Domestic Artifact Assemblages and Ritual Activities in the Bolivian Formative Mare Bermann; Jose Estevez Castillo Journal of Field Archaeology, Vol. 22, No. 4 (Winter, 1995), 389-398. Stable URL hitp:/flinks jstor-orgisii sici=0093-4690% 28 199524%2922%3A4%3C389%3 ADAAARA%3E2.0,CO%3B2-8 ‘Your use of the ISTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use, available at hhup:/www, stor orglabout/terms.html. ISTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the sc printed page of such transmission. Journal of Field Archaeology is published by Boston University. Please contact the publisher for further permissions regarding the use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www jstor.org/joumals/boston html Journal of Field Archaeology 01995 ISTOR and the ISTOR logo are trademarks of JSTOR, and are Registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office For more information on JSTOR contact jstor-info@umich edu, ©2003 JSTOR hupswwwjstor.org/ Sat Oct 4 23:36:06 2003Domestic Artifact Assemblages and Ritual Activities in the Bolivian Formative Mare Bermann, University of Pier Piusburgh, Pensslvania José Estévez Castillo Insiuro Nacional de Argueologia 1a Pa, Bolivia Survey and excavation in Oruro, Bolivia, have begun to reveal the nature of residential life during the Formative Period (1800 -ac. 300) in central highland Bolivia. This report presents the results of recent investigations at the “Wankarani complex” site of San Andtrés, Excavation revealed clusters of clay figurines grinding tones, and chipped stone bifaces in domestic contexts. Patterns of intevassemblage variability and differential dis- card at the ste suggest such artifacts were placed in ritual caches. 389) Introduction There has been little archaeological investigation of the Formative Period (1800 nc 300) in the southern Andean high plateau or altiplano. Major developments during this period included the emergence of sedentary lifeways, new technologies (metallurgy and pottery), re- gional ideologies as represented by widely-distributed iconographic styles (such as the Yaya-Mama tradition), and complex polities (centered around public-architecture sites such a8 Chiripa), The Formative Period also saw the devel- ‘opment of mixed agropastoral economies based on newly domesticated tubers and chenopods as well as the domestic camelid (Kolata 1993: 59-63). Over the past 50 years investigation centering on pub lic-architecture sites has documented some aspects of For- ‘mative Period adaptation and ceremonial life, particularly ritual activities involving temples and carved monoliths (Chavez. 1988; Chiver. and Chivez. 1975; Kolata 1983: 245-252). Lacking parallel investigation of contexts, how ver, virtually nothing is known of Formative Period life in general, and household ritual activities in particular. Al though small clay figurines have been found at Formative Period residential sites throughout the southem altiplano, the exact context of their occurrence has rarely been re ported (Bermann 1990; Bermann and Estévez 1992; Brockington et al. 1985, 1986; Ibarra Grasso and Lewis 1986; Ponce Sanginés 1970: 38-42). Our 1992 investigation of Formative settlement and subsistence in the canton of La Joya, Department of Oruro, included preliminary exploration of domestic con- texts at the site of San Andrés. Several features found in house remains at San Andrés provided new information on Formative Period household activities and ritual ‘The Wankarani Complex of Bolivia The site of San Andrés belongs to the Formative Period Wankarani complex,” a poorly-known archaeological cul- ture of the central Bolivian highlands (16.1). Sites of the complex (typically isolated mounds of house remains and cccupational refuse) resemble in form and ceramic style the type site of Wankarani, located in the Department of La Paz (Ibarra Grasso and Lewis 1986: 142-151; Ponce Sanginés 1970: 16-25; Walter 1966). Wankarani sites range from 0.520 ha in size, with estimated populations of 80 to 4000 individuals (Bermann and Estévez 1992; Ponce Sanginés 1980: 14). Carlos Ponce Sanginés’ excava tions at the type site provided a set of radiocarbon dates that remain the bass for a very general chronology (Ponce Sanginés 1970; 41-42). These radiocarbon dates, ogether with those derived from San Andrés in 1992, suggest that