FOODWAYS AND SOCIOPOLITICS IN THE OF , A.D. 600 – 900

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY AND THE COMMITTEE OF GRADUATE STUDIES OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLEMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Silvana Amanda Rosenfeld August 2011

© 2011 by Silvana Amanda Rosenfeld. All Rights Reserved. Re-distributed by Stanford University under license with the author.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial 3.0 United States License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/

This dissertation is online at: http://purl.stanford.edu/kn470yc2748

ii I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

John Rick, Primary Adviser

I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Ian Robertson

I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Diane Gifford-Gonzalez

I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Gordon F. McEwan

Approved for the Stanford University Committee on Graduate Studies. Patricia J. Gumport, Vice Provost Graduate Education

This signature page was generated electronically upon submission of this dissertation in electronic format. An original signed hard copy of the signature page is on file in University Archives.

iii

ABSTRACT

Food is at the intersection of nature and culture, being a requirement of human life but always being socially transformed and loaded with cultural meaning. This dissertation shows that it is possible to study ancient sociopolitical roles of animal food through the analysis of meal refuse in the archaeological record. Specifically, the project expands beyond the traditional focus in zooarchaeology on human subsistence by seeing food as a critical element in the creation, negotiation, and manipulation of human relationships. In particular, it shows how during the ancient Wari Empire of

Peru (A.D. 600 – 900) meat feasts and animal offerings played different roles in consolidating the empire both in the province and in the heartland.

This study compares faunal remains from the Middle sites of

Conchopata (), Cotocotuyoc (Cuzco), and Chokepukio (Cuzco).

Expectations are developed to evaluate, analyze, and contrast quotidian trash, feasting remains, and animal offerings deposits.

Feasts and offerings can be instruments of political action to pursue economic and political goals. They served a variety of roles in articulating the politics of the

Wari Empire. During the early times of the Wari influence in provincial Cotocotuyoc, offerings of camelids served to acquire and maintain symbolic capital by the local leaders. At Conchopata, a site in the Wari heartland, feasts in public open patios served to legitimize institutionalized relations of power, while feasts related to mortuary activity in private rooms functioned to naturalize status differences across this socially stratified town. Although certainly not the only practice used to retain

iv power differences, offerings and feasts involving camelid meat, beverages, and special Wari ceramics were key to build and maintain a vast and complex polity such as the Wari Empire.

v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This dissertation would not have been possible without the support of a number of people. First, I want to thank my main advisor at Stanford, John Rick. He has always been open to every topic and approach that I suggested. John never raised an eyebrow when I decided to explore a wide array of classes from Continental Philosophy to

Introduction to Quechua. Every time I asked him for advice he was there to generously share his thoughts. I thanked him for helping me navigate the graduate program and for all his support throughout these years.

Ian Robertson has been particularly important with everything related with numbers: mainly statistics and graphs. Many times I ran into his office to ask for help when the software was not cooperating. He was always happy to teach me new codes.

I thank him a lot for always being there and for reading and commenting on my chapter drafts.

Diana Gifford-Gonzalez has been essential to my development as a zooarchaeologist. She is a great teacher and I learnt a lot in her graduate seminar at

UCSC. I am glad that, while pregnant, I was able to make the trip to Santa Cruz twice a week and stay over at different friends’ houses in order to attend her seminar. Her enthusiasm is contagious and she pushed me to think in new ways about my data. She also put in tremendous time in reading multiple chapter drafts and providing lots of editing and useful suggestions.

vi Gordon McEwan was very generous in providing me with the faunal material from his excavations at Chokepukio. He also shared many of his ideas about the Wari in Cuzco. I thank him for his comments and suggestions on my chapter drafts. I want to extend my gratitude to Arminda Gibaja, his project co-director, for her support.

Froilan Iturriaga, another essential member of the Chokepukio project, was particularly kind in letting me convert his patio into a zooarchaeological lab.

I want to thank Bill Isbell who invited me to participate to the Conchopata

Project in Ayacucho a long time ago. Thanks to his enthusiasm I became interested in the Wari Empire and the possibility of pursuing a doctoral program on that topic. Bill was always happy to listen to my questions and to share ideas. I thank him for his generosity. That summer of 2002 I wouldn’t have predicted that one day I would complete a dissertation with faunal material from Conchopata. I also want to thank

Anita Cook, the Conchopata Project co-director, for reading the section on the description of Conchopata and giving me useful comments. Throughout these years I benefited a lot from discussions and email exchanges with Anita. Both Bill and Anita have always been very generous in sharing Conchopata material. I also want to thank the local Conchopata co-directors Jose Ochatoma and Martha Cabrera for kindly sharing the osteological comparative collection from the Laboratorio de Arqueologia at Universidad S. C. de Huamanga.

Mary Glowacki welcomed me into the Cotocotuyoc/Huaro Project in Cuzco with her kindness and generosity. She has always been very supportive and interested in my research. I want to thank her for sharing the faunal material from her

vii excavations. I also want to thank Nicolasa Arredondo, project co-director, for all her help.

Many more people helped along the way and I can only mention a few here.

Ian Hodder provided me with a lot of intellectual stimulation. I benefited tremendously from his classes at Stanford. I thank him for being part of my exam committee and to push my thinking with his always-clever questions. Phil Hubbard, at the Language Center gave me tons of editorial guidance. Most of this dissertation is readable thank to him. Willie Mengoni provided access to comparative material at the

Instituto de Arqueologia, Universidad de Buenos Aires and he also shared his unpublished guanaco standard measurements for my osteometric analysis. Many thanks to Carmen Jurado, the director of the Museum, from whom I borrowed the camelid comparative collection in Cuzco. I also want to thank Melissa

Chatfield, Valerie Andrushko, and Bethany Turner for our discussions and exchange on Chokepukio data. Thanks to Julie-Ann White and Yamini Rao for their support during the excavations at Cotocotuyoc.

My academic life would have been very boring without the conversations, confidences and laughs I had in the Stanford Andean Lab with Stefanie Bautista,

Ignacio Cancino, Dan Contreras, and Francesca Fernandini. In particular to Stefanie, I truly appreciate her patience and good humor that helped endure the last weeks of my writing. I also thank Trinidad Rico for mate breaks and “cultural” support. The dissertation boot camp pushed my writing a lot. I thank Yoon-Jung Lee, Rania Sweiss, and Curtis Murungis for helping me stick to it. Shelly Coughlan and Ellen Christensen

viii from the department of Anthropology helped me find the way through the University paperwork and I owe my sanity to them.

I would like to thank the institutions and agencies that provided financial support essential for my research. The National Science Foundation Graduate

Research Fellowship supported most of my time at Stanford. The Stanford Graduate

Research Opportunity Funds supported my research in Cuzco. Finally, the department of Anthropology and the Mellon Foundation were essential during my writing-up period.

To my parents, parents-in law, and aunt E. who helped me in various ways during these years. They all babysat in different parts of the world (Buenos Aires,

Lima, and California) at crucial moments during fieldwork and writing-up times and have been very supportive. I particularly thank my parents for their faith on my vocation declared at a young age. While they always asked me “Why archaeology?” they never tried to dissuade me to follow a different path.

To Matt Sayre, husband and best friend, who has been essential in my dissertation journey. I grew as a better person and scholar thank to our arguments and discussions. I can’t ask for a better person to share my life with.

A mis hijos que han soportado mis ausencias y mi profesion poco convencional, los quiero inmensamente y doy gracias por tener el privilegio de su amor y compañia.

ix TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...... IV ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... VI TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... X LIST OF FIGURES ...... XII LIST OF TABLES ...... XV CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH PROBLEM ...... 1 1.2 FOOD, FEASTING, AND ANIMAL SACRIFICE...... 3 1.3 THE ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL APPROACH ...... 4 1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE DISSERTATION ...... 6 CHAPTER 2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND OF THE CENTRAL ANDEAN REGION ...... 7 2.1 ANDEAN CULTURAL HISTORY ...... 8 2.1.1 CUZCO AND AYACUCHO BEFORE THE WARI EMPIRE ...... 10 2.1.2 THE WARI EMPIRE ...... 13 2.1.3 CUZCO AND AYACUCHO AFTER THE DISINTEGRATION OF THE WARI EMPIRE ...... 32 2.2 ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES IN THE CENTRAL ANDEAN REGION ...... 39 CHAPTER 3 SITE CONTEXTS AND SITE FORMATION PROCESSES: THE CASES OF CONCHOPATA, COTOCOTUYOC, AND CHOKEPUKIO ...... 50 3.1 CONTEXTUAL APPROACHES AND SITE FORMATION PROCESSES ...... 50 3.2 SITE EXCAVATION HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION ...... 55 3.2.1 WARI HEARTLAND: CONCHOPATA ...... 55 3.2.2 WARI IN THE PROVINCE OF CUZCO: COTOCOTUYOC AND CHOKEPUKIO ...... 70 3.3 SUMMARY OF FAUNA SAMPLE CONTEXTS ...... 82 CHAPTER 4 ZOOARCHAEOLOGY AND SOCIOPOLITICS: ISSUES ON FOODWAYS AND FEASTING ...... 84 4.1 FOODWAYS AND FEASTING STUDIES IN ARCHAEOLOGY ...... 84 4.1.2 FEASTING IN THE PREHISPANIC ...... 93 4.2 ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL INDICATORS OF FEASTING ...... 111 4.2.1 ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL INDICATORS OF FEASTING IN PREHISPANIC ANDEAN CONTEXTS ...... 118 CHAPTER 5 METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES IN ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS ...... 122 5.1 SAMPLING MATERIAL ...... 122 5.2 QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS ...... 123 5.2.1 TAXONOMIC AND ANATOMIC IDENTIFICATION ...... 126 5.2.2 SEASONALITY ...... 130 5.2.3 AGE ESTIMATION ...... 131 5.2.4 MORTALITY PROFILES ...... 133 5.2.5 BONE SURFACE MODIFICATION: WEATHERING, TOOTH MARKS, AND CUT MARKS ...... 135 5.2.6 BONE DENSITY MEDIATION ...... 136 5.2.7 MEAT UTILITY INDEXES ...... 140

x 5.2.8 SKELETAL PART ANALYSIS ...... 141 CHAPTER 6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...... 144 6.1 TAXONOMIC AND ANATOMIC DISTRIBUTION ...... 144 6.1.1 CAMELIDS ...... 147 6.1.2 RODENTS ...... 153 6.2 AGE DISTRIBUTION ...... 155 6.2.1 CAMELIDS ...... 155 6.2.2 GUINEA PIGS ...... 160 6.3 MINERAL BONE DENSITY AND FOOD UTILITY INDEXES ...... 161 6.4 BONE SURFACE MODIFICATION: WEATHERING, BURNING, CARNIVORE AND RODENT TOOTH MARKS, AND CUT MARKS ...... 173 6.5 DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION OF THE ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS ...... 178 6.5.1 INTERPRETATION OF CONCHOPATA FAUNAL DATA ...... 179 6.5.2 INTERPRETATION OF THE COTOCOTUYOC FAUNA ...... 183 6.5.3 INTERPRETATION OF CHOKEPUKIO FAUNAL DATA ...... 187 CHAPTER 7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 189 7.1 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS ...... 189 7.2 SITUATING CONCHOPATA AND COTOCOTUYOC PRACTICES WITHIN ANDEAN PATTERNS ...... 195 7.3 FUTURE RESEARCH ...... 198 7.4 FINAL COMMENTS ...... 199 APPENDICES ...... 200 APPENDIX A. FAUNAL REMAINS RECORDED FROM CONCHOPATA ...... 200 APPENDIX B. FAUNAL REMAINS RECORDED FROM COTOCOTUYOC ...... 215 APPENDIX C. FAUNAL REMAINS RECORDED FROM CHOKEPUKIO ...... 218 APPENDIX D. OSTEOMETRIC DATA ...... 225 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 226

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1 Map of Peru, showing the locations of the departments of Ayacucho and Cuzco ______8 Figure 2-2. Map of Wari sites (modified after Schreiber 2001). ______16 Figure 3-1. Map of Conchopata and close up of area with analyzed faunal material. Blue=PG1, Orange=PG2, Green=LH1, Red=LH2 ______60 Figure 3-2. Conchopata, Lineage House compounds as interpreted by Blacker and Cook (2006). Image courtesy of J.C. Blacker. ______65 Figure 3-3. Conchopata, Lineage House 2. Photo courtesy of W. Isbell ______68 Figure 3-4. Wari cemetery area at Cotocotuyoc (Cuzco, Peru). Drawing courtesy of Glowacki. The arrows point to the faunal assemblages analyzed for this study. ____ 72 Figure 3-5. Map of Chokepukio (Cuzco, Peru). Modified after McEwan et al (2005).74 Figure 3-6. Chokepukio, Unit 32-A. The Middle Horizon context is shown in brown. Image courtesy of G. McEwan ______77 Figure 3-7. Map of Chokepukio Unit 6 showing the location (in blue) of quads with faunal material analyzed for this study.Image courtesy of G.McEwan. ______79 Figure 3-8. Chokeukio,Unit 6 profile(LH=Late Horizon, LIP=Late Intermediate Period, MH=Middle Horizon, and EIP=Early Intermediate Period). Image courtesy of G. McEwan. ______80 Figure 6-1. Faunal diversity in Conchopata (NISP 7896), Cotocotuyoc (NISP 4926), and Chokepukio (NISP 372). Frequency expressed in NISP. Data from Appendix A.4 and Appendix C.4. ______144 Figure 6-2. Conchopata taxonomic distribution, frequency expressed in NISP. Data from Appendix A. 4. ______145 Figure 6-3. Chokepukio taxonomic distribution, frequency expressed in NISP. Data from Appendix C.4. ______147 Figure 6-4. Conchopata Camelid Skeletal Part Representation, frequency expressed in MNI (PG1= Patio Group 1, PG2= Patio Group2, LH1= Lineage House 1, LH2=Lineage House 2). Data from Appendices A1.1 to A1.4 ______148 Figure 6-5. Conchopata camelid limb representation, expressed in MNI. Data from Appendices A1.1 to A1.4 ______150 Figure 6-6. Cotocotuyoc camelids’ skeletal part representation, frequency expressed in MNI. Data from Appendix B.1. ______151 Figure 6-7. Cotocotuyoc camelids meat utility element representation, expressed in MNI. Data from Appendix B.1. ______151 Figure 6-8. Chokepukio camelid skeletal part representation, frequency expressed in MNI. Data from Appendix C1.1 and C1.2. ______152 Figure 6-9. Chokepukio camelid limb representation, frequency expressed in MNI. Data from Appendices C1.1 and C1.2. ______153 Figure 6-10. Conchopata camelid age profile, expressed as MNE of fused and unfused bones Data from Table 6.3. ______155 Figure 6-11. Conchopata camelid survivorship profile, expressed as percentage of fused bones by age group. Data from Table 6.3. ______156

xii Figure 6-12. Cotocotuyoc camelid age profile showing a overabundance of unfused bones at each age group, except newborns. Data from Table 6.4. ______157 Figure 6-13. Cotocotuyoc camelid survivorship profile, percentage of fused bones by age group. Data from Table 6.4. ______158 Figure 6-14. Chokepukio camelids age profile, expressed as MNE. Data from Table 6.5. ______159 Figure 6-15. Chokepukio camelids survivorship profile. Data from Table 6.5. ___ 160 Figure 6-16. Conchopata Patio Group 1 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density values. Data from Appendix A2.1 ______162 Figure 6-17. Conchopata Patio Group 1 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index values. Data from Appendix A3.1 ______163 Figure 6-18. Conchopata Lineage House 1: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density values. Data from Appendix A2.3 ______164 Figure 6-19. Conchopata Lineage House 1 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index values. Data from Appendix A3.3 ____ 164 Figure 6-20. Conchopata Lineage House 2: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density values. Data from Appendix A2.4 ______165 Figure 6-21. Conchopata Lineage House 2 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index values. Data from Appendix A3.4 ____ 166 Figure 6-22. Conchopata Lineage House 2: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density. Data from Appendix A2.2 ______167 Figure 6-23. Conchopata Patio Group 2 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility indices. Data from Appendix A3.2 ______167 Figure 6-24. Cotocotuyoc camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density values. Data from Appendix B2. ______168 Figure 6-25. Cotocotuyoc camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index values. Data from Appendix B3. ______169 Figure 6-26. Chokepukio Building 6 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density. Data from Appendix C2.1 ______170 Figure 6-27. Chokepukio Building 6 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index. Data from Appendix C3.1 ______170 Figure 6-28. Chokepukio Building 32-A camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density. Data from Appendix C2.2. ______171 Figure 6-29. Chokepukio Building 32-A camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index. Data from Appendix C3.2. ______172 Figure 6-30. Weathering stages distribution (% NISP). CkB6= Chokepukio Building 6, CkB32-A= Chokepukio Building 32-A, PG1= Conchopata Patio Group 1, PG2= Conchopata Patio Group 2, LH1= Conchopata Lineage House 1, LH2= Conchopata Lineage House 2. Data from Table 6. ______173 Figure 6-31. Osteometric data for the first phalanx. Maximum length measurement (FP1V1 and BP1V77 according to Kent’s (1982) nomenclature). Modern data from Kent 1982 (llama, vicuna and alpaca) and Mengoni and Elkin personal communication 1991 (guanaco). Ninety-five percent confidence. Data from Appendix D. ______176 Figure 6-32. Osteometric data for the first phalanx. Breadth Proximal Articular Surface (FP1V2 and BP1V78 according to Kent’s (1982) nomenclature). Modern data

xiii from Kent 1982 (llama, vicuna and alpaca) and Mengoni and Elkin personal communication 1991 (guanaco). Ninety-five percent confidence interval. Data from Appendix D ______177 Figure 6-33. Osteometric data for the first phalanx. Breadth of distal articular surface (FP1V3 and BP1V79 according to Kent’s (1982) nomenclature). Modern data from Kent 1982 (llama, vicuna and alpaca) and Mengoni and Elkin personal communication 1991 (guanaco). Ninety-five percent confidence interval. Data from AppendixD. ______178 Figure 6-34.Offering of young camelids from Conchopata, EA-44A. Photo by Silvana A. Rosenfeld ______183

xiv LIST OF TABLES

Figure 2.1 Map of Peru, showing the locations of the departments of Ayacucho and Cuzco ______8 Table 2.1. Chronological chart based on Rowe’s work indicating the approximate beginning dates for each period and horizon (adapted from Rowe 1966; Rowe and Menzel 1967). ______10 Figure 2.2. Map of Wari sites (modified after Schreiber 2001). ______16 Table 3.1. Provenience of zooarchaeological samples under study. ______83 Table 5.1. Age of complete epiphyseal fusion in camelids. Data from Wheeler (1999). ______131 Table 5.2. Age of complete epiphyseal fusion in guinea pigs. Data from Zuck (1938). ______132 Table 6.1. Conchopata skeletal elements by EA, frequency expressed in MNI. ____ 148 Table 6.2. Frequency (NISP) of rodent remains. “Others” include Neotmys sp, Abrocoma sp, and indeterminate rodent species. ______154 Table 6.3. Conchopata camelid age data, expressed in MNE. ______156 Table 6.4. Cotocotuyoc camelid data, expressed in MNE. ______158 Table 6.5. Chokepukio camelid age data, frequency expressed in MNE. ______160 Table 6.6. Guinea pig age data. ______161 Table 6.7. Summary of scatterplot values for bone mineral density and food utility indeces. ______172 Table 6.8. Weathering stage data from Conchopata, Cotocotuyoc, and Chokepukio. ______174 Table 6.9. Rodent tooth marks (NISP), carnivore tooth marks (NISP), cut marks frequency (NISP), and burnt specimens (NSP). ______174 Table 6.10. Frequency of camelid skeletal parts with cut marks (Md=mandible, Vt=vertebrae, Sc=scapula, Hu=Humerus, Ri-Ribs, Ra=radioulna, In=innominate, Fe=femur, Ti=tibia, Ta=tarsals, Pa=phalanges). ______176

xv Chapter 1 Introduction

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction to the Research Problem

One important focus of research in the study of ancient states and empires has been the ways social, economic, and political control were successfully articulated (Das and

Poole 2004; Smith and Schreiber 2005). I agree with those who argue that the political manipulation of food consumption was often used in the past to create and maintain social privilege and political power (e.g. Dietler and Hayden 2001), an issue I investigate in the context of the Wari Empire (A.D. 600-900, Peru). More specifically, my research seeks to illuminate the role of animal food in structuring the relationship between the Wari heartland of Ayacucho and the provincial area of Cuzco. I argue that display of wealth in the form of throwing meat feasts and sacrifice animals without consumption were sociopolitical strategies of the local elites in which the Wari heartland was not directly involved.

In this dissertation I study ritual and quotidian animal use through the faunal analysis of three different archaeological sites to generate new information about how the Wari presence impacted the local communities in the province of Cuzco. My research on Wari foodways examines the use of animal food at site and inter-site levels in order to understand imperial dynamics and colonial impacts on a provincial region, with a focus on the following questions: (1) What was the animal diet of the

Ayacucho and Cuzco populations during the Wari Empire? (2) Is it possible to interpret political drivers in animal use during Wari times? (3) Does animal

1 Chapter 1 Introduction

management show differences among the three sites? (3) Did culinary practices vary according to architectural settings?

I address these research questions by conducting a comparative analysis of animal bone from various archaeological contexts excavated at the sites of Conchopata,

Cotocotuyoc, and Chokepukio. The first is an urban center close to the imperial capital of Huari1 in the Ayacucho valley, the other two are provincial centers in the Valley of

Cuzco (Isbell 2004; Glowacki 2002, McEwan et al 2002). I analyzed zooarchaeological samples from the rural site of Cotocotuyoc and the administrative site of Chokepukio. I compared these results to those that I collected and analyzed from Conchopata in order to contrast the practices of the heartland and provincial populations.

I address the following goals: (1) Identify domestic and ceremonial contexts of consumption. Domestic contexts are those spaces where daily activities were performed, including daily food that could vary among the different segments in the society. Ceremonial contexts are those spaces where special activities, such as feasts

(or public meals), animal sacrifices and food related to funerary activities were performed. These contexts can be conceptually distinguished; however, they can be superimposed in practice, such as kitchen areas where animals were buried underneath the floors. (2) Examine hierarchical differences in faunal assemblages from similar contexts (domestic or ceremonial) that reflect social differences inferred through other archaeological indicators. All social levels perform everyday and special activities of

1 In this dissertation, I follow Isbell’s (2002) suggestion of using “Huari” for the imperial capital and “Wari” for the broadly diffused culture and its distinctive art found outside the capital .

2 Chapter 1 Introduction

consumption, but I expect that different sectors manipulated animal resources, or their parts, and quantities in different ways.

1.2 Food, Feasting, and Animal Sacrifice

Power and authority are processes that need to be constantly negotiated and legitimated in order to reproduce and maintain unequal sociopolitical relations. In the early Andes, Kembel and Rick (2004) proposed that the construction sequences of the different buildings at Chavín de Huántar were an intentional demonstration and reinforcement of the authority of the leaders. Other potentially important elements that play a central role in the political sphere are interpersonal practices such as feasting, and dedication practices such as animal offerings (Hayden 2001; Osborne 2004).

A feasting event can mobilize labor, create cooperative relationships within the group or exclude different groups, create alliances between social groups and create political power through nets of debts of reciprocity (Hayden 2001). Under Inca administration, food and drink was provided by the state in partial reciprocation to local communities for their labor services (Molina 1989 [1573]). It has been argued that hospitality and asymmetrical reciprocity in the form of feasts were central components of Inca imperial strategies of legitimation and control (Costin and Earle

1989). Some researchers have argued that this was also the case during Wari times

(Jennings 2006; Nash 2010), an issue I discuss in chapter 2.

In many societies, objects and/or animals were deliberately deposited and dedicated to supernatural entities. In the Andes, the symbolic use of guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) and camelids (Lama spp) has been ethnographically as well as

3 Chapter 1 Introduction

archaeologically documented (Bolton and Calvin 1981). Complete skeletons of animals, or their parts, have been recovered inside tombs (next to human bodies), or under house floors, with no cut marks or burning evidence indicating their importance beyond the domestic environment (Sandweiss and Wing 1997. Dedications or offerings are performed for the ancestors, the landscape, and the supernatural (Sillar

2004). However, offerings can also be performed for the living. Display of sacrificed wealth can also be a venue for showing and negotiating power. Therefore, offerings or votive dedications are also significant in socio-economic and political spheres (Dietler and Hayden 2001). I discuss this issue particularly in chapter 2 to understand the articulation of the Wari Empire through practices that involve the use of animals.

1.3 The Zooarchaeological Approach

Animals play a key role in human life because they can be used for food, clothing, tools, company, and transport. Beyond this, they can also act as symbols of status extending their meaning beyond their nutritional and economic values (e.g. O´Connor

2000; Reitz and Wing 1999). Further, some scholars argue, animal representations can be seen as having an actual effect on the constitution of the world (Nanoglou 2009). In the case of Chavín de Huántar (Peru), Lathrap (1973) interpreted the Obelisk Tello iconography as a celebration of the Cayman Deity bringing agricultural plants (chilli, manioc, peanuts) to people.

Traditionally, faunal analyses in archaeology focused on the reconstruction of subsistence or diet, however, the consideration of the social contexts and the cultural

4 Chapter 1 Introduction

meanings associated with animals can enrich our understanding of past and present societies (e.g. Goody 1985).

Most of the studies that analyze feasting and suprahousehold foodway practices in pre-Columbian Andean societies have utilized only architectural and/or ceramic evidence (e.g. Cook and Glowacki 2003; Gero 1992). In this sense, the zooarchaeological perspective can be very important in the discussion of different daily and ritual behaviors related to Andean foodways as the examination of actual food refuse can reveal some of the factors that produce such variation. Faunal assemblages supplement evidence about ritual behaviors and ceremonies, such as animal sacrifices, and the performance of feasts and public meals. Zooarchaeological indicators of different consumption practices include, for example, different distribution patterns of animal species, measured through the number of remains and the minimum number of individuals, as well as the distribution of meat cuts, measured through the skeletal parts represented (e.g. Jackson and Scott 1995).

I address how particular foodway practices came into play during the Wari times (A.D. 600- 1000), a period that holds great potential for revealing how hierarchical power systems expanded and came to be naturalized in the central Andes.

Due to different environmental settings and political functions of the three sites under study, I expect variations in the animal management, processing, and deposition at these sites but I also anticipate some level of homogeneity due to their participation in the Wari empire. A discussion of the degree of the Wari control is included in

Chapters 2 and 3.

5 Chapter 1 Introduction

1.4 Organization of the Dissertation

In the next chapter I provide a background of the cultural history of the central Andes focusing primarily on the Ayacucho and Cuzco areas, and I comment on the excavation history of the areas. In the same chapter, I survey the zooarchaeological studies conducted in the central Andes to provide an estimation of the available amount of data and topics that have been discussed in relation to the faunal remains. In

Chapter 3, I discuss site formation processes and describe the excavation history and the most important features of each site under study. The goal is to provide contextual information, in terms of specific location and artifacts associated recovered with the faunal remains. In Chapter 4 I review the literature on foodways and feasting in order to reflect on how the analysis of these topics has illuminated larger archaeological problems. Chapter 5 presents methodological aspects of my zooarchaeological analysis in the dissertation. In Chapter 6, I present the results of the zooarchaeological analysis at the intrasite and intersite levels and discuss my interpretations. Finally,

Chapter 7 summarizes and discusses the results, the significance of this research, and insights on future research.

6 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

CHAPTER 2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND OF THE CENTRAL ANDEAN REGION

Food is at the intersection of nature and culture, being a requirement of human life but always being socially transformed and laden with cultural meaning. This dissertation hopes to show that it is possible to study ancient sociopolitical roles of animal food through the analysis of meal refuse in the archaeological record. The Central Andes are a good place to study these issues as it was an area where societies achieved high levels of sociopolitical complexity and the preservation of animal bones is very good due to the environmental conditions.

In the first part of this chapter, to help contextualize the Wari Empire in space and time, I introduce the Andean chronology with a focus on the Cuzco and Ayacucho areas (Figure 2.1). For a useful contextualization of the Wari Empire, it is important to understand the sociopolitical landscape before the emergence of Wari Empire as well as after it receded. In the second part, I review zooarchaeological studies of non- hunter-gatherer sites in the central Andes. There is a paucity of zooarchaeological analysis in the region. Many of these studies demonstrated that by adding the analysis of animal remains, we improve our understanding of food and ritual practices in the central Andes.

7 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Figure 2-1 Map of Peru, showing the location of the departments of Ayacucho and Cuzco

2.1 Andean Cultural History

Cultural history combined with processual archaeology remains the most popular theoretical framework that archaeologists apply to understand the central Andean past

(Isbell and Silverman 2002). In this theory and its variations, societies increase in complexity following a sequence of ideal cultural types or stages. Archaeological materials representing ancient societies are assigned to these ideal types on the basis of

8 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

certain characteristics of material remains that are considered diagnostic (Isbell and

Silverman 2002:x). While a general single chronology is useful for comparing the timing of processes (such as the emergence of ceramic production or of empires) and social interaction in a large area, it can obscure independent trajectories at the more local level.

Most archaeologists in the central Andes use the classic chronological sequence formulated by Rowe (1967), which defined horizons as temporal stages based on cultural similarity. These periods display relatively uniform artistic styles throughout most of the area of study (Rowe 1967:6). The ceramic sequence of the Ica valley (in the central coast of Peru) was the master sequence to which all relative dates in the central Andes were referred because it had the best-studied chronology of pottery styles (Rowe 1967). More local and detailed chronologies and sequences can be found elsewhere (e.g. Bauer 2004: Figures I.I and I.2).

Table 2.1 shows the Andean chronology created by Rowe (Rowe 1966, Rowe and Menzel 1967) and the ceramic styles for the Ayacucho and Cuzco regions.

9 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Table 2.1. Chronological chart based on Rowe’s work indicating the approximate beginning dates for each period and horizon (adapted from Rowe 1966; Rowe and Menzel 1967). Relative Chronology (ICA) AYACUCHO CUZCO Late Horizon A.D. 1476 Inca Influence Imperial Inca

Late Intermediate Period A.D. 900 Tanta Urqo K'illki

Middle Horizon A.D. 540 Wari Wari influence

Early Intermediate Period Derived 370-420 B.C. Huarpa Chanapata

Early Horizon 1300- 1500 B.C. Rancha Chanapata Wichqana Marcavalle

Initial Period 2050 -2120 B.C. – – – –

2.1.1 Cuzco and Ayacucho before the Wari Empire

Cuzco

In the early forties Rowe (1944) carried out the first systematic work of the Cuzco area in search of early sites. In this exploration Rowe discovered the site of Chanapata where he excavated a long test trench (Rowe 1944). He compared the early occupation at Chanapata to Pucara, Chiripa, and Chavin, recognizing at least other three

Chanapata like sites in the outskirts of Cuzco: Pacalla-Mocco, Picchu, and Limpillay

(Rowe 1944). Rowe designated “Chanapata” as one of the earliest ceramic styles in

Cuzco.

In 1963, Lyon and Barreda conducted test excavations at the site of Marcavalle

(Patterson 1967). In the late sixties, Mohr Chavez excavated the sites of Marcavalle

10 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

and Pikicallepata and dated them at about 1400 – 650 B.C. (Chavez 1980). Marcavalle became a designation for another early ceramic style. In 1969, Dwyer and Valencia carried out excavations at the site of Minas Pata in the Lucre basin. This multicomponent site had a Marcavalle occupation in the lower levels (Dwyer 1971, cited in Chavez 1980). In the late seventies, San Roman excavated at Pomacanchi, and his study revealed occupations dating to the Early Horizon and Early Intermediate

Period (Chavez 1980).

In the 1990s, Bauer conducted systematic surveys in the Cuzco valley in order to write a cultural history of the region (Bauer 1992, 2004). His survey demonstrated the presence of early, highly mobile hunter-gatherer occupations (9500- 2200 B.C.). It also recorded the presence of sites that, according to Bauer, show the emergence of ranked societies (2200 B.C. -A.D. 200) and villages covering the time between the rise of the first chiefdom-level societies and the invasion of the Wari Empire in the region

(A.D. 200-600). The largest of these villages are thought to be located in the areas of greatest agricultural production, including the Cuzco, Lucre, and Huaro basins (Bauer

2004: 54) (see McEwan 2006:67 for a critique of Bauer’s methodology and interpretation).

Ayacucho

The first planned long term program to excavate early sites in Ayacucho was the

Ayacucho-Huanta Archaeological-Botanical Project by MacNeish in the late 1960s

(MacNeish 1981). MacNeish and Ravines found cave while carrying out a survey to study the origins of agriculture in Peru. The artifacts and radiocarbon dates

11 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

from Pikimachay revealed a long cultural sequence apparently covering from 23,000

B.C. to Spanish-Colonial times (MacNeish 1981:56). However, Rick (1988:14) reexamined the entire collection of the early Pacacaisa level from Pikimachay cave and concluded that there is no conclusive evidence that the lithic remains were manufactured by people (there is no extensive worked items, nor consistent shape, or selective use of particular rock form). Regarding the material from the Ayacucho phase from Pikimachay, there are a few small tools with clear fracture and non-tuff material but Rick (1988:16) suspects that they might have slipped downwards from later layers. In conclusion, the earliest strong evidence of human occupation in

Ayacucho starts around 9,000 B.C. (Rick 1988:17).

Other caves with Preceramic occupations in Ayacucho include Jaywamachay

(9000 B.C. to 200 B.C.) (Garcia Cook 1981), Puente (8000 B.C. to 2000 B.C.) (Garcia

Cook and MacNeish 1981), and the small caves of , Chupas, Ruyru Rumi, and Tukumachay (Vierra and MacNeish 1981).

Lumbreras, Bonavia, and Caycho excavated Aya Orqo in the late 1950s

(Lumbreras 1959). The early levels of the site contained the ceramic style known as

Rancha, dating from the Early Horizon. Also in that decade, Flores carried out excavations at the site of Wichqana, and he compared and found similarities between the recovered ceramics and the Rancha, Chavin, and Chanapata styles (Flores 1959 cited in Ochatoma Paravicino 1998). Lumbreras and his crew carried out a number of excavation seasons in early ceramic sites in Ayacucho, including the ceremonial center of Wichqana (1900 B.C.- 300 B.C.), the village of Chupas (1700 B.C.- 100

12 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

B.C.), Lagunillas (300 B.C.- A.D. 500), and Ñawinpukio (300 B.C.- A.D. 300)

(Benavidez Calle 1976; Lumbreras 1981).

The Early Intermediate period, the period right before the Wari, is represented in Ayacucho by the Huarpa ceramic style and Ñawinpukyo is one of the largest sites of this time period (Lumbreras 1981). After Lumbreras, Ochatoma (1998) excavated in Ñawinpukyo in 1986 identifying more agricultural terraces. In 2001, Leoni (2005;

2006) carried out extensive excavations at the site. His excavations revealed public ceremonial architecture, and his interpretations involved the presence of social differentiation and rituals to the mountains performed on site (Leoni 2005, 2006).

Most Huarpa sites seem to be located in the northern part of the Ayacucho basin and exhibit extensive terracing and irrigation canal systems (Gonzalez Carre

1982; Lumbreras 1974a). According to Gonzalez Carre (1982:77) who conducted a somewhat typological study of the material, the Huarpa culture represented the transition between the country towns (“poblados campesinos”) and urban life.

Lumbreras proposed that only the elite lived in the Huarpa urban centers while during

Wari times not only rulers but also artisans lived in the urban centers (Lumbreras

1974:123). It appears that most scholars agree that the Huarpa period probably included the origins of social and political complexity that influenced the rise of the

Wari Empire in the region (Gonzalez Carre 1982; Isbell and Silverman 2006; Leoni

2006; Lumbreras 1974a). However, the nature of these Huarpa contributions are far from being understood.

2.1.2 The Wari Empire

13 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

The consensus in the archaeological literature is that pristine states appeared in the

Andes during A.D. 0-1000, represented by Moche (A.D. 200-850, north coast of Peru)

(Castillo Butters and Uceda Castillo 2008), (A.D. 400-1000, in Bolivia) (Kolata 1993), and Wari (A.D. 550-1000, Peruvian highlands) (William

Isbell and Gordon McEwan 1991). For the first time, there is evidence of extended road systems, a regional polity beyond a single valley, expanding populations, agricultural intensification, economic specialization, and site-size hierarchies (Stanish

2001). Debate exists between those who see the three aforementioned states as independent centers of cultural evolution in the central Andes (Castillo Butters and

Uceda Castillo 2008; Shady Solis 1989; Stanish 2001) and those who believe there are clear links and spheres of influence among the areas (Isbell 1983; Isbell and Silverman

2006; McEwan 1990). More investigation is needed until this complex issue can be better understood.

Interestingly, Tiwanaku and Wari shared a similar iconography, predominantly found on ceramics, textiles, and stone sculpture (Cook 1983; Menzel 1964). Although showing some variation, the common iconographic themes included front-facing deities holding staffs, attendants shown in profiles, and human figures wearing attires

(Cook 1983). Despite the sharing of their art style, Tiwanaku’s and Wari’s architectural styles seem to have had different forms and functions (Conklin 1991).

The site of Tiahuanaco2 is a large open site with plazas and large carved monuments.

Conversely, the site of Huari has large enclosures with few entries and the imagery is only depicted on ceramics and textiles. According to Conklin, “Tiahuanaco building

2 I am following Isbell’s (2002) suggestion to spell “Tiahuanaco” for the capital site and “Tiwanaku” for the broadly diffused culture and art.

14 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

intended to convey religious imagery and to impress [..],” while “[…] Huari building intended essentially to contain” (Conklin 1991:291). Therefore, it appears that the way

Huari and Tiahuanaco controlled their populations was quite dissimilar. This difference led Schreiber (2001) to suggest that they were profoundly different in terms of their political organization as well. The relationships between the two polities are still poorly understood.

Similarly planned architecture in the Wari style and the presence of standardized designs on ceramics and textiles found across modern Peru have been interpreted as evidence of Wari imperial expansion (Anders 1986, Isbell and McEwan

1991, Lumbreras 2000, Rowe et al. 1950, Schreiber 1987, 1992, Williams 2001). The most common architectural form found in Wari sites are orthogonal yards surrounded by elongated rooms, constructed with quarried stone laid in mud mortar (Isbell 1991,

Isbell and McEwan 1991). Based on the distribution of these architectural forms and

Wari ceramics, Wari influence has been assumed to extend from its heartland in the

Ayacucho region (the capital city of Huari and the sites of Conchopata, Jincamocco,

Azangaro, Jargampata, Marayniyoq) to the Cuzco region in the south (Pikillacta,

Batan Urqo, Chokepukio, and the Huaro complex) to La Libertad and Ancash in the north ( and Honcopampa), including the central and south coast

(Maymi, Cotahuasi, Sonay, Cerro Baúl and Cerro Mejia) (Figure 3.2).

15 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Figure 2-2. Map of Wari sites (modified after Schreiber 2001).

In explaining the cause of Wari expansion, Isbell argued that environmental factors (desiccation and consequent decreasing productivity during the late Early

Intermediate Period) favored the concentration of authority and power in a centralized, hierarchical government (Isbell 1987b). Along these lines, McEwan suggested

“environmental deterioration may have cause the Wari to conquer their neighbors in

16 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

an attempt to gain more arable land in a greater variety of ecological zones to ensure against crop failure” (McEwan 2006:40). Schreiber (1992) and Bauer (2004) argued that most of the settlements outside the core were established for the purpose of extracting and storing agricultural produce. In contrast, Jennings (2006) suggested that the rapid urbanization of the Wari core demanded an influx of non-local goods, such as metal, obsidian, decorated ceramics, textiles, turquoise, and marine shells. The archaeological evidence relevant to this debate is still equivocal.

According to Schreiber (1992:69), the Wari Empire3 was a “mosaic of different levels of political control, ranging from very indirect to entirely imposed and direct…” Other scholars have argued, based on the lack of garrisons and large-scale storage facilities, that the Middle Horizon was a period of independent polities during which integration was centered on trade networks without the presence of an empire

(Shady Solis 1989; Topic and Topic 2000). Recent studies have reevaluated the issues using a model based on a network of state administrative centers, arguing that the

Wari affiliation of many sites outside the core is weak and they should be interpreted as merely local emulations of Wari forms (Jennings 2006, Jennings and Yepez

Alvarez 2001).

In the particular case of the Cuzco region, McEwan (2006:41) argued that the planned architecture of the center of Pikillacta and of the Huaro complex is evidence of direct ruling of Cuzco from A.D. 600-1000 by Wari administrators (McEwan

2006:41). The large and monumental work as seen in the architecture, the road system, and the hydraulic structures in Cuzco led McEwan to affirm that “the Wari directly

3 The term “empire” is here broadly understood as an expansive polity incorporating other sociopolitical entities (states, chiefdoms, non-stratified societies) (Morrison 2001, Schreiber 1992, Sinopoli 1994).

17 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

ruled the Inca heartland during the Middle Horizon from A.D. 600 to 1000” (McEwan

2006:41). Conversely, the lack of clear presence of Wari administrative sites outside the Lucre and Huaro valleys and the fact that Pikillacta was never completed or fully occupied made Covey (Covey 2006:7) declare that the Wari did not administer Cuzco as an imperial province. Even though the degree of control is still debated, most researchers agree that the Wari occupation in Cuzco was very influential (Lumbreras

1974b; Rowe 1956; Schreiber 1992).

The reasons for the disintegration of the Wari Empire around A.D. 1000 are not clear. McEwan suggested the Wari state had “severe overcentralization” and it became very difficult to control such a vast empire (McEwan 2006:42, see also

Gonzalez Carre 1982:101). McEwan also argued that the variable and unpredictable weather patterns could have affected agricultural productivity and state wealth

(McEwan 2006:42).

Environmental triggers combined with complex social processes are the agents that P. Ryan Williams (2002) argued affected the decline of the Wari occupation in the

Moquegua valley, where both Wari and Tiwanaku states had establishments. He suggested that “factions of Tiwanaku social groups who allied themselves with Wari settlers upset the ecological balance of water use in the valley prior to the end of the first millennium A.D.” (Williams 2002:361). He argued that the decline of the Wari occupation in would have been linked to the collapse of the local Tiwanaku occupation (Williams 2002:372). The disintegration of the Tiwanaku in Moquegua would have made the Wari occupation in the valley unnecessary as the Wari would no longer have needed to contain and interact with the Tiwanaku frontier (Williams

18 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

2002:372). Williams’s complex explanation is powerful, but it seems difficult to test the sequence of all these social and environmental complex episodes.

Wari Sites in the Heartland and Periphery. Below I provide a brief description of the most studied Wari sites to give a general view of the common architecture as well as interpreted site function (when possible) in relation to the Wari Empire. A discussion of the sites of Chokepukio, Conchopata, and Cotocotuyoc (the focus of this dissertation) is in the next chapter “Site Description and Site Formation Processes”.

Huari. The capital of the Wari Empire was located at the site of Huari. The archaeological site is situated in the department of Ayacucho, 25 km from the town of

Ayacucho and at 2,600 to 3,000 m above sea level. It covered at least 15 sq km, with the core confined to 250 ha (Isbell et al 1991: 24). The archaeological zone was divided into several sectors and was explored, excavated, and analyzed by several researchers. The first European account of Huari was by Pedro Cieza de León (1864) in the sixteenth century. The neighboring residents told the that the tall walls had been built well before the Inca times by bearded and light skin people (Cieza de Leon 1864:309). Tello carried out brief archaeological explorations in Huari in the

1930’s but nothing was really published until his general interpretive work was presented to the International Congress of Americanists in 1939 (Rowe, et al. 1950;

Tello 1942) and then later in 1970 (Tello 1970). Kroeber analyzed a small collection of pottery recovered by Tello and brought to U.C. Berkeley by O’Neale (Kroeber 1944 cited in Rowe et al 1950). Menzel conducted detailed analysis of ceramics from Huari and established a chronology of the Middle Horizon (Menzel 1964, 1968).

19 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Rowe, Collier, and Willey visited Huari in 1946 (Rowe et al 1950) and compared the long and tall walls of La Capilla sector to the sites of Viracochapampa and Pikillacta (Rowe et al 1950:123). They discussed the building style, the stone statuary, and the pottery from Huari, concluding that the most abundant pottery style showed “Coast Tiahuanaco” and “Nazca Y” connections (Rowe et al 1959:136). In the following year, Shaedel visited the site and photographed the statues (Shaedel 1948 as cited in Rowe et al 1950). In 1950, Bennett carried out excavations at Huari and produced a detailed map of the site (Bennett 1953 as cited in Isbell and McEwan

1991). Lumbreras directed excavations at Huari in 1964, digging at several sectors of the site (e.g. La Capilla/Capillayoq and Ushpa Qoto sectors) and revealing new architecture, pottery, and aqueducts (Lumbreras 1974a).

In 1977 and 1980, the Huari Urban Archaeological Project led by Isbell carried out extensive excavations of the site focusing on the Moraduchayuq sector (Isbell

1982). The excavations revealed two circular structures, a compound of seven patio groups, and a semisubterranean building (Brewster-Wray 1983; Isbell, et al. 1991).

The most prominent architectural configuration was the “patio group”, described as a large, open, trapezoid area, surrounded by long, narrow, and multistoried rooms

(Isbell, et al. 1991:37-38, Figures 19 and 21). The standardization of room shapes and sizes and the regular arrangement of rooms suggested to Brewster-Wray (1983:125) that they were built according to a formal plan using corporate labor. The recovered artifacts included trophy heads and artifacts made of Spondylus (spiny oyster), lapis lazuli, copper, and silver. Given the presence of such luxury items, along with a stone- filled platform structure, Brewster-Wray (1983:125) affirmed high status people

20 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

probably inhabited the compound. The Moraduchayuq sector was initially interpreted as mainly having an administrative function (Brewster-Wray 1983:134) but it was later interpreted as multipurpose in function, including sleeping rooms and a kitchen, with adjacent rooms for storage (Isbell et al 1991:45).

Benavidez excavated the Cheqo Wasi sector in Huari in 1977 (Benavidez C.

1991). This sector is characterized by large megalithic chambers containing more than one hundred skeletons that had been frequently stained with red powder.

Consequently, Benavidez interpreted Cheqo Wasi as an area devoted to activities related to a death cult (Benavidez C. 1991:56). The associated artifacts included pottery (sherds and miniature ceramics), lithics (mortars, manos, and a few projectile points), metals (topus, needles and tweezers), bones (human bones, bone tools, and animal remains such as felines and camelids), and luxury goods (blue-green stone beads, Spondylus artifacts, pearl ornaments, carved wood) (Benavidez C. 1991:64-65).

Bragayrac led excavations at the Vegachayoq Moqo sector of Huari in 1982

(Bragayrac D. 1991). This sector is characterized by an elongated pyramidal mound surrounded by trapezoidal enclosures that created plazas around the mound (Bragayrac

D. 1991: 71). Excavations concentrated on a sunken plaza that contained a D-shaped enclosure. Rooms with niches were found on the east and west sides of the plaza.

Human burials and highly decorated ceramics were recovered in this sector, leading

Bragayrac to interpret it as sacred and ceremonial in function. (Bragayrac D. 1991:

71). The site of Huari still awaits more excavation and analysis to obtain a better picture of this complex city and all the activities that took place there as well as its role in the development of the Wari Empire in the Middle Horizon.

21 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Jincamocco. Jincamocco is situated in the valley of Sondondo (earlier called

Carhuarazo) in the department of Ayacucho (Schreiber 1991, 1992, 2000). There was no Huarpa occupation in this valley in the Early Intermediate Period and Schreiber considers the Wari occupation as an intrusive foreign element (Schreiber 2000). The site of Jincamocco covers 15 ha; the architecture and artifacts suggested to Schreiber that Jincamocco was a Wari administrative site for the region (Schreiber 2000:429).

The settlement pattern in the region had been seen to consist primarily of small, high elevation sites. The pattern changed during Wari times when the sites were moved to lower elevations and seemed to be politically centralized around the site of

Jincamocco (Schreiber 2000:429).

