Astuhuaman 2014.pdf

221

Chapter 20

The Ushnu, the Centre of the Inca World: An Overview from the Highlands of Piura, Northern Peru

César Astuhuamán

Introduction

During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the Inca Empire expanded to incorporate many ethnic groups over a vast area of the Andes and coastal South America. This large territory was frequently managed through a series of planned centres where buildings used for Inca state admin-istrative and ceremonial functions were imposed on the local settlement hierarchy.

The Inca structures called ushnu were located on the main square of provincial centres distributed along the Inca road system. The variability of shapes and functions of Inca ushnu platforms have been described in detail by Graziano Gasparini and Luise Margolies (1977), Tom Zuidema (1989a [1980], 1989c) and John Hyslop (1990: 70–72). They can be considered the architectural symbols of Tahuantinsuyu in the provinces, representing an Inca throne and seat, and they had enormous political and ritual importance (Zuidema 1989a [1980]).

This research focuses primarily on the highlands of Piura (800–3900 m above sea level), northern Peru, where four Inca centres were identified and recorded. This region, located close to the modern frontier between Peru and Ecuador, is shaped by the Chira-Catamayo, Alto Piura, Huancabamba and Alto Chinchipe river basins. Aside from some early pioneering archaeological research (Humboldt 1991 [1802]; Tello 1916), the region has been the focus of research by Mario Polia (1972, 1973, 1995) Anne-Marie Hocquenghem (1989b, 1998) and César Astuhuamán (1998, 2008).

The aim of this chapter is to analyse the imperial infrastructure developed by the Inca to control and administer the highlands of Piura, in particular as manifest in the ushnu platform. Through an analysis of the state

infrastructure, its positioning within the landscape and its relationship to local sites, I intend to assess how the Inca institutions secured and administered the area and the degree to which the Inca planned sites reflected their provincial organisation.

Imperial strategies, ideology and sacred landscapes

Prior to contextualising the ushnu platform within the Inca Empire it is important to consider how the management of the landscape was understood and organised in the context of imperial strategies and ideology. Discrete societies have different historical, cultural and geographical backgrounds and they have developed distinct concepts and practices to define space (cf. Hodder and Orton 1976; Gil 2001: 60–64; Conolly and Lake 2006: 3–10). Western, primarily European, thought has two major approaches to space: seeing it first as a container of all material objects (an abso-lute concept) and secondly as a relation between things (a relative concept). In both cases, space is a cultural and historical construction related to referents (Conolly and Lake 2006: 3–4).1

R. Tom Zuidema has stressed the need to research prehispanic Andean concepts of space and time, and highlighted how these concepts had a strong relationship with the Inca state as expressed in their systematic cosmo-logical knowledge (Zuidema 1989b: 534). In the Andes, the concept of ‘pacha’ integrated space and time, and the spatial concepts of ‘hanan’ (higher moiety) and ‘hurin’ (lower moiety) have been considered the essence of the

ISS-20-Astuhuaman.indd 221 12/03/2014 15:41

222

C ÉSA R A STUHUAMÁN

dual organisation that has characterised diverse aspects of Central Andean societies (cf. Zuidema 1968; Murra 1975; Harris 1985; Pärssinen 2003 [1992]). Other organisational principles have also been recorded for Andean societies. Zuidema suggested that the ceque system in Cusco was organised in a socio-political hierarchy of triads: Collana (higher), Payan (middle) and Cayao (lower) (Zuidema 1995 [1964]). Collana is considered the most prestigious group within a regional hierarchy or inside a community; this division has also been related to Cusco itself and Inca buildings (Urton 1984; Niles 1987; Morris 1999). Another organisational form deployed by the Incas that has been noted is the decimal system. This was expressed in admin-istrative population units of 10, 100, 1000 and 10,000 households or male tributarios (heads of households), who gave tribute by granting their labour to the state (e.g. army service) (Julien 1983; D’Altroy 1992, 2002; Morris and Covey 2006: 147).

These principles are not mutually exclusive and have been documented in different regions such as Cusco (Zuidema 1995 [1964]) and Collaguas (Wernke 2006: 179, 206). Based on 11 analysed cases, Marti Pärssinen (2003 [1992]) argued that dual (higher and lower moie-ties), tripartite (higher, middle and lower) and quadripartite principles were used in the internal organisation of Inca provinces, in some cases simultaneously.

