Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Variations Between Inka Installations in
Variations Between Inka Installations in
Variations Between Inka Installations in
INKA POWER
Carmen Arellano
Ramiro Matos Mendieta
Tunsukancha
Warawtampu
Ninaqaqa
Pumpu
Chakamarka
Chancha
Tarmatampu
Xauxa
Huancayo
Lima
Acostampu
PACIFIC
OCEAN
Ayacucho
Ushkus
Vilcashuaman
Inka Sites
Modern cities
0 40 km
these fulill the role of administrative centers only, or were they also centers
of production? How did the Inka succeed in securing the cooperation of
the subjugated local lords? hese questions can be more fully answered
by studying local sites and Inka sites, and by documenting how the local
population utilized their natural resources and organized themselves. On
the basis of archaeological data obtained in the last thirty years3 at several
Inka sites, we are now able to make regional comparisons and to provide
answers to the above questions.
Area of Study
Our irst task is to delimit a region of study. Here we are aided by infor-
mation in sixteenth-century Spanish chronicles that sketch how the Inka
organized their territory. Unfortunately, we must rely on a single source—
CORDILLERA
ORIENTAL
Huayllay
PAMPA DE
JUNÍN
CORDILLERA LLANURA
OCCIDENTAL PAMPA DE Junín
BOMBON
LLANURA Palcamayo
Huancayo
the chronicle of Pedro Pizarro—for information on this highland region, FIG. 2 Plains of Bonbon
an area that comprised an Inka province or wamani. In his list of Inka with modern names: Pampa
de Bombon and Pampa de
provinces, Pizarro (1978 [1571]: 221) mentions that “Tarma and Atauillos Junín (ater Matos 1994: 194)
and Bonbon is another province,”4 which we interpret as forming an
Inka province or wamani. We do not know if Pedro Pizarro knew with
certainty what a wamani was and if by the Spanish word “provincia” he
meant a wamani, but we think that archaeological and ethnohistoric data
can conirm Pizarro’s information.
he names Tarma and Atauillos also refer to ethnic groups; we do
not know precisely what Pizarro meant by the term Bonbon. he Span-
iards used the word to designate the Chinchayqocha plateau (today called
Junín), and to designate the Inka administrative center located in that
place (Cieza de León 1967 [1553] chap. 20: 65; Arellano 1988: 54; Matos
1994: 115–117; Nowack 1991: 29).5 We have assumed in our study that
when the Spaniards used the term Bonbon, they were referring to the
plateau of the central highlands, which includes both the basin of Lake
Junín (formerly known as Lake Chinchayqocha) and the Bonbon plateau
with Lake Punrun as well as the puna that extends to the junction of two
cordilleras in the modern department of Pasco (ig. 2; Matos 1994). he
data from colonial documents indicate that this plateau was inhabited
by several ethnic groups: the Atauillo (Atapillu6) to the northwest of
Lake Chinchayqocha, the Chinchaycocha (Chinchayqocha) in the lake
basin, and the Yaru (Yarush) in the northern part of the plateau, which
includes the Upper Huallaga drainage (Lakes Punrun or Yanamate and
Ninaqaqa
Pumpu CHINCHAYQOCHA
ATAPILLU
Tarma
Canta
Tarmatampu
Sausa
Lauricocha) (ig. 3; Arellano 1988: 54–55; Matos 1994: 73). Because the
Yacha, Chupachu, Q’ero, and Mitmaq paid tribute to Pumpu (Ortiz de
Zúñiga 1967 [1562] 1: 37, 47, 59 passim), they may have belonged to the
Pumpu province, as Matos (1994) suggested for the Yacha. his informa-
tion from Ortiz’s Visita is reinforced by Pedro Cieza de León (1959 [1553]
chap. 50 [ii: XX]: 166)7 who states that Pumpu and other provincial capi-
tals (cabeceras) received tribute: “[ . . . ] and from every so many leagues
around the tributes were brought to one of these capitals, and from so
many others, to another.”