Azangaro. Azangaro is in the Huanta valley of the Ayacucho basin

(department of Ayacucho) and appears to have been occupied in late Wari times

(Anders 1986, 1991). Located 15 km NW from the site of Huari, the site has a tripartite configuration (3 distinctive sectors) and covers around 7.5 ha. One of the buildings had cellular orthogonal architecture. The characteristics of the stratigraphy, midden, ceramics and architecture led Anders (1991:190) to suggest that the occupation was neither long nor intensive. Using the frequencies and proportion of pottery, among other indicators, Anders interpreted the presence of people of different status living at the site (including two levels of authorities and laborers). She believed the reason for the establishment of Azangaro was the expansion of agriculture in the valley bottom. She interpreted the complex architecture of the central sector of

Azangaro as the material expression of agricultural and political calendars based on lunar and solar observations and a place to hold ceremonies (Anders 1991:192).

22 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Jargampata. Jargampata is a small site (1 ha) in the San Miguel valley of

Ayacucho. Isbell (1977) conducted fieldwork at the site in 1969. The settlement has a rectangular enclosure with evidence of ceramic refuse. Based on the relative percentages of serving vessels (cups and bowls) before and after the enclosure was built, Isbell suggested the patio at Jargampata was used to hold feasts (Isbell 1982). In the north part of the site there was little evidence of food preparation and Isbell suggested this large enclosure was used for storage. This rural site may have served as a distribution center of specialized valley products such as maize and beans (Isbell

1977).

Marayniyoq. Marayniyoq is located in the Ayacucho valley and has been interpreted as a specialized Wari facility (Valdez, et al. 2010; Valdez, et al. 2000). In this site, large concentrations of broken vessels and grinding artifacts were recovered directly over a prepared floor of diatomite and ash. In addition, cut stones of different sizes with hollow depressions were found in different parts of the sites. Valdez interpreted these stones as the base for grinding. Using ethnographic and ethnohistorical information, he considers the presence of large ceramics and grinding equipment as evidence of preparation of malted corn for chicha, a fermented beverage made out of corn, quinoa, or berries (Valdez et al. 2000, 2010). Radiocarbon dates associated with the large vessels range between A.D. 780-900 (Valdez 2006:66).

Honcopampa. Honcopampa is situated in the Callejon de Huaylas, in Ancash,

Northern Peru. Vescelius and Amat explored and mapped the site in 1961 (Isbell

1989). Isbell initiated excavations in 1987 concentrating on the 3 ha of the

Purushmonte hill sector. Structures exposed consisted mainly of D-shaped structures,

23 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

patio groups, and chullpas, which are tall rectangular buildings (Isbell 1989, 1991).

Honcopampa’s architecture appears to be a blend of Wari and northern traits, including megalithic lintels and great door jambs (Isbell 1991). Four small stratigraphic pits excavated into rooms of patio-groups revealed abundant residential debris, including large grinding stones, and some luxury goods, such as fine pottery, metal, obsidian tools and Spondylus shells (Isbell 1989). The associated ceramic style of the Middle Horizon is Polished Blackware and Redware (Isbell 1989). Bennett reported these same ceramic styles at the small Wari site of Wilkawain in , not far from Honcopampa (Isbell 1989). Charcoal collected to date the construction and occupation of the patio groups yielded radiocarbon dates from the early Middle

Horizon continuing through the later Middle Horizon (Isbell 1989). Based on the architecture and the ceramics, Isbell (1989) concluded that Honcopampa was a Wari administrative center.

Viracochapampa. Viracochapampa is situated 2.5 km north of the modern town of in La Libertad, Northern Peru (Topic 1991). The site covers around 36 ha. The two major types of buildings are niched rooms and galleries.

Interestingly, the ceramic assemblage is very small and does not include any clear

Wari decoration or shape. The radiocarbon dates (A.D. 250 and A.D. 1130) did not help to place the site in an accurate chronological context (Topic 1991:159).

Nevertheless, the architecture exhibits Wari style and construction. The site stratigraphy, the sequence of construction, and the pattern of artifact residues suggested to Topic that the site was never finished (Topic 1991:151). Other possible

24 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Wari sites in the Huamachuco area include the set of storerooms at Cerro Amaru and the site of Marca Huamachuco (Topic 1991:153).

Cajamarca region. Some researchers consider the region of as the northern extreme of the Wari Empire (Schreiber 1992, 2001). However, the three sites identified as Wari in this area have not yet been excavated. El Palacio, Yamobamba, and Ichabamba were identified solely on the basis of standing architecture –large rectangular enclosures– but no diagnostic Wari ceramics were found on the surface

(Hyslop 1984; Julien 1988 as cited in Schreiber 1992). Future excavations will be needed to clarify the affiliation of these sites.

Pikillacta. Probably the best-known and reported Wari site outside Ayacucho is the large and impressive site of Pikillacta, understood as an imperial regional center

(Lumbreras 1974b; McEwan 1987, 1989, 1996, 2005). Pikillacta is a large and well- planned site constructed on a large mountain shelf that had not been previously occupied (McEwan 1987: Figure 3-2). Two caches, each containing forty carved green stone figurines found in 1927 first brought attention to the site when Luis

Valcarcel published a description of them (Valcarcel 1933). Valcarcel thought the figurines and the site were Inca.

When Rowe, Wallace, and Menzel (Rowe 1956) visited and surveyed parts of

Cuzco, Andahuaylas, Sicuani, La Paz, and Paucartambo as part of the Fourth

University of California Archaeological Expedition to Peru, they made notes on surface remains found in these places but did not undertake any excavations. Along with Chavez Ballon, they visited the site of Batan Urqo (see below) and inspected the

Wari sherds associated with the site. Rowe concluded that this find (along with other

25 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Wari sites that Chavez Ballon explored) proved a Wari occupation in Cuzco. Rowe had recognized the Wari architecture of Pikillacta but had been puzzled not to find any refuse or sherds at the site. After Chavez Ballon’s discoveries of Wari occupation in

Cuzco, he then thought it was plausible that Pikillacta was indeed Wari (Rowe

1956:142).

Systematic excavations at Pikillacta were not carried out until much later by

Sanders (1973). He found small quantities of artifacts leading him to believe Pikillacta was built by the Wari but that it had never been occupied (Sanders 1973). Later excavations by McEwan (1987, 2005) and the Instituto de Cultura’s staff archaeologists (e.g. Arriola Tuni) produced considerable amounts of artifacts and a main trash midden (McEwan 2005), and proved the presence of Wari occupation.

Neutron activation analysis has shown that a series of Wari style ceramics found in

Pikillacta were produced and imported from the Wari heartland in Ayacucho

(Glowacki 1996, 2005b). At the same time, some ceramics that appear to be locally produced closely imitate the ceramics from the Wari heartland (Glowacki 1996, 2005).

For McEwan, it was clear that Pikillacta was built at the command of the Wari state

(McEwan 2005:147). His assertion was based on the architectural similarities to other

Wari sites, the fact that most of the recovered artifacts are of Wari styles, and the results of the radiocarbon dates that placed the site construction and occupation in the

Middle Horizon. There were two, or perhaps three, sequences of construction at the site. However, the majority of the site was never finished or used (McEwan

2005:147), a fact the archaeologists have not been yet able to explain. The function of

26 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Pikillacta probably changed through time but it seems to have been used generally as an administrative site (McEwan 2005). More specifically, McEwan has suggested that

…the Wari were the Andean innovators of the large-scale practice

of political manipulation and co-option through kinship, fictive

kinship, and ancestor worship and that they utilized these means as

an element of statecraft in controlling their empire. Large Wari

architectural sites such as Pikillacta and Viracochapampa were the

physical manifestation of this state policy [McEwan 2005:149].

McEwan argued that Pikillacta was built to house the political and religious elite who administered the Southern highland part of the Wari realm (McEwan 1987,

2005). Pikillacta then served as “a Wari device for integrating conquered populations into their social and political organization” (McEwan 2005:161), and one of its main functions was to hold ritual feasts in the patio group structures.

Batan Urqo. Batan Urqo is in the Huaro valley in the .

The area has been intensively looted and disturbed by agricultural activity. The site was first recognized in 1952 by Barreda Murillo when local inhabitants found a carved stone lid of a tomb and a few small gold artifacts (Zapata 1997). Later in that year,

Chavez Ballon carried out the first excavations and concluded the site had a long occupation sequence from the Early Horizon (Chanapata ceramic style) to the Late

Horizon (Inca ceramic style) (Zapata 1997). Later reconnaissance and survey indicated a variety of decorated ceramics (Patterson 1967; Rowe 1956). In 1988 and 1992,

27 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Zapata (1997) carried out systematic excavations in the funerary Wari area and recovered ceramics of possible Tiwanaku (northern Bolivia) affiliation. His excavations revealed a wide and rectangular wall surrounding the funerary sector that included at least twelve tombs. The associated artifacts included lapis lazuli beads, fragments of Spondylus, carved bone, and camelid bones (Zapata 1997). Comparisons of pottery from Batan Urqu and Pikillacta did not point to a strong relationship between the two sites suggesting the people buried in Batan Urqu were not those living in Pikillacta (Glowacki and Zapata 1998). Recent excavations at the Huaro complex (see below) may clarify the site relationships in time and space.

Huaro complex. The Huaro complex is situated in the Huari valley at 17 km southeast of Pikillacta and covers an area of 9 sq. km. It includes the sites of

Cotocotuyoc (described in the next chapter), Kanincunca, Hatun Cotuyoc, and

Qoripata (Glowacki 2002; Glowacki and McEwan 2001). Kanincunca covers 7.5 ha and contains a single architectural construction built of rows of chambers (6-8m x

5m). There is evidence of plastered walls and floors and round corners. Glowacki found parallels to the architecture of the Moraduchayuq sector in Huari and the

Akapana pyramid of Tiwanaku. She considered Kanincunca to have been used as a temple (Glowacki 2002).

Hatun Cotuyoc is located on the valley floor on the south edge of the Huaro complex. The architecture is of mediocre quality and walls were irregular. Glowacki

(2002) excavated two intact rooms, a small cluster of disturbed rooms, and a portion of a canal. Materials recovered include a slate floor, a well-constructed hearth, cooking vessels, and a possible guinea pig hutch. A human burial in a cist with

28 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

associated pottery was also found at the site. Glowacki interpreted Hatun Cotuyoc as a large residential area that may have housed the agricultural labor force of Huaro

(Glowacki 2002).

Qoripata comprised a number of rooms oriented around a large patio

(Glowacki 2002). The rooms were of quality construction with plastered walls and floors. Two female burials were found under the rooms’ floors and they were associated with polychrome ceramic vessels, copper tupus (dress pins), and carved bone artifacts. The site was apparently abandoned and then burned down. Based on the architecture, the polychrome ceramics (including an oversize vessel), and the presence of a “reception” area with a possible seat, Glowacki interpreted Qoripata as an administrative site (Glowacki and McEwan 2001, Glowacki 2002). Based on the ceramic style analysis and radiocarbon dates, Glowacki and McEwan (2001:38) suggested that the Wari first occupied and established themselves in the Huaro valley and later built Pikillacta as the main administrative center.

Maymi. Maymi is in the Pisco valley (Southern Peru) and was excavated by

Anders in 1987 and 1988 (Anders 1990). The site is situated 13 km from the seashore on the northern margin of the Pisco River. The ceramic sequence covers the Early

Horizon through the Late Intermediate Period but the main occupation was in the

Middle Horizon (Anders 1990). Anders found abundant Wari ceramic sherds (Robles

Moqo and Chakipampa styles) and many highly decorated and complete vessels buried as possible offerings. The function of the site and its role during Wari times remains unclear.

29 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Pacheco. Pacheco, in the Nasca Valley, was probably colonized by people from the sierra (Menzel 1964). Habitation refuse and a great offering deposit of highly decorated ceramics were recovered at this site. An examination of the paste indicated that both sherds and the large ceremonial pottery from the offering deposit were locally made. The latter followed sierra designs (Menzel 1964).

Pataraya. The site of Pataraya is located in the Tierras Blancas Valley in the

Nasca basin of Ica (Schreiber 1999, 2000). It is a small site adjacent to extent crop fields, presumably used to grow coca (Schreiber 2000). The architecture is composed of four patio groups and two larger rectangular rooms. The recovered ceramic had

Wari Viñaque designs. No local earlier occupation is associated with these crop fields leading Schreiber to suggest that the Wari highland people occupied the site

(Schreiber 2000:437).

Sonay. Sonay is located in the Camana valley, on the coast of Ica, in Southern

Peru. The site has architecture from the Middle Horizon and the Late Horizon

(Malpass 2001). The Wari building has a cellular rectangular architecture with stone walls 1.5 m high. The AMS dates taken from samples recovered under the floors, indicate a late Wari occupation (A.D. 940 ± 30 calibrated years, A.D. 1000 ± 50 calibrated years, Malpass 2001:65). Given the paucity of recovered artifacts, the site occupation was probably brief. The function of the site is still unknown.

Collota and Netahaha. The sites of Collota and Netahaha, in the Cotahuasi valley in Arequipa, presents Wari architecture and ceramics (Jennings and Craig

2001). However, Jennings and Yepez (2001) have argued that these sites were administrative centers constructed by local elites and subsequently modified with Wari

30 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

architectural features. They interpreted these Wari embellishments as proof of local emulation of Wari styles and of non-direct state control of the sites. In fact, some of this Wari-like architecture dates to the Late Horizon (Jennings 2006).

Cerro Baúl and Cerro Mejia. The archaeological site of Cerro Baúl is located on a large hill with a flat summit (a geological mesa) in the Moquegua valley, about

600 km south of Huari. Cerro Baúl is today an active shrine and ritual center

(Moseley, et al. 1991). It contains 10 ha of monumental construction, and its primary use dates to the initial phases of Wari expansion (Moseley et al. 1991: 132). Cerro

Baúl comprises several patio groups and a D-shaped structure. Moseley and colleagues believed the enclave was directly established by the Wari “atop a sacred natural bastion to emphasize political prowess regardless of economic impracticality”

(Moseley, et al. 2005:17264). Adjacent to Cerro Baúl is Cerro Mejia, which also contains intrusive Wari occupations. Cerro Mejia appears to have commanded both the access route to Baúl and the nearby high-elevation canal that would have provided both sites with water (Moseley et al. 1991:135).

The Moquegua valley is unique as it is the only area known to have overlapping Wari and Tiwanaku occupations. The Tiwanaku Omo site M10 settlement is located only 20 km south of Mejia in the same valley (Goldstein 1993; Moseley, et al. 1991). The Wari-Tiwanaku interactions at Cerro Baúl are evidenced by the presence of a silver plate with a feline design of Tiwanaku style found in the D-shaped structure, and the stratigraphic association of two Wari ceramic cups with a Tiwanaku cup (Williams, et al. 2001). In the late 1990’s the Cerro Baúl Excavation Project led by Williams started new excavations at the site and identified three distinct sectors in

31 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

the architectural core on the summit: the artisan residence area, the ceremonial sector, and an area of large rectilinear plazas flanked by narrow rooms (Williams 2001).

Based on the ceramic and obsidian analyses, Williams and colleagues (2001) suggested that imported goods from other parts of the Wari Empire were brought to C.

Baúl to be used in ceremonies. The radiocarbon dates indicate that the establishment of the site took place around A.D. 650 and that there was a second construction phase in the D-shaped structures and patios groups at around 900 (Williams 2001:78-79). It appears that Cerro Baúl was first established as a defensive outpost and was later remodeled to become “…a point of ideological and economic exchange between Wari and Tiwanaku” (Williams 2001:81).

Schreiber (2001) estimates the extent of Wari control from the capital Huari to have been 800 km north and 525 km south, 275 km east and 350 km west. However, the degree of control within this region is still debated as only seven sites in the provinces have been extensively excavated (Viracochapampa, Jincamocco, Pikillacta,

Chokepukio, Cerro Baúl, Cerro Mejia, and parts of Huaro).

2.1.3 Cuzco and Ayacucho after the disintegration of the Wari Empire

Cuzco

The period following the Wari decline in Cuzco was politically fragmented (McEwan

2006:42). The site of Chokepukio was apparently a major power center from

A.D.1000-1100 until around A.D.1438, when it was overthrown by the Inca culture

(McEwan, et al. 2005; McEwan 2006). Based on his excavations, McEwan claims that there was a strong Wari influence in the ceramics and architecture of the Late

32 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Intermediate Period (A.D. 900-1476) Chokepukio levels suggesting cultural continuity after the Wari dissolution (McEwan 2006:65). Interestingly, some ceremonial ceramics appear to have been brought from Northern Bolivia (McEwan 2006:66).

Additionally, there was also a change in burial patterns with the introduction of chullpas (tall rectangular buildings) on the site (Gordon McEwan, personal communication 2010). However, strontium isotope analysis on human bones did not show evidence of immigrant people prior to A.D. 1400 at this site (Andrushko, et al.

2009). Perhaps the ceramics arrived through trade or perhaps future isotopic work on a larger sample will provide stronger evidence that immigrants did reside here.

Glowacki has also noted continuity in the post-Wari ceramics (known as Lucre style) recovered at the site of Cotocotuyoc (Glowacki and McEwan 2001:39).

Covey excavated at Pantillijlla in the of Cuzco, a 10 ha site that includes more than a hundred stone and mud-brick structures (Covey 2006).

The analysis of the architecture and ceramics found in excavation and from surface collections led Covey to argue that this early Late Intermediate Period (with Killke ceramic style) site was expanded by an intrusive early Inca presence (Covey

2006:126).

Using mainly survey and ethnohistorical data, Bauer and Covey (2002) argued that the Inca imperial expansion followed a long-term process of state development in the Cuzco valley from A.D.1000-1400. The Inca polity extended direct control over many groups and used a variety of strategies (marriage exchange, alliances, military conquest) to consolidate the Cuzco region (Bauer and Covey 2002).

33 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

The study of Inca ruins was what initially attracted researchers to Cuzco. The

German archaeologist Max Uhle (1912) conducted some of the first excavations in

Cuzco in 1905, 1907, and 1911. Hiram Bingham led archaeological expeditions in

Machu Picchu between 1911-1916. His account of the well-preserved and relatively unexplored ruins made the site famous to the entire world (Bingham 1915; 1922;

1930; 1948).

In the early 1930s, Valcarcel (1934a; 1934c; 1935) carried out some of the initial work at the megalithic site of Sacsayhuaman. His publications included several photos and drawings of some of the large structures. Valcarcel studied and reviewed the chronicles that mention Sacsayhuaman, such as those by Polo de Ondegardo,

Sarmiento de Gamboa, and Garcilazo de la Vega (Valcarcel 1934a). Finally, he also supervised cleaning and repairing work, as well as some excavations at other Inca sites such as Pukara, Kenko, Chokechaka, , , and Pisac (Valcarcel

1934b).

In 1941-42, Rowe (1944) explored Cuzco and focused on and ceramics. In his study of the architecture, he concentrated on (temple of the Sun) and Huanacauri. His classification of Inca pottery was based on the ceramics excavated in Qoripata, Canchon of Santo Domingo, surface collections from over twenty sites, and the whole pots from the University of Cuzco Museum and the

Archaeological Institute of Cuzco (Rowe 1944).

In the Urubamba valley, Kendall (1974; 1984) carried out a survey, some excavations, and a detailed study of the Inca planning at several archaeological sites.

These sites included Cusichaca (residential and administrative site),

34 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

(residential town), Pulpituyoc (ceremonial site), Quishuarpata (site in control of water supply), Tunasmocco (agricultural community), Machu Quente (agricultural site), and

Huayna Quente (ceremonial center) (Kendall 1974, 1984). Between 1969-1973,

Kendall carried out surface collection and test excavations at the sites of Huillca

Raccay, Olleriayoc, Leoniyoc, Quishuarpata, and Olleriayoc Trancapata (Kendall

1976). She discussed and compared pre-Inca ceramic styles such as Killke, Lucre,

Qotacalle, and Huaro (Kendall 1976).

Sawyer and Chavez Ballon examined and described the site of Quellu Raqay, near Ollantaytambo (Sawyer 1980), which had been actually explored by Ephraim

Squier in 1863. Based on the site’s restricted access and labyrinthine plan, Sawyer believed Quellu Raqay had a ceremonial-administrative function.

In the 1980s Gibaja led excavations at Ollantaytambo (Gibaja 1984). She mentioned the works carried out previously at the site by, among others, Valcarcel,

Miranda, Gasparini, and Margolies, but no precise dates or references are provided

(Gibaja 1984:227). Through changes in the architecture and ceramics, Gibaja documented a brief, post A.D. 1532 occupation in certain areas of the site (Gibaja

1984).

Niles conducted architectural studies at the Inca sites of Callachaca, Raqay-

Raqayniyog, Qotakalli, and Qhataqasallaqta (Niles 1984). Her study of the formally- planned farming community led her to argue that the towns were built to further the

Inca strategy of controlling conquered people. Niles also believed that the rules of construction design followed the Inca dual principle of division into upper and lower halves.

35 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Sillar and Dean conducted surveys and excavations at and around the site of

Cacha/Raqchi, approximately 80 km south of Pikillacta in the department of Cuzco.

Raqchi was an Inca shrine dedicated to the creator deity Viracocha and included associated administrative structures4 (Sillar and Dean 2002). They focused on the settlement pattern, ceramic analysis, and funerary practices. A detailed study of the material and methods used in the ceramic production as well as form and decoration was used to interpret the role of ceramics as an expression of ethnic identity (Sillar and

Dean 2002).

Farrington and Zapata conducted systematic excavations at the site of

Tambokancha, 30 km west of the city of Cuzco (Farrington and Zapata 2003). The site covers 8 ha and includes more than seventy structures consisting of high walls with stone and adobe masonry. Farrington argued that the site has a cross-shaped alignment in the complex core and a tumi (Inca ceremonial knife) shaped general plan

(Farrington and Zapata 2003).

Chatfield (2007) excavated at the site of Aqnapampa in southern Cuzco.

Through the study of style, technology, and cultural interaction from the Late

Intermediate Period to the Spanish Colonial Period, she concluded that pottery style alone is not a good temporal marker. Her results demonstrated that there was collaboration between Spanish and indigenous potters.

4 Radiocarbon dates taken from sites R18, R22, and R48 indicate that there was also a Middle Horizon occupation in the area of Cacha/Raqchi (Sillar and Dean 2002:239, Table 2).

36 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

Ayacucho

Little is known about the time between the fall of the Wari Empire and the Inca conquest in the region of Ayacucho (Lumbreras 1974:195). The material culture of this period is known as Chancas (Lumbreras 1974, Gonzalez Carre 1982). The Chanca ethnic group may have come from the province of Andahuaylas (just west of

Ayacucho)5 (Bauer and Kellet 2010). It is believed that the Chancas were a warlike group who conquered the Ayacucho region between A.D. 1200 and 1400 and expanded to the south incorporating many diverse ethnic groups (Gonzalez Carre

1982). New AMS measurements from bones associated with Chanca ceramics at the sites of Huari and Qollana placed the Chanca arrival to the Ayacucho valley at around

A.D. 1300 (Finucane, et al. 2007). The settlement pattern of this time period seemed to have been characterized by large hilltop occupations (Lumbreras 1974a).

In A.D. 1438, the Chanca tried to conquer Cuzco but the Incas defeated them.

The Inca leader Pachacutec then began a military campaign to conquer the rebel groups in the Ayacucho region. After his success the Incas moved out all the Chancas and related groups and repopulated the area with mitimae (colonist) groups (Gonzalez

Carre 1982). The Inca imperial expansion led by Pachacutec was supposedly triggered by this successful initial conquest of the Chancas (Betanzos 1996 (1551); Sarmiento de Gamboa 2007 (1572)).

The Inca Pachacutec founded the administrative center of Vilcashuaman in

Ayacucho. Chahud was the first one to excavate Vilcashuaman in the 1960s (Chahud

5 Bauer and Kellet (2010) carried out a survey in the Andahuaylas area and brief reconnaissance work in the Soros and Vilcashuaman regions. They believe the term Chanca should only be used for the Andahuaylas group because each of these areas showed distinctive material culture (Bauer and Kellet 2010:90).

37 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

ms, cited in Gonzalez Carre and Pozzi- Escot 2002). Gonzalez Carre and Pozzi Escot

(2002) made several plans of different parts of the site and used ethnohistorical sources to discuss its use and function. Other Inca sites in the region are Intiwatana and Yanacocha (Gonzalez Carre 1982). There are also several high altitude ushnu platform sites of possible religious significance, such as Ushnu Pata and Inca Pirqa

(Meddens, et al. 2008; Meddens, et al. 2010) . Overall, there is little published material on excavations carried out in Inca sites in Ayacucho.

Although there is no agreement on the intensity of the influence, archaeologists have suggested that the Wari influenced the (D’Altroy and Schreiber

2004, Covey 2006, Isbell 2004, McEwan et al. 2002). For instance, many major Wari sites are associated with Inca roads, suggesting that a large part of the road system probably dated to Wari times (Schreiber 1987). Also, Wari settlers in Cuzco may have introduced the practice of labor service for public projects and the practice of state reciprocation through rituals and feasts (Covey 2006, cf. Topic 2000, Jennings 2006).

Finally, the importance of woven tunics for the Inca nobility may have been influenced by the Wari tapestry tunics (McEwan 2006:46). However, Covey (2006: 8) did not see enough site occupation continuity after the Wari dissolution to give the

Wari credit for the Inca imperial formation in Cuzco, arguing that it is unlikely that the

Incas adapted the Wari model of statecraft (Covey 2006:8). Although the Inca state formation process was probably more complex than we understand it now, the evidence suggests that the Wari left a good imprint for the Incas to expand and develop.

38 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

This section on the archaeological chronology of Cuzco and Ayacucho is far from exhaustive. More research was carried out in the areas but for the purpose of this dissertation this brief account should suffice to locate the reader in place and time.

This review shows that most archaeologists argue that the rise and expansion of the

Wari Empire changed the sociopolitical weaving of the regions of Cuzco and

Ayacucho. The archaeological record in Ayacucho shows evidence of increased sociopolitical complexity in the Huarpa communities at the end of Early Intermediate

Periods. However, it is not until A.D. 550 that the vast expansion of similarly planned architecture, large decorated ceramic and textiles with common designs (including the staffed deity and profile staffed figures), as well as the presence of monumental

“administrative sites” starts to expand from Ayacucho. The Wari political expansion reached the south highlands (e.g. ), south coast (e.g. Moquegua), south coast

(e.g.Pacheco), and central coast (e.g. ). As discussed above

The next section reviews previous studies of faunal remains the central Andes.

2.2 Zooarchaeological Studies in the Central Andean Region

Despite the usually large amount of faunal remains recovered in archaeological sites in the central Andes, surprisingly few detailed zooarchaeological studies have been published. With the exception of studies from hunter-gatherer/preceramic sites that discuss early subsistence (Quilter, et al. 1991; Rick and Moore 1999) and early animal domestication (Wheeler 1984, 1995; Wing 1986), the role of animals in complex

39 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

human societies is not well developed in the archaeological literature of Peru and

Bolivia.

Most of these studies focus on camelids remains, understandably as camelids are the most frequently taxon represented in the archaeology record of the Central

Andean complex societies (Pozzi-Escot and Cardoza 1986, Shimada and Shimada

1985, Webster and Janusek 2003). Only a small number of researchers have analyzed the frequency of camelid body part in detail (but see Miller and Burger 1995), but I think this is a line of research that deserves more study. Data on skeletal part analysis can be useful for discussing taphonomic issues as well as anthropic behaviors, such as transport or culinary practices. A few studies concentrate in trying to differentiate camelid species (Kent et al 2001, Wing 1988), but this is a difficult task that so far has provided mostly equivocal results. One aspects not fully elaborated in any of these studies is camelid age profiles and mortality patterns. While these issues tend to be key in studies conducted with faunal assemblages from the Old World (Vigne and

Helmer 2007; Zeder 1991), Andean zooarchaeologists have not exhausted these topics. Data on age and mortality profiles can inform us on herd management and they can be particularly useful when comparing sites. The following is a brief review of zooarchaeological studies in the region, ordered by the chronology of relevant sites.

Pozzi-Escot and Cardoza (1986) conducted an analysis on faunal material from different sites in the highlands of Ayacucho covering the period from the Preceramic to Wari times. The sites studied were Chupas, Wichqana, Ñawinpukyo, Conchopata, and Tunasniyoq (NISP6=4360). They found an overall decrease over time in the

6 NISP is the number of identified specimens from the zooarchaeological assemblage under study. More detail on faunal quantification can be found in Chapter 5.

40 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

amount of animals consumed, but an increase in the consumption of adult camelids.

However, Pozzi-Escot and Cardoza constructed their age profiles by considering all fused bones as “adult,” and all unfused bones as “juvenile.” This causes a major problem as not all camelid bone elements fuse at the same time (Wheeler 1999); for example, one animal can have fused humeri but unfused femora at the same age.

Therefore, an interpretation based simply on separating fused/unfused bones does not produce aggregates of age representative of those of the herd from which specimens derive.

Kala Uyuni is an early site (1000 B.C. to A.D. 400) by the Bolivian shore of

Lake Titicaca which not surprisingly contained a lot of fish remains. Capriles and colleagues (2008) studied a large sample (NISP=44,212) and showed a reduction in the importance of aquatic resources through the Formative Period, possibly accompanied with an increase in agriculture and camelid herding. They explained this trend within the context of environmental data (possible lake size reduction) and socioeconomic complexity (integration of multi-community polities) in the Lake

Titicaca Basin.

Miller and Burger (1995) examined faunal samples (NISP=2,252) recovered outside the ceremonial area of Chavín de Huántar in the central highlands, dated from

900-200 B.C.. By examining the differential distribution of camelid skeletal elements they argued for the consumption, but not production, of ch’arki (a technique to preserve dried meat on the bones) at Chavín around 500-200 B.C. (Janabarriu phase).

The Janabarriu assemblage (NISP = 1,242) was excavated from a unit in the modern town of Chavín de Huántar and two units excavated on the southwest edge of the site

41 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

(Miller and Burger 1995: Fig.3, Table 1). Their skeletal element profile showed high survival rates for leg bones and relatively poorer representation of skull and foot elements (1995:441). This pattern was interpreted as evidence of llama ch’arki received from the puna region where the ch’arki was prepared and the cranial and podial elements remained. However, using ethnographic data, Valdez (2000) pointed out that there are several ways of producing ch’arki, showing that the llama meat is not always left on the bone. According to Stahl (1999), Chavín’s temperatures can be cold enough to allow ch’arki production at the site, and he argued that the pattern found at Chavín could also be the product of fresh meat transportation. In sum, the ch’arki effect may be only one possibility to explain the Janabarriu bone assemblage at Chavin.

At Tablada de Lurin (200 B.C. to A.D. 300, in the central coast), Rodriguez

Loredo compared the animal offerings (NISP=2091) of two different funerary traditions (Rodriguez Loredo 2001). In both traditions, camelids were associated with male burials and were also represented by bone artifacts (spatulas, tablets). Deer heads were also associated with male (both adult and child) burials. Small birds and small carnivores were buried complete and may have been a food offering. Although two funerary traditions were recognized in terms of their building structures and the human arrangements, the animal offerings were very similar in both showing no changes in food and animal symbolic status.

At Huacas del Sol y la Luna, a Moche complex in the North Coast, Vasquez

Sanchez and colleagues (Vasquez Sanchez, et al. 2001) conducted a zooarchaeological analysis on samples (NISP=853) from the urban area dated at approximately A.D.

42 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

400-500. Based on the tooth eruption sequence they concluded that camelids of different ages were present at the site suggesting they were raised locally.

The author of this thesis conducted an analysis of a faunal sample from the

Early Intermediate Period site of Ñawinpukyo in Ayacucho (Rosenfeld ms.). The sample (NISP=4408) comprised remains from different contexts, including a circular building interpreted as part of a ceremonial compound (Leoni 2006). This structure is located on the highest hill at the site and its doorway is perfectly aligned with the

Rasuwillka snow-capped peak, the highest mountain visible from the Ayacucho

Valley (Leoni 2006:288). In this large wall enclosure, a total of twenty-three camelid bone concentrations were excavated; the animals were found disarticulated and mostly buried directly in the building’s floor (Leoni 2006:288). Four of these defined bone groups were analyzed, and they comprised at least twenty-one camelids. The bones had abundant cut marks on locations that suggested disarticulation and defleshing

(number of bones with cut marks= 38), and a few had been burnt (N=15). According to the state of bone fusion and dental eruption data, all camelids were younger than 3 years of age when they were slaughtered, indicating a preference for the consumption of relatively young meat (Rosenfeld 2002). Leoni suggested that the Ñawinpukyo inhabitants carried out ritual activities in possible relation to an ancient mountain cult

(Leoni 2006:298), and the zooarchaeological analysis supports the idea of large feasts carried out in this ceremonial building.

M. Shimada and I. Shimada (1985) used ethnographic, zooarchaeological, physiological, and ethnohistorical lines of evidence to examine llama breeding on the

North Coast from the early Middle Horizon period. Based on their own and other

43 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

published data from the Moche site of Pampa Grande (A.D. 570-670) in Lambayeque, their analyses showed the presence of all camelid body parts, an age profile ranging from neonatal to adult, and deposits of dung. The Shimadas interpreted these findings as evidence of coastal herding and breeding during the Middle Horizon.

Webster and Janusek (2003) studied camelid remains from Tiwanaku (Bolivia) including a selected sample (NISP=12,000) from rural areas, together with a more general analysis from residential contexts (NISP=40,000). They discussed camelid use and change in subsistence and ritual for the Formative and Tiwanaku Periods, finding that camelids become the main source of animal protein in the diet over time. The bone samples were highly fragmented, and proximal bone ends are rare, suggesting that the Tiwanaku people pulverized bone to extract fat and marrow. The different grades of bone burning suggested different cooking techniques. There was evidence of purposeful heating to produce bone tools and evidence of burning bones to clean areas in different areas of the settlements. They interpreted the faunal remains as evidence of ritual use of camelids in “dedicatory offerings” associated with construction activities (Webster and Janusek 2003:359). Based on the presence of hundreds of disarticulated camelid bones, the lack of cut marks, along with serving vessels at the summit of the Akapana pyramid, the authors suggested that “conspicuous consumption on a grand scale” took place in Tiwanaku (Webster and Janusek 2003:

360). They linked this activity to elite sponsors trying to display wealth.

Moseley and colleagues (2005) combined different lines of evidence to argue for the presence of feasts and abandonment rituals, as well as social differentiation in cuisine in Cerro Mejia and Cerro Baúl (NISP= 15,325) in Moquegua. In the most

44 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

lavish residential quarters excavated in Cerro Baúl, one building complex has been interpreted as an elite palace (Moseley, et al. 2005). The remains of what was apparently a building-closing ceremony feast were strewn on patio benches and the floor. Camelid, viscachas (Lagidium peruanum), and deer were (Odocoileus virginianus) consumed, as well as several types of fish. In a compound adjacent to the largest temple, a human interment (interpreted as a dedicatory burial) was placed, along with a drum and shattered ceramics. These remains have been interpreted as part of final rites for the building. One cluster of bones yielded remains of an almost complete young adult camelid, showing cut marks and placed in a shallow pit, apparently as part of the final feasting (Moseley, et al. 2005).

At Huaca Cao Viejo, a Lambayeque/Sican site (A.D. 700-1200) on the north coast of Peru, Kent and colleagues (2001) analyzed the naturally mummified camelid offerings that accompanied human burials. The offerings were mostly comprised of legs and skulls. In order to differentiate camelid species (llama, guanaco, alpaca, vicuña), they applied a range of different methods: fleece, teeth, and osteometric data.

However, the results were ambiguous, and they concluded that dentition does not discriminate among taxa. Further, the osteometric method produced some discrepancies, particularly when based on the second phalanx. Finally, the fiber method did not align with the osteometric and teeth differentiation criteria. These results are probably explained by the presence of hybrid herds.

Pozorski (1982) analyzed diachronic changes in ten sites within the Moche valley, from the Preceramic to the development of the Chimu state in the Late

Intermediate Period. Presenting little quantitative data, she reconstructed three distinct

45 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

economic shifts: the earliest occupation was located on the coast and had small-scale flood cultivation. The second economic shift was correlated with the advent of irrigation but marine resources continued to be important in the diet. A third economic shift was characterized by large-scale irrigation agriculture and llama use.

At the site of El Yaral, a Late Intermediate Period site in the Moquegua valley,

Wheeler (1995; 1996) studied mummified camelids recovered from under the floor of houses. Most llamas and alpacas were sacrificed by a blow between their ears and immediately buried beneath the house floors where they became naturally mummified due to the extreme aridity of the environment. There appears to have been a patterning in relation to the burial location of female camelids versus male camelids. However, two llamas of different sexes were buried in the chicha preparation room. Ancient

DNA collected from these well-preserved camelids has been used to study the origins of the domestic camelids in (Stanley, et al. 1994; Wheeler, et al. 2006).

At the same site, Rofes (2000; 2004) studied the remains of one-hundred and twelve mummified guinea pigs found buried beneath the floor of four residences. Based on anthropic modification (animal decapitation) and associated artifacts, he interpreted ritual practices related to building events that involved the sacrifice of these guinea pigs.

Sandefur (2001) conducted a rigorous analysis on the Wanka faunal data from the area in the Mantaro valley of Junin. She discussed the patterns in meat consumption (considering animal species, skeletal parts, cut marks and evidence of burning) between the patio groups of commoners and elites in pre-Inca and Inca times

(NISP=39,372). She interpreted the changes observed in animal use as a reflection of

46 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

the state intervention into household economic and social behavior (Sandefur

2001:196).

Zooarchaeological analysis at the Late Intermediate Period coastal site of

Cerro Azul (Lima) has shed light on the ancient economy right before the Inca conquered the area. Marcus and colleagues (1999) found evidence for the acquisition, processing, and consumption of anchovies and sardines. The analysis of animal skeletal elements and dung suggested that the Cerro Azul inhabitants did not raise llamas but did raise guinea pigs. The authors showed differences in the diets of elite and commoners at the site.

Wing (1988) conducted a zooarchaeological study of the remains recovered at the Inca site of Huanuco Pampa (NISP=8,836) in Huanuco. She found that the herd was composed of equal numbers of llamas and alpacas that were mainly mature animals. In addition, she found that a few bone measurements deviated significantly from the rest of the remains at the site, a fact she interpreted as evidence of camelid breeding experiments.

Miller (2003) conducted a systematic study of the faunal material

(NISP=1,066) associated with human burials at the Inca site of Machu Picchu. He determined the sample’s taxonomic composition, the relative abundance of skeletal parts, butchery and burning evidence, and differential mortality. Based on ethnohistorical accounts describing the Inca practice of feeding the dead, he interpreted the majority of the camelid bones associated with human burials at Machu

Picchu as having been intended to satisfy the postmortem requirements of the mummies, but actually consumed by the people in charge of the mummies. The

47 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

assemblage has a high frequency of fresh fracture, cut marks, and some signs of exposure to fire, something not expected if meat portions had been simply placed in the graves for the dead “to eat” (Miller 2003:38). The camelid age structure includes only older individuals, with no individuals under the age of two. Miller explained this age profile as reflective of the distance between the site and the puna pastures where herds were maintained. He also entertained the interpretation of Machu Picchu residents keeping aged camelids for sacrifice in calendrical ceremonies and for funerary rituals (Miller 2003:57). Combining ethnohistorical sources, his faunal data, and the human osteological evidence he suggested the presence of “…a female head of a lineage that was dedicated to the maintenance of the camelid herds necessary at

Machu Picchu for ritual purposes and the production of textiles” (Miller 2003: 63).

Sandweis and Wing (1997) reported the recovery of mummified guinea pigs during Inca times at the site of Lo Demas at Chincha. Combining the information from the ethnographic record and the faunal evidence they concluded that guinea pigs were sacrificed for a variety of ritual purposes, such as accompaniment of the dead, offerings to placate the gods, or reading the future or diagnosing someone’s illness using the rodents’ internal organs.

Although this review is not exhaustive, it touched on most relevant studies.

Research studies on faunal remains from complex sites in the Central Andes (and particularly in the Peruvian highlands) are far from abundant. This shortage of rigorous faunal studies for the time and place mentioned is one reason why the present research is important, as it will contribute to the growth of a field that can help answer many questions surrounding on ecological, social and ritual relationships that involve

48 Chapter 2 Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background

the use of animals. The above mentioned studies by Sandefur (2001), Webster and

Janusek (2003) and Moseley et al. (2005) were particularly stimulating for this dissertation project as they discuss animal uses as well as changes in practices to assess the impact of a larger polity over a site or region. My research follows these lines of inquiry using a new large data set comprising one site from the Wari heartland and two sites from the Wari province of Cuzco.

49 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

CHAPTER 3 SITE CONTEXTS AND SITE FORMATION PROCESSES: THE CASES OF CONCHOPATA, COTOCOTUYOC, AND CHOKEPUKIO

3.1 Contextual Approaches and Site Formation Processes

Household archaeology is a particular good example of an archaeological approach

with a focus in context (Allison 1999; Blanton 1994; D'Altroy and Hastorf 2001;

Feinman, et al. 2002; Flannery 1976; Flannery and Marcus 2005). Within this

approach, archaeological remains are examined in relationship to each other and to

features (e.g. hearths, benches) to understand the use of space in different parts of the

residential area (Nash 2009:225). Residential data can be used to examine

socioeconomic differences among different areas within a settlement or among

different sites, both at the same time and through time.7 As Nash has reminded us:

“Context is the key to defining activity areas and locating activities in and around

dwellings” (Nash 2009:225).

The archaeological record, however, is not a direct reflection of past activities.

As Wilk and Rathje (1982) point out, archaeologists excavate the material remains of

dwellings, not the social units. Many cultural and non-cultural processes affect the

configuration of the archaeological record (Schiffer 1972) thus affecting our

interpretation of house activities in the past. One important aspect of the dissertation

research reported here is to assess the type of bone deposits and then interpret the

human behavior that created and left such deposits during the Middle Horizon. A

7 See Nash (2009) for a review on Andean household archaeology.

50 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes crucial question is, how can we make sure that the animal bones are evidence of Wari behavior contextually related to the rest of the site instead of, for example, the remains of squatter people occupying the site after the Wari abandoned it? To tackle this question I discuss site formation processes, abandonment studies, and social stratigraphy (Inomata and Webb 2003; McAnany and Hodder 2009; Schiffer 1972).

In the 1970s, Schiffer warned that many archaeologists treated archaeological remains as if they were left behind by sudden abandonment, the famous “Pompeii premise” debate (1976; Schiffer 1972). Binford had written: “The loss, breakage, and abandonment of implements and facilities at different locations, […], leaves a “fossil” record of the actual operation of an extinct society (Binford 1964:425). Schiffer stated that Binford (1964) had suggested that “the provenience of artifacts in a site correspond to their actual locations of use in activities” (Schiffer 1972: 156). Schiffer warned that obviously this is not always the case. He asked the question of what variables determine the structure of the archaeological record. His elaborated a conceptual system to explain how the archaeological record is formed through cultural and non-cultural kinds of transformations. The latter component is essentially the taphonomic history of the record (how it was buried, for example: how the chemical components of the soil affected the artifacts). The cultural component is the “life cycle” of any element (Schiffer 1972: 157) and the processes of this cycle are: procurement, manufacture, use, maintenance, and discard. All these stages in the

“flow model” comprise the “systemic context” and when the element is discarded it becomes “refuse” and it is now part of the “archaeological context”, which is what archaeologists recover (Schiffer 1972: 159, Fig. 2). Schiffer (1072:161) famously

51 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes distinguished between the primary refuse and secondary refuse of elements that have been discarded. Primary refuse refers to material discarded at its location of use, while secondary refuse refers to material discarded is a different place than where it was used. However, the archaeological record consists of more than evidence of disposal behavior.

Other behaviors, like offering or votive dedications are not explicitly accounted for in Schiffer’s model. In fact, the Schiffer himself wrote:

Elements discarded with the deceased after ceremonial use

provide significant source of intact elements in archaeological

context, especially among simple systems. The subject of grave

accompaniments and their relationships to other aspects of the

system that discarded them, especially social organization, will not

be discussed here; although a comprehensive treatment is long

overdue [Schiffer 1972:160].

Along with burial artifacts, I would add animal sacrifice and the deposition of trash from special events that could become sacred (Jackson and Scott 1995:115).

Schiffer’s model does not discuss these types of deposits. The intentional burial of an animal under a house floor is not discard behavior. In the late 1990s, LaMotta and

Schiffer (1999:24) warned that ritual formation processes can mimic other forms of cultural deposition and that least-effort models of abandonment cannot be applied directly to floor assemblages without controlling for the effects of ritual formation

52 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes processes. They did not provide a solution arguing that we need more comparative research before we can identify the end products of ritual abandonment.

In a related study, Walker (1999) defined and discussed “ceremonial trash”.

Using a material culture-approach, Walker separated ritual behavior from belief and hypothesized that “ritual behaviors exhibit consistently patterned life histories in ongoing cultural systems” and that they “frequently lead to discrete or singularized depositional contexts in the archaeological record” (1999:72). In Walker’s terms:

“artifacts in ceremonial trash have finished their use-lives as a result of wear and tear or have become obsolete because their users have died” […] “the place of disposal is itself associated with holy spaces” (1999:75). Ceremonial trash is then different from sacrificial deposits because the latter imply “the diversion of still viable objects out of their use contexts directly into the archaeological record in order to harness their remnant use-lives within an ongoing ritual tradition” (1999:76).

According to Inomata and Webb, abandonment studies cover two interwoven aspects: abandonment as part of formation processes, and abandonment as a social phenomenon (Inomata and Webb 2003:1). The first of these issues is concerned with how material residues of activities are affected by abandonment behavior, the goal being to create a better understanding of the lifeways at a settlement before its abandonment. In drawing attention to abandonment as a social phenomenon, Inomata and Webb suggest it is a critical part of a social process or strategy (Inomata and

Webb 2003:1). As an example of this, they cite the case of certain mobile hunter- gatherers who periodically abandon their settlements. Another example is the case of

53 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

“collapse” of political systems or civilizations in when whole settlements were abandoned (Inomata and Webb 2003).

Adding a social layer to the study of site formation processes, McAnany and

Hodder (McAnany and Hodder 2009) argue that stratigraphy can be understood and interpreted also in terms such as memory, history-building, forgetting, renewing, cleansing, and destroying. In an their approach, it is possible to examine “stratigraphy not as a passive container of temporally sensitive artifacts but as a physical medium for the performance of social practice” (McAnany and Hodder 2009:7). For example, preservation by covering with earth can be seen as an active preserving or renewing agent. Houses at the Neolithic site of Çatalhöyük were carefully cleaned and filled before rebuilding, thus preserving both the earlier house and the people buried there

(McAnany and Hodder 2009:12). Contextual information (associated artifacts and depositional practices) should help discern which type of social interpretation is more appropriate in each archaeological case (McAnany and Hodder 2009:13 and 17).

According to McAnany and Hodder, termination, dedication and foundational practices contribute to understanding the social aspect of stratigraphy and could be interpreted as acts of remembering and/or memorializing (McAnany and Hodder

2009:17). These authors emphasized that studying social stratigraphy should not exclude the use of other stratigraphic techniques such as Harris matrices or micromorphology (McAnany and Hodder 2009:19).

In sum, not everything archaeologists dig is discarded material and we should be prepared to identify other types of deposits and to offer interpretations of the social behaviors of the people who created them. To this end, though, it is crucial to

54 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes understand the provenience context and stratigraphy of the archaeological material under study. I analyze and interpret the faunal deposits included in this study considering all these issues.

3.2 Site Excavation History and Description

In this section I describe the excavation history and archaeological finds at each of the three sites from which the faunal samples included in this study were recovered. I describe the archaeological material associated with the faunal deposits in order to provide contextual information that will enrich the interpretation of the zooarchaeological analysis described in Chapter 6. I assess the site formation processes in an attempt to better understand the formation of relevant bone deposits.

As discussed above, this will impact the interpretations that can be drawn from the data analysis.