The process of defining territory is related to the expres-sion of power and the political appropriation of space (Gil 2001: 63, 75; 2002: 210–11), but also to concepts of ownership. In general, empires try to control resources and/or the human labour force within a territory, and to rule it (Schreiber 1992: 11). In contrast to concepts of territorial control, in sensu stricto, ‘jurisdiction’ relates to human groups under ruling authorities (Harris 1997 cited in Gil 2002: 210–11), a concept that is probably more closely related to the Inca concept of province than that of territoriality; the important difference being the appropria-tion and control of people rather than space. In the Andes the key facet seems to have been ‘the primacy of rights over people rather than land’ (Harris 1985: 330; see also Ramírez 2005: 32).

Landscape can be considered a cultural and social construction; it is a perceived and symbolic space (Gil 2001: 63, 66–7; 2002: 210–12) intertwining notions of memory, identity, social order and transformation (Ashmore and Knapp 2000: 9–18); these are common topics when studying Andean societies. The nature of sacred landscapes (e.g. mountains) involves religious and symbolic meaning expressed in ritual practices around natural features of the landscape that assumed a sacred character for peoples in the past (Bradley 2002). In this chapter I will explore the relationships between indigenous Andean ideologies of sacred landscapes and Inca imperial rule, and assess the significance of landscape features that assumed a sacred character before the Inca conquest and were further elaborated as a feature of Inca rule. The importance of the relationship between Inca settlements and particular features of the landscape such as rocks, geological forma-tions, springs and caves during the time of the Inca Empire has been recognised in previous studies (e.g. Hyslop 1985, 1990; Gose 1993; Bauer 2000, 2004; Aldunate et al. 2003).

Ancient empires and pre-capitalist societies have con-sidered their landscape to be much more than an economic resource and, in many societies, unaltered portions of landscape were and are believed to be sacred. However, when studying the development of empires, there has been a significant tendency to emphasise military conquest and economic exploitation and to relegate ideology and religion to a secondary position (Willey 1977 cited in Vogt 1983: 19–20; Morris 1998: 304–6). A minor role is reserved for religious conquest, such as European expansion justified by the capture of sacred places and Christianisation during the medieval Crusades.2

Recent archaeological approaches to landscape (cf. Alcock and Osborne 1994; Brück and Goodman 1999; Ashmore and Knapp 2000; Bradley 2002; Smith 2003) have begun to help us to better understand interactions

Figure 20.1 Location of Aypate, Caxas, Huancabamba and Mitupampa within the highlands of Piura.


223

THE USHNU , THE CENTRE O F T HE INCA WO RLD: AN OVERV IEW FRO M T HE H IGHLANDS OF P IURA

between sacred places and political authority in ancient empires. For example, adopting a political approach to landscape, Adam Smith suggested the need to theorise the profound links between landscape and the construction and management of political authority,3 and argued that, ‘territory, urbanism, and architecture are about politics; authority is profoundly constituted in the ordering of landscapes’ (2003: 279–80).

In relation to the Inca Empire, ethnohistorical and archaeological research has given some consideration to the role of religion, ideology and state institutions during the period of expansion. Thus ancestor cults and rituals were associated with the control of water sources, and these defined the entire political culture from which the Inca state emerged and by which it was controlled (Gose 1993: 486–8). Controlling water sources is undoubtedly also an economic concern, but Peter Gose’s emphasis is on religious ideology in contrast to economic models (e.g. Murra’s model). Gose has also argued for the importance of oracles within Inca political organisation (Gose 1996: 17, 19, 21). Gose’s ethnohistorical model has not yet been tested for Inca times using the empirical evidence, but for the Middle Horizon (AD 600–1000) from the spatial analysis of major topographical features, Mary Glowacki and Michael Malpass (2003: 443) have argued that the ideological motivations of the expansion of the Wari Empire could be linked to its concept of sacred landscape.

Andean peoples developed concepts of sacred land-scapes where ancestor cults and rituals were conducted and controlled by Andean empires. In this chapter, I will consider the proposition that the socio-political order in

Andean societies may have been partly developed around sacred landscapes, in particular networks of shrines, where the Incas imposed their institutional architecture includ-ing structures invested with religious significance, such as ushnus.

The Inca ushnu as the focal point of provincial centres: ushnu platforms recorded in the highlands of Piura

From the analysis of institutional buildings at major Inca centres in Inca provinces it is suggested that sites of similar size, number of buildings and architectural features may have had a similar function and level of importance. The existence of a primary large administrative centre in each Inca province is a necessary precept for the postulated spatial and archaeological analysis. John Hyslop (1990) assumed that provincial or administrative-ceremonial centres were discrete and recognisable archaeological units, where specific characteristic Inca buildings were commonly found such as an acllawasi (the House of the Chosen Women, a form of order of women in state service), a Temple of the Sun, a plaza (trapezoidal or rec-tangular) and an ushnu platform. At the present time it is not possible to demonstrate with any certainty which of the institutional buildings were more important – each played a specific role at the provincial level despite their multifunctional character. For instance, the architectural

Table 20.1 Inca buildings at the major Inca centres within the highlands of Piura. The numbers refer to the mapped sectors within these sites. Historic sources have been used for buildings now destroyed under modern Huancabamba: (a): Xerez (1968 [1534]: 212); (b): Cieza de León (1973 [1553]: 154); (c): Garcilaso de la Vega (1967 [1609]: 84–7); (d): Tello (1916); (e) Humboldt (1991 [1802]).

