Although no structures were found, several large postholes and various large pits were identified. Various burials were recovered from the Late Archaic Phase contexts, including numerous infants as well as several youths, young adults, and adults. Although most of the burials did not contain grave goods, one youth was buried with twelve bone beads and one infant had been covered with red ocher.
The Cuzco Late Archaic Phase remains support general trends that have been identified elsewhere in the Andean highlands (e.g., Callejón de Huaylas, Ayacucho, and Lake Titicaca) as occurring during this time period. These include a population increase, as reflected in the greater number of sites; sites that are both larger in size and appear to have been inhabited for longer durations; and a greater variety of stone and bone implements as well as personal ornaments. Furthermore, there is evidence of intensification of plant resources and a possible change to pastoralism.
It should also be noted that the one set of petroglyphs found during our survey work in the Cuzco Valley is located relatively near the site of Kasapata (An. 309). Although these petroglyphs have been known locally for some time, they remain to be described or studied in detail and cannot be dated to the Archaic Period with certainty.6 The petroglyphs are situated on top of a steep hill called Cruz Moco (An. 224), directly north of the Inca ruins of Tipón and west of Kasapata. At the summit of the hill is a group of large boulders on which sets of spirals, dots, and irregularly running lines have been carved (Map 4.1 and Photo 4.1).
PHOTO 4.1. At the summit of a steep hill is a group of large boulders on which sets of spirals, dots, and irregularly running lines have been carved.
Summary and Discussion
Currently, we can only map the general contours of culture change that occurred in the Cuzco Valley during the long Archaic Period. Nevertheless, based on newly available survey and excavation data, we can state that the differences between the Early, Middle, and Late Archaic Phase remains in the valley reflect the gradual and, no doubt, uneven development of sedentary life during this period. The Early Archaic Phase begins with small groups of highly mobile hunters and foragers. The population levels and the impact of these migratory groups on the environment are so low that their campsites are almost undetectable. Nevertheless, we know that their hunting tools were made of high-quality, exotic materials, and we can propose that these groups included the Cuzco Valley within larger seasonal movements.
The Middle Archaic and Late Archaic Phases bring with them larger bands with greater archaeological visibility. These early cultures appear to have had favored sites in the valley. Although the bands were still mobile, they returned repeatedly to preferred locations in the Cuzco Valley and most likely stayed for longer periods. Excavations at the site of Kasapata provided evidence of an early occupation (ca. 4400 BC) with small structures, pits, burials, and stratified sheet middens. The vast majority of the tools and lithic debris were produced from local andesite resources. Nevertheless, travel to, or trade with, other regions also occurred, since some exotic materials, such as fine chert and obsidian, are present in the collections. Faunal remains indicate that a broad range of animals were being hunted, with an emphasis on the deer of the forested valley slopes and the camelids of the higher grasslands.
The later preceramic occupations of the valley, represented by the Late Archaic Phase sites, reflect a more sedentary lifestyle. Thick middens and larger sites are suggestive of large band sizes. Excavations at the site of Kasapata, which encountered various burials that reflected the full mortality range (infants, youths, young adults, and adults), also bespeak of a more sedentary lifestyle. The increase in camelid remains over those of other large mammals may reflect the beginnings of animal domestication. The remains of stone grinding tools for seed plant processing, as well as a stone hoe, are suggestive of more intensive utilization of wild plants. Thus, although hunting and gathering had provided well for the inhabitants of the Cuzco Valley for thousands of years, it currently appears that as early as 3000 BC groups had become larger in size and had begun to change their resource strategies to include long-term occupations, early animal domestication, and perhaps incipient agriculture.
CHAPTER 5
The Formative Period and the Emergence of Ranked Societies (2200 BC–AD 200)
LIKE OTHER RECENT AUTHORS working in the Cuzco region (e.g., Zapata 1998), I have elected to call the period of time between the advent of ceramic production and the appearance of Qotakalli pottery in the Cuzco region the Formative Period.1 During this era, profound changes occurred in the region, including the gradual shift from a mobile life to a sedentary one and the concomitant transition from wild to domesticated food resources. The appearance of permanent residential structures, which were aggregated into hamlets and villages, occurs during this period. The existence of permanent villages implies a reliance on stable food sources as well as population levels above those of most hunting-and-gathering societies. As the population levels grow, the organizational needs and material demands of these larger groups also increase. From these humble origins, craft specialization, public architecture, and social ranking emerge over time.
