear to have fed into the reservoir below Site 468 (Tunanmarca) that forms the endpoint of Canal 459-A. It may have fed into a similar, undetected reservoir below Site 472 (Hatunmarca), several kilometers to the south of the visible endpoint of Canal 459-B. Alternatively, this canal’s principal function could have been to irrigate low-lying agricultural fields in the extensive, relatively level lands underlying the modern towns of Concho and Marco. We judge the age of construction and use of this canal to be LIP and/or LH. Classification: LIP (?): Canal Complex LH (?): Canal Complex

(top) Plate A109. Site 459-A. Intersection of Feature 28-P (“dam”) and Feature 29-P (canal), at bottom of quebrada. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-14) (middle) Plate A110. Site 459-A. Section of Feature 29-P canal, at a point slightly below its origin near the head of a major quebrada beyond the low ridge in middle distance. Note archaeologist for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-17) (bottom) Plate A111. Site 459-A. Section of Feature 29-P canal, below Feature 28-P (visible at lower right-hand corner). (UMMA Neg. No. 33-15)

172

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A112. Site 460. Facing south-southeast over general site area. Bracket indicates approximate extent of the site. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-1)

SITE NO. 460 [Jau-?-42(P), Coll. 290-P; UMARP Site No. J-80] Date of Survey: Sept. 3, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [435700 E, 8709600 N; 11.6724° S, 75.5900° W] Natural Setting: 3790 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a small ridge spur (Plate A112). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow, with a sparse cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Primarily pasture for sheep and camelids. Several modern stone-walled corrals have been constructed on the slopes above the site. There are small fields devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals scattered throughout the general area. Modern corral building and field clearance have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined primarily on the basis of very light and light concentrations of surface pottery over an area of ca. 2.8 ha. There are also a few very poorly preserved remains of stone-walled architecture. Structural Remains. We discerned the poorly preserved remnants of 1 small, circular building. This measures ca. 1.5 m in interior diameter, and is constructed of unworked stones set in mud mortar. Its small size suggests that it may have had a nondomestic function (storage? burial? [no bones seen]). There are also a few suggestions throughout the site of fragmentary remnants of ancient corral-wall foundations, built of unworked, dry-laid stone. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in trace to very light concentrations throughout the site area. We saw no other artifacts. We made a single small collection from the entire site area. The material appears to be all LIP. Discussion: This small LIP site was probably dependent on the much larger Site 461 (Chawin) atop the high hill ca. 450 m to the south. Suggestions of ancient corral foundations suggest a herding function, although the site lies at a lower elevation than most herding settlements in the study area. Classification: LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 461 [Jau-LI-70(P), Unit 121-P, Colls. 288-P, 289-P; “Chawin”; UMARP Site No. J-40] Date of Survey: Aug. 31, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [436000 E, 8709000 N; 11.6779° S, 75.5872° W] Natural Setting: 3910 masl, in the lowermost puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping terrain along the crest and upper slopes of a high hill, some 150–200 m above the general level of the neighboring valley bottoms (Plates A113, A125). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow, with numerous bedrock outcrops, especially along the steeper, northern side of the site. There is a sparse to moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area functions only as sheep pasture, and some modern stone-walled corrals have been built in the southern part of the site. This modern corral building has probably damaged the archaeological remains. On the lower hillslopes to the west there are fields devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals.

(top) Plate A113. Site 461. Facing north toward site. Arrow indicates approximate site center on hilltop. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-21) (bottom) Plate A114. Site 461. Vertical airphoto of site. Maximum length of site ca. 400 m. Courtesy of Servicio Aerofotográfico Nacional.

Archaeological Remains: Surface pottery and stone-walled architecture over an area of ca. 11.5 ha (Fig. A9). A few years after our study, LeBlanc (1981:426) remeasured the site area as 4.1 ha. In her subsequent analysis, Hastorf (1993:71, 230) reports a “residential area” of 5.6 ha. The large discrepancy between our measurements and those of UMARP archaeologists may be because ours includes the entire area within the outermost wall, while the UMARP figure reflects only the built-up, residential sector. [Unfortunately, all our photographs taken at this very photogenic site were lost.] Structural Remains. The site’s borders are defined by two large, concentric stone walls (an inner and an outer wall) that encircle most of the site’s perimeter, except along the steeper, northern side (Plate A114). There are a large number of circular buildings, both domestic residences and tombs, mostly (but not entirely) found inside the inner perimeter wall. Hastorf (1993:71) reports a “structural density” of 50 structures per hectare, with an estimated population of 500–840 inhabitants. (1) The two exterior walls. (a) The outer wall. Two massive gateways are preserved: one at the south end of the site and one at the north end. These appear to have been the only formally constructed means of entering and exiting the site. The southern gateway is situated at the point where the steep, unwalled eastern slope merges onto the more moderate southern flanks of the hill. This gateway is constructed inside a ditch (probably man-made) that measures ca. 1.5 m deep and 3–4 m wide. Here was constructed a doorway defined by massive stone walls ca. 2 m thick and 1.5 m high. The entrance itself is 1.7 m wide, and the presence of partially overhanging stones at the top of the preserved doorway suggests that it originally was capped by a stone lintel at about that height (1.5 m) or a little higher.

Appendix A

Figure A9. Site 461 (Chawin), site plans. a, shows configuration of circular residential structures in patio groups; b, shows the organization and form of open spaces throughout the settlement; c, shows the linear arrangement of paths throughout the settlement (from D’Altroy 2001b:134, Fig. 6.8).

Table A15. JASP surface collections at Site 461. Coll. No.

Area

288-P 289-P

ca. 40 m dia., central sector ca. 40 m dia., southern sector

Sherd Density Chronology very light very light

all LIP all LIP

173

The main outer wall extends northward from the gateway along the site’s western border (Plate A114; Fig. A9a). This wall, still pretty much continuous and unbroken, now attains a maximum height of ca. 1 m, with a thickness of ca. 2 m at its base; the wall may originally have been somewhat higher. As the slope steepens a little along the northern third of the site, a man-made trench becomes visible along the wall’s inner side. This trench measures ca. 3 m wide and 1 m deep, and its outer side, adjacent to the outer stone wall, is lined with small, unworked stones set in mud mortar. This stone-lined trench borders the outer wall as the latter feature narrows to ca. 1.5 m wide at its base. At the north end of the site’s outer wall is another formal massive stone gateway, this time constructed directly on the ground surface. The doorway is ca. 1.7 m wide and 1.7 m high, and is built at a point where the outer wall is ca. 2 m thick. This outer north gateway is aligned directly with a comparable gateway in the inner wall (see below). A small, igloo-like circular stone-walled structure, possibly a tomb, occurs just outside the north gateway. Moving eastward from the north gateway the outer wall disappears briefly on moderately sloping ground at the northern extreme of the site. At about the point where the outer wall remnants again become briefly visible, there are several circular structures (probably residential in function), situated between the outer and inner walls—these are some of the few buildings that occur outside the inner wall. At its northern end, the outer wall terminates, as on the southern end of the site, at about the point where the steep, rugged eastern slopes begin. (b) The inner wall. The inner and outer walls are separated by 30–45 m of generally empty terrain (Plate A114). Unlike the outer wall, the inner wall is continuous around the site’s entire perimeter. Relative to the outer wall, the inner wall is thinner, higher, and better preserved (suggesting great care in its construction?). It averages ca. 1 m high and 50 cm thick at the base. We could not discern a formal gateway at the southern end of the inner wall, but its northern end is marked by a massive stone portal that aligns with the northern gateway in the outer wall. This inner north gateway measures ca. 1.7 m wide and the walls on either side have been buttressed with large boulders to a thickness of ca.1.8 m and height of ca. 2 m; the top of the doorway is not preserved. Like the outer north gateway, there is an igloo-like tomb (?) structure at one side of the doorway. (2) The circular structures. Most of these occur inside the inner perimeter wall. There are two distinct types: larger, residential structures; and smaller, tomb structures. Although we did not make a precise count, we estimate that there are approximately 250 residential buildings and perhaps a roughly equal number of tombs. The residential structures average ca. 3.5 m in interior diameter, with an overall diameter range of 2–5 m. Walls are ca. 40 cm thick and formed of unworked stone set in mud mortar, and sometimes attain heights of nearly 3 m; several trapezoidal doorways are partially preserved. These residential structures often abut directly onto the inner side of the inner perimeter wall, and frequently are linked to neighboring houses by short stone walls to form passageways (Fig. A9c). Subsequent mapping by UMARP archaeologists revealed a pattern of circular buildings clustered around open patios, with passageways between groupings of patio clusters throughout the site (Fig. A9a). The tombs are distinctive, domed structures, measuring ca. 1.5 m in diameter and 1 m high. They frequently abut directly onto the larger residential structures, and it appears that many houses had an attached tomb. We noted human bone inside and around several of these structures, and so their tomb function seems well established. Small square openings, ca. 25 × 25 cm, are preserved in some of the tombs. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in very light concentrations throughout the site area. We also noted some chert debitage. We made two surface collections (Table A15). In her subsequent restudy based on five new “excavated surface collections,” LeBlanc (1981:427) determined that the occupation at this site is all late LIP (Wanka II). Discussion: This is an important Wanka II settlement, one of several in the middle and lower Yanamarca Valley (see also Sites 468, 476, 472). This site is the northernmost, and second-smallest, of these LIP centers. Like the larger Tunanmarca (Site 472) and Umpamalco (Site 476) sites, Chawin was apparently founded during Wanka II times and abandoned prior to the Late Horizon. Like Umpamalco (Site 476), but unlike Hatunmarca (Site 472) and Tunanmarca (Site 476), Chawin lacks any clear evidence for formal public architecture. Classification: LIP: Wanka II Local Center

174

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru SITE NO. 462 [Jau-LI-71(P), Colls. 291-P, 292-P; UMARP Site No. J-37] Date of Survey: Sept. 4, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [433600 E, 8707300 N; 11.6932° S, 75.6093° W] Natural Setting: 4000 masl, in the upper puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping terrain on the crest and upper slopes of a high, isolated hill that rises some 170 m above the general level of the surrounding valley floor (Plate A115). Erosion has been generally moderate. Soil depth is shallow, and there is a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Predominantly sheep pasture, with some rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Modern corral building and field clearance have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 9.3 ha is defined by surface pottery and the fragmentary remains of stone-walled architecture. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:424) remeasured this site area as 4.1 ha (although she also reports 8.7 ha in a personal communication, 1980). Hastorf (1993:230) and D’Altroy (1992:191) both report a site area of 6.0 ha. Structural Remains. There are numerous fragmentary remains of circular stone-walled buildings, although the site’s original architecture has been badly destroyed by modern corral building and field clearing (Plate A116). Originally there appear to have been numerous circular structures, probably residential in function, with no indication of ancient corrals. Where still preserved, the circular structures measure ca. 3.5 m in diameter with walls formed of unmodified stones probably set in mud mortar (Plate A117). There are also 2 or 3 rectangular structures that measure ca. 2 × 5 m in area and with walls up to 1.5 m high (Plate A118)—their function is uncertain, but they may have been tombs. Although it is difficult to estimate the original number of structures, there may have been as many as 100 circular buildings. We did not distinguish any remnants of small structures similar to the probable domed tombs at Site 461. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in very light to light concentration throughout the site area. We also noted one good chert knife and a few pieces of chert debitage. We made two surface collections (Table A16). In her subsequent restudy based on three new “excavated surface collections,” LeBlanc (1981:424) determined that the occupation at this site is all late LIP (Wanka II). D’Altroy (1992:191), however, indicates a modest LH (Wanka III) occupation here. Discussion: A substantial Wanka II settlement, perhaps a local center, that apparently continued to be occupied at a more modest level into the LH. Classification: LIP: Wanka II Large Village LH: Wanka III Small Village Table A16. JASP surface collections at Site 462.

(from top to bottom) Plate A115. Site 462. Facing south over general area of site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-19) Plate A116. Site 462. Facing northeast over area of Collection 291-P. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-14) Plate A117. Site 462. Interior of circular structure in Collection 291-P area. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-17) Plate A118. Site 462. Facing northeast at rectangular structure in Collection 291-P area. (UMMA Neg. No. 32-16)

Coll. No.

Area

291-P 292-P

ca. 50 m dia., southern sector ca. 60 m dia., northern sector

Sherd Density Chronology light light

all LIP all LIP

SITE NO. 463 [Jau-EI-64(P), Colls. 273-P, 274-P; UMARP Site No. J-220] Date of Survey: Aug. 24, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [437400 E, 8706700 N; 11.6987° S, 75.5744° W] Natural Setting: 3530 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain on the top and upper slopes of a low, rounded hill that rises about 30 m above the general level of the adjacent valley floor to the east (Plate A119). Erosion has been generally moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushes in uncultivated parts of the site area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Some fields are terraced with stone-lined retaining walls. Modern plowing, terrace building, and field clearance have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined by the distribution of surface pottery and architectural remnants in an area of ca. 5.3 ha. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 5.8 ha for the EIP/MH component, 8.0 ha for the Wanka I component, and 12.2 ha for the Wanka II component (Hastorf 1993:229–30; D’Altroy 2001:89), and 8.0 ha for the EIP/MH and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69).

Appendix A Structural Remains. There is a single architectural complex in the central site area, at the highest point on the hilltop. There are also several stone-faced terrace walls whose age is indeterminate. The hilltop architectural complex consists of a roughly circular platform ca. 10 m in diameter and 1 m high (Plate A120). Atop this platform are the remnants of an ellipse defined by large stones that loosely enclose an area ca. 6 m long by 4 m wide. A large looter’s pit in the center of this enclosure has exposed rock fill and a possible section of a stone wall. Surface Finds. Surface pottery generally occurs in very light to light concentrations, with sherd density rising to light and light-to-moderate in the central site area at the top of the hill. We also noted several chert knives. We made two surface collections (Table A17). Hastorf (1993:230), D’Altroy (2001b:89) and Borges (1988:70) report a significant LIP (Wanka I and II) occupation here, one that we did not originally detect. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH settlement, probably with a primarily agricultural function. Occupation apparently continued into the LIP. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Wanka I Large Village Wanka II Large Village

175

SITE NO. 464 [Jau-EI-12(H), Unit 60-H, Colls. 63-H, 64-H, 65-H, 66-H, 67-H, 68-H; UMARP Site No. J-47] Date of Survey: Oct. 15, 19, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [438100 E, 8705400 N; 11.7105° S, 75.5680° W] Natural Setting: 3480 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping terrain on the top and upper sides of a low natural terrace at the base of the ridgeline defining the western edge of the Yanamarca Valley. The terrace projects eastward into the main Yanamarca Valley, and rises ca. 20 m above the general level of the valley floor (Plate A121). Because of the presence of several large, stone-faced terraces, erosion has been slight to nonexistent within the immediate site area, although the area in general is severely eroded, and the sides of the site are bordered by deep erosional gullies. Soil cover is generally deep, with a few bedrock outcrops. In uncultivated areas along field borders there is a moderate cover of grass, bushes, and cactus. Modern Land Use: Most of the site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Some fields are bordered by stone-faced terraces, of indeterminate age. The site lies at the northern edge of the modern village of Concho. Because of modern settlement, the site’s southern limits could not be accurately defined. Modern plowing, field clearance, and terrace building have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in concentrations ranging from trace to light-to-moderate over an area of ca. 5.0 ha. Subsequent UMARP resurveys report a site area as 3.6 ha (­LeBlanc (1981:431); as 6.0 ha for the EIP/MH and Wanka I components (Hastorf (1993:229–30); as an overall site area of 6.0 ha (D’Altroy (1992:191); and as 2.2 ha for the EIP/MH and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69–70). There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains. We also noted one groundstone grinding tool. We made six surface collections from throughout the site area (Table A18). On the basis of her subsequent restudy based on four new “well spaced” surface collections from the southern part of the site, LeBlanc (1981:119, 431) concluded that the occupation in this part of the site comprised a probable Wanka II component and a definite Wanka III component. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase, and she also reports the presence of “two fragments of possible [MH] Wari imitation” sherds. Subsequent UMARP studies indicate Wanka II, Wanka III, and Colonial/ Modern components. One predominantly Wanka III UMARP collection (47 = 1) yielded 346 diagnostic sherds: 102 (29.5%) Inca, 1 (0.3%) Wanka-Inca, and 134 (38.6%) Wanka III sherds. Discussion: This site was occupied over a long period beginning in the EIP/MH, although the site appears to have been abandoned during the early LIP (Wanka I) and reoccupied during Wanka II times and into Wanka III. EIP/ MH occupation dominates in the northern part of the site, while LIP/LH surface pottery is dominant in the southern sector, although some pottery of this latter period occurs throughout the site. During Wanka II, the settlement appears to have attained its maximal occupation, housing an estimated 540–900 inhabitants. During Wanka III, the settlement was smaller, with an estimated population of 463–771 inhabitants. It was subsequently occupied during the Colonial

(top) Plate A119. Site 463. Facing east over general area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-24) (bottom) Plate A120. Site 463. Platform at highest point in site, area of Collection 274-P. Note archaeologist for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-22)

Table A17. JASP surface collections at Site 463. Coll. No. 273-P 274-P

Area

Sherd Density Chronology

ca. 35 m dia., northern sector light-to-moderate all EIP/MH ca. 40 m dia., central sector light-to-moderate all EIP/MH

Plate A121. Site 464. Facing north at site on slope above modern houses. Arrow indicates approximate site center. The northern end of the modern village of Concho appears in the foreground below the site. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-3)

176

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table A18. JASP surface collections at Site 464. Coll. No. 63-H 64-H 65-H 66-H 67-H 68-H

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

75 × 40 m, northwestern sector very light mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of Inca-style ceramics 40 × 20 m, downslope from 63-H light-to-moderate mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of Inca-style ceramics 23 × 30 m, slightly below 64-H light-to-moderate mainly LIP, with lighter EIP/MH and a little Inca-style pottery 50 × 15 m, western sector light mainly LIP, plus traces of MH (Classic Wari) and Inca-style pottery 40 × 50 m, southeastern sector light mainly LIP, plus traces of EIP/MH and Inca-style pottery general collection from entire site mixed EIP/MH, LIP, and Inca-style pottery

Table A19. JASP surface collections at Site 465. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

62-H 275-P 276-P

from site as a whole 25 × 40 m, southeastern sector 25 × 30 m, northwestern sector

light-to-moderate light-to-moderate, recently plowed

mainly LIP, plus trace of EIP/MH all LIP mainly LIP, plus trace of EIP/MH

(top) Plate A122. Site 465. Facing north at site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-7) (bottom) Plate A123. Site 465. Facing west over area of Collection 275-P, with two archaeologists for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-26) and Modern Periods, although we did not measure the extent of these historic period occupations. We have arbitrarily assigned an area of 5.0 ha to the LIP and LH components, and 3.7 ha for the EIP/MH component. This site is unusual for the presence of at least one diagnostic Classic Wari MH sherd (Plate B4b, Appendix B). As noted above, Borges (1988:39) also reports two additional small MH “Wari imitation” sherds—these sherds are some of the very few reported from the Wanka Region survey area (see also Sites 442, 451, 583, 589, 624, 627). Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 465 [Jau-LI-4(H), Unit 62-H, Colls. 275-P, 276-P; UMARP Site No. J-46] Date of Survey: Oct. 22, 1975; Aug. 27, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [437100 E, 8705600 N; 11.7105° S, 75.5680° W] Natural Setting: 3720 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground along the top and upper slopes of a prominent ridge spur on the western edge of the main

Acolla Valley, about 200 m above the general level of the valley floor (Plate A122). Erosion has been generally slight to moderate, held in check by the presence of stone-faced terracing. Soil cover is generally medium. Uncultivated areas between agricultural fields have a substantial cover of grass, bushy, and cactus vegetation. Modern Land Use: Primarily rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Some fields had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Fallow fields are devoted to livestock pasture. There has been extensive clearance of rocks from cultivated fields, and most of the agricultural fields are walled to prevent the encroachment of grazing animals. Several modern animal corrals have been constructed in the general site area. These activities have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 5.7 ha is defined on the basis of the distribution of surface pottery. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:430) remeasured this site area as 4.6 ha. Hastorf (1993:230) reports an area of 3.4 ha for the Wanka II component, and D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 3.4 ha. Structural Remains. The abundance of rock rubble in modern field walls suggests the former presence of numerous prehispanic stone-walled structures that have been destroyed by modern field clearance and corral building (Plate A123). Traces of numerous probable structures are still preserved on the surface, although the density varies considerably, with the greatest density toward the edges of the site. Those structures that remain visible are constructed of standard pirka masonry with mud and pebble mortar. One probable remnant of prehispanic architecture consists of a low rubble mound measuring ca. 12 m in diameter and 1.5 m high. The perimeter of this mound is formed by a wall made of unworked stone set in mud mortar. Recent looting of this feature has not exposed any bone or ceramics. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in concentrations that vary from very light to light and even light-to-moderate in a few places. We also noted several pieces of chert debitage, and one chert scraper. We made three surface collections (Table A19). In her subsequent restudy based on six new surface collections (four “normal,” one from each quadrant of the site, and two “excavated surface collections” in the southern part of the site), LeBlanc (1981:229, 430) determined that there were two occupational components at this site: Wanka I (early LIP) and Wanka III (LH). Hastorf (1993:230), however, indicates that there is also a significant Wanka II component. Later UMARP studies detected both EIP/MH and Wanka III components, but do not report any Wanka I or II. Discussion: There is some question about whether the pre-LH component at this site is EIP/MH or Wanka I in age; the status of the Wanka II occupation is also somewhat uncertain. Since the original JASP survey detected only a trace of possible EIP/MH material, we tentatively regard this as a hilltop occupation apparently established during Wanka I times, with continued settlement during the Wanka II and III phases. The significance of the trace of EIP/MH surface pottery is uncertain. UMARP studies suggest a Wanka III population of 77–128 inhabitants. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Wanka I and II (?) Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village

Appendix A SITE NO. 466 [Jau-?-30(P), Coll. 277-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 27, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [435400 E, 8705600 N; 11.7086° S, 75.5929° W] Natural Setting: 3740 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain at the northeastern base of Cerro Tunanmarca, on a broad shelf ca. 125 m above the floor of the Yanamarca Valley to the east. Erosion has been generally moderate. Soil depth is medium, with a moderate grass cover in uncultivated areas. Modern Land Use: Mixed sheep pasture and rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Several modern stone-walled corrals have been built in and around the site area, and this activity, plus modern field clearing, has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.8 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in trace and very light densities. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, although the abundance of rock rubble in modern corral walls suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted a few pieces of chert debitage. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. Although it contains few diagnostics, the material appears to be all LIP. Discussion: A small LIP occupation, probably an outlier of the much larger Site 468, ca. 450 m to the southwest. Classification: LIP: Hamlet SITE NO. 467 [Jau-?-40(P), Fea. 22-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 27, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [435200 E, 8705400 N; 11.7104° S, 75.5946° W] Natural Setting: 3780 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground near the northeastern base of Cerro Tunanmarca, immediately overlooking a broad shelf of nearly level terrain (Plate A124), about 150 m above the floor of the Acolla Valley to the east. Erosion has been generally moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium, with a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is sheep pasture. There is some rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals on lower ground to the north. There do not appear to be any modern corrals in the site area, and there has not been any significant clearing of rock rubble for modern cultivation. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of the remains of an old, possibly prehispanic stone-walled corral. This feature is roughly rectangular, measuring ca. 40 × 15 m (Plate A124), with two surviving tiers of rough stone blocks. There is a trace of surface pottery over an area of ca. 0.5 ha. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The small collection contains few diagnostics, but the material appears to be all LIP. Discussion: Probably an LIP herding facility, probably attached to the large LIP Site 468 ca. 350 m to the southwest. Classification: LIP: Camp (?)

Plate A124. Site 467. Facing northeast over site. The three archaeologists are standing inside the stone-walled feature. (UMMA Neg. No. 29-29)

177

SITE NO. 468 [Jau-LI-33(P), “Tunanmarca,” Unit 104-P, Colls. 191-P, 192-P, 193-P, 194-P, 195-P, 196-P, 197-P; UMARP Site No. J-7] Date of Survey: July 3, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [435000 E, 8704600 N; 11.7176° S, 75.5965° W] Natural Setting: 3970 masl, in the lower puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and uppermost slopes of a large hill (Cerro Tunanmarca) that rises some 150–200 m above the floor of the Yanamarca Valley (Plate A125). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow, with many bedrock outcrops. Most of the site has a moderate cover of grass and bushy vegetation. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area functions only as pasture for sheep and camelids. The lower slopes well below the site are devoted to rainfallbased cultivation of tubers and cereals. The site area itself appears never to have been plowed or cleared for cultivation. Although there are some modern stone-walled corrals in the site area, this corral building has apparently not significantly damaged the archaeological remains, and the prehispanic architecture is fairly well preserved. Archaeological Remains: Surface pottery and stone-walled architecture over an area of ca. 45.7 ha (this represents the area enclosed by the site’s outermost enclosing wall). As seen in Plate A125A and Figure A10, the site comprises two well-defined zones, a northern and a southern, which are separated by a distinctive avenue-plaza complex at the approximate center of the site. A few years after our survey, UMARP archaeologists remeasured this site area as 32.2 ha inside the outermost enclosing wall, and 23.1 ha of residential occupation, with 12.1 ha in the northern zone, and 11.0 ha in the southern sector (LeBlanc 1981:109). Hastorf reports a “residential area” of 25 ha (1993:71) and 25.4 ha (1993:230). Costin (1986:19) reports an area of 33 ha, with an estimated population of 6900–11,400 inhabitants. Russell (1988:104) and Earle and colleagues (1987:11) report a residential area of 22 ha, with an estimated Wanka II population of 8000–13,400 inhabitants. Hastorf (1993:71) reports a “structural density” of 174 structures per hectare, and an estimated population of 7830–13,050 for the Wanka II component. Although the prehispanic architecture is generally relatively well preserved, the presence of considerable rock rubble throughout the site attests to the former presence of additional ancient structures that can no longer be recognized as such. Structural Remains. This is a large, walled site, with highly nucleated domestic and public architecture. The site is bordered by one complete perimeter wall, and a second partially complete outermost wall. The nucleated residential architecture lies completely within the perimeter walls. (1) The outer walls. Most of the site’s perimeter is marked by the presence of a massive stone wall; in some places along the southwestern side of the site there are remains of a second, outermost wall (Plate A126), with the inner and outer walls separated by 50–75 m of apparently empty space. It is unclear whether the entire perimeter was originally defined by double walls. These perimeter walls are massive, constructed of unworked, dry-laid limestone blocks, and measuring ca. 80 cm thick and occasionally still preserved up to 2 m high (Plate A127). We detected no remnants of formal gateways through these perimeter walls, although they may once have existed. (2) The circular residential structures. Inside the inner perimeter wall there are many densely packed circular stone-walled buildings—many or most of them seemingly residential in function (Plate A128; Fig. A11). LeBlanc (1981:111) estimates a total of 4280 circular habitation structures. The buildings’ walls are well made, constructed of unworked local stone set in mud mortar and chinked with smaller stone fragments (Plate A129). The structures typically measure 3.0–4.5 m in diameter, and some walls are preserved up to 3 m high; the wellpreserved structures show slightly in-leaning walls, with trapezoidal doorways ca. 1.2 m high and 70–90 cm wide, capped with a stone lintel (Plate A130). Interior wall niches are occasionally seen. Some of the smaller buildings may have been outbuildings of some sort. Although there is no apparent overall site planning, there are remnants of enclosure walls that may define open patios, roughly rectilinear in form and averaging ca. 10 × 15 m in area around which are grouped clusters of 2–7 circular structures (Plate A131; Fig. A11). The patios are enclosed by the walls of structures, by terrace retaining walls and in level areas where terraces are not needed by free standing walls which link adjacent buildings. Occasionally the patio groups are separated by narrow passageways which apparently allowed movement through the settlement. [LeBlanc 1981:111]

178

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(above) Plate A125. Sites 461 and 468. Facing southeast toward general area of hilltop Sites 461 and 468. Arrows indicate approximate site centers. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-15) (right) Plate A125A. Site 468, vertical airphoto. Courtesy of Servicio Aerofotográfico Nacional, Lima.

Plate A126. Site 468. Double exterior walls at south end of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-6)

Plate A127. Site 468. Section of outer wall near north end of site. A section of the innerexterior wall shows along the right-hand edge of the photo. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-20)

Plate A128. Site 468. Facing north over north half of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-18)

Appendix A

179

Figure A10. Site 468 (Tunanmarca), general site plan showing outer perimeter wall, mapped patio groups, and central plaza area (from D’Altroy 2001b:126, Fig. 6.5).

Figure A11. Site 468 (Tunanmarca), examples of patio groups. The individual circular structures are ca. 4 m in diameter (from LeBlanc 1981:112, Fig. 2.19).

180

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A129. Site 468. Detail of masonry construction on exterior of circular structure. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-12)

Plate A131. Site 468. Structures near Collection 192-P. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-10)

Plate A130. Site 468. Example of well-preserved circular structure, with Juan Ramirez. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-19)

Plate A132. Site 468. Large rectangular structure at Collection 194-P, with Phil Tugendrajch. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-14)

Appendix A

181 shows light-to-moderate surface pottery. We also noted one possible groundstone mano and a few chert flakes. We made seven surface collections from points distributed fairly evenly throughout the site (except for Coll. 194-P, all collections are from areas of nucleated architectural remains) (Table A20). UMARP Excavations and Surface Collections at This Site: UMARP archaeologists carried out four test excavations in or near the central plazas. They also obtained four “excavated” surface collections from different parts of the site. The excavations encountered sterile soil or bedrock at depths of 8–85 cm. These investigations revealed that the occupation was entirely late LIP (Wanka II), with a light overlay of Colonial and modern material (LeBlanc 1981:115–19). Discussion: A major Wanka II LIP center, one of the largest in the Yanamarca Valley. UMARP studies show that the site was not occupied during Wanka I times, and was apparently abandoned during the Late Horizon. The central avenue-plaza complex with its large rectangular buildings appears to represent an unusually prominent and distinctive focus of public architecture and elite residence. The consistent presence of Colonial-era pottery indicates a reoccupation of the site after Spanish conquest. Classification: LIP: Wanka II Regional Center

Figure A12. Site 468 (Tunanmarca), central plaza area (from LeBlanc 1981:114, Fig. 2.20).

(3) The central avenue-plaza complex. The only apparent exception to the dominant pattern of circular buildings in clustered patio groups is a distinctive architectural complex at the approximate center of the site, at the highest point of the supporting ridge crest. This comprises 2 or 3 large rectangular structures and a few dozen circular buildings grouped around two contiguous plazas (Fig. A12). The larger of the plazas measures ca. 40 × 45 m, and the smaller is ca. 35 × 15 m (LeBlanc 1981:113). The rectangular buildings measure ca. 8.5 × 4.5 m (LeBlanc [1981:113] measured them more precisely as 9.75 × 5.6 m, and 9.0 × 6.0 m), and are constructed of roughly squared-off limestone blocks ca. 80 cm thick and set in mud mortar (Plate A132). The plaza occupies the site’s highest point, extending over a relatively flat area ca. 60 × 80 m in area (Plate A133). Although the plaza appears to lack internal architecture, fragmentary wall remnants suggest some formally defined subdivisions. The surface of the plaza has surface pottery in light-to-moderate concentration—the highest density anywhere in the site. Approaching the plaza on both its eastern and western sides are two long, broad “avenues.” These avenues approach the plaza across moderately sloping ground that is otherwise empty of structures. The avenues measure ca. 150 m long and 15–30 m wide, with their outer edges defined by walls of dry-laid stone (Plate A134). (4) The possible shaft tomb. Although its form and function are unclear, there may be a roughly circular, stone-faced shaft tomb at the far southern end of the site. This may have marked the site’s perimeter at this point, and may have once been associated with a formal gateway—as occurs at the nearby Chawin site (Site 461). Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site, generally in very light concentrations, but with two notable exceptions: (1) in the central avenue-plaza complex where there is light-to-moderate surface pottery over a sizable area (Coll. 194-P taken there); and (2) the area lying between the inner and outer large perimeter walls along the northeastern edge of the site, in an area otherwise lacking architecture, that also

SITE NO. 468-A [Ancient canal; no field site number; Fea. 34-P] Date of Survey: Sept. 10, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [upper end of canal: 436700 E, 8702800 N; 11.7340° S, 75.5809° W] [lower end of canal: 435700 E, 8703200 N; 11.7303° S, 75.5901° W] Natural Setting: Upper end of canal: ca. 3725 masl; lower end of canal: ca. 3690 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately to steeply sloping terrain around the lower flanks of a large hill. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow. There is a sparse cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: The ancient canal extends along uncultivated ground used only as marginal livestock pasture. The lower hillslopes below the canal are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Archaeological Remains: This site comprises an ancient stonelined canal that can be traced along a distance of ca. 2 km. The original beginning and ending points are obscured by modern field clearing and plowing. The canal appears to head in a small quebrada on the south side of the hill, and it seems to terminate in the reservoir below Site 468 described above as the terminus of a long canal-aqueduct complex (Site 459). The canal section visible to us is relatively well preserved (Plate A135). It is constructed atop a well-built, stone-faced terrace, ca. 1 m wide and 25–75 cm high. The canal was originally paved with flat stones and measures ca. 40 cm wide and ca. 20 cm deep. We found no surface pottery associated with the canal. Discussion: This canal appears to have been part of the hydraulic complex that supplied water to the large reservoir below Site 468. Although the chronology of its construction and use remains uncertain, we think it probably dates primarily to the late LIP (Wanka II), when the Tunanmarca site was occupied. Classification: LIP (?): Canal Complex SITE NO. 469 [Jau-EI-13(H), Unit 61-H, Colls. 69-H, 70-H; UMARP Site No. J-222] Date of Survey: Oct. 22, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [437900 E, 8703900 N; 11.7240° S, 75.5699° W] Natural Setting: 3500 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately steep terrain at the mouth of the Quebrada Huaspi. The site occupies basal slopes on either side of the quebrada, at the upper edge of the valley floor to the east. Erosion has been slight. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is little natural vegetation. Modern Land Use: The site lies along a dirt road between the modern villages of Marco and Concho. The slopes below the site, and the valley floor farther east, are intensively cultivated, with rainfall-based,

182

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(top) Plate A133. Site 468. Section of large “plaza” at Collection 194-P, with two archaeologists for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-16) (bottom) Plate A134. Site 468. “Avenue” west of Collection 194-P, with two archaeologists for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-23) Plate A135. Site 468-A. Section of Feature 34-P canal, with Paul Liffman and Julia Medel. (UMMA Neg. No. 33-35)

Table A20. JASP surface collections at Site 468. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

191-P

ca. 70 m dia.

very light

192-P

ca. 70 m dia.

very light

193-P

ca. 70 m dia.

very light

194-P 195-P

20 × 20 m, in plaza area ca. 70 m dia.

light-tomoderate very light

196-P

ca. 70 m dia.

very light

197-P

ca. 70 m dia.

very light

all late LIP, minor Colonial and modern predominantly late LIP, plus minor Colonial and modern all late LIP, plus minor Colonial and modern all late LIP, plus minor Colonial and modern all late LIP, plus minor Colonial and modern all LIP, plus minor Colonial and modern all LIP, plus minor Colonial and modern

Table A21. JASP surface collections at Site 469. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

69-H

ca. 80 m dia., northern sector ca. 80 m dia., southern sector

very light

mixed EIP/MH and LIP, with EIP/MH dominant mixed EIP/MH and LIP, with EIP/MH dominant

70-H

very light

terraced fields just below the site and irrigation-based fields on the valley floor farther east. Modern terracing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 7.0 ha is defined by surface pottery in very light concentration. Subsequent UMARP restudies report the same site area for both the EIP/MH and Wanka I components (Hastorf 1993:229–30; Borges 1988:69–70). There are no visible prehispanic structures, although rock rubble throughout the site area suggests the former presence of ancient structures. We made two surface collections, one on either side of the dividing quebrada (Table A21). Hastorf (1993:230) subsequently determined that the LIP component dates to Wanka I times. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Discussion: A mixed EIP/MH and LIP occupation, apparently with continuous occupation from EIP/MH into the early LIP. We have arbitrarily assigned the LIP component a surface area of roughly 5.1 ha, about three-quarters of the EIP/MH site (although, as noted above, Hastorf [1993:229] indicates that both the EIP/MH and early LIP components are equal in site area). Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Wanka I Large Village SITE NO. 470 [Jau-EI-14(H), Coll. 71-H; UMARP Site No. J-141] Date of Survey: Oct. 25, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [437900 E, 8703900 N; 11.7240° S, 75.5699° W] Natural Setting: 3710 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground on the crest and upper slopes of a broad, irregular ridge, on the north side of the Quebrada Huaspi (Plate A136). To the south and east of the site the terrain descends steeply to the

Appendix A floor of the quebrada and the main Acolla Valley, the latter some 200 m below. Erosion has been generally slight within the site area. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is minimal natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. The terrain has been extensively cleared by modern farmers, and their walls of stone rubble surround most agricultural fields. This modern field clearance has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 4.1 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentrations. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 5.1 ha for the EIP/MH component, and 4.1 ha for the Wanka I component (Hastorf 1993:229–30); 4.1 ha for the EIP/ MH and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69–70); and an overall site area of 5.1 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191). There are no definite prehispanic structural remains, although the abundance of rock rubble in the modern field walls suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled buildings. We made a single surface collection from the site as a whole. The material is very predominantly EIP/MH (including both Usupukio- and Huacrapukio-phase components), with a possible trace of LIP ceramics. Borges (1988:69) also identified both Huacrapukio 1 and 2 phases. Hastorf (1993:230) reports a much more substantial Wanka I occupation than we had originally detected, while D’Altroy’s restudy revealed a significant Wanka III occupation, which we did not detect. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, apparently with both early and late phases represented. Occupation apparently continued into the early LIP (Wanka I), with an abandonment during late LIP (Wanka II) and a reoccupation during LH (Wanka III) times. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 471 [Jau-EI-20(P), Coll. 104-P; UMARP Site No. J-145] Date of Survey: Oct. 28, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [437300 E, 8701800 N; 11.7430° S, 75.5754° W] Natural Setting: 3660 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper slopes of a low hill that rises ca. 50 m above the general level of a broad shelf of nearly level terrain at the northern base of Cerro Hatunmarca, ca. 200 m south of the Quebrada Huaspi. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally medium. There is a moderate cover of grass, bushy, and cactus vegetation along the borders of cultivated fields. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of tubers, fava beans, and cereals. Modern farmers have cleared their fields of rocks, which are piled up in walls along field borders (Plate A137). Modern field clearing and plowing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.1 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. Subsequent UMARP restudies reports a site area of 1.5 ha for the EIP/MH component and 2.1 ha for the Wanka I component (Hastorf 1993:229–30); 2.1 ha for the EIP/ MH and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69–70); 1.5 ha for the Wanka II component (D’Altroy 2001:89); and an overall site area of 1.5 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191). There is no visible prehispanic architecture, although the abundance of rock rubble in modern field walls suggests the former presence of ancient buildings. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material appeared to be all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) identified Huacrapukio 1 and 2 phases. Hastorf (1993:230) and D’Altroy (1992:191, 2001:89) report significant early LIP (Wanka I), late LIP (Wanka II), and LH (Wanka III) occupations here, which we did not originally detect. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, apparently with continued occupation into the early LIP (Wanka I), apparent abandonment during late LIP (Wanka II), and a reoccupation during LH (Wanka III) times. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

183

Plate A136. Site 470. Facing southwest over general area of site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-6)

Plate A137. Site 471. Area of Collection 104-P. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-17)

SITE NO. 472 [Jau-LI-15(P), Jau-EI-29(P); “Hatunmarca”; Units 75-P, 76-P, Colls. 90-P, 91-P, 92-P, 93-P, 94-P, 95-P, 96-P, 97-P, 98-P, 99-P; UMARP Site No. J-2] Date of Survey: Oct. 25, 1975 Location: Hojas Acolla and Parco [Jau-EI-29(P): 438400 E, 8701500 N; 11.7457° S, 75.5653° W] [Jau-LI-15(P): 438500 E, 8700600 N; 11.7539° S, 75.5644° W] Natural Setting: 3730 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping terrain along the crest and upper slopes of a long, broad ridge on the western side of the Acolla Valley (Plate A138). The supporting ridge falls off steeply for about 300 m to the east into the Yanamarca Valley, and somewhat more gently for about 100 m onto rolling uplands to the west. Erosion is minimal on top of the ridge and in the terraced areas, but severe in the unterraced slopes around the site’s perimeter. Soil depth varies widely, from exposed bedrock in the more sloping areas to terraces with soil up to 2.5 m deep. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushy and cactus vegetation along the borders of agricultural fields. Springs apparently once existed on top of the site, but are no longer productive. At the base of the hill to the west is a series of springs that continue to yield enough water that they have been capped and canalized; these latter springs would probably have provided a perennial source of water in prehispanic times. Modern Land Use: Most of the site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers, fava beans, and cereals. Cultivation is carried out in small fields from which rocks have been cleared and formed into walls that border each field. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Herds of sheep, goats, and a few llama are also pastured throughout the site area. The soils on the site are among the most fertile in the immediate area, probably as a consequence of accumulated organic waste, and are therefore cultivated with a fair intensity. Archaeological Remains: This is a large, nucleated site, the largest in our entire survey region, with abundant architectural remains and surface pottery. The site is bordered by a single outer wall. Within this outer wall there are two main sectors: the lower-lying northern third (our Unit 75-P) (Plates A138A, A139), and the higher-elevated southern two-thirds (our Unit 76-P) (Plate A140; Fig. A13). We originally measured the site area within the outer wall as ca. 130.0 ha. A few years later, UMARP archaeologists also measured the entire site area as 130.0 ha (LeBlanc 1981:55–56; Costin 1986:24). In her subsequent analysis, Hastorf (1993:71, 230) reports a “residential area” of 74.0 (or 73.7) ha, with

184

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(top) Plate A139. Site 472. Facing north over northern third of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-28) (bottom) Plate A140. Site 472. Facing northeast over southern two-thirds of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-9)

(top) Plate A138. Site 472. Facing northwest over general area of hilltop site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-27) (bottom) Plate A138A. Site 472. Vertical airphoto, courtesy of Servicio Aerofotográfico Nacional, Lima.

an estimated population of 6660–11,100 inhabitants, for the Wanka II component; she estimates an area of 4.9 ha for the Wanka I component of the site (1993:230). Costin (1986:24) reports an overall Wanka II residential area of 95 ha (60 ha in the southern sector and 35 ha in the northern sector), with an estimated Wanka II population at 8600–14,200 inhabitants. Russell (1988:104) and Earle and colleagues (1987:11) report a residential area of 95 ha for the Wanka II component, and 27 ha for the Wanka III component, with estimated populations of 10,000–16,600 (Wanka II) and 2800–4700 (Wanka III) inhabitants. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 27.4 ha for the Wanka III (LH) component. The most recent UMARP measurements are 106.5 ha for the overall site, 73.7 ha of which are occupied by the two sectors of buildings (a northern and a

southern sector, each on an elevated knoll), and 32.8 ha of which comprise largely empty ground between the outer perimeter wall and the architectural zones. The two residential sectors are situated atop low knolls that rise ca. 10–15 m above the general level of the supporting ridge crest; these sectors are separated by a broad topographic low, ca. 60 m wide, which is largely devoid of architectural remains. Each residential sector is enclosed by a stone wall. The site is terraced virtually throughout, and ceramic, lithic, and other artifactual remains are extensively distributed over the ground surface. Structural Remains. Although some prehispanic structures are relatively well preserved, in many parts of the site only extensive rock rubble and a few wall remnants attest to the former presence of numerous stone-walled structures. In some cases, the prehispanic structures have been incorporated into modern field walls (Plate A141). Most of the structures whose form can still be discerned are circular, although there are also a few rectangular buildings. The general configuration of the site. UMARP mapping recorded a total of 2238 structures on the surface of the site, of which 2177 are circular and 61 rectangular (LeBlanc 1981:64). Hastorf (1993:71) reports a “structural density” of 50 structures per hectare for the Wanka II component. UMARP investigations at Hatunmarca included detailed measurements made on a total of 146 structures found in areas randomly selected for intensive surface collecting. Of these 146 structures, 139 were circular, 3 were “true rectangular,” and 4 were “sub-rectangular” (with rounded corners). The highest point in the southern sector of the site is capped by a unique complex of large rectangular buildings, unusually large circular structures, and at least 1 shaft tomb. Some remnants of ancient stone-faced terracing are visible on the slopes below the site to the east. Approximately 4750 buildings are estimated to have been present during the maximal occupation of the settlement (Wanka II), at a density of about 50 structures per hectare. While most of these were organized into architectural compounds (patio groups) containing 1 or more circular buildings, the size and number of structures per patio group is difficult to ascertain accurately because of the extensive architectural destruction. In those areas in which patio groups were preserved in relatively good condition, the buildings were laid out around an open area. Walls often connected buildings to one another, separating the patio group from the adjoining groups. In general, an open area of about 20 m2 and 1 or 2 structures were incorporated into patio groups defined as commoner during excavations. Elite groups comprised 30–40 m2 and contained 4–6 structures (Earle et al. 1987: Table 2). A segregated complex of large buildings occupies the center of each of the two main residential sectors. The central complex on the southern knoll is the more impressive of the two complexes. It consisted of at least 45 structures in

Appendix A

(top) Figure A13. Site 472 (Hatunmarca), overall site plan of the Wanka II site (from D’Altroy 1992:57, Fig. 4.4). (bottom) Plate A141. Site 472. Example of prehispanic architecture incorporated into modern stone wall. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-16) two separate subgroups. The heavy rubble in the immediate vicinity of the less impressive northern subgroup indicates that more buildings were once present there. The gap between the two main residential sectors is almost rubble free and has a very low surface ceramic density, while the hillslopes immediately to the east and west were terraced, but are currently free of any evidence of structures. From this layout, it seems clear that the zone between the two main residential sectors was intentionally segregated from the habitation area surrounding it. The southern residential sector subgroup. Here, within an area ca. 150 m in diameter, are 3 large rectangular buildings, each measuring ca. 13.5 × 5 m in area, with stone walls ca. 80 cm thick made of unworked stone set in mud mortar, and in some cases preserved up to 3 m high (Plates A142, A143). These structures have interior wall niches that measure ca. 25 cm deep, by 25 cm wide and 40 cm high. In addition to the rectangular structures, this complex contains 3 smaller, square buildings, each ca. 6–7 m on a side, and 2 or 3 unusually large circular structures measuring ca. 10 m in diameter (Plate A144). This complex also contains at least 1 stone-lined shaft “tomb,” part of which is subterranean and part of which rises above the ground level. This structure measures ca. 1.0 × 1.5 m in area and 2.5 m deep (Plate A145), with a window ca. 50 cm2. Our designation of this feature as a “tomb” is strictly provisional, based exclusively on its form; we saw no human bone in or around the structure. Because they are so vulnerable to destruction through modern field clearing, we probably failed to detect many comparable “tombs” throughout the site. The southern subgroup was clustered around a large plaza, in a roughly trapezoidal shape. The large structures and the 16 buildings facing onto the plaza distinguished the compound from normal Wanka residential patio groups. Except for small niches in the interior walls of 2 structures and the large size

185

of 5 structures (up to 10 m in diameter), the circular buildings were not readily distinguishable from other buildings of a similar floor plan at Hatunmarca. The uncoursed pirka masonry, with interior and exterior facings, was essentially identical to that found elsewhere in the site, although the stones used in the masonry are somewhat larger than those found in commoner areas. The rectangular buildings were distinctive from the remaining architecture in the southern subgroup, although they too were built of limestone pirka. The 2 largest buildings in the sector were rectangular and contained interior rows of trapezoidal or rectangular niches, in imitation of the Inca style. The larger of these 2 buildings (designated Structure A by UMARP archaeologists), which stood relatively isolated at the northern end of the complex, measured about 18 × 17 m, with walls up to 1.0 m thick and 3.0 m high: this was easily the largest building on the site. The niches here measured about 0.4 m across, 0.5 m high, and 0.3 m deep. They were not so neatly constructed as the niches at the Inca provincial center of Hátun Xauxa (Site 550), which they were likely intended to imitate, but the size and masonry were similar. They were fully lined with flat rocks and capped by lintel stones. The door faced east, over the Yanamarca Valley in the direction of Hátun Xauxa. The main rectangular building (designated Structure B by UMARP archaeologists) in the southern part of the southern subgroup contained 12 interior niches, 4 on each side wall and 2 on each end wall. A low stone ledge approximately 0.5 m wide lined the exterior of the two side walls. Access was gained to the building through a door on the north side. An unusual architectural feature—a tunnel-like passage at ground level—provided access through the east wall. It is possible that this was a drain, although no other stonework is visible in the immediate vicinity. The 1983 UMARP excavations showed that this central area in the southern architectural sector of the southern main residential subgroup was at least partially reconstructed during the Wanka III (LH) phase. In both patio groups, excavated buildings occupied during the Wanka II (late LIP) phase were demolished and covered over during Wanka III times. The ground surface was artificially elevated up to 2.0 m during construction of a flat terrace along the eastern edge of the complex. The central part of the complex was also built up, as excavations uncovered Wanka I (early LIP) and II (late LIP) phase deposits and architectural foundations beneath the Wanka III occupation. The excavations further showed that this area continued to be occupied into the Colonial era, as post-contact artifacts were recovered from occupational contexts. The architectural types. (1) The circular residential structures. These average 4–6 m in diameter and are well made, with unworked stone set in mud mortar, with near-vertical walls ca. 40–50 cm thick (Plates A146, A147), some of which still stand to heights of ca. 3.0 m. A few unusually well preserved structures have trapezoidal doorways capped by stone lintels, and interior wall niches. Clusters of 4–6 buildings are grouped around common small, open patios. Some building clusters have been constructed atop stone-faced terraces (Plate A148). As noted above, subsequent intensive mapping by UMARP revealed the presence of many such patio groups,

186

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(top) Plate A146. Site 472. Preserved circular structure near Collection 91-P, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-19) (bottom) Plate A147. Site 472. Detail of stone masonry in circular structure, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-25)

(from top to bottom) Plate A142. Site 472. Facing north over area of Collection 96-P, toward large rectangular building at top of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-32) Plate A143. Site 472. Rectangular structure south of Collection 96-P, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-34) Plate A144. Site 472. Large circular structure south of Collection 96-P, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-35) Plate A145. Site 472. Shaft tomb south of Collection 96-P, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-36)

consisting of 2–6 circular structures “whose doorways face onto the patio . . . connected by terrace retaining walls or by free standing walls, thus enclosing the patio” (LeBlanc 1981:65) (e.g., Fig. A14). UMARP archaeologists subsequently studied 139 relatively well preserved circular structures distributed throughout the site. Their measurements are summarized in Table A22. LeBlanc (1981:80) notes that virtually all the unusually large circular structures occur within the highest, central sectors of the two site sectors, in close proximity to the most numerous rectangular buildings. The floor areas of these large circular structures (up to 104 m2) are comparable to those of the larger rectangular buildings, and many of the large circular structures have Incaic features, such as interior trapezoidal niches and narrow exterior ledges. To LeBlanc (1981:80) “it appears likely that some of these larger circular structures served as elite residences” during the Late Horizon occupation of Hatunmarca. LeBlanc (1981:76) observes that while there is thus far no evidence that any of the site’s circular structures functioned for storage, the presence of human bone indicates that the infrequent smallest structures (less than ca. 3 m2) probably functioned as tombs. Such tombs, however, accounted for only a tiny fraction of the burials at Hatunmarca. UMARP mapping and excavations revealed many interments in small caverns formed by walling up the fronts of rockshelters along the site’s steep eastern escarpment; many more individuals were buried beneath the floors of abandoned circular residential buildings (LeBlanc 1971:76–77). Of the 139 circular structures studied by UMARP, only 8 had preserved doorways. The base of the door frame was consistently formed by a large dressed block, roughly three to four times the size of an average wall rock. The rest of the door frame was also formed by single blocks, in contrast to the double row of rock which forms the double faced pirka in the rest of the structure. Door widths vary from 0.40 to 0.75 m, the majority falling close to the latter figure. [LeBlanc 1981:72]

Appendix A

187

Table A22. Summary of UMARP measurements of 139 circular structures at Site 472 (Hatunmarca). Exterior Diameter

Floor Area

Mean Floor Area

2.6–7.7 m 2.0–33.2 m2 13.1 m2 Adapted from LeBlanc (1981:71–72).

Modal Floor Area

Mean Wall Width

7–19 m2

43.1 ± 5.4 cm

Table A23. UMARP measurements of 3 rectangular structures at Site 472.

Plate A148. Site 472. Circular structures on terrace, near Collection 98-P. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-1)

Length and Width

Floor Area

3.0 × 3.5 m up to 7.5 × 28.2 m Adapted from LeBlanc (1981:78–79).

up to 140.9 m2

(2) The rectangular structures. As noted above, of the 7 noncircular (out of a total of 146 structures studied) structures measured by UMARP archaeologists, 4 were sub-rectangular and 3 were “truly rectangular.” The sub-rectangular buildings. These were all too fragmentary to obtain size measurements, but a single better-preserved structure of this type near the south sector knoll-top complex measured 3.0 × 2.7 m, with an interior floor area of 3.4 m2 (LeBlanc 1981:78). The truly rectangular buildings. LeBlanc (1981:78) notes that most of these structures are found in the “central parts of both northern and southern occupation areas.” Many of these structures incorporate features known to be indicative of Incaic occupation (e.g., trapezoidal wall niches, and high concentrations of Inca-style ceramics). These characteristics suggest that some, perhaps most, of these structures were built during the Late Horizon, although “[i]t remains a possibility that some of the rectangular structures at Hatunmarca were constructed during the LIP occupation” (LeBlanc 1981:78). LeBlanc (1981:80) concludes that [m]any of these true rectangular structures probably served as public buildings or elite residences. This is suggested by their infrequency on the site, their generally larger floor areas . . . , as well as their concentration in the central areas within the southern and northern occupation zones. Within these central areas we also find the exceptionally large circular structures.

Table A23 summarizes the sizes and interior surface areas of the 3 “truly rectangular” structures measured in detail by UMARP archaeologists. (3) The burial chambers (chullpas) and burial caves. Small, beehive-shaped buildings probably served as burial chambers (chullpas). Built of the same pirka masonry as the habitation structures, they were about 2.0 m in diameter and stood no more than 1.5 m high. Fewer than 10 of these are preserved, however, so it appears that these were never particularly widely used. Burial caves and subfloor burial pits seem to have been much more common. Burial caves, many of which have been looted, line the east side of the southern residential sector. The rockshelter chambers were sealed with mortared pirka masonry. Several of these have skeletal material from multiple individuals, and are often accompanied by artifacts from the early Colonial Period. (4) Possible domestic storehouses. These circular structures could occasionally be identified by their relatively small size (2–3 m in diameter). Because not all patio groups have such storehouses, identification of their function must eventually be verified by excavation, and it is therefore not yet clear how many existed at the site. (5) Possible lookout stations. UMARP archaeologists noted the presence of “outposts or lookouts” situated around different parts of the site peripheries—structures that we did not pay any particular attention to during our own less intensive survey in 1975–76: Figure A14. Site 472 (Hatunmarca), example of Wanka II residential compound (from D’Altroy 2001b:75, Fig. 4.5).

The large structure which sits outside of the outer fortification wall on the north is one such structure. Another is the rectangular structure built into the inner fortification wall on the west of the southern occupation zone. Perhaps most obvious are the eight large structures, arranged in two groups of four each, located in the southern end of the site and on the eastern side of the ridge. These structures are set apart from the nearby residential buildings. The inner set of four are all circular structures. Within the set farther to the east below the ridge crest are two circular structures and two rectangular structures. [LeBlanc 1981:84]

188

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

The structures noted by LeBlanc fall within the size ranges exhibited by other circular and rectangular structures at Hatunmarca, and she suggests (1981:84–85) that “these structures may have served as shelters for community members involved in surveillance of the surrounding terrain” in this strategically placed location with unusually good views of the surrounding landscape. The most prominent examples are preserved at the northwest and southeast extremes of the site. (6) Perimeter walls, terraces, and stone parapets. A single massive stone wall extends around most of the site’s entire outer perimeter, and each of the two main residential sectors is, in turn, surrounded by a second, inner perimeter wall (Plates A149, A150); in a few cases an innermost third perimeter wall can also be detected. Thus, the entire site shares a single, outer perimeter wall, while the inner perimeters of both main residential sectors are marked by at least one additional wall. In most cases, the walls are closely associated with a parallel ditch, or dry moat, from which the walls’ building material was probably quarried and which may have had an additional defensive function. There are three distinct wall-ditch complexes on the more gently sloping western side of the site. Along the steeper, northern side there is no really distinct wall, but there is a large stone-faced terrace-like feature that may originally have functioned as a perimeter wall. All these walls have been much destroyed by modern farmers in the course of plowing and field clearing. However, the original walls can usually be distinguished from the modern by the high quality of their construction with mud mortar and the use of larger stone blocks. Subsequent UMARP investigations revealed additional constructional detail of these “fortification” walls:   The inner and outer fortification walls vary from 1.0 to 2.5 m in width, and in places still stand over 2 m high. Large limestone boulders form the foundation and first course of the walls. Large blocks were used to form the interior and exterior faces of the walls; the core of the wall was filled with rock rubble. At several points the walls were built over large outcrops to give the exterior face additional height. Along other sections, a trench running along the exterior of the fortification wall produces the same effect. The trench . . . varied in width from 1.9 to 2.5 m and in depth from 0.6 to 1.6 m. . . .   Only three narrow openings in the fortification walls were identified, all in the outer wall on the north side of the northern occupation zone. Two of these were about 1.5 to 2 m in width. The third entrance, located to the west of the other two, was wider. It led into a narrow alley which had been excavated into the bedrock, producing an entrance which was below the level of the surrounding area. [LeBlanc 1981:82–83]

Virtually the entire site was terraced. Most terraces were faced with unmortared pirka stone walls. In many cases, the residential architecture was incorporated into the terrace support walls. The amount of field clearing by modern farmers has made it difficult to determine how much of the land could have been used for agriculture during the Wanka occupation of the site, but it seems fairly safe to assume that many terraces were used for agriculture, even at the time of densest Wanka occupation during the Wanka II phase. (7) Camelid corrals (?). Parsons and Hastings (1977) originally suggested that the largely open area between the residential architecture and the outer perimeter wall may have been used for corralling camelids. This still seems reasonable, despite the lack of any directly supporting evidence, given the appropriateness of the terrain for herding, and the lack of independently defined corrals in the vicinity. Nevertheless, the apparent absence of internal compartmentalization within the open space raises questions about herd management. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site, usually in lightto-moderate concentrations, with some areas of moderate and very light sherd density. We also noted numerous stone tools: numerous hoes and grinding tools, and a variety of chipped-stone implements. We made ten surface collections distributed more or less evenly throughout the entire site area (Fig. A15) (Table A24). UMARP surface collections. On the basis of topography and occupational characteristics, UMARP archaeologists divided the site into 11 sampling strata: 6 in the main southern residential sector, and 5 in the northern. Within each stratum they made surface collections from 5 randomly selected circles measuring 8 m in diameter—a total of 55 new surface collections. These collections yielded a total of 61,314 sherds, of which 13,012 were diagnostic, including 503 Inca sherds (3.9% of the total diagnostics). An additional 102 sherds were composite Wanka-Inca (0.8% of the total diagnostics), while virtually all the remaining 12,407 diagnostic sherds (95.4%) were from Wanka types, such as Base Clara, Wanka Reds, Micaceous Self-slip, and Base Roja (see Appendix B).

(top) Plate A149. Site 472. Facing southeast along outer wall at south end of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-6) (bottom) Plate A150. Site 472. Facing northwest along western edge of site, showing inner and outer exterior walls. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-8)

Although LeBlanc (1981:90–91) reported Inca-style pottery from throughout the site, later assessments of the Wanka II and Wanka III occupations (Costin 1986:25; D’Altroy 1992:55–56, 186–89; D’Altroy 2001:89–90) found that the Wanka III settlement at Hatunmarca was significantly smaller than the Wanka II site (Table A25). LeBlanc (1981:61–62) also reports a small early LIP (Wanka I) occupation at this site, with an estimated surface area of ca. 2.5 ha (C. LeBlanc, personal communications, Nov. 29, 1980). Discussion: This site was a residential settlement throughout the LIP (Wanka I, II), through the Inca occupation (Wanka III), and into the early Colonial Period (Wanka IV). During Wanka I, the settlement was apparently a small village of indeterminate size and population. In Wanka II it grew to be one of the two dominant centers in the entire survey region and one of the largest late LIP settlements in the entire Peruvian sierra. Under Inca rule, the settlement shrank considerably, but maintained its elevated status as one of the two largest Wanka sites of the Late Horizon. The unusual architectural complex at the site’s highest point at the center of the main southern residential sector appears to have been a concentration of public buildings and elite residences dating mainly to the Late Horizon. The extent of the Colonial Period occupation is unclear, but it is possible that a substantial population continued to reside here. The distribution of architecture and the use of space imply a complex internal organization for this site. In particular, the Wanka III component can be divided into areas of elite and commoner occupations. The central area of each residential sector contains complexes of large, well-constructed buildings, spatially segregated from the surrounding architecture. These were apparently the focus of elite residence and civic-ceremonial activity, an interpretation substantiated by the 1983 excavations (Earle et al. 1984). The remaining architecture in each of the main residential sectors probably represents commoner occupation.

Appendix A

189

Figure A15. Site 472 (Hatunmarca), sketch plan of site showing locations of JASP surface collections. Table A24. JASP surface collections at Site 472. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

90-P 91-P 92-P 93-P 94-P 95-P

30 × 15 m, in plowed field 20 × 30 m, in plowed field 10 × 20 m, in plowed field 20 × 20 m, in plowed field 20 × 15 m, in plowed field 10 × 15 m, in plowed field

LIP, with possible trace of EIP/MH LIP, with possible trace of EIP/MH and trace of Inca-style pottery mainly LIP, with trace of EIP/MH and trace of Inca-style pottery all LIP predominantly LIP, with light EIP/MH and Inca-style pottery LIP, plus trace of Inca-style pottery

96-P

15 × 15 m, in plowed field

97-P 98-P 99-P

15 × 20 m, in fallow field 20 × 30 m, in fallow field 20 × 40 m, in fallow field

light-to-moderate light-to-moderate light-to-moderate light-to-moderate light-to-moderate moderate, on west side of south sector knoll-top complex light-to-moderate, on east side of south sector knoll-top complex light-to-moderate light-to-moderate light

Table A25. Estimates for site area and population for Wanka II vs. Wanka III occupations at Hatunmarca. Phase

Site Area

Population Range

Wanka II (late LIP) 73.7 ha 6633–11,055 Wanka III (LH) 27.4 ha 2466–4110 Adapted from D’Altroy 2001b:90–91. Slightly different figures are reported by Costin (1986:25).

Determining the precise area of the various occupational components of this settlement is difficult. Evidence for Wanka I occupation has been found on both knolls, but the size of the earlier settlement remains to be determined by further excavations. The architectural and ceramic evidence indicate that by far the greatest occupation occurred during the Wanka II phase, when the entire site appears to have been occupied.

all LIP LIP, plus trace of Inca-style pottery all LIP LIP, plus possible trace of EIP/MH

Ascertaining the area of the Wanka III occupational component is a major problem. Concentrations of Inca ceramics and architecture exhibiting Incaic architectural canons occur in two areas in the centers of the northern and southern knolls. If the area attributed to the Wanka III occupation is limited only to those places where the Inca ceramics comprise at least 5% of each surface collection, this occupation would cover about 17 ha: 13 ha on the southern knoll and 4 ha on the northern. If we assume that the difference between the areas with and without Incaic ceramics and architecture is, in part, a reflection of social differences between elites and commoners, then the areal and population estimates for Wanka III would be significantly higher. How much higher is unclear, however. One way to resolve this problem is to assume that all areas in which Inca ceramics are present were occupied during the Wanka III phase. A problem with this assumption is that the presence of one or two sherds in an agricultural field does not necessarily imply that the area was occupied during the Wanka III phase. In addition, the loci of the ceramic collections, although dispersed over the entire site, were not spread evenly throughout the site. An alternative estimate of the Wanka III settlement size might be obtained by interpolating between the surface collections with at least 5% Inca pottery and those collections in which Inca pottery is present but amounts to less than 5%. This yields a total area of 27.4 ha.