Suggested function Aypate Caxas Mitupampa HuancabambaBridge 2Storage/portazgo 1 1Storage 12 (b)Cultic/temple 5, 6Cultic monolithic 3 10Ceremonial fountain 15 17Acllawasi 13 5 3 (b), (c)Kallanka 8 6 9Rectangular plaza 7 9Residential 4 4, 13, 14, 15, 22, 30, 35, 36 1, 2, 4Residential/ administrative 9Ceremonial/administrative 10Palace 9 11Another acllawasi 3 16 5Temple of the Sun 2 19 5 (a), (b), (c), (e)Trapezoidal plaza 7 20Ushnu platform 11 21 8 (d)Access control 10, 12 32 7Metal workshop 33Agricultural terrace 16 27Drying area/tendal 14 8, 27, 28, 30, 31, 35Funerary/chullpas 6, 11Unclear 17–36 18, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, 34, 37


224


complex plaza-kallanka-ushnu has been highlighted by several authors as a key element in provincial centres for the conduct of state ceremonies, banquets and rituals to reinforce the link between the empire and its subjects (Hyslop 1990; Farrington 1992; Shimada et al. 2004; Morris and Covey 2006).

From an archaeological point of view, the four largest Inca sites identified in the study area (Aypate, Caxas, Huancabamba and Mitupampa, see Fig. 20.1) are char-acterised by a wide range of Inca buildings (e.g. ushnu platform, kallanka, plaza, acllawasi, Temple of the Sun), which are either absent in other Inca sites or are constructed in isolation, such as the group of kallankas at Huancacarpa.

These four sites comprised the centres of Inca authority because the presence of specific Inca building types con-stitutes evidence of the architecture of power that featured in major Inca imperial centres (Gasparini and Margolies 1977). Table 20.1 shows the recurrent presence of several of these building forms at the major Inca centres in the study area. I have identified these as follows: acllawasi, Temple of the Sun, plaza (trapezoidal or rectangular) and ushnu platform. These four architectural forms appear to be the key structures to identify and differentiate Inca provincial centres from other Inca sites. Other diagnostic buildings recorded in only three Inca centres were kallanka, residential compounds and another acllawasi. However,

Figure 20.2 Ushnu of Aypate: hypothetical reconstruction (image © Cristian Campos and César Astuhuamán).

Table 20.2 Dimensions of Inca ushnu at Aypate (adapted from Astuhuamán 1998, Cuadro No. 78).

Component Length (m) Width (m) Wall thickness (m) Height (m) Number of stepsUpper terrace 23.05–24 19.85–19.2 – 1.2–1.6 –Intermediate terrace 26.75–27.7 25–24.4 – 2 –Inferior terrace 44.9–34.6 31.45–31.83 – 1.2 –Main stairs 13.2 4.3 0.65–0.8 – 24Lateral stairs 3.5 0.9 – – –Drain 6.55 2.05 – 0.85 –


225


the potential identification of other diagnostic architectural features at Inca centres in further research may assist in highlighting the importance of other structures such as the portazgo (storage room), ceremonial fountains, palaces, agricultural terraces and tendales (drying areas). Thus, while some buildings were critical to the definition of an Inca provincial centre (e.g. the ushnu platform), others were less essential (e.g. the presence of funerary towers [chullpas] in Mitupampa).

Aypate

Aypate is located in a mountain chain that forms the water-shed between the Quiroz and Macará river basins, which feed into the Chira river. Aypate is a very large site consist-ing of several sectors (Humboldt 1991 [1802]: 17–18, 38; Matos 1965–1966: 90, 98; Polia 1972; 1973: 36, 44–54; 1995: 85–96; Astuhuamán 1998, 2005, 2008).