The development of fully sedentary villages, subsisting predominantly on agricultural and animal husbandry, was a long and uneven process in the Andes. Although our knowledge is elementary at best, I will summarize what we currently know concerning this process in the Cuzco region. The period during which this process took place will be divided into three phases: the Early, Middle, and Late Formative.2 The phases represent the gradual cultural transformations that begin with the establishment of the first fully sedentary, autonomous villages and that end with the development of several chiefdoms in the greater Cuzco area.
The Early Formative Phase (2200–1500 BC) and the Beginnings of Ceramic Production
The Early Formative Phase in the Cuzco region starts around 2200 BC, with the beginnings of ceramic production, and ends around 1500 BC, with the establishment of large permanent villages. The Early Formative Phase cultures developed successful agricultural systems and presumably maintained herds of domesticated camelids. Cores taken from Lake Marcacocha in the Patacancha Valley suggest that forest clearance by burning had taken place and that agriculture was established by the Early Formative Phase. There is evidence of successful Chenopodiaceae cultivation (most certainly including quinoa) as early as 2200 BC. After 800 BC, Chenopodiaceae cultivation rapidly declined (Chepstow-Lusty et al. 1997), although there appear to have been minor resurgences around 350 BC and between about 10 BC and AD 100 (Figure 3.1).
Within our survey of the Cuzco Valley, we recorded a dozen or so sites that contained large lithic components as well as the remains of heavily eroded pottery. Five of these sites contained a sand-tempered pottery that has not previously been described in the Cuzco region. The pottery is relatively thin, and the most common vessel form is a curved-sided pot with flaring rims. Although this theory is untested, I suggest that this sand-tempered ware, or perhaps another unidentified ware, represents the earliest ceramics for the Cuzco region. The central point is that the currently oldest-dated ceramic style for the Cuzco Valley, Marcavalle, certainly does not represent the first pottery style to have been produced in the region. As carefully documented by Karen Chávez (1980), Marcavalle ceramics are relatively sophisticated in their forms, surface finishes, paste-temper groups, and decorative techniques. They appear nothing like the poorly fired and unslipped first ceramics of other Andean regions, such as the Pasiri ceramics of the Lake Titicaca Basin (Stanish et al. 1997: 40–42). As additional research unfolds concerning the Late Archaic Phase and Early Formative Phase occupations of the Cuzco region, it is most certain that new ceramic types will be identified that will substantially predate the Marcavalle series.
The Middle Formative Phase and the Establishment of Autochthonous Village Leadership (ca. 1500–500 BC)
The beginning of the Middle Formative Phase is marked by the development of Marcavalle ceramics and the establishment of the
first villages. With the gradual establishment of the first villages in the Cuzco Valley, the lifeways of its early occupants were transformed. The Middle Formative Phase in the valley is represented by a series of undifferentiated settlements, which began as hamlets and grew increasingly large through time. We can speculate that these villages would have had leaders (so-called Big Men), whose positions of authority were highly unstable. Particularly successful leaders may have gained considerable authority over their lifetime. Repetitively successful individuals, family groups, or lineages would have given rise to the beginnings of ranked village societies throughout this long period.
This era of developmental growth in the Cuzco area is best represented in the detailed analysis of the site of Marcavalle by Karen Chávez and her colleagues. The site is located between Cuzco and San Sebastián, on the west bank of the Cachimayu River well above the floodplain of the Huatanay River. It is on good agricultural land, close to both the salt springs of Cachimayu (Photo 1.2) and the rich clay deposits of Sañu (K. Chávez 1980: 226–227; Bauer 1998: 86, 103).
THE SITE OF MARCAVALLE
Manuel Chávez Ballón and Jorge Yábar Moreno first noted the prehistoric occupations at the site of Marcavalle in 1949. Chávez Ballón and Rowe conducted surface collections there in 1954 (K. Chávez 1980: 211), and Rowe concluded correctly in his 1956 article that the site contained the earliest ceramics found in the valley.