190

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Our most recent population estimates for the various phases of occupation are as follows: Wanka I: possibly two villages, population unknown; Wanka II: a major center, population 6633–11,055; Wanka III: a secondary center, minimally 2040–3400 inhabitants, more probably 3250–5400; Colonial: probably a secondary center, population unknown. It is interesting that a linear cluster of rockshelter tombs marks the long, seemingly unwalled eastern border of the site. Although the flanking eastern hillslope is much steeper than the other sides of the site’s perimeter, it is conceivable that this line of tombs may have incorporated some of the social functions served by the formal walls constructed around the less steeply sloping sections of the settlement’s perimeter. We also detected a poorly defined EIP/MH occupation, most of which clusters around the knoll-top at the northern end of the larger LIP/LH site. We have arbitrarily assigned a surface area of ca. 5.0 ha to the EIP/MH occupation. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Small Village Early LIP (?): Wanka I Hamlet Late LIP: Wanka II: Regional Center LH: Wanka III Local Center SITE NO. 473 [Jau-EI-14(P), Colls. 87-P, 88-P; UMARP Site No. J-132] Date of Survey: Oct. 19, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla/Hoja Parco [439500 E, 8701000 N; 11.7503° S, 75.5553° W] Natural Setting: 3490 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the lowermost flank of a broad hill at the western edge of the Acolla Valley overlooking Laguna Tragadero to the southeast (Plate A151). Erosion has been moderate to severe, somewhat held in check by terracing. Soil depth is generally medium. There is substantial grass, bushy, and cactus vegetation along field borders. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Much of the site area had been recently plowed at the time of our survey. Cultivation takes place on fields 5–15 m in width defined by earth- and stone-faced terracing of uncertain age (Plate A152). Modern plowing and terrace building have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 17.9 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in generally light concentrations, but with some areas of very light and light-to-moderate density. Subsequent UMARP restudies report the same site area (Hastorf 1993:229; Borges 1988:69). There are no visible prehispanic architectural remains, although rock rubble is abundant throughout the site, and terrace building may have destroyed some ancient stone-walled structures; some, or all, of the terracing could actually be prehispanic. We made two surface collections (Table A26). Borges (1988:69) determined that the primary EIP/MH occupation dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. D’Altroy’s (1992:191) restudy indicates a small LH (Wanka III) occupation. Discussion: This site is the largest EIP/MH occupation in the general region. Its proximity to Laguna Tragadero suggests an orientation to wetland resources. The site was apparently abandoned during the LIP, and reoccupied by a small LH (Wanka III) settlement. Classification: EIP/MH: Very Large Village LH: Hamlet

Plate A151. Site 473. Facing south over site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-9)

Table A26. JASP surface collections at Site 473. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

87-P

5 × 20 m, northern sector 10 × 15 m, southern sector

light-to-moderate, in plowed field light, in plowed field

all EIP/MH

88-P

EIP/MH plus trace of LIP

Plate A152. Site 473. Facing northeast over terraced field in area of Collection 87-P. Modern village of Marco shown at right. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-5)

Plate A153. Site 474. Facing northeast over area of Collection 89-P. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-3)

SITE NO. 474 [Jau-EI-10(P), Coll. 89-P; UMARP Site No. J-71] Date of Survey: Oct. 20, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [440400 E, 8701300 N; 11.7476° S, 75.5470° W] Natural Setting: 3470 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level terrain atop a low knoll that rises a few meters above the floor in the Acolla Valley north of Laguna Tragadero (Plate A153). Erosion has been slight. Soil depth is deep. There is virtually no natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Parts of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light to light concentration over an area of ca. 5.3 ha. Hastorf (1993:71, 229) reports that the “residential area” of this site area measures 1.9 ha. There is also substantial rock rubble in this same area, suggestive of the former presence of stone-walled architecture that has been destroyed by modern plowing and field clearing. Hastorf (1993:71) estimates a “structural density” of 35 structures per hectare, with a population of 80–120 inhabitants. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, part of a major EIP/MH settlement cluster in this part of the Acolla Valley (including Sites 433, 434, 435, 436, 473). Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village

Appendix A

191

Figure A16. Site 476 (Umpamalco). General site plan (from Costin 1986:22, Fig. 1.4).

SITE NO. 475 [Jau-?-43(P), Fea. 35-P] Date of Survey: Sept. 10, 1976 Location: Hoja Acolla [434800 E, 8701300 N; 11.7475° S, 75.5984° W] Natural Setting: 3785 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground in a topographic saddle between higher terrain to the north and south, in an area of rounded hills and deep quebradas. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally medium. There is sparse grass vegetation. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Archaeological Remains: This is an isolated feature whose age and function are uncertain; we think it may be an ancient aqueduct or elevated walkway. The feature consists of an earth-rock rubble wall ca. 125 m long, with a maximum height of ca. 2 m, and a basal width of ca. 4 m. A modern dirt road crosses it, and there has been considerable destruction caused by modern plowing and field clearing in the area. This feature provides a relatively level surface that connects two pieces of higher ground. Its function as an aqueduct seems problematical because it occupies a low spot—that is, water could have flowed onto the feature, but could not have flowed out. There are no associated surface pottery or other archaeological artifacts. Discussion: This enigmatic feature could have had something to do with the hydraulic complex of canals and aqueducts, described under Site 459, which led water into the reservoirs at the southern base of Cerro Tunanmarca and supplied the large LIP/LH Tunanmarca site (Site 468) with household and possibly irrigation water. Classification: Uncertain: Possibly an aqueduct or elevated walkway, probably LIP or LIP/LH in age. SITE NO. 476 [Jau-LI-5(H); “Umpamalco”; Unit 63-H, Fea. 23-H, Colls. 72-H, 73-H, 74-H; UMARP Site No. J-41] Date of Survey: Oct. 26, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [434700 E, 8701300 N; 11.7475° S, 75.5993° W] Natural Setting: 3910 masl, in the lowermost puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping terrain along the crest and upper slopes of a prominent hill (Plate A154). To the west there is a steep descent onto the floor of the Quebrada Quisualcancha, ca. 200 m below; on all other sides the hillslopes descend more moderately onto the adjacent quebrada floors. Within the immediate site area, erosion has been slight due to the protection provided by abundant vegetation and nucleated stone-walled architecture. The slopes below the site are severely eroded, with some bedrock exposures. Within the site, soil depth is predominantly shallow, except on the northern side where it is generally medium. There is a substantial cover of grass, bushy, and cactus vegetation. The site has been little disturbed by modern land use.

Plate A154. Site 476. Facing northeast over general area of hilltop site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-8) Modern Land Use: The immediate site area appears to function only as marginal grazing. The lower slopes to the east and north are used for sheep pasture and rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. There has been some corral building and field clearing in the latter area, but this appears to have had minimal impact on the site itself. Archaeological Remains: This is probably the best-preserved site in the region. It is defined primarily on the basis of nucleated stone-walled architecture and surface pottery over an area of ca. 19.3 ha (Fig. A16). Much of the entire site area is bounded by a large perimeter wall. Because of the limited impact of modern land use (i.e., virtually no plowing or field clearing or corral building), the density of surface pottery is quite low. UMARP archaeologists remeasured this site area as 12.4 ha (LeBlanc 1981:427). In her subsequent analysis, Hastorf (1993:71, 230) reports a “residential area” of 15.0 ha and a “size” of 14.8 ha, with an estimated population of 2940–6570 inhabitants for the Wanka II component. Costin (1986:21) reports a residential area of 10 ha, with an estimated population of 2600–4400 inhabitants. Russell (1988:104) and Earle and colleagues (1987:11) report a residential area of 10 ha, with an estimated Wanka II population of 3000–5100 inhabitants. Structural Remains. (1) The perimeter wall. Most of the northern, eastern, and southern perimeter of the site is marked by a large wall built of large, unworked stones set in mud mortar. The wall measures ca. 1 m thick and is preserved to variable heights (Plate A155). There is no wall along the very steep western side, but a large, terrace-like retaining wall marks the edge of the site. The site’s south end is

192

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(left) Plate A155. Site 476. Facing west over southeast side of site. Arrows indicate perimeter wall. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-9)

Plate A156. Site 476. Facing northeast across east side of site. Note archaeologist at right of center. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-11) Plate A158. Site 476. Detail of stone masonry in circular structure on east side of site, with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-13)

Plate A157. Site 476. Circular structure on southeast side of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-17) unwalled, perhaps because of the unusually abundant jagged bedrock outcrops in that area. Sections of the perimeter wall have been incorporated into modern corrals around the site’s northern and eastern margins. (2) The circular residential structures. These buildings are densely packed into the site area. We made no accurate count, but there are probably at least 500. These structures are typically 4–5 m in diameter, occasionally a little larger (Plates A156, A157), constructed of unmodified rocks set in mud mortar, usually in two courses averaging 30–40 cm thick, often chinked with small pebbles (Plate A158). Many doorways are preserved, and these average 80–90 cm wide, often with steplike doorsills. One structure still has its door lintel, ca. 1.7 m high (Plate A159). There are numerous walkways, or alleys, between groups of circular buildings. These average 1–2 m wide. Buildings not abutting each other are frequently linked by stone walls so as to form a continuous side wall along the alleys (Plate A160). Subsequent mapping by UMARP archaeologists revealed a pattern of circular buildings clustered around open patios, with passageways between groupings of patio clusters throughout the site (Fig. A17). A looter’s pit into what was apparently an ancient tomb in the side of a circular building, near the hill summit on the northern side of the site, has exposed

Plate A159. Site 476. Circular structure with preserved doorway lintel, on southeast side of site, with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-15)

abundant ceramics and a few pieces of unidentified bone. We designated this as Feature 23-H, and made a separate surface collection there. (3) The “wind tunnel.” About 30 m downslope from Feature 23-H, on the northern side of the site, we discovered a cleft in the bedrock. There is an opening in the lowest part of this cleft, through which a strong gust of cold wind continuously emerges. This feature lies within an area of dense circular buildings, but is not otherwise marked by any visible architectural enhancement. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in trace and very light concentrations; in some places surface pottery seems to be entirely absent. The only location with more abundant surface pottery is the looter’s pit at Feature 23-H. We also noted several fragments of groundstone manos. We made four surface collections (Table A27). In her subsequent restudy based on four new “excavated surface collections,” LeBlanc (1981:427–28) found that this occupation is pure late LIP (Wanka II).

Appendix A

Plate A160. Site 476. Facing east along “alley” between structures on east side of site, with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-12)

193

Plate A161. Site 477. Facing southeast over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Laguna Paca in background on right in the middle distance. Modern town of Paca on the center-left. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-4)

Discussion: A major Wanka II occupation, apparently first established in Wanka II times, and abandoned during the Late Horizon. Like Chawin (Site 461), but unlike Hatunmarca (Site 472) and Tunanmarca (Site 476), Umpamalco lacks any clear evidence for formal public architecture. Classification: LIP: Wanka II Local Center SITE NO. 477 [Jau-EI-1(P), Coll. 51-P; UMARP Site No. J-81] Date of Survey: Sept. 28, 1975 Location: Hoja Acolla [443900 E, 8705500 N; 11.7097° S, 75.5148° W] Natural Setting: 3410 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated in gently sloping, rolling hilly terrain just above the edge of the valley floor ca. 750 m northwest of the shore of Laguna Paca (Plate A161). Erosion has been moderate, soil cover is medium to deep. There is little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area; scattered bushes and eucalyptus trees line the modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals, including maize. The site area was completely plowed over at the time of our survey. Nucleated houses on the western side of the modern town of Paca encroach onto the lower, eastern edge of the site. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 3.6 ha is defined by a fairly even concentration of surface pottery in light and light-to-moderate density. There are no preserved architectural remains, although there is substantial rock rubble throughout the site, and masses of stone are piled up along the edges of modern fields, suggest the former presence of stone-walled structures. Subsequent restudy by UMARP archaeologists report a site area of 3.3 ha (Hastorf 1993:229) and 3.6 ha (Borges 1988:69). We made a single surface collection (Coll. 51-P) from an area of ca. 10 × 15 m on the west side of the site. The pottery is very predominantly EIP/MH, with a trace of LIP material. Discussion: A modest EIP/MH occupation, probably focused on agriculture and the exploitation of aquatic resources. The significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery is uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: ?

Figure A17. Site 476 (Umpamalco). Example of residential units around patios (from Russell 1988:74, Fig. 3.7). Table A27. JASP surface collections at Site 476. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

72-H

ca. 75 × 35 m, from low on northern side of site ca. 100 × 100 m, from lower, SE side ca. 100 × 100 m, on NW side from looter’s pit in tomb

very light

all LIP

very light

all LIP

very light to light light-to-moderate

all LIP all LIP

73-H 74-H Fea. 23-H

SITE NO. 478 [Jau-LI-79(P), Coll. 299-P; UMARP Site No. J-77] Date of Survey: Sept. 12, 1976 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [430500 E, 8710000 N; 11.6687° S, 75.6377° W] Natural Setting: 3850 masl, at the puna-kichwa juncture on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the crest and upper slopes of a ridge spur. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Mixed grazing and rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. The entire site area is covered with a dense patchwork of modern stone-walled corrals, some of which may rest on ancient corral-wall foundations. Modern corral building and field clearance have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 0.7 ha is defined by surface pottery and a few possible remnants of prehispanic architecture.

194

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Structural Remains. Modern corral building has undoubtedly damaged several prehispanic buildings—both residential and corral structures may once have existed here. There are one or two fragmentary remnants of possible prehispanic structures: these appear to be semi-rectangular buildings ca. 2 × 2.5 m in area, made of unworked stone set in mud mortar (Plate A162). Surface Finds. Traces of surface pottery occur throughout the site. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. All the material appears to be late LIP. Discussion: A small LIP occupation, probably Wanka II, probably with a herding orientation, and probably dependent on the much larger Site 479, ca. 900 m to the south. Classification: LIP: Wanka II (?) Hamlet SITE NO. 479 [Jau-LI-76(P), Unit 122-P; UMARP Site No. J-38] Date of Survey: Sept. 12, 1976 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [430500 E, 8709600 N; 11.6723° S, 75.6377° W] Natural Setting: 3950 masl in the lower puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a large hill in the upper Acolla Valley (Plate A163). The hill rises about 100 m above an unusually large expanse of flat land surrounding the site. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally shallow, with some bedrock exposures. There is a moderate cover of grass, bushy, and cactus vegetation. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. Several modern stone-walled corrals have been built in the site area, some of them possibly atop ancient stone-wall foundations. Modern corral building has damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 6.4 ha is defined by the distribution of nucleated prehispanic architecture and very light surface pottery. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:425) remeasured this site area as 4.2 ha (as does Hastorf [1993:71, 230]). D’Altroy (1992:191) reports a site area of 4.9 ha. Structural Remains. Despite the destruction caused by modern corral building, we estimate that there were originally about 100 stone-walled structures at

Plate A162. Site 478. Remnant of possible ancient structure, with Julia Medel. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-18)

Plate A163. Site 479. Facing west toward east side of hilltop site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-19)

this site, most of them probably circular residential buildings, 3–4.5 m in diameter (Plates A164, A165), built of standard pirka masonry with mud mortar. Some of the surviving structures are quite small, measuring ca. 1.5–2 m in diameter, and probably functioned as tombs. One of these small structures still has its partially intact stone roof vault (Plate A166), and another has a small opening ca. 50 cm2 capped by a stone lintel (Plate A167). Several other circular buildings are also well preserved, with corbelled arch roofs intact; the roofs were cemented on the interior with mud mortar. The structures were laid out as typical Wanka patio groups, distributed in an irregular pattern. In her subsequent analysis, Hastorf (1993:71) reports a “structural density” of 76 structures per hectare, and a population of 575–700 inhabitants for the Wanka I component of this site. Surface Finds. There is very light surface pottery throughout the site. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. This material is primarily LIP, with a few Inca-style sherds. There is also a trace of San Blas Red/ Buff pottery—a type that predominates at LIP sites in the neighboring TaramaChinchaycocha Region to the north (Parsons et al. 2000:528–33). In her subsequent restudy based on four new “excavated surface collections” widely spaced along the narrow ridgeline on which the site is located, LeBlanc (1981:425) distinguished two occupational components: Wanka I (early LIP) and Wanka III (LH). Later UMARP studies report EIP/MH and Wanka III (LH) components here, but no Wanka I occupation, with an estimated population of 200–350 inhabitants during both EIP/MH and LH times. Discussion: There is some question about whether the pre-LH occupation at this site is EIP/MH or early LIP (Wanka I). Since the original JASP survey did not recognize any EIP/MH material, we prefer at this point to regard this site as a substantial early LIP (Wanka I) and LH (Wanka III) occupation. Apparently this site was established during Wanka I times, abandoned during the subsequent Wanka II, and reoccupied during Wanka III. The site’s location at the puna-kichwa juncture may indicate some kind of coordination of agriculture and herding. The presence of a little San Blas Red/Buff pottery is interesting, and probably not surprising given this site’s proximity to the ethnohistorically documented Wanka-Tarama frontier in this general area (Parsons et al. 2000:1:46). Classification: EIP/MH (?): ? LIP (?): Wanka I (?) Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village

Plate A164. Site 479. Looking across top of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-14)

Plate A165. Site 479. Example of circular structure, with Julia Medel. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-9)

Appendix A

Plate A166. Site 479. Small structure with partially intact roof. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-11)

Plate A167. Site 479. Small “doorway,” ca. 50 cm2. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-13)

SITE NO. 480 [Jau-LI-78(P), Unit 124-P] Date of Survey: Sept. 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [424600 E, 8711700 N; 11.6532° S, 75.6918° W] Natural Setting: 3980 masl, in the lower puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping terrain on the tops and upper slopes of two large, closely spaced hills that rise from the top of the supporting ridge crest (Plates A168, A169). To the west and south the slopes descend steeply to the floor of a large quebrada over 200 m lower down; to the north and east the lower slopes are more moderate. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow, with some bedrock outcrops, especially at the north end of the southern half of the site. There is a sparse to moderate grass cover. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. There are some modern stone-walled corrals in the site area, and these have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: Surface pottery and architectural remains over an area of ca. 5.4 ha. Structural Remains. Despite the destruction caused by modern corral building, we estimate that there were originally approximately 80 prehispanic structures, most of them roughly circular buildings measuring 3–4.5 m in diameter (Plate A170). Many of these structures are built atop well-built stone-faced terraces (Plates A171, A172). We also noted a number of small, tomb-like structures, and at least one example of a two-story rectangular structure (Plate A173), probably a storage building, similar to those that are more characteristic of the Tarama Region to the north (Parsons et al. 2000). Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in very light concentrations. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area.

195

Plate A168. Site 480. Facing north over north half of site. Arrow points to archaeologist at upper right-hand edge of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-9)

Plate A169. Site 480. Facing south over southern half of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 36-13)

Plate A170. Site 480. Circular structures near south end of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-8)

196

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru The material is late LIP, including a trace of San Blas Red/Buff pottery—a type more characteristic of the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region to the north (Parsons et al. 2000:528–33). Discussion: The presence of a little San Blas Red/Buff pottery, and the twostory rectangular storage building, is not surprising given this site’s proximity to the ethnohistorically documented Wanka-Tarama ethnic frontier (Parsons et al. 2000). This site is ca. 6.5 km southwest of Site 381 (Parsons et al. 2000:459), a large LIP settlement, also with mixed Tarama and Wanka ceramic types, at the far southeastern corner of the Tarama Region. Sites 480 and 481 (the latter ca. 1.7 km to the southeast) form an LIP settlement pair in this far northwestern corner of the Wanka Region survey area. This site’s location at the puna-kichwa juncture may indicate some kind of coordination of agriculture and herding. Classification: LIP: Large Village

(top) Plate A171. Site 480. Circular structures on terraces in southern half of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-12) (middle) Plate A172. Site 480. Looking along ridge crest in southern half of site, showing stone-faced terracing. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-10) (bottom) Plate A173. Site 480. Two-story rectangular structure, possibly a colca, with Paul Liffman. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-11)

SITE NO. 481 [Jau-LI-77(P), Unit 123-P; UMARP Site No. J-39] Date of Survey: Sept. 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [426100 E, 8710400 N; 11.6650° S, 75.6780° W] Natural Setting: 4140 masl, in the upper puna zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping terrain on the crest and upper slopes of a high, mesa-like ridge (Plate A174). The site extends over three closely spaced small hillocks that rise from the crest of the supporting ridge; the highest of these hillocks occupies the center of the cluster, and most of the archaeological remains are found on its southwestern flanks. To the north and south there are steep descents into the bottoms of adjacent quebradas; to the west and east the descending slopes are more moderate. Modern Land Use: Pasture for sheep and camelids. Some modern stonewalled corrals have been built in and around the site, and this has undoubtedly damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: Architectural remains and surface pottery over an area of ca. 4.4 ha. Despite the destruction caused by modern corral building, this site remains fairly well preserved. It has apparently never been plowed. Structural Remains. We estimate at least 150 circular residential structures, and 100 tombs. There may also be 1 fairly well preserved prehispanic corral. We detected no encircling perimeter wall, although a large section of the site’s western side is marked by a large retaining wall that forms a large terrace at the upper edge of a moderate slope. (1) The circular residential structures. These structures range from 2.5 to 5.0 m in diameter, with walls ca. 40 cm thick constructed of unworked stones set in mud mortar. Virtually all these buildings seem to have been constructed atop stonefaced terraces (Plates A175, A176). Many structures have preserved doorways, with stone lintels. Some of these doorways begin at ground level, while others, distinctly smaller, begin about 50 cm above ground level, and measure only ca. 1 m high and 50 cm wide (Plate A177)—structures with such small “doorways” may have been special-purpose buildings of some sort. A few structures with raised doorways have exterior and interior steps formed of a single stone block. The circular buildings are densely packed over much of the site area, especially on the southwestern slope of the central hillock. The structures tend to be clustered in groupings of 2–4 buildings atop terraces, with adjacent buildings connected by short stone walls up to 15 m long (although most are much shorter), ca. 1 m high and 20 cm thick. In many cases, these attached clusters define alleys, or walkways, between the building groups. Many of the circular buildings have attached circular tombs of distinctive size and form (Plate A178) (see below). (2) The tombs (chullpas). These are variable in size and form. Most are two-story cylindrical towers constructed of unworked stones set in mud mortar, measuring ca. 1.5 m in diameter, and 1.8–3 m high; typically each story has a single opening, ca. 35 × 35 cm2, with some larger openings ca. 35 × 50 cm (Plate A179). In a few cases the flat, stone-slab roofs are still intact (Plates A180, A181). There are human bone remains associated with some tombs. There are also a few one-story structures, otherwise generally similar to the two-story variant just described (Plate A182). Several of these small tombs have a roughly square, cube-like form. Although many of these tombs are directly attached to individual circular houses, some tombs, either singly or in small groups, occur in isolation, detached from individual residences. We noted one case where two such isolated, wellpreserved, two-story tombs are linked by a connecting wall. (3) The probable prehispanic corral. This is the only apparently intact and probably prehispanic corral that we saw at this site. This feature measures about 10 m2, and occurs near the site’s southern end.

Appendix A

197

(top) Plate A178. Site 481. Large circular structure with attached tomb, in northeast corner of site. Arrow points to the attached tomb (chullpa) structure. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-7) (bottom) Plate A179. Site 481. Two-story chullpa. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-26)

(from top to bottom) Plate A174. Site 481. Facing south over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-17) Plate A175. Site 481. Facing southeast over south side of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-24) Plate A176. Site 481. Facing northeast from southwest end of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-31) Plate A177. Site 481. Example of small “doorway” in circular structure. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-25)

198

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A180. Site 481. Two-story chullpa with intact roof. (UMMA Neg. No. 35-6)

Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in trace to very light concentrations. We also noted some chert debitage, and one crude chert knife. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. Although there are few diagnostics, the material appears to be all late LIP. In her subsequent restudy based on three new surface collections, LeBlanc (1981:426) determined that there are both Wanka II and Wanka III occupations at this site. She also reports the presence of San Blas Red/Buff pottery, which we did not detect in our own surface collections. Discussion: A substantial late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) occupation, probably with a herding function. Sites 481 and 480 (ca. 1.7 km to the northwest) comprise a distinctive LIP spatial pair in this far northwestern corner of the Wanka Region survey area. The presence of San Blas Red/Buff pottery indicates that, like its near neighbor Site 480, Site 481 may have been “culturally affiliated with the Tarma and Junin areas [to the north], rather than with the Wanka communities to the south” (LeBlanc 1981:426). Sites 481 and 480 are both quite similar in terms of their size, setting, and composition to Site 381, ca. 7 km to the northeast at the far southern edge of the Tarama-Chinchaycocha survey region (Parsons et al. 2000:458–59, 490). These LIP sites (381, 480, 481) occupy part of the archaeologically well defined frontier between Tarama and Wanka polities. Classification: LIP: Wanka II Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village SITE NO. 482 [Jau-LI-35(P), Coll. 207-P; UMARP Site No. J-328] Date of Survey: July 12, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [462400 E, 8690200 N; 11.8483° S, 75.3452° W] Natural Setting: 3385 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground near the base of a major ridge (Plate A183). The site area is ca. 30 m above the level of the valley floor immediately to the west. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. Uncultivated areas have a substantial cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals in irregularly terraced fields on the hillslopes. Modern field clearance and terrace building have damaged

Plate A181. Site 481. Two-story chullpa with partially intact roof fragment. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-27)

Plate A182. Site 481. Small “chullpa,” with intact roof, with Paul Liffman. (UMMA Neg. No. 34-23)

Appendix A

199

Plate A184. Site 483. Facing west over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-20) Plate A183. Site 482. Facing northwest over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-19) the archaeological remains. There is irrigation-based cultivation on the valley floor below the site. The modern village of Apata is ca. 300 m downslope to the southwest. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.4 ha is defined primarily on the basis of surface pottery in very light concentrations. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 5.0 ha for the Wanka I component. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but abundant piles of rock rubble at the edges of modern cultivated fields suggest the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all LIP. Borges (1988:70) reports Wanka I occupation, but does not mention Wanka II. Discussion: A small LIP occupation, probably mainly early LIP (Wanka I), probably with an agricultural orientation. This site and nearby Site 483 (100 m to the southwest) may have originally comprised a single, somewhat larger settlement. Classification: LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 483 [Jau-LI-36(P), Coll. 208-P; UMARP Site No. J-327] Date of Survey: July 12, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [462100 E, 8690000 N; 11.8501° S, 75.3480° W] Natural Setting: 3360 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground near the base of a major ridge (Plate A184). The site area is ca. 15 m above the level of the valley floor immediately to the west. Numerous small seasonal quebradas cut through the site area, and erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium. Uncultivated areas have substantial grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals in irregularly terraced fields on the hillslopes. Modern field clearance and terrace building have probably damaged the archaeological remains. There is irrigationbased cultivation on the valley floor below the site. The site is just above the upper, eastern edge of the modern village of Apata. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.6 ha is defined primarily on the basis of surface pottery in trace and very light concentrations. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 1.1 ha. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but abundant piles of rock rubble at the edges of modern cultivated fields suggest the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. We judged the material to be all late LIP. D’Altroy’s (1992:192, 2001:89) subsequent restudy found a predominantly late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) occupation. Discussion: A small late LH occupation, probably with LIP antecedents. This site and nearby Site 482 (100 m to the northeast) may originally have comprised a single, somewhat larger settlement. Classification: LIP: Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

SITE NO. 484 [Jau-EI-55(P), Coll. 222-P] Date of Survey: July 19, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [462100 E, 8689300 N; 11.8564° S, 75.3480° W] Natural Setting: 3385 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain atop a low bluff ca. 20–60 m above the adjacent valley floor. Erosion has been slight to moderate. Soil depth is generally medium. Uncultivated areas along field borders have a moderate cover of bushes and cactus. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. The site area was fallow at the time of our survey. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.4 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentrations. There is no visible prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 35 m in diameter. The material is all EIP/MH. Discussion: A modest EIP/MH occupation, part of a small cluster of EIP/ MH settlements in this part of the Mantaro Valley (including nearby Sites 488 and 489). Given the apparent absence of stone-walled architecture, residence may have been temporary or seasonal. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 485 [Jau-LH-27(P), Unit 106-P; UMARP Site No. J-36] Date of Survey: July 12, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [462700 E, 8689300 N; 11.8564° S, 75.3425° W] Natural Setting: 3500 m, on gently sloping ground in the lower kichwa atop a bench in the foothills rising to the east of the Mantaro floodplain on the north side of the Mantaro Valley (Plate A185). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: The site is located on a slope with scattered agricultural plots that are dependent on rainfall. The site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. The modern town of Apata lies ca. 800 m to the northwest. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a single line of circular and rectangular buildings running along the contour of the hill, divided by a gap of ca. 50 m into two segments of 30 and 8 structures (Plate A186; Fig. A18). The southern segment curves east (uphill) at the southern end, so that the last structure is slightly offset from the remainder of the line. From the lack of rubble in the gap between the segments, and the clear visibility of the structures preserved, we infer that this gap existed in the original layout of the site. Structural Remains. The architectural remains at this site consist of 35 Incastyle storehouses (colcas), definable from surface evidence. Nineteen of these are rectangular and 19 circular (Table A28). The prior existence of 3 additional circular buildings is inferred from gaps of appropriate sizes and the presence of rubble in the line of structures. The overall preservation is only poor to fair. While

200

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A185. Site 485. Facing southwest over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate center of colca line. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-13)

Plate A186. Site 485. Section of line of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-18)

Figure A18. Site 485, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map). Table A28. Colcas at Site 485. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

Number

Volume

38 19 19 35 16 19 3 3 0

1226 m3 681 m3 545 m3 1118 m3 573 m3 545 m3 107 m3 107 m3 0

the maximum height of preserved wall is 1.6 m, structures in several areas have been reduced to rubble. In general, the rectangular structures are better preserved than the circular ones, but no reason for this distinction is readily apparent. The masonry is uncoursed, metamorphic rock set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. The rocks were generally laid with the bedding horizontal, which gives the walls the appearance of rough coursing, but no effort was made to lay the rocks in even rows. No entrances or other architectural features have been preserved. The storehouses stand between two terraces, serving as a buttress for the upper terrace (0.8 m high). The temporal association of the buildings and the terraces seems good, because of the incorporation of the buildings into the structure of the earthworks. Surface Finds. UMARP survey found only four sherds within 10 m of the colcas, none of which was stylistically or functionally diagnostic. Examination of three looter’s pits inside structures produced no ceramics. Discussion: This site is an Inca state storage facility, although it has features that are slightly anomalous for a site of this nature. The structures are unusually small in comparison to the range of storage buildings throughout the survey area. The departure from the standard in structure size and masonry suggests that the local population may have played a strong role in the construction of the buildings. The distance of the facility from any contemporary LH village site seems

to rule out community storage, however. Unlike most other storage in the eastern side of the Mantaro Valley, there is no nearby Wanka II–III settlement. This is one of the two Inca state storage facilities most distant from the Hátun Xauxa center (Site 550) in the survey area (along with Site 491, ca. 2.6 km to the west). Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class E SITE NO. 486 [Jau-?-15(P), Unit 105-P] Date of Survey: July 12, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [463700 E, 8689500 N; 11.8546° S, 75.3333° W] Natural Setting: 3730 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the crest of a broad ridge. This is the highest point in the immediate area, and the terrain descends in all directions at moderate to steep slope. The site is some 400 m above the general level of the valley floor to the south. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow. There is a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is now used only for sheep pasture. On the slopes below the site there are small fields with rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. The immediate site area appears never to have been plowed. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.1 ha comprises a single architectural complex and a bare trace of surface pottery. Structural Remains. The principal feature is a circular mound, measuring ca. 15 m in diameter and 1 m high, with a broad central depression ca. 10 m in diameter and 70 cm deep—a sort of doughnut-shaped ring (Plate A187). A small looter’s pit (ca. 70 × 70 cm in area and 50 cm deep) on one side of the ring, but this has revealed no obvious architecture or ceramics. Surrounding this mound is an irregular, roughly circular ring of large stones that may have originally formed a low enclosing wall ca. 25 m in diameter (Fig. A19). Just outside the southeast corner of this outer “wall” is a small circular structure, ca. 2 m in diameter, crudely made of dry-laid stone, whose walls now are preserved to a maximum height of ca. 20 cm—this may or may not be contemporary with the main mound-wall complex. There are no other visible structural remains, but the general abundance of rock rubble may represent the remnants of 2 or 3 additional stone-walled structures.

Appendix A

Plate A187. Site 486. Mound, with Jeff Parsons standing in central depression. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-12)

201

Plate A188. Sites 488, 489, 490, 491, and 492. Facing southwest over general area of sites. Arrows indicate approximate site centers. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-10) Table A29. JASP surface collections at Site 489. Coll. No.

Area

199-P

30 m dia.

200-P 201-P

Figure A19. Site 486, sketch plan of mound complex.

Surface Finds. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The material was undiagnostic, and, unfortunately, we subsequently lost the collection. Discussion: A small site of uncertain age and function. The unusual architectural complex, combined with the prominent, ridge crest location, may indicate some sort of ritual function. Classification: LIP (?): Isolated Shrine (?) SITE NO. 487 [Jau-EI-52(P), Coll. 211-P] Date of Survey: July 16, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [464900 E, 8687900 N; 11.8691° S, 75.3223° W] Natural Setting: 3350 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the broad crest of a low ridge spur ca. 20 m above the valley floor. Erosion has been generally moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. Uncultivated areas at the edges of cultivated fields have a moderate grass cover. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals. Some parts of the site were recently plowed at the time of our survey. Modern field clearing may have disturbed the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.6 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in trace to very light concentrations. We saw no definite prehispanic structural remains, but several piles of stone rubble cleared from fields by modern farmers may represent the remnants of ancient stone-walled architecture. We made a single surface collection from the entire site. The material is very predominantly EIP/MH, with a trace of LIP ceramics. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation. The significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery is uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: ?

Sherd Density

Chronology

very light, around rectangular mixed EIP/MH, LIP, structure; overlaps with Site 490 and Inca-style pottery 15 × 15 m light-to-moderate all EIP/MH 15 × 15 m light all EIP/MH

SITE NO. 488 [Jau-EI-47(P), Coll. 202-P; UMARP Site No. J-321] Date of Survey: July 4, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [461500 E, 8688900 N; 11.8600° S, 75.3535° W] Natural Setting: 3430 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a low ridge that forms part of a narrow peninsula of higher terrain that juts prominently southwestward onto the edge of the valley floor (Plate A188). On the south the terrain descends steeply for ca. 100 m to the valley floor; to the north there is a more moderately sloping descent. Erosion has been generally moderate. Soil depth is medium. Uncultivated land at the borders of agricultural fields has grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Part of the site had recently been plowed at the time of our survey, and part was in fallow. Fallow fields serve for livestock grazing. Modern field clearing may have damaged some archaeological remains. There is irrigation-based cultivation in fields on the valley floor below the site. Archaeological Remains: The site’s surface area of ca. 2.6 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration. We saw no visible prehispanic architecture. A surface collection was made over the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, probably with an agricultural orientation. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 489 [Jau-EI-46(P), Colls. 199-P, 200-P, 201-P; UMARP Site No. J-322] Date of Survey: July 4, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [461000 E, 8688800 N; 11.8609° S, 75.3581° W] Natural Setting: 3360 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a low ridge spur, near the western end of a long peninsula of higher ground that juts out into the northern side of the valley floor (Plate A188). The site area is 15–30 m above the valley floor. Erosion has been generally moderate. Soil cover is shallow to medium. There is sparse grass cover in uncultivated sectors of the site area.

202

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(left) Plate A189. Site 490. Facing southwest at area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-2) (above) Plate A190. Site 490. Facing west at wall separating Sites 490 and 491. Arrow points to the wall. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-5) Table A30. JASP surface collections at Site 490. Coll. No. 190-P 198-P 199-P

Area

Sherd Density

Table A31. Colcas at Site 491. Chronology

25 × 25 m very light mainly LIP, plus light Inca-style and a trace of EIP/MH 40 m dia. very light mainly LIP, plus light Inca-style and a trace of EIP/MH 30 m dia. very light, around rectangular structure; mixed EIP/MH, LIP, and Inca-style pottery overlaps with Site 489

Colcas total circular rectangular

Number

Volume

39 39 0

1517 m3 1517 m3 0

Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Many agricultural fields on the valley floor below the site are irrigated. Modern field clearing and plowing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 8.7 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery. Subsequent UMARP restudy determined a site area of 9.0 ha for the EIP/MH component. There is one possible remnant of prehispanic architecture. Structural Remains. A single rectangular structure, ca. 9 × 4 m in area, with walls ca. 50 cm thick built of unworked stone set in mud mortar. This feature is near the western edge of the site, where occupation overlaps with Site 490, and the structure may postdate the EIP/MH occupation, and may even be LH in age. There is very little rock rubble anywhere else in the site area, and this suggests the absence of stone-walled architecture dating to the EIP/MH. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site area in variable very light, light, and light-to-moderate concentrations. We also noted one groundstone metate-like implement. We made three surface collections from different parts of the site area (Table A29). Borges (1988:69) subsequently found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation that overlaps along its western edge with an LIP/LH site (Site 490). Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village

(Plate A189). Some of this material may represent the remains of destroyed ancient structures. On the eastern end of the site (overlapping onto Site 489), there is a single rectangular structure, ca. 9 × 4 m in area, with walls ca. 50 cm thick built of unworked stone set in mud mortar. On the western end of the site there is an ancient-looking wall, ca. 15 m long and 1 m high, constructed of unworked, dry-laid stone (Plate A190). This may be prehispanic, and might represent a formal separation between Sites 490 and 491—the latter a cluster of Inca-style storage structures and surface pottery, undoubtedly an LH occupation constructed under Inca control. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in variable very light and light concentrations. We made three separate surface collections in different parts of the site area (Table A30). D’Altroy’s (1992:192) subsequent restudy shows a predominantly LH (Wanka III) occupation. Discussion: Mixed EIP/MH and LH (Wanka III) occupations. UMARP restudies indicate that LIP occupation is probably absent. We arbitrarily estimate the EIP/MH site area as 1.7 ha, half the dominant LH site area. The proximity of Inca colcas immediately to the west (Site 491) suggests that the LH inhabitants of Site 490 may have been a settlement directly associated with provisioning and maintaining the Inca storage complex during LH times. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

SITE NO. 490 [Jau-LI-34(P), Colls. 190-P, 198-P, 199-P; UMARP Site No. J-323] Date of Survey: June 29, 1976; July 4, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [460700 E, 8688700 N; 11.8618° S, 75.3608° W] Natural Setting: 3365 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the crest and upper slopes of a low ridge spur, near the western end of a long peninsula of higher ground 25–35 m above the adjacent valley floor (Plate A188). Erosion has been generally moderate. Soil cover is shallow to medium. There is sparse grass cover in uncultivated sectors of the site area. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Many agricultural fields on the valley floor below the site are irrigated. Modern field clearing and plowing have undoubtedly damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.4 ha is defined on the basis of surface pottery, rock rubble, and several possible remnants of prehispanic architecture. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 4.0 ha. Structural Remains. There is substantial rock rubble throughout the site area piled up in irregular mounds and along field borders by modern farmers

SITE NO. 491 [Jau-LH-25(P), Unit 103-P; UMARP Site No. J-35] Date of Survey: June 29, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [460400 E, 8688400 N; 11.8645° S, 75.3636° W] Natural Setting: 3380 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the crest and upper slopes of a low ridge spur, near the western end of a long peninsula of higher ground ca. 20 m above the level of the nearby valley floor (Plate A188). Erosion has been generally moderate to severe. Soil cover is shallow to medium. There is sparse grass cover in uncultivated sectors of the site area. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Many agricultural fields on the valley floor below the site are irrigated. Modern field clearing and plowing may have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: This site is defined by a single line of 39 Incastyle storage buildings (colcas) and surface pottery over an area of ca. 0.4 ha. Structural Remains. The 39 poorly preserved circular storehouses are arrayed in a single line along the ridge crest (Fig. A20) (Table A31). The structures are all clearly visible in foundation, but the maximum height of standing wall is

Appendix A

203

Figure A20. Site 491, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

only about 1.0 m, and most structures have been reduced to rubble and foundation rocks (Plates A191, A192). Their masonry is uncoursed, roughly shaped, metamorphic rocks in a mortar of mud and angular small pebbles (Plate A193). The stones’ natural bedding gives the masonry the appearance of coursing, but no systematic effort was made to lay horizontally regular rows of stones. These storehouses are relatively small compared to other circular storehouses, but the walls are comparatively massive. This combination is probably a consequence of the weakness of walls built of the metamorphic rock. No entrance or other architectural feature is preserved. The buildings are spaced at intervals of 1–3 m along the supporting ridge crest. The individual structures measure 3.5–4.0 m in exterior diameter, with walls ca. 50 cm thick. The remnants of a terrace, on which the storehouses may have stood at the time of their construction, are preserved in a badly deteriorated state on the south side of the line of structures. The terrace retains no evidence of stone facing and its temporal association with the storehouses is in doubt. Surface Finds. There are traces of surface pottery throughout the site area. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The material is mixed LIP and Inca-style pottery. UMARP archaeologists subsequently made one additional collection, which yielded 37 sherds, 31 of which were Incaic, 25 from large jars. Discussion: An Inca state storage facility. Its formal configuration and presence of Inca-style surface pottery indicate that it was built and used under Inca administration during the LH. It seems unlikely that there is any LIP occupation at this locality prior to Inca conquest. This is a fairly small Inca state storage facility, one of the two most distant from the Hátun Xauxa center (Site 550) in the survey area (along with Site 485, ca. 2.6 km to the east). Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class E

(top) Plate A191. Site 491. Section of Unit 103-P, with archaeologist for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-3) (middle) Plate A192. Site 491. West end of Unit 103-P, with archaeologist at center. (UMARP Neg. No. 23-4) (bottom) Plate A193. Site 491. Masonry detail in terrace. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-2)

SITE NO. 492 [No designated field site number; Coll. 189-P] Date of Survey: June 29, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [459900 E, 8688300 N; 11.8654° S, 75.3682° W] Natural Setting: 3315 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground at the base of the very western tip of a long peninsula of higher ground that juts into the northern side of the valley floor (Plates A188, A194). The site area is just a few meters above the immediately adjacent valley floor. Erosion has been generally moderate to severe. Soil cover is shallow to medium. There is sparse grass cover in uncultivated sectors of the site area. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Many agricultural fields on the adjacent valley floor just below the site are irrigated. Modern field clearing and plowing may have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is defined primarily by surface pottery in very light concentration over an area of ca. 0.1 ha. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but the abundance of rock rubble piled up along modern field borders suggests the former presence of a few ancient stone-walled buildings. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is primarily EIP/MH, with a little Inca-style pottery. Discussion: Primarily a small EIP/MH occupation. The admixture of Incastyle pottery can probably be attributed to the proximity of nearby Sites 491 and 490, although it is possible that there was a small cluster of LH structures at Site 492. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet LH: ?

204

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A194. Site 492. Facing west over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-0) SITE NO. 493 [Jau-EI-50(P), Coll. 206-P; UMARP Site No. J-324] Date of Survey: July 7, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [459600 E, 8687900 N; 11.8690° S, 75.3709° W] Natural Setting: 3280 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly flat ground on the valley floor. There has been virtually no erosion. Soil cover is deep. There is no natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Intensive irrigation-based cultivation of cereals (including maize) and alfalfa. Modern field clearing and plowing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.1 ha is defined primarily on the basis of surface pottery that occurs in variable very light and light concentrations. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the presence of abundant rock rubble piled up around the borders of modern cultivated fields suggests the former presence of stone-walled architecture. We also noted several stone hoes. We made a single surface collection over the entire site area. The material is primarily LIP, with a trace of EIP/MH pottery. Discussion: A small LIP occupation. The significance of the trace of EIP/MH surface pottery is uncertain, but it may indicate the presence of a more deeply buried EIP/MH occupation at this locality. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Hamlet (?) LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 494 [Jau-?-14(P), Coll. 203-P] Date of Survey: July 4, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [459800 E, 8688800 N; 11.8609° S, 75.3691° W] Natural Setting: 3290 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly flat valley floor. There has been virtually no erosion. Soil cover is deep. There is virtually no natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Intensive irrigation-based cultivation of cereals (including maize) and alfalfa. Modern field clearing and plowing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.5 ha is defined primarily on the basis of surface pottery that occurs in trace and very light concentrations. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the presence of abundant rock rubble piled up around the borders of modern cultivated fields suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled architecture. We made a single small surface collection over the entire site area. The material appears to be primarily LIP. Discussion: A small LIP occupation. Classification: LIP: Hamlet

SITE NO. 495/545 [Jau-EI-48(P), Coll. 204-P; UMARP Site No. J-325] Date of Survey: July 6, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata and Hoja Jauja [459200 E, 8688200 N; 11.8663° S, 75.3746° W] Natural Setting: 3280 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level valley floor (Plate A195). Erosion is virtually absent. Soil cover is deep. There is no natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area, but agricultural fields are bordered by stands of grass, bushes, and eucalyptus trees. Modern Land Use: Intensive irrigation-based cultivation of maize and alfalfa. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 1.3 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but substantial rock rubble throughout the site area and along modern field borders suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled architecture. We also noted two stone hoes. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. There are few diagnostics, but the material appears to be very predominantly LIP, with a trace of EIP/MH ceramics. Discussion: A small LIP occupation, undoubtedly with agricultural functions. The significance of the trace of EIP/MH surface pottery is uncertain, but if it does represent real EIP/MH settlement, then this location may represent a long-term occupation. The deep soil and absence of erosion may indicate a deep, subsurface archaeological deposit. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 496 [Jau-?-13(P), Fea. 16-P] Date of Survey: June 22, 1976 Location: Hoja Apata [459800 E, 8693600 N; 11.8175° S, 75.3690° W] Natural Setting: 3410 masl, in the lower kichwa zone, on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground, ca. 60 m above the main valley floor to the southwest. Erosion has been severe; soil depth is generally shallow. Substantial grassy and bushy vegetation cover. Modern Land Use: Primarily grazing, with scattered small fields of rainfallbased cereal cultivation. Archaeological Remains: The site comprises an isolated concentration of very light surface pottery over an area ca. 10 m in diameter (Fea. 16-P), with significant disturbance, probably by looting (Plate A196). This could be a looted tomb, although we saw no human bone. A local man reported that a few years ago several burials were recovered in this locality. We made a single surface collection from the entire site, but we recovered only a few badly weathered sherds. This material appears to be LIP. Discussion: A site of questionable age and function, but probably an isolated LIP cemetery (see also Sites 421, 513, 532, 534, 559, 578, 581, 588, 615). Classification: LIP (?): Small Isolated Cemetery (?) SITE NO. 497 [Jau-LI-16(H), Coll. 108-H; UMARP Site No. J-247] Date of Survey: Nov. 24, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [447700 E, 8699600 N; 11.7631° S, 75.4800° W]

Plate A195. Site 495/545. Facing northeast over area of site, with archaeologist at center. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-7)

Appendix A

205

Plate A197. Site 498. Facing east over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-25) Plate A196. Site 496. Feature 16-P, with Paul Liffman (left), Phil Tugendrajch (center), and local man (right). (UMMA Neg. No. 22-27)

Table A32. JASP surface collections at Site 498. Coll. No. 104-H 105-H 106-H 107-H

Area

Chronology

ca. 50 × 25 m predominantly LIP, trace of EIP/MH ca. 50 × 15 m mainly LIP, with light EIP/MH ca. 50 × 25 m predominantly LIP, with trace of Inca-style pottery ca. 70 × 20 m all LIP

Natural Setting: 3380 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the nearly level valley floor. Erosion has been virtually absent. Soil cover is deep. There is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area, but there is a substantial growth of grass, bushes, and eucalyptus trees along field borders. Modern Land Use: Intensive irrigation-based cultivation of cereals. The immediate site area was fallow at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. The modern dispersed village of Huertas encroaches onto the site area from the south. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 0.1 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 0.3 ha. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, and the scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures at this locality. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is predominantly LIP, with traces of Inca-style pottery and EIP/MH ceramics. Because of modern occupation, the site’s southern limits could not be accurately defined—the site could be significantly larger than the area we detected. D’Altroy’s (1992:192) subsequent restudy revealed a significant LH (Wanka III) occupation. Discussion: This site probably represents a short-lived occupation that lacked stone-walled architecture. The significance of the trace of EIP/MH surface pottery is uncertain, but there could be a deeply buried occupation of this age here. We remain uncertain about the occupation at this locality in LIP times prior to Inca domination. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: ? LH: Wanka III Camp (?)

not report an EIP/MH occupation at this site. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 2.9 ha for the Wanka I component. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 2.8 ha. There are no definite indications of prehispanic architecture, although the slight mounding of the site area could have been produced by the build-up of ancient occupation. The scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled architecture. We also noted several pieces of chert debitage, two stone hoes, and one groundstone digging-stick weight. We made four separate surface collections at different locations within the site (Table A32). Discussion: A long-term occupation, possibly beginning in the EIP/MH, continuing into the LIP (Wanka I and Wanka II), and apparently extending into the LH (Wanka III). Since UMARP archaeologists did not identify any EIP/ MH surface pottery here, we may have confused Wanka I and EIP/MH in our original sherd analysis. The apparent absence of stone-walled architecture may indicate a temporary, or seasonal, occupation in wattle-and-daub structures. The apparent long-term occupation, as well as the potentially deep and perhaps fairly well preserved archaeological deposit, make this site a good prospect for future excavation. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Wanka I and Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

SITE NO. 498 [Jau-LI-15(H), Colls. 104-H, 105-H, 106-H, 107-H; UMARP Site No. J-246] Date of Survey: Nov. 23, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [448400 E, 8699800 N; 11.7613° S, 75.4736° W] Natural Setting: 3380 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level valley floor (Plate A197). The site occupies a slightly elevated area ca. 1 m above the general level of the surrounding valley floor. Erosion has been virtually absent. Soil cover is deep. There is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area, but there is a substantial growth of grass, bushes, and eucalyptus trees along field borders. Modern Land Use: The general site area is devoted to intensive irrigationbased cultivation of cereals and fava beans. The immediate site area was fallow at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. The modern dispersed village of Huertas encroaches onto the site area from the south. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 2.9 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. Hastorf (1993:230) reports an area of 2.8 ha for both the Wanka I and Wanka II components. She did

SITE NO. 499 [Jau-LI-25(P), Colls. 145-P, 146-P; UMARP Site No. J-249] Date of Survey: Nov. 24, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [450100 E, 8699800 N; 11.7613° S, 75.4580° W] Natural Setting: 3640 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a ridge spur (Plate A198). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow, with abundant gravel in some areas. There is a sparse grass cover in uncultivated areas. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Some of the fields in the site area had crops in the early stages of growth at the time of our survey, while other fields were recently plowed or in fallow. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 6.5 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light, light, and light-tomoderate concentrations. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, although abundant rock rubble in occasional piles and along modern field borders suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted two stone hoes and several crude chert cutting tools.

206

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

There is a complex of Inca-style colcas along the western edge of the site—this complex is described separately as Site 500, but the two sites were probably closely linked. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A33). Discussion: A substantial LIP/LH occupation, almost certainly closely associated with the complex of Inca-style colcas at nearby Site 500. We are uncertain about the presence of LIP occupation at this locality prior to Inca domination. The significance of the possible trace of EIP/MH surface pottery is uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: ? LH: Wanka III Large Village

Plate A198. Site 499. Facing west over area of Collection 145-P, with archaeologist at center-left. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-17) Table A33. JASP surface collections at Site 499. Coll. No. 145-P 146-P

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

ca. 20 × 25 m, at light-to-moderate mostly LIP, with trace of south edge of site Inca-style pottery ca. 20 × 20 m, in light-to-moderate mostly LIP, with possible northern part of site trace of EIP/MH

SITE NO. 500 [Jau-LH-15(P), Unit 96-P; UMARP Site No. J-21] Date of Survey: Nov. 24, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [450000 E, 8699800 N; 11.7613° S, 75.4589° W] Natural Setting: 3630 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground along the upper slopes of a ridge spur (Plate A199). The site area is ca. 210 m above the valley floor to the west. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow, with abundant gravel in some areas. There is a sparse cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is uncultivated, used only for grazing livestock. The surrounding ridge crest and lower hillslopes are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a line of rectangular stone storage buildings (colcas) distributed parallel to the contour just below the hill crest (Plate A200), over an area of ca. 0.7 ha; there is a trace of surface pottery. Structural Remains. A single line of the foundations of 39 rectangular structures built atop a low, stone-faced terrace along a distance of ca. 400 m (Fig. A21) (Table A34). There are no indications of any other buildings. The individual structures measure ca. 7 × 4 m in area, and are spaced about 1.5 m apart. The architectural preservation is fair, and 21 structures have walls over 1.0 m high, and a few walls are still preserved up to ca. 1.9 m high (Plate A201); no entrances or other openings are preserved in any of the structures. The masonry is uncoursed fieldstone set in a mortar of mud and small pebbles. An unusual feature of these buildings is the use of metamorphic rock, rather than the far more common limestone. This may be attributed to the site’s situation in a contact metamorphic zone, and is indicative of the Incas’ use of immediately available surface rock to build their storage structures. Surface Finds. There are bare traces of surface pottery in and around the colcas. We made no surface collection. UMARP archaeologists subsequently made two surface collections, one on either side of the line of colcas, that produced a total of 23 undiagnostic sherds. Discussion: This site is dated on the basis of its general similarity to formal Inca-style storage complexes, and to the close proximity of a Wanka III site (Site 499) with Inca-style surface pottery. The precise relationship between Sites 499 and 500 is uncertain, but must have been close and direct. Site 500 is one of a series of Inca state storage facilities lining the ridge separating the Mantaro and Masma valleys (see also Sites 502, 504, 514, 516, 517, 491). Except for Site 500, these storage complexes lack immediately associated habitation, and this suggests that these sites were situated among lands set aside for Inca state production. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class E

Table A34. Colcas at Site 500. Colcas total circular rectangular

Number

Volume

39 0 39

3272 m3 0 3272 m3

Plate A199. Sites 500 and 501. Facing north over general area of sites. Arrows indicate approximate site centers. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-13)

(top) Plate A200. Site 500. Facing north over north half of site. Arrow points to archaeologist. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-19) (bottom) Plate A201. Site 500. Example of preserved colca, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-18)

Appendix A

207

Figure A21. Site 500, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Plate A202. Site 501. Facing south over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-15)

SITE NO. 501 [Jau-LI-24(P), Coll. 144-P; UMARP Site No. J-248] Date of Survey: Nov. 23, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [450300 E, 8699300 N; 11.7658° S, 75.4562° W] Natural Setting: 3580 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping terrain in a saddle between two high hills (Plates A199, A202), ca. 180 m above the main valley floor. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow, with substantial gravel debris. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushes in uncultivated areas, with an occasional eucalyptus tree. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Modern plowing and field clearing may have damaged the archaeological remains. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Archaeological Remains: The surface area of 1.9 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in light-to-moderate concentration. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but a few piles of cleared rock rubble may represent the remnants of 1 or 2 ancient stone-walled buildings. We also noted a few stone hoes and one groundstone digging-stick weight. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The badly weathered material appears to be all LIP. Discussion: A small LIP occupation, probably agricultural in function. Classification: LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 502 [Jau-LH-14(P), Unit 95-P; “Cujocuto”; UMARP Site No. J-22] Date of Survey: Nov. 24, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [451000 E, 8699100 N; 11.7676° S, 75.4497° W] Natural Setting: 3705 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the broad crest of a large hill (Plate A203) separating the Masma Valley from the main Mantaro Valley. The site is ca. 300 m above the valley floor to the west.

(top) Plate A203. Site 502. Facing south at hilltop site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-16) (bottom) Plate A204. Site 502. Section of relatively well preserved colcas, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-12)

The site area occupies the highest point in the local region. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow, with some exposed bedrock. There is a moderate grass cover. Modern Land Use: Mainly rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. At the time of our survey some fields had crops in early stages of growth, while others were fallow or had recently been plowed. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site consists primarily of a single line of rectangular stone structures arranged elliptically around the crest of the hill over an area of ca. 7.2 ha (Fig. A22). The long axes of the buildings run along the line describing the ellipse. The line is broken on the southeast side by a gap about 250 m long containing only three building foundations. A mound and a rock alignment lie within the center of the ellipse. Structural Remains. The colcas. The principal architectural remains appear to be a standardized set of Inca colcas. Seventy-five structures are readily identifiable from their surface remains, but their preservation is only poor to fair (Table A35). However, enough remains to determine that they are rectangular in form, measuring ca. 6.0 × 3.5 m in area, and with walls ca. 40–50 cm thick (Plate A204). Most buildings are

208

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(left) Plate A205. Site 502. Section of colca remnants. Arrow points to line of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-8) (above) Plate A206. Site 502. Mound inside ellipse of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-6)

Figure A22. Site 502, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Table A35. Colcas at Site 502. Colcas total circular rectangular

represented by fragmented remains and the maximum height of any wall is only ca. 0.50 m. The masonry is uncoursed metamorphic rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks and pebbles. We detected no entrances, nor is there any indication of their possible location. The colcas appear to have been constructed atop a low, stone-faced terrace (Plate A205). The interior mound complex. Within the ellipse, at the highest point on the hill, stand the remains of a rock and earth mound that has been badly disturbed by looters. The looter’s pits reveal no internal structure, nor was any evidence of exterior facing visible. The mound is roughly square, measuring 18.0 m × 20.7 m in area and standing about 2.0 m high (Plate A206). From the profiles visible in the looter’s pits, it may be inferred that the mound was built as a single unit, not in multiple phases. A roughly rectangular (23.0 × 27.0 m) alignment of rocks lies slightly northeast of the mound, also within the ellipse. The visible portion of this feature consists of an irregular line of apparently unworked cobbles, one rock wide. Because this feature is almost flush with the modern ground surface, it is difficult to determine if the mound and rock alignment were contemporary. Surface Finds. There is only a trace of surface pottery. We also noted several hoes and groundstone digging-stick weights. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The material is not very diagnostic, but appears to be LIP. UMARP archaeologists subsequently made one additional small surface collection over an area of 50 × 50 m just west of the mound within the ellipse. This included six sherds from small Incaic jars.

Number

Volume

75 0 75

6278 m3 0 6278 m3

Discussion: The architectural form and style, plus the Incaic sherds in the UMARP surface collection, indicate that this is a formal Inca storage facility, one of several such sites along the ridgeline separating the Mantaro and Masma Valleys. The closest other Inca storage sites are Site 500 (1.0 km to the northwest) and Site 504 (1.1 km to the south-southeast). Site 502’s elliptical form is unique in our survey area, as is the presence here of the large mound at the center of the complex (the Inca storage facility at Site 577 may also contain a mound). The location of the site on the highest hill on the east side of the Mantaro Valley is probably significant. From this position there is an unobstructed view for kilometers in all directions. The site would have therefore had considerable strategic value, and may have served as a military lookout, with the rectangular buildings constituting barracks. However, the buildings are atypically small and oddly arrayed in comparison to Inca barracks recorded elsewhere (Morris 1967; Kendall 1976; Gasparini and Margolies 1980). Another possibility is that the site held goods stored specifically for the Inca state religion. The central platform is suggestive of public ceremonial activity, possibly at a locality where storage of materials destined for religious functions may have been kept separate from other state goods. It is probable that the two features in the center of the site and the rectangular structures around the periphery were in use at the same time during the Late Horizon. Despite the unusual arrangement of the rectangular buildings, it is probable that they were designed for storage. The regularity of their construction

Appendix A

Plate A207. Site 503. Facing south-southeast over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 27-9)

Plate A208. Site 503. Facing southwest over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 27-7) Table A36. JASP surface collections at Site 503. Coll. No. 256-P 257-P

Area

Chronology

ca. 50 m dia., north side of site mainly LIP with lighter EIP/MH ca. 40 m dia., south side of site mostly LIP, with trace of EIP/MH

(size, spacing, materials, shape) suggests that they were built as a unit, which is characteristic of Inca storage facilities. In addition, the low density of ceramics is expected for storage sites, not habitation. It is possible that the three isolated structures in the gap along the southeast side of the ellipse were used for some function other than storage, such as security or administration. However, these three buildings are architecturally indistinguishable from the other structures, and so the suggestion of an alternative function remains tentative. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class D, possibly with major ritual significance SITE NO. 503 [Jau-LI-55(P), Colls. 256-P, 257-P; “Tinia”; UMARP Site No. J-253] Date of Survey: Aug. 10, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [452900 E, 8698700 N; 11.7713° S, 75.4323° W] Natural Setting: 3630 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the crest and upper slopes of a broad ridge (Plate A207). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally medium. In uncultivated areas there is a sparse grass cover, except along field borders where there are bushes and dense grass (Plate A208). Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. There were no crops standing in the fields at the time of our survey. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 6.6 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration. Hastorf (1993:230)

209

Plate A209. Site 504. Facing south over area of site. Arrows point to different sections of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-5)

Plate A210. Site 504. Facing south over southern two-thirds of site. Arrows indicate sections of lines of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 45-25)

and Borges (1988:70) both report an area of 8.0 ha for the Wanka I component of this site. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but abundant cleared rock rubble along modern field borders suggests the former presence of numerous ancient stone-walled buildings. We also noted several stone hoes and several chert knives and scrapers. We made two surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A36). The UMARP restudy of this site apparently did not detect any EIP/MH or late LIP (Wanka II) occupation. Discussion: The dominant occupation is early LIP (Wanka I), possibly with a lighter EIP/MH component. We have arbitrarily estimated the EIP/MH occupation as 1.6 ha. Since UMARP archaeologists did not report any EIP/MH material here, it is possible that we originally confused EIP/MH and Wanka I ceramics. Therefore, the status of any EIP/MH occupation is questionable. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Small Village (?) LIP: Wanka I Large Village SITE NO. 504 [Jau-LI-28(P)/Jau-LH-16(P), Colls. 147-P, 148-P; UMARP Site No. J-23/J-252] Date of Survey: Nov. 25, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [451300 E, 8697800 N; 11.7794° S, 75.4470° W] Natural Setting: 3550 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the crest and upper slopes of a large ridge that separates the main Mantaro Valley on the west from the Masma Valley to the east (Plate A209); the neighboring valley floors are ca. 150 m below the site. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover, except along the lines of ancient structures where there is a moderate growth of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of tubers, fava beans, and cereals. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 9.4 ha is defined by the presence of architectural remains (a line of Inca-style colcas) (Plate A210),

210

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

rock rubble, and surface pottery. The Wanka I component is measured as 9.2 ha (Hastorf 1993:230) and 9.4 ha (Borges 1988:70). D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 9.2 ha. UMARP archaeologists distinguish two separate sites here: J-23, the line of Inca colcas, and J-252, the residential component of the overall site. Structural Remains. There are no structural remains apart from the Inca-style colcas. We estimate that there were originally 66 of these rectangular storage structures arrayed in a single long line (Fig. A23); because of poor preservation, we could only positively identify 26. Only 9 structure foundations are sufficiently well preserved to allow measurements of length and width, and all wall remnants are flush with the modern ground surface. The presence of the additional 40 structures is inferred from the presence of linear arrangements of rock rubble, wall fragments, and gaps in the line. All of the better-defined buildings are located at the north end of the site; the line deteriorated into rubble in the southern end (Table A37). Masonry consists of uncoursed, unworked mixed metamorphic and granitic cobbles set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. No entrances are preserved. Numerous piles of rock rubble border the agricultural fields adjacent to the site on the east. These may be the remains of other buildings destroyed by field clearing. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site area, usually in very light concentration, but with two areas of light and light-to-moderate sherd density, each measuring ca. 50 m in diameter at the northwest end of the site. We also noted several stone hoes and a number of crude chert cutting and scraping tools. Table A37. Colcas at Site 504. Colcas

Number Volume

estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

66 0 66 26 0 26 40 0 40

5610 m 0 5610 m3 2040 m3 0 2040 m3 3570 m3 0 3570 m3 3

Table A38. JASP surface collections at Site 504. Coll. No. 147-P 148-P

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

ca. 20 × 30 m light-to-moderate mostly LIP, with light Inca-style pottery ca. 15 × 30 m light-to-moderate all LIP

We made two surface collections in the areas of heaviest sherd concentration at the northwestern end of the site (Table A38). UMARP archaeologists subsequently made two additional surface collections, each over areas of 10 × 50 m, from the northern end of the site. They recovered a total of 55 sherds, 17 of which were Inca; 13 of these came from large storage vessels. Hastorf’s (1993:230) and Borges’ (1988:70) subsequent restudies revealed early LIP (Wanka I) occupation, while D’Altroy’s (1992:192) revealed that there was also an LH (Wanka III and Inca-style ceramics) occupation. Discussion: This site comprises two principal components: (1) a linear cluster of Inca-style colcas over an area of ca. 1 ha along the western side of the site, and (2) a more amorphous concentration of surface pottery and rock rubble over a total area of ca. 9.4 ha. The UMARP ceramic analyses indicate that the larger occupation is early LIP (Wanka I), with an apparent abandonment during the late LIP (Wanka II) and reoccupation as an Inca state storage facility during the LH (Wanka III). The LH component is an Inca state storage facility, one of several on the ridgeline between the Mantaro and Masma Valleys (see also Sites 500 and 502). The association of Inca state storage sites with mixed Wanka I and Inca ceramic assemblages is characteristic of the north side of the Mantaro Valley. There may be a small Wanka III settlement associated with this storage facility. The deterioration of the pre-LH architecture at this site hinders determination of the size and nature of the earlier Wanka I component. Classification: LIP: Wanka I Large Village LH: Wanka III Small Village, and Inca Storage Facility, Class D SITE NO. 505 [Jau-LI-26(P), Coll. 150-P; UMARP Site No. J-251] Date of Survey: Nov. 26, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [452000 E, 8698000 N; 11.7776° S, 75.4406° W] Natural Setting: 3470 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper slopes of a low, rounded hill that rises about 20 m above the general level of the valley floor on the west side of the Masma Valley. Erosion has been slight. Soil cover is medium to deep. There is no natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Modern field clearing and plowing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 6.4 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in light-to-moderate concentration. Borges (1988:69) also reports a site area of 6.4 ha. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but the abundant rock rubble throughout the site area may represent the remains of ancient structures destroyed by modern plowing and field clearing. We noted several stone hoes and chert implements.

