The lnka Empire A Multidisciplinary Approach

University of Texas Press Austin

.....

CHAPTER 5

Separating the Wheat from the Chaff lnka Myths, lnka Legends, and the Archaeological

Evidence for State Development

Brian S. Bauer and Douglas K. Smit

Throughout much of the twentieth century, scholars relied on literal readings of the Spanish chroniclers to explain the development and subsequent rapid expan­sion of the Inka state across the Andes. As a result of John Rowe's review of the available chronicles, the development of the Inka state was associated with Pachacuti Inka Yupanqui's rise to power, which Rowe ( 1944) estimated to have occurred in A.D. 1438. Inher­ent in this traditional view was the assumption that the Inka state had both developed and expanded within the lifetime of a single ruler. This stance is exempli­fied by Nigel Davis (1995:59), who writes, "When he [Pachacuti] became ruler, the Inka formed only a mod­est village community; at his death they were the might­iest empire of South America," and by Duccio Bonavia (2000:134), who states, "It was not until the fifteenth century, however, that the Inkas achieved a state-type organization, which was precipitated by growing hos­tilities of contiguous ethnic groups, such as the Chanka or those around Lake Titicaca, who posed a threat to the lnkas' freedom:'

In the general absence of systematically collected archaeological data on the Inka state, there was little debate or even discussion for many decades regard­ing what had occurred in the Cuzco region during the period of state development. It was simply presumed that Pachacuti Inka Yupanqui had unified the region, founded the state, and then led the Inkas on a road to imperial greatness across the Andes.

Beginning in the 1980s, however, a series of archae­ological survey projects were undertaken in the Cuzco region that were to provide a wealth of information on the processes that took place during the development of the Inka state (Bauer 1992, 2004; Covey 2006; Kosiba 2011, 2012) . Around the same time, several archaeolog­ical projects were conducted within the heartlands of

ethnic groups of this period who lived elsewhere in the Andes (Arkush 2011; Bauer and Kellett 2010; D'Altroy and Hastorf2001). Combined, these studies have aided researchers in shifting the focus of investigation from the myths and legends recorded in the chronicles to a more comparative and archaeologically based analysis of the rise of the Inka and their relations with contem­porary groups. These studies also reflect a greater reli­ance on an anthropologically based literature that has consistently shown that state-level sociopolitical com­plexity does not appear overnight, but is the result of long-term formative processes.

In short, as Inka scholarship begins to overhaul its decades-old interpretative model, and as research efforts are refocused on archaeological data and anthro­pological models of state formation, rather than on mythical and legendary accounts, a new understanding of Inka state formation as well as its relationships with other Andean groups is emerging (Bauer 1992, 2004; Bauer et al. 2010) .

The Origin Myths of the lnka, Revisited and Rejected

The Inka origin myths detailed by the sixteenth- and early seventeenth-century Spanish chroniclers attempt to explain the appearance of the Inka as a distinct ethnic group within the Cuzco valley as the result of a long­distance journey following the immaculate emergence of a foundational couple (Manco Capac and Mama Ocllo) from a cave south of Cuzco near the town Pacari­tambo (Bauer 1992, 1996) or, alternatively, from two islands in Lake Titicaca (Bauer and Stanish 2001).1he chroniclers, following the oral accounts told to them by indigenous informants, suggest that in the following

68 BRIAN S. BAUER AND DOUGLAS K. SMIT

generations the Inkas established themselves as one of many competing ethnic groups in the Cuzco valley.

Some scholars continue to read these origin myths as historically accurate and have suggested that the ancestors of the Inka were involved in a long, northerly migration, originating in Pacaritambo or Lake Titicaca or even both (see chapters 3, 4, and 15 in this volume, by Cerr6n-Palomino, Shinoda, and Parssinen, respec­tivelyj for a differing view see chapter 2, by Salomon) . In contrast, this article will highlight recent archaeo­logical data from four different ethnic groups located across the Andes that provide a clearer picture of the sociopolitical conditions that gave rise to the Inka state.

Most authors in this volume urge that historic infor­mation from the Spanish chronicles be kept indepen­dent of and then compared to the archaeological record (see in particular chapter 15, by Parssinen) . We fully agree with this stance and further emphasize that the chronicles need to be read critically to separate mythi­cal, legendarYi and historical forms of information. More specificallYi we believe that it is unproductive to use archaeological data to attempt to evaluate the veracity of most mythic and legendary narrations. Just as we would not use recent archaeological data to test the veracity of the Judea-Christian Adam and Eve ori­gin myth, it is ill-advised to use archaeological data to examine the origin myths of South American cultures.

In regards to "Inka origins," there have been attempts to combine narratives of mythical events with archaeo­logical data to produce a combined "mythico-history"j but these have only resulted in muddled understandings of both Andean mythology and Andean history (see Hiltunen and McEwan 2004). There have also been attempts to link the development of the Inka state in the Cuzco region with mythical events said to have taken place in the Lake Titicaca region. For example, some linguists suggest that theoretical ties between proto­versions of Quechua, Aymara, and Puquina support an ancestral movement of peoples from the Lake Titicaca region to Cuzco, which is, they believe, revealed in the Lake Titicaca origin myth (see chapter 3, by Cerr6n­Palomino). Likewise, there has been research to exam­ine the "origins" of the Inka through DNA analysis and attempts to link those results with information con­tained within the Lake Titicaca and Pacaritambo origin myths of the Inkas (see chapter 4, by Shinoda). Unfor­tunatelYi some of the DNA samples from the Cuzco region were collected within the context of a limited understanding of the local cultural sequence. Samples

from different sites, different regional groups, and even different time periods appear to have been collected and analyzed together. Even more troubling is the belief that DNA information will provide "hard" evidence to either support or negate an origin myth. By definition, the events that are described within myths take place in a time and space different from our own, and the appli­cation of scientific methods to prove or disprove them seems imprudent. The power of myths does not come from their historical veracitYi but instead from their ability to explain current social conditions.