some Wankarani sites were oceupied before 1200 #.c. The Wankarani complex thus represents one of the earliest pottery-using populations of Bolivia (Bermann and réve7 1992; Ibarra Grasso and Lewis 1986: 136; Ponce Sanginés 1980: 13) Although the complex was frst recognized in the 1930s, there has been little investigation of Wankarani sites, and none in the last 25 years. Archaeologists have exposed a390 Bolivian Formative/Bermann and Estéves. Castillo Figure 1 Location of San Andrés and other Formative Period sites, handful of the characteristically circular Wankarani dwell ings at Wankarani, Uspa-Uspa, and other sites through the years, and found many examples of the most famous ‘components of Wankarani ritual life—large, carved stone llama heads shown in Figure 2 (Condarco 1959: 204-205; Guerra 1977; Lopez 1959; Métraux and Lehman 1937, 148-151, 1953: 70; Ponce Sanginés 1970: 34-36; Walter 1966; Wasson 1967: 146). At the site of Uspa-Uspa, stone Figure 2 Stone llama heads have been found on the foors of Wankarani complex houses. These specimens (Irom diffrent sites) were photographed atthe Museo Nacional Antropoligico “Eduardo Lopez Rivas" in Orato, The specimen om the let sea. 88 em tal. llama heads were found both on house floors and grouped together in caches outside the houses (Guerra, personal communication, 1992; Wasson 1967: 148). Other ritual items—clay figurines—have been collected at Wankarani sites, and at Formative Period sites in the Departments of Cochabamba, Oruro, and La Paz (Ber: mann and Estévez 1992; Brockington et al, 1985, 1986; barra Grasso and Lewis 1986: 152-157). Although Was: son (1967: 150) found small clay zoomorphic figurines (dogs and llamas) on the surface of several Wankarani mound sites, our own observations suggest that these items probably represent modern offerings. Excavation at San Andrés San Andrés is a small mound site located 1.5 km from the Rio Desaguadero, near La Joya, Bolivia. The site ‘measures roughly 4 m in height and 60 m in diameter (16. 8), Pilot fieldwork at the site in 1992 included random surface collections as well as excavation of three test units (r16.4) Excavation took place in natural and arbitrary levels. Natural layers thicker than 5 em were divided into arbitrary levels. Fill was passed through I cm mesh sereens, and all artifacts were collected, although the size of the screen prevented systematic recovery of fish remains. Soil samples were collected from each excavation lot to provide fish remains and flotation samples. When artifacts were divided up by class after removal from the screen, each artifact was compared to a series of scaled shapes to determine if the artifact was larger than 20 sq em. Two test units totalling 21 sq m (Units 1 and 2) ex plored house remains partially visible from the surface. Neither of these excavations went to sterile soil. A third test pit (Unit 3) along the mound’s eastern edge revealed a complex sequence of ashy midden deposits Results of Investigation Ac the apex of the mound, Unit I exposed the stone wall foundations of Structure 1 along with 1 sq m of house floor, and a large outdoor refuse pit. Unit 2 completely revealed Structure 2. The shallow position of Structure 2 fon the mound, and the shallow deposits overlying the structure suggest that occupation at San Andrés ended not Jong after the final abandonment of Structure 2, Radiocar: bon dates from Structure 2’s hearth and from deposits below the floor suggest that occupation of the structure ended in the 12th or 13th century BC. (TABLE 1). Architecture Structure 2 (Fic. s) measured roughly 3.4 2.8 m, and displayed an oval plan, in contrast to the circular houses excavated by Wasson at Uspa-Uspa (Wasson 1967: 154)Journal of Field Archacology/Vol. 22, 1995 391 Figure 3. sh ftom centuries of occupation give the San Andrés mound (arrow) light color. Figure 4. Location of excavation nits a San Andes. Structure 2 closely resembled the Uspa-Uspa houses in construction techniques, however. As with the Uspa-Uspa houses, the walls of Structure 2 consisted of mud brick or cut sod placed on two rows of unmodified field stones and. adobe blocks. The entrance of the structure had probably been in the NE section of the house, Ethnographic analogy suggests that the roof would have been made of pajt (thatch) and taken a conical form. Clay