Figure A23. Site 504, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Appendix A We made a single surface collection from an area of ca. 15 × 15 m in the eastern part of the site. The material is all LIP. However, Borges (1988:69) identified a significant EH occupation at this site, one that we did not originally detect. Discussion: A substantial LIP occupation in a topographically low-lying location, seemingly unmixed with either EIP/MH or LH surface pottery. Borges’ restudy indicates an EH component. This site is part of an apparent loose cluster of sites where EH occupation definitely, or possibly, occurs (see also Sites 416, 423, 509, 558, 583, 606, 609, 617, 621, 623)—in our original survey, we detected EH occupation only at Sites 509 and 623. Classification: EH: ? LIP: Large Village SITE NO. 506 [Jau-?-8(H), Loc. 1-H; UMARP Site No. J-68] Date of Survey: Nov. 26, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [453000 E, 8697100 N; 11.7858° S, 75.4314° W] Natural Setting: 3465 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on flat ground on the floor of the Masma Valley, in a very marshy area. There has been no erosion, and the entire site area is thickly covered with marsh grass. Soil cover is deep. Modern Land Use: Grazing, mostly by cattle. Archaeological Remains: This unique site comprises a dense concentration of old ridged field in an area of ca. 14.8 ha. These fields are not cultivated today, and have obviously been out of use for some time; they may be prehispanic. The field ridges are arranged in groups of parallel raised surfaces. The flat-topped individual fields measure ca. 2–3 m wide and 15–25 m long. The ditches surrounding each field average ca. 1 m wide, and the average vertical height between ditch bottoms and the surface of the adjacent ridged field is ca. 50 cm (Plate A211). Most of the ditches are filled with standing water today. Around the edges of the site area the ridged fields are less well preserved, and tend to gradually fade away onto the surrounding landscape. Parts of the site area were submerged under a few centimeters of water at the time of our survey (late in the annual dry season). We saw no surface pottery or other prehispanic artifacts in the site area. Discussion: Although its chronology remains uncertain, this complex of ancient ridged fields has obviously been abandoned for a long time, and there is apparently no living memory of their use for any agricultural purpose. We believe it likely that this complex dates to the LIP/LH. Although we suspect they are prehispanic, excavation will obviously be required to establish the date of their construction and use. This field complex would have been a very substantial agricultural facility at some point in the past. A similar concentration of ridged fields occurs next to Site 590, near the edge of Laguna Tragadero. Classification: Unknown age: Ridged Field Complex SITE NO. 507 [Jau-?-7(H), Coll. 109-H; UMARP Site No. J-254] Date of Survey: Nov. 25, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [453300 E, 8697600 N; 11.7812° S, 75.4286° W]

Plate A211. Site 506. Facing northeast over ridged fields, with chickens for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-30)

211

Natural Setting: 3485 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on a low mounded elevation that rises 2–3 m above the general level of the valley floor, on the northern side of the Masma Valley (Plate A212). There has been little or no erosion. Soil cover is deep. There is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. The modern village of Masma encroaches onto the site from the east. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.2 ha is defined by surface pottery in trace to very light concentrations. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, although the supporting mounded elevation may be partly, or wholly, artificial. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The sherds are badly weathered, but they appear to be LIP. Discussion: A small LIP valley-floor occupation. The scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of permanent, stone-walled architecture in prehispanic times. If the elevated area is artificial, the settlement could be much more substantial than it appears at first glance; this site has good potential for future excavation. The eastern limits of the sites could not be well defined due to the presence of modern occupation. Classification: LIP: Hamlet SITE NO. 508 [Jau-EI-28(P), Coll. 149-P; UMARP Site No. J-134] Date of Survey: Nov. 26, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [451700 E, 8697200 N; 11.7848° S, 75.4433° W] Natural Setting: 3580 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a large ridge that separates the main Mantaro Valley on the west from the Masma Valley to the east. The site is ca. 200 m above the floor of the Mantaro Valley, and ca. 100 m above the floor of the Masma Valley. Erosion has been generally moderate, although more severe along the steeper, western side. Soil depth is medium to shallow. There is virtually no natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Much of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.0 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in light concentration. Subsequent UMARP restudies report the same site area (Hastorf 1993:229; Borges 1988:69). There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but the presence of rock rubble piled up by modern farmers throughout the site area suggests the possible presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We saw several stone hoes and a number of chert implements. We made a single surface collection from an area of ca. 25 × 25 m in the west-central site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH occupation dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village

Plate A212. Site 507. Facing southeast at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-27)

212

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

SITE NO. 509 [Jau-EH-1(H), Colls. 111-H, 152-P; “Ataura”; UMARP Site No. J-250] Date of Survey: Nov. 26, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [451900 E, 8696100 N; 11.7948° S, 75.4415° W] Natural Setting: 3340 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on a narrow band of nearly level ground on the valley floor, ca. 100 m southwest of the base of a ridge that rises steeply to the northeast. The immediate site area is very slightly elevated relative to the surrounding valley floor. Erosion has been virtually nonexistent. Cultivated fields are bordered by dense clusters of grass and eucalyptus trees. Soil cover is deep. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of tubers and cereals, including maize. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.6 ha is defined primarily on the basis of surface pottery in trace to very light concentrations. Borges (1988:69) reports a site area of 0.8 ha. Excavations here by Ramiro Matos in 1968 (Matos 1973) revealed the remnants of stone-walled architecture (his “Sector A”) (Plate A213). Matos (1973:96) also identified a small cluster of EH rockshelter tombs (“Sector B”) in an erosional cut a short distance upslope from Sector A. He also located a complex of EH “construcciones cuadrangulares” (quadrilateral constructions) (his “Sector C”), extending over an area of more than 1 ha, in the main Mantaro floodplain just south of Sector A (Matos 1973:96–98) (Fig. A24). We did not detect either Sector B or Sector C in our 1975 survey. There are no definite prehispanic structural remains visible on the surface, but abundant rock rubble throughout the site area suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled buildings comparable to those excavated by Matos. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 20 × 60 m in the central site area, around the area of Matos’ 1968 excavations. We combined this collection with another surface collection at this same locality in 1976 (Coll. 152-P). The material is all Early Horizon. Borges (1988:56, 69) also identified EH material at this site. Discussion: Although it is small in surface area, this site is a substantial Formative occupation on the valley floor. Matos’ earlier work suggests that the site is probably significantly larger than we were able to discern in 1975. His excavations indicate that the slight elevation of the site area is primarily artificial, formed by subsurface stone-walled architecture that may include a small “temple.” There are very few well defined Formative sites in our survey area, and this is the westernmost one we recovered, and the only significant EH occupation we discovered on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. This site is part of an apparent loose cluster of sites where EH occupation definitely, or possibly, occurs (see also Sites 416, 423, 505, 558, 583, 606, 609, 617, 621, 623)—in our original survey, we detected EH occupation only at Sites 509 and 623. Classification: EH: Small Village SITE NO. 510 [Jau-EI-17(H), Coll. 110-H; UMARP Site No. J-142] Date of Survey: Nov. 26, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [453100 E, 8696200 N; 11.7939° S, 75.4305° W] Natural Setting: 3530 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a prominent ridge that separates the Mantaro and Masma Valleys. The site occupies the highest point on this part of the supporting ridge, with commanding views of the adjacent valley floors some 80–150 m below the site (Plate A214). Erosion has generally been moderate, with some bedrock outcrops on the northern side of the site. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is virtually no natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains.

Figure A24. Site 509, plan of site complex (from Matos 1973:97).

Plate A213. Site 509. Excavated architectural remains in “Sector A,” with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-33)

Plate A214. Site 510. Facing west at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-32)

Appendix A Archaeological Remains: The site area of 3.1 ha is defined by surface pottery and one ancient platform mound. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 2.8 ha for the EIP/MH component, and 3.1 ha for the Wanka I component (Hastorf 1993:229); an overall site area of 2.8 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191); and an area of 3.1 ha for the EIP/MH and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69–70). Structural Remains. The only probable prehispanic structure is a circular mound at the highest point in the site. This measures ca. 8–10 m in diameter and stands less than 1 m high. There are several looter’s pits in the mound, revealing earth and rock-rubble construction, with a stone retaining wall around its perimeter. There is considerable rock rubble scattered around the mound, much of which probably derives from the looters’ activity. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in trace to very light concentrations throughout the site area, with heaviest concentrations around the highest part of the site in the vicinity of the circular mound. We also noted one stone hoe. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is predominantly EIP/MH, with a trace of LIP ceramics. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Hastorf (1993:230) and D’Altroy (1992:191) report substantial Wanka I and Wanka III occupations, which we did not detect. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, possibly with a modest public building at the site’s highest point. The site’s prominent position and commanding views may have been important in its placement and function. Occupation apparently continued into the early LIP (Wanka I), with abandonment during late LIP (Wanka II), and a reoccupation during the LH (Wanka III); the possible public architecture may well date to Wanka I and/or Wanka III. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 511 [Jau-EI-31(P), Coll. 155-P; UMARP Site No. J-256] Date of Survey: June 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [454200 E, 8696000 N; 11.7957° S, 75.4204° W] Natural Setting: 3580 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a broad ridge that separates the Masma and Mantaro Valleys (Plate A215). To the north the terrain descends at moderate slope to the floor of the Masma Valley, ca. 100 m below; to the south and west there is a much steeper descent to the Mantaro Valley floor ca. 220 m lower down. Erosion has been moderate. Soil cover is medium. There is virtually no natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site area had been recently plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 8.0 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. Subsequent UMARP restudy remeasured the site area as 6.0 ha for the EIP/MH component (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains. We also noted several stone hoes and crude chert implements. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 25 × 30 m. All the material is EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) subsequently identified the primary occupation as early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation. There is a small LIP site (Site 512) that borders Site 511 along its eastern edge—these were originally defined as parts of the same site, but here we distinguish them as separate since they do not appear to overlap spatially. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village SITE NO. 512 (Jau-EI-31(P), Coll. 156-P] Date of Survey: June 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [454200 E, 8696100 N; 11.7948° S, 75.4204° W] Natural Setting: 3575 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a broad ridge that separates the Masma and Mantaro Valleys. To the north the terrain descends at moderate slope to the floor of the Masma Valley, ca. 100 m below; to the south and west there is a much steeper descent to the Mantaro Valley floor ca. 220 m lower down. Erosion has been moderate. Soil cover is medium. There is virtually no natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area.

213

Plate A215. Site 511. Facing north over site, with archaeologist at left-center. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-2) Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site area had been recently plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.8 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains. The general scarcity of rock rubble may indicate that there were few, if any, stone-walled structures here. We also noted several stone hoes and crude chert implements. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 20 × 60 m. All the material is LIP. UMARP archaeologists subsequently identified Wanka I surface pottery at nearby Site 512-A, and this suggests a Wanka I occupation here at Site 512 as well. Discussion: A small LIP occupation, probably Wanka I when Sites 512 and 512-A may have comprised a single small settlement. The status of Wanka II occupation is uncertain. There is a larger EIP/MH site (Site 511) that borders Site 512 along its western edge—these were originally defined as parts of the same site, but here we distinguish them separately since they do not appear to overlap spatially. Classification: LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 512-A [UMARP Site No. J-24; surveyed but not recorded by JASP survey] Date of Survey: Mid-June, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [454300 E, 8696100 N; 11.7948° S, 75.4195° S] Natural Setting: 3550 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley, on gently sloping ground on a ridge separating the Masma and Mantaro Valleys. Modern Land Use: The lands to the east of the site are currently used for dry farming a variety of upland crops, especially barley. The fields are cultivated right up to the structures comprising the site. To the west, the hillslope drops off rapidly to the irrigated floor of the main Mantaro Valley, where maize and truck crops dominate. Archaeological Remains: Because of the vegetation and deterioration of the architecture at the southern end of the site, the complete layout is impossible to determine from surface evidence. The most clearly defined section is a line of rectangular Inca-style storage buildings (colcas) running the length of the site along the front (west) of the ridge crest (Fig. A25). Along the southern third of this line is an area of dense rock rubble and overgrowth. Within this area is a line of circular foundations and a zone (ca. 20 × 30 m) of heavy rock rubble, with occasional circular building foundations visible—these circular structures were probably domestic residential buildings, not colcas. Additional piles of rock rubble are scattered throughout an area ca. 50 × 150 m, along the east side of the main line of structures. Structural Remains. The principal architectural remains at this site comprise a single row of rectangular colca foundations. The preservation of these buildings is poor to fair. Forty-eight buildings are clearly identifiable, and an additional 15 are inferred to have been present (Table A39). Most structures remain only in foundation, although some walls are preserved to a height of 0.8 m. The architecture in the east end of the site has been badly obscured by thick vegetation and

214

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A25. Site 512-A, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Table A39. Colcas at Site 512-A. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

Number Volume 63 0 63 48 0 48 15 0 15

5079 m3 0 5079 m3 3941 m3 0 3941 m3 1138 m3 0 1138 m3

piled rock rubble, but structure foundations on the western end are more easily visible on the ground surface. The masonry consists of uncoursed, unworked metamorphic rocks set in a mortar of mud and pebbles. No entrances or other architectural features have been preserved. Surface Finds. UMARP archaeologists made one surface collection from the area of the rock rubble, adjacent to the colca complex. The diagnostic sherds are LIP, with a few Inca-style pieces. UMARP archaeologists subsequently made another surface collection that contained both early LIP (Wanka I) and Inca-style pottery. Discussion: The LH component of this site is one of a series of highly standardized Inca state storage facilities along the ridgeline between the Mantaro and Masma Valleys. The colca complex at this site appears to be associated with the unrelated remains of early LIP (Wanka I) habitation (Site 512). While the remains of habitation architecture here are more extensive than at most nearby sites, most of these structures are in such poor condition that it is impossible to ascertain the layout of the Wanka I settlement. The rubble associated with the line of colcas is probably the remains of a Wanka I village that antedated the Inca use of the area and formed part of the same settlement as nearby (and partly overlapping) Site 512. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class D SITE NO. 513 [Jau-LI-29(P), Coll. 157-P; UMARP Site No. J-259] Date of Survey: June 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [454500 E, 8696000 N; 11.7957° S, 75.4177° W] Natural Setting: 3580 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper slopes of a ridge spur on the south side of the Masma Valley (Plate A216). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally shallow. There is little natural vegetation in this cultivated area, apart from grass and bushes and a few eucalyptus trees along field borders. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is uncultivated, used only for grazing livestock—this is probably because of the dense litter of rock rubble. The surrounding area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.0 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light and light concentrations.

Plate A216. Site 513. Facing west at area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-4)

Plate A217. Site 513. Looted tombs at Collection 157-P, with Paul Liffman. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-6) Although there are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, there is dense rock rubble throughout the site area, and this probably derives from ancient stone-walled structures that are no longer recognizable as such. A local man told us that about 20 years ago at this locality he and others excavated a “tomb” in which they found a large jar containing a human skeleton and a number of “rainbow colored” stones. The area from which the tomb is said to have been located is presently littered with an unusual quantity of rock rubble (Plate A217). We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is predominantly LIP, with a trace of Inca-style ceramics. Discussion: A small LIP/LH occupation, probably mainly Wanka III (LH), apparently with a few stone-walled buildings and at least one formal tomb. We are unable to tell whether this locality was occupied during LIP times prior to Inca conquest. Isolated cemeteries, as this site appears to be, are relatively uncommon in our survey area (see also Sites 421, 496, 532, 534, 559, 578, 581, 588, 615). Classification: LH: Wanka III Isolated Cemetery

Appendix A

215 Table A40. Colcas at Site 514. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

Number Volume 23 23 0 13 13 0 10 10 0

1286 m3 1286 m3 0 727 m3 727 m3 0 559 m3 559 m3 0

Plate A218. Site 514. Facing southwest over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-11) to the southwest), this site forms a pair of Inca storage facilities; a third colca complex (Site 517) is only 200 m beyond Site 516 to the southwest on the same ridge crest. This storage complex seems to have been designed in coordination with the other nearby Inca storage facilities. That is, Site 514 seems to have contained only circular structures, as was the case with Site 516, just to the south. Sites 517 (UMARP Site J-27) and 512-A contain only rectangular buildings. This suggests that each facility may have been designed to house a limited range of goods, complementary to those kept in the other storage units. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class F

Figure A26. Site 514, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

SITE NO. 514 [Jau-LI-31(P), Jau-LH-19(P), Unit 99-P, Coll. 159-P; UMARP Site No. J-25/J-258] Date of Survey: June 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [454600 E, 8695900 N; 11.7966° S, 75.4167° W] Natural Setting: 3560 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest of a low ridge spur on the southern side of the Masma Valley (Plate A218). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally shallow to medium. Natural vegetation consists of grass, bushes, and a few eucalyptus trees in areas of dense rock rubble along the borders of modern agricultural fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.7 ha is defined by surface pottery and a single line of poorly preserved Inca-style storage buildings (colcas). Structural Remains. We estimate a total of 23 circular colcas, only 13 of which are clearly identifiable (Fig. A26) (Table A40); these measure ca. 5 m in diameter with wellbuilt stone walls ca. 40 cm thick. The maximum height of preserved wall is 0.40 m, and most of the buildings have been reduced to rubble. The masonry consists of uncoursed, unworked metamorphic fieldstones set in a mortar of mud and pebbles. No entrances or other architectural features are preserved. The line of structures sits above a 1.0-m-high stone-faced terrace, the downhill face of which lies about 17.0 m to the west. This terrace is not structurally joined to the colcas, but may have been built contemporaneously with the colcas in order to prevent erosion and the subsequent undermining of the storage buildings. Surface Finds. Most of the surface pottery occurs at the north end of the site in trace to very light concentration. We made a single small surface collection from an area of ca. 10 × 60 m. The material appears to be LIP and LH, mainly Wanka II–III types. Discussion: Although we found no Inca-style surface pottery, we assume this is an LH site because of its distinctly Inca style (line of formal structures built along a ridge crest atop a stone-faced terrace). Although we cannot be sure about the absence of LIP occupation prior to Inca conquest, we suspect this is a purely LH site, with no clear sign of any residential occupation. Together with nearby Site 516 (ca. 150 m

SITE NO. 515 [Jau-LI-32(P), Colls. 160-P, 161-P; UMARP Site No. J-257] Date of Survey: June 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [455000 E, 8695500 N; 11.8003° S, 75.4131° W] Natural Setting: 3620 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the crest of a ridge on the south side of the Masma Valley. To the north the terrain descends at moderate slope onto the floor of the Masma Valley ca. 80 m lower down. To the south there is a much steeper descent onto the floor of the Mantaro Valley, ca. 250 m below. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally medium. There is little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 4.8 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in light concentration. Hastorf (1993:229–30) reports an area of 4.5 ha for both the EIP/MH and Wanka I components of this site. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 4.5 ha for the Wanka I component (she does not identify an EIP/MH component at this site). There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, although the abundance of rock rubble throughout the site area suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A41). Hastorf (1993:229) reports a significant EIP/MH occupation here, one that we did not originally detect. Although we have distinguished them as separate sites, there are two complexes of Inca-style colcas in the immediate vicinity: one, Site 516, at the northwestern end of Site 515, and a second, Site 517, along the site’s southeastern edge. Discussion: A substantial early LIP (Wanka I) settlement, apparently with significant EIP/MH antecedents. In view of the close proximity of Inca-style colcas, the apparent absence of Inca-style pottery (both in our collections and in those of UMARP’s subsequent restudy) is puzzling. The close proximity to two Inca storage complexes (Sites 516 and 517) makes an LH occupation seem likely at Site 515. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH (?): Wanka III Small Village (?)

216

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table A41. JASP surface collections at Site 515. Coll. No.

Area

160-P 161-P

ca. 40 × 40 m, north side of site ca. 50 × 50 m, south side of site

Sherd Density Chronology light light

all LIP all LIP

Plate A219. Site 516. Facing south over site. Arrow points to line of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-14)

Figure A27. Site 516, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Table A42. Colcas at Site 516. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

Number Volume 15 15 0 8 8 0 7 7 0

838 m3 838 m3 0 447 m3 447 m3 0 391 m3 391 m3 0

SITE NO. 516 [Jau-LH-20(P), Unit 100-P; UMARP Site No. J-26] Date of Survey: June 13, 1976; UMARP restudy Aug. 2, 1985 Location: Hoja Jauja [454800 E, 8695600 N; 11.7994° S, 75.4149° W] Natural Setting: 3600 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground on the side of a high ridge (Plate A219). To the south of the site there is a steep descent of ca. 250 m to the valley floor. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally medium. There is a thick cover of grass and bushes along the two architectural complexes at the edges of agricultural fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a single straight line of poorly preserved circular storage buildings (colcas), with a trace of surface pottery. Structural Remains. The architectural remains consist of a line containing 8 identifiable circular colcas (Fig. A27). No wall is preserved above the ground surface or above piled rock rubble, and the presence of 7 additional structures is inferred only from the distribution of the visible structures and intervening rock rubble (Table A42). The masonry consists of unworked metamorphic and igneous fieldstones set in a mortar of mud and pebbles, with potsherds interspersed within the mortar. No entrances or other architectural features are preserved. Surface Finds. There were only traces of surface pottery along the line of colcas, and we detected no diagnostic sherds. Discussion: Although diagnostic surface pottery is lacking, this site appears to be one of the series of Inca state storage facilities along the ridgeline between the Mantaro and Masma Valleys. Other storage sites in the vicinity are Sites 512-A and 514, ca. 100+ m to the north, and Site 517, ca. 250 m to the south. Classification: LIP: ? LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class F SITE NO. 517 [Jau-LH-21(P), Unit 101-P; UMARP Site No. J-27] Date of Survey: June 13, 1976; UMARP restudy Aug. 2, 1985 Location: Hoja Jauja [455200 E, 8695400 N; 11.8012° S, 75.4112° W] Natural Setting: 3605 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground at the edge of the crest of a broad ridge (Plate A220). Immediately to the east and south the terrain descends steeply to the valley floor ca. 240 m below. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow. There is a moderate cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is uncultivated, used only as livestock pasture. The surrounding ridge crest and slopes below the site are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.6 ha is defined by a single line of Inca-style stone storage buildings (colcas) and traces of surface pottery. This site is situated along the southern edge of Site 515. Most of the surface pottery and lithic artifacts near site 517 actually pertain to Site 515. Structural Remains. The principal architectural remains comprise a single line of rectangular colcas, curved slightly so as to conform to the contours of the hill (Fig. A28; Plate A220); a single circular structure lies at the southern end of the line. We estimate that there were originally 41 rectangular and 1 circular colca (Table A43). Architectural preservation is good, as the foundations of most of the colcas are completely preserved. A full set of measurements was available for 34 of the buildings. The best-preserved individual structures measure ca. 6 × 4 m in area. The highest standing wall is 2.2 m high (Plate A221), and most buildings retain some wall up to 1.0 m, although the uphill walls are in much worse condition than the downhill walls, because of disturbance by modern farmers in the fields above. No entrances were preserved, although the height of standing walls on the downhill sides of the buildings suggests that the entrances were most likely on the uphill sides. Short sections of straight mortared wall currently buttress an agricultural terrace over a length of 27.5 m, but no sections of wall orthogonal to the main line are preserved. If there were buildings here at one time, and if they were the same size as those in the main line of structures, then there were no more than 3 structures present. An unmortared, stone-buttressed terrace wall lines the entire length of the line of colcas. It varies in height from about 0.4 to 1.0 m, depending on the hill contours, to provide a fairly even ledge below the storehouses. The terrace has collapsed along most of the line, so it is not apparent if any additional structures were present, such as drainage canals or smooth paving. Building walls are ca. 40 cm thick made of unworked fieldstone set in a mortar of mud and pebbles (Plate A222). The rock is primarily friable metamorphic shale

Appendix A

217

mixed with igneous river cobbles at the south end, while igneous cobbles dominate the standing architecture to the north. The transition reflects change in the rocks available on the ground surface, implying that acquisition of building materials was relatively casual. Surface Finds. There are only a few traces of undiagnostic surface pottery at the site. More abundant surface pottery and stone hoes occur at nearby Site 515. We made no surface collection. Discussion: This is obviously an Inca-style storage facility, part of a four-site cluster of such facilities in this immediate region (Sites 512-A, 514, 516, 517). Site 517 is the most southerly of the Inca state storage facilities on the ridgeline between the Mantaro and Masma Valleys. Like Sites 514 and 516, Site 517 is spatially closely associated with a settlement (Site 515) where Wanka II–III surface pottery predominates in our surface collections. We are uncertain of the precise relationship between Sites 515 and 517, but we presume that the inhabitants of Site 515 had something to do with the local provisioning and maintenance of the formal storage facility, although the dominant LIP occupation at Site 515 appears to be early LIP (Wanka I). The regularity of mean structure size among this cluster of Inca storage facilities undoubtedly reflects a degree of careful planning in the construction of the storage facilities lining the Masma Valley, and suggests that they were constructed as a coordinated series. The presence of a single circular structure at the south end of the site is analogous to the situation at Site 566 (UMARP Site J-28) on the south side of the Mantaro Valley, in which a single rectangular structure was appended to the north end of a line of circular buildings. The significance of this organization is uncertain, but the anomalous buildings could potentially have been used to house a residential functionary or to store some unusual materials. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class E

(top) Plate A220. Site 517. Facing north at site. Arrow points to line of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-22) (middle) Plate A221. Site 517. Example of well-preserved colca, with Paul Liffman. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-17) (bottom) Plate A222. Site 517. Masonry detail. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-18)

SITE NO. 518 [Jau-EI-32(P), Coll. 162-P; UMARP Site No. J-255] Date of Survey: June 14, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [456900 E, 8698800 N; 11.7704° S, 75.3956° W] Natural Setting: 3660 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the lower flanks of a broad, dissected slope (Plate A223). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow. There is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.7 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but the site area is slightly (and vaguely) mounded and contains abundant rock rubble that may represent the remnants of ancient structures destroyed by modern land use. We also noted one groundstone digging-stick weight.

Table A43. Colcas at Site 517. Colcas total circular rectangular

Number Volume 42 1 41

Figure A28. Site 517, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

3515 m3 30 m3 3485 m3

218

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A223. Site 518. Facing east at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-27)

Plate A224. Site 519. Facing west over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-26) Table A44. JASP surface collections at Site 519.

We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. Although the material is badly weathered, it all appears to be LIP. Discussion: A modest LIP occupation, probably a small cluster of stonewalled domestic structures. Classification: LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 519 [Jau-EI-36(P), Colls. 167-P, 168-P] Date of Survey: June 15, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [456300 E, 8695700 N; 11.7985° S, 75.4011° W] Natural Setting: 3700 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground on two neighboring hillocks and the intervening saddle, atop the crest of a broad ridge that separates the Masma and Mantaro Valleys (Plate A224). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium. The limited natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area consists of sparse grass in fallow agricultural fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used as livestock pasture. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 5.3 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture. The general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled buildings. We also noted one chert projectile point. We made two separate surface collections, both small and badly weathered (Table A44). Discussion: A relatively large EIP/MH occupation in terms of surface area, but the apparent absence of stone-walled architecture may mean that residence here was temporary, seasonal, or short term. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village SITE NO. 520 [Jau-EI-33(P), Coll. 163-P; UMARP Site J-263] Date of Survey: June 15, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [455900 E, 8694900 N; 11.8057° S, 75.4048° W] Natural Setting: 3625 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground on two low hillocks that rise from the crest of a broad ridge. To the west and south the terrain descends steeply to the valley floor ca. 240 m below; to the east there is a much more gradual descent along the broad, undulating crest of the main ridge. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is presently used only for livestock pasture. The slopes below the site are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.1 ha is defined by surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. Borges (1988:69) subsequently remeasured the site area as 1.8 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and only a moderate quantity of rock rubble. The latter appears to be natural, and probably does not

Coll. No.

Area

Chronology

167-P 168-P

ca. 20 × 50 m, eastern site area ca. 50 m dia., western site area

all EIP/MH all EIP/MH

derive from ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted one stone hoe, one chert projectile point, and a few small chert scrapers. We made a single surface collection over the entire site area. The material is badly weathered, but it all appears to be EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) subsequently found that the primary occupation here is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, apparently without permanent stone-walled architecture. This site and Site 521 (ca. 100 m to the southeast on the same ridge crest) comprise a pair of closely spaced EIP/MH settlements; these two sites may have comprised a single local community. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 521 [Jau-EI-34(P), Coll. 164-P; UMARP Site No. J-262] Date of Survey: June 15, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [456000 E, 8694600 N; 11.8084° S, 75.4039° W] Natural Setting: 3630 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the broad crest of a large ridge. To the west and south the terrain descends steeply to the valley floor ca. 240 m below; to the east there is a much more gradual descent along the broad, undulating crest of the main ridge. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally medium. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. At the time of our survey, about half the site area was covered with barley standing about 1 m high. Fallow fields are used for livestock pasture. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 5.2 ha is defined by surface pottery in very light concentration. Borges (1988:69) subsequently remeasured the site area as 5.0 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and only a moderate quantity of rock rubble. The latter is probably natural and not the remnants of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted one stone hoe and one polished groundstone axe. We made a single surface collection over the entire site area. The material all appears to be EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) subsequently identified the primary occupation as early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, probably without stone-walled architecture. This site and Site 520 (ca. 100 m to the northwest on the same ridge crest) comprise a pair of closely spaced EIP/MH settlements. Alternatively, these two sites may have comprised a single local community. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village

Appendix A

219

Plate A226. Site 523. Facing northwest at site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-24) Plate A225. Site 522. Facing south over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-15) Table A45. JASP surface collections at Site 522. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

153-P

ca. 25 × 25 m, in fallow field

light

154-P

ca. 70 × 70 m, in uncultivated, severely eroded area

very light

mainly LIP, and lighter EIP/MH mainly LIP, and lighter EIP/MH

Plate A227. Site 524. Facing south over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-25)

SITE NO. 522 [Jau-EI-30(P), Colls. 153-P, 154-P; UMARP Site No. J-267] Date of Survey: June 12, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [454700 E, 8694700 N; 11.8075° S, 75.4159° W] Natural Setting: 3380 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the crest and uppermost slopes of a low ridge spur (Plate A225). The supporting ridge crest is ca. 20 m above the valley floor to the east and south. To the northeast the terrain rises steeply to the crest of the main ridge. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil cover is shallow to medium. The only natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area is sparse grass in fallow fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. At the time of our survey, parts of the site area were obscured by barley ca. 1 m high. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 4.8 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light and light concentrations. Subsequent UMARP restudy report an overall site area of 6.7 ha (D’Altroy 1992:192), and 8.0 ha for the EIP component (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and the scarcity of rock rubble suggests the absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes, a few groundstone manos, and a few crude chert scrapers. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site area (Table A45). Borges (1988:69) found that the primary EIP/MH component dates to the early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). D’Altroy’s (1992:192) subsequent restudy revealed an LH (Wanka III) occupation, which we did not detect. We are uncertain about the presence of LIP occupation prior to the LH, but UMARP restudies apparently did not detect any Wanka I or Wanka II material at this site. Discussion: This site apparently has two components: a slightly smaller EIP/MH and a slightly larger LH (Wanka III). This locality was apparently abandoned during the LIP. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

SITE NO. 523 [Jau-?-6(P), Coll. 166-P] Date of Survey: June 15, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [456200 E, 8693800 N; 11.8156° S, 75.4021° W] Natural Setting: 3500 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the crest of a high ridge (Plate A226). The site is ca. 125 m above the valley floor to the east and south. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow, with some patches of bare subsoil. The only vegetation is a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area serves only as livestock pasture. The surrounding slopes below the site are used for rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.6 ha is defined by surface pottery in very light concentration. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and the scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stonewalled buildings. We also noted two small chert projectile points. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The badly weathered material appears to be predominantly LIP, with a trace of EIP/MH ceramics. Discussion: A small LIP occupation, apparently lacking permanent, stone-walled architecture. The significance of the trace of EIP/MH surface pottery is uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Hamlet SITE NO. 524 [Jau-EI-35(P), Coll. 165-P; UMARP Site No. J-264] Date of Survey: June 15, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [456500 E, 8693800 N; 11.8157° S, 75.3993° W] Natural Setting: 3510 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the crest and uppermost slopes of a high ridge spur (Plate A227). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil cover is shallow, with some patches of bare subsoil. The only vegetation is a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area serves only as marginal livestock pasture. The slopes below the site are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers.

220

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.3 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. Borges (1988:69) subsequently remeasured the site area as 1.5 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture. There is a moderate quantity of rock rubble, but this appears to be natural in origin. We also noted one chert projectile point. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material appears to be predominantly EIP/MH, with a trace of LIP ceramics. Borges (1988:69) subsequently found that the primary occupation is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation. The apparent absence of permanent stone-walled architecture may mean that this locality was occupied on a seasonal, temporary, or irregular basis. The significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery is uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: ? SITE NO. 525 [Jau-?-7(P), Jau-LH-22(P), Colls. 169-P, 170-P; UMARP Site No. J-60/J-265] Date of Survey: June 18, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [456000 E, 8693400 N; 11.8193° S, 75.4039° W] Natural Setting: 3400 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping to nearly level ground on the crest and upper slopes of a ridge spur (Plate A228). The site area is ca. 50 m above the valley floor to the west and south. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass and weed cover.

(top) Plate A228. Site 525. Overlooking area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-4) (bottom) Plate A229. Site 525. Possible ancient structure at Collection 170-P, with Phil Tugendrajch. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-6) Table A46. JASP surface collections at Site 525. Coll. No.

Area

Chronology

169-P ca. 100 m in dia., in western site all LIP 170-P ca. 70 m in dia., in eastern site LIP, with light Inca-style ceramics

Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for livestock pasture. Archaeological Remains: The surface area of ca. 4.3 ha contains surface pottery and architectural remnants. Subsequent UMARP investigations indicated an overall site area of 2.3 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191) (UMARP Site J-265), and an area of 0.6 ha for the possible LH colca complex (UMARP Site J-60). Structural Remains. Although there are no definite architectural remains, there is an area of low-mounded stone rubble in the western part of the site that probably represents a row of tombs or storage structures—we suspect the latter. This comprises a linear cluster ca. 30 m long, ca. 5 m wide, and roughly 1 m high (Plate A229). No individual structures can be distinguished. If these were storage buildings similar to others in the local region, this rubble pile may represent the remains of colcas. Subsequent UMARP restudy detected the remnants of 3 very poorly preserved colcas. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in very light concentration over the site area. We also noted several stone hoes and one groundstone metate fragment. We made two separate surface from different parts of the site (Table A46). UMARP archaeologists subsequently made one additional surface collection from the entire site area. This yielded 125 diagnostic sherds, of which 44 (35.2%) were Inca, 7 (0.6%) were Wanka-Inca, and 73 (64.2%) were undiagnostic. Discussion: Apparently a substantial LH (Wanka III) settlement possibly associated with a small cluster of Inca-style colcas. Because of very poor preservation, and the small number of structures, the presence of colcas at this site remains questionable. The relationship between the domestic occupation and the possible colcas is uncertain, but was probably close and direct. The presence of LIP occupation at this locality prior to Inca conquest is uncertain. Classification: LIP: ? LH: Wanka III Small Village, assoc. with an Inca Storage Facility, probably Class F (?) SITE NO. 526 [Jau-EI-37(P), Colls. 171-P, 172-P; UMARP Site No. J-268] Date of Survey: June 19, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [456400 E, 8693100 N; 11.8220° S, 75.4003° W] Natural Setting: 3325 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Most of the site is situated on gently sloping ground at the lowermost end of a small ridge spur at the edge of the valley floor (Plate A230); part of the site extends southeastward from the base of the ridge onto the flat valley floor. Erosion has been slight to moderate. Soil cover is medium to deep. There is sparse grass in fallow fields and along field borders. Modern Land Use: Primarily rainfall-based cultivation of tubers and cereals, including maize. Parts of the valley floor are devoted to irrigation-based cultivation. The modern village of Mantaro encroaches onto the site area from the east. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The surface area of ca. 6.3 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 3.8 ha. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but numerous piles of rock rubble cleared from fields by modern farmers may represent the remnants of ancient stone-walled architecture (Plate A231). We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A47). D’Altroy’s (1992:192) subsequent restudy revealed a significant LH (Wanka III) occupation. Discussion: This site has a dominant EIP/MH component, and a smaller LH (Wanka III) component; it was apparently abandoned during the LIP. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village SITE NO. 527 [Jau-EI-42(P), Coll. 181-P; UMARP Site No. J-269] Date of Survey: June 25, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [455100 E, 8692600 N; 11.8265° S, 75.4122° W] Natural Setting: 3310 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on level ground on the valley floor, ca. 300 m east of the present course of the Río Mantaro (Plate A232). Erosion has been nonexistent. Soil depth is deep. There is sparse grass in fallow cultivated fields. Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains.

Appendix A Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.6 ha is defined by surface pottery in variable very light and light concentration. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 1.2 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but rock rubble is abundant throughout the site area, and this may represent the remnants of ancient stone-walled buildings. We also noted some chert debitage, but no definite lithic implements. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is mixed EIP/MH and LIP. D’Altroy’s (1992:192, 2001:89) subsequent restudy revealed a significant late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) components. Discussion: This EIP/MH settlement was apparently abandoned during the early LIP and reoccupied during the late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III). The abundance of stone rubble suggests permanent stone-walled domestic architecture. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 528 [Jau-LH-23(P), Unit 102-P; UMARP Site No. J-34] Date of Survey: June 19, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [458000 E, 8694000 N; 11.8139° S, 75.3856° W] Natural Setting: 3375 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the top and sides of a low ridge spur (Plate A233). The valley floor is ca. 30 m below the site to the east and south; to the northwest the terrain ascends to higher ground, gradually at first and then with increasing steepness. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is uncultivated, used only as livestock pasture. The surrounding area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields serve as livestock pasture.

221

Archaeological Remains: This site consists of a single line of Inca-style circular storage structures (colcas) constructed atop a stone-faced terrace ca. 120 m in length along the crest of the hill (Fig. A29; Plate A234), with a trace of associated surface pottery. The site area is ca. 0.2 ha. Structural Remains. There are 10 definable colcas; an additional 7 are inferred to have been present (Table A48). Architectural preservation is poor, and almost half of the site has been reduced to rubble. The maximum height of standing walls is 1.30 m. The masonry is uncoursed, rough fieldstones set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. As is the case in this part of the valley, the rock employed is friable metamorphic. No entrances or other architectural features are preserved. Individual structures measure ca. 4.5 m in diameter, with walls ca. 50 cm thick constructed of a double course of unworked stone (Plates A235, A236). Individual structures are separated by ca. 1.5 m. Surface Finds. There are only traces of surface pottery, and we saw nothing diagnostic. We made no surface collection. UMARP archaeologists subsequently made one small surface collection yielding 48 sherds from an area ca. 100 × 100 m, which yielded only 1 diagnostic sherd of possible Inca manufacture. Discussion: We date this complex to the LH primarily because of its formal similarity to other complexes of Inca-style colcas in the local region (for example, Sites 514, 516, 517), and the identification of one possible Inca-style sherd in the UMARP surface collection. Like some of these Inca state storage facilities, this site is relatively isolated from any coeval domestic occupation, although there are small LH settlements (Sites 529, 530) ca. 300 m to the SW and SE, respectively. Because it sits behind the first line of hills bordering the floodplain, this is the only Inca storage facility in the survey area that is not visible from the main valley floor. The lack of nearby residential occupation raises the question of who supplied and maintained this facility, who used the goods stored in the colcas, and where the stored goods were used. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class F

Plate A232. Site 527. Facing south over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-30)

(top) Plate A230. Site 526. Facing northeast at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-20) (bottom) Plate A231. Site 526. Area of Collection 171-P, with two archaeologists at center-right. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-7) Table A47. JASP surface collections at Site 526. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

171-P

ca. 15 × 25 m, in upper site area ca. 10 × 15 m, in lower site area

light

mainly EIP/MH, light LIP, trace Inca-style mixed EIP/MH and LIP, trace Inca-style

172-P

light

Plate A233. Site 528. Facing south at site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-19)

222

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A29. Site 528, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map). Plate A236. Site 528. Masonry detail of colca exterior wall. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-16) Table A48. Colcas at Site 528. Colcas

Plate A234. Site 528. Section of colcas, with archaeologist at center. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-14) Plate A235. Site 528. Masonry detail, showing wall in profile section. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-17)

estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

Number Volume 17 17 0 10 10 0 7 7 0

689 m3 689 m3 0 405 m3 405 m3 0 284 m3 284 m3 0

SITE NO. 529 [Jau-EI-39(P), Coll. 177-P; UMARP Site No. J-270] Date of Survey: June 19, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [457900 E, 8693900 N; 11.8148° S, 75.3865° W] Natural Setting: 3400 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the crest and upper slopes of a low ridge spur. The site is ca. 20 m above the valley floor to the east. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. Fallow cultivated fields have a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.1 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in trace and very light concentrations. Subsequent UMARP restudies report an overall site area of 1.6 ha (D’Altroy 1992:192), and an area of 2.0 ha for the EIP component (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but one mounded area with heavy rock rubble may represent the remnants of an ancient stone-walled structure (Plate A237). We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The material appears to be mixed EIP/MH and LIP. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant occupation is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). D’Altroy’s (1992:192) subsequent restudy revealed a significant LH (Wanka III) occupation. Discussion: This site has EIP/MH and LH (Wanka III) components, and was apparently abandoned during the LIP. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

Appendix A

Plate A237. Site 529. Architectural remnants, with archaeologist at center. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-13)

Plate A238. Site 530. Facing west at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-23)

SITE NO. 530 [Jau-EI-41(P), Coll. 179-P; UMARP Site No. J-272] Date of Survey: June 21, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [458200 E, 8693800 N; 11.8157° S, 75.3837° W] Natural Setting: 3360 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground at the base of a low, broad ridge spur just above the valley floor (Plate A238). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is medium. Uncultivated areas have a cover of grass and bushes, with eucalyptus trees along field borders. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.5 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 2.5 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but abundant rock rubble piled up in fields and along modern field borders suggests the presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted one stone hoe and one chert scraper. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is very predominantly LIP, with traces of EIP/MH and Inca-style ceramics. D’Altroy’s (1992:192) subsequent restudy revealed a significant LH (Wanka III) occupation. Discussion: Primarily an LH (Wanka III) occupation. UMARP restudies indicate that there was no significant LIP occupation. We are uncertain about the significance of the trace of EIP/MH surface pottery. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 531 [Jau-EI-40(P), Coll. 178-P; UMARP Site No. J-271] Date of Survey: June 21, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [458300 E, 8693500 N; 11.8184° S, 75.3828° W] Natural Setting: 3345 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and sides of a low

223

Plate A239. Site 532. Facing southeast at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-8) hillock. Erosion has been moderate. Soil cover is medium. Fallow agricultural fields have a sparse grass cover, and there are bushes and a few eucalyptus trees along modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 2.0 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 2.0 ha for the Wanka I component. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the substantial quantity of rock rubble in and around modern cultivated fields may indicate the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all LIP. Borges (1988:70) subsequently identified only Wanka I material here. Discussion: A small early LIP (Wanka I) occupation, apparently with some permanent stone-walled buildings. Because Borges does not report any Wanka II material here in her subsequent restudy of the site, it appears that this site was not occupied during the later LIP. Classification: LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 532 [Jau-LI-30(P), Coll. 158-P; UMARP Site No. J-260] Date of Survey: June 13, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [454700 E, 8696200 N; 11.7939° S, 75.4158° W] Natural Setting: 3590 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper sides of a low ridge spur on the south side of the Masma Valley (Plate A239). Erosion has been moderate. Soil cover is deep. There is moderate grass cover in uncultivated areas. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers, with fallow fields serving as livestock pasture. About half the site was under cultivation at the time of our survey. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.5 ha is defined by surface pottery and an architectural complex. Hastorf (1993:230) reports a site area of 2.5 ha, as does Borges (1988:70) for the Wanka I component. Structural Remains. The primary feature of this site is a complex of poorly preserved stone-walled structures that appear to have been tombs. The structures are configured in two lines on the east side of the ridge, each containing six tombs. The individual structures are too poorly preserved to ascertain their original size and form, but they appear to have been circular, above-ground structures, constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar (Plate A240). The tombs have all been extensively looted, one fairly recently. There is a scatter of human bone on the ground surfaces surrounding the tombs. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site area in very light and light concentrations, with the highest sherd densities on the northern side of the ridge, in the vicinity of the tombs. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all LIP, and, according to Hastorf (1993:230) and Borges (1988:70), is all early LIP (Wanka I). Discussion: A small early LIP (Wanka I) cemetery. This kind of site, with tombs isolated from settlements, is relatively uncommon in our survey area (see also Sites 421, 496, 513, 534, 559, 578, 581, 588, 615). Classification: LIP: Wanka I Isolated Cemetery

224

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru formerly present, We also noted several stone hoes, a few chert scrapers, and some chert debitage. We made three separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A49). D’Altroy’s (1992:192) subsequent restudy revealed an LH (Wanka III) occupation. UMARP studies apparently did not reveal any LIP (Wanka I or II) material here. Discussion: A multicomponent occupation, with EIP/MH predominant and LH (Wanka III) secondary. UMARP ceramic analysis indicates that the site was abandoned during the LIP and reoccupied during the LH. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

Plate A240. Site 532. Recently looted tomb, showing abundant bone litter at lower left, with Paul Liffman. (UMMA Neg. No. 21-9)

Plate A241. Site 533. Facing southwest over site, with archaeologist at centerright. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-12) Table A49. JASP surface collections at Site 533. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

174-P

ca. 15 × 15 m, northern site area ca. 15 × 25 m, central site area ca. 15 × 30 m, southern site area

light

mixed EIP/MH and LIP, plus trace Inca-style pottery predominantly EIP/MH, lighter LIP all EIP/MH

175-P 176-P

light light

SITE NO. 533 [Jau-EI-38(P), Colls. 174-P, 175-P, 176-P; UMARP Site No. J-266] Date of Survey: June 19, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [458100 E, 8693400 N; 11.8193° S, 75.3846° W] Natural Setting: 3350 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and sides of a long, low ridge spur (Plate A241). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is medium. There is a sparse cover of grass and bushes in uncultivated areas. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields serve as livestock pasture. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. The modern village of Mantaro encroaches onto the southwestern side of the site. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 5.4 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light and light concentrations. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 3.4 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but abundant rock rubble throughout the site suggests that ancient stone-walled structures were

SITE NO. 534 [Jau-EI-53(P), Fea. 15-P; UMARP Site No. J-273] Date of Survey: June 19, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [457600 E, 8694100 N; 11.8130° S, 75.3892° W] Natural Setting: 3455 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the crest and upper slopes of a ridge spur. The valley floor is ca. 60 m below the site to the south; to the north the terrain ascends at moderate slope to a high, broad plateau atop the main ridge. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow, with some areas of bare subsoil. There is sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area serves only as marginal livestock pasture. The surrounding slopes are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.1 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in light-to-moderate concentration. Borges (1988:69) later remeasured the site area as 0.2 ha for the EIP component. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but abundant rock rubble over a slightly mounded area probably indicates the former presence of an ancient structure. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant occupation dates to the early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation of questionable function. We think it may represent an isolated cemetery. Such isolated cemeteries are relatively uncommon in our survey area (see also Sites 421, 496, 513, 532, 559, 578, 581, 588, 615). Classification: EIP/MH: Isolated Cemetery (?) SITE NO. 535 [Jau-?-8(P), Coll. 173-P; UMARP Site No. J-275] Date of Survey: June 19, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [458300 E, 8692200 N; 11.8301° S, 75.3828° W] Natural Setting: 3315 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on flat ground on the valley floor (Plate A242). Erosion has been minimal, or nonexistent. Soil cover is deep. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of cereals, including maize. A large irrigation canal borders the north side of the site. Fallow fields serve as livestock pasture. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.5 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light, light, and light-tomoderate concentrations. Borges (1988:69) subsequently remeasured the site area as 1.0 ha for the EIP component. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but the presence of substantial rock rubble in this otherwise stone-less area suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made a single surface collection from an area of ca. 10 × 30 m in the area of highest sherd density. All the material we identified appeared to be LIP, but Borges (1988:69) subsequently defined both Huacrapukio 1 and 2 phase occupations (EIP/MH). Discussion: A small, valley-bottom LIP occupation, apparently with EIP/ MH antecedents. The probable presence of stone-walled structures suggests a relatively permanent occupation. We may have confused early LIP (Wanka I) with EIP/MH pottery—thus the LIP occupation here is questionable. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP (?): Small Village

Appendix A

225

Plate A242. Site 535. Site area, with two archaeologists at center-left. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-9)

Plate A243. Site 537. Facing south over site, with three archaeologists at center. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-35)

SITE NO. 536 [Jau-?-11(P), Coll. 185-P; UMARP Site No. J-276] Date of Survey: June 28, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [459000 E, 8692100 N; 11.8311° S, 75.3764° W] Natural Setting: 3315 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated atop a slightly elevated area that rises ca. 2–3 m above the general level of the surrounding valley floor. We do not know if this elevation is natural or artificial. Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil cover is deep. Uncultivated areas have a thick grass cover. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of cereals. At the time of our survey, part of the site area had recently been plowed, and barley ca. 1 m high covered the rest. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.8 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery over the vaguely mounded area. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, but the presence of substantial rock rubble in this otherwise stone-less area suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted two stone hoes and one groundstone digging-stick weight. We made a single small surface collection over the entire site area. The material appears to be all LIP. Discussion: A small LIP occupation, probably with permanent stone-walled architecture. The low mounded area may indicate the presence of fairly well preserved architecture below the present ground surface. This may be a relatively well preserved example of an LIP valley-floor occupation. Classification: LIP: Hamlet

traces of EIP/MH and Inca-style ceramics. Borges (1988:69) subsequently found a significant EIP/MH occupation, which she dated primarily to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Discussion: A small valley-floor LH (Wanka III) occupation, with EIP/MH antecedents. The apparent absence of stone-walled structures may indicate a temporary or seasonal occupation. We are uncertain about the presence of LIP occupation prior to Inca conquest. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: ? LIP/LH: Small Village

SITE NO. 537 [Jau-?-10(P), Coll. 184-P; UMARP Site No. J-274] Date of Survey: June 27, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [458500 E, 8691500 N; 11.8365° S, 75.3810° W] Natural Setting: 3315 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level terrain atop a slightly elevated area that rises irregularly ca. 2 m above the general level of the surrounding valley floor (Plate A243). We do not know if this elevation is natural or artificial. Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil cover is deep. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover, and there are a few eucalyptus trees along field borders. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of cereals. At the time of our survey, part of the site area had recently been plowed. Fallow fields function as livestock pasture. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. The modern village of San Lorenzo encroaches onto the site area from the south. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.7 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration. Subsequent UMARP restudy reports a site area of 2.0 ha for the EIP/MH component (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the slightly elevated site area suggests the presence of subsurface architecture. The scarcity of stone rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes and groundstone digging-stick weights. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is badly weathered, with few diagnostics, but it appeared to be mainly LIP, with

SITE NO. 538 [Jau-?-12(P), Coll. 186-P; UMARP Site No. J-280] Date of Survey: June 28, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [458000 E, 8690700 N; 11.8437° S, 75.3856° W] Natural Setting: 3305 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level terrain atop a slightly elevated area that rises ca. 1–2 m above the general level of the surrounding valley floor. We do not know if this elevation is natural or artificial. Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil cover is deep. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover, and there are a few eucalyptus trees along field borders. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of cereals. Fallow fields function as livestock pasture. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. The modern village of San Lorenzo encroaches onto the site area from the east. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.3 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of very light surface pottery. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the slightly elevated site area suggests the presence of subsurface architecture. The scarcity of stone rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The material is badly weathered, with few diagnostics. However, it appears to be mixed EIP/MH and LIP. Discussion: A somewhat problematic small occupation, of uncertain age or function. The apparent absence of stone-walled structures may indicate temporary, intermittent, or seasonal occupation. Because of modern settlement, the eastern limits of the site could not be defined. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Hamlet (?) LIP (?): Hamlet (?) SITE NO. 539 [Jau-LH-24(P), Coll. 180-P; UMARP Site No. J-58] Date of Survey: June 25, 1976; UMARP restudy Sept. 22, 1978 Location: Hoja Jauja [456000 E, 8690900 N; 11.8419° S, 75.4040° W] Natural Setting: 3330 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the flat valley floor ca. 350 m east of the active channel of the Río Mantaro (Plate A244). The site occupies the western edge of a low, natural terrace that overlooks the active floodplain immediately to the west. There are many water-worn river cobbles in the site area, almost certainly

226

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

of natural origin. Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil cover is deep. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of cereals. Fallow fields function as livestock pasture. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.9 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery and by the presence of what is probably a formal Inca road. Subsequent UMARP restudy measured the site area as 2.0 ha. Structural Remains. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but an old roadway that passes through the center of the site may be the main Inca road between Jauja and Huancayo (Plate A245). This feature extends for several kilometers to the northwest and southeast. It seems to have been considerably modified in modern times, and is still used for local foot traffic and by an occasional tractor or horse-drawn cart. Subsequent UMARP study identified the remnants of 4 rectangular buildings, and estimated an original total of perhaps 6–7 structures, now represented by piles of stone rubble. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site area in trace to very light concentrations. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is mixed LIP and Inca-style ceramics, with a possible trace of EIP/MH pottery. Two additional surface collections were made during the subsequent UMARP restudy of the site. These collections contained both Inca-style and EIP/MH pottery. All Inca sherds were from flared-mouth jars or small cooking or serving pots; no bowl or plate fragments were recovered. LH occupation continued into the early Colonial Period. Discussion: The LH occupation may have been a way station associated with the Inca road that passes ca. 150 m to the east. The EIP/MH material probably represents a small hamlet. The site was apparently abandoned during the LIP. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet LH: Inca Road Segment and Way Station

SITE NO. 540 [Jau-?-9(P), Coll. 183-P; UMARP Site No. J-278] Date of Survey: June 27, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [458100 E, 8689300 N; 11.8564° S, 75.3847° W] Natural Setting: 3300 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the flat valley floor (Plate A246). The site occupies a slightly elevated area that rises ca. 1–2 m above the general level of the surrounding plain, and measuring ca. 60–80 m across; this elevation may be an ancient natural levee, or it could be partly or wholly artificial. There are many water-worn river cobbles in the site area, almost certainly of natural origin. Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil cover is deep. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of cereals and alfalfa. There are several modern irrigation canals in the general site area. Fallow fields function as livestock pasture. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.8 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration. Borges (1988:69) subsequently remeasured the site area as 3.0 ha for the EIP component. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture. We also noted several stone hoes and one groundstone metate fragment. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is badly weathered, with few diagnostics, but it seems to be primarily LIP, with a trace of EIP/MH ceramics. Borges (1988:69) found a significant early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase) occupation. Discussion: A small LIP occupation, probably lacking permanent stonewalled architecture, with EIP/MH antecedents. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Small Village

Plate A244. Site 539. Facing south over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-28)

SITE NO. 541 [Jau-EI-43(P), Coll. 182-P; UMARP Site No. J-279] Date of Survey: June 27, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [457900 E, 8689600 N; 11.8537° S, 75.3865° W] Natural Setting: 3300 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the flat valley floor (Plate A247). The site occupies a slightly elevated area that rises ca. 1–2 m above the general level of the surrounding plain, and measuring ca. 50–60 m across; this elevation may be an ancient natural levee, or it could be partly or wholly artificial. There are many water-worn river cobbles in the site area, probably mostly of natural origin. Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil cover is deep. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of cereals and alfalfa. There are several modern irrigation canals in the general site area. Fallow fields function as livestock pasture. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 4.8 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in trace to very light concentrations. Borges (1988:69) subsequently remeasured the site area as 6.0 ha for the EIP component. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, although part of the site elevation could be artificial, and the general abundance of rock rubble may

Plate A245. Site 539. Section of Inca road passing through site area. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-29)

Plate A246. Site 540. Facing south over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-34)

Appendix A indicate the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes and one groundstone digging-stick weight. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is badly weathered, with few diagnostics, but it appears to be EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) subsequently found that the dominant occupation here is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). Discussion: A small valley-floor EIP/MH occupation, possibly with buried archaeological remains. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 542 [Jau-EI-44(P), Coll. 187-P; UMARP Site No. J-277] Date of Survey: June 27, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [458400 E, 8689000 N; 11.8591° S, 75.3819° W] Natural Setting: 3300 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the flat valley floor. The site occupies a slightly elevated area that rises irregularly ca. 1 m above the general level of the surrounding plain, and measuring ca. 50–60 m across; this elevation may be an ancient natural levee, or it could be partly or wholly artificial. There are many water-worn river cobbles in the site area, probably mostly of natural origin. Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil cover is deep. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of cereals and alfalfa. There are several modern irrigation canals in the general site area. Fallow fields function as livestock pasture. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.9 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration. Subsequent UMARP restudy measured the site area as 1.5 ha for the EIP/MH component (Borges 1988:69). Although there are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, the central site area contains a vaguely defined mound ca. 15–20 m in diameter and 50–70 cm high, with abundant rock rubble. We also noted two stone hoes and a groundstone digging-stick weight. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is badly weathered, with few diagnostics, but it appears to be all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) subsequently found that the dominant occupation dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Discussion: A small valley-bottom EIP/MH occupation, possibly with permanent stone-walled architecture. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 543 [Jau-EI-45(P), Coll. 188-P] Date of Survey: June 29, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [458100 E, 8688100 N; 11.8672° S, 75.3847° W] Natural Setting: 3295 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the flat valley floor (Plate A248). The site occupies a

Plate A247. Site 541. Facing east over site, with three archaeologists. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 22-33)

227

slightly elevated area that rises ca. 1 m above the general level of the surrounding plain, and measuring ca. 50–60 m across; this elevation may be an ancient natural levee, or it could be partly or wholly artificial. Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil cover is deep. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of cereals, including maize, and alfalfa. At the time of our survey, part of the site area had recently been plowed, and part was covered with barley ca. 1 m high. There are several modern irrigation canals in the general site area. Fallow fields function as livestock pasture. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.9 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, although the abundance of rock rubble suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures, and the slightly elevated site area may represent subsurface architecture. We also noted some chert debitage. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Discussion: A small valley-floor EIP/MH occupation. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 544 [Jau-EI-49(P), Coll. 205-P; UMARP Site No. J-326] Date of Survey: July 6, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [458900 E, 8688500 N; 11.8636° S, 75.3774° W] Natural Setting: 3295 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the flat valley floor (Plate A249). The site occupies a slightly mounded area elevated ca. 40 cm above the general level of the surrounding plain. Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil cover is deep. Uncultivated areas have a sparse grass cover, and there are scattered eucalyptus trees along some modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of cereals, including maize, and alfalfa. At the time of our survey, much of the site area had recently been plowed. There are several modern irrigation canals in the general site area. Fallow fields function as livestock pasture. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.8 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of very light surface pottery. Although there are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, the slightly mounded site area covered with heavy rock rubble may represent the remnants of ancient stone-walled architecture. We also noted several stone hoes. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Discussion: A small valley-floor EIP/MH occupation, probably with permanent stone-walled architecture. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet SITE NO. 545 [see SITE NO. 495]

Plate A248. Site 543. Facing southwest over site, with archaeologist at centerright. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 23-1)

228

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A250. Site 546. Facing north over area of site. Arrow points to a line of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-36)

Plate A249. Site 544. Facing east over site, with archaeologist at center-right. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-8) SITE NO. 546 [Jau-LH-9(P), Unit 84-P; UMARP Site No. J-15] Date of Survey: Nov. 4, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [445900 E, 8696600 N; 11.7902° S, 75.4966° W] Natural Setting: 3535 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on a low knoll on the lower slopes of a broad ridge (Plate A250) just below the crest of the hills separating the Yanamarca and Mantaro Valleys. The site is ca. 130 m above the main valley floor. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. Uncultivated areas in fallow fields and along field borders have grass, bushy, and cactus vegetation. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Fallow fields are used for livestock pasture. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: This site comprises seven parallel rows of stone storage structures (colcas) that extend over an area of ca. 2.3 ha (Fig. A30). Surface pottery is virtually absent. Structural Remains. The preservation of architectural remains throughout the site is poor. Most of the site consists of lines of rubble and many of the structures were defined only by fragments of wall (Table A50). Three of the rows were well defined (Plate A251), and three other shorter rows were identified in the field on the basis of a few buildings in lines of rubble. One line was defined solely because of the presence of a line of rubble. Later examination of a 1951 airphoto showed that 6 circular buildings had been present in that line at that time, as had been estimated. This provides a measure of confidence for the estimation of the number of destroyed structures in the other lines. As far as we could determine from the poor surface evidence, all structures were built from unworked limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. No entrances were preserved, nor was there any indication in any structures of their locations. All but two rows of buildings were constructed at the front of, or abutting, low terraces. The highest and lowest lines were situated on land that is gently sloped, but not terraced. Because of the modern modification of the structures and the adjacent land, it is not clear if the terracing was more extensive in the past and has since been reduced. Neither could it be determined if the terrace construction was directly associated with the erection of the buildings. Surface Finds. Virtually none. We made no surface collection. Discussion: Although we found no surface pottery, we are confident that this complex is an Inca-related storage facility, constructed and used in LH times. This site forms part of a cluster of Inca colcas in this part of the survey area ca. 0.9 km west of the Inca center at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550) (see also Sites 547, 548). Because of the highly deteriorated condition of the buildings, it is difficult to determine more about the site from surface evidence other than the general layout. The rubble at the southeast edge of the site may comprise the remains of a set of administrative or security buildings whose inhabitants monitored or controlled the flow of goods into and out of the storage units. While further data would be needed to assess this suggestion, Morris’ (1967) work at Huanuco Pampa has indicated that administrative buildings were sometimes located in analogous positions. The presence of comparably situated buildings at Site 547, just downhill, lends some credibility to this suggestion. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class C

Plate A251. Site 546. Two rows of colca remains, with archaeologist at center left. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-27) Table A50. Colcas at Site 546. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

Number Volume 93 19 74 35 8 27 58 11 47

5251 m3 1011 m3 4240 m3 1973 m3 426 m3 1547 m3 3278 m3 585 m3 2693 m3

SITE NO. 547 [Jau-LH-8(P), Unit 83-P, Coll. 117-P; UMARP Site No. J-16] Date of Survey: Nov. 4, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [446200 E, 8696600 N; 11.7902° S, 75.4938° W] Natural Setting: 3500 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground on the lower slopes of a broad ridge overlooking the Inca center of Hátun Xauxa (Site 550). The site is ca. 100 m above the valley floor. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow. Uncultivated areas in fallow fields and along field borders have grass, bushy, and cactus vegetation. Modern Land Use: Most of the general area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Fallow fields are used for livestock pasture. The more severely eroded areas serve only as marginal livestock pasture. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site is a complex of poorly preserved Incastyle storage buildings (colcas) that extends over an area of ca. 12.1 ha (Fig. A30), with traces of surface pottery. Structural Remains. At the northwest end of the site only two rows of buildings exist, but the southeastern end contains up to seven rows. The rows contain series of circular and rectangular buildings, the two shapes often mixed together in the same row, although some rows are composed solely of structures of one or the other shape. Several buildings do not lie within any of the regular

Appendix A

229

Figure A30. Sites 546 and 547, site plans showing colcas (UMARP map). rows. The most noticeable examples of the latter are 3 rectangular buildings that were erected to the southeast of the main site area, in an isolated position. The location of these rectangular buildings is analogous to that of the 3 buildings at nearby Site 546, for which an administrative or security function seems likely. In addition, 7 or 8 structures lie between rows on the southeast side of the site. These were organized into groups of 5 buildings, 1 or 2 buildings, and 1 isolated building. Farther north are an additional 5 buildings, in groups of 2 and 3, offset from the regularly laid-out lines (Table A51). Architectural preservation is variable, but generally poor to fair. Some parts of the site have been so badly disturbed that only lines of rubble remain, while in other areas walls stand up to 1.5 m high, although walls over 1.0 m high are rare. The best preservation is in the upper part of the site. One complete line is composed solely of rubble: its inclusion as a set of storehouses is based on its location, linear arrangement, and the quantity and type of rubble (limestone rocks) that it contains. All other lines have at least a few structure foundations preserved on the surface. The condition of Site 547 is comparable to that of Site 546, but is much poorer than that of Site 554. Destruction of these buildings appears to be systematic. Particularly on the upper slopes of the southern end, farmers are tearing down buildings and are piling up rock to obtain cultivation area. This has destroyed at least 30 structures in the last few years, to judge from the airphotos. On the lower part of the southern end of the site, a series of structures has been partially excavated, apparently by looters or by farmers seeking to expand their fields. Preserved wall fragments indicate that both circular (Plates A252, A253) and rectangular structures are present—in one case they are seen side by side in the same line (Plate A254). Although in most cases only lines of formless rock rubble survive, several better-preserved structures indicate that the rectangular structures measure 6–7 m long and 4–5 m wide, while circular buildings are 4–5 m in diameter. The masonry is composed of limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. No entrances were preserved. The structures were used to buttress terraces (Plate A254). We could not determine if support walls lay between buildings, because of the extensive deterioration of the masonry and the piling of rock rubble on top of the extant foundations. The terraces are generally quite low, 0.5 m or less, and thus would

not necessarily have needed the support walls for stability. In several places the terraces had been faced with limestone rocks similar to those used to build the colcas, but the poor condition of the architecture precluded determining if the facing had been present on all terraces or only on a limited number. Surface Finds. With a single exception, there are only traces of surface pottery. The exception is a single colca structure near the southern end of the site, recently destroyed in the course of field clearing for modern, tractor-based agriculture. Here, over an area of ca. 8 × 10 m, there is a heavy concentration of surface pottery (Plate A255). We interpret this to represent the contents of a single colca in which numerous pottery vessels were placed or stored. We made a large collection of the diagnostic sherds from this locality, and UMARP archaeologists also subsequently collected there. All the material is good Inca-style ceramics, primarily from large storage vessels. Those few ceramics observed on the remainder of the ground surface were almost exclusively Inca or Inca-related, although some Wanka Base Clara sherds were also present. A subsequent UMARP surface collection yielded only Inca pottery from large storage vessels. Discussion: This site is the second-largest Inca state storage facility in the survey area. It is part of the major storage complex above Hátun Xauxa (Site 550), along with Sites 546, 554, 548, 555, and 547-A. The closest site that contained a substantial number of habitation structures was probably Hátun Xauxa itself, although there may have been a small residential population at Site 554. Apart from these two latter sites, the closest clearly defined habitation is at Site 611, adjacent to storage sites 612 and 613, about 1.5 km to the northwest. Site 547 generally conforms to the layout of many other Inca-related storage sites in the region, differing primarily in its extent (Fig. A30). The size and masonry of the buildings, for example, are typical of storehouses throughout the region. The most striking organizational difference from other, smaller Inca storage sites in the survey area is the buildings that are offset from the major lines. Morris (1967) has discussed possible functions for similar structures at Huánuco Pampa, and concludes that they were probably used for administration or security. This seems to be a reasonable interpretation for the buildings here, particularly since the general lack of ceramics seems to rule out normal habitation. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class A

230

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(top) Plate A252. Site 547. Row of circular colcas, with archaeologist at center-left. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-25) (bottom) Plate A253. Site 547. Example of partially preserved circular colca, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-24)

(top) Plate A254. Site 547. Adjacent circular (left) and rectangular (right) colcas, with Christine Rudecoff standing between the two. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-23) (bottom) Plate A255. Site 547. Surface pottery at Collection 117-P, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-22)

Table A51. Colcas at Site 547. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