3.2.1 Wari Heartland: Conchopata

Conchopata is situated in the south sector of the Ayacucho valley in the central

Peruvian sierras, approximately 10 km from the capital site of Huari. It is considered a subordinate city of the Wari capital. The modern city of Ayacucho covers most of the

Conchopata ruins. Originally the settlement probably covered at least 20 hectares, but presently only three hectares remain, which have been interpreted as the core of the civic center (Isbell 2004).

55 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

The first scientific excavations at the site were carried out in 1942 by the

Peruvian archaeologist Julio C. Tello. He found a large amount of oversize pottery and named the site and pottery type Conchopata after the neighborhood where the site was located (Isbell and McEwan 1991:12). In 1961, 1964, and 1970 Lumbreras directed excavations at Conchopata and revealed substantial amounts of architecture, ceramics, and lithic tools close to the area where Tello had excavated (Lumbreras 1974a).

In 1977, workmen excavating a trench for a water pipe found a great number of large decorated ceramic sherds at the site. While the construction was halted for a couple of weeks, Sandoval, Isbell, and Cook (along with the Huari Urban Prehistory

Project) conducted excavations. They recovered large fragments of twenty-two to twenty-five oversize jars, including face-neck vessels, in a pit excavated into bedrock

(Cook 1987; Isbell 1987a).

In 1982, Pozzi-Escot carried out excavations as part of a general evaluation of archaeological and colonial monuments in Ayacucho (Pozzi-Escot 1991-83). Using a large paved road that cuts cross the site, she divided Conchopata into sector A (west of the road Avenida del Ejercito) and sector B (east of the road). Pozzi-Escot excavated in sector A and revealed a large amount of quadrangular architecture as well as many ceramic and lithic tools. She also found animal and human bones (Pozzi-Escot 1991;

Pozzi-Escot and Cardoza 1986).

In 1991, Perez and Ochatoma carried out salvage excavations at the site after modern construction began in the north part of sector A at Conchopata. They found an ancient large kiln excavated into bedrock, which had been filled with ceramic sherds and tools (Ochatoma Paravicino 2007:91).

56 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

From 1991 to 1993, a group of archaeology students at the Universidad

Nacional San Cristobal de Huamanga excavated in the south area of sector B under the direction of Ismael Perez. This work was carried out through short work seasons and revealed more architecture and ceramic tools. The results of these series of excavation were submitted to the Universidad de Huamanga by the undergraduate students as part of their their bachelor degree studies (Ochatoma Paravicino 2007:91).

In 1997 and beginning of 1998, Ochatoma and Cabrera excavated a large part of Conchopata and found a D-shape structure which included broken highly decorated vessels and burnt human crania (Ochatoma and Cabrera 2000; Ochatoma Paravicino

2007:95). In September 1998, Ochatoma, Cabrera, Isbell and Cook carried out rescue excavations as the site was becoming increasingly impacted by the growth and activities of modern neighboring settlements. From 1999 to 2001 Isbell, Cook, and

Cabrera continued with large extensive excavations in sector B around the areas destroyed by the modern settlements.

Finally in 2003, Isbell directed excavations in sector A where I had the chance to participate by directing an excavation crew (Isbell 2000, 2004). The members of the Archaeological Conchopata Project have gradually been publishing excavation results and models of interpretation (Isbell 1987a; Isbell 2000; Isbell and Cook 2002;

Isbell 2007) along with the analyses of ceramics (Cook 1987, 2004, 2009; Cook and

Benco 2000; Cook and Benson 2001; Cook and Glowacki 2003), mortuary practices

(Isbell 2000, 2004), human remains (Tung 2007, 2008; Tung and Cook 2006; Tung and Knudson 2008), animal bones (Rosenfeld 2008), isotopes (Finucane, et al. 2006), and lithic remains (Bencic 2000).

57 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Based on architecture, stratigraphy, ceramic styles and radiocarbon dates,

Conchopata was occupied from the end of the Early Intermediate Period (around A.D.

300) to the end of the Middle Horizon (around A.D. 1000) (Isbell 2000:20, table 1;

Isbell 2004: 5-8). The primary occupation and construction time was during A.D. 550 to A.D.850 (Middle Horizon Epochs 1A, 1B, and 2A, according to the central Andean chronology (Menzel 1964)) (Isbell 2000:20, table 1; Isbell 2004: 5-8).

Site formation processes at Conchopata are very complex. In her excavations in the north of sector A, Pozzi-Escot recognized four strata (including the surface stratum) but claims that elsewhere the stratigraphy was disturbed and less clear (Pozzi-

Escot 1991: 84). Given the level of destruction at the site, not all parts of the site are preserved well enough to allow chronological separation of materials within the

Middle Horizon. Furthermore, in many rooms a sequence of dirt floors, fills, and hard packed clay floors was detected indicating the long use and reuse of the rooms. In this sense it is difficult to discern the contemporaneity of rooms across Conchopata

(although see below for some exceptions). The radiocarbon, architectural, mortuary, and ceramic style analyses all indicate that the site was occupied for a long period of time during the Middle Horizon during which rooms were added, closed, and/or subdivided, while some tombs were reopened frequently (Blacker 2001, Blacker and

Cook 2006, Isbell 2000, Isbell 2004, Ketteman 2001, Tung 2003). While all the

Conchopata material analyzed here is associated with the Middle Horizon (A.D. 550-

1000), no further chronological precision can be reached for most deposits (but see below for patio groups chronological order).

58 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Conchopata is characterized by a continuous agglutination of rooms, which compose more than 250 distinct structures (designated by the prefix “EA”, which stands for “Espacio Arquitectonico”). At least four distinct architectural forms are present: patio groups, D-shaped structures, rectilinear agglutinated complexes, and possible perimeter walls (Blacker 2001)(Figure 3.1). Conchopata shows an urban nucleus including two distinctive yards or patios enclosed by walls that define a large rectangular area. These two patios are surrounded by long and narrow rooms or galleries (Isbell 2000: 23). The patio-groups are characteristic of many Wari sites.

According to radiocarbon dates and ceramic styles, the Western patio group (PG1:

EA-1A, EA-1B, EA-23E, EA-23W, EA-24, EA-83, EA-112, and EA-172) was built early in the Middle Horizon and before the Eastern patio group (PG2).

59 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Figure 3-1. Map of Conchopata and close up of area with analyzed faunal material. Blue=PG1, Orange=PG2, Green=LH1, Red=LH2

60 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

PG1 covers 532 square m, forty-one percent of which is the open patio

(EA112). Faunal material was found in all rooms of PG1 and was included in the analysis of this study. Decorated ceramic vessels were recovered from the floors of the patio. A great urn was found adjacent to the western doorway of this complex (Isbell

2007) and human remains of at least three individuals were recovered in EA-23W

(Tung 2003). PG1 appeared to have been reutilized many times as many rooms had a sequence of several prepared floors (pisos) and hard packed clay floors (apisonados).

For example, according to the field notes, EA-23W had at least five floors and three apisonados. The latest floor was made of diatomite, and it was broken through at some point during Middle Horizon times, according to the associated ceramic styles, in order to excavate a pit into the bedrock for depositing animals and human burials.

At least two D-shaped structures would have been contemporaneous to PG1

(Isbell 2007; cf. Blacker 2001). One of them –EA-143– had an entrance descending two steps to a sunken floor. At the center there was a walled circular depression with stones (Isbell 2007). Adjacent to a northern section there were several articulated burnt deer legs (Mayta 2001). To the southern-east of this structure, the floor was littered with burned human skulls and hands (Tung and Cook 2006). The other D-shaped structure –EA-100– was found partially looted. A radiocarbon date from the uppermost stratum of this structure indicated it was built before A.D. 658-890

(Ketteman 2001). Adjacent to this structure, thousands of ceramic fragments were

61 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes recovered. It is not clear if this deposit was a ceramic offering or just waste.8 The residential compound associated with PG1 is thought to have been the rooms to the west (Zone A) excavated by Pozzi-Escot in the 1980’s (see above).

PG2 was built after PG1 was abandoned, although they may have overlapped chronologically for a short period of time. PG2 is composed of an open patio (EA-98) and the galleries around it (EA-61, EA-62, EA-87, EA-97, EA-109, and EA-137). A sample of wood charcoal collected from the floor of EA 98, and associated with the repair of the roof, yielded a date of A.D. 692-993 (Beta 146398, 2 sigma calibrated date range) (Ketterman 2001: tables 4, 5, and 6). A sample of small burned twigs was recovered from the floor of EA-61, which probably postdates the construction of the room, yielded a date of A.D. 893-1157 (Beta-133545, 2 sigma calibrated date range)

(Ketteman 2001: Tables 4, 5, and 6). PG2 covers 450 square m, and the open patio covers 61 percent of the total area (Cook and Glowacki 2003: 186). Fragments of large ceramics were recovered here, including one fine vessel smashed9 in the central courtyard of EA-98 (Isbell 2007). Parts of this patio group compound were disturbed by the construction of a modern house (see Map). Faunal remains were recovered only in EA-98 and EA-61.

Analysis of the associated ceramic assemblages recovered in both patio groups showed that more than 60 percent of the ceramics represent serving vessels, including

8 No clear residential middens were found in Conchopata, but an analysis of ceramic type frequencies by Cook and Benco (2000) suggested that the high tool concentration in EA-100 (along with EA-102 and 104) could possibly be a large ceramic discard area.

9 Smashed ceramics were frequently found in Conchopata, and they were defined as ‘The Conchopata Offering Tradition” (Cook 1987, Isbell and Cook 2002). These offerings consisted on oversize decorated ceramics that have been deliberately broken and buried in different contexts (pits, on the floor of room or patios, under the floor of rooms). The ceramic shapes are urns and face-neck jars.

62 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes bowls, cups, and plates. Cook and Glowacki (2003: 187) suggested that these spaces were used for “supra-household” feasting activities as part of a Huari strategy of statecraft. They found similar ceramic patterns in other Wari sites in the Ayacucho valley, such as Jargampata and Azangaro (Cook and Glowacki 2003).

Isbell (2000: 25) has suggested that the patio-groups represent administrative areas and the associated room compounds to the north and south of PG2 are the dwellings of the ruler’s family (contemporaneous to PG2). Two D-shaped structures –

EA-33 and EA-72– located to the south were associated with PG2 (Isbell 2007) and were interpreted as ceremonial spaces. EA-33 and EA-72 appear to have not overlapped in time. D-shaped structure EA-33 was at one point filled with trash and late architecture was built on top (Isbell 2007). D-shaped structure EA-72 contained ten burned human heads of possible foreign origin (Tung and Knudson 2008), some camelid remains, and smashed oversized ceramic urns (Ochatoma and Cabrera 2000).

Many of the large ceramic fragments were finely decorated, including those of

Conchopata style depicting “the staffed god”, and others representing elaborately dressed individuals kneeling on a reef boat and holding an arrow and spears

(Ochatoma and Cabrera 2000: Fig. 9, 10a, 10b, 10c). The presence of so many elaborately painted oversize pot fragments on the floor of this D-shaped structure has been interpreted as part of a ritual closure of the building (Isbell 2007).

Blacker and Cook (2006) analyzed the architectural spatial pattern and argued for the existence of several “lineage houses” in the core of Conchopata. The characteristics of this pattern are the presence of the following (Blacker and Cook

2006): (1) Patio. Large multi-use rooms often centralized within the compound. (2)

63 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Dormitory. Medium sized room, defined by a large bench, and usually connected to the patio. (3) Kitchen and Storage. Small rooms with evidence of cooking hearths and/or storage space, usually removed from the central patio. (4) House Shrine.

Elaborate mortuary construction incorporating one or more rooms, often located near the end of the house. (5) Votive Room. Larger room attached to the House Shrine and characterized by evidence of ritual activity and/or pottery smashes.

Blacker and Cook (2006) then defined four room clusters with the preceding characteristics (Figure 3.2). Animal remains from two of these lineage house compounds (from now on LH1 and LH2) are analyzed in this dissertation.

LH1 is composed of EA-59, EA-60, EA-63 (Kitchen), EA-64 (variety of functions), EA-77 (Patio), EA-89, EA-91 (Deposito), EA-93 (Dormitory), and EA-105

(House Shrine). Faunal remains from EA-59, EA-60, EA-63, EA-64, and EA-105 were analyzed in this study.10

10 EA-89 and EA-91 contained only a few scattered animal bones; they were not included in this study as they would only inflate the MNI count (see Chapter 5: “Methodology”).

64 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Figure 3-2. Conchopata, Lineage House compounds as interpreted by Blacker and Cook (2006). Image courtesy of J.C. Blacker.

The house shrine in EA-105 included a tomb which was a large bedrock cavity containing fourteen individuals and their associated artifacts (decorated ceramic jars,

Spondylus sp, copper tupus, obsidian, and ceramic figurines). The tomb contained the remains of human fetuses, infants, children, and adults and was likely the resting place for a family group (Tung and Cook 2006). The bodies appear to have been added to the tomb over time, not in a single burial event (Tung and Cook 2006: 79). The quality of both the tomb’s construction and the grave goods suggested to Tung and Cook

(2006) that the family buried in it had elite status. At the same time, the skeletal health data (evidence of osteoarthritis) indicated people engaged in strenuous work. Tung

65 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes and Cook proposed that these people held high social status but “they were not necessarily part of a leisure class” (Tung and Cook 2006: 81).

An elaborate bench, which may have had the shape of a reclining feline, was excavated on the south side of EA-64. Interestingly, human remains of at least nine individuals were found in a pit below this construction (Blacker and Cook 2006, Tung

2003). This room also had a very high quantity of animal bones, most of which were recovered from a pit intruding in the floor.

A second lineage house, LH2, is located southwest from LH1 (see map) and consists of EA-31 (House Shrine), EA-36 (Votive Room), EA-38 (House Shrine), EA-

44 (House Shrine), EA-90 (Dormitory), EA-131 (Patio), EA-132 (Storage Area), and

EA-134 (Kitchen). Within this building complex, faunal remains recovered in EA-31,

EA-36 and EA-44 were included in this study. Samples from EA-31 (plant material),

EA-36 (charcoal), and EA-38B (plant material) yielded dates of A.D. 779-1018, A.D.

661-937, A.D. 886-1159, respectively (Beta-133548, Beta-133549, Beta-133547, 2 sigma calibrated date range). The dates from EA-31 and EA-38B were associated with the preparation of burials (Ketteman 2001: Tables 4, 5, 6).

In EA-31 the excavators found a small piece of plaster that had a brown background and a feline motif, and on this basis Milliken (2006:129) hypothesized that the walls may have been decorated with images of felines. The room also contained a bench with red pigment on its surface. A tomb underneath the bench contained ten individuals, fourteen ceramic vessels, and seventeen other funerary objects (Tung and Cook 2006:83). The human burials included three infants, one child, one juvenile female, one young adult male, and four unsexed adults. The

66 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes individuals did not show evidence of malnutrition and infectious disease but several of them had evidence of healed bone fractures and osteoarthritis (Tung 2001, Tung and

Cook 2006). The juvenile female was buried with goods similar to those found in tomb EA-105: a Wari blackware face-neck vessel, Huamanga bowls, three copper tupus, and Spondylus shells. Two infants were associated with turquoise, Spondylus shell, and a Huamanga bowl. According to Tung and Cook (2006:83), comparative data from EA-105 and EA-31 suggest that the tombs were contemporaneous, elite burial treatment was standardized (particularly among women), and individuals experienced similar health patterns during life (exposure to physical activity and possible violence).

The house shrine in EA-38 had a subdivision of spaces inside one large room block (Blacker and Cook 2006) (Figure 3.3). The largest of the cist tombs had a semicircular groove running along the east wall of the cist that corresponds to a large notched capstone. Isbell suggested that the persons buried in EA-38 were the rulers of

Conchopata and their close family members (Isbell 2004: 27). He indicated that this is one example of a room where tombs occupy so much space in it that probably no other activity except burial and burial ritual could have taken place (Isbell 2004: 13). The tombs had been looted but the bone remains were found in EA-44 and included three adult males (Tung 2003).

67 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Figure 3-3. Conchopata, Lineage House 2. Photo courtesy of W. Isbell

A primary interment of two semi-flexed, articulated camelid skeletons was found in EA-44A, the antechamber of EA-38 . The camelids had been deposited below the floor along with a complete guinea pig. One grinding stone and the remains of an architectural model were found in the same room (Isbell 2000).

In the votive room of EA-36 a large number of faunal remains were discovered associated with the ceramic fragments of oversized vessels. One ceramic smash was located in front of the doorway into the room. Several rocks scattered around the smash suggested the pots were broken and left in situ. Some of the ceramic fragments were part of face-neck jars of Huamanga style (Isbell 2000). Other artifacts associated with the ceramics included pieces of Spondylus, a small figurine, grinding stones, and potter’s tools (Milliken 2006). Most of the animal bones were recovered from three

68 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes concentrations: one was on the floor and two were intrusions breaking into the floor along the north wall of EA-36.

Blacker’s analysis of wall bonding in both house compounds (HL1 and HL2) supported a pattern of phased construction (Blacker 2001). Rooms were regularly subdivided and/or remodeled to better fit the requirements of the house inhabitants. In the “house shrines” additions were created by partitioning spaces and by doubling wall thicknesses suggesting a “permanence and commitment to place and multigenerational continuity” (Blacker and Cook 2006:8).

Some of the rooms (EA) seem to have served multiple functions and the labels used to describe them (i.e. “dormitory”) may obscure the wide array of activities carried out in the same space. For example, in the patio of HL1 (EA-77) evidence of a tomb of stone construction was uncovered in the NE corner.

Because the excavations at Conchopata produced an exorbitant amount of ceramics (much of it highly decorated) some have claimed that it was a potters’ town that emphasized the manufacture of ritual vessels (Lumbreras 1974a; Ochatoma

Paravicino 2007; Pozzi-Escot 1991). Given the variety of mortuary architecture and the implied status differentiation, however, Isbell does not share the idea that

Conchopata was a town occupied by craft workers of moderate social status (Isbell

2004:6). He argues that Conchopata was a palace in which ceramics were produced for the elite and where big vessels were ritually destroyed after the death of the rulers

(Isbell 2001, 2004). More specifically, Isbell argued that at Conchopata, “wives and concubines labored in crafts and services to create social events of aggrandizement for lords sponsoring competitive and status-building feasts, parties, and drinking bouts”

69 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

(Isbell 2007:73). However, Cook (2009), finding insufficient evidence either for the palace interpretation and for the ritual destruction of ceramics, argues that pottery was made both in domestic and communal/public architectural spaces. She identified production areas in both types of spaces and proposed that the same space was used for different activities throughout the year (Cook 2009:211, Cook and Benco 2001).

To summarize, for the purpose of the present study, the Conchopata faunal sample analyzed here was recovered from sixteen rooms (EA) in four different areas

(two patio-groups and two house compounds). The sample includes both primary (e.g. complete animal burials) and secondary deposits (e.g. pits full of animal remains) associated with Wari material.

3.2.2 Wari in the Province of Cuzco: Cotocotuyoc and Chokepukio

Cotocotuyoc

In 1996 and 1997, Mary Glowacki and Julinho Zapata performed surveys and excavations in the Huaro valley of Cuzco and recognized several Wari sites, which they denominated the Huaro complex. These sites are located 17 km southeast of the site of Pikillacta and adjacent to the modern town of Urcos and Huaro (Glowacki and

Zapata 1998). They conducted exploratory excavations at four of the Huaro sites that contained abundant archaeological material (Kanincunca, Cotocotuyoc, Hatun

Cotuyoc, and Qoripata).11 Recent and extensive excavations have been focused on

Cotocotuyoc which covers an area of approximately 66 ha (Glowacki 2008:2). The

11 A description of the excavation and materials recovered at Kanincunca, Qoripata, and Hatun Cotuyoc can be found in Chapter 2: “Archaeological and Zooarchaeological Background of the Central Andean Region”.

70 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes site was covered by stones which gave the Quechua name to the site: Cotocotuyoc means “place were there are many piles of stones” (Glowacki 2005).

The ceramic analysis by Mary Glowacki indicated that the site was occupied primarily during the Middle Horizon (A.D. 600 – 900 ), but there is also a Late

Intermediate Period (A.D. 900–1438) occupation at the site (Glowacki 2002).

Excavations in 2005, 2006, and 2008-2009 revealed an elite cemetery in the southeast area of Cotocotuyoc corresponding to the early Wari occupation (i.e., early Middle

Horizon according to the recovered ceramic styles12) (Glowacki 2005a, 2008). Many tombs were located (some of them looted) and human skeletal remains were found associate with ceramic artifacts, copper tupus (clothing fasteners) and tweezers, small

Spondylus shell artifacts, and obsidian dart points and knives. The ceramic found include Black decorated cups and Chakipamapa and Okros style bowls, cups and face- neck jars (Glowacki 2008).

This early Wari cemetery yielded a large amount of animal remains that were part of a very thick layer of camelid bones placed on top of the human burials

(Glowacki 2008). This area showed the highest density of bones of any area in the site.

The sample included in this study derives from a 2 m x 2 m, 30 cm deep excavation unit. The animal bones were arranged in two discrete concentrations (Figure 3.4) in which only a few body parts, mainly wrist (carpals) and ankle (tarsals) bones were still articulated. A fine, large obsidian knife 11 cm in length was the only artifact directly associated with these camelid bones (Glowacki 2008:14). The camelid remains lay

12 The ceramics associated with the interments are of the Epoch 1 (mostly 1a) style. No examples of Epoch 2 Viñaque pottery have been recovered from the cemetery (Glowacki, Personal Communication, 2010).

71 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes immediately on top of the human interment and beneath or at the same level as the early Wari wall foundations (Glowacki, personal communication 2010).

Figure 3-4. Wari cemetery area at Cotocotuyoc (Cuzco, Peru). Drawing courtesy of Glowacki. The arrows point to the faunal assemblages analyzed for this study.

Excavations showed that the later Late Intermediate Period (LIP) people also occupied the site (Glowacki 2005). A LIP ossuary, a mortuary area with massive concentration of human bones, and other LIP structures were documented north of the

Wari cemetery; some of the structures were built on top of older Wari wall remnants

(Glowacki 2008:10).

It is possible, but not probable, that the faunal sample represents the remains of squatters’ leftovers from people camping on the site after the cemetery was

72 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes abandoned. However, as mentioned above, the animal bones were found directly on top of the human burials and below or at the same stratigraphic level as the Wari wall foundations. Also, a Wari floor found north of the faunal cache was laid above the level of the Wari camelid offering and below the subsequent LIP wall (Glowacki, personal communication 2010).

Chokepukio

Chokepukio (spelled also Choquepukyo or Choquepugio) is located 30 km south of the city Cuzco and 1 km west from the big Wari site of Pikillacta and at 3138 m.a.s.l.

(10, 295 feet). The site, which covers 1km2, is located at the confluence of two rivers, the Huatanay and the Vilcanota, a location suggesting possible control of the north- south old main road in the Peruvian sierra (Mc Ewan et al 2005). On the east side of the site, there is a warm spring, which probably gave its name: choke means gold in

Aymara and pukio means spring in Quechua (McEwan, et al. 2005:258). Gibaja conducted excavations there for her bachelors thesis in the early 1970s (Gibaja Oviedo

1983). Between 1994 and 2007 McEwan and Gibaja carried out extensive excavations at the site revealing a long occupational sequence and spectacular Inca grave goods.

Very large niched halls and walls dominate the site, which has been divided into three areas. Area A is in the upper elevated zone, where at least twelve big agglutinated enclosures have been located. Down the hill and to the east, Area B includes a group of six big independent enclosures measuring almost 12 m by 32 m, with walls 5 m high by 1.5 m wide. Between these two areas and to the north is Area

73 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

C, containing many small houses, built by the Incas and the Late Intermediate Period

Pinagua people (McEwan et al 2005).

Chokepukio’s architecture shows many similarities to the Wari site of

Pikillacta in terms of construction techniques and general layout. They both have central patios surrounded by rooms and very high walls. However, one important difference is that Chokepukio did not appear to have had multiple story buildings like

Pikillacta and is not built on an orthogonal grid (McEwan et al 2005).

Figure 3-5. Map of Chokepukio (Cuzco, Peru). Modified after McEwan et al (2005).

McEwan and colleagues (2002, 2005) have detected a long stratigraphic sequence of architecture and artifacts, in some parts of the site spanning from the

74 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Early Intermediate Period through the Late Horizon. The earliest deposits in

Chokepukio showed a continuous and stable occupation with little change in the archaeological record until the beginning of the Middle Horizon. At this point, with the new Wari presence in Cuzco, the architecture, ceramics, lithics, and burial patterns changed strikingly (McEwan et al 2002, 2005). The goals of investigations at

Chokepukio include assessing Wari influence on the formation of the Inca state, especially by “seeking continuities in behaviors that could reflect the survival of political institutions, or specific patterns of behaviors that may be related to statecraft and social control” (McEwan et al 2005: 293).

The collection of animal bones from Choquepukio includes around 200,000 specimens of which a small proportion is from the Middle Horizon period (McEwan personal communication, 2008). For this dissertation I analyzed faunal material from two large architectural units: Unit 32-A in Sector A and Unit 6 (Structure B2) in

Sector B (Figure 3.5). Only the contexts clearly associated with material and architecture from the Middle Horizon were analyzed.

Unit 32-A13 is an enclosure measuring 16-18m x 20m. It is located next to the larger unit 32. The remains of a square water container were uncovered within the center of the patio in 32-A. This water container was formed by low walls of 12-18 cm high of stone set in mud mortar. Inside, it had a flagstone and plaster pavement

(McEwan and Gibaja 2003:5). It was located next to bedrock outcrop, possible considered as a huaca14 (McEwan et al 2005:266).

13 Unit 32-A equals to Unit A3 in McEwan et al (2005) publication. 14 In Quechua, huaca is an object that represents something revered.

75 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

During excavation it became clear that multiple building and floor laying episodes occurred after the Middle Horizon (McEwan and Gibaja 2003:5). The canal system appeared to have been used prior to the Late Intermediate Period and likely dates to the Middle Horizon. McEwan argued that Unit 32-A and Unit 32 had a ceremonial function given the presence of an elaborate canal system and pools within these enclosures. A large amount of water was apparently moved through these buildings as part of their ritual function (McEwan and Gibaja 2003, McEwan et al

2005).

The remains of the wall segments suggested that the Late Intermediate Period occupation in 32-A enclosure lay upon a substantial earlier construction dating to the

Middle Horizon and perhaps earlier (McEwan and Gibaja 2003:5). In the center of

Unit 32-A, just to the north of the water container feature, an L-shaped wall that predates the construction of the unit 32-A enclosure was exposed. Inside this small space there was an ashy deposit containing only Middle Horizon Qotakalli and Wari sherds with no mixing by Late Intermediate Period ceramic styles and no Early

Intermediate Period stratum underneath (McEwan, personal communication 2010).

Faunal material from this context is included in this study (quad W106-108 S38-40)

(Figure 3.6).

76 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Figure 3-6. Chokepukio, Unit 32-A. The Middle Horizon context is shown in brown. Image courtesy of G. McEwan.

Area B is located down the hill and 100 m East of Area A. Unit 6 is a sector with several structures (Figure 3.7). Although some parts of these structures were destroyed by later construction by the Incas, the west side of the structure B-2 (two corner rooms and a platform room) was still intact. This space includes four niches and below them what appears to have been cist tombs. Human remains were found in front of them as if they had been removed from the wall niches. Radiocarbon dates based on the skeletal remains were contemporary to those based on materials taken from the wall (McEwan 2005:269). This enclosure contained canals in its interior, two of them intersected close to the center of the structure. There was no evidence of a well, but it could have been destroyed by the later Inca occupation. The ceramic fragments found in structure 6 include the local Late Intermediate Period polychrome styles of Lucre and K’illke as well as Inca (McEwan 2005:273). The excavators

77 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes encountered a consistent stratigraphy throughout B-2 that included a Middle Horizon component. A floor separated each stratigraphic level so there was very little mixing between levels (Figure 3.8) (McEwan, personal communication 2010). Faunal material recovered from the Middle Horizon level was analyzed for this dissertation.

According to McEwan and colleagues (2005), Area B also contained two elaborate huacas, which appeared to have been deliberately buried by the Incas when they occupied the site. Huaca 1 was located south of unit 6 in a small enclosure containing a platform supporting a 2 m stone structure similar to a circular funerary tower, or chullpa. Within this structure was a large stone that McEwan and colleagues interpreted as a huaca (McEwan et al 2002, 2005). Wari offerings were found near its base and consisted of a sheet-gold llama figurine, turquoise objects, and Spondylus shells (McEwan et al 2002:297). During the Late Intermediate Period, the shrine was apparently buried together with smaller stone huacas, the remains of eight llamas, and five complete ceramic vessels of Lucre and K’illke style (McEwan et al 2002: 297).

78 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Figure 3-7. Map of Chokepukio Unit 6 showing the location (in blue) of quads with faunal material analyzed for this study.Image courtesy of G.McEwan.

Huaca 2 is located southeast of unit 10 and was also built in a circular shape, with an open entrance to the south and a small window to the north. The structure is on top of a stone platform. Small green and blue stones were recovered from the floor.

Two ceramic vessels of K’illke style were found above the small stones. At the top of the structure the excavators found three Inca stone figurines in the shape of alpacas, conopas or canopas in Quechua (McEwan et al 2005: 273).

Both Huaca 1 and 2 were completely buried in midden trash that contained large quantities of Lucre and K’illke polychrome ceramic. The excavators recovered complete and broken vessels as well as large cup fragments with a standard fracture pattern (distant from the natural stress points of the vessels) suggesting to McEwan and colleagues the possibility they were ritually broken over the huacas (McEwan et al 2005: 273).

79 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Figure 3-8. Chokeukio,Unit 6 profile(LH=Late Horizon, LIP=Late Intermediate Period, MH=Middle Horizon, and EIP=Early Intermediate Period). Image courtesy of G. McEwan.

Chokepukio has sixty-nine radiocarbon dates ranging from the Early

Intermediate Period to the Late Horizon (McEwan et al 2002:292, 2005:Table 2).

Chokepukio’s most important function appears to relate to its use as a principal regional center during the Late Intermediate Period after the Wari Empire collapsed.

While it is possible that other sites of this size existed but were demolished by the

Incas (McEwan et al 2005), Chokepukio has the only LIP monumental architecture that survived in the Cuzco valley. McEwan and colleagues believed that the fact that

Chokepukio was not demolished during the Late Horizon and was used for certain ritual activities, meant that the Incas considered it to be sacred, a place accorded high

80 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes levels of prestige (McEwan et al 2005: 274). The sacred character of the site may have related to its particular location: close to the confluence of two rivers, on top of a warm-water spring, and overlooking a large lake. All these characteristics could have led to it being considered sacred, both in Inca and pre-Inca times, as a kind of origin huaca or pacarina.15 Furthermore, the location of Chokepukio may have had strategic value since it is on the top of a hill capable of monitoring traffic on the north-south sierra road of the South Andes (McEwan et al 2005: 276).

The artifacts found in the large structures in Areas A and B included fragments of gold, silver, bronze, Spondylus shell, and bone ornaments, all materials consistent with the presence of high status groups. The ceramics included a high proportion of polychrome vessels such as bottles, plates, cups and pots. McEwan suggested this evidence could be an indication that feasts were held in the large structures (McEwan et al 2005: 277). Part of the research goals of this investigation is to use animal remains to shed light on hypotheses concerning feasting during the Middle Horizon times.

Finally, because of the presence of niches, human skeletal remains, and canals

McEwan suggested that the structures of Area A and B were possibly used for ancestor and water veneration (McEwan et al 2005: 277). Units 32, 37, 38, and 39 were larger and more elaborate that the other units in Area A and all those found in

Area B. Such units were the only structures that appear to have had their wall heights increased over time, making them look taller and more monumental (McEwan et al

2005).

15 In Quechua, pacarina means “place of dawning”, it refers to a holy place of origin, usually a spring or a cave.

81 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Because it is a multi-component site, Chokepukio site formation processes are extremely complex. The site has a long, stable Early Intermediate Period occupation.

Middle Horizon people, under the influence of the Wari Empire, built some large enclosures that were later demolished. The Late Intermediate Period was the time of major occupation, construction, and remodeling of the site. Finally, the Incas used

Chokepukio mainly to deposit offerings and human sacrifices (McEwan, et al. 2002).

The Chokepukio landscape was heavily transformed through time. The faunal assemblages from Chokepukio selected for this study (Unit 32-A, level 3 and Unit 6, level 3), however, are from levels that are associated only with Middle Horizon style ceramics and architecture (McEwan, personal communication 2010).

3.3 Summary of Fauna Sample Contexts

The Middle Horizon architecture of the three sites is rather different (as outlined above) and the faunal samples come from a diversity of contexts (Table 3.1). In

Conchopata, faunal samples were recovered in association with patio groups (Patio

Groups 1 and 2) and residential areas (Lineage Houses 1 and 2) in a variety of deposits, including pits breaking in prepared floors and concentrations on top of floors. In Cotocotuyoc, faunal samples were recovered in proximity to human burials and they were found as a dense layer of bones. Finally, in Chokepukio, where the

Later Intermediate Period and Inca occupations modified the site in substantial ways, faunal samples were associated with what appears a residential structure in one case and to a Middle Horizon ceramic level in another one.

82 Chapter 3 Site Contexts and Site Formation Processes

Table 3.1. Provenience of zooarchaeological samples under study. Region Site Provenience Unit Type of deposit accumulation on top of human Cuzco Cotocotuyoc Cemetery S20 W20 burials W106-108 S38- Cuzco Chokepukio Building 32-A 40 ashly fill E6-S2, W0-S2, Building 6 E2-S2 floor fill Ayacucho Conchopata Patio Group 1 EA-1A floor fill EA-1B floor fill EA-23E accumulations on the floor EA-23W pit intruding floors and bedrock EA-24 fill on top of bedrock EA-83 concentration on top of floor EA-112 concentrations on floor EA-172 accumulation on floor Lineage House 1 EA-60 intrusion on the floor EA-63 accumulation on the floor EA-64 intrusion on the floor EA-105 accumulation on floor Lineage House three concentrations on the 2 EA-36 floor (two breaking the floor) EA-44A accumulation under the floor Patio Group 2 EA-61 accumulation on floor EA-98 floor fill

83 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

CHAPTER 4 ZOOARCHAEOLOGY AND SOCIOPOLITICS: ISSUES ON FOODWAYS AND FEASTING

This chapter discusses foodways, feasting, and rituals involving animals: how they have been addressed archaeologically across the world, their significance, and what we have learned from studies of these topics in Andean Middle Horizon sites. I close the chapter with an assessment of the zooarchaeological markers of feasting and animal ritual, and their applications in Andean archaeology.

4.1 Foodways and Feasting Studies in Archaeology

Food practices and their implications in the social and political spheres have long been a topic of study in sociology (Beardsworth and Keil 1996; Wood 1995), anthropology

(Appadurai 1981; Douglas 1984; Levy-Strauss 1966), and more recently in archaeology (Dietler and Hayden 2001; Gumerman 1997; Parker Pearson 2003).

Conspicuous consumption of goods, such as large quantities of certain food types or exotic/luxurious ingredients, can signal the presence of wealth and power.

Furthermore, food plays an active role in social, political, and religious life both because it is physically necessary and because it is culturally transformed and structured. Specifically, food can provide the medium through which various political agendas are played out (Dietler 2001), and thus it is an exceptional way of accessing information about sociopolitical relations.

84 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

Recent foodways studies in the Americas include issues related to gender

(Bray 2003a; Gero 1992; White 2005), political economy (Kelly 2001; Smith, et al.

2003), social inequality (Costin and Earle 1989; Emery 2003), and identity (Gifford-

Gonzalez and Sunseri 2007; Scott 2007). The following examples show how these issues were interpreted using archaeological evidence, in some cases using data other than faunal remains. Many of the topics are interrelated in these studies.

Food and Gender. Through isotopic analysis of human bones from seven sites from the Pre-Classic period (1250 B.C.-250 A.D.) to the Historic period (1520-1670

A.D.) in Belize, White (2005) assesses whether food consumption was affected by gender, and whether social status and political importance of the site affected the gendering of food consumption. She finds that elite women had a different diet than the elite men, while non-elite women appeared to have consumed the same foods as non-elite male. Male elite ate more meat, maize, and marine resources, all these being more “preferred” foods, according to historic chronicles, as they were used in rituals

(White 2005:375, emphasis in the original). Based on this diet differentiation, she argues that elite women may not have participated in ritual food consumption in the same way or to the same degree elite males did. While the production of Maya ceremonies probably involved both elite males and women, female access to the food may have been more limited.

Food and Political Economy. At the mound site of Cahokia (A.D. 1050- 1350),

Kelly (2001) analyzes faunal remains to discuss the role played by the higher-ranked segment of Cahokia’s population in food provisioning and possible tributary systems with its hinterland. The faunal assemblage from the Sub-Mound 51 pit differed from

85 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics other Cahokia assemblages, which are interpreted as household refuse. The Sub-

Mound 51 pit shows a low taxonomic diversity, a dominance of higher-utility portions of deer, and little butchering refuse. Further, the bones are not thoroughly broken and they are present in great quantities in a single deposit that was probably created in a short period of time. These faunal signatures are interpreted as the result of feast preparation, consumption, and disposal. Adding other lines of evidence (e.g. the presence of sumptuary items and domestic cooking vessels), Kelly argues that

Cahokian feasts were large-scale public events, hosted by the chiefs, with both commoners and high-ranked people in attendance. Public feasts likely provided coordination between the center and the outlying communities and among the ranked segments of the population. The labor needed for mound building in Cahokia could have been mobilized through feasts. Kelly argues that feasting was probably a mechanism of tribute and social integration. She further contends that Cahokia’s relationship with its hinterland fell somewhere between the extremes of autonomy and direct domination.

Food and Social Inequality. At the Petexbatun region of Guatemala, Emery

(2003) examines zooarchaeological remains from a broad array of households of different social ranks to analyze diachronic and synchronic use of animals. She compares the Petexbatun samples with those form elite contexts in Aguateca to examine status-differentiated access to animals at Classic period Maya households.

She questions the simple dichotomy of elite vs. non-elite social classes on the basis of the complexity in the distribution of faunal remains among hierarchically ranked residences in the Petexbatun region. She finds that the elite houses at Aguateca display

86 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics variation in resource access by social rank but not by occupational differentiation among high status families. She concludes that specific details of status-differentiated access to animal resources must be correlated with local political changes to provide more robust explanatory models. Emery argues that in the Petexbatun region, differential access to particular species may have been used to enhance status during the earliest periods of political dominance in the region. The members of a middle- class society may have expressed status through the acquisition of prestige goods when these came available due to the loss of control by the highest class.

Food and Identity. The analysis conducted by Gifford-Gonzalez and Sunseri

(2007) at Paa-ko site in early colonial New Mexico revealed that the residents had a set of new economic strategies, such as metallurgy, new uses of pre-existing space, and evidence of introduced domestic animals, operating within a native Puebloan framework of animal use. The indigenous social and cultural context is reflected by continuities in wild species choice, in stone tool use to process animals, and in the consumption and disposal of horses the same way as done with other animal food.

This persistence of indigenous practices leads the authors to suggest that the

Spaniards’ high extraction of products and labor was neither intense nor constant enough to keep the Native Americans from controlling their own daily practices.

Animal Sacrifices and Offerings. Food and animals are frequently used as offerings, associated with human burials, dedicatory sacrifices for building structures, such as houses, platforms, pyramids or other rites. Animal sacrifices associated with human burials can involve the sacrificial offering of unconsumed whole or partial animals or remains of animals that were eaten and then deposited as offerings

87 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

(deFrance 2009). In these instances, people conducting a sacrifice or an offering hope that the gift will be appreciated by the intended supernatural entity – gods, earth mother, dead ancestor – which is usually expected to reciprocate in an appropriate way (Sillar 2004: 153). A sacrifice or an offering implies that an object or a living being (animal, human, plant) with still active use-life is disposed of or buried in some ritual or traditional performance. The people conducting the offering “sacrifice” the use-life of the object or living being by giving it to the supernatural entity. For example, at the base of a raised platform at Chiripa (900-600B.C. Bolivia), a pit was excavated containing an adult woman with a fetus and a pregnant camelid, in matrix filled with ash and burnt artifacts. The llama was buried whole, without evidence of butchering or consumption (Hastorf 2003). This was interpreted as a dedicatory offering for the building of a public structure.

The studies cited here that food is a good marker of status, identity, and class.

They also suggest that the investigation of food production, consumption, and disposal can greatly expand our understanding of sociopolitical and economic relations in the past.

A few of the above-mentioned studies exemplify a particular form of food practice that has been analyzed by archaeologists: feasting (see also Bray 2003b;

Dietler 1996; Klarich 2010; Wiessner and Schiefenhovel 1996). Many archaeologist have implicated feasting in their explorations of social differentiation and maintenance of unequal relations. Hayden (1995) argues for competitive feasting as major engine for the emergence of non-egalitarian societies from egalitarian hunter-gatherers. In his model, ambitious individuals organize food feasts and benefit by establishing a wide

88 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics network of contractual debt relationships, which encourage people to produce and surrender surplus that the organizers can control. These ambitious individuals or aggrandizers exert more control over labor and seek profit to increase their wealth.

The participants obtain prestige and influence in the community through their close association with the aggrandizers (Hayden 1995:25).

However, Dietler and Herbich (2001:240) remind us that, the use of feasts to mobilize collective labor has been a key economic practice in agrarian societies around the world. Before the spread of the monetary economy and creation of a wage labor market, this was the main means of organizing large-scale work projects. They also assert that, although feasts have been a common means of mobilizing labor, they did not operate in the same fashion everywhere and throughout all time.

Archaeologists must understand how feasts functioned in each case they claim it was a mechanism for executing large-scale work projects executed.

Hayden’s definition of feasting is: “any sharing between two or more people of special food (i.e. foods not generally served at daily meals) in a meal for a special purpose or occasion” (Hayden 2001: 28). It is then a communal consumption that differs in recognizable fashion from a quotidian meal. A feast is a ritualized meal, a meal that is not consumed only for sustenance (Clarke 2001:145). A feast is a form of ritual activity that involves the communal consumption of food and drink (Dietler

2001:65). This type of ritual, which does not need to be sacred, plays important social, economic, and political roles in most societies. Quotidian meals can also be ritualized, structured, events; but Dietler (2001:70) argues that they differ from feasts in that they are less consciously public performances. I would add that another difference is in

89 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics their frequency. The feast frequency, while variable, is less that everyday. A public performative meal happening absolutely everyday is not a feast as it is not marking any special occasion.

A key attribute of feasts is that they involve commensal hospitality centering on food distribution and consumption. Feasting is a practice that serves to establish and reproduce social relations (Dietler 2001:74). Through commensal hospitality, relations of reciprocal obligation, between the host and guests, create and define social differences. Guests can feel themselves in an inferior relation and obliged to the feast host. Those individuals feeling superior after offering a feast can manipulate this inequality to obtain political or symbolic power, among other gains. Feast is then a form of gift prestation (Mauss 1967), where reciprocal obligations are created. As

Dietler (2001:75) points out, feasts constitute a very subtle performative practice to establish obligations because they involve the very basic act of sharing food.

In order to understand the political dimensions of feasting, Dietler (2001) outlines three modes of commensal politics: empowering feasts, patron-role feasts, and diacritical feasts. Empowering feasts (also called entrepreneurial feasts in Dietler

1996) serve to create social and economic power. Through displays of hospitality and subsequent relations of reciprocal obligations, feast hosts acquire symbolic capital, an ability to influence group decisions. Particularly in cases where institutionalized political roles exist but without fixed, hereditary rules, hosting feasts is a way by which individuals can rise and hold political statuses (Dietler 2001:78). Empowering feasts can also be used also to gain economic advantage, as in the case of work feasts:

“an event in which a group of people is called together to work on a specific project

90 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics for a day and the participants are then treated to food and/or drink, after which the host owns the proceeds of the day’s labor” (Dietler 2001:79-80).

In the Andes, ethnographic work by B. J. Isbell (1978) in a small village in

Ayacucho shows how an influential member of the community asked his fellow villagers to help him build a house for his adoptive son. This practice is called minka in Quechua, defined as a call of aid by an individual, usually in the form of labor. The sponsor must provide three meals for all participants, as well as coca leaves, trago

(alcoholic drinks), and cigarettes. B. J. Isbell (1978:168) argues that this is the principal mechanism to acquire status and demonstrates wealth in the community.

Empowering feasts take place at various scales and contexts, but hosting large- scale feasts requires considerable labor and supplies (Dietler 2001: 80). The host uses personal networks of social obligations to mobilize additional food and labor. These networks of support are established over time through various events of prestige competition. A large lavish feast serves as an advertisement of the scale of the support base that the host has been able to build over time, and at the same time it produces further symbolic capital (Dietler 2001:81).

The other two major modes of commensal politics are patron-role feasts and diacritical feasts, and both serve to maintain existing inequalities in power relations. In patron-role feasts (Dietler 2001:82), there is no expectation of equal reciprocation. The guests acknowledge their role as subordinate, while the host’s generosity is seen as a duty. Asymmetrical commensal relations between host and guests serve to institutionalize authority (Dietler 2001:83). Rulers are expected to be generous, noblesse oblige, and feasts can be the contexts of this generous hospitality. For

91 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics example, in prehispanic times, April (Inca Raymi Quilla) was the month when the Inca ruler was celebrated. The Inca ruler gave a lavish party with food and music, and he hosted rich and poor guests: “Y el dicho Inga tenia una muy grande fiesta; convidaba a los grandes senores y principales, y a los demas mandones y a los indios pobres, y comía y cantaba y danzaba en la plaza publica…” (Guaman Poma de Ayala 1992

(1615):161). Through the form of commensal politics, the Inca ruler displayed wealth and power to legitimize status difference and his right to rule.

The last mode of commensal politics that Dietler (2001:85) cites is the diacritical feast, which involves the use of differentiated cuisine and styles of consumption to naturalize and reify status differences. The difference between this and the patron-role feasts are that, in diacritical feasts, style matters more than quantity, and that the emphasis shifts from asymmetrical relations to a statement of exclusive and unequal commensal circles. It is the use of exclusive diacritical food that symbolically serves to demarcate high status. Diacritical culinary practices include: rare, expensive, and exotic ingredients; complex preparation or consumption using highly decorated vessels, etc. These feasts recreate asymmetrical relations of power through the manipulation of food consumption to emphasize difference and separation of a certain part of the society (Dietler 2001:88). For example, Guaman Poma (1992

[1615]) mentions that the Inca ruler ate selected maize and potatoes, white llamas, and cuys, fruit, ducks, chicha, and “many other things that the Indians could not touch under death penalty” (Guaman Poma 1992 [1615]:191, my translation16). When the

16 “Cómo el Inga se regalaba muchos regalos. Comía escogido maiz, capya utcosara, y papas mauay chaucha, y carnero llamado cuyro blanco, y comía chiche, conejo blanco, y mucha fruta, y patos, y chicha muy suave que no maduraba un mes, que le llaman yamor acá; y comía otras cosas que no tocaban los indios so pena de la muerte” Guaman Poma (1992 [1615]: 191)

92 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics ruler ate certain foods that only he could eat, he was making a statement of exclusiveness and status distinction.

It is part of my goal to assess whether my Wari data from Ayacucho and Cuzco fits any of Dietler’s feast classifications and the respective motivations and behaviors outlined above. The following section is a review of archaeological approaches to feasting in the central Andes and a discussion of what scholars have argued feasting explains in the context of prehispanic political systems.

4.1.2 Feasting in the Prehispanic Andes

From ethnohistoric and ethnographic sources we know that feasting to mobilize labor was a key component in the formation and maintenance of the Inca state (AD 1476-

1532), as well as in present day Andean indigenous communities (Bolin 1998; Isbell

1978; Kaulicke 2005; Morris 1986; Murra 1980). In the case of the Inca, most studies stress that food and drink was provided by the state to the local communities for their labor services (Molina 1989 [1573]; Morris 1982; Murra 2002). Hospitality and asymmetrical reciprocity in the form of feasts were central components of Inca imperial strategies of legitimization and control in which power relations were maintained and negotiated (Bray 2003b; Costin and Earle 1989; D'Altroy and Earle

1985). This type of feast, highlighted in the ethnohistorical sources, fits into what

Dietler (2001) defined as role-patron feasts (see above).