with paja impres sions and small quantities of burned paja were found inside the structure. Major features in the housefloor included: a large posthole; a small storage or refuse pit; and a double: chambered hearth made of stone slabs and clay. A small amount of ash, charcoal, and several fragments of cooking, vessels were found near the bottom of the hearth. ‘The house floor consisted of compacted soil and sand. Occupational debris had been pressed into this surface while the house was occupied, and thin layers of sand and silt had accumulated on it, probably during Oruro’s noto- rious windy season (August-September). At least twice during the occupation of the house, the residents refloored. the house by covering the occupational and aeolian depos: its on the old surface with a layer of clean soil.392 Bolivian Formative/Bermann and Exéves Castillo Table 1. aocarhon dates fom San Andrés srs fame a oe Fan sce Be aaa ay Ses ca ear Peres ee ee posthole ° toot ¢ earth om Qe | = ye 3 i» Seo = igure 5, Pan of Structore 2 Numbered snsles matk locations of anit caches Afier exposing the uppermost of Structure 2's three floors in its entirety, we excavated the st quarter of the dwelling below the level of the uppermost floor. The deposits below the uppermost floor can best be described as a “floor zone”—a 15-em-thick layer of silty clay loam, with ash and sand lenses and microstrata (6. 6). We could not completely determine which microstrata represented ‘occupational surfaces, refuse accumulation contemporane- ‘ous with the house occupation, or natural and cultural deposits from periods when the structure was not occu pied. Most ofthe layers seemed to represent aeolian accu ‘mulation and occupational levels, Level g (F.6), however, appeared to resemble in soil type and artifact content (large bone fragments, large sherds, fire-cracked rock) the ‘occupational fill found outside the structures. Level g thus may represent a period when the house was abandoned and used for refuse disposal House Contents Artifacts found in the “floor zone” layer included frag ‘ments of undecorated cooking vessels; fragments of animal bone (camelid, bied, rodent, and fish); chipped stone tools, (mostly expedient flake tools, but some irregular blades); ground stone tools; slag from copper smelting (scorin); part ofa ceramic spoon; and items of personal adornment. ‘Among the latter were several pendants of polished marine shell. We also recovered part of a black obsidian projectile point, and a small stone cone (trompito) of unknown function, Worked bone implements from the structure included awls, serapers, and part of a polished tube. Most of the artifacts were found near the walls of the house, where they may have been overlooked or pushed during household cleaning, ‘The floor zone also yielded two fragments from ceramic tubes, one with paint-filled, incised decoration (116. 78) Similar hollow pottery tubes (generally referred to as trumpets or “sopladores”) have been found at Chiripa, Pukara, and other south-central Andean Formative sites (Brockington et al. 1985; Chivez 1988: 23; Ponce Sang- inés 1970: 48). The precise function of these tubes is unknown, but Chavez (1988: 23) describes them as “ritual paraphernalia.”Journal of Field Archacology/Vol. 22, 1995. 393 Figure 6. Simpl profile of Structure 2 bisected slong 2 WS axis, showing uppermost floor (shaded), Serta key: (a) light gray sand sits (6) ‘lack loamy clay (c) compact yellow snd; (8) black mcrostratay () mottled brown sandy ely (F) ark Brom ashy’ sanl (i) Brose clay with mi rostrata (h) dark brown sand ea: Figure 7, Ariats from Structure 2: A) fragment of ceramic “trum pe” from the floor of Structure 2; B) figurine fragment from Cache 1 ithe incisions depict a hand); C) figurine Hagmear from Cache 2. Comparison of Indoor and Outdoor Artifact Assemblages Artifact assemblages from deposits inside the structure differed in several ways from deposits outside the struc- ture. Artifice density inside the structure averaged 120/cu m, while density outside the structure averaged 580 artifacts/eu m. The outdoor deposits also contained more charcoal and fire-cracked rock. In addition, the in door and outdoor artifact assemblages differed in several ‘ways not apparent from simply comparing the proportion of artifact types in indoor and outdoor contexts (TAB 2), ‘The most prominent difference between indoor and out- door assemblages, one we initially noted during excava tion, was in mean artifact size, with the majority of artifacts from inside the structure being relatively small. Roughly 70% of the 177 artifacts found inside the structure were smaller than 20 sq cm. In contrast, only 48% of the 206 artifacts from outside Structure 2 in Unit 2 were smaller than 20 sq cm. A similar pattern was observed in the smaller artifact assemblages from Unit 1. Roughly 83% of the 39 artifacts found inside Structure I were smaller than 20 sq em, as opposed 10 40% of the 92 artifacts found ‘outside the structure. To further test the apparent contrast in artifact size, 70 artifacts were drawn at random from the indoor and out: door assemblages respectively, and individually measured (116. 8). Comparison of the indoor and outdoor samples showed that the 17.7 sq cm difference in mean artifact size between the indoor and outdoor assemblages was very significant statistically (5% windsorized log transformation t=-6.121, 001 > p. > 0001), Ik is worth repeating that this aspect of interassemblage ‘Table 2. Artifact representation inside and outside Structures I and 2: counts and percentages. mT Tar areor Teste Dana Trae on ‘herd @ (179) 397) 33 Iso) 38 8a) Bone 19 (487) 37 (40.2) 72 (400) 43 208) Bice or fragment 7179) 12130) 50 (169) 39 (185) Groundstone 15) 564) 1 (62), 13 (63) Chipped stone 3 @7 9 (92) 1s ao.) 10 48) Fire racked rock © (00) 1s (195) 317) 46 223) Other 2 6) 2 Ql) 10 (56) 17 (82) Total 38 2 7 206394. Bolivian Formative/Bermann and Estévez Castillo sqem os Inside outside my @ % 20 m2 Sw as tae st 20 8 SE; 240 456 Me 8 2 Figure 8. A random sample of asf drawa from indooe and out «door contexts indicates that artiiets Found inside the domestic ste: tures tended to he smaller than those found outside variability would not have been noticed if we were not specifically interested in artifact size differences. In fact, without further investigation, Table 2 shows how the relatively similar proportions of items such as sherds, axe fragments, and chipped stone fragments in indoor and ‘outdoor contexts of Units 1 and 2 would suggest that the assemblages were indeed furl similar. The pattern of size differences, however, indicates that important. factors structuring interassemblage variability at San Andrés are not reflected in artifact Frequencies, and would easily be missed if we had simply compared assemblages in terms of relative proportions of artifact types. These size differences are probably a function of trash disposal: the house occupants kept Structure 2 fairly clean, and discarded large artifacts outside the structure. Small items were probably overlooked during cleaning, or pressed into the structure's ditt floor. ‘The differences in artifact size berween interior and exterior assemblages illustrates how easily excavation confined to only one of these contexts (as is common in traditional approaches to domestic architecture in the south-central Andes) would provide an incomplete picture of a Wankarani occupation by not compensating for difer- ential discard modes. The interpretive implications of this, interassemblage variability can be further illustrated by simply comparing the faunal remains from inside and out side Structure 2. As shown in Table 3, bird bones (primar- ily fom aquatic/shore birds) make up a relatively high percentage of the housefloor non-fish faunal assemblage (38%) in comparison to camelid bones. Thus if we only had recovered faunal remains from the housefloor, and had. noted the large quantities of fish remains inside the dwvel ing (not shown in Table 3), we might have suggested a riverine orientation for the San Andrés population. But bird bones only constitute 16% of the non-fish faunal assemblage from outdoor contexts in contrast to 67% for ‘camelids. This difference is probably a function of size; fish and bird remains tend to be smaller and more fragile than camelid bone fragments, and were more likely to be left in the house, while camelid bone fragments were discarded outside Stone Tool Discard Patterns During excavation we were impressed by the quantity of stone tools inside the dwelling. In addition to a number of grinding stones, the uppermost floor and the 24 sq m area of floor zone yielded 