In other words, accepting origin myths as semi­historical truths neglects the role that individuals and cultures have as active forces in the production of these narratives, and, even more central, it denies the under­lying power of indigenous religions to provide sacred narratives that explain how and why the world reached its current form. While there is no doubt that multidis­ciplinary approaches offer the best grounds for studying historic and prehistoric events, it is critical that scholars both strive for epistemological independence between multiple lines of evidence (Wylie 2000) and be scrupu­lous about understanding the basic nature of their data sources.

UnfortunatelYi studies that attempt to forge con­nections between the formation of the Inka state and the ancestral migration of a foundational couple from Lake Titicaca or Pacaritambo appear to first implicitly presume the historic veracity of these Inka origin myths and then marshal scattered pieces of evidence to sup­port the historicity of the narratives. As they do this, they ignore large data sets that point toward more mun­dane, and locally based, developmental processes. In contrast, we contend that large and systematically col­lected archaeological databases offer the best beginning points for studying the prehistoric development of past cultures. These databases become even more powerful when they are developed by different researchers, as has been done in the case of the Late Intermediate~Period (LIP) cultures of the central Andes.

The Legend of Pachacuti lnka Yupanqui and the Rise of the lnka

The uncritical acceptance of the information gathered within the Spanish chronicles has also led to the wide­spread acceptance of certain Inka legends as untar­nished and accurate retellings of history.1 This is most

paz

INKA MYTHS, INKA LEGENDS , AND THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE 69

clearly illustrated in the frequently told account of Pachacuti Inka Yupanqui's legendary rise to political power following the defeat of invading Chanka forces. The prevailing narratives on this topic suggest that the Inka were but one of many small groups in the central Andes region before the Chanka-Inka war took place, and that they were fundamentally transformed from a village-level community to an expansionist state as a result of this war. In other words, many chroniclers and subsequently many modern researchers have accepted this legend at face value and have credited Pachacuti Inka Yupanqui with singlehandedly transforming the Inka from a small Cuzco polity to a large, multiethnic, and rapidly expanding state in the span of a few years. For example, Brundage (1963:95) writes, "The Chanka victory is presented to us . .. as the most striking event in all Inka history, the year one, as it were:' The legend of the Chanka-Inka war is generally not used by schol­ars to provide a general regional context in which the processes of state development took place; instead it is presented as a direct explanation for the origins of the Inka state. The actions ofPachacuti Inka Yupanqui raise him to the level of a culture hero, and he is subsequently credited with the invention of a vast array of new cul­tural institutions.

We do not challenge the existence ofPachacuti Inka Yupanqui as a major figure in Inka history, but we do believe that perspectives that posit a singular event or individual as providing the sole impetus for state forma­tion reflect a misguided overreliance on origin myths and legends as sources of historical information. While current archaeological data and recent radiocarbon dates do suggest that the Inka Empire began to dramati­cally expand across the central Andes around A.D. 1400 (Bauer 1992; Bauer et al. 2010; Covey 2006), sugges­tions that the processes of state formation in the Cuzco region were the results of the actions of a single man contradict the existing archaeological data from the Cuzco basin (Bauer and Covey 2002). Furthermore, the traditional "great man"-centered vision of state formation contradicts the broader anthropological lit­erature regarding the development of sociopolitical complexity. Although individual leaders can oversee and direct imperial expansion, as Carneiro asserts, "the actions of individuals, no matter how gifted, count for naught in the absence of certain enabling conditions" (2000:198).

We believe that attempting to answer questions regarding the exact chronology or details ofPachacuti's

actions in determining Inka state formation is beyond the scope of most archaeological inquiries, and we con­tend that researchers should focus on a broader analy­sis of the social conditions of the Cuzco region and the central Andean highlands in general that enabled the gradual formation of the Inka state and its expan­sion. Divesting Inka scholarship of an overreliance on myths and legends and an excessively literal reading of the Spanish chroniclers in turn allows for the develop­ment of new models, which will incorporate issues of state formation that operate at comparative levels and which will stand in greater harmony with anthropo­logical considerations of the formation of sociopolitical complexity.

The application of economic, ecological, or ideo­logical themes to a processual understanding of Inka state formation is by no means a recent development. Several scholars during the late 1970s and early 1980s attempted to explore Inka state formation through dis­cussions of, for example, economic exchanges (Rost­worowski 1978, 1988), warfare (Lumbreras 1978), mutual developments of economic redistribution and political centralization (Murra 1972; Isbell 1978; Schaedel 1978), and class conflict (Patterson 1985) . Although these approaches must be credited with advancing the theoretical understanding of possible avenues of state formation, they were published before regional archaeological data from the Cuzco region became available, and as such they could have only a minor impact on the course of scholarly debate. Like the earlier works of Rowe and many others interested in the history of the Inka, these earlier explorations oflnka state formation were developed directly from, and were overtly dependent on, information presented in the Spanish chronicles. They offered no independent data sources with which to test their basic assumptions. In other words, at the time that they were presented, these alternative models of state development could not be empirically tested or verified using archaeological data, and thus they gained little scholarly traction.

A number of recently conducted regional archaeo­logical survey projects in the Cuzco region focused on collecting data regarding Inka state development. This growing archaeological database (e.g., Bauer 2004; Covey 2006, 2008; Kosiba 2011, 2012) suggests that the Inka state was the culmination oflong-term, in situ processes of political consolidation exhibiting both uni­fication and centralization. Similar to later examples of Inka statecraft throughout the empire, early practices in

70 BRIAN S. BAUER AND DOUG LAS K. SM IT

political consolidation relied on a variety of strategies, ranging from outright conquest to peaceful negotiation through gift exchange and/ or marriage alliances (Bauer and Covey 2002; Covey 2006). Furthermore, recent regional studies that have been conducted within the territories of other Late Intermediate Period ethnic groups in different parts of the Andes dramatically underscore the unique level of regional consolidation that occurred in the Cuzco region between A.D. 1000 and A.D. 1400 and that later allowed the Inka to become the largest empire of the Americas (Covey 2008).