My analysis of the infrastructure at Aypate has identi-fied 36 zones each containing institutional buildings (see Table 20.1). The total site size is around 200 ha. Sector 1 of Aypate, located in the northern part of the site close to the Inca road, is composed of two rows of 20 rectangular rooms (c.135 m long). This zone is where storage and control activities were conducted and is likely to have been the main portazgo of the site. Sector 7 of Aypate is a large open space (plaza) of trapezoidal shape (c.130 × 85 × 165 × 230 m) around which the main buildings are located. Sector 8 is a large (115 m long) rectangular building without any visible internal subdivisions facing the main plaza; this is likely to have been a kallanka. Sector 11 of Aypate has a stepped platform (c.5 m high) facing the main square that appears to be an Inca ushnu platform used for ceremonies and typically located in a prominent location at major Inca centres. Sector 13 accommodates four kancha compounds located on stepped terraces and facing the trapezoidal plaza. It comprised a residential zone, a sector reserved for craft activity and a cult sector used by the acllas.

The ushnu platform of Aypate (Sector 11) is located towards the east side of the main square. It comprises a three-tiered rectangular platform with a central stone stairway leading from the plaza level to the top with a small lateral stairway joined to it (see Table 20.2). A low wall surrounds the upper terrace and a drain flanked by carved rocks was recorded there (see Fig. 20.2). Our current

excavations (2013) registered walls below the surface of this terrace. During previous research, Polia (1995: 94) noted several spherical rocks, a dog or fox skull and other present-day offerings inside the drain.

Between the ushnu platform and the acllawasi, four small structures (see Table 20.3) were recorded near the ushnu and a passage was located along the back of the large wall situated on the edge of the plaza. The function of this passage was to link the ushnu platform and the acllawasi; the other structures were related to the activities carried out at the ushnu.

Caxas

The surviving buildings of Caxas are located on both banks of the Rey Inca river that joins the Hualtaco ravine near the centre of Caxas (Montúfar 1889 [1802]: 15; Tello 1916; Xerez 1968 [1534]: 210–12; Mena 1968 [1534]: 137–8; Trujillo 1968 [1571]: 20; Cieza de León 1973 [1553]: 154; Polia 1973; Hocquenghem 1989b: 25; 1994; Humboldt 1991 [1802]: 20–21; Astuhuamán 1998, 2005, 2008; Astuhuamán et al. 2003). The site covers an area of 240 ha and 37 zones were recorded including institutional buildings and spaces without architecture. Ethnohistorical accounts concerning Caxas describe the presence of spe-cifically selected and organised groups of people such as acllas (chosen women of the state religion), mitimaes (workers providing labour service to the state), soldiers and a governor, each occupying defined institutional buildings such as the acllawasi or portazgos.

Sector 1 consists of a structure with two rows of seven rectangular rooms (c.120 m long). It is probable that storage and administrative activities were conducted here and that this was the area referred as portazgo by the Spanish soldiers (Xerez 1968 [1534]: 212). Sector 5 is shaped to accommo-date six Inca kancha compounds and a rectangular storage unit; it was a residential, craft activity and cult sector used by the acllas and well documented in ethnohistorical sources. Sector 6 of Caxas is composed of three large rectangular enclosures, each approximately 100 m in length, without internal subdivisions. These buildings, the largest recorded in Tahuantinsuyu in archaeological research, have been identified as kallankas (cf. Kendall 1985; Hyslop 1990). Sector 12 boasts the largest rectangular building (c.124.5 × 24.5 m) with 42 adjacent structures distributed along three rows. Sector 20 of Caxas comprises a trapezoidal plaza (c.120 × 90 × 70 × 70 m) situated between the right bank of the Rey Inca river and the ushnu and associated build-ings in the square. Sector 21 was an Inca ushnu platform (c.3 m high). The long and narrow terraces located close to storage facilities could have been used to dry the crops prior to storage.

The Inca ushnu platform is located on one side of a square facing the Temple of the Sun and near the right bank of the Rey Inca river (Humboldt 1991 [1802]: 22–3; Raimondi 1901 [1868]: 300; Leguía y Martinez 1986

Table 20.3 Dimensions of structures near the ushnu at Aypate (adapted

from Astuhuamán 1998, Cuadro No. 80).

Structure Externallength (m)

Externalwidth (m)

Wall thickness (m)

a 7.7 4.1 0.8–1.0b 7.6 2.6 0.8–1.0c 6.4 5.5 0.8–1.0d 8.1 5.7 0.8–1.0


226


[1914]: 101–2; Tello 1916; Ramírez 1966: 27–8; Polia 1973: 69). It consists of two stepped platforms with unequal heights at front and back (see Plate 20.1 and Fig. 20.3).