22 whole, chipped stone bifaces (hoe blades) and 17 large fragments of bifaces. The stone tools associated with Structure 2 were unusual not only for their quantity (would a single household really need so. many hoes?) but also for their size, The stone tools in the structure were exceptions to the general small size of interior artifiets. In fact, whole bifaces (measuring, be ween 7 and 15 cm long) and a handful of grinding stones ‘Table 3. Faunal remains from inside and outside con: texts: counts and percentages. Fish remains are not shown because their small size prevented systematic Unit 1 Camel deer 6 (328) 25 (68%) Bird 526%) +01) Rodent 5 (26%) 127s) Other/unknowa. 3 (168) 7 (19%) Total » 7 Unie 2 Camels /deer 22308) 29 (67%) Bird 28.38) 7 (108) Rodent 18 (21%) 409%) Other/unknown 7 (10%) 3478) Tot 2 awere among the only large artifets found in the house Over 90% of the specimens found in Structure 2 that were larger than 20 sq em were stone tools. In contrast, many of the larger specimens outside the structure were fragments of pottery or camelid bone. The grinding stones and bifaces in Structure 2 suggest that particular classes of stone tools had a different discard pathway than pottery, bone, and other types of stone tools. ‘This differential discard treatment alone might suggest the special nature of these artifact classes in Wankarani house: hold life. As we discuss below, this interpretation is rein- forced by the context in which most of the stone tools were found. The discovery of three clusters or offering caches in Structure 2 suggests that at least some of the sinding stones and bifaces, along, with clay figurines, were used oF stored for ritual activities Figurines and Bifuces: Ritual Caches? ‘The locations of the three artifct clusters found in Structure 2 are shown in Figure 5. The caches were made at different times and took slightly different forms. Cache 1 consisted ofa cluster of artifacts grouped together on the uppermost floor and was clearly associated with the final occupation of the structure. In contrast, Caches 2 and 3 consisted of artifacts placed in shallow pits. The Cache 2 pit was located in the middle of the floor zone, and could not be associated with a particular floor. The Cache 3 pit ‘was slightly below the original floor of the structure and thus may have been a sub-floor offering. Comparing the cache pits with three refuse features at San Andrés suggests that Caches 2 and 3 were not simple refuse pits. The three refuse features consisted ofa shallow pit in the uppermost floor of Structure 2 (LI2 R4),and two ‘outdoor refuse pits (one outside Structure 2 [U2 R7] and ‘one outside of Structure 1 [UL R4]). The fill and artifacts of the cache pits differed markedly from these refuse fea tures. The cache pits displayed relatively clean sand fill, unlike the ashy fill of the refuse pits. Nor did the cache pits contain the fire-cracked rock, chipped stone, and burned animal bone fragments found in the refuse pits and all other refuse deposits at San Andrés (r16. 9:1AnL¥ 2) The cache objects dic not display a purposeful arrange ‘ment, although the artifacts of Cache 2 had been covered with an inverted grinding shab or darn. As can be seen in Figure 8, each cache consisted of a set of whole bifaces, fragments of bifaces (+16. 10), and a small number of intact grinding stones. In addition, Caches 1 and 2 each included 4 fragment of an unfired orange clay figurine (FIG. 78, ¢) Unfortunately, both of these figurines were damaged dur ing excavation, Cache 3 did not contain a recognizable figurine, but it did include a small pocket of orange clay Journal of Field Archacolagy/Vol. 22, 1995. 395 smashed beneath a grinding stone that may have been part of a figurine fragment. No other figurines—fired or unfired—were found at San Andrés ‘The San Andrés specimens are similar to the flat clay anthropomorphic figurines found at Uspa-Uspa and other Wankarani sites (Ponce Sanginés 1970: 28). While the poorly-preserved San Andrés figurines do not display the clear facial features of published Wankarani figurines, they do resemble published figurines in general form. A com- parison of the Cache 2 figurine fragment (#16 7) with figurines from other sites suggests that the San Andrés specimen is the bottom half of an anthropomorphic figur ine with incisions depicting