The Late Intermediate Period in the Central Andes

In order to comprehend the rise of the Inka, one must first understand the collapse of two large Andean states, the Wari of Ayacucho and the Tiwanaku of the Lake Titicaca region, in approximately A.D. 1000. The several centuries that followed these events are generally called

Pacific ~ Ocean

t. 100 200 Km

Figure 5.1. Late Intermediate Period map of the central Andes

showing the locations of the Wanka, Chanka, lnka, and Colla

ethnic groups around a.d. 1300.

the Late Intermediate Period (A.D. 1000-1400), which was characterized by large-scale demographic move­ments, shifts in resource-procurement strategies, and a decentralization of political authority across much of the Andes, notably in the highlands (Parsons and Hast­ings 1988). However, a recent upsurge in LIP studies has revealed tremendous variation in regional patterns, as different polities exhibited diverse forms of sociopo­litical complexity (Covey 2008). Understanding the development and uneven distribution of these condi­tions can lead us toward an understanding of how and why Cuzco emerged as the center of an embryonic state during the early LIP and why similar systems of socio­political complexity did not develop elsewhere in the Andean highlands during the same period.

In order to comprehend the unique process oflnka state formation during the LIP, it is first critical to deter­mine the commonalities and dissimilarities that the lnkas had with other LIP Andean groups. These fea­tures become clear only when the early history of the Cuzco region is set within a comparative context pro­duced by other archaeological projects conducted in central Andean areas-and not merely deduced from the myths and legends of its inhabitants.

Until recently the LIP was a largely understudied period of Andean prehistory, overshadowed by schol­arly interests in the volatile states of the Middle Hori­zon (A.D. 550-1000; Wari and Tiwanaku) and the Late Horizon (A.D. 1400-1532; Inka). However, as Andean archaeology has begun to focus on processual ques­tions, this intermediate time period is now seen as a critical era of regional development (Parsons' and Hast­ings 1977; Lumbreras 1978). This new focus is reflected by the growing number of research projects that seek not only to understand the LIP history of the Inka of the Cuzco region, but also to emphasize the unique trajectories of other ethnic groups across the highlands (see Covey 2008 for a comprehensive overview).

For example, the Upper Mantaro Archaeological Research Project (UMARP) has focused on the Wanka ethnicity (D'Altroy and Hastorf 2001), while Arkush (2011) has examined the Colla of the Lake Titicaca basin, and Bauer and Kellett have examined the Chanka of the Andahuaylas region (Bauer et al. 2010; Kellett 2010). While these projects cover only a small number of ethnic groups, they serve to illustrate the diversity of sociopolitical conditions that existed among central Andean polities during the LIP.

... INI<A MYTHS, INKA LEGENDS, AND THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE 71

The Wanka and the Upper Mantaro

Inspired by several antecedent studies, including those of Matos (1975) and Parsons and Hastings (1977), UMARP ( 1978-1986) established the paradigm for Andean regional archaeological studies on the LIP. Focusing on the Wanka ethnic group of the Upper Mantaro region, UMARP investigated not only how the Inka consolidated the Wanka into their empire, but also the sociopolitical organization of the region prior to Inka annexation (DAltroy and Hastorf2001).

Building on a well-designed regional survey (Par­sons et al. 20 0 0) as well as on their own extensive program of excavations, UMARP found that the local population of the Upper Mantaro around the turn of the first millennium A.D. lived in numerous small resi­dential sites that were dispersed across the full range of environmental zones of the region. However, the archaeological data from between A.D. 1000 and A.D.

1350 demonstrated a growth in population, as well as the development of an increasingly hierarchical settlement pattern throughout the region. During this period, the scattered villages of the highly productive valley bottoms were abandoned in favor of a smaller number of much larger hilltop settlements, encircled by large stone walls. This shift from valley bottom to higher elevation settlements corresponds with a parallel shift in the focus of resource-procurement strategies: from maize to high-altitude grains and tubers (DAltroy and Hastorf2001).

The largest Wanka settlement, Hatunmarca (74 hectares), grew to become one of the largest towns of the highlands, yet there is only limited evidence for the emergence of an "elite" class among the Wanka at this time.2 Distinct Wanka lived in larger house compounds and had access to finer goods and more exotic materi­als; however, their material wealth was not qualitatively different from others within the same communities. In other words, there is no doubt that important families or powerful lineages existed among the Wanka, but their overall prestige and wealth appear to have been limited before the Inka state incorporated the Wanka into their expansionist empire, sometime after A.D.

1400 (DAltroy and Hastorf2001). Under the rule of the Inka, the hilltop settlements of

the region were abandoned and a number of even larger Inka settlements were built in the valley bottoms. A complex system of roads and storage facilities was built

within the region (Levine 1992), there was a greater emphasis on maize production, and the town of Hatun Xuaxa developed into one of the largest provincial cen­ters in the Inka Empire (DAltroy and Hastorf2001).

The Colla and the Lake Titicaca Basin

Archaeological research within the Lake Titicaca basin has provided further insight into the political balkaniza­tion that occurred across the Andean highlands during the LIP (Stanish 2003; Arkush 2011). Building on a long tradition of scholarly research on the ethnic groups of the Lake Titicaca basin (Diez de San Miguel [ 1567] 1964; Murra 1968; Hyslop 1976; Lumbreras 1974), recent research within an ethnic polity loosely defined as the Colla has focused on the large number of hilltop fortresses that dominated the landscape. Like the walled towns of the Wanka, the impressive hilltop forts of the Colla highlight the social conflict that existed across the Andes during the LIP.