Number Volume 359 128 231 170 61 109 189 67 122

23,398 m3 7898 m3 15,500 m3 11,078 m3 3764 m3 7314 m3 12,230 m3 4134 m3 8186 m3

Figure A31. Site 547-A, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Appendix A SITE NO. 547-A [UMARP Site No. J-62] Date of Survey: Early November 1975, but site not recognized until UMARP resurvey several years later. No JASP fieldnotes. Location: Hoja Jauja [446500 E, 8696600 N; 11.7902° S, 75.4911° W] Natural Setting: 3450 masl, in the lower kichwa zone, situated on nearly level ground atop an elevated plateau in the hills west of Hátun Xauxa (Site 550). The site is situated between Site 548 (UMARP J-18) and the major storage complexes at Site 547 (UMARP J-16) and Site 554 (UMARP J-17), about 250 m west of the Inca center at Hátun Xauxa. Modern Land Use: This site lies in the midst of rainfall-based agricultural fields, in which the crop stubble is used for grazing livestock. The crops grown in this area are a mix of maize, quinoa, barley, and tubers. Erosion has been slight. Archaeological Remains: The site comprises a set of badly disturbed stonewalled buildings, wall fragments, rock rubble, and very light surface pottery in the midst of an agricultural field. Architectural preservation is so poor that this site was not recognized by the original JASP survey. The destruction of the site from modern land use precludes reconstruction of the site’s original layout from surface evidence. It appears that at least one row of rectangular Inca storage structures is present on the west side of the site (Fig. A31); a parallel row of similar buildings may have existed on the east side as well (Table A52). Structural Remains. The architecture here consists of a compact set of poorly preserved rectangular buildings surrounding a low mound. The only definable structures are preserved on three sides, at best, with all western walls missing; from these remnants it can be seen that the structures are rectangular. Much of the site consists of lines of rubble that have been rearranged (by modern land use practices) from their original configurations. The masonry of the surviving building fragments is uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. No entrances or other architectural features are preserved. Surface Finds. No ceramic collection was taken from the site area, but a check of the surface of the surrounding fields revealed both Inca and Wanka ceramics in very light density. Discussion: We interpret this site as a set of Inca state storehouses. This assessment is based on the location of the buildings, the size and layout of those structures that remain, and the essential lack of associated ceramics. Some other function could reasonably be assigned to the buildings, such as security for the entire group of storage facilities on the surrounding hills, but additional data would be necessary to determine this function. No obvious habitation is preserved in the immediate vicinity of this site. The nearest sites are storage facilities about 100 m west (Site 547) and east (Site 548). Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class F SITE NO. 548 [Jau-LH-6(P), Unit 81-P; UMARP Site No. J-18] Date of Survey: Nov. 2, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [446900 E, 8696400 N; 11.7920° S, 75.4874° W] Natural Setting: 3415 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the lower slopes of a broad ridge overlooking the Inca center of Hátun Xauxa (Site 550) (see Plate A261). The site is ca. 50 m above the valley floor. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally shallow. Uncultivated areas in fallow fields and along field borders have grass, bushy, and cactus vegetation. Modern Land Use: Most of the general area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Fallow fields are used for livestock pasture. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Table A52. Colcas at Site 547-A. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

Number Volume 20 0 20 7 0 7 13 0 13

1730 m3 0 1730 m3 606 m3 0 606 m3 1124 m3 0 1124 m3

(top right) Plate A256. Site 548. Facing north along line of colca remnants. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-6) (bottom right) Plate A257. Site 548. Line of rectangular colcas, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-8)

231

Archaeological Remains: This site consists of a single line of poorly preserved Inca-style storage buildings (colcas) following the contour of the hill (Fig. A32), within an area of ca. 1.6 ha; there is also a trace of surface pottery. Structural Remains. There are 38 definable rectangular building foundations. We estimate that an additional 80 structures were originally present; these are now represented only by rock rubble and occasional wall fragments that are retained as terrace facing for the fields above. In most cases, all that remains is a continuous line of rock rubble ca. 930 m long, 8–10 m wide, and ca. 2 m high (Plate A256). Much of the site consists of rock rubble and modern field walls, with fragments of preserved colca structures occasionally interspersed. Wall fragments of some structures at the northern end of the site stand up to 2.0 m high. Within the modern cemetery in the central portion of the site are the foundations of 7 buildings, which are the only structures with foundation length and width intact. A few surviving wall remnants indicate that the structures are rectangular, probably measuring ca. 6–7 long and 4–5 m wide (Plate A257) (Table A53). Masonry is uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. Neither entrances nor evidence of their location has been preserved. Toward the northern end of the line of structures are two low rubble mounds, set about 10 m downhill (east) from the line; these measure about 5 × 3 m in area and 1.5 m high. It is not clear if these are the remains of deteriorated prehispanic buildings, or if they are the result of modern field clearing. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs along the length of the site in trace to very light concentrations. We made a single surface collection from the northern half of the site. Unfortunately, this collection was lost before we could examine it in any detail, but our recollection is that it is primarily Inca-related material. This collection was also seen by UMARP archaeologists, who confirmed its Inca characteristics. Discussion: This site forms part of a cluster of Inca colca sites in this part of the survey area west of the Inca center at Hátun Xauxa (see also Sites 546, 547, 547-A). Site 548 is the state storage facility closest to the Inca provincial center at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550), ca. 100 m downhill to the east. No Wanka habitation is associated with this site. Its spatial separation from the other storage facilities and its proximity to the main Inca administrative center suggest that the goods kept here may have been considered especially valuable, although excavations would be required to determine if this supposition is correct. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class C

232

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table A53. Colcas at Site 548. Colcas

No. Volume

estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular est. additional circular rectangular

118 0 118 38 0 38 80 0 80

7164 m3 0 7164 m3 2307 m3 0 2307 m3 4857 m3 0 4857 m3

Figure A32. Site 548, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Plate A258. Site 549. Facing north over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-37)

Plate A259. Site 550. Facing southeast overlooking modern Sausa, overlying Site 550. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-7)

Plate A260. Site 550. Facing west over site underlying modern Sausa. Arrows point to rows of colcas on hillslopes above the site. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-15)

Plate A261. Site 550. Facing northwest over area of Collection 114-P. Note piles of rock rubble throughout the area, and the line of colcas (Site 548) on the ridge above the site. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-13)

SITE NO. 549 [Jau-?-5(P), Coll. 120-P] Date of Survey: Nov. 4, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [446700 E, 8696300 N; 11.7929° S, 75.4892° W] Natural Setting: 3440 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground atop a low, rounded hill that rises a few meters above the general level of the surrounding landscape (Plate A258). To the west the terrain ascends the main ridge at moderate to steep slope; to the east there is a gently sloping descent onto the valley floor. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Much of the site area comprised fallow fields at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.4 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in light concentration. There are no definite prehispanic architectural remains, and the scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted one stone hoe and one groundstone mano. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. There are few diagnostics, but the material appears to be mainly EIP/MH, with a trace of LIP ceramics. Discussion: Primarily an EIP/MH occupation. The significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery is uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: ? SITE NO. 550 [Jau-LH-7(P), Unit 82-P, Colls. 112-P, 113-P, 114-P, 115-P, 116-P, Fea. 13-P; “Sausa,” “Jauja Tambo,” “Hátun Xauxa,” “Hátun Sausa”; UMARP Site No. J-5] Date of Survey: Nov. 3, 1975; UMARP restudy Nov. 23, 1977 Location: Hoja Jauja [447300 E, 8696500 N; 11.7911° S, 75.4837° W]

Appendix A Natural Setting: 3360 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground on the valley floor and on the lowermost flanks of the surrounding slopes to the west (Plates A259, A260). Erosion has been absent on the valley floor and slight on the lower slopes. Soil depth is medium to deep. There is very little natural vegetation in this urbanized and partially cultivated area. Modern construction, plowing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Modern Land Use: At the time of fieldwork, about 50% of the site was under the modern town of Xauxa (Sausa) and the other 50% was used for rainfall agriculture. Open fields between houselots are devoted to cultivation of cereals and tubers, and modern farmers have carefully cleared these fields of ancient stone-walled architecture. The rock rubble from such clearance has been piled up in irregular linear masses throughout the archaeological site (Plate A261). The modern town has been encroaching rapidly onto the site in recent years. It is likely that, without protection, all still-standing ancient walls will be torn down or incorporated into modern structures in the near future. Sixteenth-Century Documentary Descriptions: Miguel de Estete, who was on the first Spanish reconnaissance mission to assess the lands and Inca strength in 1533, left an effusive account in his official diary: The town of Xauxa is large and is in a very attractive valley, and the land is temperate: a strong river passes by one part of the town. It is abundant in supplies and herds; it is constructed in the manner of a town of Spain, very nucleated and with its streets well laid-out. In its view are many other towns subject to it, and the people were so numerous that it appeared to be that, of the town itself and the surrounding area, nothing similar has been seen in one town in the Indies, because it seems to many Spaniards [who] saw it [that] more than one hundred thousand people assembled daily in the principal plaza, and the markets and other plazas and streets of the same town were so full of people, that its great multitude seemed a thing of wonder. There were men who had the duty of counting people there daily, to know those who came to serve the soldiers: others had the duty of watching everything that entered the town. [Estete 1917:96–97]

233

Structural Remains. Because of Inca efforts to burn the center and the later depredations of warfare and modern incursions, only 14 clearly definable building fragments and a platform mound (usnu) remain visible above the ground surface. The surviving buildings are concentrated in a small zone in the center of the northern sector, ca. 300 m west of the usnu. Not one building is complete and most are represented by fragmentary wall sections. All preserved structures are rectangular and are laid out approximately 54°–144° from magnetic north. The surface remains are insufficient to reconstruct the distribution of the buildings, plazas or streets, even in the best-preserved area, but it appears that the site may have been organized in a rectilinear layout. One complex of unusually intact wall remnants shows two compartments, each measuring ca. 5 m wide, inside a large rectangular building. None of the standing walls evinces the close-fitting, polygonal, ashlar masonry found in some other imperial Inca architecture. All preserved structures were built of yellowish limestone and river cobbles, both available nearby, set in a mud and rock mortar. A core of small rocks and mud mortar separated the two wall faces. The rocks were often trimmed roughly, particularly for corners, but no effort was made to dress them carefully. Neither the interior nor the exterior face on any preserved building was smoothly finished. This contrasts with the architecture at Wanka settlements, in which a systematic effort was made to present a flat rock surface to both wall faces, to give a smooth finish. This distinction implies that the walls at the Inca capital may have been plastered, at least on the interior. Trapezoidal niches are preserved in three walls only; it is not clear if these were building or compound walls. One 25.6-m-long wall section, in the central sector, contains seven well-preserved niches. Each is lined with shale and is capped with a single, carefully chosen lintel stone (Plate A262). The niches are only slightly trapezoidal, but are regular in dimensions. A row of five niches in a 22.4-m-long wall fragment on the southeast part of the northern sector displays similar dimensions and masonry (Plate A263). No other niches or other architectural embellishments are fully preserved. Local residents report having encountered underground canal systems while building houses, but no evidence of this is currently visible.

In a letter to the Spanish authorities in Panama, the eyewitness Hernando Pizarro (1959:89) reported that the khipu kamayoc (keepers of the mnemonic knot records) counted off 35,000 soldiers among the forces commanded by the Inca general Chalcuchima. He also echoed Estete’s description of the center’s size and number of people present: The plaza is large and one-quarter league long. . . . It is true that there were over one hundred thousand souls. . . . This town of Xauxa is very fine and beautiful and [has] many flat exits [streets]. [Pizarro 1959:90]

A more detailed description of the architecture and activities can be found in the travelogues of Pedro de Cieza de León, who passed through in 1547: In all these parts there were great lodgings of the Incas, although the principal ones were at the beginning of the valley, in the part they call Xauxa, because there was a large enclosure where there were strong and very excellent stone lodgings, and a house of women of the Sun, and a very rich temple, and many storage structures of all the things that could be had. Besides that, there was a large number of smiths who worked large and small vessels of silver and gold for the service of the Incas and [for] temple ornaments. There were more than eight thousand Indians for service of the temple and the palaces of the lords. All buildings were of stone. The top of the houses and lodgings were immense beams, and for roofing they had long straw. [Cieza de León 1984:432]

These Spanish descriptions may be somewhat misleading, because Estete and Pizarro saw the site while an Inca army and its entourage were present, and Cieza did not see the center until 15 years after its demise. Nonetheless, Hátun Xauxa was obviously a very substantial settlement. Archaeological Remains: We originally measured the site area as ca. 33.4 ha on the basis of the distribution of surface pottery, a few architectural remnants, and masses of rock rubble cleared from fields and piled up by modern farmers. UMARP archaeologists subsequently carefully mapped and measured the site. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 46.6 ha; other UMARP studies measure the site as 48.4 ha, with a northern sector of 31.1 ha .and a southern sector of 17.3 ha. In an earlier UMARP study, LeVine (1985:312) estimated an area of 99 ha.

(top) Plate A262. Site 550. Example of preserved wall with niche, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-14) (bottom) Plate A263. Site 550. Facing west over area of Collection 115-P, showing preserved Inca walls with niches. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-12)

234

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A264. Site 550. Usnu platform, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-17) Table A54. JASP surface collections at Site 550. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

112-P

ca. 20 × 20 m, in NW site area ca. 15 × 15 m, in east-central site area ca. 15 × 15 m, in west-central site area ca. 30 × 30 m, in south-central site area ca. 10 × 15 m, in SW site area

light

all Inca-style

light-to-moderate

mostly Inca-style, with a few local LIP types

light-to-moderate

all Inca-style

light-to-moderate

mostly Inca-style, with a few local LIP types

light-to-moderate

mostly Inca-style, with a few local LIP types

113-P 114-P 115-P 116-P

A rough estimate of the maximum dimensions of the wall rocks places the range from about 0.30 m to 0.80 m, with a mode toward the lower end of the continuum. The rocks were not laid in neat rows in any preserved wall section, but were laid with their longest dimensions horizontal, giving the walls a coursed appearance. Wall thicknesses of 0.55–1.10 m lend the buildings a massiveness not found at any other site in the region. The maximum height of preserved wall is slightly less than 3.0 m, and none remains standing to a level at which the roof would have been attached. No ledges for beams remain in place, nor are any tenons preserved, but it may be inferred from Cieza’s comments that the roofs were thatched. The usnu structure. The usnu (platform mound) (JASP Fea. 13-P) on the east side of the northern sector is badly disturbed. The structure, which measures about 28 × 32 m in area and stands to a maximal height of 2.7 m, retains only small segments of pirka wall from the original construction. Much of the platform has been rebuilt, and a small modern chapel stands atop it (Plate A264); neither the corners nor the stairway of the platform is original. Surface evidence suggests that it has a rock and earth core, with a pirka facing around the exterior. The tops of some pirka sections are smoothly finished, suggesting that the modern height conforms fairly closely to that of the original platform. This facing measures about 0.7 m thick in cross section, and there is no surface evidence of a rock floor on top of the platform (cf. Wiener 1880:245; Garcia 1942:97). Several old terrace walls are standing within the site’s limits, although we cannot be sure, from the present surface evidence, that they were associated with the Inca occupation. The terraces stand to a height of ca. 0.5–1.5 m, and are faced with unmortared pirka masonry. It is probable that the main Inca road passed through the center of the settlement, as was characteristic of many Inca centers, but all evidence of the road has been destroyed within about 3 km of the site on both the north and south. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the visible site area in variable light and light-to-moderate densities, and there is a continuous very light to light scatter of sherds between Sites 550 and 551 (ca. 400 m to the east). Surface pottery tends to be relatively more dense along the northern side of the site area. We also noted several groundstone manos and a number of chert knives and scrapers.

JASP surface collections. We made five separate surface collections in different parts of the site area (Table A54). UMARP surface collections. In the subsequent UMARP restudy of the site, 16 new surface collections were made from 11 collection strata. The strata were defined in part on the basis of preserved architecture and in part arbitrarily. Surface collections were taken from randomly selected fields within each stratum. Surface densities varied from very light to moderate. Of the total 11,445 sherds collected, 5831 (50.9%) were stylistically diagnostic of late prehistoric occupations. Of these, 5716 (98.0%) were Inca, 35 (0.6%) were Wanka-Inca, 78 (1.3%) were Wanka II–III types, and 2 were imports; 314 sherds (5.3%) were undiagnostic. The Late Horizon collections included a wide range of Inca ceramic forms: flaredrim jars (aríbalos and wide-mouth jars), various smaller cooking and serving pots, bowls, plates, drinking cups, and miscellaneous forms, such as jar lids. An additional 58 sherds belonging to the EIP/MH component were recovered in the UMARP collections. JASP and UMARP surface collections show a major Wanka III (LH) occupation; a small EIP/MH component was also detected by UMARP. Discussion: This site was a major Inca highland center, on a par with administrative centers such as Willka Wamán, Pumpu (Matos 1994), Chacamarca (Parsons et al. 2000:267–72), and perhaps Huánuco Pampa (Morris and Thompson 1985)—although Hatun Xauxa lacks the fine Cuzco-style stonework seen in some sectors of Huánuco Pampa. Hátun Xauxa was a prime node of Inca imperial control in the sierra central. It was the principal Inca state settlement in the Wanka province, but some accounts accorded it an importance far exceeding regional dominance. Sarmiento (1960:257) related that a governor ruled the northern half of the Inca empire from this center during the reign of Thupa Inca (ca. 1463–1493). The emperor Wascar (rule: 1526–1532) similarly is reported to have used the valley—and we may surmise, the administrative center—as a base of power in the last years before the Spanish invasion (Guaman Poma 1980:116:94). From Guaman Poma’s brief reference, it is not clear whether Wascar’s use of Hátun Xauxa resulted from his loss of control of the northern lands to Atawalpa, whether this was simply a preferred site of power, or whether the settlement’s logistical position made it the most desirable location from which to base military operations during the civil war between Atawalpa and Wascar. Regardless of the specific motivations for the use of the installation, these accounts place Hátun Xauxa in the uppermost echelons of provincial centers for at least the last 40 years of Inca rule. One clear sign of the center’s importance is the huge storage capacity represented by the unusually large nearby cluster of colca installations (Sites 546, 547, 547-A, 548, 554, 612). Population estimates for the settlement vary, depending on the source of information. Cieza de León (1984:242) recounted that 8000 personnel served Hátun Xauxa, and Hernando Pizarro (1959:89) reported that an Inca army of 35,000 was bivouacked here in 1533. The citations noted above stated that the streets and plazas held 100,000 people (Estete 1917:96–97; Pizarro 1917:36, 45–46), a figure that is most likely a general descriptor for a large number. If the residential density of Hátun Xauxa can be assumed to be roughly equivalent to that of the much better-preserved center of Huánuco Pampa, which is estimated to have housed 10,000–15,000 people (Morris and Thompson 1985:96), it may be reasonable to estimate that 5300–8000 people were housed here permanently. An alternative approach, in which the population density is assumed to be comparable to that of the region’s Wanka III settlements (150 people/ha calculated by UMARP archaeologists), puts the settlement’s potential population in the same range: 6990 inhabitants. These figures may be rounded to 7000 as a working figure. Permanent personnel may have comprised a minimum of about 1000–2000, and rotating, temporary service personnel the remaining residential population. The area and character of the small EIP/MH site remain uncertain. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village (?) LH: Inca Imperial Center SITE NO. 551 [Jau-LH-1(H), Coll. 80-H] Date of Survey: Nov. 3, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [448300 E, 8696800 N; 11.7884° S, 75.4746° W] Natural Setting: 3350 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on the valley floor, at the base of a natural terrace escarpment that rises ca. 15 m high immediately to the north of the site. There has been no erosion. Soil cover is deep. There is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area.

Appendix A Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation of alfalfa and maize. Modern fields are bordered by rock-rubble walls built up over time by modern farmers through field clearing. Modern plowing and field clearance have significantly damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.9 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light and light concentrations. Somewhat lighter surface pottery occurs to the west, between this locality and Site 550. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the presence of cleared rock rubble in the walls bordering modern fields suggests that ancient stone-walled buildings once existed here. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is predominantly Inca-style ceramics, with a light admixture of local LIP pottery types. Discussion: This site probably represents an eastern extension of the main Inca provincial center at Site 550. Classification: LH: Detached section of Hátun Xauxa Inca Center (Site 550) SITE NO. 552 [Jau-?-3(P), Coll. 143-P] Date of Survey: Nov. 23, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [450500 E, 8696400 N; 11.7921° S, 75.4544° W] Natural Setting: 3345 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on level ground on the main valley floor atop a natural terrace that rises ca. 5 m above the level of the active floodplain immediately to the south. Erosion has been virtually absent, with deep soil cover. Apart from bushes and eucalyptus trees around the edges of modern fields, there is no natural vegetation in the site area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals (including maize), fava beans, and tubers. At the time of our survey, the site area had been recently plowed. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.4 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in densities ranging from very light to light. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture. Stone rubble, in the form of water-worn river cobbles, is abundant, but is probably of natural origin in this locality bordering the riverine floodplain. We noted a few chert tools, and one stone hoe. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The badly weathered material is not diagnostic, but it appears to be EIP/MH. Discussion: A small valley-floor occupation of questionable age, but is probably EIP/MH. We doubt that there was any permanent, stone-walled architecture at this locality. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Hamlet SITE NO. 553 [Jau-LH-17(P), Coll. 151-P; UMARP Site No. J-6] Date of Survey: June 11, 1976; UMARP resurvey July 8, 1978 Location: Hoja Jauja [451400 E, 8696100 N; 11.7948° S, 75.4461° W] Natural Setting: 3340 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on flat ground on the valley floor atop a natural terrace that rises ca. 5 m above the level of the active floodplain immediately to the south. Erosion has been virtually absent. Soil depth is deep. Apart from bushes and eucalyptus trees around the edges of modern fields, there is no natural vegetation in the site area. Modern Land Use: Intensive irrigation-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site were obscured by mature barley at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.2 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. UMARP archaeologists subsequently mapped the site and measured its area as 0.7 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191). There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stonewalled structures. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is predominantly Inca-style pottery, with a trace of local LIP

235

ceramics. UMARP archaeologists made one additional surface collection, all of which was LH (Wanka III and Incaic) material. Discussion: A small, valley-floor LH occupation, probably without pre-LH antecedents. This is one of the very few small, valley-floor sites in our survey area that has predominantly Inca-style surface pottery (see also Site 557). It may have functioned to control traffic along the river. UMARP estimates a population of fewer than 100 inhabitants, and more likely only a few households. Classification: LH: Wanka III Hamlet. SITE NO. 554 [Jau-LH-10(P), Jau-LI-27(P), Unit 85-P, Colls. 118-P, 119-P; UMARP Site No. J-17] Date of Survey: Nov. 4, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [446400 E, 8695800 N; 11.7974° S, 75.4920° W] Natural Setting: 3525 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping terrain on the top and upper eastern flanks of a large hill (Plate A265), part of a series of hills separating the Yanamarca and Mantaro Valleys. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a moderate cover of bushy and cactus vegetation along modern field borders and around the ancient structures.

Plate A265. Site 554. Facing south at area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-26)

Figure A33. Site 554, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

236

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Modern Land Use: Most of the site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. The eastern, more severely eroded sector of the site is used only for grazing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site comprises multiple parallel rows of closely spaced circular and rectangular storage buildings (colcas), following the contours of the hill over an area of ca. 12.3 ha (Fig. A33); there are traces of surface pottery. Structural Remains. Most of the site is composed of circular storehouses in long rows, although a few circular buildings are set apart from these rows, especially toward the southwest end of the site. The rectangular buildings are situated both in the long rows in series and in semi-isolated positions adjacent to the principal rows (Table A55). Architectural preservation is variable, ranging from poor to good. The majority of structures retain a substantial portion of their foundations, with many exhibiting standing walls over 1.5 m high. The highest measured standing wall is 3.2 m on one of the rectangular buildings, which are generally better preserved than the circular structures. The better-preserved circular colcas measure 4–5 m in diameter, with vertical walls ca. 50 cm thick standing up to ca. 2.5 m high. Preservation is a problem in three areas: (1) along the modern road that cuts through the site; (2) on top of the hill where modern field clearing has disturbed some of the architecture; and (3) on the lower parts of the south end, where field clearing has again taken a toll. It is not certain that the south end contained many structures, because the rock rubble may be a result of fallen terrace walls in some areas.

The masonry is uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. As is the case with most colcas, particularly those near Hátun Xauxa (Site 550), the masonry is well executed in comparison to Wanka habitation buildings, with the interior and exterior faces being smoothly finished. The corners of rectangular buildings are columnar, where preserved, which is characteristic of the other storehouses in this part of the survey region. No entrances are preserved, although the standing walls on the downslope side of several structures indicate that the entrances were probably located on the uphill side, at least for some of the structures. Occasionally, semicircular stone ledges are preserved on the lower sides of circular buildings, but no pattern to this feature could be discerned. The only other notable architectural feature is a series of support walls between structures; generally 1.0 m or less in height, these unmortared walls form a solid unit with the colcas to buttress terraces. These support-wall features are irregularly preserved, so that any systematic patterning that may have existed in their use cannot be reconstructed. There is a single line of well-preserved rectangular colcas along the lowermost, southern edge of the site. This is a line of 18–20 structures, each measuring ca. 6.5 × 4 m in area, with individual structures separated by 1.5–2.0 m (Plate A266). In addition to the colcas, there are 3 isolated large rectangular buildings, all constructed with their long axes perpendicular to the topographic contours (and thus perpendicular to the general trend of the colcas): (1) near the western end of the site near Collection 118-P, measuring ca. 4 × 7 m in area, and with vertical walls up to 2.5 m high (Plate A267); (2) ca. 50 m east of the above-described structure, measuring ca. 9 × 5 m in area, with vertical walls up to ca. 2.5 m high; and

Table A55. Colcas at Site 554. Colcas

Number Volume

estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

479 415 64 335 290 45 144 125 19

27,075 m3 22,659 m3 4416 m3 18,939 m3 15,834 m3 3105 m3 8136 m3 6825 m3 1311 m3

Table A56. JASP surface collections at Site 554. Coll. No.

Area

Chronology

118-P

ca. 15 × 25 m, in western site area, between two lines of colcas ca. 25 × 40 m, in eastern site area

LIP, with trace of Inca-style pottery LIP, with trace of Inca-style pottery

119-P

Plate A266. Site 554. Facing south at line of rectangular colcas at bottom of site, with archaeologist at center-left. Note Site 558 on hillslope in background. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-33)

Plate A267. Site 554. Example of large rectangular structure near Collection 118-P, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-32)

Plate A268. Site 554. Facing north over large rectangular structure near northeast corner of site. Note Site 547 in background. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-35)

Appendix A (3) near the northeast corner of the site, measuring ca. 10 × 5 m, with vertical walls up to ca. 2.5 m high (Plate A268). No obvious Wanka residential architecture can be associated with this site, despite the presence of non-Inca domestic ceramics. The entire site has been terraced into fairly flat, wide fields, currently under cultivation. In some instances, the rows of colcas serve as terrace supports, from which it may be inferred that the storage buildings were erected either prior to or at the same time as the terraces. Surface Finds. Surface pottery is found throughout the site area, generally in very light density, but with some light concentrations in the western part of the site. We also noted a few crude chert knives and scrapers, and one or two groundstone manos and stone hoes. We made two separate surface collections in different parts of the site (Table A56). UMARP archaeologists stratified the site into eight zones for surface collection, according to the general layout of the major rows. Four strata were randomly chosen for sampling, within which fields were also randomly chosen; the collection areas usually measured 25 × 50 m in area. All the collected material dates to the Late Horizon (Wanka III). Of the ceramics recovered in the UMARP surface collections, 87.7% is high-quality Inca-state pottery (148 of 169 sherds), and 9.5% is composite Wanka-Inca (16 of 169 sherds). Only 2 sherds belong to pure Wanka styles, 1 Base Roja jar neck and 1 Base Clara spoon. Of the Inca ceramics recovered, 93.9% (139 of 148 sherds) are from jars, most of which were large flared-rim vessels (aríbalos), presumably used for storage. Domestic pottery was recovered in only one collection, on the southeast side of the site. Of the 61 Inca sherds in this latter collection, 8 are from bowls or plates; the Base Clara spoon also comes from this collection. UMARP excavations in storehouses at this site yielded substantial quantities of Wanka ceramics in the fill of one structure, in contrast to the surface deposit that contains very little Wanka pottery (D’Altroy and Hastorf 1984). It is therefore possible that a small Wanka I–II residential occupation was not recorded during the surface collection, or that it has been buried and is not readily visible on the ground surface. Discussion: The almost total lack of local Wanka III surface pottery at this site suggests strong Inca state control, with no intermediation by local elites. The dearth of pottery in comparison to that at habitation sites is characteristic of state storage sites throughout the survey area, although the excavations here suggest that pottery within structures may be more common than would be anticipated from the surface collections: one UMARP surface collection suggests that a small population may have been resident, perhaps for security or administration. This is the largest and most complex Inca storage facility in the survey area. It is separated from Site 547 (ca. 200 m to the north) only by a barranca, and is surrounded by other, smaller colca complexes: Site 548, ca. 600 m to the northeast; Site 555, ca. 700 m to the southwest. Another colca complex, Site 558, is ca. 750 m to the south, on the opposite side of the Río Mantaro. Site 554 is dominated by circular colcas, in contrast to neighboring Site 547, which contains primarily rectangular buildings. This suggests that the major complexes were organized internally and coordinated with one another. Classification: LIP: ? LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class A

SITE NO. 555 [Jau-LH-11(P), Unit 87-P; UMARP Site No. J-19] Date of Survey: Nov. 8, 1975 Location: Hojas Jauja and Parco [445600 E, 8695300 N; 11.8019° S, 75.4994° W] Natural Setting: 3560 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level ground along the broad crest of a large ridge in the southern part of the Yanamarca Valley. Erosion has been generally slight. Soil cover is medium. There is very little natural vegetation apart from sparse grass in cultivated fields and a few small bushes along the ancient architectural remains. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.2 ha is defined by a single line of poorly preserved Inca-style storage buildings (colcas) and a bare trace of surface pottery. Structural Remains. There are 81 definable rectangular structure foundations. Most of the ancient structures have been completely destroyed so that only a linear concentration of rock rubble can be seen (Plate A269). A few surviving wall remnants indicate that the original structures were rectangular in form, measuring ca. 6 × 4 m in area. We estimate, judging from gaps in the line, the presence of rock rubble, and the size of the existing structures, that an additional 18 buildings were once present (Fig. A34) (Table A57). Many of the structures that once existed here are now represented only by rectangular depressions, rock rubble, and occasional wall fragments. At best, the structures retain a complete foundation, with walls standing up to 0.50 m. The masonry, where preserved, consists of uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. No entrances or indications of their location are preserved. Neither do any additional architectural features, such as terracing, remain.

Plate A269. Site 555. Facing south along line of colca remnants, with archaeologist at center-left. Note section of preserved wall at lower left. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-5)

Table A57. Colcas at Site 555. Colcas

Number Volume

estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

99 0 99 81 0 81 18 0 18

237

7269 m3 0 7269 m3 5947 m3 0 5947 m3 1322 m3 0 1322 m3 Figure A34. Site 555, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

238

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Surface Finds. Because there was so little surface pottery, we made no surface collection. Subsequent UMARP study detected no diagnostic ceramics. Discussion: In the absence of datable surface pottery, we assign an LH date to this site on the basis of its formal similarities to other Inca storage facilities. This site is part of a cluster of Inca storage complexes on the same hillslope: Sites 554, 548, 545, 547, and 547-A. Local domestic residential occupation appears to be absent at all of these localities. It is highly probable that, like the neighboring colca complexes, Site 555 dates exclusively to the LH, constructed and used shortly after Inca conquest. The closest residential site is Site 556, about 200 m to the south. Site 555 is the only site in the Yanamarca Valley proper that appears to have been used for Inca storage. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class C SITE NO. 556 [Jau-LI-18(P), Unit 86-P, Colls. 121-P, 122-P; “Chucchus”; UMARP Site No. J-74] Date of Survey: Nov. 8, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [445600 E, 8694600 N; 11.8083° S, 75.4994° W] Natural Setting: 3600 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground atop a low rise at the end of a broad ridge crest overlooking the Río Mantaro gorge (Plate A270). Because of extensive terracing on the east, south, and west, erosion has been slight to moderate. Soil depth is medium. There is very little natural vegetation apart from low bushes and cactus in and around piles of rock rubble. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of fava beans and cereals (including maize). Fallow fields serve for grazing livestock. Several fields in the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 10.5 ha is defined by surface pottery and remnants of ancient stone-walled architecture (Fig. A35). A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:439) remeasured this site area as 11.7 ha. Costin (1986:26) reports a site area of 12 ha, with an estimated Wanka III population of 1000–1800 inhabitants. Russell (1988:104) and Earle and colleagues (1987:11) report a residential area of 12 ha, with an estimated Wanka III population of 1300–2100 inhabitants. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports a site area of 13.2 ha. Structural Remains. Masses of rock rubble piled up in and around modern agricultural fields throughout the site indicate the former presence of many stone-walled structures (Plate A271). Subsequent UMARP field mapping identified 240 structures, typical Wanka residences, built of limestone pirka masonry; it is estimated that 450 buildings were originally present. The structures appear to have been arranged in patio groups (Fig. A36). No large plazas or ceremonial-civic architecture was identified. Much of the site was apparently terraced at the time of Wanka III occupation. The terraces stand up to ca. 1.5 m and are generally faced with unmortared stone walls. The architecture is sufficiently dispersed so that the terraces could have been cultivated, as they are today. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site area in variable very light, light, and light-to-moderate concentrations. The highest sherd densities occur in the central site area, where there is also the largest amount of rock rubble and the few surviving remnants of stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes and several groundstone manos, as well as a number of chert knives and scrapers. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A58). In her subsequent restudy based on four new surface collections “taken from each of the four quadrants of the site,” LeBlanc (1981:439) determined that the occupation is all Wanka III (Late Horizon). Although the pottery is all Wanka III, two radiocarbon dates from two excavated residential compounds and dating to A.D. 1010 ± 140 and 1280 ± 55 [Simon Fraser University RIDDL #1283 and 1280] might indicate a possible Wanka I component. Subsequent UMARP studies estimated the Wanka III population as 1056–1760 inhabitants. Discussion: A substantial LH (Wanka III) residential occupation, apparently newly established after Inca conquest. This settlement may have been linked to provisioning and maintaining the nearby Inca storage facility at Site 555. The status of the possible Wanka I component detected by two radiocarbon dates is uncertain. Classification: LIP (?): Wanka I (??) LH: Wanka III Very Large Village

(top) Plate A270. Site 556. Facing west over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-7) (bottom) Plate A271. Site 556. Facing south over area of Collection 121-P. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-1) Table A58. JASP surface collections at Site 556. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

121-P

ca. 10 × 15 m, in central site area ca. 15 × 15 m, in SE site area

light-to-moderate

all LIP

light-to-moderate

LIP plus trace of Inca-style pottery

122-P

Figure A35. Site 556, general site plan (from Costin 1986:28, Fig. 1.7).

Appendix A

239

SITE NO. 557 [Jau-LI-6(H), Coll. 81-H; UMARP Site No. J-286] Date of Survey: Nov. 5, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [447300 E, 8695300 N; 11.8020° S, 75.4838° W] Natural Setting: 3370 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground at the base of a major ridge, immediately adjacent to the valley floor to the north and east. Erosion is moderate in the immediate site area, and severe on the nearby higher slopes to the southwest. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is little or no natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. The valley floor immediately below the site is devoted to irrigation-based agriculture. Much of the site area had been recently plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearance have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.2 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light concentration. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 1.3 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, although there are several piles of rock rubble, heaped up by modern farmers in the course of clearing their fields, that may represent the remnants of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is predominantly LIP, with a trace of Inca-style pottery. D’Altroy’s (1992:192) subsequent restudy indicated a significant LH (Wanka III) occupation. Discussion: Apparently a small LH (Wanka III) occupation, near the edge of the valley floor. We are uncertain about the presence of LIP occupation at this locality prior to the LH. Classification: LIP: ? LH: Wanka III Small Village Figure A36. Site 556, example of residential unit (from Russell 1988:94, Fig. 2.23).

(top) Plate A272. Site 558. Facing west over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-15) (bottom) Plate A273. Site 558. Facing northwest over site. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-2)

SITE NO. 558 [Jau-LI-19(P)/Jau-LH-12(P), Units 88-P, 89-P, Colls. 123-P, 124-P; UMARP Site No. J-20/J-73] Date of Survey: Nov. 9, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [446900 E, 8694800 N; 11.8065° S, 75.4874° W] Natural Setting: 3560 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground on the top and upper sides of a prominent hill (Plates A266, A272, A273, A279, A281). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium, with some exposures of bedrock. There is limited natural vegetation except along the edges of modern fields and around the remnants of ancient architecture where there are substantial stands of bushes and cactus. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. The more severely eroded areas serve only for grazing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 7.1 ha is defined by the presence of ancient architecture and surface pottery. Hastorf (1993:229) reports the same site area. Structural Remains. There are two distinct complexes of prehispanic architecture: (1) a small line of fairly well preserved Inca colcas at the north end of the site (designated as UMARP Site J-20), and (2) the poorly preserved remnants of circular stone-walled buildings, probably residential in function, over the full site area (designated as UMARP Site J-73). (1) The Inca colcas (UMARP Site J-20) (Fig. A37). There are 18 circular structures on a series of stone-faced terraces (Table A59). Architectural preservation is very good, and the structures are among the best preserved of any in the survey area. The individual structures measure ca. 4 m in diameter, with walls ca. 60 cm thick (Plates A274, A275). The maximum height of standing wall is 3.6 m exterior and 3.2 m interior, on a building with a smoothly finished wall-top. The mean height of the maximum standing wall for all structures is 2.6 m. Masonry consists of uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. One structure retains a wall preserved to the bottom of the roofline—the top of this wall is flat and smoothly finished with a mortared surface. No evidence of a roof was observed, nor were any structural features for the attachment of roof-beams or poles preserved. No entrances remain, but the presence of preserved downhill walls and a lack of similarly preserved uphill walls suggests that the entrances were probably on the uphill side. The row of colcas sits on a stone-faced terrace, whose maximum height is 0.90 m (Plate A276). The terrace wall is built of the same limestone masonry

240

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table A59. Colcas at Site 558. Colcas total circular rectangular

Number Volume 18 18 0

684 m3 684 m3 0

Table A60. JASP surface collections at Site 558. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

123-P

ca. 20 × 25 m, light-to-moderate LIP plus trace of south end of site Inca-style ceramics 124-P ca. 10 × 20 m, light-to-moderate LIP plus trace of in central site area EIP/MH Unit 88 in area of Inca-style mainly LIP, with minor colcas at north end of site Inca-style ceramics

(from top to bottom) Figure A37. Site 558, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map). Plate A274. Site 558. Facing east over line of colcas. Inca provincial center of Hátun Xausa (Site 550) is seen underlying the modern town of Sausa on the valley floor in the middle distance. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-10) Plate A275. Site 558. Example of circular colca, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-13) Plate A276. Site 558. Circular colca atop a stone-faced terrace, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-12)

as the colcas, but is not mortared. Because the storehouses are set back from the terrace front by 1.4–2.2 m, they were probably not an integral part of an earth-buttressing system, as the colcas are at some other sites. The terrace on which the colcas rest here is one of a series of agricultural terraces. No other terraces contain remnants of colcas, but the nearby circular residential buildings (UMARP Site J-73) are situated partially on the terraces. (2) The circular residential structures. These have been badly destroyed by modern land use. Surviving fragmentary wall remnants indicate that the structures were circular, measuring 4–5 m in diameter, constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar. Fragments of ancient stone-faced terracing occur throughout the site, and the circular buildings appear to have been constructed atop this terracing. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in variable very light, light, and light-to-moderate concentration. We also noted several stone hoes, and a number of chert knives and scrapers. We made three surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A60). UMARP archaeologists made one additional small surface collection from an area ca. 10 × 125 m on the terraces immediately above and below the line of colcas. This produced Wanka III and Inca-style material. Four of the five diagnostic sherds recovered by UMARP are from Inca jars, and one was from a Wanka style Base Roja jar. None of the recovered sherds came from large storage vessels. UMARP restudy suggested that the trace of material we originally believed to be EIP/MH may actually be early LIP (Wanka I), and Borges (1988:69) reports that her subsequent resurvey of the site detected a significant Formative (EH) occupation. Discussion: This site represents an Inca state storage facility, apparently closely associated with a contemporary residential Wanka III settlement. We are uncertain about the presence of significant occupation at this locality prior to the LH. Our failure to detect any of the EH occupation reported by Borges is puzzling, but the possible trace of EIP/MH material in our Collection 124-P may be related to this earlier period, or to the Wanka I trace noted by UMARP. The residential architecture is much more poorly preserved than are the colcas. This may be attributable to either of two causes: Either the residential structures may have been largely abandoned prior to the construction of the storehouses, perhaps with their stones used for building the colcas; or the superior masonry of the storehouses in general may have contributed to their better preservation, even though both residence and storage buildings were used at the same time. This site is part of an apparent loose cluster of sites where EH occupation definitely, or possibly, occurs (see also Sites 416, 423, 505, 509, 583, 606, 609, 617, 621, 623)—in our original survey, we detected EH occupation only at Sites 509 and 623). Classification: EH: ? EIP/MH: ? LIP?: Wanka I (?) LH: Wanka III Large Village, and Inca Storage Facility, Class F

Appendix A

241

Figure A38. Site 559, sketch cross sections of tomb chamber. (top) Plate A277. Site 559. Facing north over eastern half of site. Arrow indicates approximate center of the eastern site area. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-25) (bottom) Plate A278. Site 559. Remnant of subterranean burial chamber (notebook = 20 cm long). (UMMA Neg. No. 37-24)

Table A61. JASP surface collections at Site 559. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

82-H

ca. 70 × 25 m, in western part of site ca. 30 × 25 m, in eastern part of site

very light

EIP/MH, with trace of LIP all EIP/MH

83-H

SITE NO. 559 [Jau-LI-7(H), Colls. 82-H, 83-H; UMARP Site No. J-284] Date of Survey: Nov. 8, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [447900 E, 8694400 N; 11.8101° S, 75.4783° W] Natural Setting: 3420 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground on the top and sides of a low, isolated ridge (Plate A277). The site lies about 50 m above the level of the nearby valley floor to the north. The supporting ridge measures ca. 0.5 km long along an east-west axis. Erosion has been generally severe. The soil is shallow, stony, and extremely calcareous, and there are numerous bedrock outcrops. Natural vegetation comprises a sparse cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Although the soil appears to be quite poor for agriculture, most of the site area is used for marginal, rainfall-based cultivation of cereals. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 4.5 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery and recently looted ancient burials. Structural Remains. Although no architecture is preserved, the site has been extensively and systematically looted. Looters have dug rows of pits across parts of the ridge crest, with clusters of such pits in some areas. Fragments of human bone appear in the backdirt of some looter’s pits, and sherd density is generally higher in the pitted areas. It appears that some looter’s pits were dug into ancient subterranean burial chambers. These burial chambers were originally excavated into the tough caliche subsoil, and may have originally been discernable from the surface by slight depressions. Most of the chambers have partially collapsed and are barely recognizable as such, but a few are better preserved (Plate A278). The best preserved of these is an irregular, bell-shaped pit about 1.8 m in basal diameter, 65 cm wide at the mouth, and at least 1.7 m deep (Fig. A38). The interior surfaces of the pit are covered with a dark mold, suggestive of considerable age.

very light

Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in trace and very light concentrations. We also noted several stone hoes. We made two separate surface collections in different parts of the site (Table A61). Discussion: Possibly an isolated cemetery with little or no domestic residential function. We are uncertain about the significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery. This is one of several isolated cemeteries in our survey area (see also Sites 421, 496, 513, 532, 534, 578, 581, 588, 615). Classification: EIP/MH: Isolated Cemetery LIP: ? SITE NO. 560 [Jau-LI-9(H), Unit 67-H, Fea. 24-H, Colls. 88-H, 89-H; UMARP Site No. J-281] Date of Survey: Nov. 10, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [447100 E, 8694200 N; 11.8119° S, 75.4856° W] Natural Setting: 3545 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and sides of a low hillock in a broad topographic saddle; the supporting hillock rises about 15 m above the general level of the saddle (Plate A279). To the west there is a steep descent to the valley floor, here encased within a narrow gorge some 200 m below. Erosion has been moderate to severe, with substantial areas of exposed bedrock. Vegetation is highly variable, parts of the site being virtually bare, while grass, bushy shrubs, and cactus thrive in the shelter of old stone walls and terrace embankments. Modern Land Use: Most of the site area is marginal livestock pasture. A few small agricultural fields within the site are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals; these fields are surrounded by rock-rubble walls created by modern farmers in the course of clearing their fields. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains.

242

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A279. Sites 558 and 560. Facing north at the hilltop sites. Arrows indicate approximate site centers. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-30)

Plate A281. Site 560. Facing northeast at wall-ditch at south end of Site 560, with Site 558 in distance. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-33)

Table A62. JASP surface collections at Site 560.

Plate A280. Site 560. Circular structure near south end of site. Note hat at left for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-29)

Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.9 ha is defined by poorly preserved stonewalled architecture, substantial rock rubble, a wall-ditch complex, and surface pottery. Hastorf (1993:229) reports an area of 2.9 ha for both the EIP/MH and Wanka I components of this site. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 3.9 ha for the Wanka I component (she does not identify an EIP/MH component here). D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 2.9 ha. Structural Remains. There are two very different kinds of prehispanic stone-walled architecture: (1) remnants of poorly preserved circular structures, some associated with stone-faced terrace fragments and probably residential in function, over much of the site area; and (2) a well-preserved wall-ditch complex (Fea. 24-H) at the far southern end of the site. (1) The circular residential buildings. Few of these are sufficiently well preserved to discern their size, form, or configuration. Masses of rock rubble throughout much of the site indicate the former presence of these structures that have been obliterated through modern land use. There are several partially preserved structures in the central site area. These are circular, mostly ca. 4 m in diameter, but with a few smaller structures ca. 1–2 m in diameter, constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar, and with a few walls standing up to ca. 1 m high. The smaller structures could represent outbuildings or tombs (although we saw no human bone remnants). Toward the south end of the site are 3 unusually large circular buildings, measuring 5–6 m in diameter, with walls standing up to 2 m high (Plate A280). These latter 3 structures are closely spaced and arrayed in a line, possibly atop a supporting terrace. (2) The wall-ditch complex. This isolated feature marks the southern end of the site, at the highest point within the site area; it is separated from the main complex of architecture by a “gap” of ca. 50 m. The wall now stands 1–2 m high, and is constructed of large, unworked stone set in mud mortar. The bordering ditch is now only ca. 1 m deep, but may have been partially filled by sheet wash since the site was abandoned. The complex extends across the width of the ridge crest, and down ca. 20–50 m onto the steeper slopes below the crest (Plate A281). Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in trace and very light concentrations. The highest sherd densities are in plowed fields. We also noted several stone hoes, several groundstone manos and metates, and a chert scraper. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A62).

Coll. No.

Area

Chronology

88-H 89-H

ca. 50 m dia., north end of site ca. 50 m dia., south end of site

all LIP all LIP

Subsequent UMARP investigations (Hastorf 1993:229) discovered a significant EIP/MH occupation, undetected by us, plus significant early LIP (Wanka I) (Borges 1988:70); D’Altroy (1992:192) also reported a significant LH (Wanka III) component. Discussion: Apparently this site was occupied from EIP/MH times into the early LIP (Wanka I), with abandonment during the late LIP (Wanka II), and a reoccupation during the LH (Wanka III). The LIP occupation is part of a cluster of LIP settlement along this same supporting ridge (Sites 560, 561, 562). The wall-ditch complex that we include as part of Site 560 is only ca. 100 m from the northern end of Site 561, and it could conceivably “belong” to that site. Alternatively, the wall-ditch could represent some sort of a social border between the two sites. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 561 [Jau-LI-10(H), Unit 68-H; UMARP Site No. J-282] Date of Survey: Nov. 10, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [447400 E, 8693800 N; 11.8155° S, 75.4829° W] Natural Setting: 3590 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and uppermost slopes of a narrow ridge. To the west and east the terrain slopes steeply down to the valley floor ca. 200 m below; the descent is particularly steep to the west. Erosion has generally been severe. Soil depth is shallow, with numerous patches of exposed bedrock. The only vegetation is sparse grass and a few thorn bushes. Modern Land Use: Primarily marginal pasture, with a few small fields serving for rainfall-based barley cultivation. Erosion, plus modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.4 ha is defined by poorly preserved architectural remnants and a scatter of surface pottery. A wall-ditch complex that we associated with neighboring Site 560 (see above) may actually be more closely associated with Site 561. Hastorf (1993:230) also reports a site area of 1.4 ha.

Appendix A

243

Plate A283. Site 562. Overlooking site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-3) Plate A282. Site 561. Example of circular structure at north end of site, with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-34)

Structural Remains. Most architectural remnants are so poorly preserved that it is impossible to discern their original size, form, or configuration. Rock-rubble debris, probably from now-destroyed structures, occurs throughout the site area, and there are a few surviving fragments of seemingly ancient stone walls. A cluster of 3 or 4 buildings near the north end of the site is sufficiently well preserved to discern slightly oval structures, measuring ca. 2.5 × 3 m in area, with slightly incurved walls constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar (Plate A282). Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in trace to very light densities. We also noted two stone hoes. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all LIP, with a possible trace of EIP/MH pottery. Hastorf (1993:230) indicates that all the LIP material is Wanka I (early LIP). Discussion: A small early LIP (Wanka I) occupation, possibly closely linked to nearby Site 560. We are uncertain about the significance of the possible trace of EIP/MH surface pottery. Classification: EIP/MH (?): ? LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 562 [Jau-LI-11(H), Unit 69-H; UMARP Site No. J-283] Date of Survey: Nov. 10, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [447900 E, 8693600 N; 11.8173° S, 75.4783° W] Natural Setting: 3570 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on the lower slopes of a major ridge, ca. 150 m above the valley floor (Plate A283). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow. Natural vegetation comprises a light cover of grass and low shrubs. Modern Land Use: Livestock pasture. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 5.6 ha contains Inca-style colca structures and a trace of surface pottery. Structural Remains. Architectural preservation is generally fair to good, and we were able to distinguish a total of 175 Inca-style colca structures—this figure is probably very close to the actual number of original structures. These buildings are arrayed in lines of varying length atop seemingly natural, discontinuous terraces of irregular size and form (i.e., without the formal supporting stone-faced terraces characteristic of many of the other colca sites in our survey area). When viewed from the adjacent valley floor, the lines of colcas stand out clearly in jagged silhouette against the skyline (Plate A284). Most of the individual structures are separated by intervals of 1.5–2.0 m within the lines; however, some are clustered more tightly and less regularly. The individual structures are of circular to oval form, and generally measure 4–5 m in diameter, with walls ca. 50 cm thick constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar, tapering slightly inward and standing up to ca. 2 m high (Plates A285, A286). A few structures, poorly preserved, appear to be somewhat smaller. We saw no remnants of openings or roofs.

Surface Finds. There is only a bare trace of surface pottery. We also noted one stone hoe fragment. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. There are few diagnostic sherds, but the material appears to be LIP. Discussion: Although Inca-style pottery is not found in our surface collection, we date this complex to the Late Horizon based on similarities in form and location to other complexes of Inca colcas in the local region. We doubt that there was any occupation here prior to Inca conquest. This site is one of several colca complexes on the same ridge slope overlooking the south side of the Mantaro Valley (see also Sites 558, 560, 561, 563). Like some of the others, this colca complex appears to lack local residential occupation. We are uncertain why UMARP archaeologists apparently did not include this site as an Inca state storage facility. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class B SITE NO. 562-A [UMARP Site J-63; “Cutocuto” or “Torreon”; no JASP survey] Date of Survey: UMARP survey Aug. 22–34, 1979; outside JASP survey area Location: Hoja Jauja [446000 E, 8691500 N; 11.8363° S, 75.4958° W] Natural Setting: 3745 masl, in the rolling hills and uplands of the upper Miraflores Valley, on the south side of the Mantaro Valley, overlooking the Río Mantaro to the north. The site is located on the top and upper slopes of a knoll; the ground falls off sharply to the north and east, and falls off more gently to the west, and ascends to the south. Soil depth is generally less than 50 cm, except where terraced. Erosion is minimal on top of the knoll, but a few gullies trend down toward the east; there is some sheet wash on the lower parts of the north slope. The best access to water would probably have been an intermittent stream to the east, downslope about 100 m from the lowest edge of the site. Modern Land Use: Rainfall agriculture. Archaeological Remains: The site covers 2.8 ha. Its buildings are laid out irregularly around open spaces, with small groups of structures aligned internally. No systematic site plan is apparent. Structural Remains. Fifty-eight buildings are still visible on the ground surface (Fig. A39) Both high-quality Inca and Wanka-Inca architecture is present. Most of the site’s architecture consists of small rectangular structures, up to 4.0 m long on a side, built of limestone pirka masonry with mud mortar and unusually small rocks. Several buildings retain portions of corbelled arch roofs, all plastered on the interior. In most structures, the quality of the architecture was exceptionally high. Occasionally, attempts at decorative geometric masonry are visible on the exterior, and several buildings retain step tenons in exterior walls. The remains of 15 circular buildings are also preserved; these more closely reflect Wanka style architecture than do the rectangular buildings. Five large rectangular buildings dominate the site. The best preserved of these stands 5.0 m high at the peak of the gable and measures 14 × 7 m on the exterior. It contains an interior ledge apparently designed to support beams for a second story or attic; the ledge sits approximately 2.5 m above the ground surface. Four wall niches line the interior of each of the two long walls, and a single doorway

244

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A284. Site 562. Looking up at line of colcas (indicated by arrows) on ridge crest. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-26)

Plate A285. Site 562. Line of colcas, with archaeologist at center of photo. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-36)

(top) Plate A286A. Facing southeast over Inca and Colonial bridge foundations across Río Mantaro. Photo courtesy of Terence N. D’Altroy. (bottom) Plate A286B. Close-up of Inca and Colonial bridge foundations at Site No. 562-D (UMARP Site J-122). Photo courtesy of Terence N. D’Altroy.

Plate A286. Site 562. Example of well-preserved circular (oval) colca, with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-37)

Appendix A

245

Figure A39. Site 562-A, site plan (UMARP map).

faces downhill to the northwest. Each niche is capped by a single lintel stone and is neatly built, although not as neatly finished as the comparable niches at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550). The doorway has been largely destroyed, so that details of construction were not preserved. The foundations of 3 other rectangular structures of similar size lie nearby, but none is preserved above ground level. The largest structure on the site is a rectangular enclosure about 29 × 28 m in area, with a maximum wall height of ca. 2.3 m. The smooth finish applied to the wall tops and the immense size of the structure suggest that it did not have a roof. Currently used as a cemetery, the enclosure exhibits the finest masonry of any known building in the study area, including those at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550). The stones were either selected for shape or were partially dressed, but the masonry is not as fine as Inca polygonal, ashlar stonework. The walls comprise courses of large, roughly rectangular stones (up to 0.80 m maximum dimension) alternating with courses of stones angled at 45° or laid flat. Corners are well-joined, rather than columnar, as is characteristic of most other rectangular buildings in the area, both Inca and Wanka. Stone columns flank the entrance and abut the exterior of the side walls. A stone-lined roadway passes to the west of the site, ascending from the direction of the Río Mantaro and Hátun Xauxa. Whether this was an Inca road is unclear, but the association of this site with the road suggests that this was the case. Surface Finds. UMARP archaeologists took four surface collections; these yielded 599 total sherds, 244 (40.7%) of which were stylistically diagnostic to Wanka II–III or Inca types; 173 (70.9%) of these diagnostics were Inca, 65 (26.6%) belonged to Wanka II–III types, and 6 (2.4%) were imports. There was also a small quantity of EIP/MH sherds. Discussion: This site has two components: a small EIP/MH hamlet, and a much larger LH settlement. The unusually fine architecture and high quality of Inca ceramics evince a strong Inca association. Because this site lies at the western perimeter of the survey zone, we cannot say with certainty that this was the most important state-related settlement in the immediate area. Nonetheless, it was, after Hátun Xauxa, the second-largest known Inca-related site in the Wanka Region, and it displays the finest Inca architecture to be found in the survey area. The high agricultural productivity of the valley lands and the nearby passage of the state road, to Pachacamac on the Pacific coast, would have made this a strategic location for a state installation. It seems reasonable to infer that at least some residents of this settlement were active participants in the administration of state control. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet LH: Inca Imperial Local Center SITE NO. 562-B, SITE NO. 562-C [No site descriptions available] SITE NO. 562-D [UMARP Site No. J-122] Date of Survey: UMARP survey; outside JASP survey area Location: Hoja Parco [approx. coordinates: 438100 E, 8697700 N; 11.7801° S, 75.5682° W]

Natural Setting: 3430 masl, at a constricted point over the Río Mantaro, ca. 4 km upstream (west) from Hátun Xauxa (Site 550) and 1 km downstream from modern Miraflores (Plate A286A). Modern Land Use: The river crossing point at this locality is currently not in use. Archaeological Remains: This site comprises the foundations of two bridges, one an Inca suspension bridge with a base of stone, on the main Inca road between Hátun Xauxa and Pachacamac on the central Peruvian coast, and the other an arched Colonial bridge about 20 m upstream (Regal 1936:53–54; Hyslop 1984:326) (Plate A286B). Structural Remains. The Inca bridge stands about 4 m high out of the water in the dry season, and perhaps half that during the rainy season. It, like the nearby Colonial bridge, crossed a span of about 10 m. The base is fairly well preserved on the east side of the river, but has fallen away substantially on the west side. The Inca bridge foundation consists of a rock and earth core, faced with pirka masonry. The masonry on the lower portion of the base does not have mortar, but the upper part (about 2 m high) has mud mortar along the side walls. Unmortared wing walls, paralleling the banks of the promontory, buffer the flow of water along the base of the structure. The bridge remnant is 3–4 m wide at the top; on the west side, the preserved section measures about 10 m long, although a segment has been washed out in the middle. A narrow, unpaved road ascends the steep hillslope to the east of the bridge, presumably leading to Hátun Xauxa, although its path has been obliterated in the hills between the bridge and the Inca center. On the east side of the river, no trace of a road can be discerned for some distance, probably because the modern highway overlies the prehistoric route. A fairly well preserved section of the road is preserved adjacent to the Inca site at Site 547-A (UMARP Site J-62), however, in the hills 4 –5 km to the south of the river. The fairly well preserved remnants of an arched Colonial bridge stand ca. 20 m upstream of the Inca bridge foundation. As in the case with the Inca bridge, the eastern side of the Colonial feature is far better preserved than the western, presumably because the flow of the river attacks the west bank. The Colonial foundation is built with an adobe and coursed limestone core, and has been faced with blue-green tiles, laid very nicely in courses. Its dimensions are approximately those of the Inca bridge, although it stands about 1 m higher out of the water. A mortared buffer wall was built to deflect the flow of the water, but it, like the earlier span, has been undermined and broken away on the west side of the river. Surface Finds. No ceramic or lithic artifacts seen. Discussion: These were probably the main bridges across the Río Mantaro from Hátun Xauxa to the Pacific coast, for both the Inca and Colonial populations. The evidence suggests that the earlier (Inca) construction was a suspension bridge, but that the Colonial bridge was an arched span. No other bridge crossing over the Río Mantaro is known until Huancayo, ca. 50 km downstream, and the river widens substantially above Site 562-D, suggesting that control of this location was a strategic essential. Classification: Inca and Colonial Bridge Foundations

246

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

SITE NO. 563 [Jau-?-5(H), Unit 70-H; UMARP Site No. J-57] Date of Survey: Nov. 11, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [448100 E, 8693600 N; 11.8173° S, 75.4764° W] Natural Setting: 3500 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on the lower slopes of a major ridge, 100 m above the level of the valley floor (Plate A287). Erosion has been generally severe. Soil depth is shallow, with considerable exposure of crumbling limestone bedrock. There is a sparse cover of grass, a few cacti, and small shrubs. Modern Land Use: Primarily marginal livestock pasture. There is a small plowed field along the upper edge of site. The site lies near the upper end of a series of rainfall-based agricultural fields that ascend the slope from the adjacent valley floor. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.3 ha contains Inca-style colcas and a trace of surface pottery. Structural Remains. There is a single line of mixed circular and rectangular structures running parallel to the slope contours (Fig. A40). In front of the southern end of this row is another row of 6 structures in a line, including 4 circular buildings, 1 rectangular building with square corners (Plate A288), and 1 rectangular building with rounded corners (at the far south end). Between the rows is a squared rectangular building, again at the far south end. Finally, a series of 3 circular buildings extends downhill at an oblique angle from the rounded rectangular building. The architectural remains thus consist of a mixture of 37 buildings: 21 circular and 16 rectangular (Table A63). Preservation of the structures is good, as 11 of the buildings retain walls over 2.0 m high. The highest preserved wall stands 2.8 m high, as measured on the downhill (east) side (Plate A289). The structures are built of uncoursed, weathered limestone and metamorphic rocks, with a mud and pebble mortar. The corners of some rectangular structures are columnar. The corners consist of interlocking rocks, whose long axes alternate from one wall to the adjoining one. This yielded only a small gain in stability, as the coursing seldom extends more than about 0.50 m into the length of each wall. The corners are bonded poorly to the remainder of the structures and have deteriorated relatively rapidly. The circular structures measure ca. 3–5 m in diameter; the rectangular structures are ca. 4–8 m long by 3–6 m wide, although there are 3 nearly square buildings that measure ca. 5 m on a side. Walls are 50–60 cm thick. No entrances are preserved, but the highest preserved walls are always on the downhill side of the buildings, while the uphill walls have collapsed. This suggests that the entrances were probably located on the uphill (west) side of the buildings. No other architectural features were preserved. The main line of structures lies on a stone-faced terrace (Plate A290). The buildings are irregularly positioned with respect to the front of the terrace (0.6–2.3 m from the edge), but are lined up on the uphill side. Again, this suggests that their uphill side was probably the point of entry. The terrace face reaches a maximum height of 1.6 m and a minimum of 0.5 m, and is flat on the upper surface; the terrace itself varies from 5 to 10 m in width. The only break in the terrace ledge, near its northern end, coincides with a small erosional cut where the terrace face may have been broken down and washed out.