a hand. What the Cache 1 figurine fragment (FG. 78) represents is unclear, but it is similar to unpublished figurines in the museum at Oruro. Although unfired clay figurines have not been reported from elsewhere in the Oruro region, unfired figurines of hhumans and animals were common grave goods in burials, dating to the later Tiwanaku Period at the lake-side settle- ‘ment of Lukurmata (Bermann 1990: 286-287}, Bifaces made from a black, volcanic rock are ubiquitous at Formative Period and Middle Horizon sites in the Oruro region (Bermann and Estévez 1992: 5; Ponce Sang ings 1970: 42; Walter 1966: 82-86). The nearest known source of this type of rock is Querimita on the edge of Lake Poopé, some 150 km to the south (Ponce Sanginés and Mogrovejo 1970: 55). Bifaces closely resembling the San Andrés specimens have been found in association with the prehispanic quarry tunnels at Querimita (Guerra, personal communication, 1992; Ponce Sanginés and Mogrovejo 1970: 64). Although the bifaces are usually described in the literature as consisting of basalt, analysis of rock sam- piles from the Querimita quarries has suggested that the tools were probably made from rhyodacite, dacite, or quartz-latite (Marquez, Kussmaul, and Hérmann 1975). The bifaces are generally thought (based on ethno: ‘graphic analogy) to have been hafted for use as agricultural implements (Ponce Sanginés 1970: 42). The narrower, or proximal, end would have been hafted. The breakage patterns observed in the San Andrés bifces may support this interpretation. Fragmentary bifaces tended to have broken laterally into proximal and distal fragments, Several distal fragments exhibited a projection or lip caused by a snap fracture, a pattern of biface breakage consistent with the use of bifaces as hoes (MeAnany 1992: 205). Yer the sheer quantity of bifaces at sites in the La Joya area, and their association, even when broken, with residential occu pations, may point to uses beyond preparation of agricul: tural fields. One possibility is that the bifaces may have functioned as all-purpose tools, used in a range of activities from wood-working to butchering, Preliminary examina396 Bolivian Formative/Bermann and Estéves, Castillo aero ger mere mee So Se Gas Sey a = Figure 9. Contents of San Andrés domestic Festures tion of the edgewear on the San Andrés specimens using the naked eye and low power magnification (20x) revealed great variability in the location and extent of polish, scratches, and microflaking, suggesting a variety of serap- ing, cutting, and chopping uses. ‘A total of 47 whole bifaces were found in Unit 2. OF these, 13 were found in cache contexts in Structure 2. As shown in Table 4, 70% of 1 caches exhibited no signs of microflake damage (crescent, step, or scalar flake scars). In contrast, 79% of the intact bifaces found outside of cache contexts displayed mi croflake scars, chiefly, but not exclusively, along the distal e whole bifaces from the Figure 10, A sample of bifices from Cache 1 of Structure 2 fuse ot ‘aus at a ary edge. It is very unlikely (chi-square with continuity correc tion = 7.862, p= .005, Cramer’s phi-square = 46) that this diflerence in the proportion of bifaces showing edge dam- age is simply an artifact of sampling. Experiments have shown that even 20 minutes of green plant cutting is likely to leave microflake sears on tools comparable in hardness to the latites and rhyodacites found here (Richards 1988: 70). It is possible, therefore, that some of the San Andrés bifaces were placed in caches unused. At the least, the disparity in edge damage suggests that many of the bifaces in the caches, if used at all, were used for different purposes than bifaces found elsewhere at the site. This interpretaTable 4. Edge (microflake) damage on whole bifaces from cache and non-cache contexts ee Ne le sage rend Toa Cache coment 4 3 1B Non-cache context 2 7 3 Total ar 16 7 tion, however, must remain an intriguing hypothesis until the biface fragments from the cache and the bifices recov- ered during surface collection are examined. Edge damage (on stone tools can result from trampling and discard as well as use, and macroscopic examinations may be highly inaccurate (Young and Bamforth 1990). More rigorous analysis is required of the edgewear patterns before we can really discuss stone tool uses or the