The research ofArkush (2011) and Stanish (Arkush and Stanish 2005; Stanish 2003) has uncovered con­tradictions between the earliest historic accounts of the LIP populations and the archaeological record of the Lake Titicaca basin. According to Spanish chroni­clers, such as Betanzos ( [ 1551-1557] 1996), two large polities dominated the Lake Titicaca basin at the time of Inka conquest: the Lupaca in the southwest, and the Colla in the north. Based on general readings of these and other Spanish chronicles, it has been widely believed that the Lupaca and the Colla developed into distinct "kingdoms," each ruled by strong hereditary lords whose power and political sway rivaled, if not equaled, those of the Inka. However, the archaeologi­cal data reveal a far more complex developmental pro­cess, which began with the Tiwanaku collapse (ca. A.D.

1000) (Arkush 2011). After the fall of the urban center ofTiwanaku and its

surrounding provincial centers, the early LIP settlement pattern of the Lake Titicaca basin was characterized by widely dispersed and relatively small towns and villages (Stanish 2003; Covey 2008). The raised-field systems that had supported the region during Tiwanaku times were abandoned, and the new settlements were estab­lished on hilltops and later fortified with large walls. Most recently, Arkush (2011) has been able to demar­cate two distinct phases of fortress construction among the Colla. During the first phase (A.D. 1000-1275), the

72 BRIAN S. BAUER AND DOUGLAS K. SMIT

overall population of the region shifted, moving from a large number oflake-level settlements to a smaller num­ber of sites located on defensible hilltops. This shift mir­rors larger patterns of settlement dispersal that followed the Tiwanaku collapse throughout the Titicaca basin. During the second phase (A.D.l275-1450), the smaller hilltop sites were abandoned in favor of even larger hill­top settlements, a settlement shift that coincided with a marked increase in the construction of fortification walls. Although paleobotanical evidence is limited, the settlement shift to higher elevation has led some to postulate an increased reliance on agro-pastoralism through time (Arkush 2011; Stanish 2003 ).

The architectural remains of the hilltop sites contain evidence of possible "elite" residences (for example, slightly larger structures are often clustered behind an extra set of fortifications at the high point of the for­tress); however, distinct architectural forms, or "pal­aces;' were not constructed. Overall, intrasite settle­ment plans indicate that labor acted primarily upon communally beneficial features such as defensive walls and tombs, rather than on monumental architecture or organized settlement plans, as would characterize elite­directed and centralized planning (Arkush 2011). Inter­estingly, the settlement-pattern evidence of endemic warfare and decentralized power does not abate toward the latter stages of the LIP, contrasting with the early Spanish chroniclers, who mention accounts of an Inka conquest of a unified Colla "kingdom" (Arkush 2011).

The Chanka and the Andahuaylas Region

Archaeological research on the sociopolitical organi­zation of the Chanka ethnic group during the LIP has recently been completed in the Andahuaylas region (Bauer et al. 2010; Bauer and Kellett 2010; Kellett 2010 ). Knowledge of the pre-Inka social conditions of the Andahuaylas region-and its associated Chanka ethnic group-is especially important to an under­standing of the activities of the Inka in the Cuzco region, as it is widely assumed that the Chanka and the Inka were close rivals locked in a brutal war at the end of the LIP (Bonavia 2000).

Until recently, the political nature of the Chanka has remained elusive, in part because we have not been able to define their territorial boundaries. Previous research has emphasized common traits-chullpas (burial tow­ers) and hilltop fortresses (see fig. 5.2)-to postulate a widespread Chanka entity that ranged across the mod-

ern Peruvian departments of Huancavelica, Ayacucho, andApurimac (see fig. 5.3). This portrayal of a multide­partmental and largely united entity reinforced the tra­ditional legend-based narratives that posit the Chanka as a vast and politically centralized and powerful polity. However, chullpas and hilltop fortresses are common features found across the Andean highlands through­out the LIP; for example, they are also found in the aforementioned Lake Titicaca basin (Arkush 2011) and Wanka territory (D'Altroy and Hastorf 2001), and are therefore extremely problematic markers of a Chanka polity. Beyond the superficial commonalities in the architecture, our analysis of the material record does not support the application of "Chanka" to LIP ethnic groups within the Huancavelica, Ayacucho, and Apu­rimac departments (Bauer and Kellett 2010). Instead, it appears that these departments were occupied by an array of different, and at times even competing, ethnic groups.

The homeland of the Chanka lies approximately 160 kilometers west of Cuzco, in the modern Peruvian province of Andahuaylas. A recent regional survey of the Andahuaylas region has demonstrated that after the Wari collapse (ca. A.D. 1000), most of the small villages located in the valley bottoms were abandoned and the population subsequently shifted to a number of much smaller nucleated settlements situated on defensible ridge-tops (Kellett 2010). While the defensive charac­teristics of these ridgetop sites are not as expansive as those found among other contemporaneous groups, such as the Wanka or the Colla, it is nevertheless clear that there was a dramatic increase in threats of vio­lence during the LIP. It also appears that there was an increased emphasis on pastoralism and the farming of high-altitude crops during this period (Kellett 2010 ) .

Perhaps most surprising is that the overall regional settlement pattern within the Andahuaylas region pro­vides no evidence of strong political unification or the emergence of a complex social stratification during the LIP. Most importantly, there is no clear settlement hier­archy for the region, no public works other than defense features, and no evidence for the development of differ­ent classes within sites, and the population appears to have been widely distributed in relatively small towns and villages across the landscape (Bauer et al. 2010; Bauer and Kellett 2010). In other words, the archaeo­logical evidence does not support the legend-based accounts that suggest that the Chanka developed as a singularly powerful and well-organized ethnic group

...

Figure 5.2. A classic LIP site with circular buildings in the Andahuaylas region of Peru. (Bauer et al. 2010:77)

Chanka Phase (AD 1000-1400)

* 138 sites <0.25 ha not shown

e Hamlet {0.25- 1 ha)

c:::J Audabuaylas Archaeulog,ical Project

- yunga(0-2.700m)

quechua (2,700- 3.500 m)

Small Village ( 1-5 ha) C=:J suni (],SOO _ J,&OO m)

Mediwtl Vill::age (5-10 hn) C=:J puna (]&00+ m)

Large Vil lage (!0+ ha) •Sites < I ha are not labeled

Figure 5.3. Settlement pattern of the Chanka (ca. a.d. 1000-1400) in th e Andahuaylas region. (Bauer et al. 2010:74)

--74 BRIAN S. BAUER AND DOUGLAS I<. SMIT

Figure 5.4. The site of Achanchi is one of the largest Chanka sites

of the Andahuaylas region . This is a fortified hilltop site similar in

form to many other LIP sites found across the central highlands.