A stone stairway leads from the level of the plaza towards the upper part of the second platform (see Table 20.4). On this platform was a drain of rectangular layout

with a low surrounding wall, recorded by Julio C. Tello in 1916 but no longer extant (see Plate 20.2). The close proximity of this ushnu platform to the river is similar to that of the ushnu recorded in the central plaza of Cusco (Farrington, this volume), and it allows liquids to be poured into the rectangular drain within it that flows out into the river.

Huancabamba Inca

Some remains of the Inca site of Huancabamba can be found under the capital city of the province of Huancabamba, which is located on both banks of the Huancabamba river. Following references to Huancabamba in early colonial Spanish sources, the first more modern mention was pro-vided by Alexander von Humboldt who, in 1802, described the Inca stone walls of the church of Huancabamba (Humboldt 1991 [1802]: 20–24). In Julio Tello’s 1916 unpublished field notes, the author described a stepped platform (probably an Inca ushnu platform) in the town square of Huancabamba and recorded many Inca stone

Figure 20.3 Caxas: hypothetical reconstruction (image © Cristian Campos and César Astuhuamán).

Plate 20.1 Profile of the Inca ushnu platform at Caxas by Tello (1916), 1916 Harvard Peruvian Expedition (Archivo Julio C. Tello, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos).


227


blocks in the streets. Discussion on the location of ancient Inca Huancabamba and a 1789 reference to a ‘Palacio de los Gentiles’ used as a quarry to build Huancabamba’s church are provided by Miguel Ramírez (1966: 27), however he was uncertain about its location. Anne-Marie Hocquenghem (1994: 55 fig. 19, 62) recorded some stepped terraces retained by Inca-style stone blocks around the modern market of Huancabamba that were ‘desman-teladas, quizás para construir la Huancabamba colonial’ (‘dismantled, perhaps to build colonial Huancabamba’) (Hocquenghem 1989b: 27).

Mitupampa

Mitupampa is surrounded by a rocky outcrop to the south, a cliff face and a group of hills named Negro and Saquir. It is near a crossroads and an Inca road passes through it. The first references to this site were provided by Humboldt (1991 [1802]: 24–5) and the Instituto Nacional de Cultura (INC) (1983: 43–4). From 1989 to 1992, Polia and col-leagues conducted archaeological research in Mitupampa, including surveying, mapping and excavations at the ushnu, surface collection and pottery analysis (Polia et al. 1993). Further work was carried out by Ricardo Espinosa (2002), César Astuhuamán, Natalia Guzmán and Jorge León (2003) and César Astuhuamán (2005, 2008).

My analysis of the infrastructure at Mitupampa has identified 11 sectors each containing institutional buildings (see Table 20.1). The total site size is around 60 ha. The Inca ushnu at Mitupampa is located in the central part of the site. Two stepped platforms of quadrangular layout formed an ushnu platform. A central staircase leads from the rectangular plaza to the top terrace; its central axis is oriented east–west (to Cerro Negro) (see Table 20.5). Carved ashlar stones were used in the corners of both terraces and

stairs. This Inca ushnu platform is similar to those recorded at other Inca centres (cf. Hyslop 1990).

Excavations conducted by Polia in 1992 at Mitupampa (Polia et al. 1993) recorded a rectangular platform sealing a formation of porous volcanic rock, where two felines had been carved in the bedrock prior to the construction of the ushnu (see Plate 20.3). This is the same type of stone as that used for the two large monoliths located nearby and other carved stones around this ushnu. Polia recorded a first carved feline in high relief, which he identified as Altar A and a second which he called Altar B (Polia et al. 1993: 20) (see Table 20.6 for dimensions). Both altars were surmounted by the subsequent rectangular platform, the dimensions of which were as follows: north 7.70 m; south 8.10 m; west 7.52 m; east 7.52 m (Polia et al. 1993: 35).

The earlier platform was covered by the lower tier of a later ushnu phase of construction. Inca activity was further confirmed by the presence of pottery sherds of Inca cups (qero) and jars (aríbalo). At least three phases of use were recorded at the ushnu in Polia’s excavations (Polia et al. 1993: 13, 18–20, 35) (see Fig. 20.4).

Polia proposed a sequential construction of the ushnu that comprised at least three phases of use and five of cons-truction (ibid.: 13–14). According to Polia, the final one was clearly Inca, while he dated the platform containing the two carved stones of felines to AD 1200 (‘Wari expansionista’). However, the material, its context and any analytical work remain unpublished. The earliest phase of use of the underlying rock as a shrine was dated to the Formative (2000–200 BC) although justification for this dating is dubious. A member of Polia’s team, Dante Casareto, was doubtful about the dating of the sequence: ‘podría ser aventurado proponer una cronología tentativa, debido a que el Templo de los Jaguares es un patrón arquitectónico “sui generis” en la zona’ (‘it could be risky to propose a tentative chronology as the Temple of the Jaguars is a sui generis architectural pattern in the zone’ (Polia et al. 1993: 56).