spatial patterning of tools at San Andrés It is possible that Caches 2 and 3 represent storage pits containing items that were not used together, perhaps simply valuable items stored together. Cache 1, however, suggests a deliberate grouping of objects on the house floor before abandonment of the structure, rather than storage. While a larger sample of houses is obviously needed to reconstruct domestic activities, the Structure 2 caches represent the first documentation of Wankarani figurines in context. If we accept that the figurines had ritual uses, the caches may represent deliberate offerings, perhaps associated with house dedication or abandonment ‘ceremonies. Further, the association of the bifaces with figurines in cache contexts suggests that some bifaces had ritual significance in addition to utilitarian functions. Conclusion Investigations at San Andrés documented a range of ‘Wankarani houschold activities including preparation and consumption of camelids, fish, and birds; spinning and ‘weaving; copper smelting; expedient flake tool making and grinding and scraping tasks. Further research will be needed to determine whether the large quantities of bi- faces were produced at the site or imported in a finished state, We found few of the biface thinning flakes one would expect from manufacture of bifaces, The excavations also revealed in domestic contexts two classes of “ritual arti facts” common in the circum-Lake Titicaca area to the north—ceramic tubes and clay figurines. Patterns of interassemblage variability, evidence of dif- ferential discard pathways, and cache settings suggest that other household rituals at San Andrés, perhaps connected Journal of Field Archacology/Vol. 22, 1995 397 to house dedication or abandonment, could have involved both the figurines common in Formative Period Bolivian sites, and several types of relatively mundane household items usually viewed as purely utilitarian in function. That artifact size affects discard patterns is not a new observation, nor is it surprising to find different artifact assemblages in different contexts since assemblage variabil- ity reflects functional, depositional, and taphonomic proc esses. For this reason, archacologists acknowledge that study of assemblage content patterning is important both to distinguish between discard modes and to understand the “behavioral context” in which sites form (Binford 1976; 340; Newell 1986: 143). Nevertheless the interpre- tive implications of differential discard modes have not always been pursued in household archaeology. As we have suggested for San Andrés, simple exceptions to general domestic discard patterns may reveal activities difficult to clucidate or document in other ways. It was the marked difference in discard treatment of certain large, mundane items that initially suggested their special status. That this “special status” was of a ritual nature was suggested by the discovery of the three caches, indicative of a “meaningful association” of these items (Binford 1976: 340), Acknowledgments This paper is dedicated to the late Mario Mercado of Intiraymi $. A., killed in a plane crash near Oruro in January 1995. His enthusiasm for Bolivian archacology ‘was only part of his larger devotion to Bolivia, its people, and its heritage. His warmth, generosity, and personal interest in the prehistory of Oruro made our research possible, We were also aided by funds from the American Council of Learned Societies. Much assistance was pro- vided by Intiraymi S. A. and Battle Mountain Gold Com pany. In particular we wish to thank from these corpora- tions Guido Arce and Marwin Columba. Our investigation could not have taken place without their support and personal interest in Bolivian prehistory. We are most grate ful to Luis Guerra for sharing his extensive knowledge of the Wankarani complex and for help provided us by the ‘Musco Nacional Antropolégico “Eduardo Lopez. Rivas” under his direction. Special thanks should also be extended to Pedro Flores (and son) for allowing. us to work on his property, Mare Berman is an assistant profesor of anchropolagy at the University of Pittsburgh. His current project in Bo- livia, co-directed with José Estéves Castillo, is investigat- ing Wankarani complex adaptation and evolution in the398 Bolivian Formative/Bermann and Esteves Castillo