Plate A287. Site 563. Facing north overlooking site. Arrow points to approximate center of line of colcas. Modern village of Huaripampa is at upper right. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-4)

Surface Finds. There is a bare trace of surface pottery. We also noted a few stone hoes. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. This contained few diagnostic sherds, but the material appears to be LIP. UMARP archaeologists subsequently made one additional surface collection from an area ca. 10 m wide along the entire 150 m length of the site. This collection recovered only 24 sherds, all but 2 of which are from the area between the two rows of colcas at the south end of the site. The UMARP collection contained 16 jar fragments, 1 pedestal foot, and 1 cooking vessel—all Incaic. Two Wanka Base Clara and 1 other local sherd were also found. Discussion: We date this site to the LH on the basis of its formal and locational similarities to nearby complexes of Inca colcas, and the presence of Incaic sherds in the UMARP surface collection. This colca group is ca. 100 m above an LIP/LH settlement (Site 564), and the two sites may have been directly linked in some fashion. From the spatial organization of the buildings at this site, it appears that the structures may have been used for more than simple storage. This inference is based in part on the presence of non-storage Wanka III household ceramics. The combination of regular, straight rows of circular and rectangular buildings and buildings offset from these suggests that the structures in the rows were used for storage, while the others were for habitation and maintenance. While this diversified layout is unusual for small storage complexes in the survey region, the presence of Wanka habitation close to an Inca storage site occurs elsewhere in the valley. As is the case with most of the other pairings of Inca storage and Wanka residence, the clear segregation of the two types of sites emphasizes the separation of state and local establishments. This storage site is relatively isolated from all other Inca storage sites in the survey area. Its closest storage neighbor is Site 558 (UMARP J-20), about 1.7 km to the north-northwest. To the south, the closest storage site is Site 566 (UMARP J-28), about 3.1 km distant. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class E, with a minor residential occupation SITE NO. 564 [Jau-LI-8(H); “Vacajalcuna”; Unit 66-H, Colls. 84-H, 85-H, 86-H, 87-H; UMARP Site No. J-285] Date of Survey: Nov. 8, 9, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [448300 E, 8693900 N; 11.8146° S, 75.4746° W] Natural Setting: 3440 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground at the base of a major ridge, ca. 50 m above the valley floor (Plate A291). Erosion has been slight within the immediate site area, and moderate to severe on the higher slopes above the site. Soil depth is shallow to medium, and quite stony. Natural vegetation along modern field borders consists of grass, cactus, and low shrubs. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site area had been recently plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 7.8 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light and light concentration. Hastorf (1993:229–30) reports an area of 6.4 ha for the both the EIP/MH and Wanka I components of this site. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 6.4 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the abundance of rock rubble piled up along modern field borders suggests the former presence of numerous ancient stone-walled structures. Stone hoes were very abundant throughout the site area—probably the highest single concentration of these tools in our entire survey area. We made four surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A64). Subsequent investigations by Hastorf (1993:229) discovered a significant EIP/MH occupation, undetected by us. D’Altroy’s (1992:192) restudy revealed the presence of a significant LH (Wanka III) component. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH settlement that continued to be occupied into the early LIP (Wanka I), apparently with an abandonment during late LIP times (Wanka II), and a reoccupation during the LH (Wanka III). The EIP/MH occupation here appears to be substantially larger than we originally detected. During LH times this residential settlement may have been directly connected to provisioning and maintaining the complexes of Inca storage facilities on the nearby slopes above this site (Sites 561, 562, 563). Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Wanka I Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village

Appendix A

247 Table A63. Colcas at Site 563. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular

Number Volume 37 21 16 37 21 16

1838 m3 591 m3 1247 m3 1838 m3 591 m3 1247 m3

Figure A40. Site 563, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Plate A288. Site 563. Examples of rectangular colcas, with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-6)

Plate A289. Site 563. Examples of circular colcas, with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-5)

Plate A290. Site 563. Line of colcas, showing terrace face along upper edge. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-7)

Plate A291. Site 564. Facing northeast overlooking site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Modern village of Huaripampa is in background. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-2)

Table A64. JASP surface collections at Site 564. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

84-H 85-H

ca. 35 × 25 m, lower NE sector ca. 40 × 15 m, in recently plowed field at southern end of site ca. 40 × 15 m, in north-central site area, in recently plowed field ca. 50 × 25 m, in lower NE sector, in partly plowed field

light, many stone hoes very light to light, numerous stone hoes very light to light, many stone hoes very light to light, many stone hoes

mainly LIP, with minor Inca-style pottery, and possible trace of EIP/MH mostly LIP, plus minor Inca-style pottery

86-H 87-H

mixed LIP and Inca-style pottery all LIP

248

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

SITE NO. 565 [Jau-LI-20(P), Unit 90-P, Colls. 125-P, 126-P; “Azul Padre”; UMARP Site No. J-287] Date of Survey: Nov. 9, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [450100 E, 8692800 N; 11.8246° S, 75.4581° W] Natural Setting: 3440 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground on the top and upper slopes of a prominent, flat-topped ridge spur, ca. 70 m above the valley floor (Plates A292, A295). The supporting ridge spur is dissected by several quebradas (Plate A293). In the immediate site area erosion has been generally slight to moderate, although the slopes below the site are severely eroded. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is an abundant cover of grass, cacti, and low shrubs. Modern Land Use: Mixed livestock grazing and rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site area have been partially leveled by irregular earth-faced terracing of uncertain age (Plate A294). Parts of the site had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 6.4 ha is defined by the poorly preserved remnants of stone-walled architecture and surface pottery. Hastorf (1993:230) reports an area of 6.5 ha for both the Wanka I and Wanka II components of this site. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 6.4 ha for the Wanka I component. Structural Remains. Most of the site’s original architecture has been destroyed in the course of modern field clearing: this can be clearly seen in the piles of rock rubble that border the cultivated fields within the site (Plate A294). We detected the foundation remnants of 1 circular structure, measuring ca. 3 m in diameter with walls ca. 60 cm thick constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in variable trace, very light, and light-to-moderate densities, with the highest densities in the northern and eastern sectors. We also noted several stone hoes and groundstone manos, plus one crude chert scraper. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A65). Hastorf (1993:230) reports both Wanka I and Wanka II material. Discussion: A substantial LIP occupation, apparently without an LH component. We are uncertain about the significance of the possible trace of EIP/MH ceramics in one surface collection. Classification: EIP/MH (?): ? LIP: Wanka I and Wanka II Large Village

SITE NO. 566 [Jau-LI-21(P)/Jau-LH-13(P), Units 91-P, 92-P, Colls. 127-P, 128-P, 129-P; “Huauya”; UMARP Site No. J-28/J-289] Date of Survey: Nov. 10, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [451100 E, 8692400 N; 11.8282° S, 75.4489° W] Natural Setting: 3440 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground on the top and upper sides of a broad ridge spur, ca. 75 m above the valley floor (Plate A295). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow. There is a substantial cover of grass, bushy shrubs, and cacti. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Fallow fields serve for grazing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 16.2 ha contains substantial remains of prehispanic architecture and surface pottery. Hastorf (1993:230) reports an area of 15.1 ha for both the Wanka I and Wanka II components of this site, and Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 16.2 ha for the Wanka I component. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 15.1 ha. Structural Remains. There are two categories of prehispanic architecture: (1) circular structures, probably residential in function, found throughout the site area (UMARP Site J-289); and (2) a line of Inca-style colcas at the lower, northeastern edge of the site (UMARP Site J-28). (1) The circular residential structures. These have been badly damaged by modern land use practices, as is clearly seen by the masses of stone rubble that have been piled up along modern field borders throughout the site (Plate A296). Nevertheless, we were able to observe the remnants of ca. 50 buildings that were sufficiently well preserved to give a good idea of original size, form, and

(top) Plate A292. Site 565. Facing east over west end of site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-16) (bottom) Plate A293. Site 565. Facing south at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-17)

(top) Plate A294. Site 565. Facing east over terraced fields in area of Collection 125-P, in northern part of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-14) (bottom) Plate A295. Sites 565 and 566. Facing southeast at sites. Arrows indicate approximate site centers. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-18)

Table A65. JASP surface collections at Site 565. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

125-P

ca. 20 × 15 m, in northern sector ca. 50 × 10 m, in southern sector

light

LIP, with possible trace of EIP/MH all LIP

126-P

light-to-moderate

Appendix A construction: these measure ca. 4–6 m in diameter, constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar, with vertical walls that sometimes still stand more 2.5 m high (Plates A297, A298, A299). There are a few remnants of what appears to be mud plastering on wall interiors (Plate A298). We saw no doorways or roof remnants. Originally there were probably well over 100 such structures at the site. (2) The colcas. There is a line of 21 circular colcas, with 1 rectangular structure appended to the north end (Fig. A41) (Plate A300). Preservation of all buildings is good, and walls are preserved up to 3.8 m high on the exterior (Plate A301). The individual structures are ca. 4 m in diameter, separated by spaces of ca. 2.5 m, with walls ca. 60 cm thick. The masonry consists of uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. Our impression is that the stones used for colca construction are significantly larger than those used to build the circular residential structures at this site. No entrances are preserved, nor do any other architectural features remain. The line of colcas rests on one of the stone-faced terraces that are widely distributed on this hillslope; the colcas sit between two terraces, thus acting as a buttressing wall. Unmortared stone walls support the terraces between the structures, but do not join the buildings structurally. The single rectangular building at the end of the line of circular structures is almost certainly part of the Inca architectural complex. Its masonry is similar to that of the circular colcas, and it is placed in direct line with the other buildings. Because it is the sole rectangular building in the row, it seems likely that it functioned for administration or security. Because of its small size and architectural distinctiveness, this rectangular structure has not been counted as a storehouse for purposes of the tabulations in Table A66. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in variable very light, light, and light-to-moderate densities. Sherd densities are generally higher in the western sector, and lower in the eastern part of the site. There is very little surface pottery in the immediate vicinity of the line of colcas. We noted numerous stone hoes, and several chert scrapers. We made three separate surface collections in different parts of the site (Table A67). Subsequent restudy by Hastorf (1993:230), Borges (1988:70), and D’Altroy (1992:192) indicates the presence of early LIP (Wanka I), late LIP (Wanka II), and LH (Wanka III) components. UMARP archaeologists made two surface collections, each over an area of ca. 10 × 50 m, one above the line of colcas and one below. Although surface pottery was present in trace to very light densities, only one possible Inca sherd and two Wanka-Inca sherds were found. The remaining pottery was either Base Roja (Wanka style) or undiagnostic. Discussion: A site with substantial early LIP (Wanka I), late LIP (Wanka II), and LH (Wanka III) occupations. The presence of the Inca-style colcas within the site’s borders suggests that during LH times the settlement’s inhabitants were charged with provisioning and maintaining the imperial colcas under Inca domination. The seemingly larger size of the stones used in colca construction suggests that the colcas may have been built at a different time than the circular residential structures, or that the construction of the two types of architecture was distinct for functional and/or sociological reasons. This is the only Inca storage facility in the immediate vicinity. The closest such site (Site 573, UMARP Site J-29) lies 3.1 km away, and the closest colca complex to the north (Site 563, UMARP Site J-57) is 5.1 km distant. The direct association of Inca colcas with a large Wanka residential community is unusual in the survey area. The direct association of the colcas with a Wanka settlement raises the question of whether the village existed first and the colcas were added later; or whether the settlement and the storehouses were built at essentially the same time; or whether the Wanka II settlement was abandoned during the LH. The lack of immediately visible Inca ceramics on the surface of the residential component suggests that it may not have been occupied during Wanka III times. Alternatively, because storage did not necessarily entail the use of ceramics, the lack of Inca pottery near the storehouses does not preclude an LH association of storage and habitation. The settlement could have been established prior to the Inca incursion and still have been used during the LH, with the storage added for the state’s administrative convenience. Inca ceramics are spread widely throughout the valley, however, and it seems highly unlikely that a village of this size, so close to Hátun Xauxa, would not have received any Inca pottery. It therefore seems more likely that the village was abandoned as a population center during the LH. It is also possible that this settlement was the village into which Wankas from various communities were resettled by Viceroy Toledo in 1572 in a community

249

(top) Plate A296. Site 566. Facing east across top of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-20) (middle) Plate A297. Site 566. Example of circular colca, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-21) (bottom) Plate A298. Site 566. Example of circular colca, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-23) known historically as Muquiyauyo (Adams 1959); the modern community of this name lies ca. 2 km to the east of the site. However, field survey in the immediate environs of this modern town failed to record any Wanka-style ceramics, and so the habitation component of Site 566 could conceivably represent the early Colonial settlement. Classification: LIP: Wanka I and Wanka II Very Large Village LH: Wanka III Very Large Village, and Inca Storage ­ Facility, Class F

250

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A301. Site 566. Example of circular colca with upwardly tapering walls, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-27)

(top) Plate A299. Site 566. Example of stone masonry in circular structure, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-24) (bottom) Plate A300. Site 566. Overlooking line of colcas at lower northwestern edge of site, with archaeologist at lower center-left. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-26)

Figure A41. Site 566, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map). Table A66. Colcas at Site 566. Colcas total circular rectangular

Number Volume 21 21 0

901 m3 901 m3 0

Table A67. JASP surface collections at Site 566. Coll. No. 127-P 128-P 129-P

Area

Sherd Density

ca. 30 × 30 m, in plowed field at western edge of site light ca. 15 × 20 m, in fallow field in central site area light-to-moderate ca. 10 × 20 m, in fallow field, eastern sector light-to-moderate

Chronology all LIP all LIP all LIP

Appendix A

251

plus a trace of EIP/MH pottery. Hastorf (1993:230) reports that both early LIP (Wanka I) and late LIP (Wanka II) material is present, and Borges (1988:70) identifies a significant Wanka I component. D’Altroy (1992:192) indicates a significant LH (Wanka III) component. Discussion: A substantial LIP and LH occupation. The trace of EIP/MH pottery probably derives from nearby Site 569, a sizable EIP/MH site immediately to the northwest. Sites 567 and 568 form a pair of LIP settlements in this part of the south-side Mantaro Valley. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Wanka I and Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village Plate A302. Site 567. Facing east at site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-28)

Plate A303. Site 567. Facing east over site. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-30)

SITE NO. 567 [Jau-LI-22(P), Coll. 132-P; UMARP Site No. J-291] Date of Survey: Nov. 10, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [451900 E, 8692100 N; 11.8310° S, 75.4416° W] Natural Setting: 3400 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on a broad apron elevated ca. 40 m above the adjacent valley floor (Plate A302). Erosion has been generally moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There are substantial stands of shrubs and cactus along modern field borders, and sparse to moderate grass cover in fallow fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers in small terraced fields. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.3 ha contains remnants of stone-walled architecture and surface pottery. Hastorf (1993:230) reports an area of 2.4 ha for both Wanka I and Wanka II components of this site. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 3.3 ha for the Wanka I component. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 2.4 ha. Structural Remains. Prehispanic architecture is generally poorly preserved, and we could identify the remnants of only 10–15 stone-walled structures. Many more certainly existed originally, as can be deduced by the abundance of rock rubble piled up along modern field borders throughout the site (Plate A303). The partially intact circular structures we saw measure 4–6 m in diameter, with vertical walls ca. 40 cm thick constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar. We estimate an original total of 20–30 such buildings. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in variable very light, light, and light-to-moderate concentrations. We also noted several stone hoes and a variety of chert implements. We made a single surface collection from an area of ca. 30 × 30 m in an area of light sherd density in the central site area. All the diagnostic material is LIP,

SITE NO. 568 [Jau-LI-23(P), Coll. 133-P; UMARP Site No. J-292] Date of Survey: Nov. 10, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [452200 E, 8692000 N; 11.8319° S, 75.4388° W] Natural Setting: 3400 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on a broad apron elevated ca. 40 m above the adjacent valley floor. Erosion has been generally moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There are substantial stands of shrubs and cactus along modern field borders, and sparse to moderate grass cover in fallow fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers in small terraced fields. Several fields in the site had been recently plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.0 ha contains surface pottery and the poorly preserved remnants of several stone-walled structures. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 3.6 ha. Structural Remains. Prehispanic architecture is generally poorly preserved, and we could identify the partial remnants of only a few stone-walled structures. Several more certainly existed originally, as can be deduced by the abundance of rock rubble piled up along modern field borders throughout the site area. The partially intact structures we saw measure 4–6 m in diameter, with vertical walls ca. 40 cm thick constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar. We estimate an original total of 10–15 structures. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in variable very light and light concentrations. We also noted several crude chert implements. We made a single surface collection from an area of ca. 20 × 25 m in the eastern part of the site. All the diagnostic material is LIP. D’Altroy’s restudy (1992:192) indicates that the main occupation may be LH (Wanka III). Discussion: Apparently a small LH settlement, possibly occupied during the antecedent LIP. Classification: LIP (?): Small Village (?) LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 569 [Jau-EI-24(P), Colls. 130-P, 131-P; UMARP Site No. J-290] Date of Survey: Nov. 10, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [451700 E, 8692400 N; 11.8282° S, 75.4434° W] Natural Setting: 3370 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the lower edge of a major ridge, ca. 20 m above the adjacent valley floor (Plate A304). Erosion has been generally moderate in the immediate site area, and more severe on the steeper slopes above the site. Soil depth is medium. Natural vegetation consists of low shrubs and grasses along modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals (including maize), fava beans, and tubers in terraced fields (mainly earth-faced terracing, of uncertain age). Several fields in the site had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 9.8 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light and light concentrations. Hastorf (1993:230) reports an area of 7.4 ha for both Wanka I and Wanka II components of this site. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 9.4 ha for the Wanka I component. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the presence of substantial cleared rock rubble along modern field borders suggests the former presence of several ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes, groundstone manos, and crude chert or basalt scraping/chopping tools.

252

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A304. Site 569. Facing northeast over site, with archaeologist at center. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-29) Table A68. JASP surface collections at Site 569. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

130-P

ca. 10 × 20 m, in western sector ca. 20 × 30 m, in eastern sector

light

all EIP/MH

very light to light

mostly EIP/MH, trace of LIP

131-P

We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site area (Table A68). Hastorf (1993:229–30) does not report any EIP/MH material at this site. Discussion: Apparently a substantial EIP/MH occupation, although the fact that UMARP archaeologists do not report any EIP/MH pottery here may mean that we originally confused EIP/MH with early LIP (Wanka I) material. Sites 569 and 571 form a pair of relatively large EIP/MH settlements in this part of the southern Mantaro Valley. The UMARP restudy of this site indicates that occupation continued into early and late LIP times (Wanka I and II), but was abandoned during the LH. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Large Village (?) LIP: Wanka I and Wanka II Large Village SITE NO. 570 [Jau-?-4(P), Coll. 134-P] Date of Survey: Nov. 11, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [450100 E, 8691500 N; 11.8364° S, 75.4581° W] Natural Setting: 3810 masl, in the uppermost kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level ground on the top of a broad bluff. Erosion in the immediate site area has been slight. Soil depth is medium. There is little natural vegetation apart from a few bushes and grass around the borders of modern agricultural fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of fava beans and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.0 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in light concentration. There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted a few crude chert implements, and one fragment of a stone hoe. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. There were few diagnostic sherds, but the material appears to be EIP/MH. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation. This is one of the highest EIP/MH sites in our entire survey area. Its location just below the puna-kichwa juncture suggests a seasonally or occasionally occupied settlement by people whose primary residences were at lower-lying settlements. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet SITE NO. 571 [Jau-EI-25(P), Colls. 135-P, 136-P, 137-P, 138-P, 139-P; UMARP Site No. J-293] Date of Survey: Nov. 15, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [452700 E, 8691400 N; 11.8373° S, 75.4342° W] Natural Setting: 3420 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground on the top and sides of a low ridge spur (Plate A305). Erosion has been moderate to severe.

Plate A305. Site 571. Facing east over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-37)

Plate A306. Site 571. Facing west across top of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-33)

Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a moderate cover of grass, shrubs, and cacti, especially around masses of rock rubble and the surviving architecture. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers in small terraced fields. Many of the modern terraces are stone-faced, and appear to have been constructed with the remains of ancient structures (Plate A306). Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 12.2 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery, rock rubble, and a few partially preserved architectural remnants. Subsequent UMARP restudies report an overall site area of 9.1 ha (Hastorf 1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:192), and 12.2 ha for the EIP/MH component (Borges 1988:69). Structural Remains. There are only a few definite remnants of prehispanic architecture. However, the abundance of rock rubble piled up around modern agricultural fields attests to the former presence of numerous ancient stone-walled structures. The few partially preserved buildings are circular, measuring 4–6 m in diameter, with walls ca. 50 cm thick made of unworked stone set in mud mortar. The walls of one structure are preserved up to ca. 2 m high (Plate A307). Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in variable very light, light, and light-to-moderate concentrations. We also noted several stone hoes and a few chert implements. We made five separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A69). Borges (1988:69) subsequently found that the dominant EIP/MH occupation dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation. Sites 571 and 569 form a pair of relatively large EIP/MH settlements in this part of the Mantaro Valley. D’Altroy (1992:192) indicates a modest LH (Wanka III) occupation at this locality, which we did not detect; the presence of a few fairly well preserved stone-walled structures also suggests a possible LH occupation here. Classification: EIP/MH: Very Large Village LH (?): Wanka III Hamlet

Appendix A

Plate A307. Site 571. Example of well-preserved circular structure. Arrow points to archaeologist on right side of structure. (UMMA Neg. No. 43-32)

253

Plate A308. Site 572. Facing east over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-20)

Table A69. JASP surface collections at Site 571. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

135-P

ca. 10 × 15 m

all EIP/MH

136-P

ca. 10 × 15 m

137-P

ca. 10 × 15 m

138-P

ca. 15 × 35 m

light-to-moderate, recently plowed field light-to-moderate, recently plowed field light-to-moderate, fallow field light, fallow field

139-P

ca. 15 × 15 m

light-to-moderate, fallow field

all EIP/MH all EIP/MH mostly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP mostly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP

SITE NO. 572 [Jau-LI-14(H), Jau-LI-40(P), Unit 73-H, Colls. 92-H, 93-H, 94H, 95-H, 96-H, 97-H, 98-H, 99-H, 220-P; UMARP Site No. J-61/J-294/J-295] Date of Survey: Nov. 16, 17, 1975; July 19, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [453800 E, 8690200 N; 11.8482° S, 75.4242° W] Natural Setting: 3360 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on the lower flanks of a high ridge. The lower edge of the site is only ca. 15 m above the adjacent valley floor (Plate A308). Deep gullies partition the hillside into a series of spurs; the site occupies two such adjacent spurs (Plate A309). Erosion has been slight to moderate within the site, held in check by numerous ancient and modern terraces and wall remnants. Soil depth varies from shallow to medium. The gullies and small quebradas are generally choked with brush a few meters high. Dense thickets of bushes and cactus also grow on uncultivated parts of the site, especially around modern field borders and remnants of ancient stonewalled architecture. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Most of the site area is terraced into narrow strips of nearly level land, or partitioned into fields by piles of rock rubble and bushes; the terracing is of uncertain age. The upper edge of the valley-floor irrigated land is only about 100 m northeast of the site. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.2 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery, some lithics, and the poorly preserved remnants of prehispanic architecture. The site is bisected by a large gully, ca. 30 m wide (Plate A309). We consider the remains on both sides of this gully as part of the same site. UMARP archaeologists subsequently distinguished these two sectors as separate sites (J-294 and J-295). D’Altroy (1992:192) reports overall site areas of 1.2 ha for Site J-294, and 1.6 ha for Site J-295. Borges (1988:70) reports areas of 3.2 ha for J-294 and 3.0 ha for J-295 for the Wanka I component. Structural Remains. These are poorly preserved, and the large quantity of stone rubble piled up along field borders throughout the site attests to the destruction in modern times of numerous ancient structures. In the upper part of the site,

Plate A309. Site 572. Facing west at site. Arrows point to centers of the two site sectors separated by a deeply incised gully. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-19)

Plate A310. Site 572. Example of circular structure, with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-16)

on the north side of the gully, are the remains of at least 3 and possibly as many as 6 stone-walled circular buildings ca. 5 m in diameter. The walls are only ca. 30 cm thick, and are constructed of unworked stone set in abundant mud mortar; some are preserved to a height of ca. 1.5 m (Plate A310). We saw no doorways, windows, or interior niches. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in variable very light, light, and light-to-moderate concentration. Stone hoes are abundant throughout the site, and we also noted a few groundstone digging-stick weights, stone-bowl fragments, and small fragments of chert debitage.

254

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table A70. JASP surface collections at Site 572. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

92-H 93-H 94-H 95-H 96-H 97-H 98-H 99-H 220-P

ca. 45 × 20 m, in upper, southeastern part of site ca. 50 × 20 m, in eastern part of site ca. 40 × 25 m, below and northeast of Coll. 93-H ca. 20 m dia., from lower, NE end of site ca. 25 m dia., lower, northern sector of site ca. 25 m dia., above Coll. 96-H ca. 30 m dia., NW of Coll. 97-H ca. 35 m dia., below Coll. 98-H taken from the site as a whole

very light to light very light very light to light light light and light-to-moderate light and light-to-moderate light light

mixed LIP and Inca-style pottery mostly LIP, plus trace of Inca-style pottery mostly LIP, plus trace of Inca-style pottery mixed EIP/MH and LIP, plus trace Inca-style pottery mixed EIP/MH and LIP, plus trace Inca-style pottery mainly LIP, with traces of Inca-style and EIP/MH mostly LIP, plus trace Inca-style pottery mostly LIP, plus light Inca-style pottery mixed EIP/MH and LIP, plus trace of Inca-style pottery

We made nine separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A70). Subsequent restudy by D’Altroy (1992:192) revealed that the occupation is primarily late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III), although Borges (1988:70) reports a significant Wanka I component. Discussion: This is a mixed occupation, with EIP/MH, early and late LIP (Wanka I and II), and LH (Wanka III) components; the LH component is apparently dominant. The site was apparently occupied from the EIP/MH into the early LIP (Wanka I), but abandoned during the late LIP (Wanka II), and reoccupied in the LH. The proximity of a concentration of Inca-style colcas (Site 573) suggests that the LH inhabitants of Site 572 were concerned with supplying and maintaining the storage facility at Site 573 under Inca domination. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 573 [Jau-LH-4(H), Unit 74-H; UMARP Site No. J-29] Date of Survey: Nov. 17, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [453600 E, 8690300 N; 11.8473° S, 75.4260° W] Natural Setting: 3405 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground at the lower, eastern edge of a wide bluff that slopes gently upward to the west. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium, with abundant stone pebbles. The sparse natural vegetation consists of low shrubs, cactus, and grass. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is used only for grazing livestock. There are small fields devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers above and below the site. Archaeological Remains: The site comprises a single line of Inca-style storage buildings (colcas) and a trace of surface pottery over an area of ca. 0.2 ha. Structural Remains. The line of colcas contains 15 circular buildings arrayed in a slightly curved configuration parallel to the topographic contours, with good overall preservation (Fig. A42) (Table A71). The individual structures are 4–5 m in diameter and spaced ca. 2.5 m apart, with walls ca. 50 cm thick that slant slightly inward; some still stand up to 3.0 m high on the downhill side (Plates A311, A312, A313). The masonry is uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. Single entrances are preserved in 3 structures, all on the downhill (east) side. One entrance is elevated 1.0 m above ground surface, and two are elevated 1.4 m. The entrances range from 0.4 to 0.7 m in width, and from 0.9 to 1.6 m in height. The two fully preserved entrances are capped by single lintel stones. There is no visible supporting terrace, and the structures’ foundations appear to have been dug directly into the hillslope on their uphill sides. All entrances have been deliberately blocked with unmortared rocks. This blockage was not an integral part of the masonry, and the dating of the closure of the structures is therefore problematical. A semicircular ledge (0.6 m high) was constructed as part of 1 structure. Built of the same mortared masonry as the colca, and integrated structurally into the unit, it may have been used to facilitate entry into the high aperture. An unmortared rock wall, preserved between 2 structures in the middle of the line, seems to have served as a retaining wall.

Figure A42. Site 573, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map). Table A71. Colcas at Site 573. Colcas total circular rectangular

Number Volume 15 15 0

490 m3 490 m3 0

Surface Finds. There is only a bare trace of surface pottery. We made a single small collection from the entire site area. The material is badly weathered and undiagnostic, but appears to be LIP. Discussion: Despite the apparent lack of Inca-style pottery in our surface collection, we date the Site 573 colca complex to the LH because of its similarity in architectural form and configuration to other examples of Inca-related storage buildings in our survey area. This site is part of a loose cluster of Inca storage facilities on the south side of the Mantaro Valley (see also Sites 576 and 577). The northern edge of a Wanka III settlement (Site 572) lies about 100 m to the south, and the inhabitants of this site may have been involved in provisioning and administering the storage facilities in this part of the study area. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class F SITE NO. 574 [Jau-LI-12(H)/Jau-LI-41(P), Colls. 90-H, 91-H, 221-P; UMARP Site No. J-296/J-297] Date of Survey: Nov. 16, 1975; July 19, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [453700 E, 8689900 N; 11.9509° S, 75.4251° W] Natural Setting: 3400 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground on a bluff on the highly dissected lower flanks of a major ridge. The site is ca. 80 m above the adjacent valley floor (Plate A314), and lies between major erosional gullies.

Appendix A

255

Plate A314. Site 574. Facing southwest at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-18) Table A72. JASP surface collections at Site 574. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

90-H

ca. 30 m dia., in upper sector ca. 25 m dia., in lower sector ca. 50 m in dia., in central site area

very light

all late LIP

very light

all late LIP

very light

mostly late LIP, plus trace of Inca-style pottery

91-H 221-P

(top) Plate A311. Site 573. Row of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-23) (middle) Plate A312. Site 573. Colca exterior, with Charles Hastings. Same structure as shown in Plate A313. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-22) (bottom) Plate A313. Site 573. Colca interior, with Charles Hastings. Same structure as shown in Plate A312. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-21)

Erosion has been generally moderate within the site area, held in check to some extent by numerous terraces. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There are thick stands of bushes, cactus, and grass in uncultivated areas. Modern Land Use: Most of the site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers in small, terraced fields. Most of the terraces are earth-faced, but some have stone-facing; the date of their construction is uncertain. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains.

Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.5 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery, lithic artifacts, and remnants of ancient architecture. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 0.8 ha for that sector of the site designated UMARP Site J-297. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 7.4 ha for the Wanka I component. Structural Remains. A few small fragmentary remnants of circular stonewalled structures are scattered throughout the site area, but it is clear from the abundance of rock rubble piled up along modern field borders that most ancient buildings at this site have been destroyed through modern land use. The few surviving wall remnants are too fragmentary to permit estimates of the size or form of the original structures. Some of the stone-faced terracing may be ancient. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in very light concentrations. We also noted numerous stone hoes, and several chert knives and scrapers. We made three separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A72). D’Altroy’s (1992:192, 2001:89) subsequent restudy indicates that the dominant occupations at UMARP Site J-297 are late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III), and Borges (1988:70) identified a substantial Wanka I occupation. However, we are uncertain about the presence or absence of LIP material at UMARP Site J-296. Discussion: Apparently a small LH (Wanka III) residential occupation, with a much larger Wanka I settlement. We are uncertain about the presence of late LIP occupation here prior to the Late Horizon. We are puzzled by the large discrepancy between our estimate of site area and those made by UMARP archaeologists. The LH occupation at this locality may have been linked to provisioning and maintaining the complex of Inca colcas above the site on the same hillslope (Site 577). Our surface collections at this site illustrate the uncertainties of recovering low-frequency Inca-style ceramics with our survey methodology: neither of the two collections made in 1975 contained any, while the collection we made at this site in 1976 did. Classification: LIP: Wanka I Small Village Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

256

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

SITE NO. 575 [Jau-LI-39(P), Coll. 218-P; UMARP Site No. J-298] Date of Survey: July 17, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [453800 E, 8689500 N; 11.8545° S, 75.4242° W] Natural Setting: 3620 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground atop a low hillock on the middle flanks of a large ridge. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium. The limited natural vegetation consists of sparseto-moderate grass and cactus around the borders of modern agricultural fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearance have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.0 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of very light surface pottery. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 0.8 ha. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 1.0 ha for the Wanka I component. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the abundance of cleared rock rubble around modern field borders suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes and chert scrapers. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is LIP. D’Altroy’s subsequent restudy indicates a primarily late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) occupation, while Borges (1988:70) identified a significant early LIP (Wanka I) component. Discussion: A small LH settlement, apparently with Wanka I and Wanka II antecedents. Classification: LIP: Wanka I Hamlet Wanka II Hamlet LH: Wanka III Hamlet SITE NO. 576 [Jau-LH-3(H), Unit 72-H; UMARP Site No. J-30] Date of Survey: Nov. 16, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [453000 E, 8690000 N; 11.8500° S, 75.4315° W] Natural Setting: 3650 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground at the edge of a low bluff on the middle slopes of a large ridge, ca. 250 m above the valley floor (Plate A315). Erosion has been slight to moderate in the immediate site area, but severe on the adjacent slopes. Soil depth is generally shallow. There is a thick cover of grass and low shrubs around the ancient architectural remains. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is presently fallow. The adjacent slopes above and below the site are devoted to the rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a single line of Inca-style circular storage buildings (colcas) covering an area of ca. 0.1 ha. We saw no surface pottery or lithic artifacts, and subsequent studies by UMARP archaeologists likewise detected no surface pottery. Structural Remains. The architectural remains consist of eight circular colcas, each of which is clearly visible, at least in foundation, arrayed ca. 1.5 m apart along a line parallel to the topographic contours (Fig. A43) (Table A73). The colca structures are ca. 4–5 m in diameter, with walls ca. 60 cm thick and preserved up to 2.1 m high. Masonry consists of uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. In 1 structure there is a preserved opening at the base of its uphill side (Plate A316). This opening measures ca. 80 × 35 cm, and is framed by large blocks of unworked stone. This was the only opening detected. Many of the building interiors are now filled with wall-fall and are overgrown with bushes. The colcas stand at the front face of a terrace, one of a short series on the slope. The terraces and colcas are not structurally joined and the terraces were not needed to support the buildings. Because of this, the relative ages of the colcas and the terraces could not be determined. However, the lack of other terraces nearby suggests that the terrace and colca construction was contemporaneous. Surface Finds. Because of the absence of surface pottery, we made no surface collection at this site. Discussion: We date this site to the LH on the basis of the similarity of its architecture to Inca-related colca complexes throughout the survey area. Sites 576 and 577 (350 m distant) form a pair of isolated complexes of Inca colcas in this part of the Mantaro Valley. Site 576 is the second-smallest discrete set of Inca colcas in the survey area. It falls among a group of small storage facilities with no direct association with local habitation or other imperial construction. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class F

Plate A315. Site 576. Facing northeast overlooking site. Arrow points to line of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-13)

Plate A316. Site 576. Interior of circular colca, showing opening, with Phil Tugendrajch. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-14)

Figure A43. Site 576, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Table A73. Colcas at Site 576. Colcas total circular rectangular

Number Volume 8 8 0

313 m3 313 m3 0

Appendix A SITE NO. 577 [Jau-LH-2(H), Unit 71-H; UMARP Site No. J-31] Date of Survey: Nov. 15, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [452800 E, 8689600 N; 11.8536° S, 75.4334° W] Natural Setting: 3775 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level ground at the edge of a wide bluff on the side of a large ridge, ca. 400 m above the adjacent valley floor (Plate A317). Erosion has been slight in the immediate site area, but severe on the slopes below. Soil cover is medium to deep within the site; the soil has a distinctly red color, unusual in this region. There is a moderate cover of grass, shrubs, and cactus within the site, but very little natural vegetation on the adjacent cultivated slopes. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is presently unused. The adjacent slopes are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields serve for grazing livestock, and there are a few small, stone-walled sheep corrals in the area. These modern corrals appear to have been constructed with stone taken from the ancient structures. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.5 ha is defined by a complex of Inca-style storage buildings (colcas), a single unusual platform mound, and traces of surface pottery. Structural Remains. Most of the site consists of a single line of 31 circular and 6 rectangular colcas arrayed in a line parallel to the topographic contours (Fig. A44). About 17 m to the west of the north end is an area that appears to contain 4 additional circular structures (Table A74). Overall preservation is fair to good. The individual circular colcas are spaced 1–2 m apart, measuring ca. 4 m in diameter, with inward-leaning walls ca. 80 cm thick at the base and tapering upward to a thickness of ca. 20 cm (Plate A318). Numerous circular structures are preserved to a height exceeding 2.0 m, with the highest standing wall standing ca. 2.8 m high. Some plaster remains on the interior wall surface of 1 circular building. The rectangular buildings are in much poorer condition than the circular structures, but their foundations are sufficiently well preserved to permit their identification, if not accurate measurement of their sizes. The buildings are constructed of uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles. The calcareous quality of the local soil apparently resulted in a very high-quality mud mortar, which may have contributed to the generally good preservation. The southernmost structure retains remnants of reddish clay or mud plaster on the interior wall. Whether this is the only structure with plaster, or whether it has simply been unusually well preserved, is unclear. Doorways are preserved on the uphill sides of 6 circular structures (Plates A319, A320). These openings are all small, raised slightly above the present ground surface. Mean dimensions are 0.70 m high by 0.45 m wide. A single lintel stone caps each of the preserved entrances, with the remaining surrounding rocks being particularly well laid in comparison to the rest of the structure. Because of the height of the wall preserved on the side and downhill faces of the structures (all of which lack entrances), it is reasonable to assume that the location of all entrances was on the uphill (west) face. Building entrances appear to have been of two mutually exclusive types, one characteristic of colcas in the northwestern half of the site, the other in the southeastern half. The northwestern variant has an opening on the uphill side of the structure measuring ca. 60–70 wide and higher up on the structure than most walls are now preserved. The southeastern variant has a smaller opening at the bottom of the uphill side of the structure, measuring ca. 65 × 30 cm and capped by a massive stone lintel (Plate A319). Three circular structures retain exterior stone tenons. These features project 20–24 cm out from the wall facing the adjacent colca structure, usually 1.5–2 m above the ground level (Plate A320). These tenons were either chosen for their natural shape, or were worked into the desired form. Although several other buildings retain walls of equivalent height, the tenons appear on only 3 structures, suggesting that some selection has been exercised in determining which colcas were to receive the tenons. Unmortared rock walls were constructed between all pairs of adjoining buildings. These were carefully laid at the base, but were not structurally joined to the colcas. The walls combined with the buildings to form a solid terrace support. A low rectangular earth platform is situated on the uphill side of the long line of buildings. This platform, which measures 15 m long (north-south) by 10 m wide (east-west), stands up to 0.5 m high, and is quite flat. It is bordered in places with a single row of stones and the corners are squared. It does not resemble any other features at Inca Storage Facilities in the study area, except for the earth and stone mound feature at Site 502, an unusual elliptical configuration of colcas. Surface Finds. There is a bare trace of surface pottery. We collected 5 or 6 badly weathered sherds. There are no diagnostic sherds, but the material ap-

257

(top) Plate A317. Site 577. Facing east overlooking site, with archaeologist at center. Arrow points to line of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-9) (middle) Plate A318. Site 577. Examples of circular colcas, showing spacing between structures, with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-10) (bottom) Plate A319. Site 577. Circular colca with preserved doorway and lintel, with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-12)

pears to be LIP. UMARP archaeologists subsequently made one additional small surface collection of 11 sherds, 3 of which were from Inca jars and 2 of which were from Wanka-style pots. Discussion: An isolated group of Inca-style colcas similar to those found elsewhere in the survey area. These are dated to the LH on the basis of their form and configuration, plus the handful of Inca-style sherds detected by UMARP archaeologists. Sites 576 and 577 form a loose cluster of Inca colca groups in this part of the Mantaro Valley. Site 577 is one of the most inaccessible Inca state storage facilities in the survey area, situated some 400 m above the main valley floor. It is clearly visible from the valley floor below, however, a feature shared by almost all Inca storage groups. The high placement of Site 577 would

258

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table A74. Colcas at Site 577. Colcas total circular rectangular

Number Volume 41 35 6

2207 m3 1516 m3 691 m3

Figure A44. Site 577, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Plate A320. Site 577. Example of colca with arrow pointing to projecting “peg,” with Charles Hastings. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-11)

have been inefficient for activities concentrated on the valley floor. One possible explanation is that the surrounding agricultural fields were designated for a specific purpose, such as supporting the state religion, and that accessibility or proximity to local villages was relatively unimportant. Alternatively, this locality may have functioned to store materials derived from camelid pastoralists in the unsurveyed higher puna to the west. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class E SITE NO. 578 [Jau-?-6(H), Fea. 25-H] Date of Survey: Nov. 15, 1975 Location: Hoja Jauja [452200 E, 8689300 N; 11.8563° S, 75.4389° W] Natural Setting: 4030 masl, in the upper puna zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground atop a low hillock on the upper side of a large ridge, nearly 700 m above the main valley floor (Plate A321). Erosion has been moderate to severe in the immediate site area, and there is considerable bedrock exposure. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a moderate grass cover. Modern Land Use: The general area serves as pasture for sheep. There is a modern square stone-walled structure, ca. 2 m on a side, built of dry-laid stone, that probably serves as a temporary shelter for herders. There is also a recently constructed cairn built of cemented rock standing ca. 1.5 m high. The construction of these modern structures has undoubtedly damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.1 ha is defined by the presence of ancient architecture and surface pottery. Structural Remains. These consist of (1) a circular platform, (2) a small circular building foundation, and (3) a looted tomb. (1) The circular platform. Ca. 10 m in diameter and less than 1 m high, constructed of earth and rock rubble, with a dry-laid stone wall around its perimeter.

Plate A321. Site 578. Facing north over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 44-8)

A looter’s trench, ca. 3 m long, has recently been dug into the platform, but we saw no artifacts in the backdirt. (2) The circular building foundation. Ca. 4 m southeast of the platform, measuring ca. 2 m in diameter and seemingly constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar. Only the lowermost tier of stones is preserved. (3) The tomb. Adjacent to the northern side of the platform. This feature has been badly looted, but enough remains to see that this was originally a semisubterranean feature, probably a stone-lined chamber. Surface Finds. Recent looting has exposed a few potsherds. We also noted a stone hoe and a few unidentifiable bone fragments (probably human) in the vicinity of the tomb. We made a single small surface collection. There are few diagnostic sherds, but the material appears to be LIP. Discussion: Probably an isolated LIP cemetery. This site is quite similar to nearby Site 581, ca. 1.3 km to the southeast, and this pair of isolated LIP cemeteries may comprise some kind of a ritual focus and social marker near the puna-kichwa juncture. This is one of several isolated cemeteries in our survey area (see also Sites 421, 496, 513, 532, 534, 559, 581, 588, 615). Classification: LIP (?): Isolated Cemetery SITE NO. 579 [Jau-LI-37(P); “Huancanihuata”; Colls. 213-P, 214-P, 215-P; UMARP Site No. J-300] Date of Survey: July 18, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [454500 E, 8688800 N; 11.8608° S, 75.4178° W] Natural Setting: 3430 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground on the top and upper sides of a wide bluff on the side of a major ridge, ca. 80 m above the adjacent valley floor (Plate A322). Erosion has been slight to moderate. Soil cover is medium. The uncultivated parts of the site have a moderate cover of

Appendix A

Plate A322. Site 579. Facing north over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-31)

Plate A323. Site 579. Facing northwest over area of Collection 213-P, with Julia Medel (left), Phil Tugendrajch (center), and Paul Liffman (right). At left, note piles of stone rubble cleared by modern farmers. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-26) Table A75. JASP surface collections at Site 579. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

213-P

ca. 15 m dia., NE end of site ca. 30 m dia., upper central site area ca. 15 m dia., SE end of site

light

mixed EIP/MH and LIP, plus trace of Inca-style pottery mainly LIP, plus trace of Inca-style pottery mainly LIP, plus light EIP/MH

214-P 215-P

very light light

grass and bushes, especially along modern field borders and around the remnants of ancient structures. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Most modern cultivation is within terraced fields—the age of the terracing is uncertain, but most is stone-faced and some may be ancient. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 6.3 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery, lithic artifacts, rock rubble, and possible remnants of ancient architecture. Subsequent UMARP restudies report an overall site area of 8.1 ha (D’Altroy 1992:192), and 7.0 ha for the EIP/MH and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69–70). Structural Remains. There are no definite remnants of prehispanic structures, but the general abundance of rock rubble piled up along modern field borders throughout the site area (Plate A323) indicates the former presence of ancient buildings that have been destroyed by modern land use practices. There are a few terrace retaining walls constructed of dry-laid stone, but their antiquity is questionable.

259

Plate A324. Site 580. Facing northwest over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-12)

Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site area in very light and light concentrations. We also noted numerous stone hoes and several chert scrapers. We made three separate surface collections in different parts of the site area (Table A75). Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH occupation dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase; she also identified a significant early LIP (Wanka I) component. D’Altroy’s (1992:192, 2001:89) subsequent restudy detected a significant late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III). Discussion: A chronologically mixed occupation. The EIP/MH component appears to comprise two localities separated by ca. 180 m within the overall site area: we have arbitrarily assigned the northern locality an area of ca. 1.6 ha, and the southern locality an area of ca. 1.1 ha. Occupation apparently continued through LIP and into LH times. The LH (Wanka III) settlement may have been linked to provisioning and maintaining the Inca-style colcas (Site 580) on the same ridge slope ca. 800 m to the southwest. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Wanka I Large Village Wanka II Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village SITE NO. 580 [Jau-LH-29(P); “Uccha”; Unit 107-P; UMARP Site No. J-32] Date of Survey: Aug. 6, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [453600 E, 8688600 N; 11.8626° S, 75.4260° W] Natural Setting: 3710 masl, in upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on slightly to moderately sloping ground in the middle section of a major ridge, ca. 350 m above the main valley floor (Plate A324). The site area is dissected by numerous seasonal quebradas, and erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil cover is shallow to medium. There is substantial growth of grass, bushes, and thorn scrub in and immediately around the remains of ancient architecture; elsewhere there is sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Mixed grazing of livestock and rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: This site consists of three separate sections of Inca-style storage structures (colcas) separated by gaps and arrayed in a single line (Plate A325; Fig. A45). The northern section contains 8 circular structures (Plate A326); the central section contains 17 circular buildings, 10 rectangular buildings with square corners (Plate A327), and 1 rectangular building with rounded corners; the southern section contains 8 circular buildings (Fig. A45). Each section is built atop its own stone-faced terrace that measures ca. 15 m wide and 1 m high (Plate A328). The complex covers an area of ca. 0.7 ha, and there is a trace of surface pottery. Structural Remains. There are a total of 46 colca structures (Table A76). It seems likely that the complex was considered as a unit by its designers. Forty-four of the buildings were readily defined from surface remains, and the existence of 2 others was inferred from layout and rubble. The overall preserva-

260

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A45. Site 580, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Plate A328. Site 580. Line of colcas atop stone-faced terrace. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-6) Table A76. Colcas at Site 580. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

(top) Plate A325. Site 580. Facing north over site. Arrows indicate approximate opposing ends of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-3) (middle) Plate A326. Site 580. Example of circular colca, with Paul Liffman. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-7) (bottom) Plate A327. Site 580. Example of well-preserved rectangular colca, with Paul Liffman. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-5)

Number Volume 46 33 13 44 33 11 2 0 2

2078 m3 1526 m3 552 m3 1951 m3 1526 m3 425 m3 127 m3 0 127 m3

tion of architecture is fair to good. Some buildings retain walls over 2.0 m high, and some have been virtually destroyed, with only fragmentary foundations surviving. Of the three sections of colcas comprising this site, the northern two contain the best-preserved buildings. The rectangular colcas measure ca. 3.5 × 6.0 m in area, with walls ca. 60 cm thick, with individual buildings spaced ca. 2.5 m apart. The circular colcas measure 4.0–5.0 m in diameter, with individual buildings spaced ca. 1 m apart. The masonry shows marked localization in selection of building materials. Colcas in the northern two sections were constructed of limestone, probably from the bedrock exposed nearby, while colcas in the southern sector were built from metamorphic rocks. The different construction materials reflect a surface transition from sedimentary to metamorphic rocks between the central and southern sectors. In each case, the mortar was clayey mud, with small rocks and pebbles. To judge from the superior preservation of the structures in the northern two sectors, the mortar used in the southern sector must have been of lower quality. White plaster remains fixed to the interior wall of one rectangular building in the central sector. As noted in our description of Site 577, the colca at that site

Appendix A that retains plaster on its interior surface is circular in floor plan, suggesting that plastering of interior walls may have been characteristic of both shapes of Inca storehouses in the survey area. The rectangular structures whose corners are still present to some height display the columnar construction prevalent in the Mantaro Valley. This has resulted in the deterioration of most corners, but those still standing show nicely squared edges and faces, indicating that care was taken to trim or to select aesthetically pleasing rocks. The circular colcas share this high-quality masonry, although these buildings pale structurally and aesthetically in comparison to fine Inca cut stone masonry. Entrances are preserved in 7 structures: 3 circular buildings in the northern sector and 4 rectangular buildings in the central group (Plate A327). Masonry around the entrances, all of which face downhill (east), was more carefully laid than in the rest of the structures. Several lintel stones cap each fully preserved entrance, and two stones for the base. The entrances are small: 0.55–0.80 m high and 0.50–0.65 m wide; they are situated up to 0.80 m from the bottom of the walls in which they are placed. Both the central and southern sections are incorporated into terrace series. The southern sector of colcas abuts the front end of a terrace, but was not structurally integrated into the terrace face. The central sector was built on the upper of two terraces, both of which are faced with stones. The upper terrace was altered after the buildings were erected, because it cuts across the line of colcas at the southern end. Surface Finds. Surface pottery is very sparse. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. There are few diagnostics, but the material appears to be LIP. UMARP archaeologists subsequently recovered three sherds from the northern sector of the site; two of these were from small Inca jars and one was a Wanka sherd of indeterminate style. Discussion: We date this site to the LH on the basis of the similarity of its architectural form and configuration to other groups of Inca-related colcas in our survey area, plus the two Inca jar sherds recovered by UMARP archaeologists. This is one of several similar groups of Inca colcas in this general part of the Mantaro Valley (Sites 576, 577, 580). This site is somewhat unusual for the presence of both rectangular and circular colcas in such close proximity to each other. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class E SITE NO. 581 [Jau-?-41(P), Fea. 23-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 7, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [452600 E, 8688300 N; 11.8653° S, 75.4352° W] Natural Setting: 4050 masl, in the upper puna zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground at the top (and highest point) of a small hill that rises from the broad crest of a major ridge. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a thick grass cover. Modern Land Use: There are few indications of any present use of the immediate site area. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.1 ha contains the badly looted remains of several stone-lined subterranean burial chambers and a trace of surface pottery. The looting has made it difficult to estimate the number, size, and form of the chambers, but there appear to have been about five of them, each measuring ca. 1 m in diameter and 50 cm deep. They may originally have had some surface elevation as well, as substantial rock rubble is piled up around the looted chambers. We also detected a few fragments of what appears to be human bone. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. There are no good diagnostics, but the material appears to be LIP. Discussion: A small LIP isolated cemetery, probably originally containing about five small stone-lined, partially subterranean tombs. This site is quite similar to nearby Site 578, ca. 1.3 km to the northwest, and this pair of isolated LIP cemeteries may comprise some kind of a ritual focus and social marker near the puna-kichwa juncture. Several other isolated cemeteries occur in our survey area (see Sites 421, 496, 513, 532, 534, 559, 578, 588, 615). Classification: LIP (?): Isolated Cemetery SITE NO. 582 [Jau-?-32(P), Unit 198-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 7, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [453200 E, 8688400 N; 11.8644° S, 75.4297° W] Natural Setting: 3880 masl, in the lowermost puna zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground atop a break in slope

261

Plate A328A. Site 582. Facing east at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-17)

Plate A329. Site 583. Facing east overlooking site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-33)

that forms a natural terrace ca. 30 m wide near the top of a high ridge (Plate A328A). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow. There is moderate grass cover. Modern Land Use: Sheep pasture. The foundations of two modern herder’s shelters have been constructed from stone rubble taken from the remains of what appears to be an ancient corral. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.1 ha contains the remnants of an apparently ancient stone-walled corral that formerly enclosed an area ca. 15 × 20 m. Only the foundation stones are preserved, and we could not detect whether or not mud mortar was used in the original wall construction. There is a trace of surface pottery. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. There is no good diagnostic pottery, but the material appears to be EIP/MH. Discussion: This site appears to be a small EIP/MH herding facility, probably an isolated corral, possibly with an attached herder’s shelter. If so, this is one of the very few such sites in our survey area, and the apparent lack of disturbance in LIP times may mean that excavation here could reveal an unmixed EIP/MH deposit. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Camp SITE NO. 583 [Jau-EI-54(P), Coll. 219-P; UMARP Site No. J-299] Date of Survey: July 18, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [454200 E, 8689500 N; 11.8545° S, 75.4205° W] Natural Setting: 3360 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground atop a low bluff that is near the base of a major ridge, ca. 40 m above the main valley floor (Plate A329). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally medium. Most of the site area has been cleared for modern cultivation, but there are dense concentrations of shrubs and grass along piles of cleared rock rubble that border modern fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.6 ha is defined by the distribution of light surface pottery. Borges (1988:69) reports a site area of 1.5 ha for the EIP/MH component.

262

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the abundance of cleared rock rubble piled up by modern farmers suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted a few stone hoes. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 15 × 25 m. The material is predominantly EIP/MH, with traces of LIP and EH ceramics. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH occupation dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase, and she also reports (1988:39) the presence of “a single fragment of a possible [MH] Wari imitation” sherd. Discussion: Primarily an EIP/MH occupation. The significance of the traces of EH and LIP surface pottery is uncertain. Because of its general scarcity in our survey pottery, the presence of EH pottery here is particularly interesting, and may indicate a small, but significant EH occupation. This site is ca. 5 km northwest of a small cluster of EH/EIP/MH occupation (Sites 620–625), and it may have been part of a pioneering EH agricultural community in this part of the southern Mantaro Valley. The presence of a possible MH Wari imitation sherd is interesting because it is one of the very few found in the Wanka Region survey area (see also Sites 442, 451, 464, 589, 624, 627). This site is part of an apparent loose cluster of sites where EH occupation definitely, or possibly, occurs (see also Sites 416, 423, 505, 509, 558, 606, 609, 617, 621, 623)—in our original survey, we detected EH occupation only at Sites 509 and 623. Classification: EH (?): Camp (?) EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: ? SITE NO. 584 [Jau-LI-42(P)] Date of Survey: July 18, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [455000 E, 8688300 N; 11.8654° S, 75.4132° W] Natural Setting: 3380 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground near the highly dissected base of a massive ridge. The site area lies between two seasonal quebradas that have cut deeply into the hillslope. Erosion has been moderate to severe, somewhat held in check by irregular stone-faced and earth terraces of uncertain age. Natural vegetation is quite sparse, with a scattering of shrubs, cactus, and grass along modern field borders and terrace faces. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and fava beans in small fields defined by irregular terracing. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.8 ha is defined primarily by a trace of surface pottery, plus abundant rock rubble, piled around field borders and in modern terraces, that may represent the displaced remnants of prehispanic structures. We made no surface collection. The ceramic material is undiagnostic, but it appears to be LIP. Discussion: A small occupation of uncertain function and age. Perhaps a small LIP settlement. Classification: LIP (??): Small Village (?) SITE NO. 585 [Jau-?-36(P), Fea. 18-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 6, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [453600 E, 8688100 N; 11.8672° S, 75.4260° W] Natural Setting: 3780 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on the middle part of a high ridge, overlooking the main valley floor ca. 340 m below. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow. There is a sparse cover of grass and low shrubs. Modern Land Use: Sheep pasture. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a single small, stone-walled structure resting atop a stone-faced terrace. This circular structure measures ca. 2 m in diameter, with walls constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar and measuring ca. 60 cm thick (Plate A330). The supporting terrace is ca. 25 cm long and 75 cm high along its front (downhill) face (Plate A331). We detected no surface pottery. Discussion: A single structure, of uncertain function or age. Classification: Unknown period: Camp (?)

(top) Plate A330. Site 585. Remnant of circular structure, with Kurt Anschuetz. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-11) (bottom) Plate A331. Site 585. Section of stone-faced terrace. Arrow indicates front (downhill) face of terrace. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-13)

SITE NO. 586 [Jau-?-37(P), Fea. 19-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 6, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [454200 E, 8687600 N; 11.8717° S, 75.4205° W] Natural Setting: 3720 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest of a small ridge spur on the side of a major ridge. Erosion has been severe. Soil depth is shallow to absent, with numerous bedrock outcrops. There is a thin scatter of grass and shrubs. Modern Land Use: Marginal livestock pasture. There are several modern stone-walled corrals in the general site area, although they do not appear to have been used much in recent times. Modern corral building has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site comprises a tight cluster of 3 small circular structures. These measure ca. 3 m in diameter, with walls ca. 35 cm thick constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar, now standing less than 50 cm high. We saw no surface pottery. We estimate the site area as 0.1 ha. Discussion: A small occupation of uncertain age, probably a cluster of herder’s shelters. Classification: Unknown age: Camp (?)

Appendix A

263

Plate A332. Site 587. Facing southeast over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 24-29) Table A77. JASP surface collections at Site 587. Coll. No. 216-P 217-P

Area

Chronology

Plate A333. Site 589. Facing northeast over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-18)

ca. 50 m dia., eastern site area mainly LIP, plus lighter EIP/MH ca. 50 m dia., western site area mainly LIP, plus trace of EIP/MH

SITE NO. 587 [Jau-LI-38(P); “Talo”; Colls. 216-P, 217-P; UMARP Site No. J-301] Date of Survey: July 17, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [455100 E, 8688000 N; 11.8681° S, 75.4123° W] Natural Setting: 3420 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to moderately sloping ground on the dissected lower slopes of a major ridge (Plate A332). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is medium. Modern field borders formed of piled-up rock rubble have a thick cover of grass, shrubs, and cactus. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and fava beans. Modern plowing and field clearance have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 4.4 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 5.0 ha for the Wanka I component. There are no definite prehispanic structures, but the abundance of rock rubble piled up along modern field borders suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled buildings. We also noted several stone hoes and chert scrapers. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A77). Discussion: A mixed occupation, with both EIP/MH and LIP components. Borges (1988:69–70) does not report any EIP/MH at this site, but did identify a significant early LIP (Wanka I) component. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 588 [Jau-EI-53(P), Fea. 15-P; UMARP Site No. J-308] Date of Survey: June 19, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [457600 E, 8694100 N; 11.8130° S, 75.3892° W] Natural Setting: 3370 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and sides of a ridge spur, ca. 30 m above the adjacent valley floor. Erosion has been severe. Soil depth is shallow to absent. There is a very sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Marginal grazing for livestock in the immediate site area. The less-eroded slopes below the site to the northeast are devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Archaeological Remains: This site contains a single vague mound, ca. 2 m in diameter and 20 cm high, with substantial rock rubble and light-to-moderate surface pottery in an area no more than ca. 5 m in diameter. Subsequent UMARP restudy determined a site area of 1.2 ha for the EIP/MH component (Borges 1988:69). We made a single surface collection from the site as a whole. The material is all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) subsequently found that the dominant component

dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase, and she also reports (1988:39) the presence of “a single fragment of [MH] Cajamarca style pottery.” Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation of questionable function, possibly an isolated tomb or small tomb cluster. The presence of a single Cajamarca sherd is particularly interesting because it appears to be virtually the only one discovered in our survey area. This site is one of several isolated cemeteries in our survey area (see also Sites 421, 496, 513, 532, 534, 559, 578, 581, 615). Classification: EIP/MH: Isolated Cemetery (?) SITE NO. 589 [Jau-EI-58(P), Coll. 232-P; UMARP Site No. J-309] Date of Survey: July 27, 1976 Location: Hoja Jauja [456000 E, 8687400 N; 11.8735° S, 75.4040° W] Natural Setting: 3350 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on a natural terrace ca. 10 m above the adjacent valley floor (Plate A333). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is medium. Uncultivated areas along modern field borders have a light cover of grass and bushes. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.3 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of very light surface pottery. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and the scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted two fragments of groundstone digging-stick weights. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:39) reports “a single [MH] Wari [ceramic] fragment” here. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation. The single MH Wari sherd is one of the very few found in the Wanka Region survey area (see also Sites 442, 451, 464, 583, 624, 627). The apparent absence of stone-walled structures may indicate seasonal or temporary residence. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 590 [Jau-LI-12(P); “Huashua” or “Tragadero”; Unit 74-P, Colls. 82-P, 83-P; UMARP Site No. J-4] Date of Survey: Oct. 14, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [440100 E, 8700500 N; 11.7548° S, 75.5498° W] Natural Setting: 3460 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on flat ground at the northwestern corner of Lago Tragadero, a large expanse of marsh and open water on the floor of the enclosed Tragadero Basin (Plate A334). The site occupies a low, broad knoll of (apparently natural) high ground rising 3–5 m above the level of the nearby marshland

264

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A334. Site 590. Facing east overlooking site at edge of Lago Tragadero. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Modern village of Tragadero is at left-center. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-33)

Plate A335. Site 590. Facing north over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-13)

Figure A46. Site 590, site plan (from LeBlanc 1981:45, Fig. 2.2).

Table A78. JASP surface collections at Site 590. Coll. No.

Area

Chronology

82-P 83-P

ca. 20 × 20 m, at south end of site ca. 10 × 15 m, in north-central site

mainly LIP, with traces of EIP/MH mainly LIP, with some Inca-style pottery, and a few EIP/MH sherds

(Plate A335). There has been no erosion. Soil depth is deep. There are sparse stands of scrub brush and grass in fallow fields, and thick marsh vegetation immediately to the southeast. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers, plus some vegetables, such as onions, in nearby fields. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. The modern village of Tragadero encroaches onto the northern end of the site, and may cover that part of the site. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 4.2 ha is defined by a fairly uniform cover of light-to-moderate surface pottery and a scatter of rock rubble. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:44) remeasured this site area as 3.7 ha. Hastorf (1993:230) reports a site area of 4.8 ha for the Wanka I component

of the site. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 5.9 ha. The most recent UMARP estimate for the overall site area is 3.7 ha. Structural Remains. There are no clear surficial remains of prehispanic architecture, although the low knoll that supports the site may be partly, or wholly, artificial. The abundance of rock rubble in the plowed fields and piled up along modern field borders suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. During their subsequent mapping, UMARP archaeologists detected a possibly post-hispanic architectural complex: a single well defined rectangular structure (20.5 m by 8 m exterior dimensions, . . . just to the southeast of the center of the site [Fig. A46]. This structure has been largely dismantled; a single course of roughly shaped limestone blocks remains visible on the ground surface. The masonry is unlike that used at

Appendix A

265

Figure A47. Site 590, complex of ancient drained fields (from Earle et al. 1980:12, Fig. 3).

most Huanca sites. A single row of large blocks was employed rather than the double row which forms double-faced pirka masonry found in typical Huanca buildings. [LeBlanc 1981:46]

UMARP archaeologists also noted two features that may have prehistoric counterparts associated with this site: a stepping-stone bridge and a small Catholic shrine at the point where the stream that drains Laguna Tragadero disappears under the hill on which Site 472 (Hatunmarca) lies. The bridge consists of a series of large stones that rise about 1 m above the drainage channel, passing from the west side of Site 590 to the west side of Site 591; gaps of about 50 cm separate the stones. Because the bridge has been rebuilt in modern times, it is difficult to determine if it was originally a prehistoric construction. According to local residents, the shrine lies at a point where the Incas had erected a shrine, but no trace of this remains. Surface Finds. In addition to the surface pottery, we noted several groundstone mortars and chert scrapers and knives. We made two separate surface collections in different parts of the site (Table A78). Subsequent UMARP investigations. UMARP archaeologists mapped this site, made ten new surface collections, and excavated four stratigraphic units (one was excavated to sterile soil at a depth of 1.85 m below ground surface; the other units were excavated only as far as the top levels of an underlying EIP/ MH occupation, at depths of up to ca. 1.5 m below ground level). LeBlanc’s (1981:49–53) analyses of the excavated ceramics showed that an initial EIP/MH occupation was overlain by early LIP (Wanka I) and Late Horizon (Wanka III) occupations, with an apparent absence of late LIP (Wanka II) pottery. The UMARP surface collections indicated that EIP/MH, early LIP (Wanka I), and LH (Wanka III) ceramics extended over the entire site area. The nearby drained (ridged) fields. Ca. 100 m east of the site, on flat ground at the edge of the Tragadero marsh, is an area ca. 300 × 300 m that contains the remnants of numerous drained (ridged) fields similar to those described for Site 506 (Fig. A47). These features appear to be very old, and are probably prehispanic. The ridged fields are somewhat irregular in size and form, but generally tend to be rectangular-to-square, ca. 15–20 m long and 5–15 m wide, elevated ca. 50 cm, with low depressions between individual fields. We found no surface pottery or other artifacts on or immediately around the fields.

Earle and colleagues (1980:12–13) describe these fields as follows: This area is part of an old glacial lake floor, and the fine alluvial soils are poorly drained. Throughout the field area, a cross-cutting pattern of ditches has been dug to drain the soils. The characteristic ditch pattern [as seen in Fig. A47] consists of a row of parallel ditches 4-8 m apart that drain into a common ditch running perpendicular to smaller ditches. The common ditch then drains into one of several main ditches that eventually lead [into the] . . . lake. . . . Test excavations across the drainage channels show the well-defined edge of the artificial ditch, and in some cases several excavation stages can be discerned [in the construction of the fields].

Discussion: A small, lakeshore settlement with a long occupational history, beginning in EIP/MH and extending into early LIP, with an apparent abandonment during late LIP (Wanka II) times, and a reoccupation during the LH (Wanka III). The abundance of rock rubble probably means that there were stone-walled structures here, at least during LIP/LH times. The presence of a finely constructed stepping-stone bridge, the Inca building foundation, the high proportion of Inca ceramics, and the nearby shrine collectively suggest that this settlement may have held a particular significance for the Incas. UMARP archaeologists estimate a Wanka III population of 455–759 inhabitants. Although the ridged fields cannot be dated with any certainty, we suspect they are contemporary with the LH (Wanka III) occupation. The immediate proximity of aquatic resources in the nearby Lago Tragadero marshland suggests that these probably played a role in the economies of these settlements. Because of the encroachment of modern buildings, the northern limits of the site could not be accurately defined. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village, with drained fields SITE NO. 591 [Jau-LI-11(P), Coll. 80-P; UMARP Site No. J-3] Date of Survey: Oct. 13, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [440200 E, 8700100 N; 11.7584° S, 75.5488° W] Natural Setting: 3460 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on flat ground on the western edge of Lago Traga-

266

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A336. Site 591. Facing east overlooking site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Lago Tragadero is visible in the middle distance. The modern village of Coricancha is in the foreground. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-20)

dero (Plate A336). The site occupies a low, broad knoll of high ground ca. 5 m above the level of the marshland. There has been no erosion. Soil depth is deep. There are sparse stands of scrub brush and grass in fallow fields, and thick marsh vegetation immediately to the east. The site is near the outlet for Lago Tragadero: a stream that flows into a large sinkhole to the south. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. The modern dispersed village of Coricancha borders the western edge of the site, but does not appear to encroach significantly onto the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.0 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable light and light-to-moderate concentration. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:46) remeasured this site area as 1.7 ha. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 1.4 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, although the low knoll that supports the site may be partly, or wholly, artificial. The abundance of rock rubble in the plowed fields and piled up along modern field borders suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We noted several chert scrapers and knives. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 15 × 20 m with lightto-moderate sherd density in the central part of the site. The material is predominantly LIP, with a few Inca-style sherds. On the basis of stratigraphic excavations at this site, LeBlanc (1981:49) determined that there was definite EIP/MH (undetected by us in our surface collections) and LH (Wanka III) occupation, possible early LIP (Wanka I), and no late LIP (Wanka II). Discussion: A mixed occupation, with EIP/MH, early LIP (Wanka I), and LH (Wanka III) components. Local economies probably combined agriculture with the exploitation of aquatic resources. UMARP studies indicate that the site was abandoned during the late LIP (Wanka II). Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 592 [Jau-EI-12(P), Coll. 84-P; UMARP Site No. J-131] Date of Survey: Oct. 14, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [440400 E, 8696600 N; 11.7901° S, 75.5471° W] Natural Setting: 3465 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on flat ground on the western edge of Lago Tragadero. The site occupies a low, broad knoll of high ground elevated ca. 5 m above the level of the marshland (Plate A337). There has been no erosion. Soil depth is deep. There are sparse stands of scrub brush and grass in fallow fields, and thick marsh vegetation immediately to the east. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. The modern village of Chocon encroaches onto the southern edge of the site.