The following studies use archaeological evidence discuss the presence of feasting in the central Andes. As my main interest is the relation of feasting and

93 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics sociopolitics during Wari times, I subdivided such studies into dealing with after the

Middle Horizon, before the Middle Horizon, and during the Middle Horizon. In the latter subsection, I dedicate more discussion on how feasting functioned in the Wari

Empire.

Feasting after the Middle Horizon.

Bray (2003a) examines the Inca ceramic assemblage in terms of its functional and culinary significance and uses ethnographic evidence to reconstruct an imperial “haute cuisine”. She argues that the Inca elaborated a distinctive suite of ceramic cooking, service, and storage vessels to create visible differences between social classes. She contends this strategy is related to the way the Inca state used gender to model social hierarchy. When the Inca state offered food and drink to the conquered subjects in return for tributary labor during feasts, chosen women, acclakuna, served as the state’s hosts. Bray argues that in the construction of state reciprocity, authority was communicated through these women’s complementarity to the other dimension of the

Inka imperialism: the masculine domain of warfare and conquest. Therefore, by analyzing Inca state pottery as culinary equipment, she discusses how gender systems were involved in political strategies of empire consolidation such as state-sponsored feasts.

Using paleoethnobotanical and isotopic data from the prehispanic Sausa group of the Mantaro valley in Junín, Peru, Hastorf (1996) argues for an increased circumscription of female activities during the Inca times. Isotopic data show that during pre-Inca times, Sausa men and women plant food consumption, including

94 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics maize, was similar. However, during Inca times, Sausa men consumed more maize than women. Assuming that female chores were located mainly indoors, while male labor was located outdoors, this pattern of maize distribution suggests increase intensification of female processing activities. Hastorf argues that these findings can be interpreted as representing more female labor to support male socio-political activities in state work parties.

Goldstein and Shimada (2010) use a paleoethnobotanical approach to interpret the macrobotanical remains recovered from metal and ceramic production contexts in relation to food production areas at Huaca Sialupe in the North Coast of Peru during the Middle Sicán period (A.D. 950-1050). At this site, they distinguish three different sets of fire-use features: ceramic kilns, metalworking furnaces, and hearths. Based on size and shape they classified hearths at the site into two different forms: individual hearths and aggregated hearths. The location and morphology of the aggregated hearths lead them to believe that they relate to suprahousehold food production. Some of these hearths are located in the corner of rooms and their complex formation process included the aggregation of cooking fires ten to thirty cm in diameter.

Goldstein and Shimada argue that chicha was cooked in these hearths. Their evidence for maize beer production in these hearths includes: associated maize remains, cotton bags, large porrones (large storage vessels), gourd-bowl remains, and ceramic bowls.

In these same rooms, they found evidence of ceramic workshop. It appears that both beer brewing and ceramic firing occurred at the same spaces. They consider the residents at Sialupe to be people involved in craft production and their support network. Goldstein and Shimada interpret the suprahousehold consumption of chicha,

95 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics and possibly roasted meat, at part of a domestic process of craft production that could have happened on a daily basis.

This case study emphasizes that suprahousehold consumption is not always feasting. I agree; as discussed at the beginning of this chapter, feasts are a specific social practice that involves communal food consumption different from everyday meals, one that involves public performance (Dietler 2001, Hayden 2001).

Feasting before the Middle Horizon.

One of the first studies to analyze the presence and role of feasting in the pre-Inca archaeological record was that carried out by Gero’s (1992) on material from the Early

Intermediate Period (200 B.C. to A.D. 600). At the site of Queyash Alto in Ancash,

Peru, Gero interprets the formal architectural layout with its restricted access as a non- domestic occupation at a “ceremonial” or “administrative” site (Gero 1992:17, emphasis in the original). The site includes a high status household with superimposed floors and highly decorated plates and ollas, among other finely crafted artifacts. In close association with these structures was a deposit of llama remains that included mandibles, ribs, vertebrae, and split long bones. This find was interpreted as a brief dumping episode of large quantities of butchered llama. Also, intruding in bedrock in the lowest house floor was a pair of prepared burials of two females associated with a monkey and possibly several guinea pigs. Materials from the ridge top itself revealed high densities of large vessels and colander sherds, and Gero suggests the presence of production and storage areas in these structures. There was also a small dedicatory pit with a cache of six guinea pigs and a juvenile llama associated with this area.

96 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

Gero (1992:18) argues that the open plaza was used for ritual feasts. This sector included the presence of White-on-Red style bowls probably used as drinking vessels, fragments of undecorated open-necked jars, ceramic spoons, ground stone bifaces and knives. She contends that the restricted access and the formally designed space of the plaza suggest that these feasts were sponsored by a prestigious kin-group to legitimize their special privilege among other kin-groups. She suggests that most likely these feasts were held to repay labor debts to neighboring groups.

For the Formative Chiripa (Bolivian highlands) contexts, Hastorf (2003) discusses the importance of ancestral worship and feasts in the formation of social memory. She uses architectural, burial, and artifactual evidence to support the importance of civic memorials over time (1500 B.C. to 250 B.C.). For example, two of the six burials excavated from Early Chiripa contexts, included one adult female wrapped at the base of the burial pit, with additional bodies and artifacts added later.

This is interpreted as a lineage-ancestral worship focused around women. Hastorf suggests that the early residents at Chiripa held periodic gatherings venerating some of the female dead. The ceramics associated with the burials and the plaster surfaces are predominantly serving vessels – bowls and jars – suggesting they were used in public ritual consumption or feasting. This ceramic suite differs from the mixed assemblage of cooking and serving ware excavated from the middens. The pattern of female burials and serving ceramics associated with enclosures continues through time. These rituals of venerations would have helped transmitting community cohesion from one generation to the next.

97 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

From Moche (A.D. 200 to 800) contexts on the north coast of Peru, Gumerman

(2010) explores evidence for various types of feasting, including work-party feasts and life-cycle feasts. Work-party feasts during Moche time would have mobilize agricultural labor for the host in exchange for food and drink. At the Moche site of

Ciudad de Dios, a rural farming village, Gumerman found maize remains, large grinding stones and urns that he interprets as evidence of chicha preparation. Much of the urn fragments were associated with a large and deep hearth in an elite area of the site. He also found a large amount of camelids bones and lithic tools that suggest to him that the lamas were also part of the feasts. However, no information on camelid skeletal part representation or bone preservation and fracture condition is given.

Gumerman argues that Moche work-party feasts were small-scale and they served to feed agricultural laborers and extra-household administrators and craftsmen

(Gumerman 2010:117). What was the frequency of these feasts? It appears that, as in the case of the work by Goldstein and Shimada (2010) discussed above, the practices at Ciudad de Dios were also daily, suprahousehold consumption events. However, unlike them, Gumerman considers them under the feasting rubric.

I would argue again that frequency is a key factor to decide whether suprahousehold activities involving food can be considered feasts. In my opinion, feasts can be cyclical (once, or even a couple of times a year). However, I do not consider food consumption activities that occur daily to be feasts as the public performance of ingesting food is lost in its quotidian repetition, and it merges with regular, domestic meals.

98 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

At the site of Ñawinpukyo in Ayacucho, Peru, Leoni (2006) found evidence of feasting and ritual activities in a Huarpa (A.D. 1-550/600) architectural group (East

Plaza) consisting of a walled compound, eighty-two m long x forty-five m wide. This compound is located on the highest part of the hill, with an impressive view of the

Rasuwillka snow-capped peak. According to Leone, evidence of Huarpa occupation activities in the East Plaza include a circular ceremonial building, a semi-circular ritual structure, food preparation facilities, and a prepared cache of broken ceramics. He interprets these remains as evidence of communal feasts related to an ancient

Ayacucho mountain cult (Leoni 2006: 286). The circular building comprises three concentric stone circles, and it has one narrow doorway that is perfectly aligned with the Rasuwillka snow-capped peak (Leoni 2006: 288). The inner circles were kept clean and no remains were recovered in excavation, except for the bones of a disarticulated juvenile camelid (Rosenfeld ms.). The space between the intermediate and outer walls had two concentrations of stone tools: one of three grinding manos, and the other one of one slab grinding stone and four manos. Leoni (2006:288) interpreted these finds as evidence of food preparation. The most interesting find was the recovery of twenty-three camelid bone concentrations distributed in the north section of the building17. Leone argues that he detected differences in bone depth and deposition suggests sequential deposition, and it implies that the activities represented in these contexts took place over time. Leoni argues that communal religious feasts related to the mountain cult took place in the Ñawinpukyo’s hilltop compound during the late Early Intermediate Period. These religious feasts would have served to

17 Quantitative and qualitative data on Ñawinpukyo fauna can be found in Chapter 3, section 3.2 “Zooarchaeological Studies in the Central Andes”.

99 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics integrate the local community and affirm its identity (Leoni 2006:298). Arguing from

Andean ethnographic evidence, Leoni suggests that the animal bone concentrations may represent propitiatory rites, as part of fertility and regeneration ceremonies to please and appease the mountain deity.

Based on the evidence excavated at the site of Chinchawas in Ancash, Peru,

Lau (2002) argues that, by A.D. 500, public ceremonies including ancestor veneration and feasting were key components of the site’s political life. In his view, local leaders employed ancestor veneration ceremonies to legitimize unequal access to goods and labor (Lau 2002:280). The site of Chinchawas is 4 ha in size and it has two sectors:

Sector 1 consists of a series of enclosures and probably functioned for residential and public activities, while Sector 2 consists of small mortuary constructions and served as the primary cemetery (Lau 2002:284). Enclosure 2 in Sector 1 is a high-status architectural complex and includes agglutinated rooms and patios, as well as a circular structure. In comparison to adjacent areas, Enclosure 2 contained little refuse. The pottery of the lowest levels is local Recuay style and overall, bowls represented over ninety-two percent of the decorated diagnostics, suggesting most ceramics were serving pottery. Several hearths and ashy deposits, ollas, and burnt bones were excavated in zones adjoining Enclosure 2 suggesting repeated cooking activities took place here. Part of a dense refuse deposit or midden was excavated ten meters to the southeast of Enclosure 2. The deposit had excellent preservation and the faunal remains do not show intensive fracturing or burning. Camelids made up most of the assemblage (MNI=64) but deer, small mammals, and guinea pigs were also represented in low frequencies. The ceramics, of local style and highly decorated,

100 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics consist of mainly large bowls and jars. The midden also included bone and metal artifacts, figurines, a miniature vessel, and beads of stone and shell. Lau interprets this midden deposit as “the result of corporate activities involving large-scale consumption” (Lau 2002:291). Surrounded by a complex of rooms, food preparation areas, and large-scale disposal, Lau argues that Enclosure 2 may have been a central ceremonial space where feasts took place. He suggests that during these large ceremonies, local leaders reinforced status differences through the mechanism of festive labor mobilization.

Feasting during the Middle Horizon. The Moraduchayuq Compound at the

Wari capital site of Huari18 (Ayacucho) is composed at least of seven patio groups

(Isbell, et al. 1991). Two distinctive types of deposit were identified during excavation. One is composed of mixed trash, including animal bones and large sherds, and Isbell interprets it as a dump. The second type of deposit was a sedimentary matrix with few finds, except for some small objects. This deposit is considered residential and it probably represents areas that were fully occupied until sudden abandonment, but never used as a dumping place (Isbell, et al 1991: 43).

The discarded refuse contained predominantly ceramic fragments. About seventy percent of the rim sherds come from serving vessels, mainly bowls and cups, but also bottles, jars, and pitchers. The high percentage of this type of ceramics suggests that feasting was frequent at the Moraduchayuq Compound. Bottles, large narrow-necked jars, and pitchers were used to serve chicha. Large, wide-necked jars were used to prepare chicha. Large storage jars and cooking vessels are not frequent in

18 See Chapter 3 for a fuller description of the sites commented in this section.

101 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics the compound, indicating that food preparation took place somewhere else. The camelid bones found in the dumps are mostly long bones, although Isbell et al. supply no quantitative data. This suggested to the authors that butchering took place outside the compound and only meatier body parts were brought in for consumption.

Associated lithic remains do not include any core or debris that would indicate the manufacture of stone artifacts. Grinding stones used to prepare food were also very rare (Isbell, et al. 1991: 44).

After examining all the excavated evidence in the patio groups, Isbell and colleagues (1991) conclude that the Moraduchayuq Compound was a multipurpose complex for specialized administrators. Given the relatively small amount of open space19 in the compound, the authors do not believe large public feasting was the main purpose of the compound. They argue that middle-level officials used this multipurpose space, which include feasting subordinates who were relied on to carried out specific tasks.

The Wari site of Jargampata (Ayacucho) includes residential structures and an administrative compound, the latter consisting of a square enclosure with elongated rooms along two sides (Isbell 1988:183-184). The ceramic analysis shows that the administrative compound contained more than fifty percent open-bowl vessels and about twenty-five to thirty percent necked jars, in contrast to the residential areas that showed forty to forty-five percent open bowls. The difference is not great, but Isbell interprets the higher percentage in open bowls in the former area as indicative of serving a large number of people and feasting activity held by the state administration.

19 The ratio of open to roofed space at Moraduchayuq is 0.5 to 1 as opposed to the ratio of the Inca plazas at Huanuco Pampa, which are 3.5 to 1 and 1.6 to 1 (Isbell, et al 1991:45 and Morris 1979, cited in Isbell, et al 1991: 45).

102 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

He suggests the participants could have been local people responsible for working the adjacent agricultural lands.

The site of Pikillacta (Cuzco) has two hundred and twenty-two patio groups of various sizes, each comprised of long, narrow rooms surrounding an open patio

(McEwan 2005:150). These patio groups had high walls and a few access points, suggesting the importance of privacy and security for the events that took place in them. The artifacts recovered in theses spaces included camelid bones, ceramics,

Spondylus princeps, beads of colored stones, and obsidian. Some hearths were also excavated in rooms of these patio groups. In five of the eight patio groups that contained pottery, seventy to ninety percent ceramics were serving vessels, mostly serving bowls (Glowacki 1996, cited in Cook and Glowacki 2003). Almost half of all the vessels found in the site were jars. Based on the morphological characteristics and ethnographic analogy (Brewster-Wray 1990, cited in Cook and Glowacki 2003), they interpret such regular size jars to have been used for serving chicha, while wide-mouth jars were probably used for preparing the drink. Fragments of wide-mouth jars were found associated with the hearths but the majority was recovered from the main midden. Refitting showed that fragments from the patio galleries matched those found in the midden, suggesting that food preparation for feasts was carried out in the patio group rooms but the feasting debris were later discarded outside (Cook and Glowacki

2003:180-182). Lastly, very few tumblers and short cups were identified. Drawing on the Inca analogy, McEwan (2005:151) proposes that the feasting occurring in these patio groups included both administrative ritual and religious practice. Feasting would have served to bring together a ruler and his subjects to create and maintain reciprocal

103 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics relationships established for labor extraction. Conspicuous generosity characterized these feasts, and the many rooms in these patio groups in Pikillacta may have served for storing goods to be distributed among the participants.

At Qoripata, a sector of the Huaro Complex (Cuzco), Glowacki (Cook and

Glowacki 2003:191-192) identified a large patio group with a large concentration of ceramics, most of which (estimated at between eighty to ninety percent) were serving vessels, such as bowls and cups. Evidence of food preparation, including utilitarian ceramic and hearths, was recovered in the nearby chambers. Glowacki interpreted these data as evidence that administrative activities, involving suprahousehold feasting, were carried out in this sector.

At the sites of Cerro Baúl and Cerro Mejia in Moquegua (south Peru), Nash

(2010) argues for the presence of feasting when interpreting several discrete assemblages recovered in the monumental structures and residential quarters. In Unit 4 of Cerro Mejia, she found evidence that feasting may have occurred occasionally in this structure, and that one last feast event probably took place with the abandonment of this unit. The structure has a large food preparation facility that includes a large room with a big hearth, the latter associated with a large quantity of charred animal bone. Serving wares of a variety of forms and pastes were more abundant in this residence than others.

On the summit of Cerro Mejia, a Wari patio group was excavated (Unit 145) that also exhibited evidence of suprahousehold meal preparation, mainly cooking. One room (C) contained seven hearths, several cooking vessels, and many remains burnt animal remains. Some of the hearths were stone-lined and presumably used for boiling

104 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics and preparing chicha. The other two rooms (A and B) had typical household features but were kept unusually clean suggesting that large food preparation was located in a different area away from this patio group. Nash argues that the central patio and one of the rooms (D) may have been used to hold audiences: this room has a paved floor, a bench, and a large doorway opening toward the patio.

A formal patio group (Unit 9) with five open rooms on three sides of an open patio and a paved floor was excavated in Cerro Baúl (Nash 2010:96). The central patio has benches on all four sides and was filled with smashed vessels and food remains, including camelid bones and several species of fish. These findings were interpreted as evidence of feasting, representing an abandonment ritual with ceramic vessels smashed on purpose in the center of the patio. The unit, however, had no evidence of suprahousehold preparation facilities. In nearby Unit 7, grindstones, beans, and molle

(Schinus molle) drupes in a large pit were recovered. This unit’s remains suggest the presence of a specialized facility to store molle drupes for chicha production. Located west of Unit 9, there is also a large open plaza with benches and a niche interpreted as a meeting area for “commensal politics” probably related to the preparation facility located in Unit 7 (Nash 2010:100).

Nash (2010:102) recognizes that there is no direct evidence that feasting was carried out on regular basis; however, she argues that the features and designs of the architecture support this even more than the actual feasting remains. She argues that the frequency of feasting would be directly inferred by analyzing the accumulation of detritus from such events as found in middens. However, she warns us, midden material can be difficult to link to the specific events that produced them. She

105 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics concludes that the design of spaces commented above would reflect the planning of gathering and the facilities to prepare suprahousehold meals. Finally, based on ethnohistorical accounts and on the presence of expanded kitchens, Nash suggests that the wives and female kin of regional leaders and barrio heads were probably integral to the preparation of large-scale meals in the residences of Cerro Mejia. In contrast, specialists either attached to the households or pertaining to state institutions, may have been responsible for preparing the feasts in Cerro Baúl.

Nash (2010:102) argues that the feasting evidence found in Cerro Baúl and

Cerro Mejia were not of large work-feasts, that is, a direct exchange of food for labor, since these types of large meals would vary in location, according to the work place, and the serving ware would go home with the laborer. She contends that such feasting would be hard to detect archaeologically. It is the feasting that occurs regularly in the same venue that we hope, as archaeologists, to be able to recognize. Alternatively, the feasting occurring as part of an abandonment ritual would leave visible traces.

At Conchopata (Ayacucho), at least two distinctive patio groups have been identified (Cook and Glowacki 2003). A ceramic analysis carried out in the earliest of the patio groups, the one around EA-112, showed that sixty-five percent of a total of three hundred and forty-three ceramics were serving vessels (bowls, cups, oversized bowls and plates). The later patio group, around EA-98, showed that seventy-five percent of a total of fifty-nine ceramics were serving vessels, such as bowls and cups.

These high percentages associated with the patio groups are interpreted as evidence of suprahousehold feasting activities (Cook and Glowacki 2003:187). A few ceramic

106 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics production tools were found in both structures, suggesting that these spaces were also used for ceramic manufacturing activities, perhaps between feasting events.

Cook and Glowacki (2003:195) argue that the differences in ratio between bowls and cups may indicate different types of feasting. While the pattern of high bowl to cup ratio, as found in Pikillacta and Huaro, could be indicative of administrator-laborer feasting, a high ratio of tumblers and short cups to bowls, as found in Conchopata and potentially at Cerro Baúl may suggest a more elite-oriented feasting. They argue that bowls could have been used to serve both food and drink, in sequential order, to the laborers. The bowls’ more repetitive and simpler design in comparison to drinking vessels could indicate that small bowls were produced in mass quantity for a large number of people. Cups tend to be found in pairs in the archaeological record. As documented both in Andean modern and early colonial feasting events, the host of an event usually toasts with each guest in turn, drinking from one cup while offering a second cup to his guest. Cook and Glowacki (2003:196) suggest that this protocol could explain the low number of elite drinking cups. These

Andean state-sponsored feasts had state administrators and elites sharing some of the accumulated state surpluses. Finally, they argue that the Wari evidence suggests a type of “patron-role feast” (sensu Dietler 2001:83, and explained in the above section), in which hospitality is used to legitimize asymmetric power relationships. However, they argue that their Wari evidence also shows characteristics of “tribute feasts” (sensu

Hayden 2001:58), characterized by very large gatherings, the consumption food, and rituals honoring deities or ancestors (Cook and Glowacki 2003:197).

107 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

Isbell and Groleau (2010) argue for evidence of feasting related to commemoration and women at Conchopata. Smashed ceramic offerings were recovered in a small size residential compound (EA-204, EA-205, EA-206), containing very large and undecorated vessels, presumably for brewing and serving wares. The floor of one of the rooms (EA-205) had been broken in several places along the walls by pits containing camelid bones, obsidian tools, and ceramic molds.

Below the floor, the interment of a woman in her forties was found along with infants buried at different times (Isbell and Groleau 2010: 194). A textile-wrapped young canid lay on the cover of the woman’s grave (Rosenfeld 2004). A miniature and a regular-size face-neck jar (forms associated with chicha consumption) were associated with the dead woman. On the floor and in fill layers above the grave were the large sherds of big chicha brewing and serving ware (at least two gigantic and two large vessels). The room was closed by sealing the doorways with stones and masonry.

However, Isbell and Groleau (2010:195) argue people continued venerating this woman using a narrow hole that was found cutting through the room’s west wall behind the grave’s clay cap.

Isbell and Groleau (2010: 212-213) suggest that the buried woman was probably a brewer of some renown and that her relatives cooked ritual meals as they prepared to seal the house, placing the remains of these meals as offerings by the walls. They argue that there is evidence of commemorative feasts documented by smashed oversized ceramic vessels and offering pits filled with animal bones found in small households that were formerly productive areas.

108 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

These studies assess the evidence of feasting in the archaeological record by examining architecture, the relative frequencies of food serving vessels in relation to those of food preparation vessels, and only secondarily, the state of faunal remains at a very general level. In most cases it has been assumed that Wari feasting worked essentially like that in Inca times when the state hosted big meals during and after the completion of major work projects.

However, comparing Inca and Wari architecture, Jennings (2006) suggests that diacritical feasts – those used to naturalize concepts of social differentiation by different foods and consumption styles (Dietler 2001, see section above) – were a more common type of state-sponsored feast than patron-client feasts in the Wari province. Jennings’s suggestion is based on what he interprets as insufficient storage capacity and small size of the yards (patios) where feasts were held in comparison to the Inca ones. He suggests that Wari power in the colonies “was based less on reciprocal ties between the masses and the state, and more on network strategies of rule” between local elites and the state (Jennings 2006:278).

I agree with Jennings (2006) that the evidence appears to show that the local elites were those benefiting most from the feasts. However, I am skeptical of the weight given to the state sponsorship of these feasts. The literature never clearly states what state-sponsored feasts would imply in the Wari state. In general terms, sponsorship implies an economic relationship. Was the Wari state really financing – or even officially encouraging – these feasts? If that were the case, how this was accomplished has not been demonstrated. One type of evidence for a more direct intervention of the

Wari heartland in sponsoring feasts in peripheral places could be a substantial

109 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics presence of imported vessels manufactured in the Wari heartland found in provincial sites. However, instrumental neutron activation analysis carried out on ceramics from

Pikillaqta (Cuzco) showed that only a few Wari Chakipampa style sherds were manufactured in the Ayacucho region and then exported to this provincial site

(Glowacki 2005b). Although more research is required, I would argue that feasting was not necessarily a direct imperial political strategy, but rather a local elite strategy to maintain control and legitimize their power with the prestige and practices of the

Wari State or Empire. By extension feasting practices with Wari symbolic association helped reinforce, recreate, and maintain the presence of the Wari polity itself.

It is possible that the local elites used the Wari ceramics and architectural designs to legitimize their position but the people from the Huari capital were not directly involved in financing all feasts. Special Wari ceramic decoration20 used at the feasts as well as the location of the suprahousehold meals at the patio groups probably served to enhance the Wari state imagined community. As famously stated by Anderson (1983) for modern nation states,

…It is imagined because the members of even the smallest nations will never

know most of their fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in

the minds of each lives the image of their communion (Anderson 1983: 6).

We don’t know how the Wari state bound together the communities of its territory but it seems clear that the spread of certain ceramic styles and architectural designs

20 Robles Moqo and Conchopata styles include many of the serving vessels associated with feasting activities in the Huari heartland (Cook and Glowacki 2003:178).

110 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics such as the patio group was among the chief features of the Wari expansion (Cook

2001; Willliam Isbell and Gordon McEwan 1991; Menzel 1964; Schreiber 1992).

The examples above show that while the presence of feasting has been asserted from archaeological evidence from prehispanic Andean contexts, its motivations in each particular sociopolitical system has not been extensively discussed. We learn that feasting did not always serve the same purpose all over the Wari polity or even within each site. At Cerro Baúl and at Conchopata, more than one type of feasting has already been identified within the site (abandonment ritual feasting, public feasting, ancestor veneration feasting) and these probably involved different hosts and guests (Cook and

Glowacki 2003, Isbell and Groleau 2010, Nash 2010).

This review of archaeological approaches to Andean feasting illustrates that there are some general assumptions about the concept of feasting (hospitality in the form of large amounts of foods and drink, attractive types of food, luxurious display of food and containers) that seemed to be reflected in general types of evidence in the archaeological record, such as a combination of the presence of a particular architectural space, highly elaborated or decorated ceramics, large quantity of certain animal species, non-daily frequency. In the following section, I examine zooarchaeological indicators of feasting as used in the literature and then discuss which of those can be applied in Andean contexts.

4.2 Zooarchaeological Indicators of Feasting

Archaeologists have long tried to detect particular markers in the archaeological record to distinguish different type of food deposits. Hayden (2003: Table 2.1)

111 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics mentions the following variables to identify feast food in the archaeological record: rare or labor-intensive plants and animals (spices, domestic animals), special food

(tobacco, alcohol), and evidence of food wastage (deposition of articulated limbs, unprocessed bones). In the same vein, Ceret and Pestle (2010) discuss certain attributes used to identify highly valued food, such as scarcity (resources valued for their rarity in the local environment or for their very restricted access), abundance

(elite people consume more of the same food than the rest of the population eats), labor investment (large amount of time invested in certain food acquisition or preparation), and particular taste (resources that are protein-rich, fatty, salty, spicy, or sweet).

Spatial analysis of specimens of different animals or of different meat cuts has been used to assess levels of sociopolitical stratification within a population (e.g.

Stokes 2000). The assumption is that the community leaders or the “elite” restrict or control the access to a variety of animal species and/or better meat cuts represented, which can be represented by ungulate upper limb bones. In this sense, prime cuts of meat or greater taxon diversity are expected in the higher status areas or in ceremonial/public areas, the latter used to display or to hold ceremonies or feasts by the elite. However, if a taxon with more edible material is chosen to feed a large amount of people, feasting evidence can have low species diversity. The terms “elite” and “high status” are used here as having equivalent meaning: a portion of the society that had more political, social and/or ideological power or position. The following are four examples of analyses using zooarchaeological markers to infer differential status and feasting.

112 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

Based on their studies in Crenshaw and Lubbub Creek sites, Arkansas, Jackson and Scott (1995) inferred status differentiation and feasting for chiefdom-level societies in pre-colonial Southeast. They proposed that the economic and political relations between the elite and non-elite segments of chiefdom societies, as interpreted by artifactual, mortuary and architectural patterns, affected animal use and species representation in faunal assemblages. Jackson and Scott proposed that, in addition to being used differentially in the diets of ranked groups, animals played a symbolic role in status identification. Both quantity of meat and species spectrum were regulated according to status. Based on ethnographically documented chiefdoms, they argue for the political importance of animal symbolism, due to the exclusive cosmological knowledge of the elite and the role of feasts for demonstrating differences in status.

Jackson and Scott (1995:107) derived the following zooarchaeological expectations for faunal refuse generated by the Southeastern elite: 1) public feasting: low taxonomic diversity, high meat yield species, bulk meat cuts, bulk cooking, and little butchering debris; 2) elite private consumption: high taxon diversity, prime cuts, rare taxa, low butchering debris, greater than average quantity of bird bones (related to local ideology); 3) elite use of animal products: presence of rare taxa, dangerous taxa, furbearers, colorful plumage bearers, high non- utilitarian bone modification; 4) non- elite households: greater representation of less meaty body parts and primary butchering debris.

Venison played a central role in Southeastern subsistence, although turkey, rabbits, squirrels, and fish were also consumed. Relative taxa representation was measured both by percent weight of identified specimens and by percent of the

113 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics number of identified specimens (NISP). Jackson and Scott assessed relative abundance of elements in relation to meat value through Binford’s Modified General Utility

Index (MGUI). They argue that the elite hosted feasts in public areas associated with their residential dwellings to negotiate the social and economic relations underlying the legitimacy of their rule (Jackson and Scott 1995:108).

In an related study, Potter (1997) searches ethnographic literature to find patterns of ceremonial and medicinal use of animal remains in groups with environments similar to that where his archaeological research is centered. His goal is to identify the loci where communal ritual repeatedly occurred and to gain understanding of the role ritual played in the organization of the early Anasazi community at the McPhee Village site in the American Southwest (Potter 1997: 354).

He derives the following expectations for loci where communal ritual occurred: 1) high relative frequencies of non-subsistence species like carnivore bones and bird bones, indicating ritual manipulation, 2) species than can be efficiently hunted in a communal way, such as jackrabbits, for communal feasting 3) high representation of high utility portions of mammals, such as proximal legs and axial elements of deer, 4) presence of species that are abundant in the local environment, such as rabbits.

Although all areas served domestic and ritual functions, those areas where more intensive ritual activities occurred are expected to show an increase in faunal diversity

(Potter 1997:358). Potter used taxonomic richness (the number of different species represented in an assemblage) as a measure of diversity. He prefers to use the richness measure over evenness, because the former is based on presence and absence of taxa rather than element frequencies, and is thus less subject to the impact of formation

114 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics process (Potter 1997: 359). To control for the effect of sample size on the richness of the assemblages, Potter calculates the mean expected richness for the assemblages given different sample sizes with a Monte Carlo simulation method (Kintigh 1989).

The McPhee Pueblo roomblock exhibited greater richness than expected. Most of its diversity was in non-subsistence fauna (carnivores and birds). These species were compared across the community. The results show that McPhee Pueblo roomblock assemblages had the highest diversity. Potter interprets these results to be indicative of more ritual activity in this roomblock as compared to any other in the community.

At the Neolithic site of Çatalhöyük (Konya, Turkey), Martin (2000/2001) identified two distinctive patterns of animal carcass processing. The first one involves sheep and goats whose bones were highly processed. After the meat was removed, the bones were cracked open to obtain marrow and then smashed to be boiled, probably in order to obtain grease. Piles of these bones were found in houses next to ovens and fire hearths, indicating these animals were consumed as a domestic resource. In the second pattern, cattle bones are discarded as relatively intact large joints suggesting a very different mode of butchering and preparation. In some cases, cattle body parts with high meat content (such as vertebrae and long bones) were recovered articulated suggesting they had been cooked in one large piece. In most cases, the marrow had been removed from the cattle bones but Martin believes they had not been smashed for grease. She thinks these bones were too big to have been boiled in stews; rather, they were probably roasted in outside hearths. She argues that cattle bone remains indicate large-scale feasting. The cattle had an important symbolic status in Çatalhöyük.

Elaborate wall painting included the representation of bulls and horns. Furthermore,

115 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics installations of complete cattle skulls and horns were recovered in some buildings.

Martin suggests that feasts involving roasted cattle may have congregated a good part of the community to commemorate events such as family births or the abandonment of renewal of houses, and the cattle paintings and installations were probably related to these feasts. These feasts then served to keep the community integrated. Bogaard and colleagues (2009) argue that communal social cohesion was essential for a densely packed settlement as Çatalhöyük. Sharing meat in feasts, along with the use of cattle installations representing past consumption events, played an important role in keeping the community together.

In an interesting case of reinterpretation, Crabtree (2002) presents new insights from an Irish Iron Age site after her initial paleoeconomic interpretation fifteen years before. The site of Dun Ailinne includes two concentric circles of posts enclosing an area of forty-two m in diameter. A rough paving of stones was laid over a portion of the site, and above of it there was a layer containing many animal bones, burnt stone, charcoal and ash. She suggests that these deposits represented ritual feasting. Other lines of evidence that led Crabtree interpret Dun Ailinne as a ceremonial site were the complete absence of residential structures, and minimal evidence of craft activities at the site. The zooarchaeological measures used by the author were the % NISP to assess the relative abundance of animal species, and tooth wear to create a cattle age profile. Beef and pork were the preferred food for feasting, in comparison to mutton and horseflesh. The majority of the cattle were slaughtered at a very young age.

Crabtree believes that these animals would have been costly to kill given the fact that,

116 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics apparently, when calves are removed the mothers’ milk production stops. She wondered what the feast sponsors were gaining from such expensive feasts.

In her initial interpretation, Crabtree had argued that the feasts served sociopolitical functions and as a way to make use of surplus animals produced by a dairy economy: young males and old females who were not milk producers (Crabtree

1990). In her reinterpretation she recognizes that she had taken an exceedingly materialist approach in defining the subsistence economy as the core of ancient human societies, and ritual activities as mere epiphenomena (Crabtree 2002: 64). Her new interpretation highlights the consumption of a large number of calves as a form of conspicuous consumption, since the cost of the slaughter included the loss of dairy products as well. Further, she considers the location of consumption to be an important factor, as Dun Ailinne was distant from the typical rural settlements of the period.

Crabtree concludes that these ritual feasts served to enhance the power and prestige of the lord of Dun Ailinne.

One of the indicators most frequently used in these studies is species diversity or species richness as an indicator of status differentiation, ritual, and feasting when compared to other sectors of the sites. Species richness is the number of different species in a given area, while species evenness is the relative abundance with which each species is represented in an area. For example, particular animals are expected to appear mostly in feasting contexts, such as jackrabbits among the Dolores Anasazi

(Potter 1997) or deer in the American Southeast (Jackson and Scott 1995) as opposed to regular animal consumption, which included a wider variety of animal species.

Other indicators of feasting include trends towards a high frequency of meatier animal

117 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics body parts, as well as little breakage and few cut marks, both signaling intentional and affordable waste. I will now discuss whether the indicators mentioned above in the case studies can be applied in the central Andean contexts.

4.2.1 Zooarchaeological Indicators of Feasting in Prehispanic Andean Contexts

In contrast to the European, Southwest Asia, and North American cases outlined above, where higher species diversity is said to characterize feasting behavior, central

Andean highlands faunal assemblages from complex societies in general tend to consist almost exclusively of camelid remains, with the addition of some guinea pigs and birds (for a discussion on the scarcity of guinea pig remains found in the Andean archaeological records, see Valdez and Valdez 1997). There are ecological reasons for the low diversity of animal species found in the central Andean archaeological record.

People in South America only domesticated a few animal species: llama (Lama glama), alpaca (Lama pacos), guinea pig (Cavia porcellus), and muscovy duck

(Cairina moschata). Dogs (Canis familiaris) apparently reached the Andes fully domesticated (Leonard, et al. 2002; Stahl 2003; Wing 1977). There is, however, a variety of wild Andean fauna that includes mountain lions (Puma concolor), wild cat

(Felis colocolo), foxes (Dusicyon culpaeus), deer (Hipocamelus antisensis), skunks

(Conepatus rex), viscachas (Lagidium peruanum), and small rodents, including

Phyllotis sp, Abrocoma sp, and Cavia sp. (Pearson 1951). However, most of these wild species did not appear to have been regularly consumed, and they are infrequently represented in the archaeological record of central Andean complex societies (although see Moseley et al 2005 and Miller 2003).

118 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

While species richness is not low in the Andes (Pimm and Gittleman 1992;

Rahbek 1997), it is as yet unclear how abundant each species is in comparison to other areas of the world. In other words, it could be the case that, at least in certain areas of the Andes, deer or viscachas were not sufficiently abundant to be hunted in high quantities, not would be attractive given the availability of having domesticate animals. This fact could partially explain the low representation of wild fauna in the archaeological record of complex societies from the central highlands.

Therefore, species diversity is not a good methodological indicator in this part of the world. A skeletal part analysis of camelid remains can provide a better understanding, and it can be done by comparing different body parts consumed by different segments of the societies and/or for different consumption activities

(feasting, elite consumption, non-elite consumption).

Some expectations regarding special meals when analyzing camelid skeletal remains are: (1) Skewed representation of certain skeletal elements: a) Feasting and/or higher status consumption: high frequencies of skeletal elements bearing large amounts of meat, e.g. vertebrae, ribs, femur, and humerus (Mengoni-

Goñalons 1991:188)21; b) Lower status consumption or food preparation and discard areas: high frequencies of llama lower limbs or bones with little meat, e.g. metacarpals, metatarsals, and feet (Mengoni-Goñalons 1991:188). (2) Even representation of all body parts as found in a complete skeleton: a) Roasting of entire animal, implying consumption at the supra-household level, or some form of feasting: even element representation and thermal modification of protruding sections of bone;

21 Llama ranking of amount of meat by skeletal part is based on the proportion between the llama body part minus the dry bone. Therefore, the ranking shows the amount of edible meat (including meat, fat, and marrow) by skeletal part in relation to the bone (Mengoni-Goñalons 1991:188).

119 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics b) Sacrificial burials, offerings: articulated skeletons with no evidence of butchery or consumption; c) General household trash discard: a random selection of elements.

It is then expected that certain assumptions about feasting, such as consumption of large amount of food, roasted meat, best animal cuts, can be reflected in general trends in the representation of camelid remains, as in high frequency of skeletal elements with large amounts of meat or even representation of all body parts with evidence of roasting. The latter would be indicating a particular form of meat preparation. At the same time, as the presence of abundant fresh bone fracture and cut marks are often interpreted as evidence of marrow extraction and high intensive butchery, their absence can signal the presence of wealth display in the form of food waste.

It is difficult to assess how much and how often people actually ate meat as part of their everyday culinary practice in Wari times. In the prehispanic central

Andes, the mains sources of animal proteins and fat were camelids and guinea pigs

(Rosenfeld 2008). Ethnohistorical sources agree on the fact that maize and meat were consumed mainly on special occasions. In Inca Religion and Customs, Cobo (1997

[1653]) mentioned that “The plebeian ate very little meat, and when they did it was at festivals and banquets”. However, ethnoarchaeological research carried out among

South Andean herders indicates more quotidian meat consumption: according to

Goebel (2001), each domestic household butchers one llama every ten days;

Yacobaccio (2007) says the rate is one adult llama every two months. Nevertheless, these rates are drawn from herders subsisting more on their animals than agricultural produce through much of the year. In towns such as the sites analyzed in this study

120 Chapter 4 Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics

(Conchopata, Chokepukio, and Cotocotuyoc) where the access to camelids was probably more restricted given the distance to the herder communities in the puna environment, camelid meat consumption was probably sporadic. Guinea pigs may haven been eaten more often given that they can be raised inside houses. It is then possible that large amounts of camelid meats were reserved for feasting events.

In this study, I want to examine how faunal analysis can be used to identify differences and similarities in the meat consumed during feasts occurring at various parts of the sites. Using archaeological evidence from both Wari province

(Chokepukio, Cotocotuyoc) and heartland (Conchopata), I discuss the presence of feasts to reinforce status/power relationships carried out in public spaces. These data will be compared to that on more exclusive, family, community based feasts organized in more restricted areas of the sites. I discuss whether the Wari evidence from Cuzco and Ayacucho fits Dietler’s model discussed above. The next chapter presents in detail the methodology of the zooarchaeological analysis from the three Wari sites under study.

121 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues

CHAPTER 5 METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES IN ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

The zooarchaeological analysis carried out for this study combines qualitative and

quantitative approaches to characterize Middle Horizon patterns of animal use (e.g.

species, body parts, age) across different contexts seeking to understand what

behaviors produced variation in the observed patterns and to relate these behaviors to

Wari sociopolitical strategies. In particular, and recapitulating from chapter 1, I want

to address the following questions: (1) What was the animal diet of the Ayacucho and

Cuzco populations during the Wari Empire? (2) Is it possible to interpret political

drivers in animal use during Wari times? (3) Does animal management show

differences among the three sites? (3) Did culinary practices vary according to

architectural settings?

5.1 Sampling Material

To tackle the question of Wari foodways and their sociopolitical roles, I analyze

faunal material recovered from three sites in the central Andes: Conchopata from the

Wari heartland in Ayacucho, and Chokepukio and Cotocotuyoc, from the provincial

area of Cuzco. I participated in the excavations in Conchopata (season 2003) and

122 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues

Cotocotuyoc (seasons 2005 and 2006). This study is the first full faunal analysis of the animal bones from Cotocotuyoc, Conchopata22, and Chokepukio.

Data were gathered from 2002 to 2008, and the format in which they were entered varied according to the different sites. However, I recorded the same variables for each site, making the data files comparable. For Conchopata and Cotocotuyoc the faunal data were entered into computer spreadsheets, using Microsoft Excel®, while for Chokepukio the data were entered into a database software, FileMaker® (2004), using a coding system based on that created by Gifford and Crader (1977). In both formats I entered basic descriptive data including taxon determination, element identification and portion, state of bone fusion, and presence of cut marks.

Bone specimens were analyzed from units for which the excavations’ directors had more control over the temporal stratigraphy through ceramic analysis and radiocarbon dates (Cook and Isbell, personal communication 2002 and 2003;

Glowacki, personal communication, 2006; McEwan, personal communication 2008).

5.2 Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis

Zooarchaeologists have different opinions about which quantitative measures of abundance are most useful. According to Perkins (1975:10-11), MNI – the minimum number of individual animals necessary to account for the specimens observed – provides better estimates of taxonomic abundance in assemblages that were not wet sieved because MNI is not affected by differential fragmentation. However, Lyman

(2008:81) claims that NISP – the number of identified specimens in the collection – is

22 Patricia Maita, an undergraduate student from Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos (Lima, Peru) did a preliminary analysis of a small sample from Conchopata in 2001and 2002.

123 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues to be preferred over MNI as the quantitative measure of taxonomic abundance because of the effects on aggregation and of interdependence (see also Grayson 1984).

Basically, the nature of the subdivisions into which a site is partitioned for analysis will affect the result of the total MNI, as more analytical units will result in a higher

MNI. Nevertheless, using NISP as a unit of comparison encounters problems when comparing taxa with different number of elements in their skeletons as well as comparing differentially fragmented taxa (Grayson 1984; Lyman 2008). MNI can safely be used to compare taxonomic abundances among sites since each site is considered a separate unit of analysis and aggregation and interdependence are not a problem (Gifford-Gonzalez n.d.). I therefore decided to calculate and interpret both

NISP and MNI for all sites and relevant units of analysis. I also calculated MNE – the minimum number of skeletal elements necessary to account for an assemblage of specimens of a particular skeletal element – and MAU – minimal animal units

(Binford 1978) – in order to analyze camelid skeletal part representation. Following the standard procedures, element side and fusion data were taken into account in calculating MNE and MNI.

At Conchopata, MNE and MNI were calculated at the level of locus, the recordkeeping unit during excavation. For example, one architectural space,

Estructura Arquitectonica or EA, typically includes many loci. In a few cases from

Conchopata, it was clear during laboratory analysis, usually due to refitting, that remains from two loci were part of the same deposit and I combined the specimens in one unit to derive the quantitative measurements. For visual display, in most cases, I

124 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues combined the results by the following grouping: Patio Group 1, Patio Group 2,

Lineage House 1, and Lineage House 2.

In Cotocotuyoc, while field notes and maps recorded the excavation of the two assemblages, given their proximity and the fact that they were collected together, I calculated the MNI and MNE for everything as a single unit of analysis.

In Chokepukio, quantification measurements were calculated by building

(Building 6 and Building 32-A). The bone remains were recovered from layers associated with Middle Horizon ceramics and there was no finer grain information to analyze the faunal remains in smaller units (see more details in Chapter 3). Also, as the total count of remains was relatively small in comparison to the other two sites, it was not desirable to further subdivide it.

As mentioned earlier, in order to assess skeletal representation Minimal

Animal Units (MAU) are also used in this study. MAU are MNE values that have been standardized to a complete skeleton. In other words, the observed MNE values for each skeletal part are divided by the number of times that skeletal part occurs in one skeleton. Normalizing MAU values to %MAU (MAU values divided by the greatest observed value in a particular collection and multiplied by 100) allows us to graphically compare samples of different sizes (Lyman 2008:239). However, these

%MAU values cannot be compared statistically because of their normalization

(Lyman 2008:240). MAU and % MAU calculations allow measuring the average or overall completeness of the skeletons represented in a collection (Lyman 2008:241).

I conducted the laboratory analysis in the of Ayacucho (summers of 2002 and 2003) and Cuzco (summers of 2005, 2006, and 2008). The bones were lightly

125 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues brushed but never washed with water to avoid further contamination in case future

DNA analyses and other techniques are applied. A hand lens was used to identify any surface modification and an electronic caliper was used to measure fused, long bones for osteometric analysis.

5.2.1 Taxonomic and Anatomic Identification

In Ayacucho, I conducted the laboratory analysis at the Laboratorio de Arqueología at the Universidad Nacional San Cristóbal de Huamanga where I had access to comparative skeletal collections that included alpacas (Lama pacos), vicuñas (Vicugna vicugna), Andean foxes (Lycalopex culpaeus), ocelots (Felis pardalis), and guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus). Additionally, various osteology atlases and visual guides

(Altamirano Enciso 1983; Galotta and Galotta 1994; Gilbert 1990; Gilbert, et al. 1981;

Mann Fisher 1978; Pacheco T, et al. 1986; Schmid 1972) were used in the taxonomic and anatomic identification of the remains.

In Cuzco, taxonomic and anatomic identification were carried out with the assistance of osteological atlases, as well as a collection of digital photographs of animal bones that I had taken at the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology at UC Berkeley. I also used a complete llama skeleton borrowed from the Macchu Picchu Museum.

I carried out the identification and observational work on all bone materials; in cases that I was not sure of, I took digital photographs and made drawings of the bone specimens, which I later checked with experts and comparative specimens at the

Institute of Archaeology (ICA), University of Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Among various problems in Andean zooarchaeology, the interspecific osteological determination of the family Camelidae is a question that has proven to be

126 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues very difficult to resolve. The South American camelids include the wild guanaco

(Lama guanicoe, Muller 1776) and vicuña (Vicugna (Lama) vicugna, Molina 1782), and the domestic llama (Lama glama, Linneaus 1758) and alpaca (Lama pacos,

Linneaus 1758). Although the four forms are clearly distinguished on phenotypic characters (fiber characteristics, ear morphology), they are difficult to distinguish from one another based on their osteology.

Wheeler (1982) attempted to distinguish llama/guanaco from vicuña and alpaca based on their incisor morphology. Llama and guanaco have spatulate shape incisors, with enamel covering all surfaces of the crown, and with a differentiated root.

Vicuña incisors are non-spatulate and rootless, square in cross-section, and their enamel is only present on the labial surface. Alpaca incisors have a rectangular cross- section, non-spatulate in shape, and have a differentiated root structure. However, these criteria have not been extensively used in the literature probably because the incisor morphology criteria proved hard to apply. As well, hybridization could potentially produce more dental variation. Under forced conditions, camelids will mate across species (e.g. llama + alpaca) producing fertile offspring (Kent 1982).

Genetic analysis on mitochondrial DNA camelids suggests that hybridization among domestic species occurred in the past (Stanley, et al. 1994; Wheeler, et al. 2006).

Osteometric analysis is another technique used to try to identify camelid species in the zooarchaeological record. Archaeologists have used bone measurements from reference collections combined with statistical techniques to distinguish camelids species in the archaeological record (Kent 1982; Miller 1979). This technique is based on the observation of a size gradient among living wild and domestic camelids in

127 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues terms of their body weight and skeleton size. The camelid body size order from largest to smallest is guanaco, llama, alpaca, and vicuña (Kent 1982; Miller 1979). However, it has been noted (Elkin, et al. 1991) that the guanacos measured to get the standards for osteometric studies were solely from Patagonia. Higher altitude guanacos show a bigger body mass than those living in lower latitudes, following to Bergmann’s rule.