Luis Barreda Murillo and Patricia Lyon directed the first excavations at Marcavalle in 1963 and 1964. The preliminary results of that work are presented in Barreda Murillo (1973), along with the first detailed description of the ceramics from the site. K. Chávez (1980: 213) reports that various other surface collections and excavations were conducted at the site during the 1960s and 1970s by members of the Cuzco academic community and by other professionals. Despite its important position in the prehistory of the Cuzco region, the site is now nearly destroyed. Alfredo Valencia Zegarra and Arminda Gibaja Oviedo (1991) have chronicled the slow destruction of the site of Marcavalle and have pleaded for its preservation.
Karen Chávez directed the largest study at Marcavalle from 1966 through 1968. Her research is described in a number of publications (K. Chávez 1977, 1980, 1981a, 1981b, 1982). On the basis of extensive attribute study, K. Chávez defined ten major vessel forms and divided the Marcavalle collections into four phases. She also provided descriptions of a number of surface finishes, paste-temper groups, and decorative techniques.
Considerable effort has been made to date Marcavalle pottery. A carbon sample from Barreda Murillo and Lyon’s 1963 excavations yielded a date of 2645 ± 115 BP (calibrated 95.4% probability 1050–400 BC; Patterson 1967: 143; Lawn 1971: 373).3 K. Chávez furnished five dates for Marcavalle ceramics that ranged from 2916 ± 55 BP to 2571 ± 45 BP.4 To these, we may be able to add a date, 3330 ± 240 BP (calibrated 95.4% probability 2300–900 BC), provided by Frederick Engel (Krueger and Weeks 1966: 155) from materials found at the site of Chanapata.5 These dates suggest that the production of Marcavalle ceramics may have occurred as early as 1200 BC and continued perhaps until about 700 or 500 BC.
MARCAVALLE AND THE FORMATION OF VILLAGE LIFE
Excavations by K. Chávez at the site of Marcavalle provided important information on the lifeways of the early villagers who lived there. A large number of faunal remains from the site were analyzed by Elizabeth S. Wing (1978) and George R. Miller (1979). The majority (< 84%) of the faunal remains were camelids (K. Chávez 1980: 244–246). The sizes of the camelids indicate that they were domesticated, and the broad animal age span in the collection suggests that they were being used and killed for a variety of purposes, including wool, beasts of burden, food, and sacrifices (K. Chávez 1980: 246–248). Other domesticated animals in the collection included guinea pigs and dogs. Wild species were represented by deer, pumas, small rodents, birds, and toads in decreasing percentages (K. Chávez 1980: 244, 247).
Lithics from the site document trade with other localities of the southern highlands. Two fragments of obsidian have been traced to the Chivay source, near the Colca Valley, and four additional obsidian pieces have been identified as coming from the Alca sources, near Qotahuaci (K. Chávez 1980: 249–253; Burger et al. 2000: 289).6 K. Chávez (1980: 243–244) also recovered direct evidence of agriculture, with bean remains being dated at 800 BC and maize at 200 BC. Other imported materials included a peccary tooth from the lowlands and green stone bowls of an uncertain source (K. Chávez 1980: 247, 254–255). Finally, although some adobe walls were identified, no large architectural features that could be classified as public works were found. K. Chávez (1980: 259) summarizes what the valley-wide settlement pattern would have been like during Middle Formative times: “While each village, including Marcavalle, was likely relatively self-sufficient, each developed its own local specialties, as the restrictions accompanying sedentism limited direct or easy access to resources. . . . No direct evidence was found to indicate social stratification, or craft specialization based on principles other than age or sex.” She also emphasizes that the people of Cuzco and the Lake Titicaca Basin lay within the same broad interaction sphere and that trade and exchange occurred between the two regions from an early period in prehistory. It was an interaction that would continue to grow for many centuries, until the arrival of the Wari in the Cuzco Valley.
Marcavalle was not, of course, the only village in the Cuzco Valley. There were many other villages like it. For example, test excavations by Edward B. Dwyer (1971b) at the site of Minaspata in the Lucre Basin revealed evidence of a similar, although slightly smaller, village. This occupation, writes K. Chávez (1980: 215), “was associated with beans, corn, camelids, and guinea pigs . . .” Through a comparison of materials recovered at Marcavalle and Minaspata, she concludes: “The relationship with the Lucre Basin inhabitants appears to have been one of stable, mutual reciprocity in a context of mundane interaction as between kinsmen or neighbors involving perhaps many persons from various segments of the populations. . . .” (K. Chávez 1981b: 343; emphasis in original). An additional small village site dating to the Middle Formative Phase has been identified at Batan Orco in the Huaro area (Patterson 1967; K. Chávez 1980; Zapata 1998). As research continues, and as we are better able to distinguish different ceramic styles within the Formative Period, there is little doubt that many others sites will be found.