Plate A337. Site 592. Facing southwest at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-26)

Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.2 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in light-to-moderate concentration. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 1.7 ha (Hastorf 1993:229; D’Altroy 1992:191), and 2.2 ha for the EIP/MH component (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, although the low knoll that supports the site may be partly, or wholly, artificial. The abundance of rock rubble in the plowed fields and piled up along modern field borders suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We noted several chert scrapers and knives. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 25 × 25 m in the southern part of the site. The material is predominantly EIP/MH, with a trace of LIP ceramics. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. D’Altroy’s (1992:191) restudy revealed a significant LH (Wanka III) occupation at this site, which we did not detect. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation. The trace of LIP surface pottery probably derives from nearby Site 591, and does not appear to represent a significant LIP occupation at this locality. The inhabitants of this site may have combined agriculture with the exploitation of aquatic resources. D’Altroy’s restudy indicates that there was also an LH (Wanka III) settlement. The site may be slightly larger if it extends any significant distance southward below the modern village of Chocon. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 593 [Jau-EI-11(P), Coll. 81-P; UMARP Site No. J-218] Date of Survey: Oct. 13, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [440200 E, 8700100 N; 11.7584° S, 75.5488° W] Natural Setting: 3480 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the top and sides of a low, broad ridge that descends gradually northward along the southwestern shore of Lago Tragadero (Plate A338). Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil cover is medium to deep. There is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated site area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. The site area was fallow at the time of our survey, and was being used to graze sheep. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 10.4 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable light and light-to-moderate concentrations. Subsequent UMARP restudies report an overall site area of 10.2 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191), and 10.4 ha for the EIP component (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, although the low knoll that supports the site may be partly, or wholly, artificial. The abundance of rock rubble in the plowed fields and piled up along modern field borders suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 40 × 15 m in the central site area. The material is predominantly EIP/MH, with a trace of LIP and

Appendix A

Plate A338. Site 593. Facing north at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Note grazing sheep for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-22)

Inca-style ceramics. Borges (1988:69) subsequently revealed that the primary occupation here is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). D’Altroy’s (1992:191) study detected a significant LH (Wanka III) component. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, possibly combining agriculture with the exploitation of aquatic resources, probably occupied mainly during earlier EIP times. The site was apparently abandoned during the LIP and reoccupied during the LH (Wanka III). Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village SITE NO. 594 [Jau-EI-19(P), Colls. 102-P, 103-P; UMARP Site No. J-82] Date of Survey: Oct. 27, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [438000 E, 8700200 N; 11.7575° S, 75.5690° W] Natural Setting: 3690 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground along the top and sides of a long knoll elevated ca. 10–20 m above the general level of the surrounding landscape (Plate A339). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally shallow. There is little natural vegetation apart from clusters of grass and shrubs, and a few small trees, along piles of rock rubble that border modern cultivated fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 5.4 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in variable light and light-to-moderate concentrations. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the abundance of rock rubble piled up by modern farmers in and around their fields (Plate A339) suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled buildings. We also noted numerous chert scrapers and knives. We made two separate surface collections in different parts of the site (Table A79). Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, with a significant secondary LIP component. We have arbitrarily estimated an area of 1.8 ha for the LIP occupation (one-third that of the dominant EIP/MH component). Sites 594 and 595 form a pair of EIP/MH settlements in this part of northern Mantaro Valley. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 595 [Jau-EI-18(P), Colls. 100-P, 101-P; UMARP Site No. J-78] Date of Survey: Oct. 27, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [438000 E, 8699600 N; 11.7629° S, 75.5690° W] Natural Setting: 3720 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a low, broad ridge between two secondary quebradas (Plate A340). Erosion within the immediate site area has been slight to moderate; the steeper slopes below the site are severely eroded. Soil cover is medium along the broad ridge crest, and shallow on the slopes below. There is very little natural vegetation aside from grass and shrubs along rock rubble piles surrounding modern fields.

267 Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Fallow fields are used for pasturing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 4.5 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in variable light and lightto-moderate concentrations. Subsequent UMARP studies also indicate a site area of 4.5 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191), although Borges (1988:69) reports an area of 2.5 ha for the EIP/MH component. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the abundance of rock rubble piled up by modern farmers in and around their fields (Plate A341) suggests the former presence of numerous ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted a groundstone celt, a groundstone digging-stick weight, a stone hoe, and several chert knives and scrapers. The slopes below the site to the west are extensively terraced—these stone-faced terraces are obviously old, but their age is uncertain. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A80). In her subsequent restudy, Borges (1988:69) found that the EIP/ MH occupation is primarily early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). D’Altroy (1992:191) reports a very modest LH (Wanka III) occupation here. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, probably occupied primarily during the earlier EIP. Sites 595 and 594 form a pair of EIP/MH settlements in this part of the northern Mantaro Valley. The significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery is uncertain, although D’Altroy’s indication of a Wanka III occupation suggests that it is largely Wanka III. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Hamlet

Plate A339. Site 594. Facing northwest at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-15) Table A79. JASP surface collections at Site 594. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

102-P

ca. 15 × 15 m, in plowed field ca. 15 × 25 m, in plowed field

light-to-moderate

primarily EIP/MH, plus traces of LIP primarily EIP/MH, plus minor LIP

103-P

light-to-moderate

Plate A340. Sites 595 and 472. Facing northeast at sites. Arrows indicate approximate site centers. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-19)

268

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A341. Site 595. Facing south over site. Note stone rubble piled along edges of modern cultivated fields. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-13) Table A80. JASP surface collections at Site 595. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

100-P

20 × 20 m, northern sector ca. 20 × 20 m, southwestern sector

light-to-moderate

all EIP/MH

light-to-moderate

mostly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP

101-P

SITE NO. 596 [Jau-LI-16(P), Unit 77-P, Colls. 106-P, 107-P; UMARP Site No. J-8] Date of Survey: Oct. 29, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [436700 E, 8699400 N; 11.7647° S, 75.5810° W] Natural Setting: 3800 masl, in the uppermost kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a prominent hill (Plate A342) on the northern side of the deeply entrenched Quishurcancha subvalley, a northern tributary of the Mantaro Valley. To the west there is a very steep descent of ca. 300 m to the bottom of the Quishurcancha gorge. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow. There is little natural vegetation except for clusters of grass, shrubs, and cactus along rock rubble piled up along the edges of modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Rainfall based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Fallow fields are used for pasturing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 6.5 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery, lithic artifacts, and poorly preserved ancient architecture. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:423) remeasured this site area as 5.9 ha. Hastorf (1993:230) reports an area of 5.4 ha for the Wanka II component of this site. D’Altroy (1992:191) also reports an overall site area of 5.4 ha. Structural Remains. Most of the site’s prehispanic architecture has been destroyed by modern farmers in their efforts to clear their fields for plow cultivation. Amorphous masses of rock rubble are piled up throughout the site, usually along the edges of modern fields (Plate A343). The abundance of this rubble suggests that there were once a large number of nucleated ancient stone-walled buildings at this locality. Despite the destruction, several surviving remnants indicate that the structures were circular, measuring 3–6 m in diameter, constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar (Plate A344). We estimate that there were originally roughly 50–100 of these structures, most of them probably residential in function. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in variable light and light-to-moderate concentrations. We also noted numerous stone hoes and several chert scrapers and knives. We made two separate surface collections in different parts of the site (Table A81). In her subsequent restudy based on eight new surface collections, LeBlanc (1981:423) determined the presence of a possible Wanka II (late LIP) occupation and a definite Wanka III (LH) occupation. Discussion: A substantial LIP/LH occupation. LeBlanc’s restudy indicates that the Wanka II occupation is questionable, and so this may be an entirely LH settlement. However, Hastorf’s (1993:230) designation of this site as a late

(top) Plate A342. Site 596. Facing northwest toward hilltop site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-24) (middle) Plate A343. Site 596. Facing northeast across top of site. Note Site 427 on hilltop in background. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-20) (bottom) Plate A344. Site 596. Circular structure, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-22) Table A81. JASP surface collections at Site 596. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

106-P

ca. 20 × 35 m, in northern sector ca. 20 × 20 m, in southern sector

light-to-moderate, in fallow field light-to-moderate, in fallow field

mostly LIP, plus trace of EIP/MH all LIP

107-P

LIP (Wanka II) occupation suggests that there is still some question about the precise chronology. We are uncertain about the significance of the trace of EIP/ MH surface pottery in one of our surface collections. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP (?): Wanka II Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village

Appendix A

269

Plate A345. Site 597. Facing south over area of surface collection, with archaeologist seated at center-right. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-18)

Plate A346. Site 598. Facing north over area of site, with Lago Tragadero at center-right in middle distance. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-32)

SITE NO. 597 [Jau-LI-17(P), Coll. 105-P; UMARP Site No. J-42] Date of Survey: Oct. 29, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [437800 E, 8698700 N; 11.7710° S, 75.5709° W] Natural Setting: 3760 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the crest and upper slopes of a long, broad ridge. To the south and east there are steep descents into the deeply incised gorge of the Río Mantaro, ca. 300 m below. Erosion has been slight to moderate in the immediate site area, but more severe on the slopes below. Soil depth is shallow, with some bedrock outcrops. There is little natural vegetation apart from grass and shrubs along concentrations of rock rubble piled up on modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Several fields had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Fallow fields serve as livestock pasture. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.3 ha is defined by the distribution of abundant rock rubble and surface pottery in variable light and very light concentrations. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:428) remeasured this site area as 2.6 ha. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports a site area of 3.3 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the abundance of rock rubble piled up by modern farmers along and within their fields (Plate A345) attests to the former presence of numerous ancient stone-walled buildings. We also noted several stone hoes and chert knives. We made a single surface collection from an area of ca. 30 × 40 m on the northern side of the site. This material is predominantly LIP, with a trace of Inca-style ceramics. In her subsequent restudy based on two new surface collections, LeBlanc (1981:229, 428) found a possible Wanka II (late LIP) occupation, a definite Wanka III (LIP/LH) occupation, and a mixture of Colonial/Modern material. UMARP studies included two surface collections that covered about 50% of the site: Collections 42 = 1 and 42 = 2. Collection 42 = 1 yielded 154 total diagnostic sherds: 33 (31.4%) Inca, 2 (1.3%) Wanka-Inca, and 27 (17.5%) Wanka III types. Collection 42 = 2 yielded 366 diagnostic sherds: 110 Inca (30.1%), 5 (1.4%) Wanka-Inca, and 50 (13.6%) Wanka III types. Discussion: A substantial Wanka III (LH) occupation. UMARP studies suggest an LH population of 297–495 inhabitants. It is also possible that the settlement continued to be occupied, or was resettled, during early Colonial times. The status of a Wanka II occupation is uncertain. Classification: LIP (?): Wanka II Small Village (??) LH: Wanka III Small Village

There is very little natural vegetation aside from sparse concentrations of grass and shrubs along modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields serve for pasturing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.9 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of light surface pottery. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 3.4 ha (Hastorf 1993:229) and 3.9 ha for the EIP/MH component (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the general abundance of rock rubble along modern field borders suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes and groundstone digging-stick weights, plus several chert knives and scrapers. We made a single surface collection over an area of ca. 15 × 15 m in the central site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) subsequently found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, whose inhabitants probably combined agriculture with the exploitation of aquatic resources. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village

SITE NO. 598 [Jau-EI-13(P), Coll. 86-P; UMARP Site No. J-217] Date of Survey: Oct. 14, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [441000 E, 8698700 N; 11.7711° S, 75.5415° W] Natural Setting: 3480 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground at the lower end of a broad, low ridge that borders the southwestern shore of Lago Tragadero (Plate A346). Erosion has been slight to nonexistent. Soil depth is medium to deep.

SITE NO. 599 [Jau-EI-17(P), Unit 71-P; UMARP Site No. J-51] Date of Survey: Oct. 12, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [441200 E, 8699100 N; 11.7675° S, 75.5397° W] Natural Setting: 3460 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on flat ground on the southwestern shore of Lago Tragadero, on the main floor of the Yanamarca Valley. The site occupies a low, broad knoll elevated ca. 3 m above the level of the adjacent marshland (Plate A347). There has been no erosion. Soil depth is deep. There are sparse stands of scrub brush and grass in fallow fields, and thick marsh vegetation immediately to the north and east. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.8 ha is defined by surface pottery, a few lithic artifacts, and an architectural remnant. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:434) remeasured this site area as 0.4 ha. Hastorf (1993:230) reports a site area of 0.4 ha for the Wanka I component of the site. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 0.7 ha. The scarcity of rock rubble suggests a general absence of ancient stonewalled architecture. Structural Remains. A single, oval-shaped mound, measuring ca. 6 × 3 m in area, and standing ca. 2 m high (Plate A348). The mound has a substantial cover of rock rubble (the only significant concentration of rock rubble at the site), and light surface pottery. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs on and around the mound feature described above in variable light and very light concentration. We also noted a few crude chert knives and scrapers. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. There are few diagnostic sherds, but all the material appears to be LIP.

270

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A347. Site 599. Facing northwest over site at edge of Lago Tragadero. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Note Site 472 on hilltop above. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-10)

Plate A349. Site 600. Facing east over area of site. Arrow points to mound group. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-17)

Plate A348. Site 599. Mound feature, with archaeologist atop for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-11)

Plate A350. Site 601. Facing south over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-29)

In her subsequent restudy based on two new “excavated surface collections” from the eastern and northern sides of the mound, LeBlanc (1981:229, 434) identified two occupational components: “probable” Wanka I (early LIP) and Wanka III (LH). However, Hastorf (1993:229) reports an EIP/MH component that measures 0.4 ha in area. D’Altroy (1990:35) also reports an EIP/MH component. UMARP studies estimate a small LH population of 16–26 inhabitants. Discussion: A small Wanka I and Wanka III occupation, with a small EIP/ MH antecedent. Apparently this locality was first occupied in EIP/MH times, with continued settlement into Wanka I, then abandonment during Wanka II, and reoccupation during Wanka III. The function of the mound feature is uncertain. During the Late Horizon it may have functioned as a platform for the performance of lakeside ritual, but it might have had a different function during Wanka I times. The apparent absence of stone-walled structures, apart from this mound, suggests an absence of permanent residential occupation over most of the site. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet LIP: Wanka I Hamlet LH: Wanka III Hamlet

The general abundance of rock rubble in the plowed fields suggests the former presence of additional stone-walled structures that can no longer be detected from the ground surface. Structural Remains. Three mounds are clustered within an area ca. 35 m in diameter in the central site area. Two of the mounds are very closely spaced, forming a unit ca. 14 m long, 1–3 m wide, and standing 1.5–2 m high. The third mound, slightly to the west of the other two, measures ca. 4 m in diameter and 2 m high. These structures appear to be constructed of earth and rock rubble. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site area in light concentration. We also noted several crude chert knives and scrapers. We made a single surface collection over an area ca. 15 × 15 m between the lakeshore and the mound group described above. This material is primarily LIP, with traces of EIP/MH and Inca-style ceramics. In her subsequent restudy based on six new surface collections well spaced throughout the site, LeBlanc (1981:433–34) found a mixture of Wanka I (early LIP), Wanka III (LH), and Colonial/Modern ceramics. D’Altroy’s (1992:191) restudy also revealed the presence of LH (Wanka III) material. Borges’ restudy (1988:69) detected a significant early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase) occupation. Discussion: A modest Wanka I and Wanka III lakeshore occupation, apparently with EIP/MH antecedents, whose inhabitants may have undertaken both agriculture and the exploitation of aquatic resources. Apparently the site was abandoned during Wanka II times and reoccupied during the Late Horizon. UMARP studies suggest a Wanka III population in the range of 144–240 inhabitants. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

SITE NO. 600 [Jau-EI-15(P), Unit 70-P, Coll. 78-P; UMARP Site No. J-50] Date of Survey: Oct. 12, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [445400 E, 8699800 N; 11.7612° S, 75.5011° W] Natural Setting: 3460 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site occupies nearly level ground atop a low, broad knoll elevated ca. 2 m above the nearby marshland on the southern shore of Lago Tragadero (Plate A349). There has been no erosion. Soil depth is deep. There are sparse stands of scrub brush and grass in fallow fields, and thick marsh vegetation immediately to the north and east. Modern Land Use: The immediate site area is devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.2 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery, rock rubble, and ancient architecture. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 1.3 ha (LeBlanc 1981:433); an overall site area of 1.6 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191–92); and 1.7 ha for the EIP component (J-229) (Borges 1988:69).

SITE NO. 601 [Jau-LI-13(P), Unit 73-P, Coll. 85-P; UMARP Site No. J-43] Date of Survey: Oct. 14, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [440500 E, 8697600 N; 11.7810° S, 75.5461° W] Natural Setting: 3630 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground on the top and upper slopes of a prominent hill (Plate A350) on the southwest edge of the Yanamarca Valley. Immediately to the south the terrain descends steeply into the gorge of the deeply entrenched Río Mantaro, ca. 175 m below. Erosion has

Appendix A been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow. There is a scanty cover of grass, shrubs, and cactus. Modern Land Use: Mixed sheep pasture and rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers in small fields that have been cleared of rock rubble. The shallow soil makes this an agriculturally marginal area. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 10.1 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of surface pottery in light and light-to-moderate concentration. A few years after our survey, LeBlanc (1981:429) remeasured this site area as 1.8 ha. D’Altroy (1992:191) reports a site area of 1.9 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the abundance of rock rubble on the surfaces of cultivated fields and piled up around their borders attests to the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. Several circular rubble mounds look like buried structures, but no wall faces are preserved on the surface. We also noted several chert knives and scrapers, and some groundstone fragments. There are remnants of several old-looking stone-faced terraces, ca. 2–4 m wide, in the steeper, lowermost section of the site. Their age is uncertain, but they may be prehispanic. We made one surface collection from an area of ca. 10 × 15 m in the southeastern part of the site. The material is predominantly LIP, with a few EIP/MH sherds. On the basis of two new surface collections, LeBlanc (1981:429) inferred a Late Horizon (Wanka III) and Colonial/Modern occupation at this site. UMARP studies did not detect an EIP/MH component. Discussion: The great discrepancy between JASP and UMARP site-area measurements poses a major interpretive problem. It is possible that the UMARP site was defined only as the LH component. In any case, this seems to be a predominantly LH occupation, with a possible minor EIP/MH component. The status of the EIP/MH occupation is uncertain, especially because subsequent UMARP studies did not detect it. UMARP archaeologists suggest a Wanka III population of 147–244 inhabitants. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Hamlet LH: Wanka III Large Village (?) SITE NO. 602 [Jau-EI-3(P), Colls. 68-P, 69-P; UMARP Site No. J-203] Date of Survey: Oct. 7, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [442900 E, 8697600 N; 11.7811° S, 75.5241° W] Natural Setting: 3510 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground near the base of a broad ridge, ca. 750 m west of Lago Tragadero (Plate A351). Erosion has been slight. Soil depth is medium. There is little natural vegetation except for sparse grass and a few low shrubs. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey, while some fields were fallow. Fallow fields are used to pasture livestock. The modern village of Pachascucho encroaches onto the edge of the site from the southwest. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 8.0 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light to light concentrations. The sherd density is higher in the eastern part of the site. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 5.5 ha for both the EIP/MH and Wanka I components (Hastorf 1993:229–30); 8.0 ha for the EIP/MH and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69–70); and an overall site area of 5.5 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191). There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled architecture. We also noted a few chert knives and scrapers. We made two separate surface collections in different parts of the site (Table A82). Borges (1988:69) reports both Huacrapukio 1 and 2 phases here. Hastorf (1993:230) and D’Altroy (1992:191) report significant early LIP (Wanka I) and LH (Wanka III) occupations at this site, which we did not originally detect. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, probably with continued occupation into the early LIP (Wanka I), abandonment during late LIP (Wanka II), and reoccupation during the LH (Wanka III). This site is part of a sizable cluster of EIP/MH occupation on the eastern side of Lago Tragadero (Sites 431, 435, 601–605). The apparent absence of ancient stone-walled architecture may indicate either short-term occupation, or house construction using adobe or wattle and daub.

271

Plate A351. Site 602. Facing south over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 38-20) Table A82. JASP surface collections at Site 602. Coll. No.

Area

68-P 69-P

ca. 15 × 15 m, in eastern site area ca. 15 × 15 m, in central site area on ridge crest

Sherd Density Chronology light light

all EIP/MH all EIP/MH

Plate A352. Site 603. Facing south over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 38-19)

Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Wanka I Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village SITE NO. 603 [Jau-EI-2(P), Coll. 67-P; UMARP Site No. J-202] Date of Survey: Oct. 7, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [443500 E, 8700300 N; 11.7567° S, 75.5186° W] Natural Setting: 3510 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the top and sides of a broad ridge just above the point where it merges onto the valley floor (Plate A352). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is medium to deep. There is little natural vegetation. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Most of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.3 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light and light concentrations. Hastorf (1993:229–30) and Borges (1988:69) report the same site area for both the EIP/ MH and Wanka I components. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests a lack of ancient stone-walled structures.

272

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 50 × 50 m in the central site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) subsequently found that the primary occupation here is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). Hastorf (1993:230) reports a significant early LIP (Wanka I) occupation here, one that we did not originally detect. Discussion: A small EIP/MH settlement, part of a substantial cluster of EIP/ MH occupation on the eastern side of Lago Tragadero (Sites 431, 435, 602– 605). Occupation apparently continues into the early LIP (Wanka I). The apparent absence of ancient stone-walled architecture may indicate either short-term occupation, or house construction using adobe or wattle and daub. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP (?): Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 604 [Jau-EI-16(P), Coll. 79-P; UMARP Site No. J-201] Date of Survey: Oct. 12, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [442700 E, 8699700 N; 11.7621° S, 75.5259° W] Natural Setting: 3460 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on level ground on the valley floor, ca. 350 m east of Lago Tragadero (Plate A353). Erosion has been minimal to nonexistent. Soil depth is deep. There is virtually no natural vegetation. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.0 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in light concentration. D’Altroy (1992:191, 2001:89) reports an overall site area of 1.5 ha. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the general abundance of rock rubble in the plowed fields suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material appears to be mixed EIP/MH and LIP, although many of the sherds were of types unknown to us. Subsequent restudy by D’Altroy (1992:191, 2001:89) revealed a significant late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) occupation, which we did not originally detect. Discussion: A small occupation, apparently with both EIP/MH and LH components. The possibly “foreign” provenance of the “unknown” ceramics is intriguing. Any stone-walled structures that may once have existed here probably date to the LH. The EIP/MH component of this site is part of a substantial cluster of EIP/MH occupation on the eastern side of Lago Tragadero (Sites 431, 435, 602–605). Classification: EIP/MH (?): Small Village LIP: Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

Lago Tragadero. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is medium to deep. There is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Much of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. A major earth terrace measuring ca. 15 m wide and 3 m high, of unknown age, extends across the length of the site. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.2 ha is defined by the distribution of light surface pottery. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 2.2 ha for the EIP/MH component, and 3.2 ha for the Wanka I component (Hastorf 1993:229), and 3.2 ha for the EIP and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69–70). There are no remains of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made a single collection from an area ca. 20 × 15 m in the central site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Borges’ (1988:69) subsequent restudy identified early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase) as the dominant occupation. Hastorf (1993:230) reports a significant early LIP (Wanka I) occupation here, which we did not originally detect. Discussion: A modest EIP/MH occupation, part of a substantial cluster of EIP/MH settlement on the eastern side of Lago Tragadero (Sites 431, 435, 602–605). Occupation apparently continued into the early LIP (Wanka I). Aquatic resources and a naturally high water table were probably significant factors in the local economy. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP (?): Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 606 [Jau-EI-15(H), Unit 64-H, Colls. 75-H, 76-H, 77-H, 78-H, 79-H; UMARP Site No. J-221] Date of Survey: Nov. 1, 1975 Location: Hojas Parco and Jauja [445400 E, 8699800 N; 11.7612° S, 75.5011° W] Natural Setting: 3425 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground on the top and upper sides of a broad bluff elevated ca. 20 m above the nearby valley floor (Plate A355). Erosion has been slight. Soil depth is medium to deep. There is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area.

SITE NO. 605 [Jau-EI-4(P), Coll. 70-P; UMARP Site No. J-200] Date of Survey: Oct. 8, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [443000 E, 8699600 N; 11.7630° S, 75.5232° W] Natural Setting: 3490 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground at the base of a hillslope at the edge of the valley floor (Plate A354), ca. 750 m east of the Plate A354. Site 605. Facing south over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 38-23)

Plate A353. Site 604. Facing northwest over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-12)

Plate A355. Site 606. Facing southeast over area of Collection H. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 37-21)

Appendix A

273

Table A83. JASP surface collections at Site 606. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

75-H 76-H 77-H 78-H 79-H

west-central site area northeastern sector of site east-central sector of site south-central sector of site southeastern sector of site

light, in plowed field light, in plowed field very light, in plowed field light-to-moderate, from slope at edge of site very light, in plowed fields

all EIP/MH mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP mainly EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP mostly LIP, plus trace of EIP/MH and trace of Inca-style pottery some local LIP, but most sherds unknown to us

Modern Land Use: Intensive rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Much of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. The modern town of Jauja encroaches onto the southeastern edge of the site. Modern plowing and building construction have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 14.0 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light, light, and light-to-moderate concentrations. The uneven distribution of surface pottery density may indicate individual houses separated by cultivated areas. Subsequent UMARP restudies report a site area of 10.0 ha for both the EIP/MH and Wanka I components (Hastorf 1993:229–30); 14.0 ha for the EIP and Wanka I components (Borges 1988:69); and an overall site area of 10.0 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191). There are no remains of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted four stone hoes in different parts of the site. We made five separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A83). Hastorf (1993:230) reports a significant early LIP (Wanka I) occupation here, one that we did not originally detect. D’Altroy’s (1992:191) subsequent restudy revealed a significant LH (Wanka III) component. Borges (1988:69) reports a significant EH and EIP/MH (Huacrapukio 1 and 2 phases) occupation. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH settlement, apparently with roots in the EH, and with occupation continuing into the early LIP (Wanka I). The site was apparently abandoned during the late LIP (Wanka II) and reoccupied during LH (Wanka III) times. The significance of the unknown (to us) surface pottery in Collection 79-H obviously needs to be further investigated. Because of modern occupation, the site’s southeastern limits could not be properly defined. This site is part of an EIP/MH settlement cluster atop the same low bluff overlooking the modern town of Jauja (see also Sites 607, 608, 609, 610). This site is also part of an apparent loose cluster of sites where EH occupation definitely, or possibly, occurs (see also Sites 416, 423, 505, 509, 558, 583, 609, 617, 621, 623)—in our original survey, we detected EH occupation only at Sites 509 and 623. Classification: EH: ? EIP/MH: Very Large Village LIP: Wanka I Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village SITE NO. 607 [Jau-EI-5(P), Coll. 71-P] Date of Survey: Oct. 8, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [444600 E, 8699600 N; 11.7630° S, 75.5085° W] Natural Setting: 3520 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on the lower slopes of a large ridge. Erosion in the site area itself has been moderate, but the site’s eastern and western sides are bordered by severely eroded terrain (Plate A356). Soil depth is shallow to medium. Uncultivated areas have a medium cover of grass, cactus, and low shrubs. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.6 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of very light surface pottery. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture. However, the site area contains three broad, stone-faced terraces, each measuring ca. 20 m wide and 2.5 m high. The facing of these terraces is constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar. The antiquity of the terraces is uncertain, but they are obviously quite old, and the care with which they have been constructed suggests that they may be prehispanic.

Plate A356. Site 607. Facing east over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 38-25)

We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Discussion: A modest EIP/MH occupation. We suspect the terracing is contemporaneous with the surface pottery. However, if the terraces are post-EIP/MH, then their construction may have obliterated whatever stone-walled structures may previously have existed here. This site is part of an EIP/MH settlement cluster atop the same low bluff overlooking the modern town of Jauja (see also Sites 606, 608, 609, 610). Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 607-A (Un-recorded as a JASP storage facility; UMARP Site No. J-226) Date of Survey: Oct. 8, 1975; UMARP resurvey in 1986 Location: Hoja Parco [444700 E, 8699700 N; 11.7621° S, 75.5075° W] Natural Setting: 3500 masl, on gently sloping ground in the lower kichwa zone, on the east slope of a hill overlooking the north end of the main Mantaro Valley, about 3.4 km north of Hátun Xauxa (Site 550). Modern Land Use: The site lies at the edge of a cultivated plateau (rainfallbased agriculture), on which the principal crop is potatoes. Below the site, the fields are largely cultivated in maize. Erosion around the site is moderate on the slope and slight elsewhere. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of three lines of circular stone storage buildings (colcas) paralleling the topographic contours (Fig. A48), with surface pottery in trace to very light concentrations. Structural Remains. We estimate an original total of 37 structures at this site, 1 of which is rectangular and the remainder circular. Only 29 of these buildings could be clearly identified from surface remains, the prior existence of the other 8 being inferred from gaps in the lines and the distribution of rock rubble (Table A84). The structures’ preservation is generally poor, as only the foundations remain; most of these lie almost flush with the ground surface. The masonry of the structures is standard pirka, fieldstone set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles; the rock fragments are not noticeably dressed. Entrances have not been preserved in any structure, and it was not possible to determine on which side they were located. No other architectural features have been preserved. The

274

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru colcas rest on cultivated, stone-faced terraces, about 1.0–1.5 m high. It seems likely that these were used for agriculture at the time that the site was occupied, because the placement of the colcas on the terraces indicates that the terraces were built prior to the storehouses. Surface Finds. We made one surface collection along the middle line of structures in an area of trace to very light sherd density. The material was dominated by EIP/MH types, although a very few Inca-style sherds were recovered. Discussion: This site has two components: a small EIP/MH hamlet (Site 607) and an Inca state storage facility (Site 607-A). The original JASP survey did not recognize the storage facility, and UMARP archaeologists did not identify it until the 1986 resurvey of the region. No Wanka III community is associated with the storehouses. This site lies in a string of Inca state storage facilities along the hillslopes between the Yanamarca and Mantaro Valleys, and is comparable in layout and positioning to Site 546 (UMARP J-15) above Hátun Xauxa. Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class E

Figure A48. Site 607-A, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map). Table A84. Colcas at Site 607-A. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular total identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

Number Volume 37 36 1 29 28 1 8 8 0

1861 m3 1824 m3 37 m3 1477 m3 1440 m3 37 m3 384 m3 384 m3 0

Plate A357. Site 608. Facing southeast over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Modern town of Jauja is at center-left. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-3)

SITE NO. 608 [Jau-EI-22(P), Coll. 110-P; UMARP Site No. J-224] Date of Survey: Nov. 2, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [444600 E, 8699200 N; 11.7666° S, 75.5085° W] Natural Setting: 3590 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on a severely eroded side of a large ridge. The site occupies a narrow ridge spur between two shallow quebradas (Plate A357). Erosion has been severe, especially along the eastern and western sides of the site, with some bedrock exposures. Soil depth is shallow. There is a sparse cover of grass and low shrubs. Modern Land Use: Marginal rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.7 ha is defined by the distribution of light surface pottery. Subsequent UMARP restudies report an overall site area of 1.4 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191), and 1.8 ha for the EIP component (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled architecture. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 10 × 15 m in the central site area. The material is very predominantly EIP/MH, with a trace of LIP ceramics. Borges’ (1988:69) subsequent restudy indicated that the primary EIP occupation dates to the Huacrapukio 1 phase. D’Altroy (1992:191) detected a significant LH (Wanka III) occupation. Discussion: A modest EIP/MH occupation, with a reoccupation of this locality during LH (Wanka III) times. This site is part of an EIP/MH settlement cluster atop the same low bluff overlooking the modern town of Jauja (see also Sites 606, 607, 609, 610). The site was apparently abandoned during LIP times. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 609 [Jau-EI-23(P), Coll. 111-P; UMARP Site No. J-223] Date of Survey: Nov. 2, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [445440 E, 8699200 N; 11.7667° S, 75.5008° W] Natural Setting: 3410 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the top and sides of a broad bluff elevated ca. 5–10 m above the level of the adjacent valley floor (Plate A358). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium (a road cut along the western side of the site shows a soil depth of 30–50 cm). There is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Fallow fields are used for grazing livestock. The modern town of Jauja encroaches onto the northern and eastern sides of the site. Modern plowing and building have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.9 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in very light and light concentrations. Hastorf (1993:229) and D’Altroy (1992:191) report a site area of 4.3 ha. Borges (1988:69) reports an area of 5.8 ha for the EH and EIP/MH components. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:69) detected both Huacrapukio 1 and 2 phases, and she also found a significant EH occupation that was not apparent to us

Appendix A

Plate A358. Site 609. Facing east over site, with archaeologist at center-left. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Houses at edge of modern Jauja are visible just beyond the site. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-4)

(1988:56). D’Altroy’s (1992:191) subsequent restudy revealed an LH (Wanka III) component, which we did not detect. We suspect that the LH material here derives primarily from the proximity of the nearby Inca provincial center at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550). Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, apparently with EH antecedents. This site is part of an apparent loose cluster of sites where EH occupation definitely, or possibly, occurs (see also Sites 416, 423, 505, 509, 558, 583, 606, 617, 621, 623)—in our original survey, we detected EH occupation only at Sites 509 and 623. We are puzzled by the comparatively large discrepancy between the JASP and UMARP estimates of site area. This site is part of an EIP/MH settlement cluster atop the same low bluff overlooking the modern town of Jauja (see also Sites 606, 607, 608, 610). This locality was apparently reoccupied during LH (Wanka III) times. Because of modern occupation, we could not properly define the site’s eastern limits. Classification: EH: ? EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village SITE NO. 610 [Jau-EI-21(P), Colls. 108-P, 109-P; UMARP Site No. J-225] Date of Survey: Nov. 1, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [445100 E, 8698900 N; 11.7694° S, 75.5039° W] Natural Setting: 3460 masl, in the lower kichwa on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and uppermost sides of a broad ridge above the modern town of Jauja (Plate A359). Erosion has been moderate within the site area, but the bordering terrain along the site’s western and northern sides is severely eroded. The site occupies a tongue of less eroded land in this highly dissected area. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Parts of the site had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 5.8 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable light and light-to-moderate concentration. In her subsequent restudy, Borges (1988:69) measured the site area as 2.7 ha for the EIP component. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A85). Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH settlement. Borges’ (1988:69) subsequent restudy indicated that the primary occupation is early EIP (Huacrapukio 1 phase). The significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery is uncertain. This site is part of an EIP/MH settlement cluster atop the same low bluff overlooking the modern town of Jauja (see also Sites 606, 607, 608, 609). Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: ?

275

Plate A359. Site 610. Facing south over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. Modern town of Jauja is at left. (UMMA Neg. No. 42-1) Table A85. JASP surface collections at Site 610. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

108-P 109-P

ca. 15 × 25 m ca. 20 × 25 m

light, in plowed field light, in plowed field

all EIP/MH primarily EIP/MH, plus trace of LIP

SITE NO. 611 [Jau-LI-14(P)/Jau-LH-4(P), Units 72-P, 79-P; “Huancas de la Cruz”; UMARP Site Nos. J-13, J-59] Date of Survey: Oct. 18, 1975; Nov. 1, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [445100 E, 8697400 N; 11.7829° S, 75.5039° W] Natural Setting: 3680 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper slopes of a prominent hill on the side of a large ridge, overlooking the modern town of Jauja (Plates A360, A361) ca. 1.7 km to the southeast. There are surviving springs on the hillslope ca. 200 m to the northwest. Erosion has been slight to moderate within much of the site, but severe along the western side. Soil depth is shallow to medium. The natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area is limited to a few low shrubs and cacti around the remains of ancient stone architecture. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Sections of the hillslope have been terraced—both earth- and stone-faced terraces are present; their age is indeterminate. Modern plowing, field clearing, and (possibly) terrace building have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 12.9 ha is defined by the presence of prehispanic architecture, surface pottery, and lithic artifacts. UMARP archaeologists subsequently remeasured this site as 9.0 ha and estimated its Wanka III population at 800–1400 (Costin 1986:29) and 900–1600 inhabitants (Russell 1988:104; Earle et al. 1987:11). D’Altroy (1992:191) reports an overall site area of 11.2 ha. UMARP distinguished two sites here: J-13, the colca component; and J-59, the residential component (Fig. A49). The JASP survey combined these into a single site. Structural Remains. With the exception of one structure excavated in 1983 (Earle et al. 1987:77–78), all structures at this site have been destroyed or badly disturbed. General. Much of the site surface has abundant rock rubble, either piled up along field borders or within the cultivated fields (designated by UMARP as Site J-59). This amorphous rubble probably represents the remnants of ancient stone-walled structures destroyed in the course of modern land use. Using a density of 50 buildings per hectare, derived from better-preserved Wanka III sites, such as Hatunmarca (Site 472) and Chucchus (Site 555), UMARP archaeologists estimate that 575 buildings (apart from the colcas) were once present. These were apparently arranged into standard Wanka patio groups; masonry was typical limestone pirka, with mud and pebble mortar. Inca colcas (UMARP Site J-13). This comprises a line of 35 rectangular structures (Table A86) (Fig. A49; Plates A361, A362). Architectural preservation is good, as each structure is clearly visible on the surface. Some walls stand over 2.0 m high, with the maximum height of preserved wall being 3.05 m (exterior)

276

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

(top) Plate A360. Site 611. Facing east over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 40-2) (bottom) Plate A361. Site 611. Facing east overlooking line of colcas in eastern part of site (line of colcas indicated by arrow). Modern town of Jauja is below the site, on right. (UMMA Neg. No. 39-37)

(top) Plate A362. Site 611. Facing north along eastern side of site. Arrow points to line of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-33) (bottom) Plate A363. Site 611. Example of rectangular colca, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-34)

Figure A49. Sites 611, 612, 613, site plan showing colcas (UMARP map).

Table A86. Colcas at Site 611. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular

Table A87. JASP surface collections at Site 611.

Number Volume 35 0 35

2758 m 0 2758 m3 3

Coll. No.

Area

Chronology

Unit 72-P from site as a whole mainly LIP, plus trace of Inca-style pottery Unit 79-P ca. 10 × 30 m, along upper edge of Inca colcas mainly LIP, plus light Inca-style pottery

Appendix A on the downhill side (Plate A363). A gap of 25 m, through which a modern road passes, lies between the 4 rectangular structures at the north end and the other 31 buildings. It may be the case that other structures once existed in this gap, but no rubble or other indication of a foundation remains on the ground surface. The masonry consists of uncoursed limestone rocks, set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles; the walls were smoothly finished interior and exterior. Although no entrances are preserved, they may have been located in the uphill (west) walls, because this side of the buildings was consistently broken down, in contrast to the downhill side. The colcas are located on a stone-faced terrace extending over a distance of ca. 350 m parallel to the topographic contours through the lower, eastern section of the site—one of a series of terraces descending the slopes to the east. The colcas are not structurally joined to the supporting terrace, but the placement of the buildings on the terrace surface shows that the terraces were built prior to, or at the same time as, the colcas. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in variable very light, light, and lightto-moderate densities. The highest densities occur in the higher, western part of the site, above the line of colcas. Surface pottery is quite sparse in the immediate vicinity of the colcas. We also noted several stone hoes and groundstone manos. We made two separate surface collections from the residential (non-colca) part of the site (Table A87). Several years after our survey, UMARP archaeologists made one additional surface collection at this site (their Site No. J-59). LeBlanc (1981:228–29) reports that all this material dates to Wanka III (LH). Subsequent UMARP analysis showed that this collection yielded 427 diagnostic sherds, of which 156 (36.5%) were Inca or Wanka-Inca. Discussion: A substantial LH (Wanka III) settlement, closely associated with three Inca storage facilities (besides UMARP Site J-13 designated as part of Site 611, Site 612 [UMARP Site J-12] and 613 [UMARP Site J-14]). The inhabitants of the site were probably involved in provisioning and maintaining these storage facilities in close proximity to the Inca provincial center at Hátun Xausa (Site 550). The colca component of this site is one of a series of closely spaced Inca storage facilities (Sites 611, 612, 613) situated along the hills above the Hátun Xauxa Inca center (Site 550). Its size, layout, and association with a Wanka habitation occupation are characteristic of some storage sites not directly associated with the Inca administrative center at Hátun Xauxa. It forms a part of three storehouse facilities associated with a Wanka village that was newly established during the Inca occupation of this region. The closest Inca storage facilities are Sites 612 (UMARP J-12) and Site 613 (UMARP J-14), which are 150 m downhill (east) and 350 m south along the same contour as Site 611 (UMARP J-11), respectively (Fig. A49). At the north end of the Site 611 colca line are the remains of three or four rectangular buildings, offset from the main line and separate from the habitation area. Architecturally they are comparable to colcas in the region. They may have served an administrative function for the stored goods, or they may have been used for storage themselves. Their potential storage volume has not been included in the totals shown in Table A86. Classification: LH: Wanka III Very Large Village, and Inca Storage Facility, Class E. SITE NO. 612 [Jau-LH-5(P), Unit 80-P; UMARP Site No. J-12] Date of Survey: Nov. 1, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [445100 E, 8697700 N; 11.7802° S, 75.5039° W] Natural Setting: 3600 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the lower slopes of a major ridge overlooking the modern town of Jauja ca. 1.7 km to the southeast. Erosion has been slight to moderate within much of the site, but severe along the northern side. Soil depth is medium. The natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area is limited to a few low shrubs and cacti around the remains of ancient stone architecture. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: This site consists of a single line of stone storage buildings (colcas) and rock rubble, with traces of surface pottery; the site area is ca. 0.2 ha. (Fig. A49).

277

(top) Plate A364. Site 612. Facing south along line of colcas, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-35) (bottom) Plate A365. Site 612. Example of rectangular colca, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-36) Table A88. Colcas at Site 612. Colcas estimated total circular rectangular identifiable circular rectangular estimated additional circular rectangular

Number Volume 60 9 51 57 6 51 3 3 0

4048 m3 542 m3 3506 m3 3876 m3 361 m3 3506 m3 181 m3 181 m3 0

Structural Remains. Fifty-seven stone structures can be identified on the ground surface and an additional 3 are estimated to have been present, judging from gaps in the line and the presence of rock rubble. There are 9 circular structures at the northern end and 51 rectangular structures at the southern end, with no intermingling of shapes (Table A88). The overall architectural preservation is fair to good, although the far northern end and sections of the southern half have deteriorated badly (Plate A364). In the better-preserved part of the site, the highest standing wall is 3.85 m (Plate A365). The rectangular structures were better preserved than the circular buildings, of which only foundations remain. The structures are generally evenly spaced, about 2.5 m apart, but two larger, rubble-free gaps of 12 m and 19 m are located in the rectangular and circular series, respectively. It is not clear if these gaps existed in the original layout. The masonry consists of uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles; the walls were smoothly finished on the interior and exterior. The walls are ca. 60 cm thick. Neither entrances nor other architectural features were preserved.

278

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

The downhill side of the northernmost 15 rectangular storehouses is faced with a stone terrace, such that the storehouse walls and the terrace face present a single, continuous surface. To the south, the terrace continues, although whether the stone facing continues could not be determined, because the terrace face has deteriorated from the terrace edge. From the incorporation of the rectangular storehouses into the terrace wall, it appears that these buildings and terrace were erected as a planned unit, and the circular buildings were added later. Below the terrace with the storehouses is a series of terraced fields, but their period of construction has not been determined. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in trace and very light densities. We also noted several stone hoes and groundstone manos, plus several crude chopping or scraping implements of fine-grained basalt. We made a single surface collection from the entire site. All the material is LIP, with one diagnostic Wanka-style sherd (Base Roja), but no definite Inca-style pottery. Discussion: Although there were no definite Inca-style ceramics in our small surface collection, we date this site to the LH on the basis of its form and configuration, both similar to other complexes of Inca-related colcas in the survey area. The proximity of this site to Site 611 (ca. 50 m to the south) suggests a close relationship between the two. This site is part of a cluster of closely spaced Inca Storage Facilities on this bluff overlooking the Inca Provincial Center of Hátun Xausa (Site 550) (see also Sites 611 and 613) (Fig. A49). Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class D SITE NO. 613 [Jau-LH-3(P), Unit 78-P; UMARP Site No. J-14] Date of Survey: Nov. 1, 1975 Location: Hoja Parco [445400 E, 8697100 N; 11.7856° S, 75.5012° W] Natural Setting: 3640 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on nearly level to gently sloping ground on a broad bluff overlooking the nearby valley floor (Plates A366, A367), ca. 1.6 km northwest of the Inca center at Hátun Xauxa (Site 550). Erosion has been slight to moderate in the immediate site area, but more severe farther down the slope. Soil depth is shallow to medium. The natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area consists of low shrubs and grasses around the remnants of ancient architecture. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers in the general site area. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: This site consists of two parallel lines of stone storage structures (colcas), covering of area of ca. 0.4 ha, with traces of surface pottery (Fig. A49). Structural Remains. Each of the two rows of colcas comprising this site contains 16 circular structures (Table A89). Architectural preservation is very good. No entrances are preserved, but some walls stand 3.5 m high (Plate A368). The masonry consists of uncoursed limestone rocks set in a mortar of mud, small rocks, and pebbles (Plate A369). The walls were smoothly finished on the interior and exterior. The solid standing wall on the downhill (east) side of several buildings, and the lack of standing wall on the uphill side, suggests that entrances were probably located on the uphill side. The lower line of 16 colcas is built atop a stone-faced terrace that extends for ca. 100 m parallel to the topographic contours; the upper line of 16 colcas is separated by ca. 50 m from the lower line, and appears to lack a supporting terrace. Individual structures measure ca. 4.5 m in diameter, with walls ca. 60 cm thick. The walls on the downslope sides of each structure extend down onto the underlying bedrock, below the actual interior floor. A series of stone-faced terraces lies downhill from the structures, but their temporal relationships to the storehouses is unclear. Surface Finds. There is only a trace of surface pottery. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site area. The material contains few diagnostics, but it appears to be mainly LIP, with a trace of Inca-style ceramics. Discussion: An Inca storage facility, similar to numerous others in our survey area. This site is part of the major series of Inca storage facilities in the hills between the Yanamarca and Mantaro Valleys. The layout and architecture of these structures are typical of Inca state storage units. Unlike nearby Sites 611 and 612 (both of which have exclusively or predominantly rectangular colcas), this site apparently contains only circular colcas—probably indicating a different type of stored material. We doubt that there was any LIP occupation at this locality prior to the LH. This site is part of a cluster of closely spaced Inca storage facilities on this bluff overlooking the Inca provincial center of Hátun Xausa (Site 550). Classification: LH: Inca Storage Facility, Class E

Plate A366. Site 613. Facing south over area of site. Arrows point to line of colcas. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-32)

Plate A367. Site 613. Facing southeast overlooking line of colcas. Modern town of Sausa is at center-left. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-27)

Plate A368. Site 613. Example of circular colca, with Christine Rudecoff. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-30)

Plate A369. Site 613. Masonry detail, with pencil for scale. (UMMA Neg. No. 41-29)

Appendix A Table A89. Colcas at Site 613. Colcas total storehouses circular rectangular

Number Volume 32 32 0

2112 m3 2112 m3 0

SITE NO. 614 [Jau-?-17(P), Coll. 212-P] Date of Survey: July 17, 1976 Location: Hoja Concepción [462000 E, 8686900 N; 11.8781° S, 75.3489° W] Natural Setting: 3285 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on level ground on the second (natural) terrace ca. 10 m above the level of the active floodplain of the Río Mantaro. The present riverbed is ca. 1.1 km to the south. There has been little or no erosion. Soil depth is deep. There is little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area, apart from rows of eucalyptus trees along modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.8 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is primarily LIP, with a trace of EIP/MH ceramics. Discussion: The principal component appears to be a small LIP occupation. There may also be an EIP/MH component, although that is more questionable. The apparent lack of permanent stone-walled structures suggests short-term, or temporary, residence. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Hamlet SITE NO. 615 [Jau-?-16(P), Fea. 17-P] Date of Survey: July 16, 1976 Location: Hoja Concepción [463400 E, 8686300 N; 11.8836° S, 75.3361° W] Natural Setting: 3295 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on level ground on the second (natural) terrace ca. 15 m above the level of the active floodplain of the Río Mantaro. A third natural terrace rises ca. 100 m to the east. The present riverbed is ca. 1.2 km to the south. There has been little or no erosion. Soil depth is deep. There is little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area, apart from rows of eucalyptus trees along modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Irrigation-based cultivation. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: This site is probably a small, badly looted prehispanic cemetery. Local people told us that several years ago several “chullpas” (apparently subterranean, or semi-subterranean stone-lined chambers) were discovered here. These were dug up and their contents removed, leaving a light scatter of surface pottery and rock rubble over an area ca. 10–15 m in diameter (< 0.1 ha). We also noted one groundstone digging-stick weight. We made a small surface collection from the site area. The material appears to be principally LIP, with a possible trace of EIP/MH pottery. Discussion: A small LIP isolated cemetery, possibly dating to early in the period. The trace of EIP/MH surface pottery probably derives from nearby Site 616. Other isolated cemeteries occur at Sites 421, 496, 513, 532, 534, 559, 578, 581, and 588. Classification: LIP: Isolated Cemetery SITE NO. 616 [Jau-?-18(P), Coll. 223-P] Date of Survey: July 16, 1976 Location: Hoja Concepción [463400 E, 8686400 N; 11.8827° S, 75.3361° W] Natural Setting: 3305 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on level ground on the second (natural) terrace ca. 15 m above the level of the active floodplain of the Río Mantaro. A third natural terrace rises ca. 60 m to the east. The present riverbed is ca. 1.3 km to the south. There has been little or no erosion. Soil depth is deep. There is little natural

279

vegetation in this intensively cultivated area, apart from weeds in fallow fields and rows of eucalyptus trees along modern field borders. Modern Land Use: A combination of rainfall- and irrigation-based cultivation in the general area; the immediate site area is not irrigated. Part of the site had been recently plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.3 ha is defined primarily by the distribution of very light surface pottery, and secondarily by the distribution of rock rubble in this area where there is generally little natural stone on the ground surface. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the localized abundance of rock rubble suggests the former presence of several ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes and crude chert scrapers. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. There are few diagnostics, but the material appears to be LIP with a lighter EIP/MH component. Discussion: The chronology of this occupation is uncertain. This site may represent continuity at a small valley-floor settlement from the later EIP/MH into early LIP. The probable presence of stone-walled structures suggests some form of relatively permanent settlement. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 617 [Jau-?-19(P), Coll. 233-P; UMARP Site No. J-312] Date of Survey: July 27, 1976 Location: Hoja Concepción [459600 E, 8685100 N; 11.8944° S, 75.3710° W] Natural Setting: 3305 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the top and sides of a low hill that is slightly detached from the base of the main ridge to the southwest. The site is ca. 300 m southwest of the present river channel, and immediately overlooking the active floodplain. Erosion is slight. Soil depth is medium. There is little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area, although some fallow fields have high weeds. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Parts of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. The adjacent floodplain is devoted to irrigation-based agriculture. Fallow fields are used for pasturing livestock. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.5 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several chert scrapers and debitage, and one example of a crude chopper-like implement made of fine-grained reddish basalt. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Borges (1988:56, 69) detected an EH component, that we did not originally recognize. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, apparently with EH antecedents, in close proximity to the river floodplain. The apparent absence of stone-walled structures suggests temporary, seasonal, or some form of impermanent residence. This site is part of an apparent loose cluster of sites where EH occupation definitely, or possibly, occurs (see also Sites 416, 423, 505, 509, 558, 583, 606, 609, 621, 623)—in our original survey, we detected EH occupation only at Sites 509 and 623. Classification: EH: ? EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 618 [Jau-LI-43(P); “Cuto”; Colls. 224-P, 225-P, 226-P; UMARP Site No. J-304] Date of Survey: July 25, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [455500 E, 8686600 N; 11.8808° S, 75.4086° W] Natural Setting: 3640 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground on the top of a broad bluff on the upper part of a major ridge. The supporting bluff comprises a large expanse of approximately level terrain in this otherwise moderately sloping landscape (Plate A370). Erosion within the site has been slight to medium; the steeper slopes above and below the site are more severely eroded. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a thick growth of grass, cactus, and low shrubs in and around the masses of stone rubble that have been piled up around the borders

280

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru of modern cultivated fields (Plates A371, A372). Fallow fields have a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site area had been recently plowed at the time of our survey; other fields were fallow. Fallow fields are used to pasture livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 12.6 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light and light concentrations, and by masses of rock rubble piled up by modern farmers around the borders of their cultivated fields. D’Altroy (1992:192, 2001:89) reports an overall site area of 11.8 ha. Although there are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, the great abundance of piled-up rock rubble suggests the former presence of numerous ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted many stone hoes, several groundstone digging-stick weights, and several chert implements. We made three separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A90). D’Altroy’s (1992:192, 2001:89) subsequent restudy indicates a late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) occupation. Discussion: A large late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) settlement, possibly with a very minor EIP/MH component at the site’s northern end. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Wanka II Very Large Village LH: Wanka III Very Large Village

(top) Plate A370. Site 618. Facing west over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-11) (middle) Plate A371. Site 618. Facing northeast overlooking site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-5) (bottom) Plate A372. Site 618. Facing south over area of Collection 225-P, with Ruben Garcia (left) and Julia Medel (right). (UMMA Neg. No. 25-2)

SITE NO. 619 [Jau-EI-56(P), Coll. 227-P; UMARP Site No. J-303] Date of Survey: July 25, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [454600 E, 8686700 N; 11.8798° S, 75.4169° W] Natural Setting: 3780 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper sides of a broad hill spur high up on the side of a major ridge. The site occupies a local high spot between major quebradas to the north, west, and south (Plate A373). Erosion within the immediate site area has been slight to moderate, but the surrounding landscape on all sides is highly dissected and severely eroded. Soil depth at the site is shallow to medium. Apart from a sparse grass cover in fallow fields, there is little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 4.0 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery. There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several chert knives and scrapers. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 30 × 60 m in the central site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation, although the apparent absence of stone-walled structures might indicate temporary or seasonal residence; alternatively, residential structures could have been built using adobe, rammed earth, or wattle-and-daub. At this relatively high elevation, close to the kichwa-puna juncture, the inhabitants of this site may have combined agriculture and herding. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village

Table A90. JASP surface collections at Site 618. Coll. No.

Area

224-P

ca. 65 m dia., northern site area

225-P

ca. 20 m dia., central site area ca. 35 m dia., southern site area

226-P

Sherd Density

Chronology

very light and mainly LIP, plus traces light-to-moderate, of Inca-style pottery in plowed field and EIP/MH ceramics light, in all LIP plowed field very light and light all LIP

Plate A373. Site 619. Facing northwest over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-7)

Appendix A

281

SITE NO. 620 [Jau-EI-59(P), Coll. 246-P; “Nievespacca”; UMARP Site No. J-302] Date of Survey: Aug. 6, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [455200 E, 8685200 N; 11.8934° S, 75.4114° W] Natural Setting: 3755 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper sides of a broad ridge between two major quebradas. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is generally medium. Natural vegetation is limited to sparse grass cover in fallow fields, and a few low shrubs along concentrations of rock rubble piled up along modern agricultural field borders. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Fallow fields are used for pasturing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.9 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the abundance of rock rubble suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures, subsequently destroyed by modern farmers. We noted one crude chert scraper, and several fragments of chert debitage. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, seemingly with permanent stonewalled structures. At this relatively high elevation, close to the kichwa-puna juncture, the inhabitants of this site may have combined agriculture and herding. This site is part of a cluster of EH and EIP/MH occupation in this part of the survey area (Sites 620–625). Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 621 [Jau-LI-44(P); “Ullo”; Colls. 228-P, 229-P; UMARP Site No. J-306] Date of Survey: July 26, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [456300 E, 8685300 N; 11.8925° S, 75.4013° W] Natural Setting: 3630 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper sides of a prominent hill between two major quebradas on the middle section of a major ridge (Plates A374, A375). The supporting hill stands out as a local high point. Erosion has been slight to moderate within the site, and moderate to severe on the surrounding slopes below the site. Uncultivated areas have a moderate cover of grass, shrubs and cactus (Plate A376); and there are thick concentrations of grass, shrubs, and cactus along the masses of rock rubble that modern farmers have piled up along their field borders. Fallow fields are used for pasturing livestock. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. The slopes below the site have been extensively terraced. The age of this terracing is uncertain, but some of it is stone-faced, and all of it appears to be old. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 8.3 ha is defined by the distribution of light-to-moderate surface pottery and by piles of rock rubble around modern field borders. D’Altroy (1992:192, 2001:89) reports an overall site area of 11.6 ha, while Borges (1988:69) reports a site area of 12.0 ha. There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, but the abundance of rock rubble throughout the site (Plate A376) suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes, plus a number of chert knives and scrapers. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A91). D’Altroy’s subsequent restudy revealed a significant late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) occupation. Borges (1988:69) reports a significant EH occupation, one that we did not originally detect. Discussion: A substantial occupation, with both EIP/MH and LH (Wanka III) components of approximately equal size, apparently with EH antecedents. The EIP/MH component of this site is part of a cluster of EH and EIP/MH occupation in this part of the survey area (Sites 620–625). Subsequent UMARP studies appear to show an absence of significant LIP occupation antedating the LH. If so, this locality was abandoned during the LIP and reoccupied during the LH. This site is part of an apparent loose cluster of sites where EH occupation definitely, or possibly, occurs (see also Sites 416, 423, 505, 509, 558, 583, 606, 609, 617, 623)—in our original survey, we detected EH occupation only at Sites 509 and 623.

(top) Plate A374. Site 621. Facing east over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-6) (middle) Plate A375. Site 621. Facing northeast at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-1) (bottom) Plate A376. Site 621. Facing east over area of Collection 228-P, with Paul Liffman and Julia Medel (left) and Phil Tugendrajch (right). (UMMA Neg. No. 25-10) Table A91. JASP surface collections at Site 621. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

228-P

ca. 20 m in dia., northern site area ca. 10 × 20 m, southern area

light-to-moderate

mixed EIP/MH and LIP

light-to-moderate

mixed EIP/MH and LIP

229-P

Classification: EH: ? EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village

282

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

SITE NO. 622 [Jau-?-20(P), Coll. 238-P] Date of Survey: July 31, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [456500 E, 8685200 N; 11.8934° S, 75.3994° W] Natural Setting: 3540 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on a broad bluff adjacent to a large quebrada in the middle section of a major ridge. Erosion has been slight to moderate within the site area, but more severe on the slopes below the site, especially on the northern side. Soil depth is medium. The only natural vegetation in the intensively cultivated area is a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. At the time of our survey, part of the site area had recently been harvested (wheat or barley). Fallow fields are used for pasturing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.0 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture. There is some stone rubble, but this is rather lightly dispersed over the site area and could be natural. We made a single small surface collection from the entire site. There are few diagnostics, but all the material appears to be EIP/MH. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, probably an outlier of nearby Site 621 (on the other side of the quebrada). This site is part of a cluster of EH and EIP/MH occupation in this part of the survey area (Sites 620–625). Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village SITE NO. 623 [Jau-EH-1(P), Coll. 237-P; UMARP Site No. J-307] Date of Survey: July 31, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [457000 E, 8685300 N; 11.8925° S, 75.3948° W] Natural Setting: 3505 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the crest and sides of a broad bluff in the middle sector of a major ridge (Plate A377). Erosion has been slight to moderate. Soil depth is medium. There is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site had recently been plowed at the time of our survey (Plate A378). Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 3.5 ha is defined by the distribution of light surface pottery. In her subsequent restudy, Borges (1988:69) remeasured the site area as 3.6 ha. There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. Lithic artifacts are common: we noted one hammerstone, one groundstone digging-stick weight, one stone hoe, several chert scrapers, and one fist-sized groundstone mano. We made a single surface collection over an area of ca. 40 m in diameter in the central site. The material is primarily Early Horizon (Late Formative), with a trace of EIP/MH ceramics. Borges (1988:56, 69) also identified EH material here. Discussion: A substantial Formative (EH) occupation, one of only two EH sites that we originally recognized in our survey area (see also Site 509, on the northern side of the Mantaro Valley). There may be a fairly deep archaeological deposit here, and this apparently well preserved locality is obviously worth further attention. The apparent absence of stone-walled structures may indicate that residence was seasonal, temporary, or impermanent. Site 623 appears to have been a pioneering settlement within a cluster of subsequent EIP/MH occupation in this part of the survey area (Sites 620, 621, 622, 624, 625). This site is also part of an apparent loose cluster of sites where EH occupation definitely, or possibly, occurs (see also Sites 416, 423, 505, 509, 558, 583, 606, 609, 617, 621)—in our original survey, we detected EH occupation only at Sites 509 and 623. Classification: EH: Small Village SITE NO. 624 [Jau-EI-57(P), Coll. 231-P; UMARP Site No. J-137] Date of Survey: July 26, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [456900 E, 8685600 N; 11.8898° S, 75.3958° W] Natural Setting: 3490 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the crest and sides of a low rise atop a broad bluff in the middle sector of a major ridge (Plate A379). Erosion has been slight to moderate. Soil depth is medium. Apart from grass and low shrubs along modern field borders and in quebradas, there is very little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area.

Plate A377. Site 623. Facing north at area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-23)

Plate A378. Site 623. Facing west across site, with Phil Tugendrajch. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-22)

Plate A379. Site 624. Facing west at site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-14) Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Parts of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Fallow fields are used to pasture livestock. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.6 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery. Subsequent UMARP restudies report site areas of 2.6 ha (D’Altroy 1992:191) and 6.0 ha (Borges (1988:69). There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes and chert scrapers. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. In her subsequent restudy, Borges (1988:69) identified both Huacrapukio 1 and 2 phases, and also reports “a single MH Wari [ceramic] fragment.” D’Altroy (1992:191) also identified a significant LH (Wanka III) component, which we did not detect. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, part of a cluster of EH and EIP/MH occupation in this part of the survey area (Sites 620–625). The apparent absence of stone-walled structures may mean that the occupation here was seasonal, temporary, or impermanent. D’Altroy’s restudy indicates that this location was reoccupied during LH (Wanka III) times. This is one of a handful of sites in our survey area with definite MH Wari material (see also Sites 442, 451, 464, 583, 589, 627). Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village

Appendix A

Plate A380. Site 625. Facing northeast at site, with three archaeologists for scale. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-13)

SITE NO. 625 [Jau-LI-45(P), Coll. 230-P] Date of Survey: July 26, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [456900 E, 8685800 N; 11.8880° S, 75.3958° W] Natural Setting: 3485 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper sides of a narrow ridge between two seasonal quebradas (Plate A380), in the middle sector of a highly dissected major ridge. Within the site area erosion has been moderate; the slopes below the site are severely eroded. Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: The site area is presently uncultivated, and used only for grazing livestock. There has been cultivation here in the recent past, but probably no more recently than about 5 years ago. Modern plowing has probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.9 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery. There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, and the general scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted a few chert knives and scrapers. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, possibly lacking permanent residence. This site is part of a cluster of EH and EIP/MH occupation (Sites 620–625) in this part of the survey area. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet SITE NO. 626 [Jau-LI-46(P), Coll. 234-P; UMARP Site No. J-310] Date of Survey: July 30, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [458000 E, 8685400 N; 11.8916° S, 75.3857° W] Natural Setting: 3375 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground in a shallow swale between two low ridges, near the base of a major ridge, just above the modern village of Sincos at the edge of the main valley floor. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is medium. Natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area is limited to substantial grass, low shrubs, and cactus along rock rubble piled up at the sides of modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals (including maize) and tubers. Fallow fields are used for pasturing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.8 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light and light concentrations. D’Altroy (1992:192) also reports an overall site area of 0.8 ha. There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, but the rock rubble piled up by modern farmers along the edges of their fields suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled architecture. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is mainly LIP, with a trace of Inca-style and EIP/MH pottery. D’Altroy’s (1992:192) subsequent restudy indicated that the primary occupation is LH (Wanka III). Discussion: This appears to be primarily a small LH (Wanka III) site, possibly with an EIP/MH component. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LH: Wanka III Hamlet

283

Plate A381. Site 627. Facing east overlooking site, in area of Collection 236-P, with three archaeologists for scale. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-20) Table A92. JASP surface collections at Site 627. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

235-P

ca. 15 × 20 m, on northern side ca. 25 × 25 m, in central site

light-to-moderate

mixed EIP/MH and LIP

very light

all EIP/MH

236-P

SITE NO. 627 [Jau-LI-47(P), Colls. 235-P, 236-P; UMARP Site No. J-311] Date of Survey: July 30, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [458900 E, 8684200 N; 11.9025° S, 75.3774° W] Natural Setting: 3440 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the top and upper slopes of a broad bluff on the lower flanks of a major ridge (Plate A381). Erosion has been slight within most of the site area, except along the steeper northern side where it has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is medium to deep over most of the site, and shallow on the northern side. The only natural vegetation is a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 5.1 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light, light, and light-to-moderate densities. The highest sherd densities occur along the eroded northern side of the site. Borges (1988:70) reports an area of 5.5 ha for the Wanka I component. There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, although a moderate quantity of rock rubble throughout the site suggests the former presence of a few ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site area (Table A92). Borges (1988:39) reports the presence at this site of “a single fragment of a possible Wari imitation” sherd. She also identified a significant Wanka I occupation (her phase IA, which may overlap with the late MH). Discussion: A multicomponent occupation, predominantly EIP/MH but with a secondary early LIP (Wanka I) component. We have arbitrarily estimated an area of 1.3 ha for the LIP occupation (one-quarter of the dominant EIP/MH site area). The possible MH Wari imitation sherd is one of the very few ever found in the Wanka Region survey area (see also Sites 442, 451, 464, 583, 589, 624). Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Wanka I Small Village SITE NO. 628 [Jau-?-22(P), Coll. 240-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 1, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [458600 E, 8683700 N; 11.9070° S, 75.3802° W] Natural Setting: 3440 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper sides of a low hillock at the edge of a broad bluff on the lower flanks of a major

284

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

ridge. Erosion has been slight. Soil depth is medium. Natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area is limited to sparse grass and thick weed cover in fallow fields, and clusters of low shrubs and cactus along field borders. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Most of the site area is presently fallow, used for pasturing livestock, although some surrounding fields are currently in various stages of cultivation. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 0.4 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery. There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, and the scarcity of rock rubble suggests an absence of ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several fragments of stone hoes. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all EIP/MH. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation, probably lacking permanent stone-walled structures. Probably an outlier of nearby Site 627 (ca. 400 m to the northeast). Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet SITE NO. 629 [Jau-LI-48(P), Coll. 241-P; UMARP Site No. J-315] Date of Survey: Aug. 1, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [458400 E, 8683500 N; 11.9088° S, 75.3820° W] Natural Setting: 3480 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground around the sides of a small knoll on a broad bluff on the lower flanks of a major ridge. Erosion has been slight. Soil depth is deep. The only natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area is a sparse grass cover. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. At the time of our survey a crop of wheat or barley had recently been harvested. There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, but the abundance of rock rubble in modern fields suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.7 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery and by the general abundance of rock rubble. We also noted several stone hoes, and a few chert knives and scrapers, as well as a crude “chopper” made of fine-grained basalt. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is all LIP. Discussion: A small LIP occupation. Classification: LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 630 [Jau-EI-68(P), Coll. 242-P; UMARP Site No. J-139] Date of Survey: Aug. 1, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [457900 E, 8683100 N; 11.9124° S, 75.3866° W] Natural Setting: 3560 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground on the top and upper sides of a prominent hill elevated ca. 20 m above the general level of a broad bluff on the side of a major ridge (Plate A382). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is shallow to medium. Natural vegetation consists of grass in fallow cultivated fields, and concentrations of low shrubs and cactus along modern field borders. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Most of the immediate site area is presently fallow, used for pasturing livestock. Some of the hillslopes below the site have earth terraces, averaging about 1 m high and of uncertain age. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 7.6 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable light and light-to-moderate concentrations. Subsequent UMARP restudies report an overall site area of 7.0 ha (D’Altroy (1992:191, 2001:89, 91), and 8.0 ha for the EIP/MH component (Borges 1988:69). There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, although the presence of a moderate quantity of rock rubble suggests the former presence of some ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted some chert debitage. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 20 m in diameter in the central site area where there was light-to-moderate surface pottery. The material is very predominantly EIP/MH, with a trace of LIP. Borges (1988:69) found that the dominant EIP/MH component dates to the Huacrapukio 2 phase. D’Altroy’s (1992:191, 2001:89) subsequent restudy revealed a significant late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III) occupation, which we did not detect.