With regard to the final occupation, Polia emphasised the Inca use of the platform structure, his argument being based on the Inca-style pottery in the fills of the upper two platform tiers, their form, construction techniques and

Table 20.4 Dimensions of the Inca ushnu at Caxas (adapted from

Astuhuamán 1998, Cuadro No. 36).

Component Length (m) Width (m) Height (m)Upper terrace 13.5 9.5 0.75Inferior terrace 19.0 15.0–16.0 1.85Stair 6.0 2.5 –Drain 3.5–4.27 1.06–1.2 –

Plate 20.2 Layout of the Inca ushnu’s drain at Caxas by Tello (1916), 1916 Harvard Peruvian Expedition (Archivo Julio C. Tello, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos).

Table 20.5 Dimensions of the Inca ushnu at Mitupampa (adapted from Polia et al. 1993: 18–20, 35).

Component Length (m) Width (m) Wall thickness (m) Height (m) Number of stepsUpper terrace 21.60–22.30 14.87–15.90 0.80 1.83–2.35 –Lower terrace – – – 1.10–1.30 –Stair 5.20 3.18–3.95 – – 13


228


abundant presence of pottery of similar date on the surface (ibid.: 10).

I suggest that the two carved felines constitute the earli-est Inca activity at Mitupampa, which was subsequently sealed by the later modifications represented by the fills and platform tiers. A stylistic analysis of the carved stones should assist in defining their cultural affiliation. Carving felines in stone was not a local tradition in the highlands of Piura and there are no other documented examples in the region. Carved felines have been recorded at other Inca centres such as Samaipata (Meyers 1999, 2007), Huánuco Pampa (Morris and Thompson 1985; Kendall 1985; Pino Matos 2004a), Sayhuite (Van de Guchte 1990) and sites around Cusco (Bauer 1991). The carved felines almost certainly reflect the first phase of Inca occupation. Further remodelling ended in its ultimate form of a two-tiered platform. This implies a long Inca sequence for the site and a very different interpretation of the evidence.

A chronological overview of the Inca occupation within the highlands of Piura

It is suggested that Inca provinces were defined and organised as a result of a gradual process, which can be better understood if we take a historical overview. It is

probable that the Inca settlements with state buildings were used as provincial centres and/or as ceremonial centres during different periods of the historical process of Inca conquest and provincial consolidation. To accom-modate the chronological problems discussed above, at least two stages of development of the Inca provincial organisation in the study area identified by excavation and architectural analysis are proposed. A consideration of stages within the historical process of the annexation of the highlands of Piura in the Inca Empire and the gradual installation of Inca centres and infrastructure may help to explain the presence of four major Inca centres and the associated provincial organisation. There is consistent archaeological evidence for several phases of construction at a number of the major Inca sites, and, although it is not possible to provide precise dating or correlation between the phases at the different sites, the modifications of these sites require consideration as to the changes in state strat-egy that prompted them.

Mitupampa, the smallest ‘centre’ built in the study area to include a ‘full’ range of Inca buildings (e.g. ushnu platform, kallanka, plaza) could have been the first Inca provincial centre built in the highlands of Piura. This is suggested because of its geographical position being the most southern and it is therefore likely to have been annexed early. Some features of the Inca buildings found here suggest that Mitupampa predates Caxas and Aypate. For instance, the longest kallankas at Inca centres (e.g.

Table 20.6 Dimensions of the early altar inside the Inca ushnu at Mitupampa (adapted from Polia et al. 1993: 18–20, 35).

Component Length (m) Width (m) Wall thickness (m) Height (m)Altar A 2.10–2.13 1.84–2.18 – 0.12–0.27Altar B 2.53–2.58 1.17 0.20–0.25 0.15–0.20

Plate 20.3 Two carved felines at the Inca ushnu at Mitupampa (photo © César Astuhuamán).