(Bauer et al. 2010:81)

during the LIP (fig. 5.4). As will be discussed in more detail below, rather than paralleling the dramatic cen­tralization of wealth and power that occurred in the Cuzco region among the Inka, the development pattern of the Chanka appears to be very similar to those of the many other relatively small polities scattered across the highlands during the LIP.

Trends of the Late Intermediate Period

We have provided three case studies (Wankas, Collas, and Chankas) that help to highlight the political decen­tralization and balkanization that occurred in the cen­tral highlands following the collapse of Tiwanaku and Wari. Although the regional specifics of each of these three cases differ, they illustrate a number of common trends across the highlands between A.D. 1000 and A.D.

1400: the widespread abandonment of valley-bottom settlements, the construction of new settlements on

ridges or hilltops, an increasing prevalence of warfare, a diversification of subsistence practices, and an overall lack of regional centralization.

Fieldwork in the Cuzco region indicates that the course of sociopolitical development followed a very different path in the heartland of the Inkas.

State Formation in the Cuzco Region

Although Rowe ( 1944) had conducted excavations within the Cuzco basin to develop a chronological ceramic sequence, settlement patterns in the Cuzco region remained uninvestigated until the 1980s. The first large-scale settlement survey was conducted by Bauer, between 1984 and 1987, and included a 600-square-kilometer survey of the area directly south of Cuzco (Bauer 1992) . The results of this survey not only demonstrated the necessity for acquiring regional settlement data in the Cuzco region, but also revealed the problematic nature of relying on the chronicles to assume a shallow chronology for state formation. Two further surveys subsequently expanded upon this ini­tial project: a 350-square-kilometer survey within the Cuzco basin itself, between 1997 and 1999 (Bauer and Covey 2002), and a 300-square-kilometer survey north ofCuzco, in 2000 (Covey 2006). Taken together, these three projects documented more than two thousand archaeological sites throughout a contiguous survey area of over 1,200 square kilometers. Additionally, the resulting research zone forms a continuous transect that stretches over 80 kilometers along the north-south axis of the Cuzco region, thereby providing the first compre­hensive view of changing settlement patterns through­out the formative processes of the Inka state (Bauer and Covey 2002). In other words, through the creation of a combined database from several diffrent, but related, projects, we can move beyond literal readings of Inka myths and legends and begin to examine the historic development of the Inka within their heartland.

The Cuzco Basin from the Middle Horizon to the Late Intermediate Period

As demonstrated by the nearby presence ofPikillacta­a large Wari administrative center located 30 kilometers to the south, in the Lucre basin-the Cuzco basin dur­ing the Middle Horizon (A.D. 600-1000) was within the sphere of Wari influence. However, there is very little evidence that Wari administration significantly

INI<A MYTHS, INI<A LEGEND S, AND THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE 75

disrupted settlement patterns within the Cuzco basin proper. Prior to the appearance of the Wari, and con­tinuing throughout the Middle Horizon with little devi­ation, the population of the Cuzco basin was concen­trated within several villages on the southern side of the valley, along lower slopes and valley bottomlands that were ideally positioned to take advantage of the alluvial terraces of Huatanay River and rainfall farming (Bauer and Covey2002).

The Wari collapse at approximately A.D. 1000 resulted in the abandonment of Pikillacta; the settle­ment pattern was transformed as political competition increased in the absence ofWari administration. During the early LIP (A.D. 1000-1200), the local settlements increased in number and population, while a distinct new settlement pattern developed on the northern end of the Cuzco valley, in an area where there is little evi­dence of prior intensive habitation (Covey 2006) . The growing population of the northern end of the valley supported itself by constructing large terraces that cre­ated thousands of hectares of improved agricultural land, supplied with water provided by a series of newly

constructed canals (fig. 5.6). This growth in population and agricultural productivity suggests that settlement shifts in the Cuzco basin coincided with an increased ability of local elites to mobilize large labor forces for the construction of further agricultural improvements, as well as the ability to exercise a degree of control over the resulting agricultural surpluses (Bauer and Covey 2002).

In contrast, the nearby Oropesa basin, located between the Cuzco basin and the Lucre basin, exhib­ited almost complete site abandonment and depopu­lation following the Wari collapse, providing further illustration of the unique processes occurring in the Cuzco basin during the early LIP. Rather than choosing full-scale abandonment of valley bottoms, or increased reliance on defensive hilltop fortresses, the Cuzco pol­ity responded to the Wari collapse by placing a stronger emphasis on agricultural and economic productivity as a criterion for site location (Covey 2006).

This growing network of settlements along the Cuzco basin floor flourished into the second half of the LIP (A.D. 1200-1400), suggesting a limited concern

Paucartambo • Figure 5.5. Area of archaeological surveys

conducted in the Cuzco region between

1986 and 2000. (Bauer 2004:73)

~ ChokepukJo~ ~ P1k1llacta

Araypallpa - •

10 20 Jo 40 so Accha - • KILOMETERS

(Lucre Basin)

~ Archaeological site PAP= Pacariqtambo Archaeological Project 1986-1989

e Modern community CVAP = Cuzco Valley Archaeological Project 1994, 1997-1999 SVAP = Sacred Valley Archaeological Project 1999-2000

-

76 BRIAN S. BAUER AND DOUGLAS K. SMIT

e .25- 1 ha · 1-Sha

(Approximately 140 smaller sites have been omitted)

Figure 5.6. Unlike many other areas of the central Andes, where the inhabitants were living in fortified hilltop settlements, by around

a.d. 1300 the lnka had developed a massive infrastructure and a large population base in the Cuzco basin . (Bauer 2004:76)

with warfare or raiding and increased centralization of political unitary. Furthermore, this settlement pattern exhibits continuity from the Middle Horizon (A.D. 600-1000) up through the appearance of imperial Inka pottery, indicating a lack of the conflict that could oth­erwise have threatened the internal processes of socio­political consolidation (Covey and Bauer 2002 ).