La Joya region. Mailing addres: Department of Anthro ology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, José Estéves Castillo is an archacologist of the Instituto Nacional de Argueologia (INAR) of Bolivia interested in Formative Period cultures and the prebispanic Ti- wanaku state, In addition to the La Joya project, he is currently directing an investigation of Formative setle- ments in Pasto Grande, Bolivia. Mailing address: Inst- into Nacional de Arqueologia, Casilla 20319, La Paz, Bolivia. Bermann, Mare 1990" “Prehispanic Household and Empire ar Lukurmata, Bo livin” unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of ‘Michigan, Ann Arbor. Bermana, Mare, and José Estévez Castil 1992" “Investigation at La ora, Oruro,” unpublished report of the 1991 season, Instituto Nacional de Arqueologia, La Paz, Binford, Lewis R 1976 “Forty-seven ‘Trips: A Case Study in the Character of Some Formation Processes of the Archaeological Re cord,” in Edin 8. Hall Jr ed, Contribusins 20 Anh pola: The Interior Peoples of Northern Alaska. Archae flaca! Survey of Canada. Paper 49, Orawa: National “Museums of Canada, 299-351 Brockington, David L., David Pereira Herrera, Ramén San zetenea R, and Ricardo Céspedes P. 1985 Informe preiminar de las excaraciones arqucolénicns en Sierra Motho y Chullpa Pempa, Cunderno de Invest gacion, Serie Argucolagia 5. Cochabamba: Universidad ‘Mayor de San Simon, 1986 Eveavaciones en Maina Paonpa y Conchn Pata, Mique Cuaderno de Investigacion, Serie Arguesiagin 6. Cochabamba: Universidad Mayor de San Simon, (Chives, Karen Mobe 1988 “The Significance of Chiripa in Lake Titicaca Basin Devel: opments.” Expedition 30(3): 17-26. (Chivez, Sergio J.,and Karen Mohr Chivez 1978 "A Carved Stela from Tarsco, Puno, Per, and the Defi tion oF an Early Sivie of Stone Sculpaure from the Alt plano of Peru and Bolivia,” Nawpe Pacha 13: 45-83, Condarco, Luis 1959. “Archaeological Notes on the Oruro Region, Bolivia,” Ethos 3-4: 202-207 Guerra, Lai 1977 EL Arte x Ix Prebisoria Orwroa. La Paz: Los Amigos del Libro Tarra Grasso, Dick Edgar and Roy Querejazu Lewis 1986. 30,000 Aner de Preinaria on Bolen, La Paes Los Amigos del Libr, Kolata, Alan 1983. “The South Andes,” in Jesse Jennings, ed, Ancient South Americans San Diego: W. H, Freeman, 241-284 1993. The Tinned, London: Thames and Hudson Lopes Rivas, Eduardo 1959 “Argucologia del Departamento de Oruro, Cantén Machacamarea,” Notarde Arucslen a Bolviana 2 McAnany, Patricia 1992 “Agricultural Tasks and Tools: Patterns of Stone Too! Discatd Near Prehistoric Maya Residences Bordering Pullrouser Swamp, Belize,” in ‘Thomas W. Kllion, ed, Gardens of Probivarss The Arcaalen of Settlement Aa culture in Greater Mewnnerien. Tuscaloosa: Universit of Alabama, 184-218, Marquez Oxia, Jorge, 8. Kussmavl, and PL K. Hérmann 1975. Esuaio Ptragraia del Crva Quevimita yu Comparacion fon Arteftcior Litieon Contra de Investigaciones A ‘quesligicas 7. Métraun, Alfed, and Heinz Lehmann 1937" “Archéologie de Ia Province 'Oruto, Bolivie (Mounds Abe Belén),” Journal de la Société des Americanises 29: 147-158, 1953 “Arqueologia del Departamento de Orato (Bolivia).” Kina (1-2): 69-73, Novell, Raymond R. 1985 "Reconstruction of the Partitioning and Usiization of Outside Space in a Late Prehistorie/Farly Historie Inupiat Village," in Susan Kent, ed, Method and Tiory For Activity aren Renrchs An Eshwonrchneoonical ‘proach, New York: Columbia University Press, 107-178, Ponce Sanginés, Carlos 1970 Las Culturas Wanbarani y Chiripa ym Rela com Ti swanatin. Aeademin Nacional de las Ciencie 28. La Paz Academia Nacional de las Ciena 1980 Panorama dela Arqucoloia Boliviana. La Paz: Juventud. Ponce Sanginés, Carlos, and Gerardo Mogrovejo Terrazas 1970 Acerca de be proedencia del material laco de lt mons ‘ment de Tiwanaku Academin Nacional de las Ciencias 21. La Paz: Academia Nacional de las Ciencias Richard, Thomas TOSS Microwear Patterns on Experimental Basalt Tiss. BAR International Series 460. Oxtord: BAR Walter, Heing 1966 Beitrane sur Avchucoenie Balivins, Arshneoliehe Sew aden in den Kovilleren Bovis M1, Baesler-Arcir Newe Folge Beibep 4 ‘Wasson, John 1967 “Investigaciones Oraeo,” Khana Aso X15 145 Proliminares de los “Mounds” de 6 Young, Donald, and Douglas B. Bamforth 1990 “On the Macroscopic Identification of Used Flakes,” American Antiquity 38: 408-407,