Plate A382. Site 630. Facing northeast at area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-31)

Discussion: A substantial EIP/MH occupation Sites 630 and 631 form a pair of EIP/MH settlements in this part of the southern Mantaro Valley. D’Altroy’s (1992) restudy of this site indicates that this locality was reoccupied during LH (Wanka III) times. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: Wanka II Large Village LH: Wanka III Small Village (?) SITE NO. 631 [Jau-LI-49(P), Coll. 243-P; UMARP Site No. J-314] Date of Survey: Aug. 1, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [457900 E, 8682600 N; 11.9170° S, 75.3866° W] Natural Setting: 3570 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground near the edge of a steep descent into a major quebrada. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. Natural vegetation consists of sparse grass in fallow agricultural fields, and a substantial cover of low shrubs and cactus along rocks piled up along modern field borders and within some fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Parts of the hillslope have been terraced to form small, irregular fields. The terraces are mostly earth, and their age is uncertain. Fallow fields are used for pasturing livestock. Modern plowing, terracing, and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 5.1 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery and substantial rock rubble. The only definite remnant of prehispanic architecture is a small fragment of one structure, apparently circular, constructed of unmodified rock set in mud mortar. However, the abundance of rock rubble piled up by modern farmers along field borders and inside some fields suggests the former presence of numerous ancient stone-walled structures. We also noted several stone hoes and chert knives, plus some chert debitage. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 30 × 50 m in the central site area. The material is mixed EIP/MH and LIP. D’Altroy’s (1992:192) subsequent restudy detected a probable modest LH (Wanka III). Discussion: A substantial mixed occupation, with both EIP/MH and LH components; we remain uncertain about the status of an LIP occupation. We assume the surface areas for both components are approximately equivalent, but we suspect the stone-walled architecture may be mainly LIP or LH. This site forms EIP/MH and LIP/LH settlement pairs with nearby Sites 630 and 632, respectively. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LIP: ? LH: Wanka III Large Village (?) SITE NO. 632 [Jau-LI-50(P), Colls. 244-P, 245-P; UMARP Site No. J-313] Date of Survey: Aug. 1, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [457300 E, 8682900 N; 11.9142° S, 75.3921° W] Natural Setting: 3580 masl, in the lower kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping ground on the side of a

Appendix A

285

major ridge (Plate A383). The terrain north of the site descends steeply into a major quebrada. Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. Natural vegetation consists of sparse grass on fallow agricultural fields, and a substantial cover of low shrubs and cactus along rocks piled up along modern field borders and within some fields. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers in irregularly terraced fields (both stone-faced and earth-faced terraces, all of uncertain age). Fallow fields are used for pasturing livestock. Modern plowing, field clearing, and (possibly) terracing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 14.1 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery and prehispanic architecture. D’Altroy (1992:192) reports an overall site area of 13.3 ha. Structural Remains. Prehispanic architecture is not well preserved, but scattered remnants occur throughout the site. The abundance of rock rubble piled up along modern field borders indicates the former presence of many other ancient stone-walled structures (Plate A384). The circular structures. The surviving structures are circular, measuring ca. 3–4 m in diameter, constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar. The square structure. There is also an unusual, irregularly square structure, ca. 3 m on a side, with a partially preserved roof at ca. 2 m above ground level (Plate A385). This building has a single small, ground-level “doorway,” ca. 50 × 50 cm, about midway along one wall but no other visible opening. It may be a tomb, although we saw no human bone. Surface Finds. Variable very light and light sherd densities throughout the site. We also noted two stone hoes, a chert knife, and some chert debitage. We made two separate surface collections from different parts of the site (Table A93). Several years after our survey, UMARP archaeologists made one additional surface collection at this site. LeBlanc (1981:228–29) reports that the material in this collection is all Wanka II (late LIP). However, D’Altroy (1992:192) detected a significant LH (Wanka III) component. Discussion: This site apparently represents a substantial late LIP (Wanka II) and LH (Wanka III). The unusual square structure may date to the LH. Classification: LIP: Wanka II Very Large Village LH: Wanka III Very Large Village SITE NO. 632-A [Jau-?-21(P), Coll. 239-P] Date of Survey: July 31, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [456600 E, 8684200 N; 11.9025° S, 75.3985° W] Natural Setting: 3625 masl, in the upper kichwa zone, on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on moderately sloping terrain on the crest and upper sides of a ridge spur adjacent to a large quebrada in the middle section of a major ridge. Erosion has been moderate to severe, held in check to some degree by the presence of large, earth-faced terraces (of unknown age) (Plate A386). Soil depth is shallow to medium. There is a sparse cover of grass and weeds. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers. The immediate site area was fallow at the time of our survey. Modern plowing and terrace building have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 1.6 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery in variable very light and light concentrations; the heaviest sherd densities are along the sides of the adjacent quebrada. We also noted two stone hoes. We made a single surface collection from the entire site. The material is primarily LIP, with a trace of EIP/MH. Discussion: A small LIP occupation. We are uncertain about the significance of the trace of EIP/MH surface pottery. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Small Village SITE NO. 633 [Jau-LI-53(P); “Lupuc”; Coll. 253-P; UMARP Site No. J-305] Date of Survey: Aug. 8, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [455100 E, 8684600 N; 11.8988° S, 75.4123° W] Natural Setting: 3830 masl, near the uppermost edge of the upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping ground along the crest and upper slopes of a broad ridge spur between major quebradas (Plate A387). Erosion has been slight to moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium, and rather stony. Natural vegetation consists of thick grass, low shrubs, and cactus along rock rubble piled up on the sides of modern fields (Plate A388).

(top) Plate A383. Site 632. Facing east over area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-35) (middle) Plate A384. Site 632. Facing northwest over area of Collection 244-P, with two archaeologists. Site 618 is seen in middle distance. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-33) (bottom) Plate A385. Site 632. Well-preserved structure near Collection 244-P, with Julia Medel. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-32)

Table A93. JASP surface collections at Site 632. Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

244-P

ca. 50 m dia., southern site area ca. 40 m dia., northern site area

light

mainly LIP, plus trace Inca-style ceramics LIP, plus light Inca-style ceramics

245-P

light

286

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Plate A389. Site 634. Facing east over area of site. Bracket indicates approximate extent of site. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-24)

Plate A386. Site 632-A. Overlooking site, with archaeologist for scale. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 25-25)

Plate A390. Site 634. Circular structures in area of Collection 248-P, with Paul Liffman. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-33)

Plate A387. Site 633. Facing north at area of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-29)

Plate A388. Site 633. Facing northwest over northwest end of site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-30)

Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals, fava beans, and tubers. Parts of the site area had recently been plowed at the time of our survey. Fallow fields are used for pasturing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.7 ha is defined by the distribution of very light surface pottery and rock rubble. There are no definite remains of prehispanic architecture, but the abundance of rock rubble piled up by modern farmers around the borders of their fields suggests the former presence of ancient stone-walled structures. We made a single surface collection from an area ca. 50 m in diameter in the central site area. The material is all LIP. Discussion: A small LIP occupation. The site’s high elevation, at the kichwapuna juncture, may mean that the inhabitants of the LIP settlement combined agricultural and herding. Like nearby Sites 634, 635, and 636, this site is situated just outside our intensively surveyed area. Classification: LIP: Small Village

SITE NO. 634 [Jau-LI-51(P), Unit 109-P, Colls. 247-P, 248-P, 249-P; UMARP Site No. J-83] Date of Survey: Aug. 7, 8, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [453100 E, 8685000 N; 11.8952° S, 75.4307° W] Natural Setting: 3870 masl, in the lower puna zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the crest and upper sides of a broad ridge (Plate A389). Erosion has been moderate. Soil depth is shallow to medium. Natural vegetation consists of a sparse to medium grass cover in uncultivated areas and in fallow fields. Modern Land Use: The site area and its surroundings on the supporting ridge crest serve mainly as livestock pasture. However, there are several fields where rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers is carried out. There are no modern stone-walled corrals in the area. The hillslopes below the site are more intensively cultivated. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of 9.9 ha is defined by the distribution of surface pottery and prehispanic architectural remains. Structural Remains. Although the ancient architecture is not well preserved, there are numerous remnants of circular structures, ca. 2.5–3.5 m in diameter, with walls constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar and measuring ca. 50 cm thick (Plate A390). A few structures have walls preserved to heights of ca. 1.8 m. The great abundance of rock rubble incorporated into modern field borders and on the ground surface indicates that many more ancient structures once existed at this locality, which have now been destroyed through modern land use. We estimate an original total of 150–200 buildings. There are no definite remnants of ancient camelid corrals, and the circular structures appear to have been highly nucleated within the site. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs throughout the site in trace to very light densities. The relatively higher sherd densities occur mainly in plowed fields. We made three separate surface collections in different parts of the site; all the sherds are very badly weathered (Table A94). Discussion: A substantial LIP occupation, possibly with minor EIP/MH antecedents. Although there are no definite remains of ancient corrals, we suspect the LIP inhabitants of this site were primarily concerned with herding. Like nearby

Appendix A Table A94. JASP surface collections at Site 634.

287

Table A95. JASP surface collections at Site 635.

Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

Coll. No.

Area

Sherd Density

Chronology

247-P

ca. 80 m dia., western site area ca. 80 m dia., central site area ca. 80 m dia., eastern site area

very light

mainly LIP, plus possible minor EIP/MH mainly LIP, plus possible traces of EIP/MH all LIP

250-P 251-P

eastern half of site western half of site

very light very light

probably all LIP probably all LIP

248-P 249-P

very light very light

Plate A391. Site 635. Example of circular structure in area of Collection 250P, with Paul Liffman. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-26)

Plate A392. Site 636. Facing southeast over site. Arrow indicates approximate site center. (UMMA Neg. No. 26-27)

Sites 633, 635, and 636, this site lies outside our intensively surveyed area. Because we did not survey systematically in the surrounding puna landscape, there may well be still-undetected corral remains in the general vicinity of the site. Sites 634 and 635 comprise an LIP settlement pair in this part of the survey area. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Large Village

primarily concerned with herding. Like nearby Sites 633, 634, and 636, this site lies outside our intensively surveyed area. Because we did not undertake survey in the surrounding puna landscape, there may well be still-undetected corral remains in the general vicinity of the site. Sites 635 and 634 comprise an LIP settlement pair in this part of the survey area. Classification: LIP: Small Village

SITE NO. 635 [Jau-LI-52(P), Unit 110-P, Colls. 250-P, 251-P] Date of Survey: Aug. 8, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [452400 E, 8685400 N; 11.8916° S, 75.4371° W] Natural Setting: 3860 masl, in the lowermost puna zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently sloping to nearly level ground along the crest and upper sides of a broad ridge. Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow, with some bedrock exposures. There is a sparse to medium grass cover in uncultivated areas and in fallow fields. Modern Land Use: Pasture for livestock. There are no modern livestock corrals in the immediate site area, although such features do exist in the nearby modern village of Lacuari Pampa. There appears to have been no recent cultivation in the site area. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 4.9 ha is defined by surface pottery and poorly preserved prehispanic architecture. Structural Remains. Although the ancient architecture is not well preserved, there are several remnants of basal foundations of circular structures, ca. 2.5–3.5 m in diameter, with walls constructed of unworked stone set in mud mortar and measuring ca. 50 cm thick (Plate A391). The great abundance of rock rubble suggests that many more ancient structures once existed at this locality; we estimate an original total of 150–200 buildings. There are no definite remnants of ancient camelid corrals, and the circular structures appear to have been highly nucleated within the site. Surface Finds. Surface pottery is found throughout the site in trace to very light concentrations. We made two small and badly weathered surface collections in different parts of the site area (Table A95). Discussion: A substantial LIP occupation. Although there are no definite remains of ancient corrals, we suspect the LIP inhabitants of this site were

SITE NO. 636 [Jau-EI-60(P), Coll. 252-P; UMARP Site No. J-138] Date of Survey: Aug. 8, 1976 Location: Hoja Sincos [454500 E, 8683200 N; 11.9115° S, 75.4178° W] Natural Setting: 3780 masl, in the upper kichwa zone on the south side of the Mantaro Valley. Situated on gently to moderately sloping ground on a broad rise (Plate A392). Erosion has been moderate to severe. Soil depth is generally shallow. There is a sparse to medium grass cover in uncultivated areas and in fallow fields, with low shrubs and some eucalyptus trees along field borders and quebradas that cut through the area. Modern Land Use: Rainfall-based cultivation of cereals and tubers in small, scattered fields. Fallow fields and uncultivated land are used for pasturing livestock. Modern plowing and field clearing have probably damaged the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site area of ca. 2.9 ha is defined by surface pottery in trace to very light concentrations. There are no definite remnants of prehispanic architecture, but the moderate quantity of rock rubble on the ground surface and piled up around modern field borders suggests the former presence of several ancient stone-walled structures. We made a single surface collection from the entire site area. The material is mainly EIP/MH, with a trace of LIP ceramics. Discussion: A small EIP/MH occupation. The significance of the trace of LIP surface pottery is uncertain. The location of this site close to the puna-kichwa juncture may indicate that the EIP/MH inhabitants combined agriculture and herding. Like nearby Sites 633, 634, and 636, this site lies outside our intensively surveyed area. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LIP: ?

288

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

UMARP Site Survey in the Jisse-Pomacancha Drainage by Terence N. D’Altroy This section presents standardized descriptions of the prehistoric archaeological sites along the west side of the Rio Quishurcancha, generally lying between the modern settlements of Jisse and Pomacancha (Interior Cover Map, Figs. A50–A55). This area lies within the district of Janjailllo, and is encompassed within sections of the 1:25,000 topographic maps of Pomacancha, Acolla, and Parco. The survey that recorded these sites was conducted by UMARP personnel, directed by D’Altroy, during May–July 1983. Recording procedures followed the standard techniques used earlier in the JASP surveys. The intent of surveying this area was to ascertain the nature of the prehistoric occupation of the drainage to the west of the Yanamarca Valley. While the latter area was the focus of UMARP field research, especially excavation, the western edge of the JASP survey zone lay at the Río Quishuarcancha. Thus, UMARP’s most intensive zone of study was bordered on the west by an area about which we had no settlement information. The field survey, whose results are summarized here, was intended to redress this problem. The area to be surveyed was defined as the land bordered by the Río Mantaro (on the south), the Río Quishuarcancha (on the east), the 4000-m contour (on the west), and the modern settlement of Pomachancha (on the north). This area covers 8 km north to south by 3–4 km east to west. Each survey transect covered the set of environmental and land-use zones within the survey area, from the lower riparian zone, through low hillslopes, up to the edge of the puna. Because limited time and resources permitted only about a 25% survey, the study region was divided into sixteen 500-m-wide parallel transects, running up from the Río Quishuarcancha to the 4000-m contour. These transects were numbered consecutively from south to north. In an effort to randomize the survey, and to ensure that the entire region got adequate coverage, a randomized systematic sample was chosen for fieldwork. The number “four” was chosen randomly (from a random numbers table) and the fourth, eighth, twelfth, and sixteenth

transects were surveyed at 100% coverage. Additional time at the end of the survey permitted examination of the lower end of the survey zone, so that about 37% of the entire study region was ultimately surveyed (ca. 11 km2). While the survey only partially covered the land within the study region, examination of the airphotos showed that all major sites with standing architecture fell, at least in part, within one of the survey transects. Thus, all of the large sites were recorded, while it is probable that the smaller end of the site-size range was represented by a reasonable cross section of the sites that existed in the region. Because the large sites in the Upper Mantaro tended to be Wanka II (late LIP) and occasionally Wanka III, it is probable that most of the late prehispanic populace was recorded during the survey. In contrast, it is likely that the survey recorded a more proportional cross section of the smaller sites, which tended to be concentrated in the EIP/MH and LH (Wanka III). As can be seen in the accompanying figures, however, some of the larger EIP/MH sites were quite extensive. These were not readily visible on airphotos, because of a lack of standing architecture, and it is therefore possible that some important early sites remain undetected within the survey zone. When the analysis of the surface ceramics was conducted (in 1983), the ceramic chronology used to assign occupations to particular phases had not yet been sufficiently refined to separate the EIP from the MH, nor to separate Wanka I from Wanka II, based solely on surface collections. These refinements were made in 1986, but the ceramics have not been reanalyzed since 1983. The phase assignments for the sites described here are therefore somewhat broader than those used for the settlements described elsewhere in this volume. Nonetheless, the dominant patterns in settlement are clearly visible. Because these parallel the major trends in the Yanamarca and main Mantaro Valleys, we feel that the chronological assessments reported here are indicative of the key changes that occurred in the prehistory of this area. NOTE: Because the Jisse-Pomacacha sites are imprecisely positioned on the JASP base maps from which their UTM and latitude-longitude coordinates are measured, these locational coordinates are less accurate than those of the JASP-surveyed sites.

Appendix A

Figure A50. UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, showing principal survey transects.

289

290

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A51. UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, showing EIP/MH sites. The site numbers were assigned by UMARP.

Appendix A

Figure A52. UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, showing LIP (Wanka I and Wanka II) sites. The site numbers were assigned by UMARP.

291

292

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A53. UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, showing LH (Wanka III) sites. The site numbers were assigned by UMARP.

Appendix A

Figure A54. UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, showing sites with Colonial Period occupation. The site numbers were assigned by UMARP.

293

294

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A55. UMARP Jisse-Pomacancha survey area, showing the distribution of sites with a primary lithic component. The site numbers were assigned by UMARP.

Appendix A UMARP SITE NO. J-93 Date of Survey: June 6, 1983 Location: Hoja Acolla [ca. 432300 E, 8702400 N; 11.7375° S, 75.6213° W] Natural Setting: 3900 masl, on rolling uplands in the lower puna on the north side of the Mantaro Valley, on a west-facing slope of a low ridge about 450 m WSW of a ridge escarpment overlooking the Río Quishuarcancha. A small seasonal quebrada lies about 300 m to the south. The site lies just below the crest of a relatively gently sloped ridge. The site is partially overgrown by grasses and shrubs, but the general area has been largely cleared for cultivation. Because much of the site is terraced, there is little erosion. The soil cover looks reasonably deep toward the flat part of the terraces, but upper sections of the terraces exhibit extensive outcrops. Modern Land Use: The site area has been cultivated recently, but was in fallow at the time of survey. Wheat and barley are grown extensively in the area and the fields in which the site is located have likely been used for potato farming. Although the fields lie in an area of rainfall agriculture, an irrigation canal that is probably modern lies a short distance below the site area. Archaeological Remains: This site is a small scatter, almost exclusively lithic, covering an area of about 70 × 70 m (0.5 ha). Structural Remains. There are no structural remains nor evidence of dismantled buildings, although modern field walls surround most fields. The location of the site among terraces suggests that these features have some antiquity, but dating them is problematical. Surface Finds. The ceramic surface density is very, very light—a total of about 20 undiagnostic sherds was collected. The collection was taken from an area about 30 × 20 m in two adjacent fields, which was the area of highest sherd concentration. Most of the lithics were orange chert, probably either from the Pomacancha quarry about 1 km to the north, or from local limestone bedrock; no groundstone was recovered. Discussion: This site is a lithic scatter with very few sherds. The available ceramics do not permit temporal classification of the site. Classification: Unknown period: Hamlet UMARP SITE NO. J-94 Date of Survey: June 14, 1983 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [ca. 429900 E, 8701200 N; 11.7483° S, 75.6433° W] Natural Setting: 3900 masl, in rolling uplands in the lower puna, on the top of a low hillock about 600 m south of the small town of Huali on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site lies on the upper slopes and crest of a low hill overlooking the riachuela that flows through Huali and eventually into the Río Quishuarcancha. The site itself is covered by recently cultivated fields, but the vegetation in adjacent areas comprises the low grasses typical of the puna. A small brook runs just to the north and northwest of the site. Although there has probably been some erosion off the top of the low hill, the slopes below are not especially steep, so that the erosion has been moderate, at worst. The soil depth appears to be about 30 cm; no rock outcrops are showing. Modern Land Use: The site itself was being dry-farmed at the time of survey. A local informant says that the irrigation in the area is primarily employed to water lands used for pasturage and not for irrigated fields. This may be accurate, given that most of the fields around the site are dry. Archaeological Remains: The site is essentially a lithic scatter, covering about 57 × 90 m (0.5 ha). No architecture or rock rubble was noted in the vicinity, nor was any looting noted. Surface Finds. Virtually all the artifacts recovered from the single 4 × 4 m collection area were lithics. Most lithics were the yellow-orange-red chert common in the area, but little of the reddish-purple andesite, found exclusively to the south and east, was found. No groundstone was recovered. The single diagnostic sherd recovered was a Micaceous Red fragment, which was probably LH or Colonial. Discussion: This site is quite similar to Site J-93, both in composition and in terms of setting. The density of material at J-94 is markedly higher than at J-93. Chronological placement of the site is uncertain, given that one sherd is inadequate to secure the date of the activities that produced the lithic material. Classification: Unknown period: Hamlet

295

UMARP SITE NO. J-95 Date of Survey: June 14, 1983 Location: Hoja Acolla [ca. 433800 E, 8702400 N; 11.7375° S, 75.6075° W] Natural Setting: 3675 masl, in the rolling uplands of the upper kichwa, on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site lies on gently rolling terrain to the west of the Río Quishuarcancha drainage and east of the first major escarpment of the western cordillera. The site lies about 1.76 km NNW of the town of Janjaillo. The topography of the site area is basically flat, with a very slight gradient sloping away from the river. The natural vegetation is chiefly grasses, found in a few areas used for pasturage. The closest moving water is the Río Quishuarcancha drainage, about 450 m to the east of the site. Erosion is slight, because the slopes are very gentle; there is no evidence of problems of downcutting, such as quebradas or arroyos. The soil appears to be relatively deep, perhaps 50 cm. Modern Land Use: The site itself is dry-farmed, probably in wheat or barley. About 50% of the usable terrain in the immediate vicinity is currently used for pasturage. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a sherd and lithic scatter covering 40 m N-S × 55 m E-W (0.2 ha). Structural Remains. No architecture is preserved, but the fields are bordered with fieldstone, some of which probably just eroded from the escarpment, but some of which may be from prehispanic architecture. However, nothing that hints at ancient structures is present. Surface Finds. The ceramic scatter is very light and fairly uniformly distributed across the site. Two surface collections were taken, covering 10 × 17 m in the south field and 13 × 39 m in the northern field. The material is mixed EIP/MH and LIP/LH. A fair amount of chipped stone was recovered along with one groundstone (moledor) fragment. None of the yellow-orange-reddish chert found at nearby sites was recovered, and little of the reddish-purple andesite. Discussion: The site was probably a farming hamlet, initially occupied during the EIP/MH and reoccupied in Wanka II–III (LIP/LH). The occupation looks predominantly LH, but a continued occupation into the early Colonial Period is also possible. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet LIP/LH: Hamlet UMARP SITE NO. J-96, “Plana Loma” Date of Survey: July 29, 1983 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [ca. 430550 E, 8703600 N; 11.7266° S, 75.6373° W] Natural Setting: 4000 masl, in rolling uplands in the upper puna, on the north side of the Mantaro Valley, on a flat to gently sloping ridge crest. The ridge falls off steeply to the north and east and more gently to the south; to the west, the ridge ascends gently to a crest about 1.5 km away. The modern town of Pomacancha lies to the northwest of the site, about 750 m away. A thin cover of grass and stubble, from barley harvested a few weeks before our survey, covered the site. There is a deep quebrada off the ridge to the east and a series of springs about 300 m southwest, which a local farmer says are perennial. Erosion is slight on the hill crest, but moderate to severe over the edges; the soil is up to 20 cm deep. Modern Land Use: The principal uses of the land are dry-farming and grazing. Most of the site has been cleared for cultivation and about 25% was in crop shortly before the survey. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a scatter of ceramics and lithics over an area of 150 × 75 m (1.1 ha). The site is generally in very poor condition, primarily as a result of field clearing for agriculture. Structural Remains. A very few wall foundations may still be potentially preserved in the bases of the field walls. A fair amount of rock has been piled in the field walls, which would seem to be the result of clearing of natural rock and old structures. Surface Finds. The surface pottery is very light, evenly scattered over the site, with a lesser density toward the periphery. One collection was taken over an area 10 × 10 m; the diagnostic artifacts were exclusively EIP/MH. Other artifacts encountered include some groundstone, but no hoes or axes, and some bone fragments. The flaked lithics are predominantly chert, with a little obsidian. The lithic forms include cores, bifaces, many flakes, no blades, and four projectile points. Discussion: The site was probably an EIP/MH agricultural and herding site of low population density, similar to those of the lower hillslopes to the north. Perennial access to water would have made the site inhabitable year round. The recovery of bone from the surface collection suggests that there may be some midden present. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet

296

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

UMARP SITE NO. J-97 Date of Survey: July 29, 1983 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [ca. 433000 E, 8703450 N; 11.7280° S, 75.6149° W] Natural Setting: 4000 masl, in the upper puna on the north side of the Mantaro Valley, along a ridge top and a south-facing 20° slope south and west of the modern town of Pomacancha. The ridge runs downhill northwest-southeast, very gently. About half the site is covered with sparse ichu and low grass. A quebrada lies about 200 m south of the site, about 50 m lower in elevation. A series of perennial springs lies across the quebrada, about 200 m to the northwest and west of the site, but easily accessible to it. Erosion is severe over the parts of the site that have not been preserved by construction of low terrace walls and lynchets. Bedrock shows through the surface throughout the site area, covering about 10% of the site’s surface. The depth of the soil is 0–10 cm over the whole site. Modern Land Use: About 70% of the site is currently used for grazing, with about 30% being used for rainfall agriculture this year. The identifiable crop on the land was barley, although the owner of the fields in the immediate vicinity said that he grows barley, wheat, potatoes, quinoa, ulloco, and mashua. Archaeological Remains: This is a small quarry site, perhaps an extension of the major chert quarry (UMARP Site J-99) that lies about 500 m southwest, but more likely a local, casual source of chert that occurs naturally in small veins and nodules in the limestone bedrock. The artifact scatter is almost exclusively lithic. Structural Remains. No architecture is preserved within the area encompassed by the lithic scatter. The limestone rocks in the surrounding field walls and terrace walls may have come in part from scattered structures, but no evidence of any substantial architecture remains. Surface Finds. Only a very few sherds were found on the site. These appear to be all EIP/MH, with the exception of one Micaceous Red sherd, which may be Colonial or Modern. Most of the surface artifacts are fairly low-grade mottled yellow-to-brown chert. A few cores, some flakes, and some retouched pieces were recovered from a surface collection over an area of 5 × 3 m at the bottom of a terrace in a plowed field. Discussion: This is a small chert quarry, probably used primarily during the EIP/MH. The chert is not high quality, and the scatter of material is not particularly dense. It seems likely, although not certain, that the use of the area as a chert source was associated with the occupation of the EIP/MH site (UMARP J-96) that lies on a hilltop about 100 m to the northeast. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Quarry UMARP SITE NO. J-98 Date of Survey: July 29, 1983 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [ca. 430550 E, 8704100 N; 11.7221° S, 75.6373° W] Natural Setting: 3950 masl, in the lower puna on the north side of the Mantaro Valley, in two caves (J-98A and J-98B) in a quebrada at a point of constriction where a small valley narrows into a 25-m-wide passage between two limestone cliff faces; the water flow is to the northeast, down toward Pomacancha. Neither of the two caves that comprise the site contains vegetation in the interior, apart from a bit of moss and lichen, particularly on the roofs. Low grass covers the ground for about 3–4 m in front of the upstream cave (J-98A), below which is a field cultivated in barley this season. The land in front of Cave J-98B falls off rapidly only about 3–5 m from the entrances; this area is in low grass and bushes. Cave J-98A sites about 10 m north of the quebrada bed, which is 3–4 m wide and 2–3 m deep at that point. The quebrada is fed by perennial springs 1–2 km upstream. Cave J-98B sits about 20 m north of this quebrada and is elevated about 10 m above the quebrada bed. Neither cave is eroded internally, although the slopes immediately in front of the caves have very little soil, where not preserved by terracing. The only terrace present lies about 8 m downslope from the mouth of Cave J-98A, creating a terrace about 5 m wide and 25 m long. The soil depth exposed below the current stone terrace wall is about 50 cm. The soil depth within the two caves is probably no more than 10–20 cm, although this is hard to estimate without testing. Modern Land Use: Both caves are currently used as temporary shelters. They contain broken bottle glass and there are several sheep horns inside Cave J-98B. The terrace below J-98A is used for rainfall agriculture, currently barley. Archaeological Remains: This site contains two caves, whose occupations may or may not be related either temporally or functionally. The caves were recorded as a single site because they lie only about 100 m apart.

Cave J-98A has an entrance about 3 m wide and 3 m high, and is about 4 m deep. The usable part of the cave is only about 6 m2, part of which is taken up by a natural bench about 50 cm high. This bench has been cut (grooved) in numerous places, primarily along the right side of the cave entrance (facing in), but also at the rear. These cuts are about 5–8 cm long and 1 cm deep maximum; they form irregular patterns crosscutting one another. Apart from being concentrated along the edge of a natural bench, the cuts are not regularly arrayed. The total area covered by the cuts is about 2 m long by 50 cm wide, about 30–80 cm off the cave floor. A possible explanation for the cuts is that they were the result of the deliberate dulling of stone tools (bifaces) being worked in the cave. Cave J-98B is about 10 m long along the face of the cliff and a little more than 2 m high maximum. The cave has two entrances, each about 2 m wide. The overall shape of the cave is tubular, closed off in the center (from opening onto the quebrada) by a limestone cliff face that has not yet collapsed. No cut marks were noted within this cave, although we did not carry out a detailed examination of the cave rock surface. Both caves have fire-blackened roofs, but neither appears to have a very deep midden deposit. The antiquity of the discoloration is not easily discernable, since both caves are currently used as shelters. Structural Remains. No prehistoric architecture was observed at or near either cave, although a modern, unmortared limestone rock wall has been built over the entrance to Cave J-98B. This wall is about 60–80 cm high, and impedes access to the cave. Surface Finds. Only a trace of ceramics was found at each cave mouth. One collection was taken from an area 8 × 5 m in front of the mouth of Cave J-98A. The majority of the artifacts recovered were lithic, not ceramic, and the ceramics were chronologically undiagnostic. However, the ceramic material appear to be from pink paste and coarse red pottery, which can be assigned to the EIP/MH. A second collection was taken from an area of 3 × 5 m at the mouth of Cave J-98B. Lithics also dominated this collection, which was much sparser than that at Cave J-98A. Many fine small chert lithics were recovered in Collection J98A. Most of this material was debitage, probably from the secondary stages of lithic tool manufacture. Similar debitage was found at the mouth of Cave J-98B, although the density of the material was significantly lower. Discussion: Both caves were probably used for the intermediate stages of production of lithic tools roughed out at quarry Site J-99, which lies about 150 m upstream (west) from Cave J-98A. It is difficult to assign the caves to a specific time period, but it seems reasonable to assign their occupations primarily to the EIP/MH, for two reasons. First, the sites lie in the midst of a series of EIP/ MH sites and, second, the only ceramics found probably pertain to this period. Whatever the time period, the occupation was likely temporary or sporadic, given the lack of midden accumulation in either cave. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Quarry Station UMARP SITE NO. J-99 Date of Survey: July 29, 1983 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [ca. 430100 E, 8703600 N; 11.7266° S, 75.6415° W] Natural Setting: 3950–4000 masl, in the lower puna on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site lies on both sides of a quebrada that flows along the bottom of a small valley west of (above) modern Pomacancha. The site extends over the ridgeline south of the quebrada, onto an area of gently rolling hills. The vegetation on the north side of the quebrada is mossy, with little clumps of grass. The south side is almost entirely cultivated, with barley stubble covering about half the fields at the time of survey. A spring-fed watercourse flows southeast through the site toward Pomacancha. It appears to carry enough water to be perennial, although the flow disappears in a streambed and then reemerges below. The north side of the quebrada is fairly heavily eroded, with bedrock and shallow soil exposed over much of the site. The soil depth on the south side of the quebrada is well preserved by construction of lynchets, which characterize much of the valley’s slopes. The soil depth on the north side is about 0–5 cm, and 20 cm or more on the south side. Modern Land Use: The north side of the quebrada is used for grazing, with no evidence of agriculture within the site area, although there are numerous fields on the slopes above (north) and downstream (east) from the site. The south side of the quebrada is apparently entirely in rainfall agriculture. The soil is dark brown and seems to be rich, although traces of modern fertilizer were noted in the fields. A spring-fed canal runs along the crest of the hill on the south side of the quebrada. Currently this brings drinking water to the village of Paquis, which

Appendix A lies about 250–300 m east of the site, although some small bleeder canals were noted in the fields. The antiquity of this simple hydraulic system is not clear. Archaeological Remains: This is a large chert quarry, covering 30–40 ha. The site consists of a lithic scatter, derived from the chert nodules in limestone, which are distributed heavily over the ground surface (see Russell 1988 for a detailed analysis of the surface materials). Structural Remains. We detected no evidence of architecture. Some piles of limestone rubble are scattered throughout the fields, but these could represent the remains of no more than a very few structures. It seems unlikely that any sort of residential settlement was built here, especially considering the lack of ceramics on the ground surface. Surface Finds. There is almost no surface pottery, and that which exists could not be assigned to a time period. The dominant surface artifacts are the products of the primary stages of lithic tool manufacture. The hillslopes on which the site lies contain vast amounts of chert nodules, mixed within the agricultural soil. The original matrix in which the chert had been formed was Cretaceous limestone from which the chert nodules eroded, ending up scattered over the hillslopes. The chert appears to occur solely in nodules up to 20–30 cm in diameter, although it is possible that veined deposits occur below the agricultural soil. Most of, if not all, the nodules have a calcic exterior. The chert itself occurs in a variety of colors, predominantly a red to opaque, with some translucent white. The quality varies from an excellent, readily controllable, lustrous chert, through mottled, unevenly formed chert, to siliceous rock that has not been fully transformed into a real chert. Despite the variation, it would be easy to find high-quality material virtually anywhere on the site. Many of the larger nodules have been gathered into piles in the fields so as to create more easily tillable soils for the modern farmers. The artifacts remaining on the ground surface include decortication flakes, prepared flake and blade cores, exhausted cores, blades, flakes, and some minimally retouched flakes. Because the proportion of finishing or retouched flakes found on the surface is extremely small, it seems probable that cores and tool blanks were roughed out at the quarry, with the intent of finishing the lithic products at other locations. The density of material varies locally across the site, with the densest deposits producing more than 100 pieces of worked chert per square meter, or so. This thins out to a few pieces per square meter in the lightest deposits. The densest areas occur just north (downslope) of the ridgeline running along the south side of the quebrada. We made two surface collections. Collection 99 = 901 (3 × 5 m), taken on a fairly steep hillslope north of the quebrada, produced only lithics; here the ground surface was mostly exposed soil, with a little mossy, grassy cover. Collection 99 = 902 (2 × 2 m), taken in a plowed agricultural field on the north-facing slope, south of the quebrada, yielded several hundred lithics, this being one of the densest areas on the site. The latter collection area lies about three-quarters of the way up the hillslope from the quebrada to the ridge crest. The field in which collection 99 = 902 was taken contains several piles of rock, much of which is chert nodules, so it seems apparent that the surface of the field has been reduced proportionally in the number of unused nodules and large cores. An interesting feature of the site is that no hoes or other groundstone artifacts were noted. This suggests that the agricultural cultivation of the site area is a relatively recent phenomenon, and lends further credence to the idea that the site was not the location of extensive habitation, if any, during the prehistoric periods. Discussion: This was apparently the principal chert quarry in the Upper Mantaro Region, although no prehistoric residential occupation has been recorded. The chert from this source is found throughout the northern half of the Mantaro Valley and onto the Huaricolca puna, from the EIP/MH to LH (Russell 1988). The dominant use of the material appears to have occurred during Wanka II–III (LIP/LH). The presence of flake and blade manufacturing debris at the source further suggests a continuous use in these periods, while the dominance of debris from the early stages of tool manufacture indicates a technology in which the more refined stages of tool manufacture were conducted at other locations. Classification: EIP/MH: Chert Quarry LIP: Chert Quarry LH: Chert Quarry UMARP SITE NO. J-105 Date of Survey: May 31, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [ca. 436200 E, 8697650 N; 11.7805° S, 75.5856° W] Natural Setting: 3675 masl, in rolling uplands in the upper kichwa on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site lies on a gentle to moderate slope,

297

above a steep descent to a creek. The vegetation is a low grass cover, with ichu intermixed. The bedrock occasionally extrudes through the thin (10–20 cm deep) soil, but erosion is not marked because of the relatively gentle grade of the slope. To the north lies a deep drainage that flows east to the Río Mantaro, about 1–2 km away. Modern Land Use: Most of the site is in grass fallow, and has probably never been worked. Sections of the land have been leveled into irregular terraces about 15 m deep by 20 m long. At the time of survey, the fields around the site were sown in potatoes and wheat. Archaeological Remains: This is a small, poorly preserved site, about 50 m on a side (0.3 ha), consisting primarily of a ceramic scatter, intermixed with rock rubble. Structural Remains. No architecture is preserved, although there is a lot of rock rubble throughout the site, both in fields and along the field borders. It is not clear how much architecture was originally here, but at most there were only a few structures. Surface Finds. The surface pottery is very light and badly eroded. We made a single surface collection from the site as a whole. The few diagnostics found dated to Wanka II–III (LIP/LH). The concentration of lithics is much higher than the ceramics, with a range of flakes collected. One stone hoe fragment was also found. Discussion: This appears to be a small LIP/LH site. Classification: LIP/LH: Hamlet UMARP SITE NO. J-106 Date of Survey: May 31, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [ca. 436610 E, 8697600 N; 11.7810° S, 75.5818° W] Natural Setting: 3700 masl, on gently sloping terrain in the upper kichwa on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site lies on the top of a high hill, the crest of which overlooks the Río Mantaro. The site is situated above a deep ravine, which lies to the west and north and flows east to the Río Mantaro. The vegetation is a grassy cover that overlies a thin (10 cm) layer of soil just above bedrock. Although the soil itself is very rocky, erosion appears to be moderate, because of the gentle incline of the hillslope. Modern Land Use: The land was in fallow at the time of survey, and may never have been cultivated. Below the site is a series of terraced fields cultivated in dry-farmed wheat (70%) and potatoes (30%). Archaeological Remains: This site is a poorly preserved scatter of surface pottery and rock rubble covering an area of about 30 × 40 m (0.1 ha), oriented along the contour of the hillslope. Structural Remains. No architecture is preserved at this site, although there is a rubble scatter over most of the site. Three or four piles of rock rubble that lie at the edge of the hilltop may be the remains of structures. The series of terraces descending to the southeast have well-set stone-wall facings. Whether they are temporally associated with the site, or are more recent, is open to question. Surface Finds. Surface pottery is very light to light, fairly evenly concentrated throughout the site, spilling over the edge of the hill to the west and southwest. A variety of flaked lithics were collected and one fragment of a groundstone mano was noted. We made a single surface collection from the entire site. The ceramics are rather undiagnostic, but appear to be predominantly EIP/MH with a trace of Wanka III material. Discussion: This site, like nearby Site J-105, may have been a small, possibly permanent homestead. Its age could not be clearly determined, but it probably pertained to the EIP/MH, with a minimal Wanka III (LH) occupation. Classification: EIP/MH (?): Hamlet LH: ? UMARP SITE NO. J-107 Date of Survey: May 31, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [ca. 436450 E, 8697350 N; 11.7832° S, 75.5833° W] Natural Setting: 3600 masl, in the rolling uplands zone in the upper kichwa on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site lies on a gentle slope, just over the edge of the hilltop (to the east) of a hill rising directly above the confluence of the Ríos Mantaro and Quishuarcancha. The Río Mantaro lies to the south and the Río Quishuarcancha to the east and north of the hill. The hillslope falls off rapidly to the drainages in both directions below the site. Permanent water is accessible, albeit with some difficulty, since the Río Mantaro lies about 200 m directly downslope to the northeast. No springs were noted on the hill that supports the site, but a seasonal drainage, probably spring-fed, lies about 250 m to the northwest. Erosion is slight, because of the gentle slope of the hill and

298

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

terracing below the edge of the ceramic scatter. The soil depth is probably 30 cm or more. There is little or no natural vegetation in this fully cultivated terrain. Modern Land Use: The site area is completely devoted to rainfall-based cultivation. On top of the hill was a wheat field, with a crop standing about 1 m high and ready to harvest at the time of survey. Below the edge of this field is a series of terraces with recently plowed potato fields. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a few structure foundations scattered over the hillslope, with an intermixed very light ceramic scatter. The site is in poor condition, having been cultivated fairly extensively. Structural Remains. There are at least six rubble mounds scattered throughout the site, which probably represent the remains of residential structures. Two of these show evidence of aligned structure foundations still visible under the rock piles, which are about 3.5 m in diameter. It is difficult to estimate the size of the structures, since they have been so badly disturbed by field clearing, but they appear to have been circular in plan. The masonry appears to have been standard limestone pirka. No building clusters were observed, but the extensive field clearing may have eliminated all but a few structures from showing surface evidence. Overall, it is likely that no more than 15–20 structures were originally present. Surface Finds. Surface pottery occurs in very light and light density, and appears to be exclusively EIP/MH, although a few modern sherds were also noted, probably resulting from the practice of fertilizing cultivated plots with household garbage. Sherd density is relatively higher on and around the rubble mounds. We made two surface collections: Collection 107 = 901 was taken from a rubble mound at the east (downslope) edge of the wheat field, over an area of 5 × 5 m; Collection 107 = 902 was taken from an area about 10 × 10 m of recently harvested ground in the center of the wheat field. One piece of groundstone (part of a batan) and a partial bag of flaked lithics were also collected. We noted no stone hoes. Discussion: This site is part of a series of small EIP/MH settlements scattered around the crest of this hill and down the slope to the east, near the confluence of the Ríos Mantaro and Quishuarcancha. Sites J-105, J-106, and J-107 could be considered sectors of the same dispersed settlement. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet UMARP SITE NO. J-108, “Huacllimarca” Date of Survey: June 1, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [ca. 436100 E, 8698750 N; 11.7706° S, 75.5865° W] Natural Setting: 3800 masl, in the upper kichwa in the rolling uplands zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site lies on top of a high, rounded hill that falls off about 400 m in elevation to the Río Quishuarcancha to the northeast and the same distance to a small tributary to the west and south. To the north-northwest the gradient is less steep and a ridgeline connects the hill to an area of rolling hills. Steep drainages surround the hill on the west, south, and east sides of the hill, all feeding into the Río Mantaro, about 2 km to the southeast. The natural vegetation is grass and low cactus. Erosion is severe around edges of the site where there is no terracing. Where the ground is terraced and toward the central habitation area, the erosion is slight. The soil depth is 10–20 cm at most, even on the terraces. Bedrock is visible throughout the site. Modern Land Use: On the west and northwest, terraced fields are cultivated in rainfall-based wheat and potatoes. At the time of survey, the land had been in fallow for many years, except for terraced fields along the lower, western edge of the site. Most of the surface was being grazed by sheep. Archaeological Remains: The site comprises a nucleated area of well-preserved stone buildings atop a terraced hill, covering a total of 4.1 ha of habitation area. The site is broken into a series of terraces with 2–3 structures on each. Many building walls have broken down, but most retain full foundations and walls standing up to 1–2 m high. Apart from modern farming on the lower terraces, the site has not been badly disturbed and there has been no apparent looting. Structural Remains. (1) The rectangular and circular buildings. In general, the architecture lies along the crest of the hill, which is elliptical, elongated along the north-south axis. The structural remains consist primarily of about 200 buildings, all of double-faced limestone pirka masonry. The site is dominated by an area of 5–6 single-room rectangular buildings and fairly large (4–7 m in external diameter) circular structures at the crest of the hill. There is no evidence for a bifurcation of the site into two parts, and the finer architecture grades into apparent residential compounds. The structures are distributed fairly evenly throughout the site, although the northwest quadrant is somewhat denser than the others. In orders of structure density, the quadrants are northwest, southwest, northeast, and southeast.

Except for the 5–6 rectangular structures on the hill crest, all the remaining structures are circular. All the structures are single story, as far as we can determine from the standing architecture. The only building standing to the roofline is a small (1.5 m across, 1.5 m high) chullpa, or beehive-shaped tomb (no bone visible on the surface) in the northwest quadrant. The rectangular buildings are concentrated in the center of the site, with the exception of one (#3 described below) that lies about halfway along the southern half of the north-south axis, about 30 m west of the axis. The dominant rectangular structure at the hill summit measures 8.3 m (north-south) × 4.6 m (east-west), with a single door facing east. It overlooks a terrace (20 × 15 m), and there are no structures on the first couple of terraces below to the east, thus apparently offering an unimpeded view across the Río Quishuarcancha to the main Mantaro Valley and the cordillera oriental. A smaller rectangular structure (6.1 m north-south × 4.6 m east-west) lies adjacent to the south, offset about a meter west; it also has a single door facing east. About 10 m to the north of the first structure is a square building, about 4 m on a side. The other rectangular structure of note (#3) measures 9.0 m northsouth × 5.8 m east-west, and has two doors on the east side. The masonry on the rectangular buildings is relatively well finished; the door margins and corners are columnar. There is, however, little evidence in any structure of a concerted effort to lay the rock in courses. Apart from the area of central rectangular buildings, the structures are grouped around open patios, with walls connecting them and defining compounds. This pattern is present primarily along the gently sloping crest of the hill, which contains about a third of the architecture. Where the slope is steeper, the ground is terraced, with 1 or 2 structures on many terraces. As the site descends to the perimeter walls, the density of structures decreases, and the proportion of modern agricultural fields increases to 100%. About 30–40% of the area within the perimeter walls has no buildings on it; this is located primarily just inside the interior perimeter wall on the north and east sides of the site. The layout of buildings, walls, and terraces produces an irregular pattern, with pathways defined between patio groups. The few paths we could make out were about 1–2 m wide. It was not clear whether, or to what degree, access from any one part of the site to another was restricted. (2) The stone-faced terraces. The entire site is terraced from the perimeter walls to the gently sloping crest line, with the exception of the north area between the lowermost architectural remains and the interior perimeter wall. This latter terrain is badly eroded and does not seem to have been improved in any way. The terraces seldom exceed 10 m in width. Their length is variable, from about 10 m to about 50 m, and their height ranges from about 1.0 m to about 2.5 m. In general, the terraces grade from a primary architectural function on the top of the site to an agricultural use toward the peripheries. Terracing continues outside the west perimeter wall about five more levels downslope. (3) The perimeter walls and gateways. The site is essentially surrounded by high walls: the steeper the approach, the fewer the walls. On the north, there are three of these, roughly parallel, spaced about 25 m apart. On the west, there are two roughly parallel walls, and on the south and east, one each. The west and east walls are further protected by a series of terraces, and the terrain below the south wall falls off into a sheer drop of some 400 m. The walls are up to 2 m thick and 3 m high on the north and west. They are built of large rocks and mud mortar, and generally give upslope onto terraces. No dry moats were noted. Four points of access into the site were observed: Gateway No. 1. There is a single opening way in the interior perimeter wall at the northeast corner of the site. This measures 1.0–1.5 m wide, and is faced with large rocks on either side, but has no further architectural embellishment nor any directly associated structures. Gateway No. 2. A second point of access is located in the same wall at the northwest corner of the site. Here the wall is extremely robust, about 2 m wide and 2 m high, and built of large rocks and boulders. The gateway is about 2 m wide, and becomes a lined path extending upward into the site. A single row of limestone rocks about 0.5–1.0 m high lines either side of the path for about 30 m into the site. The path itself has been dug about 0.5 m into the ground, so that access through the gate and path would render a person passing through vulnerable to anyone commanding an interior position. A small circular structure lies about 20 m away from the path inside the wall, but other structures are much farther uphill. Gateway No. 3. The third gate is in the northwest part of the north exterior wall. It is a bit smaller than the lined gates and has no interior pathway, but is imposing and defensible nonetheless.

Appendix A

299

Table A96. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-108. Coll. No.

Area

Comments

108 = 901 10 × 10 m From two small terraces in the southeast quadrant. One circular building foundation on the upper terrace. 108 = 902 5 × 10 m From one terrace in an architecturally dense part of the southwest quadrant. The terrace is bordered above, below, and to one side by circular buildings. 108 = 903 15 × 20 m Taken in the center of the site in an open, terrace-patio area to the east of the highest central rectangular structure. Circular buildings border the terrace to the north and south. 108 = 904 10 × 10 m Taken over two adjoining terraces in the center of the northeast quadrant. Circular structures buttress the terraces above and below the collection area. 108 = 905 10 × 19 m Taken from two terraces about 100 m northwest of the center of the site. One circular building lies to the north and south of each terrace. Gateway No. 4. The fourth point of access lies toward the south end of the west interior wall. At one point, the wall stops and the terrace below it grades into the terrace above. This provides a ramp into the site, although the exterior wall must still be broached, and there are several additional terraces above this point to the east. (4) The possible wells. In the north half, at least three holes were dug into bedrock. These are about 1.0 m in diameter and of an undetermined depth; they were filled with loose rock at the time of survey. These were apparently wells, since the vegetation in them (including ferns) is adapted to wet conditions. The closest alternative water source is about 150 m downslope to the west. Surface Finds. The surface pottery throughout the site is very light to light, concentrated in terraces below the dominant areas of architecture. Various Wanka II–III (LIP/LH) types were found, along with a little Inca, Wanka-Inca, and early Colonial. Traces of EIP/MH pottery were also present. Five collections were taken, all from grassy surfaces (Table A96). Discussion: This was a residential and agricultural site, apparently first occupied during the late LIP (Wanka II) and occupied by a reduced population during the LH (Wanka III) and into the early Colonial Period (Wanka IV). The significance of the traces of EIP/MH surface pottery is uncertain. The last occupation of this site may have been the community known historically as Huacllamarca or Huajlasmaraca. We estimate the site’s maximal population as 369–615 inhabitants. The surface collections indicate that the dominant occupation occurred during Wanka II, when it was likely built with defense in mind. The site is very similar to other late LIP sites in layout and appearance; the architecture suggests some internal social differentiation. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Wanka II Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village UMARP SITE NO. J-109, “Llamap Shillon” Date of Survey: June 3, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [ca. 435150 E, 8696900 N; 11.7873° S, 75.5953° W] Natural Setting: 3925 masl, in the rolling uplands in the lower puna on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site occupies two knolls and a saddle on a long, north-south trending ridge in a valley descending toward the Río Mantaro from the west and north. On both sides of the ridge are gentle, seasonal quebradas 100–150 m below the crest of the hill, draining seasonal rainfall and run-off from springs. At the south end of the ridge, the ground falls off in a nearly vertical drop to the Río Mantaro ca. 400 m below. The natural vegetation is a thin cover of grass, low bushes, and cactus. Erosion is severe below the habitation area and between the north and south knolls of the site. On the north knoll, terracing and modern occupation have built up the soil and reduced erosion, except at the far north tip, which is badly eroded. In the south, erosion is severe everywhere, with bedrock exposures throughout the habitation areas. The soil cover is thin, up to 20–30 cm in the north sector, and 0–10 cm in the south. Modern Land Use: The limits of the modern community of Jisse lie about 100 m to the north. The architectural areas of the site are used for marginal grazing. The east slope of the ridge is used extensively for agricultural fields. Modern construction of walls around fields has destroyed part of the site’s perimeter walls, and a few modern fields have penetrated into the archaeological residential sector of the southeast slope of the north knoll. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of two large sectors of dense architecture, both enclosed by up to three parallel walls, and separated by a large open area. The total habitation area measures 18.6 ha. The preservation of

different parts of the site varies significantly, depending on intrusion of modern fields and the use of rock from ancient structures for building modern houses. The south sector is in generally better condition than the north, probably because it is less accessible to the inhabitants of modern Jisse. The buildings in the south sector stand up to 3.0 m high, although the majority of structures have deteriorated substantially. The only structures with any roof remaining are small storage buildings, tombs (chullpas), or coverings over springs. The northern sector of the site is preserved best in its southern half, particularly along the west side of the central ridge. Many structures there retain walls standing over 2 m high; a minority of the buildings have surviving walls less than 1 m high. From the crest of the north knoll to the north end of the site, most of the structures have been reduced to the level of their foundations; a few (< 10%) of the buildings in this area have walls standing over 1 m high. Most of the east side of the site has been disturbed by extensive construction of modern fields and their encircling walls. The extent of this disturbance is hard to determine precisely, since it is unclear whether much of the area was used for corrals at the time of occupation, or was unused. One result of the modern field clearing is that any ancient perimeter walls that may have existed in this area have been dismantled. The modern fields penetrate the residential parts of the archaeological site only slightly along the east edge of the north sector. Structural Remains. The architectural organization of this site is complex, but the basic layout consists of two sectors of buildings, each surrounded by one to three perimeter walls. These sectors are separated by a wide area with only 1 structure and a series of walled areas, probably delimiting corrals. Each sector is subdivided by large walls, which appear to define multi-residential compounds. Further field study will be necessary to determine the significance of these mid-sized districts. North sector architecture. The architecture in the north sector is about three to four times as dense as that in the south sector. The north sector occupies the north face of the south knoll (the lower section, north of the open areas), the saddle between the knolls, and the entire north knoll. Within this area, the highest concentration of architecture lies along the west side of the site up to the crest of the north knoll. Along the east side of the crest line, the architecture remains fairly dense for the first 20–40 m below the crest line, but faces out rapidly below that point, leaving a gap of perhaps 50 m to the interior perimeter wall. Virtually all of these structures are circular, built of limestone pirka with slightly inwardleaning walls that typify Wanka residential architecture. The architecture of this sector is generally grouped into a series of compounds, separated by walls and terraces. From surface indications, it is difficult to assess how many structures belonged to different compound groups, but a rough estimate would be the 1–5 structures typical of other, better-preserved late LIP Wanka sites. In many areas, particularly along the edges of the site and in the saddle, the compounds are built on terraces that have been buttressed by stone walls up to a meter, or so, high. A notable fraction (20–40%) of the structures in the saddle area have courses of neatly trimmed rocks, set in mud mortar, from the ground to the roof. In other parts of the north sector, occasional structures can be found with coursing, but the majority have been reduced to close to ground level, and it is thus impossible to say to what extent they have been coursed in the past. We noted at least 4 small (5 m maximum per side) rectangular structures in the north sector, concentrated in the area with the finer architecture. These were apparently not associated with one another in any systematic way, since they occur in different areas, separated by at least 20–30 m. The rectangular structures were small and peripherally located, so that they do not seem to have played a central elite, public, or ceremonial role, such as the rectangular buildings at major Wanka

300

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

II and III sites such as Hatunmarca (Site No. 472), Tunanmarca (Site No. 476), and perhaps Marca (Site No. 431). At the peak of the north knoll are five or six open terraces covering an area up to 20 m in length and 10 m in width. Few, if any, structures are present on these terraces, although there were buildings on other terraces around the sides and down the slopes of the knoll. Although there is no obvious large-scale architecture in this open area, designating it as a ceremonial-civic area would be contingent upon showing that the open, central space was allocated to public activities. Apart from the finer architecture to the south of this area, in the saddle between the knolls, there does not seem to be any good architectural reason to assign an elite designation to any part of the site, including the open area atop the north knoll. Given the size of the site, the restriction of access by walls, and the differences in masonry and ceramics, however, it seems quite likely that the site evidences some sort of a social hierarchy. Until more detailed investigation, however, the nature and organization of such a hierarchy remains unclear, although the north knoll, particularly the saddle area, seems a likely area for elite residence. South sector architecture. The southern sector is the smaller of the two residential zones, comprising about 25–35% of the site’s total residential area. This area is very open in terms of structural density, perhaps comparable to Chawin (Site No. 461). The most interesting aspect of the sector’s layout is that the buildings do not obviously cluster into compounds, as is the case elsewhere on this site and in other coeval settlements. The structures are generally well separated, with many buildings seeming to stand out on their own. The general impression is that the area was occupied rapidly by a number of families, each occupying 1 or 2 structures. As is the case elsewhere, the area among structures was generally divided into patios by walls joined to buildings. These walls are about 0.5–2.0 m high and surround areas up to 20–40 m on a side. The density of midden and surface ceramic scatter is extremely low here, suggesting that the south sector was occupied for only a short period. All the 200–300 structures in this sector are circular, with the density falling off to virtually nothing a short distance below the crest of the hill. All were built of the limestone pirka masonry characteristic of Wanka settlements in the region. Only a very few structures exhibited any effort either at coursing even the basal rows or at trimming the rocks neatly. Measurements of a haphazardly selected sample of 10 structures yielded a mean external diameter of 4.2 m and a range of 3.5–5.1 m, typical of Wanka residences in the region. To the east of the main concentration of buildings, a gap of 50 m or more separates the interior perimeter wall and the lowest structures. Winding among the structures were several wide passageways running irregularly from the perimeter into the interior of the sector, generally from the east side interior perimeter wall. These paths were 2–5 m wide and were often lined on either side with stones. Several differences can be noted between the north and south sectors. First, the north sector does not exhibit the large enclosures associated with the structures on the south. Second, the architecture in the north sector is generally finer than that found in the south, and is, in certain instances, among the finest Wanka architecture in the Upper Mantaro Region. Third, the soil and midden deposits are substantially deeper in the north than in the south, indicating that the former was occupied for a greater period of time. Perimeter walls and terracing. A series of parallel perimeter walls surrounds the entire site. Along the west there is a maximum of four parallel walls, each supporting a terrace, one above the other. These are quite well preserved, and gaining the top would require a climb of 3 m or more in places. On the east, modern corral construction has obliterated the perimeter walls along at least half the site, although little sections of the original perimeter wall can be picked up in field walls and terraces. The western walls appear to continue around the north end of the site, although modern rock pirating has made it difficult to determine if all four walls existed here in the past. At the far south end of the site, where the hill falls off precipitously to the Río Mantaro, no perimeter wall is visible. Surrounding each of the residential sectors is a high perimeter wall, analogous to those found at other major Wanka II settlements, such as Hatunmarca (Site 472) and Tunanmarca (Site 476). Those walls still stand up to 2 m and higher in some areas. Because they have been partially broken down, access points are not obvious, apart from a gateway at the north end of the northern sector’s interior wall. This is marked by a single stone erected on end. Another entrance lies along the west side of the site, halfway down the south face of the north knoll. It is about 1.5 m wide and lies above a series of terraces, each of which is faced by an additional perimeter wall. At the second entrance, there is a jog in a section of wall, creating a right angle in the perimeter wall. This section projects

out about 5–8 m and there is a circular structure in the corner above, suggesting that it served to control access through the gate. The wall here is about a meter thick and is mortared. The highest concentration of terracing lies on the east and west sides of the saddle area and up the south face of the north knoll. The terraces on the west side stand up to 2 m high and the wall continues well above the surface of the ground (1+ m). The main terrace walls here could therefore also have served as defensive walls. The terraces were generally faced with mortared walls, whose limestone was probably mined from the bedrock extruding in the immediate vicinity. The terracing throughout the rest of the site seems to derive from an effort to flatten land more for buildings than for agricultural fields. Very little of the land within the site was open for crops, at least within the zones given to residential architecture. Between the residential areas and the perimeter walls, the land could have been used for corralling herds or for some agriculture. However, most of the land in this area today is very shallow and eroded and was probably not used for agriculture in the past. The possible corrals. Between the two residential sectors is an extensive area without any buildings. The south half of this area is open, with a very shallow soil deposit on about half the surface and exposed bedrock on the remainder. The north half of the open area is subdivided into rectangular units about 25–40 m on a side by a series of low (0.5 m), unmortared limestone walls. These give the appearance of being corral areas, although the walls certainly are not presently high enough or solid enough to have kept animals penned up. The lack of mortar in the walls also leaves the antiquity of their construction open to question. Internal water sources. Within the southern sector is a system of water sources, deriving from at least eight underground springs. For the most part, the outlets for the water are lined in stone, with small catchment basins in front. One example was built of vertical slabs of limestone that lined the outlet on three sides. The water flowed out from beneath a ground-level capstone into a basin about 5 × 10 m and 0.2 m deep. The most elaborate of these capped springs was a full circular pirka structure about 2.5 m in diameter and 1.5 m high, with a corbelled arch roof partially preserved on top. This stood at the far south end of the site, beyond any other structures. The existing vegetation in the immediate vicinity of the springs is wet-adapted—e.g., moss and ferns—suggesting that failure of the water supply was not the reason that the site was abandoned. The distribution of water sources in the northern sector was not nearly so visible as in the southern sector. Only one clear water source with catchment basin was observed, located on the southern face of the north knoll, in the area of finer architecture. This feature was only about 1.0 m in diameter. Surface Finds. The density of surface remains recovered varies markedly throughout the site. In the south sector the sherd density is trace to very light, with slight concentrations in the terraces along the west side and in fallowed fields. The ceramic density in the north sector is generally higher than in the south, ranging from very light to light. The density of rock rubble on the ground, however, makes this a tenuous assessment. Many flaked lithics were collected with the ceramics. Manos, rocker grinders, and deep mortar fragments were noted, but not collected. We made six surface collections (Table A97). The ceramics are very predominantly Wanka II (late LIP). No imperial Inca sherds were found, but a few sherds that appear to have incorporated some Incaic elements were found in four of the six collections. We detected a few probable EIP/MH sherds in one collection.

Table A97. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-109. Coll. No.

Area

Comments

109 = 901 109 = 902 109 = 903 109 = 904 109 = 905 109 = 906

20 × 30 m 20 × 40 m 30 × 40 m 15 × 20 m 20 × 20 m 20 × 20 m

SW quad of south sector south sector, halfway down central ridge line axis south slope of north sector, along axis east of axis, on south slope of north knoll far northwest end of site crest of the north knoll, east side of axis

Appendix A Discussion: This site is primarily a large Wanka II town or small center, defensively located and constructed. The maximal Wanka II population is estimated at 4374–7290 inhabitants. The Wanka II settlement contained the two residential sectors characteristic of large sites, but had a minimum of large-scale architecture and open plaza area within residential sectors. The extensive agricultural land to the east, west, and north of the site could have supported a large population, and water sources within the site would have made it easily defensible. The north sector seems to have been occupied for a much longer period than the south, given the extensiveness of the terracing, the density of the architecture, the relatively greater depth of the soil, and the density of the midden. It is possible that the occupation continued into Wanka III in much reduced form. It is possible, however, that the late ceramics pertain to an early Colonial (Wanka IV) reoccupation of the settlement. The presence of a few probable EIP/ MH sherds indicates that there was a small EIP/MH occupation of uncertain character. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LIP: Wanka II Local Center LH: Wanka III–IV Small Village UMARP SITE NO. J-110 Date of Survey: June 3, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [ca. 434100 E, 8697050 N; 11.7859° S, 75.6049° W] Natural Setting: 3850 masl, in the lower puna in the rolling uplands on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site is located on the lower slopes of a steep hill, about 50–75 m above a drainage that lies to the north and east. The hillslope trends down gently to the southeast, while to the west the hill rises rapidly to crest at 4365 masl. A gentle spring-fed stream flows northwest-southeast about 75 m below the site. It continues south for about 2.5 m into the Río Mantaro. There is relatively little erosion because of the moderate slope of the hill and because the soil is conserved by stone walls that serve as lynchet buttresses. The depth of the soil is about 15–20 cm throughout the site. The vegetation is grass and cultivated oats. Modern Land Use: The site lies about 1.0 km west of the outskirts of the modern village of Jisse. The land on which the site lies is devoted to rainfallbased agriculture. At the time of survey it was almost totally cultivated in oats, which had been about half harvested. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a sherd scatter and architectural remnants in a few cultivated fields, covering an area of ca. 2.2 ha. Structural Remains. The standing architecture consists of the remains of 3 or 4 circular, limestone pirka structures scattered throughout the site. Five old stone-faced terrace lines ascend the hill. The surviving architecture rests primarily on the second lowermost terrace. Surface Finds. There are very light to light concentrations of surface pottery in a couple of areas. We made one surface collection from an area of 18 × 24 m. The diagnostics comprise mostly Inca and Inca-related ceramics. A number of EIP/MH (Huacrapukio phase) jar handles were also noted and collected. Other collected artifacts included flaked lithics and two hoe fragments. Discussion: This site appears to have been a dispersed farmstead occupied first in the EIP/MH and than again in the LH (Wanka III). Its position on good land next to a spring would have been advantageous for a small-scale agricultural operation. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village UMARP SITE NO. J-111 Date of Survey: June 3, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [ca. 433800 E, 8697100 N; 11.7854° S, 75.6076° W] Natural Setting: 3925 masl, in the lower puna in the rolling uplands zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site is in a rockshelter that is on a steep hillslope above Site J-110. A gentle drainage is situated about 50 m to the north and east. The site itself is not eroded, although the slopes immediately surrounding it have been rather severely. The soil depth at the site is about 20 cm, or more. The natural vegetation consists of brush, cactus, and grass around the mouth of the cave. Modern Land Use: The site is presently used as a small corral for animals and as a temporary shelter for herders. Archaeological Remains: This is a small limestone cave site, with a fireblackened roof, about 2.5 m wide at the mouth, 5 m deep, and 2 m high at the

301

mouth. It is difficult to determine the general condition of any prehistoric deposits because the entire surface of the cave is covered by animal dung. Structural Remains. The architectural remains consist of a modern field wall that blocks the mouth of the cave. It is unclear if any architecture here is prehistoric. Surface Finds. Neither surface pottery nor lithics were observed, but scattered human and animal bone are present. Discussion: This site is a small shelter, or possibly tomb, of uncertain age. Classification: Uncertain age: ? UMARP SITE NO. J-112 [not located on map] Date of Survey: June 3, 1983 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [?] Natural Setting: 3960 masl, in the lower puna, in the rolling uplands zone on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site lies atop a gently rolling hill on a major incline trending eastward down toward the modern village of Jisse. The terrain is open and gently rolling, with a steep decline to the north and east. To the northwest, west, and south the land is in open fields. The vegetation on the site is low grass, cactus, and scrub brush. A quebrada lies about 75 m to the west, starting just above the site and falling off steeply to the east. Erosion is moderate over the whole site, and somewhat more severe downhill to the east. The soil is shallow throughout the site, 0–10 cm in depth. Modern Land Use: Mainly grazing. Potatoes and barley were under rainfallbased cultivation in nearby fields. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a ceramic scatter among a series of walled-in areas, probably ancient camelid corrals, covering an area of ca. 1.3 ha. The general condition of the site is fairly good. There is little or no modern disturbance, except in the south where many modern fields have been laid out. The borders of these fields appear to coincide with old corral borders. Structural Remains. The architecture comprises a series of corrals covering about 50 × 250 m, grading into modern fields and corrals. The ancient corrals are 20–40 m on a side, and are generally rectangular. At least 8 small circular structures, with corbelled arch roofs, were constructed at various corners of the corrals. They were made of rude limestone pirka masonry, stand about 1.5 m high, and measure about 3.0 m in diameter. One corral encloses a possible seasonal spring, in front of which a ditch 20 cm deep and 2 m long and 1 m wide has been dug out in recent times. Surface Finds. The surface pottery is very light, mostly heavy jars, some possibly modern but with some Wanka II–III (LIP/LH) jar rims. Other artifacts include some flaked lithics, but we noted no groundstone. A single surface collection was made from the entire site area. Discussion: This site probably represents a small LIP/LH herding facility, probably with some continued occupation into the historic period. It is situated near the upper end of the tuber cultivating zone, but there are fields higher up that are under cultivation today. The proximity of perennial springs and open grasslands near the main Mantaro Valley, and especially the proximity of the Río Mantaro, would have made the area attractive for small-to-moderate-scale herding. The very small size of the buildings and the lack of appreciable midden and household compounds suggest that the site was probably occupied only intermittently. The small structures would probably have served best as temporary or seasonal shelters rather than permanent habitations. Classification: LIP/LH: Small Village UMARP SITE NO. J-113 Date of Survey: June 4, 1983 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [ca. 430850 E, 8703100 N; 11.7311° S, 75.6346° W] Natural Setting: 3850 masl, in the lower puna on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site lies in rolling uplands on a north-facing slope, about 100 m south of the center of the modern village of Pomacancha. The topography of the site area is a fairly steep terraced hill face. The hill descends in all directions, most markedly to the north and east. A small, spring-fed, intermittent drainage lies to the north; it flows east into a large quebrada that flows north along the east side of the site. Both watercourses pass about 75 m below the crest of the hill, and about 20 m below the lowest sector of the site. Erosion has been minimized in most places by the erection of extensive, stone-faced terracing over the entire site. The soil depth ranges from 0 to 30 cm, depending on the part of the terraces where it is measured: the soil tends to be deeper toward the

302

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table A98. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-113. Coll. No.