So, while guanacos from Patagonia weigh 120 kg, those from northwest Argentina weigh only 70-90, making llamas (90-140 kg) the biggest camelid in the region (Elkin, et al. 1991). The size gradient in northwest Argentina, from largest to smallest, is the following: llama, guanaco, and vicuña. It would make sense that the same size gradient exits as well in Peru, given its closeness to the equator. Therefore, using

Patagonian standards for comparison with archaeological specimens from the Central

Andes would not be appropriate. In this study, I use published modern standards from llama and alpaca specimens from Peru23 (Kent 1982) and guanaco specimens from northwest Argentina (Mengoni and Elkin personal communication, 1991). All measurements were taken following Kent’s (1982) criteria. The archaeological specimens used for the osteometric analysis in this study are first phalanges from

Conchopata and Chokepukio.

Miller and Gill (1990:57) warn that osteometric analysis provide only a baseline with which to compare the archaeological camelid bones. There are still problems of overlapping among species sizes, and hybridization adds another layer of error and uncertainty. However, as there yet are no better techniques developed to

23 One of the eight llamas measured by Kent (1982: Table IV) is from Missouri, USA.

128 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues discriminate camelid species, osteometric analysis can still be used to at least obtain an approximation of the camelid species involved in the sites under study.

Anatomical Identification: Special Cases.

Distal metacarpal or metatarsal fragments of camelids are difficult to differentiate because they have no features that distinguish them from one another. If only relying upon the distinctive but less durable proximal portions, metacarpals and metatarsals would appear to be very underrepresented when calculating MNE and MAU.

Therefore, I opted to divide fused and unfused distal metapodial and then to assign 50

% of each class to metacarpal and 50% to metatarsal.

The same problem occurred with camelid ribs when calculating the minimal number of elements. Middle shaft fragments are commonly represented and it is impossible to estimate how many elements these small fragments account for.

Taphonomically, it makes sense that camelid rib middle shaft fragments and sternal end fragments are more represented than head fragments in the archaeological record as the latter have lower mineral density values (see Stahl 1999: Table 2). Counting just the identifiable rib heads would underestimate the actual rib representation. After trying some refitting in the lab, it became clear that ribs were usually fragmented in more than four pieces. Therefore, for this analysis, I divided the total number of rib small middle shaft fragments by four to obtain the MNE, a conservative estimate.

Although I have reservations about these procedures I have been unable to find another alternative to avoid underrepresenting ribs.

129 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues

5.2.2 Seasonality

In archaeology, seasonality refers to the time of the year at or during which a particular event is most likely to have occurred (Monks 1981). The coincidence of cultural activity with naturally occurring events provides a calendar of prehistoric human events (Davis 1987; Reitz and Wing 1999). By identifying seasonal patterning, archaeologists can better understand prehistoric cultures, their environmental adaptation, and their cyclical subsistence (Bowen 1988). Methods for assessing seasonality in faunal remains depend upon the occurrence of a well-defined birth season, and the presumption of a rate of change similar to modern relatives (Davis

1987: 76). The strongest case is made when various factors can be used to assess seasonal variation in the use of a site. Clearly, the overall accuracy of these analyses relies upon the use of modern analogues (Gifford-Gonzalez 1991) and more research needs to go into creating standards for a broader range of animal species.

Storage and transport issues need to be taken into account because they can complicate seasonality estimations (Reitz and Wing 1999; Yerkes 2005). For example, there are various methods to extend the use of meat, such as freezing and smoking.

Ch’arki is a Native Andean technique for preserving llama and alpaca meat, usually on the bone, by freezing it in the cold nights and drying in the hot sun in the puna environment (Miller and Burger 1995; Stahl 1999; Valdez 2000).

Camelids have a restricted birth season. Young are born between December and March, when pastures are most abundant due to rain (Bonavia 1996; Novoa and

Wheeler 1984). Studies of camelid postcranial bone fusion sequence and dental eruption can be used to determine age of death (Miller 2003; Wheeler 1982, 1999) and

130 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues thus the time of the year when the butchering occurred. For example, a camelid determination of 1-3 months most likely indicates that slaughter occurred at the end of the rainy season.

5.2.3 Age estimation

To estimate camelid age, I follow the criteria of dental eruption and bone fusion sequence (see Table 5.1) developed by Wheeler (1982; 1999). To estimate the age of cuys or guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) I use the epiphysis fusion sequence (see Table

5.2) recorded by Zuck (1938). For other species, I simply note the fusion of the long bones, i.e. presence or absence of fusion of long bone epiphyses, because of the lack of comparative data on age assessment in those taxa.

The lama lifespan is about 20 years (Wheeler 2003). Camelid bones have all fused by the age of 45 months. Dental eruption data provide age estimation for older camelids that exceed this age because permanent dentition keeps erupting and wearing over a longer span. However, in this study’s assemblage, the complete mandibles necessary for applying this method were infrequent. As a consequence, I recorded dental information when available but there were not enough data to present them graphically or in tables, and they were only used qualitatively.

Table 5.1. Age of complete epiphyseal fusion in camelids. Data from Wheeler (1999). Age in months Point of Fusion 1 medial metacarpal and metatarsal joints 12-18 scapula, distal humerus, proximal radioulna, distal tibia 24 proximal humerus, calcaneus 33 distal metacarpal and metatarsal 42 distal radius-ulna, proximal femur, distal femur, proximal tibia

131 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues

Table 5.2. Age of complete epiphyseal fusion in guinea pigs. Data from Zuck (1938). Age in weeks Point of Fusion 14-15 Distal humerus 16-17 Pelvis 18-19 Middle phalanges 20-21 Proximal femur 22 Proximal phalanges 23-24 2nd metatarsal 23-24 Proximal radius 25-27 Calcaneus 25-27 Metacarpal 1, 2, 3 28-30 Distal tibia 28-30 Metacarpal 4 28-30 Metatarsals 1,2, 3 34-36 Distal femur 37-40 Humerus head 41-44 Distal fibula 61-68 Humerus tuberosity 61-68 Proximal ulna 86-96 Distal radius 101-108 Proximal tibia 101-108 Distal ulna 116-124 Tibial tubercle 116-124 Proximal fibula

Most Andean zooarchaeologists use the camelid bone fusion sequence data published by Wheeler (1999) or the data included in Kent’s doctoral dissertation

(1982), both based upon actualistic studies. However, they differ on how they subdivide age fusion classes for constructing mortality profiles. Shimada and Shimada

(1985) use regular intervals, based on months, that ranged from 0 to 40 months. Miller and Burger (1995) use regular intervals, based on years, from 0 to 10. Webster and

Janusek (2003) construct their age profiles using percentage of life span (10% to 20% life span= 0-3 years of age). Wheeler (1999:303) divides the age fusion sequence in 1 month old, 12-18 months old, 24 months old, 33 months old, and 42 months old.

Finally, Yacobaccio (2007) follows Kent (1992)’s bone fusion data and uses Early

132 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues

Fusion (between 6 to 12 months), Middle Fusion (between 12 to 24 months), and Late

Fusion (between 24 to 36 months).

In this study, I followed Wheeler’s camelid postcranial epiphyseal fusion data24 (Table 5.1) and five age fusion classes: 1 month of age (newborn), 12-18 months (subdault), 24 months (breeding age), 33 months (breeding25 age), and ≥ 42 months (mature and aged camelids).

For every fusion class, the actual inference steps are as follows: For example for the 33-month age class, I first tally all metacarpals and metatarsals, then I tally the fused and unfused, and then present the data in a bar graph as such: unfused or ≤ 33 months: MNE frequency; fused or ≥ 33 months: MNE frequency. I follow this procedure for each of Wheeler’s five fusion age classes.

5.2.4 Mortality Profiles

Age or mortality profiles are used to interpret past animal management and economic strategies. It is expected that different economic systems will reflect on different proportions in the age of slaughtered animals. For example, when sheep and goat herders’ main economic strategy is meat production, most male animals are killed at a young age when they are at their best of the meat potential and they are less disruptive to the life of the herd than they would be when older, while females are retained for breeding (Payne 1973). If wool production is the main goal, animals of both sexes are kept until they are fully adult, with most males being castrated at an early age (Payne

24 I chose to apply Wheeler’s bone fusion data (1999) over Kent’s study (1982) because the former is a journal publication while the latter is an unpublished doctoral dissertation. 25 Sexual maturity in domesticated camelids is reached between two and three years of age (Bonavia 1996:32; Kent 1992:46).

133 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues

1973). In the Andes, a faunal assemblage dominated by camelids older than 45 months most likely means that the herd was mainly kept for textile production or transportation. Llamas are sheared once a year from two to eight years of age

(Yacobaccio 2007:42). On the other hand, a predominance of young camelids may indicate that animals were butchered for meat consumption. While the latter interpretation would be strengthened by knowledge of sex of individuals as in the Old

World models commented above, there is no published study of a scientific method for camelid sex determination using bone remains.

Various methods exist for building age profiles. Depending on the available comparative data for the animals under study, some zooarchaeologists use tooth eruption and wear data (Payne 1973; Klein 2007), while others use long bone fusion data (Miller and Burger 1995, Wheeler 1999, Yacobaccio 2007), or both (Wapnish and Hesse 1988; Zeder 1991).

In this study, camelid age profiles were built using bone fusion data because dental data were not numerous enough to construct meaningful age profiles. Age profiles were therefore constructed for each relevant context following Wing’s (1972) method. For each age class, based on Wheeler’s (1999) postcranial epiphyseal fusion sequence, the fused and unfused elements found in the archaeological record are tallied and then converted to percentages to determine the proportion of bones from animals that died before and after the fusion of such elements was completed for that age class.

I built a bar graph showing the percentage of unfused and fused elements by age fusion class, as exemplified in Yacobaccio’s (2007: Figures 4-6) work. I also built

134 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues a line graph showing the percentage of only the fused bones by age class, a method followed by Wheeler (1999: Figure 4). As noted by Klein and Cruz-Uribe (1984:57), the interpretation of an age profile may depend on the comparison with other profiles.

When comparing the percentages of unfused and fused bones by age fusion class among different profiles we can observe whether fused or unfused bones dominate the sample. The line graphs using only the fused bones by fusion class offer a better way to display information for inferring when most animals from the herd were slaughtered and whether animals were kept to an older age.

As cautioned by Miller and Burger (1995:447), mortality profiles based on bone fusion data present some drawbacks. For example, taphonomic factors can affect the representation of certain bones, and thus some fusion age classes can be inflated or underrepresented. This is inevitable; therefore, when comparing profiles from different contexts, a discussion of factors affecting bone representation needs to be included.

5.2.5 Bone Surface Modification: Weathering, Tooth Marks, and Cut Marks

The analysis of bone weathering is useful for assessing bone preservation and the likelihood that examples of human and animal modification will be found on the bones. The weathering of a bone is the process by which the original organic and inorganic components of bone are separated from each other and destroyed by physical and chemical agents operating on the bone (Behrensmeyer 1978).

Behrensmeyer defined six stages of bone weathering for mammals larger than 5 kilos in body weight. Therefore, in this study, I record weathering data only on Artiodactyla

(deer and camelid) specimens. Following her method, I record the maximum weathering displayed on areas larger than 1 cm2 on each bone fragment.

135 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues

The identification of animal tooth marks can help us understand the role of rodents and carnivore animals as agents of accumulation and modification of bone assemblages (Binford 1981; Lyman 1994) which can impact bone element representation. Potential Andean animals that could access and disturb camelid bones are rodents, especially leaf-eared mice (Phyllotis spp); canids, especially foxes

(Lycalopex culpaeus) and dogs (Canis familiaris); and felids, especially mountain lions (Puma concolor).

In order to evaluate the origin of the bone assemblages it is necessary to identify and quantify the animal tooth marks displayed on the camelid bones. In this analysis, I consider morphology, localization, frequency, and distribution of the marks in order to identify the type of tooth mark (e.g. scoring, pitting, furrowing, and punctures).

The identification of cut marks on bone specimens can help us understand killing and butchering patterns. In this study, I follow Binford’s (1981) cut mark classification based on his ethnographic studies. He classified cut marks according to their location, frequency and morphology as dismembering, skinning, and filleting marks.

5.2.6 Bone Density Mediation

Before attempting any interpretation of the human activity that produced the zooarchaeological assemblage, mineral bone density effects on element durability should be considered. It is necessary to evaluate the density-mediated destruction of different elements and therefore, the nonhuman site formation processes that could have affected the element frequency in the bone sample.

136 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues

One way to evaluate bone density-mediated destruction is to correlate the camelid skeletal part frequencies with the bone mineral densities of those elements. If the most common bones in an archaeofaunal sample are those with highest density values, taphonomic factors (weathering, carnivore activity, trampling, chemical action, etc.) could be the main agents responsible for the sample configuration. Basically, the principle behind is that hard bones tend to survive environmental action better than soft bones.

Lyman was one of the pioneers in measuring animal bone mineral density. He used a technique called photon absorptiometry or photon densitometry to derive “bone mineral densities” for specific skeletal parts:

The technique involves the measurement of how weak a photon

beam of known strength becomes when it passes through the

selected part of a bone. A scan site ‘is that area or part of a bone

which was actually measured [or scanned] by the photo beam’

(Lyman 1984:272)... The measurements of bone mineral density

are approximations of the bulk density, and are given in g/cm3 for

the scan site [Lyman 1994:238].

Lyman obtained mineral bones densities for deer, pronghorn antelope, and domestic sheep (Lyman 1994:Table 7.6). Following the same procedure, Kreutzer

(1992) obtained mineral bone density values for bison while Elkin and Zanchetta did the same for guanaco and vicuña (Elkin and Zanchetta 1991).

137 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues

In a later study, Elkin carried out a second series of volume density analyses in order to account for the irregular shape of the bones (Elkin 1995). This time she expanded her sample to include llama specimens. Her new method consisted of dividing the bone mineral content value of each skeletal part – obtained by the densitometer – by its volume as measured by water displacement (Elkin 1995:31). She found out that long bones have higher density values than the vertebrae, ribs, and proximal epiphyses (Elkin 1995:33).

In 1999, using state-of-the-art technology at the time, Stahl expanded on the research of camelid bone structural density by enlarging the sample to ten adult domesticated camelid skeletons (Stahl 1999). The absorptiometer used by Stahl digitizes an image of each scan site upon completion of each scan. Thus, the machine automatically detects the outside edges of the bone and outlines its contour (Stahl

1999: 1351).

Stahl’s method for calculating volume differed from previous studies. He calculated cross sectional areas by measuring the distance between standardized osteometric landmarks for each scan site on a digital platform (Stahl 1999:1352). He then computed the volume density in two ways. One followed Lyman’s procedure; the second method factored cm out of g/cm2 to calculate g/cm. He then computed “shaped

2 adjusted” volume density (VDsa) by dividing cm (cross sectional area) into g/cm

(Stahl 1999:1352, Table 2).

Stahl’s results indicated that portions of the mandible, the calcaneum, and distal limbs showed the highest density scan sites in camelids, while the neck vertebrae, the proximal humeral head, and the distal femur have the lowest structural

138 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues values (Stahl 1999: table 4). It appears that portions of the metapodial diaphysis and calcaneum are particularly high in structural bone density of all studied artiodactyls, specifically deer, camels and camelids (Stahl 1999:1358). It is necessary to mention that according to Lam and colleagues (1998; 2003), photo densitometers cannot distinguish internal heterogeneity in bone structure, an important variable for any bone element that possesses a medullar cavity. Computed tomography (CTScan) produces the most accurate data on bone mineral density because they account for variation in the shape of bone-cross sections (Lam et al 2003). However, this technology has not been applied on camelid bones yet.

In this study I use Stahl’s VDsa values to examine bone density mediation in the Middle Horizon camelid samples from Cuzco and Ayacucho. Because these values were measured on adult skeletons they should theoretically be applied only to fused bones (Izeta 2005). However, it is impossible to know if diaphysis fragments are from fused bones or not. Similarly, bones that do not have a fusion sequence (e.g. trapezoid) are also difficult to determine whether they are from adult or juvenile skeletons.

Tarsals, carpals, and diaphysis tend to be dense, so if these high values are taken out we may potentially not find density mediation although it is there. As a consequence I decided to include all bone specimens regardless of fusion stage or size.

I chose Spearman’s rho as the statistical test to assess the correlation of bone mineral density values with skeletal part frequency because the bone density values are ordinal data. Those correlation results with coefficients for which P < .05 were considered significant.

139 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues

5.2.7 Meat Utility Indexes

Bone mineral density data can be combined with derived meat utility indexes to explore different economic strategies of animal exploitation. Food or meat utility indices measure average values of meat, and sometimes also marrow and grease, to estimate the economic utility of the skeletal parts of a particular animal species. For his study on the Nunamiut, Binford (1978) measured the amounts of meat, marrow, and grease associated with the skeletal parts of domestic sheep and caribou. He computed the weight of fat and muscle tissue, multiplied the marrow cavity volume by the percentage of fatty acids present in the marrow, and multiplied the volume of skeletal elements for cancellous parts by the percentage of fatty acids present in the marrow. He then constructed indices of the economic utility of skeletal parts to model human consumption strategies. His curves and behavioral models (e.g. bulk strategy, gourmet strategy) were intended to explain hunter-gatherers’ use and transport of animal carcasses to a cave or central site. However, the indices can also be used to assess the utilization of domestic animals.

A strong positive correlation between the frequencies of skeletal parts (usually using % MAU) and the food values of each skeletal element (Binford 1978; Metcalfe and Jones 1988) is an index of human selectivity for those animal body parts with highest content of meat, marrow, and grease.

Regarding the food utility indices developed for camelid skeletal parts, Borrero

(1990) calculated the utility values of guanacos’ body parts; Mengoni-Goñalons

(1991) measured the values of llama body parts. In this study, given the temporal context of the samples, I use Mengoni-Goñalons’s (1991) llama values.

140 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues

The statistical test chosen to correlate food utility values with frequency of skeletal parts was Spearman’s rho test as the importance of the values is their rank order. Those correlation results with coefficients for which P < .05 were considered significant.

Grayson (1989) discusses the relationship between the bone mineral index and the food utility index and offers different interpretations for combinations of correlation coefficients between the % MAU of a bone assemblage and both bone density and food utility. For example, he argues that if density-mediated destruction was responsible for the bone assemblage accumulation, the statistical relation between

%MAU and mineral bone density will be positive and significant while the statistical relation between %MAU and %FUI will be insignificant. Conversely, human differential transport could be inferred if %MAU and %FUI are significantly and positive correlated but % MAU and mineral bone density are insignificantly correlated. Grayson warned that other combinations of statistical correlations might be more difficult to interpret (Grayson 1989: 647). His recommendations will be considered in this study.

5.2.8 Skeletal Part Analysis

In this research, camelid skeletal part representation is used to explore differential patterning of meat provisioning, both within and among sites. Differential camelid bone representation across architectural units within the site is expected as a result of the spatial partitioning of different activities such as daily consumption, cooking, butchering, or feasting across the site. Dissimilar patterns could also emerge from the

141 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues comparison of Conchopata, Chokepukio, and Cotocotuyoc as they may have had different roles in the Wari administration.

Many factors can shape body part representation, for example: differential transport of carcass parts of varied nutritional utilities (Perkins and Daly 1968). Most of these studies have focused on hunter-gatherer sites (e.g. Lyman 1985; Niven 2007).

One exception is Miller and Burger’s (1995) study in which they interpreted differential camelid body part representation across Chavín de Huántar (Peru) as the result of the consumption of imported ch’arki (desiccated camelid meat).

When assessing skeletal representation, two important methodological issues are how to count bone specimens and which bone specimens should be considered.

For instance, Bartram and Marean (1999) use MNE (minimal number of elements to account for the bones), whereas Klein and colleagues (Klein, et al. 1999) preferred

MNI (minimal number of individuals that account for each bone). Both of these studies focused only on long bones.

In contrast, Miller and Burger (1995:441) considered both the appendicular

(limb) and axial skeleton. They created a different measurement, called the expected number of fragments (ENF) (Miller 1979). They start by calculating the probable number of fragments (PNFR) for each element by assuming that all (proximal and distal) appendicular elements could be broken into two recognizable fragments. For example, a complete tibia would be counted as 4: 2 for the proximal end and 2 for the distal end (Miller 1979:182). The PNFR of each element is then multiplied by the number of each of these elements in one skeleton (PNFR/I). The PNFR/I for each element is multiplied by the minimum number of individuals, previously determined

142 Chapter 5 Methodological Issues for the site; the result is the expected number of fragments (ENF). The observed number of fragments (ONF) is calculated in the same way as the PNFR. Finally, the survival percentage of each element is calculated by dividing the ONF by the ENF

(Miller 1979:180-185). This procedure tried to solve the problem of highly fractured assemblages. However, by incorporating so many unique derived measurements, the results are difficult to compare with those of other researchers who used simpler and conventional methods.

A more broadly comparable quantification measurement used to calculate expected frequencies of skeletal representation is the minimal anatomical units (MAU) and its standardization (%MAU) (explained above in section 5.2), which are used in this study. In this case, %MAU is useful because it is easy to calculate, easy to replicate by other scholars, and useful for visually showing the observed bone element frequencies versus the expected ones.

143 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

CHAPTER 6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, I present and interpret the results of the zooarchaeological analysis from each site under study and finish with a comparison among the three sites in relation to my research questions.

6.1 Taxonomic and Anatomic Distribution

Taxa Diversity

Cotocotuyoc

Amphibia Ave Carnivora Chokepukio Cervidae Rodentia Camelidae

Conchopata

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

Figure 6-1. Faunal diversity in Conchopata (NISP 7896), Cotocotuyoc (NISP 4926), and Chokepukio (NISP 372). Frequency expressed in NISP. Data from Appendix A.4 and Appendix C.4.

144 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

The faunal remains recovered from Conchopata, Cotocotuyoc, and Chokepukio

(Figure 6.1) have some diversity but camelids comprised most of the sample in each case.

Conchopata

The faunal assemblage recovered at Conchopata is mainly composed by camelids

(NISP=3983), followed closely by rodents (NISP=3687). Most of the rodents are guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus). Carnivore remains (NISP=128) are from one young domestic dog or fox. Bird remains (NISP 63) were mostly of small size but a few remains were the size of tinamou (Pteronemia pennata), a medium-size flightless bird.

Conchopata Taxonomic Diversity Total NISP= 7842

LH 2

LH 1 Other Amphibia Ave Carnivora Rodentia Camelidae PG 2

PG 1

0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750

Figure 6-2. Conchopata taxonomic distribution, frequency expressed in NISP. Data from Appendix A. 4.

145 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Cotocotuyoc

The sample comprises all the animal remains excavated in unit S18W20 in the cemetery area. The animal bones showed minimal articulation and were arranged in discrete assemblages (Figure 3.4 in Chapter 3). Only a few body parts, mainly wrist

(carpals) and ankle (tarsals) bones were found articulated. The number of identified specimens is 5102 and the minimum number of camelid individuals is 42. There were also a few rodent remains (NISP 9).

Chokepukio

The vast majority of the zooarchaeological remains recovered from both Building 6 and Building 32-A are camelid bone specimens (Figure 6.3). A few rodents (Table

6.2), cervid (one tarsal), and toad remains complete the assemblage.

146 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Chokepukio Taxonomic Diversity Total NISP= 372

Building 32A

Amphibia Cervid Rodentia Lama

Building 6

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220

Figure 6-3. Chokepukio taxonomic distribution, frequency expressed in NISP. Data from Appendix C.4.

6.1.1 Camelids

Conchopata

The camelid skeletal part representation at Conchopata seem to follow three patterns

(Figure 6.4): One is that of Patio Group1 where radii-ulnae, femora, and tibiae are the bones more represented; the second patters is that followed by Lineage House 1 and

Lineage House 2 where there is an even distribution of camelid body parts; finally, the small sample from Patio Group 2 follows a pattern of relative abundant vertebrae, metapodials, and humeri. However, there are differences when analyzing by EAs

147 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

(Table 6.1). In Patio Group 1, EA-23W has a relative even skeletal part representation

of camelid bones. The same applies to EA-36 and EA-44A.

Conchopata Camelid Skeletal Part Representation

20

15

PG 1 MNI LH1 10 LH2 PG 2

5

0 Skull maxilla mandible Atlas Axis Cervical Thoracic Lumbar Sacrum Scapula Humerus Radius-ulna Carpals metacarpals 1 phalanx 2 phalanx 3 phalanx Innominate Femur Patella Tibia Calcaneum Astragalus Tarsals Metatarsals

Figure 6-4. Conchopata Camelid Skeletal Part Representation, frequency expressed in MNI (PG1= Patio Group 1, PG2= Patio Group2, LH1= Lineage House 1, LH2=Lineage House 2). Data from Appendices A1.1 to A1.4.

Table 6.1. Conchopata skeletal elements by EA, frequency expressed in MNI. Skeletal Elements 1A 1B 23E 23W 24 36 44A 60 61 63 64 83 98 105 112 172 Skull 1 1 0 4 1 7 2 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 1 Maxilla 0 0 1 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 Mandible 0 0 0 3 3 5 2 0 0 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 Atlas 0 1 0 4 0 6 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 Axis 0 0 0 2 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Cervical 1 1 1 5 1 7 2 1 1 0 2 1 0 1 4 0 Thoracic 0 1 1 5 1 5 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 4 1 Lumbar 0 1 0 5 2 4 2 1 1 0 2 1 1 0 4 1 Sacrum 0 0 0 2 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scapula 1 1 0 5 2 6 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Humerus 0 1 1 6 3 11 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 Radioulna 0 1 0 8 3 8 2 1 0 0 3 1 0 0 8 1 Carpals 0 0 1 7 2 6 2 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 Metacarpal 1 6 1 3 1 6 2 1 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 1

148 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

1 phalanx 2 2 1 6 1 8 2 1 0 0 3 2 1 3 5 1 2 phalanx 1 2 1 4 1 7 1 1 0 0 3 0 1 1 1 1 3 phalanx 0 0 1 4 0 5 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Innominate 0 2 0 4 2 8 2 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 3 1 Femur 0 0 1 6 3 6 2 1 0 0 2 1 0 1 7 1 Patella 0 0 0 2 1 2 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 Tibia 0 1 0 7 1 7 2 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 5 1 Calcaneum 0 0 1 6 2 5 2 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 4 1 Astragalus 0 0 1 5 2 5 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 3 1 Tarsals 0 0 0 6 1 8 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 Metatarsal 0 0 1 3 0 6 2 0 1 0 3 1 0 2 2 1

In terms of meat utility elements, high utility limbs (humerus and femur) are represented and so are middle (radioulna and tibia) and low (metapodials) utility limbs

(Figure 6.5).

Osteometric data from Conchopata (Figures 6.32, 6.33. and 6.34) point to the presence of both large and small size camelids. At least some first phalanges recovered from EA-23W, EA-1A, and EA-1B cluster close to modern llama measurements, while some first phalanges from EA-64 and EA-23W cluster close to alpaca measurements.

149 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Conchopata Camelid Limbs Representation (MNI)

30

20

10

0 Humerus Femur Radioulna Tibia Metacarpal Metatarsal

Figure 6-5. Conchopata camelid limb representation, expressed in MNI. Data from Appendices A1.1 to A1.4.

Cotocotuyoc

Camelid skeletal representation in terms of MNI frequencies shows a relative high abundance of scapula, humerus, femur, and metapodials (Figures 6.6). All limb bones are well represented in the Cotocotuyoc assemblage: humeri and femora that have the limb highest meat content have the highest frequency (Figure 6.7).

150 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Cotocotuyoc Camelids (MNI)

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0 Scapula Humerus Radius-ulna Tibia Patella Femur Innominate Crania Maxilla Mandible Atlas Axis Carpals Metacarpal 1 Phalanx 2 Phalanx 3 Phalanx Metatarsal Tarsal Astragalus Calcaneum Cer Tho Lum Cau Ribs Ste Sac Ses

Figure 6-6. Cotocotuyoc camelids’ skeletal part representation, frequency expressed in MNI. Data from Appendix B.1.

Cotocotuyoc Camelid Limbs

35

30

25

20 MNI

15

10

5

0 Humerus Femur Radioulna Tibia Metacarpal Metatarsal

Figure 6-7. Cotocotuyoc camelids meat utility element representation, expressed in MNI. Data from Appendix B.1.

151 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Chokepukio

In terms of camelids skeletal parts, both buildings follow a somewhat similar pattern with a relative higher abundance of radius-ulna, first phalanx, and tarsals (Figure 6.8).

Chokepukio Camelid Skeletal Part Representation

4

3

Bldg 6 MNI 2 MNI Bldg 32A MNI

1

0 Skull maxilla mandible Atlas Axis Cervical Thoracis Lumbar Sacrum Scapula Humerus Radioulna Carpals metacarpals 1 phalanx 2 phalanx 3 phalanx Innominate Femur Patella Tibia Calcaneum Astragalus Tarsals Metatarsals

Figure 6-8. Chokepukio camelid skeletal part representation, frequency expressed in MNI. Data from Appendix C1.1 and C1.2.

There is a low representation of limb bones with high and low utility content and a relatively high representation of medium utility limb elements (Figure 6.9).

While osteometric analysis (Figures 6.32, 6.33, and 6.34) based on the first phalanx point to the presence of both large size and small size camelids, data from Building

32-A suggest a relative abundance of alpaca size camelids. Osteometric data aligning

152 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion with alpaca size’s measurements is another line of evidence to support the emphasis of wool production suggested by the age profile analysis (see below). Osteometric data also suggest the presence of some intermediate size camelids. It is possible that these camelids appearing to be smaller than llama but bigger than alpacas are hybrids forms.

Chokepukio Camelid Skeletal Representation (MNI)

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0 Humerus Femur Radius-ulna Tibia Metacarpal Metatarsal

High Utility Medium Utility Low Utility

Figure 6-9. Chokepukio camelid limb representation, frequency expressed in MNI. Data from Appendices C1.1 and C1.2.

6.1.2 Rodents

Rodents are present, with high variation, in the three sites’ archaeological assemblages

(Table 6.2). Conchopata has the highest frequency of rodent remains, including the highest frequency of guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus). Conchopata also has the highest frequency of leaf ear mice (Phyllotis sp), an animal species which probably entered the archaeological record due to taphonomic factors. There are no reasons to believe

153 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion that Phyllotis was part of the diet of Conchopata’s dwellers. Most of non- cavid rodents were recovered from room EA-61 (non-caviid rodents NISP=759), a small room at the corner of the large rectangular patio EA-98 in PG2. It is possible that the abundance of these rodents is signaling that this small room was used for storage of agriculture products or other refuse attracting this large amount of rodents.

Table 6.2. Frequency (NISP) of rodent remains. “Others” include Neotmys sp, Abrocoma sp, and indeterminate rodent species. Total Cavia Phyllotis SITE UNIT NISP porcellus sp. Others Cotocotuyoc S20W20 9 0 2 7 Chokepukio Building 6 7 4 0 3 Building 32- Chokepukio A 1 1 0 0 Conchopata EA-1A 35 20 9 6 Conchopata EA-1B 96 72 7 17 Conchopata EA-23E 19 7 8 4 Conchopata EA-23W 804 774 2 7 Conchopata EA-24 11 10 1 0 Conchopata EA-36 440 436 0 4 Conchopata EA-44A 157 139 7 11 Conchopata EA-60 58 58 0 0 Conchopata EA-61 761 2 76 683 Conchopata EA-63 6 6 0 0 Conchopata EA-64 1206 1191 4 11 Conchopata EA-83 11 7 0 4 Conchopata EA-98 0 0 0 0 Conchopata EA-105 79 74 5 0 Conchopata EA-112 75 75 0 0 Conchopata EA-172 23 21 0 2

The majority of the guinea pig remains were recovered from EA-64 and EA-

23W. EA-64 is part of Lineage House 1, and the guinea pigs recovered comprised at least thirty-two individuals under the age of 4 months (Table 6.3). Guinea pig remains recovered from EA-23W were sixteen complete individuals, all under the age of 4 months (Table 6.3).

154 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

6.2 Age Distribution

6.2.1 Camelids

Conchopata

As a whole, the Conchopata camelid remains assemblage is predominately composed by unfused bones (Figure 6.10). The mortality profile shows that 20 % of the herd died before turning one month of age. All these specimens were recovered in EA-36 and

EA-64. Most of the remaining animals died before eighteen months of age, and of those who survived this age most made it to past 3 and ½ years of age. This proportion of older animals was most probably kept to an older age for their wool or to be used as pack animals.

Conchopata Camelids

100%

80%

60%

F UF

40%

20%

0% 1 m 12-18m 24 m 33 m 42 m Age Groups

Figure 6-10. Conchopata camelid age profile, expressed as MNE of fused and unfused bones Data from Table 6.3.

155 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Conchopata

100

90

80

70

60

50 %F

40

30

20

10

0 1 m 12-18m 24 m 33 m 42 m Age Groups

Figure 6-11. Conchopata camelid survivorship profile, expressed as percentage of fused bones by age group. Data from Table 6.3.

Table 6.3. Conchopata camelid age data, expressed in MNE. Age Unfused Fused Groups elements elements 1 m 8 31 12-18m 89 25 24 m 45 3 33 m 31 11 42 m 78 24

Cotocotuyoc

The age structure reveals selection for young individuals at Cotocotuyoc. Over 98% of the camelid bones are unfused suggesting a young age at the time of death. The frequency of unfused calcanea (ankle bones) indicates that at least twenty-five individuals were killed before 24 month of age. When analyzing the age profile

156 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

(Figure 6.12 and Table 6. 4), it is clear the overabundance of unfused bones at each age group but most of them survived 1 month of age with very few animals surviving

3 ½ years of age. This is also seen on the survivorship profile (Figure 6.13) where it shows that most animals in the herd were killed around or before 12-18 months of age.

Cotocotuyoc Camelids

100

90

80

70

60

%F 50 %UF

40

30

20

10

0 1 month 12-18 months 24 months 33 months 42 months Age Groups

Figure 6-12. Cotocotuyoc camelid age profile showing a overabundance of unfused bones at each age group, except newborns. Data from Table 6.4.

157 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Cotocotuyoc Survivorship Profile

100

90

80

70

60

50 %F

40

30

20

10

0 1 month 12-18 months 24 months 33 months 42 months Age Groups

Figure 6-13. Cotocotuyoc camelid survivorship profile, percentage of fused bones by age group. Data from Table 6.4.

Table 6.4. Cotocotuyoc camelid data, expressed in MNE. Unfused Fused Age of Fusion elements elements 1 month 2 105 12-18 months 120 30 24 months 67 3 33 months 105 2 42 months 119 12

Chokepukio

At least, in the first two age categories, the camelid remains recovered in Chokepukio are dominated by fused bones (Figure 6.14, Table 6.5). Chokepukio had an older camelid population than the other two sites under study. According to the survivorship profile, over half of the herd was killed around two years of age (Figure 6.15) but from those who survived, many of them made it past 3 and ½ years of age. The latter

158 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion possibly represents animals who were kept until an older age to use for their wool and/or as burden animals.

Chokepukio Camelids

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

F 50% UF

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% 1 m 12-18 m 24 m 33 m 42 m Age Groups

Figure 6-14. Chokepukio camelids age profile, expressed as MNE. Data from Table 6.5.

159 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Chokepukio Survivorship Profile

100

90

80

70

60

50 % F

40

30

20

10

0 1 m 12-18 m 24 m 33 m 42 m Age Groups

Figure 6-15. Chokepukio camelids survivorship profile. Data from Table 6.5.

Table 6.5. Chokepukio camelid age data, frequency expressed in MNE. Age Unfused Fused groups elements elements 1 m 1 12 12-18 m 6 10 24 m 3 2 33 m 7 5 42 m 11 4

6.2.2 Guinea pigs

Many guinea pig remains were recovered from Conchopata. Out of an MNI of ninety- five guinea pigs, eighty-two are younger than five months of age, representing eighty- six percent of the sample (Table 6.6). This high frequency of guinea pigs of similar age is another line of evidence to suggest these animals are the domesticated species

C. porcellus. If these animals were the wild variety of C. aperea, we would expect a large range of age due to random capture. However, it appears that the Wari people

160 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion were selecting guinea pigs of certain age for their sacrifice and consumption.

Interestingly, ethnographic studies from Cuzco, show that people prefer slaughter guinea pigs three to four months after they are born as this is the age when they reach full growth (Bolton 1979).

Table 6.6. Guinea pig age data. Cavia porcellus SITE UNIT MNI Age in months Chokepukio Building 6 1 indeterminate age Building 32- Chokepukio A 1 indeterminate age Conchopata EA-1A 1 younger than 7 months Conchopata EA-1B 3 younger than 5 months Conchopata EA-23E 1 younger than 4 months Conchopata EA-23W 16 younger than 4 months Conchopata EA-24 3 1 younger than 4 months, 1 older than 9 m, 1 indet 11 younger than 5 months, 6 younger than 4 months, Conchopata EA-36 19 2 indet. Conchopata EA-44A 1 younger than 4 months Conchopata EA-60 3 2 younger than 4 months, 1 older than 12 months Conchopata EA-61 1 indeterminate age Conchopata EA-63 2 younger than 5 months Conchopata EA-64 32 younger than 4 months Conchopata EA-83 1 younger than 5 months Conchopata EA-105 5 younger than 4 months Conchopata EA-112 2 1 younger than 4 months, 1 around 10 months Conchopata EA-172 3 older than 7 months

6.3 Mineral Bone Density and Food Utility Indexes

As explained in Chapter 5 “Methodological Issues”, it is important to correlate the camelid skeletal part representation with the mineral bone density to assess if the bones that are most represented are those with highest density values in which case taphonomic factors (weathering, carnivore activity, etc.) could be the main responsible agents of the sample configuration. The correlation between the frequencies of skeletal parts with food values per skeletal element, as explained also in the methodology

161 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion chapter is one indicator to assess human economic strategies, in terms of selecting those animal body parts with highest content of marrow, grease, and meat.

Conchopata

Patio Group 1. The correlation between camelid skeletal parts and bone mineral density is negative and significant (rho = -0.32, p = 0.001) indicating bone structure did not affect the assemblage representation (Figure 6.16). The skeletal part correlation and food utility index is not significant suggesting the representation of all camelid skeletal parts is relatively balanced in this area of the site (Figure 6.17).

Conchopata Camelids Patio Group 1 rs= -0.32 p= 0.001

100 TI1

RU2 AS1AS2AS3 P13 FE6 FE1 TI3 P12 RU6TI5 CA3 CA2 IS1 75 HU5 RU3RU4TI4 CA4 HU1 HU3 PU1 MC1 IS2 MC2 CE1 HU4MR1CA1 MR2 CE2 50 TI2 RU5AC1MC3 AX1 SP1AX3FE4AX2MC6AT1AT2MR3AT3 P1U1LM1 IL1 P11

HU2FE2 FE3P22MR6 MR5MC5 MR4 MC4 LU2 P23 PA1RI1C1 M1 IL2 RI2 RI3 TH1 CD1 TH2RU1SP2 RI4 25 PU2 FE5SP3 SC1LU1L1S1SP4 N1 LU3 DN7 P21 E1 ST1 SC2 T1DN1RI5 P31 DN3 DN6 DN8 DN5 DN4DN2 0 T11 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 BMD

Figure 6-16. Conchopata Patio Group 1 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density values. Data from Appendix A2.1.

162 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Conchopata Camelids Patio Group 1 rs=0.19 p=0.47 100 Tibia Lum and sac

Radius-ulna Humerus Crania 75

Tarsals 1 Phalanx Cer Innominate

Femur and patella 50 Metapodial Scapula Carpals

Mandible Tho Ribs Atlas and Axis

25

0 0 25 50 75 100 Food Utility Index

Figure 6-17. Conchopata Patio Group 1 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index values. Data from Appendix A3.1.

Lineage House 1. There is a non-significant correlation (rho =-0.04, p= 0.63) between mineral bone density and camelid skeletal representation indicating that there is a low probability that bone density was an important taphonomic factor (Figure 6.18).

However, the negative correlation between skeletal representation and food utility index is relatively strong (rho= -0.42, p= 0.09) (Figure 6.19). The bone elements more represented are crania, metapodials, and tarsals.

163 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Conchopata Camelids- Lineage House 1 rs= -0.04 p=0.63

100 AS1 AS2AS3

RU6 CA3 CA4 CA2

75 PA1 MC6MR6 MC5

AC1 MC2 MC1 SP3 RU5 MR5 LM1 IL1

50 CE2 P11 N1 P12 FE6TI1 HU5 RU3MR2IS2 HU1 TI2FE5FE1MR1 RU4MC3 U1 MC4

CD1 CE1 P22 MR3 P23 P13 RI3 P21 AX1 SP1RU2AX3HU4FE4AX2AT1AT2PU1AT3S1SP4 DN1E1 MR4 DN2 DN6 IS1 DN7 DN8 25 RI4 P31 LU1TH2 RI5 ST1PU2FE2 FE3TI5CA1RI1C1 L1 TI4 P1 DN4 DN3 TH1 RI2 LU2 LU3 HU2 HU3 SC1 RU1SP2 T11 DN5 0 SC2 TI3 T1 M1 IL2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 BMD

Figure 6-18. Conchopata Lineage House 1: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density values. Data from Appendix A2.3.

Conchopata Camelids Lineage House 1 rs=-0.42 p=0.09

100 Crania

75

Metapodial Tarsals Mandible Radius-ulna Innominate 1 Phalanx Femur and patella Scapula 50

Humerus Cer Ribs Atlas and Axis Tibia 25 Carpals Tho Lum and sac

0 0 25 50 75 100 Food Utility Index

Figure 6-19. Conchopata Lineage House 1 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index values. Data from Appendix A3.3.

164 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Lineage House 2. There is no correlation (rho = -0.03, p=0.76) between mineral bone density and camelid skeletal representation indicating bone density was not a central factor in bone survivorship (figure 6.20). The correlation between skeletal part representation and food utility index is not significant (rho = -0.24, p=0.36) suggesting food value was not a factor affecting the bone representation (Figure 6.21).

Conchopata Camelids-Lineage House 2

100 C1

CD1 IL1

AC1 AT1 IS2 N1 IS1 CE1 CE2 AT2 75 MR1 MR6SC1MR3AS1AT3RU4AS2AS3MR2 IL2 CA2 MC6RU3TI4 MC2MR5U1 MR4 SP1 MC1CA3RU5 L1 CA4 HU5HU4 MC3 FE6 PU1 P12 HU2 PU2 FE3FE1HU3FE4 P13S1TI3 MC5 MC4 50 M1 LM1 RI1 RI2 LU3 RI3 HU1AX1 TI1AX3TI2TI5SP3PA1P22SC2 SP4SP2P23P1

AX2 FE2 CA1 TH2 ST1 FE5 DN4 DN6 DN8 LU1 LU2 25 DN1 DN2 DN7 P11 RI5 P31 RU2 T1E1RI4 TH1 T11 DN5 DN3 P21 RU6 0 RU1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 BMD

Figure 6-20. Conchopata Lineage House 2: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density values. Data from Appendix A2.4

165 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Conchopata Camelids Lineage House 2 rs= -0.24 p=0.36

100 Humerus

Carpals Innominate

Radius-ulna Tarsals Cer 75

Metapodial Scapula Tibia

Atlas and Axis

50

Mandible

1 Phalanx Femur and patella Lum and sac

Tho Ribs 25

Crania

0 0 25 50 75 100 Food Utility Index

Figure 6-21. Conchopata Lineage House 2 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index values. Data from Appendix A3.4.

Patio Group 2. Although this is a small sample, no correlation was found (rho = -0.15, p= 0.13) between skeletal part representation and bone mineral density suggesting bone density did not impact the bone assemblage survivorship (Figure 6.22). The correlation between skeletal part representation and food utility index (rho =0.12, p=

0.64) is also non-significant (Figure 6.23).

166 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Conchopata Camelids PG2 rs= -0.15 p=0.13

PA1MR1CA3 100 HU1 HU2 TI1 TI2HU3CA1MR6 S1MR2 CA4 IL1 CA2

75

LU2

50 P11 P12

CE1 CE2

LU1 P22 P23 RI4 RI3 25

TH2

RI1 RI2 LU3P31IL2 AX1 ST1 FE6 FE2 AX3 AX2AC1AS3DN1 LM1 DN5 MC4 DN4DN2 DN3 IS1 DN6 DN7 DN8 0 TH1PU2SP1RU6RU2HU5FE3TI5FE5HU4FE1SP3MC1CD1FE4SC2C1SC1RU5MC6AT1AT2PU1RU3L1P21MR3P13AS1AT3RU4TI4AS2TI3RU1SP4MC3IS2SP2T1N1MC2E1MR5MC5M1RI5P1T11U1 MR4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Bone Mineral Denisty

Figure 6-22. Conchopata Patio Group 2: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density. Data from Appendix A2.2.

Conchopata Camelids Patio Group 2

100 Humerus

75

50 Innominate Tibia

25 Metapodial Femur and patella 1 Phalanx Cer

Carpals Tarsals Lum and sac Ribs Tho Atlas and Axis Crania Mandible Radius-ulna Scapula 0 0 25 50 75 100 Food Utility Index

Figure 6-23. Conchopata Patio Group 2 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility indices. Data from Appendix A3.2.

167 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Cotocotuyoc

In Cotocotuyoc, the camelid skeletal part representation and the bone mineral density

(values from Stahl 1999) are actually negatively correlated (rho = -0.25, p= 0.01) indicating that bone structure is not a factor mediating in bone survivorship and that the bone configuration is thus probably a result of human behavior (Figure 6.24).

Cotocotuyoc Camelids rs= -0.25 p=0.01

100 MC1 MC3MC2 SP1

FE2 FE3FE5HU4 TI4 HU2 MR1 MR3MR2 MC5 MC4 TI2 AX1 AX3 AX2AC1AS1AS2AS3 75 TI1 CE1 CE2 RU5 MR5 MR4 AT1AT2AT3 IL2IL1 CA2 FE6 P13 RU3 P12 CA3 CA4 RU4 HU3 IS2 IS1 50 FE1FE4 TI5 SP3 LU1LU2SP4SP2 LU3 PU2HU5CD1 PU1

TH1 MC6 TI3 ST1 MR6 RU6 DN6 DN7DN8 25 P22C1 TH2S1 P23 DN4 HU1 RU2PA1RI1 RI2 N1 M1P1U1 DN2 SC1 DN3 P11CA1 RI5 RI3 RU1 E1 L1 DN1 LM1DN5 P21 P31 SC2 0 T1 RI4T11 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Bone Mineral Density

Figure 6-24. Cotocotuyoc camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density values. Data from Appendix B2.

In Cotocotuyoc, there is no correlation (rho = 0.093, p = 0.72) between skeletal part representation and food utility values (camelid values from Mengoni Goñalons

1996) indicating that there was no preference for selecting those body parts with higher nutritional value (Fig. 6.25).

168 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Cotocotuyoc camelids rs= -0.093 p=0.72

100 Radius-ulna Humerus Metapodial Scapula

Tibia

Atlas and Axis Innominate 75 Cer 1 Phalanx Tarsals

Ribs Femur and patella

50 Crania Lum and sac

Carpals Tho Mandible 25

0 0 25 50 75 100 Food Utility Index

Figure 6-25. Cotocotuyoc camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index values. Data from Appendix B3.

Chokepukio

Building 6. This bone assemblage shows no correlation (rho = 0.035, p = 0.73) between skeletal representation and bone mineral density indicating bone structural density was not a factor in bone representation (Figure 6.26). Skeletal representation and FUI have a non-significant correlation (rho=-0.35, p=-0.16) (Figure 6.27).