Tribute-paying status vis-à-vis Pumpu should not be the only criterion
for inclusion in this wamani, since these ethnic groups also paid tribute to
Huánuco Pampa and Cusco. his leads us to ask why Pedro Pizarro does
not mention the Yacha, Chupachu, Q’ero, and Mitmaq in his account.
Pizarro’s account is incomplete; he omits many ethnic groups, including
large ones such as the Yawyus. Although Pizarro (1978 [1571]: 221) states
that the Sawsa and the Wanka formed a province, he does not mention
the Yawyus, whom Margarita Gentile Lafaille (1976) has shown belonged
to the Wanka province.
Pedro Pizarro’s document is extremely important, and the informa-
tion it contains is supported by additional archaeological and ethno-
historic data. Relying on his account and the information of Gentile
Lafaille, we suggest that the Inka province of Pumpu included four ethnic
groups: Yarush, Chinchayqocha, Tarma, and Atapillu. he exact territory
Tapuc
Coyllarisquizca Yaruscayan
Huaylarisca
Warawtampu
Atococha
Amado
Grande
Tinyahuarco
Shaley
Ninaqaqa Bellavista
Vicco
Carhuamayo
Pumpu Ulcumayo
Ingapirca
Junín
occupied by each group remains to be determined. Arellano (1994) is FIG. 4 Locations of Inka
Warawtampu
PALCAMAYO
Chakamarka STYLE
Canta
TARMA
STYLE Tarmatampu
Sausa
MANTARO
STYLE
Yawyos Acobamba
Ushkus
Acostampu
PACIFIC OCEAN
Chincha Alta
0 100 km
assume that the Mantaro ceramics found in areas outside of the Wanka
territory are a product of socioeconomic interaction. hese two pottery
styles—San Blas and Mantaro—do not appear suddenly. On the contrary,
they are the product of long traditions strongly rooted within their territo-
ries, whose antecedents go back to the Early Intermediate period (Parsons
et al. 2000).
he Late San Blas pottery is simple, abundant, and almost monoto-
nous. It can be light brown, beige, or smoky white, and decorated with
irregular red lines (sometimes curved) or with spots. Its shapes include
hemispherical bowls, cooking pots (ollas) with short necks and everted
rims, and jars with wide necks and mouths (ig. 6). As mentioned earlier,
this pottery is associated with the villages and houses of pastoralists on the
altiplano, mountain peaks, mountain slopes, the rocky moraines, and the
lands around the lake. he size of these pastoralist villages varied between
25 and 30 ha, as is the case of Yanacancha and Marcacocha on the southern
area of the altiplano. In the altiplano, the most prominent villages
(Yanacancha, Marcacocha, Juninjirca, and Marcapunta) are situated on
hilltops, as well as on the shore of the lake. Inhabited lakeside villages
include Ondores, Ucu, and Ninacaca. San Blas pottery is associated with
camelid herders who raised vicuña for their wool, and bartered it for other
goods such as salt. San Blas ceramics were found in important salinas (salt
deposits) like Kachiqocha (San Blas) and Qaqas (San Pedro) (Matos 1994:
35–36). he puna was also a zone where fresh products could be converted
into dehydrated goods (such as chuño, charki, and caya), which were then
easier to store and transport. he presence of Mantaro pottery in the alti-
plano suggests long-distance interaction, and the domestic trash suggests
that these people had a stable household economy.
UCHUQ
XAUXA?
SAN BLAS
STYLE
WANKA
STYLE
diferent local pottery styles, each with a limited geographic distribution FIG. 9 Possible distribution
within one valley or area of the altiplano (ig. 9). he irst group appears in of ceramic styles in the
province of Tarma
Tarmatampu and neighboring areas. he type of pottery is simple, gener- FIG. 10 Tarma-style pottery
ally utilitarian, brown, gray, or reddish, sometimes natural or brick red in
color, and others are decorated with simple black or red lines, apparently
without any standard designs (ig. 10). his style, tentatively called Tarma,
is associated with the Tarma ethnic group, but that name probably was
not in use prior to the arrival of the Inka.12 his Tarma group occupied
the western side of the Tarma Basin and the adjacent puna to the west
and northeast.