Climatically, it is proposed, based on lake sediment cores and ice cores, that the Cuzco basin underwent a region-wide drought from approximately A.D.12SO until A.D. 1310, not only requiring an intensification of agri­cultural production, but likely prompting further con­struction of agricultural improvements to the landscape (Covey 2006).31his period also saw the development of Cuzco as a distinct urban center, which increased in size to SO hectares at a time when other political centers in the nearby Sacred Valley and Paruro did not expand beyond 10 hectares (Bauer 1992; Covey2006). Materi­ally, excavations of the Cuzco urban center during this period have uncovered large amounts of high-quality Killke (i.e., early Inka) cerarnics,4 notably below sites that would assume great importance during the impe­rial period, such as Sacsayhuaman, Cusicancha, and the Coricancha, as well as across the central core of the city

of Cuzco. This signifies a far greater degree of continuity from the LIP to the imperial period than a literal read­ing of the chronicles would indicate (Bauer and Covey 2002).

Archaeological Evidence from the Greater Cuzco Region

By A.D. 1300, settlement data from the Cuzco basin indicate a growing hierarchical network of multitiered settlements centered around a rapidly urbanizing Cuzco, an intense system of agricultural terracing and canals that increased the efficiency and quantity of maize production, and increasingly standardized Killke ceramics (Covey 2008). Additionally, two separate lines of archaeological evidence from valleys adjacent to the Cuzco basin indicate that the developing Inka polity incorporated nearby ethnic groups at a much ear­lier time than previously assumed. First, Killke ceramics are widely distributed at archaeological sites as far as SO kilometers away, yet decrease in number as the distance. from Cuzco increases (Bauer 1992, 1999). Surface col­lections conducted during the aforementioned surveys also illustrate that Killke ceramics are found at a higher

INKA MYTHS, .INKA LEGENDS, AND THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE 77

frequency and larger spatial distribution than other LIP ceramic types in this region after A.D. 1300 (Covey 2008).

Second, settlement patterns from surrounding regions display contradicting levels of sociopolitical complexity. For example, the Pauro region to the south of Cuzco contains many small, scattered settlements found adjacent to agricultural land with little evidence of inter- or intrasite hierarchy (Bauer 1992). Heffer­nan ( 1989) found similar settlement patterns in the Limatarnbo region, SO kilometers to the west of Cuzco. Compared with accounts of this area in the Spanish chronicles, Heffernan notes that "the mythico-historic characterization of pre-Inka populations as constantly warring, in light of field evidence, is imbalanced and fails to appreciate stable elements in the socio-economic landscape ofLimatambo" (Heffernan 1989:413 ).

However, research from the north of Cuzco does demonstrate a greater prevalence of fortified hilltop sites. For example, the site of Muyuch'urqu dominates the Cuyo basin from an elevated ridgetop 4,000 meters above sea level. Located in the center of a nucleated set­tlement pattern, this site appears to have been the center of a small independent polity, with the high frequency of defensive features suggesting a lack of peaceful inter­action with the expanding Inka state. Across the Cuyo basin, at a higher elevation than Muyuch'urqu, the site of Pukara Pantillijlla contains the earliest ceramic and architectural evidence of Inka presence in the region. Following the construction ofPukara Pantillijlla, settle­ment patterns shift to valley lowlands and several mas­sive irrigation projects were completed, signifying the advent of Inka administration over a previously con­frontational polity (Covey and Bauer 2002). Radiocar­bon data from classic Inka-style buildings at the site of Pukara Pantillijlla date site construction to A .D. 1300, potentially representing "a terminus ante quem of c. A .D .

1300 for Inka state formation" (Covey 2008:299).

Conclusion

We contend that the uncritical incorporation of origin myths and legends into models of state development is an unproductive method of reconstructing the past. This is not to say that myths and legends provide no information whatsoever; instead, we assert that they must be treated as different types of narratives rather than as semihistoric accounts. For example, origin

myths can provide profoundly important insights regarding how different cultures conceive of their ancient past, and such myths provide explanatory infor­mation regarding central religious rituals (Bauer 1996; Sahlins 1981, 1985), but they should not be regarded as narrating what actually occurred. The reconstruction of the ancient past can be done only in a gradual fashion, with large-scale and systematic research; the attempted reliance on mythic or legendary events is an unaccept­able shortcut.

Throughout the Andes, the LIP / Late Horizon Period boundary is marked by the arrival of imperial­style Inka artifacts and architecture, which compels us to place the temporal focus of research regarding Inka state formation on LIP sociopolitical complexity. Through a comparison of several recent LIP studies­the Wanka of the Jauja region (D'Altroy and Hastorf 2001), the Colla from the Lake Titicaca region (Arkush 2011), and the Chanka from the Andahuaylas region (Bauer et al. 2010)-we have presented in this chapter archaeological data that dramatically underscore the unique level of regional consolidation present within the Cuzco basin on the eve of the Inka expansion.

In contrast to mythic accounts oflnka origins in the Pacaritambo or Lake Titicaca region and the legend­based accounts of Pachacuti Inka Yupanqui's meteoric rise to power, the archaeological evidence provides a distinctly different picture. In other words, the material record contradicts much of the information provided in the Spanish chronicles. From our perspective, it is clear that the colonial narratives overstate the degree of polit­ical centralization of groups surrounding the Cuzco region at the time of imperial expansion. The lack of archaeological evidence for political centralization of the Chanka is particularly significant, as the chronicles state that the Chanka invasion of Inka Cuzco was the original impetus for state formation under Pachacuti. The discrepancies between information provided in the Spanish chronicles and the archaeological record of conquered groups such as the Chanka and Colla call into question the traditional use of these chronicles to reconstruct the development of Inka sociopolitical complexity through time.