The Late Formative Phase and the Development of a Valley-wide Chiefdom (500 BC–AD 200)
During his seminal 1940s research, Rowe identified a pre-Inca ceramic style that he named Chanapata. In 1942 Rowe excavated at the type-site of Chanapata, just north of the city of Cuzco, and found a series of retaining walls, various burials, and vast amounts of ceramics and animal bones (Rowe 1943, 1944: 10–23). He was also able to document similar pottery on the surfaces of two other sites in the Cuzco Valley (Picchu and Limpillay [Wimpillay]), and at a third site near the community of Maras (Pacallamocco), approximately 30 aerial kilometers northwest of Cuzco. Summarizing his excavation and exploration findings, Rowe writes: “The locations of the known sites near good agricultural land where game is not particularly plentiful suggest that the people of Chanapata practiced agriculture, and great quantities of llama bones show that they kept large numbers of domestic animals. Pottery is well made and abundant, and a high percentage of decorated ware is found in the refuse, . . .” (Rowe 1946: 198). It is through the pottery style defined at the site of Chanapata that we can identify the Late Formative Phase sites of the Cuzco Valley and other nearby regions.
CHANAPATA AND DERIVED CHANAPATA CERAMICS
During his work at Chanapata, Rowe was able to define the first pre-Inca ceramic style of the Cuzco region (1944: 15–16).7 Combining decorative elements (plain, incised, punctated, burnished, etc.) and ware color (red and black), he divided the Chanapata collection into several subtypes. Continued research by Rowe in the Cuzco region in the mid-1950s identified several additional Chanapata sites, some of which contained a greater frequency
of fine red ware than black ware. These findings caused Rowe to review his data from Chanapata, and he found that there was a decrease in the frequency of polished black ware from the bottom to the top of the excavations. Rowe writes, “This situation suggests that the sites with red fired ware only are later than the main occupation at Chanapata. We gave the name ‘Derived Chanapata to the newly identified red phase . . .” (1956: 143).8 Radiocarbon dates from various Chanapata-containing sites support the proposition that there is a shift through time from black to red wares in the sequence.
Because Rowe’s initial report on the archaeology of Cuzco contained an extensive description and numerous drawings of Chanapata ceramics, this style is relatively well known and has been found at various sites in the Cuzco region. For example, Chanapata ceramics have been found at the site of Huillca Raccay in the Cusichaca Valley (Kendall 1976; Hey 1984; Lunt 1984), at Chokepukio in the Lucre Basin (McEwan 1987), at Muyu Orco in the Cuzco Valley (Zapata 1998), at Batan Orco in the Huaro Basin (Zapata 1998), and across the area of Paruro (Bauer 1999, 2002).
We also have numerous radiocarbon dates from excavation levels with Chanapata ceramics (see Appendix). Work done in 1960 by Chávez Ballón at Chanapata furnished two dates (Yamasaki, Hamada, and Fujiyama 1966: 337). The first sample dated to 2520 ± 150 BP (calibrated 95.4% probability 1000–200 BC),9 but the second yielded the less useful date of 2360 ± 760 BP (calibrated 95.4% probability 2300 BC–AD 1200)10 due to a small sample size. A sample from the site of Chanapata is mentioned by Patterson (1967: 143) as dating to 2600 ± 150 BP (calibrated 95.4% probability 1150–350 BC). Another sample from the type-site submitted by Engel (Krueger and Weeks 1966: 155) provided a date of 3330 ± 240 BP (calibrated 95.4% probability 2300–900 BC).11 This date seems too early for Chanapata ceramics but may well date a lower stratum of Marcavalle materials at the site. Work in the Cusichaca region has supplied another sample with a date of 2380 ± 70 BP (calibrated 95.4% probability 800–200 BC)12 from the site of Huillca Raccay (Burleigh, Ambers, and Matthews 1983). Two samples from the site of Chokepukio (McEwan et al. 1995: 15) date Chanapata and Derived Chanapata remains at 2130 ± 70 BP (calibrated 95.4% probability 380 BC–AD 10)13 and 2190 ± 60 BP (calibrated 95.4% probability 390–90 BC).14
Ancient Cuzco Page 7