169 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Chokepukio Camelids Bldg 6 rs= 0.043 p=0.66

100 SP1

MR3 MR6 MC3 MC6 75

TI5 TI3

P11 AC1 50 SP3 TI4 RU6 CD1 PA1 P13

CE2 RU2 HU3 AT3 MC2 MC5T11 CE1 C1AT2 MR2 U1 MR4 MC4 IS1 DN7 DN8 AT1 MR5 MC1 MR1 M1 P12 25 LU1 LU2 LU3 HU4 CA1 AS2 CA2DN2 FE6 FE1 CA3IS2 RU1 N1 P1CA4 DN5IL1 DN4 HU5 P22 P21 P23 TH2 ST1 RI4 RI5 RI3 TH1 AX2 AS1 P31 HU1 AX1 FE2 AX3 AS3 DN1 LM1 IL2 DN3 DN6 0 HU2TI1PU2TI2FE3FE5FE4RI1SC2SC1RU5PU1L1RU3S1RU4SP4RI2SP2T1E1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Bone Mineral Density

Figure 6-26. Chokepukio Building 6 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density. Data from Appendix C2.1.

Chokepukio Camelids Bldg 6 rs= -0.35 p=0.16

100 Scapula

Metapodial Radius-ulna 1 Phalanx 75

Tibia

50 Innominate Femur and patella Tarsals Atlas and AxisCarpals Crania Cer Mandible 25 Lum and sac Humerus Tho Ribs

0 0 25 50 75 100 Food Utility Index

Figure 6-27. Chokepukio Building 6 camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index. Data from Appendix C3.1.

170 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Building 32-A. This assemblage shows no correlation between % MAU and mineral bone density (rho = -0.02, p= 0.81) and the same is true for %MAU and FUI (rho =-

0.07, p=0.77) (Fig. 6.28 and 6.29).

Chokepukio Camelids Bldg 32

100 DN5 DN4 DN3

RU5 75

HU5 CA1 HU4 CA3 TI4 CA4 CA2

50

RU6 MR2RU4 TI1 FE2 HU3 AX1 TI2TI5 SP4 DN1 IL1 DN2 DN6 DN7 DN8 SP1SP3MR1AX2

25 FE3FE4MR6AC1AS2 MC2 HU1 HU2 RU2 RU3MC3 MR5 MC4 FE5MC1 MC6AS1AS3 MC5 RI4 RI3 P11 P13 P12 CE1 RI1 RI2 LU1LU2 FE6ST1 PU2 AX3 CD1 TH2 N1 M1 P1LM1 IL2 0 TH1 CE2FE1PA1P22SC2C1SC1AT1AT2PU1L1P21MR3AT3S1TI3RU1IS2SP2T1P23E1RI5T11U1 MR4LU3P31 IS1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Bone Mineral Density

Figure 6-28. Chokepukio Building 32-A camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and bone mineral density. Data from Appendix C2.2.

Scapula, metapodials, and tibia show a high representation in Building 6, but vertebrae and ribs are very underrepresented. Mandible, tibia, humerus, and radioulna are the most represented elements in Building 32-A, while vertebrae and tarsals are the least represented in this assemblage. Bldg 6 shows a high representation of metapodial and phalanx while both elements are very underrepresented in Bldg 32.

171 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Chokepukio Camelids Bldg 32- A 100 Mandible Radius-ulna

Tibia 75

Humerus

50

Crania Scapula

Metapodial 25 1 Phalanx Innominate Femur and patella

Ribs Cer Lum and sac Atlas and Axis Carpals Tarsals Tho 0 0 25 50 75 100 Food Utiliy Index

Figure 6-29. Chokepukio Building 32-A camelids: correlation of skeletal frequencies (%MAU) and food utility index. Data from Appendix C3.2.

Table 6.7. Summary of scatterplot values for bone mineral density and food utility indeces. %MAU/ BMD %MAU/ FUI Conchopata PG1 negative non-significant Conchopata PG2 non-significant non-significant Conchopata LH1 non-significant negative Conchopata LH2 non-significant non-significant Cotocotuyoc negative non-significant Chokepukio Building 6 non-significant non-significant Chokepukio Building 32-A non-significant non-significant

In summary, bone mineral density was not a factor that mediated camelid

skeletal part representation for the Conchopata, Cotocotuyoc, and Chokepukio

assemblages. While a selection of bone with highest food values is not apparent,

Conchopata Lineage House 1 has a significant high representation of camelid elements

with poor utility values (Table 6.5).

172 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

6.4 Bone Surface Modification: Weathering, Burning, Carnivore and Rodent Tooth Marks, and Cut Marks

In general terms, bone specimens were well preserved with most specimens falling in the stage 0 and stage 1 categories. The distribution among weathering stages is very similar among the Conchopata assemblages, while the Cotocotuyoc and the

Chokepukio assemblages’ patterns are very different (Figure 6.30 and Table 6.8). The

Cotocotuyoc faunal specimens had the best preservation, along with the small

Chokepukio Building 32-A assemblage, while the Chokepukio Building 6 is the most weathered assemblage.

100

90

80

70

Ck Bg 6 60 Ck B32-A Ct C 50 PG1 PG2 LH1 40 LH2

30

20

10

0 Stage 0 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 Weathering Stage

Figure 6-30. Weathering stages distribution (% NISP). CkB6= Chokepukio Building 6, CkB32-A= Chokepukio Building 32-A, PG1= Conchopata Patio Group 1, PG2= Conchopata Patio Group 2, LH1= Conchopata Lineage House 1, LH2= Conchopata Lineage House 2. Data from Table 6.

173 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Table 6.8. Weathering stage data from Conchopata, Cotocotuyoc, and Chokepukio (NISP AND %NISP). Stage 0 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 N % N % N % N % N % N % Ck Bg 6 37 48.7 25 32.9 12 15.8 1 1.3 1 1.3 0 0 Ck B32- A 43 89.6 5 10.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 Ct C 3421 88.3 415 10.7 37 1.0 2 0.1 0 0.0 0 0 PG1 1016 66.3 374 24.4 123 8.0 19 1.2 1 0.1 0 0 PG2 13 59.1 7 31.8 1 4.5 1 4.5 0 0.0 0 0 LH1 188 63.9 80 27.2 22 7.5 2 0.7 2 0.7 0 0 LH2 661 65.6 316 31.3 30 3.0 1 0.1 0 0.0 0 0

Table 6.9. Rodent tooth marks (NISP), carnivore tooth marks (NISP), cut marks frequency (NISP), and burnt specimens (NSP). Rodent Carnivore Cut Burnt Site Unit marks marks marks specimens Conchopata EA-112 0 0 2 20 Conchopata EA-24 2 0 1 6 Conchopata EA-23W 0 1 15 30 Conchopata EA-23E 0 0 0 2 Conchopata EA-63 0 0 1 5 Conchopata EA-60 0 0 2 4 Conchopata EA-105 1 0 3 2 Conchopata EA-44A 0 0 0 0 Conchopata EA-36 2 0 11 16 Conchopata EA-83 0 0 2 6 Conchopata EA-172 0 0 1 11 Conchopata EA-64 1 1 3 48 Conchopata EA-61 0 0 0 4 Conchopata EA-98 1 0 0 5 Conchopata EA-1A 0 0 0 7 Conchopata EA-1B 9 0 4 26 Chokepukio Building 6 0 0 0 15 Chokepukio Building 32-A 0 0 1 0 Cotocotuyoc S20 W20 0 0 3 20

At least sixteen camelid bone specimens from Conchopata had signs of rodent activity (Table 6.9), most of them were recovered from Patio Group 1. Only two carnivore tooth marks were found in the overall camelid data. Carnivore and rodent marks on bones were absent at the Cotocotuyoc assemblage. No carnivore or rodent marks were found in the faunal assemblages recovered from Chokepukio Building 6

174 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion and Building 32-A. The low frequency of carnivore and rodent tooth marks in the assemblages suggests that no major natural post deposition events took place in

Conchopata, Cotocotuyoc, and Chokepukio.

Specimens with cut marks in Conchopata were somewhat abundant, particularly in relation to the other two sites (Tables 6.9). Most specimens with cut marks are on camelid bones recovered from EA-23W (Patio Group 1) and EA-36

(Lineage House 2). In addition one guinea pig femur from EA-24 had cut marks on its proximal end. Most cut marks on camelid bone specimens were on vertebrae and ribs, followed by the innominate and tarsals (Table 6.10) indicating filleting and dismembering activities.

Burnt bone specimens include both identified specimens to an anatomical level and non-identified fragments (NSP) (Table 6.9). In Conchopata, burning bone specimens were particularly abundant in Patio Group 1, followed by Lineage House 1.

At Cotocotuyoc, animal bone specimens revealed few anthropic modifications.

Only three specimens showed clear cut marks: two astragali and one distal radius, indicating dismembering. The bones were recovered complete in most cases, showing no pre-deposition fractures. Finally, only twenty bone specimens were burnt (most of them were non identified fragments). At Chokepukio, only one specimen (a camelid distal tibia) found in Building 32-A had cut marks. Building 6 had fifteen burnt specimens (Tables 6.9 and 6.10).

175 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Table 6.10. Frequency of camelid skeletal parts with cut marks (Md=mandible, Vt=vertebrae, Sc=scapula, Hu=Humerus, Ri-Ribs, Ra=radioulna, In=innominate, Fe=femur, Ti=tibia, Ta=tarsals, Pa=phalanges). Site/Unit Md Vt Sc Hu Ra Ri In Fe Ti Ta Ph Total Chokepukio B 32-A 1 1 Cotoc S20W20 1 2 3 Conchopata EA-1B 3 1 4 Conchopata EA-23W 6 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 15 Conchopata EA-24 1 1 Conchopata EA-36 1 4 1 3 1 1 11 Conchopata EA-60 1 1 2 Conchopata EA-63 1 1 Conchopata EA-64 1 1 1 3 Conchopata EA-83 1 1 2 Conchopata EA-105 1 1 1 3 Conchopata EA-112 2 2 Conchopata EA-172 1 1 Total 1 10 2 5 1 10 7 1 3 7 2 49

Figure 6-31. Osteometric data for the first phalanx. Comparative data on the left, individual archaeological specimens on the right. Maximum length measurement (FP1V1 and BP1V77

176 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

according to Kent’s (1982) nomenclature). Modern data from Kent 1982 (llama, vicuna and alpaca) and Mengoni and Elkin personal communication 1991 (guanaco). Ninety-five percent confidence. Data from Appendix D.

Figure 6-32. Osteometric data for the first phalanx. Comparative data on the left, individual archaeological specimens on the right. Breadth Proximal Articular Surface (FP1V2 and BP1V78 according to Kent’s (1982) nomenclature). Modern data from Kent 1982 (llama, vicuna and alpaca) and Mengoni and Elkin personal communication 1991 (guanaco). Ninety-five percent confidence interval. Data from Appendix D

177 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Figure 6-33. Osteometric data for the first phalanx. Comparative data on the left, individual archaeological specimens on the right. Breadth of distal articular surface (FP1V3 and BP1V79 according to Kent’s (1982) nomenclature). Modern data from Kent 1982 (llama, vicuna and alpaca) and Mengoni and Elkin personal communication 1991 (guanaco). Ninety-five percent confidence interval. Data from AppendixD.

6.5 Discussion and Interpretation of the Zooarchaeological Analysis

In this section I discuss the faunal results to offering an interpretative narrative of the events that produced the faunal assemblages. Part of this narrative is influenced by the work of Dietler (2001) discussed in Chapter 4 “Zooarchaeology and Sociopolitics:

Issues on Foodways and Feasting”. I also attempt a discussion on how each site’s interpretation fits in the context of the Wari Empire.

178 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

6.5.1 Interpretation of Conchopata Faunal Data

Patio Group 1 (EA-1A, EA-1B, EA-23E, EA-23W, EA-24, EA-83, EA-112,

EA-172). This architectural grouping of rooms around the rectangular patio has a variety of deposits. A complete skeleton of a young dog with no cut marks or any other anthropic modification on the bones had been deposited in the EA-172 entrance, probably as a dedicatory offering. Rooms EA-1A, EA-1B, EA-23E, EA-172 have few remains and they represent little meat, as most of them are from the lower extremities of the camelid skeleton (Table 6.1). However, the small room EA-23W at the corner of the patio EA-112 has a high frequency of bone specimens, many with cut marks and thermal modifications (Tables 6.9). All camelid body parts are represented in EA-

23W, and a high frequency of upper leg bones (femur, humerus) and scapula is noticeable (Table 6.1).

If bones in EA-23W were result of daily discard activity, leaving the rest of the site all clean, why would people choose to leave their trash around the patio area? I argue that the bone characteristics, the context and location of the assemblage point to refuse from a major consumption event. If the faunal remains from EA-23 W are the residues from a special suprahousehold activity such as a feast, what was its role? I argue the assemblage suggest the remains of a feast that can be interpreted as “patron- role feasts” (Dietler 2001:82) where the use of commensal hospitality is used to legitimize institutionalized relations of power. The presence of food remains from all the camelid skeleton points to cooking entire animals for a large meal with many guests. The location of consumption would have been the open patio of EA-112. The

179 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion remains of the feast were subsequently left in the small room of EA-23W where three young camelids of around 3 months of age had been deposited under the oldest floor of the room. As discussed in Chapter 3 “Site Context and Site Formation Processes”,

Cook and Glowacki (2003) have also argued for public feasting to explain the high frequency of decorated and serving vessels recovered in Patio Group 1. This large concentration of bones probably represents the last feasting episode that took place in

EA-112. The low rates of weathering (Figure 6.30, Table 6.8) and absence of rodent and carnivore tooth marks (Table 6.9) suggest that bone specimens were buried relatively quickly. Such characteristics do not conform to expectations for a coarse- grain assemblage, as would be the case if EA-23W had been the “garbage room” for this patio group accumulated through time.

Patio Group 2 (EA-61, EA-98). EA-61 and EA-98 have few identified camelid remains (NISP 28) but, as mentioned above, many rodent remains (NISP 761) concentrated in EA-61 (Table 6.2). With such a small camelid sample, not much can be said, except that the patio area was kept clean. Rodents are mostly of a non-food species (Phyllotis sp) suggesting they are post-occupational in origin. As mentioned above, this large quantity of commensal rodents in one small room suggests that the room stored grains or some other food product attractive to mice.

In Lineage House 1 (EA-60, EA-63, EA-64, EA-105), most of the faunal remains were recovered in EA-64 as an intrusion into the floor. This intrusive deposit includes a complete camelid skeleton (younger than 1 month of age). The camelid’s neonate age indicates the sacrifice was carried out during the rainy season (around december-march). Thirty-two complete guinea pigs were found along the young

180 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion camelid (Table 6.2 and 6.6). The faunal specimens recovered in other areas of EA-64 as well as in EA-60, EA-63, and EA-105 are scarce and the most represented camelid body parts are skull, metapodial, and tarsals (Table 6.1). In fact the correlation between skeletal elements and food utility index is negative (Figure 6.19, Table 6.7) for Lineage House 1. At least nine bone specimens bear cut marks (Table 6.9).

Leaving aside the offering of the young camelid and guinea pigs most of the remains appeared to be ordinary butchery refuse which includes bones with little meat.

Lineage House 2 (EA-36, EA-44A) bears many more faunal specimens. In EA-

36, over twenty-five hundred bone specimens were discovered associated with the ceramic fragments of intentionally smashed oversized vessels possibly used to carry chicha (Isbell 2000: 34). Remains were recovered from one concentration and two pits breaking through the floor. The three accumulations exhibited a high frequency of thermal alteration and cut marks (Table 6.9). Unburnt bones showed little weathering

(Figure 6.30), and the minimum number of camelids was fifteen. The well-prepared pits filled with post-consumption refuse in a room covered with large fragments of oversize vessels suggest special refuse, not of just regular or ordinary garbage. The camelid bone assemblage from EA-36 shares many attributes with EA-23W, including even skeletal representation (Table 6.1), high frequency of cut marks and specimens with thermal alteration (Table 6.9). However, the location of the assemblages is different. While EA-23W is a room associated with the patio, EA-36 is part of a mortuary building. The type of feast carried out in this building could be interpreted as a diacritical feast, which involves the use of differentiated cuisine and consumption styles to reify and naturalize status differences of the participants. The restrictive

181 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion access to the mortuary building points to the characteristics that define diacritical feasts: “...the emphasis shifts from an asymmetrical commensal bond between unequal partners to a statement of exclusive and unequal commensal circles: obligations of reciprocal hospitality are no longer the basis of status claims and power” (Dietler

2001:85). Feasts held in association with mortuary activities at Conchopata appeared to have taken place privately. However, in a small settlement like Conchopata, this hardly could have gone unnoticed. The display of wealth was probably and, not necessary consciously, also performed for the living.

A primary burial of two semi-flexed, articulated camelid skeletons was found in the mortuary building entrance room in EA-44A (Figure 6.31). They had been deposited below the floor along with a complete guinea pig. The two camelids were between 1 and 3 months of age, and they did not have any cut marks or evidence of thermal alteration. These characteristics: articulated skeleton, absence of cut marks and thermal alteration suggest the animals had not been consumed. The room where the animals were found is the entrance chamber to the room containing human burials in cists. These articulated animals placed under the floor suggest a foundational or dedicatory ritual sacrifice.

182 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion

Figure 6-34.Offering of young camelids from Conchopata, EA-44A. Photo by S.Rosenfeld.

6.5.2 Interpretation of the Cotocotuyoc fauna

The assemblage is composed of mostly unbroken and unweathered camelid bones representing virtually the whole skeleton of at least 42 individuals (Figures 6.6 and

6.7) selected from a particular age range of animals, younger than 42 months of age, and located directly above human burials (Figure 6.12 and 6.13, Table 6.4).

The Cotocotuyoc bone assemblage in the cemetery does not represent typical domestic waste nor the remains of squatters’ leftovers left by people camping after the cemetery was abandoned. The Cotocotuyoc assemblage recovery context was interpreted as a cemetery and not domestic dwellings by the excavators, and stratigraphic, structural, and zooarchaeological evidence support this interpretation.

The camelid remains lay immediately on top of the human interment and beneath or at

183 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion the same level as the early Wari wall foundations. Moreover, a Wari floor found north of the faunal cache was laid above the level of the Wari camelid offering and below the subsequent Lucre wall (Glowacki, personal communication 2010).

This deposit represents a departure from those previously discussed and is thus far unique in the archaeofaunal repertoire of Wari sites. If this assemblage were a midden we would expect a mixed deposit of fragmented bones, charcoal, ash, plus broken artifacts such as ceramic fragments and worn lithic tools. However, only animal bones and one obsidian knife were found in this layer and very few of the hundred animal bones were fractured. As well, the excellent state of bone preservation

(Figure 6.30, Table 6.8) suggests quick burial (Lyman 1994:405), something not expected in a midden accumulated over time.

Only three of 4926 Cotocotuyoc specimens showed cut marks (Table 6.9 and

6.10). This, along with the fact that most skeletal specimens were recovered in a complete state, suggests that these camelids were not intensively butchered as with a consumption event.

One explanation for the virtual absence of cut marks and thus probably minimal butchery is what’s been called ritual wasteful consumption (e.g. Galik 2002).

The absence of intense exploitation could indicate a waste of meat and marrow resources. This behavior could be expected when the meal and its consumption are intended as a means to display wealth. Alternatively, the virtual lack of evidence for butchery marks could be interpreted as animal sacrifice without consumption.

However, if the Cotocotuyoc cemetery deposit is a sacrifice, it differs from the usual one encountered as dedicatory offerings in other Wari sites. In the latter, single or

184 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion small numbers of animals are interred whole and articulated. At Cotocotuyoc the animals were mostly found disarticulated. It is possible that they could have been deposited above the cemetery as a secondary offering, having being interred as wholly articulated bodies somewhere else and, after decomposition, collected, carried to the cemetery, and placed on top of the compact layer above the human burials. However, if this were the case, the bones must have been transported in bags or as bundles, since even small bones and unfused epiphyses are well represented. No evidence of such textile containers was recovered. Further, the bone reburial would have had to take place quickly after decomposition because the weathering rates are low. Therefore, secondary deposition seems an improbable scenario for this assemblage.

The Cotocotuyoc faunal assemblage thus displays unique features that do not accord with the other samples reported here and in other zooarchaeological literature on Wari sites. The extremely low frequency of cut marks and fragmentation, as well as the lack of thermal alteration depart from what is expected from both daily and large consumption events. At the same time, disarticulation is generally not expected in a sacrifice without consumption when all camelid parts are present.

Given their association with an early Wari cemetery, it is possible that the camelids were prepared and offered as a special “meal for the ancestors”. While the

Cotocotuyoc people did not consume the camelids, they disarticulated the skeletons and placed them as food on top of the human burials. In fact, the few cutmarks present on the assemblage are disarticulation marks. The disarticulated camelids may represent food for the dead, meat on the bones left to decay. While it is difficult to choose between the two scenarios: a) remains of consumed meat during a wasteful

185 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion feast or b) disarticulated portions of camelids left unconsumed for the dead to eat, the virtually intact assemblage was left as an offering related to the human burials. Given the stratigraphic sequence it seems that this extraordinary camelid offering took place soon after the period during which the humans were interred in the cemetery. Can the assemblage be explained in terms of the sociopolitical transformations that were occurring in the Huaro valley?

Following Glowacki’s interpretation that the Cotocotuyoc cemetery is associated with the early settlers of the Huaro valley (Glowacki 2008), it could be proposed that the Cotocotuyoc local leaders performed a massive offering of camelids to the dead ancestors, perhaps founding members of the community. Their motivation might have been to achieve balance (appease anger, pay homage) as well as to display wealth among the living, in order to reinforce social demarcations and maintain control in this new sociopolitical environment influenced by the Wari Empire.

Adapting from Dietler’s (2001) concept of empowering feasts, I interpret the

Cotocotuyoc assemblage as empowering offerings, offerings performed for advertisement of power. With a new type of political arrangement, like the Wari

Empire influence in the region, giving large offerings may have been the means by which local leaders assumed these roles and held their high statuses. In a context where fixed political roles are perhaps not yet institutionalized under the influence of the new imperial organization power was being renegotiated, sustained, and contested through sacrificing camelids. These offerings where young camelids were sacrificed were possibly public statements of prestige. The amount of waste, translated into sacrificing, approximate forty-two young llamas, must have been a public display of

186 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion wealth. The fact that the animals were placed on top of human burials suggests a performance possibly related to local ancestor veneration. All rituals have multiple audiences and motivations (Dietler 2001:78). It could have been a meal offered to the dead people but at the same time it was directed towards other segments of the

Cotocotuyoc society who were also benefiting from being on good terms with their ancestors. Those offering the llamas created relations of reciprocal obligation and social asymmetry between the donors and the rest of the community that in the long run helped maintained the Wari superstructure.

6.5.3 Interpretation of Chokepukio Faunal Data

The deposits of the bones recovered both in Building 6 and Building 32-A were interpreted as fill during excavation (see Chapter 3 Site Context and Site Formation

Process: the cases of Conchopata, Cotocotuyoc and Chokepukio). A mix of ceramic fragments, bones, and broken lithic artifacts were found in a mixed context. The small camelid assemblage from the Middle Horizon contexts in Chokepukio is mainly composed of body parts with small quantities of meat: radio-ulna, first phalanx, and tarsals (Figure 6.8 and 6.9). There is a low representation of high utility bones, such as humerus, femur, and vertebrae. Given the small sample size there is a relative high abundance of burnt specimens in Building 6 (Table 6.9). These deposits appeared to be general everyday refuse. Given the relative abundance of low utility parts, either these elements were the only body parts transported to the site, or most probably, meatier body parts were left somewhere else within the site. Sample age data indicate an older herd than the Conchopata and Cotocotuyoc herds suggesting possibly more

187 Chapter 6 Results and Discussion emphasis on wool production or caravans. I would argue for wool production, as animals used in caravans would be expected to die along routes, while wool production animals may have been kept close to the site. Finally, osteometric data analysis also suggests an abundance of alpacas (Figures 6.32, 6.33, and 6.34) supporting the claim about the emphasis of wool production at the site. However, it is worth noting that the Chokepukio bone sample is very small (NISP 372) and therefore, any conclusion is tentative.

188 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions

CHAPTER 7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Food is at the intersection of nature and culture, being a requirement of human life but always being socially transformed and loaded with cultural meaning. This dissertation shows that it is possible to study ancient sociopolitical roles of animal food through the analysis of meal refuse in the archaeological record. Specifically, the project expands beyond the traditional focus in zooarchaeology on human subsistence by seeing food as a critical element in the creation, negotiation, and manipulation of human relationships. In particular, it shows how during the ancient Wari Empire of

Peru (A.D. 600-900) feasts and animal offerings played different roles in consolidating the empire both in the province (Cotocotuyoc and Chokepukio) and in the heartland

(Conchopata).

7.1 Research questions and summary of results

It is important to note at the outset that in none of the archaeological sites under study was animal bone preservation greatly affected by non-humans agents or processes, indicating that we can interpret the sample configurations as a result of human activity.

In this section I summarize the results by answering the research questions posed at the beginning of this dissertation.

(1) What was the Animal Diet of the Ayacucho and Cuzco Populations during the

Wari Empire?

189 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions

As expected for high altitude Andean contexts, animal diet included camelids, guinea pigs, and birds. Carnivores and amphibians, although present in the assemblages, do not appear to have been consumed by the populations. Carnivores were recovered from ritual contexts, while amphibians are probably of non- anthropic origin. There is a prevalence of young camelids in Conchopata and Cotocotuyoc. The assemblage in Chokepukio is mainly composed of adult to old camelids.

Chokepukio and Cotocotuyoc had very few rodent bone specimens, whereas

Conchopata had a very large proportion of guinea pig remains. This is particularly interesting, as most assemblages from complex societies in the central Andes do not appear to include such large abundance of guinea pig in relation to camelids. Guinea pigs may have provided a ready supply of meat for consumption and offerings.

Most of the Conchopata guinea pigs were younger than 5 months of age, indicating a selection at the time of killing, and thus these were most definitely domestic animals. This is consistent with data from ethnographic account of Andean traditional communities who prefer to consume guinea pigs of that age (Bolton and

Calvin 1981). While many guinea pigs were definitely consumed at the site

(disarticulation and at least one cut marks is present), a large proportion was also placed as unconsumed offerings both in new and abandoned rooms, and in many cases alongside camelids.

(2) Is it Possible to Interpret Political Drivers in Animal Use during Wari Times?

Earlier in Chapter 4, expectations about bone assemblages produced by feasting, offerings without consumption, and quotidian trash were outlined. It is expected that

190 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions certain assumptions about feasting, such as consumption of large amount of food, roasted meat, best animal cuts, can be reflected in general trends in the representation of camelid remains, as in high frequency of skeletal elements with large amounts of meat or even representation of all body parts with evidence of roasting. At the same time, as the presence of abundant fresh bone fracture and cut marks are often interpreted as evidence of marrow extraction and high intensive butchery, their absence can signal the presence of wealth display in the form of food waste. In terms of animal offerings without consumption, animal bones are expected to show articulation, absence of fragmentation, cut marks, or fire exposure, and to show good preservation.

Bones recovered from quotidian trash or middens are expected to show high levels of fragmentation, exposure to fire, and high rates of weathering. Regular trash is not necessarily expected to be dump immediately so middens tend to be coarse-grain deposits, both issues resulting in higher levels of weathering rates. Bones specimens resulting from trash or discard activity tend to be recovered in mixed deposits that include broken artifacts, such as ceramic fragments and worn lithic tools.

The assemblages from Conchopata EA-23W (Patio Group 1) and EA-36

(Lineage House 2) generally accord with the expectations outlined for feasting. The assemblages show a high density of bone remains, cut marks, thermal modification, and low weathering rates in basically bone-only deposits. While all body parts are present, there is a predominance of upper bone legs and scapula, all parts with abundant meat. As discussed in Chapter 6, public feasting in Conchopata Patio Group

1 may be interpreted as “patron-role feast” (Dietler 2001:82) where the use of

191 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions commensal hospitality is used to legitimize institutionalized relations of power between the local elite and their guests. The guests acknowledge their role as subordinate, while the host’s generosity is seen as a duty. Asymmetrical commensal relations between host and guests serve to institutionalize authority (Dietler 2001:83).

The assemblage from Conchopata EA-44A (Lineage House 2) and EA-64

(Lineage House 1) accord with the expectations outlined for animal offerings without consumption. Young camelids and guinea pigs were recovered articulated and without cut marks or signs of fire exposure, all elements were present, and the specimens show excellent preservation. As discussed in Chapter 6, feasting in Conchopata Lineage

House 2 can be understood as “diacritical feasts” (Dietler 2001: 85) used to reify status differences in an exclusive and restricted access-mortuary building. The restrictive access to the mortuary building points to the characteristics that define diacritical feasts: “...the emphasis shifts from an asymmetrical commensal bond between unequal partners to a statement of exclusive and unequal commensal circles: obligations of reciprocal hospitality are no longer the basis of status claims and power” (Dietler 2001:85). Feasts held in association with mortuary activities at

Conchopata took place privately. However, in a small settlement like Conchopata, this hardly could have gone unnoticed. The display of wealth was probably also performed for the living. Both public and private feasting served to maintain existing inequalities at Conchopata. This suggests reinforcement and consolidation of authority and power was a continuous process at the core of the Wari realm.

The small assemblages from Conchopata Patio Group 2 and Lineage House 1

(without the offerings from EA-64) and Chokepukio Buildings 6 and 32-A generally

192 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions accord with quotidian food preparation discard or trash. Correlation between camelid skeletal part representation and food utility index is negative and strong in Lineage

House 1, and the bone elements more represented are crania, metapodial, and tarsals.

While the %MAU and FUI correlation is not significant for Chokepukio and

Conchopata Patio Group 2, the bones most represented are metapodials, phalanges, podials, and radioulna. The level of fragmentation was high and the bone assemblages were mixed with broken ceramics and other artifacts. Finally, bone specimens were particular weathered in Chokepukio Building 6.

The assemblage from the Cotocotuyoc cemetery does not conform to any of the expected patterns, as the bones were found disarticulated, all elements were represented, and cut marks and signs of fire exposure were virtually absent. Two different scenarios can explain this configuration: a) the camelid bones are meals for the dead, basically meat left to decay on the bone; or b) the camelid bones were consumed in a mortuary ritual and they represent wasteful consumption, thus the lack of intense butchering. Consumed or non-consumed amounts of camelid remains were then placed as animal offerings on top of human burials. Mortuary offerings during the early time in the Cotocotuyoc settlement may be interpreted as the result of

“empowering offerings” (adapted from Dietler 2001) made by local leaders to gain and maintain power in the new context of the Wari Empire.

(3) Does Animal Management Show Differences Among the Three Sites?

193 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions

At the site of Chokepukio in Cuzco, age profiles point to the predominant use of adult- to-old camelids, perhaps indicating the importance of the area as a textile production center or llama caravan node, beyond its administrative functions, as interpreted through architecture and ceramics. While it is a small sample, osteometric analysis indicates the presence of small camelids, possible alpacas, suggesting that textile production may have been important at the site.

In comparison to Chokepukio and Conchopata, Cotocotuyoc displays a relatively high representation of long bones with low utility content but this is because whole animal skeletons – and hence bodies – were deposited above the cemetery, rather than selectively chosen cuts of camelid for meals. Most of the Cotocotuyoc camelids died by twenty-four months of age and very few survived even to 3 ½ years of age. It appears that only juvenile camelids were selected for offerings to the dead.

The assemblage at the Cotocotuyoc cemetery revealed complete animals deposited on top of the human burials, with an absence of cut and burn marks, pointing to either a non-consumption, mass sacrifice of young camelids, or a wasteful consumption of meat that basically left a lot of meat on the bones and hence no cutmarks. In both scenarios, the evidence suggests events of conspicuous juvenile llama offering related to human burial practices during the early moments of the Wari Empire, possibly related to the local leaders’ attempt to maintain power through the display of wealth.

In the Wari heartland site of Conchopata, a higher frequency of better meat cuts prevails. A significant portion (twenty percent) of Conchopata camelids died before one month of age. Most of these very young camelids were used for sacrifice without consumption. From those that survived, most died before eighteen months of

194 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions age, while those who survived this age made it to past 3½ years. The juvenile camelids were selected for butchering probably because they have reached their full potential for tender meat; those that died older then 3 ½ years were probably used in textile production or in caravans. Osteometric analysis shows the presence of both large and small camelids, suggesting both llamas and alpacas were used at the site.

(4) Did Culinary Practices Vary According to Architectural Settings?

In Conchopata, public feasting took place in the open rectangular patio in Patio

Group 1, while private feasting took place in the back rooms of Lineage House 2, next to the mortuary room. The later Patio Group 2 does not show evidence of public feasting. This could be the result that indeed this practice did not occur in this patio group or that the area where the remains are deposited has not been excavated yet.

Rooms in Lineage House 1 have evidence of everyday food refuse. Dedicatory offerings of camelids and guinea pigs appear associated with patio groups (EA-23W), residential areas (EA-64), and mortuary areas (EA-44A).

7.2 Situating Conchopata and Cotocotuyoc Practices within Andean Patterns

Offerings of complete articulated camelid and guinea pig as those found beneath the floors of Conchopata (e.g. EA-44A) were also reported at Middle Horizon Tiwanaku

(Webster and Janusek 2003), at the Late Intermediate Period site of El Yaral (Rofes

2000, 2004; Wheeler 1995, 1996), and at the Inca site of Lo Demas (Sandweis and

Wing 1997), among others. Animal age varies but it appears to be a preference for young individuals, possibly signifying the loss of potential of meat and wool consumption. It is also possible that young camelids who died of cold or diseases (they

195 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions are the most vulnerable in the herd) were used for these practices when became available. These offerings of animals without consumption placed under houses’ floors are in most cases interpreted as dedicatory burials, related to structure building events.

It appears that animal offerings beneath floors are a tradition that goes deep in time in the Andes beyond any particular political organization.

Based on ethnohistorical accounts that describe that food was placed in front of

Inca mummies and afterwards the people in charge of the bodies consumed the food,

Miller (2003) argues for a similar situation when interpreting the Machu Picchu camelid bones. The collection has a high frequency of fresh fracture, cut marks, and signs of exposure to fire, something not expected if meat portions had been simply placed in the graves for the dead “to eat” (Miller 2003:38). This is the opposite from the characteristics described for the Cotocotuyoc camelid assemblage: no fractures, no cut marks, and no signs of exposure to fire. It is possible that indeed the camelids were left on top as meals for the dead, and eventually the meat on the bones decayed leaving the bones in good preservation as it was observed. It is also possible that camelid meat was consumed but only in little quantity, in an attempt to display wealth and capability of waste. It is difficult to choose which scenario is more plausible but it is interesting to note that the Cotocotuyoc bone assemblage departs from the examples reported in the Andean literature.

Andean scholars have argued for the presence of feasting practices during the

Early Horizon (Hastorf 2003), Early Intermediate Period (Gero 1992, Lau 2002,

Leoni 2006,Vaughn 2004), Middle Horizon (Brewster and Janusek 2003, Cook and

Glowacki 2003, Isbell 1988, Isbell et al 1991, Isbell and Groleau 2010, Jennings 2006,

196 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions

McEwan 2005, Moseley et al 2005, Nash 2010, Swenson 2006) , Late Intermediate

Period (Parsons, et al. 1997) and Late Horizon (Bray 2003, Hastorf 1996). The roles of feasting have been related to dead commemoration, closure ceremonies, fertility and regeneration rites, work-parties, in order to enhance community building, display wealth, reify asymmetric relationships, and mobilize labor. While the presence of feasting has been asserted from archaeological evidence from prehispanic Andean contexts, its motivations in each particular sociopolitical system have not been extensively discussed. Feasting did not always serve the same purpose all over the region or even within each site. At Cerro Baúl and at Conchopata, more than one type of feasting has already been identified within the site (abandonment ritual feasting, public feasting, ancestor veneration feasting) and these probably involved different hosts and guests (Cook and Glowacki 2003, Isbell and Groleau 2010, Nash 2010).

The review of archaeological approaches to Andean feasting illustrates that there are some general assumptions about the concept of feasting (hospitality in the form of large amounts of foods and drink, attractive types of food, luxurious display of food and containers) that seemed to be reflected in general types of evidence in the archaeological record, such as a combination of the presence of a particular architectural space, highly elaborated or decorated ceramics, and large quantity of certain animal species.

As discussed in Chapter 4 most of these studies assess the evidence of feasting in the archaeological record by examining architecture, the relative frequencies of food serving vessels in relation to those of food preparation vessels, and only secondarily, the state of faunal remains at a very general level. In most cases it has

197 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions been assumed that Wari feasting worked essentially like those in Inca times when the state hosted big meals during and after the completion of large work projects.

While it has generally been accepted that during Inca times the state directly sponsored many public feasts (Morris 1982), it is not clear this was the case during

Wari times. I am skeptical of the weight given to the state sponsorship of these feasts during the Middle Horizon. The literature never clearly states what state-sponsored feasts would imply in the Wari state. Sponsorship implies an economic relationship:

Was the Wari state really financing – or even officially encouraging – these feasts? If that was the case, it has not been showed how this was accomplished. I would argue that feasting was not necessarily a direct imperial political strategy, but rather a local elite strategy to maintain control and legitimize their power with the prestige and practices of the Wari State or Empire. By extension offerings and feasting practices with Wari symbolic association helped reinforce, recreate, and maintain the presence of the Wari polity itself.

7.3 Future Research

Further analysis of data and interpretation needs to focus on the relationship and articulation of the three sites in terms of their function and location in the province and heartland of the Wari Empire. It will be ideal to have a higher temporal resolution for the occupation of the sites. As mentioned earlier, while ceramic style analysis from the

Cotocotuyoc cemetery indicated that the human burials were early in the Middle

Horizon period, it will be extremely helpful to have radiocarbon dates directly associated to the Cotocotuyoc human and animal bones. Better, to date the bones

198 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions directly in order to have a better temporal precision. In the case of Chokepukio, a site with a long occupation sequence, in the near future I expect to process the data I collected from pre-Wari and post-Wari levels to develop a diachronic zooarchaeological comparison. Finally, faunal data from Conchopata Area A (west of

Avenida del Ejercito) should be added in the future. This area includes some contexts with human burials associated with faunal assemblages that deserve a zooarchaeological analysis in order to explore further variation in animal use across the site. Finally, there was a high frequency of bone tools in the Conchopata assemblage that merit further analysis and interpretation, especially in terms of estimating whether their manufacture affected camelid skeletal part representation.

7.4 Final Comments

Offerings and feasts can be instruments of political action to pursue economic and political goals. Offerings and feasts served a variety of roles in articulating the politics of the Wari Empire. During the early times of the Wari influence in provincial

Cotocotuyoc, offerings of camelids served to acquire and maintain symbolic capital by the local leaders. At Conchopata, a site in the Wari heartland, feasts in public open patios served to legitimize institutionalized relations of power, while feasts related to mortuary activity in private rooms functioned to naturalize status differences across this socially stratified town. Although certainly not the only practice used to retain power differences, offerings and feasts involving camelid meat, chicha beverages, and special Wari ceramics were key to build and maintain a vast and complex polity such as the Wari Empire.

199 Appendices

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Faunal Remains Recorded from Conchopata

A.1.1 Frequency of bone specimens from Conchopata EA-1A, EA-1B, EA-23E, EA- 23W.

EA- 1A EA- 1B EA- 23E EA- 23W NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI Scapula 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 15 6 5 Humerus 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 38 12 6 Radioulna 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 46 13 8 Tibia 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 34 12 7 Patella 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 2 Femur 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 30 9 6 Innominat 0 0 0 4 2 2 0 0 0 19 7 4 Skull 2 1 1 8 2 1 0 0 0 30 4 4 Maxilla 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 6 2 2 Mandible 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4 3 Atlas 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 4 4 4 Axis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 Carpals 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 37 37 7 Metacarp 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 12 4 3 1 Phalanx 2 2 1 5 4 2 3 2 1 44 28 6 2 Phalanx 1 1 1 7 6 2 1 1 1 26 20 4 3 Phalanx 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 9 9 4 Metatarsal 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 13 5 4 Tarsal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 18 6 Astrag 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 9 9 5 Calc 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 12 9 6 Cer 1 1 1 5 2 1 2 1 1 91 24 5 Tho 0 0 0 11 5 1 2 1 1 88 41 5 Lum 0 0 0 20 6 1 0 0 0 78 26 5 Ribs 5 2 1 30 12 1 4 1 1 154 46 5 Ste 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 3 Sac 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 2

200 Appendices

A.1.2 Frequency of bone specimens from Conchopata EA-61, EA-63, EA-64, EA-83.

EA- 61 EA- 63 EA- 64 EA- 83 NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI Scapula 0 0 0 1 1 1 4 2 1 1 1 1 Humerus 2 1 1 1 1 1 8 2 1 1 1 1 Radioulna 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 5 3 1 1 1 Tibia 1 1 1 0 0 0 7 3 2 3 2 2 Patella 1 1 1 0 0 0 4 4 2 0 0 0 Femur 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 4 2 3 2 1 Innominate 1 1 1 0 0 0 9 3 2 0 0 0 Skull 0 0 0 2 2 1 28 3 3 4 1 1 Maxilla 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 1 1 Mandible 0 0 0 2 2 1 7 3 2 2 1 1 Atlas 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 2 0 0 0 Axis 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 Carpals 1 1 1 0 0 0 5 5 1 0 0 0 Metacarpal 2 1 1 0 0 0 18 5 3 6 1 1 1 Phalanx 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 18 3 4 2 2 2 Phalanx 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 16 3 0 0 0 3 Phalanx 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 1 0 0 0 Metatarsal 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 4 2 0 0 0 Tarsal 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 12 2 0 0 0 Astragalus 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 2 0 0 0 Calcaneum 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 6 3 0 0 0 Cer 2 1 1 0 0 0 15 7 2 2 1 1 Tho 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 13 2 0 0 0 Lum 1 1 1 0 0 0 24 6 2 1 1 1 Ribs 4 1 1 4 1 1 94 22 1 20 8 1 Stenebra 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sacrum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

201 Appendices

A.1.3. Frequency of bone specimens from Conchopata EA-24, EA-36, EA-44A, EA- 60.

EA-24 EA- 36 EA- 44A EA- 60 NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI Scapula 3 2 2 22 10 6 8 4 2 1 1 1 Humerus 3 3 3 39 16 11 11 4 2 0 0 0 Radioulna 7 3 3 28 13 8 11 4 2 1 1 1 Tibia 2 2 1 25 10 7 11 4 2 0 0 0 Patella 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 Femur 6 3 3 20 10 6 15 4 2 4 1 1 Innominate 7 2 2 31 14 8 12 4 2 2 1 1 Skull 9 1 1 82 7 7 46 2 2 0 0 0 Maxilla 0 0 0 16 7 5 4 3 2 0 0 0 Mandible 3 3 3 16 7 5 6 4 2 0 0 0 Atlas 0 0 0 9 6 6 6 2 2 0 0 0 Axis 2 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 2 0 0 0 Carpals 0 0 0 52 51 11 20 20 2 2 2 1 Metacarpal 2 2 30 10 6 10 4 2 1 1 1 1 Phalanx 4 4 1 34 28 8 25 16 2 6 2 1 2 Phalanx 3 2 1 22 19 7 10 8 1 3 3 1 3 Phalanx 0 0 0 14 14 5 5 5 1 0 0 0 Metatarsal 0 0 23 10 6 10 4 2 0 0 0 Tarsal 1 1 1 28 27 8 16 16 2 0 0 0 Astragalus 2 2 2 8 8 5 4 4 2 1 1 1 Calcaneum 2 2 2 11 9 5 7 4 2 0 0 0 Cer 4 3 1 73 31 7 11 9 2 4 1 1 Tho 4 2 1 79 28 5 21 20 2 0 0 0 Lum 7 4 2 59 19 4 31 10 2 1 1 1 Ribs 38 8 3 196 50 5 94 32 2 0 0 0 Stenebra 1 1 1 6 6 2 10 10 2 0 0 0 Sacrum 0 0 0 11 4 4 5 1 1 0 0 0

202 Appendices

A.1.4 Frequency of bone specimens from Conchopata EA-98, EA-105, EA-112, EA- 172.