229


Incallacta, Tomebamba) have been attributed to the reign of Huayna Capac (Kendall 1985: 270, 350; Niles 1999: 273–6) suggesting that smaller kallankas may be earlier. In the central part of the Central Andes, kallankas are usually between 20 and 70 m in length (e.g. Huánuco Pampa; Morris and Thompson 1985); the kallanka at Mitupampa (which is roughly 25 m) fits within this ‘early’ scheme. Further evidence for the early Inca presence at Mitupampa is the construction sequence of the ushnu platform. It is suggested that the two carved stone felines were an Inca foundation act followed by subsequent modification final-ised in the construction of the stepped ushnu platform. Representational carvings of felines (pumas or jaguars) and single-tier ushnu platforms have been associated with Topa Inca’s rule (Kendall 1985: 272–5). Both the presence of the felines and the sequential remodelling of the ushnu there-fore imply a long Inca sequence at the site. A radiocarbon sample from Level c of Sector 3 at Mitupampa shows a wide date range,4 and although this does not confirm a clear foundation or use date it is not inconsistent with an earlier dating that proposed c. AD 1493–1525 for Huayna Capac’s reign (as suggested by Rowe 1945). Mitupampa would therefore represent the earliest Inca centre built in the highlands of Piura.

In accessing Mitupampa, the Inca used the Huancabamba region and supply stations (e.g. Ovejeria) as their earliest

routes, as suggested by Spanish chroniclers (Cabello Balboa 1951 [1586]: 320–21; Garcilaso de la Vega 1967 [1609]: 3, 82–4). In the second stage, the political control and power of Mitupampa probably extended across much of the Huancabamba basin, which was controlled via the Inca road.

A comparative analysis of Inca centres suggests that the initial Inca control of the study area and early organisation of provinces during the rule of Topa Inca Yupanqui was a result of both a military presence and cult strategies across the Huancabamba region. In this first stage, Mitupampa was a provincial centre that included a range of Inca build-ings (e.g. one platform ushnu, one small kallanka and one rectangular plaza), with a principally ritual role.

The economic and socio-political reorganisation of the area featured strongly during the reign of Huayna Capac, who transformed the region into a base from which to conduct military campaigns against the Bracamoros to the east, the Ecuadorian lowland to the northwest and the Ecuadorian highland to the north. This included construction of three new major Inca centres (Caxas, Huancabamba and Aypate) and remodelling of Mitupampa. This may suggest the reduction of the impor-tance of the earlier Inca centre of Mitupampa and changes in its role under new Inca politics and strategies. This might help to explain why there was no mention of Mitupampa

Figure 20.4 Mitupampa: hypothetical reconstruction (image © Cristian Campos and César Astuhuamán).


230


in the surviving early Spanish colonial descriptions of the area. Some structures at the old centre of Mitupampa were rebuilt (e.g. the ushnu platform) following Huayna Capac’s architectural canons, but the major efforts in the region were put into the building of the new centres and the development of the roads to facilitate greater control over local resources and to create new alliances with local lords.

The positioning of the Inca ushnu within the landscape

A common feature of the main Inca centres in the high-lands of Piura is that each of them was located close to a dominant hill or mountaintop. Aypate is situated close to a hilltop and the site was terraced with some buildings con-structed on the terraces, in particular around the summit. Caxas is located in a valley surrounded by mountains and Huancabamba is likewise located in a valley between Pariacaca and Witilingun, two mountains. Mitupampa faced Cerro Negro (‘Black Mountain’). Inca burials were found on Pariacaca and Cerro Negro (Tello 1916; Polia et al. 1993). At Mitupampa, funerary towers (chullpas) were identified facing the Paraton mountain (Polia et al. 1993; Astuhuamán 2005). Polia recorded Pre-Inca cemeteries in Olleros around the Aypate mountain, with some of the burials facing its summit (Polia 1995: 291).

The early occupation of Mitupampa centred on a ceremonial compound where offerings to mountain gods may have been made next to the two carved stone felines on the ceremonial platform directed to the Cerro Negro mountain. Mitupampa became the earliest Inca centre built in the highlands of Piura with characteristically Inca-style buildings (e.g. small kallanka and the early ushnu platform). Later, during Huayna Capac’s rule, some of the buildings at Mitupampa were modified (e.g. the two-tiered ushnu platform). During the various Inca occupation phases at Mitupampa, the Cerro Negro and Paraton mountains were the focal points for the ushnu platform.

Why was Cerro Negro important with respect to the orientation of the Inca ushnu at Mitupampa? Polia identi-fied an earlier Late Intermediate Period (c. AD 1000–1400) cemetery on the hilltop and a settlement nearby (Polia et al. 1993: 57; INC 1983: 43–4). In 1993 or 1994, accord-ing to an El Comercio newspaper report (El Comercio 1992), Polia identified a grave with human remains and artefacts of a prehispanic shaman on the top of Cerro Negro, although unfortunately this find remains otherwise unpublished. The orientation of the Inca ushnu platform at Mitupampa may thus have been a tribute to an important local ancestor and an expression of the ancestor’s cult by the Inca to co-opt and consolidate local deities and political alliances.