As discussed elsewhere (Bauer 2004; Bauer and Covey 2002; Covey 2006), state development pro­gressed through the unification of a host of differ­ent ethnic groups of varying sizes scattered across the Cuzco region, notably the Pinahua and Mohina of the Lucre basin and the Ayamarca of the Maras area. The

----78 BRIAN S. BAUER AND DOUGLAS 1< . SMIT

unification-or in a few cases the successful elimina­tion-of these ethnic groups over the course of several centuries resulted in the creation of an Inka state and a heartland capable of sustaining rapid Inka imperial expansion. In a foreshadowing of later imperial prac­tices, the Inka utilized a diverse range of strategies to incorporate neighboring polities into the developing state. Several less powerful neighboring ethnic polities accepted Inka administration early on, perhaps even inviting Inka patronage to secure the benefits of grow­ing Inka exchange networks. Examples of this can be found south of the Cuzco valley, where little evidence of conquest or abrupt settlement change is noted in the latter stages of the LIP, suggesting that these groups were absorbed earlier into the developing state.

In contrast, stronger neighboring groups main­tained their independence from Inka control, at times depopulating areas and settling in defensive sites to protect settlements and resources. In the southeastern end of the Cuzco valley, in the Lucre basin, the Pina­hua and Inka remained rivals during the initial phases of regional state formation. It was only following more substantial state consolidation in neighboring areas that the Inka successfully incorporated the Lucre basin.

Finally, groups of intermediate complexity used alliances and violence to align themselves with the strongest regional competitors. It is certain that, as occurs worldwide, marriages between elite families of different ethnic groups helped to promote stable, cross­generational coalitions. Additionally, the neighboring elites gained access to the regional agricultural intensifi­cation, as well as a regional exchange network facilitated by a growing network of Inka roads. Most importantly, the groups within the area came to see themselves as "Inka," resulting in an expanded population base across the Cuzco region that became culturally distinct from nearby Andean regions such as the Lake Titicaca basin (Bauer and Covey io02). The ethnic integration of the greater Cuzco region was a critical phase in the cul­tural development of the region and later enabled these groups to expand into neighboring non-Inka regions.

By A.D. 1300, the Inka had formed a large cultural heartland within the Cuzco region through the unifica­tion of over a dozen formerly independent groups; had developed a distinctive state architectural style; had built a large, central capital city; and were in the process of transforming the landscape with immense terrace systems. While other regions of the Andes continued to

be politically fragmented and divided by regional con­flict, archaeological data from the Cuzco region indi­cate a relative absence of defensive architecture, signify­ing a conspicuous lack of the warfare that was endemic throughout the Andes during the LIP. Furthermore, the archaeological data contradict the notion of rapid state formation driven by migration from outside the Cuzco region, as the settlement pattern data suggest not the rapid influx of a powerful foreign group, but rather con­tinued stability.

This viewpoint requires that a distinction be made between Inka state expansion, which occurred rapidly across the Andes, and state formation, a long-term pro­cess that occurred during the LIP and that laid the foun­dations for Inka imperialism. As a result, we reaffirm the need to redirect the interpretation of Inka origins away from the mythical and legendary accounts related by the chroniclers, and instead contend for a contin­ued emphasis on examinations of Inka state-formative processes within an anthropologically grounded and archaeologically supported comparative framework.

Notes

1. Myths and legends are two different forms of the retelling of the past. Myths tend to be more religious in nature and fre­quently address the fundamental organization of a society at the beginning of time, while legends frequently deal with the actions of culture heroes and are set within a·more historic context.

2. It is an odd historic fact that despite its large size, Hatun­marca is only briefly mentioned in the classic chronicles of Peru. Various smaller ethnicities living closer to the early centers of Spanish control hold more dominant positions in Spanish retell­ings of the Andean past.

3. The exact timing and impact of climatic change on the settlement patterns of the LIP and the development of the Inka are still issues of major debate.

4. For additional information on Killke ceramics, see Bauer 1999 and 2002.

Bibliography

Arkush, Elizabeth N.

2011 Hillforts of the Ancient Andes: Colla Warfare, Society, and Landscape. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

Arkush, Elizabeth N., and Charles Stanish

2005 "Interpreting Conflict in the Ancient Andes : Implica­tions for the Archaeology of Warfare:' Current Anthro­pology 46:3-28.

Bauer, Brian S.

1992 The Development of the Inca State. Austin: University of Texas Press.

INI<A MYTHS, INI<A LEGENDS, AND THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE 79

1996 "Legitimization of the State in lnca Myth and Ritual." American Anthropologist 98:327- 337.

1999 Early Ceramics of the Inca Heartland. Fieldiana Anthro­pology, n.s. 31. Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History.

2002 Las antiguas tradiciones alfarerias de Ia region del Cuzco. Cuzco: CERA "Bartolome de Las Casas.

2004 Ancient Cuzco: Heartland of the Inca. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Bauer, Brian S., and Alan R. Covey

2002 "Processes of State Formation in the lnca Heartland ( Cuzco, Peru)." American Anthropologist 104:846- 864.

Bauer, Brian S., and Lucas C. Kellett

2010 "Cultural Transformation of the Chanka Homeland (Andahuaylas, Peru) during the Late Intermediate Period (A.D. 1000-1400):' Latin American Antiquity 21:87- lll.

Bauer, Brian S., Lucas C. Kellett, and Miriam Araoz Silva

2010 The Chanka: Archaeological Research in Andahuaylas (Apurimac), Peru. Los Angeles : Cots en Institute of Archaeology, University of California.

Bauer, Brian S., Miriam Dayde Anioz Silva, and GeorgeS. Burr

2012 "The Destruction of the Yurak Rumi Shrine (Vileabamba, Cuzco Department)." In Andean Past, 10:195- 212.