EA- 98 EA- 105 EA- 112 EA-172 NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI NISP MNE MNI Scapula 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 2 1 0 0 0 Humerus 1 1 1 0 0 0 6 3 2 0 0 0 Radioulna 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 3 8 1 1 1 Tibia 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 8 5 2 1 1 Patella 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 Femur 0 0 0 1 1 1 8 5 7 3 2 1 Innominate 0 0 0 3 2 2 8 3 3 2 1 1 Skull 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 Maxilla 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 Mandible 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 2 2 7 1 1 Atlas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Axis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Carpals 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 Metacarpal 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 1 1 1 1 Phalanx 2 2 1 5 3 3 18 16 5 3 3 1 2 Phalanx 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 3 Phalanx 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Metatarsal 0 0 0 6 3 2 4 3 2 2 1 Tarsal 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 1 1 Astragalus 0 0 0 1 1 1 4 4 3 1 1 1 Calcaneum 1 1 1 0 0 0 6 5 4 1 1 1 Cer 0 0 0 4 1 1 8 7 4 0 0 0 Tho 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 10 4 2 1 1 Lum 1 1 1 0 0 0 9 5 4 2 1 1 Ribs 5 2 1 48 20 1 86 18 5 9 7 1 Stenebra 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Sacrum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

203 Appendices

A.2.1 Bone mineral density data from Conchopata Patio Group 1 (scan sites and VDSA data from Stahl 1999 Patio Group 1 scan VD sites SA N MAU %MAU Acetabulum AC1 1.89 9 4.5 50.00 Astragalo AS1 1.91 16 8 88.89 AS2 2.08 16 8 88.89 AS3 2.14 16 8 88.89 Atlas AT1 1.79 4 4 44.44 AT2 1.8 4 4 44.44 AT3 1.94 4 4 44.44 Axis AX1 0.69 4 4 44.44 AX2 1.66 4 4 44.44 AX3 1.35 4 4 44.44 Cuneiform C1 1.66 6 3 33.33 Calcaneo CA1 1.54 10 5 55.56 CA2 3.75 14 7 77.78 CA3 1.6 14 7 77.78 CA4 2.73 13 6.5 72.22 Cuboid CD1 1.49 5 2.5 27.78 Cervical CE1 1.04 26 5.2 57.78 CE2 1.33 24 4.8 53.33 Mandible DN1 2.43 2 1 11.11 DN2 3.87 1 0.5 5.56 DN3 4.38 2 1 11.11 DN4 3.85 1 0.5 5.56 DN5 3.09 1 0.5 5.56 DN6 5 2 1 11.11 DN7 7.19 4 2 22.22 DN8 7.23 2 1 11.11 Tarsal Cu3 E1 2.45 3 1.5 16.67 Femur FE1 1.41 15 7.5 83.33 FE2 1.03 7 3.5 38.89 FE3 1.35 7 3.5 38.89 FE4 1.5 8 4 44.44 FE5 1.36 4 2 22.22 FE6 0.86 15 7.5 83.33 Humerus HU1 0.61 12 6 66.67 HU2 0.84 7 3.5 38.89 HU3 1.42 12 6 66.67 HU4 1.39 10 5 55.56 HU5 1.3 13 6.5 72.22 Ilion IL1 3.29 8 4 44.44 IL2 3.18 6 3 33.33 Ischion IS1 5.04 14 7 77.78 IS2 2.12 11 5.5 61.11 Lunar L1 1.86 4 2 22.22 Maleolo LM1 2.84 8 4 44.44 Lumbar LU1 1.84 14 2 22.22

204 Appendices

LU2 1.91 22 3.14 34.92 LU3 3.02 14 2 22.22 Magnum M1 2.59 6 3 33.33 Metacarpal MC1 1.46 11 5.5 61.11 MC2 2.39 11 5.5 61.11 MC3 2.12 9 4.5 50.00 MC4 3.43 7 3.5 38.89 MC5 2.5 7 3.5 38.89 MC6 1.78 8 4 44.44 Metatarsal MR1 1.47 10 5 55.56 MR2 2.08 10 5 55.56 MR3 1.89 8 4 44.44 MR4 2.92 7 3.5 38.89 MR5 2.48 7 3.5 38.89 MR6 1.71 7 3.5 38.89 Navicular N1 2.39 4 2 22.22 Pisiform P1 2.61 8 4 44.44 Phalanx 1 P11 1.53 30 3.75 41.67 P12 3.2 59 7.375 81.94 P13 1.9 61 7.625 84.72 Phalanx 2 P21 1.88 13 1.625 18.06 P22 1.61 27 3.375 37.50 P23 2.41 26 3.25 36.11 Phalanx 3 P31 3.1 9 1.125 12.50 Patella PA1 1.45 6 3 33.33 Pubis PU1 1.83 12 6 66.67 PU2 1.03 4 2 22.22 Rib RI4 2.56 60 2.5 27.78 RI1 1.61 72 3 33.33 RI2 2.12 71 2.95 32.87 RI3 3.36 68 2.83 31.48 RI5 2.6 24 1 11.11 Radioulna RU1 2.1 5 2.5 27.78 RU2 1.26 16 8 88.89 RU3 1.86 13 6.5 72.22 RU4 2.06 13 6.5 72.22 RU5 1.75 9 4.5 50.00 RU6 1.18 14 7 77.78 Scaphoid S1 1.98 4 2 22.22 Sacrum SC1 1.71 2 2 22.22 SC2 1.65 1 1 11.11 Scapula SP1 1.1 8 4 44.44 SP2 2.22 5 2.5 27.78 SP3 1.44 4 2 22.22 SP4 2.12 4 2 22.22 Stenebra ST1 0.83 7 1.166 12.96 Trapezoid T1 2.34 2 1 11.11 First Tarsal T11 2.62 0 0 0.00 Thoracic TH1 0.91 30 2.5 27.78 TH2 1.97 29 2.41 26.85 Tibia TI1 0.96 18 9 100.00

205 Appendices

TI2 1.25 9 4.5 50.00 TI3 2.09 15 7.5 83.33 TI4 2.07 13 6.5 72.22 TI5 1.36 14 7 77.78 Unciform U1 2.68 8 4 44.44

A.2.2 Bone mineral density data from Conchopata Patio Group 2 (scan sites and VDSA data from Stahl 1999)

Patio Group 2 scan VD sites SA N MAU %MAU Acetabulum AC1 1.89 0 0 0.00 Astragalo AS1 1.91 0 0 0.00 AS2 2.08 0 0 0.00 AS3 2.14 0 0 0.00 Atlas AT1 1.79 0 0 0.00 AT2 1.8 0 0 0.00 AT3 1.94 0 0 0.00 Axis AX1 0.69 0 0 0.00 AX2 1.66 0 0 0.00 AX3 1.35 0 0 0.00 Cuneiform C1 1.66 0 0 0.00 Calcaneo CA1 1.54 1 0.5 100.00 CA2 3.75 1 0.5 100.00 CA3 1.6 1 0.5 100.00 CA4 2.73 1 0.5 100.00 Cuboid CD1 1.49 0 0 0.00 Cervical CE1 1.04 1 0.2 40.00 CE2 1.33 1 0.2 40.00 Mandible DN1 2.43 0 0 0.00 DN2 3.87 0 0 0.00 DN3 4.38 0 0 0.00 DN4 3.85 0 0 0.00 DN5 3.09 0 0 0.00 DN6 5 0 0 0.00 DN7 7.19 0 0 0.00 DN8 7.23 0 0 0.00 Tarsal Cu3 E1 2.45 0 0 0.00 Femur FE1 1.41 0 0 0.00 FE2 1.03 0 0 0.00 FE3 1.35 0 0 0.00 FE4 1.5 0 0 0.00 FE5 1.36 0 0 0.00 FE6 0.86 0 0 0.00 Humerus HU1 0.61 1 0.5 100.00 HU2 0.84 1 0.5 100.00 HU3 1.42 1 0.5 100.00 HU4 1.39 0 0 0.00 HU5 1.3 0 0 0.00

206 Appendices

Ilion IL1 3.29 1 0.5 100.00 IL2 3.18 0 0 0.00 Ischion IS1 5.04 0 0 0.00 IS2 2.12 0 0 0.00 Lunar L1 1.86 0 0 0.00 Maleolo LM1 2.84 0 0 0.00 Lumbar LU1 1.84 1 0.14 28.57 LU2 1.91 2 0.28 57.14 LU3 3.02 0 0 0.00 Magnum M1 2.59 0 0 0.00 Metacarpal MC1 1.46 0 0 0.00 MC2 2.39 0 0 0.00 MC3 2.12 0 0 0.00 MC4 3.43 0 0 0.00 MC5 2.5 0 0 0.00 MC6 1.78 0 0 0.00 Metatarsal MR1 1.47 1 0.5 100.00 MR2 2.08 1 0.5 100.00 MR3 1.89 0 0 0.00 MR4 2.92 0 0 0.00 MR5 2.48 0 0 0.00 MR6 1.71 1 0.5 100.00 Navicular N1 2.39 0 0 0.00 Pisiform P1 2.61 0 0 0.00 Phalanx 1 P11 1.53 2 0.25 50.00 P12 3.2 2 0.25 50.00 P13 1.9 0 0 0.00 Phalanx 2 P21 1.88 0 0 0.00 P22 1.61 1 0.125 25.00 P23 2.41 1 0.125 25.00 Phalanx 3 P31 3.1 0 0 0.00 Patella PA1 1.45 1 0.5 100.00 Pubis PU1 1.83 0 0 0.00 PU2 1.03 0 0 0.00 Rib RI4 2.56 3 0.125 25.00 RI1 1.61 1 0.04 8.33 RI2 2.12 1 0.04 8.33 RI3 3.36 3 0.125 25.00 RI5 2.6 0 0 0.00 Radioulna RU1 2.1 0 0 0.00 RU2 1.26 0 0 0.00 RU3 1.86 0 0 0.00 RU4 2.06 0 0 0.00 RU5 1.75 0 0 0.00 RU6 1.18 0 0 0.00 Scaphoid S1 1.98 1 0.5 100.00 Sacrum SC1 1.71 0 0 0.00 SC2 1.65 0 0 0.00 Scapula SP1 1.1 0 0 0.00 SP2 2.22 0 0 0.00 SP3 1.44 0 0 0.00

207 Appendices

SP4 2.12 0 0 0.00 Stenebra ST1 0.83 0 0 0.00 Trapezoid T1 2.34 0 0 0.00 First Tarsal T11 2.62 0 0 0.00 Thoracic TH1 0.91 0 0 0.00 TH2 1.97 1 0.08 16.67 Tibia TI1 0.96 1 0.5 100.00 TI2 1.25 1 0.5 100.00 TI3 2.09 0 0 0.00 TI4 2.07 0 0 0.00 TI5 1.36 0 0 0.00 Unciform U1 2.68 0 0 0.00

A.2.3 Bone mineral density data from Conchopata Lineage House 1 (scan sites and VDSA data from Stahl 1999).

Lineage House 1 scan VD sites SA N MAU %MAU Acetabulum AC1 1.89 4 2 57.14 Astragalo AS1 1.91 7 3.5 100.00 AS2 2.08 7 3.5 100.00 AS3 2.14 7 3.5 100.00 Atlas AT1 1.79 2 1 28.57 AT2 1.8 2 1 28.57 AT3 1.94 2 1 28.57 Axis AX1 0.69 2 1 28.57 AX2 1.66 2 1 28.57 AX3 1.35 2 1 28.57 Cuneiform C1 1.66 1 0.5 14.29 Calcaneo CA1 1.54 1 0.5 14.29 CA2 3.75 6 3 85.71 CA3 1.6 6 3 85.71 CA4 2.73 6 3 85.71 Cuboid CD1 1.49 3 1.5 42.86 Cervical CE1 1.04 7 1.4 40.00 CE2 1.33 9 1.8 51.43 Mandible DN1 2.43 2 1 28.57 DN2 3.87 2 1 28.57 DN3 4.38 1 0.5 14.29 DN4 3.85 1 0.5 14.29 DN5 3.09 0 0 0.00 DN6 5 2 1 28.57 DN7 7.19 2 1 28.57 DN8 7.23 2 1 28.57 Tarsal Cu3 E1 2.45 2 1 28.57 Femur FE1 1.41 3 1.5 42.86 FE2 1.03 1 0.5 14.29 FE3 1.35 1 0.5 14.29 FE4 1.5 2 1 28.57

208 Appendices

FE5 1.36 3 1.5 42.86 FE6 0.86 3 1.5 42.86 Humerus HU1 0.61 3 1.5 42.86 HU2 0.84 0 0 0.00 HU3 1.42 0 0 0.00 HU4 1.39 2 1 28.57 HU5 1.3 3 1.5 42.86 Ilion IL1 3.29 4 2 57.14 IL2 3.18 0 0 0.00 Ischion IS1 5.04 2 1 28.57 IS2 2.12 3 1.5 42.86 Lunar L1 1.86 1 0.5 14.29 Maleolo LM1 2.84 4 2 57.14 Lumbar LU1 1.84 5 0.71 20.41 LU2 1.91 2 0.28 8.16 LU3 3.02 1 0.14 4.08 Magnum M1 2.59 0 0 0.00 Metacarpal MC1 1.46 4 2 57.14 MC2 2.39 4 2 57.14 MC3 2.12 3 1.5 42.86 MC4 3.43 3 1.5 42.86 MC5 2.5 5 2.5 71.43 MC6 1.78 5 2.5 71.43 Metatarsal MR1 1.47 3 1.5 42.86 MR2 2.08 3 1.5 42.86 MR3 1.89 3 1.5 42.86 MR4 2.92 2 1 28.57 MR5 2.48 4 2 57.14 MR6 1.71 5 2.5 71.43 Navicular N1 2.39 3 1.5 42.86 Pisiform P1 2.61 1 0.5 14.29 Phalanx 1 P11 1.53 13 1.625 46.43 P12 3.2 13 1.625 46.43 P13 1.9 10 1.25 35.71 Phalanx 2 P21 1.88 9 1.125 32.14 P22 1.61 11 1.375 39.29 P23 2.41 11 1.375 39.29 Phalanx 3 P31 3.1 6 0.75 21.43 Patella PA1 1.45 5 2.5 71.43 Pubis PU1 1.83 2 1 28.57 PU2 1.03 1 0.5 14.29 Rib RI4 2.56 21 0.87 25.00 RI1 1.61 13 0.54 15.48 RI2 2.12 11 0.45 13.10 RI3 3.36 29 1.20 34.52 RI5 2.6 16 0.66 19.05 Radioulna RU1 2.1 0 0 0.00 RU2 1.26 2 1 28.57 RU3 1.86 3 1.5 42.86 RU4 2.06 3 1.5 42.86 RU5 1.75 4 2 57.14

209 Appendices

RU6 1.18 6 3 85.71 Scaphoid S1 1.98 2 1 28.57 Sacrum SC1 1.71 0 0 0.00 SC2 1.65 0 0 0.00 Scapula SP1 1.1 2 1 28.57 SP2 2.22 0 0 0.00 SP3 1.44 4 2 57.14 SP4 2.12 2 1 28.57 Stenebra ST1 0.83 3 0.5 14.29 Trapezoid T1 2.34 0 0 0.00 First Tarsal T11 2.62 0 0 0.00 Thoracic TH1 0.91 5 0.41 11.90 TH2 1.97 8 0.66 19.05 Tibia TI1 0.96 3 1.5 42.86 TI2 1.25 3 1.5 42.86 TI3 2.09 0 0 0.00 TI4 2.07 1 0.5 14.29 TI5 1.36 1 0.5 14.29 Unciform U1 2.68 3 1.5 42.86

A.2.4 Bone mineral density data from Conchopata Lineage House 2 (scan sites and VDSA data from Stahl 1999)

Lineage House 2 scan VD sites SA N MAU % MAU Acetabulum AC1 1.89 16 8 84.21 Astragalo AS1 1.91 14 7 73.68 AS2 2.08 14 7 73.68 AS3 2.14 14 7 73.68 Atlas AT1 1.79 8 8 84.21 AT2 1.8 7 7 73.68 AT3 1.94 7 7 73.68 Axis AX1 0.69 4 4 42.11 AX2 1.66 4 4 42.11 AX3 1.35 4 4 42.11 Cuneiform C1 1.66 19 9.5 100.00 Calcaneo CA1 1.54 7 3.5 36.84 CA2 3.75 14 7 73.68 CA3 1.6 12 6 63.16 CA4 2.73 12 6 63.16 Cuboid CD1 1.49 17 8.5 89.47 Cervical CE1 1.04 36 7.2 75.79 CE2 1.33 36 7.2 75.79 Mandible DN1 2.43 5 2.5 26.32 DN2 3.87 5 2.5 26.32 DN3 4.38 3 1.5 15.79 DN4 3.85 6 3 31.58 DN5 3.09 3 1.5 15.79

210 Appendices

DN6 5 6 3 31.58 DN7 7.19 5 2.5 26.32 DN8 7.23 6 3 31.58 Tarsal Cu3 E1 2.45 4 2 21.05 Femur FE1 1.41 10 5 52.63 FE2 1.03 7 3.5 36.84 FE3 1.35 10 5 52.63 FE4 1.5 10 5 52.63 FE5 1.36 6 3 31.58 FE6 0.86 10 5 52.63 Humerus HU1 0.61 8 4 42.11 HU2 0.84 10 5 52.63 HU3 1.42 10 5 52.63 HU4 1.39 11 5.5 57.89 HU5 1.3 11 5.5 57.89 Ilion IL1 3.29 18 9 94.74 IL2 3.18 14 7 73.68 Ischion IS1 5.04 15 7.5 78.95 IS2 2.12 15 7.5 78.95 Lunar L1 1.86 12 6 63.16 Maleolo LM1 2.84 9 4.5 47.37 Lumbar LU1 1.84 19 2.71 28.57 LU2 1.91 18 2.57 27.07 LU3 3.02 30 4.28 45.11 Magnum M1 2.59 9 4.5 47.37 Metacarpal MC1 1.46 12 6 63.16 MC2 2.39 13 6.5 68.42 MC3 2.12 11 5.5 57.89 MC4 3.43 10 5 52.63 MC5 2.5 10 5 52.63 MC6 1.78 13 6.5 68.42 Metatarsal MR1 1.47 14 7 73.68 MR2 2.08 14 7 73.68 MR3 1.89 14 7 73.68 MR4 2.92 13 6.5 68.42 MR5 2.48 13 6.5 68.42 MR6 1.71 14 7 73.68 Navicular N1 2.39 15 7.5 78.95 Pisiform P1 2.61 8 4 42.11 Phalanx 1 P11 1.53 17 2.12 22.37 P12 3.2 42 5.25 55.26 P13 1.9 40 5 52.63 Phalanx 2 P21 1.88 8 1 10.53 P22 1.61 32 4 42.11 P23 2.41 32 4 42.11 Phalanx 3 P31 3.1 17 2.12 22.37 Patella PA1 1.45 8 4 42.11 Pubis PU1 1.83 10 5 52.63 PU2 1.03 10 5 52.63 Rib RI4 2.56 46 1.91 20.18 RI1 1.61 100 4.16 43.79

211 Appendices

RI2 2.12 100 4.16 43.79 RI3 3.36 100 4.16 43.79 RI5 2.6 52 2.16 22.81 Radioulna RU1 2.1 0 0 0.00 RU2 1.26 4 2 21.05 RU3 1.86 13 6.5 68.42 RU4 2.06 14 7 73.68 RU5 1.75 12 6 63.16 RU6 1.18 1 0.5 5.26 Scaphoid S1 1.98 10 5 52.63 Sacrum SC1 1.71 7 7 73.68 SC2 1.65 4 4 42.11 Scapula SP1 1.1 12 6 63.16 SP2 2.22 8 4 42.11 SP3 1.44 8 4 42.11 SP4 2.12 8 4 42.11 Stenebra ST1 0.83 18 3 31.58 Trapezoid T1 2.34 4 2 21.05 First Tarsal T11 2.62 3 1.5 15.79 Thoracic TH1 0.91 20 1.66 17.54 TH2 1.97 43 3.58 37.72 Tibia TI1 0.96 8 4 42.11 TI2 1.25 8 4 42.11 TI3 2.09 10 5 52.63 TI4 2.07 13 6.5 68.42 TI5 1.36 8 4 42.11 Uniciform U1 2.68 13 6.5 68.42

A.3.1 Conchopata Patio Group 1 food utility data (FUI values from Mengoni- Gonalons 1991)

Element FUI MNE MAU % MAU Crania 14.75 10 10 76.92 Mandible 9.95 11 5.5 42.31 Atlas and Axis 8.57 8 4 30.77 Cer 64.15 39 7.8 60.00 Tho 61.75 60 5 38.46 Lum and sac 77.97 100 12.5 96.15 Innominate 40.18 15 7.5 57.69 Ribs 100 102 4.25 32.69 Scapula 41.66 13 6.5 50.00 Humerus 36.68 21 10.5 80.77 Radioulna 23 22 11 84.62 Carpals 11.76 40 5.71 43.96 Metapodial 9 23 5.75 44.23 Femur and patella 75.94 27 6.75 51.92 Tibia 43.04 26 13 100.00 Tarsals 21.88 57 8.14 62.64 1 Phalanx 4.78 62 7.75 59.62

212 Appendices

A.3.2 Conchopata Patio Group 2 food utility data (FUI values from Mengoni- Gonalons 1991) Element FUI MNE MAU % MAU Crania 14.75 0 0 0.00 Mandible 9.95 0 0 0.00 Atlas and Axis 8.57 0 0 0.00 Cer 64.15 1 0.2 20.00 Tho 61.75 1 0.083 8.33 Lum and sac 77.97 2 0.125 12.50 Innominate 40.18 1 0.5 50.00 Ribs 100 3 0.125 12.50 Scapula 41.66 0 0 0.00 Humerus 36.68 2 1 100.00 Radioulna 23 0 0 0.00 Carpals 11.76 1 0.14 14.29 Metapodial 9 1 0.25 25.00 Femur and patella 75.94 1 0.25 25.00 Tibia 43.04 1 0.5 50.00 Tarsals 21.88 1 0.14 14.00 1 Phalanx 4.78 2 0.25 25.00

A.3.3 Conchopata Lineage House 1 food utility data (FUI values from Mengoni- Gonalons 1991)

Element FUI MNE MAU % MAU Crania 14.75 5 5 100.00 Mandible 9.95 6 3 60.00 Atlas and Axis 8.57 3 1.5 30.00 Cer 64.15 9 1.8 36.00 Tho 61.75 14 1.166 23.33 Lum and sac 77.97 7 0.875 17.50 Innominate 40.18 6 3 60.00 Ribs 100 43 1.79 35.83 Scapula 41.66 5 2.5 50.00 Humerus 36.68 4 2 40.00 Radioulna 23 6 3 60.00 Carpals 11.76 8 1.14 22.86 Metapodial 9 13 3.25 65.00 Femur and patella 75.94 11 2.75 55.00 Tibia 43.04 3 1.5 30.00 Tarsals 21.88 23 3.28 65.71 1 Phalanx 4.78 23 2.87 57.50

213 Appendices

A.3.4 Conchopata Lineage House 2 (EA 44A not included) food utility data (FUI values from Mengoni-Gonalons 1991) Element FUI MNE MAU % MAU Crania 14.75 7 1 12.50 Mandible 9.95 7 3.5 43.75 Atlas and Axis 8.57 9 4.5 56.25 Cer 64.15 31 6.2 77.50 Tho 61.75 28 2.33 29.17 Lum and sac 77.97 23 2.875 35.94 Innominate 40.18 14 7 87.50 Ribs 100 50 2.08 26.04 Scapula 41.66 10 5 62.50 Humerus 36.68 16 8 100.00 Radioulna 23 13 6.5 81.25 Carpals 11.76 51 7.28 91.07 Metapodial 9 20 5 62.50 Femur and patella 75.94 12 3 37.50 Tibia 43.04 10 5 62.50 Tarsals 21.88 44 6.28 78.57 1 Phalanx 4.78 28 3.5 43.75

A.4 Conchopata taxonomic diversity (NISP) Camelidae Rodentia Carnivora Ave Amphibia Other Patio Group 1 1471 959 128 3 11 2 Patio Group 2 28 761 0 4 0 0 Lineage House 1 721 1361 0 13 13 0 Lineage House 2 1708 607 0 43 8 1

214 Appendices

Appendix B. Faunal Remains Recorded from Cotocotuyoc

B.1 Cotocotuyoc skeletal part elements. Cotocotuyoc NISP MNE MNI Scapula 94 64 42.0 Humerus 148 66 38.0 Radioulna 214 65 25.0 Tibia 182 58 26.0 Patella 17 16 8.0 Femur 176 63 36.0 Innominate 132 52 26.0 Crania 223 16 16.0 Maxilla 17 17 9.0 Mandible 79 19 10.0 Atlas 24 24 24.0 Axis 47 26 26.0 Carpals 88 88 8.0 Metacarpal 70 70 35.0 1 Phalanx 215 184 23.0 2 Phalanx 78 68 9.0 3 Phalanx 14 14 2.0 Metatarsal 56 56 32.0 Tarsal 58 58 15.0 Astragalus 58 53 28.0 Calcaneum 56 49 29.0 Cer 173 123 25.0 Tho 220 134 19.0 Lum 164 114 17.0 Cau 48 39 3.0 Ribs 406 241 11.0 Ste 62 62 11.0 Sac 10 10 10.0 Ses 1 1 1.0

215 Appendices

B.2. Cotocotuyoc bone mineral density data (scan sites and VDSA values from Stahl 1999). scan VD sites SA N MAU %MAU Acetabulum AC1 1.89 52 26 76.47 Astragalo AS1 1.91 53 26.5 77.94 AS2 2.08 53 26.5 77.94 AS3 2.14 53 26.5 77.94 Atlas AT1 1.79 24 24 70.59 AT2 1.8 24 24 70.59 AT3 1.94 24 24 70.59 Axis AX1 0.69 26 26 76.47 AX2 1.66 20 26 76.47 AX3 1.35 20 26 76.47 Cuneiform C1 1.66 17 8.5 25.00 Calcaneo CA1 1.54 9 4.5 13.24 CA2 3.75 49 24.5 72.06 CA3 1.6 42 21 61.76 CA4 2.73 43 21.5 63.24 Cuboid CD1 1.49 30 15 44.12 Cervical CE1 1.04 123 24.6 72.35 CE2 1.33 123 24.6 72.35 Mandible DN1 2.43 6 3 8.82 DN2 3.87 13 6.5 19.12 DN3 4.38 11 5.5 16.18 DN4 3.85 17 8.5 25.00 DN5 3.09 6 3 8.82 DN6 5 19 9.5 27.94 DN7 7.19 19 9.5 27.94 DN8 7.23 19 9.5 27.94 Tarsal Cu3 E1 2.45 7 3.5 10.29 Femur FE1 1.41 35 17.5 51.47 FE2 1.03 60 30 88.24 FE3 1.35 60 30 88.24 FE4 1.5 34 17 50.00 FE5 1.36 59 29.5 86.76 FE6 0.86 47 23.5 69.12 Humerus HU1 0.61 15 7.5 22.06 HU2 0.84 56 28 82.35 HU3 1.42 37 18.5 54.41 HU4 1.39 59 29.5 86.76 HU5 1.3 30 15 44.12 Ilion IL1 3.29 49 24.5 72.06 IL2 3.18 49 24.5 72.06 Ischion IS1 5.04 36 18 52.94 IS2 2.12 36 18 52.94 Lunar L1 1.86 6 3 8.82 Maleolo LM1 2.84 5 2.5 7.35 Lumbar LU1 1.84 106 15.14285714 44.54 LU2 1.91 106 15.14285714 44.54

216 Appendices

LU3 3.02 106 15.14285714 44.54 Magnum M1 2.59 16 8 23.53 Metacarpal MC1 1.46 68 34 100.00 MC2 2.39 68 34 100.00 MC3 2.12 68 34 100.00 MC4 3.43 57 28.5 83.82 MC5 2.5 57 28.5 83.82 MC6 1.78 23 11.5 33.82 Metatarsal MR1 1.47 56 28 82.35 MR2 2.08 56 28 82.35 MR3 1.89 56 28 82.35 MR4 2.92 50 25 73.53 MR5 2.48 50 25 73.53 MR6 1.71 21 10.5 30.88 Navicular N1 2.39 16 8 23.53 Pisiform P1 2.61 16 8 23.53 Phalanx 1 P11 1.53 34 4.25 12.50 P12 3.2 175 21.875 64.34 P13 1.9 184 23 67.65 Phalanx 2 P21 1.88 16 2 5.88 P22 1.61 68 8.5 25.00 P23 2.41 68 8.5 25.00 Phalanx 3 P31 3.1 14 1.75 5.15 Patella PA1 1.45 15 7.5 22.06 Pubis PU1 1.83 29 14.5 42.65 PU2 1.03 29 14.5 42.65 Rib RI4 2.56 110 4.583333333 13.48 RI1 1.61 0 0 0.00 RI2 2.12 186 7.75 22.79 RI3 3.36 186 7.75 22.79 RI5 2.6 110 4.58 13.48 Radioulna RU1 2.1 8 4 11.76 RU2 1.26 15 7.5 22.06 RU3 1.86 44 22 64.71 RU4 2.06 38 19 55.88 RU5 1.75 50 25 73.53 RU6 1.18 19 9.5 27.94 Scaphoid S1 1.98 17 8.5 25.00 Sacrum SC1 1.71 10 5 14.71 SC2 1.65 2 1 2.94 Scapula SP1 1.1 64 32 94.12 SP2 2.22 30 15 44.12 SP3 1.44 30 15 44.12 SP4 2.12 30 15 44.12 Stenebra ST1 0.83 62 10.33 30.39 Trapezoid T1 2.34 0 0 0.00 First Tarsal T11 2.62 0 0 0.00 Thoracic TH1 0.91 134 11.16 32.84 TH2 1.97 105 8.75 25.74 Tibia TI1 0.96 51 25.5 75.00 TI2 1.25 54 27 79.41

217 Appendices

TI3 2.09 23 11.5 33.82 TI4 2.07 58 29 85.29 TI5 1.36 33 16.5 48.53 Unciform U1 2.68 16 8 23.53

B.3. Cotocotuyoc food utility data ( FUI values from Mengoni-Goñalons 1991) Element FUI % MAU Crania 14.75 48.48 Mandible 9.95 28.79 Atlas and Axis 8.57 75.76 Cervical 64.15 74.55 Thoracic 61.75 33.84 Lumbar and sacrum 77.97 46.97 Innominate 40.18 78.79 Ribs 100.00 60.86 Scapula 41.66 96.97 Humerus 36.68 100.00 Radioulna 23.00 98.48 Carpals 11.76 38.10 Metapodial 9.00 95.45 Femur and patella 75.94 59.09 Tibia 43.04 87.88 Tarsals 21.88 69.26 1 Phalanx 4.78 69.70

Appendix C. Faunal Remains Recorded from Chokepukio

C.1. Chokepukio frequency of skeletal representation Building 6 Building 32-A % % NISP MNE MAU NISP MNE MAU Scapula 9 6 100 7 2 40 Humerus 4 1 16.7 9 3 60 Radioulna 8 5 83.3 7 5 100 Tibia 9 4 66.7 7 4 80 Patella 4 3 50 0 0 0 Femur 2 2 33.3 2 2 40 Innominate 7 3 50 3 1 20 Skull 8 1 33.3 3 1 40 Maxilla 4 3 50 4 2 40 Mandible 8 2 33.3 18 5 100 Atlas 2 1 33.3 0 0 0 Axis 0 0 0 2 1 20

218 Appendices

Cer 20 5 33.3 1 1 0.2 Tho 6 4 11 1 1 0.08 Lum 6 5 23.6 1 1 0.14 Ribs 27 1 1.33 34 5 8 Carpals 7 7 33.3 0 0 0 Metacarpal 17 5 83.3 5 1 20 1 Phalanx 23 19 79.3 5 4 20 2 Phalanx 5 5 21 0 0 0 3 Phalanx 1 1 4.3 0 0 0 Metatarsal 17 5 83.3 7 2 40 Tarsal 6 6 50 0 0 0 Astragalus 1 1 16.7 1 1 20 Calcaneum 3 1 16.7 3 3 60

C.2.1 Chokepukio Building 6 bone mineral density data (scan sites and VDSA values from Stahl 1995) Building 6 scan VD sites SA N MAU %MAU Acetabulum AC1 1.89 3 1.5 50.00 Astragalo AS1 1.91 0 0 0.00 AS2 2.08 1 0.5 16.67 AS3 2.14 0 0 0.00 Atlas AT1 1.79 1 1 33.33 AT2 1.8 1 1 33.33 AT3 1.94 1 1 33.33 Axis AX1 0.69 0 0 0.00 AX2 1.66 0 0 0.00 AX3 1.35 0 0 0.00 Cuneiform C1 1.66 2 1 33.33 Calcaneo CA1 1.54 1 0.5 16.67 CA2 3.75 1 0.5 16.67 CA3 1.6 1 0.5 16.67 CA4 2.73 1 0.5 16.67 Cuboid CD1 1.49 3 1.5 50.00 Cervical CE1 1.04 5 1 33.33 CE2 1.33 5 1 33.33 Mandible DN1 2.43 0 0 0.00 DN2 3.87 1 0.5 16.67 DN3 4.38 0 0 0.00 DN4 3.85 1 0.5 16.67 DN5 3.09 1 0.5 16.67 DN6 5 0 0 0.00 DN7 7.19 2 1 33.33 DN8 7.23 2 1 33.33 Tarsal Cu3 E1 2.45 0 0 0.00 Femur FE1 1.41 1 0.5 16.67

219 Appendices

FE2 1.03 0 0 0.00 FE3 1.35 0 0 0.00 FE4 1.5 0 0 0.00 FE5 1.36 0 0 0.00 FE6 0.86 1 0.5 16.67 Humerus HU1 0.61 0 0 0.00 HU2 0.84 0 0 0.00 HU3 1.42 2 1 33.33 HU4 1.39 1 0.5 16.67 HU5 1.3 1 0.5 16.67 Ilion IL1 3.29 1 0.5 16.67 IL2 3.18 0 0 0.00 Ischion IS1 5.04 2 1 33.33 IS2 2.12 1 0.5 16.67 Lunar L1 1.86 0 0 0.00 Maleolo LM1 2.84 0 0 0.00 Lumbar LU1 1.84 5 0.71 23.67 LU2 1.91 5 0.71 23.67 LU3 3.02 5 0.71 23.67 Magnum M1 2.59 2 1 33.33 Metacarpal MC1 1.46 2 1 33.33 MC2 2.39 2 1 33.33 MC3 2.12 5 2.5 83.33 MC4 3.43 2 1 33.33 MC5 2.5 2 1 33.33 MC6 1.78 5 2.5 83.33 Metatarsal MR1 1.47 2 1 33.33 MR2 2.08 2 1 33.33 MR3 1.89 5 2.5 83.33 MR4 2.92 2 1 33.33 MR5 2.48 2 1 33.33 MR6 1.71 5 2.5 83.33 Navicular N1 2.39 1 0.5 16.67 Pisiform P1 2.61 1 0.5 16.67 Phalanx 1 P11 1.53 13 1.62 54.00 P12 3.2 7 0.9 30.00 P13 1.9 11 1.4 46.67 Phalanx 2 P21 1.88 3 0.4 13.33 P22 1.61 3 0.4 13.33 P23 2.41 3 0.4 13.33 Phalanx 3 P31 3.1 1 0.12 4.00 Patella PA1 1.45 3 1.5 50.00 Pubis PU1 1.83 0 0 0.00 PU2 1.03 0 0 0.00 Rib RI4 2.56 6 0.25 8.33 RI1 1.61 1 0.04 1.33 RI2 2.12 1 0.04 1.33 RI3 3.36 6 0.25 8.33 RI5 2.6 6 0.25 8.33 Radioulna RU1 2.1 1 0.5 16.67 RU2 1.26 2 1 33.33

220 Appendices

RU3 1.86 0 0 0.00 RU4 2.06 0 0 0.00 RU5 1.75 0 0 0.00 RU6 1.18 3 1.5 50.00 Scaphoid S1 1.98 0 0 0.00 Sacrum SC1 1.71 0 0 0.00 SC2 1.65 0 0 0.00 Scapula SP1 1.1 6 3 100.00 SP2 2.22 0 0 0.00 SP3 1.44 3 1.5 50.00 SP4 2.12 0 0 0.00 Stenebra ST1 0.83 1 0.2 6.67 Trapezoid T1 2.34 0 0 0.00 First Tarsal T11 2.62 2 1 33.33 Thoracic TH1 0.91 2 0.16 5.33 TH2 1.97 4 0.33 11.00 Tibia TI1 0.96 0 0 0.00 TI2 1.25 0 0 0.00 TI3 2.09 4 2 66.67 TI4 2.07 3 1.5 50.00 TI5 1.36 4 2 66.67 Unciform U1 2.68 2 1 33.33

C.2.2 Chokepukio Building 32-A bone mineral density data (scan sites and VDSA values from Stahl 1995). Bldg 32-A scan VD sites SA N MAU %MAU Acetabulum AC1 1.89 1 0.5 20.00 Astragalo AS1 1.91 1 0.5 20.00 AS2 2.08 1 0.5 20.00 AS3 2.14 1 0.5 20.00 Atlas AT1 1.79 0 0 0.00 AT2 1.8 0 0 0.00 AT3 1.94 0 0 0.00 Axis AX1 0.69 1 1 40.00 AX2 1.66 1 1 40.00 AX3 1.35 0 0 0.00 Cuneiform C1 1.66 0 0 0.00 Calcaneo CA1 1.54 3 1.5 60.00 CA2 3.75 3 1.5 60.00 CA3 1.6 3 1.5 60.00 CA4 2.73 3 1.5 60.00 Cuboid CD1 1.49 0 0 0.00 Cervical CE1 1.04 1 0.2 8.00 CE2 1.33 0 0 0.00 Mandible DN1 2.43 2 1 40.00 DN2 3.87 2 1 40.00 DN3 4.38 5 2.5 100.00

221 Appendices

DN4 3.85 5 2.5 100.00 DN5 3.09 5 2.5 100.00 DN6 5 2 1 40.00 DN7 7.19 2 1 40.00 DN8 7.23 2 1 40.00 Tarsal Cu3 E1 2.45 0 0 0.00 Femur FE1 1.41 0 0 0.00 FE2 1.03 2 1 40.00 FE3 1.35 1 0.5 20.00 FE4 1.5 1 0.5 20.00 FE5 1.36 1 0.5 20.00 FE6 0.86 0 0 0.00 Humerus HU1 0.61 1 0.5 20.00 HU2 0.84 1 0.5 20.00 HU3 1.42 2 1 40.00 HU4 1.39 3 1.5 60.00 HU5 1.3 3 1.5 60.00 Ilion IL1 3.29 2 1 40.00 IL2 3.18 0 0 0.00 Ischion IS1 5.04 0 0 0.00 IS2 2.12 0 0 0.00 Lunar L1 1.86 0 0 0.00 Maleolo LM1 2.84 0 0 0.00 Lumbar LU1 1.84 1 0.14 5.60 LU2 1.91 1 0.14 5.60 LU3 3.02 0 0 0.00 Magnum M1 2.59 0 0 0.00 Metacarpal MC1 1.46 1 0.5 20.00 MC2 2.39 1 0.5 20.00 MC3 2.12 1 0.5 20.00 MC4 3.43 1 0.5 20.00 MC5 2.5 1 0.5 20.00 MC6 1.78 1 0.5 20.00 Metatarsal MR1 1.47 2 1 40.00 MR2 2.08 2 1 40.00 MR3 1.89 0 0 0.00 MR4 2.92 0 0 0.00 MR5 2.48 1 0.5 20.00 MR6 1.71 1 0.5 20.00 Navicular N1 2.39 0 0 0.00 Pisiform P1 2.61 0 0 0.00 Phalanx 1 P11 1.53 2 0.25 10.00 P12 3.2 2 0.25 10.00 P13 1.9 2 0.25 10.00 Phalanx 2 P21 1.88 0 0 0.00 P22 1.61 0 0 0.00 P23 2.41 0 0 0.00 Phalanx 3 P31 3.1 0 0 0.00 Patella PA1 1.45 0 0 0.00 Pubis PU1 1.83 0 0 0.00 PU2 1.03 0 0 0.00

222 Appendices

Rib RI4 2.56 7 0.3 12.00 RI1 1.61 5 0.2 8.00 RI2 2.12 5 0.2 8.00 RI3 3.36 7 0.3 12.00 RI5 2.6 0 0 0.00 Radioulna RU1 2.1 0 0 0.00 RU2 1.26 1 0.5 20.00 RU3 1.86 1 0.5 20.00 RU4 2.06 2 1 40.00 RU5 1.75 4 2 80.00 RU6 1.18 2 1 40.00 Scaphoid S1 1.98 0 0 0.00 Sacrum SC1 1.71 0 0 0.00 SC2 1.65 0 0 0.00 Scapula SP1 1.1 2 1 40.00 SP2 2.22 0 0 0.00 SP3 1.44 2 1 40.00 SP4 2.12 2 1 40.00 Stenebra ST1 0.83 0 0 0.00 Trapezoid T1 2.34 0 0 0.00 First Tarsal T11 2.62 0 0 0.00 Thoracic TH1 0.91 0 0 0.00 TH2 1.97 1 0.08 3.20 Tibia TI1 0.96 2 1 40.00 TI2 1.25 2 1 40.00 TI3 2.09 0 0 0.00 TI4 2.07 3 1.5 60.00 TI5 1.36 2 1 40.00 Unciform U1 2.68 0 0 0.00

C.3.1 Chokepukio Building 6 food utility data (FUI values from Mengoni-Gonalons 1991) Building 6 Element FUI MNE MAU % MAU Crania 14.75 1 1 33.30 Mandible 9.95 2 1 33.30 Atlas and Axis 8.57 1 1 33.30 Cer 64.15 5 1 33.30 Tho 61.75 4 0.33 11.00 Lum and sac 77.97 5 0.62 20.70 Innominate 40.18 3 1.5 50.00 Ribs 100 6 0.25 8.33 Scapula 41.66 6 3 100.00 Humerus 36.68 1 0.5 16.70 Radioulna 23 5 2.5 83.30 Carpals 11.76 7 1 33.30 Metapodial 9 10 2.5 83.30 Femur and patella 75.94 5 1.25 41.70 Tibia 43.04 4 2 66.70

223 Appendices

Tarsals 21.88 6 1.2 40.00 1 Phalanx 4.78 19 2.4 80.00

C.3.2 Chokepukio Building 32-A food utility data (FUI values from Mengoni- Gonalons 1991) Building 32-A % Element FUI MNE MAU MAU Crania 14.75 1 1 40.00 Mandible 9.95 5 2.5 100.00 Atlas and Axis 8.57 0 0 0.00 Cer 64.15 1 0.2 8.00 Tho 61.75 1 0.08 3.20 Lum and sac 77.97 1 0.125 5.00 Innominate 40.18 1 0.5 20.00 Ribs 100 7 0.29 11.67 Scapula 41.66 2 1 40.00 Humerus 36.68 3 1.5 60.00 Radioulna 23 5 2.5 100.00 Carpals 11.76 0 0 0.00 Metapodial 9 3 0.75 30.00 Femur and patella 75.94 2 0.5 20.00 Tibia 43.04 4 2 80.00 Tarsals 21.88 0 0 0.00 1 Phalanx 4.78 4 0.5 20.00

C.4 Chokepukio taxonomic diversity (NISP) Camelidae Rodentia Cervid Amphibia Building 6 217 7 1 1 Building 32A 144 2 0 0

224 Appendices

Appendix D. Osteometric Data

D.1 First phalanx osteometric data. ML= maximum length, BPAS=breadth of proximal articular surface, WPAS= wide proximal articular surface, BDAR=breadth of distal articular surface, WDAS= wide distal articular surface (Measurements followed Kent 1982). FIRST PHALANX ML BPAS WPAS BDAR WDAS Reference 19.65 18.37 17.58 16.29 Mengoni and Elkin Modern Guanaco Forelimb 71.32 1991 61.93 18.67 16.59 15.51 13.28 Mengoni and Elkin specimens Guanaco Hindlimb 1991 Llama Forelimb 71.89 22.16 19.98 18.62 17.36 Kent 1982 Llama Hindlimb 62.87 20.33 17.39 16.79 15.42 Kent 1982 Alpaca Forelimb 60.5 17.6 16.37 14.98 14.34 Kent 1982 Alpaca Hindlimb 54.49 16.9 15.22 14.2 13.22 Kent 1982 Vicuna Forelimb 61.33 15.53 15.09 13.56 12.96 Kent 1982 Vicuna Hindlimb 57.13 15.3 14.37 13.8 12.77 Kent 1982 Archaeological Conchopata EA-64 52 17 15 13.5 11.4 specimens Conchopata EA-23W 71.3 23.5 22.3 18.6 15.9 Conchopata EA-23W 57 17.7 16.2 13.6 12.9 Conchopata EA-1B 62.5 19.3 21.3 19.3 17 Conchopata EA-1A 65.4 20.6 19.5 20 17 Chokepukio Building6 77.79 21.66 n/a 17.71 n/a Chokepukio Building6 60.65 18.78 n/a 15.26 n/a Chokepukio Building6 61.02 19.09 n/a 15.84 n/a Chokepukio Building6 60.86 17.9 n/a 14.53 n/a Chokepukio Building6 59.96 18.91 n/a 16.56 n/a Chokepukio Building6 54.57 16.16 n/a 13 n/a Chokepukio Building6 62.9 18.96 n/a 15.35 n/a Building 32- Chokepukio A 56.89 19.8 n/a 14.31 n/a Building 32- Chokepukio A 56.49 16.59 n/a 13.24 n/a

225

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allison, P. M. 1999 The Archaeology of Household Activities. Routledge, London ; New York.

Altamirano Enciso, A. 1983 Guía Osteológica de Cérvidos Andinos. Serie Investigaciones 6.

Anders, M. B. 1986 Wari Experiments in Statecraft: A view from Azangaro. In Andean Archaeology: Papers in Memory of Clifford Evans. Monographs XXVII, edited by R. Matos Mendieta, S. A. Turpin and H. H. Eling, pp. 201- 224. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

1990 Maymi: un sitio del Horizonte Medio en el valle de Pisco. Gaceta Arqueologica Andina 17:27-39.

1991 Structure and function at the planned site of Azangaro: cautionary notes for the model of Huari as a centralized secular state. In Huari admimistrative structure: prehistoric monumental architecture and state government, edited by W. H. Isbell and G. F. McEwan, pp. 165-197. , Washington D.C.

Andrushko, V. A., M. R. Buzon, A. Simonetti and R. A. Creaser 2009 Strontium Isotope Evidence for Prehistoric Migration at Chokepukio, Valley of Cuzco, Peru. Latin American Antiquity 20(1):57-75.

Bartram, L. E. and C. W. Marean 1999 Explaining the "Klasies Pattern": Kua Ethnoarchaeology, the Die Kelders Middle Stone Age Archaeofauna, Long Bone Fragmentation and Carnivore Ravaging. Journal of Archaeological Science 26:9-29.

Bauer, B. and A. Covey 2002 Processes of State Formation in the Inca Heartland (Cuzco, Peru). American Anthropologist 104(3):846-864.

Bauer, B. S. and L. C. Kellet 2010 Cultural transformations of the homeland (Andahuaylas, Peru) during the Late Intermediate Period (A.D. 1000-1400). Latin American Antiquity 21(1):87- 111.

Behrensmeyer, A. K. 1978 Taphonomy and Ecological Information from Bone Weathering. Paleobiology 4(2):150- 162.

Benavidez C., M. 1991 Cheqo Wasi, Huari. In Huari Administrative Structure. Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government, edited by W. H. Isbell and G.

226

McEwan, pp. 55-69. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, D.C.

Benavidez Calle, M. 1976 Yacimientos Arqueologicos en Ayacucho. Universidad Nacional de San Cristobal de Huamanga, Ayacucho.

Bencic, C. M. 2000 Industrias liticas de Huari y Tiwanaku. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP. Huari y Tiwanaku: Modelos vs. Evidencias. Primera Parte 4:89-118.

Bennett, W. 1953 Excavations at Wari, Ayacucho, Peru 49. Yale University Publications in Anthropology, New Haven.

Betanzos, J. d. 1996 (1551) Narrative of the Incas. Translated and edited by Roland Hamilton & Dana Buchanan from the Palma de Mallorca manuscript. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Binford, L. 1981 Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths. Academic Press, New York.

Binford, L. R. 1964 A consideration of archaeological research design. American Antiquity 29:425-441.

1978 Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology. Academic Press, New York.

Bingham, H. 1915 Types of Machu Picchu Pottery. American Anthropologist 17(2):257-271.

1922 Inca Land; Explorations in the Highlands of Peru. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, New York.

1930 Machu Picchu, a citadel of the Incas; report of the explorations and excavations made in 1911, 1912 and 1915 under the auspices of Yale University and the National Geographic Society, by Hiram Bingham, New Haven, Pub. for the National Geographic Society, Yale University Press; London, H.Milford, Oxford University Press,.

1948 Lost city of the Incas, the story of Machu Picchu and its builders. [1st ed. Duell, New York,.

Blacker, J. C. 2001 Growing Up Huari: An Analysis of Architectural Style, Technique, and History at the Middle Horizon Site of Conchopata, Ayacucho, Peru. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, State University of New York at Binghamton

Blacker, J. C. and A. G. Cook

227

2006 Wari Wasi: Defining Conchopata Houses, Paper presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Puerto Rico, April 27-30

Blanton, R. 1994 Houses and Households. A Comparative Study. Plenum Press, New York.

Bogaard, A., M. Charles, K. C. Twiss, A. Fairbarn, N. Yalman, D. Filopovic, G. A. Demiregi, F. Ertug, N. Russell and J. Henecke 2009 Private Pantries and Celebrated Surplus: Storing and Sharing food at Neolithic Catalhoyuk, Central Anatolia. Antiquity 83:649-668.

Bolin, I. 1998 Rituals of Respect. The secret of survival in the high Peruvian Andes. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Bolton, R. 1979 Guinea Pigs, Protein, and Ritual. Ethnology XVIII(3):229- 252.

Bolton, R. and L. Calvin 1981 El cuy en la cultura peruana contemporanea. In Runakunap Kawasayninkupaq. La Tecnologia en el Mundo Andino, edited by H. Lehtman and A. M. Soldi. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas, Mexico, DF.

Bonavia, D. 1996 Los Camelidos Sudamericanos. Una Introduccion a su Estudio. Instituto Frances de Estudios Andinos, Lima.

Borrero, L. A. 1990 Fuego-Patagonian bone assemblages and the problem of communal guanaco hunting. In Hunters of the recent past, edited by L. B. Davis and O. K. Reeves, pp. 373-399. Unwyn Hyman, London.

Bowen, J. 1988 Seasonality: an Agricultural Construct. In Documentary Archaeology in the New World, edited by M. C. Beaudry, pp. 161-216. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Bragayrac D., E. 1991 Archaeological Excavations at Vegachayoq Moqo Sector of Huari. In Huari Administrative Structure. Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government, edited by W. H. Isbell and G. McEwan, pp. 71-80. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington D.C.

Bray, T. 2003a Inka Pottery as Culinary Equipment: Food, Feasting, and Gender in Imperial State Design. Latin American Antiquity 14(1):3-28.

2003b The Archaeology and Politics of Food and Feasting in Early States and Empires. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, New York.

228

Brewster-Wray, C. 1983 Spatial Patterning and the Function of Huari Architectural Compound. In Investigations of the Andean Past. Papers from the First Annual Northeast Conference on Andean Archaeology and Ethnohistory, edited by D. H. Sandweiss, pp. 122-135. Cornell University, Ithaca.

Capriles, J. M., A. I. Domic and K. M. Moore 2008 Fish Remains from the Formative Period (1000 BC- AD 400) of Lake Titicaca, Bolivia: Zooarchaeology and Taphonomy. Quartenary International 180:115-126.

Castillo Butters, L. J. and S. Uceda Castillo 2008 The Mochicas. In Handbook of South American Archaeology, edited by W. H. Isbell and H. Silverman, pp. 707-729. Springer, New York.

Ceret, L. A. and W. J. Pestle 2010 Identifying High-Status Foods in the Archeological Record. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology in press.