Religious ideology played a key role in the organisa-tion of Inca provinces with the location of the major Inca centres in some regions being based principally on

proximity to ancient local shrines (e.g. Cerro Negro at Mitupampa, Pachacamac, Chinchaycocha, and Canas). It was an efficient strategy used by the Inca Empire where local cults were prestigious and had regional dimensions. On this basis the Inca created a few religious jurisdictions that overlapped and paralleled minor administra-tive power centres. This was the case for the religious jurisdictions of Pachacamac, Isla del Sol, Ayahuaca and Mitupampa.

In many cases sacred landscapes have been a constant of the Andean world – they were important to local populations before the Inca, and they continued to attract followers after the fall of the Inca Empire and the Spanish extirpation of idolatries. Sacred landscapes were a major feature of provincial organisation. I suggest that it was this relationship between people and some features of their local geography and ancestor cults that gave them an affiliation and identity with ‘their’ territory. The Inca recognised this and sought to integrate sacred sites and their followers into their religious and social networks of imperial control order and provincial organisation, which are strongly related to the ordering of landscapes (Smith 2003: 279–80).

Conclusion

Models of Inca provincial organisation as used across the Andes include synchronic aspects and spatial and dia-chronic dimensions of Inca authority during the fifteenth and early sixteenth century. The analysis of power struc-tures, and their respective major centres, suggests that these did not all share the same level of importance for the Inca state. They served varying purposes, which is reflected in their distinctive material characteristics. The Inca centres in the highlands of Piura have more simi-larities than differences, in particular their location close to local cult sites as well as the types of state buildings present and their functions. There are not sufficient formal differences between these sites to suggest that they were individually or uniquely created to accommodate local circumstances – these were centres with standard Inca architectural canons. However, there is evidence that Pre-Inca local features conditioned the location of the Inca centres in Piura (e.g. Mitupampa, Aypate). One reason for this could be that the control of local cults and the imposition of Inca state religion was the underlying strat-egy for the ultimate political and economic control of the indigenous population by the Inca state. In spite of the fact that different roles are envisaged for these centres, as expressed in their state buildings, under new Inca poli-tics and expansionist strategies, the ushnu remains as the centre of these Inca sites mimicking the centre of the Inca world as expressed on a provincial level.

The public buildings that made up the main Inca centres have some formal differences (e.g. size, orienta-tion, location and architectural layout), which may reflect


231


variations in the local economic and ritual requirements of the Inca. These in turn may be an expression of different strategies for the provincial organisation or may reflect chronological discrepancies. However, these buildings have similar standard architectural forms, similarities that can be explained by assuming that some aspects of Inca control at the provincial level were imposed homogene-ously across the Inca Empire and that essential aspects were preserved. The repetition of many comparable building forms and spatial arrangements at different sites facilitated the standardised and repeated performance of state activities by Inca personnel of all ranks as these were moved across the empire, from the Maule river to the Pasto river, from the coast to the Amazon. Following its ideological and imperial role, the ushnu transmitted Inca concepts of society and cosmos to local lords and their subjects.

Acknowledgements

This paper was elaborated and finished with the support of the personnel of the Proyecto Integral Aypate (2012–2013), under the management of the Proyecto Qhapaq Ñan of the Ministerio de Cultura (Perú). I extend many thanks to all of them.

Notes

1. Other distinctions of space are: ‘Continuous space enables human movement from a given location in any direction to another location … Discrete space, on the other hand, constrains movements to certain links or connections’ (Gorenflo and Bell 1991: 80–81). Dual concepts about sacred and profane space have also been elaborated (Eliade 1997 [1958]).

2. In this perspective, María Rostworowski (1992) analysed the case of Pachacamac, Bill Sillar (2002: 225, 236–7) analysed the Inca expansion and capture of ancient local shrines in Raqchi, Cusco region, Brian Bauer and Charles Stanish (2003) analysed the case of the Isla del Sol, and John Topic, Theresa Lange Topic and Alfredo Melly Cava (2002) the case of Catequil. See also Conrad and Demarest (1988, 1992) and Jennings (2003).

3. The landscape ‘profoundly conditions the very terms in which we are situated as subjects, governed by institutions and regimes, and located within polities and geopolitical order’ (Smith 2003: 276–7).

4. A calibrated Oxford radiocarbon date of a grain of maize (Zea maiz) collected at Level c (OxA-1631: 364 +/- 26 BP) shows the following results:

68.2% probability: AD 1450 (46.1%) AD 1530 AD 1590 (22.1%) AD 1620 95.4% probability: AD 1450 (52.6%) AD 1530 AD 1550 (42.8 %) AD 1640



Documents

Astuhuaman 2014.pdf