Within the same basin, we ind a second local pottery style, called
Palcamayo, described by Bonnier and Rozenberg (1978a, b). he Palca-
mayo style is distributed from the source of the Palcamayo River, which
is on the southeastern slope of the altiplano to the area northeast of the
Tarma River (ig. 9). he Palcamayo style seems to coincide with an ethnic
group that, according to colonial sources and to the present day, is known
as Palcamayo (Arellano 1988: chap. 4, map 4).
he third pottery style, equally simple and utilitarian, is characterized
by striations on the surface, and some vessels without any decoration at
all. he most common shapes are ollas with narrow necks and laring rims
and jars with short necks and wide spouts. Numerous anthropomorphic
and zoomorphic igurines were also found. his type of pottery is mostly
distributed in the northern part of the altiplano and it extends to the
Upper Huallaga. Given its spatial and temporal distribution, it seems to
deine part of the area of the ethnic group called Yarush. he style is related
It is interesting to note that on the one hand, although there were military
raids by the Inka—irst by Pachakuteq, then by hupa Yupanki and Wayna
Qhapaq, as we shall see—this does not explain the constant campaigns of
conquest or why Inka soldiers did not permanently besiege the zone. As
Cieza de León remarks, the lake was a “force” for the Chinchayqocha,
who hid in it.14 We obviously cannot imagine that the entire population
of Chinchayqocha hid in the lake. Who did hide then from the Inka? We
suggest that those who hid among the reeds of the lake were the curacas
and lords of the señoríos in order to avoid making the mocha or gesture
of submission. According to Polo de Ondegardo (1917 [1571]: 117), it was
an Andean custom that the conqueror of a region could only designate
himself as lord of the conquered area when he possessed the body and
domain of the lord he conquered. Although they made raids against the
population, did the Inka ever conquer the Chinchayqocha?
Although the topography permitted the lords of the altiplano to
maintain control of their territory, Inka domination of the neighboring
señoríos of Tarma, Wanka, and others would have forced the Chinchay-
qocha—and probably the Yarush too—to submit to or accept a partial
Inka occupation of their territory. Otherwise, it would have meant that
the Chinchayqocha had limited access to the natural resources of the
zones with which they traditionally interacted. As Nowack (1991: 76)
32 (LXXXIII): 112) “whose natives were no less warlike than the natives
of Bombón.”
at the junction of three rivers (tinkuy pata) to build this settlement. In Warawtampu
Conclusion
By integrating ethnohistoric and archaeological data, we can begin to
understand one of the provinces of Tawantinsuyu. Scarce data from docu-
ments can be conirmed through archaeological data. Pizarro’s informa-
tion about the existence of the province of Pumpu also seems to be correct.
he geopolitical, geoeconomical, and geosocial situation of our region of
study was understood by the Inka and incorporated into a new political
structure, called wamani.
Cieza de León’s account of the diferences in the Inka conquest of the
ethnic groups is conirmed through the variations between Inka installa-
tions in the region. he Inka state used a variety of strategies to incorpo-
rate and maintain subjugated peoples. Since those subjugated had been
organized in diferent ways prior to domination by the Inka, each area
constitutes a speciic political and economic case, and it is important to
develop as many case histories as we can. Some groups were incorporated
by force while others were not. It appears that the Tarma groups had to
be militarily subdued (probably because they were so centralized and
powerful), while the less politically complex groups along the lake could
be incorporated by means of diplomacy and reciprocal exchanges. We
have seen that each Inka installation constitutes a diferent case study. One
of the fundamental diferences was whether the Inka were establishing a
new settlement or constructing an installation on a pre-existing settle-
ment. We also saw that Inka domination could be manifested on two
levels: at the state level, with the construction of public buildings; and
at the household level, where the inventory of vessel types and foods may
have been afected.
Some sites display many Inka buildings with Inka-style architecture;
others do not. Local traditions were oten maintained alongside new styles
Acknowledgment
We want to thank Joyce Marcus for her useful comments on and editing
of the text.