Chatfield, M. 2007 From Inca to Spanish Colonial: Transitions in Ceramic Technology. Ph.D. Dissertation, UC Santa Barbara.

Chavez, K. M. 1980 The Archaeology of Marcavalle, and Early Horizon Site in the Valley of Cuzco, Peru. Baessler-Archiv, Neue Folge, Band XXVIII:203-329.

Cieza de Leon, P. d. 1864 The travels of Pedro Cieza de Leon, A.D. 1532-1550, contained in the First part of his Chronicle of Peru 1. The Haklyut Society, London.

Clarke, M. J. 2001 Akha Feasting. An Ethnoarchaeological Perspective. In Feasts. Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics, and Power, edited by M. Dietler and B. Hayden, pp. 144-167. Smithsonian Instutution Press, Washington.

Cobo, B. 1997 [1653] Inca Religion and Customs. Third ed. Translated by R. Hamilton. University of Texas Press., Austin.

Conklin, W. 1991 Tiahuanaco and Huari: architectural comparisons and interpretations. In Huari administrative structure. Prehistoric monumental architecture and state government edited by W. H. Isbell and G. F. McEwan, pp. 281-291. Dumbarton Oaks.

Cook, A. 1983 Aspects of State Ideology in Huari and Tiwanaku Iconography: the Central Deity and Sacrificer. In Investigations of the Andean Past. Papers from the First Annual Northeast Conference on Andean Archaeology and Ethnohistory, edited by D. H. Sandweiss, pp. 161-187. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.

229

1987 The Middle Horizon Ceramic Offerings from Conchopata. Nawpa Pacha 22- 23, 1984-1985:49-90.

2001 Huari D-Shaped Structures, Sacrificial Offerings, and Divine Rulership In Ritual Sacrifice in Ancient Peru. , edited by E. Benson and A. Cook, pp. 119-163. University of Texas Press, Austin.

2004 Wari Art and Society. In Andean Archaeology, edited by H. Silverman, pp. 146- 166. Blackwell Publishing.

2009 Visllani Visllacuni: Patrones de consumo a comienzos del Horizonte Medio Revista de Antropologia. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile 20:205-226.

Cook, A. and N. Benco 2000 Vasijas para la Fiesta y la Fama: Produccion Artesanal en un Centro Urbano Huari. In Boletin de Arqueologia PUCP, No 4. Huari y Tiwanaku: Modelo vs. Evidencias. Primera Parte, edited by P. Kaulicke and W. Isbell, pp. 489-504. Potificia Universidad Catolica del Peru, Lima.

Cook, A. and E. Benson (editors) 2001 Ritual Sacrifice in Ancient Peru. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Cook, A. and M. Glowacki 2003 Pots, Politics, and Power: Huari Ceramic Assemblages and Imperial Administration. In The Archaeology and Politics of Food and Feasting in Early States and Empires, edited by T. Bray, pp. 173-202. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers New York.

Costin, L. and T. Earle 1989 Status Distinction and Legitimation of Power as Reflected in Changing Patterns of Consumption in Late Prehispanic Peru. American Antiquity 54(4):691- 714.

Covey, A. 2006 How the Incas built their Heartland. State formation and the innovation of imperial strategies in the Sacred Valley, Peru. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

Crabtree, P. 1990 Subsistence and Ritual: the Faunal Remains from Dun Ailinne. Emania 7:22- 25.

D'Altroy, T. and T. Earle 1985 Staple Finance, Wealth Finance, and Storage in the Inka Political Economy. Current Anthropology 26(2):187- 206.

D'Altroy, T. and C. Hastorf (editors) 2001 Empire and Domestic Economy Kluwer Academic Plenum Publishers, New York.

230

Davis, S. 1987 The Archaeology of Animals. Yale University Press, New Heaven. deFrance, S. 2009 Zooarchaeology in Complex Societies: Political Economy, Status, and Ideology. Journal of Archaeological Research 17:105-168.

Dietler, M. 1996 Feasts and Commensal Politics in the Political Economy. Food Power and Status in Prehistoric Europe. In Food and the Status Quest. An Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by P. Wiessner and W. Schiefenhovel, pp. 87- 125. Berghahn Books, Providence, RI.

2001 Theorizing the Feast: Rituals of Consumption, Commensal Politics, and Power in African Contexts. In Feasts. Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics, and Power, edited by M. Dietler and B. Hayden, pp. 65- 114. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Dietler, M. and I. Herbich 2001 Feasts and Labor Mobilization. In Feasts, Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives in Food, Politics, and Power, edited by M. Dietler and B. Hayden, pp. 240=264. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washigton, D.C.

Dwyer, E. B. 1971 The Early Inca Occupation of the Valley of Cuzco, Peru. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California at Berkeley.

Elkin, D., C. Madero, G. Mengoni Goñalons, D. Olivera and H. Yacobaccio 1991 Avances en el Estudio Arqueologico de los Camelidos de Noroeste Argentino. Paper presented at the VII Convencion Internacional de Especialistas en Camelidos Sudamericanos, San Salvador de Jujuy, Argentina.

Elkin, D. and J. Zanchetta 1991 Densitometria osea de camelidos. Aplicaciones arqueologicas. Shincal 3:195- 204.

Elkin, D. C. 1995 Volume Density of South American Camelid Skeletal Parts. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 5(1):29-37.

Emery, K. 2003 The Noble Beast: Status and Differential Access to Animals in the Maya World. World Archaeology 34(3):489- 515.

Farrington, I. S. and J. Zapata 2003 Nuevos canones de arquitectura Inka: investigaciones en el sitio de Tambokacha-Tumibamba, Jaquijahuana, Cuzco. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 7:57- 77.

Feinman, G. M., L. M. Nicholas and H. R. Haines

231

2002 Houses on a hill: Classic period life at El Palmillo. Latin American Antiquity 13:251-277.

FileMaker 2004 FileMaker Pro 7. FileMaker, Inc, Zurich.

Finucane, B., P. Maita Agurto and W. Isbell 2006 Human and Animal diet at Conchopata, Peru: stable isotope evidence for maize agriculture and animal management practices during the Middle Horizon. Journal of Archaeological Science 33:1766- 1776.

Finucane, B. C., J. E. Valdez, I. Perez Calderon, C. Vivanco Pomacanchari, L. Valdez and T. O'Connell 2007 The end of the Empire: new radiocarbon dates from the Ayacucho valley, Peru and their implications for the collapse of the Wari state Radiocarbon 49(2):579- 592.

Flannery, K. (editor) 1976 The Early Mesoamerican Village. Academic Press, New York.

Flannery, K. and J. Marcus 2005 Excavations at San Jose Mogote 1: The Household Archaeology. Memoirs No.40. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Galik, A. 2002 An Iron Age Bone Assemblage from Durezza Cave, Carinthia, Austria: Detecting Ritual Behaviour through Archaeozological and Taphonomical Analyses. In Behaviour Behind Bones: The Zooarchaeology of Ritual, Religion, Status and Identity, edited by S. J. O'Day, W. Van Neer and A. Ervynck, pp. 54-61. Oxbow Books, Oxford.

Galotta, D. R. and J. M. Galotta 1994 Esqueleto de la llama (Lama glama). Atlas. Excerta Anatomica Camelidae:11-19.

Garcia Cook, A. 1981 The stratigraphy of Jaywamachay, Ac335. In Prehistory of the Ayacucho Basin, Peru, edited by R. S. MacNeish, A. Garcia Cook, L. G. Lumbreras, R. K. Vierra and A. Nelken-Terner, pp. 57-79. vol. II, Excavations and Chronology. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

Garcia Cook, A. and R. S. MacNeish 1981 The stratigraphy of Puente, Ac 158. In Prehistory of the Ayacucho Basin, Peru, edited by R. S. MacNeish, A. Garcia Cook, L. G. Lumbreras, R. K. Vierra and A. Nelken-Terner, pp. 80-112. vol. II, Excavations and Chronology. The University of Michigan Press Ann Arbor.

Gero, J. 1992 Feasts and Females; Gender Ideology and Political Meals in the Andes. Norwegian Archaeological Review 25(1):15-30.

232

Gibaja, A. 1984 Sequencia cronologica de Ollantaytambo, Peru. In Current Archaeologial Projects in the Central Andes, edited by A. Kendall, pp. 225-245. BAR International Series 210, Oxford.

Gibaja Oviedo, A. 1983 Arqueologia de Choquepugio. In Arqueologia Andina, edited by A. Gibaja Oviedo, pp. 29-44. Ediciones Instituto Nacional de Cultura, Cuzco.

Gifford, D. P. and D. Crader 1977 A computer coding format for archaeological faunal remains. American Antiquity 42(2):225-238.

Gifford-Gonzalez, D. 1991 Bones Are Not Enough: Analogues, Knowledge, and Interpretative Strategies in Zooarchaeology. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 10:215- 254.

Gifford-Gonzalez, D. and K. U. Sunseri 2007 Foodways on the Frontier: Animal Use and Identity in Early Colonial New Mexico. In The Archaeology of Food and Identiy, edited by K. C. Twiss, pp. 260-287. vol. Occasional Paper No.34. Center for Archaeological Investigations. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

Gilbert, B. M. 1990 Mammalian Osteology. Archaeological Society, Missouri.

Gilbert, B. M., L. D. Martin and H. G. Savage 1981 Avian Osteology. Laramie., Wyoming.

Glowacki, M. 1996 The Wari Occupation of the Southern Highlands of Peru: A Ceramic Perspective from the Site of Pikillacta. University Mircrofilms, Ann Arbor.

2002 The Huaro Archaeological Site Complex: Rethinking the Huari Occupation of Cuzco. In Andean Archaeology I. Variations in Sociopolitical Organization, edited by H. Silverman and W. Isbell, pp. 267- 286. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Press, New York.

2005a Excavations at Cotocotuyoc: New Data on the Wari and Lucre Occupations of the Huaro Valley, Cuzco, Peru. Paper presented at the 24th Northeast Conference on Andean Archaeology and Ethnohistory, Washington, D.C.

2005b Pottery from Pikillacta. In Pikillacta. The Wari Empire in Cuzco, edited by G. McEwan, pp. 101-114. University of Iowa Press, Iowa city.

2008 The Huaro Valley Archaeological Project: Season 2008, the Elite Wari Cemetery at Cotocotuyoc. Field Report. Manuscript, pp. 23pp.

Glowacki, M. and G. McEwan

233

2001 Pikillacta, Huaro y la gran region del Cuzco: nuevas interpretaciones de la ocupacion wari de la sierra sur. Boletin de Arqueologia PUCP. Huari y Tiwanaku: Modelos vs. Evidencias. Segunda Parte 5:31- 50.

Glowacki, M. and J. Zapata 1998 The Wari Occupation in Cuzco: Recent discoveries from the Huaro valley. Paper presented at the 38th Annual Meeting of the Institute of Andean Studies, Berkeley.

Goebel, B. 2001 El ciclo anual de la produccion pastoril en Huancar (Jujuy, Argentina). In El uso de los camelidos a traves del tiempo, edited by G. Mengoni Gonalons, D. Olivera and H. Yacobaccio, pp. 91-115. Ediciones del Tridente, Buenos Aires.

Goldstein, D. J. and I. Shimada 2010 Feeding the Fire. Food and Craft Production in the Middle Sican Period (AD 950-1050). In Inside Ancient Kitchens. New Directions in the Study of Daily Meals and Feasts, edited by E. A. Klarich, pp. 161-189. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado.

Goldstein, P. 1993 Tiwanaku Temples and State Expansion: A Tiwanaku Sunken- Court Temple in Moquegua, Peru. Latin American Antiquity 4(1):22- 47.

Gonzalez Carre, E. 1982 Historia Prehispanica de Ayacucho. Universidad Nacional de San Cristobal de Huamanga, Ayacucho.

Gonzalez Carre, E. and D. Pozzi- Escot 2002 Arquelogia y etnohistoria en Vilcashuaman. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 6:79-106.

Grayson, D. 1984 Quantitative Archaeology. Topics in the Analysis of the Archaeological Faunas. Studies in Archaeological Sciences. Academic Press.

1989 Bone Transport, Bone Destruction, and Reverse Utility Curves. Journal of Archaeological Science 16:643- 652.

Guaman Poma de Ayala, F. 1992 (1615) Nueva Cronica y Buen Gobierno. Crónicas de Indios y Mestizos II. Enciclopedia Histórica de la Literatura Peruana Lima.

Gumerman, G., IV 2010 Big Hearths and Big Pots. Moche Feasting on the North Coast of Peru. In Inside Ancient Kitchens. New Directions in the Study of Daily Meals and Feasts, edited by E. A. Klarich, pp. 111-131. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado.

Hastorf, C.

234

2003 Community with the Ancestors: Ceremonies and Social Memory in the Middle Formative at Chiripa, Bolivia. . Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 22(4):305- 332.

Hastorf, C. A. 1996 Gender, Space, and Food in Prehistory. In Contemporary Archaeology Theory. A Reader, edited by R. Preucel and I. Hodder, pp. 460-484. Blackwekk, Oxford.

Hayden, B. 2001 Fabulous Feast: A Prolegomenon to the Importance of Feasting In Feasts. Archaelogical and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics, and Power, edited by M. Dietler and B. Hayden, pp. 23-64. Smithsonian Institutional Press, Washington.

Hyslop, J. 1984 The Inka road system. Studies in archaeology. Academic Press, Orlando.

Inomata, T. and R. W. Webb 2003 The archaeology of settlement abandonment in Middle America. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Isbell, B. J. 1978 To Defend Ourselves: Ecology and Ritual in an Andean Village. Institute of Latin American Studies, University of Texas at Austin : distributed by University of Texas Press, [Austin].

Isbell, W. 1987a Conchopata, Ideological Innovator in Middle Horizon 1A. Ñawpa Pacha 22- 23, 1984-1985:91- 126.

1987b State Origins in the Ayacucho Valley, Central Highlands, Peru. In The Origins and Development of the Andean State, edited by J. Haas, S. Pozorski and T. Pozorski, pp. 83- 90. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

2000 Repensando el Horizonte Medio. Boletín de Arqueología. Huari y Tiwanaku: Modelos vs. Evidencias 4:9-68.

2004 Mortuary Preferences: A Case Study from Middle Horizon Peru. Latin American Antiquity 15(1):3-32.

Isbell, W., C. Brewster- Wray and L. Spickard 1991 Architecture and Spatial Organization at Huari. In Huari Administrative Structure. Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government, edited by W. Isbell and G. McEwan, pp. 19- 53. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington D.C.

Isbell, W. and A. Cook 2002 New Perspective on Conchopata and the Andean Middle Horizon. In Andean Archaeology II. Art. Landscape, and Society, edited by W. Isbell and H. Silverman, pp. 249-305. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, New York.

Isbell, W. and G. McEwan

235

1991 A History of Huari Studies and Introduction to Current Interpretations. In Huari Administrative Structure. Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government., edited by W. Isbell and G. McEwan, pp. 1-18. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC.

1991 Huari Administrative Structure. Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.

Isbell, W. H. 1977 The Rural Foundations of Urbanism: Economic and Stylist Interaction between Urban and Rural Communities in Eight-Century Peru. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

1982 Huari Urban Prehistory. In Current Archaeological Projects in the Central Andes. Some approaches and results, edited by A. Kendall, pp. 95-131. BAR International Series 210, Oxford.

1983 Shared Ideology and Parallel Political Development: Huari and Tiwanaku. In Investigations of the Andean Past. Papers from the First Annual Northeast Conference on Andean Archaeology and Ethnohistory, edited by D. H. Sandweiss, pp. 186-208. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.

1988 City and state in Middle Horizon Huari. In Peruvian Archaeology. An overview of pre-Inca and , edited by R. W. Keatinge, pp. 99-165. Cambridge University Press, New York.

1989 Honcopampa: Was it a Huari Administrative Center? In The Nature of Wari. A Reappraisal of the Middle Horizon Period in Peru, edited by R. M. Czwarno, F. M. Meddens and A. Morgan, pp. 98-114. BAR International Series 525, Oxford.

1991 Honcopampa. Monumental ruins in Peru's North highlands. Expedition 3:27- 36.

2007 A Community of Potters, or Multicrafting Wives of Polygynous Lords? . In Craft Production in Complex Societies, edited by I. Shimada, pp. 68-96. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake city.

Isbell, W. H. and A. Groleau 2010 The Wari Brewer Woman. Feasting, Gender,Offerings, and Memory. In Inside Ancient Kitchens. New Perspectives in the Study of Dily Meals and Feasts edited by E. A. Klarich, pp. 191-219. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado.

Isbell, W. H. and H. Silverman 2002 Preface. In Andean Archaeology 1. Variations in Sociopolitical Organization, edited by W. H. Isbell and H. Silverman, pp. ix-xii. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York.

2006 Rethinking the Central Andean Co-Tradition. In Andean Archaeology III, edited by W. H. Isbell and H. Silverman, pp. 497-518. Springer, New York.

236

Izeta, A. D. 2005 South American camelid bone structural density: what are we measuring? Comments on data sets, values, their interpretation and application. Journal of Archaeological Science 32:1159-1168.

Jackson, H. and S. Scott 1995 The Faunal Record of the Southeastern Elite: the Implication of Economy, Social Relations and Ideology. Southeastern Archaeology 14(2):103-119.

Jennings, J. 2006 Understanding Middle Horizon Peru: Hermeneutic Spirals, Interpretive Traditions, and Wari Administrative Centers. Latin American Antiquity 17(3):265- 286.

Jennings, J. and N. Craig 2001 Politywide Analysis and Imperial Political Economy: The Relationship between Valley Political Complexity and Administrative Centers in the Wari Empire of the Central Andes. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20:479-5002.

Jennings, J. and W. Yepez Alvarez 2001 Architecture, Local Elites, and Imperial Entanglements: the Wari Empire and the Cotahuasi Valley of Peru. Journal of Field Archaeology 28(1/2):143-159.

Julien, D. G. 1988 Ancient Cuismancu: Settlement and Cultural Dynamics in the Cajamarca Region of the North Highlands of Peru, 200 B.C.-A.D. 1532. Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.

Kaulicke, P. 2005 Las Fiestas y sus Residuos: Algunas Reflexiones Finales. In Boletin de Arqueologia PUCP. Encuentros: Identidad, Poder y Manejo de Espacios Publicos, edited by P. Kaulicke and T. D. Dillehay, pp. 387-402. vol. 9. Universidad Catolica del Peru, Lima.

Kelly, L. 2001 A Case of Ritual Feasting at the Cahokia Site. In Feast. Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics, and Power, edited by M. Dietler and B. Hayden, pp. 334- 367. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington.

Kembel, S. and J. Rick 2004 Building authority at Chavin de Huantar: Models of Social Organization and Developments in the Initial Period and Early Horizon. In Andean Archaeology, edited by H. Silverman, pp. 51-76. Blackwell Publishing.

Kendall, A. 1974 Architecture and planning at the Inca sites in the Cusichaca area Baessler- Archiv, Neue Folge, Band XXII:73-137.

1976 Preliminary report of ceramic data and the pre-Inca architectural remains of the (lower) Urubamba valley, Cuzco. Baessler-Archiv, Neue Folge, Band XXIV:41- 159.

237

1984 Archaeological investigations of the Late Intermediate Period and Late Horizon Period at Cusichaca, Peru. In Current Archaeological Projects in the Central Andes. International Congress of Americanists, Manchester 1982, edited by A. Kendall, pp. 247-290. BAR International Series, Oxford.

Kent, J. D. 1982 The domestication and exploitation of South American camelids: methods and analysis and their application to circum-lacustrine archaeological sites in Bolivia and Peru. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Washington University.

Kent, J. D., V. F. Vasquez Sanchez and T. Rosales Than 2001 Pastoreo y manejo de camelidos en la epoca Lambayeque: datos zooarqueologicos. In El uso de los camelidos a traves del tiempo, edited by G. L. Mengoni Gonalons, D. E. Olivera and H. D. Yacobaccio, pp. 131-143. Ediciones del Tridente, Buenos Aires.

Ketteman, W. G. 2001 New Dates from the Huari Empire: Chronometric Dating of the Prehistoric Occupation of Conchopata, Ayacucho, Peru. Unpublished Master Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Binghamton University, State University of New York.

Kintigh, K. 1989 Sample size, Significance, and Measures of Diversity. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by R. Leonard and G. Jones, pp. 25- 36. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Klarich, E. A. (editor) 2010 Inside Ancient Kitchens. New Directions in the study of Daily Meals and Feasts. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Klein, R. and K. Cruz Uribe 1984 The Analysis of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. University of Chicago Press.

Klein, R. G., K. Cruz-Uribe and R. Milo 1999 Skeletal Part Representation in Archaeofaunas: Comments on "Explaining the "Klasies Pattern": Kua Ethnoarchaeology, the Die Kelders Middle Stone Age Archaeofauna, Long Bone Fragmentation and Carnivore Ravaging" By Bartram & Marean. Journal of Archaeological Science 26:1225-1234.

Kolata, A. 1993 The Tiwanaku. Portrait of an Andean Civilization. Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, MA.

Kreutzer, L. A. 1992 Bison and deer minerall bone densities: comparisons and implications for the interpretation of archaeological faunas. Journal of Archaeological Science 19:271- 294.

Kroeber, A. L. 1944 Peruvian Archaeology in 1942. Viking Fund Publications in Archaeology 4.

238

Lam, Y. M., X. Chen, C. Marean and C. Frey 1998 Bone density and long bone representation in archaeological faunas: comparing results from CT and photon densitometry Journal of Archaeological Science 25:559-570.

Lam, Y. M., O. M. Pearson, C. W. Marean and X. Chen 2003 Bone density studies in zooarchaeology. Journal of Archaeological Science 30(12):1701-1708.

LaMotta, V. M. and M. B. Schiffer 1999 Formation Processes of House Floor Assemblages. In The Archaeology of Household Activities, edited by P. M. Allison, pp. 19-29. Routledge, New York.

Lathrap, D. W. 1973 Gifts of the Cayman: Some Thoughts on the Subsistence Basis of Chavin. In Variation in Anthropology: Essays in Honor of John C. McGregor, edited by D. W. Lathrap and J. Douglas, pp. 91-105. Illinois Archaeological Survey, Urbana, Illinois.

Lau, G. 2002 Feasting and Ancestor Veneration at Chinchawas, North Highlands of Ancash, Peru. Latin American Antiquity 13(3):279-304.

Leonard, J. A., R. K. Wayne, J. Wheeler, R. l. Valadez, S. Cuill én and C. Vilà 2002 Ancient DNA Evidence for Old World Origin of New World Dogs. (Cover story). Science 298(5598):1613.

Leoni, J. B. 2005 La veneración de montañas en los Andes preincaicos: el caso de Ñawinpukyo (Ayacucho, Perú) en el período Intermedio Temprano. Chungara, Revista de Antropología Chilena 37(2):151-164.

2006 Ritual and Society in Early Intermediate Period Ayacucho: a view from the site of Nawinpukyo. In Andean Archaeology, edited by W. H. Isbell and H. Silverman, pp. 279-306. vol. III. Springer, New York.

Lumbreras, L. G. 1959 Esquema arqueologico de la sierra central del Peru. Revista del Museo Nacional 28:64-117.

1974a Las Fundaciones de Huamanga. Hacia una Prehistoria de Ayacucho. Nueva Educacion., Lima.

1974b Los Origenes de la Civilizacion en el Peru. Second Edition. ed. Milla Batres., Lima.

1981 The Stratigraphy of the Open Sites. In Prehistory of the Ayacucho Basin, Peru, edited by R. S. MacNeish, A. Garcia Cook, L. G. Lumbreras, R. K. Vierra and A. Nelken-Terner, pp. 167-198. vol. II. Excavatios and Chronology. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

239

Lyman, R. L. 1985 Bone Frequencies: Differential Transport, In situ Destruction, and the MGUI. J. of Archaeological Science 12:221- 236.

1994 Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

2008 Quantitative Paleozoology. Manuals in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, New York.

MacNeish, R. S. 1981 The Stratigraphy of Pikimachay, Ac100. In Prehistory of the Ayacucho Basin, Peru, edited by R. S. MacNeish, A. Garcia Cook, L. G. Lumbreras, R. K. Vierra and A. Nelken-Terner, pp. 19-56. vol. II. Excavations and Chronology. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

Malpass, M. 2001 Sonay: un centro wari celular ortogonal en el valle de Camana, Peru. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 5:51-68.

Mann Fisher, G. 1978 Los Pequeños Mamíferos de Chile. Gayana 40.

Marcus, J., J. Sommer and C. Glew 1999 Fish and mammals in the economy of an ancient Peruvian kingdom. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences 96:6564-6570.

Martin, L. 2000/2001 Hunting, herding, feasting: animal use at Neolithic Catalhoyuk, Turkey. Archaeology International:39-42.

Mauss, M. 1967 The gift : forms and functions of exchange in archaic societies. Norton, New York.

Mayta, P. 2001 Reporte de restos faunisticos de Conchopata. Unpublished manuscript.

McAnany, P. A. and I. Hodder 2009 Thinking about stratigraphic sequence in social terms. Archaeological Dialogues 16(01):1-22.

McEwan, C. 1990 Some Formal Correspondences between the Imperial Architecture of the Wari and Chimu Cultures of Ancient Peru. Latin American Antiquity 1(2):97-116.

McEwan, G. 1987 The Middle Horizon in the Valley of Cuzco, Peru. The impact of the Wari occupation of the Lucre Basin. BAR International Series 372, Oxford.

240

1989 The Wari Empire in the Southern Peruvian Highlands: a view from the Provinces. In The Nature of Wari. A Reappraisal of the Middle Horizon Period in Peru, edited by R. M. Czwarno, F. M. Meddens and A. Morgan. BAR International Series 525, Oxford.

1996 Archaeological Investigations at Pikillacta, a Wari site in Peru. Journal of Field Archaeology 23:196- 186.

2005 Pikillacta. The Wari Empire in Cuzco. University of Iowa Press, Iowa city.

McEwan, G., M. Chatfield and A. Gibaja 2002 The Archaeology of Inca Origins: Excavations at Chokepukio, Cuzco, Peru. In Andean Archaeology I. Variations in Sociopolitical Organization, edited by W. Isbell and H. Silverman, pp. 287- 303. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, New York.

McEwan, G., A. Gibaja and M. Chatfield 2005 Arquitectura monumental en el Cuzco del Periodo Intermedio Tardio: evidencias de continuidad en la reciprocidad ritual y el manejo administrativo entre los Horizontes Medio y Tardio. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 9:257-280.

McEwan, G. F. 2006 The Incas : new perspectives. ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara, Calif.

Meddens, F. M., N. P. Branch, C. Vivanco Pomacanchari, N. Riddiford and R. Kemp 2008 High Altitude Ushnu Platform in the Department of Ayacucho,Peru, Structure, Ancestors, and Animation Essence. In Pre-Columbian Landsccapes of Creation and Origin, edited by J. E. Staller, pp. 315-355. Springer, New York.

Meddens, F. M., C. McEwan and C. Vivanco Pomacanchari 2010 Inca "Stone Ancestors" in Context at a High Altitude Usnu Platform. Latin American Antiquity 21(2):173-194.

Mengoni Goñalons, G. 1991 La Llama y sus Productos Primarios. Arqueologia 1:179- 196.

1996 La Domesticacion de los Camelidos Sudamericanos y su Anatomia Economica. Zooarqueologia de Camelidos. Perspectivas Teoricas y Metodologicas 2:23- 35.

Menzel, D. 1964 Style and Time in the Middle Horizon. Ňawpa Pacha 2:66- 73.

1968 La Cultura Huari. Las Grandes Civilizaciones del Antiguo Peru. VI. Compania de Seguros y Reaseguros Peruano- Suiza S.A., Lima.

Metcalfe, D. and K. Jones 1988 A reconsideration of animal body-part utility indices. American Antiquity 53(3):486-504.

Miller, G.

241

1979 An Introduction to the Ethnoarchaeology of the Andean Camelids. PhD Thesis, University of California at Berkeley.

2003 Food for the Dead, Tools for the Afterlife. In The 1912 Yale Peruvian Scientific Expedition Collections from Machu Picchu. Human and Animal Remains, edited by R. Burger and L. Salazar, pp. 1- 63. vol. 85. Yale University Publications in Anthropology, New Heaven, Connecticut.

Miller, G. and R. Burger 1995 Our Father the Cayman, Our Dinner the Llama: Animal Utilization at Chavin de Huantar, Peru. American Antiquity 60(3):421- 458.

Miller, G. R. and A. L. Gill 1990 Zooarchaeology at Pirincay, a Formative Period Site in Highland Ecuador. Journal of Field Archaeology 17(1):49-68.

Milliken, C. D. 2006 Ritual and Status: Mortuary Display at teh Household Level at the Middle Horizon Wari Site of Conchopata, Peru. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Pittsburgh.

Molina, C. d. 1989 [1573] Fabulas y Mitos de los Incas. Cronicas de America. Historia 16, Madrid.

Monks, G. 1981 Seasonality Studies. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 4:179- 240.

Morris, C. 1982 The Infrastructure of Inka Control in the Peruvian Central Highlands In The Inca and Aztec States, 1400- 1800, edited by G. Collier, R. Rosaldo and J. Wirth, pp. 153- 172. Academic Press, New York.

1986 Storage, supply, and redistribution in the economy of the Inka state In Anthropological History of Andean Polities, edited by J. V. Murra, N. Watchel and J. Revel, pp. 59-68. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Moseley, M., D. Nash, P. R. Williams, S. deFrance, A. Miranda and M. Ruales 2005 Burning Down the Brewery: Establishing and Evacuating an Ancient Imperial Colony at Cerro Baul, Peru. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102(48):17264- 17271.

Moseley, M. E., R. A. Feldman, P. S. Goldstein and L. Watanabe 1991 Colonies and Conquest: Tiahuanaco and Huari in Moquegua. In Huari Administrative Structure. Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government, edited by W. H. Isbell and G. F. McEwan, pp. 121-140. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, D.C.

Murra, J. V. 1980 The Economic Organization of the Inka State. JAI Press, Greenwich.

242

2002 En Torno a la Estructura Politica de los Inkas. In El Mundo Andino. Poblacion, Medio Ambiente y Economia., edited by J. V. Murra, pp. 43- 56. Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos. , Lima.

Nanoglou, S. 2009 Animal Bodies and Ontological Discourse in the Greek Neolithic. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 16:184-204.

Nash, D. J. 2009 Household Archaeology in the Andes. Journal of Archaeological Research 17:205-261.

2010 Fine Dining and Fabulous Atmosphere. Feasting Facilities and Political Interaction in the Wari Realm. In Inside Ancient Kitchens. New Directions in the study of Daily Meals and Feasts, edited by E. A. Klarich, pp. 83-109. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Niles, S. A. 1984 Architectural Form and Social Function in Inca Towns near Cuzco. In Current Archaeological Projects in the Central Andes. Some approaches and results, edited by A. Kendall, pp. 205-223. BAR International Series 210, Oxford.

Niven, L. 2007 From carcass to cave: Large mammal exploitation during the Aurignacian at Vogelherd, Germany. Journal of Human Evolution 53(4):362-382.

Novoa, C. and J. Wheeler 1984 Llama and Alpaca. In Evolution of Domesticate Animals, edited by I. Mason, pp. 116- 128. Longman, New York.

Ochatoma, J. and M. Cabrera 2000 Arquitectura y areas de actividad en Conchopata. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP. Huari y Tiwanaku: Modelos vs. Evidencias. Primera Parte 4:449-488.

Ochatoma Paravicino, J. 1998 El periodo Formativo en Ayacucho: balance y perspectivas. Boletin de Arqueologia PUCP 2:289-302.

2007 Alfareros del Imperio Huari. Vida cotidiana y areas de actividad en Conchopata. Universidad Nacional de San Cristobal de Huamanga. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Lima.

Osborne, R. 2004 Hoards, votives, offerings: the archaeology of the dedicated object. World Archaeology 36(1):1-10.

Pacheco T, V., A. Altamirano E and E. Guerra P 1986 The Osteology of South American Camelids. Archaeological Research Tools 3.

243

Parsons, J. R., C. M. Hastings and R. Matos Mendieta 1997 Rebuilding the State in Highland Peru: Herder-Cultivator Interaction during the Late Intermediate Period in the Tarama-Chinchaycocha Region. Latin American Antiquity 8(4):317-341.

Patterson, T. 1967 Current Research. Highland South America. American Antiquity 32(1):143- 144.

Payne, S. 1973 Kill-off Patterns in Sheep and Goats: The Mandibles from A şvan Kale. Anatolian Studies 23:281-303.

Pearson, O. M. 1951 Mammals in the Highlands of Southern Peru. Bulletin: Museum of Comparative Zoology 106:117-174.

Perkins, D. J. and P. Daly 1968 A hunters' village in Neolithic Turkey. Scientific American 219:96-106.

Pimm, S. L. and J. L. Gittleman 1992 Biological Diversity: Where is it? Science 255:940.

Potter, J. 1997 Communal Ritual and Faunal Remains: an Example from the Dolores Anasazi. Journal of Field Archaeology 24(3):353- 364.

Pozorski, S. 1982 Subsistence Systems in the Chimu State. In : Andean Desert City, edited by M. Moseley and K. Day, pp. 177-196. School of American Research. University of New Mexico, Alburqueque.

Pozzi-Escot, D. 1991 Conchopata: a community of potters. In Huari Administrative Structure. Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government, edited by W. H. Isbell and G. McEwan, pp. 81-92. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, D.C.

Pozzi-Escot, D. and C. R. Cardoza 1986 El Consumo de Camelidos entre el Formativo y Wari, Ayacucho. Instituto Andino de Estudios Arqueologicos. Universidad Nacional San Cristobal de Huamanga, Ayacucho.

Quilter, J., B. Ojeda E., D. M. Pearsall, D. H. Sandweiss, J. G. Jones and E. Wing 1991 Subsistence Economy of El Paraiso, an Early Peruvian Site Science 251:277- 283.

Rahbek, C. 1997 The Relationship among Area, Elevation, and Regional Species Richness in Neotropical Birds. The American Naturalist 149(5):875-902.

244

Reitz, E. and E. Wing 1999 Zooarchaeology. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Rick, J. and K. Moore 1999 El Precerámico de las Punas de Junín: El punto de vista desde Panaulauca. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 3:263-295.

Rick, J. W. 1988 The character and context of highland preceramic society. In Peruvian Archaeology. An overview of pre-Inca and Inca society edited by R. W. Keatinge, pp. 3-40. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Rodriguez Loredo, C. 2001 Las ofrendas de camelidos en un cementerio del Formativo Superior, costa central, Peru. In El uso de los camelidos a traves del tiempo, edited by G. L. Mengoni Gonalons, D. E. Olivera and H. D. Yacobaccio, pp. 221-240. Ediciones del Tridente, Buenos Aires.

Rofes, J. 2000 Sacrificio de Cuyes en El Yaral, Comunidad Prehispanica del Extremo Sur Peruano. Boletin Instituto Frances de Estudios Andinos 29(1):1- 12.

2004 Prehispanic Guinea Pig Sacrifices in Southern Peru, the Case of El Yaral. In Behavior Behind the Bones. The Zooarchaeology of Ritual, Religion, Status and Identity, edited by S. J. O'Day, W. Van Neer and A. Ervynck, pp. 95- 100. Oxbow Books, Oxford.

Rosenfeld, S. A. 2004 Zooarchaeology at Conchopata, a Huari Urban Center. Paper presented at the Society for American Archaeology, 69th Annual Meeting, March 31- April 4. Montreal, Canada.

2008 Delicious guinea pigs: Seasonality studies and the use of fat in the pre- Columbian Andean diet. Quaternary International 180:127-134.

ms. Ñawinpukyo. Análisis Zooarqueológico. 2002. Unpublished Manuscript.

Rowe, J. 1944 An Introduction to the Archaeology of Cuzco. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University. Vol. 27, no. 2, Cambridge, Mass.

1956 Archaeological Explorations in Southern Peru. American Antiquity 22:135- 151.

Rowe, J., D. Collier and G. Willey 1950 Reconnaissance Notes on the Site of Huari, near Ayacucho, Peru. American Antiquity 16:120- 137.

Rowe, J. H.

245

1967 Stages and Periods in Archaeological Interpretation. In Peruvian Archaeology. Selected Readings, edited by J. H. Rowe and D. Menzel, pp. 1-15. Peek Publications, Palo Alto, Ca.

Sanders, W. 1973 The Significance of Pikillakta in Andean Cultural History. Occasional Papers in Anthropology. Penn State University 8.

Sarmiento de Gamboa, P. 2007 (1572) The . Translated and edited by Brian S. Bauer and Vania Smith. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Sawyer, A. R. 1980 Squier's "Palace of Ollantay" Revisited. Nawpa Pacha 18:63-72.

Schiffer, M. 1976 Behavioral Archaeology. Academic Press.

Schiffer, M. B. 1972 Archaeological Context and Systemic Context. American Antiquity 37(2):156- 165.

Schmid, E. 1972 Atlas of Animal Bones. For Prehistorians, Archaeologists and Quaternary Geologists. Elselvier Publishing, New York.

Schreiber, K. 1991 Jincamocco: a Huari administrative center in the South central highlands of Peru. In Huari admimistrative structure: prehistoric monumental architecture and state government, edited by W. H. Isbell and G. F. McEwan, pp. 199-213. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington D.C.

1992 Wari Imperialism in Middle Horizon Peru. Anthropological Papers 87. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

1999 Regional approaches to the study of prehistoric empires: examples from Ayacucho and Nasca, Peru. In Settlement Pattern Studies in the Americas: Fifty years since Viru, edited by B. R. Billman and G. M. Feinman, pp. 160-171. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.

2000 Los Wari en su Contexto Local: Nasca y Sondondo. In Boletin de Arqueologia PUCP. N4. Huari y Tiwanaku: Modelo vs. Evidencias. Primera Parte, edited by P. Kaulicke and W. Isbell, pp. 425- 448. PUCP, Lima.

2001 The Wari Empire of Middle Horizon Peru: the Epistemological Challenge of Documenting an Empire without Documentary Evidence In Empires. Perspectives from Archaeology and History, edited by S. Alcock, T. D'Altroy, K. Morrison and C. Sinopoli, pp. 70- 92. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Scott, E. M.

246

2007 Pigeon Soup and Plover in Pyramids: French Foodways in New France and the Illinois Country. In The Archaeology of Food and Identity, edited by K. C. Twiss, pp. 243-259. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 34. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

Shady Solis, R. 1989 Cambios Significativos Ocurridos en el Mundo Andino durante el Horizonte Medio In The Nature of Wari. A Reappraisal of the Middle Horizon Period in Peru, edited by R. M. Czwarno, F. M. Meddens and A. Morgan, pp. 1- 22. BAR International Series 525, Oxford.

Shaedel, R. P. 1948 Monolithic scultpture of the Southern Andes. Archaeology 1(2):66-73.

Sillar, B. and E. Dean 2002 Identidad etnica bajo el dominio Inka: una evaluacion arqueologica y etnohistorica de las repercusiones del estado Inka en el grupo etnico Canas. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 6:205-264.

Smith, M., J. B. Wharton and J. M. Olson 2003 Aztec Feasts, Rituals, and Markets: Political Uses of Ceramic Vessels in a Commercial Economy. In The Archaeology and Politics of Food and Feasting in Early States and Empires, edited by T. Bray, pp. 235- 268. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, New York.

Stahl, P. 1999 Structural density of domesticated South American camelid skeletal elements and the archaeological investigations of prehistoric Andean ch´arki. Journal of Archaeological Science 26:1347-1368.

2003 Pre-Columbian Andean Animal Domesticates at the Edge of Empire. World Archaeology 34(3):470- 483.

Stanish, C. 2001 The Origins of State Societies in South America. Annual Review of Anthropology 30:41- 64.

Stanley, H., M. Kadwell and J. Wheeler 1994 Molecular Evolution of the Family Camelidae: a Mitochondrial DNA study. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. BS 256(1345):1-6.

Stokes, P. 2000 A cut above the rest? Officers and men at South Shields Roman fort. In Animal Bones, Human Societies, edited by P. Rowley-Conwy, pp. 146-151. Oxbow Books, Oxford.

Swenson, E. 2006 Competitive Feasting, Religious Pluralism and Descentralized Power in the Late Moche Period In Andean Archaeology III, edited by W. H. Isbell and H. Silverman, pp. 112-142. Springer, New York.

247

Tello, J. C. 1942 Origen y desarrollo de las civilizaciones prehistoricas del Peru. Paper presented at the Congreso Internacional de Americanistas, 1939, Lima.

1970 Las ruinas de Huari. In 100 anos de arqueologia en el Peru, edited by R. Ravines, pp. 519-525. vol. 3. Fuente e investigaciones para la historia del Peru. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima.

Topic, J. R. 1991 Huari and Huamachuco. In Huari admimistrative structure: prehistoric monumental architecture and state government, edited by W. H. Isbell and G. F. McEwan, pp. 141-164. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington D.C.

Topic, J. R. and T. L. Topic 2000 Hacia la Comprension del Fenomeno Huari: una Perspectiva Norteña. In Huari y Tiwanaku: Modelos vs. Evidencias. Primera Parte, edited by P. Kaulicke and W. Isbell, pp. 181- 218. Boletin de Arqueologia PUCP, N4, Lima.

Tung, T. A. 2003 A Bioarchaelogical Perspective on Wari Imperialism in the Andes of Peru: A View from Heartland and Hinterland Skeletal Populations. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

2007 Trauma and violence in the Wari Empire of the Peruvian Andes: warfare, raids, and ritual fights. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 133:941-956.

2008 Dismembering bodies for display: a bioarchaeological study of trophy heads from the Wari site of Conchopata, Peru. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 136:294-308.

Tung, T. A. and A. G. Cook 2006 Intermediate-Elite Agency in the Wari Empire. The Bioarchaeology and Mortuary Evidence. In Intermediate Elites in the Pre-Columbian States and Empires, edited by C. M. Elson and R. A. Covey, pp. 68-93. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Tung, T. A. and K. J. Knudson 2008 Social Identities and Geographical Origins of Wari Trophy Heads from Conchopata, Peru. Current Anthropology 49(5):915-925.

Uhle, M. 1912 Los Origenes de los Incas. In XVII Congreso de Americanistas, pp. 302-352. Coni Hnos, Buenos Aires.

Valcarcel, L. E. 1933 Esculturas de Pikillacta. Revista del Museo Nacional 2:19-48.

1934a Los trabajos arqueologicos del . Revista del Museo Nacional III(3):201- 234.

248

1934b Primer Informe sobre los trabajos arqueologicos que se verifican en el Departamento dell Cuzco. Revista del Museo Nacional III(1-2):181-191.

1934c Sajsawaman Redescubierto. Revista del Museo Nacional III(1-2):3-36.

1935 Sajsayhuaman redescubierto (IV). Revista del Museo Nacional IV(2):161- 203.

Valdez, L. and J. E. Valdez 1997 Reconsidering the Archaeological Rarity of Guinea Pig Bone in the Central Andes. Current Anthropology 38(5):896- 898.

Valdez, L. M. 2000 On Ch'arki Consumption in the Ancient Central Andes: A Cautionary Note. American Antiquity 65(3):567-572.

2006 Maize beer production in Middle Horizon Peru. Journal of Anthropological Research 62:53-80.

Valdez, L. M., K. J. Bettcher and L. E. Valcarcel 2010 Production of maize beer at a Wari site in the Ayacucho valley, Peru. Arqueologia Iberoamericana 5:23-35.

Valdez, L. M., J. E. Valdez, K. J. Bettcher and C. Vivanco 2000 Marayniyoq, un establecimiento Wari en el valle de Ayacucho, Peru. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 4:549-564.

Vasquez Sanchez, V. F., T. E. Rosales Than and L. Coronado Tello 2001 Evidencias arqueologicas de crianza de camelidos en los siglos V y VI en la Costa Norte de Peru. In El uso de los camelidos a traves del tiempo, edited by G. L. Mengoni Gonalons, D. E. Olivera and H. D. Yacobaccio, pp. 241-260. Ediciones del Tridente, Buenos Aires.

Vaughn, K. J. 2004 Households, Crafts, and Feasting in the Ancient Andes: The Village Context of Early Nasca Craft Consumption. Latin American Antiquity 15(1):61-88.

Vierra, R. K. and R. S. MacNeish 1981 The stratigraphy of the other cave excavations. In Prehistory of the Ayacucho Basin, edited by R. S. MacNeish, A. Garcia Cook, L. G. Lumbreras, R. K. Vierra and A. Nelken-Terner, pp. 113-148. vol. II, Excavations and Chronology. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

Vigne, J.-D. and D. Helmer 2007 Was milk a "secondary product" in the Old World Neolithisation process? Its role in the domestication of cattle, sheep and goats. Anthropozoologica 42(2):9-40.

Walker, W. 1999 Ceremonial Trash? In Expanding Archaeology, edited by J. M. Skibo, W. H. Walker and A. E. Nielsen, pp. 67-79. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake city.

249

Wheeler, J. 1982 Aging Llamas and Alpacas by their Teeth. Llama World 1(2):12-17.

1984 La Domesticacion de la Alpaca (Lama pacos L.) y la Llama (Lama glama L.) y el Desarrollo Temprano de la Ganaderia Autoctona en los Andes Centrales. Boletin de Lima 36:1- 11.

1995 Evolution and present situation of the South American Camelidae. Biological Journal of Linnean Society 54:271-295.

1996 El Estudio de Restos Momificados de Alpacas y Llamas Precolombinas. In Zooarqueología de Camélidos., edited by D. Elkin, C. Madero, G. Mengoni Goñalons, D. Olivera and H. Yacobaccio, pp. 91- 101. vol. 2. GZC. Ediciones El Tridente, Buenos Aires.

1999 Patrones Prehistóricos de Utilización de los Camélidos Sudamericanos. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 3:297- 305.

Wheeler, J., L. Chikhi and M. Bruford 2006 Genetic Analysis of the Origins of South American Camelids. In Documenting Domestication. New Genetic and Archaeological Paradigms, edited by M. Zeder, D. Bradley, E. Emshwiller and B. Smith, pp. 329- 341. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California.

White, C. D. 2005 Gendered food behaviour among the Maya:Time, place, status and ritual Journal of Social Archaeology 5(3):356-382.

Wiessner, P. and W. Schiefenhovel (editors) 1996 Food and the Status Quest. An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Berghahn Books, Providence, RI.

Wilk, R. J. and W. L. Rathje 1982 Archaeology of the Household : Building a Prehistory of Domestic Life. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.

Williams, P. R. 2001 Cerro Baul: A Wari Center on the Tiwanaku Frontier. Latin American Antiquity 12(1):67-83.

2002 Rethinking Disaster- Induces Collapse in the Demise of the Andean Highland States: Wari and Tiwanaku. World Archaeology 33(3):361- 374.

Williams, P. R., J. A. Isla and D. J. Nash 2001 Cerro Baul: un enclave Wari en interaccion con Tiwanaku. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 5:69-87.

Wing, E. 1972 Appendix IV. Utilization of Animal Resources in the Peruvian Andes. In Excavations at , Peru. A Report on the Third adn Fourth Expeditions, edited by S. Izumi and K. Terada, pp. 327-351. University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo.

250

1986 Domestication of Andean Mammals. In High Altitude Tropical Biogeography, edited by F. Vuilleumier and M. Monasterio, pp. 246- 264. Oxford University Press and American Museum of Natural History, Oxford and New York.

Wing, E. S. 1977 Animal Domestication in the Andes. In Origins of Agriculture, edited by C. A. Reed, pp. 827-859. Mouton Publishers, The Hague.

Yerkes, R. 2005 Bone Chemistry, Body Parts, and Growth Marks: Evaluating Ohio Hopewell and Cahokia Mississippian Seasonality, Subsistence, Ritual, and Feasting. American Antiquity 70(2):241- 265.

Zapata, J. 1997 Arquitectura y contextos funerarios Wari en Batan Urqu, Cusco. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 1:165-206.

Zeder, M. 1991 Feeding Cities. Specialized Animal Economy in the Ancient Near East. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Zuck, T. 1938 Age order of epiphyseal union in the guinea pig. The Anatomical Record 70(4):389- 399.

251