Area

Comments

113 = 901 15 × 50 m on two grassy terraces and one plowed field 113 = 902 20 × 20 m in a plowed field around the west side of the knoll crest

front of the terraces. The natural vegetation around the site is grass, low scrub, thorn brush, and cactus. Modern Land Use: The site is mostly cultivated in barley and potatoes, although a few terraces are in fallow. Archaeological Remains: The site, which covers about 10.2 ha, is in poor condition. Its surface remains consist primarily of a ceramic scatter on a series of stone-faced terraces. The site is generally triangular in shape, as it continues up the face of the hill in an increasingly narrow band. The site ends about 25 m below a small peaked hill, on the top of which is Site J-114. There is no evidence of looting, but extensive modern cultivation has badly disturbed the archaeological surface remains. Structural Remains. The ancient architecture has been largely destroyed, except for the stone terrace faces. The presence of moderate concentrations of rock rubble in many areas, even on the surface of some terraces, suggests that there originally were buildings scattered across the slope, and that the initial terracing of the site was prehistoric. The hillslope is terraced upward for about 250 m at a slope of about 30 degrees. The terraces are faced with mortared fieldstone, and there are occasional remnants of structures scattered throughout the cultivated fields. Surface Finds. The surface pottery is very light to light, and is concentrated at the lower (eastern) end and to the north, where the slope is less steep. The ceramics are mostly EIP/MH, with some Inca, scattered in pockets across the site. The ceramics continue up the hill at a density of very light to light in clusters that may pertain to houses. Only scattered groundstone was observed, and flaked lithics were light over the whole site. Two surface collections were made (Table A98). Discussion: This site appears to be part of an extended strip settlement along the low hills and gentle slopes to the west, south, and east of Pomacancha. It appears to have been a dispersed agricultural or herding community, with a very predominant EIP/MH component, with a modest reoccupation during the LH. We estimate the EIP/MH population as 918–1530 inhabitants. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LH: Wanka III Small Village UMARP SITE NO. J-114 Date of Survey: June 1983 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [ca. 430200 E, 8702800 N; 11.7338° S, 75.6406° W] Natural Setting: 3950 masl, in lower puna on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site is located on a small peak on a ridge crest along the south side of the Pomacancha Valley, about 700 m south of the modern village of Pomacancha. The site is confined to the top of the peak that descends precipitously to a quebrada on the south and east, and more gently onto a saddle between peaks to the west, and gradually toward Pomacancha to the north. The closest drainage is a deep quebrada, 100 m below the site to the south and east. Erosion is minimal on top of the site, but severe off the edges where the land is not cultivated. The soil depth is generally 0–5 cm deep on the hilltop, and about 10–15 cm deep in a cultivated field at the west end. The natural vegetation is mostly ichu grass, scrub, and low cactus. Modern Land Use: The site was fallow at the time of survey, except for a potato field at its far west end. Archaeological Remains: This is a small hilltop site, covering about 100 m east-west by 25 m north-south (0.3 ha). It was probably associated with the terraced fields (Site J-113) below. The structures have collapsed considerably, but have not been obviously disturbed. Structural Remains. Five collapsed limestone pirka structures are dispersed across the site, concentrated on top of the peak. Their exterior diameters are 4.2

m, 4.5 m, 3.1 m, 3.4 m, and ca. 2.8 m. The three preserved doorways face east. No other stone rubble that might represent the remains of other structures is visible, and no other wall constructions remain. Surface Finds. The surface pottery is a very light to light scatter over the whole site, with both EIP/MH and Wanka II–III (LIP/LH) components. We made one surface collection from an area of 10 × 50 m. Other artifacts included flaked lithics, but we saw no groundstone. Discussion: This site is probably a small, probably permanent, residential settlement occupied during the EIP/MH, and reoccupied during the LIP/LH. We estimate its population at about 25 inhabitants. This site is part of a series of EIP/MH sites around Pomacancha. A major chert quarry (Site J-99) lies up the main quebrada to the west. Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet LIP/LH: Hamlet UMARP SITE NO. J-115 [not located on map] Date of Survey: June 4, 1983 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [?] Natural Setting: 3925 masl, in the lower puna on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site is situated in a series of rockshelters on a cliff face that ascends about 75 m to the hill crest above, and descends in a more gentle, but still very steep slope, about 75 m to the village of Pomacancha. The ridgeline and cliff face in which the rockshelters are situated trend down from the northwest. A seasonal stream flows eastward out of a valley to the west of Pomacancha approximately 250 m south of the site area. No springs were observed in the vicinity. The caves that comprise the site do not themselves appear to be eroded on the interior, but the hillslopes immediately below are severely eroded, except where a few agricultural terraces and lynchets have been constructed. Inside the caves, the soil depth is no more than ca. 10 cm. Only lichen and moss grow on the cave interiors, but grass, cactus, and low bushes cover the hillslopes around the cave mouths. Modern Land Use: The rockshelters are used as temporary shelters by herders and farmers in the area. The surrounding terrain is used for mixed grazing and rainfall-based potato-barley cultivation. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a series of perhaps 10 caves along a cliff face above Pomacancha. These appear to be partially natural and partially remodeled out of the cliff face. Two or three appear to be directly cut out, as though they were burial caves, but none shows any evidence of bones or associated burial materials. The characterization of these caves as an archaeological site is problematic, in that only a few lithics were found scattered at the cave mouths or on the talus slopes below. The surfaces of most of the caves have been disturbed by modern use, and, without further investigation, it is difficult to ascertain to what extent, if any, the caves were used prehistorically. Surface Finds. We noted no prehistoric surface pottery, but some Modern or Colonial sherds were found. We made no surface collection. A few flaked chert artifacts, mostly debitage, were found on the ground surface in front of and below the cave mouths. Since there is an EIP/MH site on the hilltop above the cliff face (Site J-114), it is difficult to determine with any assurance that the artifacts came from use of the caves and were not washed down from the EIP/ MH site higher up. Discussion: This site does not have an assured prehistoric component, but it may have been used as temporary shelter by early occupants of the region. The principal evidence for ancient human use of the caves consists of the obvious hollowing out of some of the cave interiors and the presence of flaked lithics. There are several EIP/MH sites in the immediate vicinity, and it is probable that herders used the caves for shelter, if only temporarily. Classification: Unknown period: ? UMARP SITE NO. J-116 Date of Survey: June 6, 1983 Location: Hoja Pomacancha [ca. 431400 E, 8704350 N; 11.7198° S, 75.6295° W] Natural Setting: 3950 masl, in the puna on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site is located below a north-facing hill face along the sheer cliffs above the modern village of Pomacancha. The site lies on a gentle knoll at the base of the steep hill and cliffs that mark the south end of our survey in this transect. To the north, the knoll descends gradually toward a quebrada that descends into

Appendix A Table A99. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-116. Coll. No.

Area

Comments

116 = 901 35 × 50 m half in a plowed field, half in a fallow field 116 = 902 40 × 45 m in a recently plowed field and along a rock wall

Pomacancha and then off to the south and west. An intermittent stream lies about 100 m south of the site. Because of the gentle gradient and extensive terracing, there is little erosion on the site. The principal natural vegetation consists of low bushes along rubble walls at field borders. Modern Land Use: At the time of survey, the entire site was devoted to rainfall-based cultivation of potatoes and barley, with about half in fallow. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a scatter of surface pottery and rock rubble covering an area about 150 m north-south by 300 m east-west (4.5 ha) on the knoll top. Structural Remains. No structures are visible, except for the very occasional circular limestone pirka foundation fragment. However, the extensive rock rubble piled into walls throughout the site indicates that there were formerly many structures, perhaps several score, on the site. Surface Finds. The surface pottery occurs in trace to light densities; the densest concentrations lie along the field borders at the walls where rock and other material has been piled up by modern farmers. The lightest visible sherd concentrations are in the heavy grass areas where the sherds are visible only every couple of meters or so. The systemic correlation between (1) grass and few sherds, and (2) plowed fields and walls and light sherd concentrations suggests that the sherd scatter is fairly even throughout the site. Other artifacts include flaked lithics and a few pieces of groundstone, including a mano and a hoe. We made two surface collections about 150 m apart (Table A99). The surface pottery contains both EIP/MH and Wanka III ceramics. Discussion: This probably represents an agricultural and/or herding settlement, occupied during the EIP/MH and reoccupied during LH (Wanka III) times. We estimate the population for both periods at 504–840 inhabitants. Classification: EIP/MH: Small Village LH: Wanka III Small Village UMARP SITE NO. J-117 Date of Survey: June 6, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [436900 E, 8697700 N; 11.7801° S, 75.5792° W] Natural Setting: 3575 masl, in the lower kichwa on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site is located on a steep hillslope overlooking the confluence of the Ríos Mantaro and Quishuarcancha, on an east-facing slope. The top area of the site lies on a ridge spur that forms a flat terrace projecting about 100 m east from a prominent hill jutting above the Río Mantaro. Above is a sheer incline, and below the slope descends in a series of terraces toward the rivers. The Río Quishuarcancha flows about 500 m away, to the east and north, while the Río Mantaro lies about 300 m south of the site. Access to water is possible from both rivers and from at least one active spring, which emerges below the top terrace and is centrally located with respect to the remainder of the site. Erosion is moderate on the upper levels of the site; terraces minimize erosion below the top. The highest terraces appear to conserve up to 2 m of soil, but where terraces have not been built, the soil depth is 0–5 cm. The natural vegetation consists of sparse grass, cactus, and brush. Modern Land Use: Areas with heavy rock rubble at the top of the site are unused. Many of the terraces below the top of the hill were cultivated at the time of survey, with rainfall-based barley as the dominant crop. Most other terraces were recently in fallow. Only about 30% of the terraced fields have been cultivated in recent years, and most of these are overgrown or are partially covered with rock rubble. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a dispersed set of terraces, structure foundations, and ceramic scatter, covering an area of 12.0 ha. The surface remains extend over both a series of steep terraces and unterraced hillslope. The site is also characterized by intermittent piles of rock rubble, probably representing the remains of collapsed architecture. Because of modern

303

Table A100. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-117. Coll. No.

Area

Comments

117 = 901

40 × 50 m

117 = 902

5 × 80 m

on the upper rocky mounds covered by grass, cactus, and brush along the grassy edge of the uppermost terrace

cultivation and land clearance, the ancient architectural remains are in fairly poor condition overall. Structural Remains. The terraces. The terraces, which are consistently faced with dry-stone walls, range from about 100 m wide at the top to about 5–10 m wide for the narrowest (maximum width). The internal organization of the site was not readily discernable, but some complex features were evidently present prehistorically. The most notable of these is a large, artificially created terrace (ca. 50 m long by 30 m deep), toward the top of the site. This is the second terrace down, just below and south of a terrace with four clustered mounds, described below. The terrace was partially bordered by a thick stone wall (ca. 1 m thick), rising to a height of ca. 0.50 m or less above ground level at the front of the terrace face. Similar large walls lie downhill to the east of this area, apparently segregating some parts of the site from others. Some of these walls are at least 1 m thick and run both parallel and orthogonally to the terraces. We noted at least three of these prominent walls. Many of the terraces retain intact earth-and-clay-mortared support walls, whose height often exceeds 3 m; in many additional cases, the retaining walls have collapsed onto the terrace below. The rockshelter. To the south of the most conspicuous terrace is a rockshelter with a thickly blackened roof. This feature is about 6 m long by 4 m deep, and is currently walled off as a small corral. The rock-rubble mounds. The uppermost part of the site contains sets of rubble mounds clustered into groups separated from one another by 50–100 m. One cluster of four mounds covers an area of ca. 40 × 70 m; a few scatters of rubble lie on a terrace immediately below. These mounds probably represent the remains of house clusters, although no foundation walls were clearly visible. On the top terrace, additional clusters of four and three rubble mounds were observed. On the terraces further down the hill, these rubble mounds could be seen on every third or fourth terrace, either at the terrace face or at the back. Surface Finds. Surface pottery is highly variable across the site. A very light scatter of a sherd or two every few meters occurs throughout. Higher concentrations of 10–20 sherds per square meter are consistently associated with the rubble mounds, which lends credence to the interpretation of these features as domestic architecture. A few flaked lithics and some groundstone also occur. We made two surface collections, and it appears that the primary occupation dates to the EIP/MH, with a bare trace of Inca-related material (Table A100). Discussion: This site is unusual in a number of ways. It may be interpreted as an unusually large EIP/MH settlement, perhaps a large village or small center. If the density of habitation was comparable to that of other farming settlements in the region, its population would have been between 540 and 900 inhabitants. The remains that can readily be taken to be residential structures, however, are relatively few. No more than a score or so are easily recognizable on the ground surface, and the population may have been quite modest, on the order of a couple of hundred people. The dominant architectural features are the massive stone-faced terraces, not habitation structures. The spatial extent of the occupation and the labor invested in terrace construction are anomalous for EIP/MH occupations in the region, especially considering the relative sparseness of the surface deposit. It is possible that some, perhaps most, of the terraces pertain to much later occupation, but the ceramic or architectural evidence to support this view was not evident during our survey. Some of the rubble mounds were located toward the front of the terraces, indicating that they were built either after or during the terrace construction. The unprotected location is appropriate for an LH occupation, but the ceramics contained only a minimal LH component. Classification: EIP/MH: Very Large Village, possibly with regional and/or ritual significance LH: ?

304

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

UMARP SITE NO. J-118 Date of Survey: June 13, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [ca. 437300 E, 8697600 N; 11.7810° S, 75.5755° W] Natural Setting: 3475 masl, in the lower kichwa on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site is situated on a low, terraced hillslope near the confluence of the Ríos Mantaro and Quishuarcancha. The former lies about 500 m to the east, while the latter is only about 75 m to the northeast. The hillslope rises steeply above the site to the west and the east. Because of the extensive terracing at and above the site, erosion is very slight, and the soil is 0.5 m, or more, deep in many areas. While most of the site area is under cultivation, there are low trees and high bushes along the modern field borders. Modern Land Use: The site is almost entirely devoted to rainfall-based cultivation, with maize, habas, and wheat growing in adjoining fields. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a concentration of surface pottery and rock rubble atop a series of terraces, covering an area of about 40 × 25 m (0.9 ha). Structural Remains. No architecture is standing, although there are some rock rubble piles along field walls that may represent the remnants of ancient buildings, plus several stone-faced terraces, with mud mortar, which may also be prehispanic. We estimate that at most there were originally perhaps a score or so buildings here. Surface Finds. There is very light surface pottery over the site, with a surprisingly high (45.6%) Inca component, and no recognizable earlier types. Other artifacts include lithic flakes and groundstone fragments. We made a single surface collection from over an area of 15 × 20 m. Discussion: This is a Wanka III (LH) hamlet or farmstead situated on good river terrace land, spatially discontinuous from the EIP site above to the west (Site No. J-117). The high percentage of Inca ceramics is unusual for such a small settlement. However, its positioning adjacent to rich alluvial soils at this strategic location at the juncture of two major drainages suggests that it may have been a small agricultural settlement installed by the Inca state. It may be comparable in this sense to Sites J-59 (JASP Site 611) and J-74 (JASP Site 556), which appear to have been Wanka III farming settlements established close to the provincial center of Hátun Xauxa (JASP Site 550). In contrast to these other sites, there are no storage facilities at or near Site J-118. Classification: LH: Wanka III Hamlet UMARP SITE NO. J-119 Date of Survey: June 14, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [ca. 434600 E, 8699850 N; 11.7606° S, 75.6002° W] Natural Setting: 3700 masl, in the upper kichwa on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site is located on gently sloping ground just above (south of) the modern village of Janjaillo. The lands around the site are terraced to the north, toward Janjaillo, while the land to the south and east is gently rolling hillslope. To the north and east, the terrain falls off more rapidly to the Río Quishuarcancha. There are numerous springs in the rolling lands to the south and west, the closest being about 200 m to the west. The Río Quishuarcancha lies about 500 m to the north. Because of the extensive terracing, there appears to be little recent erosion, although there are bedrock exposures in many places. In general, soil depth ranges from 0 to 15 cm, except at the front edges of terraces, where it is still more than 20–30 cm deep. There is little natural vegetation in this intensively cultivated area, apart from grass along field borders and in fallow fields. Modern Land Use: The entire site area has been devoted to rainfall-based cultivation in recent years. The dominant crops are habas, wheat, and potatoes. Archaeological Remains: The site is primarily composed of surface pottery and rock rubble scattered over an area of 7.1 ha in agricultural fields. Structural Remains. There is no visible standing architecture, although all the modern fields are lined with stone walls that average about 1 m in height; some of this rubble may derive from ancient structures cleared away by modern farmers. The quantity of roof tile fragments and modern pottery is curious, given the lack of standing architecture. It seems likely that there was a twentiethcentury occupation here, one that was abandoned and converted to agricultural use. Alternatively, the use for fertilizer of household garbage from Janjaillo may have produced the accumulation of modern refuse. Surface Finds. The surface pottery ranges in density from very light to moderate, and is a mixture of EIP/MH, Inca, Colonial, and Modern. We also noted flaked lithics and groundstone fragments.

We made one surface collection from an area of 5 × 10 m in a plowed haba field. It contained moderate amounts of modern and late Colonial ceramics, plus lighter EIP/MH and Inca-related material. Discussion: This was a multicomponent settlement, with EIP/MH, LH (Wanka III), Colonial, and modern occupations. Depending on the density of habitation, its population during any one period may have varied considerably. Using the standard figure of 150 people/ha for agricultural communities, the largest population would have been on the order of 639–1065 inhabitants (60–100% occupation). Because the architecture from all periods has apparently been dismantled and piled into field walls, it is difficult to know if these density figures are appropriate. The high quality of the EIP/MH ceramics here is unusual, especially the decorated pink and orange paste bowls, which are among the more elaborate of the EIP/MH ceramic types. The Wanka III occupation may have been substantially less extensive than the EIP/MH occupation, given that the LH ceramics comprised only about 14% of the sherds recovered. This differential may, however, be attributable to a substantially shorter duration for the Inca-period occupation. The overlay of modern trash makes evaluation of these questions difficult without further investigation. Classification: EIP/MH: Large Village LH: Wanka III Large Village UMARP SITE NO. J-120 Date of Survey: June 14, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [ca. 436150 E, 8698150 N; 11.7760° S, 75.5860° W] Natural Setting: 3600 masl, in the upper kichwa on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site lies on a natural terrace and hillslope, up a steep slope from the Río Quishuarcancha, which lies about 150–200 m to the east. The site is located down the steep west side of the hill on which is situated the archaeological site of Huacllimarca (J-108), about two-thirds of the way down to the river. To the east, the land falls off rapidly to the river, while to the west there is a precipitous hill face. A small tributary drainage lies to the south of the site, and a hill to the north, and a tributary stream running into the Río Quishuarcancha lies about 25 m to the south. Erosion is moderate because of the natural terrace. Nonetheless, the soil depth is shallow, 0–10 cm. The natural vegetation is mostly a thick, low grass, which obscures surface visibility. Modern Land Use: About 80% of the area has been devoted to rainfall-based cultivation, although all the fields appear to have been fallow for several years. Modern farming has disturbed the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a ceramic scatter on a series of stone-faced terraces, covering an area of 0.9 ha. Structural Remains. There are at least four rubble mounds scattered throughout the site: they measure about 8 m in diameter and 1–2 m high. It is probable that these represent the remains of ancient buildings. There are no other visible architectural remnants. The antiquity of the stone-faced terracing is supported by the location of the rubble mounds atop them, and by the consistent mortaring of the stone-wall facings. The most notable construction on the site is a centrally located, spring-fed artificial catchment basin. This feature measures 15 × 20 m, and lies about 30 m from the closest rubble mound. The sides of the basin are earthen, although unmortared stone walls line the top. The antiquity of the basin is unclear, although it was clearly not constructed recently. The catchment basin does not intersect with any other site features. It seems possible that the basin was intended for use as a livestock watering place. Surface Finds. There is a very light scatter of surface pottery and flaked lithics. We made one surface collection from over an area of 15 × 20 m on an agricultural field with a dense grassy cover atop a centrally situated terrace. The ceramics are a mixture of LH (Wanka III) and Colonial pottery, with traces of EIP/ MH material. There is a rubble mound about 20 m east of the collection terrace. Discussion: This site appears to be primarily an LH (Wanka III) and early Colonial hamlet. The significance of the trace of EIP/MH surface pottery is unclear. The water catchment basin suggests that one function of the settlement’s inhabitants may have been to provide water for livestock, although we are unable to determine the age of the basin feature. The dominant presence of Inca-related ceramics suggests that the principal occupation was LH. Classification: EIP/MH: ? LH: Wanka III Hamlet

Appendix A UMARP SITE No. J-121 Date of Survey: June 14, 1983 Location: Hoja Parco [ca. 436300 E, 8698600 N; 11.7719° S, 75.5847° W] Natural Setting: 3675 masl, in the upper kichwa on the north side of the Mantaro Valley. The site lies atop a spur about 20 m below the crest of a ridge amongst the steep hills south and west of the Río Quishuarcancha. To the west are the rolling hills in the area of the modern village of Jisse; to the east and north are the hills of the upper Yanamarca Valley; and to the south is the Río Mantaro. There are rolling hills just to the west of the site, and a terrace to the south, both of which are cultivable. Access to water would have provided little problem, since a spring emerges from the hillside about 75 m away and 25 m below. The Río Quishuarcancha itself lies about 225 m below to the north and east. In the upper sector, the site is not terraced, and the soil has been severely eroded, leaving only a few centimeters in many places, except for the west side of the site, which retains soil up to 30 cm deep. The lower sector is severely eroded, often to bedrock, except within the modern field walls, which keep the soil from washing downslope. Over most of the site there is low grass and cactus scrub, which has been cropped by grazing livestock. Modern Land Use: Primarily grazing for livestock. Two small fields are presently devoted to rainfall-based cultivation. Modern land use has caused significant damage to the archaeological remains. Archaeological Remains: The site consists of a sherd scatter and a few structural foundations and rock rubble over an area of 0.3 ha. The site is divided into upper and lower sections. The upper runs along the crest of the ridge above good agricultural land, and the lower sector covers a small spur just below the tip of the ridge crest. The upper sector extends over an area ca. 100 m long by 25 m wide, while the lower covers an area about 50 × 50 m. The lower sector has been severely damaged by the construction of modern corral walls. The upper sector has not been so badly damaged by modern land use, but most of the ancient architecture has collapsed into rubble. Behind (north of) the lower sector are two small caves, just over the edge of the spur at the beginning of the ascent into the upper sector. These caves are 1.5–2.0 m high at the mouth. The larger (on the west) is 3–4 m deep and contains modern garbage, in addition to a piece of groundstone and a couple of lithic flakes. The other cave is smaller, about 2 m deep, and did not contain any visible artifacts that could be attributed to an ancient occupation. It is almost entirely closed up by an unmortared stone wall, which prevented easy access into the cave. Structural Remains. Five partially preserved structure foundations survive: four in the upper sector and one in the lower. No walls stand above ground level, but the structures appear to be circular, of limestone pirka masonry, measuring 3–5 m in exterior diameter. We saw no indication of clustering of structures into compounds, nor was there any evidence of any other ancient walls on the site. From the amount of rock rubble, we estimate that perhaps 20–25 structures originally existed at the site. Surface Finds. The density of surface pottery ranges from trace to very light, and there are areas in which only one or two sherds can be found per square meter. We also noted a scattering of flaked lithics, and one large groundstone (batan) fragment. Two surface collections were made, both of which contained EIP/MH ceramics (Table A101). Discussion: This site appears to be a small EIP/MH settlement situated adjacent to good agricultural land and access to water. There is no visible evidence for internal differentiation within the site. Unlike many EIP/MH sites in this area, this immediate locality was apparently not reoccupied during the LH (Wanka III). Classification: EIP/MH: Hamlet

Table A101. UMARP surface collections at UMARP Site J-121. Coll. No.

Area

Comments

121 = 901 121 = 902

20 × 20 m 2 × 20 m

in upper sector, in plowed field in lower sector, in plowed field

305 Table A102. Summary of ceramic chronology at sites in the JissePomacancha survey area. Site & Coll. EIP/MH J-93-901 J-94-901 J-95-901 J-96-901 J-97-901 J-98-901 J-99 J-105-901 J-106-901 J-107-901 J-107-902 J-108-901 J-108-902 J-108-903 J-108-904 J-108-905 J-109-901 J-109-902 J-109-903 J-109-904 J-109-905 J-109-906 J-110-901 J-111-901 J-112-901 J-113-901 J-113-902 J-114-901 J-115-901 J-116-901 J-116-902 J-117-901 J-117-902 J-118-901 J-119-901 J-119-902 J-120-901 J-121-901 J-121-902

X X ? X X X X ? ?

LIP

LH

?

X

Colonial X X

X ? ? X X X X X X X X X X X ?

X X X X X X X X X X

?

X X X

? ?

X X

X X

X X X X

?

X X ?

X X

X X X X X

? ? ? ? ? ?

X X X X

?

X

? ? ?

? ?

X X

X ?

306

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A56. Hoja Yauli, EH + EIP/MH sites.

Appendix A

Figure A57. Hoja Yauli, LIP general sites.

307

308

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A58. Hoja Yauli, definite early LIP (Wanka I) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A59. Hoja Yauli, definite late LIP (Wanka II) sites.

309

310

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A60. Hoja Yauli, definite LH (Wanka III) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A61. Hoja Acolla, EH + EIP/MH sites.

311

312

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A62. Hoja Acolla, LIP general sites.

Appendix A

Figure A63. Hoja Acolla, definite early LIP (Wanka I) sites.

313

314

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A64. Hoja Acolla, definite late LIP (Wanka II) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A65. Hoja Acolla, definite LH (Wanka III) sites.

315

316

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A66. Hoja Pomacancha, EH + EIP/MH sites.

Appendix A

Figure A67. Hoja Pomacancha, LIP general sites.

317

318

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A68. Hoja Pomacancha, definite early LIP (Wanka I) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A69. Hoja Pomacancha, definite late LIP (Wanka II) sites.

319

320

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A70. Hoja Pomacancha, definite LH (Wanka III) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A71. Hoja Apata, EH + EIP/MH sites.

321

322

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A72. Hoja Apata, LIP general sites.

Appendix A

Figure A73. Hoja Apata, definite early LIP (Wanka I) sites.

323

324

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A74. Hoja Apata, definite late LIP (Wanka II) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A75. Hoja Apata, definite LH (Wanka III) sites.

325

326

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A76. Hoja Jauja, EH + EIP/MH sites.

Appendix A

Figure A77. Hoja Jauja, LIP general sites.

327

328

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A78. Hoja Jauja, definite early LIP (Wanka I) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A79. Hoja Jauja, definite late LIP (Wanka II) sites.

329

330

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A80. Hoja Jauja, definite LH (Wanka III) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A81. Hoja Parco, EH + EIP/MH sites.

331

332

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A82. Hoja Parco, LIP general sites.

Appendix A

Figure A83. Hoja Parco, definite early LIP (Wanka I) sites.

333

334

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A84. Hoja Parco, definite late LIP (Wanka II) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A85. Hoja Parco, definite LH (Wanka III) sites.

335

336

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A86. Hoja Concepción, EH + EIP/MH sites.

Appendix A

Figure A87. Hoja Concepción, LIP general sites.

337

338

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A88. Hoja Concepción, definite early LIP (Wanka I) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A89. Hoja Concepción, definite late LIP (Wanka II) sites.

339

340

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A90. Hoja Concepción, definite LH (Wanka III) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A91. Hoja Sincos, EH + EIP/MH sites.

341

342

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A92. Hoja Sincos, LIP general sites.

Appendix A

Figure A93. Hoja Sincos, definite early LIP (Wanka I) sites.

343

344

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure A94. Hoja Sincos, definite late LIP (Wanka II) sites.

Appendix A

Figure A95. Hoja Sincos, definite LH (Wanka III) sites.

345

346

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table A103. Overall summary of JASP and UMARP site chronologies. X = present; X? = probably present; ? = uncertain. Site

382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 431-A 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441

EH EIP/MH Wanka I Wanka II LIP LIP/LH LH Unknown X X X? X X?

X X X X

X X X

? ?

X X X X X

X X X X X X ? X? X X X X X X? X

? ?

?

X

X X? ?

X

X

X

X X X X

X X

?

X

X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X

X

X X ?

X X

? X X

X X? X

X X

X

X X X ?

X

X

X X

X

X X ? X X X X X X X X X X

?

Table A103 cont. Site

442 443 444 445-A 445-B 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 459-A 459-B 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 468-A 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495/545 496 497 498

EH EIP/MH Wanka I Wanka II LIP LIP/LH LH Unknown X

X X X X X X X X X X X? X X? X

X

X X

X ? X ? X? X?

X X

X X X X

X X X X?

?

X? X

X X

X? X

? ?

X?

X X

X X X?

X X X X ?

?

? X

X? ?

X

X

X

X

X X X

X X X X

?

X X? X

X

X

X X

X

X

X

X

X X

X X X X X? X X

X

X

X

X X ?

X X X X

X

X X? ?

X

X X ?

X X

Appendix A

Table A103 cont. Site

EH EIP/MH Wanka I Wanka II LIP LIP/LH LH Unknown

499 500 501 502 503 504 505 ? 506 507 508 509 X 510 511 512 512-A 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545/495 See 495 546 547 547-A 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 ?

?

?

X X

? X?

X X

X

X X

X

X

X

X ? ?

X X

X

X

X X

?

X?

X? ?

X X X X X X

X?

X X ? X?

X X? X X X X X X

?

X X X X? X X

?

X X

X X X

X?

X

X X X X ? X

X ?

X

X X? X

X X X

X

X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X

X

347

Table A103 cont. Site

559 560 561 562 562-A 562-B 562-C 562-D 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 607-A 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615

EH EIP/MH Wanka I Wanka II LIP LIP/LH LH Unknown X X? ?

?

X X

X X

X

X ? ? X X X X

X X X X

X X X

X

X

X X X

X?

X X X

X

X?

?

X

X

X?

X? X

X X X X X X X X X ? X X X X? X X X? X X X X X X

?

X

X X X X? X X X X X X X X

? X?

X X

X X X X X? X X

X X X X X X X X X X X

X X?

X

X? X

X

?

X X

X X X X X X

348

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru Table A103 cont. Site

616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 632-A 633 634 635 636

J-93 J-94 J-95 J-96 J-97 J-98 J-99 J-105 J-106 J-107 J-108 J-109 J-110 J-111 J-112 J-113 J-114 J-115 J-116 J-117 J-118 J-119 J-120 J-121

EH EIP/MH Wanka I Wanka II LIP LIP/LH LH Unknown ?

? X

X X ? X X X X X X ? X X

X

X

X X

X X

X X

X

? ? X

X X X

? X X X X ?

UMARP JISSE-POMACANCHA SURVEY AREA X X X? X? X

X

X

X? X ? ? X

X

X X

X X

X

X X

X ? X X X

X

X

X X ? X X X

X ? X

X X

X

Table A104. Number of identified chronological components in different periods for all JASP and UMARP sites. EH

EIP/MH

Wanka I

Wanka II

General LIP

General LIP/LH

LIP/LH + LH

10 150 60 22 53 9 129 EH includes both definite and possible cases. All other periods include only definite and probable cases.

Appendix A Table A105. Summary of chronology, elevation, surface area, and classification for residential settlement sites. Nonresidential sites (storage facilities, ­cemeteries, cave occupations, roads, canals, quarries, and uncertain status) not included in this list. JASP Elevation Site No. (masl) 382 383

3820 3590

384 385

3580 3565

386 387 388

3520 3425 3460

389

3440

390 391 392 393 394

3390 3380 3580 3700 3370

395 396

3370 3530

397 398

3380 3380

399

3445

400 401 402 403

3610 4110 4125 4050

404

4050

405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415

4030 3975 3850 3870 3850 3840 3830 3900 3760 3800 3800

416

3940

417 418 419 420 422 423 424

3850 3680 3625 3535 4015 3400 3390

Period(s) of occupation ? EIP/MH LIP EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) LIP EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka I) LIP LH EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) LIP LIP LIP EIP/MH LIP EIP/MH LIP LIP LH (Wanka III) LIP LIP LIP LIP LIP LIP LIP LIP EIP/MH LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LIP EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III)

JASP No. of Area Structures (ha) (if known) 0.2 0.1 0.1 7.3 7.9

0.6 3.6 4.2 4.2 4.2 11.2 11.2 11.2 0.9 0.6 1.5 6.9 1.4 1.4 1.4 2.6 2.5 2.5 1.0 6.3 6.3 6.3 5.6 2.4 2.4 1.1 2.5 1.2 2.0 2.0 1.4 1.4 0.1 1.0 0.1 3.2 4.9 3.1 2.1 0.4 < 0.1 3.9 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 1.7 1.5 0.2 1.1 5.8 2.1 3.1 3.1 3.1

Classification

camp hamlet camp large village Inca storage facility + large village hamlet small village small village small village small village very large village very large village very large village hamlet hamlet small village large village small village small village small village small village small village small village hamlet large village large village large village large village small village small village hamlet 30 small village 25 small village ? small village 90 small village ? small village 10 small village hamlet 50 small village hamlet 10 small village small village small village small village hamlet camp? small village ? small village ? small village 3 small village small village small village small village small village hamlet small village 90–110 large village small village small village small village small village

349

Table A105 cont.

JASP Elevation Site No. (masl) 425 426

3540 3630

427 429

3630 3675

431

3565

432

3610

433

3490

434

3490

435

3480

436

3470

437

3520

438 439 440 441

3725 3510 3470 3520

442

3575

443 444

3800 3530

445-A 445-B 446 447

3535 3535 3690 3580

448

3505

449

3590

450

3560

451 452

3600 3600

453 454

3580 3670

455 456

3780 3800

457

3930

460 461 462

3790 3910 4000

463

3530

Period(s) of occupation LIP (Wanka I) LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III) LIP LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I, II) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LIP EIP/MH EIP/MH LH (Inca) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP LIP LIP (Wanka II) LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I, II)

JASP No. of Classification Area Structures (ha) (if known) 1.2 10–15 small village 4.2 small village 4.2 small village 2.6 8–10 small village 1.9 ? small village 1.9 6 small village small ? ? 35.1 1600 local center 10.5 large village 10.5 large village 10.5 large village 1.4 small village 1.4 small village 1.0 hamlet 1.0 hamlet 10.3 large village 10.3 large village 2.0 small village 2.0 small village 5.8 large village small hamlet 1.7 small village 0.1 camp 5.3 large village 3.5 small village 3.5 small village 4.3 small village 4.3 small village 1.9 small village 10.1 large village 10.1 large village 1.4 small village 0.4 hamlet 11.4 very large village 3.1 small village 3.1 Inca imperial tambo 0.4 hamlet 0.4 hamlet 0.4 hamlet 3.3 small village 6.6 large village 6.6 large village 1.2 small village 1.2 small village 0.9 hamlet 0.5 hamlet 0.5 hamlet 0.3 hamlet 1.7 hamlet 3.5 small village 3.5 small village 0.4 hamlet 1.0 small village 0.5 hamlet 0.5 hamlet ? camp 1.3 small village 2.8 small village 11.5 250 local center 9.3 100 large village small small village 5.3 large village 5.3 large village

350

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Table A105 cont. JASP Elevation Site No. (masl) 464

3480

465

3720

466 467 468 469

3740 3780 3970 3500

470

3710

471

3660

472

3730

473

3490

474 476 477 478 479

3470 3910 3410 3850 3950

480 481

3980 4140

482 483

3385 3360

484 487 488 489 490

3385 3350 3430 3360 3365

492 493

3315 3280

494 495/545 497 498

3290 3280 3380 3380

499 501 503

3640 3580 3630

504

3550

505 507 508 509 510

3470 3485 3580 3340 3530

511 512 515

3580 3575 3620

Period(s) of occupation EIP/MH LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III) LIP LIP LIP (Wanka II) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka II) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka II) LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) LIP LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka I) LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP LIP LIP LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III) LH (Wanka III) LIP EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) LIP LIP EIP/MH EH EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III)

JASP No. of Classification Area Structures (ha) (if known) 3.7 small village 5.0 small village 5.0 small village 5.7 large village 5.7 large village 0.8 hamlet 0.5 camp 45.7 4280 regional center 7.0 large village 5.1 large village 4.1 small village 4.1 small village 4.1 small village 2.1 small village 2.1 small village 2.1 small village 5.0 ? small village small ? hamlet 130.0 4750 regional center 27.4 ? local center 17.9 very large village small hamlet 5.3 large village 19.3 500 local center 3.6 small village 0.7 hamlet 6.4 ? large village 6.4 100 large village 5.4 large village 4.4 large village 4.4 large village 3.4 small village 1.6 small village 1.6 small village 1.4 small village 2.6 small village 2.6 small village 8.7 large village 1.7 small village 3.4 small village 0.1 hamlet ? hamlet? 2.1 small village 0.5 hamlet 1.3 small village 0.1 camp 2.9 small village 2.9 small village 6.5 large village 1.9 small village 1.6 small village 6.6 large village 9.4 large village ? small village 6.4 large village 0.2 hamlet 3.0 small village 0.6 small village 3.1 small village 3.1 small village 3.1 small village 8.0 large village 2.8 small village 4.8 small village 4.8 small village ? small village?

Table A105 cont. JASP Elevation Site No. (masl)

Period(s) of occupation LIP EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) LIP EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP LIP EIP/MH LIP/LH EIP/MH LIP EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH LH (Inca)

JASP No. of Area Structures (ha) (if known) 1.7 5.3 2.1 5.2 4.8 4.8 0.6 1.3 4.3 6.3 6.3 2.6 2.6 2.6 3.1 3.1 3.5 2.0 5.4 ? 1.5 1.5 0.8 1.7 1.7 0.3 0.3 0.9 2.8 2.8 4.8 1.9 2.9 0.8 3.4 small ? 33.4

518 519 520 521 522

3660 3700 3625 3630 3380

523 524 525 526

3500 3510 3400 3325

527

3310

529

3400

530 531 533

3360 3345 3350

535

3315

536 537

3315 3315

538

3305

539 540

3330 3300

541 542 543 544 549 550

3300 3300 3295 3295 3440 3360

551

3350

LH (Inca)

2.9

552 553 556 557 558 560

3345 3340 3600 3370 3560 3545

561 562-A

3590 3745

562-B 562-C 564

? ? 3440

565 566

3440 3440

567

3400

568

3400

569

3370

EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) LH (Wanka III) LH (Wanka III) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LH ? ? EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka I, II) LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III) LIP? LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH? LIP (Wanka I, II)

0.4 1.2 10.5 1.2 7.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 1.4 small 2.8 ? ? 7.8 7.8 7.8 6.4 16.2 ? 3.3 3.3 2.0 2.0 9.8? 9.8

? ?

20–30

Classification small village large village small village large village small village small village hamlet small village small village large village large village small village small village small village small village small village small village small village large village small village small village small village hamlet small village small village hamlet? hamlet? hamlet small village small village small village small village small village hamlet small village ? Inca imperial regional center detached sector of Site 550 hamlet hamlet very large village small village large village small village small village small village small village hamlet Inca imperial locus ? ? large village large village large village large village very large village very large village small village small village small village small village large village? large village

Appendix A Table A105 cont. JASP Elevation Site No. (masl) 570 571

3810 3420

572

3360

574

3400

575

3620

579

3430

582 583

3880 3360

584 585 586 587

3380 3780 3720 3420

589 590

3350 3460

591

3460

592

3465

593

3480

594

3690

595

3720

596

3800

597 598 599

3760 3480 3460

600

3460

601

3630

602

3510

603

3510

604

3460

605

3490

606

3425

607 608

3520 3590

609

3410

610

3460

Period(s) of occupation EIP/MH EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I, II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH EH EIP/MH LIP ? ? EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka II?) LH (Wanka III) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH

JASP No. of Classification Area Structures (ha) (if known) 1.0 hamlet 12.2 very large village small hamlet 3.2 small village 3.2 small village 3.2 small village 2.5 small village 2.5 small village 1.0 hamlet 1.0 hamlet 2.7 small village 6.3 large village 6.3 large village 0.1 camp ? camp? 1.6 small village 1.8 small village? < 0.1 camp? 0.1 camp 4.4 small village 4.4 small village 1.3 small village 4.2 small village 4.2 small village 4.2 small village 3.0 small village 3.0 small village 3.0 small village 2.2 small village 2.2 small village 10.4 large village 10.4 large village 5.4 large village 1.8 small village 4.5 small village small hamlet 6.5 large village 6.5 large village 3.3 small village 3.9 small village 0.8 hamlet 0.8 hamlet 0.8 hamlet 2.2 small village 2.2 small village 2.2 small village small hamlet 10.1 large village 8.0 large village 8.0 large village 8.0 large village 2.3 small village 2.3 small village 3.0 small village 3.0 small village 3.0 small village 3.2 small village 3.2 small village 14.0 very large village 14.0 large village 14.0 large village 2.6 small village 2.7 small village 2.7 small village 1.9 small village 1.9 small village 5.8 large village

351

Table A105 cont. JASP Elevation Site No. (masl) 611 614 616

3680 3285 3305

617 618

3305 3460

619 620 621

3780 3755 3630

622 623 624

3540 3505 3490

625 626 627

3485 3375 3440

628 629 630

3440 3480 3560

631

3570

632

3580

632-A 633 634 635 636

3625 3830 3670 3860 3780

J-93 J-94 J-95 J-96 J-105 J-106 J-107 J-108 J-109 J-110 J-112 J-113 J-114 J-116 J-117 J-118 J-119 J-120 J-121

Period(s) of occupation LH (Wanka III) LIP EIP/MH LIP EIP/MH LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH EIP/MH EIP/MH LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH EH EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LIP (Wanka I) EIP/MH LIP EIP/MH LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) EIP/MH LH (Wanka III) LIP (Wanka II) LH (Wanka III) LIP LIP LIP LIP EIP/MH

JASP No. of Classification Area Structures (ha) (if known) 12.9 575 very large village 0.8 hamlet ? hamlet 2.3 small village 1.5 small village 12.6 very large village 12.6 very large village 4.0 small village 1.9 small village 8.3 large village 8.3 large village 8.3 large village 2.0 small village 3.5 small village 2.6 small village 2.6 small village 0.9 hamlet 0.8 hamlet 5.1 large village 1.3 small village 0.4 hamlet 2.7 small village 7.6 large village 7.6 large village ? small village? 5.1 large village 5.1 large village 14.1 very large village 14.1 very large village 1.6 small village 2.7 small village 9.9 200 large village 4.9 200 small village 2.9 small village

UMARP JISSE-POMACANCHA SURVEY 3900 ? 0.5 hamlet 3900 ? 0.5 hamlet 3675 EIP/MH 0.2 hamlet LIP/LH 0.2 hamlet 4000 EIP/MH 1.1 small village 3675 LIP/LH 0.3 hamlet 3700 EIP/MH 0.1 hamlet 3600 EIP/MH ? hamlet 3800 LIP (Wanka II) 4.1 200 small village LH (Wanka III) 4.1 200 small village 3925 LIP 18.6 local center LH (Wanka III) ? small village 3850 EIP/MH 2.2 small village LH (Wanka III) 2.2 small village 3960 LIP/LH 1.3 small village 3850 EIP/MH 10.2 large village LH (Wanka III) ? small village 3950 EIP/MH 0.3 hamlet LIP/LH 0.3 hamlet 3950 EIP/MH 4.5 small village LIP/LH 4.5 small village 3575 EIP/MH 12.0 very large village 3475 LH (Wanka III) 0.9 hamlet 3700 EIP/MH 7.1 large village LH (Wanka III) 7.1 large village 3600 LH (Wanka III) 0.9 hamlet 3675 EIP/MH 0.3 hamlet

Appendix B

Ceramic Chronology Jeffrey R. Parsons and Ramiro Matos M.

The first systematic general ceramic sequence for this part of the Peruvian sierra central was published by Lumbreras (1960). Several years prior to our 1975–76 fieldwork, Browman (1970) developed a ceramic sequence based on surface and excavated collections from his study area between Huancayo and Jauja in the main Mantaro Valley. Subsequent to our survey, UMARP scholars produced several major studies of Wanka Region archaeological ceramics— primarily LeBlanc (1981), D’Altroy (1981), Costin (1986, 2001), and LeCount (1987). Although these UMARP analyses focused primarily on the LIP and LH, some attention was also devoted to pre-LIP phases. These UMARP studies have gone far beyond our original practical understanding of Wanka ceramic chronology. Although Browman’s study was available at the time of our fieldwork, we were unable to apply its full details to our typically small, badly weathered surface collections because it depended heavily on often rather subtle shifts in type frequencies, decorative techniques, vessel form, and surface treatment. It is not our intent in this section to present a full description of the Wanka Region archaeological ceramic sequence—for such descriptions, interested readers are referred to the above-noted sources. Our purpose here is much more modest: to provide a sense of those ceramic categories that were most useful to us, and in some cases to our UMARP successors, in evaluating occupational chronology of the sites we encountered in our surveys, with emphasis on vessel form and decoration. To this end, we are heavily dependent upon the work of the UMARP archaeologists listed above, and much of this appendix consists of selected summations of their interpretations and descriptions, supplemented with photos of selected sherds from our own surface collections. We also make selective use of Browman’s earlier studies of EH and EIP/MH pottery. As noted above, because our original evaluations of occupational chronology were based on typically small and badly worn surface collections, we were frequently unable to recognize attributes of surface finish and decoration that enabled Browman and the UMARP archaeologists to develop a more refined ceramic phasing based on their better-preserved excavated collections.

Early Horizon The only systematic study of Early Horizon ceramics in the Wanka Region remains that of Browman (1970), whose Pirwapukio phase is dominated by incurved ollas (which might be called “tecomates” [neckless jars] in Mexico) and enclosed bowls with incised and punctuate decoration (Fig. B1, Plate B1). Matos (1973) illustrated several examples of this material from his excavations at the Ataura site (JASP Site 509). Painted decoration is absent, and most vessels are brown to gray-brown in color; appendages or supports are scarce. Two of our sites (Nos. 623 and 509 [Ataura]) yielded substantial quantities of EH ceramics. Despite the scarcity of EH sites in our survey area, this pottery usually proved to be distinctive and readily recognizable in our surface collections at the handful of EH sites we did identify, although we apparently missed more subtle traces of this material at several multicomponent sites where UMARP archaeologists subsequently detected EH sherds.

Early Intermediate Period/Middle Horizon This long era comprises what UMARP archaeologists (Hastorf et al. 1989) defined as Huacrapukio I, II, and III, and what Browman (1970) characterized as his successive Uchupas, Usupukio, Huacrapukio, Calpish, and Quinmsahuanca phases (Table 4.3). As previously noted, UMARP archaeologists were just beginning to refine this portion of the Wanka Region ceramic sequence on the basis of new excavations when they had to terminate their investigations after their 1986 fieldseason. For both Hastorf et al. and Browman, the transition between the EH and EIP/MH sequences was defined by the Cochachongos phase. As noted elsewhere, distinctly Wari-related ceramics are extremely scarce in our survey area,

353

354

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure B1. EH, sherd profiles. 1–19, enclosed bowls; 20–42, enclosed ollas. Adapted from Browman 1970: Figs. 34, 35.

Appendix B although as Browman (1970:139) noted long ago, there are some generic ware similarities between late EIP and MH ceramics in the Wanka and Wari Regions. The most diagnostic EIP/MH pottery consists of simple hemispherical bowls with interior painted geometric designs, occasionally with naturalistic camelid motifs (Figs. B2, B3; Plates B2, B3). The paint is typically black to purple to reddish-brown applied atop vessel surfaces that vary from tan to orange-brown, to gray-brown, and pinkish. Many of these bowls have a highly characteristic pink paste (Plate B2), an attribute that continues in low frequency into the subsequent early LIP. Several different jar forms, often with strap or lug handles, are also common, mostly plainware but sometimes with dark painted bands around the rim, and slash-incisions and punctuate appliqué decoration around the exterior neck (Plate B4a). There are low frequencies of distinctive anthropomorphic and camelid slab (plaque) figurines with appliqué limbs, facial features, and sexual organs, and usually with dark painted decoration (Plate B5). Such figurines appear to decline toward the end of the era. Distinctive Huari-related sherds are rare, but do occur in very small quantities at a few sites (Plate B4b)

The Late Intermediate Period Lumbreras (1960) defined two contemporary styles of LIP ceramics in the Wanka Region, which he called Mantaro de Base Roja y Mantaro de Base Clara. These were characterized by similar vessel forms and manufacturing techniques, and were differentiated primarily on the basis of the color of the slip applied to the vessel surface: varied shades of red, in the case of Mantaro Base Roja, and varied shades of pale white, in the case of Mantaro Base Clara. Base Roja vessels had distinctive rim forms and circular stamped impressions. In our original evaluations of site chronology in our surface collections, we followed Lumbreras’ general guidelines of these ceramic categories. The following discussion of LIP ceramics closely follows the comprehensive studies of LeBlanc (1981) and Costin (1986, 2001) undertaken in the years after our fieldwork as part of the UMARP investigations. LeBlanc’s analysis was the first to make the critical separation between the early LIP (Wanka I) and late LIP (Wanka II) phases, and also to characterize the local LH ceramic assemblage (Wanka III). However, she also demonstrated a significant degree of long-term continuity of some common ceramic types—notably Base Clara and plainwares— that persisted through the entire LIP with only minor changes in vessel form and decorative technique. She also detected a number of MH antecedents in these same ceramic categories, in terms of paste and decoration—which undoubtedly contributed to our own difficulty in separating Wanka I occupations at some multicomponent sites with both EIP/MH and Wanka I surface pottery. Costin (2001:205–10), following LeBlanc’s lead, distinguishes three main LIP ceramic categories in the Wanka Region: (1) Micaceous self-slip: an abundant plainware, characterized as a “ubiquitous cookware.” According to Costin (2001:206), this pottery is distinguished by its paste, a sugary textured, light reddish-brown ware with abundant light-colored mica inclusions. Almost all . . . vessels are low-necked globular jars. These vessels are rarely decorated. Occasionally small nubbins and appliqués have been added to vessel shoulders. . . . Infrequently a thin black or dark grey line was painted around the collar or rim.

(2) Base Clara, Cream Slip, and Wanka Red: variants grouped because of their similarities in paste and vessel form. Costin (2001:207–9) characterizes this grouping as follows: All were manufactured of a fine-to-medium-textured paste—usually reddishyellow or light reddish-brown—with medium to coarse, rounded to rectangular limestone and other sedimentary inclusions. Cream Slip . . . is a variant covered with light-grey or very pale brown slip, but otherwise undecorated. Base Clara may be unslipped or slipped in colors similar to Cream Slip. Both slipped and unslipped variants of Base Clara have similar decoration, most often straight, undulating, or cross-hatched lines on vessel neck, collar, or body. . . . Paint colors vary from weak red through reddish-to-dark-grey. . . . Wanka Red vessels . . . are covered with a weak or light-red wash. . . . Occasionally, Wanka Red vessels are also painted with reddish to dark grey designs similar to those of Base Clara.

355

  These types were manufactured in a variety of jar and bowl forms. A small hemispherical bowl and a large, high-necked jar predominate in the assemblage. We also recovered globular low-necked jars similar in form to the cooking vessels and deep basins probably used for serving.

(3) Andesite-tempered wares: These include the distinctive Base Roja pottery, the most diagnostic ceramic indication of Wanka II and Wanka III occupation. Costin (2001:209–10) characterizes Andesite-tempered pottery as follows: Non-plastics are medium to coarse angular fragments of andesite and its constituent minerals. Andesite wares come in two variants: slipped and unslipped. The unslipped variant is pebble burnished or rubbed to a low polish. The slipped variant, often called Base Roja, . . . is covered with a deep red slip and painted with complex black-and-white designs. Vessels are predominantly face-neck jars and tall-necked jars. Decoration [on Base Roja vessels] consists of black and white painted motifs and plastic decoration, such as cane stamping and modeled appliqués.

In sum, Wanka I is best characterized by the presence of Base Clara and abundant undecorated red-slipped (Wanka Red) and plainware vessels, most of the latter similar to Base Clara in paste, form, and surface treatment. In Wanka II, Base Clara and plainwares continue, similar to those of Wanka I but with a number of subtle differences in vessel form, decorative technique, and surface treatment (see below). The most characteristic Wanka II pottery is Base Roja, which does not occur in Wanka I and whose presence or absence is thus key to separating early (Wanka I) and late (Wanka II) LIP occupations. A potential problem arises in distinguishing between Wanka II and Wanka III occupations in the absence of Inca-style pottery because all these local ceramic categories characteristic of Wanka II are also present, with subtle modifications (see below), in Wanka III (see below). Similarly, it may sometimes be difficult to recognize a Wanka I component at a site where the presence of Base Roja sherds clearly indicates a Wanka II occupation. Typical LIP vessel forms and decoration are illustrated in Figures B4–B8 and Plates B6 and B7. Continuities between MH and Wanka I Ceramics LeBlanc noted some continuities in decorative techniques and vessel form between the Wanka I Base Clara and plainwares, on the one hand, and certain categories of the antecedent EIP/MH (Huacrapukio/Usupukio phases), on the other. [The continuity between Huacrapukio and Wanka I Base Clara pottery] is indicated by the use of a purplish paint applied to a beige or off-white background in the early phase of the LIP. Apparently, the change in background color, from orange characteristic of Huacrapukio ceramics to off-white characteristic of Base Clara, preceded the development of new paints. [LeBlanc 1981:168] The high-necked jars common in the early LIP collections also may be a continued practice from the earlier [MH] ceramic tradition. [LeBlanc 1981:205] Another similarity between the Huacrapukio/Usupukio ceramics and the early LIP [Wanka I] . . . is the predominance of simple punctuate and incisions in appliqué strips located around jar collars (as earlier noted by Browman 1970:83, 89, 99, 104–106). . . . these are replaced first by cane stamps of small diameter (ca. 3 mm) and finally in the late LIP [Wanka II] by the use of larger cane stamps (6–7 mm dia.) (Browman 1970: Fig. 154). [LeBlanc 1981:211]

LeBlanc (1981:233) also found that low frequencies of pink paste pottery typical of some EIP/MH pottery persists into the Wanka I ceramic assemblage. This continuity is also seen in the painted decorative motifs in some types of pink-paste pottery from both phases: [As in Huacrapukio/Usupukio] many of the [Wanka I decorative] motifs are laid out on the interior surface of the bowl with straight lines extending from the rim to the center of the bowl. . . . the most distinctive similarity is in the color of the paint. The blue-purple paint often used in the Huacrapukio/ Usupukio ceramics is also found on the few painted examples of [Wanka I] Pink Paste. [LeBlanc 1981:162]

356

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure B2. EIP/MH, sherd profiles of bowls (1–16) and jars (17–35). Adapted from Browman 1970: Figs. 95, 96.

Appendix B

Figure B3. EIP/MH, examples of decoration on bowls (a, b) and jar (c). Adapted from Hastorf et al. 1989:126, Fig. 13.

357

358

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure B4. LIP, examples of Base Clara bowl forms. Adapted from LeBlanc 1981:159, Fig. 3.8.

Appendix B

Figure B5. LIP, examples of Base Clara jar forms. 1–14, adapted from LeBlanc 1981:157, Fig. 3.6; 15–18, adapted from LeBlanc 1981:138, Fig. 3.7.

359

360

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure B6. LIP, examples of Base Clara decoration. a, b, jars, adapted from LeBlanc 1981:154, Fig. 3.4; c–f, bowls, adapted from Costin 1986:100, Fig. 2.34.

Appendix B

Figure B7. LIP, Wanka II, examples of Base Roja jar forms. Adapted from LeBlanc 1981:151, Fig. 3.3.

361

362

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure B8. LIP, Wanka II, examples of Base Roja decoration. a–c, adapted from Costin 1986:80, Fig. 2.19; d–k, adapted from LeBlanc 1981:150, Fig. 3.2.

Appendix B

363

Similarities and Differences between Wanka I and Wanka II Ceramics

in late LIP groups . . . continue to be used during the LH, although in lower relative proportions. [LeBlanc 1981:211]

In addition to the above-noted changes in the size of cane punctuates (from smaller to larger), LeBlanc found that Wanka I and Wanka II Base Clara pottery can be differentiated in the following ways, some of which are rather subtle:

Although LeBlanc was concerned with the possibility that some LH sites may have been inhabited by people who lacked access to Inca or Inca-style pottery, she concluded that:

The early LIP [Wanka I] ceramic collections include a greater variety in paint color and texture among Base Clara sherds than found in late LIP [Wanka II] collections in which the dark paint on Base Clara sherds is much more consistently opaque grey-brown. [LeBlanc 1981:169]

All of the collections in the LH [multivariate analysis] cluster contain various quantities of Inca and/or Huanca-Inca pottery. . . . Inca pottery is widely distributed through the Yanamarca valley. It is found at many different kinds of sites, small and large, valley-floor sites and hilltop sites, sites in the southern and the northern parts of the valley. Given its wide distribution it is unlikely that there were many LH communities which did not receive Inca pottery. More important, it is even less likely that a particular class of local LH community has been omitted. [LeBlanc 1981:234–35]

[Relative to Wanka I, in Wanka II], the dark paint on Base Clara becomes a more consistent grey-brown color. Tall necked jars with rounded lips are common Base Clara and plainware forms in the early phase. . . . [In Wanka II Base Clara] wavy lines are frequently painted near the rim, both on jars and bowls . . . [and] plastic decoration on jar collars is normally a row of double cane stamps. Shorter necked jars are proportionately more common [in Wanka II]. . . . The [Wanka II] short necked jars frequently have a distinctive upturned lip, which results in a slightly concave surface on the interior of the outward expanding neck near the lip. Simple punctuates and vertical or diagonal slashes are used as plastic decoration around the collars of [Wanka II] jars. [LeBlanc 1981:233]

The Late Horizon (Wanka III) During our 1975–76 surveys, we were uncertain about how widely distinctive Inca-style pottery may have been distributed in the Wanka Region during LH times, and about how much late LIP pottery may have changed during the short LH. Consequently, we were then unable to recognize LH occupations with any confidence unless Inca-style pottery was present in our surface collections. Although LeBlanc’s subsequent analysis improved the ability to distinguish between local (non-Inca-style) LIP and LH ceramics, her study also noted some important continuities between the local Wanka II and Wanka III ceramic assemblages: [L]ate LIP (Wanka II) shares certain features with the Late Horizon (Wanka III) collections. [In addition to Base Clara and plainwares characteristic of Wanka II], [b]oth groups contain the Huanca Red series and Base Roja, though in varying proportions. There is some indication that the relative frequency of Base Roja increases slightly from the late LIP to the LH, and that Huanca Red decreases during the Late Horizon. Continuity can be seen in these groups in the particular lip forms used on Base Clara, Huanca Red and plainware jars. The slightly upward turning jar lip . . . commonly found

In sum, it appears that LH occupation can be recognized with some confidence in the Wanka Region because distinctive Inca-style pottery occurs widely, albeit in relatively low frequencies, throughout the survey area. Although LeBlanc found that there are also indications of more subtle shifts in Base Clara, Base Roja, Wanka Red, and plainware pottery in terms of surface finish, vessel form, and type frequency from Wanka II to Wanka III, these shifts often proved difficult for us to recognize in our typically small, badly worn surface collections. We continue to wonder if Wanka II occupation may have gone unrecognized at some sites where, owing to the presence of Inca-style pottery, a Wanka III age was inferred while Wanka II was assumed to be absent. Inca and Wanka-Inca Pottery Although it occurs in relatively low frequencies (LeBlanc [1981:167–68] determined that it seldom accounted to more than ca. 2% of the assemblage at most LH sites), Inca-style pottery proved to be widespread and comparatively easy to recognize throughout the Wanka Region. This pottery occurs in two variants: (1) ceramics made according to Cuzco norms of vessel form and decoration, either manufactured locally or imported; and (2) local Base Clara and Base Roja pottery manufactured using standard Inca vessel forms and decorative norms (referred to as Wanka-Inca in UMARP publications). The two most common Inca-style vessel forms are the aryballo and the shallow plate. Other distinctive vessel forms include flared-rim jars, closed bowls and basins, often with large strap handles, carinated bowls, and pedestal cooking vessels (Figs. B9–B11). Decorative motifs feature a variety of geometric and broad bands of solid color (Plate B8).

364

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure B9. LH, Inca-style, examples of arybollid, or flaring jar, vessels. a–c, adapted from Costin 1986:93, Fig. 2.29; d, adapted from D’Altroy 1992:227, Fig. A.2.

Appendix B

Figure B10. LH, Inca-style, examples of closed bowls. Adapted from D’Altroy 1992:227, Fig. A.8.

365

366

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

Figure B11. LH, Inca-style, examples of other typical vessel forms. a, carinated bowl, adapted from Costin 1986:110, Fig. 2.42; b, plate, adapted from Costin 1986:113, Fig. 2.44; c, d, pedestaled cooking vessel, adapted from Costin 1986:112, Fig. 2.43.

Appendix B

Plate B1. Examples of EH decorated pottery, all from Site 623.

367

368

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Plate B2. Examples of EIP/MH decorated bowls with pink paste. a, Site 572; b, Site 435; c, Site 608; d, Site 451; e, Site 558; f, Site 606; g, Site 606; h, Site 606.

Appendix B

369

b

a

d

c

e

g

h

j

f

i

k

l

Plate B3. EIP/MH, examples of decorated bowls. a, Site 608; b, Site 608; c–j, Site 606; k, Site 583; l, Site 583; m, Site 571; n, Site 450.

m

n

370

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

a

b

Plate B4. a, EIP/MH, example of jar rim with painted decoration, Site 526; b, Wari-related MH sherd, Site 464.

Appendix B

a

Plate B5. EIP/MH, examples of anthropomorphic slab figurines. a, Site 457; b, Site 456.

b

371

372

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

a

b

d

e

c

f i

g

h

j

k

l

Plate B6. LIP, examples of Base Clara decoration. a, Site 572; b, Site 572; c, Site 472; d, Site 464; e, Site 464; f, Site 568; g, Site 626; h–j, Site 558; k, Site 431; l, Site 427; m, Site 470.

m

Appendix B

a

b

c

Plate B7. LIP, Wanka II, examples of Base Roja decoration. a, Site 557; b, Site 565; c, Site 566; d, Site 472; e, Site 568; f, Site 618; g, Site 579.

d

f

373

e

g

374

Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Junín, Peru

a

b

c

f d

e

h

i

k

g

j

l

Plate B8. LH, examples of Inca-style ceramic decoration. a–f, Site 550; g, Site 551; h, Site 454; i, Site 464; j–n, Site 547.

m

n