Bauer, Brian S., and Charles Stanish

2001 Ritual and Pilgrimage in the Ancient Andes: Theislands of the Sun and the Moon. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Betanzos, Juan de

( 1551-1557) 1996 Narrative of the Incas . Trans. and ed. Roland Hamilton and Dana Buchanan. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Bonavia, Duccio

2000 "The Origins of the lncas and the Chanka Question." In The Inca World: The Development of Pre-Columbian Peru, A.D. 1000- 1534, ed. Laura Laurencich Minelli, 133-140. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Brundage, Burr Cartwright

1963 Empire of the Inca . Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Carneiro, Robert L.

2000 The Muse of History and the Science of Culture. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

Covey, R. Alan

2006 How the Incas Built Their Heartland. Ann Arbor: Uni­versity of Michigan Press.

2008 "Multiregional Perspectives on the Archaeology of the Andes during the Late Intermediate Period (c. AD 1000-1400 )."Journal of Archaeological Research 16:287- 338.

D'Altroy, Terence N., and Christine Ann Hastorf

2001 Empire and Domestic Economy. New York: Kluwer Academic.

Davies, Nigel

1995 The Incas. Niwot: University Press of Colorado. Diez de San Miguel, Garci

(1567) 1964 Visita hecha a Ia provincia de Chucuito por Garci

Diez de San Miguel en el afw 1567. Ed. Waldemar Espinoza Soriano. Documentos Regionales para Ia Etnologia y Etnohistoria Andinas l. Lima: Casa de Ia Cultura del Peru.

Heffernan, Kenneth

1989 "Limatambo in Late Prehistory: Landscape Archaeol­ogy and Documentary Images oflnca Presence in the Periphery of Cuzco." PhD diss., Australian National University, Canberra.

Hiltunen, Juha, and Gordon F. McEwan

2004 "Knowing the lnca Past:' ln Andean Archaeology, ed. Helaine Silverman, 237- 254. New York: Blackwell.

Hyslop, John

1976 "An Archaeological Investigation of the Lupaca King­dom and Its Origins." PhD diss., Columbia University, New York.

Isbell, William

1978 "Environmental Perturbations and the Origin of the Andean State:' In Social Archaeology: Beyond Subsistence and Dating, ed. Charles L. Redman, 303- 314. New York: Academic.

Kellett, Lucas

2010 "Chanka Settlement Ecology: Hilltop Sites, Land Use, and Warfare in Late Prehispanic Andahuaylas, Peru:' PhD diss., University of New Mexico.

Kosiba, Steve

2011 "The Politics of Locality: Pre-lnka Social Landscapes of the Cusco Region:' ln The Archaeology of Politics: The Materiality of Political Practice and Action in the Past, ed. P.Johansen and A. Bauer, 114-150. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.

2012 "Em placing Value, Cultivating Order: Places of Con­version and Practices of Subordination throughout Early Inka State Formation ( Cusco, Peru)." ln Construc­tions of Value in the Ancient World, ed. G. Urton and]. Papadopoulos, 99- 127. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California.

LeVine, Terry

1992 Inka Storage Systems. Norman: University of Oklahoma.

Lumbreras, Luis Guillermo

1974 The Peoples and Cultures of Ancient Peru. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

1978 "Acerca de Ia aparici6n del estado lnka." ln Aetas y trabajos del III Congreso peruano "El Hombre y Ia cultura andina/' 1:101-109. Lima: UNMSM.

Matos Mendieta, Ramiro

1975 "Prehistoria y ecologia humana en las punas de Junin:' Revista del Museo Naciona/37:41-51.

Montesinos, Fernando de

( 1630) 1920 Memorias antiguas historiales del Peru. Trans. and ed. Philip Ainsworth Means. London: Hakuyt Society.

Murra, John V.

1968 "An Aymara Kingdom in 1567." Ethnohistory 15:115-151.

1972 "El 'control vertical' de un maximo de pisos ecol6gicos en Ia economia de las sociedades andinas." In Visita

--80 BRIAN 5. BAUER AND DOUGLAS K. SMIT

de Ia provincia de Le6n de Hwinuco par Inigo Ortiz De Zuniga hecha en 1562, ed.J. V Murra, 429-476. Hua­nuco : Universidad Hermilio Valdizan.

Parsons, J. R., and C. M. Hastings

1977 "Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Upper Man­taro, Peru. A Preliminary Report of the 1975 Field Season." Report submitted to the lnstituto Nacional de Cultura, Lima, Peru, and the National Science Foundation.

1988 "The Late Intermediate Period:' In Peruvian Prehistory, ed. R. W. Keatinge, 190-229. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

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

Mendieta

2000 Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Upper Mantaro and Tarma Drainages, Jun{n, Peru. Ann Arbor: Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan.

Patterson, Thomas

1985 "Exploitation and Class Formation in the Inca State." Culture 5.1:35-42.

Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, Marfa

1978 "Una hipotesis sabre el surgimiento del estado Inca:' In Aetas Y trabajos del III Congreso Peruano "El Hombre y Ia cultura andina," 89-100. Lima: UNMSM.

1988 La historia del Tawantinsuyu. Lima: IEP. Rowe, John H.

1944 An Introduction to the Archaeology of Cuzco. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Harvard University.

1946 "Inca Culture at the Time of Spanish Conquest:' In Handbook of South American Indians, ed. Julian H. Steward, 2:183-330. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 143. Washington, DC.

Sahlins, Marshall D.

1981 "The Stranger-King; or, Dumezil among the Fijians:' Journal of Pacific History 16:107-132.

1985 Islands of History. Chicago: University of Chicago. Schaedel, Richard

1978 "Early State of the Incas:' In The Early State, ed. H.]. M. Claessen and Peter Skalnik, 289- 320. The Hague: Mouton.

Stanish, Charles

2003 Ancient Titicaca: The Evolution of Complex Society in Southern Peru and Northern Bolivia. Berkeley: Univer­sity of California Press.

Wylie, A.

2000 "Questions of Evidence, LegitimacYi and the (Dis) unity of Science." American Antiquity 65:227-237.